“Weeding” Through the Controversy of Marijuana Pharmacology

By Justin Brown | 01 April 2008

Introduction
In 1999, famed talk show host Montel Williams publicly announced that he had been diagnosed with degenerative Multiple Sclerosis. In November of 2003 he was stopped in a Detroit Michigan airport for possession of Marijuana. He was not charged because he reportedly proved that his physician had prescribed its use. Although Williams adequately defined his legal right to possess the prohibited plant, authorities still fined him for possession of the “paraphernalia” that allowed him to take his “medicine”.

Since the late 1950’s the public use of marijuana, has been at the forefront of American debate and anti-drug legislation. Over the last 20 years, the ethical questions surrounding its use have been focused within the medical community. Some evidence suggests that the delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) chemical contained in marijuanacan provide legitimate pain relief and improved quality of life for the medically ill.

Beyond the obvious obstacle of the non-prescribed possession of marijuana being illegal in the United States, other problems lie in the fact that there is a limited cache of evidence regarding the plant’s medicinal benefits. At this nine states have laws allowing doctors to prescribe marijuana, but the Federal Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) consistently hinders any use of the drug. It argues that the evidence is not empirical and anecdotal at best. However, if the federal government would approve further research and practitioners acted responsibly, marijuana could very soon become a viable, legal, and efficient alternative to traditional medicine.

Legalization: The Worst Case Scenario
Relatively, it’s not hard t0 imagine the consequences of legalizing Marijuana for use by the general public. Research has shown a severe “impairment of attention, learning, and memory…” (kalat et al., 2001). Drivers and workers under the influence and illegal distribution are just a few of the potential problems that come to mind. One might ask, how ethically responsible would it be for the U.S. Government to willingly authorize the use of the marijuana plant? In the research magazine, Texas Medicine, Dr. Leonides G. Cigarroa, Council Chair of the Texas Medical Association, acknowledged that little is known about the effects of tetrahydrocannabinol and fails to offer a solution for the harm done by inhaling smoke directly into the lungs.

This is quite ironic considering that there is a confounding array of legal drugs, both prescribed and over-the-counter, that present some of the same consequences as marijuana. Barbiturates, anti-depressants, and alcohol affect serotonin and dopamine levels, causing very similar physiological effects. Drugs like Amphetamines, Phencyclidine (PCP), and even Ca-ffeine, have proved more responsible for impaired memory, and hallucination. As for the smoke inhalation of marijuana, Nicotine-laden tobacco products are one of the leading, legally sold drugs in America.

Evidence: Absent or Ignored? 
It is a struggle to understand why the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency has gone out of its way to restrict the conscientious efforts of researchers.  Noelle Davis, executive director of Texans for Medical Marijuana, points out that “the [researchers] keep being blocked or no one answers their requests for two or three years” (Ortolon, 2004, par. 21). The DEA argues that the evidence available is insufficient to authorize the medical use of the plant, but won’t even authorize any responsible, empirical study of its use. 

In 1995, it was discovered that #a chemical called anandamide, which naturally binds to cannabinoid receptors in the skin and brain.  The discovery revealed that a specific receptor chemical called ananadamide has “at least one known function, which is to decrease pain” (Kalat etal., 2001, p. 74).  In 1997 a similar discovery was made about a chemical called sn-2 arachidonytylglycerol.  The chemical inhibits serotonin synapses in the brain, which are related to severe nausea. The government should have a moral responsibilityto at least allow researchers to offer patients suffering from AIDS, Diabetes, MS, Fibromyalgia, and Cancer an alternative form of treatment?

A Note on Patient Riahts and Privacy
Another moral debate concerns the physician-patient rrelationship, and their ability to pursue all possible treatments. Presently, many state laws prevent a doctor from even conversing with their patients about the use of marijuana.  If a doctor and patient feel in jeopardy of being arrested, then neither can even asses the possible benefits of the therapy. Houston Neonatalogist, Dr. Michael Speer says, “Issues between physicians and patients ought to be issues between physicians and patients” (Ortolon,2004, par. 14).

The federal government continually exacerbates this issue by stepping on the state’s rights and laws where medicinal marijuana use is already legal. They indict users and pester the doctors who are acting within the law when prescribing the medicine. There are numerous regulatory bodies, including the Council on Scientific Affairs and the Texas Medical Association, who argue that it is a freedom of speech  and that health care providers should “be allowed to discuss any and all treatment options ……without the fear of regulatory,disciplinary, or criminal sanctions” (Ortolon, 2004, para. 12).

In The End
In the end, legislators, health care providers, and patients must agree to conduct more research.  Only open-minded dialogue can balance the hopes and fears for medicinal marijuana. Former Presidential nominee John Kerry, who has supposedly “admitted to smoking marijuana in the past …,” once promised that if elected, he would investigate the innovative research that has been conducted on medical marijuana use. (Cannabis News Staff, 2003, para. 11).

References

Cannabis News. (2004, August 6). Kerry: Get an Herbal, not a Fetal
          Position (Article 20). Retrieved October 1, 2004, from
          http://www.texmed.org/ata/nrm/tme/sept04_science_marijuana.asp

Kalat, J. W., et al., (2001). Biological Psychology. (7thed.). Belmont:
          Wadsworth and ‘Thompson Learning.

Ortolon, K. (2004, September). Lighting Up a Controversy: Debate Over
          Medical Marijuana Heats Up. In Texas Medicine Magazine. Texas
          Medical Association © 2001.   Retrieved October 01, 2004, from
          http://www.texmed.org/ata/nrm/tme/sept04~science~marijuana.asp
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Redacted  from an original research compiled by Justin E. Brown  |  Old Dominion University
Originally published: October 05, 2004