TED Conversations

Neil Deatherage
Eugene, OR
United States

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Should Cannabis be legalized as a medicine?

The rich biodiversity of plants in nature has provided humans many medicines to prevent and cure sickness and disease. The use of cannabis as a medicine continues to gain acceptance within the scientific and medical community, with Connecticut early this month joining 16 other states to legalize it for medical use. Case studies continue to support the value of cannabis as a medicine to ameliorate various ailments ranging from glaucoma, multiple sclerosis, AIDS, Parkinson's, chronic pain, and nausea associated with cancer.

Despite scientific evidence supporting medicinal qualities from cannabis, much controversy surrounds outright legalization for medicinal use. While many states currently allow cannabis as an alternative to traditional medicines, the FDA continues to classify cannabis as a schedule I drug subjecting patients to possible fines and/or imprisonment under federal law.

Can cannabis find a place in today's society as an alternative medicine, or are possible unforeseen consequences too great to allow this plant for medicinal use?

Sort By:

Neil Deatherage 50+
- +2
May 24 2012: I would like to thank each and everyone for his/her insight and participation in this TED conversation. It has been with great pleasure reading different perspectives not only from fellow University of Oregon classmates, but perspectives from those throughout the United States and in different countries across the globe. The sheer volume of comments in this discussion suggests this question is going to remain at the forefront of scientific and political debate, with more questions than answers to come as the issue of medicinal cannabis intensifies. Thank you all again very much.

Sincerely,

Neil Deatherage
Mitchell Babbitt
- 0
May 23 2012: By any consistent standard of substance hazard, cannabis is FAR less dangerous than many legal substances- for example, alcohol.
The number of deaths in the history of humanity due to marijuana overdose? Still a whopping none, zero, nada.
So if we as a society were looking to hold all substances to a consistent standard of control, of COURSE cannabis should be allowable as an alternative medicine, and should be treated with similar or less regulation than alcohol in every other sphere!
But unfortunately we don't hold all substances to a consistent standard, because there is money to be made transforming the medicinal properties of this plant into a pill!
Matthew Kinsella 50+
- 0
May 23 2012: Cannabis is a fairly neat plant and many benefits arise from its use. We continue to use items, substances, and resources that have proven to have severe and serious consequences. Take alcohol, oil, and fast food for instance. They are all legalized and they don't provide any benefits to us. So if you are asking me to consider whether or not we should legalize a plant to help patients in the medical field for "unforeseen consequences" I find that plain silly. Cannabis should be made legal for medical use.
Jenna Rosenfeld
- 0
May 23 2012: I've repeatedly heard that while being in possession of marijuana is illegal, it is not actually illegal to be high (at least in Oregon). However, I haven't been able to find any legitimate sources to back this up or refute it. Does anyone know the truth of this from more than just hearsay?
- Francesca Farris
  - 0
  May 23 2012: It's certainly not illegal to be high. You can't be arrested anywhere for it. How can they prove you are high? And even if they somehow could, you can't be arrested for that. Only for possession of marijuana.
  - peter lindsay 30+
    
    0
    May 23 2012: Road side drug testing is done in Australia. They can test for THC amphetamines opiates and ecstacy type pills in your saliva. In Australia it is illegal to be high.
    - Francesca Farris
      
