New York Times Runs
Pro-Medical Marijuana Op-ed
By National Review Senior Editor Richard Brookhiser
(Marijuananews note: I am genuinely proud to
call Richard a friend, but he is also one of the most effective spokespersons for the
medical marijuana cause. I would love to see former Times managing editor A. M.
Rosenthals face when he reads this.
See
Former New
York Times Managing Editor Rosenthal Denounces
"False Compassion" Of Medical Marijuana Proponents
If The Times ever starts covering what is really going on, marijuana prohibition will end
much sooner.
This Op-ed is a very good sign.)
A DRUG WAR AGAINST THE SICK
March 22, 1999
From The New York Times
letters@nytimes.com
http://www.nytimes.com/
http://forums.nytimes.com/comment/
A Government-commissioned panel of experts reported last week that there had been
"an explosion of new scientific knowledge" on the medical uses of marijuana. The
chemicals in marijuana, they concluded, can fight the nausea induced by chemotherapy,
boost the appetites of AIDS patients and ameliorate some symptoms of multiple sclerosis.
The report was no news to me. I had reached the same conclusions as a cancer patient,
seven years ago. In 1992 I was found to have testicular cancer.
My chemotherapy put me in the hospital for five days at a time, once a month, for four
months.
But midway through my treatment I could tell that Zofran, then a
hot new drug prescribed to combat nausea, was losing its effect.
For the remainder of my chemotherapy I turned to marijuana to
keep my head out of the toilet. None of the doctors or nurses at the hospitals I went to
for treatment (New York University Medical Center) or consultation (Memorial
Sloan-Kettering) discouraged me from using marijuana should the need arise.
They said they had patients who had benefited from it when other
drugs had failed.
But none of them could prescribe it, because using marijuana was
a crime and remains so, despite half a dozen state referendums since 1992 urging
that it be legalized for medical use. Federal laws still ban marijuana as stringently as
heroin.
Not that I was ever at much risk of arrest.
As a member of the media elite, I was not a likely target for a drug bust, and living
in Manhattan, I could acquire what I needed under the cover of urban anonymity.
But people in less privileged professions, or from different ZIP codes, do get into
trouble when buying or growing marijuana for medical purposes.
Unequal enforcement is a sign of bad law.
The experts report raised serious questions about the toxicity of marijuana
smoke. But many medicines are toxic.
The relevant question is, toxic compared to what? The chemicals in chemotherapy are
dangerous; so is radiation; so are the drugs in AIDS cocktails.
See
Medication Given For
Glaucoma Can Cause Symptoms Of Senility In Some Patients
But They Cannot Be Given Marijuana Because It Causes Symptoms of Happiness
Context For Medical Marijuana Debate
An AIDS patient facing starvation might well be willing to damage his lungs instead.
Further work should be done on alternative delivery systems, like inhalers and patches.
But in the meantime there are sick people who could use relief now. Polemicists in the war
on drugs fear that acknowledging marijuanas medical efficacy would set a bad
example.
Then why dont we take morphine out of hospital medicine cabinets?
There is also little risk of inducing bad habits in patients.
Using marijuana medically is the ultimate aversion therapy, forever linking the plant
to hospital smells and IV poles. In almost every case when the medical use of marijuana
has been put on a ballot, it has been approved by voters.
Supporters have been as diverse as the rainwater liberals of Oregon and the cowboy
libertarians of Arizona. We will probably discover that the District of Columbia approved
an initiative last fall, too, if Congress allows the votes to be counted.
See
Democracy In Limbo: The Court Still
Hasnt Ruled On The D.C. Medical Marijuana Vote
On this issue, voters have shown that they are more mature than
the political class. For obvious reasons, there has been no leadership on this issue from
President Clinton, who began his career of evasion at the national level by telling us he
didnt inhale.
Conservative Republicans, my ideological soulmates, have also been woefully stubborn.
They hammered Hillary Clintons health care plan because it
would come between doctors and patients, yet they support Gen. Barry R. McCaffrey and the
Office of National Drug Control Policy when they do the same thing.
Support for medical marijuana is not an exception to conservative principles but an
extension of them. My chemotherapy worked, and I havent smoked during the entire
Clinton Administration. But should I ever need to turn to marijuana again, Id like
to be able to do so without the added burden of breaking the law.
Richard Brookhiser, a senior editor of National Review, is the author of
"Alexander Hamilton, American."
Copyright: 1999 The New York Times Company