Peter A. Lipson's recent column about medical marijuana contains a slew of egregious inaccuracies. Not only is it poorly researched, but he fails to acknowledge the small mountain of evidence that has shown marijuana to be a safe, legitimate and potentially lifesaving medicine for many seriously ill patients.
Marijuana has been used as a medicine for at least 5,000 years, but the "real question," Mr. Lipson writes, "is whether it safely and effectively mitigates the course or symptoms of any medical condition."
To answer that, one needs only to refer to the substantial number of peer-reviewed studies on the topic, as well as the many esteemed health organizations that have endorsed patients' legal access to medical marijuana.
Just take the American Nurses Association, which says, "there is a growing body of evidence that marijuana has a significant margin of safety when used under a practitioner's supervision."
Still not convinced?
In 2008 the American College of Physicians--124,000 doctors of internal medicine--stated, "Evidence not only supports the use of medical marijuana in certain conditions, but also suggests numerous indications for cannabinoids," marijuana's unique, active components.
The American Academy of HIV Medicine, American Public Health Association, Leukemia and Lymphoma Society and countless others, have echoed these conclusions.
Ignoring such support, Mr. Lipson argues that marijuana could not be a "science-based treatment" because it "does not come in easily measured doses." He adds that the notoriously ineffective Marinol pill could be, however, because it contains "set amounts" of cannabinoids.
But whereas whole-plant marijuana contains up to 80 different cannabinoids, many possessing therapeutic properties, Marinol contains just one (THC) and therefore does not offer the full medicinal potential that marijuana does. And--contrary to what Mr. Lipson says--Marinol is actually less effective as a dosing option than smoked or vaporized marijuana, because when ingested orally the pill takes longer to have an effect. Alternatively, inhaled marijuana provides near immediate relief, allowing patients to administer dosage based on their specific needs.
Mr. Lipson also claims that "data in favor of the use of marijuana tend to be anecdotal and hyperbolic." This is simply not true. Controlled clinical trials published in a substantial number of peer-reviewed scientific journals, including Neurology, The Lancet and the Journal of Opioid Management, show marijuana helps ease neuropathic pain, a condition common in those suffering from HIV/AIDS, multiple sclerosis and other diseases. These studies show marijuana relieves that pain even when conventional painkillers fail.
If this sampling isn't enough, just last week, the Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research, at the University of California, San Diego, released a report based on 15 separate studies and nearly $9 million in research showing again that smoked marijuana can provide relief from pain caused by nerve damage and the muscle spasticity associated with multiple sclerosis.
Instead of even acknowledging these findings--released days before his column was published--Mr. Lipson instead overstates long-debunked prohibitionist scare-talk, warning readers that, "marijuana has many negative effects, such as addiction and withdrawal." Well, according to the National Academy of Sciences' Institute of Medicine, that level of addiction is relatively minor. In a 1999 report the Institute of Medicine reported that "millions of Americans have tried marijuana ... [but] few marijuana users become dependent on it."
That same government report found that "nausea, appetite loss, pain and anxiety are all afflictions of wasting, and all can be mitigated by marijuana," which directly counters Mr. Lipson's baseless claim that marijuana "doesn't seem to help with weight loss in cancer ... or with nausea and appetite loss."
Then there's Mr. Lipson's conclusion, which states that medical marijuana advocates "should focus their efforts on improving the study of marijuana rather than the premature use of it as a drug." While it is true that the federal government actively prevents the research necessary for marijuana to pass through the FDA approval process, thousands of suffering Americans cannot afford to wait for the federal government to come to its senses. The rationale behind the push for medical marijuana is moral, despite what Mr. Lipson says. It is unconscionable that patients who could find relief from marijuana should be denied access to a potentially lifesaving medicine and treated like criminals if they use it, simply because the federal government has failed to allow research.
Rather than call attention to this dilemma facing seriously ill patients, Mr. Lipson sadly promotes baseless claims, helping to preserve an unjust system that keeps legitimate medicine from patients who need it most.
