Marijuana and Psychiatry

[Dentite]

I was wondering what the opinion on this would be. In Canada, the government has recently allowed it to be readily available for those suffering from extreme pain caused by either cancer or AIDS.
Perhaps there is some psychiatric benefits as well. Many people self-medicate with this drug to relieve common pathologies such as anxiety. And why not? Nothing relieves stress better then a few bong hits. I could see it also being useful for relieving depression, OCD, and parkisons symptoms.
Considering people are going to use it anyways, would it not make sense to have it controlled by psychiatrists and available for prescription? That way distribution could be controlled by an MD, not a 'black-market doctor', and eliminate criminal records. This would be effective and would probably be safer then some of the drugs that are currently out on the market.
I consider this might be rejected for a couple of reasons. 1) Defeciencies in mental health are often associated with weak moral character as opposed to how physical health is treated. Opponents would argue people would abuse it. 2) Pharmaceutical companies would lose huge market shares.

Of course, it still might work in Canada where even doctors probably get high.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Nutmeg]

Originally posted by Dentite

Of course, it still might work in Canada where even doctors probably get high.

Or California

 

[Thewonderer]

Originally posted by Dentite
Perhaps there is some psychiatric benefits as well. Many people self-medicate with this drug to relieve common pathologies such as anxiety. And why not? Nothing relieves stress better then a few bong hits. I could see it also being useful for relieving depression, OCD, and parkisons symptoms.

Maybe because there are already drugs out there that can relieve anxiety and depression and those are shown to be efficacious in better controlled trials than for marijuna???

 

[rxg16]

Maybe because there are already drugs out there that can relieve anxiety and depression and those are shown to be efficacious in better controlled trials than for marijuna???

Yeah but you can't use a BONG for buspar or zoloft!

 

[Dentite]

The wonderer said:

Maybe because there are already drugs out there that can relieve anxiety and depression and those are shown to be efficacious in better controlled trials than for marijuna???



Well, the only reason that these trials are better controlled is that they would have an easier time passing ethical clearance than would marijuana studies on human subjects. Or are you saying marijuana was used in these studies? Could you direct me to some of these studies? If so then I refute your argument no further.

One final caveat. These journals are often promoted by drug companies and written by ghostwriters. Research it yourself. Many of the names used are just pseudonyms. The result is a very narrow range of research hypothesis with the result that much of published work becomes junk science.

Case and point. A professor of psychiatry at U of T lossed his job because he publically spoke out against the dangers of fenfluramine. This angered the pharmaceutical companies and they restricted their funding. The result was that the professor lost his job. He found another one but this demonstrates the nature of the beast.

 

[RaiderNation]

Nice comment nutmeg. Just remember some "high" doctor will be paying your salary someday if your lucky.

 

[Olanzapine]

The idea that marijuana needs to be legalized is ******ed. The active ingredient in marijuana is already available in prescription, but hardly anyone ever prescribes it because it doesn't give people the same "high" that marijuana gives even though it has the same analgesic potential. Medicine is not meant to give people high's; analgesics like neurontin and NSAIDS are such effective pain relievers because they don't rely on making their user euphoric to relieve pain. Euphoria is an unfortunate side effect of narcotics, because if euphoria and mental impairment weren't associated with opiates, they could be used much more regularly to treat everyday pain. The idea that psychiatric drugs are supposed to give users a high doesn't make any sense either, as every high is inevitably associated with a low and giving someone an addiction never helped anyone.

 

[Darth Vader]

Interesting that you would consider euphoria a side effect of opiates seeing as how it's also their mechanism of action. I guess that it makes biological sense that by flooding our pleasure receptors we would decrease our pain, but even then, it's only masking the pain. I agree that analgesics such as NSAIDS are better not only because they have less abuse potential, but also because their mechanism of decreasing the inflammation makes more sense in terms of pain control.

 

[J.opt]

Where does the marijuana being prescribed come from? From government regulated farms in the U.S.? From some sort of labs?

 

[bosky]

It is my understanding that there is a farm in Mississipi (in one of their college towns) where Marijuana is purposefully grown for government use.

 

[doc05]

Originally posted by Darth Vader
Interesting that you would consider euphoria a side effect of opiates seeing as how it's also their mechanism of action. I guess that it makes biological sense that by flooding our pleasure receptors we would decrease our pain, but even then, it's only masking the pain. I agree that analgesics such as NSAIDS are better not only because they have less abuse potential, but also because their mechanism of decreasing the inflammation makes more sense in terms of pain control.

except that there's plenty of pain not associated with inflammation, and that NSAIDs don't really work for severe cases. But that's why we have pain management specialists.