Pubdate: Sun, 25 Jun 2006 Source: Bulletin, The (Bend, OR) Copyright: 2006 Western Communications Inc. Contact: http://www.bendbulletin.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/62 Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v06/n580/a08.html Author: Allan Erickson, Bulletin guest columnist Note: The Washburn decision is at http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/S52254.htm Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Marijuana - Medicinal) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/testing.htm (Drug Testing) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/people/Allan+Erickson IN MY VIEW In its May 6 editorial on the workplace drug testing case recently before the Oregon Supreme Court, Washburn v. Columbia Forest Products, Bulletin editors commented on Oregon's 1998 medical cannabis (marijuana) legislation as being "as much about sanctioning pot use as it is about treating the symptoms of illness." The editorial says, "We do wish, though, they'd be honest about what it is they're trying to do rather than pushing smoke screens like Oregon's medical pot law." Oregon's medical cannabis laws are doing primarily what they were established to do - providing protection from prosecution to patients who find cannabis useful. In Oregon, there are over 12,000 registered medical cannabis-using patients in the state, and some 2,000 doctors have given them the recommendations necessary. I asked Dr. Rick Bayer, chief petitioner for the 1998 Oregon Medical Marijuana Act, how the Washburn v. Columbia Forest Products case will affect patients utilizing cannabis in Oregon, and he said, "All supporters of medical cannabis and supporters of disabled workers were disappointed in the final outcome of the Washburn case." Few argue with an employer's "right" to submit their employees to workplace drug testing. Drug testing can be seen as a direct assault against the cannabis community because the non-water-soluble cannabis metabolites remain stored in the body for long periods of time. Other drugs - opiates, cocaine, methamphetamine and hallucinogens - are water soluble and flushed from the system in a day or so. Information and statistics on drug testing are rare, and opinion is often the sole "evidence" in support of drug testing. There is no evidence showing drug users cause workplace accidents and whether drug users use more medical benefits is inconclusive at best. The Supreme Court's decision dealt not so much with medical cannabis but instead relied on disability as the factor in their decision. But none of the members of the court lost their jobs, and Columbia Forest Products only lost one employee. Robert Washburn, on the other hand, lost his job even though he never displayed impairment at work. There are employers in Oregon who acknowledge the OMMA. A worker for these companies, with their OMMA card, will not be dismissed for a THC positive urinalysis. Columbia Forest Products did not have to dismiss Washburn. And therein lies the rub. Not impaired on company time but being an acknowledged medical cannabis user and losing his job, Washburn becomes another poster boy in what is mostly a federal policy of wrongful persecution against cannabis and its consumers. Consider the recent release of the statement by the Food and Drug Administration that cannabis has no current proven medical use. Really? Is that why the federal government has its own medical cannabis grown at the University of Mississippi, which it provides to five patients, once a month, in the form of 300 prerolled cigarettes in a can. In its blatantly false statement, the FDA openly displays the sad continuation of seven decades of official federal policy built upon lies and the providing of intentional misinformation on cannabis. When the medical literature available on cannabis is reviewed, there are some gems that need to be noted. In 1974, a study was conducted by researchers at the Medical College of Virginia. Funded by the National Institute of Health to find evidence that marijuana damages the immune system, researchers in that study found instead that THC slowed the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice - lung and breast cancer and a virus-induced leukemia. That study was shut down by the Drug Enforcement Agency and buried. It was validated again in 2000 when researchers in Madrid announced they had destroyed incurable brain tumors in rats by injecting them with THC, the active ingredient in cannabis. For Washburn, a relatively harm-free medicine that kept him comfortable while he slept and rested effectively cost him his job. His dismissal took another worker off Oregon's tax roll. As one patient told me, "I know it helps with my symptoms, and I know that with it I can still work. If I have the chance." The Bulletin does our communities a service by providing input on this subject. By allowing an open and public debate I have no doubt the false stance of the federal prohibition bureaucracy will be laid bare and cannabis will once again be legal. But it is imperative to first offer protection to our patients. Seventy years of misinformation is an immense hurdle to overcome. It is not the legalization community that is deceptive, rather, it is our government. Cannabis is a safe and affordable alternative (and easily grown in the garden) for many conditions and diseases when compared to a regimen of very expensive and often toxic pharmaceuticals. Allan Erickson, of Eugene, is a member of the Drug Policy Forum of Oregon, the Media Awareness Project and Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake