Oregon's Medical Marijuana Law Under Attack!
Please help protect Oregon’s patients.
Right-wing Republican Kevin Mannix has filed an initiative that would abolish Oregon's Medical Marijuana Program, instantly
making criminals of over 16,000 sick Oregon patients. Mannix, an insurance defense attorney and former chairperson of
Oregon's Republican Party, even plans a tax-payer-funded-gift to the pharmaceutical industry by requiring the state of Oregon
to purchase less-effective prescription drugs, like Marinol, for Oregon's medical marijuana patients, who he intends to treat like
This terrible initiative has national implications because if the right-wing Republicans, insurance companies, and Big Pharma
manage to dismantle the Oregon Medical Marijuana Program, they will be emboldened to kill the programs of all of the other
medical marijuana states. This is an important time for our movement and all of us, especially sick patients, need us to move
forward, not back to a time where grandmothers stricken with glaucoma and cancer are treated as drug dealers.
Kevin Mannix's Act can be read at:
WHAT IT IS GOING TO DO;
and other Text of Interest:
Sec 1 This Act shall be known as the Oregon Crimefighting Act. The purpose of this Act is to reduce all types of crime in Oregon, thereby better protecting our people and stimulating economic growth through improved and aggressive prevention, early intervention, investigation, prosecution, accountability, and rehabilitation. Drug abuse and addiction are heavily associated with crime, and these problems are important targets of criminal justice laws. To fight crime, this Act:
b. establishes Meth Strike Forces, to focus on drug crime,and a Coordinated Grant Program to improve funding for drug prevention and treatment programs;
c. allows tax credits for contributions to Meth Strike Force and drug prevention or treatment programs;
g. replaces the Medical Marijuana Act with a more medically appropriate Marijuana Derivative and Synthetic Cannabinoid Prescription Program to focus help on those with legitimate needs
Section 10. In order to reduce abuse of the system currently in place, the people hereby replace the "Medical Marijuana Act" with the following Marijuana Derivative and Synthetic Cannabinoid Prescription Program.
a. Cesamet and marinol are synthetic cannabinoids which are approved by the Food and Drug Administration for treating loss of appetite and for treating nausea.
b. The provisions of this section, relating to Cesamet and Marinol use, may be expanded to include other drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration that include cannabinoids, their derivatives or synthetic cannabinoids, if such drugs are to be used for purposes covered by this section. Such extension shall be by way of rules established by the Department of Human Services, which is authorized to make such rules.
c. When an attending physician or nurse practitioner determines that a patient will likely benefit from use of prescribed Cesamet or Marinol for a diagnosed debilitating medical condition, so as to prevent or mollify decreased appetite or severe nausea, or for control of intractable pain or other symptoms of the condition, and the patient does not have health insurance which covers the cost of such medication, the patient may apply to the Department of Human Services for provision of that part of the cost which is not covered by insurance. The Department of human Services shall promptly process the application and, upon confirming that the application meets the requirements of this Act, shall pay or reimburse the amount necessary to ensure delivery of Cesamet or Marinol to the patient.
d. The Department of Human Services shall establish rules for carrying out this Program. The Department may use the Oregon health Plan as a process for carrying out this Program, if the Department finds this will be efficacious.
e. The purpose of this program is to ensure the availability of Ceasmet and Marinol to patients who need such medication, regardless of coverage by health insurance. Because this is a benefit for Oregonians, at the expense of Oregon's government, no patient is eligible for participation in the Marijuana Derivative and Synthetic Cannabinoid Prescription Program unless the patient has been a legal resident of Oregon for at least one continuous year immediately preceding application for coverage under the Program.
f. The attending physician or nurse practitioner shall monitor the patient's use of Cesamet and Marinol on the same basis as other controlled substances.
g. For purposes of this section:
i. "Attending physician" means a Doctor of Medicine or Osteopathy licensed in oregon under ORS Chapter 677.
ii. "Controlled Substance" has the meaning given in ORS 475.005.
iii. "Diagnosed debilitating medical condition" means a condition diagnosed by an attending physician or nurse practitioner who determines that the practice is cancer; multiple sclerosis; glaucoma; positive status for acquired immune deficiency syndrome; or any other condition where the attending physician or nurse practitioner believes that a prescription for the use of Cesamet or Marinol is a preferred form of treatment or a preferred form of necessary palliative care.
iv. "nurse Practitioner" has the meaning given in ORS 678.010.
To what "abuse of the MMA
does he refer? This would be, it seems to us, a soft place in logic and would
require some major evidence to prove. Wonder what it is, huh? There is report
after report, study after study that attests that its definitely more
efficacious when ingested by smoking or vaporizing as opposed to Marinol. Folks we know have tried Marinol and it was
completely ineffective, and had uncomfortable and intractable diarrhea as one
Give Mr. Mannix a call and tell
him what you think of his crime initiative. Or better yet, fax him with mmj
studies and reports. Request that he
assist efforts against "abuse" of OMMP by providing the specifics
of the evidence for "abuse" which this #131 is "responding"
to. Please let him know that you oppose his plan to treat Oregon's sick
patients like criminals. You can
contact him at:
2003 State Street, Salem OR 97301
Phone: (503) 364-1913 Fax: (503) 362-0513
To: firstname.lastname@example.org |
Subject: MEDICAL CANNABIS
Dear Mr. Mannix:
Your proposal known as, the Oregon Crimefighting Act, has come to my
My working background is in the healthcare field: first, as a nurse; second
25 years as a medicolegal transcriptionist. I've worked for two counties'
medical examiners offices, AZ University College of Medicine, as well as
trauma and acute care hospital medicolegal transcription. I have 30 years
in the field having worked (and still working) closely with physicians and
other clinicians. I am the mother of two, grandmother of four.
I was finally forced to retire early because of my degenerative disabilities
I sought medical treatment for 13 years before I finally gave up on
opioids, antidepressants (norepinephrine receptor inhibitors to dull the
pain), and muscle relaxants that the doctors were giving me for my pain. I
ve tried, literally, everything including the Fentanyl patches, which are
100x stronger than morphine, to no avail. My day-to-day life was
excruciatingly painful physically as well as mentally foggy from the
elevated level of the pharmaceutical drugs in my system and, finally, a
family member suggested I try medical marijuana (MMJ), going on four years
I took some time to do research and was astonished to find all the
scientific evidence available; completely unbiased, objective (double blind
studies, etc.), methodical investigation from, literally, all over the free
world online. After educating myself, I then went to my primary care
physician (PCP) and, after some discussion regarding the dismal failure of
opioids for pain management, she gave me a recommendation for MMJ.
Four years later, I can tell you my life has changed dramatically. I use
MMJ as adjunctive therapy along with an extremely low dose of opioids and am
off all other pain meds. As adjunctive treatment MMJ is very effective, but
smoking (or vaporizing) is the most effective for many patients. I can
speak for a trial of Marinol, personally, and say that it was completely
ineffective in dulling my pain and gave me horrible diarrhea for days.
Forget it! I speak as only one individual, a subjective and anecdotal point
of view to be sure, but also speak to the science and research done on this
subject. Many patients share my dilemma, not to mention the cost to
taxpayers for having to cover the exorbitant price of Marinol and/or Cesamet
You have stated in the bill that there are problems with illegal activity
for MMJ patients in OR. This, in fact, is not the case in the overall MMJ
patient population. I was and still am a law-abiding citizen and voter and
am tired of feeling that I'm a criminal when at least four physicians
(including specialists in internal medicine, orthopedics, pulmonology, and
family medicine PCP) have come to the same medical diagnoses and medical
conclusions over 16 years of my suffering. There is so much to learn...if
you dare. Please, before considering making this into law, remember the
thousands of extremely ill patients out here who depend on this natural and
efficacious medicine administered via smoking or vaporizing and educate
yourself in the scientific facts. Legitimate MMJ patients are not criminals.
Please read the article below which addresses the smoking/vaporizing v.s.
Marinol/Cesamet argument per scientific criteria.
Thanks for your time,
Note that dealing with Mannix - and this method of getting rid of OMMA - is not
a one shot deal. If he gets this idea on the ballot what we will need to do is
engage in a campaign to defeat the measure. This will mean writing letters,
registering voters, raising money etc. If it does not get on the ballot,
then we’ll likely see this or
something like it later by some other path.
We must be ever vigilant. Its
not something any of us can do once and think that is enough.
Action! Resources; Orgs, Links and other Tools
SO, WHAT’S NEXT? Mannix, et al, have filed this initiative
for the November 2008 ballot.
It has a preliminary ballot title that
fails to mention the repeal of the OMMA.
