Examining the debate on the use of medical marijuana.

R L DuPont
{"title":"Examining the debate on the use of medical marijuana.","authors":"R L DuPont","doi":"10.1046/j.1525-1381.1999.09252.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The opium poppy and the coca leaf offer useful perspectives on the current controversies over medical marijuana. In both cases, purified synthetic analogues of biologically active components of ancient folk remedies have become medical mainstays without undermining efforts to reduce nonmedical drug use. A decade ago, a campaign strove to legalize heroin for the compassionate treatment of pain in terminally ill patients. Like the current campaign to legalize medical marijuana, many well-meaning people supported this effort. The campaign for medical heroin was stopped by science when double-blind studies showed that heroin offered no benefits over the standard opioid analgesics in the treatment of severe cancer pain. Scientific medicine requires purified chemicals in carefully controlled doses without contaminating toxic substances. That a doctor would one day write a prescription for leaves to be burned is unimaginable. The Controlled Substances Act and international treaties limit the use of abused drugs or medicines. In contrast to smoked marijuana, specific chemicals in marijuana or, more likely, synthetic analogues, may prove to be of benefit to some patients with specific illnesses. Most opponents of medical use of smoked marijuana are not hostile to the medical use of purified synthetic analogues or even synthetic tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), which has been available in the United States for prescription by any licensed doctor since 1985. In contrast, most supporters of smoked marijuana are hostile to the use of purified chemicals from marijuana, insisting that only smoked marijuana leaves be used as \"medicine,\" revealing clearly that their motivation is not scientific medicine but the back door legalization of marijuana.</p>","PeriodicalId":20612,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Association of American Physicians","volume":"111 2","pages":"166-72"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Association of American Physicians","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1381.1999.09252.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

The opium poppy and the coca leaf offer useful perspectives on the current controversies over medical marijuana. In both cases, purified synthetic analogues of biologically active components of ancient folk remedies have become medical mainstays without undermining efforts to reduce nonmedical drug use. A decade ago, a campaign strove to legalize heroin for the compassionate treatment of pain in terminally ill patients. Like the current campaign to legalize medical marijuana, many well-meaning people supported this effort. The campaign for medical heroin was stopped by science when double-blind studies showed that heroin offered no benefits over the standard opioid analgesics in the treatment of severe cancer pain. Scientific medicine requires purified chemicals in carefully controlled doses without contaminating toxic substances. That a doctor would one day write a prescription for leaves to be burned is unimaginable. The Controlled Substances Act and international treaties limit the use of abused drugs or medicines. In contrast to smoked marijuana, specific chemicals in marijuana or, more likely, synthetic analogues, may prove to be of benefit to some patients with specific illnesses. Most opponents of medical use of smoked marijuana are not hostile to the medical use of purified synthetic analogues or even synthetic tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), which has been available in the United States for prescription by any licensed doctor since 1985. In contrast, most supporters of smoked marijuana are hostile to the use of purified chemicals from marijuana, insisting that only smoked marijuana leaves be used as "medicine," revealing clearly that their motivation is not scientific medicine but the back door legalization of marijuana.

审查关于医用大麻使用的辩论。
罂粟和古柯叶为当前关于医用大麻的争议提供了有益的视角。在这两种情况下,古代民间偏方生物活性成分的纯化合成类似物已成为医疗支柱,而不会破坏减少非医疗药物使用的努力。十年前,一场运动努力使海洛因合法化,以同情治疗绝症患者的疼痛。就像目前医用大麻合法化的运动一样,许多善意的人支持这一努力。当双盲研究表明,在治疗严重的癌症疼痛方面,海洛因没有比标准的阿片类镇痛药更有效时,医学海洛因的运动被科学阻止了。科学的医学需要在不污染有毒物质的情况下,严格控制剂量的纯化化学品。有一天,医生会给叶子开处方烧掉,这是不可想象的。《管制物质法》和国际条约限制滥用药物或药品的使用。与吸食大麻相比,大麻中的特定化学物质,或者更有可能是合成类似物,可能对某些患有特定疾病的患者有益。大多数反对医用大麻的人并不反对医用纯化的合成类似物,甚至是合成四氢大麻酚(THC),自1985年以来,在美国,任何有执照的医生都可以开出处方。相比之下,大多数吸食大麻的支持者对使用从大麻中提纯的化学物质持敌对态度,坚持认为只有吸食过的大麻叶子才能作为“药物”使用,这明显表明他们的动机不是科学医学,而是大麻合法化的后门。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信