Posted on: Sunday, 5 July 2009, 10:30 CDT
In a move that has the good people of California scratching their heads
in perplexity, state lawmakers recently passed a measure that would
eventually require medical marijuana—prescribed most frequently to
alleviate suffering in patients with severe cancer—to carry a warning
label telling of its potential cancer-causing risks.
Last
month state environmental regulators decided that cannabis should be
added to its official list of substances known to cause cancer, which
will likely lead to warning signs in marijuana dispensaries and
cautionary labels on product packaging.
In a 1996
referendum, Californians voted to legalize the leafy green stuff for
patients ailing under serious diseases such as AIDS, cancer and
glaucoma. A number of research studies have pointed to the unique
benefits of marijuana in counteracting the pain, nausea and
“wasting-effect” that often accompanies the late stages of AIDS and
cancer in particular.
Defenders of pot legalization have argued
that scientists have long known that marijuana smoke contains
carcinogens, but that this does not necessarily prove a causal
relationship with cancer.
Regulators have countered this claim
however, pointing to studies conducted by the state’s Office of
Environmental Health Hazard Assessment in which "marijuana smoke was
clearly shown, through scientifically valid testing according to
generally accepted principles, to cause cancer," according to an agency
statement.
Dr. Thomas Mack, a University of Southern California epidemiologist and
chairman of the committee, said the decision to add marijuana smoke to
the official list of cancer-causing substances is no big shocker.
“If
you take a piece of vegetable material, a leaf, and burn it, you're
going to get the type of compounds that cause cancer,” explained Mack.
Still,
Mack agrees to some extent with the defenders of marijuana
legalization, saying that the data linking marijuana smoke to cancer is
only “suggestive” and by no means conclusive.
Critics of the
regulatory decision have pointed to a number of methodological flaws in
the studies reviewed by the committee, such as the inclusion of data
from studies conducted in North Africa, where marijuana is typically
mixed with tobacco.
There is by no means a consensus in the
scientific community regarding the relationship between pot smoke and
cancer. One 2006 study even indicated that marijuana smokers may
actually be at a reduced risk of developing cancer than nonsmokers.
“If
they want to classify marijuana smoke as carcinogenic, then that is
true. It contains carcinogens,” said Donald Tashkin, a longtime
marijuana researcher at the University of California. "That doesn't
mean it causes cancer."
Ironically, the regulators’ authority to
list marijuana as a cancer-causing substance derives from another
voter-approved measure known as Proposition 65, which instructs state
health officials to compile a list of all substances that can lead to
cancer, birth defects or reproductive abnormalities.
First
instituted in 1986, critics contend that the list of dangerous
substances has grown absurdly long, including such common products as
aspirin, gasoline, potato chips and French fries.
Dr. Frank
Lucido of Berkeley, vice president of the American Academy of
Cannabinoid Medicine, is a true believer in the benefits of medical
marijuana and says that he has been prescribing it to patients since it
first became legal in 1996. The AACD is a recently formed organization
of physicians who study and advise standards for medical marijuana use.
Lucido says that while he will not stop prescribing marijuana
as a result of the legislation, he may begin suggesting that patients
take it in a smoke-free form, such as marijuana-infused foods or
vaporizers.
“Obviously, it's never good to breathe smoke if you can avoid it,” Lucido said.