Opinion: Canadian Medical Association shouldn't give cannabis cold shoulder

gb123

Well-Known Member
What role does weed have in medicine? According to the CMA, it's minimal. Ted S. Warren / AP

The Canadian Medical Association (CMA) recently announced that it supports the elimination of the current medical cannabis system once federal legalization is implemented in October. The rationale is “the lack of evidence, the lack of scientific studies showing it actually works, the lack of knowledge around dosing and interactions with other medications.”

The CMA’s reservation with cannabis as a safe and effective therapeutic option mirrors concerns within the medical community. Cannabis is known to be cognitively impairing, and scientific research on its chronic use is limited. It is also well established that cannabis may have deleterious effects in the neurologic development of the central nervous system, which does not fully mature until 25 years of age. This uncertainty, combined with an aggressive timeline for legalized consumption, has handcuffed health care providers, who possess varying degrees of comfort with prescribing medicinal marijuana.

However, with its position, the CMA has not only demonstrated its lack of willingness to learn about this growing field, it has abandoned physicians who will invariably field more inquiries about cannabis from patients. This is especially problematic given the growing scope of cannabis as a therapeutic option in conditions including epilepsy and spasticity. Moreover, in the context of a national opioid crisis, cannabis is growing as an alternative for chronic pain patients, and is currently recommended as a third-line medication according to the national pain guidelines.

Even more concerning is the emerging pattern among medical associations to be slow to evolve with the changing times. For example, many were initially resistant to embrace social media and online dialogue, which allowed for the unfortunate proliferation of medical misinformation. Nowhere is this more exemplified than with the anti-vaccine movement , which was given space to grow due to the void in evidence-based contributions from the scientific community.

This lack of checks-and-balances is poised to repeat itself as a result of the reticence from Canada’s largest physician body. By removing itself from the conversation, physicians under the guidance of the CMA run the risk of letting the cannabis narrative be controlled by actors looking to maximize profit ahead of patient benefit.

The CMA recently came under fire for its sale of one of its crown-jewel assets, MD Management, to the tune of $2.5 Billion. CMA members, who do not collect any of the proceeds, criticized the organization for not consulting them before closing the deal. This eye-watering windfall is expected to further the institution’s strategic vision, which includes improving physician wellness. This is an important issue, and the CMA should use a portion of the MD Management revenue to create a free, continuing medical education program for physicians to learn about evidence-based research for new interventions including cannabis.

The Cannabis Act will represent the Trudeau government’s signature legislative victory during its first term, despite expressed concerns from the medical community. Ultimately, physicians need to be prepared for the new reality of legalization, and the CMA would be wise to support its colleagues to tackle this issue head-on.
 

WHATFG

Well-Known Member
The CMA’s reservation with cannabis as a safe and effective therapeutic option mirrors concerns within the medical community. Cannabis is known to be cognitively impairing, and scientific research on its chronic use is limited. It is also well established that cannabis may have deleterious effects in the neurologic development of the central nervous system, which does not fully mature until 25 years of age. This uncertainty, combined with an aggressive timeline for legalized consumption, has handcuffed health care providers, who possess varying degrees of comfort with prescribing medicinal marijuana.
Ya gotta love when the CMA starts spouting...
...well guess what? Opiates are known to be cognitively impairing and scientific research on chronic use is rampant. It is well established that opiates have deleterious effects on the neurological functioning, nevermind development, of the CNS. The CMAs inability to embrace Cannabis as an alternative to the over prescription of opiates, has handcuffed healthcare providers into a "not enough data" excuse.
This lack of checks-and-balances is poised to repeat itself as a result of the reticence from Canada’s largest physician body. By removing itself from the conversation, physicians under the guidance of the CMA run the risk of letting the cannabis narrative be controlled by
Bravo!
 

VIANARCHRIS

Well-Known Member
Unless there is a proven risk that the patients' preferred medicine is harmful to their health, a doctor should be obligated to respect the will of the patient. A doctor is there to diagnose and give recommendations, the decision over treatment is fully up to the patient. Any doctor who refuses to listen to the patient should have their license to practice revoked.
 

BarryBwana

Well-Known Member
So how did an controlled substance become valid for medicinal use if there's a "lack of evidence" it provides medical benefits?
 

bigmanc

Well-Known Member
Unless there is a proven risk that the patients' preferred medicine is harmful to their health, a doctor should be obligated to respect the will of the patient. A doctor is there to diagnose and give recommendations, the decision over treatment is fully up to the patient. Any doctor who refuses to listen to the patient should have their license to practice revoked.
Isn’t the feeling you get from Drs like there the boss? Funny how that works eh
 

WHATFG

Well-Known Member
So how did an controlled substance become valid for medicinal use if there's a "lack of evidence" it provides medical benefits?
...but it's not valid for medicinal use...HC is pretty clear about that...the government,however, figured out that they can make a lot of money off of the legalization of cannabis...so how does a controlled substance become valid for recreational use if all the studies referenced only have negative outcomes with regard to anything cannabis?....I mean has anyone heard the government ever say we have a study here that states cannabis __________ (fill in the blank) is good for you?.......I don't think so.
 

VIANARCHRIS

Well-Known Member
Isn’t the feeling you get from Drs like there the boss? Funny how that works eh
Yet they act like retarded 10 year old's when you call them out on it. One of the most enjoyable times in my life came from watching my asshole doctor stutter and stammer as he practically begged for another chance when I fired him for being a douche. I have chronic pain from end-stage OA in my knee and hip, but their solution was to feed me anti-depressants and pain pills and put me on a 12 year wait for replacement surgery. My argument was simple: let me replace 6 pills/day with one plant. He refused and ridiculed me. It felt good to return the favour.
I opted out of BC healthcare 6 years ago and am exercising my right to autonomy of my personal health. I have zero trust, confidence or respect for anyone in the medical profession.
 
Top