However, even the evidence-based studies on which these groundbreaking reports are based are limited by their inability to include research and data regarding the specific strains and compositions of cannabis being purchased and consumed in the United States.
However, even the evidence-based studies on which these groundbreaking reports are based are limited by their inability to include research and data regarding the specific strains and compositions of cannabis being purchased and consumed in the United States.Potential Medicinal Use Anecdotal and peer-reviewed scientific evidence indicates that cannabis and/or its components have medicinal benefits and can be used to treat a variety of medical conditions.Addiction professionals are in the unique position to be able to recognize, diagnose, mitigate, and treat the detrimental effects of cannabis use.Tags: Tailoring Business Plan SampleViolence In Video Games EssayBusiness Plan Market ResearchCritical Essays About BeowulfIntroduction Leadership EssayPrompt EssayEasy Scholarship Essay TopicsBerkeley Evening Mba EssaysUniversity Of Central Florida ThesisName Meaning Essay
Download Printable Version Summary Although state and local governments are increasingly legalizing recreational and medicinal cannabis use, NAADAC, the Association for Addiction Professionals, does not currently support the use of cannabis as medicine or for recreational purposes. We strongly encourage increased efforts to perform research that will allow evidence-based and scientifically supported policy changes pertaining to medicinal use of cannabis.
It is imperative at this crucial time, as the laws and cultural norms pertaining to cannabis are shifting dramatically, that cannabis be subjected to the same research, consideration, and study as any other potential medicine pursuant to the standards of the U. Until the body of accepted research allows the scientific community to reach an evidence-based consensus on the effects of cannabis on the human brain and body, NAADAC is unable to support legislative or voter ballot initiatives to legalize cannabis for medical or recreational use.
FDA has not approved cannabis itself to treat any medical conditions, but it has approved one drug containing cannabidiol, one of more than 80 active chemicals in marijuana, for the treatment of seizures associated with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome or Dravet syndrome in patients 2 years of age and older. In addition, the FDA has approved two drugs containing a synthetic version of a substance that is present in cannabis. NAADAC recognizes that early studies have shown that cannabis can have therapeutic uses and supports the continued research of potential medicinal use of cannabis. government agencies to expand permitted research opportunities and increase research funding.
However, it is NAADAC’s position that before cannabis is permitted to be used for any therapeutic or medicinal purposes, it must be subjected to the same research, consideration, and study as any other potential medicine pursuant to the standards of the FDA. Conclusion and Recommendations For the reasons stated in the foregoing, NAADAC does not currently support the use of cannabis as medicine or for recreational purposes. We strongly encourage increased efforts to perform research that will allow evidence-based and scientifically supported policy changes pertaining to medicinal use of cannabis.
Even scientists who wish to conduct research on cannabis in states where it is legal may risk their DEA licenses or federal funding by performing that research. All cannabis used for government-sanctioned research must be obtained through the NIDA Drug Supply Program, and NIDA’s sole source of marijuana is the University of Mississippi. As a result, researchers are limited in the types, strains, compositions, and forms of the cannabis that they receive to study.
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) have identified three significant barriers to cannabis research, all of which are a direct result of the current federal laws related to cannabis. The NASEM committee found that “[i]nvestigators seeking to conduct research on cannabis or cannabinoids must navigate a series of review processes that may involve the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), the U. Researchers are not permitted, for example, to study the actual cannabis being sold quasi-legally across the majority of states.
Thirdly, the NASEM committee found that there are limited funding opportunities through the National Institute of Health (NIH) and NIDA. Increased funding opportunities are necessary for adequate research to take place.
Accordingly, it is NAADAC’s position that the federal government must issue new guidance to provide legal protections for scientists studying cannabis and provide increased funding for this research to take place.
 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; Health and Medicine Division; Board on Population Health and Public Health Practice; Committee on the Health Effects of Marijuana: An Evidence Review and Research Agenda.
Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2017 Jan 12. Changes in marijuana use across the 2012 Washington State recreational legalization: is retrospective assessment of use before legalization more accurate?