[Rags123]

Originally Posted by blueash

Thanks for your compliment. I will pause to suggest that these are very different issues. A decision whether to allow the state to regulate the availability of medical marijuana seems like it should be decided on medical evidence. That means both evidence in favor and against. And balance the risk vs benefit. While it is legitimate to ask the "what if" questions they should not dominate the discussion, as they did too often IMO. If there is a product which according to a licensed physician would benefit a patient more than present risk to that patient, and in fact there are hundreds or thousands of similar cases, that would make me question the classification of that product as having no known benefit. Keep in mind we allow medications which have a huge amount of potential for abuse to be prescribed and just do our best to control that abuse. Oxycontin has an enormous abuse potential, but sometimes is the only pain medication that provides some relief to patients with severe pain. Could there be doctors who abuse the right to prescribe and patients who fake symptoms and divert their pills to the street, of course. But we don't make oxycontin a schedule one drug because it is a needed weapon in the battle against pain.

Legalization of recreational marijuana is not one which should be based mostly on the medical considerations. The one medical/psychological concern might be the theory of gateway drug use. IMO this is not settled in the literature but most data suggests pot does not lead to other drugs, it more is a stop over point for people who are going that way anyhow. Example, most people get to having intercourse. But at some point they behaviorally pause at second or third base. Petting didn't gateway going all the way, it was just easier to get there first.

Legalization should be decided on whether the societal costs of criminalization, prosecution, incarceration, creating a high profit drug underground, loss of potential tax revenue, and those kinds of considerations are worth keeping. What is the downside of legalization vs continued criminalization? Reasonable people will see the data differently, and we all come pre-loaded with our cultural constraints. In a few short months we will have 4 states with wide availability of recreational pot. Those who oppose de-criminalization should be prepared to produce real data showing that the consequences they predicted actually happen. That means something more than just a case report here and there of an individual who did poorly. In the absence of adverse outcomes, I would hope that those who oppose decriminalization would reconsider.

First, at the risk of you getting a "big head" , allow me to once again compliment your postings on this issue. I think one of the best things about message boards like this is the ability to debate logically, see new ideas, and prompt investigation. You have done that for me, without the usual quips and one liners that folks normally use and try to disguise that as being knowledgable.

I did some reading based on your post and again will say loud and clear that it is obvious in reading your posts that I am not in the same ballpark as you in knowing the subject, but that is fine. Most of what I will say you can take as a question because I surely am not to pass myself off as any kind of expert on this subject.

I will start at the end. I still have questions and concerns about MEDICAL marijuana. As do the American Medical Association, although they feel strongly that whatever needs to be done to further study should be done ASAP. I also believe that the American Cancer Association are in that camp.

I did find two drugs that supposedly will do what cannabis will do for patients....Marinol and Zofran....both of which I am sure you will find fault with, and that is fine with me.....both have side effects but so does medical marijuana.

I find it difficult to support the use of a "drug" that has not gone through the process of being approved by the FDA. As I said, drugs INCLUDING marijuana have side affects.

Actually you probably know this but HEROIN also has a number of beneficial things it can do for us medically. THAT fact shocked me as I read and I sure hope that is not the next drug being pushed on a ballot to approve for use.

I also find it difficult to VOTE on a ballot on a subject like this. I think you said about deciding based on medical science and I have strong doubts as to whether the voters voted on this based on medical science. It has been politicized and if there were to be a movement to find more drugs that can mimic the good things about medical marijuana, I would probably support that. I just hope in my lifetime I am not faced with a ballot that wants to legalize both marijuana and heroin which appears not beyond the reasonable.

Again, I appreciate your instilling in me the need to investigate this further and I will continue to read more as I go.

I doubt if you will ever convince me to support recreational marijuana but you did get me to look further into medical use and for that I am glad.

I will read your response and I am sure that will generate more reading for me but as I said....THAT is one main function of a message board.

Thanks for not quipping and generalizing. I am not, as charged, narrow minded in anyway...those who make that charge are the narrow minded. I am also not unsympathetic as charged also.

Thanks for allowing some conversation and please continue....