      0
      
      May 24 2012: Hmm, didn't know that. Well at least that doesn't apply for the United States. That's as much as I know.
Sydni Rucks 50+
- 0
May 23 2012: The debate around legalizing cannabis is a heated one, to say the least. There are the people on campus who go around with petitions to get pot legalized and decriminalized for any potential user. Many people are all on board for signing such petitions because they like to smoke recreationally, not for its medicinal purposes. Not many people take the medicinal aspect of marijuana seriously since so many people abuse their medical marijuana cards, however, there are some very serious benefits that I think need to be acknowledged when determining the legalization. One such benefit would be what this herb can offer to cancer patients who undergo chemotherapy and need a means of reducing their nausea so that they can be as comfortable as possible through a tough time in their lives. (http://www.cancer.org/Treatment/TreatmentsandSideEffects/ComplementaryandAlternativeMedicine/HerbsVitaminsandMinerals/marijuana)
It really is too bad that so many people knock down the benefits of marijuana because of a few extreme cases that are published in the press. Hopefully the public can get past these stories and accept the benefits as an alternative medicine.
Annette White
- 0
May 23 2012: I find it interesting that this is a debate which confines the question to - 'for medical purposes'. The USA is the only nation state, as far as I am aware, which has conducted a large scale 'prohibition' then legalisation experiment. The damage caused by prohibition in terms of the racket surrounding it and the general criminalisaton of large swathes of the population, together with the differential access to alcohol for rich and poor can in my view be paralleled with the current world wide concern over illegal drugs of all kinds. Many people using drugs chaotically, are doing so in an effort to self medicate the pain of their existence. The illegality of their usage and the resulting hike in prices leads to large scale criminality to fund drug use, launder profits, smuggle raw components. Increases in prostitution, burglary and robbery rates,gang warfare and exploitation of third world economies dependent on opiate production all to a significant extent arise from a stubborn refusal to confront the truth about drugs. Prohibition leads to unintended consequences which are worse than the ill effects of legalisation. .There is a huge proportion of the populations of the USA and UK, who are mouldering in prison because, instead of help with a drug problem, they have received harsh punishment. Meanwhile the drug barons continue to parasitise the poorest communities and rake in huge profits.
Maybe it is time to announce a truce in the war on all drugs and think again...
Alex Burke
- 0
May 23 2012: I believe that cannabis legalization could possibly lead to two separate place's in our society. In one case, the legalization could be a smooth process in which it is taxed, regulated and helpful to society, creating more jobs in a relatively new field of work and stimulating a small percentage of the nation's economy. Alternatively, it could end up being poorly regulated, taxed incorrectly and end up just being detrimental to our society. Hopefully situation one will unfold if it ever is legalized.
- Conor O'Higgins 20+
  - 0
  May 23 2012: Isn't the second scenario simply a less extreme version of the current situation?
Eric Parsons
- 0
May 23 2012: The majority of the responses favor the legalization of medical marijuana. My greatest concern about this is the regulation. I believe that the only way for medical marijuana to ever gain true acceptance, true pharmaceutical grade regulation must occur. This would mean that clinical trials would need to be conducted and the quality of the product would need to be ensured. Many dispensaries currently get their medical marijuana from backyard growers which puts the customers at risk for buying a below grade product. In addition, the current trend of passing out prescriptions without due cause also takes away from the effort. Both prescription pills and medical marijuana cards are abused which significantly detracts from the legalization of medical marijuana as it already has a negative connotation.
Bre Senate
- 0
May 22 2012: I feel as though the legalization of Cannabis will may be imminent, although along with Neil, I have thought of the difficulties such a legalization will make for insurance companies. I think it is important to note that Marijuana is not just a "gateway drug" in the sense of using "harder" recreational drugs... but a gateway drug that spikes the interest of the user in seeking other natural medicinal cures and could inspire a greater trust in herbalism and natural medicines. This power struggle is what medical/insurance companies are trying to avoid, which I feel, is a proponent of why Cannabis has not been legalized though it is in no way worse than other legal intoxicants like alcohol!
Neil Deatherage 50+
- +1
May 22 2012: I think what will be interesting to watch over the next decade is how employment, insurance and our government handles cannabis becoming increasingly accepted as a medicine. Most jobs that require drug screening cannot accept cannabis as a medicine, often denying employment. Health insurance companies cover prescription drugs in the hundreds of millions of dollars per year, but have yet to extend coverage with less expensive cannabis alternatives. And when these issues cannot be solved in State Supreme Courts but must be decided in Federal Court? These will be very interesting times for cannabis in the United States..
Beatrix Bacher
- 0
May 22 2012: Considering the fact that many states have already legalized cannabis for medicinal use, and it seems likely that other states will follow suit eventually that this question is moot. It seems that if it has medical uses it should be used, especially given the fact that far worse drugs are used and are illegal without a prescription, such as methamphetamine. Particularly given this, it seems that it makes sense to legalize the use of cannabis for medicinal purposes. I think that the drug needs to be re-classified in part because it is not particularly dangerous and studies on its long term effects are inconclusive. While some consider it to be a "gateway drug" and should therefore be controlled, I think that anyone uses more dangerous drugs would do so without cannabis and while there may be a correlation between cannabis users and users of hard drugs, I do not see a causative relationship. Those who will break the law and use cannabis simply more likely to break the law and use other drugs, but cannabis does not necessarily lead to this use.
It also seems ridiculous to punish those with legitimate medical needs for cannabis for the actions of a few, but it is the price we pay for living in a modern society, just as sudafed (a nasal decongestant used to treat mild allergies) is no longer available over the counter because some were using it to make meth.
To summarize: I think cannabis should be legalized and reclassified as a less dangerous drug so those with legitimate medical need do not face fines or imprisonment.
Ellen Ingamells
- +1
May 22 2012: While I agree with most of our class that there are extensive benefits to legalizing medical marijuana, removing many of the restrictions on recreational use, and controlling the market much as we do alcohol and cigarettes, I think it is very important to consider the legal compensations we must make. While for some marijuana does not impair their ability to drive, communicate, or function in any other way, for many it does. A lot of the legitimate concern around marijuana legalization is that by turning it into a marketable commodity we are putting another mental-state altering drug into the hands of drivers, cyclists and pedestrians. I think if we are going to allow for the use of medical marijuana there have to be strict guidelines for its use as well as increasingly harsh conditions for being under its influence.

