Marijuana - Next legislative nightmare?

[Jack Wilborn]

Since Medical Marijuana and recreational Marijuana are making the news, along with two states that have made recreational Marijuana legal for adults, I thought we should open some kind of dialog about it. I'm hoping that many will give their thoughts, opposition and support.

Since many of us have been indoctrinated by the US Government, let’s start there. Most of the information we receive is from NIDA (National Institute Drug Abuse) and it is their charter to deal with drug abuse, not benefit. Reading the latest "Facts about Marijuana", updated January 2014, we find the NIDA, states that it causes many lung related problems, inflammation, cough, phlegm, chest illness, COPD and a heightened risk of lung infections. It also states that Marijuana smokers, who do not smoke tobacco have more health problems and miss more days of work, because of respiratory illnesses. The NIDA’s position can be found in its entirety at

http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana.

This is in conflict with a study done by UCLA which ran from 1985 for 20 years and had over 5100 people in the study. They were expecting some of the above problems, including cancer. They were surprised when they found a lower cancer rate, no irritation in the lungs and those that smoke Marijuana had a less lung related health problems than those that smoked tobacco. In fact their study stated that many had lungs that were more capable after smoking Marijuana than before and did no damage relating to COPD. As an asthmatic, I was also surprised. They believe that it's because of THC and other cannabinoids that have anti-inflammatory and immune suppressing properties. An article on the study is available at:

http://healthland.time.com/2012/01/10/study-smoking-marijuana-not-linked-with-lung-damage/.

NIDA is aware of the study, but does not address it. Why do they not address this situation of complete conflict? They also offer no alternative study or reasons for their position or statements. This makes it hard to accept for anyone trying to form an opinion, as NIDA does not provide an acceptable argument. There are some links in the healthland article that is interesting to read and I suggest that you read them. Such as

U.S. Rules That Marijuana Has No Medical Use. What Does Science Say?

I feel that other investigations of Marijuana and its effects, preclude anything supported by the US Government. One should stay with studies from other countries and news feeds which don’t have a preconceived agenda. It is interesting that Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Neurosurgeon, Chief Medical Correspondent, CNN wrote an article "Whey I would say NO to pot" in 2009 but then completely reversed his opinion in a documentary called "Weed". This documentary is available via YouTube. You can also read his statements on "why I changed my mind on Weed" at

http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/08/health/gupta-changed-mind-marijuana/.

In conclusion, I will state that I was trained by the DEA as a police officer when I was going through the academy for the city of Glendale, Arizona. I found, even then, that the government’s statements were questionable at best and downright baseless in others. I suspect that we will see much on the subject in the coming months and years, with attempts to legalize it as a recreational drug and correct some existing problems with the Medical use of Marijuana.

Please give an opinion, along with what you position is based.

[Jack Wilborn]

Pat thanks for responding.  You are absolutely correct on the point about 'stoner's' making correct judgments. It sounds like they have (had) the problems with drugs that many have, which is a sickness (as no different with alcohol).  I wish you luck in the future. 

As many seem to point to me that Marijuana is bad, that is not what this is about.  This is about the ability of people to maintain a position and belief that has been drilled into them for 70 + years even if it's fundamentally flawed.  Believe me I understand how difficult it is to even think in that direction, and that's part of the problem that we in the US have and why I pointed out Dr. Gupta's position.  He too assumed that the governments information and position was based on clear evidence.  If all of you would take the 50 minutes that his documentary runs, you will see some unbelievable things.  This is not advocating legalization, but an understanding of something that may have been misleading.

We tolerate many of the 'hard' drugs because we have lots of research of what is ok and what isn't.  You can go to the pharmacy and purchase morphine, with the right paperwork. We have millions of users, but do not abuse the drug.  It may seem strange to you but it is true. These people do not use harder drugs, some don't even use alcohol.  I will admit that in high school I tried Marijuana.  Didn't like the smell or the effect on me.  I love the taste of beer, whiskey and other alcoholic drinks but find that I don't like the effect of alcohol on me.  So I taste all, but rarely.  Many people that do 'indulge' do not use daily or while working.  How many millions, they don't know as many don't want to be associated with this drug.

I don't think anyone wants the heavy crane operator to be loaded while he works, the same as with alcohol. What if he drinks when not at work, is that ok?  Maybe, if he isn't an abuser.  It is possible that the same is true with Marijuana  Like smokes a joint before bed.  Like alcohol, I don't have a problem with it if it's not abused, the same with opiates, narcotics and other drugs.  The problem with anything, is over indulgence. Not knowing when to NOT use is or being driven to always be stoned, these are signs of dependence.

We already have a couple of drugs that have their basis of creation in the Cannabis plant and we have since 1985 used the FDA approved drug "Marinol", so don't just say Marijuana is terrible, it has some known pharmaceutical properties.  Even though Marinol is synthesized and not made from the plant itself. There is also a drug in stage II testing called "Sativex", from a UK company.  It's authorized in over 20 countries, I believe, hopefully here this year. For cancer pain.

Many of the people responding have stated the "with my eyes", yet they won't watch a program that shows without a doubt that this is being used in a medicinal way to help very young children.  Even the drug used has very little THC (what makes you "high) in the plant and doesn't get you "high".  You are eliminating that which we take for granted for medicinal use.

Dr. Gupta is a Neurosurgeon, and the Chief Medical Correspondent for CNN.  He was asked to be the US Surgeon General by Obama, but declined.  He has more pressure on him than most as he's on the news almost daily.  Many people acknowledge his level of commitment to people and medicine.

Dr. Gupta did not get "convinced" by talk, he actually went out and spoke to people and saw what happened.  Some with a drawer full of pharmaceuticals and no relief, yet a couple of puffs and the spasms that plagued him go away. Could we make a medicine out of this, OF COURSE we can if we can use the research available. But we need to freedom to do the research.

if any of you think you know all about Marijuana I dare you to sit though Dr. Gupta's documentary and then maybe you can believe your eyes.  Many of these strains do not contain any THC, so there is no reason people would get hooked on them.  You just need to accept there is another side.

I'm still here to be shot at, thanks for your time to write me your thoughts.

Jack

[Gayla L. Coletto]

I agree that medical marijuana has a place in medicine. As I stated before in my opinion it should be treated as all other prescriptions and despenced by a pharmacy.
Why are we changing the way our meds are being despenced,that's the problem.
I know marijuana was once legal. It was destroyed because of a wealthy business owner who didn't want the competition from the hemp industry. So just another govt. debacle.
Sick people should receive any medicine that will help with their illness or pain. We know it has helped many people who are sick. I don't want their need to be effected. Just don't want children getting their hands on this, I've seen it ruin many lives. We can do this but let's do it the right way. We can gather a discussion group that meets with politicians to do this the right way. Right now anyone can get a med. Maj. Card.
Why? Where is the real need? Which doctors are handing out the cards. Let's make it tougher to get the cars. I know many young people that have cards, why? This is where the attention needs to be focused.

[Jack Wilborn]

Rebecca, thanks for joining the discussion.  I realize that Obama in this discussion would be a problem, but it is the truth. If Obama legalized Marijuana it would very much surprise me.  I only stated that because it is a president that did it and it was at a time that Dr. Gupta was against any kind of Marijuana, as his statements show.  I am not trying to be 'for' or 'against' anyone here and I think I am conservative in nature.  I'm only trying to get people to get the facts before jumping to conclusions. It sounds like you know the facts and have voiced them in a way that I think is good.  I understand the confusion, but Dr. Gupta did stick his neck out doing what he did.

You have the bottom line, it's a medication and should be treated as such.  It would be much better if they shot down the Schedule system and replaced it with one that was based on knowledge. I am enlightened that you know how much money influenced the ban on Cannabis.  I also hope other can see your view. That's what this whole thing was about, just to get people to read and get good information they can make a good decision. It is interesting that Hearst printed how Negroes and Mexicans turned into 'beasts' when smoking Cannabis.  After Villa took back the 800,000 acres of prime timber land (for paper manufacture) from him!

I hope you see that I'm not trying to be anything for Marijuana, except to get people to not take the word of a country that has had reason, monetarily, to impose restrictions on the world.  What's worse is that they keep propagating false information.

I appreciate the note and will try and keep the Obama name out of the references, I did have a bad feeling about brining him up, even thought he was after someone with the US attitude towards Marijuana.  Did you happen to see his documentary?  It is kind of slow to start but shows some of the things that I witnessed and changed my mind of medical uses.

Again thanks for the note, I hope more at least learn about some of this stuff before making up their minds.

