DRUG WAR FACTS
Compiled and updated by Douglas A. McVay
for Common Sense for Drug Policy, csdp.org
Updated: October 2004
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Medical Marijuana
1. Since 1996, ten states have legalized medical marijuana use:
AK, AZ, CA, CO, HI, ME, NV, OR, VT, and WA. Eight of the ten did so
through the initiative process, Hawaii's law was enacted by
the legislature and signed by the governor in 2000, and Vermont's
was enacted by the legislature and passed into law without the
governor's signature in May 2004.
Source: National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws
(NORML), from the web at
norml.org
last accessed Oct 9, 2004.
2. The Institute of Medicine's 1999 report on medical marijuana
stated, "The accumulated data indicate a potential therapeutic
value for cannabinoid drugs, particularly for symptoms such as
pain relief, control of nausea and vomiting, and appetite stimulation."
Source: Janet E. Joy, Stanley J. Watson, Jr., and John A Benson,
Jr., Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base. Division
of Neuroscience and Behavioral Research, Institute of Medicine
(Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1999).
3. The Institute of Medicine's 1999 report on medical marijuana
examined the question whether the medical use of marijuana would
lead to an increase of marijuana use in the general population
and concluded that, "At this point there are no convincing data
to support this concern. The existing data are consistent with
the idea that this would not be a problem if the medical use
of marijuana were as closely regulated as other medications with
abuse potential." The report also noted that, "this question
is beyond the issues normally considered for medical uses of
drugs, and should not be a factor in evaluating the therapeutic
potential of marijuana or cannabinoids."
Source: Janet E. Joy, Stanley J. Watson, Jr., and John A Benson,
Jr., Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base. Division
of Neuroscience and Behavioral Research, Institute of Medicine
(Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1999).
4. In the Institute of Medicine's report on medical marijuana,
the researchers examined the physiological risks of using marijuana
and cautioned, "Marijuana is not a completely benign substance.
It is a powerful drug with a variety of effects. However, except
for the harms associated with smoking, the adverse effects of
marijuana use are within the range of effects tolerated for other
medications."
Source: Janet E. Joy, Stanley J. Watson, Jr., and John A Benson,
Jr., Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base. Division
of Neuroscience and Behavioral Research, Institute of Medicine
(Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1999).
5. The Institute of Medicine's 1999 report on medical marijuana
examined the question of whether marijuana could diminish patients'
immune system - an important question when considering its use
by AIDS and cancer patients. The report concluded that, "the
short-term immunosuppressive effects are not well established
but, if they exist, are not likely great enough to preclude a
legitimate medical use."
Source: Janet E. Joy, Stanley J. Watson, Jr., and John A Benson,
Jr., Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base. Division
of Neuroscience and Behavioral Research, Institute of Medicine
(Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1999).
6. "Conclusions: Smoked and oral cannabinoids did not seem to be
unsafe in people with HIV infection with respect to HIV RNA
levels, CD4+ and CD8+ cell counts, or protease inhibitor levels
over a 21-day treatment."
Source: Abrams, Donald I., MD, et al., "Short-Term Effects of
Cannabinoids in Patients with HIV-1 Infection - A Randomized,
Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial," Annals of Internal Medicine,
Aug. 19, 2003, Vol. 139, No. 4 (American College of Physicians),
p. 258.
7. "This study provides evidence that short-term use of
cannabinoids, either oral or smoked, does not substantially
elevate viral load in individuals with HIV infection who
are receiving stable antiretroviral regimens containing nelfi-
navir or indinavir. Upper confidence bounds for all estimated
effects of cannabinoids on HIV RNA level from all
analyses were no greater than an increase of 0.23 log10
copies/mL compared with placebo. Because this study was
randomized and analyses were controlled for all known
potential confounders, it is very unlikely that chance imbalance
on any known or unknown covariate masked a
harmful effect of cannabinoids. Study participants in all
groups may have been expected to benefit from the equivalent
of directly observed antiretroviral therapy, as well as
decreased stress and, for some, improved nutrition over the
25-day inpatient stay."
Source: Abrams, Donald I., MD, et al., "Short-Term Effects of
Cannabinoids in Patients with HIV-1 Infection - A Randomized,
Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial," Annals of Internal Medicine,
Aug. 19, 2003, Vol. 139, No. 4 (American College of Physicians),
p. 264.
8. "Nevertheless, when considering all 15 studies (i.e., those
that met both strict and more relaxed criteria) we only noted
that regular cannabis users performed worse on memory tests, but
that the magnitude of the effect was very small. The small magnitude of
effect sizes from observations of chronic users of cannabis
suggests that cannabis compounds, if found to have therapeutic
value, should have a good margin of safety from a neurocognitive
standpoint under the more limited conditions of exposure that
would likely obtain in a medical setting."
Source: Grant, Igor, et al., "Non-Acute (Residual) Neurocognitive
Effects Of Cannabis Use: A Meta-Analytic Study," Journal of the
International Neuropsychological Society (Cambridge University
Press: July 2003), 9, pp. 687-8.
9. In spite of the established medical value of marijuana, doctors
are presently permitted to prescribe cocaine and morphine -- but
not marijuana.
Source: The Controlled Substances Act of 1970, 21 U.S.C. §§ 801
et seq.
