Pubdate: Thu, 12 Apr 2001
Source: Seattle Weekly (WA)
Copyright: 2001 Seattle Weekly
Contact:  http://www.seattleweekly.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/410
Author:  RIC SMITH, SHORELINE, WA
Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n612/a10.html?18748

A DROWSY AFFAIR

I attended the February 12 hearing in Olympia [see "Spliffed," 4/5], and my 
chief concern is that you may have mistakenly attended some other hearing.

The hearing before the Senate Committee on Health and Long-Term Care 
February 12, 2001, regarding SB 5176 was an opportunity to voice support or 
opposition to a small yet IMPORTANT clarification in Washington state's 
Medical Marijuana law RCW 69.51(A): Whether to assign regulatory oversight 
to this state's Department of Health.

The 'impressive' can mentioned in your column holds a 30- day supply of 
medical marijuana particulate matter rolled into cigarettes issued by the 
federal government to patients currently participating in their program. 
This 'enormous quantity' is one federal patient's recommended amount, 
presented as an example of practices/guidelines within the federal 
government's ongoing 25- year-old program. The canister was a simple 
tactile aid, certainly not part of any "performance."

Over a 60-day period, some of us may medicinally utilize an amount of 
marijuana troubling to you--many do not--in order to control our pain, 
spasticity, nausea, and/or other symptoms or side effects relating to our 
specific diagnosis. Medical marijuana may be smoked, and it may be 
ingested. Efficacy varies dependent upon means of delivery. My supply of 
medical marijuana fits rather nicely into a pint-sized carton or container.

Irregardless of your personal opinions [and] your mocking characterizations 
of ill persons as "one serious viper, indeed, mon," legally authorized 
patients under the care of their licensed physician deserve the protections 
afforded them by this law. This was made evident by the margin of our 
state's voters overwhelmingly approving the initiative in 1998 creating 
this law. Clearly defined protections that would cover all patients using 
marijuana, whether the "dirt weed the feds dish out'" or the "10-20 times 
more potent" "street bud" of your clouded imagination, remains the issue. 
With passage of SB 5176, the Department of Health can finally do this.

The confusion shown by your interpretation of the day's proceedings once 
again supports the need for accurate public education. Proof again that the 
affected parties-- patients, care-givers, medical providers, law 
enforcement, etc.--need and deserve clear language/protections within this 
state's 3-year-old law. Careful thought has gone into SB 5176; the decision 
to turn regulatory duties of 69.51(A) over to Department of Health is an 
important one.

Again . . . are you sure you were at the correct hearing? What were ya 
smoking, "mon"?

RIC SMITH SHORELINE
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom