Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
trix

Feds Won't Supply Pot For Ptsd/marijuana Research

Recommended Posts

Veterans suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, commonly referred to as PTSD, rely on medical marijuana to treat a variety of symptoms including haunting nightmares and sleeplessness. The good news: Research to explore marijuana as treatment for PTSD was recently approved. The bad: Study cannot begin until the US Public Health Service gives scientists permission to buy pot.

 

Several months ago, a Food and Drug Administration and University of Arizona Institutional Review Board gave researchers approval to begin studying the effects of marijuana on US military veterans with PTSD. However, the study, which is being financed by the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS), has been in limbo for the past 14 weeks because the Public Health Service has not authorized them to purchase “study” marijuana.

 

MAPS Executive Director Rick Doblin, Ph.D. says his team intends to investigate the safety and effectiveness of both smoked and vaporized marijuana on a group of 50 US veterans suffering from “chronic, treatment-resistant” PTSD. Interestingly, previous animal studies have suggested that marijuana effectually offers silence to an overactive fear system, but federal prohibition laws have kept scientists from conducting clinical trails on patients suffering from PTSD.

 

“This groundbreaking research could assist doctors in how to recommend treatment for PTSD patients who have been unresponsive to traditional therapies,” said Dr. Doblin.

 

Before the study can receive the official green light, the Public Health Service must first conduct a special review for the requested marijuana. Although there is a hefty supply of government marijuana allotted for FDA-regulated research, disbursement of this “science weed” is big brothered by the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the Drug Enforcement Administration, who have specifically mandated additional reviews be administered for study marijuana -- no extra review is required for any other substance with a Schedule I classification.

 

After having their research rejected in 2011, MAPS resubmitted revisions to the project in October of last year, but they are not holding their breath for timely response. While the FDA is required to respond to inquiries within 30 days, the Public Health Service has no time constraints. Therefore, until the agency decides they are ready to respond, potentially life saving research is on hold.

 

“If the PHS review requirement was removed,” said Dr. Sue Sisley, who would lead the study, “we would gather information that could help veterans today. The stifling of medical research on marijuana stands in the way of our vets returning to a normal life.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's why Cuomo's mmj law was a political move and not for patients.  He can save face by running the program thru the fed which won't supply it.  Hopefully it gets all his supporters on board to push the senate to finally pass the bill that has gone thru the house a bunch of times.  Hopefully the pressure will eventually get them to make a move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By t-pain
      Massachusetts DOPH published an in depth report about medical marijuana patients. The findings and information in the report are useful for petitioning new qualifying conditions and educating physicians. Similar to the Minnesota DOH reports.
      https://www.mass.gov/report/massachusetts-department-of-public-health-marijuana-research
      REPORT Report Massachusetts Department of Public Health Marijuana Research
      ORGANIZATION: Department of Public Health DATE PUBLISHED: July 9, 2019 The Marijuana Baseline Health Study (MBHS)
      A legislative mandate required the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (DPH) to conduct a baseline study to investigate three topics:
      Patterns of use, methods of consumption, and general perceptions of marijuana Incidents of impaired driving and hospitalization related to marijuana use; and Economic and fiscal impacts for state and local governments This study, referred to as the Marijuana Baseline Health Study (MBHS), was conducted by DPH, under the leadership of the DPH Commissioner, in consultation with the Executive Office of Health and Human Services, the Executive Office for Administration and Finance, and the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security.
      Downloads
        Open PDF file, 5.37 MB, forMarijuana Based Health Study Final Report (PDF 5.37 MB)   Open DOCX file, 4.29 MB, forMarijuana Based Health Study Final Report (Accessible Version) (DOCX 4.29 MB)  
      Good quotes can be found within the report:
       
    • By MR49009
      research completed
    • By MR49009
      research completed
    • By Leagoman
      Calling on all Veterans to help us get out from under the VA Pain Management’s Thumb and Start Healing through Medical Marijuana!!!
    • By Michael Komorn
      Pregnancy and Medical Marijuana
      Expectant mothers are searching for answers about the safety profile of Medical Marijuana. Unfortunately the scientific community has dropped the ball and kicked it off the cliff on this issue. The lack of scientific research is due to marijuana’s illegality. Further, there exist huge biases within the published research. Mostly the research confounds marijuana use with tobacco and/or alcohol, two known causes of fetus and child harm. Separating out marijuana effects from the self-reported research on mothers who also smoke tobacco and drink alcohol is impossible. Likewise no pregnant women are signing up for research studies due to the illegality of marijuana and CPS removing children from mothers for testing positive for marijuana use.
      Many organizations quote from other organizations, who quote from other studies and reviews. The Minnesota Department of Health OFFICE OF MEDICAL CANNABIS quotes from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee report:
      In the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists official committee opinion, interim update Oct 2017, the committee found:
       
