April 23rd, 2008 by Peter Bonginelli
filed under: Medical Marijuana, News
No Comments
MA – Lyle Craker, Professor of Plant Science at UMass Amherst may be taking the Drug Enforecement Agency (DEA) to court after they denied his appeal to grow marijuana for medinal purposes.
Craker submitted his request in 2001, and was first rejected by the DEA in 2006. The DEA Chief Administrator initially ruled against issuing the license, only for a separate DEA judge to rule in favor. The final verdict will not be decided for another 18 months, however Craker plans to take the DEA to court in the event that they deny his license again.
“If the DEA administrator denies this, then we can go to court outside the DEA and then the DEA has to follow the court ruling,” he said. “The court makes their own decisions, so I don’t know if I’ll be denied. Who knows, this is ultimately a political decision.”
The DEA has repeatedly blocked attempts by scientists and researchers to grow marijuana in order to study its potential medical properties. A medical researcher was quoted as saying, “It is almost like the government is censoring our research at this point.” Even the second biggest medical association in the United States, the American College of Physicians, released a statement this year asking that more research be done on medical marijuana.
Craker adamantly believes that ill patients have a right to medicine that could potentially help them, and that clinical trials need to be done on that medication. “Have there ever been any clinical trials that actually demonstrate this [the claim that marijuana inhibits vomiting and is of medicinal value] better than a placebo? The answer is no, so that’s why you have to do research on it,” Craker said. “If clinical trials show there is no difference [in using marijuana for medical purposes] than giving somebody sugar water, then go ahead and keep it illegal.”
April 4th, 2008 by Peter Bonginelli
filed under: Medical Marijuana, News
No Comments
Michigan – The fight for Medical Marijuana in Michigan took a huge step forward this week. As of Monday the state elections panel certified that 377,975 signatures have been collected backing the plan. Only 304,000 signatures are needed to get the initiative on the ballot, should legislators fail to act on the legislation within 40 days.
The initiative would allow doctors to prescribe Marijuana for medical conditions, and protect patients from state prosecution. Alaska, California, Colorado, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, and Oregon have already taken it a step further and decriminalized small amounts of marijuana. Getting caught in these states results in simply a ticket and no legal action. While Michigan’s initiative doesn’t provide as much leniency, it is definitely a step in the right direction.
March 29th, 2008 by Peter Bonginelli
filed under: Opinion
No Comments
It is time to listen to Barney Frank. Marijuana has been illegal in the United States for 71 years now, and few if any positive benefits have come from marijuana prohibition. A little over a week ago Barney Frank declared that he would be introducing a bill to congress to decriminalize marijuana on a national level. Below are some points I made in an earlier post on what the 5 main arguments are for decriminalizing marijuana.
Marijuana Is A Non-Toxic Medicine – It is undisputed among the medical community that marijuana contains medicinal value to patients of multiple degenerative illnesses, and the American College Of Physicians (ACP) told the government just last month to back off states that have approved medical marijuana, as well as demanding further research be done. (ACP Endorsement)
→ continue reading
March 25th, 2008 by Peter Bonginelli
filed under: Medical Marijuana, Opinion
No Comments
Marijuana Is A Non-Toxic Medicine – It is undisputed among the medical community that marijuana contains medicinal value to patients of multiple degenerative illnesses, and the American College Of Physicians (ACP) told the government just last month to back off states that have approved medical marijuana, as well as demanding further research be done. (ACP Endorsement)
Marijuana For The Economy – Although marijuana and hemp are fundamentally different, both are currently illegal to cultivate and both hold much potential for our struggling economy. Hemp is a great alternative to plastics and textiles in many industries, as well as having a high yield-per-acre for ethanol production (more than corn). Marijuana, on the other hand, is the biggest cash crop in the United States that is not taxed. We lose an estimated $42 billion a year (article) to marijuana prohibition alone, with $10 billion going to law enforcement and $32 billion in lost tax revenue (don’t be surprised to see double that number to double in the case of legalization). At a time our economy is struggling, we need all the new streams of revenue we can get.
