cannabisnews.com: Marijuana: Yes or No To Medicinal Use? Marijuana: Yes or No To Medicinal Use? Posted by CN Staff on May 01, 2006 at 13:50:59 PT By Simran Grover Source: Tartan Pennsylvania -- The use of marijuana for medical purposes has been debated for many years. While some consider the plant to be a phenomenal ailment reliever, others believe that the psychoactive and harmful effects overpower the possible benefits. In the most recent chain of events, on April 20, the FDA rejected medical use for marijuana. Although a number of states have passed legislation allowing for marijuana to be used medically, the FDA says that these laws are inconsistent with the new rulings. Canada has taken a different route from the U.S., however, and has allowed for medical testing and prescription use of the substance. Canadian researchers have recently discovered that marijuana can cause the neurons in the brain to regenerate.Marijuana has been on the medical scene in the US since the beginning of the 19th century. Doctors recommended that it should be sold over the counter as a pain reliever, but it soon lost popularity with the development of aspirin. In 1937, Congress passed the Marijuana Tax Act, which eventually led to use of the substance being criminalized. The American Medical Association was the solitary opponent to this legislative step. Since that time, marijuana has been outlawed by the federal government and has been banned for medicinal use.In the 1960s, marijuana was found to reduce intra-ocular (internal eye) pressure and helped patients with glaucoma, helping to prevent blindness. It was also found to eliminate the nausea experienced during cancer chemotherapy. Lastly, marijuana was found to control muscle spasms associated with spinal cord injury.The part of marijuana that is responsible for the “high” condition associated with the drug was found to be delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC. The chemical compound was isolated, approved by the FDA, and sold under the name Marinol. Marinol had too many side effects and was too expensive for the common person. Smoking marijuana also immediately releases THC into the blood stream, while taking a capsule took an hour before relief was finally felt.In 1996, California permitted patients to use marijuana for medical purposes. This led to political contradictions because a state law conflicted with a federal law. The public disagreed with laws that restricted patients’ use of marijuana. The federal government then decided to modify their policies. They did not change their perspective on outlawing marijuana, but allowed for more marijuana research in order to better understand its effects.The reliability of medicinal marijuana research has been questioned. This is because an effective placebo for marijuana cannot be created, as traditional research methods require. A placebo is an inactive substance that is given as a control and has no therapeutic effects. Using humans as subjects, two groups would have to be created, one that received marijuana and one that did not. The psychoactive properties of marijuana cannot be replicated in a placebo, and thus prevents such an experiment from being conducted.The debate and controversy surrounding the use of medicinal marijuana is expected to continue until a successful compromise between researchers and proponents is reached.Source: Tartan, The (PA EDU)Author: Simran Grover Published: May 01, 2006 — Volume 100, Issue 25 Copyright: 2006 The Tartan NewspaperContact: news thetartan.orgWebsite: http://www.thetartan.org/Related Articles & Web Site:IOM Reporthttp://newton.nap.edu/html/marimed/ The Politics of Pothttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread21800.shtmlFDA Denies Marijuana Has Medical Valuehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread21797.shtmlFDA Denies Medical Value of Marijuana http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread21794.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #16 posted by whig on May 02, 2006 at 12:11:45 PT runderwo You are charitable to Mr. Gilchrist, but he uses code that is perfectly understandable to anyone in the white supremacist community. [ Post Comment ] Comment #15 posted by runderwo on May 02, 2006 at 12:01:51 PT whig I disagree with his numbers regarding how many are criminals since he didn't provide any evidence for that, but I fail to see how "southern border-crosser" is a racist term on its face.http://www.cis.org/articles/2005/back1405.htmlMexico eclipses all other countries in terms of immigrants entering: http://www.cis.org/articles/2005/back147.gifAbout 25% of the immigrant population is illegal: http://www.cis.org/articles/2005/back1425.gif Unfortunately, it does not break down illegal immigrants by country of origin.26% of illegals are below the poverty line, many using government services: http://www.cis.org/articles/2005/back1427.gifThe big question is, are the rest of the immigrants creating enough value to justify paying for the dependent ones to remain here?I am assuming that they are not fleeing an oppressive regime if their country of origin is Mexico. If someone is fleeing an oppressive regime (i.e., one that our New Century Foreign Policy(TM) would go and 'spread democracy' to) then I think harboring them is the only humane thing to do. [ Post Comment ] Comment #14 posted by Max Flowers on May 02, 2006 at 09:58:13 PT Reverend Green You're right again! [ Post Comment ] Comment #13 posted by global_warming on May 02, 2006 at 03:15:42 PT thanks for the feedback it's as I thought, he is a kook and I would never vote for such an idiot. [ Post Comment ] Comment #12 posted by whig on May 02, 2006 at 02:42:18 PT runderwo http://www.jimgilchrist.com/immigration.php"Each week, thousands of illegal immigrants cross our southern border. Although some presumably have good intentions, at least twenty percent (20%) of southern border-crossers are known criminals, drug dealers, sex traffickers, and gang lords. Most frightening of all, mingled with those menaces are potential terrorists from countries hostile to the United States."It's that southern border over which the brown-skinned people come that he complains about, never the northern or people who come from Europe and overstay their visas. [ Post Comment ] Comment #11 posted by BGreen on May 02, 2006 at 00:25:36 PT Gilchrist is just like ALL other republicans He knows better than us, he gets to choose how a woman uses her body, he gets to control us.He considers support for Israel to be a Christian necessity, even though Israel is spying on us, lying to us and is ultimately responsible for the death of thousands of our soldiers because we're fighting all of these wars for Israel.This is contrary to the Christian belief, and that's why we're NOT jews anymore.Kick ALL the political bastards as far into the sea as possible.The Reverend Bud Green [ Post Comment ] Comment #10 posted by runderwo on May 01, 2006 at 23:49:06 PT whig I should clarify. I would only vote for him if there were no alternatives given that he would favor one particular religion in the areas of abortion and stem cell research, and that he favors continued meddling in the Middle East. But I did not see anything that could be accused as racism, unless you consider removing Affirmative Action to be a racist move (I happen to consider Affirmative Action itself to be fundamentally racist) [ Post Comment ] Comment #9 posted by runderwo on May 01, 2006 at 23:41:54 PT whig What is the proof that he is a racist? [ Post Comment ] Comment #8 posted by whig on May 01, 2006 at 19:00:39 PT Gilchrist There's no way I could support a racist for President. [ Post Comment ] Comment #7 posted by global_warming on May 01, 2006 at 17:13:50 PT Then I Awake Then I awake and look around me, at four grey secular wall's that surround me and I realize that I was only dreaming.Has God forsaken me?They can have my mortal house,They can fight over my garment,They can eat and be full,This Green Green World,Has a Majestic Pallor,That subtly can remindOur place in this courtAs I swallowI can breatheI can remembersome old proverbsas this worldslowly consumes its flesh and witness [ Post Comment ] Comment #6 posted by global_warming on May 01, 2006 at 16:33:10 PT in the meantime, some thoughts "Green Green Grass Of Home"The old home town looks the same as I step down from the train, and there to meet me is my Mama and Papa. Down the road I look and there runs Mary hair of gold and lips like cherries. It's good to touch the green, green grass of home. Yes, they'll all come to meet me, arms reaching, smiling sweetly. It's good to touch the green, green grass of home. The old house is still standing tho' the paint is cracked and dry, and there's that old oak tree I used to play on.Down the lane I walk with my sweet Mary, hair of gold and lips like cherries. It's good to touch the green, green grass of home. Yes, they'll all come to meet me, arms reaching, smiling sweetly. It's good to touch the green, green grass of home.[spoken:]Then I awake and look around me, at four grey wall surround me and I realize that I was only dreaming. For there's a guard and there's a sad old padre - arm in arm we'll walk at daybreak. Again I touch the green, green grass of home. Yes, they'll all come to see me in the shade of that old oak tree as they lay me neath the green, green grass of home. [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by global_warming on May 01, 2006 at 16:24:35 PT from what I have seen http://www.jimgilchrist.com/issues.phpWonder what Ron Paul has to say about this man? [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by global_warming on May 01, 2006 at 16:08:19 PT both good comments Q:Has any one heard of Gilchrist?He is considering a run for the presidency..http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49985He seems to be a firebrand, but what is his view on the use of Cannabis? [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by runderwo on May 01, 2006 at 16:06:09 PT placebo I don't understand this paragraph."The reliability of medicinal marijuana research has been questioned. This is because an effective placebo for marijuana cannot be created, as traditional research methods require. A placebo is an inactive substance that is given as a control and has no therapeutic effects. Using humans as subjects, two groups would have to be created, one that received marijuana and one that did not. The psychoactive properties of marijuana cannot be replicated in a placebo, and thus prevents such an experiment from being conducted."Do they mean a placebo in the sense that you compare one strain of marijuana devoid of THC or CBD to another strain rich in them? Or in the sense that you compare psychoactive THC to some form of non-psychoactive THC?I think it is pretty well established that the psychoactive and therapeutic effects of THC as found in marijuana are inseparable, and may even overlap. So a placebo would have to be synthesized, casting doubt upon the results. [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by OverwhelmSam on May 01, 2006 at 15:35:50 PT whig I seen your comment. I made one under TD. [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by whig on May 01, 2006 at 15:09:01 PT Comments to Tartan http://www.thetartan.org/2006/05/01/scitech/marijuana/discuss [ Post Comment ] Post Comment