Get the Doctors on side

[pipeman]

Here is a proforma that will hopefully be hitting some circles in the medical community in the coming months. Take a copy, change/add to it if you want, and hit up your Doc and see what they say.

 

Over the past 50 years modern drug laws and the "war on drugs" approach in general has proved itself a failure. To advocate the "toughening up" of drug laws and an escalation of our failed drug policies in general is insanity as most logical people can see. Unfortunately this seems to be the only line of thinking our polititions and police force are currently open to.

 

Even if you do not agree with drug use, history has shown that drug prohibition does not reduce drug use amongst the general population.

 

Drug laws create a huge burden on tax dollars, our legal system, and our police force, not to mention the social injustice they result in.

 

Alcohol prohibition in the USA was not only a failure but gave money and power to organised crime. Unfortunately Western society has failed to pay attention to this glaring example of the stupidity of prohibition. Drug prohibition, as did alcohol prohibition, achieves nothing other than punishing people, profiting criminals, and making drugs more readily available to children.

 

Drugs should be a health care issue, not a criminal issue. The criminal status of drugs creates health as well as social problems as drug users tend to be reclusive, and paranoid. Sometimes this is due to the type of drug they like to use, but a lot of the time its the unjust laws and threat of punishment which is constantly hanging over their head. Legalisation of drugs would allow people to talk openly about their drug use without fear of persecution which is important for mental and social health.

 

Cannabis is not only not addictive but can be consumed by methods other than smoking which are completely harmless to your health, such as by vapourisation, food, and tinctures.

 

Cannabis has numerous medicinal applications and is often used by cancer and aids patients as it has the added benefit of stimulating appetite. Its legal status restricts and often prevents any legitimate research in this area.

 

Most of the social problems related to drug use are created by the drug laws themselves. If all drugs were legal general drug use would not significantly rise. On the other hand, black market drugs would be eliminated. Criminal drug dealers would be out of business. Safe, cheap and quality controlled drugs could be dispensed from chemists, and the government would collect a tax on sales to fund regulation of the industry. A lot of drug crime is a result of people that cannot afford their habit, a problem that would not exist with legalisation.

 

Cannabis is not addictive. Of course it can be psychologically addictive, but so can anything, including eating chocolate and watching TV. Doing these things all day every day will surely destroy your life just as easily as cannabis will, but that’s no reason to make chocolate and TV illegal, is it? Also a lot of cannabis users mix with tobacco, so often they are experiencing tobacco withdrawl not cannabis withdrawl. In most cases even chronic users have little trouble giving up cannabis only, usually resulting in agitation and sleeping trouble which subsides after a few weeks.

 

It is impossible to fatally overdose on cannabis. In fact extreme cannabis overdoses result in little more than feeling like shit and throwing up for a few hours, and this is extremely rare. There has never been a single death in recorded medical history attributed solely to cannabis.

 

The crackdown on cannabis has made it more profitable to deal in more dangerous drugs, mainly ecstasy. Cannabis is bulky and smelly which makes it easier for you to get busted. It also takes a long time to grow so new supply is not always readily available. So if you are a business man, it makes sense to ditch the relatively harmless cannabis, which presents many potential problems, and concentrate on pushing pills and powders.

 

THE AMA DOES NOT SUPPORT LEGALISATION OF CANNABIS. DOCTORS ARE NOT CAMPAIGNING FOR IT. WHY NOT???

 

The original cannabis prohibition laws in the US were actually introduced in congress under the disguise of the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 and under protest from the American Medical Association at the time. Politics dictate our drug policies, not medical evidence. Until we change the law to return drug users to the hands of medical professionals rather than police and judges the many problems caused by our drug prohibition laws will continue and possibly get worse.

 

 

The Emperor Wears No Clothes by Jack Herer is a good book to start with if you are interested in the truth on this subject.

[mull]

THE AMA DOES NOT SUPPORT LEGALISATION OF CANNABIS. DOCTORS ARE NOT CAMPAIGNING FOR IT. WHY NOT???

 

 

Money.

[Frazz]

Pharmacutical companies have the Doctors in their pocket ... where else can ya get tickets to the Coolum Classic , Australian Open box seats, etc. free ...

 

[pipeman]

The idea was to appeal to the Doctor's ego. I doubt most Doctors would sell their ethics for an occasional seat in the Xanax corporate box. The trick is to get their fat heads off next year's BMW long enough to give it enough thought to agree with you. Most will, in my experience.

