THE OAKLAND TRIBUNE

Editorials

Tuesday, January 5, 1993

When President-elect Bill Clinton's choice for U.S. Surgeon General spoke out in support of the medical use of marijuana, she turned the spotlight on a an absurd and cruel government hupocrisy Dr. Joycelyn Elders, director of the Arkansas Health Department, said that if she's confirmed, she will advocate a change in policy that would make marijuana available to patients suffering from cancer, glaucoma, AIDS and some neurological conditions.

Pointing out that much stronger drugs such as codeine and morphine are prescribed for pain, she said simply that if marijuana is beneficial to patients, it should be available to their doctors.

Marijuana's medical benefits are not disputed. It reduces nausea and vomiting for chemotherapy patients, stimulates the appetite for AIDS patients and helps them tolerate the side effects of AZT, relieves the pressure on the eye for patients with glaucoma and reduces muscle spasms for people suffering from multiple sclerosis and paralysis.

One group advocating the medical sue of marijuana estimates 5 million Americans suffering from a variety of diseases would benefit from legal access to the substance.

Even the u.S. government recognized the value of marijuana; until last year, the Public Health Service dispensed it to a small number of patients. But responding to political pressure in an election year, the PHS discontinued the program, saying a new prescription drug, Marinol, is as effective. The new drug may be available, bu at £8 a pill, it is much too costly for many patients to afford.

Dr. Ivan Silverberg, a San Francisco cancer specialist, has testified that each year in San Francisco, an estimated $32 million is spent on the hospitalization of cancer patients for extreme nausea and vomiting that could be controlled by marijuana.

So why is the spiky-leaved green plant shunned by government officials? They cling to the fear that allowing it to be used for medicinal purposes will promote use of illicit drugs. But their argument is weak; morphine and cocaine, highly addictive drugs, are available for doctors to prescribe. Thei use is successfully controlled throught extra-stringent prescriptions.

Dr. Silverberg suggests government policy may be more sensitive to the wishes of pharmaceutical companies that would not cash in on a non-patented substance than to the suffering of patients dying of AIDS and cancer. He makes the grim point that terminally ill people are not a powerful political constituency.

The government policy is additionally wrong-headed because it denies reality. A Harward University study found that 40 percent of the sruveyed cancer specialists had recommended marijuana to relieve nausea brought on by chemotherapy. In the Bay Area, the absurd government policy plays itself out in the periodic prosecution of Santa Rosa's Mary Rathbun, 69, also known as "Brownie Mary, "who bakes marijuana-laced brownies and distributes them to sick people.

This is reefer madness; not a wild-eyed frenzy inspired by marijuana, but the arbitrary judgment of government officials.

President-elect Bill Clinton should stand behind Elders. Then, when she becomes the new U.S. Surgeon General, she should clear the smoke and fight for a clear-headed and compassionate policy that allows the medical use of marijuana.