Posted on 07/30/2014 10:40:11 AM PDT by ConservingFreedom
Doctors in Macon, Georgia, told Janea Cox that her daughter, Haleigh, might not live another three months.
That was the middle of March, when Haleigh's brain was being short-circuited by hundreds of seizures a day, overrunning the array of five potent drugs meant to control them. Worse, the drugs were damaging Haleigh's organs.
"She was maxed out," Cox said. "She'd quit breathing several times a day, and the doctors blamed it on the seizure medications."
Cox had heard that a form of medical marijuana might help, but it wasn't available in central Georgia. So a week after hearing the ominous diagnosis, she and Haleigh packed up and moved to Colorado Springs, Colorado. There, Haleigh began a regimen of cannabis oil: four times a day and once at night.
By summer, she was down to just a handful of seizures a day. In less than three months, doctors were able to wean her off Depakote, a powerful medication that had been damaging her liver.
Haleigh had never been able to walk or talk. But freed from seizures in Colorado, "She said 'Mama' for the first time," Cox said. "She's playing with puzzles; she's walking. She's almost being a normal child."
Despite all the good news, Cox is living in limbo. Her husband, a paramedic, couldn't afford to leave his job and pension; he still lives and works in Forsyth, Georgia. The family is relying on charity to keep their Colorado apartment for the next few months; beyond that, the future is uncertain.
A bill being introduced Monday in the U.S. House of Representatives could be Cox's ticket home. The three-page bill would amend the Controlled Substances Act -- the federal law that criminalizes marijuana -- to exempt plants with an extremely low percentage of THC, the chemical that makes users high.
If passed, it would be the first time that federal law allows any medical marijuana use.
"No one should face a choice of having their child suffer or moving to Colorado and splitting up their family," said Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pennsylvania, the bill's sponsor. "We live in America, and if there's something that would make my child better, and they can't get it because of the government, that's not right."
The bill will land in a Congress that may be open to change. Across the country, highly sympathetic patients and a nonintoxicating product have proved a popular mix. This year alone, 11 states have passed legislation loosening regulation of cannabis strains with high cannabidiol and/or minimal THC content.
In this atmosphere, Perry says that once members and their staffs are brought up to speed, he expects the bill to attract "overwhelming" support.
"It wouldn't be surprising if we see broad support for this proposal," agreed Mason Tvert, communications director at the Marijuana Policy Project, which advocates for marijuana and medical marijuana legalization. "If this bill gets support, it will demonstrate that there is recognition of marijuana's medical benefits."
Dubbed the Charlotte's Web Medical Hemp Act of 2014, the bill is named after Charlotte Figi, a young Colorado girl whose parents have campaigned nationwide for easier access to medical marijuana after successfully controlling their daughter's seizures with cannabis oil. Since her story became known, a growing number of parents have flocked to Colorado, hoping for similar success.
The Charlotte's Web cannabis strain, developed by the Realm of Caring nonprofit organization in Colorado Springs, is in high demand, in part because of the attention it's received in the media. Many families wait months for a batch to be grown and processed into cannabis oil. Perry's bill, however, would apply to any cannabis strain with a THC content of less than 0.3%.
Charlotte's Web and similar strains not only have minimal THC, they have high levels of cannabidiol, another chemical. A growing body of anecdotal evidence suggests that cannabidiol can effectively control seizures, though there are no published studies to support its use.
It's easy to find critics who say parents should follow a more traditional route.
"There is no evidence for marijuana as a treatment for seizures," Rep. John Fleming, R-Louisiana, a physician, claimed during a congressional hearing last month. "We hear anecdotal stories, and that's how myths come about."
Fleming and others point out that a pharmaceutical version of cannabidiol oil, called Epidiolex, is being tested in clinical trials. But many children aren't able to get into the trials. Haleigh Cox is disqualified because she has type-1 diabetes. Others aren't willing to wait several months to be enrolled.
"With Epidiolex, there just aren't enough seats at the table," said Mark Knecht, a father from Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, whose story helped inspire Perry's bill.
His daughter Anna, 11, has epilepsy and suffers anywhere from a handful of seizures a day to more than 100, despite her four anti-convulsant medications. Knecht, the chief financial officer of a large Christian medical nonprofit, says Anna has been evaluated at several top hospitals but couldn't land a spot in the Epidiolex trial.
Twenty-three states and the District of Columbia have laws on the books allowing medical marijuana for a variety of conditions. But even as states rewrite their regulations, federal law remains the same: Marijuana is illegal to grow, sell or use for any purpose. Under the 1970 Controlled Substances Act, marijuana is listed on Schedule 1, meaning it has "no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse." To backers of reform, the Catch-22 is familiar: Marijuana is restricted in large part because there is little research to support medical uses; research is difficult to conduct because of tight restrictions.
A series of memos from the Justice Department has said that arresting individual medical marijuana users is not a priority, and a 2013 memo added that federal prosecutors should not target large commercial operations except on a case-by-case basis. But most observers say that shipping or transporting the drug across state lines ups the ante.
"For families like us, the biggest issue is the federal issue. You can't take it across state lines," Knecht explained.
His family still lives in Mechanicsburg. But after seeing CNN's medical marijuana documentary last year, Anna and her mother, Deb, established residency in Colorado, where they obtained a medical marijuana card that let them place an order for a batch cannabis oil, in hopes it will control Anna's seizures. If Perry's bill becomes law, Knecht says, "Realm of Caring could just put it in a FedEx package."
Rejoice Libertarians! The one stronghold keeping American from freedom is being razed. Tomorrow the IRS, EPA, NEA, DHS, TSA, etc will all be sent home.
It's even better new for people with seizures, and those who care about them.
Cannabis oil is a scam.
It’s sold as a cure all.
Truly from the depths of Hell comes this scam on hurting people.
People like Rep. Fleming don’t care until it hits a loved one. Remember Lynn Nofziger, the Reagan staffer? He had a battlefield conversion when his daughter got cancer and need marijuana to help ease the side effects of chemo. THEN it was ok.
It's being "sold" here as a treatment for seizures - and a pharmaceutical company has skin in the game.
It’s sold as a cancer cure as well.
I know someone who’s father was diagnosed with a lung cancer recently.
She heard about cannabis oil and how it would cure cancer. She wanted to spend thousands of dollars to buy it because these scam artists from the depths of Hell sell it as a cure for cancer.
In truth though, I've never been rabidly opposed to marijuana. My main objection to it was the ready availibity of it to children (under 21), studies have shown that it is harmful to children. I'm vehemently opposed to my 14 year old son and 15 year old daughter smoking anything.
I smoked cigarettes for 50 years, giving them up 6 years ago.
Because of my shaking, I've lost the ability to write or print even semi legibly, even typing is difficult.
It has taken me about 5 minutes to type this relatively short reply.
***The three-page bill***
Must be a Republican bill. A DEM bill would have three pages of the same thing plus 2000 pages of special interest pork.
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
Beware!
Regardless what FDR's activist justices wanted everybody to think about the scope of Congress's Commerce Clause powers in Wickard v. Filburn, federal laws criminalizing mariquana would apply only to interstate trade, imo, not to intrastate trade. This is evidenced by the following excerpts from pre-FDR era Supreme Court case opinions where justices not only clarified that the states have never delegated to Congress, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate intrastate commerce, but also that the states have likewise never granted Congress the specific power to regulate intrastate agriculture.
”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphases added].” —Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited. None to regulate agricultural production is given, and therefore legislation by Congress for that purpose is forbidden [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.r
Note that there is nothing stopping the states from amending the Constitution to grant Congress the specific power to regulate intrastate marijuana production if that is what the states want.
America wasn’t razed before there were laws against marijuana. As it is now, you cannot even grow industrial hemp (marijuana), a valuable and useful cash crop, which contains very little THC. DemocRats created the WOD to imprison more blacks on southern prison plantations and Republicans should end it.
Of course- a drugged up, stoned populace is a controllable populace. Keep’em stoned and happy and they don’t give a damn about anything else. Personally- I think druggies should be given ALL the drugs they want-free- let’em OD and be done with it.Collect all the confiscated drugs- have a stadium where the addicts could come indulge until they dropped then call a waste disposal system. Repeat weekly.
Which part of "low percentage of THC" did you not understand?
let’em OD and be done with it.
Nobody has ever fatally ODed on marijuana (unlike alcohol).
Thousands of dollars???!!! That's hilarious. It doesn't cost thousands. As for lung cancer, dunno how well it'll work, but it certainly has healing properties for some skin cancers. I've never seen it sold as a "cure all", however. You might want to do a little more research before you spout the "evil weed" propaganda, which is completely false.
Which is just one good argument FOR legalization. I guarantee you that not one street corner dealer will check your kid's ID. On the other hand, the shops here in CO are doing an excellent job with that.
I saw a young man on tv with the same symptoms I have, smoke a low THC joint and the problem went away immediately.
It's amazing how effective and fast acting it is. I hope you find that it works for you. It may not, but from the sounds of it, it most likely will. Keep me in the loop, as I'd like to know how it works out for you.
Unlike alcohol, or perfectly legal prescription drugs.
I think you should do a little more reality based research and drop your magical thinking.
As per price, the oil needs a lot of dope for extraction and it costs thousands.
Trust me, it doesn't cost thousands. You have no idea, clearly. There's a difference between speaking from experience, and learning about it via propaganda. I promise you, from the depths of my cold, black libertarian heart, it does NOT cost thousands.
“Apricot pit extract was once sold as a cure for cancer - a contemptible practice, but hardly a good argument for banning apricots.”
Quite an odd analogy.
I understand the lack of logical thinking and rational thought on the part of the liberals, who pioneered the call for pot as panacea.
But it’s sad to see it in supposed conservatives.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.