Medical Marijuana | MedicalMarijuanaPlanet.com

The Legalization of Marijuana – Part 1 of 2
By Alex Simms

On July 30, 2001, the ‘Narcotic Control Regulation’ was amended and the ‘Marijuana Medical Access Regulation’ came into force. This sparked the beginning of a heated national debate, the subject in question being the legalization of marijuana for medical purposes in Canada. While marijuana is still considered an illegal substance in Canada, it is approved for use under certain circumstances. It is available for applicants who have a terminal illness with a prognosis of a life span of less than 12 months, those who suffer from specific symptoms associated with certain serious medical conditions, or those who have symptoms associated with a serious medical circumstance, where conventional treatments have failed to relieve symptoms (Health Canada, “Medical Marijuana”).

Due to previous stigmatizations associated with marijuana use, as well as its previous legal implications, public favor was not in support for the recent Bill C-17; a Bill for cannabis law reform in Canada, which was passed on November 1, 2004. The legislation allows a person to have up to 30 grams of marijuana in their possession, within limitations, while only receiving a fine (Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy, “Cannabis Law Reform in Canada”). This Act is the closest the Canadian government has ever before come toward legalizing marijuana. It is becoming increasingly apparent that through Bill C-17, there will be potentially beneficial monetary implications for the federal government, false social perceptions will lessen, and medical benefits of cannabis use will become further appreciated. In the future, marijuana use will not be perceived as the social ‘evil’ it once was, or still is. In light of the following information, it will become clear that it is not necessary to prohibit marijuana use, but rather to regulate it.

To drug policy reformers, prohibition of marijuana is not just a cause to be supported, but a mandatory way of life, necessary to uphold society’s moral fiber. These activists do not consider marijuana to be safe. Even when scientific information supports the lack of harmful effects of cannabis on the body; many still categorize it with dangerous substances such as cocaine or heroin. It is these ‘marijuana myths’ that continue to influence the opinions of so many Canadian citizens, even though there is a lack of fact-driven information to support common social stigma.

A widespread belief amongst the public is that marijuana is a ‘gateway drug’, leading to the use of more harmful substances. Never has there been a consistent relationship between the use patterns of various drugs. While marijuana use has fluctuated over the years, harder, more addictive drug use, such as LSD, remains the same. In fact, in 1999 less than 16% of high school students who smoked marijuana report trying cocaine (qtd. in Zimmer, 2). Another frequent misconception is that high levels of marijuana use can be profoundly addicting. While lab rats that are injected with THC and then given a cannabinoid receptor-blocker do experience some withdrawal symptoms, such as disturbed sleep and loss of appetite, humans are never given ‘blockers’. THC slowly leaves the human system, causing no serious withdrawal (Zimmer et al. 47). A study such as this is not relevant to physical addiction in humans.

Lastly, many people still believe that the damaging effects of smoking marijuana are greater then that of smoking tobacco products. Although, except for their psychoactive ingredients, tobacco and marijuana smoke are nearly identical, tobacco use is far more dangerous than the latter. Mainly because of nicotine (cigarettes’ addictive quality), cigarette smokers tend to smoke 10 cigarettes a day, while regular cannabis smokers smoke fewer than 5 (Zimmer et al. 62). Marijuana smoke also effects the lungs in a different way than tobacco smoke does. “The nature of the marijuana-induced changes were also different, occurring primarily in the lungs’ large airways – not the small peripheral airways affected by tobacco smoke. Since it is small-airway inflammation that causes chronic bronchitis and emphysema, marijuana smokers may not develop these diseases” (Zimmer et al. 64).

These are just a few basic examples of the social stigmatization surrounding marijuana use, as there are many others. When closer examined, none of these ‘myths’ provide a solid foundation for the prohibition of marijuana use; therefore its ban remains unfounded.

Alex Simms is a content writer for Avalon Studios, a Web Design & Development firm working with small businesses.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Alex_Simms
http://EzineArticles.com/?The-Legalization-of-Marijuana—Part-1-of-2&id=109356

The Legalization of Marijuana – Part 2 of 2
By Alex Simms

A very influential factor regarding the legalization of marijuana, is the cost implications of maintaining cannabis prohibition to the federal and provincial governments, and in turn the average Canadian taxpayer. According to the Auditor General of Canada, it is projected that approximately $450 million was spent on drug control, enforcement, and education in the year 2000.

Since ¾ of drug offences are marijuana related, the majority of the $450 million spent across Canada was due to cannabis prohibition laws. This expenditure also does not include funding for marijuana related court hearings, or incarcerations, as over 300 000 people are arrested for simple marijuana possession every year (Cohen et al. 2). Another issue to consider is that the amount of cannabis users continues to rise across Canada, up from 6.5% in 1989, to 12.2% in 2000 (Nabalamba, 1).

This will only increase the amount of funding the federal government is forced to contribute to drug control and enforcement, further charging the taxpayer. A more cost efficient way to regulate marijuana is to set an age limit through provincial regulation, permitting for adult use of a substance less harmful than both alcohol and tobacco. Otherwise, it is left in the hands of organized crime, with the government continuing to spend millions on its prohibition, and not profiting from its continuous increase in use. In this situation, the regulation of marijuana should not only be allowed, but would financially benefit the country.

Even after thousands of years of people using marijuana to treat a variety of medical conditions, many still believe marijuana is a drug without therapeutic value. Patients undergoing cancer chemotherapy, or AIDS related AZT therapy, found smoking marijuana to be an effective way to curb nausea (Health Canada, “Medical Marijuana”). Often it is more effective than available prescribed medications. “44% of oncologists responding to a questionnaire said they had recommended marijuana to their cancer patients; others said they would recommend it if it were legal” (Zimmer et al. 87). Other uses include control for muscle spasms associated with spinal cord injury/disease, and multiple sclerosis and pain/ weight loss associated with cancer, HIV, and arthritis patients.

Cannabis also lessens the frequency of seizures in epilepsy, and controls eye pressure in glaucoma patients (National Institute on Drug Abuse, “Drug Policy Information Sheet”). Although medical marijuana has been approved for use under certain circumstances, it is very difficult, if not impossible, to obtain cannabis for treatment purposes in Ontario. This is because the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario issued a warning in October 2002, cautioning that the “clinical efficacy of the drug has not been entirely established” and to “proceed with caution” when prescribing cannabis (The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, “Prescribing Medical Marijuana”). Due to this, a physician cannot make a proper declaration of the risks and benefits; therefore, they can not fully inform the patient of the drugs possible effects.

Fortunately, since the legalization of marijuana for medical use occurred almost 5 years ago, one could assume a proper risk assessment of the drug will soon be completed through Health Canada. Through marijuana’s apparent medical usages, it becomes clear that it should be regulated across the country.

The implication of marijuana’s prohibition is financially devastating to the federal government. As false social perceptions are the only grounds for this ban to be upheld, and the medical sciences continue to find new usages for cannabis as therapeutic treatment, it remains unfounded to continue its outlaw. Through government enforced regulation, it becomes obvious that the benefits of marijuana legalization outweigh the disadvantages.

Alex Simms is a content writer for Avalon Studios, a Web Design & Development firm working with small businesses.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Alex_Simms
http://EzineArticles.com/?The-Legalization-of-Marijuana—Part-2-of-2&id=110600

Is Marijuana Dangerous?
By Dan B. Clark

Is Marijuana dangerous is a question that could have as many different answers as the number of people you asked? Cannabis is a hot topic today as more and more states (not to mention countries) legalize medical marijuana more and more people become interested. There is a ton of information and most of it is contradictory. Anyone could win a debate on either side of the argument using articles based on findings from medical studies. It is as important to look closely at the company or organization that funds the study as well as the findings themselves. Politics often finds its way into such studies.

Is Marijuana dangerous can depend on what other substance we use for comparison? If we compare cannabis to a long list of FDA approved medications and the deaths and health complications attributed to said medications then Marijuana wins that argument. When pot is compared to other illegal “recreational drugs” it is the lesser of two evils. On the other hand just because there isn’t a line outside Drug Detox Clinics for those that smoke Marijuana doesn’t mean users are totally out of the woods.

