What is wrong with smoking marijuana for medicinal purposes

July 1, 11:58 PMPortland Drug Policy ExaminerJohn English

Previous Next

27 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Portland Drug Policy Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

To see it through unbiased eyes, we need to review painful lessons from our nation’s history. Around the beginning of the 1900’s, America faced a serious medical challenge. In a very real way, this whole scenario is playing itself out again, right in front of our eyes.

Fly-by-night swindlers traveled from town to town hawking “miracle medicines” that claimed cures for everything from baldness to life-threatening diseases. Though their tonics rarely helped, much less cured their maladies, consumers often reported feeling better. There was a reason for this – most often they contained large amounts of alcohol and / or opium and other feel-good agents.

This chaotic medicinal marketplace, where legitimate medicines competed with unproven and often dangerous snake oils compelled the U.S. Congress over 100 years ago to create the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which is now responsible for approving, regulating and verifying the effectiveness and safety of medicines.

Their mission is two-fold: to verify and ensure that medicines meet safety and effectiveness in treating medical conditions. (Some drugs only mask or hide symptoms, allowing them to continue to cause harm.)

Recently, the FDA has come under criticism – that they too often seem to serve the large pharmaceutical companies. Drug users who want their drug of choice have taken this criticism further . . . . many say too far, but most agree that the pharmaceutical companies and their lobbyists wield too much power in D.C.!

So the problem is, do we now, throw it all out and allow the alternative - letting the people decide again? Medicine by election can be just as corrupting, especially when the media seems to be in the hands of the wealthy - those who own the printing presses and TV channels.

Simply stated, the FDA states it has not found compelling scientific evidence that smoking marijuana relieves the myriad of ailments that its proponents claim.

When considering at this question, one must take into account two related issues: 1) that the whole plan to make marijuana legal was published in “High Times.” They issued a call, compelling users to come forward saying that pot helped their suffering.

See the video of Nathan Edelman:

And there’s another part: 2) that a survey showed that medical marijuana cardholders had been smoking pot for an average of 17 years! That in itself, brings the whole system under more suspicion - - - for what if, marijuana does cause one to think their “medicine” helps their condition when it is instead, actually causing or contributing to it?

Then, there’s two further question that needs to be asked:

1) What weed is smoked without the particulate matter, tars, and (over 400 chemical compounds in the smoke) not causing harm? The doctor’s oath is “First, do no harm.”

2) If people who were already breaking the law using an illicit drug for 17 years before the system allowed this pseudo-legal use, do they have the credibility to allow us to believe this actually helps?

This article written from the inspiration of the Testimony of Dr. David Murray, Chief Scientist, Office f National Drug Control Policy before the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security - - - “Hearing on the Drug Enforcement Administration’s Regulation of Medicine”  published in: http://www.drugwatch.org/Newsletters/Apr%202008%20Newsletter.pdf