So What if People Would Abuse a Medical Marijuana System?

[poledriver]

So What if People Would Abuse a Medical Marijuana System?

As an activist, there are a plethora of excuses you hear day today about why medical marijuana should not be legal, and one that always stands out to me is: “people will abuse medical marijuana.”

Their argument is that people will either over use their medical privileges or that they will use their medical card to buy for minors or people that do not have a medical card. To this I say of course. Of course people will abuse their medical marijuana privileges. People will over use their medication. People will use their medical card to sell to people that do not have a card. People will even sell it to minors. Without a doubt, this will happen on a daily basis if medical marijuana is legalized.

So what? Has this argument stopped you before? People already do this constantly with opioids, opiates, and ADD medication.

Today, thousands of people across the nation will get their hands on prescription medication that doesn’t belong to them. Today, thousands of high schoolers will get their hands on tobacco or alcohol when they are underage for these substances. Today, thousands of people in prohibition states will get their hands of marijuana regardless of the law.

This happens! People will get their hands on these substances no matter what. But the questions is if this is a sufficient reason to punish medical patients who need it for legitimate reasons? Would that not be a major injustice done upon people that are already suffering? Just because some people may break the law, doesn’t mean that all that are suffering must suffer even more because of the choices of others according to opponents of medical marijuana.

http://www.theweedblog.com/so-what-if-people-would-abuse-a-medical-marijuana-system/

 

[oreocub]

medical marijuana challenges and competes with the pharmaceutical industry.
states with medical marijuana access have seen a 25 percent decrease in painkiller overdoses.


https://news.vice.com/article/leading-anti-marijuana-academics-are-paid-by-painkiller-drug-companies
"Dr. Mark L. Kraus, who runs a private practice and is a board member to the American Society of Addiction Medicine, submitted testimony in 2012 in opposition to a medical marijuana law in Connecticut. According to financial disclosures, Kraus served on the scientific advisory panel for painkiller companies such as Pfizer and Reckitt Benckiser in the year prior to his activism against the medical pot bill. Neither Kraus or Evins responded to a request for comment."

"It’s more than a little odd that [the Community Anti-Drug Coalition of America] and the other groups leading the fight against relaxing marijuana laws, including the Partnership for Drug-Free Kids (formerly the Partnership for a Drug-Free America), derive a significant portion of their budget from opioid manufacturers and other pharmaceutical companies. According to critics, this funding has shaped the organization’s policy goals: CADCA takes a softer approach toward prescription-drug abuse, limiting its advocacy to a call for more educational programs, and has failed to join the efforts to change prescription guidelines in order to curb abuse. In contrast, CADCA and the Partnership for Drug-Free Kids have adopted a hard-line approach to marijuana, opposing even limited legalization and supporting increased police powers"
http://www.businessinsider.com/poli...al-companies-fund-anti-marijuana-fight-2014-7

people abuse prescribed opiates. people will abuse medical marijuana. but medical marijuana honestly has helped plenty of people with seizures, cancer, etc. opiates just help with the pain for the most part.

 

[Felonious Monk]

It's not a difficult position to defend, imo, that it is actually impossible to "abuse" a medical marijuana system, once you actually understand the mechanism of action of cannabis in the body. You're making a positive health decision by choosing to use cannabis over alcohol, tobacco, or prescription medications, so by "abusing" the system, you're paying taxes on your medicine and not using some other substance.

 

[AlphaMethylPhenyl]

I have to say that while overall the utility of medical or legal marijuana use appears to override the consequences, some parts of the population will still inevitably suffer. I'm thinking mainly of the 1% of the population that's schizophrenic; they are drawn to marijuana because it temporarily relieves the negative symptoms of their disease, the positive symptoms then become exacerbated for at least days after a single use.

I honestly wonder if people truly give a damn about those with a psychotic illness. It's frustrating. And for them, it's possible that (excluding full CB1 agonists), marijuana is the single worst thing they can ingest, not tobacco, not alcohol. not opiates. Does that matter?

 

[poledriver]

Yeah. But isnt it pretty similar with alcohol? I know 2 people who are schizophrenic and they both use/abuse weed, alcohol and tobacco..

 

[AlphaMethylPhenyl]

Reacted maybe a bit much. But I do think it's an instance of the tyranny of the majority.

I'm not an expert, but I read a fair amount of scientific literature. Alcohol can also cause psychosis. There are some people who literally turn into maniacs after drinking. Alcohol has a large variety of neurochemical effects. I think though that generally speaking it takes becoming well-drunk to have something of a hallucinogenic experience from drinking (crudely put, so NMDA antagonism reaching a certain threshold). As for pot, well, the hallucinogenic experience is counted on, or "you got weak weed, man". Psychosis in my estimation is, in one form or another, the typical state one aims for when smoking weed, even a small bit. It's a very inward experience. A few drinks by contrast makes one more outgoing and sociable.

