Medical Marijuana – The Debate Rages On
Marijuana is also referred to as marijuana, grass and marijuana however its proper name is obviously cannabis. It’s known as a prohibited substance in the US and lots of nations and ownership of marijuana is a crime punishable by law. The FDA classifies marijuana as Schedule I, chemicals that have an extremely large potential for abuse and have no proven medical use. Over the years several studies assert that a few substances utilized in bud possess medicinal use, specially in terminal diseases such as cancer and AIDS. This started a fierce debate on the advantages and disadvantages of the use of medical marijuana. To settle this debate, the Institute of Medicine released the famous 1999 IOM report entitled Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base. The report was comprehensive however, did not give a clear cut yes or no answer. The other decks of the medical marijuana issue usually cite a portion of this record within their advocacy arguments. However, even though the report clarified many things, it never settled the controversy once and for all.
Let’s consider the problems that support why medical marijuana should be legalized.
(1) Pot is just a naturally occurring herb and it has online cbd merchant account been used from South America into Asia as an herbal medicine for millennia. In this time when the all natural and organic are essential health buzz-words, a naturally occurring herb like bud may be more appealing to and more healthy for consumers than synthetic drugs.
(2) Marijuana has strong therapeutic potential. Several studies, as summarized in the IOM report, researchers have discovered that cannabis can be used as analgesic, e.g. to deal with pain. A few studies showed that THC, a marijuana component is effective in treating chronic pain caused by cancer patients. But studies on severe pain such as those experienced during surgery and trauma possess inconclusive reports. A few research workers, also outlined from the IOM report, have demonstrated that some bud components have anti emetic properties and are, therefore, effective against nausea and vomitingthat are normal side effects of cancer chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Specific compounds extracted in bud possess strong curative capacity. Cannobidiol (CBD), a significant component of marijuana, was shown to own antipsychotic, anticancer and anti oxidant properties. Other cannabinoids have been shown to prevent high blood pressure (IOP), a significant risk factor for glaucoma. Drugs which have active ingredients present in bud but have now been synthetically manufactured in the laboratory have been approved by the US FDA. One example is Marinol, an antiemetic agent suggested for nausea and vomiting related to cancer .
Lots of medical professional societies and associations have expressed their own support. As an instance, The American College of Physicians, recommended a re evaluation of the Schedule I classification of bud in their 2008 position paper. ACP also expresses its strong support for research to the curative purpose of marijuana in addition to exemption from federal criminal prosecution; civil liability; or practitioner sanctioning for physicians who prescribe or distribute medical marijuana in accord with law. Similarly, protection against civil or criminal penalties for patients who use medical marijuana as permitted under state laws.
(4) Medical marijuana is lawfully used in most developed countries The argument of if they’re able to do it, why not ? Is another strong point. Some nations, including Canada, Belgium, Austria, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Spain, Israel, and Finland have legalized the curative usage of marijuana under strict prescription control. Some nations in the US are also allowing exemptions.
Now here are the arguments against medical marijuana.
(1) insufficient information on safety and efficacy. Medication regulation relies upon safety first. The protection of marijuana and its components still has to first be established. Efficacy simply includes instant. Unless marijuana is proven to be improved (safer and far better ) than drugs now available in the current market, its approval for medical use may be a long shot. In accordance with the testimony of Robert J. Meyer of the Department of Health and Human Services using a drug or treatment, without knowing how to utilize it even if it’s beneficial, does not benefit anyone. Simply having access, without needing safety, efficacy, and decent use information does not help patients.
(2) not known compound components. Medical marijuana may simply be readily accessible and affordable in herbal kind. Like other herbs, marijuana falls under the class of botanical items. Un-purified botanical goods, but face many problems including lot-to-lot consistency, dosage determination, potency, shelf-life, and toxicity. Based on the IOM report when there is any future of marijuana as a medicine, it lies in its isolated components, the cannabinoids and their synthetic derivatives. To completely characterize the different components of marijuana could cost so much time and money that the costs of these medications which will come out of this will be too significant. Currently, no pharmaceutical company appears to be enthusiastic about investing money to isolate more therapeutic components from bud beyond what is available in the market.
(3) Potential for misuse. It might perhaps not be as addictive as hard drugs like cocaine; nevertheless it cannot be denied that there’s a prospect of substance abuse associated with marijuana. This was demonstrated by a few studies as outlined in the IOM report.
(4) Insufficient a secure delivery method. The most common type of delivery of marijuana is through smoking. Considering the recent trends in antismoking legislations, this kind of delivery will never be approved by health authorities.
Even if marijuana has therapeutic consequences, it’s just fixing the symptoms of certain diseases. It does not cure or cure these illnesses. Given that it is effective against these indications, there are already medications available that work as well and better yet, minus the side effects and risk of abuse connected with bud.
The 1999 IOM report could not settle the debate about medical marijuana with scientific evidence available at that moment. The report clearly discouraged the use of smoked marijuana but gave a nod to marijuana use through a health inhaler or vaporizer. In addition, the analysis also advocated that the compassionate use of marijuana under strict medical supervision. Furthermore, it advocated more funds in the research of their efficacy and safety of cannabinoids.
Therefore what stands in the way of clarifying the questions caused by the IOM report? The health authorities don’t appear to be curious about having another review. There’s limited data available and anything can be found is biased towards safety issues on the adverse effects of smoked marijuana. Data available on effectiveness mainly include studies on synthetic cannabinoids (e.g. THC). This disparity in statistics creates a goal risk-benefit appraisal difficult.
Clinical studies on marijuana are difficult to run as a result of limited funds and strict regulations. On account of the complicated legalities involved, hardly any pharmaceutical companies are buying cannabinoid research. In many cases, it’s not clear just how exactly to specify medical marijuana as advocated and opposed by many groups. Does this merely consult with the use of the botanical product marijuana or does this contain artificial cannabinoid components (e.g. THC and derivatives) as good? Synthetic cannabinoids (e.g. Marinol) available on the market are extremely costly, forcing people towards the less expensive cannabinoid from the form of bud. Of course, the matter is further clouded by conspiracy theories involving the pharmaceutical industry and drug regulators.