Recommended reading
In regards to the article about why the CMA is leery about medical marijuana (CMA Interface June 12, 2001), I would encourage you to read the book Marihuana Reconsidered, by Dr. Lester Grinspoon. Dr. Grinspoon set out to prove the harmful effects of marijuana, and soon realized through study after study that its effects were far less dangerous than previously believed. This book is considered to be the most comprehensive and thorough evaluation of the benefits and dangers of cannabis. It is a must read for anyone who wishes to be truly educated about the subject.
Jed Davis (via email)
Dr. Grinspoon, a professor at Harvard University Medical School, published Marihuana Reconsidered in 1971. It has proven so popular that a second edition was published in 1994. Grinspoon sums up his thoughts in this excerpt from an introduction he prepared for the revised edition. "Re-reading Marihuana Reconsidered now, I find that some chapters, such as those on chemistry, pharmacology, and medical uses, are out of date. Some of the ideas expressed in the book now seem a little quaint to me as well. The tone is more conservative than it would be if I were to undertake the same task today. Although I still believe that marihuana is not harmless, I am convinced that it is one of the least dangerous, if not the least dangerous, of all psychoactive drugs, legal or illegal, recreational or medicinal."
— Ed.
Mr. Mazankowski proposes doctors be placed on salary to take away the incentive to see so many patients. Does he not realize that there’s a doctor shortage across the country? Would it not make more sense to encourage doctors to see even more patients? To me, near the end of my GP career, a salaried position with (I presume) limited hours and perks might be welcome. It would provide me the means to slow down. What it might do to future generations of doctors, and to health care in general, is another story.
Lorne Walton, MD
Maple Ridge, BC
Dr. J.S. McGoey states (CMA Interface, Jan. 8, 2002) that he doesn’t understand why the CMA has been so reluctant to consider and recommend changes to a system that has brought needless anguish to our citizens. I also had some difficulty understanding this fact until I read an article by Christopher Lyon in a recent issue of the Economist. It said that "a government monopoly of doctors’ salaries amounts to thefts of their time, labour, knowledge and, yes, love." I now understand why the CMA fails to act. It is frightened of a government that is acting as a thief. The CMA must now show some courage.
J.C.L. Wade, MD
Victoria
Our goal is to cut highway carnage, so we favour a (blood-alcohol) limit of 0.02% for drivers. The argument that it is the hard-core drinkers who will continue to drink and drive may be valid, but it is not an "all-or-none situation." The more social pressure there is against drinking and driving, the fewer "borderline" hard-core drinkers there will be. Airlines have banned smoking and cities such as Ottawa have nonsmoking bylaws for public places. These changes have helped push people who know that smoking is a self-destructive behaviour to quit. Today, only 23% of Canadians smoke.
Similarly, when more people acknowledge that drinking and driving is too dangerous for themselves and others, we will see drinking-related statistics on highway deaths drop as well.
We must also find better ways for people to assess their risk for the road and find other social behaviours that can reduce this risk. Just as glucometers have dropped in price and become more efficient over the last few years, perhaps the CMA could support a reasonably inexpensive home breathalyzer that would be made available at bars, restaurants, offices and private homes.
Part of our (drinking-and-driving) problem stems from the conflict of interest in that the many of the powers that be — judges, lawyers, lawmakers and, yes, doctors too — leave parties and events after finishing a drink. They know that if laws become too stringent, they might be the next person picked up. If they are stopped, the consequences may be more than they can tolerate. However, we should look at how the Swedes and Finns have changed their outlook on drinking and driving as a society, and move in that direction.
Clifford L. Dobson, MD
Joan A. Whitfield, MD
Victoria
Misguided Mazankowski
Where's the love?
Cut the carnage
 |
 |