[iamnotacop]

I went to a Doctor back in 2000 to talk about my mental health issues at the time. I was a bit depressed and anxious all the time and not sleeping too well. Cannabis was what I was using at the time to deal with the issues, but that had it's own set of consequences (such as paranoia from growing). He didn't seemed concerned about me smoking Cannabis except for the damage due to actually smoking it.

He offered me sleeping tablets, which I refused because of the side effects. He offered me Valium which wasn't good because it is addictive and I don't like the thought of being addicted to another substance. He offered me anti depressants but they would react bad with the Cannabis, plus I didn't want to be a damn zombie state.

Then he decided that I needed cognitive brain therapy, or something like that. So he rang the local mental health clinic and tried to get me an appointment, but they were full and not accepting new clients. So he tried the next one on the list near where I lived, but they said that I lived too far away and was not allowed to go there. Which is kind of ironic considering the Government at the time was putting crap on TV about mental health issues and going to the Doctor, which is why I did.

In the end the Doctor just told me that I was better off, and probably safer, sticking to the Cannabis. The main thing was that he wrote it all on my medical records, at my request, so that if I ever got busted then it is another part of my defence. So the fact that I didn't want addictive and dangerous man made drugs, and there was no other help available at the time was enough reason for the Doctor to agree that for me Cannabis was a perfectly fine cure/method of coping.

 

I don't have those issues any more, but it is still on my medical records, if I ever need to use them in a court of law. So I agree that it can't hurt having a chat to your Doctor about your Cannabis usage, even if it is just a plan to help your defense out in case you ever get caught.

Edited December 5, 2007 by iamnotacop

[pipeman]

A revised draft. Got one convert so far...

 

CANNABIS AND DRUG LAW REFORM

 

Over the past 50 years modern drug laws and the "war on drugs" culture in general has proved itself a failure. To advocate the "toughening up" of drug laws and an escalation of our failed drug policies in general is insanity as most logical people can now see. Unfortunately this still seems to be the only line of thinking our politicians and police force are currently open to.

 

Even if you do not agree with drug use and do not respect the rights of others to make their own choices, history has shown that drug prohibition does not reduce drug use in the community. And as well as not actually solving any drug problems, drug prohibition is a huge drain on tax dollars, our legal system, and our police force, not to mention the social injustice it results in.

 

Alcohol, which is legal and available to be bought in any quantity, is not only highly addictive and toxic, unlike cannabis, but consumption has a tendency to result in aggression and violence, unlike cannabis. The police have no problem with the guy picking up a case of beer, but will arrest the guy they spot smoking a joint in the park. Who represents a greater risk to themselves and the community at large? Lock up the guy with the case of beer I say, that bastard is much more likely to do some serious damage before the night is out. Imagine if the predominant social lubricant of our society was cannabis instead of alcohol. Police would have a lot less trouble to deal with on the average Friday and Saturday night for starters. Despite the paranoia that exists in our society about drugs, illegal drug use is an insignificant problem when compared to the violence, accidents, and health issues caused by alcohol.

 

Alcohol prohibition in the USA (which was born out of the same culture as drug prohibition) was not only a failure but gave money and power to organised crime. Unfortunately modern society has failed to pay attention to this glaring example of the stupidity of prohibition. Drug prohibition, as did alcohol prohibition, achieves nothing other than punishing users, profiting criminals, and making drugs more readily available to children. Even if you believe drugs are the root of all evil and users are the devil incarnate, the logical position would still be to support legalisation to ensure that drugs remain under the control of medical professionals, rather than criminals.

 

Alcohol prohibition laws were eventually reversed, simply because the majority of people drank alcohol. This also serves to highlight the incredible ability of “democratic” governments to legislate against both the will of the people and against the greater good of the people at the same time, and also the willingness of police forces to support and enforce such laws without question. This is a cultural problem which has infested most of Western society. Unfortunately drug users were and are in the minority, so drug prohibition laws remain a part of our culture. Furthermore the police often discourage drug law reform activists by using the very laws they are protesting against to persecute them.

 

Drugs should be a health care issue, not a criminal issue. The criminal status of drugs actually creates health and social problems as drug users tend to be reclusive and paranoid. Sometimes this is due to the type of drug they like to use, but a lot of the time it’s the unjust laws and threat of punishment which is constantly hanging over their heads. Legalisation of drugs would allow users to be open with their habits without fear of persecution, which is important to maintain mental health, minimise stress, and most importantly maintain feedback regarding their drug use. Keeping drug use private is an easy way to develop abuse issues and slip into social isolation, and this is exactly what drug prohibition laws encourage drug users to do.

 

Ending drug prohibition would also avoid forcing drug users into the criminal world as the only option to obtain their drug of choice. Apparently popular drugs are too dangerous for Doctors to dispense, which must be why governments maintain their criminal status to ensure criminal organisations retain control. Is that what responsible drug law means? Leaving criminals in charge of drug supply?

 

As well as being much less harmful and addictive than most other legal and illegal drugs cannabis has many medicinal applications and is often used by cancer and aids patients as it has the added benefit of stimulating appetite. Other than pain relief, it’s also been found to be an effective treatment for many other specific medical conditions, such as glaucoma. Its legal status restricts and often prevents any legitimate research in this area. It also prevents Australian Doctors from prescribing cannabis if they see fit. However the case for medicinal marijuana is so strong that even countries which currently maintain anti marijuana laws also have medicinal marijuana programs funded by the government. The two most prominent examples are the USA and Canada. Interestingly, there currently exists a legal challenge to all marijuana possession laws in Canada, as two judges over the past 5 years have declared cannabis prohibition laws unconstitutional. www.thepotlawhasfallen.ca/

 

Doctors in Australia can prescribe narcotics, chemotherapy, and many other potentially deadly and addictive treatments, but not cannabis. Why? Cannabis is less physically addictive than either tobacco or alcohol, less damaging to your health, and certainly much less addictive than any narcotic.

 

Cannabis can be consumed by methods other than smoking which are completely harmless to your health, such as vapourisation, food, and tinctures. This fact is often ignored by government funded research which persists in drawing attention to the unhealthy practice of smoking cannabis, which in reality is an irrelevant issue. Hopefully with legalisation our governments will start focusing on harm minimisation education rather than scare mongering and propaganda which seems to be their current strategy.

 

Abstaining from cannabis after long periods of chronic use can result in an agitated state of mind and trouble sleeping which passes after a couple of weeks. Even the heaviest users rarely experience withdrawal symptoms more severe than that, which is still much milder than most other drug withdrawals. Some even argue that cannabis is less addictive than coffee. Also a lot of cannabis smokers use tobacco in their mix, and often confuse tobacco withdrawal with cannabis withdrawal. If our Doctors were properly educated about cannabis use perhaps they would be able to effectively advise cannabis users on harm minimisation, which would help prevent the instances of tobacco dependency associated with cannabis use, which users then often mistake for cannabis withdrawal when they try to quit.

 

It should be noted that smoking tobacco with cannabis can be even more damaging than smoking tobacco alone, because when smoked with cannabis it is drawn deep into the lungs and held in for a period of time. For this reason smoking cannabis with tobacco or “spin” is very unhealthy and should be avoided. Unfortunately important harm minimisation advice such as this is often lost or not even attempted amid the ignorant reefer madness style propaganda which is often initiated by politicians and police for some cheap publicity. Fortunately, due to the internet, it has become possible for drug users to educate each other, as it is now possible for like minded people to connect online and pool their knowledge.

 

Most of the social problems related to drug use are created by the drug laws themselves. Even if all drugs were to become legal drug use would not significantly increase. On the other hand, black market drugs would be eliminated. Criminal drug dealers would be out of business. Drug users would not be socially isolated. Safe, cheap, quality controlled drugs could be dispensed from chemists, and the government would collect a tax on sales to fund regulation of the industry. Most drug crime is a result of people that cannot afford their habit, a problem that would not exist with legalisation. Also as well as saving tax payer’s dollars that were previously used to persecute drug users, the government will not only be collecting tax on cannabis sales, but on the whole cannabis industry, which currently operates as a black market denying the government a significant source of revenue.

 

Criminal organisations which currently profit from drug supply, as well as pharmaceutical, alcohol, and tobacco companies (which some argue are also criminal organisations) stand to lose a lot of revenue if cannabis is legalised, which is why they provide funding and try to exercise political pressure to ensure our laws stay as they are. Therefore it’s important to examine the source of funding for all research reports into cannabis, as it is a political issue more than a scientific issue.

 

It is impossible to have a fatal or even dangerous cannabis overdose. Even the most extreme cannabis overdose will result in no more than a case of the spins, feeling like shit and spewing up for a few hours, and it’s very rare for even that to happen, and in any case it’s certainly a lot safer than making yourself sick with alcohol. No death in recorded medical history has ever been attributed to cannabis. The same cannot be said for alcohol, or aspirin, or even peanut butter for that matter.

