New study: Marijuana useful for treating pain

[SRW]

New study released


SACRAMENTO — Medical marijuana is a promising treatment for some specific pain-related medical conditions, researchers from the University of California's Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research reported Wednesday.
State-funded studies conducted over the past decade have found marijuana effective by itself or in combination with other drugs for conditions such as nerve pain associated with HIV and muscle spasms associated with multiple sclerosis....


This study appears to confirm real benefits to medical marijuana. Is there a logical reason for not allowing it to be prescribed and dispensed?

California where it is legal, it is difficult to get legally, even for researchers.

 

[GreenLines]

This study appears to confirm real benefits to medical marijuana. Is there a logical reason for not allowing it to be prescribed and dispensed?

Certain ways of getting it into your system can cause lung damage.
Long term affects aren't entirely known.
Will likely raise the number of work and driving related accidents.

Nothing else is coming to mind at the moment.

 

[SRW]

Certain ways of getting it into your system can cause lung damage.
Long term affects aren't entirely known.
Will likely raise the number of work and driving related accidents.

Nothing else is coming to mind at the moment.

I am talking about medical use not recreational, all you listed above are currently occurring. As this is the recreational drug of choice for many.

Because of the onerous federal laws it is almost impossible to do a long term study on the affects, however it is not exactly a mystery, it has been around for a long time.

 

[GreenLines]

I am talking about medical use not recreational, all you listed above are currently occurring. As this is the recreational drug of choice for many.

I'm not aware that there's a vastly different way of using a pipe with regular marijuana and "medical marijuana". There are different modes of burning the buds, a vaporizer comes to mind though I don't know how it works, that avoid putting heat into the lungs.

One of the federal recipients of "medical marijuana" the distribution system is by smoking joints.

Because of the onerous federal laws it is almost impossible to do a long term study on the affects, however it is not exactly a mystery, it has been around for a long time.

"Onerous federal laws" doesn't work for me as a reason that the research can't be done, since there are plenty of places where it is legal... I think.

 

[calebprime]

For people who are really sick, and who don't care too much about their lungs, and aren't too concerned with losing some of their drive and focus, I think weed can be effective relief.

But we all know that half the people in California who got a script weren't really ill.

They were 'anxious'--when they stopped smoking weed.

In my case, better to fight for the natural endorphins by exercising. Better to live with a little too much tension. Better to put that anxiety to use.

I wish it weren't so, but I found it too pleasant, too easy, to relax and kill my various pains--muscular and mental--with weed.

Problem is, it can make you a little too withdrawn, if that's your tendency.

I eventually started accomplishing less, smoking more, and wanting to just withdraw into the safety of my room, listening to music, instead of making it myself.

In that regard, weed isn't incompatible with a consumerist society--it tends to make people a bit more passive, but they'll still order in for pizza.

The worst thing for me was the effect on my lungs--I never got around to a vaporiser--and the effect on my marriage--it put me on a different planet from my wife, who never touches the stuff.

As a 'recovering' ex weed-addict, you'd think I could muster more disapproval about the drug, but I don't think it's that bad--until you start smoking too much like I did.

It took me around 50 days after quitting to feel like my old self again.

But that's just me--(and these days, probably 5 million other people...)

 

[Barsdamian]

Allow me to weigh in. I am a professional, semi-pro athlete, cannabis user and part-time cannabis legalization activist.

To answer the original question, there are plenty of reasons that cannabis remains illegal, none of them logical.

The biggest is money. There is trillions of dollars worth of the economy tied up in cannabis prohibition. So many organizations benefit it can be hard to keep track. Here's just a few of the major benefactors...

-Law enforcemnent from the DEA to local cops and everything in between. 700,000 marijuana related arrests annually in the US.
-Private prison industry and prison guards. 1 in 32 US adults is in the justice system with the 'war on drugs' being a major contributor.
-Drug treatment industry. Drug courts send thousands to 'treatment' programs even though cannabis arguably has a lower potential for addiction than caffeine.
-Alcohol and beer makers. Many view medical cannabis as a stepping stone to out and out legalization and the alcohol industry put a fair amount of money behind keeping cannabis restricted.
The list goes on and on and on.

I should also note that this study is not alone. There have been a number of promising studies that show that cannabis may have a lot to offer in other areas. As you pointed out however, research is very difficult. The supply for any study must be obtained from the federal govt through the National Institute for Drug Abuse (NIDA). Not only do they make it prohibitively expensive, but they tend only fund studies that will support their anti-cannabis stance.

A good example is the work or Dr. Tashkin at UCLA who conducted a large study of cannabis and lung cancer. NIDA happily funded his study but when the data suggested that cannabis users actually had a slightly lower incidence of lung cancer than the general population, they refused to publish the study. Dr. Tashkin was left to publicize his work and, not surprisingly, it got almost no attention in the press.

 

[Barsdamian]

Will likely raise the number of work and driving related accidents.

I don't believe there is evidence to back this up. I have searched pretty thoroughly and to my knowledge, there have been no credible studies looking at the effect of cannabis on driving ability.

If you know of something along these lines, please pass it along.

 

[calebprime]

Allow me to weigh in. I am a professional, semi-pro athlete, cannabis user and part-time cannabis legalization activist.

To answer the original question, there are plenty of reasons that cannabis remains illegal, none of them logical.

The biggest is money. There is trillions of dollars worth of the economy tied up in cannabis prohibition. So many organizations benefit it can be hard to keep track. Here's just a few of the major benefactors...

-Law enforcemnent from the DEA to local cops and everything in between. 700,000 marijuana related arrests annually in the US.
-Private prison industry and prison guards. 1 in 32 US adults is in the justice system with the 'war on drugs' being a major contributor.
-Drug treatment industry. Drug courts send thousands to 'treatment' programs even though cannabis arguably has a lower potential for addiction than caffeine.
-Alcohol and beer makers. Many view medical cannabis as a stepping stone to out and out legalization and the alcohol industry put a fair amount of money behind keeping cannabis restricted.
The list goes on and on and on.

I should also note that this study is not alone. There have been a number of promising studies that show that cannabis may have a lot to offer in other areas. As you pointed out however, research is very difficult. The supply for any study must be obtained from the federal govt through the National Institute for Drug Abuse (NIDA). Not only do they make it prohibitively expensive, but they tend only fund studies that will support their anti-cannabis stance.

A good example is the work or Dr. Tashkin at UCLA who conducted a large study of cannabis and lung cancer. NIDA happily funded his study but when the data suggested that cannabis users actually had a slightly lower incidence of lung cancer than the general population, they refused to publish the study. Dr. Tashkin was left to publicize his work and, not surprisingly, it got almost no attention in the press.

This ex weed-smoker doesn't take issue with any of this.

I think cannabis should be legal, and I don't think it's that bad.

However, it's a no-brainer about driving.

eta: It's also a no-brainer about cell-phones and driving...

As for my quitting, it was simply my personal choice.

If you are taking the politics to the point where you are saying that there are no withdrawal symptoms after prolonged heavy use, then I disagree with you.

That's all.

 

[Barsdamian]

I'm not aware that there's a vastly different way of using a pipe with regular marijuana and "medical marijuana". There are different modes of burning the buds, a vaporizer comes to mind though I don't know how it works, that avoid putting heat into the lungs.

Vaporization works by heating the cannabis to a temperature where the desired cannabinoids vaporize but no combustion takes place. Typically this is accomplished by forcing hot air through ground cannabis. Delta-9-Tetrahydracannabinol (THC), the main active component vaporizes at about 160 Celcius.

Some medicinal users resist vaporization however, as other compounds such as cannabidol and cannabinol do not vaporize until much higher temps >200C. At those temps, many other compounds begin to vaporize as well and you might as well be smoking at that point.

Beyond that, many medicinal users take cannabis orally in baked goods or as tinctures to obtain their desired effects.

 

[Barsdamian]

However, it's a no-brainer about driving.

eta: It's also a no-brainer about cell-phones and driving...

That is essentially the answer that MADD gave when the group I was assisting took them to task for their stance that driving while high was the same as driving while drunk. After finally admitting that there was no evidence to back up their position, they said their stance on the issue was based on "common sense."

