It’s been known for a while that some cannabinoids, the active components in marijuana, have antibacterial properties (one of many useful facts you won’t find on ONDCP’s Web site). Now, as noted by stories in the New York Times and Web MD, five cannabinoids, including THC, have been shown to be active against a particularly worrisome form of staph infection that’s resistant to conventional antibiotics. It took these major media outlets a while to catch up with the study, published August 6 in the Journal of Natural Products, but at least they covered it. 

A new article in the European Journal of Cancer Care answers medical marijuana opponents who claim that cancer patients don’t need marijuana to relieve the nausea and vomiting from chemotherapy. Opponents claim that while studies in the past showed THC to be roughly comparable to other anti-nausea drugs, it wasn’t substantially better. Since those studies, they argue, better anti-nausea drugs have come into use, making medical marijuana irrelevant. In any case, they add, THC is available in pill form as Marinol. [Read more →]

Could marijuana be helpful for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)? The possibility is raised by a newly published case report in Cannabinoids, the journal of the International Association for Cannabis as Medicine. Doctors from the Heidelberg University Medical Center in Heidelberg, Germany, report on an adult ADHD sufferer who exhibited classic ADHD behavior — pushy, impatient, having trouble focusing or responding to questions appropriately — and who had not been helped by Ritalin, a standard ADHD treatment, but whose symptoms essentially disappeared after smoking marijuana. The authors also discuss animal research that suggests cannabinoids may be effective against ADHD, as well as a human study suggesting that moderate marijuana use may have helped ADHD patients with cocaine dependence stay in treatment.

Some studies have found an association between marijuana use and ADHD symptoms, often drawing the inference that marijuana is worsening ADHD, or that ADHD sufferers are at risk for “drug abuse.” But what if they’re self-medicating and — in at least some cases — actually helping reduce their symptoms?

The drug czar’s office wants us to believe that marijuana causes or worsens depression. Too bad science keeps moving in precisely the opposite direction, as noted in two articles just published in Cannabinoids, the journal of the International Association for Cannabis as Medicine. In one, Viennese physician Kurt Blass discusses successful treatment of depression with dronabinol (Marinol), the THC pill. In the second, University of Texas researcher Regina A. Mangieri discusses the animal studies in which cannabinoids have shown antidepressant-like activity. No one is arguing that depressed teens should self-medicate with marijuana rather than seek professional help, but one-sided, misleading “information” from our government doesn’t help parents navigate these complex situations.

A systematic review and accompanying commentary in the June 17 issue of CMAJ, the medical journal published by the Canadian Medical Association, look at the side effects of cannabinoid medications. The results are generally reassuring.

Researchers reviewed published studies of various cannabinoid preparations, including Marinol, the THC pill, and Sativex, a marijuana-based oral spray (but not, unfortunately, smoked or vaporized whole marijuana). They found no increase in serious or life-threatening reactions to the drugs as compared to placebo. The less serious side effects that did occur were just what you’d expect — dizziness, for example. But the commentators expressed concern over the relative lack of data on smoked marijuana and on long-term use of other cannabinoids.

We could have such data if the U.S. government wanted us to. The Feds have been giving medical marijuana to a small number of patients for over 30 years in a program closed to new enrollment in 1992, but have never published any data on these patients, of whom only four now survive. And back in 1999 the Institute of Medicine raised the possibility of doing “n-of-1 studies” (for example, by reopening that closed federal program) in order to collect data while allowing access to medical marijuana for patients in great need. The suggestion was ignored.

Once again, our government is doing everything it can to avoid knowing that medical marijuana is safe and effective.

The other day I had a lengthy discussion with two producers at a national TV network. It was an unnerving lesson in what we’re up against as we try to educate the mainstream media.

The network had just broadcast a completely uncritical story on a report from a private think tank that serves as a drug war cheerleader. It had reported completely preposterous claims about supposed dangers of increased marijuana potency causing lung cancer or sending thousands to emergency rooms as if they were undisputed fact. I’d called to complain, and to their credit the producers called back.

Also to their credit, they asked tough questions about the points I was making. I want reporters to do that, as I never make statements to journalists that I can’t back up with published scientific evidence. And I do think the discussion made some progress (which is why I’m not naming names). But it also became clear that they never applied the same level of skepticism to claims made by prohibitionists. 

As we discussed the evidence that marijuana smokers don’t have higher lung cancer rates and that THC and other cannabinoids have documented anti-cancer activity, I mentioned that the 1999 Institute of Medicine report stated that marijuana has not been proven to cause any type of cancer. “But that was 1999,” one of the producers said. “With the increased potency now, it’s a whole different drug!” 

She had no idea she’d just repeated a completely fictional White House talking point as if it were revealed truth. 

I patiently explained that the notion that the claimed doubling of THC levels makes today’s marijuana “a whole different drug” makes no more sense than to claim that wine is a different drug than beer because it contains about three times the alcohol — a notion no one would take seriously. I also noted that higher potency would decrease any lung cancer risk, because users would get more THC (which fights cancer) with less smoke, and it’s the smoke that contains any potentially carcinogenic compounds. 

The producers believed they had done due diligence in researching the think tank’s claims: “We checked them with the National Institute on Drug Abuse.” The idea that a government agency that has long been an integral part of the drug war might not be a completely impartial source regarding marijuana had not occurred to them.

They listened to me. I think they heard. I hope they understood.