Medical Marijuana Probe Flags 8 Arizona Physicians

[Michael Komorn]

Medical marijuana probe flags 8 Arizona physicians

 

 

 

If you don’t like the law, blame the Dr’s. Looks like the same attack on the law is taking place in Arizona.

 

 

 

"It's obvious that these physicians are not acting on the up and up," Humble said. "To me, it's an indicator of, 'What else aren't you doing?' "

 

 

 

Is it obvious, or do as many patients suffer from chronic pain as they do in Michigan. See the MDCH, LARA website which recently updated its website to show that 27% of Michigan residents have been treated for chronic pain in 2010. Is the objection here to the fact that this many people are suffering from chronic pain or their decision of what medication to use to treat that condition?

 

 

 

http://washingtonexaminer.com/news/2011/08/medical-marijuana-probe-flags-8-arizona-physicians

 

 

 

By: The Associated Press | The Associated Press | 08/20/11 1:25 PM

 

State health officials have filed complaints against eight physicians who have recommended nearly half of the 10,000 Arizonans certified to use medical marijuana.

 

They say the physicians have failed to check patients' prescription-drug histories, as required.

 

State rules regulating the voter-approved medical-marijuana law require people to obtain a written recommendation from a licensed physician.

 

The doctor must perform a physical exam, review a year's worth of medical records, discuss the risks and benefits of medical marijuana, and review a state database that tracks prescription-drug use.

 

The Arizona Republic (http://bit.ly/pM1Ln4) reports that physicians can face a variety of consequences, from a letter of reprimand to suspension of their license, if their regulatory boards find they falsified medical records or are otherwise guilty of unprofessional conduct.

 

In one case, a naturopathic physician issued recommendations to about 1,000 people but checked the state Board of Pharmacy's controlled-substances database just 56 times, said Will Humble, director of the state Department of Health Services.

 

Because she indicated that she had checked the database on all the patients, Humble wonders what else she was lying about.

 

"It's obvious that these physicians are not acting on the up and up," Humble said. "To me, it's an indicator of, 'What else aren't you doing?' "

 

A review of the patient's drug-prescription history can help physicians determine whether medical marijuana is the best option or whether the patient is just looking to get high. The database tracks the log-in for every patient as well as searches for patients who aren't in the system.

 

In an effort to prevent doctors from encouraging recreational-marijuana use, Humble asked his staff to pull the names of doctors who had written more than 200 recommendations since the law took effect in mid-April. Ten came up.

 

When patient records were compared with the state pharmacy database, it showed that eight of those 10 physicians — three allopathic doctors and five naturopaths — failed to review drug histories on many of their patients.

 

Three doctors had never logged on, although they had checked the box on hundreds of medical-marijuana applications saying they had reviewed the patient's drug history.

 

The eight physicians account for nearly half of the 10,000 doctor recommendations in Arizona. The number recommended by each doctor ranged from slightly more than 200 to about 1,300.

 

Humble has no authority over Arizona physicians, but he reported the doctors to their regulatory boards this week. State law prohibits him from releasing their names, but they will become public if the boards agree to investigate.

 

Lisa Wynn, executive director of the Arizona Board of Medical Examiners, said a record-keeping violation would be relatively simple to review. A clinical investigation involving patient care, however, would involve hiring an expert in medical-marijuana use to evaluate whether physicians were acting appropriately.

 

If the board decides to investigate, a review committee will determine what discipline, if any, to recommend. The board can take that recommendation or issue its own, including dismissal of the complaint.

 

Proposition 203, approved by voters in November, legalized medical-marijuana use for people with certain debilitating conditions and allowed them to designate someone as a "caregiver" to grow or otherwise obtain marijuana for them.

 

About 80 percent of those issued state ID cards to use medical marijuana also are authorized to grow it.

 

The state was to begin licensing dispensaries in June, but a federal lawsuit filed by Gov. Jan Brewer put that process on hold, sparking a new round of legal action. Because there are not yet any licensed dispensaries, caregivers and patients are allowed to grow their own pot, up to 12 plants per person.

