cannabis health - [february edition 2005]

8/9/2019 Cannabis Health - [February Edition 2005]

1/36


2/36


3/36


4/36

4 Cannabis Health

Editorial...............................................................6

Letters .................................................................6

The Economic Future of Cannabis in Canada ...............................................9

Marijuana Medica l Acces s Regu lations .........................................................11

Deba ting Decrimina lization ............................................................................13

Canadian AIDS Society Response to MMAR................................................15

BC Compassion Club Response to MMAR Amendments...........................16

Meduser Group Response to Health Canada................................................19

How To Change the World ..............................................................................20

Howa rd J. Wo oldr id ge f rom L.E.A.P. r i des aga in

Dennis Lillico Fights for his Hum an Rights ..................................................22

Dennis Li l l ico s t i l l can t f ind a phys ic ian

The Cannabis Buyers Club & Hempology 101 ............................................23

Insurance Coverage for Grow Operations .....................................................26

Growing Marijuana from a Health Point of View ..........................................27

Onta rio Hemp Alliance ...................................................................................28

Cooking With Cannabis ..................................................................................31

Cannabrex Nutriceutical (advertorial) ...........................................................32

AroMed Vaporizer (product review) ...............................................................33

InsideCannabis Health

Cannabis Health is published six times a year. Allcontents copyright 2005 by Cann abis Health. CannabisHealth assumes n o responsibility for any claims or rep-resentations contained in this magazine or in anyadvertisement, nor do they encourage the illegal use ofany of the products advertised within. No portion ofthis magazine may be reproduced without the writtenconsent of the publisher.

StaffEDITOR , BARB ST. [email protected]

PRODUCTION MANAGER BRIAN McANDREW production@ cannabishealth.com

ADVERTISING SALES

[email protected]

DISTRIBUTION MANAGER LORRAINE [email protected]

STORE AND SHIPPING MANAGER GORDON [email protected]

ACCOUNTING BARB CORN ELIUS

WEBMASTER [email protected]

GENERAL INQUIRIES [email protected]

Vo l u m e 3 I s s u e 2 , J a n u a r y - Fe b r u a r y 2 0 0 5

Cannabis HealthCannabis Health Magazine is the voice and the new

image of the responsible cann abis user. Th e publicationtreats cannabis as one plant and offers balanced coverage ofcannabis hemp and cannabis marijuana. Special attention isgiven to the therapeutic health benefits of this plant mademedicine. Regular contributors offer the latest on the evolv-ing Canadian cannabis laws, politics, and regulations. Wealso offer professional advice on cannabis cooking, growingat home, human interest stories and scientific articles fromcountries throughout the world, keeping our readers intouch and informed. Cannabis Health is integrated with ourresource website, offering complete downloadable PDF ver-

sions of all archived editions. www.canna bishealth.com

Subscribe TodayMasterCard/ Visa Accepted

Call: 1 868 808 5566

Employment OpportunitiesSee www.cannabishealth.com for more details

NEW Downtow n Location7457 3rd St., Grand Forks, BC Canada

Mailing Address: Box 1481Grand Forks BC Canada V0H 1H0

Phone: 250 442 5166

Fax: 250 442 5167Toll Free: 1 866 808 5566

Email: [email protected]

Brian McAndrew wished to show the dou-ble standard that surrounds the MedicalCann abis Issue. While the powers that be tellus there is no medical value to the plant, mil-lions of dollars are being invested in research onisolating the different active ingredients. Eventhough the cage has a locked door, there are nobars on the back of the cage. The key to the

door, compassion for the whole plant , is in plainview. The names on the cage symbolize thosewho have access to the open back door. Theapplication process that admitted 757 medicalusers is a very confusing and difficult one, withthe doctors reluctant to help. This leaves a mil-lion or more medical cannabis users withACCESS DENIED!


5/36

Cannabis Health 5


6/36

6 Cannabis Health

Education seems to be the growing issue.

A fter all, A nn M cLellan called pot smok-

ers stupid. One would expect the woman

who is both Deputy Prime Minister of

Canada and Minister of Public Safety tohave better knowledge of the issue. I think

the problem is bigger than we thought..

The number of chronically ill Canadiansusing cannabis medicinally in this countrytoday is estimated to be more than one mil-lion. Why, then , does Canadas legal marijua-na medical access program have less thaneight hundred participants? The medicalassociations do not want the doctors labeledwith Health Canadas assigned role of mari-

juana gatekeeper. They have advised doctorsof the possible legal repercussions associatedwith this role and the majority of doctors are

just refusing to sign an y kind of prescriptions

for marijuana, period. The proposed amend-ments to the Marijuana Medical AccessRegulations will not alleviate this problem.Doctors do not want to sign for marijuana,now or in the future, and without the signa-

ture Health Canada deems the application forlegal status incomplete and void. For years,this dysfunctional government system hasblocked all legal access to marijuana for thevast majority of sick Canadians. In fact it hasforced the most vulnerable of our citizensinto the r ank of criminals.

Law enforcement officials are claiming th eproduction of all marijuana in Canada is linkedwith organized crime and some of our publicofficials have even confirmed this inaccuratetheory. If the average daily dose of a millionmedical users is around 3 grams, (a conserva-tive estimate) then the demand for medicalmarijuana in Canada is over a million kg peryear. Where does the governmen t think the potis coming from? The bottom line is; thepatients are suffering and the black market isbeing held responsible for the governmentsdysfunctional legal marijuan a access problems.

The history of this dysfunction is longand sordid. Numerous lawyers have madestands on the issue of medical marijuanaaccess, only to have the courts pass it off tothe politicians. Our elected politicians havenot w anted to fix it for fear of losing the nextelection, so they just keep throwing our taxdollars at studying and debating the same oldproblems, in hopes that they can put it off

long enough for someon e else to fix it.

When the Senate report recommendelegalization we thought w e might see the en dHowever, it would seem the on ly people whread the Senate report were all us persecutecriminalized stupid pot smoking Canadian

and not the elected officials in charge odeciding our fate. Hence, we are facinrecriminalization with Bill C-17, whicdoes not deal with t he issue of medical acceat all, and in fact impedes the process evefurther by giving the police agencies morpower to discriminate against sick Canadianwho w ant to grow a small number of plantfor person al medical use.

When will the insanity stop? If the goernment intends to limit the supply in ordeto pharmaceuticalize the herb, then obviouly they have not been listenin g to the milliocurrent consumers who have already choseto turn to the naturally grown herbal medic

nal altern ative.

The up side; our voices are gettinstronger, public perception has alreadchanged, and the medical use of cannabis inow publicly accepted throughout the worldActivist groups, patient un ions, corporationpolitical allies, advocacy organizations, tradand growers associations and pro cannabbusinesses have all been formed. Millions ovoices cannot be silenced. Rest assured, thpot will be brought to the boil, one way or t hother.

Keep smiling; it m akes them wonder wha

youre up to.

Barb St.Jean

E d i t o r i a l

Mr. Pressman is the Executive Director of NORML Canada. NORML Canada(National Organization for Reform of

Marijuana Laws in Canada) is a non-profit, public interest, member operated and fundedgroup, chartered at the federal level in Canadasince 1978, working at all levels of governmentto eliminate all civil and criminal penalties for

private marijuana use, through public educa-tion, research, and legislative and judicial chal-lenges. NORML Canada does not advocate orencourage the use of marijuana, but believes

that the present policy of discouragementthrough the use of crim inal or civi l law has beenexcessively costly and harmful to both societyand the individual. NORML Canada plays avital role as a strong and credible nationalorganization advocating a scientific and evi-dence based approach to marijuana policy inCanada on behalf of the over three millionCanadian marijuana users. NORML Canadaneeds your support! Visit www.norml.ca and

find out how you can join and supportNOR ML Canada in the fight for sane marijua-na laws. Get involved today !

To: The Honourable A. Anne McLellan,P.C., M.P.

Deputy Prime Minister and Minister ofPublic Safety and Emergency Preparedness,340 Laurier Avenue West, Ottawa, OntarioK1A 0P8

November 5, 2004

Dear Deputy Prime Minister McLellan,

I am wr iting you today to express my ourage and deep disappointment in your recencomments labeling Canadians who smok

marijuana as stupid. As the ExecutivDirector of an organization th at advocates obehalf of the over three million r egular mar

juana users in Canada, I can tell you thCanadians who smoke marijuana donappreciate being described that way by thDeputy Prime Minister of Canada.

Your comments are inappropr iate, un bcoming, and un informed. You shou ld retracthese comments an d apologize to the millionof tax-paying Canadians you have insultedYour gratuitous commen t calls into questiothe ability and conviction of your government to put forward legislation that seriousl

L e t t e r s

Jody Pressman Predidnet Norml Canada

Open

Letter

from

NORMLCanada


7/36

Cannabis Health 7

and impartially examines and addresses the evidence at hand.

You and your governmen t are behind the curve and way behind pub-lic opinion on this issue. We expect better man ners and better leadershipfrom our elected officials.

NORML Canada w ill have more substant ial things to say about yourgovernments proposed legislation in the weeks ahead. In the meantimeI trust you will elevate the public debate on this issue, something theunanimous Senate committee report on the use of marijuana had noproblem doing. You have chosen to ignore this en lighten ed and exh aus-tive study completely and go in the opposite direction of its recommen-dations.

We respectfully disagree with your comments an d th e legislation Mr.Cotler h as proposed. So do most Canadians.