Marijuana Prohibition Is Destroying Lives – Unlike the Drug Czar John Walters’ anti-marijuana commercials tells you it is marijuana prohibition that is destroying lives. In 2006 almost 800,000 people were arrested on marijuana related charges, with about 730,00 being for mere possession. Due to limited funding, pro-legalization organizations don’t have the money to air ads on the story of Will Foster, Weldon Angelos, or any of the other victims on the marijuana policy project’s victims page.
The People Want It – In the Barney Frank article referenced above, even Frank acknowledges that politicians are way behind the public in their support for marijuana. I suggest anyone that is interested in the statistics of support for decriminalization check out this article. 47% Of Americans admit to trying marijuana at least once, 80% support its medical use, and 76% support decriminalization for personal use.
Civil Liberties – There seems to be something fundamentally wrong and unconstitutional about the government regulating drugs in the first place. At the very least, many, including US Rep. Barney Franks feel that the matter should be left up to the states (article). Frank also made a comment on the show Real Time about how many believe that decriminalizing or legalizing pot would be sending the message of “pot is ok” to children. He asked if you would rather send them the message “we are hypocrites”.
In conclusion, I hope you will at least rethink your position on marijuana, and read some of the sources I have provided. , From protecting our civil rights, to easing the pain of an aids patient, or saving an 18 year old kid from getting rejected for financial aid, there are many benefits that both decriminalization and legalization will bring. The only way the laws will change is through education and taking action. To e-mail your district US Rep. in support of Barney Franks planned legislation you can contact them through a quick and easy e-mail form here.
March 16th, 2008 by Peter Bonginelli
filed under: Medical Marijuana, News
No Comments
Illinois - Members of the Senate Public Health Committee voted 6-4 to legalize the use of medical marijuana in Illinois. A similar bill fell just shy of a majority vote in the Senate last year, and the legislation would make Illinois the 13th state to legalize medical use of marijuana.
The bill will allow patients with “debilitating medical conditions” to obtain a prescription from their doctor. Under these circumstances, possession of under 8 plants and 2 ½ ounces of useable marijuana would be considered legal.
Two weeks ago New Hampshire passed similar legislation so there may soon be 14 states that have disobeyed federal regulations regarding medical marijuana. That, coupled with the American College of Physicians’ endorsement of the drug a couple weeks ago, should push the federal government to repeal the ban on medical marijuana.
February 6th, 2008 by Peter Bonginelli
filed under: Medical Marijuana, News
No Comments
Source: Nevada Appeal
Nevada — The water, the lights, the seeds, the soil. The problem could be several things. Some patients will learn how to grow, said Claude Miller, a Nevada medical marijuana consultant. Some won’t. "There’s patients who can’t grow a flower," he said. "Much less medical marijuana."
That’s part of the reason he started his business. Many of the 900 patients in Nevada’s program know little about the plant when they register.
But those patients, despite a provision in state law, must grow their marijuana themselves or find a state-approved "caregiver" who will grow it for them.
"(Marijuana) is a godsend and it really helps people," said Miller, who supports medical marijuana only under a tightly regulated system.
Patients, however, will not be able to get the drug like other prescriptions the state recognizes unless the federal government changes its stance.
Following a 2000 ballot initiative, the state Legislature wrote the constitutional amendment into law including a section that ordered the University of Nevada School of Medicine to research marijuana and develop a program to distribute it to patients.
The 2001 law says the Legislature understands the state’s "obligation" to research a distribution program, but also says it must do it with the permission from the federal government.
The ballot initiative, approved by 65 percent of voters, called for "appropriate methods for supply of the plant to patients authorized to use it." These patients include residents diagnosed with illnesses such as cancer, glaucoma and AIDS.
The federal government, however, rejects the opinion of the 12 states with medical marijuana programs.
"Smoked marijuana has not withstood the rigors of science," according to the Web site of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. "(It) is not medicine, and it is not safe."
