Marijuana activist dies following explosion

Ottawa Citizen ^ | November 1, 2003 | James Gordon

[Loyalist]

CREDIT: Jonathan Hayward, The Canadian Press

Don Appleby died of his injuries suffered in an Oct. 12 explosion while he was trying to make a concentrated oil using marijuana and butane.

Don Appleby's fight against the aids virus that was sapping him was made more difficult by a tragic paradox. While the Ottawa man was one of the few Canadians who could legally smoke marijuana for medicinal purposes, he could rarely afford it due to his minuscule disability pension.

In the end, he was killed in the struggle to produce the drug that was helping him survive.

On Oct. 12, Mr. Appleby was in the bathroom of his Blake Boulevard apartment, trying a dangerous method to get some use out of the non-smokable parts of his marijuana plants.

By injecting butane into a plastic container with the plant in it, he hoped to make a concentrated oil he could use. Friends suspect he then tried to light a joint, igniting an explosion that blew the bathroom door off its hinges.

Residents of the apartment above his heard the explosion, and rushed him to the Ottawa Hospital's General campus. It's where he remained in intensive care since the incident, and where he died Thursday morning.

Ron Whelan was Mr. Appleby's close friend, and was living under the same circumstances. He said yesterday that Mr. Appleby never should have died the way he did.

Both 44, they received about $900 a month on disability, not nearly enough to pay for both marijuana and food. While the government would pay for the $1,500-$2,000 of aids medication Mr. Appleby needed, they wouldn't pick up the cost of the marijuana. Nausea was a side-effect of the pills, and without the drug, he couldn't keep them down.

Forced to buy marijuana himself and pay rent, his friends say Mr. Appleby was reduced to scrounging through dumpsters to find the food he could no longer afford. He would go searching behind restaurants late at night so nobody would see him. At the same time, he wasn't shy about asking people with marijuana gardens to help him.

"You do what you have to do to survive, whether it's beg, borrow or steal," Mr. Whelan said. If one had a bag of dry macaroni from the food bank, he would often go to the other's place to share.

Mr. Appleby decided to try and save some money by growing his own marijuana, and after two failed gardens, things were starting to work out for him. Still, the cost to grow was still high. With no other source of medicine, he resorted to the butane method. He never recovered from the burns that covered 75 per cent of his body and his scorched lungs.

Mr. Whelan said although Mr. Appleby experienced difficult times in the past, he really blossomed after meeting people similar to him. He loved participating in marijuana rallies, and helping others.

"The world needs more people like Donny," he said. "He was there for the underdog, and it's a terrible loss for everyone who knew him."

Mr. Whelan said he doesn't blame the government for what happened to his friend, but said it should take more responsibility and provide for people like him.

© Copyright 2003 The Ottawa Citizen

[ellery]

Actually the main issue here is Constitutional. The tax issue is important, but secondary.

[Conservative til I die]

There are legal drugs to combat nausea. I wonder if he tried them?

As someone who went through chemotherapy last year (I'm otherwise healthy and in my mid-20's, for some background),though they give you a steroid and anti-nausea IV drip before treatment, and little red anti-nausea pills for the ensuing days, it does not nearly eliminate nausea. Might reduce it, since I was puking three times daily instead of six, but I decided against any control experiments. Nor lack of appetite that usually follows a couple days after treatment.

Who knows how much marijuana or marijuana derivatives might help, but I see no reason that other abuse-able controlled substances like vicodin and steroids can be prescribed to help a cancer patient but marijuana can't.

[robertpaulsen]

Seriously, I don't even think he's going to be charged.

With what? Buying OxyContin from his housekeeper? Where's the proof? Where's the pills? The audio tape's not admissable, and it's a felony in Florida to even make one. E-mails? She's his housekeeper and had access to his computer. I know she says she sold him some.

I can provide you with a transcript of exactly what Rush admitted to. An addiction to prescription painkillers. He has NOT admitted to any illegal activity. But, at your insistence, let's say he did buy these pills, without a prescription, from somebody, maybe even his housekeeper. Without proof, what are we to do about it?

