Monday, November 23, 2009
Marijuana. It’s a small word that generates a large reaction (for better or for worse). People are polarized on the topic. Yes, there is a definite social stigma surrounding this infamous, leafy plant. Consequently, the potential for cannabis-based drugs has been greatly hindered by legal and political considerations - obstacles that researchers and pharmaceutical companies do not normally find themselves battling. After all, it’s not everyday that research and development teams are looking to create novel drugs from a Schedule I substance – a substance that by definition is not considered to have a legitimate medical use. However, with the recent recommendation by the American Medical Association (AMA) that marijuana’s Schedule I drug classification be reconsidered in order to facilitate research and development of cannabinoid-based medications, could this be the dawn of a new era?
I believe that the AMA’s recommendation is right on the mark. From the limited number of clinical trials conducted on smoked cannabis, the description conferred by a Schedule I classification – namely, that there is no legitimate medical use – no longer appears to apply. According to the executive summary of the Council on Science and Public Health’s (CSAPH) report accompanying the new recommendation, trials have suggested that smoked cannabis can reduce neuropathic pain, improve caloric intake and appetite in patients with reduced muscle mass, and possibly reduce pain and improve spasticity in patients with multiple sclerosis. Thus, it seems plausible that cannabis-based medicines could be developed. The re-classification of marijuana from its current Schedule I status is a necessary step to take if we hope to further explore and take advantage of the ameliorating properties of cannabis.
The question then becomes, should pharmaceutical companies dedicate some of their research and development budgets to cannabis-based drugs? From a scientific perspective, the answer is a resounding yes. Scientists steer their investigations based on preliminary experiments and promising results, and as articulated in the CSAPH report, preliminary trials suggest a variety of medicinal uses for cannabis. Furthermore, assuming that there are legitimate medicinal applications for cannabis, the development of cannabis-based medicines (in the form of pills, for example) would work to neutralize much of the stigma associated with medicinal marijuana (only 13 states even allow the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes). Cannabis-based drugs, a few steps removed from the plant itself, would allow patients access to the therapeutic effects of cannabis, while distancing the treatment from the contentious issue of smoked marijuana. This is, of course, in addition to the obvious advantage that an efficacious cannabis-based pill or other medication medium is much safer than toxic, unrefined smoke.
So what is the greatest obstacle threatening to hinder the development of cannabis-based drugs? Ironically, it is the same thing that I just mentioned above: medicinal marijuana. While the current guidelines regarding medicinal marijuana leave much to be desired – and in fact invite the development of safer, easier-to-regulate cannabis-based treatments – the fact of the matter is, pharmaceutical companies are looking to make a profit. Nobody is going to invest the funds necessary to get a drug on the market unless there is a foreseeable fortune to be made on that product. Drug companies are in the business of “blockbusters,” after all. As long as the raw marijuana plant is legal in some states for medicinal purposes, there really isn’t a market for other cannabis-based treatments. (At least, not the financially-fruitful market for which drug companies are always on the lookout.) A consequence of the legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes is the creation of numerous, often poorly-regulated marijuana shops and boutiques (just look at the 800+ dispensaries in California). Given the diversity of outlets from which to purchase the plant, as well as the wide variety of plant strains and price range for medicinal marijuana, patients in need could no doubt find a cheaper alternative to expensive pills. Thus, if cannabis-based drugs are ever to be developed, not only does the federal classification of marijuana need to be changed, the availability of the raw plant for medicinal purposes needs to be restricted. It’s a game of supply and demand – and that’s a game that pharmaceutical companies are looking to win.
11/23/2009
It doesn't have to be either/or. You can have "both/and". There will always be a need for a medical market.
