Pot is also known as pot, grass and marijuana but its proper name is actually cannabis. It comes from the leaves and flowers of the plant Cannabis sativa. It’s considered an illegal substance in the US and lots of nations and possession of marijuana can be a crime punishable by law. The FDA classifies marijuana as Program I, chemicals that have an extremely large potential for abuse and have no established medical usage. Through time several studies assert that some compounds utilized in bud have medicinal usage, specially in terminal diseases like cancer and AIDS. This started a fierce debate on the pros and cons of using medical marijuana. To repay this argument, the Institute of Medicine published the famous 1999 IOM report entitled Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base. The analysis was comprehensive but failed to provide a very clear cut yes or no reply. The other decks of the medical marijuana issue often cite a portion of this report in their advocacy arguments. However, although the report clarified a lot of matters, it never settled the controversy once and for all.
Let us look at the issues that encourage why medical marijuana ought to be legalized.
(1) Marijuana is just a naturally cbd oil cancer occurring herb and has been used from South America into Asia as a herbal medicine for millennia. In this time when the all pure, organic are important health buzzwords, a naturally occurring herb such as marijuana could be attractive to and safer for users than synthetic drugs.
Several studies, as summarized in the IOM report, researchers have observed that cannabis can be used as analgesic, e.g. to treat pain. A couple of studies showed that THC, a marijuana component works well in treating chronic pain caused by cancer patients. But studies on severe pain such as those experienced during surgery and injury possess inconclusive reports. A few research studies, also summarized in the IOM report, also have demonstrated that some bud components possess anti emetic properties and are, so, effective against nausea and vomiting, which are common side effects of cancer chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Specific compounds extracted from bud have strong therapeutic potential. Cannobidiol (CBD), a significant component of marijuana, has been demonstrated to possess anti fungal, anti cancer and anti oxidant properties. Other cannabinoids have been shown to prevent high intraocular pressure (IOP), a significant risk factor for glaucoma. Drugs which contain ingredients present in marijuana but have now been synthetically manufactured from the laboratory are approved by the USFDA. 1 example is Marinol, an antiemetic agent suggested for nausea and vomiting associated with cancer. Its active component is dronabinol, a synthetic Delta 9- tetrahydrocannabinol (THC).
Lots of healthcare professional societies and organizations have expressed their support. As an illustration, The American College of Physicians, recommended a reevaluation of the Schedule I classification of bud within their 2008 post newspaper. ACP also expresses its strong support for research into the curative role of bud in addition to exemption from national criminal prosecution; civil accountability; or professional sanctioning for physicians that prescribe or dispense medical marijuana in accord with law. In the same way, protection from civil or criminal penalties for patients using medical marijuana as permitted under laws.
(4) Medical marijuana is legally used in most developed countries The argument of when they’re able to do it, why not us? Is another strong point. Some nations, for example Canada, Belgium, Austria, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Spain, Israel, and Finland have resisted the therapeutic use of marijuana under rigorous prescription management. Some nations in the united states may also be allowing exemptions.
Now here are some arguments against medical marijuana.
(1) insufficient data on safety and efficiency. Medication regulation is based on safety. The security of marijuana and its components still needs to first be established. Efficacy only comes moment. Even if bud has several beneficial health effects, the benefits should outweigh the risks for it to be contemplated for medical use. Unless marijuana is proven to be better (safer and far better) than drugs currently available on the market, its own approval for medical usage might be a long shot. In accordance with the testimony of Robert J. Meyer of the Department of Health and Human Services having access to a drug or hospital therapy, without even knowing just how to use it even if it’s effective, will not benefit anybody. Simply having access, without needing safety, efficacy, and decent use information does not help patients.
(2) not known compound components. Medical bud can be readily available and inexpensive in herbal type. As with other herbs, marijuana falls under the category of botanical products. Unpurified botanical goods, however, face many problems for example lot-to-lot consistency, dosage conclusion, potency, shelf-life, and toxicity. Based on the IOM report in case there’s a possibility of marijuana as a medicine, it lies in its isolated components, the cannabinoids and their synthetic derivatives. To completely characterize the different elements of marijuana would cost as much money and time that the costs of the medications that should emerge of this will be overly significant. Currently, no pharmaceutical company appears to be interested in investing cash to segregate more therapeutic components from marijuana outside what’s available on the marketplace.
(3) Potential for misuse. Marijuana or cannabis is addictive. It might not be as addictive as hard drugs such as cocaine; nevertheless it cannot be denied that there’s a prospect of substance abuse associated with bud. This has been attested by a few studies as summarized in the IOM report.
(4) Insufficient a secure delivery method. Considering the recent trends in antismoking legislations, this kind of delivery won’t ever be approved by health authorities. Reliable and safe delivery systems from the kind of vaporizers, nebulizers, or inhalers continue to be at the testing stage.
If marijuana has therapeutic consequences, it is simply fixing the symptoms of certain diseases. It can not treat or cure these disorders. Considering the fact it is effective against those indications, you will find medications available which work just as well and better yet, without the side effects and risk of abuse associated with bud.
The 1999 IOM report couldn’t settle the debate about medical marijuana together with scientific evidence available at that time. The report clearly discouraged the use of smoked marijuana but gave a nod to marijuana use through a health inhaler or vaporizer. Moreover, the research also recommended that the compassionate use of marijuana under strict medical supervision. Furthermore, it encouraged more funding from the research of the efficacy and safety of cannabinoids.
Therefore what stands in the way of Assessing the questions caused by the IOM report? Medical authorities don’t appear to be curious about having the following review. There’s limited data available and anything is available is biased towards safety problems regarding the adverse consequences of smoked marijuana. Data available on effectiveness mainly come from research on artificial cannabinoids (e.g. THC). This disparity in statistics creates a target risk-benefit appraisal difficult.
Clinical studies on bud are difficult to conduct because of limited funding and strict regulations. On account of the complicated legalities involved, hardly any pharmaceutical companies are buying cannabinoid research. In many cases, it is unclear how to define medical marijuana as advocated as opposed by many classes. Does it just check with the usage of this botanical product bud or does it contain artificial cannabinoid components (e.g. THC and derivatives) as good? Synthetic cannabinoids (e.g. Marinol) for sale in the market are extremely pricey, forcing people towards the cheaper cannabinoid from the form of bud. Naturally, the matter is further obscured by conspiracy theories between the pharmaceutical industry and drug regulators.