 

___

 

Information from: The Arizona Republic, http://www.azcentral.com

 

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/news/2011/08/medical-marijuana-probe-flags-8-arizona-physicians#ixzz1Vf39Ky6s

 

 

 

 

 

Posted by:

 

Michael Komorn

 

18006563557

 

 

 

 

[Guest Indica Jones]

Az. has always been held hard by the pharma companies. When I worked @ The Princess resort, Pfizer overshadowed Caterpillar International by 3 to 1 in occupancy and extra Ballroom tents that had to be set up. If you look at the 500 they are 31. H e l l even Sammy the Bull got popped in Az. for X. It is just a Pro-pill state.

[Restorium2]

They base this whole bucket of swill on one false premise;

 

A review of the patient's drug-prescription history can help physicians determine whether medical marijuana is the best option or whether the patient is just looking to get high.

 

For every possible amount of prescription drugs a patient could possibly have been prescribed... there is a possible reason besides 'just getting high'. It is totally ridiculous to say that just because a DOCTOR prescribes a patient medicine, that the very medicine that was prescribed BY A DOCTOR disqualifies a patient from qualifying to use medical cannabis.

 

After some contemplation;

Aren't we lucky that the opposition to medical cannabis are such shallow thinkers?

On the other hand, it is only good if there are some thinking people around to point out that the non thinkers are full of baloney.

 

Here's a good one for the thinkers;

What patient needs to get off prescription drugs MORE than one that has been doctor shopping for pills? They are trying to exclude the patients that NEED medical cannabis the most because they don't (want to) understand cannabis is a gateway drug to end drug abuse with pills.

[Dr. Bob]

Reviewing the patient's MAPS report here in Michigan may or may not be helpful with making the decision for MMJ. Most patient that get a recommendation will be on chronic narcotic pain control as well, so in reality, what does that really tell me?

 

But you know if the voters allowed the use of medical marijuana, and I wanted to be one of the folks writing the certs, I would comply with the law as it was written. In AZ apparently they want the docs to review the prescription database, and they felt it was important enough to put a check box on the form. So just do it.

 

An argument can be made that the database check can be done by other means. I ask my patients about medication use for example and in most cases that gives me the information I need to reach a medical decision. But if I was in AZ, I would not stop there, especially after it was questioned with these ten. I would as a matter of routine check each database entry, not only to get the information, but to have a paper trail to show it as an additional protection for my patients. It is learning what they (LEO) are looking for and how they plan on going after me and my patients. Just like the O'Connell decision is here in Michigan.

 

This is the difference between a physician based practice and those out to make a quick buck at the expense of sick people. Those that have the most to lose here (the mills) are the one's coming out against 'check lists' mandated by the state when it comes to certifications. In a way, I welcome those same check lists, because right now there is no agreed on legal definition of 'bona fide' doctor patient relationship in Michigan except when it comes to telemedicine. This current situation of 'it is what we say it is' applies both to doctors and prosecutors, and the result is that practically every certification visit can be questioned and argued. I don't like that situation, I would much rather have a list of what it is, do it, and protect my patients from yet another unjustified attack.

 

If we have a list of the components of a bona fide doctor patient relationship, to put them in a position that they cannot question the relationship because it is clearly documented that we did each thing they wanted us to do, we as doctors are safer and so are our patients. Those that don't follow good medical practices will simply not adapt because it interferes with their profits, or their doctors won't stand up to the task (if they even have a doctor to see the patient).

 

I will remind everyone that a few years ago the DEA put guidelines for the use of pain medication in chronic pain right on their website. It was taken down once it was apparent that 'diversion cases' against doctors treating chronic pain were being lost because those same doctors were pointing to the published guidelines from the DEA, showing in the patient charts how ALL components were clearly being met, and the prescriptions were clearly justified. Written standards actually cut down on successful prosecutions so their answer was to remove any guidance and make it all a debate again. We may find ourselves in a position shortly where the standard may be delineated in law for our protection. That is not always a bad thing.

 

Dr. Bob

[Timmahh]

my first question is in Az, do the Drs "Recommend" MMJ use, or is it Prescribed?

If MMJ can not be PREscribed, due to its Federally held Sched. 1 status, then how can a Dr, be forced to review and compare medicinal use of Prescribed medication, with a non Prescribed one?

 

now obviously, a Drs H.O. is to due harm to any patient and only work to better their health, thus knowing any Rx meds a Pts is taking is always a smart thing for a Dr to know about their Pt. especially when that Dr may prescribe, yet another medication that can have dangerous interactions with other meds the Pt is on. But, in my best knowledge to date, Cannabis has not shown to interact negatively with any medication, prescribed or otherwise. Is this pretty much how it is where interactions between Cannabis and other medications is?

