Source: USA Today
Section: Editorial - Our View
Pubdate: Fri, 30 Oct 1998
Copyright: USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.
Contact:  http://www.usatoday.com/

A WAY TO EASE SUFFERING

Two years ago, stirred by tales of relief from patients and physicians, not
potheads, California and Arizona voted to let marijuana be used as a
treatment for pain and suffering. 

But it never happened. 

In California, state and federal officials trumped voters by threatening
doctors with the loss of their licenses or prosecution. They also persuaded
judges to close cooperatives where patients could get quality-controlled pot. 

In Arizona, lawmakers overrode their own constituents, barring doctors from
prescribing such drugs without federal approval. 

In both cases, opponents of the initiative feared any tolerance of
marijuana would weaken the drug war. 

Now, supporters are counterattacking. Medical marijuana initiatives have
multiplied threefold: They're on the ballot Tuesday in five more Western
states and the District of Columbia. And Arizonans will vote yet again: on
whether to affirm or repeal the legislature's roadblock to the 1996
initiative. 

The anecdotal evidence is compelling: Thousands of patients use pot in
small doses to relieve the side effects of AIDS and cancer treatments or to
treat chronic pain and glaucoma symptoms. Critics say such claims are
unproved scientifically and a manufactured substitute is available. But a
significant number of desperately sick people, and their doctors, say they
find dosage problems in using the pharmaceutical version and the herbal
form works far better for them, often in smaller amounts. 

The medical literature affirms the dilemma, and a 1991 Harvard survey of
oncologists found almost half had recommended marijuana to some patients. 

By any standard, marijuana is less dangerous than amphetamines or cocaine,
both of which can be prescribed in small quantities. The New England
Journal of Medicine, a respected and conservative publication, has
correctly labeled the government "hypocritical in forbidding doctors to
prescribe marijuana while letting them prescribe morphine and (Demerol)."
Physicians are leading the efforts to change the law in Washington and
Oregon. 

The No. 1 argument against medical use of marijuana is that any opening
will be exploited by those seeking to legalize drugs generally and that it
sends the wrong message to youth. Unquestionably, the promoters of these
initiatives include people whose real agenda is drug legalization. But that
doesn't justify a needlessly rigid ban on a doctor's sincere effort to do
what's best for a suffering patient. 

The thumping votes for change in Arizona and California and the favorable
pre-election polls in most places where it's on the ballot this year
suggest the public is sending an important message: "Just say no" is no
answer to suffering people and compassionate physicians.
- ---
Checked-by: Richard Lake