Posted on 09/07/2019 4:37:12 AM PDT by MarvinStinson
Colorado's experiment with marijuana legalization has been an epic disaster, according to one doctor seeing its effects on the front lines.
Dr. Karen Randall, an emergency room physician certified in "cannabis science and medicine," said the legalization of marijuana has damaged, rather than helped, her home state. Randall, who spoke alongside former White House drug czar John Walters at the right-leaning Hudson Institute on Friday, said the public is being misled about the effects of recreational marijuana.
"I think the public needs to know that we are not okay," Randall said. "The grand experiment is not going so well. I don't think the public is hearing about this as they should be."
In 2012, Colorado and Washington become the first states in the nation to legalize marijuana for recreational use. The Centennial State is often pointed to as a success story with more than $1 billion in tax revenues generated since legalization. Eight more states followed in approving recreational use.
While the country has plowed ahead with marijuana legalization, less attention has been paid to potential downsides of the weed market. Randall said legalization has brought with it high-potency dope: The average joint in Colorado, she says, now contains 20 milligrams of THC, 10 times as much as the average joint at Woodstock. Concentrated products, sometimes called "shatter," can be up to 99 percent THC.
"My fellow physicians don't understand, they don't understand the potency that we're dealing with in Colorado at this point," Randall said. "The potency has dramatically increased."
Randall has seen a "marked increase in medical problems" at the emergency room she works at in Pueblo, Colo. She's experienced increased admissions for cannabis-related nausea and cardiac issues. Dr. Randall is likely not alone. One recent study found a three-fold increase in marijuana-related admissions in the aftermath of legalization.
At the same time many patients use legal marijuana heavily under the misguided impression that it has medical benefits, according to Dr. Randall. She cited one patient who used marijuana to treat his brain cancer—unsurprisingly, without success.
"Patients routinely use a gram a day, five grams a day," she said. "Why? It's okay, it's legal, it's healthy, the industry has said it will cure all kinds of diseases."
The Colorado state government is also working to perpetuate this belief. Randall cited the state's recent decision to add Autism Spectrum Disorder to the list of conditions eligible for treatment with medical marijuana, which specifically permits the drug's use by minors. The Autism Science Foundation says there is "limited research, and no evidence, on the potential short-term, long-term or neurodevelopmental risks and benefits of medical marijuana or its related compounds in ASD."
There is, however, evidence that marijuana adversely affects developing brains. The U.S. surgeon general warned that chronic teen marijuana use negatively affects IQ, school performance, and is even linked to psychotic disorders including schizophrenia.
Randall said the state government has not only ignored scientific findings about marijuana's effects to push sales, but failed in the regulatory responsibility it promised would accompany legalization. The surgeon general's report noted that marijuana use during pregnancy is linked to "adverse outcomes, including lower birth weight." A recent study of Colorado dispensaries found that 69 percent recommended women use marijuana anyway, with some actually discouraging mothers from telling their doctors about their drug use.
Randall pointed to other commonly cited effects of legalization, including a historic increase in homelessness and a growing population of chronic, marijuana-dependent users. All of these, she suggested, have gone unreported in spite of the toll they are taking on her community.
The glittering image of post-legalization Colorado—with billions in tax revenue and a happy populace—runs up against the uncomfortable reality of poor regulation and patients dangerously misguided about the risks and benefits of marijuana use.
"There are a whole host of us who are speaking out about it, and people need to start listening and looking to the future," Randall said. "This is going to be a crisis with potential long-term consequences that will far outpace the opioid crisis, with lasting damages and lasting injuries, as well as a significant cost to the public."
Marijuana turns people into insufferable bores. They drone oon and on about the wonders of their addiction and why you too should become a narced-out stoner.
“”The grand experiment is not going so well.”
Of course!
They would be better off in prison.
/s
“Legalizing an activity causes the number of people engaging in that activity to skyrocket.”
Not really.
Weed has been ubiquitous for at least 30 years. In every county in America.
Those who want to smoke it, will. And have.
There’s no widespread increase in use. Not in kids and not in adults.
“THC will push borderline psychotics into full blown psychosis (hallucinations, break with reality). In fact, anyone will hallucinate if they take a high enough dose of THC - it is just a matter of the individual’s tolerance.”
Absolutely true.
Those who are borderline psychotics should never smoke weed. Or, drink whiskey for that matter.
It's also worth noting from the link that "there have been no reported cases of death attributable to cannabis in the world medical literature (Blum, 1984; Nahas, 1984)."
At what point do we simply say “those self-harms, like the ones from alcohol, tobacco, and bacon double cheeseburgers, are not the proper objects of government force - the Land of the Free is not a nanny state"?
Almost everything anyone does "affects" someone else; the proper test for government force is the narrower "violation of rights" (cf. the Declaration of Independence), which pot sale and use are not.
I never said alcohol had any benefits. I said alcohol was damaging enough and when you put weed on top of alcohol it’s a disaster. Perhaps you misread my statement?
They are all too dangerous.
At least you're consistent. But aren't there a great many other things comparably dangerous? Cars? Firearms? Your position appears to be the opposite of limited-government conservatism.
Why not take alcohol off the pile by banning it?
“Patients routinely use a gram a day, five grams a day,” she said.”
When I use it a microdose (1/10 gram per day) suffices.
I think it's a thousand "ers".
CBD is verboten if you are on blood thinners, especially warfarin, and Xarelto. It magnifies their effects, meaning uncontrolled bleeding
“If I dug deeper what do you think the odds she believes that medical concerns compel the banning of firearms? 90%? Higher?”
Since she is a conservative (”spoke...at the right-leaning Hudson Institute”), I’d guess 10% or less.
I think legalizing pot is stupid. I’m a conservative who carries. I don’t see any conflict.
“There doesn’t seem to be any such thing as board certification in “cannabis science and medicine”.”
Maybe not an AMA board certification, but:
“This appears to be driven by pretend-Christians in open defiance of the very first commands given by God to mankind in Genesis 1:26-28.”
“Then God said, “Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you; 30 and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to every thing that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food”; and it was so.”
You live in the Garden of Eden? Or is that only when you are stoned? Tumbleweeds have seeds. Go eat.
An issue on which her medical credentials have no bearing. This was not a medical statement but simple axe-grinding. Shame on her.
(And by the by, it's probable that the increase was due to pot-seeking relocation from other states, rather than pot causing homelessness.)
Your response if stupid. Of course actions have consequences, some actions are known to have worse or higher probability of bad outcomes. Painting my window frames is not likely to harm anyone. smoking drugs that alter ones mind state is however and doing other dangerous things ( driving, painting your window frames) increases risk to others. If you can’t find waldo in this equation, you may not ought be on your own.
But hey, we all set our own standards on FR...
John "Pot is 30 times stronger" Walters? The irony is priceless.
Almost everything anyone does "affects" someone else; the proper test for government force is the narrower "violation of rights" (cf. the Declaration of Independence), which pot sale and use are not.
some actions are known to have worse or higher probability of bad outcomes.
Already a narrower standard than your previous "affects".
Painting my window frames is not likely to harm anyone. smoking drugs that alter ones mind state is however and doing other dangerous things ( driving, painting your window frames) increases risk to others.
The danger to others of the pot+driving combo is no more an argument for banning pot than it is for banning cars. And alcohol+driving is equally dangerous - do you therefore support banning that drug? I don't; history tells me that this cure was worse than the disease.
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.