10. According to a review by the General Accounting Office (GAO)
of medical cannabis programs in four states, "Most medical
marijuana recommendations in states where data are collected have
been made for applicants with severe pain or muscle spasticity
as their medical condition. Conditions allowed by the states'
medical marijuana laws ranged from illnesses such as cancer and
AIDS, to symptoms, such as severe pain. Information is not
collected on the conditions for which marijuana has been
recommended in Alaska or California. However, data from Hawaii's
registry showed that the majority of recommendations have been
made for the condition of severe pain or the condition of muscle
spasticity. Likewise, data from OregonÂ’s registry showed that,
84 percent of recommendations were for the condition of severe
pain or for muscle spasticity."
Source: General Accounting Office, "Marijuana: Early Experiences
with Four States' Laws That Allow Use for Medical Purposes"
(Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, Nov. 2002), GAO-03-189,
p. 24.
11. Though doctors in the US are not permitted to prescribe
marijuana, they are allowed to discuss it with their patients
and to recommend marijuana to those patients for whom it would
be useful. This was clarified by the federal courts in the case
of Conant v. McCaffrey in Sept. 2000:
"The government is permanently ENJOINED from (i) revoking a
class-member physicianÂ’s DEA registration merely because the
doctor recommends medical marijuana to a patient based on a
sincere medical judgment and (ii) from initiating any
investigation solely on that ground. This injunction applies
whether or not the physician anticipates that the recommendation
will, in turn, be used by the patient to obtain marijuana in
violation of federal law. The Court finds that all other issues
tendered are not justiciable."
A federal appeal of the case was rejected by the US Supreme Court
in Oct. 14, 2003 (Case No. 03-40, Walters v. Conant).
Source: Conant v. McCaffrey, Case No. C 97-00139 WHA, US District
Court for the Northern District of California (9th Circuit),
"Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Cross-Motions
for Summary Judgment; Dissolving Preliminary Injunction;
Entering Permanent Injunction," Sept. 2000, pp. 22-23; Associated
Press, "Supreme Court Rejects Anti-Marijuana Case," Oct. 14,
2003.
12. Organizations that have endorsed medical access to marijuana
include: the Institute of Medicine, the American Academy of Family
Physicians; American Bar Association; American Public Health
Association; American Society of Addiction Medicine; AIDS Action
Council; British Medical Association; California Academy of Family
Physicians; California Legislative Council for Older Americans;
California Medical Association; California Nurses Association;
California Pharmacists Association; California Society of Addiction
Medicine; California-Pacific Annual Conference of the United
Methodist Church; Colorado Nurses Association; Consumer Reports
Magazine; Kaiser Permanente; Lymphoma Foundation of America;
Multiple Sclerosis California Action Network; National Association
of Attorneys General; National Association of People with AIDS;
National Nurses Society on Addictions; New Mexico Nurses Association;
New York State Nurses Association; New England Journal of Medicine;
and Virginia Nurses Association.
13. A few of the editorial boards that have endorsed medical access
to marijuana include: Boston Globe; Chicago Tribune; Miami Herald;
New York Times; Orange County Register; and USA Today.
14. Many organizations have favorable positions (e.g., unimpeded
research) on medical marijuana. These groups include: The Institute
of Medicine, The American Cancer Society; American Medical Association;
Australian Commonwealth Department of Human Services and Health;
California Medical Association; Federation of American Scientists;
Florida Medical Association; and the National Academy of Sciences.
15. The Controlled Substances Act of 1970 established five categories,
or "schedules," into which all illicit and prescription drugs
were placed. Marijuana was placed in Schedule I, which defines
the substance as having a high potential for abuse, no currently
accepted medical use in the United States, and a lack of accepted
safety for use under medical supervision. To contrast, over 90
published reports and studies have shown marijuana has medical
efficacy.
Sources: The Controlled Substances Act of 1970, 21 U.S.C. §§
801 et seq.; Common Sense for Drug Policy, Compendium of Reports,
Research and Articles Demonstrating the Effectiveness of Medical
Marijuana, Vol. I & Vol. II (Falls Church, VA: Common Sense for
Drug Policy, March 1997).
16. The U.S. Penal Code states that any person can be imprisoned
for up to one year for possession of one marijuana cigarette
and imprisoned for up to five years for growing a single marijuana
plant.
Source: The Controlled Substances Act of 1970, 21 U.S.C. §§ 801
et seq.
17. On September 6, 1988, the Drug Enforcement Administration's
Chief Administrative Law Judge, Francis L. Young, ruled: "Marijuana,
in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active
substances known. ...[T]he provisions of the [Controlled Substances]
Act permit and require the transfer of marijuana from Schedule
I to Schedule II. It would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious
for the DEA to continue to stand between those sufferers and
the benefits of this substance."
Source: US Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Agency, "In
the Matter of Marijuana Rescheduling Petition," [Docket #86-22]
(September 6, 1988), p. 57.
18. The DEA's Administrative Law Judge, Francis Young concluded:
"In strict medical terms marijuana is far safer than many foods
we commonly consume. For example, eating 10 raw potatoes can
result in a toxic response. By comparison, it is physically impossible
to eat enough marijuana to induce death. Marijuana in its natural
form is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known
to man. By any measure of rational analysis marijuana can be
safely used within the supervised routine of medical care."
Source: US Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Agency, "In
the Matter of Marijuana Rescheduling Petition," [Docket #86-22],
(September 6, 1988), p. 57.
19. Between 1978 and 1997, 35 states and the District of Columbia
passed legislation recognizing marijuana's medicinal value. States
include: AL, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, FL, GA, IL, IO, LA, MA, ME,
MI, MN, MO, MT, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, OH, OK, OR, RI, SC, TN,
TX, VT, VA, WA, WV, and WI.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Available online at: drugwarfacts.org
Questions, comments or suggestions for additions and modifications
may be addressed to Doug McVay at: dmcvay@drugwarfacts.org |
