Marijuana liberalization policies: why we can’t learn much from policy still in motion.
Marijuana liberalization policies: why we can’t learn much from policy still in motion.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/pam.21726
复制
发表时间：
2014
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
Sevigny, Eric L.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Pacula, Rosalie Liccardo;Sevigny, Eric L.
加州在近17年前将医用大麻合法化，这对联邦政府将大麻列入1970年《受控物质法案》第一附表的做法构成了重大挑战。正如许多人预测的那样，加州只是第一个。截至2013年5月，19个州和哥伦比亚特区现在为持有和供应医用大麻的患者提供法律保护，在许多情况下，还为照顾者提供法律保护。2012年11月，科罗拉多州和华盛顿州进一步将销售和持有用于娱乐目的大麻合法化。考虑到正在进行的巨大的自然实验，人们可能已经预料到，放开大麻政策的好处和坏处已经有很多人知道了。然而，不幸的是，除了医用大麻法律随着时间的推移而不断变化的巨大异质性之外，对于到底存在哪些保护措施以及对谁来说，存在巨大的不确定性，这意味着我们还没有了解到我们应该知道的那么多。大麻是否是药物，娱乐用大麻是否无害的问题，必然交织在所有关于政策改革的辩论中，但这些都不是本次讨论的重点。有合法证据表明，大麻植物中含有的活性大麻素可用于治疗某些疾病和症状(梁，2011年；沃森、本森和喜悦，2000年；医学研究所，1999年)，并且几个世纪以来一直有效(Eddy，2010年；Grspoon，2005年)。因此，毫不奇怪，美国医学会(AMA)在2009年通过了一项决议，敦促联邦政府审查重新安排大麻的案件，指出这样做将促进基于大麻的药物的研究和开发，并避免不适当的州法律拼凑在一起，这些法律没有侧重于建立医用大麻的临床指南或标准(AMA，2009)。生物医学和公共卫生文献中也有证据表明，大麻可以通过合理的途径损害健康或
California legalized the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes nearly 17 years ago, representing a major challenge to the federal government’s scheduling of marijuana as a Schedule I drug in the 1970 Controlled Substance Act. As many predicted, California was simply the first. As of May 2013, 19 states and the District of Columbia now provide legal protection to patients, and in many cases caregivers, for possession and supply of marijuana for medicinal purposes. In November 2012, Colorado and Washington went even further legalizing the sale and possession of marijuana for recreational purposes. Given the tremendous natural experiment that is taking place, one might expect that much would already be known about the benefits and harms of liberalizing marijuana policies. Unfortunately, however, the tremendous uncertainty regarding what protections actually exist, and for whom, in addition to the enormous heterogeneity in the medical marijuana laws that continue to change over time, has meant that we do not yet know as much as we should.The questions of whether marijuana is medicine and whether recreational marijuana use is harmless are necessarily intertwined in all of the debates over policy reform, but these are not the focus of this discussion. There is legitimate evidence that active cannabinoids available in the marijuana plant are useful in the treatment of some medical conditions and symptoms (Leung, 2011; Watson, Benson, & Joy, 2000; Institute of Medicine, 1999) and has been for centuries (Eddy, 2010; Grinspoon, 2005). As such, it is not surprising that the American Medical Association (AMA) adopted a resolution in 2009 urging the federal government to review the case for rescheduling marijuana, noting that doing so would facilitate research and development of cannabinoid-based medicine and avoid the patchwork of inadequate state laws that do not focus on establishing clinical guidelines or standards for medically prescribing marijuana (AMA, 2009). There is also evidence in the biomedical and public health literatures of reasonable pathways through which marijuana can harm health or
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
1.7
作者：
Khatapoush, S;Hallfors, D
通讯作者：
Hallfors, D
影响因子：
3.5
作者：
Crost, Benjamin;Guerrero, Santiago
通讯作者：
Guerrero, Santiago
影响因子：
0.3
作者：
MacCoun, Robert;Pacula, Rosalie Liccardo;Reuter, Peter
通讯作者：
Reuter, Peter
DOI：
10.3122/jabfm.2011.04.100280
发表时间：
2011-07-01
影响因子：
2.9
作者：
Leung, Lawrence
通讯作者：
Leung, Lawrence
影响因子：
4.2
作者：
Burgdorf, James Richard;Kilmer, Beau;Pacula, Rosalie Liccardo
通讯作者：
Pacula, Rosalie Liccardo