Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

More Patients at ERs Citing Pot Use
Las Vegas Sun ^ | 23 August 2002

Posted on 08/24/2002 1:02:56 AM PDT by JediGirl

CARSON CITY -- A federal study that shows drug-related emergency room visits are on the rise takes aim at marijuana use.

The survey, by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, said drug-related emergency room visits rose 6 percent in 2001 over the previous year, to 638,484.

The number of times marijuana was mentioned as a drug patients used rose 15 percent, the study said, greater than the increase in cocaine use, which rose 10 percent, and heroin and methamphetamine, which were unchanged.

The study, which surveys 458 hospital emergency rooms nationwide, comes as Nevada and Arizona consider ballot questions that would legalize or decriminalize marijuana.

"Marijuana-related medical emergencies are increasing at an alarming rate, exceeding even those for heroin," White House Drug Czar John Walters said in a prepared statement. "This report helps dispel the pervasive myth that marijuana is harmless.

"In reality, marijuana is a dangerous drug, and adults and youth alike should be aware of the serious consequences that can come from smoking it."

Billy Rogers, leader of the campaign to pass Nevada's ballot question, which would legalize possession of up to three ounces of marijuana, disputed the conclusions.

"They're not talking about marijuana emergencies," Rogers said. "Nobody has died from an overdose of marijuana."

When patients go to an emergency room, they are asked what, if any, drugs they have taken. The federal Drug Abuse Warning Network counts the mentions of illegal drugs and misused prescription drugs reported by patients, and those are compiled into the twice-a-year study. Often patients said they had taken more than one drug.

Alcohol in combination with other drugs was the most frequently mentioned nationwide, at 34 percent, with cocaine at 30 percent, marijuana at 17 percent and heroin, 15 percent.

Marijuana had been used in combination with other drugs 76 percent of the time it was mentioned; 24 percent of the time, it was the sole drug used.

The increase in marijuana use reflected in emergency room visits drew federal concern. Between 1994 and 2001, mentions of marijuana per 100,000 emergency room patients rose 151 percent, compared with 34 percent for heroin and 22 percent for cocaine.

The rate for patients age 12 to 17, although stable from 2000 to 2001, increased 23 percent from 1999 to 2001, the report said.

"The clear message of the DAWN survey is that in already crowded emergency rooms, increasingly, one of the reasons people are showing up is marijuana use," said Mark Weber, spokesman for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

"It's taking resources from other parts of the health care sector. If you have 10 people in a room, how do you prioritize?"

The study gave separate reports for 21 cities, but Las Vegas was not among them. Neither the state nor county health division had statistics for Nevada or Las Vegas on those treated in emergency rooms with marijuana problems, and University Medical Center does not track drug use by type of drug, a spokesman said.

Local paramedics said they have noticed an increase in drug use overall in Las Vegas, but not in marijuana, said Tammy Bame, spokeswoman for American Medical Response.

"No one seems to feel there is an increase," Bame said. "There's nothing that really stands out."

AMR paramedic Shannon Cavey said Thursday the top drugs she sees in the Las Vegas area are crystal meth, GHB and Ecstasy, drugs not frequently used with marijuana.

"We see a lot more of those than people just getting high ( on marijuana )," Cavey said.

Alcohol, another depressant, is the drug most commonly associated with marijuana use, she said.

In fact, pot is rarely a topic during her shifts, she said.

"I don't hear about it much in the field," Cavey said.

An informal poll at Valley Hospital showed a similar result. Emergency room personnel have not noticed any increase in marijuana-related cases, spokeswoman Gretchen Pappas said.

"We haven't seen anything like that," Pappas said.

Weber, of SAMHSA, agreed that in Western cities use of club drugs and methamphetamine has been more prevalent since the early 1990s. But across the country, he said, more young people are in drug treatment for marijuana dependence that all other illegal drugs combined.

As with any depressant, marijuana can be dangerous when taken with other depressants, Cavey said. However, a marijuana-only overdose is rare, said Cavey, who has been a paramedic for 10 years.

"I have never even seen anyone overdose on marijuana," Cavey said. "It's always been mixed with something else."

Rogers said there is going to be a lot of smoke blown in this election campaign and his job is to cut through it to get the facts.

Besides allowing the possession of up to three ounces of marijuana by adults, the constitutional amendment would allow the state Legislature to set up "pot shops" to distribute marijuana.

It would still be illegal for minors to possess the drug.

"Nevadans are smart enough to know that heroin and cocaine are dangerous and marijuana is less dangerous," Rogers said.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: drugs; marijuana; nevada
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 941-960961-980981-1,0001,001-1,014 next last
To: Roscoe
Case law and precedent are part of the legal process.

But not, by any sane definition, part of "the legislative history of the United States."

981 posted on 09/03/2002 2:19:40 PM PDT by MrLeRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 978 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
Gibbons v Ogden has already proved to be non-responsive to the issues at hand. Your entire case is wholly dependent on FDR's New Deal interpretation of the Commerce Clause.
982 posted on 09/03/2002 2:19:52 PM PDT by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 980 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
I don't see anything in there about prohibitions being "unconstitutional." Was that an argument made to the USSC?

If not, so much the worse for your notion that the United States v. Cannabis Cultivators Club ruling supports your Constitutional position.

983 posted on 09/03/2002 2:21:33 PM PDT by MrLeRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 973 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
Gibbons v Ogden has already proved to be non-responsive to the issues at hand.

Already covered:

(B) controlled substances distributed locally usually have been transported in interstate commerce immediately before their distribution, and

(C) controlled substances possessed commonly flow through interstate commerce immediately prior to such possession.

(4) Local distribution and possession of controlled substances contribute to swelling the interstate traffic in such substances.

(5) Controlled substances manufactured and distributed intrastate cannot be differentiated from controlled substances manufactured and distributed interstate. Thus, it is not feasible to distinguish, in terms of controls, between controlled substances manufactured and distributed interstate and controlled substances manufactured and distributed intrastate.

(6) Federal control of the intrastate incidents of the traffic in controlled substances is essential to the effective control of the interstate incidents of such traffic.

984 posted on 09/03/2002 2:23:20 PM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 982 | View Replies]

To: MrLeRoy
[Case law and precedent are part of the legal process.]

But not, by any sane definition, part of "the legislative history of the United States."

Non sequitur.

985 posted on 09/03/2002 2:24:46 PM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 981 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
The non sequitur was yours in suggesting that what was part of "the legal process" was necessarily part of "the legislative history of the United States."


986 posted on 09/03/2002 2:27:22 PM PDT by MrLeRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 985 | View Replies]

To: MrLeRoy
The non sequitur was yours

False.

987 posted on 09/03/2002 2:33:34 PM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 986 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
Well, Roscoe, I've had another enjoyable day beating you like a rented mule. But I'm headed home now; see flog you tomorrow!
988 posted on 09/03/2002 2:35:18 PM PDT by MrLeRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 987 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
Legislative "findings" are not law. Where is the USSC determination that the Commerce Clause allows federal regulation of intrastate commerce, prior to 1937?
989 posted on 09/03/2002 2:36:03 PM PDT by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 984 | View Replies]

To: MrLeRoy
Pipe dream.
990 posted on 09/03/2002 2:36:19 PM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 988 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
federal regulation of intrastate commerce

The illicit drug trade crosses state lines.

991 posted on 09/03/2002 2:41:34 PM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 989 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
What doesn't? We've been there and done that, and you still don't have an explaination. All you've done is run in circles trying to avoid acknowledging that your position and philosophy assumes FDR's New Deal interpretation of the Commerce Clause to be correct, and is completely unsupportable without it.
992 posted on 09/03/2002 2:53:43 PM PDT by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 991 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
Already been over this, Roscoe. Did you go to law school? If so, how'd you ever make it past con law?

993 posted on 09/03/2002 4:45:18 PM PDT by Hemingway's Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 980 | View Replies]

To: MrLeRoy
Actually, Roscoe's arguments are a nice foreshadowing of the kind of arguments gun grabbers are going to put up once the USSC grants cert to a case applying Ashcroft's "new" individual right status to federal gun laws.
994 posted on 09/03/2002 4:49:00 PM PDT by Hemingway's Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 988 | View Replies]

To: Hemingway's Ghost
Already been over this, Roscoe.

BTW, thanks!

995 posted on 09/03/2002 6:55:14 PM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 993 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
BTW, thanks!

For what, exactly?

996 posted on 09/04/2002 5:24:39 AM PDT by Hemingway's Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 995 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
The illicit drug trade crosses state lines.

SOME illicit drugs cross state lines; the ones that do not are not part of interstate commerce and thus are beyond the Congress' Constitutional authority.

997 posted on 09/04/2002 11:39:46 AM PDT by MrLeRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 991 | View Replies]

To: MrLeRoy
SOME illicit drugs cross state lines; the ones that do not are not part of interstate commerce and thus are beyond the Congress' Constitutional authority.

Nonsense.

"Controlled substances manufactured and distributed intrastate cannot be differentiated from controlled substances manufactured and distributed interstate. Thus, it is not feasible to distinguish, in terms of controls, between controlled substances manufactured and distributed interstate and controlled substances manufactured and distributed intrastate."

998 posted on 09/04/2002 12:47:56 PM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 997 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
"Controlled substances manufactured and distributed intrastate cannot be differentiated from controlled substances manufactured and distributed interstate. Thus, it is not feasible to distinguish, in terms of controls, between controlled substances manufactured and distributed interstate and controlled substances manufactured and distributed intrastate."

So what? If it's not "feasible" for the feds to do X without exceeding their Constitutional authority, they must not do X.

999 posted on 09/04/2002 2:03:11 PM PDT by MrLeRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 998 | View Replies]

To: MrLeRoy
exceeding their Constitutional authority

It doesn't.

1,000 posted on 09/04/2002 2:05:40 PM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 999 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 941-960961-980981-1,0001,001-1,014 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson