"LDS Church: Legal analysis raises concerns about Utah medical marijuana initiative"

[pogi]

Here is the article from KSL which has a link to the analysis:

https://www.ksl.com/?sid=46318852&nid=148&title=lds-church-legal-analysis-raises-grave-concerns-about-utah-medical-marijuana-initiative

While I am in favor of legalizing medical marijuana, there are several points in this analysis which raise some concerns for me.  This is not how I envision it should be.

If medical marijuana is to be legalized, it needs to be treated like all other prescription medications.  For example, if you are being treated for pain, no doctor is going to give you a medical opioid card that is good for X amount of months to be used as desired.  No, you are going to get a prescription with a very specific quantity, dosage, and frequency.  That will not be the case with these medical cannabis cards.  It will be up to the user to take it as desired basically, with no follow up visit required.

There are several other points that brought up concerns, and also a lot of points that I don't see as an issue at all. 

What points do you guys view as a concern, or not?

I do like that the church included this:

Quote

We invite all to read the attached memorandum and to make their own judgment.

 

[rongo]

Fascinating! Thanks for pointing this out.

This looks to me like the Church is floating a trial balloon to gauge where Utahns are at (including active LDS). I think this analysis and calculus is going to figure prominently in its eventual policy declaration (which has been talked about to my knowledge since at least September). 

[california boy]

Not surprised that the church would do a political hit piece on marijuana and tell the members to read it rather than providing a balanced informative information piece for the members to consider

Replace marijuana with opioids and you can see how ridiculous some of these arguments are

[provoman]

49 minutes ago, pogi said:

Here is the article from KSL which has a link to the analysis:

https://www.ksl.com/?sid=46318852&nid=148&title=lds-church-legal-analysis-raises-grave-concerns-about-utah-medical-marijuana-initiative

While I am in favor of legalizing medical marijuana, there are several points in this analysis which raise some concerns for me.  This is not how I envision it should be.

If medical marijuana is to be legalized, it needs to be treated like all other prescription medications.  For example, if you are being treated for pain, no doctor is going to give you a medical opioid card that is good for X amount of months to be used as desired.  No, you are going to get a prescription with a very specific quantity, dosage, and frequency.  That will not be the case with these medical cannabis cards.  It will be up to the user to take it as desired basically, with no follow up visit required.

There are several other points that brought up concerns, and also a lot of points that I don't see as an issue at all. 

What points do you guys view as a concern, or not?

I do like that the church included this:

 

I woukd say a lot of it is non issue. A few valid points.

What is particularly disapponting is that Kirton&Mckonkie put their name on it. Why is this disappointing, because sone if i comes across as fear mongering, at least one point raised by K&M appears to be a falsehood

Seeming falsehood in the K&M letter:

• Quote

  The Marijuana Initiative Prohibits Local Zoning Ordinances Targeted at Marijuana Dispensaries. 

•  
• K&M presents the initiative as prhibiting local ordiances, this suggests that a local government can not creste ANY ordinance that applies to dispensaries
•  
• But how does the initiative read according to K&M

Quote

 

• Municipalities and counties cannot “enact a zoning ordinance that prohibits a cannabis dispensary from operating” within their jurisdiction. (Section 26-60b-506(1)-(2).)

 

So the law does not prohit local zoning as presented by K&M. The prohibit local prohibition; that is a significant distinction.

[provoman]

• Quote

  The Marijuana Initiative Will Make Marijuana More Accessible to Minors. A careful review of the 2015-2016 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, conducted by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, an agency within the U.S Department of Health and Human Services, reveals that marijuana usage among children ages 12-17 (and adults ages 18-25) is generally significantly higher in states that have legalized recreational and medicinal use. Utah had the lowest rates of usage in the nation among both age groups.[6]The marijuana initiative may change that.

  Fear mongering. And notice that the information is from States with recreational marijuana. Why not just provide the information of usage in States with only medical. 