I would also just like to say that while marijuana from an objective perspective is not a gateway drug, for an addictive personality all types of drugs are a gateway (including coffee, sodas, specific foods, etc.). I personally have been privy to family members who struggle with addiction now, and I do wonder if we did not have legal addictive stimulants, and easy access to the illegal ones, which like marijuana have few side effects, would these people I care about have ended up where they are today? The question then becomes where the realm of government ends and the freedom of the individual begins. Do we have the right as a government to limit all people's access to addictive stimulants? Or do all people have the right to make their own decisions without regulation? I lean more towards the latter, believing that all creatures on this earth are inherently good, except for wolverines, and as long as they are not hurting anyone else physically or emotionally because of their drug use then they should be allowed to make their own choices and use their own bodies as they will.
- Nikolai Bonachev
  - 0
  May 22 2012: I see what you're saying, but honestly... marijuana is very easily accessible in today's society. It's already in the hands of cyclists, drivers, and pedestrians and is exponentially less of a risk than alcohol and many other substances. I believe that marijuana use should be restricted while operating vehicles, but I don't believe conditions as strict as those in place for alcohol are necessary. Honestly, I think the biggest risk posed by marijuana is complacency, and even that I don't believe.
  
  As far as being a gateway drug, I again refer to it's ease of accessibility. If an individual really wants it, they will obtain it legally or illegally. Marijuana's illegality is not going to prevent a kid from trying it if they want to try it. Now, I'm not the world's greatest advocate for marijuana legalization, but seriously... there are much greater issues going on in the world to focus our resources and energy and the legalization of marijuana could be a great addition to the economic stability of this country if conservatism would adapt to dynamic and changing times.
  - Ellen Ingamells
    
    0
    May 22 2012: When it comes to accessibility I agree with both of your points. And I've got to say it's a bit of my point as well. We have a huge drug trade in the US, and with our prescription happy physicians it's not hard to get your hands on something we don't typically make at home. However my question is whether we should have these drugs at all. If the black hand of regulation came into our lives and removed all temptations there could be a world without drugs, it's not what I'm suggesting, but it's not out of the realm of possibility either.
    
    My concern when it comes to use is that it is a state altering drug, and while some people drive fine drunk, and some drive fine high you never know when the new food you ate that day will react strangely to the drug and halfway through your drive home your high over powers you. We don't know the side effects of marijuana when it comes to its daily use in our variable world, and there IS an increased risk to being on any type of medication or drug and operating a vehicle. I've been in the car too many times and switched drivers because the fade that day is just more than they expected and they are endangering themselves and others behind the wheel.
    - Nikolai Bonachev
      
      0
      
      May 22 2012: The subject can easily become philosophical or a discussion concerning the power of our government, but that only adds difficulty to the subject. There are surveys continuously being taken that shows a a stark rise in use despite being illegal. I'm fairly certain removing the temptation would not result in the decline of drug use of any drug in general. How could temptation even be removed? If drug use was only as a result of individual rebellion to an established law, that may be the case. But, human nature is curious and that will not be restricted whether illegal or not as we have seen. Drug use of any kind will never disappear and history evinces people's dedication to them. Although a world or even nation absent of drug use would be great, we should not focus attention to the possibility, because although it is a possibility, it's such a minuscule possibility that probability does not favor it. The case is very similar to prohibition.
      
      I think it's pointless to draw the line between medicinal use and recreational use. Really, marijuana use isn't going to cause riots, it's not going to destroy society, and it's not going to halt national productivity. Although it is a mind altering drug that may be placed in the hands of the public, its side effects are much less of a threat than many other legal drugs on the market today. Yes, it's a risk, but it's a minor risk in which, if handled properly, the positives I believe have a much greater potential to outweigh the negatives. Medicinal use will only lead to the legality of recreational use, especially with the balance of power shifting to more liberal generations of leaders in the upcoming decades. It's imperative we remove our personal biases on the matter and focus on the way things are and how we may harbor these truths to benefit us, because currently, while the nation could benefit from the legalization of marijuana use, we will never with such conservatist restrictions. Times change and we must adapt to them.
Molly McDevitt
- 0
May 22 2012: I have to say that I am on the same page with many regarding my views of marijuana. The drug in a medicinal form or recreational use has been widely accepted across the country. Like Emil said before me, acquiring a medical card is not an outrageous task and many towns allow for individuals to have possession of the drug within small doses (i.e. Colorado). In addition, the negative connotations associated with the drug do not, in my opinion, out weigh the benefits that it may provide (i.e. tax, safe management and medical benefits). Therefor, I believe it can find it's way into our medical world without disruption of negative consequences.
- Brooke Bilyeu
  - 0
  May 22 2012: I agree with Molly. I think in a few years marijuana will no longer have the negative connotations that it does in some groups now. This depends also on the political power in government.This highlights the importance of the upcoming election, for if we end up with a conservative president things could turn out much differently. I am also interested in hearing more about clinical studies that have been done on the uses of marijuana. Legalization would open the door for much more of this type of work which would be beneficial.
  - Helen Rappe
    
