This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related articles  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Health Policy  • Law and Medicine  • Alert me on articles by topic

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: In his Commentary, Dr Gostin¹ expresses concern that the current regulation of marijuana is flawed. He states that the Controlled Substances Act does not adequately address the potential medical benefit that the use of marijuana can provide, citing data from the Institute of Medicine that tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) may be useful in the treatment of pain, nausea, vomiting, and appetite suppression. He states that the present regulation of marijuana inappropriately interferes with the patient-physician relationship by punishing physicians who prescribe marijuana to relieve pain and suffering; this impedes the physician's ability to speak frankly and openly with patients regarding potential treatment options.

An assumption is that the therapeutic benefits from the use of marijuana are derived from THC and not other products of combustion. Perhaps an effective policy would include a distinction for the delivery mechanism for THC. Most medications are supplied in a standardized form with specific . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Rajiv Das, MD, MPH
rajivdasmd@comcast.net
Saratoga, Calif

RELATED ARTICLES

Regulation of Medical Marijuana—Reply
Lawrence O. Gostin
JAMA. 2005;294(24):3091-3092.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Medical Marijuana, American Federalism, and the Supreme Court
Lawrence O. Gostin
JAMA. 2005;294(7):842-844.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT