Medical Marijuana Issue in Florida: One Big Pot Hole

On August twenty nine, 2013, the Federal Department of Justice given a memorandum stating it will continue to count on state and local authorities to manage marijuana activity through enforcement of state narcotics laws. But, in light of new state laws allowing for possession of a tiny quantities of marijuana plus regulating production, processing and sale of marijuana, the Department designated eight criteria to guide state law enforcement. States must (one) stop the distribution of marijuana to minors; (2) prevent profits from the selling of marijuana from moving to criminal enterprises; (3) restrict the diversion of marijuana coming from states where it's legal to states where it is illegal; (four) stop marijuana pastime from being used as a cover for the trafficking of other illegal drugs; (five) stop violence and also the use of firearms in the taking care and distribution of marijuana; (6) prevent drugged driving and also the exacerbation of additional undesirable public health effects associated with marijuana use; (seven) prevent the growth of marijuana on public lands; and (eight) prevent marijuana possession or use on federal property. In the function that the Federal Government establishes that States are not sticking with these kinds of requirements, the Federal Government reserves the right of its to challenge State laws. The Feds did not say how any of that was to be done. They just said the states need to do that here. But Florida has evidently been looking the other way.

The new Law

In passing - https://www.buzzfeed.com/search?q=passing CS/CS/SB 1030, Florida has missed several crucial issues. Think about, for example, the new law, that has the following features:

It makes "low-THC cannabis" legal when recommended by a medical doctor or maybe osteopathic physician for an individual who has certain medical conditions. Which conditions? Cancer, seizures, persistent or severe muscle spasms. Seems clear enough. Here's the spot that the Florida Legislature decided to go off track-

A patient is considered qualified to get this treatment assuming (among other things), the individual is a fixed resident of Florida and also the physician establishes the chances of ordering the pot are affordable. Just how does a physician determine whether the patient is an unchangeable resident? Can there be any protection to generate that decision in faith which is fine? Nope. Just how does a physician help make the reasonableness determination? Is the study of marijuana use perhaps part of the medical college curriculum? No.

Remarkably, the Florida Medical Association as well as the Florida Osteopathic Medical Association have accountability, starting October, 1, 2014, to prepare prescribing physicians through an eight hour education program. The way the Legislature made the decision to allocate that performance to the FMA and FOMA, the reason they in addition want that task (beyond collecting non dues revenues) and just how the drafters came up with 8 hours (does that include things like drinking water and bathroom breaks?) is a wonder. And just how this kind of training pertains at all on the daily medical practice of the physicians taking these kinds of a training course is absent. Could an orthopedist undertake it? Sure. How about a pathologist? You guess. A dermatologist? Not an issue. Why would a profitable, practicing physician elect to pursue this new direction? How is that the best and "highest use" for an excellently skilled cardiologist, family practitioner or perhaps anesthesiologist? Evaluating an individual with cancer or with awful seizures who might benefit from medical marijuana requires no over a 8 hour program? I assumed it required lessons in internal medicine, neurology and... cancer. And so, can this be a medically, scientifically driven law designed to assist individuals in need or one that just makes everyone that is sure gets their piece of the pie? It seems to miss the mark.

Florida has reportedly had a lengthy and lingering trouble with the problem of drug diversion. People from all over have arrived at Florida not just for the sunshine, but also for the oxies, roxies and many other controlled substances. Has that trouble been licked? Was law enforcement consulted on the public safety failures involved in the law? Were they in the drafting room when the bill was produced? I do not know, but it is hard to see any of their fingerprints on the brand new law. It seems we've just dumped this issue on them! Where, for example, is the roadside test to check individuals operating motor vehicles under the influence of pot, medical marijuana or even otherwise? It does not occur! There is no way to protect the public out of this just yet. The best they are capable of doing is to send it off to some confirmation laboratory and hang on one day or so (at a major expense the taxpayers will bear). It is a law without substantial consequences, in addition to all physician training fees and licensure fees will do is place cash in the pockets of the government as well as organizations waiting to pounce condor cbd gummies on shark tank ( redirect to %domain_as_name% - https://www.kentreporter.com/blog/condor-cbd-gummies-review-worth-the-mo... ) the ability.

One bright spot... the Legislature has decided to study the usage of medical marijuana. Yep. They've reserved a single BILLION... I mean thousand dollars (about the price of a website) for the Department of Health Biomedical Research Program to master cannabidol and its effect on intractable childhood epilepsy, a really laudable seeming idea. So anywhere will the rest of the money come from to do what the law mandates the Department of Health is creating a Compassionate Use Registry which (among other things) prevents an individual seeking prescribed pot from multiple physicians; establishes dispensing organizations throughout Florida; polices the skilled doctors, the dispensing organizations & patients who could be abusing the law? Who understands. Question: why don't you study this BEFORE green lighting the whole idea? Colorado and Washington have both led how on the problem, so you will want to review the public health as well as medical problems prior to passing a law with so many open issues?