Sincerely, Jody Pressman, Executive Director, NORML Canada

Serious Error in Montel StoryYour otherwise excellent stor y about Montel Williams Sept. 21 sh ow

devoted to medical marijuana contained one serious factual error: It isnot true that the U.S. federal government has the power to negate thedecisions passed by state legislatures.

In fact, the U.S. Constitution gives states considerable autonomy ingoverning affairs within their borders. While the federal governmentcan and does continue to enforce its own marijuana laws in states thathave enacted medical marijuana laws, it cannot overturn or invalidatethese state laws. Since 99 percent of all U.S. marijuana ar rests are madeby state and local police acting under state and local laws, these lawsafford patients su bstantial prot ection despite federal hostility.

Unfortunately, the myth that federal law trumps state law hassometimes been used successfully by opponents of reform to frightenstate legislatures out of enacting laws to protect patients. CannabisHealth and its readers can do a great service by debunking such misin-formation at every opportunity.

Sincerely, Bruce Mirken, Director of Communications M arijuana

Policy Project - ht tp://www.mpp.org. Sign up for MPPs free e-mail alerts -http://www.mpp.org/subscribe

Legal DilemaI am a 78 year old medical cannabis user and have suffered from

crippling Rheumatoid Arthritis for over 30 years. I have asked my doc-tor to sign the exemption forms, but he refused because his Associationtold him not to. He does, however, fully support my use of cannabis asmedicine.

This dilemma causes me great anxiety and frustration, because Ichoose not to support the Black Market. I want to grow my own medi-cine; just a couple of plants, but with my decision, came a certainamoun t of risk. You see, recently I had my plan ts stolen. It was don e inthe middle of the night, twenty feet from my bedroom window. I wokein the morning to stubby stalks, not the beautiful medicine I had hoped

to harvest shor tly. I felt as violated as if theyd come into my home an dstolen my personal belongings. Theft is theft in my books!

What kind of recourse, if any, do I have? Should I report it to thelocal RCMP detachment? Any advice would be appreciated. Thank youfor the wonderful magazine.

VH, Hamilton, ON

Rip-offs ResponseWHATS A PATIENT TO DO?

Th is article refers to th e letter from the 78 year old medical user. Werecently spoke with Sgt. Al Olsen of the Gran d Forks RCMP detachmentabout this rip-off problem. This is what we found out.

Should you choose to report th e theft, the RCMP will investigate the

L e t t e r s c o n t i n u e d


8/36

break and enter ; they will also investigate thecultivation of marijuana unless you arelicensed by Health Canada. Th ere is no suchthin g as a legal grow, un less you are licensed.It doesnt matter if you qualify for the exemp-

tion bu t cant get a doctor to sign off, you arestill breaking the law, Olsen stated.

Sgt. Olsen also told us the RCMP aremandated and required to investigate the cul-tivation, but are not forced to press charges.This is where police discretion comes in.They assess the situation and circumstancesand use their discretionary powers to deter-mine who is and who is not charged.

There have also been many stories in thenews lately about home invasions where thehomeowner has been seriously injured bythieves looking for marijuana. But until mar-

ijuana is decriminalized or legalized, there isnot much recourse for the medical user andvigilante justice will get them nowhere, otherthan in jail for assault. We find it very sadmedical users have to choose between; fight-

ing for access to the governments marijuana,outrageous Black Market prices, or risk thethreat of theft and personal harm, just to getthe medicine that helps them with their ill-ness.

When we asked Sgt. Olsen if he had anopinion on the medical use of cannabis, hetold us he had n o opinion, as he did not haveenough knowledge on the subject to formone. We tru ly appreciate his honesty, as thereseem to be far too many folks forming opin-ions based upon misinformation. We believeknowledge holds the keys for a change inthese unfair laws.

Kudos from readers

Ive been handing out the zine to everclient who walks in. The response to youmagazine has been good. People havenheard of it on a mass scale and are impresse

as I was, about the lack of pee-testing anbong/babe ads. Finally, someone is taking thplant seriously!

..... and again

We love your mag (our mag). Our patientlove your mags. They are available eacmonth for a small patient donation ($1 USThey go like hotcakes. As a matter of fact referred someone from a non-MMJ state ithe US to your website. He wanted lots oinfo. Our Midwest is ultraconservative.

L e t t e r s c o n t i n u e d

Its good to be back.

After spending two years and thefirst ten issues helping to start CannabisHealth and keep it going, I had to leavedue to time conflicts with my personalbusiness, Beyond Graph ix.

Two weeks before this issue went to print, Barb St. Jean, also aFounding Director of Cannabis Health Foundation and currentEditor, asked me to come back to get this issue out and to active dutyas Production Manager again with CH. ...I accepted the challenge.

I look forward to working with the Cannabis Health team onceagain on futur e issues of our magazine..

Brian McA ndrew, Production Manager

Its great to be active.

Ive been involved with the organiza-tion since inception in 1999, but a Lupusflare has kept me from fully participatingover the last few years.

With the help of wonderful doctorsand natural medicines Im fighting back and it feels greCannabis for health has been my passion and it is a pleasure woring with such a dedicated team of individuals to fulfill the visio

Im looking forward to the future.

Barb St. Jean, Editor


9/36

Cannabis Health 9

Written by W endy Little and Eric Nash

Island H arvest Certified Organic Cannabis

A n ew industry has emerged from whatwas once a lucrative economic source onlyavailable to Canadians who chose to oper-ate at odds with the law. This new in dustryis medical marijuana. How do we knowthis? Because jobs, businesses, researchgrants and opportunities are being createdfrom a legal economic sector which didntexist four years ago.

Money is now being spent onfederal government medical mari-

juana programs that receive mil-lions of taxpayer dollars. Money isbeing spent on a Canadian busi-ness that won the multi-milliondollar federal governmen t contractto produce and supply marijuanato Canadians. Money is beingspent on medical cannabisresearch projects funded by thefederal government and by the pri-vate sector. Money is being spenton the purchase of marijuana by

patients from their legally licenced growers.Thr ough both the pr ivate sector and govern-ment fun ds, there is a substantial amount ofmoney changing hands.

There is support for the expansion anddiversification of the medical cannabisindustry from virtually all levels of our soci-ety. Th e public via opinion polls, the judicialsystem through constitutional and charterrights rulings, the private sector from theFraser Institute, and the political supportfrom the Senate report. All the evidence isclear - a legal cannabis industry has wide-spread public support, is well establishedand w ill continue to rapidly expand over the

next few years.This new industry sector is garnering

much support from many significant placesin our society. The courts provided an exam-ple of judicial support, specifically in a recentOctober 2003 Ontario Court of Appeal rul-ing. The three judges ruled that each govern-ment licenced cultivator should be able togrow and sell cannabis to a multitude ofpatients within the MMAR. This was amajor step in p roviding the medical cannabismarket with exactly what it wants an d n eeds;a diverse choice of cannabis sources withvarying strains, pr ices and range of quality.

We also see cannabis industry supportcoming from the 2002 Senate SpecialCommittee report which states that aCanadian resident should be able to obtain alicence to produce and distribute cannabis

and its derivatives for therapeutic purposes.Considerable support also comes from theCanadian public, most major news media,and from respected institutions like theFraser Institute. Prominent public figureslike Vancouver Mayor Larry Campbell andPierre Berton also support this buoyant andexpandin g legal cannabis industry.

How else do we know that a new indus-try is emerging? For the past few years, wehave been operating Island Harvest withinthe legal Canadian cannabis industry. IslandHarvest is a certified organic medicalcannabis production facility, and we complywith Health Canadas Marihuana MedicalAccess Regulations, selling and distributing

our product to those who are authorized bythe government to r eceive it.

We are observing the gradual change inthe flow of money from one agency to anoth-er, from one organization to another, fromone business sector to another. We see thefinancial shift from RCMP anti-grow-opfunding to government regulatory funding(Office of CannabisMedical Access), thefinancial shift from blackmarket distribution topharmaceutical distribu-tion (pharmacy pilot proj-ects), the financial shift

from illegal medical grow-ing to multi-million dollargovernment contracts andsmall business operations.

In addition to theseshifts in financial circula-tion, there is also a mas-sive and rapid expansionof cannabis plant-basedmedicines from thebiotech and pharmaceuti-cal sector. This in turn isfueled by private and gov-

ernment investment money. We are observing all of these transitions and developmenwhich support the emergence and credibilitof this exciting new industr ial and agricultual sector which will create jobs and econom

ic opportunity across Canada.

Of course how our tax money is spent, anwhere that money is going will always be contentious issue. Many people wonder whthe government is spending so much moneon a program which really isnt addressing thmajor issue, which is to make access to mar

juana simple for all Canadians who wish tuse it for medical purposes. However the issuis very complex, and the main problem is duto the fact that the cannabis plant is an illegacontrolled substance.

Like any emerging economic sector, therare people who are resistant to change. Thi

resistance can be demonstrated in the federgovernments failure to recognizchanging public attitudes in regardto personal health choices. Aexample of this is the developmenof a cumbersome medical cannabaccess program, which the courtcontinue to prove as unw orkable. Swe see the legal cannabis industrthwarted by a lack of awareness anvision by the federal governmen t.

So the cannabis industry iCanada operates in a dichotomouway - a mix of legal and illegal. Itclear that the use, distribution an

sale of marijuana for recreational purposeare cur rent ly illegal. Yet wh en used for medical purposes, its evident that marijuana icompletely legal in Canada. Th erefore a neindustry has developed in the past few yearwhich supports this well established and rapidly growing legal cannabis market.

There are very simple solutions that thgovernment coulimplement to make thMarihuana MedicaAccess Regulationmuch more efficienand workable. Thwould give the lega

cannabis industry a significant boost, and thlegal cannabis markewould be provided witexactly what is needeto satisfy the demanfor a diverse range ocannabis products.

The first actioHealth Canada coultake would be to implement an existing sectioof the MMAR, which i

Econom i c Fu tu re o f Cannab i s i n Canada

M o n e y i s n o w b e i n gs p e n t o n f e d e r a l

g o v e r n m e n t m e d i c a lm a r i j u a n a p r o g r a m st h a t r e c e i v e m i l l i o n so f t a x p a y e r d o l l a r s .


10/36

10 Cannabis Health

to use inspector s to verify cropproduction standards by all theproducers. This would elimi-nate the potential of diversionto the recreational market,which is their greatest con-cern. Th e second step to makethe cannabis access programworkable is to eliminate physi-cians as the gatekeepers.Canadian Medical Associationrepresentatives have statedthat they would prefer not tobe involved in their role asgatekeepers to medicalcannabis. The CanadianMedical ProtectiveAssociation also issued a mem-orandum to doctors acrossCanada advising against sign-ing the MMAR forms. It is evi-

dent that Health Canadascannabis access program canbe workable with minoramendments. This would satisfy the courts,the people who use cann abis therapeuticallyand the marijuana industry producers anddistributors.

These simple MMAR amendmentswould also be in compliance with theInternational Convention on Illegal Drugsbecause Health Canada would then be utiliz-ing a control measures program to preventand eliminate diversion of medical cannabisto the illicit market. This would provide agreat sense of relief to the Canadians who use

cannabis medically by taking a progressiveaction to make th e system more efficient andeffective. It would also produce necessaryand realistic solutions in maintaining adiverse and prosperous cannabis industry.Finally, by addressing these persistent prob-lems in the legal cannabis industry, and tak-ing the n ecessary steps to solve them, govern-ment would demonstrate commitment andhonest intent to change inadequate policy.

However, the resistance to change runsdeep, and other issues need looking at. Its

apparent that some people have developed anegative perception of cannabis productiondue to the misinformation about grow-ops -commonly perpetuated myths by lawenforcement and government. At IslandHarvest, we have demonstrated by our reallife experience, that marijuan a grow-ops canbe operated safely, professionally and respon-sibly within any community. In fact, as legal-ly regulated cannabis cultivators in our com-munity, we experience immense public sup-port. We have been provided with letters ofencouragement and support from our federal

MP, provincial MLA and our mayor andcouncil to promote our medical cannabisindustry expansion to create jobs, economicgrowth and tax dollars.

So the legal business of cannabis is hereto stay, and it has huge support from allaspects of our society and cultur e. As JeffreyA. Miron, Boston University Professor ofEconomics, writes in the foreword of ourrecent book, Sell Marijuana Legally - AComplete Guide to Startin g Your Marijuan aBusiness, My research on cannabis prohibi-

tion has emphasizedthat the current prob-lems in the cannabis

market result fromprohibition ratherthan from cannabisitself. This view isalso expressed fromnumerous sources -from the Senate, lawenforcement, thecourts and mostimportantly theCanadian public.

The Canadian pub-lic supports medical

cannabis use and the associateindustry sector that goes with an industry that provides necessary product and createeconomic growth and opportunity. The spin-off employmenand revenue generated from aaspects of the cann abis producindustry is substantial. Whawas once considered druparaphernalia is no longer, amany of these products are curent ly being used medically inlegally regulated environ ment

Vaporizers will continue tevolve and the market for edble cannabis products will continu e to grow. Product researcand development for alternatives to smoking cannabis wialso expand. The future of thcannabis industry has enomous potential, and it is rapid

ly becoming a significant an d importan t facof our national economy.

Our federal government will begin tacknowledge that small communities acrosCanada affected by dwindling resourcebased economic opportunities should be ablto capitalize on the emerging legally regulaed cannabis industry. The business ocannabis must remain open for aCanadians to take part, from small familrun businesses to mid-size companies; ashould be permitted access to participate i

this tremendous renewable resource basebusiness opportun ity.

In essence, there are absolutely no negative effects from the development, expansioand diversification of a legally regulatecannabis industry - one that allows all leveof business to become involved. This is thnew industry that our Canadian economneeds. There are very exciting times aheafor the business of cannabis, and now is thtime to get involved.

Econom ic Futu re o f Cannab i s i n Canada

GW Pharmaceuticals - updateGW Pharmaceuticals submitted a regu-

latory application for Sativex in Canada inMay 2004. This application was in su pportof the treatment of Neuropathic Pain inpatients with MS.

The Canadian regulatory authority,Health Canada, have proceeded to carryout the regulatory review swiftly and GWunderstands that the process is approach-ing completion. To date, Health Canada hasnot made GW aware of any issues whichwill prevent the grant of a product licence.Source Net retrieval Dec. 4 2004: http://www/gwphar-

m.com/n ews_press_releases.asp?id= /gwp/pressreleas-

es/currentpress/2004-12-03/


11/36

Cannabis Health 11

Cannabis Health Magazine receives manyinquiries from physicians and chronically illpeople from all parts of Canada wanting toknow how and where to purchase the gov-ernments marijuana. Information surroun d-ing the Marijuana Medical AccessRegulations administered by the Office ofCannabis Medical Access under the directionof Health Canada has been extremely confus-ing to most of our callers. We have compiledthe following information in hopes of allevi-ating some of the confusion surroundinglegal access to medical marijuana.

Whos WhoThe Office of Cannabis Medical

Access coordinates the development andadministration of the regulatory approachpermitting individuals to access marihuana(cannabis) for medical purposes. The DrugAnalysis Service is responsible for theestablishment of a reliable Canadian sourceof medical research-grade mar ihuan a.

Prairie Plant Systems Inc. is contract-ed to provide Health Canada with a reliablesource of quality, standardized research grademarihuana to meet research needs in Canada.

The Drug Strategy and Controlled

Substances Programme, via the Office ofResearch and Surveillance (ORS), estab-lished the Exper t Advisory Committee.

The Expert Advisory Committee onMarijuana for Medical Purposes (EAC-

MMP) provides Health Canada (HC) withtimely scient ific/ medical advice related to theMarihuana Medical Access Regulations pro-gram (MMAR) and the Medical MarijuanaResearch Program (MMRP). Committeemembership is mandated to include the fol-lowing areas of expertise: HIV/AIDs, multi-ple sclerosis (MS), palliative care, pain man-agement, pharmacology/toxicology, ophthal-mology, epilepsy and ethics.

Medical Marijuana ResearchProgram/Canadian Institutes of HealthResearch (CIHR)- As part of HealthCanadas strategy to addr ess the issue of med-ical marijuana, in 1999, the Department

(Health Canada) created the MedicalMarijuana Research Program (MMRP). Th eestablishment of the Program recognized theneed for research into marijuana and associ-ated cannabinoids to determine the safetyand efficacy of these compounds in the man-agement of symptoms in patients unrespon-sive to usual treatment modalities. Note: Th e

funding process for Operating Grants anRandomized Control Trials under this programme was suspended in June 2003 anremains suspended until further notice. Fomore info: http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e4628.html

The Stakeholder Advisory Committeon Medical Marihuana provides the DruStrategy and Controlled SubstanceProgramme of Health Canada with timeladvice on medical, scientific, regulatory, polcy, and operat ional issues related to marihuna for medical purposes. This committee icomprised of represen tatives from th e RCMCanadian Association of Chiefs of PoliceCanadian Medical Association, several othehealth organizations, compassion clubs, usegroups, designated growers and patients. Foadditional informat ion on this committee, seCannabis Health/Volume 2: Issue 4May/June, 2004.

The Marihuana Medical AccesRegulations promulgated in July 200established a framework to allow the use omarihuana by people who are suffering fromserious illnesses, where conventional treaments are inappropriate or are n ot providinadequate relief of the symptoms related to th

Mar i j uana Med i ca l Access Regu la t i o n s


12/36

12 Cannabis Health

medical condition or its treatment, andwhere the use of marihuana is expected tohave some medical benefit that ou tweighs therisk of its use. These regulations weredeemed unconstitutional by a 2003 Ontario

Court of Appeal decision, on the basis thatthey failed to provide a legal supply of mar i-huana for person s author ized to possess it formedical purposes.

Changes to the MarijuanaMedical Access Regulations arebeing carried out in phases. Thefirst phase, the RegulationsAmending the Marihuana MedicalAccess Regulations, carried out inlate 2003, focused on responding tothe Ontario Court of Appeal deci-sion. Th e second in volved a broaderreview of the regulations, andincluded a comprehensive consulta-

tive process. In October 2004 a sec-ond set of Regulations Amendingthe Marihuana Medical AccessRegulations was published for com-ment in the Canada Gazette, Part I.The following amendment to theregulations should take effect, ifpassed, by the spring of 2005.

The number of categories of symp-toms under which a person may apply forauthorization to possess marihuana for med-ical purposes is reduced from three to two. The

previous Categories 1 and 2 are merged in to onecategory ( Category 1) . The need for a speciali stto sign the medical declaration for the symp-

toms set out in the Schedule to the Regulations(previous Category 2) has been eliminated.W hile assessment of the applicant by a special-ist is still a requirement under the new Category2, the treating physician, whether a specialistor not, can sign the medical declaration.

