Posted on 08/21/2002 11:54:00 AM PDT by aculeus
Scientists have developed a cannabis-based medicine which relieves chronic pain without any of the "high" normally associated with the drug.
They believe the discovery could pave the way for cannabis-based medication to become available by prescription within two years.
Much of the controversy surrounding the medicinal use of cannabis has centred on fears that it would be used solely for its mood-altering effects.
However, scientists at the University of Massachusetts in the United States say their discovery should help authorities to overcome these fears.
Dr Sumner Burstein and colleagues say early trials of the medication in animals and healthy patients have been promising.
The medication, called ajulemic acid or CT3, has been manufactured in laboratories.
It maximises the medicinal effects of tertrahydrocannabinol - the key ingredient of cannabis - without any of the mind-altering effects.
'More effective'
In animal tests, this compound was found to be between 10 to 50 times more effective at reducing pain than tetrahydrocannabinol.
Those tests showed that ajulemic acid was very effective at preventing the joint damage associated with arthritis and relieving the muscle stiffness associated with multiple sclerosis.
The compound was tested last year in 15 healthy volunteers in France. That study reported no side effects or mood changes in those participants.
A further trial on 21 patients with chronic severe pain is currently underway in Germany.
Dr Bernstein said the results of each study had been promising.
"The indications so far are that it is safe and effective," he said.
Dr Bernstein added that the compound could replace a wide variety of current medicines used to fight pain.
"We believe that [the compound] will replace aspirin and similar drugs in most applications primarily because of a lack of toxic side effects."
Dr Bernstein acknowledged that some patients may wish to experience the mood-altering effects of cannabis by taking this compound.
But speaking at the national meeting of the American Chemical Society in Boston, he added: "The medical community wants efficacy without this effect."
A spokeswoman for the UK's Medicinal Cannabis Research Foundation said: "We believe it would be premature to comment on the merits of ajulemic acid before more rigorous testing in patients has been carried out, but look forward to seeing the results after further study."
Yup, indeed. Chronic pain sucks.
Sorry to burst your bubble dear, but I have been on my job for 16 years and am the top administrative person in my geographic area, I am very well respected by all my peers, they think I am "Wonder Woman". I have raised children that were not my own as well as my own as a single mother, long story, but they never even knew I smoked. I currently own my own property and home, independent of my hubby, and just enrolled in college at the age of 43. I have no health problems and have only had one accident in 30 years, when someone pulled behind me on purpose in a parking lot when I was already halfway out of the parking space so they could use the insurance money to put a down payment on a new car.
I don't use drugs on the job, I don't drink on the job, I don't drive drunk or stoned (too paranoid, LOL) it is merely the way I relax in the evening after a stressful day at work. But considering I am bipolar, I am sure you would say I was self-medicating...WRONG. I can have 2-3 beers after I get home at night and smoke one...I don't have to go on the hard drugs they offer that I will get addicted to, been there, done that...never again, sorry I won't live my life as a zombie. Taking me off of my small amount of beer and smoke due to your perception of what drug abuse is and recommending hard drugs that specifically warn me not to drive or operate heavy machinery to combat my "problem" as the psychiatrists call it ..to be honest, is like treating a freckle with chemo.
Sorry, but like I told Don Joe, I am honest to a fault, your argument has no basis in fact when it comes to my situation, quit painting with such a wide brush, I know many others like myself whose lives could prove you wrong.
Geez...and you think WE are killing brain cells, LOL!
False. I advocate a change in the law to respect freedom; I do not advocate the use of drugs, legal or illegal.
and putting the public at large in danger from the drug use!!!!
Alcohol is the only danger to the public. From the US Department of Justice's National Criminal Justice Reference Service (publication NCJ 145534): "Of all psychoactive substances, alcohol is the only one whose consumption has been shown to commonly increase aggression. [...] Marijuana and opiates temporarily inhibit violent behavior [...] There is no evidence to support the claim that snorting or injecting cocaine stimulates violent behavior. [...] Anecdotal reports notwithstanding, no research evidence supports the notion that becoming high on hallucinogens, amphetamines, or PCP stimulates violent behavior in any systematic manner."
Lawsuits caused by drug users.
What lawsuits do drug users cause?
Criminality of drug users.
SOME drug users, like some alcohol users, are criminals; that does not justify laws against ALL drug users.
Violent crimes of drug users.
SOME drug users, like some alcohol users, are criminals; that does not justify laws against ALL drug users. And remember, "Of all psychoactive substances, alcohol is the only one whose consumption has been shown to commonly increase aggression."
Poor health of drug users.
Why is their health any of your business?
And since tobacco is also bad for the health, do you advocate a ban on tobacco?
it is illegal to basically be drunk in public,
And it should be illegal to be stoned in public, too. But since it's legal to buy and sell alcohol and be drunk in private, why shouldn't it be legal to buy and sell drugs and be stoned in private?
at work
False. It will usually get you fired, but it is not illegal.
or anywhere around children.
False. This is not illegal.
I agree that there are problems with the ones we already have. My question is why are they legal and the others not? IMO, either all should be legal or all illegal. To be otherwise is hypocritical.
Provide evidence that anyone has stated that children will "never" get legalized pot.
Children get pot now---and according to a recent study, get it more easily than they get the legal drugs tobacco and alcohol. The question is whether they would get it more or less easily if it were legal. It is likely that it would be less easy, for the simple reason that if pot were legal for adults, sellers of pot would have a new incentive to not sell to children: the potential loss of a legal adult market.
Where in the Constitution is your specific right to possess or eat a peanut butter and jelly sandwich? Better put down that fluffernutter, because the government didn't tell you specifically that you can have it.
Been setting any urination records lately?
Lots of people seem to have problems handling opiates, but personally, I could never understand people's fascination with being groggy and constipated.
Hint: they never will. This is a feint-and-jab battle we've been fighting for years on FR. A CA Guy is just the latest DEA lover of the pack, and Destructor is his cheerleader. Even Kevin Curry and Dane have moved onto greener pastures.
I'm one of the only people I know who actually has a bachelor of science degree in political science. I get my panties in a bunch when a "conservative" poli sci major writes shite like what Malcolm wrote . . . Jesus, Mary, and Joseph are people blinded by ideology.
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.