 

The crackdown on cannabis is also helping to increase the popularity of harder and more dangerous drugs, such as ecstasy. Cannabis is bulky and smelly which makes it harder to move and use in public. It also takes a long time to grow so new supply is not always readily available. The current legal environment is encouraging dealers to abandon cannabis, which is relatively harmless, and turn to pushing pills and powders which are much more addictive and dangerous, but easier to conceal and move. The sad truth is it’s easier to score dangerous synthetic drugs like ICE than it is to score a bag of grass these days.

 

THE AMA DOES NOT SUPPORT LEGALISATION OF CANNABIS. DOCTORS ARE NOT CAMPAIGNING FOR IT. WHY NOT???

 

The original cannabis prohibition laws in the US were actually introduced in congress under the disguise of the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 and under protest from the American Medical Association at the time. Politics have and continue to dictate our drug laws, not medical evidence. Until we change the law to return drug users to the hands of medical professionals rather than police, judges and bikie gangs the many direct and indirect problems caused by our drug prohibition laws will continue to compound.

 

The Emperor Wears No Clothes by Jack Herer is a good place to start if you are interested in the truth on this subject.

 

The idea of the following table is not only to compare the health risks of different substances commonly consumed but to highlight what effect the laws have on drug availability. Reality is when compared to either alcohol, tobacco, or fast food cannabis is both less addictive and less harmful.

 

 

If you strongly believe drug use is bad and should be minimised wouldn’t you rather see “Doctor’s Prescription” in the availability column rather than “Anyone”? If you are against drugs, logic should dictate that you would be advocating laws which provide the most control over drug distribution to the public, and that is legalisation. Drug prohibition is simply handing control over to criminals, and is not preventing supply to the public. This is not an opinion, it is a fact of modern history.

 

When a law fails in its objective, and is causing more harm than it prevents, don’t you think it should be changed?

 

This document is primarily aimed at cannabis law reform, but includes arguments for the legalisation of all drugs, as these arguments also apply to cannabis. The goal of this document is to get you thinking about the issue, do your own research, and convince yourself of the truth. And if you feel the cause is worthy, campaign for drug law reform.

[roid]

sleeping tablets... Valium... anti depressants...

...cognitive brain BEHAVIOURAL therapy, or something like that. So he rang the local mental health clinic and tried to get me an appointment, but they were full and not accepting new clients. So he tried the next one on the list near where I lived, but they said that I lived too far away and was not allowed to go there. Which is kind of ironic considering the Government at the time was putting crap on TV about mental health issues and going to the Doctor, which is why I did.

 

i had a similar experience. A few years ago those tv ads gave me confidence that the government actually wanted to help, so i started seeing some Doctors.

But it seemed the government's "new outlook" was nothing but a ruse, i couldn't see what action they had actually taken to backup their "we understand ur sick, let us help" advertised claims. For instance i decided that i should apply for sickness benefits from Centerlink as part of the effort, but the constant hoops i had to jump through were ridiculous and completely inappropriate given my mental state. Everytime i had to deal with them it was more like a parole hearing.

 

I'd describe my experience with the government as: alienating.

Edited December 7, 2007 by roid

[Pam]

Antidepressants mix very well with MJ, and even seem to help. My own experience proves that.

 

When senate bill 650 came up for vote in Illinois, 900 doctors and 500 nurses showed up to lend support, and even with the addition of 50 clergy to that our politicians still would not pass the bill! It was defeated by 4 votes!

 

I personally saw a doctor in California while visiting there, and after a thorough Q&A session, she agreed to give me her recommendation.

 

My experience with my own doctor and his nurses, is that they are afraid. While I talked about my visit to Cali and how well the medicine worked, all they seemed to be able to do was stare at me bug eyed that I would be telling them that I used MJ for pain! They appear to be victims of the media and the demonizing of a simple herb. And in fear of being caught up in doing something illegal.

 

While it's true that to get most of these cowardly doctors to admit the benefit, the herb will have to become legal, the only problem we have is that to make it legal, we need the doctors to stand up and say that it works. Rock and hard place is where we sit in this.

If people keep at the doctors, they may just get the message. It's worked in 12 states so far. To me it's kind of like the ice caps... the more they melt, the faster they melt. So keep telling them. It's the squeaky wheel that gets the grease.