Source: The Nation (US) Contact: http://www.thenation.com/ Pubdate: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 Author: Ed Glick, RN REBUTTAL OF H. RES 372 - A CASE OF MISTAKEN IDENTIDY Introduction H. Res.. 372 was introduced in the House of Representatives on February 26, 1998. It constitutes a "sense of the House of Representatives that marijuana is a dangerous and addictive drug and should not be legalized for medicinal use." This paper is a rebuttal of H. res. 372 and an argument that marijuana has several extensively documented applications and a high safety margin with medically supervised use. In addition it refutes the rhetorical tool of of connecting the issues of substance use and abuse to medically supervised use as inconsistent with the accepted protocols which govern the medical research process. It questions the underlying legal, moral and political priorities which criminalize sick, suffering and dying people for their medically supervised use of marijuana as fundamentally inconsistent with basic tenets of nursing practice which strive to care for and support ill people with compassion. Each rebuttal paragraph corresponds to the item of the same number in the text. The vote on H. Res.. 372 is tentatively scheduled for Tuesday, April 21'st, 1998. 1. The Controlled Substances Act was signed into Law in 1970 by President Richard Nixon. It classifies certain drugs or substances with a high potential for abuse into schedules. There are 5 schedules which represent graded levels of control. Schedule one is for drugs which do not meet any of the three basic requirements of listing: 1.No recognized medical value; 2. Toxic; 3. Highly dependence forming Schedule one placement of marijuana is inappropriate on two of the three parameters. Numerous scientific studies document five notable uses. (anti seizure effects, anti nausea effects, appetite stimulant effects, analgesic effects and intraocular pressure reduction effects.) In 1987 DEA Chief Administrative Law Judge Francis Young conducted extensive and well documented hearings into marijuanas placement into Schedule 1. He subsequently ruled that marijuana should be immediately reclassified into schedule 2 His ruling was dismissed by DEA Administrator John Lawn claiming the evidence was not scientific enough. In the intervening decade documentation about the therapeutic uses of cannabinoids (the chemicals in marijuana responsible for its effects) has increased including numerous books, research papers and patient accounts. 2. Marijuana use is not associated with domestic violence when used alone. Alcohol is. Marijuana is ranked as one of the least toxic drugs in wide-spread use today. There is no documented mortality associated with acute overdose of cannabis in the medical literature encompassing 5000 years of use. In contrast, four hundred-thousand Americans die each year from diseases brought on by tobacco smoking. Research citing increases in traffic accidents related to cannabis intoxication is ambiguous at best. Some studies show that drivers intoxicated by marijuana actually compensate for their impairment by driving more carefully. Alcohol use is clearly associated with more aggressive driving patterns. Obvious wisdom would dictate that driving while under the influence of ANY drug is foolish. 3. This paragraph in H. Res. 372 expands upon and repeats paragraph 1. Research clearly shows that medical complications of Heroin, PCP, and Cocaine use can be severe and life-threatening. Approximately twenty-five thousand Americans die each year from complications of illegal drug use such as heart attacks and strokes. Medical contraindications of marijuana relate to a large extent on inhaling as the route of delivery. Pulmonary complications such as bronchitis, and respiratory infections can and do occur. Immune impairments are probably minimal, with some studies showing enhanced immunity. Cognitive impairments can occur to some heavy conic users-most notably reversible short-term memory deficits. Cannabis Dependence Syndrome is listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental disorders (DSM-IV) as an affliction based upon inability to control use. Reproductive research is far from conclusive, and has often been based upon large doses of cannabinoids infused rapidly into rodents. Research purporting to prove the existence of withdrawal symptoms also is based upon wildly unrealistic research protocols in rodents. There is no documented malignant pathology (cancer) associated with exposure to marijuana in humans in spite of the fact that marijuana smoke contains many of the same harmful combustion by-products as tobacco smoke. Large scale mortality research has shown no increase in mortality associated with marijuana use when confounding variables are considered. By far the greatest contra-indication to marijuana is that associated with its illegal status. These include arrest, prosecution, loss of home and employment, fines, jail time and child protective service investigations. 4. Dronabinol, known by the trade name Marinol is a synthetic version of the THC molecule-one of the major cannabinoids. It is approved for use by the FDA as a schedule 2 drug for appetite stimulation related to AIDS wasting syndrome and as an anitemetic in cancer chemotherapy. Marinol costs $15 or more per capsule and is dispensed in 2.5 mg, 5 mg and 10 mg doses in a sesame oil formulation. It is effective for some patients however others prefer the ease and speed of the inhaled route. The lungs deliver cannabinoids to the brain in 1-10 minutes allowing patients to easily self regulate the dose and effect. Marinol may take 3 hours to digest and patients complain of excessive sedation, dizziness. Patients who are nauseated often cannot tolerate pills. Phase 3 clinical trials by the FDA have not been conducted in spite of much evidence of efficacy. In February 1997 The National Institute of Health conducted an inquiry about medical uses of marijuana and concluded that several indications merit further study. 5. Marijuana has an extensively documented history of medical use spanning 5000 years. Marijuana was widely prescribed by physicians in Europe and America as a tincture (an alcohol based preparation) until its use was effectively banned in 1937 by passage of the Marihuana Tax Act. In western medical science drugs are evaluated primarily for efficacy. Many obscure, dangerous and potent drugs exist and are used when necessasary by physicians. 6. Numerous governmental and scientific commissions have publicly positioned themselves in support of a medically supervised and regulated supply of marijuana. These include The World Health Organization, and many physician and nursing groups. Unfortunately, decades of Federal Government obstruction has confused Americans. 7. In November of 1996 voters in the states of Arizona and California approved initiatives which legalize marijuana for medical use. Shortly thereafter, on December 30th 1996, HHS Secretary Donna Shalala, National Drug Coordinator Barry McCaffery and Attorney General Janet Reno conducted a press conference openly threatening to revoke the DEA license of doctors who prescribe marijuana to their patients. Doctors filed suit and gained an injunction forbidding Federal authorities from carrying through on their threat. 8. Shortly after Arizona voters approved of the medical use of marijuana legislators in Arizona passed legislation nullifying the vote. Voters refiled another petition to bring the question to a vote. Arizonans will again vote on the issue this November. 9. In the United States there are no laws which completely forbid citizens of one state from financially supporting legislative or political efforts underway in another state. Millions of dollars cross state lines each year for many different issues. 10. Organizations like the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) have long supported compassionate use of marijuana when governmental and health care agencies have not. Many other pro-legalization groups have advocated for reform of laws surrounding the war on drugs. Public support of medical marijuana may be a result of widespread experience of loved ones, family members and friends who have benefited by using marijuana. Americans overall oppose unregulated access to marijuana but continue to support medically supervised access. 11., 12. Many children in the United States have drug abuse problems. Many parents do also. Problems of addiction in the United States cost billions of dollars annually and result in approximately half a million deaths. Billions more dollars are spent in interdiction efforts. Drug availability on the street remains high, prices for hard drugs have fallen and purity has increased. Marijuana use in children has risen in recent years partly because of a perception of safety. But many children appear confused about the mixed messages they receive about substance use in our society. These messages that connect legal drug use with prosperity, glamour and health are pervasive. The DARE program, ostensibly a medical class taught by law enforcement personnel, is in 80% of public schools. It has repeatedly been shown as ineffective at teaching children the risks and benefits associated with all drugs. There is simply no logical connection between safe and effective drugs used under medical supervision and their potential for abuse by others, a point repeatedly acknowledged by governmental commissions. 13. References to statistical associations between marijuana use and hard drugs are misleading and inconclusive. The 1997 National Drug Strategy reports that some 80% of marijuana users do not use hard drugs. Increased use of hard drugs by marijuana using teenagers can be explained by looking at personality types which are more risk-taking. Troubled youths coming from troubled homes are more likely to behave in anti-social or unhealthy ways-including using marijuana. This does not make marijuana a causative agent in the progression to more deadly substances. There is no biochemical connection between marijuana use and the use of other substances. Marijuana users are more likely to drink alcohol. It is absurd to assert that marijuana use leads to alcohol use, or vice-versa. The gateway theory has been repeatedly used as a pretext for marijuana prohibition. It has been discredited by studies which describe it as faulty logic with no basis in fact. There is a statistical association with alcohol use and violence. Alcohol works on parts of the brain which affect self-control. This is a biochemical explanation. Tobacco use over many years is statistically associated with cancer. This also is a biochemical association. Cocaine, Heroin, PCP and Methamphetamine use is statistically and causally related to a variety of medical complications including death. IV injection of drugs with contaminated syringes has a clear statistical association with increases in the transmission of the AIDS virus. Use of marijuana by children does not lead to hard drugs. Government interdiction efforts which strive to end the massive flow of drugs into the United States however seem to be statistically correlated with increases in hard drug use in this country. 14. In US society children receive many ambiguous messages regarding sexual activity, drug use, and money through practically all mass media but particularly through television. But cultural messages which glamorize drug use have nothing to do with medically supervised access to a valuable medicine. Marijuana occupies a niche along with thousands of other plants and drugs. Appropriate medical use of a drug does not glamorize inappropriate use of it and is a spurious argument. On the other hand, deceptive emotional laden rhetoric which persistently assigns moral overtones to a medical or public health issue is a disservice to Americans who depend on their government to be honest. Many other public health or medical issues have been mischaracterized by politicians, mostly republicans, as breakdowns in moral fabric, including passing out condoms, sterile needles and elective abortion. Not only does this deceive Americans, but it neglects to evaluate public health issues on a balanced playing field. There is widespread addiction , mortality, morbidity and suffering associated with substance use. Legal behaviors kill half a million Americans each year. 15. 16. Many Americans, particularly teenagers are distrustful of the Federal Government. Poor quality politically motivated drug education epitomized by the DARE program, serves to cultivate ignorance, apathy and distrust of the Federal Government. Inequities in public health policy abound. Children perceive an illogical association between the high rate of legal tobacco related death and the non-existent death associated with illegal marijuana. In addition, children have seen first hand how loved ones have benefited from using marijuana, or watched them slowly die from using tobacco. As such, the more Americans understand about the medical use of marijuana, the more they approve of it. It is mostly conservative politicians and Federal Government agencies which continue a long tradition of misinforming the public about the beneficial uses of marijuana. As a result, large numbers of patients endure arrest, and prosecution because of their use of it. CONCLUSION H. Res. 372 represents an attempt to maintain polarization in the debate about medical marijuana and illegal drug use by disregarding a large body of evidence which supports medically justified use. Many of the assertions made in H. Res. 372 are either demonstrably false, or casually unrelated to the risk/benefit assessment that governs drug research and use in this country. It fails to place the relatively small issue of medical marijuana into a balanced perspective of drug use and addiction in our society. By deflecting attention away from public health behaviors which cause an alarming degree of mortality and morbidity, like tobacco use, H. Res. 372 serves to misinform the public. Americans , and particularly children are distrustful and cynical about government. Large numbers of sick and dying patients are currently using marijuana for documented relief of several conditions. Federal attempts to criminalize patients, and their health care providers result in more pain and suffering, a more intrusive Federal Government and a more cynical and uninformed public. Within the medical framework of the United States compassion and knowledge should be integrated. Disallowing a valuable medicine for poorly documented and morally dubious reasons is inconsistent with the basic cornerstones of medical care. Edward Glick, RN