Physicians are no longer required, in theirdeclarations, to make definitive statementsregarding benefits outweighing risks, or to makespecific recommendations regarding the dailydosage of marihuana to be used by the appli-

cant. In addition, the information that thephysician is required to provide in the medicaldeclaration has been reduced to only those ele-ments essential to confirm that the applicantsuffers from a serious medical condition and

that conventional treatm ents are inappropriateor ineffective.

These amendments provide limited author-ity for a pharmacy-based distribution system

for dried marihuana that is produced by alicensed dealer on contract with Her Majesty inright of Canada, to authorized persons withouta prescription from a phy sician. T his will allowthe conduct of a pi lot project to assess the feasi-bility of distributing marihuana for medical

purposes through the conventional pharmacy-based drug distribution system.

The new provisions, which allow police offi-cers to confirm authorization and licence infor-mation with H ealth Canada , will enhance theability of Canadian police to investigate andtake appropriate enforcement action in regardsto any unauthorized marihuana-related activi-ty including, for example, the production orstorage of marihuana at locations other thanthose authorized, or trafficking in marihuana,which includes selling, giving, sending, deliver-ing, or administering marihuan a to any personnot nam ed in t he authorization or licence issuedby Health Canada.

The following snip is taken from HealthCanadas Regulatory Impact AnalysisStatement and can be found in its entirety

at:http:// canadagazette.gc.ca/par tI/2004/ 2041023/html/regle2-e.html

To enhance protection of the health ansafety of Canadian s, Health Canadas strategdirection for the medical marihuana program

envisions the program taking on, to the exten possible, the features of the traditional healcare model employed for other medicinal agenavailable in Canada. Such a model woul

include: continued support for researcand enrolment of patients in clinical oopen label trials as the first consideratioof pat ients and physicians; a centralizesource of marihuana that complies wit

product standards, accompanied in tlonger term by a phase-out of personacultivation; distribution of marihuan

for medical purposes to authorized pesons through pharm acies; updat ed infomation stemming from research into th

risks and benefits of marihuana wheused for medical purposes, and educatioof pat ients and physicians; and improve

post-market surveillance to monitor thsafety and efficacy of marihuana wheused for medical purposes.

The Application ProcessPatients and Physicians can obtai

a guide to the regulations and an applcation form from the Health Canada websitwww.hc-sc.gc.ca/hecs-sesc/ocma/ or by caling Health Canadas Office of CannabiMedical Access in Ottawa at (613) 954-654or toll-free at 1-866-337-7705. NOTE: thproposed changes to the MMAR must b

passed before the policies and forms currenly posted can reflect any chan ges.

For more information on the proposeamendments contact: Ms. Cynthia Sun strumDrug Strategy and Controlled SubstanceProgramme, Healthy Environments anConsumer Safety Branch, Address Locato3503D, Ottawa, Canada K1A 1B9, (613) 9460125 (telephone), (613) 946-4224 (facsimle), [email protected] (electronic mail). Or visit the website of the Office of Cannabis Medical Accesfor general inquiries: http://www.hcsc.gc.ca/hecs-sesc/ocma/in dex.htm or Phon1 866 337-7705 - Tel: 613 954-6540 - Fax: 61

952-2196 E-mail: [email protected] patient participation statistic

are posted monthly on the OCMA site. As oSeptember 3, 2004 Only 757 persons arcurrently allowed to possess marihuana fomedical pur poses in Canada - 553 persons arcurrently allowed to cultivate/produce - 43hold a Personal-Use Production Licence an59 hold a Designated-Person ProductioLicence, under the Marihuana MedicaAccess Regulations (MMAR).

Mar i j uana Med i ca l Access Regu la t i o n s

Information surroundingthe Marijuana MedicalAccess Regulations adminis-tered by the Office ofCannabis Medical Access

un der the direction of HealthCanada has been extremelyconfusing to most of ourcallers.


13/36

Cannabis Health 13

Cannabis Health has been following theon-going decriminalization debates. InSeptember 2002, the special Senate commit-tee on illegal dru gs tabled its final report, r ec-ommending the legalization of cannabis.Also in September 2002 in the Speech fromthe Throne, the government made a commit-ment to act on the results of parliamentaryconsultations with Canadians on options forchange in our drug laws. The specialHouse committee on December 12, 2002 dis-regarded the recommendations of the specialSenate committee for legalization of cannabisand r ecommended in its report a comprehen-sive strategy for decriminalizing the posses-sion and cultivation of not more than thirtygrams of cannabis for personal use. Bill C38was followed by Bill C10 and then Bill C17,currently under debate in the house, eachmore restrictive than the last.

This debate has been unnerving. Theamount of misinformation vocalized inregards to cannabis use and the potentialhealth risks have confirmed our suspicionthat very few of our elected politicians haveactually read the senate committee report.Scientific evidence overwhelmingly indicatesthat cannabis is substantially less harmful

than alcohol and should be treated not asa criminal issue but as a social and pub-lic health issue (1) said Senator PierreClaude Nolin, chair of t he committee.

Mr. Randy White (Abbotsford,

CPC) however, said; W ith t he lungs, itis more irritat ing; with 50% more tarthan tobacco. It has a greater effect on theupper airways than tobacco, and maycause lung, head and neck cancer. ..Weare talking about something that is reallyunf it for people and is in fact worse thancigarettes (2)

Mr. Russ Hiebert (South SurreyWhite RockCloverdale, CPC, stated;It is far worse than smoking. It is anactivity that we are officially, as a House,try ing to discourage. For example, emphy-sema and lung cancer are both conse-quences of smoking and drug use. (3)

Mr. Peter MacKay (Central Nova, CPC)said: Ingesting marijuana is very damaging;its carcinogenic, THC. (4)

We did not have to go very far to pointout their errors. We referred back to the AskEthan Russo column in early CannabisHealth Journal issues. (Note: Professor

Ethan Russo currently serves in a consultan

cy position as Senior Medical Advisor to thCannabinoid Research Institute, the divisioof GW established to promote exploratorresearch.) The following are two excerptfrom his bi-monthly columns.

W hile I never recomm end smoking tobaco, it is true that concomitant cannabis mit

Deba t i ng Dec r im i na l iza t i o n


14/36

14 Cannabis Health

D e b a t i n g D e c r i m i n a l i z a t i o n

gates some of the harm to a degree. I would referyou to my Chronic Use Study, available online,and to an article that indicated that cannabis-only sm oking does not seem to provoke emphyse-ma, and to an interesting study by Poth et al.that demonstrates how T HC actually helps pre-vent carcinogenic deterioration. Remember,there has never been a documented case of lungtum our in a cann abis-only smoker.

However, this obvious misinformationproblem is not exclusively the fault of ourelected officials; The media has played a sig-nificant role in the reporting of inaccurate orbad science. A sentence taken out of contextcan have a whole new meaning. Take thisreported media snip for example: a Dutchstudy shows that Canadas smokers areseven times more likely than other peo-ple to have psychotic symptoms. Whywould Canadians be more psychotic thanother people? Cannabis Health is still lookingfor the research study linked to that reportedsnip. We want to find out who the other

people are andwhat theyre smok-ing.

Relating tomental health andcannabis use Dr.Ethan Russowrote: The use ofcannabis to treatbipolar problems(previously knownas manic depres-

sion) is a fascinat-ing development. Asurprising numberof people so afflicted

have independently made the discovery thatcann abis has im proved their condit ion, whetherthe mania or depression. It may also reduce sideeffects of other drugs used in its treatment, suchas Lith ium , Carbam azepine (T egretol) orValproate (Depakote). Some people have foundcannabis more effective than conventionaldrugs .Endocannabinoids seem to beintimately involved in emotional regulationmechanisms in the limbic system. Because THCand other chemicals in cannabis mimic ourown internal biochemistry, they may help

replace what is missing. Cannabis strains thatcontain cannabidiol (CBD) also have anti-anxiety and anti-psychotic benefits. The bestdocumentation available for this is an articleby the eminent clinical cannabis prophet, LesterGrinspoon, that was published in Journal ofPsychoactive Drugs in 1998 .

The health implication misinformation isnot the only problem, this whole decrimi-nalization process, in our opinion, has beenan expensive exercise in futility. It has leadthe public into believing marijuana will bealmost legal in Canada, bu t th e political rhet-

oric and system of penalties outlined in BillC17 actually point to a tougher and widerenforcement stance. If this Bill is passed, theActs will be amended to create four newoffences of cannabis possession involvingsmall quan tities of cann abis material. For thefirst three offences, law enforcement will beable to issue a ticket exclusively. Officers w illhave the discretion of enforcing the fourthoffence, anything over 30grams, either byissuing a ticket or a summons, depending onthe officers appreciation of the circum-stances related to the offence.

As for the cultivation of cann abis, the billwould restructur e the offence as follows:

One to three plants: guilty of an offencepunishable on summary conviction andliable to a fine of $500 or, in the case of ayoung person , $250. Th is would be exclusive-ly by ticket.

Four to twenty-five plants: guilty of anoffence and liable, on conviction on indict-ment, to imprisonment for a term of notmore than fiveyears less a day,or on summaryconviction, to afine of not morethan twenty-fivethousand dollarsor to imprison-ment for a term ofnot more thaneighteen months,or both.

Twenty-six tofifty plants: guilty of an offence and liable, onconviction on indictment, to imprisonmentfor a term of not more than ten years.

Fifty plants or more: imprisonment for aterm of not more than fourteen years.

The Hon. Keith Martin (ParliamentarySecretary to the Minister of NationalDefence, Lib. stated: T hat is why Bill C-17is extremely important. It dramaticallyincreases penalties for those involved in com-mercial grow operations. The bill separates thesmall t ime user from those individuals involvedin commercial grow operations. This is very

humane. (5)If the purpose of this bill is to deter

Organized Crime then its targeted at thewrong people. What it does, is discriminateagainst the chronically ill patients whoshould be allowed to grow 25 plants for a 5gram per day prescription level. As well,three patients should be able to grow in onesite, 75 plants, as per the Medical MarijuanaAccess Program. Under this bill, that wouldmean three cancer patients, who cant gettheir doctor t o sign th e required forms, couldbe imprisoned for up to fourteen years each

for organizing to grow their own medicinThis is not very humane. Seventy-five planin a commercial organized crime grow-op not worth the effort. If the government reallwanted to stop organized crime they woullegalize marijuana. Allow everyone to grotheir own and license decentralized commnity based production facilities to supply thone million sick Canadians who currentluse cannabis medically and cant get legaccess to a supply. No demand = no blacmarket.

Sources: www.cannabishealth.comarchives/ (Issue 1/pg12 & Issue 4/pg 16Ask Ethan Russo

For full debate information see: (Bill C17. On the Order: Government OrdersNovember 1, 2004The Minister oJusticeSecond reading and reference to thStanding Committee on Justice, Huma

Rights, Public Safety and EmergencPreparedness of Bill C-17, an act to amenthe Contraventions Act and the ControlleDrugs and Substances Act and to make co

sequential amendments to other acthttp://www.parl.gc.ca/38/1/parlbus/chamb u s / h o u s e / d e b a t e s / 0 2 0 _ 2 0 0 4 - 1 102/han020_1240-e.htm(1) CBC News - Pot less harmful than alcohoSenate report Thu, 05 Sep 2002Full Senate report retrieval Nov 16,2004http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/Committee_Se

Rep.asp?Language= E&Parl= 37&Ses= 1&mm_id= 85(2) Pg/ 1250 web retrieval Nov 8, 2004http://www.parl.gc.ca/38/1/parlbus/cham bus/ouse/debates/020_2004-11-02/han020_1250-

E.htm(3) Pg/1350 web retrieval Nov 8, 2004http://www.parl.gc.ca/38/1/parlbus/cham bus/ouse/debates/020_2004-11-02/han020_1350-

E.htm(4) Pg/ 1330 web retrieval Nov 8, 2004http://www.parl.gc.ca/38/1/parlbus/cham bus/ouse/debates/020_2004-11-02/han020_1330-

E.htm(5) Pg 1320/ web retrieval Nov 8, 2004http://www.parl.gc.ca/38/1/parlbus/cham bus/ouse/debates/020_2004-11-02/han020_1320-

E.htm

Dr.Ethan Russo

Remember, there has never

been a documented case of

lung tumour in a cannabis-

only smoker.


15/36

Cannabis Health 15

A coalition of community-based groupsconfronting HIV infections and AIDS

The Canadian AIDS Society is a nationalcoalition of 120 community-based AIDSorganizations across Canada. We are dedicat-ed to strengthening the response toHIV/A IDS across all sectors of society, and t oenriching the lives of people and communi-ties living with HIV/AIDS.

The Canadian AIDS Societys Board (1)of Directors favours a controlled legalizationsystem for cann abis in Canada. The currentprohibitionist regulatory environment,including the MMAR, is still unduly restric-tive and hinders access to a safe, affordable,varied and reliable supply ofcannabis for therapeutic purposeswithout fear of prosecution or dis-crimination for those who use ittherapeutically. This said, theCanadian AIDS Society will contin -ue to work with Health Canada toprovide input into the medical mar-ijuana access program in the cur-rent regulatory framework.

The proposed amendments tothe MMAR do not address thesocial and economic fallout for

medical users. Measures must betaken to ensure that costs for med-ical marijuana are covered and thatauthorized persons, exemptees andholders of licences to produce areentitled to insur ance coverage.

Canadians have a legal right to liberty andsecurity of the person, as set out in theCanadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms,and interpreted by Canadian courts. Thisincludes the right to make decisions of funda-mental personal importance, such as thechoice of treatment to alleviate the effects ofdebilitating symptoms with life-alterin g conse-quences. The threat of criminal prosecution,

or the power of a physician to block access toa program that would alleviate the fear of pros-ecution, deprive seriously and chronically illCanadians of this right to liberty.

We FULLY SUPPORT the shift of respon-sibility from the physician to the applicant.Applicants will now acknowledge anddeclare th eir acceptance of the risks associat-ed with the use of cannabis. We PROPOSEthat they should be accepting responsibilityfor the amount of cannabis they intend touse, REGARDLESS of the amount.

The most difficult hurdle for applicantsto overcome to access the medical marijuana

program is to find a physician that is willingto sign the request for authorization forms.We PROPOSE that the medical declarationshould be limited to confirmation of diagno-sis. The Minister could then authorize theapplicant based on the ApplicantsDeclaration and on t he physicians diagnosis.

If physicians are going to continue to berequired to be the gatekeepers in the medicalmarijuana access program, then we RECOM-MEND th at the Minister develop a commun i-cation strat egy targeted at medical practition-ers in Canada. This effort could be done

jointly in collaboration with the various

stakeholders. We also PROPOSE that theMMAR include a section that protects physi-

cians from civil action based on completingthe application forms for their patients.

Regarding the authorization to communi-cate information to Canadian police, weREQUEST that further consideration begiven on this matter and that measures betaken to ensure that this information not beused in t he process of someone applying for apolice record check, that this will not resultin continued surveillance of an authorized

persons home or a licenced produ cers home,and that this information will NOT be usedwhen an au thorized person or a licenced pro-ducer wishes to cross a border.

We WELCOME the add ition of a limitedauthority for a pharmacy-based distributionsystem for dried cannabis in the MMAR, asONE option for distribution.

We STRONGLY URGE Health Canadato re-examine its vision of phasing outlicences to produce. We CALL on HealthCanada to comply with the Hitzig decision(Ontario Court of Appeal) address the

remaining two provisions of the MMAR thawere struck down, as they existed at thatime: (1) limit on one person holding morthan one licence to grow; and (2) limit olicence holders growing in common witmore than two h olders. We therefore requethat section 41.(b) and section 54 bremoved from th e MMAR.

We REQUEST that the MMAR providthe authority for Health Canada to designatMORE licenced dealers. We RECOMMENDthe implementation of a regulatory framework to control and monitor th e quality ancost of the products and to ensure tha

licenced dealers are adher ing to rigorous agrcultural standards. We URGE that provisionbe made to enable the current licenced deaer, Prairie Plant Systems, to offer a variety ostrains of cannabis, with both Cannabis indca and Cannabis sativa options, and a varietof THC an d cann abidiol (CBD) levels.

To read the complete Submissions of thCanadian AIDS Society on the ProposeAmendments to the Marihuana MedicaAccess Regulations, please vishttp://www.cdnaids.ca/web/backgrnd.nsf/c

/cas-gen-0089 . For more information, pleascontact Lynne Belle-Isle, National ProgramConsultant, at [email protected] or at 1

800-499-1986, ext. 126.

(1) The Canadian AIDS SocietyPosition Statement on HIV/AIDS and thTherapeutic Use of Cannabis is available oour Web site at: http://www.cdnaids.caweb/position.nsf/cl/cas-pp-0021

(2) Hitzig v. Canada, Court of Appeal foOntario, DOCKET: C39532; C39738C39740, October 7, 2004, h ttp://w ww.ontaiocourts.on.ca/decisions/2003/october/hitzigC39532.htm

C a n a d i a n A I D S S o c i e t y R e s p o n s e t o M M A R

The Canadian AIDS

Societys Board of

Directors favours a

controlled legalization

system for cannabis

in Canada.

Cannabis Healthrecommends that you

take the time to visit the

web site and read the

entire statement of the

Canadian AIDS Society.


16/36

16 Cannabis Health

B C C o m p a s s i o n C l u b R e s p o n s e

t o M M A R A m e n d m e n t s

Health Canada recently releasedamendments to the MarijuanaMedical Access Regulations.Glaringly, the needs of medicalcannabis users the primary stake-holders continue to be unmet bythese Regulations, leaving the vastmajority potentially subject toincreased criminal sanctions and finesun der th e proposed Bill C-17.

A stated goal of these amendmentsis to place cannabis in a more tradi-tional health care model. Thereappears to be an underlying assump-tion being made that this model entailsonly physicians, pharmacies, and a sin-gle source of supply.

These assumptions are un foundedand the model based on them isunnecessarily restrictive. HealthCanadas contin ued efforts to r egulateand administer this herb as a pharma-ceutical product pr esents obstacles forpatients, doctors, and the governingbodies of the medical commun ity.

Tellingly, the amendments introduce theelimination of personal and designated-per-son production licenses, and once againignore the court-ordered remedies that weremeant to pave the way for the licensing ofCompassion Clubs. In order to meet theneeds of all medical cannabis users,

Compassion Clubs are an ideal compliment topharmacy distribution, personal and smallscale-production.