A recent study at King’s College in London found that small amounts of trahydrocannabinol (THC), an active ingredient in marijuana, used by subjects in the study caused psychotic symptoms which included paranoia and hallucinations. Using MRI scans researchers discovered that the inferior frontal cortex which regulates paranoia is adversely affected by THC. Many patients in Drug Rehab Centers have a duel diagnosis; that is addiction and a mental health issue. Could there be a connection? There are no easy answers and in the end people have to make up their own minds. I just think there has to be more intense research by impartial laboratories before we have a definitive answer.

Dan C’s career in the addiction field spans twenty-five years. He has held positions in all phases of administration and clinical services in Treatment Facilities throughout the state of Florida. He is currently employed by http://www.recoveryconnection.org

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Dan_B._Clark
http://EzineArticles.com/?Is-Marijuana-Dangerous?&id=1923138

California’s Reefer Madness
By Michael E Jones

Simon Says “I Love Getting High”
Simon’s gaze was transfixed on an uncertain point across the room. Every now and then his eyes would give in to the strains of having to stay awake, eyelashes flittering to a close. He would silently nod off a bit then abruptly reconnect with our world, as if jolted by some unseen electric shock.

I had barely recognized him yesterday in the controlled chaos of this emergency room. Two years ago when I saw him, he was a frightened and suicidal 17-year-old living in the grips of a mentally ill mother and a devoted Scientologist father. Back then he’d been “rescued” by a squad of Scientology nuts who circled him and demanded his release. One of them was a suit who described himself as John Travolta’s lawyer. In any event, his forlorn and helpless expression spoke volumes that his mouth could not that day. The Cruise cadets scooped him up and carried him away. “He’ll be back,” I muttered to a colleague So here he was, a bit older and a lot sicker. “I just love getting high, man,” he bellowed at me, his grinning face lit up with pride. “See, look,” he said, his stained fingers digging around in a front pocket of his once-blue jeans. He produced a tattered and four-folded set of photocopies and handed them to me.

They were his physician’s statements for procuring medical marijuana. The copies bore the logo of a “Family Practice” pot clinic and some auspicious language explaining that Simon needed to get high for a “medical problem.” What, I wondered, could this generally healthy 19-year-old be carrying that requires the use of dope.

“I have insomnia and lack of appetite,” Simon said.
“Pretty common side effects of smoking crystal meth for days on end, as you have been doing,” I pointed out.
“Oh, yeah,” he stammered and chuckled, closing his eyes again .

We Voted for This?
When millions of us Californians voted for Proposition 215 in 1996 legalizing medical marijuana, we did so with images of gaunt and pained terminally ill patients. Pot, we were told, would be used to help the most desperate of our brothers and sisters gain weight and feel better. Instead, it has degenerated into little more than a front for legalized drug dealing.

That medical marijuana isn’t being used as we voters intended is almost a foregone conclusion. NORML, the National Organization for Reform of Marijuana Laws, has itself reported, according to the US Department of Justice, that medical marijuana is used for the following conditions:

40% Chronic Pain
22% AIDS-Related
15% Mood Disorders
23% All other categories

What happened to all the morbidity and mortality?

When we witness delirious 18 to 20-something year-old burn-outs parading through our emergency rooms and offices brandishing prescriptions for pot, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out something’s up. It didn’t take authorities long to figure it out, either.

Just a few weeks ago, on August 22, California’s Bureau of Narcotics enforcement busted two men in Los Angeles for the illegal possession, transportation and sale of marijuana in connection with a marijuana dispensary, Today’s Healthcare, in Northridge, CA. The men were making a healthy profit off of dealing “medical” marijuana to a clientele between the ages of 18 and 29.

The problem in California has gotten so enormous that Attorney General Edmund Brown had to issue guidelines last month just to give some shape to an otherwise out-of-control system.

What’s the Prescription?
Applying a psychological overlay to all of this yields, for me, a different conclusion than my initial knee-jerk, oh-my-God-isn’t-this-awful reaction. A cornerstone of psychological theory is the splintering of the whole person into acceptable and unacceptable parts. One who recognizes perverse sexual impulses within themselves might defend against these urges by becoming rigidly religious, for instance.

Extrapolated to a societal level, one could argue that we are so collectively unnerved by our love of chemicals and pleasure that we don’t just enforce laws against it, we declare war on it. If we’re defeated, we might try to rationalize and make excuses, much like cousin Boudreau drinks himself into a nightly stupor because of his “bad back.”

The degree of our defensiveness is proportional to our degree of investment in the self image we like to propogate. Are we as a collective determined to prove ourselves righteous by battling the demon to our own death? Or are we prepared to declare, as Simon did, “I just love getting high, man”?

Quite frankly, I think we in California have reached the intermediate stage of rationalization. I don’t believe there is enough will in the Golden State to stem reefer madness. We can drown in a sea of data about the destructive effects of marijuana, protest loud and long about the evils of getting high, but it is still, to many, “only weed.” God grew it so it’s more trustworthy than anything man-made.

What would the healthy social response be to this dilemmes? I suggest that we stop tip-toeing around the issue and legalize pot for once and for all. Then regulate it and tax it as we do with every other “sin.” Here’s what that might look like:

1. No one under 18 may purchase marijuana. For any reason. Period.
2. Tax sales at a rate of 20%.
3. Only state-licensed businesses may sell it, and only in certain geographic areas.
4. Illegal sales will be deterred by significant increases in the penalties for them.
5. Tax revenues will be divided among state healthcare programs, drug education and intervention efforts and will help close the state’s yawning budget gap.
6. Finally, revenues will fund free medical marijuana to those truly in need of it.

That’s the honest, and pragmatic, solution to the issue. But are we ready to reconnect with that pleasure-seeking spirit we once disowned?

Michael Jones, LMFT, BCPC is a licensed and Board Certified psychotherapist in Glendale, CA. For an appointment, call (818) 974-2158 or visit him at http://www.psych247.com

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Michael_E_Jones
http://EzineArticles.com/?Californias-Reefer-Madness&id=1497057

Medical Marijuana – The Debate Rages On
By Katt Mollar

Marijuana is also known as pot, grass and weed but its formal name is actually cannabis. It comes from the leaves and flowers of the plant Cannabis sativa. It is considered an illegal substance in the US and many countries and possession of marijuana is a crime punishable by law. The FDA classifies marijuana as Schedule I, substances which have a very high potential for abuse and have no proven medical use. Over the years several studies claim that some substances found in marijuana have medicinal use, especially in terminal diseases such as cancer and AIDS. This started a fierce debate over the pros and cons of the use of medical marijuana. To settle this debate, the Institute of Medicine published the famous 1999 IOM report entitled Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base. The report was comprehensive but did not give a clear cut yes or no answer. The opposite camps of the medical marijuana issue often cite part of the report in their advocacy arguments. However, although the report clarified many things, it never settled the controversy once and for all.

Let’s look at the issues that support why medical marijuana should be legalized.

(1) Marijuana is a naturally occurring herb and has been used from South America to Asia as an herbal medicine for millennia. In this day and age when the all natural and organic are important health buzzwords, a naturally occurring herb like marijuana might be more appealing to and safer for consumers than synthetic drugs.

(2) Marijuana has strong therapeutic potential. Several studies, as summarized in the IOM report, have observed that cannabis can be used as analgesic, e.g. to treat pain. A few studies showed that THC, a marijuana component is effective in treating chronic pain experienced by cancer patients. However, studies on acute pain such as those experienced during surgery and trauma have inconclusive reports. A few studies, also summarized in the IOM report, have demonstrated that some marijuana components have antiemetic properties and are, therefore, effective against nausea and vomiting, which are common side effects of cancer chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Some researchers are convinced that cannabis has some therapeutic potential against neurological diseases such as multiple sclerosis. Specific compounds extracted from marijuana have strong therapeutic potential. Cannobidiol (CBD), a major component of marijuana, has been shown to have antipsychotic, anticancer and antioxidant properties. Other cannabinoids have been shown to prevent high intraocular pressure (IOP), a major risk factor for glaucoma. Drugs that contain active ingredients present in marijuana but have been synthetically produced in the laboratory have been approved by the US FDA. One example is Marinol, an antiemetic agent indicated for nausea and vomiting associated with cancer chemotherapy. Its active ingredient is dronabinol, a synthetic delta-9- tetrahydrocannabinol (THC).

(3) One of the major proponents of medical marijuana is the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), a US-based organization. Many medical professional societies and organizations have expressed their support. As an example, The American College of Physicians, recommended a re-evaluation of the Schedule I classification of marijuana in their 2008 position paper. ACP also expresses its strong support for research into the therapeutic role of marijuana as well as exemption from federal criminal prosecution; civil liability; or professional sanctioning for physicians who prescribe or dispense medical marijuana in accordance with state law. Similarly, protection from criminal or civil penalties for patients who use medical marijuana as permitted under state laws.

(4) Medical marijuana is legally used in many developed countries The argument of if they can do it, why not us? is another strong point. Some countries, including Canada, Belgium, Austria, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Spain, Israel, and Finland have legalized the therapeutic use of marijuana under strict prescription control. Some states in the US are also allowing exemptions.

Now here are the arguments against medical marijuana.

(1) Lack of data on safety and efficacy. Drug regulation is based on safety first. The safety of marijuana and its components still has to first be established. Efficacy only comes second. Even if marijuana has some beneficial health effects, the benefits should outweigh the risks for it to be considered for medical use. Unless marijuana is proven to be better (safer and more effective) than drugs currently available in the market, its approval for medical use may be a long shot. According to the testimony of Robert J. Meyer of the Department of Health and Human Services having access to a drug or medical treatment, without knowing how to use it or even if it is effective, does not benefit anyone. Simply having access, without having safety, efficacy, and adequate use information does not help patients.

(2) Unknown chemical components. Medical marijuana can only be easily accessible and affordable in herbal form. Like other herbs, marijuana falls under the category of botanical products. Unpurified botanical products, however, face many problems including lot-to-lot consistency, dosage determination, potency, shelf-life, and toxicity. According to the IOM report if there is any future of marijuana as a medicine, it lies in its isolated components, the cannabinoids and their synthetic derivatives. To fully characterize the different components of marijuana would cost so much time and money that the costs of the medications that will come out of it would be too high. Currently, no pharmaceutical company seems interested in investing money to isolate more therapeutic components from marijuana beyond what is already available in the market.

(3) Potential for abuse. Marijuana or cannabis is addictive. It may not be as addictive as hard drugs such as cocaine; nevertheless it cannot be denied that there is a potential for substance abuse associated with marijuana. This has been demonstrated by a few studies as summarized in the IOM report.

(4) Lack of a safe delivery system. The most common form of delivery of marijuana is through smoking. Considering the current trends in anti-smoking legislations, this form of delivery will never be approved by health authorities. Reliable and safe delivery systems in the form of vaporizers, nebulizers, or inhalers are still at the testing stage.

(5) Symptom alleviation, not cure. Even if marijuana has therapeutic effects, it is only addressing the symptoms of certain diseases. It does not treat or cure these illnesses. Given that it is effective against these symptoms, there are already medications available which work just as well or even better, without the side effects and risk of abuse associated with marijuana.

The 1999 IOM report could not settle the debate about medical marijuana with scientific evidence available at that time. The report definitely discouraged the use of smoked marijuana but gave a nod towards marijuana use through a medical inhaler or vaporizer. In addition, the report also recommended the compassionate use of marijuana under strict medical supervision. Furthermore, it urged more funding in the research of the safety and efficacy of cannabinoids.

So what stands in the way of clarifying the questions brought up by the IOM report? The health authorities do not seem to be interested in having another review. There is limited data available and whatever is available is biased towards safety issues on the adverse effects of smoked marijuana. Data available on efficacy mainly come from studies on synthetic cannabinoids (e.g. THC). This disparity in data makes an objective risk-benefit assessment difficult.

Clinical studies on marijuana are few and difficult to conduct due to limited funding and strict regulations. Because of the complicated legalities involved, very few pharmaceutical companies are investing in cannabinoid research. In many cases, it is not clear how to define medical marijuana as advocated and opposed by many groups. Does it only refer to the use of the botanical product marijuana or does it include synthetic cannabinoid components (e.g. THC and derivatives) as well? Synthetic cannabinoids (e.g. Marinol) available in the market are extremely expensive, pushing people towards the more affordable cannabinoid in the form of marijuana. Of course, the issue is further clouded by conspiracy theories involving the pharmaceutical industry and drug regulators.

