Pubdate: Wed, 16 Jul 2003
Source: Province, The (CN BC)
Copyright: 2003 The Province
Contact:  http://www.canada.com/vancouver/theprovince/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/476
Author: Susan Martinuk
Note: Susan Martinuk is a Vancouver broadcaster and freelance writer.
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmjcn.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal - Canada)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/decrim.htm (Decrim/Legalization)

MEDICAL TREATMENT OR ROAD TO A HIGH? PROOF MAY BE IN THE POT

Health Canada employees are busy packing marijuana into hundreds of baggies 
for distribution to doctors who may wish to prescribe pot to their patients.

Handing dope over to doctors is another world first in public policy for 
Canada but, in keeping with our current health care standards, it likely 
won't be good medicine for anyone.

So why are we doing it? To appease the courts --which apparently are 
directing health-care policies in Canada.

Marijuana has no proven scientific benefit, yet three years ago an Ontario 
court ruled that the terminally ill should be able to use marijuana for 
pain relief. But the purchase of marijuana remained illegal and 
consequently an Ontario Superior Court ruled early this year that it was 
unconstitutional for the government to withhold access to 'medical' 
marijuana. The court gave Ottawa six months to comply.

Last week, Health Minister Anne McLellan announced that doctors would be 
the new distribution system. Physicians would essentially become dealers 
for a drug that is unproven in terms of benefits and untested for medical use.

No wonder the president of the B.C. Medical Association called the decision 
"horrifying and mind-boggling."

Funny . . . don't we rely on the Health Protection Branch of the health 
ministry to protect us from that very scenario? Most drugs go through years 
of clinical testing before approval. There are likely hundreds of 
medications in research trials that would benefit some, yet none of us 
would advocate they be made available to patients first and undergo 
efficacy/safety testing later.

Yet, primarily on anecdotal evidence, the court ordered the government to 
bypass all the precautions. Even worse, the health minister is going along 
with it.

McLellan called it a "compassionate" approach to healthcare. Even though 
she acknowledged a lack of definitive evidence of medical benefits, she did 
promise to start new clinical trials to determine if there is a therapeutic 
benefit. In other words, she is bent on doing what she can to justify her 
decision -- after the fact.

This is healthcare? Determining the efficacy of a drug after handing it 
over to patients?

Sadly, this is how health care happens when our elected government in 
Ottawa is content to subjugate its rule to the courts when the issues get 
dicey.

Only in Canada do activists seek changes in medical policy via the courts. 
Only in Canada do activists and the courts carry more power than objective 
science in setting health policy.

Granted, some studies have concluded that marijuana has the potential to 
treat pain, nausea and lack of appetite and this creates the perception 
that there is scientific support for "medical" marijuana.

But researchers conclude these reports by stating that the detrimental 
effects of marijuana far outnumber the potential benefits, thus it is not a 
recommended treatment. A prescription drug that mimics these benefits is 
available, so why place unknown risks on a patient's health?

Marijuana may well prove to be a legitimate drug. But the Canadian 
government is actually retarding its medical progress by handing it out 
without undergoing proper studies. It's a bad precedent for health care 
and, frankly, it smacks of a lawsuit waiting to happen.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom