Skip to main content

Is Medical Marijuana Safe and Effective?

I am on the record in opposition of Ohio’s system for authorizing the use of medical marijuana.  While I am not an expert on the issue, my reading over several years has informed me that persuasive medical evidence of safety and efficacy – the legal and regulatory standard used for prescription drug approval -  is lacking for nearly all ‘approved’ uses of this drug.  And while it is true that there is some evidence that marijuana offers benefit in a very narrow range of medical conditions, the broad claim of efficacy for a panoply of illnesses is unfounded scientifically.  Champions of medical marijuana use should want, if not demand, that the drug is vetted and tested under the auspices of the Food and Drug Administration.  Wouldn’t you want to be assured of any drug’s safety and efficacy?  Should anecdotes of benefit or beliefs of benefit be sufficient to release a medication for general use?  Is this the standard that we use to approve drugs used to treat hypertension and cancer?

Beyond the lack of rigorous medical evidence, I strenuously object to legislatures commandeering the medial marijuana approval process.  The notion of politicians granting medical approval of a drug for an ever-enlarging list of ailments is preposterous.  Of course, such a process should be wholly under the control and authority of medical professionals and appropriate governmental agencies.  Not only are lawmakers unqualified for this task, but the political process is contaminated with conflicts of interests, business concerns, lobbying influences and upcoming elections.  For example, if a medical marijuana company wants to build a large dispensary in a certain district, might this make the legislator representing that district likely to vote in support of any medical marijuana measure?  


Marijuana - Panacea or Faith Healing?

Look how ridiculous the situation has become here in Ohio.  This past December the Ohio Senate passed a bill that aims to legalize medical marijuana for a patient whose condition may reasonably be expected to be relieved by the drug.  Think of that absurd language!   Doesn't this seem just a mite too broad?  Who defines what constitutes reasonable?  What if a patient or even a doctor reasonably expects that medical marijuana will be effective against acne or arthritis or asthma or hair loss?  Remember, even now there are folks who believe that ivermectin is effective against COVID-19.

This horse has left the barn and there is no turning back. How did we let this happen?  The political and economic forces who favor (read: stand to benefit from) expanded medical marijuana use outmaneuvered medical professionals and enjoyed strong public support from ordinary people who truly believe in the product’s promise of healing.  But belief in benefit should not be the standard used to determine safety and efficacy of medical drugs and devices.  Politicians should rank dead last or lower on the list of folks who should be in charge of drug approval.  

 

 

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Becoming a Part-Time Physician

Next month my schedule will change.  I will henceforth be off on Fridays with my work week truncated to Monday through Thursday.   I am excited to be enjoying a long weekend every weekend.  And while the schedule change is relatively minor, this event does feel like an important career moment for me.  It is the first step on a journey that will ultimately lead beyond my professional career.  It is this recognition that makes this modest schedule modification more significant than one would think it deserves.  As some readers know,   my current employed position has been a dream job for me.   Prior to this, I was in a small private practice, which I loved, but was much more challenging professionally and personally.   My partner and I ran the business.   Working nights, weekends and holidays were routine for decades.   On an on-call night, if I slept  through until morning, I felt as if I had won the lottery.   And w...

When Should Doctors Retire?

I am asked with some regularity whether I am aiming to retire in the near term.  Years ago, I never received such inquiries.  Why now?   Might it be because my coiffure and goatee – although finely-manicured – has long entered the gray area?  Could it be because many other even younger physicians have given up their stethoscopes for lives of leisure? (Hopefully, my inquiring patients are not suspecting me of professional performance lapses!) Interestingly, a nurse in my office recently approached me and asked me sotto voce that she heard I was retiring.    “Interesting,” I remarked.   Since I was unaware of this retirement news, I asked her when would be my last day at work.   I have no idea where this erroneous rumor originated from.   I requested that my nurse-friend contact her flawed intel source and set him or her straight.   Retirement might seem tempting to me as I have so many other interests.   Indeed, reading and ...

Will Smarter Lawyers End Frivolous Lawsuits?

How do you know if a lawyer is any good?  Of course, they've all passed the bar, but now their profession is lowering it.  While most of us strive for excellence, and raise our children to value this virtue, prominent legal educators are establishing a new quality intitiative for their profession.  Who says that lawyers can't reform themselves?  Perhaps, we physicians can follow their bold example and raise the credentials of our pre-medical students.  I’ll present the facts. You be the judge. I have written a dozen posts on tort reform on this blog, which always generate spirited and adversarial retorts from attorneys and their supporters. They accuse me and other tort reform advocates of carrying water for insurance companies. They repeatedly point out that I know nothing about the legal system and are unqualified to opine on its flaws. They deride me when I argue that effective tort reform would reduce the practice of defensive medicine, despite the re...