drug reform – Hank Kalet

A-Rod, steroids and informed choice

http://espn.go.com/broadband/player.swf?mediaId=3894963Well, he’s admitted it. Alex Rodriguez, one of the best hitters on the planet, has admitted taking steroids while playing in Texas from 2001-2003.

I’m not sure how to respond. I have come down on both sides of hte steroid issue in baseball over the years, initially buying into the arch “kick ’em out” school. But the anarchist in me — the one who believes that drugs should be decriminalized if not legalized outright and tightly regulated — wonders why this is all that important.

I know — these guys are role models, blah blah blah. I know — this supposedly taints the competitive balance, yada yada yada.

But let’s be fair. A-Rod is an adult — as are Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and the rest, though they do all act like big kids. It’s his choice, or should be his choice, what he wants to do with his body — so long as he has all of the information necessary to make an informed choice.

I liken the use of performance enhancement drugs to laser eye surgery. No one would blink if a ballplayer had the surgery — even though it alters the player’s body and could improve an aspect of his game. (I’m not talking about someone who has the surgery to get rid of his glasses, but to improve decent sight.)

There is a debate going on among medical ethicists over this — over steroids and Ritalin and other drugs that have definite medical benefits for some ailments, but also offer some improved performance for the healthy. The question is whether they should be allowed to use these substances — should college students use Ritalin to improve their studying and their test scores, for instance? Right now, I come down on the side of yes, though I don’t advocate their use. As long as you can make an informed decision, and your actions do not have a negative impact on others, I think it should be up to you.

The Star-Ledger backs me up on medical marijuana

I posted Monday on legislation that would legalize so-called “medical marijuana,” saying that

In a humane world, medical marijuana — i.e., the use of pot to mitigate certain debilitating conditions — would be accepted as a matter of course, a normal part of treatment.

It’s nice to see The Star-Ledger, in an editorial today, come to the same conclusion.

This is a good bill, one with stringent safeguards to ensure that the use of marijuana is restricted to legitimate medical patients. Every applicant for a permit would have to prove a bona fide relationship with a physician who can provide documentation of the medical condition at issue.

The paper adds that the “tangled issue” suffers from a willingness of both sides to cherry-pick scientific arguments, but that the Bush administration — and its allies among antidrug crusaders — have been using a “heavy-handed approach (that) hasn’t been popular in a lot of states” and that has turned the Office of National Drug Control Policy into “a sort of campaign office for the anti-legalization crusade.”

One handout, for example, questions whether marijuana is an effective medication, yet concedes that “smoking marijuana may allow patients to temporarily feel better.”

Isn’t that the purpose of an analgesic? If the feds know of any pain reliever that makes people feel better permanently, they should put this miracle drug on the market. In the interim, that argument supports the use of medicinal marijuana.

The other main objection from the Office of National Drug Control Policy is that smoking marijuana “increases the risk for respiratory diseases similar to those associated with nicotine cigarettes.” This argument would make sense if the federal government banned cigarettes. But it’s absurd to argue that a healthy citizen may fill his lungs freely with cigarette smoke until he develops cancer, yet be precluded from a few puffs that deliver a drug to soften the side effects of chemotherapy.

The hypocrisy would be maddening if it weren’t the kind of thing that we see all the time in public debates over controversial issues.

I am an advocate of harm reduction and legalization of drugs — heavily regulate them from their very beginnings as seeds or in the manufacturing process, through packaging and distribution and tax them heavily to generate cash to offset any negative impacts they may have on society.

That said, I also know the political will is not there and that legalization remains a long way off. Denying a drug that has the potential to alleviate pain and suffering among the sick is just cruel. By passing this legislation, we can take a step toward rectifying this injustice.

Prescribing reforms for drug policy

In a humane world, medical marijuana — i.e., the use of pot to mitigate certain debilitating conditions — would be accepted as a matter of course, a normal part of treatment.

But in most states, New Jersey included, it is illegal.

State Sen. Nicholas Scutari, D-Union, is looking to change that. He’s sponsored legislation — S-119, New Jersey Compassionate Use Medical Marijuana Act — that, according to The Star-Ledger,

would require the state Department of Health and Senior Services to evaluate requests from physicians who recommend marijuana to their patients to help alleviate a “debilitating medical condition,” defined as cancer, glaucoma, HIV and AIDS, or chronic illnesses that cause “wasting syndrome, severe or chronic pain, seizures and severe and persistent muscle spasms.”

Patients the health department deems worthy would receive a state identification card verifying their enrollment. Patients, and their primary caretakers who do not have a history of drug convictions, “shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution or penalty” provided they possess the card and no more than six marijuana plants and 1 ounce of “usable marijuana.”

The legislation is scheduled for a hearing Monday, which will feature testimony from a couple of local residents — Gerry and Don McGrath of Robbinsville — who will tell the Senate Health Committee “about how their son, Sean, regained his appetite and reduced his suffering before he died from cancer four years ago.”

“I strongly believe that once members of the Senate Health Committee listen objectively to stories like ours on Monday, they will vote yes on the bill, bringing it closer to becoming law and help those currently suffering in New Jersey,” Don McGrath said.

I’m hoping that a reasonable discussion can be had, though it’s more likely the antidrug fearmongers will take over. Read some of these papers on the medical marijuana issue from the Drug Policy Alliance.