With an I-131 Comment Deadline of July 9, every OMMA supporter should write or fax
comments to the Secretary of State's office challenging the Ballot Measure title and description.
The Secretary of State Elections Division won't take e-mail comments but
said fax is OK:
(Salem) 503-373-7414 is their fax number. (Salem) 503-986-1518 is voice and
a human will answer.
The snail mail taken from the SOS stationery is:
Office of the Secretary of State, Elections Division
141 State Capitol
Salem, OR 97310-0722
Would those of you who already sent comments please share them with us so we
may learn from you? And, make sure you've forwarded this Alert on to everyone you know
and gotten them to send in a comment as well.
For those who are interested in preserving the OMMA and have not sent
their comments; here are some examples.
Dear Mr. Bradbury and staff:
Thank you for allowing me to comment on I-131. My information is from the
website of the Oregon SOS. I -131 is a very long and complicated initiative.
Section 1 admits to 13 different goals of the initiative ("a" through "m").
Some have to do with crime, some with voting, some with medical care such as
the Oregon Medical Marijuana Law, and some with executive branch staffing.
This initiative must be split up into several different initiatives because
it is far too confusing to Oregon voters to have 13 different goals in one
initiative. In particular the part about eliminating the Oregon Medical
Marijuana Law that voters passed by popular initiative in 1998 - ORS 475.300
- 475.346 are repealed upon passage of this act in Section 10 (h) of I-131 -
should be considered separately. The current title deceives Oregonians into
overturning a law they already voted on and passed because it fails to
mention the most important part of I-131.
The ballot title listed as, "Modifies Laws Addressing Crime Prevention,
Criminal Prosecutions/Sanctions, Medical Marijuana, Law Enforcement; Creates
Tax Credit" is an anemic attempt at a too complicated initiative. Oregonians
will have no idea from this title they are repealing a ballot initiative
they recently approved in 1998 and may need for their own care.
As mentioned, any repeal of the Oregon Medical Marijuana Law of 1998
(Measure 67) should be considered as a separate initiative.
If you disagree, then the ballot title should as least say, "Repeals Medical
Marijuana Law" such as, "Modifies Laws Addressing Crime Prevention, Criminal
Prosecutions/Sanctions, Law Enforcement; Repeals Medical Marijuana Law;
Creates Tax Credit".
Thank very much. Please contact me if I am unclear.
and Contact Info
Secretary of State Bill Bradbury |
c/o Elections Division
141 State Capitol
Salem, OR 97310-0722
ORIGINAL VIA FAX TO 503-373-7414
CONFIRMATION BY MAIL
Re: Proposed Initiative Petition #131; Comments regarding procedural constitutional
requirements and regarding proposed Ballot Title
Dear Secretary Bradbury:
I write to comment on the above-referenced proposed initiative petition. Proposed initiative petition #131 is procedurally constitutionally deficient in that it violates the ‘single subject’ mandate of Article IV, Section 1(2)(d) of the Oregon Constitution (‘A proposed law or amendment to the Constitution shall embrace one subject only and matters properly connected therewith.’). Although the prosecution and conviction of persons accused of crime constitutes a single subject (State v. Fugate, 332 OR 195, 26 P3d 802 (2001), ‘crimefighting’ is not a single subject which includes both repealing the Medical Marijuana Act and creating a Retired Senior Volunteer Police program, to name just two of the subjects of the proposed initiative.
The breadth of the proposed initiative is reflected in the proposed ballot title, which identifies at least 5 separate ‘subjects’; “Crime Prevention” “Criminal Prosecutions/Sanctions” “Medical Marijuana” “Law Enforcement” and “Creates Tax Credit”. In this respect, the title violates Article IV, Section 20 of the Oregon Constitution.
Additionally, the title is misleading in describing one of the subjects as crime “prevention”. For example, neither prohibiting persons in custody from voting nor expediting DNA testing in rape or sexual abuse cases has anything at all to do with preventing crime. Neither, of course, does denying medical cannabis patients and their Secretary of State Bill Bradbury Re: Proposed Initiative Petition #131 July 6, 2007 Page 2
providers exception from the criminal law for their therapeutically appropriate use of medical cannabis.
The title is also misleading in that the effect of a ‘Yes’ vote is not merely to ‘modify’ the Medical Marijuana Act, but to repeal it. The replacement of the Medical Marijuana Act with a ‘Derivative and Synthetic Cannabinoid Prescription Program’ can hardly be considered a mere ‘modification’. Explaining that the proposed initiative “Repeals “Medical Marijuana Act”; adopts program for public payment of “synthetic cannabinoids”” in the Summary of the Ballot Title highlights the misleading nature of the Result of Yes Vote language instead of correcting it.
Lastly, the unconstitutional scope of the initiative, in embracing more than one subject only and matters properly connected therewith, is also reflected in the final two words of the Summary “Other provisions.”
Thank you for your careful consideration of these objections and concerns.
Very truly yours,
Dear Secretary of State Bill Bradbury:
I oppose Initiative 131 in its entirety.
The ballot title as currently drafted does not even mention that this proposal would scuttle Oregon's successful, self-funding medical marijuana program and mandate that the state replace it with an incredibly expensive prescription drug program. The prescription drugs recommended do not replace cannabis; in fact, the main medicinal cannabis compound for pain, spasms, seizures, glaucoma and other conditions is cannabidiol, or CBD, and it is not available pharmaceutically today. These expensive pharmaceuticals (that this proposal would mandate be purchased by the state) would not help the vast majority of the current medical marijuana patients licensed by the state health department. Please clarify the ballot title to include its effect on the Oregon Medical Marijuana Program and note the included mandate for a state-funded prescription drug program solely for this program's applicants.
Initiative 131 clearly violates our state initiative's restriction to a single subject.
Registered Oregon Voter
This letter is on-line at the bottom of this web page:
It can be printed as a downloadable Word
file from this site, or it can be cut-and-pasted into any other word
Bill Bradbury |
Secretary of State
141 State Capitol
Salem, OR 97310-0722
Re: Comment on petition #131; violation of procedural constitutional requirement
Thank you for considering my comments regarding petition #131. I urge you to reject this petition because it violates the single-subject requirement in the Oregon Constitution, Art IV, sec 1(2) (d) which states, “A proposed law or amendment to the Constitution shall embrace one subject only and matters properly connected therewith.” This proposed initiative would logroll Oregon voters, concerns matters not properly connected and would not allow voters to make distinct choices about each change proposed by the measure.
Petition #131’s draft title states that the proposed initiative “Modifies Laws Addressing Crime Prevention, Criminal Prosecutions/Sanctions, Medical Marijuana, Law Enforcement; Creates Tax Credit.” The proposed initiative would, among other things, require certain sex offenders to receive 25 year sentences, prevent sex offenders from holding office, prevent incarcerated persons from voting, require Oregon’s Attorney General to assist counties’ drug prosecutions and establish tax credits for contributions to drug programs. Also, while the draft title states that the initiative would modify laws addressing medical marijuana, the initiative would repeal the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act (OMMA) and replace the current medical marijuana program with a “synthetic cannabinoids” program at taxpayer expense. OMMA exempts qualified patients from criminal laws, thus the act pertains to non-criminal activity that should not be included in a proposed initiative that attempts to
modify criminal laws. A program for public payments of “synthetic cannabinoids” also does not pertain to any criminal activity.
In 1998, 611,190 Oregon voters voted for OMMA, passing the initiative with 54% of the vote. This proposed initiative would nullify that vote without clearly explaining that to the voters. A more appropriate ballot title would explicitly state the fact that OMMA would be repealed. Measure 11, a previous anti-crime initiative was approved by 788,695 Oregon voters in 1994. Clearly, many Oregon voters approve of both OMMA and anti-crime laws. This petition, by logrolling anti-crime provisions with a provision repealing OMMA, would not allow voters to make a distinct choice about each proposed reform. One of the chief petitioners of this petition, Kevin Mannix, attempted to repeal OMMA as a state legislator in 1999 and he has admitted publicly in The Newberg Graphic that, “This initiative is clearly not about just that.” Any attempt to repeal OMMA should be done on its own merits, not in a petition that misleads and
logrolls Oregon’s voters.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns regarding my comment.
NOTE: One way to find a ballot title is go here:
Then search all of the 2008 initiatives.
Look for 131 Anti-crime, click, and it has a preliminary ballot title that
fails to mention the repeal of the OMMA.
And Then? If I-131 survives any challenges and become a petition, they must collect
the required signatures by July 3, 2008 for the measure to appear on the
ballot. If they collect sufficient signatures then the measure would be
voted on at the November 2008 general election.
