DON'T LEGALIZE MARIJUANA IN THE NAME OF MEDICINE

The California Medical Association called for marijuana legalization
last weekend.

And word is that other groups, such as the California Society of
Addiction Medicine, are considering similar measures.

The CMA claimed that legalization is an essential first step toward
increasing our knowledge of the drug, including our knowledge about
any medical uses. They argued that medical marijuana has placed
doctors in an impossible position in California, and the only way to
get them out of it is to legalize the drug outright.

Sadly, though, such a view is shortsighted and poses a major risk to
public health.

We sympathize with California's doctors.

They are caught between a federal law that says that marijuana is
illegal and a state law that has opened the gates widely to its use
for almost any purported medical reason.

But medical marijuana does not rely on the time-tested Food and Drug
Administration process for examining the safety and efficacy of the
drug. Rather than legalization, isn't the solution to use this process?

Unfortunately, legalization groups have convinced CMA and other
medical societies that the process doesn't work. They claim that
research is stifled because marijuana is illegal.

But the evidence says otherwise.

As of 2011, 209 active researchers are registered with the Drug
Enforcement Administration to perform bona fide research with
marijuana, marijuana extracts and THC, the active component in marijuana.

There are 288 studies being conducted by the National Institutes of
Health to research the constituents in marijuana, or
cannabinoids.

A concrete example of this can be found in a product called Sativex,
which the FDA and DEA have been involved in (it is in FDA trials).
Sativex, a drug approved in Canada, the United Kingdom and other parts
of Europe for the treatment of multiple sclerosis spasticity and
cancer pain, combines THC and another active ingredient in marijuana,
CBD, to eliminate the "high" from THC.

Those who want to use marijuana for any reason in the name of medicine
may not like it, but this kind of standardization is the right way to
"medicalize" marijuana.

Full legalization, on the other hand, according to a study published
last year by the Rand Corp., would increase drug use. A look at our
problems with alcohol and tobacco reveals that, even though we collect
some taxes on their sales, they pale in comparison to the social costs
of these drugs (that is why alcohol taxes, for example, do not
effectively pay for drunken driver education or youth anti-drinking
initiatives).

We agree with many medical societies that the setup for dispensing
medical marijuana is not working.

According to multiple studies, very few of those who sought a
recommendation had cancer, HIV/AIDS, glaucoma or multiple sclerosis.

This is seen also in Colorado, where only 2 percent of users reported
cancer.

What has been the result of medical marijuana in California?
Researchers are now saying that there is a link between medical
marijuana and higher drug use rates.

Legalization, as proposed by the CMA, would only increase marijuana
use even further.

The solution to these problems is found in allowing the scientific
process to play out, not letting marijuana legalization politics win
the day. Let's just hope that the California Society of Addiction
Medicine and other similar groups are listening.