There is a big confusion over the use of cannabis, the commonest drug on the streets. Some doctors consider it as a danger, leading to serious mental problems, while others want to make it legal and freely available to treat severe conditions, like chronic arthritis, and multiple sclerosis.
There is a big confusion over the use of cannabis, the commonest drug on the streets. Some doctors consider it as a danger, leading to serious mental problems, while others want to make it legal and freely available to treat severe conditions, like chronic arthritis, and multiple sclerosis.
Even Ballymena Borough Council has debated the issue, with Ulster Unionist James Currie claiming that arthritis patients fly to Amsterdam every weekend to get cannabis for pain relief. Those who cannot afford the journey have no choice but to stay at home and suffer.
The council decided against cannabis, but has called on the government to reclassify it as a Class B drug, reversing the 2004 decision by David Blunkett to lower it to Class B status. Police can issue warnings to users, but in ordinary circumstances no arrests are made.
Two years on, Home Secretary Charles Clarke has indicated that a re-think is under way, partly due to the rising use of the drug and partly because of evidence of its harmful effects. Here, almost a quarter of drivers and motorcyclists killed over the last 3 years had taken drugs. Hospitals have reported a 24% increase in the number of people looking for treatment for drug misuse and, of these, 64% of cases involved cannabis.
Most people would like to know how serious are the health risks from cannabis, and can any benefits outweigh the hazards? Various physicians, however, offer various answers to this question- and the Government is most concerned about a New Zealand research, revealing that heavy users, up to 10 joints a week, are 4 times more likely to develop mental problems than others.
This seems to be enough to deter anyone using large amounts of cannabis for recreational use- and there is also higher risk of lung cancer from its high-tar residue. But it is so well established, as a drug of choice, that the authorities can only hope to decrease rather than stop the consumption.
As for its medicinal qualities, there are plenty of physicians to claim that it is unsurpassed for relief of arthritis and the debilitating effects of MS. Why, they ask, should it not be available on prescription, instead of requiring journeys to Holland, where it is legal? What about patients who are unable to travel?
Mr Clarke is facing a choice between tightening controls on a potentially harmful substance, and leaving things as they are, in a kind of limbo. It should be available to the sick, like many another dangerous drug, under doctor’s prescription.