[california boy]

How about this one:

Quote

 Under the Marijuana Initiative, Large Numbers of Utahans Will Likely Qualify for Medical Cannabis Cards.  Under the proposed law, a person “is eligible” for a medical cannabis card if (1) the person is a Utah resident, (2) a physician diagnoses the person with a “qualifying illness,” and (3) the physician believes the person “may benefit from treatment with cannabis ….” (Section 26-60b-201.) The list of “qualifying illnesses” includes life-threatening and debilitating diseases, but also includes conditions that are difficult to diagnose and can afflict many people in varying degrees, such as “chronic pain,” which by some estimates includes over 15% of the population. Further, the physician must only believe that the patient “may benefit” from marijuana. Finally, the Department of Health does not have discretion to deny a medical cannabis card but “shall… within 15 days” issue a medical cannabis card to a patient with a referral from a physician.:

So rather than giving a prescription for marijuana, doctors prescribe the much more addictive opioids.  And how is that any better?

Edited May 12, 2018 by california boy

[provoman]

5 minutes ago, california boy said:

How about this one:

So rather than giving a prescription for marijuana, doctors prescribe the much more addictive opioids.  And how is that any better?

And it impunes the ethics of Utah Doctors to suggest that they will advise marijuana uasage willy-nilly

[california boy]

Or how about this one:

Quote

The Marijuana Initiative Allows Patients to Get a Recommendation from a Physician Based on a One-time Visit. Nothing in the Initiative requires the physician who refers a patient for a medical cannabis card to have a prior relationship with the patient, to review the patient’s medical records, or to schedule a follow-up visit to see how the treatment is working.

Are patients required to have multiple appointments with doctors before any other drug can be prescribed?  Are follow-up visits required by law for other drugs that a physician may prescribe ?

 

Quote

The physician is required to do “a full assessment of the patient’s condition and medical history,” but this can presumably be done through patient reporting during a single visit. (Section 26-60b-107(4).) In states that have legalized medical marijuana, “prescribing physicians typically have no prior relationship with the applicant-patient” and often know nothing more about the patient than what the patient discloses during a single visit.

Is a doctor required by law to have the patient report his medical history with multiple visits for other drugs?

 

Quote

Also, nothing in the Marijuana Initiative prevents a patient from going to a different physician every six months to get a renewal recommendation.

Is there any law against going to a different doctor every six months to get a prescription for other drugs?

You could go through virtually this entire document asking these kinds of logical questions. Like I said, it is a political hit piece put out by the Church.  How does that strengthen trust and credibility in church leadership?  This piece is designed for those Mormons that do whatever the prophet says without any thought or question.  It will probably work in Utah.  I wonder how those members of the church that could greatly benefit from marijuana with their illness will feel about the church if this law is defeated.  How would you feel?

Edited May 12, 2018 by california boy

[strappinglad]

Each law that is passed  has a bunch of " regulations " attached to it which outline the finer" devil in the details" points and provide guidelines/restrictions to law enforcement. The law firm seems to be anticipating areas of concern about possible future regulations . Those here who think that acceptance of medical MJ will not eventually lead to a push for recreational  MJ and a removal of Federal restrictions are spitting in the wind. The arguments from personal freedom to non-discrimination have been used successfully before.

To suggest/imply that the LDS Church gave strict orders to the K/M law firm about exactly which direction the report must go , stretches cynicism quite a ways.

[cacheman]

1 hour ago, provoman said:

The Marijuana Initiative Will Make Marijuana More Accessible to Minors. A careful review of the 2015-2016 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, conducted by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, an agency within the U.S Department of Health and Human Services, reveals that marijuana usage among children ages 12-17 (and adults ages 18-25) is generally significantly higher in states that have legalized recreational and medicinal use. Utah had the lowest rates of usage in the nation among both age groups.[6]The marijuana

What is the measure that they used for their statement regarding accessibility to minors?  Also,  wouldn't usage trends be a more useful statistic in determining how the initiative may impact teen use? The data show usage in the 12-17 age group decreasing nationwide in the two years of data they presented.  Legal states showed some of the most dramatic decreases,  while some prohibition states like Utah showed increases in the 12-17 age group.  

Edited May 12, 2018 by cacheman

[Exiled]

I haven't had a chance to digest this study, but it purports that marijuana use reduces opiate overdose.  If anything can reduce opiate related death, we should look at it.   https://drugabuse.com/legalizing-marijuana-decreases-fatal-opiate-overdoses/

[Kenngo1969]

4 hours ago, Exiled said:

I haven't had a chance to digest this study, but it purports that marijuana use reduces opiate overdose.  If anything can reduce opiate related death, we should look at it.   https://drugabuse.com/legalizing-marijuana-decreases-fatal-opiate-overdoses/

Huh.  So this study's authors controlled for absolutely everything that could reduce opioid deaths other than marijuana use, hmm?  So, correlation, contrary to that old saw, really is causation, then, hmm?  Color me surprised, if not out-and-out skeptical.  Who knew?

[sunstoned]

7 hours ago, california boy said:

Not surprised that the church would do a political hit piece on marijuana and tell the members to read it rather than providing a balanced informative information piece for the members to consider

Replace marijuana with opioids and you can see how ridiculous some of these arguments are

I wish the church would stay out of politics.  All this "analysis" was is just code for all members to oppose it.

[Calm]

Quote

e patients required to have multiple appointments with doctors before any other drug can be prescribed?

In my experience in Utah, long term opioid use required multiple visits because other drug options were tried out before opioids were prescribed (not all drugs were tried out by the same doctor as prescribing, medical history showing trying out every other drug option first going back several years was acceptable).  Blood tests and detailed medical history including doctor records for a significant amount of time were required.  Sleep study was also required since the purpose was to help with sleep/movement disorder.  The process might be different for chronic pain.  One month visits to get the right dose were required at first.  Then my visits were every three months, after three or four years of staying at the same dose, it switched to every six months.  Prescriptions were renewed monthly by calling in and clearing with the doctor and then the prescription had to be picked up by a person (husband and son had been able to do this, have not tried nonrelative) and taken to the pharmacy.  Neither faxing or phoning prescriptions in was allowed.

Edited May 12, 2018 by Calm

[cacheman]

3 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Huh.  So this study's authors controlled for absolutely everything that could reduce opioid deaths other than marijuana use, hmm?  So, correlation, contrary to that old saw, really is causation, then, hmm?  Color me surprised, if not out-and-out skeptical.  Who knew?

You are right to be skeptical of Exiled's statement.   The study does not purport that marijuana use reduces opiate related deaths. However, it does show a correlation. Correlation often indicates some level of causation,  which is why the authors suggest that legalizing Cannabis may reduce opioid eelated deaths. A study published this month in the Journal of the American Medical Association - Internal Medicine adds to that argument by showing opioid prescription patterns in the wake of legalizing Cannabis for medical purposes.  There are other studies out there that add evidence to the argument as well.  

I personally know people that have used Cannabis to break their opioid addiction. These people did that in a prohibition state,  which is impressive in itself since anybody can legally,  without a prescription go down to their local grocery store and purchase opiates. 

[Calm]

"since anybody can legally,  without a prescription go down to their local grocery store and purchase opiates. "

Huh?  Missing something....unless you mean Imodium.

[cacheman]

1 minute ago, Calm said:

"since anybody can legally,  without a prescription go down to their local grocery store and purchase opiates. "

Huh?  Missing something....unless you mean Imodium.

Yes.  Immodium (loperamide). Many opioid addicts will use it to stave off withdrawals.  If you take large enough amounts,  a portion will cross the blood / brain barrier creating an opiate high.  Obviously,  the health implications of this can be traumatic.  You can also purchase poppy seeds to make a tea.  This is quite common,  and there have been a number of deaths and cases of addiction related to poppy seed tea.  It's also legal and easy to purchase opium poppy seeds.  It's technically illegal to grow them, but the law is rarely enforced. I've also seen poppy straw and pods for sale at my local farmers market. 

[Calm]

I have grown Oriental poppy seeds myself, gorgeous flowers, up in Canada.  Maybe I should do some more this year.  You got me all ambitious.  I have twomassive pots Ihave been debating what to put in.  Time to hit the Nursery.

see at the top:

https://www.deamuseum.org/ccp/opium/history.html

I love poppyseed salad dressing, poppyseed cake, poppyseed buns...must be a total addict.  

[cacheman]

I should add, that while not an opiate, kratom is widely available and legal in most states.  It appears to be a safer alternative to opioids in that it doesn't cause respiratory depression and it lacks the level of euphoric properties of opioids.  Many have used it to get off of opioids, but it still carries a significant risk of dependency and addiction.  

Not to mention all of the other numerous legal products out there that can get people high or intoxicated.  There are many useful products or common plants that can be misused to obtain a high.  

Our longstanding drug policy hasn't been effective at addressing our real societal problems that lead a sizeable portion of our citizens to seek out these highs.  I am amazed that people still think the answer to our 'drug' problems are found in restricting availability. They are more available than ever.  We need to address the roots of the problem rather than continue supporting an ineffective system of laws that have resulted in numerous negative consequences.  This is very much a moral issue in my mind. 

I know I've deviated from the discussion of medical Cannabis.... but it just blows my mind that people would oppose it because of fears that people will misuse it to get high.  People are already getting high.....easily,  and in large numbers.  What we've been doing hasn't worked.  Why are we fighting to maintain policies that haven't worked and in turn created new problems..... especially when there is growing evidence of the medicinal potential of the plant.  

I think the LDS church's focus on this issue is missing the big picture.  They actually have a model that has been effective in their realm. ...the word of wisdom.  The misuse of Cannabis in LDS populations is not low because they limited freedoms or restricted access. It's because they effected a cultural change by tying spiritual/moral/ethical reasons for abstaining from drug abuse.  On top of that,  they offer guidance and help for those who need it.  Imagine if our drug policies and laws were focused on effecting a positive cultural change and providing needed services rather than enforcing ineffective laws that have ended up creating new problems. 

[janderich]

14 hours ago, pogi said:

If medical marijuana is to be legalized, it needs to be treated like all other prescription medications.  For example, if you are being treated for pain, no doctor is going to give you a medical opioid card that is good for X amount of months to be used as desired.  No, you are going to get a prescription with a very specific quantity, dosage, and frequency.  That will not be the case with these medical cannabis cards.  It will be up to the user to take it as desired basically, with no follow up visit required.

Agreed. And the first thing to treating it like other prescription medications is to get it listed as a schedule II drug instead of a schedule I drug by the DEA. This will allow researchers to study it without a special license. By the way cocaine is listed as a schedule II drug. 

[Kenngo1969]

35 minutes ago, janderich said:

Agreed. And the first thing to treating it like other prescription medications is to get it listed as a schedule II drug instead of a schedule I drug by the DEA. This will allow researchers to study it without a special license. By the way cocaine is listed as a schedule II drug. 

I'm not certain, but I believe legitimate medical uses for Cocaine were discovered before non-medical use was made illegal.

[janderich]

10 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

I'm not certain, but I believe legitimate medical uses for Cocaine were discovered before non-medical use was made illegal.

Certainly could be, but marijuana was used medicinally before it was put on the list and it is clear now that it has medical uses.  

[Exiled]

10 hours ago, sunstoned said:

I wish the church would stay out of politics.  All this "analysis" was is just code for all members to oppose it.

Yes indeed. https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/multimedia/file/Legal-Analysis-of-Utah-Medical-Marijuana-Initiative.pdf

It is full of fear-mongering scare tactics designed to stampede the public into not supporting the legislation.  

And now I present "Reefer Madness" to make you really scared:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esfKfTBGadg  

 

[ksfisher]

https://www.ksl.com/?sid=46317964&nid=1009&title=study-69-of-colorado-dispensaries-recommended-marijuana-to-treat-morning-sickness

Nearly 70 percent of marijuana dispensaries contacted during a health study in 2017 recommended that expectant moms suffering from morning sickness use marijuana.

The alarming statistic was part of a study conducted by Denver Health, with help from the University of Colorado School of Medicine, Colorado School of Public Health and the University of Utah, which was published in the peer-reviewed Obstetrics & Gynecology.

"It was surprising and concerning to us, because there are data results that cannabis can be harmful to the developing fetus," said Dr. Torri Metz, a high risk obstetrician at Denver Health.

[Kenngo1969]

3 hours ago, ksfisher said:

... "It was surprising and concerning to us, because there are data results that cannabis can be harmful to the developing fetus," said Dr. Torri Metz, a high risk obstetrician at Denver Health.

"Dr." Torri Metz doesn't know what she's talking about.  She's obviously being bought off by the pharmaceutical companies. 

It's ...

An ...

Herb!