I've heard it said that weed is a feeling enhancer, basically meaning that it will bring to mind sensations that would've otherwise been confined to the subconscious. This is no good for the schizophrenic, who already has to deal with their subconscious getting in the way of how they perceive the world.

Alcohol is more of a mood-enhancer. Instead of widening the scope of consciousness, it narrows it. No doubt though that alcohol isn't good for the schizophrenic. But it's rather benign when compared to weed. Of course staying free from all drugs (except medication) should be their goal, not throwing them into the a trip on top of the one they experience naturally, not relying on lubricants to socialize them for them.

 

[Burnt Offerings]

I have to say that while overall the utility of medical or legal marijuana use appears to override the consequences, some parts of the population will still inevitably suffer. I'm thinking mainly of the 1% of the population that's schizophrenic; they are drawn to marijuana because it temporarily relieves the negative symptoms of their disease, the positive symptoms then become exacerbated for at least days after a single use.

I honestly wonder if people truly give a damn about those with a psychotic illness. It's frustrating. And for them, it's possible that (excluding full CB1 agonists), marijuana is the single worst thing they can ingest, not tobacco, not alcohol. not opiates. Does that matter?

I don't find that argument to be very convincing. You could easily flip it around and say that cannabis may provide therapeutic benefits to many who suffer from some kind of organic disease process (such as MS, for example), and don't you care about them? Don't they matter?

(If that comment was related in any way to an advocacy of actual policy re: medical marijuana. If it was just a general comment then yeah, it sucks that cannabis exacerbates the mood disorders of some individuals. But what can be done about that without infringing on the rights of adults who are capable of making their own decisions about what substances they choose to consume?)

Also, I don't agree with this:

Psychosis in my estimation is, in one form or another, the typical state one aims for when smoking weed, even a small bit.

...and I don't think most people would, at least according to popular definitions of the word "psychosis". In fact psychotic symptoms induced by cannabis are a big reason many users stop smoking weed.

 

[SixBuckets]

I have to say that while overall the utility of medical or legal marijuana use appears to override the consequences, some parts of the population will still inevitably suffer. I'm thinking mainly of the 1% of the population that's schizophrenic; they are drawn to marijuana because it temporarily relieves the negative symptoms of their disease, the positive symptoms then become exacerbated for at least days after a single use.

Some of them are. Some of them aren't. Some of them are made worse by marijuana, some aren't. People living with schizophrenia are as diverse as people with any other medical condition.

I honestly wonder if people truly give a damn about those with a psychotic illness. It's frustrating. And for them, it's possible that (excluding full CB1 agonists), marijuana is the single worst thing they can ingest, not tobacco, not alcohol. not opiates. Does that matter?

I would say that amphetamines would be just as bad, if not worse, for people with poorly managed schizophrenia that reacts to drugs. Yet we still prescribe Ritalin and Adderal to people who have ADHD.

 

[AlphaMethylPhenyl]

This is a tricky subject. I tend to think that people who have a physical disease that can only be effectively treated with marijuana (including not pharmaceutical THC/CBD) will go far out of their way to get it anyway; it is clearly not needed for you average teenager, so there is less pressure to get it. I have yet to come across more than a couple cases, if that, for whom marijuana, and only marijuana, helps. I certainly wouldn't prosecute them, though.

I think we need more integration of the facts of what marijuana can do to our children to the larger population. Then, it won't be so benign, but treated as a major health hazard for them. The marijuana of today is definitely not what your parents smoked. And the statistics show it.

What I might propose for these hypothetical cases in which marijuana, and only marijuana, can combat symptoms of a physical disease, is an exemption to the law. But as we see in the United States, just because something has Schedule II status (methylphenidate and amphetamine), doesn't mean it will be rarely prescribed or hard to get.

There's no easy solution to this. I think everyone has to give a little. I don't have the answer, or even the best answer, and I would imagine that you would claim the same.

Psychosis is basically losing touch with reality. That, I would argue, is what the pot-smoker shoots for.


SixBuckets,

The literature clearly reflects that marijuana exacerbates psychotic symptoms in schizophrenics. I agree that schizophrenia can present itself in a multitude of ways, but this is generally agree upon.

Amphetamine is interesting. It can make things worse, particularly if one's positive symptoms aren't under complete control. But it's also been used, in conjunction with an antipysychotic (usually haldol), to treat negative/cognitive symptoms of schizophrenia, assuming positive symptoms are already under control. This is not typical, and is certainly risky, if not inadvisable, but it is done. In actuality one of my friends was treated this way. Ultimately he got off of Adderall though because he realized that it's associated with better outcomes for schizophrenics to not use stimulants. High-THC marijuana, even when it was freely available, was never used to treat any aspect of schizophrenia.