The BC Compassion Club has respondedto Health Canadas proposed amendmentswith recommendations that adhere to theoverarching goal of providing optimal h ealthcare to all those in need.

INTRODUCTIONThe MMAR programme was established

to remedy the unconstitutionality of theCannabis prohibition laws, which forceCanadians to choose between their libertyand their health, by providing a legal routefor those who use cannabis medically. Sinceits inception in 2001, the programme hasfailed to meet th at goal.

Considering that th is programme has pro-vided licenses for legal possession to only 800Canadians, production licenses to only 500,and has supplied only 80 of the estimated400,000 who use it medicinally, it cannot besaid to be remedying the unconstitutionalityof the prohibition laws. In fact, it would leavethe vast majority of medical users potent iallysubject to increased criminal sanctions andfines un der t he proposed Bill C-17.

Moreover, this programme has beenfound un constitutional in the courts. Th e lat-est amendments to the MMAR programmecontinue to evade the court ordered remediesand their responsibility to Canadians.

These amendments purportedly addressthe concerns of all the programmes stake-holders. Indeed, they do appear to meet theneeds of law enforcement. They also address

some of the concerns of physicians, althoughit is yet uncertain if it will be sufficient toencourage them to embrace the previouslyrejected role of gatekeeper. Glaringly, theneeds of medical cannabis users the pri-mary stakeholders continue to be unmet bythese Regulations.

Response to theproposed Amendments

The amendments that have been proposedaddress the needs of some of the programmesstakeholders. However a few key pointsrequire further consideration if this pro-gramme is to successfully meet the needs of

medical cannabis users.1. Elimination of thePersonal Production Licenses

Health Canadas plan to fade out PersonalProduction and Designated Person Licensesis of no benefit to the most important stake-holders in this programme; the patients. Formany, growing their own source of medicinenot only allows for control over the mode ofproduction (e.g. organic cultivation) andstrain selection, but also minimizes some ofthe costs associated with purchasingcannabis from another party.

The MMAR must continue tallow personal production and deignated person licenses, and mualso implement the court remedy oallowing Designated-PersoProduction License holders to growfor more than one holder of aAuthorization to Possess Licensand more than three holders olicenses to produce and cultivattogether.

2. Monopoly over ProductionThe amendments pr opose tha

the only legal source of medicinbe produced by Prairie PlanSystems (PPS). To date, PPS haproduced such a poor qualitproduct that many of the fewlicense holders who have ordereit have returned it.

The stated need for a standardized and quality-controllesource of marihuana can baddressed through the licensing o

laboratories to carry out the appropriattests.

Intern ational drug conventions can also brespected in regards to the requirement for government agency to have tight controthrough the establishment of licensing protocols.

Establishing a monopoly over productio

will not address the n eed for a wide variety ostrains, stronger product, and safer cultivation techniques. These goals would best bachieved through the contracting of a largnu mber of small-scale producers who possethe expertise and experience necessary fothis important un dertaking.

The MMAR must accommodate compettion in a free market in order to increase thquality, broaden the selection, and decreasthe en d-cost of the medicine, all of which arnecessary to meet the needs of medicacannabis users.

3. Authorization to Recommend Access

The proposed amendments still require patient in t he n ew Category 2 to be assesseby a specialist, discriminating between leveof medical assessment warranted for diffeent symptoms based on the existing state oscientific knowledge.

Considering the dearth of research due tthe prohibition of Cannabis, as well as thlack of commitment to research demonstraed by Health Canada, in effect this amendment arbitrarily discriminates betweeCanadians equally deserving relief from th esymptoms. Th is injustice is exacerbated sincthis option does not address the obstacle o


17/36

Cannabis Health 17

waiting lists for specialists, nor the fact thatspecialists are more resistant to the pro-gramme than general practitioners.

This amendment demonstrates a lack ofrespect for the medical opinions of healthcare practitioners and interferes in their rela-

tionship with th eir patients.

Regardless of the condition in question,one recommendat ion from a health care prac-titioner must be sufficient to au thor ize legiti-mate use of Cannabis or access HealthCanadas medicinal cannabis programme.

Amendments to the MMAR state HealthCanada will continue to require the opinionand support of a physician, since physiciansare th e professionals best positioned to assessmedical need. Decisions by the courts havelent support to the continued involvement ofphysicians, including specialists.

The amendments reject the n atural health

care professionals, since with few exceptions,controlled substances can be sold or providedto a patient on ly by, or un der the direction ofa physician, dentist or veterinarian . Cannabismust be also considered an exception, since itis a relatively harmless herb, unlike most othercontrolled substances.

For optimal health care, authorization torecommend access to herbs must be extendedto the health care practitioners most experi-enced with herbal medicine, such asNaturopathic Doctors and Doctors ofTraditional Chinese Medicine.

4. Natural Health ProductThe amendments to the MMAR claim

that Marihuana isa drug as definedby the Food andDrugs Act and isnot a naturalhealth product asdefined by theNatural HealthP r o d u c t sRegulations.

For th e purpos-es of thoseRegulations, a sub-

stance or combination of substances or a tra-ditional medicine is not considered to be anatural health product if its sale, under theFood and Dr ug Regulations, is required t o bepursuant to a prescription when it is soldother than in accordance with section

C.01.043 of those Regulations.

According to these amendments, pusuant to a confirmation of diagnosis, anministerial approval, a patient is legallicensed to access cannabis without a prscription. Therefore according to the pu

poses of the Natural Health ProducRegulations, cannabis could be classified a

a Natural HealtProduct.

Cannabis must bregulated as Natural HealtProduct in order eliminate the obstcles presented fopatients, doctors, anthe governing bodieof the medical community that arisfrom attempting

regulate and administer this herb as a phamaceutical product.

5. Pharmacy Distribution

Amendments made to physician formappear to have been designed specifically

BC Compass i on C lub Response to MMAR Amendments

This amendment demon-

strates a lack of respect for

the medical opinions of

health care practitioners

and interferes in their rela-

tionship with their patients.


18/36

18 Cannabis Health

place cannabis in a more traditional healthcare model. There is an underlying assump-tion that this model entails only physiciansand pharmacies, and that this model is theonly one that will enhance protection of the

health and safety of Canadians.While pharmacies may provide a base

level of service and facilitate access for some,this model is not sufficient to meet the n eedsof all medical cannabis users. Pharmacies tra-ditionally do not have the capacity to providethe additional information and close moni-toring of patients postulated in the amend-ment s. They also will not be providing accessto the variety of strains and delivery optionsneeded to address the many symptoms ofmedical cannabis users.

Health Canada must recognizeCompassion Clubs as the ideal compliment tothe pharmacy model, allowing the needs of

all medical cannabis users t o be met.Additional Required Amendments

The proposed amendments havefailed to address some of the majorconcerns articulated by medicalcannabis users.

1. Licensing of Compassion ClubsThe court-ordered remedies,

which have been ignored in theseamendments, were meant to clear theway for licensing of CompassionClubs. In court, Health Canada statedthat these clubs addressed the supplyissue since th ey historically provideda safe source of marihuana to thosewith the medical need and that these unlicensed suppliers shouldcontinu e to serve as the source of sup-ply for those with a medical exemp-tion. Despite their own claims, HealthCanada has still not integrated CompassionClubs into th e legal framework.

For over seven years, Compassion Cluboperators have been risking arrest and crimi-nal prosecution in order to address the press-ing medicinal needs of Canadas criticallyand chronically ill. This vital work has beenrecognized by numerous Canadian courts, aswell as governmental bodies such as theSenate Special Committee on Illegal Drugs.Compassion Clubs serve a clear and neces-sary purpose, and have the strong support oftheir local communities and of the Canadianpublic as a w hole.

Compassion Clubs across Canada havegarnered unique and invaluable experiencesupplying cannabis to over 8000 medicalcannabis users, including many MMARlicense holders. The BC Compassion ClubSociety (BCCCS) provides access not only toclean, high quality cannabis, but also pro-vides education, monitoring, support andother natural heath care services to their

members - all at n o cost to the taxpayer.

Community-based distribution throughCompassion Clubs could meet both th e needsof medical cannabis users an d the other goalsarticulated by the MMAR by adhering to the

following standards: Non-profit incorporation to guarantee

financial transparency and ensure responsi-bility to the consumer.

A minimu m level of production and dis-tribution standards based on Good LabPractices (GLP) and Good AgriculturalPractices (GMP) guidelines.

The exclusive use of organic cultivationpractices.

Participation in inspections to ensurestandards are being met

Community-based, non-profitCompassion Clubs are an effective, afford-

able, sensible, and time proven way, not only

to distribute medicinal cannabis, but also toprovide suffering Canadians with valuableservices no other model can offer.

To ensur e the futu re success of a medicalcannabis programme, Health Canada mustrespect Compassion Clubs as an effective dis-tribution model that has already proven theability to meet the needs of many medicalcannabis users and save the government asignificant amount of money.

2. Cost CoverageThese amendments fail to address thevital concern of cost coverage that primarystakeholders expressed directly to HealthCanada during the consultation session inOttawa in February 2003. The failure to acton this important issue will continue to forcemany legitimate users of medicinal cannabisinto poverty.

Cost coverage must address all costs ofmedicine, including personal cultivation andpurchases from Compassion Clubs and mustnot be limited to Health Canadas product,which is below quality standards for poten cy,

variety, and safety.

Health Canada must establish affordabilty and reimbursement of the costs througthe provincial health insurance system, prvate insurance companies and tax deduction

for all use of cann abis for recognized medicconditions and symptoms.

3. AmnestyCanadian courts have found that thos

who are using, supplying or producinmedicinal cannabis are providing an essentiahealthcare service. Unfortunately somCanadians have received a criminal recorfor providing or using medicinal cannabis.

To restore justice, medicinal cannabusers, distributors and their suppliers muimmediately be given amnesty.

4. Decentralization of AuthorizationTh e Office of Medical Cannabis has spen

millions of dollars operating an unnecessarbureaucracy that has produced littlbenefit to Canadians. CompassioClubs, by contrast, implement higstandards of eligibility and providquality medicine to thousands oCanadians at no cost to Canadian taxpayers.

The decentralization of the Officof Cannabis Medical Access programme and the legitimization oCompassionate Clubs will not onlsave Health Canada preciouresources, it will also address many othe concerns expressed by those wh

could benefit from the medical use ocannabis.

Like other natural health producand pharmaceutical medications, th

lawful possession of medicinal cannabis munot require authorization from a centralizefederal body, the Office of Medical CannabAccess.

ConclusionHealth Canada has been put in th e cha

lenging position of balancing the n eeds of lawenforcement, the medical establishment anmedical users of cannabis.

The implementation of our recommenda

tions is necessary to meet the needs of thhundreds of thousands of Canadians whcould alleviate their chronic pain, improvtheir appetite and relieve their nausea, whilstaying productive and main tainin g a level ohope and happiness despite their serious condition.

For more information: Rielle CapleStrategy and Communications BCompassion Club Society, [email protected] phone: 604-875-0214 www.thecompassionclub.org

BC Compass i on C lub Response to MMAR Amendments

Compassion Clubs across

Canada have garnered

unique and invaluable

experience supplying

cannabis to over 8000

medical cannabis users


19/36

Cannabis Health 19

Meduse r Group Response t o Hea l t h Canada

FOR IMMEDIATE R ELEASE

Monday, November 15th, 2004

Press Statement from the MeduserGroup which is comprised of 15 percent of

the patients participating in the medicalmarijuana access program of HealthCanadas Office of Cannabis MedicalAccess.

This statement is our official responseto Health Canadas recent proposedMarihuana Medical Access Regulationsamendments, which were published in th eCanada Gazette. (Vol. 138, No. 43 - October23, 2004)

Although Health Canada invitedpatients to the table to provide input onthe MMAR program, based on their needsas the primary stakeholders in this pro-

gram, it has failed to implement th eir rec-ommendations.

Health Canada is ignoring input, rec-ommendations and rulings made bypatients, the Canadian Senate Committeeand the courts.

Health Canadas position seems to bethat the desires of physicians and law

enforcement are more important than theneeds of patients. The result of this posi-tion is that the MMAR and Office ofCannabis Medical Access programremains an ineffective, cumbersome and

faulty program.There are continuing admission prob-

lems for those wishing to enter th e MMARprogram, and there are continuingcann abis supply problems for those alreadywithin t he system.

In addition to the MMAR admissionand supply problems, Health Canadaslong-term vision of phasing out personaland designated medical cannabis produc-tion licences is unacceptable to patientswho w ish to cultivate their own supply ofmedical cannabis.

The recent proposed MMAR amend-ments fail to address the pr imary intent ofthe MMAR program, which is to providepeople who wish to use cannabis medici-nally with efficient compassionate accessto a range of safe and effective sources ofmarihuana.

Health Canada continues to ignore

these requirements, and it is evident fromthe lack of action in acknowledging anaddressing these concerns, that the needof patients are not a priority in MMARpolicy development and amendments.

CONTACT: Canada western repPhilippe Lucas (Victoria, BC) Phone: (250884-9821 Email: [email protected] western rep: Eric Nash (DuncanBC) Phone: (250) 748-8614 [email protected] Canada centrarep: Alison Myrden (Burlington, ONPhone: (905) 681-8287 [email protected] Canada eastern repDebbie Stultz-Giffin (Bridgetown, NSPhone: (902) 655-2355 Email: [email protected]


20/36

20 Cannabis Health

Howard J. Wooldridge, Leap

The tall, lanky cowboy strides to thepodium. Grasping the microphone, hisvoice booms out to the audience ofRotarians, War on Drugs. How is thatworking for you in Colorado? Is it reducingcrime? Is it reducing rates of death an d dis-ease? Is it even redu cing rates of drug use?The audience murmurs an d mumbles a NOto all of the questions.

Twenty five minutes later the Rotariansfiled out, many stopping to shake my handand say that I gave them a lot to think about.Thu s ends another presentation, one of over100 that I have done in 2004. My mind drifts

back to where I was a year ago..ridingMisty 40 kilometers a day, 6 days a week.Th en; dressed in jeans, boots & spurs, dirty t-shirt, cowboy hat and always needing a bath,now; I am wearing a sport coat, shiny bootsand buckle, and my Sunday cowboy hat.What a change!

2004 has been a year of driving from oneRotary to another, speaking to and changing30-60 community leaders at a time. WhileMisty is resting comfortably on 10 acres at aranch in Kentucky, my Chevy truck hastransported me some 50,000 KM. FromTexas to Colorado to Virginia to Oregon andnorth to Alaska I have traversed the United

States, seeking to educate the un converted.My efforts this year are part of an inter-

national effort by LEAP, Law EnforcementAgainst Prohibition. LEAP speakers havemade over 1000 presentations to audiencesaround the world. LEAP seeks out venueswhere the majority of the listeners are whatwe call the unconverted. LEAP speakerssimply give the listeners the facts of the fail-ure of the war on drugs and let them decidewhat to do.

The response to the LEAP message hasbeen consistent across nearly all parts of

America; namely, that over h alf the audiencewalks out ready to end the war on drugs!How can that occur? LEAP speakers receiveimmediate credibility from the crowdbecause we have been in the trenches of the

war on drugs. This transformation of viewsheld by so man y creates energy, propelling usforward to another and yet another civicorganization. It is difficult to put on paperthe jolt one receives when a man or womanshakes your hand, says God bless and keepup the good work. I have had hundreds andhundreds of conservatives approach me andwish me well. Yes, yes, I have had a fewdeath th reats but so far, so good.

It isnt just Rotarians who have beenconverted. I was sleeping in a no-tellmotel in Mississippi this spring, when thepolice pounded on my door around mid-night. I tumbled out of bed and met three

young, unhappy-looking cops at my door.They informed me that I had left the key inthe door of my truck. I thanked them butthen, in an accusing tone, they asked aboutthe sign on my truck, COPS SAY LEGAL-IZE POT, ASK ME WHY. I replied thatmost of us want to focus on drunk driversand child molesters. Fifteen minutes laterthey asked for LEAP brochu res and instr uc-tions on how to join!!

LEAP is comprised of current an d formerprofessionals in law enforcement in 45 coun-tries. The vast majority are police with anice sprin kling of prosecutors, judges, correc-tion officers and even a few ex-DEA agents.

Volunteers all, we now have over 40 activespeakers with a like number who are in theprocess of being certified to speak. We havemade over 600 presentations in the past 12months and when you include TV and radioaudiences, several million people have heardour voices. Th e level of activity will onlyincrease, as we created a speakers bureau in2004, where 15 volunteers book our speak-ers next presentations. We are on themarch!

My efforts will slow down drastically inDecember. I will transport Misty back to aranch in Oklahoma to prepare for a 6,000KM ride from Los Angeles to New York City.In addition to riding Misty a few miles every-day, I will train Rocky, a backup horse incase Misty is injured. Unable to completelyshut u p, I will present to a Rotary or Kiwanisonce a week or so.

You might ask w hy I would make t hi

mind, body and spirit-breaking trip again.fully admit to still being tired from the firstrip I completed in the fall of 2003. The impetus to ride again comes from meeting somany inspirational reformers this yearFrom Stormy Ray in Oregon to Bernie Elliin Tenn essee and many others in between, stand in awe of the sacrifices that they havbeen making for years.

The 2005 ride will generate hundreds oradio, TV and newspaper appearances withan estimated 6 million people exposed to tht-shirt, LEAP message and reform in generalAlso importan t, Americans for Safe Access ASA- will coordinate with LEAP to provid

marijuana patients to appear with us inphoto ops. The combination of a wheelchaipatient, the horse and the cowboy will be powerful and compelling image for reformWe will knock people out of their comforzone of complacency and increase the pressure to end drug prohibition.

The ride will begin on a beach just soutof Los Angeles about March 12, 2005. Wwill average about 40 KM per day, and resone day in seven. We have a routine whershe lopes 3.2 KM, then I dismount and leaher for 1.6 KM. Next year I will walk abou2,080 KM, almost the distance betweenVancouver and Winnipeg. The demands o

such an endeavor are 24/7, the greatest beinthe never-ending search for food for Mistand to a lesser degree her water. From thLA city limits to the border of Nebrasksome 3,000 KM, there will be almost ngrass. In each village, I will seek out a cemetery, post office, funeral home any placwhere they might water their yards, thus providing some grass for poor Misty.

The grass is only half of the equationbecause the caloric demands of so much exercise require Misty to eat 9 kilos of grain peday. Though I never had children, the expe

H o w T o C h a n g e t h e Wo r l d

. . .until the war on

drugs is over or until Idraw my las t breath .


21/36

Cannabis Health 21


rience of 6 month s of trying to care for Mistyallows me to relate to being a mom. Themost gut-wrenching memories of the firsttrip were the nights of no food for her. Aftershe worked hard to carry my little butt 35 to

60 KM, she would look at me with her one,big, brown eye asking where is dinner.When I had none to give, it broke my heart.

Luckily, those nights were few and farbetween. Even with the bold t-shirt, peoplefrom coast to coast volunteered to help outwith grain and water. One particular nasty60 KM stretch on I-84 from Mountain Hometo Boise, ID was almost typical. We rode outat daybreak and the temperature quicklyrose to 40 Centigrade. After 44 KM of blaz-ing sun in the desert, we stopped at a truckstop for lunch. Misty had plenty to drinkbut here, there was not even a postage stampof grass. As I was about to enter the caf, I

spotted at the pumps, a stock trailer full ofsheep. I asked the shepard, if I could buysome hay. He said no, but I could have all Iwanted. Misty had a fine lunch of threeflakes of alfalfa. Th is story repeated itself allacross America.

After we ride into the Big Apple in earlyNovember, Misty will receive two months off

at a ranch in Georgia. After I rest up, I willfind a place for the two of us nearWashington DC. In 2006 I w ill be a lobbyistfor LEAP in th e US Congress.

LEAP in 2005 will continue its primarmission of speaking to civic groups and anywhere there is an audience of the unconverted. More frequently, the phon e is rin ging an

Howard and M isty wi th some new friends in Orego


22/36

22 Cannabis Health

someone is asking us toprovide a speaker for aforum, debate, testimony,etc. For example, before Ileave for California to

start my newest trekacross America, I amscheduled to testify beforethe Oklahoma SentencingCommission, a state com-mittee. While I am backin dirty jeans, dirty t-shirtand always needing ashower, my colleagueswill take their Saturdaybaths early and be off tospeak to an other group of35 Rotarians.

If you would like to follow Misty and me acros

the deserts, mountains, prairies and into th

Big A pple, there will be a special link on th

LEA P website of: www.leap.cc The website wi

contain a m ap, my daily journal, and photos

the trip. Please visit. If you ever have thchance to visit with me in person, I would b

grateful. The loneliness on such a long ride

mind-bending.

I am often asked how long will thruinous policy of drug war continue. I aoptimistic that with so many pulling thwagon back to sanity, drug prohibition wibe in the history books by 2014. As for me,will donate my time and my horse as much awe can han dle, unt il the war on d rugs is oveor u ntil I draw my last breath .


Howard and Misty in Oregon

Denn i s L i l l i c o F igh t s f o r h i s Human R igh t s

By Kate

Skye.

Courtesy of

Trail Daily

Times

W h i l eD e n n i sLillico stillcant find a

p h y s i c i a nto champi-on his right to access medicinal marijuana,local Member of Parliament , Jim Gouk, MP isoffering his support. We have legal use ofmarijuan a for medical circumstan ces but it isnext to impossible for someone like Lillico tobe able to access it legally, Gouk said. He isprofoundly disabled. I think anyone who hasever met with the man has to have some sym-pathy for what h e is going through . . . he sayshe gets a tremendous amount of relief (frommarijuana) and it seems some doctors haverecognized that bu t are now caught u p in pol-itics. Those politics began, Lillico said,when th e College of Physicians an d Surgeonsadvised doctors not to recommend marijuanato their patients because the federal govern-ment had not decriminalized it.

No doctor wan ts to put in a recommen-dation because there is a liability factorbecause they are actually endorsing the u se ofwhat is currently a criminal offense drug,Gouk said. Last year, Lillico started a HumanRights claim against the College of Physiciansand Surgeons of B.C., two local doctors, and aneurogeneticist at UBC, saying he had beendiscriminated against. That hearing will takeplace in Jun e 2005, in Castlegar. I feel I have

been discriminated against because they haveacknowledged that smoking cannabis doeshelp with my pain and movement yet at thesame time they wont prescribe it, Lillicosaid. Lillico, 38, suffers from a very r are n eu-rological disorder known as familial autoso-mal dominant myoclonic dystonia, a condi-tion that is severely disabling and causesseizure-like symptoms, and severe pain. Ivetried many different medications,and the

only medicine th at gives me relief is marijua-na, he said. Under the federal governmentsmarijuana medical access regulation, peoplecan be authorized to grow, possess and usemarijuana for medical purposes, but firstthey must app ly to the Minister of Health forauthorization. Application for authorizationmust be supported by a medical declaration.But the real issue, Gouk said, is that thefederal government is not taking a clearstand. Th is is typical Liberal legislation. T heydo something so they can say theyve donesomething but do so little . . . they try to walkboth sides of the fence at the same time. In aquestionnaire sent by Gouk to his con-

stituen ts in 1998, 49.9 percent said they werein favour of medical marijuana, 19.6 percentwere totally opposed, and 30.5 percent saidthey want ed more information. What s to bedone with marijuana is not something thatshould be decided behind closed doors byParliament. There needs to be a lot more pub-lic dialogue about t he pros an d cons. When itcomes to medical marijuana, Gouk said,there is some indication that certain peopledo get a lot of relief from certain types of ail-ments . . . we need to see some real genuinescientific indication as to whether or not itreally does provide relief (and) if there are

alternat ive ways of taking it besides smokinit. Getting the debate out in the open wihelp move the discussion forward, he saidLets discuss it dispassionat ely once and foall. Even though Gouk is offering support hadded, I dont smoke marijuana, I nevehave, I dont recommend anybody smoke iBut when it comes to people like Lillico, hadded, if I can help him get access to legamarijuana, Im going to do it. Despite sti

not being able to get a local physician tchampion his cause, Lillico said he apprecates Gouks support. All I can do is battle onI dont have much choice in the matter. Thdoctors arent giving me any choices; theyrnot giving me anything (medicinally) thacomes close to wh at cann abis does for me.

Update: Frances Kelly, Barrister &Solicitor for th e Commun ity Legal AssistancSociety, Disability Law Program, has beeadvised by the BC Human Rights Tribunthat t here is a hearing set for Jun e 6, 7 and 2005 at 9:30am (at a location to be detemined in Castlegar). Cannabis Health contacted Denniss legal counsel, Frances Kell

but she could not comment at this time. Shdid say, Dennis has a good case, thPhysicians & Surgeons of British Columbiand t he doctors have a dut y to accommodatwhich they clearly have not done. Therefusals to sign the required forms havdenied Dennis Lillico access to the FederaGovernments approved Medical MarijuanAccess program. Cann abis Health is planninto attend the hearing, if anyone else is inteested in attending, please contact us for futher u pdates.


23/36

by Ted Smith

Hempology 101 started weekly meetingsin Vancouver in November 1994, and Iattended my first meeting in January 1995.By Sept I h ad decided to host the Wednesday

night meetings in downtown Victoria andvolunteered to write a Hempology 101 text-book. With my involvement in the move-ment, I met a woman who made cannabis-infused salve and cookies and in January1996, we decided to start the CannabisBuyers Club. The CBC was the first publicmedical cannabis club in Canada completewith a pamphlet and a pager n umber. I founda downtown apartment a couple of monthslater in Victoria, but more thieves appearedthan donors in those first few years and theservices of the club stayed quite limited.

Th e CBC believes it is un fair to requ ire adoctors recommendation, in order to access

cannabis, from someone who suffers from apermanent, physical disability or disease.Doctors are reluctant to endorse cannabis,primarily because they have been warned bythe College of Physicians and Surgeons not topromote th e herb. Conservative doctors dontwant a smoked plant to be considered a med-icine; and especially not if people enjoy theprocess. A lack of quality research has limit-ed the medical communitys ability to un der-stand cannabis and pat ients lacking a reliablesupply of cannabis products cannot prove totheir doctors that the herb helps them feelbetter. Without watching people improvetheir lives by using cannabis, physicians havelittle information.

Th eo and Mordici the Muffin Man start-ed a service in Vancouver in the summer of1996 called the Vancouver MedicalMarijuana Coalition; however the originalteam did not last long. When Hillary Blackreturned from Europe she joined Theo toform the Vancouver Medical MarijuanaBuyers Club. Doctors recommendationswere requested for some conditions and thename was changed to the CannabisCompassion Club. The group incorporated asthe B.C. Compassion Club Society in 1997.

Hempology 101 and the CBC made slow,steady progress in the early years. Many

questioned my actions as I chose to fight forlegalization with Hempology 101. Iveattended public rallies where I have beenknown to smoke joints and pass out cookies.

I believe that the responsible use of qualitycannabis gives more benefits than harm tothe average healthy person. However, underthe circumstan ces I believe that the most vu l-nerable and ill of our citizens should n ot haveto wait for the laws to change, or their doctor

to become supportive, before t hey gain accessto a club. By limiting membership in the clubto people with incurablemedical problems we hopeto take the first steptowards full legalization.Since the early days somepeople believed the CBCwent too far and groupslike Hempology 101 shouldbe kept distant from med-ical suppliers.

On November 8, 2000,I was arrested and chargedwith trafficking for sharing

a few joints after a weekly101 Club 4:20 Hempologymeeting at the Universityof Victoria. On e week later,on International MedicalMarijuana Day, I wasarrested and charged againfor trafficking, this ti

cannabis health - [february edition 2005]

Documents