New Studies Destroy the Last Objection to Medical Marijuana

[Alison Myrden]

Just found this....

 

Love and stuff,

 

 

Ali

xx

 

 

 

 

AlterNet

 

http://www.alternet.org/drugreporter/51277/

 

New Studies Destroy the Last Objection to Medical Marijuana

 

 

 

By Bruce Mirken, AlterNet. Posted May 2, 2007.

 

 

New research on "vaporization" has demonstrated that all those fears about the ill effects of smoking marijuana are 100 percent obsolete.

 

 

Anyone who advocates for medical marijuana sooner or later runs into arguments about smoking: "No real medicine is smoked." "Smoking is bad for the lungs; why would any doctor recommend something so harmful?" It's a line of reasoning that medical marijuana opponents have used to great effect in Congress, state legislatures, and elsewhere. Indeed, the FDA's controversial 2006 statement opposing medical marijuana was couched in repeated references to "smoked marijuana."

 

But new research demonstrates that all those fears of "smoked marijuana" as medicine are 100 percent obsolete.

 

The smoking argument was the closest thing to a scientifically meaningful objection to medical marijuana. While marijuana smoke, unlike tobacco, has never been shown to cause lung cancer, heavy marijuana smoking has been associated with assorted respiratory symptoms and a potentially increased risk of bronchitis. That's because burning any plant material produces a whole lot of substances such as tars, and carbon monoxide that are not good for the lungs.

 

Nevertheless, inhalation is clearly the best method for administering marijuana's active components, called cannabinoids. Cannabinoids such as THC are fat-soluble molecules that are absorbed slowly and unevenly when taken orally, as in the prescription THC pill Marinol. This means that Marinol typically takes an hour to two hours to work, and dose adjustment is nearly impossible. Patients often report that when it finally kicks in, it hits like a ton of bricks, leaving them too stoned to function.

 

For that reason, The Lancet Neurology noted a few years ago, "Smoking has been the route of choice for many cannabis users because it delivers a more rapid 'hit' and allows more accurate dose titration." Because the effect is nearly instantaneous, patients can simply take as many puffs as they need, stopping when they've achieved the needed effect without excessive intoxication.

 

So far, no pharmaceutical product -- not even Sativex, the much-touted marijuana spray now marketed in Canada -- achieves this combination of rapid action and simple, accurate dose adjustment.

 

Back in 1999, the Institute of Medicine's White House-commissioned report on medical marijuana conceded marijuana's medical benefits, saying that what is needed is "a nonsmoked rapid-onset cannabinoid drug delivery system."

 

The new studies -- one from the University of California, San Francisco, and the other from the University at Albany, State University of New York -- confirm that such a system is here. It's called vaporization, and has been familiar to medical marijuana patients for many years, but few outside the medical marijuana community know it exists. Unlike smoking, a vaporizer does not burn the plant material, but heats it just to the point at which the THC and the other cannabinoids vaporize. In the Volcano vaporizer tested at UCSF, the vapors are collected in a detachable plastic bag with a mouthpiece for inhalation.

 

The UCSF study, conducted by Dr. Donald Abrams and colleagues and just published online by the journal Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics (to appear in the journal's print edition on May) compared a commercially available vaporizer called the Volcano to smoking in 18 volunteers. The subjects inhaled three different strengths of marijuana either as smoked cigarettes or vaporized using the Volcano.

 

The researchers then measured the volunteers' plasma THC levels and the amount of expired carbon monoxide, which is considered a reliable marker for the unwanted combustion products contained in smoke.

 

The two methods produced similar THC levels, with vaporization producing somewhat higher levels, and were judged equally efficient for administration of cannabinoids. The big difference was in expired carbon monoxide. As expected, there was a sharp increase in carbon monoxide levels after smoking, while "little if any" increase was detected after vaporization. "This indicates little or no exposure to gaseous combustion toxins," the researchers wrote. "Vaporization of marijuana does not result in exposure to combustion gases, and therefore is expected to be much safer than smoking marijuana cigarettes."

 

A second study, by Dr. Mitch Earleywine at the University at Albany, State University of New York, involved an Internet survey of nearly 7,000 marijuana users. Participants were asked to identify their primary method of using marijuana (joints, pipe, vaporizer, edibles, etc.) and were asked six questions about respiratory symptoms. After adjusting for variables such as age and cigarette use, vaporizer users were 60 percent less likely than smokers to report respiratory symptoms such as cough, chest tightness or phlegm. The effect of vaporizer use was more pronounced the larger the amount of marijuana used.

 

"Our study clearly suggests that the respiratory effects of marijuana use can be decreased by use of a vaporizer," Earleywine commented. "In fact, because we only asked participants about their primary means of using marijuana, it's likely that people who exclusively use vaporizers will get even more benefit than our results indicate, because no doubt some in our study used vaporizers most of the time but not all of the time."

 

In a rational world, the government officials objecting to medical marijuana based on the health risks of smoking would greet this research with open arms. They would join with groups like the Marijuana Policy Project in spreading the word about this important, health-enhancing technology.

 

Don't hold your breath.

[Jess Stone]

Its funny Alison that the attitude is that therapeutic drugs can never be smoked ,hmm thousands of years of various types of "therapeutic smoke" have been employed by tribal etc. Medicine People (being PC) but with a racist air of superiority white western culture "knows better"

 

And of course before cannabis was made illegal medically as well as ALL other uses it was in fact sometimes smoked medically, in Australia a asthma cure available from pharmacies ,I believe well past the banning of it on our behalf by the UK by signing an amendment to the League of Nations 2nd Opium convention for South Africa to control the dagga smoking "darkies" and it was branded as Asthmadors and were Cannabis Indica and Datura leaf cigarettes and obviously they were smoked

 

http://antiquecannabisbook.com/images/DrugCirA.jpg

http://antiquecannabisbook.com/images/DrugCirB.jpg

 

http://antiquecannabisbook.com/images/C03ACigarigoIndio.jpg

 

 

According to the United Nations [bulletin on Narcotics 1951],[2] Under the subtitle: "Preparations exempted from the control measures of the Narcotics Conventions: The following formula is given:

Preparation # 5: Indian Cigarettes of Grimault (Dr. Ph. Chapelle)

Government: Siam

Notification: C.L.302.1930.III. Annex I

Formula:

# Belladonna leaves - 0.962 gm

# Cannabis indica extract - 0.0005 gm.

# Nitrate of potash - 0.033 gm

 

Which brings up an interesting subject; Again, according to the United Nations [bulletin on Narcotics 1962],[3] the following is stated:

 

"Preparations made from extract or tincture of cannabis were not mentioned in the 1925 Convention, but in 1935 were brought within the control of the Convention by a decision of the Health Committee of the League of Nations under article 10 of the Convention. Such preparations are in some respects under a stricter control than the extract and tinctures themselves. Preparations made from the extract and tincture which are capable only of external use, and a medicinal cigarette called "Indian Cigarettes of Grimault" (Dr. P. H. Chapelle) are exempted from control.[ League of Nations document C.136.M.87. 1939. III ]

 

Which brings up a good trivia question; Are these cigarettes, "Under InterNational Treaty Law," still legal today? Hmmm! An interesting question

 

I think you and everyone here at OzStoners will love this site Alison (if you were'nt aware already) : Antique Cannabis Book-Ch7-Anti-Asthmatic Cigarettes , Index:

 

http://antiquecannabisbook.com/images/EliLilly_A.jpg

Blow me over is that Eli Lilly ? Well damn it is,the HYPOCRITES ,and Lilly officials ... bizarre tip involves marijuana: "Do not smoke marijuana while using Marinol".

Not sure if they still sell it or similar

Edited May 2, 2007 by Jess Stone

[Jess Stone]

I came across this gem on Antique Cannabis Book :

The Daily Gleaner [Kingston, Jamaica] Oct. 23, 1946 pg1

American Seamen said Taking Ganja Into Australia

'To Give White Girls'

SYDNEY, October 22,1946: Marihuana one of the world's worst drugs, which is known in United States as "Mary Warner", was being brought to Australia by American coloured seamen to give to white girls, the police prosecutor suggested in the central police court today. . . . Marihuana is known as ganja in Jamaica.

The reason I've chosen this one example, is because the very same newspaper, the Daily Gleaner (of Jamaica), was at the same time carrying large bold face ad's for Grimaults Cannabis Cigarettes. But of course, they were "Cannabis" NOT "Marihuana" cigarettes!... from ACB

 

and here's the ad

http://antiquecannabisbook.com/images/GrimaultAdi.gif

 

This gets even better I hit the search engines and as you'll notice the Daily Gleaner still exists and the company Grace&Kennedy still exists at the same location 64 Harbour Street Kingston Jamaica

Edited May 3, 2007 by Jess Stone

[Alison Myrden]

Its funny Alison that the attitude is that therapeutic drugs can never be smoked ,hmm thousands of years of various types of "therapeutic smoke" have been employed by tribal etc. Medicine People (being PC) but with a racist air of superiority white western culture "knows better"

 

And of course before cannabis was made illegal medically as well as ALL other uses it was in fact sometimes smoked medically, in Australia a asthma cure available from pharmacies ,I believe well past the banning of it on our behalf by the UK by signing an amendment to the League of Nations 2nd Opium convention for South Africa to control the dagga smoking "darkies" and it was branded as Asthmadors and were Cannabis Indica and Datura leaf cigarettes and obviously they were smoked

 

Which brings up an interesting subject; Again, according to the United Nations [bulletin on Narcotics 1962],[3] the following is stated:

 

"Preparations made from extract or tincture of cannabis were not mentioned in the 1925 Convention, but in 1935 were brought within the control of the Convention by a decision of the Health Committee of the League of Nations under article 10 of the Convention. Such preparations are in some respects under a stricter control than the extract and tinctures themselves. Preparations made from the extract and tincture which are capable only of external use, and a medicinal cigarette called "Indian Cigarettes of Grimault" (Dr. P. H. Chapelle) are exempted from control.[ League of Nations document C.136.M.87. 1939. III ]

 

Which brings up a good trivia question; Are these cigarettes, "Under InterNational Treaty Law," still legal today? Hmmm! An interesting question

 

I think you and everyone here at OzStoners will love this site Alison

 

My dear friend Dr. Lester Grinspoon from the Harvard Medical Centre in the U.S. feels that not only is smoking the fastest route of administration, but the neatest and most practical.

 

He is one of the few Doctors I know who doesn't recognize smoking as a "dirty" delivery method.

God love Dr. Grinspoon!

 

Thanx for the great Link Jess .

 

Love and stuff,

 

 

 

Ali

xx