Supporting a ban on medical marijuana means supporting socialized medicine
In England, heroin—a potent pain-killer—is available for use by healthcare providers. But in the U.S., the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) classifies it as a schedule I drug which legally stipulates that it has no clinical use. Marijuana is another Schedule 1 substance that, according to the DEA, has no clinical use.
While the majority of people see government involvement in medicine via Medicare, Medicaid, The Affordable Care Act, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), as part of the increasing socialization of healthcare in this country, they fail to realize that restrictions on what a healthcare provider may prescribe (e.g. marijuana) are part and parcel of the same trend. Several states have now passed laws that permit the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes. These uses include chronic pain, nausea, lack of appetite, and related conditions. However the DEA persists in its view that, despite its clinical use and the development of synthetic FDA-approved oral formulations, marijuana has no clinical role.











Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Actually, it doesn’t. The connection between banning medical marijuana and supporting socialized medicine makes as much sense as saying being pro-life means having to support Sandra Fluke’s contraception demands.
Stoic Patriot on March 21, 2013 at 7:09 PM
If marijuana had medical properties, it would be thriving in pill form.
BKeyser on March 21, 2013 at 7:12 PM
On.Big.Logical.Fallacy at work.
-
BTW I have not problem with doctors giving you marijuana, gasoline, or Peeps if they think it well help you or lessen your pain.
CW on March 21, 2013 at 7:19 PM
I typed a censored word … I have no idea which one. I think it might be one from the article. I hate when they do that, here.
ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 21, 2013 at 7:30 PM
That is quite a leap of logic ya got goin’ there.
29Victor on March 21, 2013 at 7:36 PM
On behalf of every conservative with more brains than a potted plant: up yours, idiot liberaltarian!
…I feel like an utter dunce for not thinking of this myself.
You’re absolutely right.
MelonCollie on March 21, 2013 at 7:46 PM
The catch there is that the pill isn’t allowed to make you high.
MetaThought on March 21, 2013 at 7:51 PM
Exactly – hence why it isn’t being made. The only real, consistent benefit is “whoooa! trippy, man!”
The medicinal qualities of pot are hilariously overstated, including by even a couple notable conservatives. Drug companies are not run by such airheads, hence why the pill doesn’t exist.
MelonCollie on March 21, 2013 at 7:59 PM
There is no clinical use to heroin, because there are much better substitutes that aren’t addictive NEARLY to the degree that heroin is. If that’s true that in England, it can be prescribed, then it’s incredibly STUPID.
The DEA has access to all the data regarding marijuana and its usage, and they correctly conclude that the same applies to marijuana that applies to heroin.
Neither has anything to do with socialized medicine.
Was this author high when he wrote this article?
JannyMae on March 21, 2013 at 9:38 PM
well-reasoned
/
Capitalist Hog on March 22, 2013 at 1:37 AM