    +1
    May 23 2012: I think that if we end up with a conservative president this year, we will have much larger things to worry about than legalizing marijuana; hey, even a "liberal" president in office does not guarantee that his or her ideas will become reality. My biggest problems with marijuana are the way it is currently distributed, and (like Ellen said) how it will influence the actions and decisions of those using it while in situations that could be dangerous to people around them. Whether or not marijuana is legalized, it should be managed like any other prescription drug: there should be a set dosage prescribed by a physician. As it is now, those who have medical marijuana cards can buy it from licensed growers and have up to 24 ounces of it in their possession, to take at will. That's a lot. It's enough that the user could become irresponsible with it, taking more often than necessary and then getting into a car and killing someone on the road. It's enough to sell to others. The regulation of this drug into a set dosage would hopefully get rid of some of that uncertainty. It would certainly make me feel safer about the consequences of arguing for its legalization.
Emil McDowell
- 0
May 22 2012: I feel that, at least in west coast cities, Cannabis has already been accepted as an alternative medicine. In Oregon it seems like almost anyone can get a medical card. The only legal issues that seem to come about with medical marijuana in Oregon is the closing of dispensaries, but even this is minor because there are so many in the major cities. I'm sure medical marijuana is much more taboo in other states, but it seems to me like a good amount of North American's have already accepted/embraced marijuana's medicinal value.
Robert Winner 50+
- 0
May 22 2012: Wow almost every response is in favor of Cannabis becoming legal. That explains a lot of the responses I have read in the past (LOL). However, when tests are administered to see if Cannabis is in the system they measure for THC the active chemicals in the plant. If that has been identified and can be manufactured then what is the need to legalize? If the perscription is for eyes then add THC to other eye medicines and go to the pharmacy and get your perscription filled. For other ailments do the same medicine plus THC and perscribe. The reason to legalize is to make recreational cannabis available. Thefts were it is grown will go up. resales will go up. Crime in general will increase as the "abusers" will prey on the licenced users. One responder said alchol and cigarettes are killers already available so legalizes all drugs. So, we have two problems lets multiply it to five, ten, or more. The cost of insurance for medical, car, life, etc ... will skyrocket. The welfare generation will be selling off all they can get and use. The "I want it all free" will become more dependent and costly to the few who still work and pay for all of them.

Nope can not see this as a good thing. Drugs, illegals and criminals are the most expensive cost that burden the workers today. Making it legal will not change the crime rate. It will increase the danger it represents to the public.

Okay I'm braced for the responses. I have been in police work most of my life and have seen this first hand. Hope it never come to your house or your loved ones. All the best. Bob.
- Patrick Mazi
  - +1
  May 22 2012: I can't tell if you are trolling. However, I will respond as if you are being serious.
  
  Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but your assertions are simply opinions. One cannot definitively say, "If cannabis is legalized for medical use, then crime will... insurance will... etc." Saying you know what will happen is nonsense. In fact, a 5 min GoogleScholar search will provide peer reviewed studies that make claims completely opposite of your assertions.
  
  Medically speaking, the THC drug you mention is called Marinol. Though it has helped many patients manage various diseases, anecdotal evidence supports the view that it is not as effective as when THC is ingested via cannabis. Furthermore, the drug is costly and many insurance providers will not cover the cost of the prescription. If you had to watch a loved one whither away due to complications of a disease that could be eased with cannabis, I believe making your stance would be softened if not swayed.
  
  Lastly, in response for your association of the legalization movement and the "welfare generation," I would like to direct you to a recent NY Times op-ed. This editorial was penned by a NY State Supreme Court Justice. Since you are formerly in law enforcement, perhaps the opinion of an individual who 1) is not of the welfare generation and 2) has dedicated their life to upholding the laws of our country as you have may soften your opinions. Here is the web address:
  http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/17/opinion/a-judges-plea-for-medical-marijuana.html?_r=2&ref=opinion
  
  Bob, thank you for your service as a police officer. I hope that you continue to consume additional information concerning this subject matter and come to a more defensible, less inflammatory opinion (even if you still disagree with legalization). Disagreement is okay; shooting from the hip on a sensitive issue is less so.
  - Robert Winner 50+
    
    0
    May 22 2012: Pat, Lawyers make a living finding someone who will support their client this time and provide evidence against the next time. Lawyers move cases to get favorable judges. Opinion pieces in papers are a dime a dozen. As you yourself state the cost is expensive and insurance will not cover it. If made legal would it still be expensive, would insurance cover it, etc ... Making it legal would not stop abuse. Pat my "assertions" come from the school of been there done that, seen that, hate that. I have seen people die from using drugs but never from not using illegal drugs. Yep I'm hard over on the subject no doubt. I believe that there is a medical field called onocology that helps relieve pain in dying people. Again no need for cannabis. Hope I never have to say I'm sorry this happened to you. Go to your PD and ask for a ride along into the seedy part of town and see first hand the destruction caused by drugs and drug wars. Or go the hospital emergency room and work as a volunteer and see the amount of drug and drug related cases come in each night. If you want in the game argue from the been there aspect and you will have more credability. We are certainly on the different side of the fence on this Pat. All the best. Bob
    - Patrick Mazi
      
      0
      
      May 22 2012: You cheapen your stance by demeaning the entire legal profession. In my opinion, you are very nearly slandering a State Supreme Court Justice. That Justice, also a cancer patient, deserves more respect than anonymous internet lawyer snipping.
      
      Sure there are many op-eds to be had, but there is only one NY Times and I would venture a guess it is crazy difficult to get your essay published there. Dime a dozen in the NY Times, I think not.
      
      Oncology is a medical specialty that deals with cancer and cancer treatment. Sure oncologists deal with minimizing pain, but so do orthopedic surgeons, cardiologists, and ophthalmologists. So discounting the need for cannabis based on the fact there are oncologists isn't the best argument one could make.
      
      Again, I urge you to research this issue. Having worked in a level one trauma hospital, I can say I have never seen anyone come in due to the ill effects of marijuana. As for the PD suggestion, I have been on two ride-a-longs. My college roommates (3) all now work as police officers in municipalities around Kansas City. I have my bases covered and come to my conclusion on this issue.
      
      I applaud your disagreement and am encouraged you care enough to reply to my post. I am not trying to dissuade you from your opinion, just hoping you will continue your research and come to a more reasoned defense of your position (it is a very valid position on this issue).
- Georgia Kurtz
  - 0
  May 22 2012: Bob, first off I would like to reply to your surprise to almost every response being in favor of Cannabis becoming legal. This particular talk was posted by a student at University of Oregon in affiliation with a class assignment in which 60 students are required to post. A majority of the posts are from students in Eugene and there is a cultural aspect involving marijuana that may be influencing many students ideas on Cannabis.
  
  Secondly, THC in pill form is available but the argument against this would be that act of taking marijuana in as a whole (either smoked or oils heated and ate etc) has synergistic effects that cannot be reproduced by simply using one component of marijuana.
  
  Finally, it is hard for me to see crime rates increasing due to marijuana use, marijuana is omnipresent and the structures to abuse, such as gardens, drug dealers, etc are already in place and are not being abused at any unusual rate. I know many marijuana "users" from every walk of life, including line cooks and 6 figure professionals and none of them prey on others. I think the idea that marijuana makes people criminals is the same ideas as cake making someone fat. Some people are predisposed to criminal activity due to genetics and environment, marijuana does not make someone a criminal. Some people are predisposed to over-consuming cake because of genetics and environment and this makes them fat, the cake doesn't make them fat.
  
  Peace
- Allison Walter
  - +1
  May 22 2012: Bob, I find your comment very informing. It's interesting to hear a point of view from someone that understands the law side of the issue. When I've had this same debate in some of my previous classes, many students argued that if marijuana was legalized, our crime rate would decrease and the use of the drug would slowly diminish overtime. I believe that we will never truly know what will happen in our society until we see if for ourselves.
  - Robert Winner 50+
    
    0
    May 22 2012: Those are arguments of passion not fact. I agree that the final bell would be the determiner. If it is legalized I will obey the law. The people who will win are the lawyers. Losers are the homeowners and business people. Insurance lawyers will add clauses to policies for home, car, and life and rates will go up. Not any different that rates for me if I got a DUI, etc ... Laws will be written to protect the police and the public if the offender is "under the influence". This is a big game that will change many things and none for the better. The new big ad will be "Busted for POT call Joe the Lawyer a expert in cannabis cases". Cops will be sued daily for enforcing "bad" laws and shot at by irate citizens. Nothing good will come from this. For sure it will cost the straight guys. Thanks for the reply. Its not the law side I express. It is the scum of society and dead kids that should never have been there, the suffering of mothers, fathers, kids, and innocents that make me cry. I feel nothing for the scum that prostitutes a young girl hooked on drugs. Sorry to preach. All the best. Bob
- Mike Robinson
  - +1
  May 22 2012: Robert what do you think of my assertion that keeping marijuana illegal effectively subsidizes the product to the benefit of organized crime? The Canadian Association of Police Chiefs has advocated decriminalization because keeping it illegal effectively makes the police enemies of young people, who smell the hypocrisy of a police force protecting the rights of pharmaceutical companies and alcohol/tobacco companies to sell drugs while criminalizing those who choose relatively safe and natural alternatives. History shows us prohibition does not work, except to make the criminal element more prosperous while simple users find themselves in jail or socially ostracized.
  Then again, in America where over 3% of the population is in jail or on probation, the business model of incarceration demands tenants....
Brett Gottfried
- 0
May 21 2012: I don't see any problem with making this a medical drug. Just like other perscription drugs it should be moniter and only allowed to people who need it. Just like perscription pain pills they have there place but should only be given to you when it is deem appropriate by a doctor. I strongly think that marijuana allow to be used for medicial purposes/
Mat Lisin
- 0
May 21 2012: First off, I am all for medicinal cannabis. There are just too many accounts of people with severe pain who have been helped by medicinal cannabis to humanely oppose the idea. By no means though does this mean that I think our current system is utilizing this drug effectively.

When a patient is prescribed nearly any other drug, they are prescribed a fixed amount of it to be measured out for them by a pharmacist. Cannabis is considered a schedule I narcotic by the federal government, and because of this cannot be prescribed by a physician (at least not in Oregon). The way our states system works is that a grower is legally able to grow the cannabis for a medicinal card holder. That card holder is legally allowed to posses up to 24 ounces of cannabis, they are legally able to have in their possession 1.5lbs! Anyone who knows anything about the plant knows this is a staggering amount. When the patient is out of the plant they can just go back to the grower and obtain more. This system is flawed, and is creating the ability for people to abuse the drug. If the drug is not going to be legalized and we are going to continue to legally allow it only for medicinal purposes it should be prescribed like any other drug. Source: Oregon Medical Marijuana Program Handbook
http://public.health.oregon.gov/DiseasesConditions/ChronicDisease/MedicalMarijuanaProgram/Documents/ommpHandbook.pdf

Personally I think it should just be legalized. The economic benefits are undeniable, and the only dangerous aspect of the drug are legal ramifications created because the plant is illegal. It is a relatively harmless substance (compared to alcohol at least) and frankly seems un-American to tell people they cannot use a plant that naturally grows in this country.
- Beatrix Bacher
  - 0
  May 22 2012: I agree completely, I did not know about all the implementation laws and 1.5 pounds does seem like a large amount. It should be like other prescription drugs where a certain amount is allowed by a physician and the dose is dependent on the need of the patient, not on a universal law saying that everyone with a certain condition can obtain the same amount. The "special" classification of cannabis needs to be taken away and it needs to be adopted within the practice of medicine.
manuel pena
- 0
May 21 2012: I believe that al drugs should be legal. I don't do drugs, but I know many people who do, and something I've learned is that making something illegal won't stop people from using it. Another reason why I believe all drugs should be legal is alcohol and cigarettes. The two are drugs that kill people, not only the user, but those around them. So yeah, all drugs should be legal, I think it would make them easier to manage.
Casey Gibbons
- 0
May 21 2012: I do not think the legality of the drug would be the biggest issue, but how the drug is bought and sold without reaching those who will sell the drug for recreational use. I think the method of administering the right to grow your own plants should not be allowed, the patient should have to request a prescription and refill it at a pharmacy to control the amount released to the public. This is because there are those irresponsible people who will grow more than needed and give the extra to someone for resale and in turn be used not as a health aid, but as a possibly dangerous recreational activity. Any attempt to lower the excess drug to the public, the better. If they can legalize it while controlling its distribution, I see no problem in the legalization of marijuana.
Elisa Merk
- 0
May 21 2012: For me.. of course
Debra Smith 200+
- 0
May 21 2012: If it is truy medicinal, of course it should be available to those who are ill under the same restrictions as other meds.
Trevor Howard
- 0
May 21 2012: I'm in the same boat here as many individuals in that I believe that it should be legalized, taxed and made available to those who need it. Although I am far from knowing much about marijuana, I have read enough articles and heard enough debates to determine that it is effective in aiding people who use it to fight symptoms of many different illnesses whether it be that of chemotherapy, pain, etc. Through the legalization of marijuana, it seems apparent that it would significantly raise taxes while also cutting out a huge amount of drug smuggling that occurs on a daily basis across both state and international borders. Instead of raising a property or income tax, why not open up a massive and entirely new resource to tax? Marijuana is along the same lines of alcohol, except how many people die of overdosing on it?
It seems to me that there isn't any significant group of people who are opposed to taxing marijuana and, although it is considered a gateway drug, it seems potentially more safe than liquor. Yes, it is a social taboo here and there are countless cases of people abusing it but if it can actually benefit the lives of a huge number of people like it seems it has and can, then let's legalize it, regulate it, tax it and help our country move forward.
- Amanda Hooper 50+
  - 0
  May 21 2012: Hey Trevor,
  I agree with what you said above about legalizing, regulating, and taxing marijuana. While people may still buy it illegally, will that number go up if we legalize it? Likely not. Also people do abuse marijuana, but people also abuse tobacco and alcohol as well.
  
  Legalizing the use of marijuana also brings up another issue though and that is the growing of the plant. Would there be governmental farms that grow and sell marijuana for the purpose of medical use, or would anyone now be allowed to become a marijuana farmer and start selling to the government so that they may tax it?
  - Mike Robinson
    
    0
    May 21 2012: Perhaps like tobacco it could be a licensed plant where an individual could grow up to 12 plants for personal use.
    My opinion is that by keeping cannabis illegal they effectively subsidize it for organized crime. Rather than being worth $20 per once it is worth $200. I guess it keeps bikers out of worse trouble.... hard to say!
Erik Schoof
- 0
May 21 2012: There seems to be one issue that people seem to forgetting about, that needs to be considered in this discussion. Money. As far a legaization goes, it is never ending cycle of opposing views. However, the economic growth and development of an industry needs to be considered.