Jack

[Jack Wilborn]

Rebecca, I'm sorry you feel we need no new medications. Many of the sick would disagree and many researchers have their hands tied by these regulations.  The drugs on the Schedule list are at best political as research was finding uses when the laws went into effect terminating good honest research.  As I keep saying, all I want is people to be informed before making up their minds. 

I hate to say, but I witnessed a woman with MS (Multiple Sclerosis), I could hardly understand her speech.  I understand many times she is hung up on, as they think it's a crank call.  I say her smoke a few puffs, and her talking changed to one I could easily understand.  I could see her cramped muscles starting to relax.  There no medication that is currently available that will do this.  Israel has used it with Parkinson's to help relieve the shacking that is uncontrollable. In the US most of these patients use alcohol to try and control these shakes, as it's available and somewhat helps.  I guess I, along with the others, are too ignorant to realize we are being fooled.

Thanks for the comment.

Jack

[American Pride]

I have Essential Tremors and it helps with my shaking too.

[Jack Wilborn]

Rebecca, I hope you read a reply by American Pride.

Jack

[American Pride]

Jack, as someone who has had plenty of personal experience with marijuana I applaud you for your willingness to look at all aspects of it and seek the truth.

[Jack Wilborn]

American Pride, I tried to 'friend' you so I could send you a message, but this will have to do.  There is a pettion to ask Obama to change it to a different schedule, you may want to sign and get others that you know to also.  Here's the link..

https://www.change.org/petitions/president-barack-obama-if-marijuan...

The above link came from this:

http://blog.mpp.org/prohibition/new-bill-in-congress-would-make-dru...

and shows some of the legislation, where you can see why they have been tight lipped.

Also, I'm glad you mentioned LEAP, as I have been a member since it started.  Many fine people there that can reply to virtually any question.

Good luck

Jack

[American Pride]

Thank you for the links! I've accepted your friend request but i'm glad that you've shared the links here so that others who may be watching this thread and  interested can check them out.

[Pat J]

There are two sides to all stories, or more.  On this issue of FDA approved medications, I can say they are not necessarily any safer than marijuana.  To be clear, I'm not in favor of legalizing marijuana for all to get including children.  It must be said that when you see a new drug advertised (and that's another question) on TV, half the ad is taken up with a speed talker telling us about all the dangerous side affects.  Read the label on any drug you get or see a print ad in a magazine and the next page or two covers in tiny print all the bad things that could happen to you if you take that drug.  The FDA is just as corrupt and entangled with Big Pharma as the rest of government.  So I am equally leery about ingesting chemicals.

To the issue of advertising.  Why are these drugs advertised?  What happened to a doctor deciding what drug is best for a medical condition?  They advertise to get the public to demand drugs for every tiny ailment, thus padding the gigantic pockets of Big Pharma.  I know people, and even my step-mother, who take drugs to counter the effects of the other drugs.  Making the argument that prescription drugs are any better than marijuana is a false argument because they are abused by patients and doctors alike.

[Jack Wilborn]

Pat, I agree. My wife used to work for a pharma company in San Diego, so I'm pretty aware of the rings they have to jump thought. Not to mention the trials usually involve people next to death and determining if the drug caused it or something else is always a problem 

I didn't mean to compare one to another, even though it sounded that way, as I re-read it. Usually the correct response to making it legal and children, is at least there is a good chance that it won't be sold to them, like the local distributor of Marijuana does.

I have a cardiac condition so I have to be leery of any drug I take, over the counter or via a doctors script. I've been dealing with debilitating pain for 20+ years. When they did the Medical Marijuana, I was hoping that they would have set some kind of constraints, like a chronic problem and all drugs not working then try Marijuana. The hope was that there would be companies that would refine and produce known amounts for use. This did not happen.

Unfortunately, I've read about the problem they had in Montana, where most towns have one doctor and if he/she didn't believe, they couldn't get it. So of group of doctors came up with a 'traveling road show" that stopped in these towns on the weekend and gave the people a chance to see a doctor.  It ended up that when you went, they gave you a checklist of conditions that were approved for Medical Marijuana, so you checked the boxes, paid the $600 dollars and they gave you a completed application for a card.  This was the biggest hoax and the legislators blamed it on the 'dopers', but the people signing the paperwork was the doctors.  I computed what they made in the first year and it came out to about 3 million.  They flooded the state board that issued the cards. Of course the legislators, blaming it on the 'patients', gutted the bill and now their Medical Marijuana is pretty much defunct. It was a cash cow. Which is one reason I'm surprised that Republicans are not behind a push to legalize so they get the money!