Also, those who experience a mood-lifting effect from amphetamine are thought to be less severely schizophrenic, and in the cases of ADHD, have a more minor form of ADHD, than their more severely affected cohorts. So my friend was lucky that he didn't have too severe of symptoms, and was only allowed a trial with Adderall because of it.

 

[Burnt Offerings]

If merely altering your present state of consciousness (ie "losing touch with reality") is your definition of psychosis, then all psychoactive drugs induce psychosis, making the term meaningless.

 

[SixBuckets]

This is a tricky subject. I tend to think that people who have a physical disease that can only be effectively treated with marijuana (including not pharmaceutical THC/CBD) will go far out of their way to get it anyway; it is clearly not needed for you average teenager, so there is less pressure to get it. I have yet to come across more than a couple cases, if that, for whom marijuana, and only marijuana, helps. I certainly wouldn't prosecute them, though.

I think we need more integration of the facts of what marijuana can do to our children to the larger population. Then, it won't be so benign, but treated as a major health hazard for them. The marijuana of today is definitely not what your parents smoked. And the statistics show it.

What I might propose for these hypothetical cases in which marijuana, and only marijuana, can combat symptoms of a physical disease, is an exemption to the law. But as we see in the United States, just because something has Schedule II status (methylphenidate and amphetamine), doesn't mean it will be rarely prescribed or hard to get.

I'm fairly ambivalent on the decriminalisation/legalisation argument when it comes to drugs. My main concern is end users being able to access drugs without facing criminalisation. But I definitely feel that legalisation - where the production and supply is taken over by the state - will result in many harms related to quality and additives being reduced.

Psychosis is basically losing touch with reality. That, I would argue, is what the pot-smoker shoots for.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here, but I can assure you that psychosis and a marijuana high have very, very little in common.

The literature clearly reflects that marijuana exacerbates psychotic symptoms in schizophrenics. I agree that schizophrenia can present itself in a multitude of ways, but this is generally agree upon.

That doesn't mean that it affects everyone the same way. I'm not arguing against the idea that weed and schizophrenia is frequently a bad combo. But there are obviously people living with schizophrenia who consume marijuana and find it doesn't exacerbate their symptoms - I've met some of them! There are some on these boards! The schizophrenia spectrum umbrella covers a really wide variety of illnesses that present in really diverse ways.

Amphetamine is interesting. It can make things worse, particularly if one's positive symptoms aren't under complete control. But it's also been used, in conjunction with an antipysychotic (usually haldol), to treat negative/cognitive symptoms of schizophrenia, assuming positive symptoms are already under control. This is not typical, and is certainly risky, if not inadvisable, but it is done. In actuality one of my friends was treated this way. Ultimately he got off of Adderall though because he realized that it's associated with better outcomes for schizophrenics to not use stimulants. High-THC marijuana, even when it was freely available, was never used to treat any aspect of schizophrenia.

But you didn't say "high THC marijuana" before - you just said marijuana. I'm sure you know that high CBD strains are being investigated for antipsychotic properties.

Also, those who experience a mood-lifting effect from amphetamine are thought to be less severely schizophrenic, and in the cases of ADHD, have a more minor form of ADHD, than their more severely affected cohorts. So my friend was lucky that he didn't have too severe of symptoms, and was only allowed a trial with Adderall because of it.

I'm not sure what you're basing that on. People who experience mood/affect fluctuations with schizophrenia spectrum disorders (whether they're considered classically schizophrenic or diagnosed with schizoaffective or another illness under the umbrella) aren't any more or less "severely schizophrenic" - psychiatry doesn't really allocate ratings like that. They just have a different presentation that may affect their functioning and wellbeing in different ways.

 

[manboychef]

It exacerbates the symptoms of my OCD when I smoke pot, thus I just don't smoke. I do however respect the rights of those who do, and will stand up and declare it when the time comes.

 

[belligerent drunk]

It exacerbates the symptoms of my OCD when I smoke pot, thus I just don't smoke. I do however respect the rights of those who do, and will stand up and declare it when the time comes.

The right to personal freedom is a right everyone should stand up for whether it's something they benefit from or not.

 

[manboychef]

The right to personal freedom is a right everyone should stand up for whether it's something they benefit from or not.

