ALLOWING MARIJUANA AS MEDICINE IS A BAD BILL

Editor's note: This article is a response to the March 30 Forum article "State should approve marijuana for the ailing" by Dr.  Joycelyn Elders.

While I don't question the intentions of legislators who support legalizing marijuana for medical purposes, this is bad legislation.

This bill would allow doctors to certify that individuals with debilitating medical conditions such as glaucoma, cancer and AIDS would benefit from the use of marijuana.

We should acknowledge the existing, legal drugs available to accomplish the same purpose.  Marinol, for example, is an approved drug that comes in both pill and liquid form.  In addition, newer anti-nausea drug delivery systems are available.

That said, there are many aspects of this legislation that bother me.

Under the proposal, individuals issued a certificate to use the marijuana for medicinal purposes would be allowed to grow up to five plants.  I have seen news reports showing clandestine "farms" being cut down and some plants appear to be taller than the individuals destroying them.

According to the New Jersey Federation for Drug Free Communities and verified by the Drug Enforcement Administration, the average marijuana plant produces about one pound of useable marijuana, which can be made into about 1,100 marijuana joints.  Five plants would produce over 5,500 joints annually, or 15 joints a day.

With this amount of marijuana being produced across the state, how will the state certify their security? We can't guarantee this illegal material won't be stolen or shared, possibly fueling a new market source not limited to the gravely ill.

Decades of research have demonstrated that as children's perceptions of the harmfulness of a drug goes down, drug use goes up.  Various groups attempting to legalize this drug have run a lengthy campaign funded by wealthy individuals to convince young folks that marijuana is a harmless recreational drug.

Maxwell Berrand, a Norwalk High School sophomore, recently spoke out against the bill at the Capitol, and observed "already rampant among students, marijuana will become justified in their minds and all hesitation to use it will end."

Thirty-six percent of Connecticut's high school students have used marijuana and the younger they are when they start, the greater their risk of becoming dependent.  It is the illicit drug that most accounts for emergency room visits and more kids enter treatment for marijuana than for all other illicit drugs combined; 60 percent of teens in drug treatment have a primary diagnosis of marijuana dependence.

The bill fails to take into account the many proven risks of marijuana use, especially smoked marijuana.  According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, smoking marijuana leads to changes in the brain similar to those caused by cocaine or heroin, and the amount of tar inhaled by marijuana smokers and the level of carbon monoxide absorbed are three to five times greater than among tobacco smokers for similar amounts.  Marijuana can also impair the immune system, a significant risk for the AIDS patients the bill purports to help.

The American Society of Addiction Medicine and its Connecticut chapter are squarely against the bill, stating in a prepared statement that they "strongly oppose the legislation of medical marijuana on the grounds that there has been, to date, no critical research performed establishing its efficacy.  For each symptom or disease advocated to be treated by smokable marijuana, there are accepted, well researched and more effective treatments."

Similar to concerns being expressed nationally about prescription drugs from Mexico and Africa, this bill would bypass carefully designed and controlled federal processes that assure the safety of medications.

Who will be liable if patients approved for medical marijuana become dependent on the drug and require an expensive drug treatment program? Or worse still, who will be liable if they drive a car while under the influence of marijuana? One study of reckless drivers who were not impaired by alcohol showed that 45 percent tested positive for marijuana.  How will workers who are under the influence impact businesses, and what are the implications for their co-workers? What about the teacher, bus driver or police officer whose doctor decides they could benefit from marijuana?

This bill leaves these and many other questions unanswered.

So with highly doubtful benefits and proven harmful effects of marijuana, why is this bill under consideration? I believe it is much safer and wiser to defer decisions about medical treatment to doctors and scientists who study the medical benefits and risks of drugs, and the U.S.  Food and Drug Administration, which requires rigorous clinical trials of drugs for human use.

I do not believe the General Assembly should take this step, as there are safer and legal alternatives.

State Rep.  Claudia Powers, R-151, of Greenwich is a member of the assembly's Judiciary Committee.  Readers may write her at Legislative Office Building, Room 4200, Hartford 06106-1591.  Her e-mail address is Claudia.Powers@housegop.state.ct.us.