Now the Joint Commission has some competition from another medical professional society.
According to this LA Times article, the board of the American Marijuana Advocates, er, um the AMA, has put forth a statement that one of its goals is to “conduct clinical research, develop cannabis-based medicines and devise alternative ways to deliver the drug.”
The article quotes the AMA as stating that
“Despite more than 30 years of clinical research, only a small number of randomized, controlled trials have been conducted on smoked cannabis,” and these trials were “insufficient to satisfy the current standards for a prescription drug product.”
The AMA also published a disclaimer that stated “This should not be viewed as an endorsement of state-based medical cannabis programs, the legalization of marijuana, or that scientific evidence on the therapeutic use of cannabis meets the current standards for a prescription drug product.”
Which leaves the whole issue not making sense. If they don’t endorse medical cannabis or legalization of marijuana, then why is their goal to “conduct clinical research, develop cannabis-based medicines and devise alternative ways to deliver the drug”? Do they want to do research in to “non medical cannabis” and “illegal drugs”?
In other news … the AMA Board also unanimously voted that batting one’s head with a sneaker could possibly be a sound way to gauge the effects of marijuana on one’s brain and that Mr. Hand was a real jerk when he stole Spicoli’s pizza in Fast Times at Ridgemont High.
Hat tip to the Volokh Conspiracy
Could it be that members of the AMA are at the age where they have seen, first hand, the “medicinal” use of marijuana?
The DEA, NIDA, et al have worked very hard to block most research in the efficacy of medical pot. I don’t see a logical inconsistency in the AMA (who are otherwise mostly useless) advocating research on the subject, while not advocating for medical pot or legalization until the results of the research are in.
I don’t use marijuana, but I believe in drug testing
I also believe that we can find good medicine in very strange places if we just look for it.
The whole medical marijuana thing is built on anecdotal research. There has been very very little true scientific research on marijuana.
We need real research. Real research would tell us if there is some real value in marijuana or if it is all placebo.
We could also do real research into what the long term risks of smoking marijuana is. My personal belief is that we will find it to be more hazardous on a gram to gram comparison to tobacco, but that marijuana smokers smoke less.
I believe the Federal Government has the authority to regulate dangerous substances, but the regulation should always allow research.
Itis true that disclaimers often introduce a logical inconsistency, but are a pragmatic necessity in today’s world of idealogues… who are not really interested in the truth per se, as much as anything that would validate their particular prejudices.
Legalize it, tax it, stop pretending it’s worse than alcohol.
For once I agree completely with Matt!
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile.
What it sounds like the AMA wants to extract the beneficial anti-nausea part of marijuana and put it in a pill so that the patient can’t get high. This Quaker point of view permeates our society — the authorities are against anything that feels good or makes us happy!
I agree with Matt — legalize it, tax it, it’s no worse than alcohol (and you don’t throw up on your shoes!). I have watched “Killer Weed” and laughed all the way through it!
Dude. That’s totally awesome.
Really who cares? It should be legal anyways. It’s harmless compared to Etoh.
You guys are right.
It’s not like marijuana use is linked to an increase in use of harder drugs or an increase in drug use and dependence.
We shouldn’t worry about the correlation between marijuana use and suicide or serious suicide attempts, either.
If you want to get the “benefits” from medical marijuana, we already have a drug for that. It’s called Marinol.
I don’t buy the argument that marijuana is “less harmful” than alcohol, either.
Regardless of where you stand on marijuana use, I don’t think that a real or implied endorsement of illegal drug use should come from a medical organization.
What’s next … recommendation of studies on crack, meth, and huffing?
You know … there have only been a small number of randomized, controlled trials on the medical effects of mescaline.
This would explain the AMA’s parsing of support vs endorsement.
You do *inhale* marijuana into your lungs and i would think that right there would make it worse than alcohol.
I have an aunt that died of lung cancer in Sept,1981. We were all out on a boat that previous may and I could swear my cousins were discussing her next dose of marijuana with her and assumed it was legal. Never thought about it.
So..I guess they were giving it to her? Thought there was a pill back then?
Anyway..that drug you mentioned WC sounds like it would do the same thing.
I do think that any person suffering from a painful, terminal disease should be made as comfortable as possible. I also wonder if the body..alleviated of the pain and nausea would then be stronger to resist the disease enough to give the patient *more time* on this earth.
In the 1920′s, England used a formula called Brompton’s cocktail for terminal ill patients with severe pain. Doubt it’s in use anymore since two of the three ingredients were heroin and cocaine. I’ve given marinol to people and seen zilch effects on appetite or mood. Just don’t think it’s the same as THC that’s inhaled.