There are several possible
desirable outcomes. Soundly defeating the measure at the 2008 election would be
one. Convincing Mannix, et al, to refile their initiative without the repeal
OMMA portion would be another. Them
failing to get enough signatures would mean that there would be no vote and
nothing would happen.
to resist these Prohibitionist assaults on OMMA. We will be gathering more information and will report back on a
regular basis. PLEASE let us know if
you or your group find out anything, get any feedback, etc. We REALLY need to Watchdog, Lobby and
Network on this Folks!
Click > here < for MS-WORD version of this Alert,
click > here < for PDF version.
Print these off, then Post, Hand Out and otherwise distribute all over the place.
To stay in the loop, stay tuned to this webpage.
TAKING UP THE FIGHT TO PROTECT MEDICAL MARIJUANA
Proposed ballot measure would undo existing law;
local woman stricken with a variety of maladies vows to fight the legislation
* By David Sale, Newberg Graphic reporter.
Newberg resident Pamela Sterling is not ashamed of her drug use.
Due to chronic illness, the 43-year-old former
registered nurse enrolled four years ago in
Oregon’s medical marijuana program, one of 231
current members in Yamhill County.
Approved by voters in 1998, participants are
issued cards identifying them as members on the
recommendation of a qualified doctor a M.D. or
osteopath (D.O.) who has diagnosed them with a
qualifying condition such as glaucoma, cancer,
Alzheimer’s disease or chronic pain. Enrollment
allows members to possess and use marijuana, as
well as to grow up to seven marijuana plants for personal use.
“I used to work as a labor and delivery (OB/GYN)
nurse and I injured my neck and shoulder (on a
difficult birth),” Sterling said. “I have a lot
of muscle tremors and spasms and I used to be on
a lot of pills, but medical marijuana has taken the place of that.”
Sterling is not alone in her experience. A
2004 study at the University of California in San
Francisco has shown that medical marijuana can
lower, by up to half, a patient’s narcotics use.
“They had me on prescription painkillers like
Dilaudid and Xanax, and then anti-Parkinson’s
medication to deal with the side effects from
those,” she said. “At one point they suggested
putting me on methadone. I said no. It had gone too far.”
But her desire to avoid using potentially
addictive, opiate-based medication was not the
only reason Sterling turned to medical marijuana.
She was also diagnosed with coeliac disease.
Coeliac disease is an auto-immune disorder in
which a patient’s digestive system is unable to
digest wheat or wheat gluten (found in many
foods), instead causing inflammation and damage to the intestines.
Genetic in origin, coeliac disease can often
be controlled through a wheat-free diet
(substituting rice, corn or potatoes). But
following a visit to Brazil for a medical
conference, where she caught intestinal parasites
from drinking water, Sterling’s digestive issues
took a dramatic turn for the worse.
“I used to weigh well over 250 (pounds), I’m
now down to 115 for a while, I was literally
starving,” she said. “I was living in a duplex at
the time and my neighbor would hear me (vomiting)
in the bathroom through the wall. They brought
some weed over and suggested I try it. I’d grown
up in southeast Missouri and never even smoked a
cigarette ‘til I was in my 30s but it worked
really well to reduce my symptoms.”
So when Sterling heard that former state
representative and political activist Kevin
Mannix (R-Salem) was preparing an initiative that
would replace Oregon’s medical marijuana program
with synthetic alternatives, she decided to speak out.
“I’m not lighting a joint and trying to stick
it in someone else’s mouth,” she said. “I only
want the right to medicate myself the way my physicians and I see fit.”
Mannix’ proposal, titled “The Oregon
Crimefighting Act of 2008,” addresses many more
issues than medical marijuana. Among its
provisions are a program of tax credits to fund
methamphetamine investigation and treatment;
stiffer sentences for repeat arrests for drunk
driving or sexual offenses; and increasing law enforcement.
But the act would also require the use of
Marinol or Cesamet pills containing a synthetic
form of THC, the active ingredient in marijuana
to be used in place of medical marijuana.
This change would “reduce abuse of the system
currently in place,” the act states, and the
synthetic alternatives would be covered under the Oregon Health Plan.
“I think that the legislature has failed to
address these issues,” Mannix said. “This is
about a complete reform of Oregon’s criminal
justice system along with the initiatives 40
and 41 that I’ve already filed, which will
establish mandatory minimum sentencing and
dedicate 15 percent of lottery proceeds to law enforcement.”
Although Mannix attempted to overturn the
medical marijuana act as a state legislator in
1999, “This initiative is clearly not about just that,” he said.
“There needs to be an alternative for people
suffering from debilitating diseases, but it’s
very clear that the issue (of abusing the current
program) needs to be addressed,” he said. “This
is very novel no other state has offered to
fully fund a prescription program to take medical marijuana’s place.”
But data showing widespread abuse of the
program is difficult to come by. The Portland
Police Bureau investigated 30 cases of illegal
sales or fraudulent enrollment by participants
among more than 2,000 enrolled members in Multnomah County.
“The state police have just started putting
together data this year,” said Polk County
Sheriff Bob Wolfe, who serves on the Oregon State
Sheriff’s Association legislative committee.
“We’ve had a few cases in the county where
cardholders are growing more than their
allotment. We’ve also had cases where people
break in and steal their plants. But the
sheriff’s association doesn’t have a position on
the act as yet if it gets on the ballot, we’ll weigh in.”
“Don’t put us in the same category as meth
users,” Sterling said. “I’ve heard of people
having a card who get busted with 300 plants
but people also sell Xanax and morphine on the
street. As a nurse, I’ve seen much more abuse of
prescription medications than in this program.”
Sterling is also concerned that the details
of Mannix’s proposed initiative are unworkable.
Members of the medical marijuana program must
supply the plant themselves and Sterling said
members often trade seeds or cuttings “there’s
no money exchanged.” Using synthetic
alternatives, however, could prove expensive for Oregon.
“A Marinol prescription runs between $800 and
$1,000 a month, depending on the dosage,” she
said. “There’s over 14,000 patients enrolled in
the medical marijuana program, according to the
state’s figures. If just half of the patients are
low-income or even just lacking health insurance,
that’s $6 million per month that the state would
have to pay. Mannix wants to create a deficit to kill the program.”
Moreover, Sterling added, being forced to use
a synthetic pill substitute would harm her personally.
“I can’t absorb the pill due to my digestive
issues. That’s the whole issue with Marinol
those prescription painkillers I still take are
in suppository or patch form,” she said. “A lot
of people (using medical marijuana) with Crohn’s
disease or other intestinal conditions have the same problem.”
While the medical marijuana program has been
controversial since its inception, Sterling said
that open discussion is the solution.
“I have three kids, ages 19, 21, and 24, and
they know I smoke marijuana they know I’m ill
and they’ve seen the symptoms,” she said. “The
fear comes with lack of knowledge, lack of
education. That’s what I’m trying to correct.”
Source: Newberg Graphic (OR)
* Bookmark: (Marijuana - Medicinal)
Cannabis Has "Clear Medical Benefits" For HIV Patients, Study Says --
Smoked marijuana produces “substantial and comparable increases in food
intake … with little evidence of discomfort and no impairment of cognitive
New York, NY: Inhaling cannabis significantly increases daily caloric intake
and body weight in HIV-positive patients, is well tolerated, and does not
impair subjects’ cognitive performance, according to clinical trial data to
be published in the Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes (JAIDS).
Investigators at Columbia University in New York assessed the efficacy of
inhaled cannabis and oral THC (Marinol) in a group of ten HIV-positive
patients in a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. All of the subjects
participating in the study had prior experience using marijuana
therapeutically and were taking at least two antiretroviral medications.
Researchers reported that smoking cannabis (2.0 or 3.9 percent THC) four
times daily "produced substantial … increases in food intake … with little
evidence of discomfort and no impairment of cognitive performance."
On average, patients who smoked higher-grade cannabis (3.9 percent)
increased their body weight by 1.1 kg over a four-day period. Researchers
reported that inhaling cannabis increased the number of times subjects ate
during the study, but did not alter the average number of calories consumed
during each meal.
Investigators said that the administration of oral THC produced similar
weight gains in patients, but only at doses that were "eight times current
recommendations." The US Food and Drug Administration approved the
prescription use of Marinol (a gelatin capsule containing synthetic THC in
sesame oil) to treat HIV/AIDS-related cachexia in 1992.
Subjects in the study reported feeling intoxicated after using either
cannabis or oral THC, but remarked that these effects were "positive" and
Although not a primary outcome measure of the trial, authors reported that
patients made far fewer requests for over-the-counter medications while
taking either cannabis or oral THC than they did when administered placebo.