From your lips to god's ears belligerent drunk. No matter what the right is. Even though I no longer use any drugs that are not prescribed, I still tell cops to go suck a lemon when they ask to search my car. In fact, I recently was pulled over because my left turn signal on the back of my car was malfunctioning. This led to a police officer pulling me over and asking if he could check me, and my car for weapons, bombs, drugs etc. When I said, for an equipment violation, why do you need to search me and my car? He basically cut me off and said this is a yes or no question. Of course I said no. He then had a canine unit come up and it hit on my car (big surprise). They then tore my car apart, actually damaging my center console. After they were done and didn't find anything, I was asked "If you knew there wasn't anything in the car, why didn't you just let me search in the first place?" I told him "It is my right, I have taken down you and your canine unit's badge number and I had my phone on record in my pocket" I fully intend to try to make a big a fuss as I can over this, because as citizens we all need to start standing up for our rapidly diminishing rights. If a cop wants to search your car, chances are they are going to find "reasonable suspicion" to do so regardless if it is right. The law is, if you are pulled over for an equipment violation or moving violation that is not indicative of DUI than the officer needs "reasonable suspicion" as well as your consent to search the car. Reasonable suspicion is erratic behavior, nervousness, or drugs in plain sight. I exhibited none of these things.

 

[Burnt Offerings]

Cops get pissed when they encounter citizens who know their rights.

I'm on the fence about saying no to vehicle searches every time, though. If you don't have anything then yeah, say no and watch in amusement as they violate your rights in vain regardless. But if you actually have drugs in your vehicle, and they're well hidden, then perhaps submitting to a search is in your best interest, as most times cops only do cursory searches of the front driver & passenger area...unless they find drugs or paraphernalia within arms reach of the driver's seat they'll usually leave it at that. A lot of times around here, if you say no to a search, they'll simply seize your vehicle until they can get a warrant to search it.

But, on the other hand, I've had my vehicle searched very extensively before when I agreed to a search (I didn't have anything on me, though), and you'd have an easier time getting your case dismissed in court if you refuse a search and they come up with something anyway, so I don't know...

(I guess this is getting off topic but your 4th amendment rights are important, including the ones that relate to your motor vehicle, and it's a topic of considerable interest to drug users obviously.)

 

[manboychef]

Fuck the police. Don't ever give them an inch, and the fact that they will seize your car till they can get a warrant is just another reason for every single person to stand up and say no. They won't be able to seize everyones car. It would just become a nightmare for them, not to mention all the litigations they would face due to people missing appointments/work.

 

[SixBuckets]

From your lips to god's ears belligerent drunk. No matter what the right is. Even though I no longer use any drugs that are not prescribed, I still tell cops to go suck a lemon when they ask to search my car. In fact, I recently was pulled over because my left turn signal on the back of my car was malfunctioning. This led to a police officer pulling me over and asking if he could check me, and my car for weapons, bombs, drugs etc. When I said, for an equipment violation, why do you need to search me and my car? He basically cut me off and said this is a yes or no question. Of course I said no. He then had a canine unit come up and it hit on my car (big surprise). They then tore my car apart, actually damaging my center console. After they were done and didn't find anything, I was asked "If you knew there wasn't anything in the car, why didn't you just let me search in the first place?" I told him "It is my right, I have taken down you and your canine unit's badge number and I had my phone on record in my pocket" I fully intend to try to make a big a fuss as I can over this, because as citizens we all need to start standing up for our rapidly diminishing rights. If a cop wants to search your car, chances are they are going to find "reasonable suspicion" to do so regardless if it is right. The law is, if you are pulled over for an equipment violation or moving violation that is not indicative of DUI than the officer needs "reasonable suspicion" as well as your consent to search the car. Reasonable suspicion is erratic behavior, nervousness, or drugs in plain sight. I exhibited none of these things.

Also, the time they spend trying to bully you for refusing a search when you're not carrying anything is time they and their dog are prevented from harassing people who might actually be holding.

 

[Felonious Monk]

Psychosis is basically losing touch with reality. That, I would argue, is what the pot-smoker shoots for.

And I would argue that's an overgeneralization.

I'd also like to point out that I've met several people with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder who used CBD-rich cannabis medicine to control their psychosis (with a strain with nearly zero THC, "ACDC"). One of them was even in a rehab facility at the time and received medicine under medical supervision.

 

[my3rdeye]

He then had a canine unit come up and it hit on my car (big surprise). They then tore my car apart, actually damaging my center console. After they were done and didn't find anything,

Those dogs hit on every single car the handlers want.

My problem with medical pot is that when it becomes fully legal the med pot crowd is going to demand it cheaper or tax free. I think it should just be legal and the same laws for everyone.
If I drink a few beers to combat my insomnia that is medical use of beer, but if I make a fuss and demand cheap beer because my doctor agrees with me everyone would laugh. Yet insomnia is on the list of afflictions that pot can be used for. Why is the beer drinker not entitled to the same rights as the pot user? It doesn't seem fair to me. I think medpot should only exist until it's legal.
Once it is legal med pot is going to suck millions of tax dollars out of economy. It was only supposed to be to protect people from arrest, once it's legal I think medical pot should be abolished.