Archive

ShareThis Page
Trib editorial: Medical marijuana vs. opioids | TribLIVE.com
Editorials

Trib editorial: Medical marijuana vs. opioids

webmarijuana2
Medical marijuana plants

States’ legalization of marijuana, for recreational use or palliative care, has corresponded with a slight, although notable, reduction in opioid prescriptions, according to two new studies. In which case there’s reason to believe that the supposed devil that’s not known — primarily because of the federal government’s restrictions on medical marijuana research — is a better alternative to the known opioid demon, which is killing people.

Two studies in the American Medical Association’s peer-reviewed Journal of Internal Medicine show a drop in opioid prescriptions in states with medical and/or recreational marijuana laws. One study between 2011 and 2016 — when Medicaid was expanded under ObamaCare — showed that medical marijuana cut opioid use by nearly 40 prescriptions per 1,000 Medicaid enrollees.

Another study, focusing on Medicare Part D enrollees, found states with medical marijuana dispensaries reduced the number of opioid prescriptions for people over 65.

Of course more research is warranted. But the findings suggest that medical marijuana can, at least in some circumstances, replace highly addictive opioids for pain relief.

And it’s doubtful anyone ever died from a marijuana overdose, if that’s even possible.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.