Journal of the California Cannabis Research Medical
Mikuriya Asks Medical Board to
Drop Charges and Clarify Practice Standards re Cannabis July
11 Hearing Update / September 10
Hearing Update Defence Update / Hearing
What Every Doctor
Should Know About Cannabinoids
Conditions Are Californians Using Cannabis to Treat by Fred
Notes on Learning
What to Look For by Tom O'Connell, M.D.
a Substitute for Alcohol by Tod Mikuriya, M.D.
Ring Lardner, Jr., on Cannabis
as a Substitute for Alcohol
Recommendation to Patients: "Don't
Smoke, Vaporize" by Dale Gieringer
Marijuana Smoking Doesn't
Lead to Higher Death Rate, Kaiser Study Report
Join Push for Guidelines
Proposed Practice Guidelines by
David Hadorn, M.D.
CMA to MBC: More Evidence Coming in Every Day
Problem, by Lester Grinspoon, M.D.
Bayer Buys Rights to Market
GW's Cannabis Extract
Bayer's Original Blockbuster
A Predecessor to The
Indian Hemp Drug Commission Report by Tod Mikuriya, M.D.
In This Issue
As California physicians take advantage of the unique
research opportunity afforded by the Compassionate Use Act of 1996,
there is renewed interest in studies carried out in the pre-prohibition
The 1873 Report of British tax officials evaluating the alleged deleterious
effects of cannabis (see related article) addresses
the relationship of cannabis and mental disorder in terms that are relevant
in California in 2003.
The report’s conclusion —that the harm caused was small and the tax revenue
significant— was affirmed in a massive study 20 years later, The Indian Hemp
Drugs Commission Report of 1893-94.
The IHDC Report was my introduction to the pre-prohibition medical literature
on cannabis. In 1966, when I was in charge of setting up research funding patterns
and priorities for the National Institute of Mental Health, I ordered and received
the eight-volume report from the National Library of Medicine archives. For
the next six months I carried the documents with me and photocopied selected
It was only recently, however, that I learned of this predecessor report that
in four and a half pages reached strikingly similar conclusions.
Perhaps we in California will come to similar conclusions, too. Neither human
physiology nor the effects of cannabis have changed.
The CCRMG is in an optimal position for studying of the costs and benefits
of longterm medicinal cannabis use. Despite the continuing political controversy
surrounding cannabis, actual monitoring and supervison of patients will afford
experience to improve treatment of chronic illnesses.