       
      Uninformed opinion, with zero evidence and lots of fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD) are used to scare mothers away from a nontoxic plant. These uninformed unscientific opinions are being used by lawmakers to craft laws continuing the cycle of FUD and the illegality of marijuana. “Oh we don’t know what marijuana does, so let’s treat it like heroin” and “if anyone questions our opinion of marijuana, we’ll call them dirty lazy pothead stoner hippies” or “puppets of the marijuana industry”.
       
      But we do know what marijuana does. One cannot live in a bubble and ignore reality and the world around us. Women smoke and eat marijuana while pregnant.
      Cannabis use during pregnancy in France in 2010
      Trends in Self-reported and Biochemically Tested Marijuana Use Among Pregnant Females in California From 2009-2016

      http://news.gallup.com/poll/194195/adults-say-smoke-marijuana.aspx 
       
      Much of the opinions on marijuana are tainted by a small number of poorly designed studies on marijuana. For example, the National Institute of Health gives grants to researchers through NIDA, the National Institute of Drug Abuse, to study marijuana. NIDA’s focus is on drug abuse, so 90% of its grants are for studies on marijuana abuse, not marijuana benefits. When you ignore half of your research, you ignore science. Many of these studies are completed in order to get future grants from NIDA; research is often conducted from the conclusion backwards in order to show some kind of harm from marijuana use. This, in of itself, does not bias research.
       
      https://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/19/health/policy/19marijuana.html 
       
      The bias is introduced when researchers are rushed and forced to publish results, even if the studies were deficient. For example, every website and newspaper ran with the story about marijuana using children lose IQ points. Not many reported on the follow-up study that could not replicate the first study. When eliminating co-founders, the new study found no drop in IQ points. Further, research on twin siblings showed that the drop in IQ was due to parenting, binge drinking or other societal influences, not marijuana.
      https://www.drugabuse.gov/news-events/nida-notes/2016/08/study-questions-role-marijuana-in-teen-users-iq-decline 

       
      Try reading that last sentence again. In a world of science, evidence, reasoning and logic, a doctor makes a statement that decades of use of marijuana might make you lose intellectual function, based on conjecture.
      NIDA also continues to perpetuate the myth that Marijuana is a “gateway drug”.
      https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/marijuana/marijuana-gateway-drug 
      These findings are consistent with the idea of marijuana as a "gateway drug." However, the majority of people who use marijuana do not go on to use other, "harder" substances.
      NIDA, NIH, FDA, DEA, including other federal, state, and local government organizations and private companies continue to perpetuate these and other lies in order to keep marijuana illegal. ASA has filed complaints against the DEA multiple times to get it to remove incorrect statements about marijuana off of the DEA’s website.
      http://www.safeaccessnow.org/iqa_victory 
      A cyclical pattern emerges from the current and past situation surrounding marijuana.
      1.      Stymied scientific research, due to illegality of marijuana and government funding biases
      2.      Using stymied scientific research as a reason to ignore reality.
      3.      Repeating the biased scientific research, long after it was shown to be deficient.
      4.      Using the deficient biased research in “meta-reviews”. Thus taking bad science as a base to create more bad science just by doing an analysis of the bad science conclusions.
      5.      Even after a research study has been fully proven to be deficient and conflicting with better research, continue to hold it up as if it is still valid in some way.
      6.      Publish opinions as if they were facts, without any data to back up any claims.
      Continue reading for more conflicting studies and more calls for research.
      Marijuana: Prenatal and Postnatal Exposure in the Human
      Marijuana use in pregnancy and lactation: a review of the evidence
       
      Marijuana and Pregnancy
      The Association of Marijuana Use with Outcome of Pregnancy
       
      Prenatal Tobacco, Marijuana, Stimulant, and Opiate Exposure: Outcomes and Practice Implications 
      Many of these studies contradict themselves. Some report differences in birth weight, some show no differences. Read the studies yourself!
       
      http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?2017-HB-5222 
      House bill 5422 will force MMFLA provisioning centers to give patients and caregivers an unscientific pamphlet, as described by the legislature.
       
       
      HB 5222 looks like it will pass. All this fear and doubt of a non-toxic 5,000+ year old medication used by millions of humans in every country in the world.
×
×
  • Create New...