Medical Marijuana – The Debate Rages On

Posted by hgsba on May 18, 2018

Pot is also known as pot, grass and pot but its formal name is actually cannabis. That is about from the leaves and flowers of the plant Cannabis sativa. It is considered an illegitimate substance in the US and many countries and own marijuana is a crime punishable by law. The FDA classifies marijuana as Schedule We, substances which have a very high prospect of maltreatment and have no proven medical use. Over the years several studies declare that some substances found in marijuana have healing use, especially in fatal diseases such as tumor and AIDS. This began a fierce debate over the advantages and disadvantages of the use of medical pot. To settle this controversy, the Institute of Medication published the famous 99 IOM report entitled Cannabis and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base. The survey was comprehensive but would not give a clear cut yes or no answer. The contrary camps of the medical marijuana concern often cite part of the report in their advocacy arguments. However, even though the report cleared up many things, it never settled the controversy once and for all. Florida marijuana doctor

Discussing look at the problems that support why medical marijuana should be legalized.

(1) Marijuana is a natural herb and has been used from Southerly America to Asia as an herbal medicine for millennia. In this time period when the all natural and organic and natural are important health buzzwords, a naturally developing herb like marijuana might be more attractive to and safer for consumers than synthetic drugs. 

(2) Marijuana has strong healing potential. Several studies, as summarized in the IOM report, have observed that cannabis can be used as analgesic, e. g. to take care of pain. A few studies showed that THC, a marijuana component is effective in treating persistent pain experienced by tumor patients. However, studies on acute pain such as those experienced during surgery and trauma have pending reports. A few studies, also summarized in the IOM report, have exhibited that some marijuana components have antiemetic properties and are, consequently, effective against nausea and vomiting, which are common side results of cancer chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Some experts suspect that cannabis has some therapeutic potential against nerve diseases such as multiple sclerosis. Specific compounds removed from marijuana have strong therapeutic potential. Cannobidiol (CBD), a major element of marijuana, has been shown to have antipsychotic, anticancer and antioxidant properties. Different cannabinoids have been proven to prevent high intraocular pressure (IOP), a major risk factor for glaucoma. Medications that may contain active ingredients present in marijuana but they have been synthetically produced in the laboratory have been given the inexperienced light by the US FDA. One example is Marinol, an antiemetic agent indicated for nausea and vomiting associated with cancers chemotherapy. Its active component is dronabinol, a man-made delta-9- tetrahydrocannabinol (THC).

(3) One of the major proponents of medical pot is the Marijuana Insurance plan Project (MPP), an US-based organization. Many medical professional societies and organizations have expressed their support. Because an example, The North american College of Physicians, suggested a re-evaluation of the Schedule I classification of marijuana in their 08 position paper. ACP also expresses its strong support for research into the therapeutic role of weed as well as permission from federal criminal requested by prosecution; civil liability; or professional sanctioning for physicians who prescribe or dispense medical marijuana in accordance with state law. Similarly, security from criminal or municipal penalties for patients who use medical marijuana as permitted under state regulations.

(4) Medical marijuana is legitimately used in many developed countries The argument of if they can do it, why not all of us? is another strong point. Some countries, including Canada, Belgium, Austria, the Holland, the United Kingdom, The country of spain, Israel, and Finland have legalized the therapeutic use of marijuana under rigid prescription control. Some claims in america are also allowing faveur.

Now here are the arguments against medical weed.

(1) Lack of data on safety and usefulness. Drug regulation is structured on safety first. The protection of marijuana and its components still has to first be founded. Efficacy only comes second. Even if marijuana has its own beneficial health effects, the huge benefits should surpass the risks for doing it to be considered for medical use. Unless marijuana is proven to be better (safer plus more effective) than drugs now available in the market, its approval for medical use may certainly be a long shot. According to the testimony of Robert J. Meyer of the Department of Health and Human Services the ability to access a drug or medical remedy, without knowing how to make use of it or even if it is effective, will not benefit anyone. Just having access, without having safety, efficacy, and enough use information does not help patients.

(2) Unfamiliar chemical components. Medical weed can only be easily accessible and affordable in herbal form. Like other herbs, marijuana falls under the class of organic products. Unpurified botanical products, however, face many problems including lot-to-lot consistency, medication dosage determination, potency, shelf-life, and toxicity. Based on the IOM record if there is any future of marijuana as a medicine, it is situated in its isolated components, the cannabinoids and their synthetic derivatives. To completely define different components of weed would cost so much time that the costs of the medications that will come from it would be too high. Currently, no pharmaceutical company seems enthusiastic about investing money to isolate more restorative components from marijuana further than precisely what is already available in the market.

(3) Prospect of abuse. Weed or cannabis is addicting. It might not exactly be as addictive as hard drugs such as cocaine; nevertheless it cannot be refused that there is a potential for drug misuse associated with marijuana. It had been demonstrated by a few studies as summarized in the IOM report.

(4) Insufficient a safe delivery system. The most typical form of delivery of marijuana is through smoking. Considering the current trends in anti-smoking legislations, this form of delivery will never be approved by health specialists. Reliable and safe delivery systems in the form of vaporizers, nebulizers, or inhalers are still at the testing stage.

(5) Symptom alleviation, not treatment. Regardless if marijuana has beneficial effects, it is merely dealing with the symptoms of certain diseases. It will not treat or cure these illnesses. Provided that it is beneficial against these symptoms, there are already medications available which work just as well or even better, with no side effects and likelihood of abuse associated with marijuana.

The 99 IOM report could not settle the debate about medical marijuana with technological evidence available at that point. The report definitely disappointed the use of smoked cigarettes marijuana but gave a nod towards marijuana use by using a medical inhaler or vaporizer. In addition, the report also recommended the compassionate use of marijuana under tight medical supervision. Furthermore, it urged more funding in the research of the safety and efficacy of cannabinoids.

So what on earth stands in the way of making clear the questions brought up by the IOM statement? The health authorities do not seem to be to be enthusiastic about having another review. There is limited data available and whatever can be bought is biased towards questions of safety on the unfavorable effects of smoked pot. Data on efficacy mainly come from studies on synthetic cannabinoids (e. g. THC). This disparity in data makes a goal risk-benefit assessment difficult.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *