The Letter That Wasn’t

Last April a letter to the editor was published in the Columbian news paper. I can’t help but attempt to respond when I read these types of ignorant statements. I waited the mandatory 30 day period between this and my last letter. I believe I hit the 200 word limit on the button. At this point in time it’s obvious to me the publisher hasn’t seen fit to print my rebuttal. Here’s the letter that raised my ire; 

A prescription still drug use

Here’s my letter (that didn’t make print) in response;

In Kenneth Juergen von Husan’s missive dated April 17 and titled _A prescription still drug use_, his last sentence reads, “There is no such thing as ‘medical marijuana,’ pot is pot.” This statement leads me to believe Mr. Husan is woefully ignorant on the medicinal efficacy of cannabis. In the interest of education allow me to briefly point out;

It’s documented that cannabis has been used as an herbal medicine for over 2,300 years.

GW Pharmaceuticals is currently marketing a cannabis derived product (Sativex) in Canada and several European nations. This medicine is used to treat MS and severe pain. Several other pharmaceutical companies are following suit.

WSU is currently involved in a study to verify the synergistic relationship between cannabis and opiate pain relievers.

The Washington State Department of Health has approved cannabis in the treatment of several maladies, from pain to eating disorders.

Current studies are showing that cannabis may very well shrink tumors associated with breast cancer. Though the results aren’t conclusive at this point there is evidence that cannabis may even prevent some cancers.

With a 200 word limit I’m forced to keep this class session short. The bell has rung. You are dismissed.



  1. markvevers said,

    May 13, 2010 at 8:04 pm

    Very cool man 😀

  2. capndrift said,

    May 15, 2010 at 7:54 am

    Thanks, Mark.

    Ya’ know, I figure you wandered over from your own
    wordpress blog. I see you have a “Letters” category too.
    But now, by posting those three simple words, you’ve
    thrown the door open to my following pontification.
    Thanks, man. I appreciate the opportunity. Heh.

    The way I see it, cannabis ignorance comes in two categories. The first is the folks who are still influenced
    by the propaganda of the thirties (and beyond) and haven’t
    bothered to do their own research. A little education can
    go a long way with these folks. Why would an individual
    maintain a negative opinion about cannabis when they have
    been made aware of the truths and facts; the research, the
    studies. Any intelligent person would revise their view on
    the subject. Obviously.

    The second are the people who insist on remaining
    ignorant and spewing the senseless rhetoric that was
    spawned so many years ago in corporate boardrooms.
    Why in creation these folks wish to remain blind to the
    truth, and further the lies, is beyond me. What could
    possibly be their motivation? I truly don’t understand and,
    frankly, it frustrates me to no end. At times it flat out
    gets my dander up, it does.

    Thanks again for dropping in, Mark.
    That’ll teach ya’! Heh, heh.

  3. Dan Jacobs said,

    July 8, 2010 at 6:50 pm

    While there are studies that suggest that cannabis might prevent some cancers, are there studies that suggest that smoking cannabis does not contribute to mouth, throat, esophageal, or lung cancer? While my mother was dieing of HIV/AIDS, she wasn’t the least bit concerned about any possible lung cancer risks like those I listed, but someone that uses cannabis for non-end of life issues might be concerned.

  4. capndrift said,

    July 9, 2010 at 6:19 am

    No there’s not, Dan.
    What there also isn’t is a single documented case where a cancer was attributed to smoking cannabis alone (unlike cigarettes).

    Even with that said, inhaling any burning material probably isn’t very good for the respiratory system.

    Many people prefer smoking for a variety of reasons. Cancer patients suffering from nausea might have a hard time keeping an ingested product down. Also, the effect from smoking is almost immediate. The titration level is known within a few minutes, whereas with oral ingestion it can take an hour or more; and then the dose might prove to be too little or too much.

    The solution is vaporization.

    With vaporization the glandular trichomes are heated to the point of ebulition releasing the cannabinoid terpenes as a vapor. The vapor is inhaled in the same fashion as regular smoking. The plant material never reaches the combustion temperature… no benzene, carbon monoxide, etc.

    Thanks for dropping in, Dan!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: