the_right_wing@truth.com

The 1930's position on cannabis was but a bit more than three decades
removed from the battle of the turn-of-century nostrums and schools of
medicine, vis-a-vis the osteopaths and the medical doctors.

peter h. proctor

The DO's are as much physicians as we MD's. So I'm not sure
what you mean..... And, in retrospect, the AMA was
rightfully-concerned about the law preventing the development of new
the****utic uses for cannabis...

BTW, the speaker of the house asked the sponsor of the bill
whether the AMA had signed onto it. The sponsor flatly lied and said
the AMA supported it, when in fact they opposed it. So the bill was
passed essentially without any debate. Just one more example of
the long trail of mendacity surrounding these laws.

Dr P

george conklin

<YTeLa.16409$C83.1525437@newsread1.prod.itd.earthl ink.net>,

What does this have to do with physicans at MD Anderson being persecuted
for helping cancer patients with doses common already in Europe?
You must be high.

george conklin

Correct. In fact, no one remembered to ban pot for about 30 years, as
you note. It was a forgotten drug.

george conklin

You have proved my point. No one ever has heard of the pain clinic at MD
Anderson. They sure have heard of the AMA. These are local physicians
acting with silence from their major lobbing group. The AMA has
successfully seen to it we do not have universal health care. That is far
harder to do than to let the dying have some pain relief.

howard mccollister

The AMA doesn't represent the interests of the vast majority of physicians.
All it is is a lobbying organization, and they have failed miserably at that
task. They aren't interested in Orac, they are interested in the AMA. I can
assure you that the AMA has COST Orac money.

70% of US physicians have rejected the AMA agenda. The reason the AMA
continues to exist at all is momentum from simple tradition (which is
obviously becoming less and less relevant), and the leadership vacuum in the
medical profession.You can rail against the AMA all you want. 70% of doctors
in America will agree with you, but for different reasons.

HMc

the_right_wing@truth.com

The 1930's position on cannabis was but a bit more than three decades
removed from the battle of the turn-of-century nostrums and schools of
medicine, vis-a-vis the osteopaths and the medical doctors.

hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu (herman

This is, unfortunately, not the case. The moralists would
accuse physicians of promoting addiction (they already
have), and the paranoids in law enforcement, prosecution,
etc., seem to have nothing standing in their way.

It is only if those paranoids are risking their livelihoods
that anything can be done. It is next to impossible to do
anything to them for their major violations of rights.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Deptartment of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu (herman

No, we need to remove the cops. The present physicians can
then use judgment, and learn without fear.

--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Deptartment of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

peter h. proctor

Nonsense. E.g., the head of the Pain clinic at MD Anderson
runs a decriminalization weekly cable TV show in collaboration with
the retired Chairman of the Pharmacology Dept. at UT Medical School
Houston. They similarly are very active in drug legalization
issues. often testify, etc. These guys are about as expert as you
can get in this area. But nobody seems to be listening...

Dr P