It is estimated that the state of California is missing out on about $15 billion in revenue from legalization. This is in just sales and taxes alone. Consider the fact that there would also be an industrial boon resulting in the creation of new jobs in the sales, cultivation, distribution, and marketing aspects. Given the fact that the US faces an incredible amount of debt at this time, the government needs to be proactive in its search for new streams of revenue. Not only would there be the taxable income from individual states, there could, and should be federal luxury taxes as well, similar to those on alcohol and tobacco.

Take into account the reduction in cost of the war on drugs and the federal government could be earing billions annually from a simple piece of legislature. I do believe that there needs to be regulation and control if legalization were considered. Fines, taxes, and penalites must be applied. But, simply apply the rules that govern alcohol to marijuana, and there is a system set up for the government to manage, and mitigate the risks that will come.

The pro-marijuana groups, such as NORML, have a mantra of "Tax my weed legally, please". This simple statement shows that there is a growing social drive, a willingness to pay any and all taxes levied, and a growing market that needs to be tapped. This source of incomes should not be ignored.
- Nathan Heidt
  - 0
  May 21 2012: This seems like the main argument for most people but it is not as simple as most seem to think. Legalizing weed would instantly take away power, money and influence from the tobacco, pharmaceutical and alcohol industries. To me, it makes a lot more sense that these industries fighting to keep marijuana illegal is what is preventing marijuana from having an economic impact rather than the government's unwillingness to make it legal. You are definitely right when you say money is at the root of this discussion but the groups that are fighting for legalization have a lot less than those fighting to keep it illegal and surrounded by social stigmas.
  - Erik Schoof
    
    0
    May 21 2012: Its funny that you mention that. I was under the distinct impression that the role of government was to be the voice of the people. It seems, however, that the powers that be are more interested in the special interest groups that fund their campaigns that what the people desire.
    
    For years I have spoken about how the government needs to strip itself away from the special interest teat and go back to its roots. Of the people, for the people, by the people. Instead, the government has degenerated into an elitist organization with the will of the common man no where in its sights. Even the Democrats, who claim to care for the middle and working classes, all come from well to do socialites.
    
    It has been ages since someone in big government has actually cared, and acted upon, the needs of the commonwealth. Instead the entire system has become gummed up with the backscratching of special interest groups and the "good-old boys club". It has all become a homogeneous blob.
    
    If the people were actually represented I believe that not only would we see the decriminalization of a common plant, but we would see a paradigm shift towards a system that aims to take care of its citizens though socialized programs, including health care.
    
    Now, don't for a second think that I am in favor of Socialism and Big-Brother. However, last I checked, my big brother has always looked out for my well being, no matter the cost to himself.
Logan Hein
- 0
May 21 2012: I'm cautious to say anything either way on this subject because of the huge variations of "data" that exist on this subject. Drugs have never been my biggest subject of interest, so I've never done much if any digging myself, but I've heard a ton about the subject from word of mouth, classes and such, and have heard an astounding number of "facts" that conflict with each other. For instance I’ve heard several times that fMRI's have shown that cannabis has no long term effects...and I've heard the exact opposite many times. I know fMRI isn't the most absolute science in the world, but really, the subject is just a mess and I don't see any reliable way to judge how dangerous cannabis is or isn't. Of course there’s a TON of anecdotal data about cannabis because it's very widely used illegal or not, but it's very hard to glean the level of involvement of something like drugs outside of an at least somewhat controlled environment. There are a massive numbers of factors in play.

I will say that if it really does have strong medical properties then it should be legalized as a prescription medicine. Even if it is harmful, if it helps elevate symptoms of something else harmful, it should at least be provided as an option; as long as it's made clear that there might be adverse side effects. That’s how it goes with medicine; sometimes it’s less about finding a “cure” and more of choosing between two evils. Of course, I think the issue lies less in the dangers/benefits cannabis has on an individual level and more on what effect legalizing marijuana/medicinal marijuana has on a societal level, and that's when I officially feel unqualified to talk about the subject.
- Jenna Rosenfeld
  - 0
  May 23 2012: Logan, I appreciate your honesty on the subject, and I feel compelled to agree. I simply do not know enough about this subject to feel confident arguing one side or another without adding to the plethora of insubstantial arguments already available. I have heard extremely conflicting views on almost every aspect of this debate. I completely agree that although many parts of the marijuana debate center around quality of life and how the drug will change the life of a given individual, these arguments have very little to do with the legalization status. Money and crime rate are going to be the big players in this game. I don't agree that this is how it should be, only how it is.
Alexa Westerbeck
- +1
May 21 2012: I think that marijuana should absolutely be an option medicinal treatment for illnesses like cancer. If the benefits from using medical marijuana are justified then there should be no reason that people can't use it for medicinal reasons. However, I think that people take advantage of this capability to obtain marijuana in some states. Therefore, cannabis should be more heavily regulated and distributed to people who would actually benefit from it and are not just trying to use it for recreational purposes. For instance, I know in California almost anyone can obtain medical marijuana. You could be having back pains and receive it without question. As far as the use of marijuana for medicinal reasons, its distribution does need to be more controlled to prevent this from happening. On that note, I do think the drug has a place in today's medical society, but its place in recreational society is a whole other subject.
- Sarah Caponi
  - +1
  May 21 2012: I agree that marijuana should be made legal for medicinal purposes. After seeing and hearing stories of people going through cancer anything to ease their pain makes sense to me. I think you are right in saying it has a definite place in today's medical society but should be separated from recreational use. I am wondering if you have any ideas on how medical marijuana could be better regulated?
  - Georgia Kurtz
    
