Judge: PTSD approved for medical marijuana use

2014-06-07T05:00:00Z Judge: PTSD approved for medical marijuana useHOWARD FISCHER Capitol Media Services Arizona Daily Sun

PHOENIX — State Health Director Will Humble acted illegally in denying access to medical marijuana to people — many of them former soldiers — suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, an administrative law judge has ruled.

Judge Thomas Shedden said Humble relied solely on the lack of scientific “peer-reviewed” studies in determining that PTSD should not be added to the list of conditions for which marijuana could be made available. But the judge said the health chief should also have considered the testimony of doctors and nurses who said the drug has helped their patients.

Humble said Friday he is studying the ruling but has not decided whether he will follow it. Under state law, Shedden’s decision is merely a recommendation and Humble has until July 9 to decide whether to reject it.

Attorney Kenneth Sobel, representing the Arizona Cannabis Nurses Association, said Friday if that happens he will ask a superior judge to intercede and overrule Humble.

“Veterans desperately need this medicine,” he said, citing figures showing 22 former soldiers kill themselves every day, many of them suffering from PTSD.

The 2010 voter-approved Arizona Medical Marijuana Act allows the use of the drug by patients suffering from a list of several specified medical conditions. These range from glaucoma and AIDS to any chronic or debilitating condition that leads to severe and chronic plan.

So far close to 50,000 people have qualified under the existing list of conditions to purchase up to 2 1/2 ounces of marijuana every two weeks.

But the law also requires Humble to consider requests for expanding the list of conditions for which marijuana can be recommended.

Proponents of adding PTSD to that list tried in 2012 and again last year.

That led Humble to contract with the College of Public Health at the University of Arizona to review peer-reviewed studies to determine whether there is any basis for that addition.

That report found “observational studies of varying quality,” with the conclusion that “the totality of this evidence should be considered very low quality with a high degree of uncertainty.” Based on that, Humble decided he could not make marijuana available for PTSD.

But Shedden said he reads the health department’s own rules to say that decision should not be based solely on scientific studies.

He said the rules also require consideration of other evidence that marijuana will treat a medical condition or at least its symptoms. And Shedden said there was “substantial evidence” that the drug alleviates the symptoms of PTSD — even if that evidence came from doctors and patients citing their own experiences.

For example, he cited testimony by Dr. Richard Strand who said his own review of medical literature shows that traditional drugs are not effective for everyone suffering from PTSD. Strand said there are side effects.

Shedden also considered the testimony of Ricardo Pereyda who said the medical marijuana he is able to get for his chronic pain has helped him deal with PTSD following his Army service in Iraq as a military policeman.

“There’s plenty of anecdotal evidence,” Humble said Friday. “At the hearings that we had, one family after the next came up and personally testified that they believed that marijuana provided relief for their PTSD.”

And Humble said he considered that.

“But throughout my entire career I’ve really focused on using scientific evidence really as the cornerstone of good, effective decision making when it comes to public policy,” he said. And that evidence is not there.

Sobel, however, said relying solely on scientific studies to expand who gets medical marijuana is unreasonable simply because there are none — at least in part because the federal government has thrown roadblocks in the path of researchers. In fact, he doubted that anyone could find the kind of study that Humble wants now for PTSD for any of the other conditions for which marijuana already can be recommended by doctors.

Beyond that, Sobel said the rules themselves make clear that marijuana can be considered appropriate if it provides a “palliative benefit.”

And that’s where anecdotal evidence comes in.

“Good doctors will tell you that probably the best way to find out if it makes you feel better is to ask the patient,” he said.

Anyway, Sobel said, even if there are no scientific studies on marijuana being beneficial, he said there also are no studies showing it is harmful.

Copyright 2015 Arizona Daily Sun. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

(2) Comments

  1. Dave K
    Report Abuse
    Dave K - June 07, 2014 2:49 pm
    It is a cruel and barbaric act to keep medicine from those who would benefit. The voters rejected the use of FDA standards when they approved the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act. To use unreasonable and arbitrary standards to reject additional qualifying conditions just wastes everyone's time and is not in the spirit of compliance with this act. Humble should not be allowed to play the FDA game of blocking the research or watching it being blocked and then complaining that they cannot act because the information is not available. Evidence comes in many forms and information obtained from double blind studies is no more valid or true than information obtained using other methods.
  2. Duncan20903
    Report Abuse
    Duncan20903 - June 07, 2014 8:58 am
    So where the heck is “the LAW is the LAW (blah, blah, blah)” crowd when authorities decide to break the law and violate their Oath? Up in the peanut gallery cheering that lawbreaking like the hypocritical partisan hacks that they are is where.

    Go Will Humble! Break that law!! Break it again!!!
Add Comment
You must Login to comment.

Click here to get an account it's free and quick