Screw it. OK. So without any proof, the prosecutor, in a suicidal move, charges Rush with buying what, 10,000 pills? I don't know, do you? Let's just pick a number since we're railroading the son of a bitch anyways.

Somehow, somewhere, in some Florida kangaroo court, Rush is found guilty by a jury consisting of Roger Moore and Al Franken family members.

He has no prior record, of anything. He is an upstanding member of the community. A humanitarian, raising $1.5 million in donations for the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society from the Limbaugh radio program ($350,000 personally, up from $250,000 last year). He has completed a drug rehab program.

Now, do I favor him serving 15 years in prison for ... whatever? I favor his being treated no differently than any other person with a similar clean history and similar charge (whatever that charge is).

[Ditter]

Nausea & vomiting are truly awful. Until recently I have had 1 or 2 migraine headaches a month for my whole adult life. Accompaning the severe pain & light sensitivity was nausea. I couldn't hold down water much less a pill to dull the pain. My Dr prescribed Phenergan supositories. They worked great!

[Conservative til I die]

You paid lip service to my "what if Rush is guilty" question, but really you dodged it, talking more about lack of evidence and the like. My point is, if Rush were to be indicted, there was evidence against him, and he was convicted, would you support him getting the book thrown at him, without sympathy?

IMO, Rush is probably guilty. People with painkiller addictions tend to run through their prescriptions with days and sometimes weeks until the next refill. Either that means Rush is going cold turkey for periods of time, or he's getting it through more nefarious means. Of course, I think such laws are stupid and the way we treat drug addicts is wrongheaded, so my conscience is clean when I say leave Rush alone.

[Conservative til I die]

So basically, your view is, as long as you can beat the rap, there's nothing wrong with illegally partaking of controlled substances. Guess it helps when you're an upstanding conservative, rather than some dirty hippie who probably likes Clinton.

[robertpaulsen]

"You're changing the subject. Your argument was that decriminalization or legalization would cost taxpayer money. Your willingness to have all of us foot the bill for free room, board and medical care for nonviolent drug offenders seriously undercuts this argument."

First, no I'm not. Pay attention. I don't have the time to keep repeating myself to you.

The doper in this article is costing the taxpayers money. For food, for marijuana, for AIDS medication, and still it isn't enough. He blew himself up doing dope, and it cost the taxpayers for his hospitalization, too. He died, and I'm sure the taxpayers picked up that tab.

Now, you come along and posit that we also pay for "nonviolent drug offenders" jail time. And, somehow, you think these two thing are similar.

No one is bouncing around the FR forum telling me that arresting drug users and throwing them in jail is NOT going to affect me. They're saying that with marijuana though, aren't they? "It only affects the user, robertpaulsen. It's none of your business, robertpaulsen."

Sorry. That's a lie. I'm being lied to, and I love to point it out every time the opportunity presents itself. THAT's the point I'm trying to make -- being lied to.

As to people going to jail. Hey, seems as though YOU'RE changing the subject, not me.

[robertpaulsen]

"Who said anything about deterrence?"

Thought you wanted to deter scumbag drug dealers. If you don't, then I'm not interested in discussing it.

[robertpaulsen]

You have no idea what the question is, but I'm supposed to have a concrete answer for you? Idiotic.

If he is indicted. For what? Evidence. What kind? Convicted? Of what crime? You don't have a single clue. Guilty? Of what? Doing drugs? Doing drugs is not a crime (look it up).

[pageonetoo]

"Oh really? Show me where Jesus endorsed drunkenness. Was Jesus a drunkard as well? "
Already did, you just failed to see it, I guess...

"I don't know what any of this has to do with anything, but...."

It is about everything that matters... Gods' economy...

Moral relativism is what allows our culture to exist.

Faith brings works, but as a result...not as the MOTIVATING force, but as a response to His leading.
I have seen more "back-slidden" christians, because they never grasped the concept of submitting their will to God. If God is in control, He will take away any urges or unclean thoughts. "Resist the Devil, and he will flee" is an admonition to hold steady against sin. But God gives us the ability.
Paul, in his writings said' I know in whom I have believed, and am persuaded that He is able to keep me, until the end." Paul knew that it was God's control of Paul's life, which would keep him for eternity.
I tend to think those supposed back-sliders may never have received God into their heart, just their minds.