 

so what im getting at is this. If Cannabis is not prescribed in Az, then the only BIG complaint there against these 10 Dr.s, is they are accused of not doing the full check before sending in the paperwork.

 

ok, do these Dr have other staff can may have done the background check in the Drug Database? Does the Dr only have acccess to that database, or do their staff also have their own access?

 

just because the DR themselves did not log in, does not directly mean the records for said pt were not checked upon by someone. or does their database, have records of which pts records have been checked, and whom checked them?

 

alot of details yet to be stated. but overall, it appears to me, they are trying to pick on the 10 Drs that have signed the most Cannabis certifications in Az. but if those Drs are not following all scopes of the Az law, then they are not fullfilling one of the main objectives to the Az law as written.

[Mememe]

three allopathic doctors and five naturopaths - sounds like AZ is going after those who use alternative methods to heal. Maybe the docs have a harassment case against the state. I wonder how many people who use naturopathic or allopathic Dr's. even take pills.

[Restorium2]

Taking cannabis AWAY from people that use prescription medication because they use too much? That's just so ignorant.

 

But there is no shortage of ignorance.

 

Want to have some fun?

 

Put a bunch of ignorant people in a room and give them a microphone. Then ask them to talk about something they are ignorant about.

 

What do you have?

 

A Schuette press conference about medical cannabis!!!

[+Silverblue]

It's obvious there's more going on there. I think drs should know what meds their pt's are on, in case anything happens to the pt, the dr is better able to pinpoint the cause.

 

There's been a war on natural care that may've started around the same time that mj became illegal.

 

People will always find something to pick on. If they look for a problem, they'll somehow manage to find one, even if it doesn't really exist.

 

Sb

[+Silverblue]

Throughout history there's always been bullies who prey on the weakest among us. When The People have had enough abuse, they fight back, uprisings happen and sometimes The People win, at least for awhile, and the pendulum keeps swinging.

 

This will keep happening till The People find a way to hold accountable anyone in office who abuses the law and continually causes harm to them. After ONE repeat offense, I say, GET 'EM OUTTA THERE FAST. The problem is, these clever bullies know how to play on our emotions; they seem to know what we wanna hear; will promise anything, rarely intending to follow through. These cowards are pathological liars who are afraid to play fair, afraid to pick on anyone who can really fight back. A psychiatrist would have a field day analyzing such disturbed beings. I've said all this before I'm sure.

 

So we know what the problem is, but what's the solution? I've revealed that before, too. Take the incentive away. And the incentive is MONEY and POWER. If they break a law, they are often immune to punishment. THAT has to be stopped, too. Laws should apply to EVERYONE. You'll see how it's done when I'm dictator. lol, but seriously... our whole society is based on money. The more money someone has, the more influence they have, the more they have, the more they want, the more they want makes them do anything to get it and will do ANYTHING to KEEP. It seems to drive them mad. They're in it for all the wrong reasons. They're supposed to serve The People, not serve themselves. Rewards will come to those who do good, if they do it for the right reasons. They don't need to play hero, or be the meanest s o b, totally oblivious to what's truly important, big bad tough guy. Totally sick.

 

When someone abuses me, I will fight back as hard as I can. When someone's kind to me, I'll do whatever I can to show my appreciation and protect them. Kindness brings kindness, cruelty brings rebellion. Any good employer knows this. Find 2 examples of places that do the opposite of each other. One place mistreats workers, employee turnover is very high; now look at a company that treats its workers well. Those employees are extremely loyal, many will stay there till retirement, they'll work long and hard and do excellent work.

 

It's the same with anyone in any situation. Treat me well, and I'll love you forever, but treat me badly, and WATCH OUT. POW!

 

Sb

[Dr. Bob]

My feeling on this case is that the doctors are required to check a box indicating they reviewed the medication history. More than likely what we are dealing with is doctors that looked at a full year's worth of records, got a review of the medication through that, and checked the box. I don't see anything wrong with that. Perhaps the state was just fishing with the main certification doctors (200 recommendations are a little more than 1 a day for 6 months... not that many especially if that is the main focus of the practice). When they ID'ed the doctors, they looked at their access to the equivalent of MAPS to see if there was PROOF in the form of a paper trail that they did use THAT resource to check the medication history. Then they went sputtering off.

 

If I was doing certs in AZ, I would from this moment on be sure to check the database for medication just to have the paper trail. I think that when this is looked into, it will show they were doing a reasonable review. But why give them an opening. I am considering doing a MAPS and making it a part of the patient's chart in my office, I think that will just make it a little more defensible. It is a free extra step but if it gives more safety the the patient, I have no problem doing it.

 

Dr. Bob

[phaquetoo]

oh so now its the dr's fault? hmmm i think it is despenses fault also...but that dont mean anything till some one with an attny patch says it,,i was full of b.s when i blamed the dr.s and despenses! oh thats ok,,i dont mind being the only one right most of the time,,,and getting banned for being right!

 

Peace

FTW

Jim

[phaquetoo]

Throughout history there's always been bullies who prey on the weakest among us. When The People have had enough abuse, they fight back, uprisings happen and sometimes The People win, at least for awhile, and the pendulum keeps swinging.

 

This will keep happening till The People find a way to hold accountable anyone in office who abuses the law and continually causes harm to them. After ONE repeat offense, I say, GET 'EM OUTTA THERE FAST. The problem is, these clever bullies know how to play on our emotions; they seem to know what we wanna hear; will promise anything, rarely intending to follow through. These cowards are pathological liars who are afraid to play fair, afraid to pick on anyone who can really fight back. A psychiatrist would have a field day analyzing such disturbed beings. I've said all this before I'm sure.

 

So we know what the problem is, but what's the solution? I've revealed that before, too. Take the incentive away. And the incentive is MONEY and POWER. If they break a law, they are often immune to punishment. THAT has to be stopped, too. Laws should apply to EVERYONE. You'll see how it's done when I'm dictator. lol, but seriously... our whole society is based on money. The more money someone has, the more influence they have, the more they have, the more they want, the more they want makes them do anything to get it and will do ANYTHING to KEEP. It seems to drive them mad. They're in it for all the wrong reasons. They're supposed to serve The People, not serve themselves. Rewards will come to those who do good, if they do it for the right reasons. They don't need to play hero, or be the meanest s o b, totally oblivious to what's truly important, big bad tough guy. Totally sick.

 

When someone abuses me, I will fight back as hard as I can. When someone's kind to me, I'll do whatever I can to show my appreciation and protect them. Kindness brings kindness, cruelty brings rebellion. Any good employer knows this. Find 2 examples of places that do the opposite of each other. One place mistreats workers, employee turnover is very high; now look at a company that treats its workers well. Those employees are extremely loyal, many will stay there till retirement, they'll work long and hard and do excellent work.

 

It's the same with anyone in any situation. Treat me well, and I'll love you forever, but treat me badly, and WATCH OUT. POW!

 

Sb

 

 

No the clever bullies know how to play on your emotions! not mine! I will not bend for any one!

 

Peace

FTW

Jim

[Dr. Bob]

It all goes back to the BB hypothesis, anything they do is designed to short circuit the law. In this case they are just trying to cause trouble for the doctors as a way to discourage use of the Act. Reading between the lines, it doesn't seem there is anything to it, but they got a headline out of it.

 

Dr. Bob

[+Silverblue]

No the clever bullies know how to play on your emotions! not mine! I will not bend for any one!

 

Peace

FTW

Jim

:thumbsu:

 

Sb

[Kingdiamond]

And people wonder why most doctors want nothing to do with medical marijuana ..

[Restorium2]

And people wonder why most doctors want nothing to do with medical marijuana ..

Dr. Steven E. Newman is why a lot of doctors around Michigan are afraid to recommend medical cannabis.

Dr. Newman will tell every doctor who will listen that medical cannabis needs to be held to a higher level of scrutiny than the Oxycontin, and other dangerous drugs, that he prescribes regulary. He even says he doesn't need a bona fide doctor patient relationship to prescribe Oxycotin and the other dangerous drugs. He says ONLY medical cannabis requires a bona fide doctor patient relationship. I think he should be charged with malpractice for his lack of understanding of state and federal medical law in regard to a bona fide doctor patient relationship and writing prescriptions. How many times has he followed his own advice and prescribed dangerous drugs without a bona fide doctor patient relationship?

The problem lies with doctors like Dr. Steven Newman.

Listen to his ignorance;

http://www.msms.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home&TEMPLATE=/CM/HTMLDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=18784

 

Here google bot.. Dr. Steven E. Newman of Michigan doctor review