Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Sunday July 17 2016, @02:56PM   Printer-friendly
from the pot-kettle-black dept.

Christopher Ingraham writes in The Washington Post that a new study shows that painkiller abuse and overdose are significantly lower in states with medical marijuana laws and that when medical marijuana is available, pain patients are increasingly choosing pot over powerful and deadly prescription narcotics. The researchers found that, in the 17 states with a medical-marijuana law in place by 2013, prescriptions for painkillers and other classes of drugs fell sharply compared with states that did not have a medical-marijuana law.

The drops were quite significant: In medical-marijuana states, the average doctor prescribed 265 fewer doses of antidepressants each year, 486 fewer doses of seizure medication, 541 fewer anti-nausea doses and 562 fewer doses of anti-anxiety medication. But most strikingly, the typical physician in a medical-marijuana state prescribed 1,826 fewer doses of painkillers in a given year. As a sanity check, the Bradfords ran a similar analysis on drug categories that pot typically is not recommended for — blood thinners, anti-viral drugs and antibiotics. And on those drugs, they found no changes in prescribing patterns after the passage of marijuana laws.

The tanking numbers for painkiller prescriptions in medical marijuana states are likely to cause some concern among pharmaceutical companies. These painkiller drug companies have long been at the forefront of opposition to marijuana reform, funding research by anti-pot academics and funneling dollars to groups, such as the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America, that oppose marijuana legalization.

Cost-savings alone are not a sufficient justification for implementing a medical-marijuana program. The bottom line is better health, and the Bradfords' research shows promising evidence that medical-marijuana users are finding plant-based relief for conditions that otherwise would have required a pill to treat. "Our findings and existing clinical literature imply that patients respond to medical marijuana legislation as if there are clinical benefits to the drug, which adds to the growing body of evidence suggesting that the Schedule 1 status of marijuana is outdated."

Related:
Study Finds That Legalized Medical Cannabis Led to a Decline in Medicare Prescriptions


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday July 18 2016, @02:25PM

    by tangomargarine (667) on Monday July 18 2016, @02:25PM (#376161)

    because, we DON'T know what the fuck we are doing, and make some assumptions it is X or Y or Z in the mj cornucopia that is the effective ingredient in this or that usage; when it may be a subtle interaction and cocktail we have NO IDEA is going on...
    i don't give a shit WHAT bullshit 'studies' some Big Pharma lapdog has done: given a choice between a WHOLE/holistic application of mj versus some singular portion of its chemical soup, i will go with the WHOLE/holistic dosage every time...

    So what you really mean to say, is that we *do* know what's going on; you just reject the research. Alrighty then.

    --
    "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 19 2016, @09:25PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 19 2016, @09:25PM (#376868)

    The fact that there have been some studies doesn't necessarily mean we know what's going on. Those studies need to be replicated, and there needs to be massive scientific consensus before you can be justifiably confident.