NewsHawk: Ganjarden: 420 Magazine - Cannabis Culture News & Reviews
Source: Forbes.com
Author: Mike Meno
Contact: Forbes.com
Copyright: 2010 Forbes.com LLC
Website: Don't Believe The Hype
Marijuana has been used as a medicine for at least 5,000 years, but the "real question," Mr. Lipson writes, "is whether it safely and effectively mitigates the course or symptoms of any medical condition."
To answer that, one needs only to refer to the substantial number of peer-reviewed studies on the topic, as well as the many esteemed health organizations that have endorsed patients' legal access to medical marijuana.
Just take the American Nurses Association, which says, "there is a growing body of evidence that marijuana has a significant margin of safety when used under a practitioner's supervision."
Still not convinced?
In 2008 the American College of Physicians--124,000 doctors of internal medicine--stated, "Evidence not only supports the use of medical marijuana in certain conditions, but also suggests numerous indications for cannabinoids," marijuana's unique, active components.
The American Academy of HIV Medicine, American Public Health Association, Leukemia and Lymphoma Society and countless others, have echoed these conclusions.
Ignoring such support, Mr. Lipson argues that marijuana could not be a "science-based treatment" because it "does not come in easily measured doses." He adds that the notoriously ineffective Marinol pill could be, however, because it contains "set amounts" of cannabinoids.
But whereas whole-plant marijuana contains up to 80 different cannabinoids, many possessing therapeutic properties, Marinol contains just one (THC) and therefore does not offer the full medicinal potential that marijuana does. And--contrary to what Mr. Lipson says--Marinol is actually less effective as a dosing option than smoked or vaporized marijuana, because when ingested orally the pill takes longer to have an effect. Alternatively, inhaled marijuana provides near immediate relief, allowing patients to administer dosage based on their specific needs.
Mr. Lipson also claims that "data in favor of the use of marijuana tend to be anecdotal and hyperbolic." This is simply not true. Controlled clinical trials published in a substantial number of peer-reviewed scientific journals, including Neurology, The Lancet and the Journal of Opioid Management, show marijuana helps ease neuropathic pain, a condition common in those suffering from HIV/AIDS, multiple sclerosis and other diseases. These studies show marijuana relieves that pain even when conventional painkillers fail.
If this sampling isn't enough, just last week, the Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research, at the University of California, San Diego, released a report based on 15 separate studies and nearly $9 million in research showing again that smoked marijuana can provide relief from pain caused by nerve damage and the muscle spasticity associated with multiple sclerosis.
Instead of even acknowledging these findings--released days before his column was published--Mr. Lipson instead overstates long-debunked prohibitionist scare-talk, warning readers that, "marijuana has many negative effects, such as addiction and withdrawal." Well, according to the National Academy of Sciences' Institute of Medicine, that level of addiction is relatively minor. In a 1999 report the Institute of Medicine reported that "millions of Americans have tried marijuana ... [but] few marijuana users become dependent on it."
That same government report found that "nausea, appetite loss, pain and anxiety are all afflictions of wasting, and all can be mitigated by marijuana," which directly counters Mr. Lipson's baseless claim that marijuana "doesn't seem to help with weight loss in cancer ... or with nausea and appetite loss."
Then there's Mr. Lipson's conclusion, which states that medical marijuana advocates "should focus their efforts on improving the study of marijuana rather than the premature use of it as a drug." While it is true that the federal government actively prevents the research necessary for marijuana to pass through the FDA approval process, thousands of suffering Americans cannot afford to wait for the federal government to come to its senses. The rationale behind the push for medical marijuana is moral, despite what Mr. Lipson says. It is unconscionable that patients who could find relief from marijuana should be denied access to a potentially lifesaving medicine and treated like criminals if they use it, simply because the federal government has failed to allow research.
Rather than call attention to this dilemma facing seriously ill patients, Mr. Lipson sadly promotes baseless claims, helping to preserve an unjust system that keeps legitimate medicine from patients who need it most.
NewsHawk: Ganjarden: 420 Magazine - Cannabis Culture News & Reviews
Source: Forbes.com
Author: Mike Meno
Contact: Forbes.com
Copyright: 2010 Forbes.com LLC
Website: Don't Believe The Hype