| |
05/06/05 |
Dr. O'Connell's Statement to Medical Board of
California
Although, cannabis had been widely used as an herbal palliative in
Western Medicine for nearly a century, all prescriptive use was abruptly
ended by passage of the Marijuana Tax Act in 1937. Thus, whatever evidence
persuaded California voters to pass Proposition 215
in 1996 must have been provided by individuals engaging in what was- of
necessity- illegal self-medication during the late Eighties and early
Nineties.
In fact, the disclosure of those illegal experiments by Doblin and Kleiman
in the peer-reviewed medical literature in 1991 had called attention to the
phenomenon and also provided some initial impetus for what eventually became
a successful initiative.
After I began screening cannabis applicants in late 2001, the discovery that
nearly all were already chronic users who had originally tried it during
adolescence-- at about the same time most had also tried alcohol and
tobacco-- led me to develop a structured interview aimed at a better
understanding of that same self-medication phenomenon. Over three thousand
such encounters have
now been recorded and enough data from over 1200 structured interviews has
been analyzed to permit the admittedly startling conclusions I will share
with you this morning:
1) Demographic data amply confirm that a vigorous illegal "marijuana" market
didn't begin until cannabis was first made available to large numbers of
adolescents and young adults during the 'hippie' phenomenon of the late
Sixties.
2) The subsequent sustained growth of that illegal market, although
difficult to measure precisely, is widely acknowledged. Those same applicant
demographics also suggest that the continued growth has resulted from
chronic use by an unknown fraction of the teen initiates faithfully tracked
by annual federal surveys since 1975.
3) The striking temporal association between initiation of cannabis on the
one hand, and tobacco and alcohol on the other, first noted by researchers
in the early Seventies was confirmed; however, the "sequence" they also
noted in which cannabis was usually the third agent tried no longer obtains.
All three are now tried at similar
ages-- and in random order.
4) Those findings, together with an almost universal acknowledgement of
similar emotional symptoms, suggests that rather than acting as a "gateway"
to other drugs, cannabis has, since the late Sixties,
become a third agent tried unwittingly along with alcohol and tobacco by
troubled adolescents-- and for similar emotional symptoms.
In other words, what the three agents have in common is an ability to treat
symptoms of adolescent angst and dysphoria; and thus function as
self-medications.
5) That interpretation is further supported by several other findings
developed by systematic inquiries into their family and school experiences-
plus their initiations of a menu other illegal drugs- including both
psychedelics and "street" drugs.
6) There is also startling-- yet conclusive-- evidence that once they had
settled on cannabis as their self-medication of choice, this population then
dramatically diminished its consumption of both alcohol and tobacco in
sustained fashion. Federal statistics gathered since 1970 also show a
gradual parallel decrease in the consumption
of both-- plus some related improvements in health outcomes.
7) The bottom line seems to be that in addition to its better-known ability
to relieve several somatic symptoms, cannabis has also been a beneficial
psychotropic medication for many of its chronic users since their
adolescence.
This unique clinical evidence also suggests that cannabis was a benign and
safe anxiolytic/antidepressant long before any pharmaceutical agents were
even available for those purposes-- and that it still outperforms most of
them in both efficacy and safety.
This evidence further suggests that current attitudes toward cannabis are
not only profoundly mistaken; but that continued aggressive prohibition
inflicts great damage on both individuals and society.
My primary reason for sharing this information with you at this early phase
is precisely because it is so radically at odds with both official policy
and popular beliefs; a collateral reason is to point out that gathering such
data wasn't even possible until 215 was passed.
Finally, because the 'medical marijuana' laws passed by other states have
been so restrictive, the acquisition of such data has only been possible in
California.
A more detailed account of these findings is available at:
http://www.ccrmg.org/journal/05spr/anxiety.html.
Respectfully,
Thomas J. O'Connell MD
CA Lic. G20034
|
| |
|
Input to the Medical
Board of California by year: |
2005 |
|
|
|
January 21, 2005
-- Statement |
|
Special meeting of
the MBC to discuss the Enforcement Monitor's preliminary report
on their 2 year investigation of the MBC |
|
2004 |
|
May 7, 2004
-- Transcript |
|
Various question
raised to the MBC. Comments on MBC positions. |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
May 8, 2003 |
|
Defining standards
of care, complaint initiation and responsibility |
|
|