Pubdate: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 Source: Anderson Valley Advertiser (CA) Copyright: 2006 Anderson Valley Advertiser Contact: http://www.theava.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/2667 Note: Titled by MAP and author of referenced article's comments appended Author: Dave Bishop Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v06/n232/a08.html?296091 Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?115 (Cannabis - California) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/people/Denney (Philip A. Denney, MD,) PURE WASTE ! With regard to your article Feb. 22nd titled 'Investigation of Dr. Denney'... This investigation by Redding's police dept of Doctor Phil Denney is one of the biggest wastes of our tax dollars the city of Redding could possibly undertake, with or without the Federal Governments assistance. PURE WASTE ! To begin with, the city of Redding should be advised that it is against the law to attempt to circumvent or overturn a referendum passed by the people. In particular the Chief of Police need only refer to article three sec. 3.5 , paragraph c. of the Calif. Constitution to realize which law he is breaking in particular, not to mention a thorough investigation into his own moral values.(referring to his collusion with the Federal govt., also against the law.) The only possible way that there could be ANY wrong doing, with regard to THIS Doctor giving a recommendation, would be if some unscrupulous individual lied. Doctor Denney is extremely honest and professional. It is expected that he believe the liar. This is what took place when Agent Steve Decker of the BATF, disguised as Steven P. Hoffmaster with a neck injury, asked the doctor to recommend Cannabis for his pain. He couldn't remember when or where he saw a doctor last, but was in pain.(The DEA is so well practiced at lying, that it is no wonder that the doctor was fooled.) Should the Doctor believe the patient? Should the Doctor, after observing an old scar on this person's neck, call him a liar and tell him he isn't really in pain? What Doctor has THAT right? No Doctor that I have ever been to EVER asked me if I was lying to him, except on the papers that state that you "declare under penalty of perjury" have I been asked that question. With a signature, the doctor should be off the hook ...after all, the liar signed their 'name'. Should the doctors of California or all of America now employ a lie detector? Isn't it common practice for a person, no matter what the ailment, to confer with the Doctor, fully expecting that the doctor will believe them? How else can we be treated? You tell the Doctor what the problem is, and the doctor, BELIEVING YOU, makes the appropriate recommendation. SO why is it the Doctor that is in trouble instead of the liar? What kind of a profession is it, when they have to resort to lying to the doctor for treatment to get arrests, instead of going after the real bad guys...the killers, and methamphetamine freaks and violent criminals. Isn't that what the BATF , FBI and the DEA are supposed to do? Our local law enforcement, in an act of collusion, are taking ALL doctors inherent honesty and appropriate compassionate treatment and using this as a tool against them. This is reprehensible! These same efforts aimed at the rampant methamphetamine epidemic would actually save lives and protect people from dangerous criminals. Could it be the fear of Danger that directs these agents to attack doctors and sick people? Dave Bishop National Director American Alliance for Medical Cannabis P.O. Box 834 Garden Valley, Ca. 95633. P.S.to editor. To Keep the letter short I left out the actual text of the constitution. It is below if you wish to include it. Article 3 sec. 3.5 , An administrative agency, including an administrativeagency created by the Constitution or an initiative statute, has no power: (a) To declare a statute unenforceable, or refuse to enforce astatute, on the basis of it being unconstitutional unless anappellate court has made a determination that such statute isunconstitutional;(b) To declare a statute unconstitutional;(c) To declare a statute unenforceable, or to refuse to enforce astatute on the basis that federal law or federal regulations prohibitthe enforcement of such statute unless an appellate court has made adetermination that the enforcement of such statute is prohibited byfederal law or federal regulations. ...To date, no such decision or determination has been made. DB FG Comments- Bishop's letter makes some key points. Pain diagnoses are almost always based on the patient's account of what he or she is feeling. A doctor's willingness to prescribe or recommend drugs that provide relief should not be influenced by fear of law enforcement... Jeff Meyers is a journalist and filmmaker best known for a documentary about Jack Herer, so I was surprised by the tone of his letter and its false assumptions. Denney ITAL takes a detailed history and performs a thorough exam. (I have observed him at work, with patients' consent.) The narc's cover story ITAL did END ITAL check out: he had a scar on his neck. It couldn't be confirmed that he'd had previous treatment at a hospital in Santa Clara. Several hospitals were phoned in vain -which shows that the office was conscientiously trying to get supporting documentation. The doctor has every right to decide that a patient's claims and physical evidence suffice... More on Denney's situation in C Notes. - --- MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom