Jewish leaders testify for medical marijuana
He tried several therapies to find relief — all without success.
Finally, his physician suggested an alternative treatment: marijuana.
“He thought it would be helpful, but obviously my husband was uncomfortable experimenting with it because he knew it was illegal,” Damsker recalled. “It really saddened me that he was unable to have an alternative therapy that would at least make him feel more comfortable.”
That was in 2001 — the year her husband died — but Damsker retold that story last week to the state House of Representatives Health and Human Services Committee, which is considering a bill that would legalize marijuana for medical use only.
Damsker, a board member of the Jewish Social Policy Action Network in Philadelphia, testified in favor of House Bill 1393. Rabbi Eric Cytrin of Temple Beth El in Harrisburg, a Conservative congregation, also testified that medical marijuana was consistent with Jewish values.
In fact, medical marijuana enjoys significant support in the Jewish world. In addition to JSPAN, which has a chapter in Pittsburgh, the Union for Reform Judaism adopted a resolution at its 67th General Assembly supporting its use.
The Conservative movement, has yet to endorse medical marijuana but Rabbi Elliot Dorf, one of the movement’s leading scholars has come out in favor, as have several Orthodox rabbis.
“In terms of Judaism, we would see this as part of our charge by God to be compassionate and merciful and respond to our neighbors’ distress,” Cytrin said. “That’s where we’re coming from ultimately.
“There’s no indication in scripture whether this (marijuana) should be legalized or not, but when we think of the commandments to treat our neighbors with kindness, love and compassion, this is one way to do it.”
In supporting medical marijuana, the Reform movement cited several talmudic sources for its stance including this commentary by Maimonides: “God created drugs and compounds and gave us the intelligence necessary to discover their medicinal properties; we must use them in warding off illness and disease. (Mishneh P’sachim 4:9).
In Israel, people with cancer, multiple sclerosis or certain other conditions can apply for a license to receive a free supply of medical marijuana. It is provided by a charitable organization, Tikkun Olam, which supplies it to some 700 patients.
Sponsored by state Rep. Mark Cohen, H.B. 1393 would permit the use of medical marijuana through so-called “compassion centers” where the narcotic may be dispensed.
Under the bill, patients could legally use marijuana with a doctor’s written recommendation, said Cohen’s spokesman, Leon Czikowsky. The patient would obtain a photo ID from the Health Department then take it to a compassion center to purchase marijuana for use on the premises or at home.
Compassion centers would either be private non-profit operations or run by the Health Department, according to the bill.
Patients could use the marijuana through vaper machines at the compassion centers, as cigarettes, or other ways.
“Depending on the medical condition, some people may find it easier to put in food,” Czikowsky said.
Cancer, ALS, wasting disease, Crohn’s disease and glaucoma, are among the conditions for which marijuana could be legally dispensed.
The Health Department, and State Police would regulate compassion centers, Czikowksy said.
Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington already permit marijuana for medical purposes, and in Arizona, doctors are permitted to prescribe it.
JSPAN President Brian Gralnick said his organization’s support applies to medical use only and not total legalization.
“It hasn’t come up,” he said. “We’re just focused on this bill before us.”
Gralnick expects further committee hearings in January and February with a possible committee vote by spring.
Damsker said the Pennsylvania bill is quite different from the controversial California law, which blurs the distinction between medical and recreational use.
“This is a very well crafted bill that protects the users and assures the compassionate centers have to be licensed,” she said.
She is cautiously optimistic that the bill can pass.
In fact, a 2006 poll conducted by Franklin & Marshall College found that 76 percent of Pennsylvanians support marijuana use if a physician recommends it.
“Many people in Pennsylvania, which is a very conservative state, are not opposed to the medical use of marijuana,” Damsker said. “It really does help the chronically ill individual, and people should have the choice.”
(Lee Chottiner can be reached at leec@thejewishchronicle.net or 412-687-1005.)



Wonderful to see the Jewish community speaking out, as ending the war is entirely consistent with Jewish religious and ethical values.
Benevolent medical, social and spiritual use of cannabis date back to the beginning of recorded history.
Prohibition is an historical aberration.
1.Yes, the Sativex trials are important because the rigor of these trials may well put the issue to rest. The November 21, 2009 LA Times Editorial "The AMA's Reversal on Marijuana" specifically notes: For all the debate over whether marijuana has medicinal value, arguments that the drug has significant palliative properties or that it has none suffer from the same flaw: There's little scientific proof either way." [www DOT latimes DOT com /news /opinion /la-ed-ama21-2009nov21,0,406900 DOT story]
Most studies lack scientific certainty because they lack the rigor associated with a scientific determination. In fact they are just too small in size, lack sufficient internal controls, and / or are too short in length to make any determination other than maybe.
2. What makes the Sativex trials important is they are a rigorous application of scientific process to best determine scientific certainty: (A) they meet the AMA criteria for a medicine: "The AMA supports the concept of drug approval by scientific and regulatory review to establish safety and efficacy, combined with appropriate standards for identity, strength, quality, purity, packaging, and labeling, rather than by ballot initiative or state legislative action." ... Unoffical [ AMA Witholding from publication to allow peer review] AMA REPORT 3 OF THE COUNCIL ON SCIENCE AND PUBLIC HEALTH (americansforsafeaccess DOT org /downloads /AMA_Report DOT pdf)
(B) given the above they satisfy most of the AMA objections to "the patchwork of state-based systems that have been established for "medical marijuana" is woefully inadequate in establishing even rudimentary safeguards that normally would be applied to the appropriate clinical use of psychoactive substances. " Executive Summary, AMA REPORT 3 OF THE COUNCIL ON SCIENCE AND PUBLIC HEALTH. (last page at www DOT ama-assn DOT org /ama1 /pub /upload /mm /interim-2009 /i-09-council-reports DOT pdf)
(C) The rigor of the F.D.A. process, although arguably not perfect, is far and away the most scientific and hence most removed from the corrupting influence of special interest groups including the mpp. SEE "Medical Marijuana: The conflict Between Scientific Evidence and Political Ideology", Cohen, Utah Law Review, pp.41-42. [www DOT epubs DOT utah DOT edu /index DOT php /ulr /article /viewFile /143 /125 (note: slow to load)]
(E) Setting aside the issues of a lack of marijuana as scientific medicine in 13 of the 50 states (see 2(A) above) the abuse of the presciption in California, Oregon and colorado are beyond dispute. A recent Washington Post editorial (Oct 25 "Questions About Pot") is calling for a for a moratorium on new state programs. [www DOT washingtonpost DOT com /wp-dyn /content /article /2009 /10 /25 /AR2009102502293 DOT html] for astart follow google news about the dispensories selling to anyone for profit (prohibted by Cal. law), growers producing for the black market and "patients" and growers being robbed.
The Creator must laugh at our collective idiocy to have made his perfect all purpose plant so illegal and so controversial. Ahh, The FOLLY of MAN and his LAWS!
But when the money trail is followed then it becomes apparent why MAN made did make it illegal. BIG PHARMA. COTTON and LUMBER Industries. BIG OIL. Can I stop yet?
The link for Hebrew translation for anointing oil recipe:
http://www.thc-ministry.org/benyehudadictionaryreference.html#exodus3023
Also, the best part of all religions is about tolerance, patience, and compassion. I feel alot of that in this article.
13,500 Americans die every year from GI bleeding caused by using non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications (NSAIDS) for pain relief.
Cannabis has been proven - again and again - in SCIENTIFIC studies to have NEVER caused a single death, through long-term use or overdose. Heavy, long-term use of cannabis has recently been proven to NOT increase the incidence of lung cancer. Take a look for yourself:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17035389?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
How do I know all this? I almost died from taking NSAID meds prescribed by my doctor, I had to be rushed to the ICU, where they used an endoscopic laser to cauterize the arteries in my stomach and stop me from bleeding to death.
So preach to me about "scientific validation".
The MS and Cancer Society haven't endorsed medicinal cannabis? Gee, do you think they get any money from Big Pharma? How do you think the people at the MS and Cancer Societies get paid? Do some research, you'll find a money trail leading directly to Big Pharma's door.
Just last year, The American College of Physicians, a professional group made up of 124,000 practicing physicians, passed a resolution supporting state laws that allow medical cannabis use. Again, don't take my word for it, see for yourself:
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:PeE-bl-8DyQJ:www.acponline.org/advocacy/where_we_stand/other_issues/medmarijuana.pdf american college of physicians cannabis 2008&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShLSZzroTQA-ktW7hGYFi4ijEpicu1iWUfNdzs4VWZPRCaBGTTORni1PEMaMwbAB-K-o4C9QDcavRH-l5inJO47m5FX5bDagWqjN1ldfx7EPoEwRcOH3QW0wCCS2NbpGd12GYUI&sig=AHIEtbT1zKs1iq20-99_n6G7XUUi3ZbMuQ
Although I respect and understand your concerns over medical marijuana, I have to respectfully disagree with you.
First, no one is saying that "smoking a joint makes marijuana medicine." What is being demonstrated and what advocates are trying in vein to get others to see is that there is plenty of research that proves the efficacy of marijuana for treatment of certain aliments and symptoms of others. For an overview of the research to date, feel free to visit www.mpp.org/research.
Second, to address your broad statement that the states are inadequate to oversee a medical marijuana program, what proof do you have of this? You have provided a nice quote from the AMA that simply concludes this, but again, where is the proof. The fact that 13 states, to date, have passed and have effectively overseen incredibly popular and effective medical marijuana laws tends to show the opposite is true. The states are the perfect venue for overseeing a program of this nature.
3. The fact that the FDA is near the end of clinical trials for Sativex confirms that cannabinoids found in marijuana have medical efficacy. You, presumably, rely on the future availability of Sativex as a reason deny those among us who are currently sick and dying medicine that would help alleviate some of their more terribly symptoms. Furthermore, Sativex and Marinol only contain one of the many cannibinoids found in marijuana; all of which should be studied, but that is no reason to deny a patient medicine today.
Finally, if it's ultimately smoking that you take issue with, smoking marijuana is avoidable. One can administer marijuana through edibles or through a vaporizer, which heats the marijuana to a point of releasing the cannibinoids but not to a combustible level.
Thank you for your time.
1. Smoking a joint does not make marijuana medicinal. Neither the MS Society or American Cancer society advocates its use. The November 21, 2009 LA Times Editorial "The AMA's Reversal on Marijuana" specifically notes: For all the debate over whether marijuana has medicinal value, arguments that the drug has significant palliative properties or that it has none suffer from the same flaw: There's little scientific
proof either way."
As to its potential, the American Medical Association, LA Times & Washington Post is
calling for extensive federal research of rijuana's medicinal purpose(s).
According to the AMA - "The AMA supports the concept of drug approval by scientific
and regulatory review to establish safety and efficacy, combined with appropriate standards for identity, strength, quality, purity, packaging, and labeling, rather than by ballot initiative or state legislative action. ..." Unoffically released AMA REPORT 3 OF THE COUNCIL ON SCIENCE AND PUBLIC HEALTH.
2. The States are structurally incapable of assuring such treatments are safe, valid, accurate, reliable and capable of administrative management.
Again, according to the AMA - “the patchwork of state-based systems that have been established for 'medical marijuana' is woefully inadequate in establishing even rudimentary safeguards that would normally be applied to the appropriate clinical use of Psychoactive substances."
The Washington Post editorial (Oct 25 "Questions About Pot") calls for a moratorium on new state programs.
3. The F.D.A. is currently near the end of extensive clinical trials of Sativex for
cancer & M.S. It is the AMA's position that smoking it is not a solution.:
"If there is any future for marijuana as a medicine, it lies in its isolated components, the cannabinoids and their synthetic derivatives. Isolated cannabinoids will provide more reliable effects than crude plant mixtures. Therefore, the purpose of clinical trials of smoked marijuana would not be to develop marijuana as a licensed drug but rather to serve as a first step toward the development of
nonsmoked rapid-onset cannabinoid delivery systems." Unoffical Report.
Dr. Edward Langston, an AMA board member, states more studies, in particular randomized, controlled trials, need to be carried out on smoked cannabis. According to Dr. Edward Langston the small number of that have been conducted in the past 30 years have been "insufficient to satisfy the current standards for a prescription drug product." LA Times.