It may seem like common sense to most but there should be evidence backing it up before society decides that its inappropriate.

On a personal level, there are a couple of activities in my life where being high definitely improves my performance, so I'm willing to allow that driving while high may not be as bad as it seems. I'd like to see some evidence either way.

If you are taking the politics to the point where you are saying that there are no withdrawal symptoms after prolonged heavy use, then I disagree with you.

I wouldn't say that. Many people do report withdrawal symptoms but I'll point out that these are highly individual. Many people have almost none.

I travel to the US for business a few times a year and when I do I go clean for that week or two. The only withdrawal symptom I routinely have is a diminished appetite which I look at as a good thing...especially when eating out every day for 2 weeks.

 

[GreenLines]

I don't believe there is evidence to back this up. I have searched pretty thoroughly and to my knowledge, there have been no credible studies looking at the effect of cannabis on driving ability.

If you know of something along these lines, please pass it along.

I'm going with the proposed medical marijuana bill in my state which says that if you're under the affects of THC while driving, it's a punishable offense. Driving while high is strictly prohibited in the Wisconsin medical marijuana bill.

The biggest is money. There is trillions of dollars worth of the economy tied up in cannabis prohibition. So many organizations benefit it can be hard to keep track. Here's just a few of the major benefactors...

I can see billions annually, I cannot see trillions, as the THC industry, I'm told, does less then $20B/year in the US.

Vaporization works by...

Appreciate that, always wondered what was going on.

It may seem like common sense to most but there should be evidence backing it up before society decides that its inappropriate.

I agree and disagree with this. By this reasoning dumping toxic chemicals into a body of water on an industrial scale is perfectly fine, as long as no studies are done on the affects of it.

On a personal level, there are a couple of activities in my life where being high definitely improves my performance, so I'm willing to allow that driving while high may not be as bad as it seems. I'd like to see some evidence either way.

What works well for you may not work well for someone else. You probably also have a built up resistance to the drug, and may not go all out and smoke an oz. in a couple hours.

 

[SRW]

"Onerous federal laws" doesn't work for me as a reason that the research can't be done, since there are plenty of places where it is legal... I think.

There is to my knowledge only one place where you can legally obtain marijuana for study and the researchers are faced with bureaucratic nightmare to obtain it.

From the article in the OP

"But it doesn't fill the enormous vacuum created by the federal government's monopoly on the supply of marijuana that can be used in clinical research," Gutwillig said.
The only legal source of marijuana for these and other studies is the National Institute on Drug Abuse, which oversees a farm at the University of Mississippi.

I gave up smoking marijuana back in the 70's did not suffer any withdrawals but my understanding is that only about 10% of people are apt to get physically addicted. Then again while smoking it 90% of people get stupider than they normally are, and while most people tend to get very stupid whenever they are driving; adding a drug is a bad idea.

 

[GreenLines]

There is to my knowledge only one place where you can legally obtain marijuana for study and the researchers are faced with bureaucratic nightmare to obtain it.

I was thinking world wide research, not just North America.

 

[Barsdamian]

I can see billions annually, I cannot see trillions, as the THC industry, I'm told, does less then $20B/year in the US.

I overstated my case. When considering the economic benefits of prohibiting all drugs, the figure easily tops $1 Trillion. When talking about cannabis specifically, which we are, its obviously not as high. My mistake.

I agree and disagree with this. By this reasoning dumping toxic chemicals into a body of water on an industrial scale is perfectly fine, as long as no studies are done on the affects of it.

There are many examples of human activities that are extremely damaging and have continued for years until evidence is produced and society reacts accordingly.

What works well for you may not work well for someone else. You probably also have a built up resistance to the drug, and may not go all out and smoke an oz. in a couple hours.

Valid points but not an argument for continued prohibition.

Go to any pharmacy and you'll find dozens of easily available products that affect your ability to drive. Yet citizens are trusted with the responsibility to use these products and their automobiles safely. Cannabis may well diminish ones ability to drive, but that is not an adequate reason to continue prohibition.

 

[sadhatter]

Good thread a couple of comments from my experience.

1) The vaporizer sucks, i know people that enjoy them, but i have yet to use one that gives me the full " effect" of smoking. I find that you do get a high, but it is much "lighter" and you find yourself vaporizing more than you would have smoked. ( a financial rather than medical issue.)

2) Driving while high is like driving while eating. I wouldn't do it myself, but i have seen people preform just as well when high. That being said i personally will no longer get in a car with someone who is high.

3) I have went cold turkey rather randomly through the past few years. Latest was fairly recently , and i went for 4 months going from about 3.5 grams a day to zero. ( moved back in the the parents while i am going back to school.) And i didn't have any ill effects other than very slight insomnia the first night. Now as the situation changed i am smoking ( much less , about.5 to a gram a day), and no one around has stated any behavior change.

4) Like anything addiction is a personal issue, i personally have a very addictive personality. ( 16 hour dr who binges, 12 hour video game sessions, reading an entire novel in a sitting, etc. Are par for the course for me.) But as much as i love weed, i have never had an issue if i couldn't get any.

Those things being said, my only devils advocate point is that as far as i am aware there is no road side test for thc. Which would make it hard to confirm if someone is on it at the time they are driving. And in some areas ( i know there are a few, including my city. ) police are no longer allowed to use the smell of pot to search due to the similarity in smell to some brands of american cigarettes ( i would not say they smell the same, as per when i smoked cigarettes i loved marlboros and all the high poison american smokes, and never noticed this. Though now that i smoke the occasional cigar, i have noticed a few, that i would swear had dope in them.).

 

[Skeptical Greg]

New study: Marijuana useful for treating pain

Like we really needed a study to confirm this ...

 

[SRW]

New study: Marijuana useful for treating pain

Like we really needed a study to confirm this ...

It is the specific type of pain like idiopathic neuropathies which make this relevant. Nerve pain does not respond to narcotics and is treated with anti-depressants which do not always work.

 

[Shawnibus]

For people who are really sick, and who don't care too much about their lungs, and aren't too concerned with losing some of their drive and focus, I think weed can be effective relief.

Didn't know that this happens to absolutely everyone who begins using cannabis. Thanks for stating it like it's a fact without exception.

1) The vaporizer sucks, i know people that enjoy them, but i have yet to use one that gives me the full " effect" of smoking. I find that you do get a high, but it is much "lighter" and you find yourself vaporizing more than you would have smoked. ( a financial rather than medical issue.)

I do agree that the effects are different when smoking and when vaporizing, but it feels like a different high instead of like it's not giving the 'full effect'. Vaporizers seem to produce more of a head high for me. I don't have trouble getting up off the couch afterward. I guess this means that vaporizers suck.

 

[luchog]

I"Onerous federal laws" doesn't work for me as a reason that the research can't be done, since there are plenty of places where it is legal... I think.

Nope. So far there is not one country where cannabis is fully legal, although there are several where it is decriminalized or the laws aren't sufficiently enforced. Most of these, however, are developing or Third World nations like Afghanistan. The only place it's even remotely close to legal is The Netherlands; and even there it is still technically illegal, there is simply a government policy of non-enforcement of possession (although trafficking can still be prosecuted).

 

[luchog]

I don't believe there is evidence to back this up. I have searched pretty thoroughly and to my knowledge, there have been no credible studies looking at the effect of cannabis on driving ability.

If you know of something along these lines, please pass it along.

There have been. Most of them were Canadian, although I don't have the links handy (they shouldn't be hard to find).

The basic conclusions of all the studies were that 1) despite the claims of users, cannabis does impair reaction times, although not as much as alcohol; 2) cannabis does not impair judgement the way that alcohol does, so that cannabis users tend to drive more carefully than average drivers (the direct opposite of alcohol use); 3) cannabis users are more likely to slightly underestimate their driving ability, in contrast to alcohol users who are more likely to substantially overestimate it.

The upshot of all was that cannabis does impair one's ability to drive; but that cannabis users were less likely to be hazardous drivers than alcohol users.

Given that roughly 20% of Americans are regular or occasional users; I don't think legalization will have a significant effect on the rate of traffic accidents.