Pubdate: Mon, 27 Oct 2003
Source: Daily Collegian (PA Edu)
Copyright: 2003 Collegian Inc.
Contact:  http://www.collegian.psu.edu/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/543
Author: Jessica Cambridge, and Erin James, for The Collegian
Cited: Marijuana Policy Project ( www.mpp.org )
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/topics/Conant (Walters v. Conant)

DOCTORS ALLOWED TO DISCUSS MARIJUANA AS MEDICINE

Pro-medicinal marijuana groups are cheering over the U.S. Supreme Court 
ruling that physicians can discuss the treatment option of medicinal 
marijuana with their patients without risking prosecution.

"The Supreme Court's decision not to take the case is probably the most 
significant court action on the medical marijuana front in two decades," 
said Robert Kampia, co-founder and executive director of the Marijuana 
Policy Project (MPP), a lobbying group whose goal is to replace marijuana 
prohibition with a regulated system.

Kampia, a former Undergraduate Student Government president, and Chuck 
Thomas, Penn State alumnus, founded MPP in 1995.

"My goal is to end marijuana prohibition, and it takes an organization to 
do that," Kampia said.

Recently, the high court upheld the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals case 
of Walters v. Conant.

Doctors will now be able to recommend marijuana for medical reasons, but 
physicians can still be prosecuted if they help their patients acquire the 
drug.

Nine states have made marijuana legal if recommended or prescribed by a 
physician, but federal law stipulates that marijuana is illegal in all 
circumstances.

"We've never thought that doctors should be punished for talking about a 
medical option with their patients," said Krissy Oechslin, assistant 
director of communications for MPP.

Ellen Nagy, marketing manager for University Health Services, said the 
facility does not see patients with conditions that can be treated with 
medicinal marijuana, so the center will not be affected by this ruling.

Centre Community Hospital spokeswoman Maureen Karstetter said the hospital 
also would not be directly affected by the Supreme Court's ruling since the 
hospital does not employ oncologists or cancer specialists.

Patients who seek the medical benefits of marijuana can use an alternative 
pharmaceutical drug called Marinol, the pill version of THC, one of the 60 
active components of marijuana.

The Drug Enforcement Administration cites Marinol as an effective drug to 
treat nausea and vomiting associated with chemotherapy and lack of appetite 
in AIDS patients.

"The medical marijuana [Marinol] is a tablet form, so you would have the 
desired effect, the increase in appetite, but it wouldn't give you the 
euphoria that the smoked type would," said Tom Miller, a pharmacist at CVS 
Pharmacy, 116 W. College Ave.

Although other CVS pharmacies have rarely dispensed the drug, the State 
College CVS where Miller works, has never filled a Marinol prescription.

"Around here I don't see many, if any, prescriptions for it," he said.

However, the Supreme Court's ruling involves not only public health 
concerns, but also the First Amendment's right of free speech.

If the Supreme Court had ruled in favor of the Bush administration, state 
power to legalize medicinal marijuana would have been limited.

"It would have essentially made the state medicinal marijuana laws mute," 
Bruce Mirken, spokesman for MPP, said.

Some Penn State students evaluated the impact of the ruling.

"It could just lead to a legalization of [marijuana]. I'm not a fan of the 
legalization of marijuana in any way," Mike Shotto (junior-political 
science) said.

Another Penn State student said she is also reluctant to accept marijuana 
as a legitimate medical option.

"I'm totally against them being able to prescribe [marijuana]. It's a drug 
that will be and can be abused by people. I think it's blurring the line 
too much on what can be legal," Lauren Teti (freshman-marketing) said.

Other students understand the benefits marijuana could provide.

"I'm in favor of it because my grandma had glaucoma. I can see how it can 
have some medical benefits," Rebekah Smith (senior-animal science) said. 
Smith added that if her grandmother had chosen to use marijuana for 
medicinal purposes, it would have alleviated some of her pain.

Amanda Gold (junior-psychology) said she supports the use of medicinal 
marijuana if the doctor thinks that the drug is necessary.

"I think it does depend on the case and how severe the symptoms are," Gold said.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Keith Brilhart