AMA Decides Against Endorsing Medical Marijuana

AMA Decides Against Endorsing Medical Marijuana

NewsMax.com Wires
Wednesday, June 20, 2001

CHICAGO - American Medical Association's House of Delegates Tuesday rejected a committee report that would have urged the organization to consider of compassionate use of medical marijuana for cancer patients and others.

Council on Scientific Affairs (CSA) had inserted the concept of compassionate use of medical marijuana into its recommendations, but the committee on public health rejected those changes. Without debate, the House of Delegates approved the report without the mention of compassionate use.

Dr. Michael Williams, a Baltimore neurologist and chairman of CSA, told United Press International, "Our council proposed compassionate use, but the committee didn't find there was enough evidence to support it in their recommendations."

But, he said, the debate over medical marijuana use is far from over. "We will continue to monitor the area. Once clinical research is done. Then we can more to compassionate use."

"There just is no scientific evidence to establish the effectiveness of marijuana," said Dr. Herman Abromowitz, a family physician in Dayton, Ohio, and a member of AMA's Board of Trustees.

But the house acceptance of the modified CSA report did change AMA policy on marijuana to some extent, said Dr. Scott Deitchman, an occupational medicine specialist in Duluth, Ga., and a member of CSA.

Previous AMA policy had opposed compassionate use of marijuana in a small federally run trial. The trial showed little success, said Deitchman.

"What we did," said Williams, "is that the AMA went from opposition to marijuana for compassionate use to a position of silence."

New policy urges that doctor-patient discussion of marijuana should not be criminal.

Also Tuesday, the AMA delegates rejected another controversial proposal, refusing to endorse, or even mention, a moratorium on executions or the death penalty. Although AMA policy guidelines state that participation by doctors in state-sanctioned executions is unethical, the organization has taken no position regarding the death penalty itself.

"This is an emotional, nonmedical, political issue," said Dr. Joseph Snyder, an ophthalmologist from Potomac, Md., "and the issue should not be a matter for the house."

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
Health Issues
A product that might interest you:
Get your site on ALL the top search engines INSTANTLY!