    0
    May 21 2012: I also agree that medical marijuana has a place in medical society, most of the research I've read only states the absolute benefits to the drug. I agree, as well, that the availability of medical marijuana is tarred by the ease of access for illegal use or non-medicinal purposes and this image is used as a tool for proponents against medical marijuana and limits the potential for marijuana use for medicinal purposes. . Stricter regulation of medical marijuana distribution could help to limit this negative view(although I am not personally in favor of regulating marijuana for recreational use). One way to regulate and alter the view of non-medicinal use is to regulate the marijuana dispensaries, this can be as simple as requiring the dispensaries to have a more "pharmacy/medical office" atmosphere instead of a "head shop" atmosphere. The strains of marijuana could be restricted to ones that serve medicinal purposes instead of strains that have a hint of bubble gum or blueberry in them.
chad manderscheid 10+
- +1
May 21 2012: I would vote for a libertarian solution of decriminalization of growing cannabis for personal use or barter but would want any commercial production to be heavily regulated and taxed, May sound contradictory but I think it would work to take the criminal element out of the loop.
Kris Rosvold
- +2
May 21 2012: It absolutely should be legal... It's cheaper and more effective than most anti-depressants, does less damage than alcohol to the body, and can be grown (free) from seed. It is also one of the most effective anti-nausea drugs available The ONLY reason it's still a Schedule 1 drug is that the anti-depressant manufacturers would be out of business if it were legal! The fact of the matter in my lifetime is that when the "War On Drugs" was started in the 1970's, aprox. 30% of "kids" used drugs of some sort...Alcohol, weed, coke, lsd, etc. That number has NOT changed appreciably in the 40 Years of WASTED dollars. It has been as low as 27% and as high as 34%. But it REMAINS around 30% throughout all the changes and time and BILLIONS of dollars wasted! This leads me to believe that about 30% of the population needs some form of drug to escape their reality... Many of those folks grow out of it but lots don't. I suspect that there is a bio-chemical reason for this but am no researcher... Just an observer of patterns in the world around me.
Cannabis was only listed in the USA as a Schedule 1 Drug after the 1957.. This listing was due in large part to the fear that the cheap, renewable fiber from hemp would supplant wood pulp for paper production.... Yet another example of "our" "great" government protecting an industry from another industry at the great expense of the Citizens of the country! Please remember when dealing with our federal and state governments: They're policy is: " Profit before the people".
See the attached link to Wikki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_history_of_cannabis_in_the_United_States#Marijuana_Tax_Act_.281937.29
Lisa Murphy
- +2
May 21 2012: I believe that people should have the ability to take cannabis if they wish, but that the growing/sales of it should be highly regulated and taxed. I think the government could take this as an opportunity to make money to benefit things like medical research and other good causes. With all of the medicinal marijuana clinics there already are, there is obviously a demand for the drug, so there is money to be made. The government could research the medicinal benefits of marijuana and its side effects and then regulate and distribute it to the public.
- Christina Thommes
  - 0
  May 21 2012: I agree with you that cannabis should be legalized but heavily taxed. I would argue though, that the money should be used to improve the country's economic situation as opposed to medical research. There absolutely is demand for cannabis, be it for medicinal or recreational purposes. Overall the effects of recreational use of cannabis don't seem to be much worse than tobacco or alcohol, and it certainly has medicinal value. I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be presented as an option for medical treatment. I agree that it needs to be regulated, as with tobacco and alcohol, and the short term and long term effects need to be made clear to the people. But with the demand for marijuana and hemp as high as it is, legalization for medical and recreational use could potentially significantly improve the country's economic situation.
- Nicholas Schulze
  - 0
  May 22 2012: I completely agree with you Lisa. If we take a look at this issue in a broader less medical context there is great potential to make a lot of money via taxation and regulation. I also agree that with it's already known sources of medicinal value further research should be done on plants that belong to the same family as cannabis to see if any of these other plants hold as much potential. I would also find it interesting that since a couple other quite infamous drugs are also derived directly from plants or fungi, if research on possible medicinal properties they might have as well.

Load more comments…

Sign In

To join or start a conversation, you'll need to sign in. Not a member? Register Now (it's free and fast).

Live Conversations

Live Conversations are hosted by TED speakers and TED Fellows. Ask your questions and participate in the discussions on the following dates and times: