New Study Shows Why Big Pharma Hates Medical Marijuana (washingtonpost.com)

HughPickens.com writes: Christopher Ingraham writes in the Washington Post that a new study shows that painkiller abuse and overdose are significantly lower in states with medical marijuana laws and that when medical marijuana is available, pain patients are increasingly choosing pot over powerful and deadly prescription narcotics. The researchers "found that, in the 17 states with a medical-marijuana law in place by 2013, prescriptions for painkillers and other classes of drugs fell sharply compared with states that did not have a medical-marijuana law... In medical-marijuana states, the average doctor prescribed 265 fewer doses of antidepressants each year, 486 fewer doses of seizure medication, 541 fewer anti-nausea doses and 562 fewer doses of anti-anxiety medication. But most strikingly, the typical physician in a medical-marijuana state prescribed 1,826 fewer doses of painkillers in a given year."

[P]ainkiller drug companies "have long been at the forefront of opposition to marijuana reform, funding research by anti-pot academics and funneling dollars to groups, such as the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America, that oppose marijuana legalization..."

Comments

Ummm click bait

[Anonymous Coward]

So because J&J donates to drug prevention efforts for children you logically assume they only do it because they are afraid of lost revenue due to legal marijuana? That's a pretty far stretch. that is like saying Britain donates to food pantries so they can by food from farmers who harm our water supply more......

Re:Doses, not prescriptions.

[Mr D from 63]

For more on painkiller crackdown;

https://www.google.com/search?...

Candy

[amiga3D]

My wife had damaged the occipital nerve on the left side of her head in an accident. She had excruciating pain from this and went repeatedly to various doctors trying to get some help. They handed out hydrocodone and oxycodone like it was candy. After exhausting all options locally she was sent to a pain center. Their answer? More pills. I remember sitting there with a humongous bottle of hydrocodone and told her if you take all this shit it's going to kill you. I got her in to the pain clinic at Emory University Hospital in Atlanta and the doctor there did a nerve ablation that gave her relief from the pain. It came back and she had to have further treatment but the last 3 years have been pain free. It seems that if doctors can't figure what to do they just throw pills at it.

Re:One of five big industries

[Rockoon]

Dont forget the alcohol lobby.

Where are big pharma's recreational drugs?

[swb]

Where are big pharma's recreational drugs? The ones they engineer from the ground up to provide a pleasant, short-term euphoria with designed-in features to prevent overdose, mitigate overconsumption and abuse, and cheap enough that they could be priced lower than mass-produced marijuana?

I would kind of expect that somebody, somewhere would figure out that this would not only be big business but good public policy. Punitive measures to inhibit use of the existing classes of recreational drugs hasn't worked, so why not engineer alternatives that mimic those highs but minus as much of the negative side effects as possible?

The current class of recreational drugs have all kinds of nasty side effects, addictions, overdose deaths, corrosive physical effects, hangovers, and all the social problems they produce. Marijuana isn't bad in comparison to most, but even it still has the lingering stupor and the smoking aspect.

You would think that the bright guys in the lab would be able to come up with something new that minimized the negatives while still giving people something that would dissuade most people from bothering with the legacy highs.

Pot Probably Safer than Benzodiazepines

[BrendaEM]

Having tried both, I feel that pot is less addictive than Atavian.

When my mother had cancer, they gave her Benzodiazepines for stress. The withdraw she went thought was like nothing I have ever seen anyone go through from pot.

Perhaps in a perfect world there would be no pot, but there wouldn't big drug and beer companies telling you and your government what to do.

Re: Companies shouldn't have political power

[Ellis D. Tripp]

Bernie called for the immediate removal of pot from the Controlled Substances Act, which would effectively legalize pot at a federal level.

The DNC platform language calls for a "pathway toward legalization", which is, of course, vague enough to be fairly meaningless and unenforceable against HRC once in office. And it barely passed, 81-80.

Re: Companies donate to campaigns. A lot.

[BronsCon]

Basically, I think, what the AC you were replying to is calling for is open discussion of the spirit of the law, the letter of the law, and the ways in which the two disagree, coupled with making it illegal to do things that technically follow the letter while violating the spirit. Applied evenly, that's actually a very sound idea; for example, it would mean no more tickets for doing the regular posted speed limit past a school when school is in session and all children are inside the building, because the spirit of the law is to protect children (who aren't in danger when you're going more than 20MPH past a building they happen to be inside of) while the letter allows you to get slammed for it.

Treason is, perhaps, a bit harsh, but I suppose it would depend on the nature of the law being twisted. For example, in the case of a law you're being prosecuted for violating, if it's a minor crime and/or it wasn't publicized at all, simply dropping the charges and paying 3x lost wages and legal costs should suffice; if it was made public or is a major crime that may affect your ability to find housing or work in the future, ongoing yearly payments of 10x the mean salary might be in order. That would serve as a deterrent against bullshit arrests and prosecution and lead to more common-sense enforcement of the law, which is something that needs to be highlighted in order to get votes, especially when the people doing the voting (e.g. politicians) benefit from at least one class of the loopholes being discussed.

As for crimes you commit, which is what the AC was talking about (clearly you understand this, I'm just clarifying that I do as well) that's a much longer discussion. Perhaps too long for a single Slashdot post, but I think it would be interesting nonetheless, if you wish to pursue it.