Most of these requests were to treat patients’ gastrointestinal complaints
(nausea, diarrhea, and upset stomach), investigators said.
Patients in the study also reported that smoking higher-strength marijuana
subjectively improved their sleep better than oral THC.
"The data demonstrate that over four days of administration, smoked
marijuana and oral [THC] produced a similar range of positive effects:
increasing food intake and body weight and producing a ‘good [drug] effect’
without producing uncomfortable levels of intoxication or impairing
cognitive function," authors wrote.
They added, "Smoked marijuana … has a clear medical benefit in HIV-positive
[subjects] by increasing food intake and improving mood and objective and
subjective sleep measures."
A previous preliminary trial by Columbia investigators published in the
journal Psychopharmacology in 2005 also reported that inhaling cannabis
produce[s] substantial … increases in food intake [in HIV+ positive
patients] without producing adverse effects."
Survey data indicates that an estimated one out of three HIV/AIDS patients
in North America use cannabis therapeutically to combat symptoms of the
disease or the side-effects of antiretroviral medications.
Clinical trial data published in the Annals of Internal Medicine in 2003
reported that cannabis use by HIV patients is associated with increased
CD4/T-cell counts compared to non-users. A separate study published in JAIDS
in 2005 found that HIV/AIDS patients who report using medical marijuana are
3.3 times more likely to adhere to their antiretroviral therapy regimens
than non-cannabis users.
Most recently, investigators at San Francisco General Hospital and the
University of California's Pain Clinical Research Center reported this year
in the journal Neurology that inhaling cannabis significantly reduced
HIV-associated neuropathy (nerve pain) compared to placebo.
The Columbia University study is one of the first US-led clinical trials to
evaluate the efficacy of smoked cannabis to take place in nearly two decades
and it is the first to compare the tolerability and efficacy of smoked
marijuana and oral THC in HIV patients.
For more information, please contact Paul Armentano, NORML Senior Policy
Analyst, at: email@example.com. Full text of the study, "Dronabinol and
marijuana in HIV-positive marijuana smokers: caloric intake, mood, and sleep
" will appear in the Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes.
Further discussion of this trial, as well as an exclusive interview with the
study’s lead investigator, is available on the Thursday, June 28 edition of
the NORML Daily Audio Stash, online at:
Mannix pushes for tougher meth crime sentencing
* By Derek Sciba and KATU Web Staff
SALEM, Ore. - Attorney Kevin Mannix, the creator of Oregon's Measure 11,
says he's close to putting his latest initiative on the November ballot.
In 1994, Oregon voters passed Measure 11, which instituted tough prison
sentences for 16 different violent crimes.
Now, Mannix is hoping voters support new legislation that would mandate
longer sentences for those convicted of meth-related crimes including forgery,
burglary, meth production and ID theft.
Opponents say that Oregon prisons, which now cost $1.3 billion a year to
fund, should be places of rehabilitation and not long-term incarceration.
Mannix says "right now, we're the patsy state. This is the place to go if
you want to steal cars or deal drugs."
He says the Oregon legislature has been "unwilling to bite the bullet and do
what needs to be done."
Clatsop County District Attorney Josh Marquis says under current sentencing
guidelines, someone might serve 30 days for a first-degree burglary
Under the new Mannix plan, the sentence would be three years.
Currently, an identity thief might serve 10 days for his crime, but under
the new plan, the sentence would again be three years in prison.
Marquis says the new plan is far from perfect, but says the current
sentencing guidelines are often weak.
State Representative Chip Shields claims the state is already moving in the
right direction to reduce meth and other crimes, and says the proposal would
mean more prisoners, more prisons, and more money spent on the prison system.
Shields says Oregon should be spending more money on prevention rather than
"We are now spending $1.3 billion on prisons in this state," Shields says. "
We are spending more on prisons than higher education and community colleges
Mannix says he is close to gathering enough signatures to get the measure on
the November ballot.
Re: Mannix on the move.
He sounds mighty confident.
Mannix is a busy boy this year. “The enemy of my enemy <?>”
Consumer Reports survey reveals Americans fed up with drug industry influence,
FDA corruption. See: http://www.newstarget.com/021795.html
More than four out of five Americans think drug companies
have too much influence over the Food and Drug Administration, and 84 percent
believe that advertisements for prescription drugs with safety concerns should
be outlawed, reveals a striking new survey from Consumer Reports.