Federal Authority
Federal policy, supported by the past three presidents, has stalled research and development of a state distribution program.
Dr. Dave Lupan, an associate dean at the state school of medicine, said the university has made "no progress whatsoever" on the legislature’s mandate. It will stay that way at least until there is a new president, he said.
It is unlikely the policy will change under the next administration, though. Republican presidential candidates John McCain and Mitt Romney do not support legalizing medical marijuana. Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are undecided.
But the university would have more problems than policy if it tried to start a program. Not only does the federal government have no interest in the school’s research, Lupan said, the state has given no money for it.
"It’s not only a matter of bucking federal government authority," he said, but of finding doctors to work for free.
The federal government itself has had medical marijuana evaluated several times. A 1999 federally-commissioned study by the Institute of Medicine reported, "the accumulated data indicates a potential therapeutic value for cannabinoid drugs, particularly for symptoms such as pain relief, control of nausea and vomiting and appetite stimulation."
The Federal Drug Administration, however, said in 2006 the medical use of the drug is not supported by science.
Green and Black Thumbs
A change in federal policy that led to state distribution could, according to supporters, help many patients.
Jennifer Bartlett, who manages the current state program through the Nevada Department of Agriculture, said "there are some who can’t grow it, and it’s a struggle."
She has not endorsed state distribution, however, and said many patients have no problems growing their own marijuana or finding a caregiver.
A state program would help all patients, though, not just those who have difficulty growing it, said Dan Hart, who managed the group that led the medical marijuana ballot initiative.
The state could make sure the medicine was good quality, he said, and this also would particularly help patients with a debilitating disease.
But some medical marijuana advocates, such as Chandler Laughlin, said the state should not be involved with marijuana and that a state-run program is a bad idea.
The Silver City resident and radio host did say many patients like him can’t grow high quality marijuana.
"I have a black thumb," he said.
Bruce Mirken, who supports marijuana legalization, said a state-run program could make it easier for the state to both guarantee effective use for patients and track illegal use by others.
It can’t be difficult for patients to get the medicine they need under the current program, he said.
"You could grow your own tomatoes, but if all your plants die, you don’t have a salad that day," said Mirken, a representative for the Marijuana Policy Project, which has unsuccessfully pushed ballot initiatives in Nevada to partially legalize marijuana.
A Model Program
If Nevada eventually does set up a distribution program, it probably won’t be the first state to do it.
New Mexico, which legalized medical marijuana in April, is working on the rules its department of health would need to run a distribution program.
This will allow patients to get the drug the way other patients get their medicine, said Reena Szczepanski, director of the anti-drug prohibition New Mexico Drug Policy Alliance. It would help prevent patients from going to the black market, she said.
But New Mexico’s system might not work for Nevada, because of the state’s sparsely populated areas. She said a state-run system where the drug is distributed through pharmacies might be better for Nevada.
The federal government itself has the only active government-run distribution program in the country. The Compassionate Investigational New Drug program was started in 1978 and closed to new patients by President George H.W. Bush in 1991. A few people are still in the program, though, and they get monthly supplies of marijuana grown at the University of Mississippi.
Miller, head of Nevada Medical Marijuana Consultants, said a state-run distribution program could be good for Nevada, but the state should be careful not to legalize it or regulate it the way California does, with marijuana available at licensed clubs.
"We don’t want a bunch of drug-dealing thugs in this," he said.
But Miller, who became a patient after a spine surgery, said the drug is more safe and effective for many people who would otherwise be prescribed pain killers. Those people, he said, deserve to have their medicine.
Opponents, he said, don’t understand the research or the state’s program.
"We’re not just a bunch of yahoos smoking reefer," he said.
Complete Title: Federal Government Stands in The Way of a State-Run Medical Marijuana Distribution
Source: Nevada Appeal (Carson City, NV)
Author: Dave Frank
Published: February 4, 2008
Copyright: 2008 Nevada Appeal
Contact editor@nevadaappeal.com
Website: http://www.nevadaappeal.com/
Loading ...