In conclusion, the future of medical marijuana and the settlement of the debate would depend on more comprehensive and comparable scientific research. An update of the IOM report anytime soon is well-needed.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Katt_Mollar
http://EzineArticles.com/?Medical-Marijuana—The-Debate-Rages-On&id=2104014

On Medical Marijuana
By Ned Wicker

Over the years I have read a lot about the pros and cons of medical marijuana, and from time-to-time there is a piece on the news about it, usually profiling somebody who is in trouble with the law. The debate continues.

Marijuana is so common. It grows everywhere. During my days as a sports writer, I recall Hall of Fame baseball player Robin Yount’s hilarious story about marijuana plants growing in the outfield of the old Comiskey Park in Chicago, after the ill-fated “Anti Disco Night” fiasco between games of a double header. Fans got crazy when they lit a disco record bon fire in center field. They stormed the field and tore up the grass. The situation turned from silly to completely out of control in a matter of moments and it got so bad that the umpires ruled the field “unplayable,” forcing the White Sox to forfeit the second game. Robin said the Brewers were the next team in after the event and these “tiny little pot plants” were growing in the outfield grass.

People have been growing their own marijuana for years, or selling marijuana to earn extra money. It’s against the law, but most people sort of look the other way and don’t really care about it. They read about, or see a story about a person who is using marijuana to control pain, or for some other “medical” purpose and they think to themselves, “That’s not so bad, why don’t they leave him alone.”

I have a problem with “medical marijuana” for a couple of reasons. First and foremost, the medical or limited use of marijuana is just the tip of the iceberg, because the exceptions to the rule quickly expand. What starts out as a controlled activity ends up as either pseudo legalization, or a kind of tacit consent.

Laws concerning medical marijuana are a veil. Secondly, and more importantly, if marijuana can be grown so easily, and is so common, how can a physician prescribe marijuana with any sense that the drug will be used according to the prescription? Other drug groups such as opiates and barbiturates have strict controls, but even with those controls, the abuse is rampant. Any notion of controlling marijuana is a joke.

The fact that so many people view marijuana as harmless is bothersome. “Well, at least he isn’t drinking alcohol,” says a mother of her teenager’s marijuana use. Teenagers like to stretch their limits and test the boundaries of parental control. It’s an invitation for trouble because “limited use” turns into “unlimited use.”

The American medical network writes, “As with abuse of cocaine, opioids, and alcohol, chronic marijuana abusers may lose interest in common socially desirable goals and steadily devote more time to drug acquisition and use. However, THC does not cause a specific and unique ‘a-motivational syndrome.’ The range of symptoms sometimes attributed to marijuana use is difficult to distinguish from mild to moderate depression and the maturational dysfunctions often associated with protracted adolescence.

Chronic marijuana use has also been reported to increase the risk of psychotic symptoms in individuals with a past history of schizophrenia. Persons who initiate marijuana smoking before the age of 17 may subsequently develop severe cognitive and neuropsychological disorders, and may be at higher risk for later poly-drug and alcohol abuse problems.”

It’s a slippery slope we try to stand on when we take anything illegal and try to “pretty it up” to look legitimate. Are there legal and effective ways of helping chemotherapy patients deal with the side effects of their treatments? If chronic pain is an issue, is there no other way than marijuana for that condition? There are excellent arguments on both sides. I invite you to look at the postings on ProCon.org. There’s a lot there to read and ponder.

In closing, my objections, bottom line, are more on a moral level than a legal level. I view the legal level as a “Pandora’s box” and like so many other issues, you can get tangled up in the details and lose sight of the purpose. As for the moral objection, it is much more clearly defined for me. Marijuana is a dangerous drug from a moral perspective, because it represents the beginning of a long succession to a bad ending.

Ned Wicker is the Addictions Recovery Chaplain at Waukesha Memorial Hospital Lawrence Center He author’s a website for addiction support:

Drug-Addiction-Support.org

Drug Addiction Symptoms

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Ned_Wicker
http://EzineArticles.com/?On-Medical-Marijuana&id=1415650

Medical Marijuana Access Regulations in Canada
By Beverly OMalley

Canada’s initiative to decriminalize marijuana is focused on terminally ill patients who benefit from the use of medical marijuana to relieve unbearable symptoms of chronic and terminal illnesses. The Marijuana Medical Access Regulations (MMAR) lists specific rules for Canadians to follow.

The (MMAR) gives the Canadian health care system a legal method to regulate individuals who use, cultivate, or store marijuana for medical purposes. The regulations are a result of an Ontario Court of Appeals ruling in 2000 that mandated the Canadian government to create new regulations within the year that focused on the medical marijuana issue. The court order included a stipulation aimed at getting the Canadian government to move on this issue. Basically the courts said that if the Canadian government had not completed the task of setting up regulations for the use of marijuana for medical purposes within the year then the Ontario courts would not prosecute as illegal the use, growth, or storage of marijuana. This clear message from the court was the first step in creating the MMAR. By 2001, the new medical marijuana regulations were in effect.

Research into the benefits of medical marijuana by modern scientists began in the 1800’s and William Brooke O’Shaughnessy of the Medical College in Calcutta is credited with the first research and introduction of the healing properties of marijuana to the Western medical community. For the remainder of the 19th Century, the plant was widely used in Western countries as a medicine for pain relief, muscle spasms, and stomach cramps. During this time it was effective in relieving many symptoms of chronic illness. Even though research continued to show the medicinal benefits of using the plant, new laws were beginning to be enacted in many countries that focused on the use of illegal drugs. Marijuana became one of the drugs encompassed by these new rules and regulations and as a result the ability to use it for medical purposes was taken away by governments that wanted to curb the use of illegal drugs by its citizens.

By eliminating the right to use marijuana legally, it became a black market product. Even though it was key to the relief of many debilitating symptoms of chronic and terminal illnesses, these laws made it illegal to use, grow, or store the plant even for personal use. Even possession of the plant was illegal. Such was the result of the criminalization of marijuana.

Now that the MMAR is in effect, the use of medical marijuana has been decriminalized. Marijuana has not been legalized however, and continues to be illegal to anyone without the proper license or authorization from the Canadian government.

The MMAR was created to regulate the growing, distribution, and use of marijuana for medical purposes. The regulations are broken down into different segments that describe the rules to follow for users, growers, storage facilities, and access to the drug through the Canadian health care system. Each segment provides direction for how a person can get get licensed, license renewals, and the amounts of medical marijuana that can be in possession at any one time. The latest statistics kept by the Canadian government (July 2008). show there are 1476 physicians authorized to prescribe the drug, while the number of Canadians authorized to possess, grow, or store it is 2812.

Medical Marijuana Users

The regulations state that an application must be made to the Canadian government, which includes personal information and identification. An authorization from a medical professional must accompany the license request, which states the types of ailments and the benefits that may be realized by the patient. The regulations also give the procedures for authorized users to follow when confronted by authorities who are inquiring about their use of the drug. All the steps involved in obtaining and maintaining a medical marijuana authorization is listed in the MMAR, and the Canadian government is bound to follow those rules until changed by new regulations or laws.

Marijuana Growers

The grower must make an application to the Canadian government with complete identification papers and plans for growing medicinal marijuana for the Canadian health care system and individual patients. Even though Canada has its own government-controlled herb growing company it is possible for private citizens to grow marijuana under the new regulations.

A plan for production and outlets for disposal must be included in the application so that the growing of the drug can be regulated and the quantity of drug can be monitored. For each license to grow medical marijuana, a limit to the amount a grower can produce is set. A license to grow medicinal marijuana does not give a grower the right to grow as much as they want. The quantity of drug produced must match the distribution points authorized by the Canadian government. All the steps in cultivation are monitored and tracked according to the new MMAR laws. The Canadian health care system is partly responsible for working with government agencies to insure that the regulations do not create a larger illegal marijuana problem by having legal growers producing too much of the drug which might find its way into the illegal markets.

