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.
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.
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:
According to the new law passed by the Colorado government doctors can prescribe medical marijuana for patients suffering from cancer, HIV and AIDS, glaucoma, PTSD or other chronic medical condition that causes, nausea, severe pain, and seizures. The new law includes all medical conditions in which opioids could be recommended.
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
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.
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.
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”.
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.
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!
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.