• 84 percent agree that drug companies have "too much
influence over the government officials who regulate them." More than
two-thirds of those surveyed are concerned that drug companies actually pay the
FDA to review and approve their drugs. It's a situation that turns drug
companies into the "customers" of the FDA.
Cesamet, a synthetic cannabinoid similar to the
active ingredient found in naturally
occurring Cannabis sativa L. [Marijuana;
delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (delta-9-THC)], is contraindicated in
any patient who has a history of
hypersensitivity to any cannabinoid.
Patients receiving treatment with Cesamet should be specifically
warned not to drive, operate machinery,
or engage in any hazardous activity
while receiving Cesamet. During controlled clinical trials of Cesamet, virtually all patients experienced at least
one adverse reaction. The most commonly
encountered events were drowsiness, vertigo, dry mouth, euphoria (feeling “high”), ataxia, headache,
and concentration difficulties. Cesamet
should not be taken with alcohol, sedatives,
hypnotics, or other psychoactive substances because these
substances can potentiate the central
nervous system (CNS) effects of nabilone.
Since Cesamet can elevate supine and standing heart rates and cause postural hypotension, it should be used with
caution in the elderly, and in patients
with hypertension or heart disease. Cesamet should also be used with caution in patients with
current or previous psychiatric
disorders, (including manic depressive illness, depression, and schizophrenia) as the symptoms of these
disease states may be unmasked by the
use of cannabinoids. Cesamet should be used with caution in individuals receiving concomitant therapy
with sedatives, hypnotics, or other
psychoactive drugs because of the potential for additive or synergistic CNS effects. Cesamet should be
used with caution in patients with a
history of substance abuse, including alcohol abuse or dependence and marijuana use, since Cesamet
contains a similar active compound to
marijuana. Cesamet should be used with caution in pregnant patients, nursing mothers, or pediatric
patients because it has not been
studied in these patient populations.
( http://www.walgreens.com/library/finddrug/druginfo1.jsp?particularDrug=Cesamet&id=649354 )
Overdose: If overdose is
suspected, contact your local poison control
center or emergency room immediately. Symptoms of overdose may
include coma, fast heartbeat,
hallucinations, severe dizziness, severe mental or mood changes, or trouble breathing.
20 EA - CESAMET 1MG CAPSULES
MARINOL is approved for
two uses. MARINOL treats nausea and vomiting
associated with cancer chemotherapy in patients who have failed to respond adequately to conventional
treatments. MARINOL also treats
appetite loss associated with weight loss in people who have acquired
immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS).
MARINOL should be used with
caution in patients with a history of
seizure disorder; patients with cardiac disorders; patients with a history of substance abuse (including
alcohol abuse or dependence); patients
with mania, depression, or schizophrenia (along with careful psychiatric monitoring); patients taking
sedatives, hypnotics, or other
psychoactive drugs; and in elderly patients, pregnant patients,
nursing mothers, or pediatric patients.
The most common adverse effects
probably related to MARINOL are
dizziness, euphoria, paranoid reaction, somnolence, thinking abnormal, abdominal pain, nausea and vomiting.
Marinol vs. Marijuana: Politics, Science, and Popular
The argument that marijuana contains more than one active
ingredient, thereby implying that Marinol cannot possibly replicate all of
marijuana's medical effects, finds favor among many physicians and physicians'
groups. Arthur Leccese of Gambier College further explains this sentiment,
"Consideration of the basic pharmacology of marijuana reveals the error of
public policy that denied therapeutic benefit to those who might profit from
inhalation, or oral consumption of more than one psychoactive component of the
crude marijuana plant." (51) Since marijuana is composed of hundreds of
compounds, it seems arbitrary for U.S. medical policy to only accept one of
those compounds as medically valid. Many other respected organizations share
this disapproval of current U.S. drug policy.For example, the following medical
groups and journals favor medical
marijuana over Marinol: National Academy of
Sciences, American Public Health Association, California Academy of Family Physicians, San Francisco Medical
Society, Federation of American
Scientists, Psychopharmacology, and most recently, the New England Journal of Medicine. (52) Although
these organizations normally carry
tremendous influence, the current government drug policy disfavors medical marijuana to such an
extent, that even these organizations
lose their voice.
from High Times 1994 * Marinol: The Little Synthetic That
(back to top)