The discussion here is really to try and get those that believe everything they are told is scientifically proven. And that we have been mislead.  Of course if you believe that you know all and we knew all in the 30's when this was really getting started, is too bad and will eventually disappoints yourself. In wasn't until the 90's that they discovered receptors in the brain and other places that is keyed to Marijuana Cannabinoids or similar molecules. The point being that we are always learning and that we have gotten it wrong many times, so the research should always continue. In the Scientific American (hope it's not considered liberal), here's the link, read it as it's short and to the point.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/end-the-ban-on-psychoacti...

August 14, 1970, the Assistant Secretary of Health, Dr. Roger O. Egeberg, who wrote the suggestion that Marijuana be a Schedule I drug, stated in part, "Since there is still a considerable void in our knowledge of the plant and effects of the active drug contained in it, our recommendation is that marijuana be retained within schedule 1 at least until the completion of certain studies now underway to resolve the issue."  Of course the passing of the legislation killed any research into the drug. Although he had a lot of information at that time, it's quite obvious that there was more to research.

Hope I didn't put you sleep.. Thanks for your input, it's nice to hear from someone that is not brainwashed.

Jack

[American Pride]

I support the legalization of marijuana but I don't support its abuse any more than I support the abuse of alcohol or prescription drugs. Legal or not, people who want it will always be able to get it. I went to a local Catholic grade school MANY years ago. The first time I smoked marijuana was when I was in 5th grade and I smoked it with other students behind the kindergarten classroom during our recess. An 8th grader gave it to us. Here we are, about 48 years later and nobody has even slowed the drugs down... much less put a stop to them. All we have succeeded in doing is making it a VERY profitable industry for the wrong people... just like we did with the prohibition of alcohol. Prohibition was the best thing that ever happened for Al Capone and today, the cartels are raking in fortunes by providing illegal drugs. The bigger the risk to provide the product, the higher the price they can charge their customers.

I hate the idea of legalizing drugs like heroin and methamphetamine because I see no good coming from them. I have seen good with marijuana. My husband is 65 and has never even thought about smoking a cigarette, much less marijuana. His father was a heavy smoker and died of cancer so he made his mind up long ago that he will never smoke. My husband is also a parplegic due to a spinal cord injury when he was 20. Because of his injury he has spasms that can be unbearable when the weather changes. He has suffered through days of endless spasms and no amount of prescription pain pills or anti spasmodic would help.him. There were times when I was afraid that he was going to overdose on them but he would say that he didn't care. He had asked me about marijuana before and when marijuana became legal for medical use he asked me what I thought. I told him that the dispensaries provide it in edible form so he wouldn't have to worry about smoking and that I felt it was worth a try. He saw the doctor, got his card and off we went to a dispensary in Scottsdale. (For someone who has been used to shopping very covertly for marijuana this was like the proverbial 'kid in a candy store'.) The facility was very professional in every way. They had a security guard out front and the waiting room could have been the waiting room of a doctor, lawyer, etc. but for the aroma of fresh marijuana filling it.

I helped my husband fill out his paperwork and he showed his card. Because I am also his caregiver I signed too. We were shown to the room where the actual store was and were helped by a very well informed salesperson. The doctor had suggested a high CBD low THC strain. He explained to us that CBD (cannabidiol) is the compound in marijuana that is anti-inflammatory and it relieves pain. He said that it was very effective with neuropathic pain which was exactly what my husband needed. As we were talking we mentioned the trouble my husband had in getting to sleep when he has his spasms so the sales person recommended equal THC. THC is the compound in marijuana that gives the well known high. We decided to give that a try and got several chocolate candy bars. It was only a matter of a day before he had his spasms so I cut up the candy the way the salesperson told us and gave him a piece. (We were told to divide into 8ths and only take one 8th and then wait an hour and a half before taking more if needed.) He was feeling more relaxed and the pain was milder two hours later so he took another piece and in about an hour the pain was gone. He slept like a baby through the night and woke up without spasms. It has been the best thing in the world for him. 

Like many things, marijuana has the potential to be a great help or a great disaster. It all depends on who is using it and how they use it. Some people can have a couple of beers or cocktails to unwind after work and others don't know when to stop. Some people can eat just one Twinkie and others (like me) have to eat the whole box of them. That's how it is with marijuana and that is why we need to have the same kind of laws for it's use that we have for alcohol.... but we really don't need to continue the futile war against it.