The MMAR also has rules for the storage of marijuana destined for the medical community. An application must be made to the Canadian government that lists personal identification of the owner of the storage property, the property description, and the routes that the drug will take to final disposal.

While one patient may obtain the right to do all three of the regulated acts, individuals may also be able to lawfully grow or store the plant even without the right to consume it. The Canadian government took the most appropriate steps in creating rules that could be easily followed by authorized individuals pertaining to the use of medical marijuana. Now that the MMAR is in effect in Canada, other countries are looking into similar federal regulations to oversee the use of medical marijuana by their own citizens.

Beverly Hansen OMalley is a health promotion specialist and likes to write about health related topics that help people in their daily lives. She is the the owner of http://www.registered-nurse-canada.com where she explores the uniqueness of the nursing profession in Canada including comparison of the nursing entrance tests for the US and Canada, comparison of registered nurse salaries across the country and what it means to have a nursing license.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Beverly_OMalley
http://EzineArticles.com/?Medical-Marijuana-Access-Regulations-in-Canada&id=1993000

Decriminalizing Common Sense: Why Marijuana Ought To Be Legal
By Joshua Smith

For over 4,800 years, marijuana has been safely used to treat a “whole host of gastrointestinal disorders, insomnia, [and] headaches” (i). The ancient doctors prescribed marijuana because it had proven to be a safe and effective herbal treatment. Today, marijuana is also widely used as a recreational drug comparable to tobacco and alcohol. Unfortunately, this time-honored substance is considered illegal by the U.S. government. Despite abundant evidence of the benefits of marijuana use, those who partake continue to be prosecuted as common criminals. It is high time for marijuana to be officially recognized as the safe, medicinal substance that it is. It ought to be at least as legal to buy, sell, possess, and consume as tobacco and alcohol.

Over the last few decades, marijuana has slowly returned to its rightful status as a useful and legitimate herbal treatment for various ailments. Those who suffer from chronic nausea and vomiting have much to gain from a daily marijuana regimen. In studies conducted in New Mexico, researchers found that, “More than ninety percent of the patients who received marijuana…reported significant or total relief from nausea and vomiting” (ii). With such a high success rate, it is no wonder doctors are clamoring for the right to prescribe marijuana to their patients.

The government has tried to characterize marijuana as a dangerous drug by declaring that marijuana smoke causes cancer. However, most of the carcinogenic chemicals associated with marijuana smoke come from the paper it is often rolled with. Federal statutes outlawing the possession of marijuana “paraphernalia” like pipes and bongs constitute the prime reason why marijuana is smoked through a tube of paper rather than via other methods that filter out most of the carcinogens. Furthermore, if marijuana were legal, users could opt to consume it in tea form, which is totally non-carcinogenic (iii).

Indeed, a reasonable person is hard-pressed to find reasons why marijuana should continue to be classified as a Schedule I drug, since it is demonstrably less addictive than nicotine and causes significantly less harm to the body than alcohol. Despite the proven health risks, these two latter substances remain legal while the former is falsely labeled a dangerous narcotic. However, a growing chorus of respected voices in the medical community is now speaking out in defense of marijuana. The editors of the prestigious British medical journal, Lancet, have stated, “The smoking of cannabis, even long-term, is not harmful to health…It would be reasonable to judge cannabis as less of a threat…than alcohol or tobacco” (iv).

The much-maligned miracle of marijuana has been denied for far too long by the U.S. government. For the sake of the suffering, and for the sake of those who choose marijuana as their recreational drug of choice, the time has come for a real reevaluation of U.S. marijuana policy. Rather than the dangerous, community-destroying menace it has been made out to be, marijuana has been proven to be not only safe for human consumption but also beneficial for those who seek to tap its medicinal and recreational usefulness.

Notes:

i) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_marijuana

ii) http://www.medmjscience.org/Pages/science/pierson.bhtml

iii) http://www.drugtext.org/sub/marmyt1.html

iv) http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=3476

Josh Smith is a telecommunications data analyst and aspiring writer. He is a regular contributor to the political debate on http://www.PolitiPoll.net.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Joshua_Smith
http://EzineArticles.com/?Decriminalizing-Common-Sense:-Why-Marijuana-Ought-To-Be-Legal&id=391854