Pubdate: Wed, 23 Jul 2003
Source: Press and Journal, The (UK)
Copyright: 2003: Northcliffe Newspapers Group Ltd.
Contact:  http://www.thisisnorthscotland.co.uk/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/347
Author: Ian Oliver

LET SCIENCE SETTLE THE GREAT CANNABIS CONTROVERSY

Sympathy and emotional responses are not good grounds for deciding what 
should be regarded as medicine and whether a dangerous, mind-altering 
substance should be legalised. If we were to place our trust in limited and 
uninformed public opinion to draw up the pharmacopoeia, we would be on very 
dangerous ground. Judging from the reaction that has occurred in some 
quarters over the circumstances of an unfortunate woman in Orkney who has 
been flouting the/law by distributing cannabis chocolate to fellow-MS 
sufferers, that is exactly what some people are demanding.

After the abandonment of the case against Elizabeth "Biz" Ivol for 
cultivating, possessing, and supplying cannabis, I was invited to take part 
in a radio discussion about whether or not cannabis should be legalised for 
medical purposes. Naturally, there was and remains an immense amount of 
sympathy for anyone who suffers from a chronic and incurable disease; that 
was very apparent from most of the contributions to the programme.

Everyone wanted to allow the best possible care and treatment for Ms Ivol, 
a person who has been diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. However, some 
contributors approved of her manufacture, consumption, and supply of 
cannabis-laced chocolate and the growing of cannabis plants to enable her 
compassionate but illegal activities.

The thrust of opinion was that if Biz and any other patients are able to 
get relief by consuming cannabis, then the law should allow them to do so. 
The fact that the cannabis plant is not classified as a medicine, and has 
not passed the tests necessary to receive a licence, has not deterred some 
in their pursuit of the quest to legalise the drug. Even distinguishing the 
good intentions of those who want cannabis to be used as a medicine from 
those who want to use the drug of their choice for recreational purposes, a 
profound ignorance prevails about the dangers.

The Government must bear responsibility for failing to publicise accurate 
information about cannabis, particularly its alleged medicinal properties.

FOR many years, there have been claims and anecdotal evidence that using 
cannabis has produced benefits for sufferers of various maladies. The US 
Office of National Drug Control Policy commissioned research by the 
National Academy of Science, Institute of Medicine, to review the 
scientific record of marijuana. A report was published early in 1999, which 
concluded that some of the compounds found in the substance do have a 
potential as a medicine in the relief of symptoms such as pain, nausea and 
vomiting and poor appetite associated with the wasting diseases of Aids and 
cancer.

This report demonstrated that, for most sufferers, there were other, 
more-effective drugs available, but for the few who do not respond to 
standard medications there is the possibility that new drugs could be 
developed from cannabinoids taken from the plant.

The eventual approval of the use of cannabinoids should be subject to the 
same procedures as for the adoption of any other drug. The researchers did 
not support the use of cannabis for glaucoma, multiple sclerosis or any 
other chronic condition.

International treaties oppose the legalisation of drugs of abuse. Cannabis 
has been recognised as a drug of abuse and its increased potency over the 
last two decades has made it the leading cause of drug-related 
emergency-room episodes in the US. New research indicates that it is a much 
more dangerous drug than was believed previously. The annual report of the 
International Narcotics Control Board (INCB), in 1998, stressed that 
medical research should not become a pretext for legalising cannabis. The 
report concluded: "Political initiatives and public votes can easily be 
misused by groups promoting the legalisation of cannabis for recreational 
use under the guise of medical dispensation."

An article in the British Medical Journal, in 2001, concluded that 
cannabinoids are no more effective at controlling pain than codeine and 
their depressant effects limit their usefulness. They should not be used in 
the treatment of acute pain and their widespread introduction for the 
clinical treatment of pain was said to be undesirable.

Researchers from the University Hospital in Helsinki endorsed that view and 
demonstrated that a series of undesirable side-effects meant that 
cannabinoid derivatives had no place at present in mainstream medicine; 
there are better alternatives available. These findings were confirmed by 
the Pain Management Centre at Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham 
University. And, in an article in the British Medical Journal (July, 2001), 
it was stated that cannabis was not "a neglected wonder drug". Previously, 
the British Medical Association had issued a report entitled The 
Therapeutic Use of Cannabis, which concluded that cannabis itself was 
unsuitable for medical use.

JUST about every month, some of the leading medical research centres around 
the world publish more information to show how dangerous a substance is 
cannabis. Thus, it is extremely unwise to regard it as a recreational or 
medicinal drug that should gain implicit Government approval by its failure 
to educate the public about the dangers. It is beyond dispute that cannabis 
affects adversely the cardio-vascular, central-nervous, respiratory, 
reproductive, immune and neuro-psychological systems. It is carcinogenic 
and produces psychosis in many young abusers. However much we might 
sympathise with those who suffer painful illnesses, it is important that we 
also understand the nature of cannabis and not react to anecdotal evidence, 
which is overwhelmingly countered by medical research.

I cannot imagine that even the most hard-line opponent to the abuse of 
illicit drugs would object to any research-based medicine drawn from the 
cannabis plant. What we must not do is allow ourselves to be duped into 
believing that a few personal experiences with a mind-altering substance is 
persuasive evidence which justifies the legalisation of cannabis.

If the medical (and not the political) world enthusiastically endorses the 
alleged medical benefits of cannabis, I shall be pleased that science has 
prevailed over ill-informed public opinion and political posturing. We must 
await the outcome of Government-approved trials. Until then, I shall 
continue to oppose self-medication with illegal drugs.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Larry Stevens