In reality, though, the concept of letting certain patients obtain medical
marijuana has support in all corners of the country -- including Louisiana.
As we reported in last week's cover story ("The Best Medicine?"), six state
legislatures and three Louisiana governors approved medical-marijuana laws between
the years 1978 and 1991 in our state Capitol -- which is a long way from Haight-Ashbury.
But stringent federal controls on marijuana have discouraged Louisiana officials
from activating laws they put on the books three times.
Louisiana is one of many states to recognize what the federal government refuses
to admit: marijuana has therapeutic value for some patients. Anecdotal evidence
strongly suggests that using marijuana has helped some people cope with -- if
not survive -- debilitating illnesses; and that the drug is far less addictive,
less powerful and less dangerous than many legally prescribed medications such
as morphine, hydrocodone and other opiates.
No one disputes the fact that marijuana had been used as medicine in numerous
cultures for centuries before the United States made it illegal 65 years ago.
The driving force behind that legislation was Harry Anslinger, a Prohibition
agent-turned-U.S. Commissioner of Narcotics. Anslinger's Congressional testimony
against marijuana included such questionable "evidence" as: "Most [marijuana
users] are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music
-- jazz and swing -- result [sic] from marijuana usage. This marijuana causes
white women to seek relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others." (Anslinger
relied in part on testimony from then-New Orleans district attorney Eugene Stanley.)
The American Medical Association (AMA) at the time challenged the bill, objecting
to its authors preparing it in secret without consulting the AMA. "There are
evidently potentialities in the drug that should not be shut off by adverse
legislation," AMA legislative counsel Dr. William Woodward testified. "The medical
profession and pharmacologists should be left to develop the use of this drug
as they see fit." In an additional letter to Congress, Woodward wrote on behalf
of the AMA that "the prevention of the use of the drug for medicinal purposes
can accomplish no good end whatsoever." Despite the AMA's objections, Congress
accepted Anslinger's insistence that marijuana caused "violence, insanity and
death," and outlawed the herb in 1937.
The federal Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) continues to classify marijuana
as a Schedule I drug -- one that has no therapeutic value and is subject to
the strictest degree of controls. As part of its refusal to reclassify marijuana,
the DEA maintains that not enough research exists to support its therapeutic
benefits. This stipulation creates a catch-22 for medical marijuana -- because
the federal government simultaneously places far stricter guidelines on marijuana
research than it does on other types of pharmaceutical studies. Any researcher
wishing to conduct marijuana studies must obtain approval from the Food and
Drug Administration, the Drug Enforcement Agency, the National Institutes of
Health, and the National Institute on Drug Abuse, which controls the only legally
grown supply of marijuana in the United States. By comparison, researchers developing
new pharmaceuticals are required by law only to have their protocols approved
by the FDA and an institutional review board.
Medical-marijuana opponents argue that letting doctors prescribe pot would
increase its availability on the streets -- an argument that overlooks the fact
that far more dangerous drugs are prescribed every day. State medical-marijuana
laws, including Louisiana's, generally contain provisions to determine who is
qualified to receive therapeutic marijuana and to screen out anyone trying to
obtain the drug for recreational use. Louisiana's law had established a Marijuana
Prescription Review Board to certify patients, physicians and pharmacies as
eligible to participate in the state's medical-marijuana program. But because
the program never got off the ground, the board was dissolved.
There is no disputing the fact that marijuana, like many substances, can be
harmful. Yet, while a variety of prescription medications have caused overdose
deaths, marijuana has no lethal levels. The FDA's own chief administrative law
judge, Francis Young, noted this fact in a 1988 ruling when he advised the FDA
to reclassify marijuana. But the FDA's top brass overruled his recommendation.
Not surprisingly, one of the nation's biggest donors to elected officials --
the pharmaceutical industry -- vehemently opposes the federal approval of a
medication that easily could be grown by smaller companies across America.
Three times, this state has demonstrated that it supports medical marijuana,
and common sense and human empathy demand that we follow through. State lawmakers
should resume work on putting Louisiana's inactive medical-marijuana law into
effect. Louisiana's congressional delegation should support changing federal
research guidelines to make it easier for scientists to conduct clinical trials.
Louisiana at one time led the nation in its advocacy of marijuana for qualified
patients. It's time to finish what we started.