11/23/2009
It's absurd to suggest keeping marijuana "restricted" in order to promote higher profits for pharmaceutical companies. We're putting ppeople _in jail_ for using a plant, basically an herbal remedy, andd you're suggesting we continue doing that in order to ensure higher profits for a limited number of corporations? Licensing, taxing, and regulating marijuana will put the criminal drug dealers out of business and protect our children. Regulate the marijuana business, medical or otherwise. While we’re at it, let’s implement a personal cultivation permit. Limit the number of plants, and put a fee on it to cover administrative costs, something like a fishing license, with maybe a little extra for education or fixing the roads. How about $100 per year for a permit to cultivate a dozen plants? It's a win-win
11/24/2009
Why did the Shrub admin. take out a patent on cannabinoids? Why do human beings have cannabinoid receptors in our brains? How do you like living in a plutocracy? How often do you think,for yourselves?
11/24/2009
This is exactly why some suspect the AMA had ulterior motives when it moved for reclassification: "While we rejoice that the AMA reversed its position and urged the rescheduling of cannabis, keep your mind focused on why they might have done that. Is it the pure altruism of realizing a mistake and returning to a rational scientific approach to cannabis moderated by compassion for suffering people and the benefit herbal cannabis would provide? Or is it the realization that the people are crusading for legal marijuana and succeeding, and if herbal cannabis becomes truly legal their friends in the pharmaceutical industry lose all the profits off of cannabinoid pills, sprays, and inhalers to the ultimate “less expensive generic”?" http://stash.norml.org/mercks-4-56-billion-anti-cholesterol-drugs-no-better-than-cheap-b-vitamin
11/24/2009
This is ALL about money. First the caretaker law was poorly written and also provides a huge threat to drug companies who will do ANYTHING to stop pot from being legal i.e. develop yet another failed pill. We've been thru that and we've also studies pot for a very long time. No more grants for studies ought to be granted. In short by passing the caretaker law the gov't has pissed in the pool and there is not way of taking it back politically. So they ought to just legalize it and tax the retail end of it and make tons of 'free' money, the sick get better w/out narcotics (pot is NOT a narcotic by definition in the real world) and everyone wins. The phony shops will disappear as big money rolls in which it already has. And keep in mind that the one's with the money are the dealers that already have growing capabilities and good product and most important to politicians lots of cash. Frankly no one really cares unless there is a survey taken. If no survey exists then only a few loud mouths make noise. But the majority of the country has had it with the huge waste of money to house and prosecute and ruin the lives of millions over smoking some pot. Big deal. Ask any cop they like to arrest pot smokers they don't give them any trouble at all plus they drive slow.
11/24/2009
It is way past time to re-legalize. There is not one logical argument to support the criminalization of this plant.
11/25/2009
Dr.Donald Tashkin in 2005 at UCLA concluded that people who smoke marijuana are less likely to get cancer than people who do not smoke anything at all. I do not call that toxic.
11/30/2009
Hello This is a good post.It is really good to know about AMA’s recommendation about research.You have very well written about pharmaceutical companies.Thank you very much for sharing all this information with us. thé
12/14/2009
i am currently a medical marijuana patient in colorado. we are really having a hard time out here between getting the medicine and the cost. On top of that the law makers out here want to make it even harder to obtain usable medicine. I believe that it would benefit everyone if the goverment could regulate medical marijuana in a fair and just way for all but everyone knows thats just not how americans handle things :(
NOTICE: As such, the comments on this blog were, are, and will always be solely the opinions of the individuals leaving them. In no way does Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News, GEN Publishing, Inc., or Mary Ann Liebert ,Inc. endorse, condone, agree with, sponsor, etc. these comments.
ADVERTISEMENT
INTERVIEW:
NEW PROGNOSTIC GENETIC TEST FOR ADOLESCENT SCOLIOSIS - Interview with Dr. Baron Lonner, director of Scoliosis and Spine Associates
...MORE
NewsArticles BlogsADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to RSS
HOME
Hot Topics
All Topics
Archived
Post a Topic
RSS
COMMENT
Email
Print
Back
Share
Listen
Save