We wouldn't vote for recreational marijuana here in California. No, it had to be sold as "medical marijuana" to ease the suffering of cancer patients. That's how marijuana is sold in stores across California, as "medicine" for which you need a prescription. The land of the hippie and surfer dude wasn't brave enough to flout federal law directly, we had to try, as Oppa says on Kim's Convenience, a sneak attack.
And maybe it's all crap anyway:
Researchers from the University of Bath's Centre for Pain Research have contributed to a major international review into the safety and efficacy of cannabinoids when used to treat pain, including chronic pain in children and adults.
Conducted for the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) and recently published across 13 linked scientific articles in the journal Pain, leading experts from around the world including Dr. Fisher and Professor Eccleston from Bath reviewed existing data into cannabinoids, including for so-called 'medicinal cannabis' and 'medicinal cannabis extracts."
Their findings suggest that although there is preclinical data supporting the hypothesis of cannabinoid analgesia, uncertainties especially in clinical evidence, imply the evidence base for efficacy and safety does not reach the threshold required for the IASP to endorse their general use for pain control. The studies and the statement from the IASP are limited to the use of cannabinoids to treat pain, and not for other conditions for which cannabinoids are used.
Dr. Emma Fisher who led the review of the clinical evidence said: "Cannabis, cannabinoids, and cannabis-based medicines are becoming an increasingly popular alternative to manage pain. However, our review shows that there is limited evidence to support or refute their use for the management of any pain condition. The studies we found were poor quality (high risk of bias) and the evidence was of very low-certainty, meaning that we are very uncertain of the findings and more research is needed."
I don't care if the feds legalize marijuana or not, but I have a hard time with states' flouting federal law and the feds' not doing anything about it. There be dragons.
I agree that there needs to be better coordination between federal law and state law.
ReplyDeleteBut, there hasn't been able to do good studies about medical marijuana due to the federal restrictions of classifying it as a Schedule 1 drug.
There are medical conditions where it is a valuable medicine. I am thinking nausea from chemotherapy, glaucoma, certain severe seizure disorders, among others.
Ideally, rethinking the whole federal and state handling of marijuana should be done. Especially, so that we can get good scientific evidence about what works and what doesn't.
Few people understand how much marijuana has changed in the last few decades. Growers have been selectively breeding stronger and stronger variants (oh, that word!) The tokes people took in the 60's were nothing compared to the high-octane weed available today.
ReplyDeleteThe National Institute of Drug Abuse keeps track of THC content in marijuana seized by the DEA. In 1995, the percentage was just 4%, in 2019 that increased to about 15%. And the 1995 levels were already a strong increase over the weed of the 1960's (under 1%). There is even a variety which packs in 28% THC.
The mild high of yesterday is gone. Marijuana is now a very potent drug.
Still...the libertarian in me says: have at it!