The purpose of man is to glorify God.

The goal of man is to be eternally with God.

If your salvation depends on whether you took a drink, smoked a joint, or ate too much, then they could all prevent you from entering into the covenant with God, guaranteeing our eternal life...
He puts no such constraints. The temple priests have added their own interpretation to the Word, to bring us in line with group thought.

But God is a God of individuals. If only one person were to accept Him as Savior, He could gladly die the death He did, to be resurrected "according to the Scriptures".. to provide for our eternal life...

He did it for me. He did it for you. Whosoever will call on the name of the Lord, WILL BE SAVED.

If there is any other question, I will be glad to expound!

By the way, which did come first? chicken/egg?

[Conservative til I die]

Doing drugs is not a crime (look it up).

Really? Then what are us pro-dopers fighting for, then?

Now answer the question, coward.

[Conservative til I die]

"Oh really? Show me where Jesus endorsed drunkenness. Was Jesus a drunkard as well?

"Already did, you just failed to see it, I guess...

>>Yes, I must have missed it. So please, show me where Jesus endorsed drunkenness and was a drunkard Himself. I'd really be interested to know this.

>>Other than that, your theology is pretty whacked, IMO. If you believe in some sort of moral anarchy as a Christian, then you aren't much of a Christian.

[Conservative til I die]

BTW, I have no idea why you post those quotes on your homepage about you being the best of the best when it comes to the WOD debate. IMO, you might even be a level below Dane, and employ the same tactics of dodge dodge dodge, deflect deflect deflect, distort distort distort, and insult insult insult.

[Cultural Jihad]

Please do try to stick to issues instead of personalities, if you can. No one is really interested in your calumny.

[Dane]

IMO, you might even be a level below Dane, and employ the same tactics of dodge dodge dodge, deflect deflect deflect, distort distort distort, and insult insult insult

Dude, if you are going to mention my name in one of your posts, I would request you have the courage to "ping" me in the reply line.

[Conservative til I die]

Sorry, it was an honest oversight. I usually do ping people I mention.

But I promise, next time I insult someone by compare them to you, I'll ping you to it.

[Dane]

But I promise, next time I insult someone by compare them to you, I'll ping you to it

No problem, you usually insult people's intelligence with every post you make anyway, IMO.

[ellery]

Of course I want to deter drug dealers and drug use. Your mistake is assuming that my proposal to fine nonviolent offenders rather than jail them is intended to deter. Fines are meant to punish. I propose that education and treatment are the way to deter.

[ellery]

The doper in this article is costing the taxpayers money. For food, for marijuana, for AIDS medication, and still it isn't enough. He blew himself up doing dope, and it cost the taxpayers for his hospitalization, too. He died, and I'm sure the taxpayers picked up that tab. Now, you come along and posit that we also pay for "nonviolent drug offenders" jail time. And, somehow, you think these two thing are similar.

Wrong. You repeatedly use a cost-to-taxpayers argument as a reason for marijuana to be criminalized. So of course the cost to taxpayers for marijuana prohibition becomes relevant.

No one is bouncing around the FR forum telling me that arresting drug users and throwing them in jail is NOT going to affect me. They're saying that with marijuana though, aren't they? "It only affects the user, robertpaulsen. It's none of your business, robertpaulsen."

Um, we conservatives like to think in terms of individuals, not groups. Have that argument with the person who made the assertion. Pay attention to and discuss my individual assertions with me....or not.

And you still haven't answered my question about why butane shouldn't be criminalized, as it can be used to make drugs.

[Conservative til I die]

The argument about medical services for potheads being due to drug legalization is a strawman. The issue here is socialized medicine in general. There are hundreds of other things that people get treated for on the taxpayer dole, illegal and legal, drug-involved and non-drug involved. One can support legalization and still believe that drug use shouldn't be subsidized.