I just received word that Timothy Garon passed away this afternoon. I’ve said what I’ve needed to say about what happened to this man. There’s a lot of tragedy in this world, but it’s especially tragic when people who we don’t expect to be among the ranks of the willfully ignorant bring about a result like this.
It’s also a reminder for those participating in the 2008 Global Marijuana March on Saturday that there’s still a long way to go.
Well, at least his doctors killed him. It’s worse to be killed by your insurance company. But, in a real sense, it was the GOP who killed him. I didn’t know him, but R.I.P. my good man. You’re in a better place now — a place with no Republican neighbors.
R.I.P. Timothy Garon, I pray your family and friends will find strength to get thru this difficult time. Now that your story has been told, maybe the medical community will re-evaluate the effects of marijuana for medical reasons. This is not a “political” issue, but rather a medical community that needs to do further research to prove their ideologies wrong. (let’s just hope the medical community moves research and decisions much faster than our politicians). You have made your stamp on this earth and opened many peoples eyes and minds! Thank you for sharing your story and may you enjoy life on the other side.
This would never happen if gummint ran health care. Notwithstanding Canada, France, and Cuber, rationing would NEVER occur. Everyone could get all the health care they need and not ever have to worry about cost. The latest technology, the best meds, the best docs would be available immediately to everyone for free.
@3 – I agree with universal healthcare to a certain degree, as long as I don’t live in pain needing a knee replacement and have to wait 2 years. My neighbors moved here from Austrailia, main reason work, 2nd reason, so she could get her knee replacement as she had been on a waiting list (non-emergency) for 2 years in Australia.
good thing she’s not poor here, she’d still be waiting.
@4
In some countries you have wait-lists, in ours you have people who don’t have any insurance or insurance with little coverage so they can’t get things like knee replacements.
What’s worse having to wait for knee replacement, not being to get knee replacement surgery or having to cash in half your 401K to get knee replacement surgery?
All the (reasonable, workable) universal coverage plans I’ve seen for the U.S. wouldn’t create wait-lists, turn doctors into government employees or ban secondary insurance.
Even McCain supports changing the way heath care is delivered. The folks that don’t want anything to change are shit out of luck.
@3 Yes, we need free gummint healthcare so you can afford to pay your outstanding debt to Goldy, now 2 1/2 years past due. Pay up, you welshing cheapskate!!
@6 – I support universal health care as I think it will bring down the costs associated with health care, I just don’t want to be in the waiting line for routine care (as some countries healthcare works).
Lee, I don’t recall if you knew or even met the guy, but a loss is a loss and it is sad. We shouldn’t wait for events such as this in order to have a respectful and substantive discussion of what led to it. Perhaps if things were taken one step at a time — uncouple the medical pot issue from overall decriminalization and/or the freedom to use non-medically. Perhaps if the pro-medical pot advocates were willing to accept restrictions such as not allowing the user to grow their own… I don’t know the answers, but maybe you can “Ichiro” the issue — go for a steady string of “singles” instead of trying to hit a home run on the issue every time you’re up.
Roger @ 1, Shut the hell up. Somebody DIED as a result of MEDICAL POLICY, not the national drug policy and not the GOP. Vicodin and MS-Contin are legal (with prescription) and if he’d been popping those, they’d likely have rejected him, too.
Hannah @ 2 is correct when she says that more evaluations — legitimate, double-blind studies — need to be made about this. As I’ve said before, I don’t have a problem with people using it for medical purposes and WITH a real doctor’s prescription. OTOH, growing and distribution should carry MUCH heavier penalties.
Yes it’s a tragedy and may he rest in peace. Keep in mind that for an average person it is much more likely to be killed in a liberal run city (ie Detroit,LA,Philly,New Orleans ect) than not getting a liver or even fighting in a war. Perspective…. it counts.
@1 “The GOP killed him”
Hahahahaha. And by GOP you mean “sharing dirty needles and getting Hep C” right?
If only there were rules and laws about these kinds of things so that this wouldn’t happen to another person…
Someone call a Waaaahmbulance…..I’d rather some youth get this transplant than a tragic self destroyer like Mr. Garon. Precious commodities demand precious scrutiny of recipients…….Mr. Garon failed the test. I’m sure someone else can make use of the transplant that Mr. Garon would more than likely would have pissed away yet again despite given a second chance.
Turn the page…..
@1
Heaven is a place without Republicans. I like the thought of that.
I’m so sorry! A good man died. At the very least he doesn’t have to keep dealing with the pain and fears.
RIP Mr. Garon.
Peace & sympathies to your family and friends.
Sorry he passed away, but I’m not sure what that has to do with being reminded of the “2008 Global Marijuana March.” Shouldn’t the list of those who do and don’t qualify for a transplant be left up to the doctors?
I heard Pelletizer@1 killed him.
Moron@13: Heaven is a place where Jesus decides and God agrees. So if you don’t agree with Jesus how you’s gonna git there? So for you atheistic Moonbat! Donkey, I don’t expect many of y’all to make it.
@15
Sorry he passed away, but I’m not sure what that has to do with being reminded of the “2008 Global Marijuana March.”
It’s an annual rally for marijuana users to demand more rights to be able to make our own decisions without having government interfere. There are a number of ways in which government interference has led to discriminatory views of medical marijuana patients.
The right is celebrating this death – since it saved them money – because they are pro-life, unless it means spending tax dollars.
And if Heaven is a place that lets an ass-licking, cum-drunk bitch like Puddydick in – I sure as Hell want nothing to do with it or the supposed God running it.
I’m all for the legalization of marijuana, medical or otherwise, but I’m just trying to figure out the connection here. Shouldn’t it be left up to the doctors who is and is not a good candidate for a transplant?
Lee @ 18
“It’s an annual rally for marijuana users to demand more rights…”
Will you be there for the 2008 Global Meth March, too?
As I’ve said before, a hefty chunk of the blame should fall squarely on the shoulders of Tim’s doctor who obviously knew far too little about the treatment of his condition to know that marijuana use can get you disqualified from a transplant. In fact, drug laws had nothing to do with the disqualification. You clearly stated that what he did was legal. He got what you’re apparently marching for — use of pot to deal with his symptoms. It was a medical decision and if you want to change that, you should go into medicine, do the research and publish peer-reviewed papers. The government can’t force doctors to perform procedures — especially when resources are so scarce.
There are only 6,000 organs for 98,000 people who need transplants. ALL other things being equal, if one guy doesn’t use pot and the other guy does, even a micro-slim chance that he’s addicted is a reasonable tie-breaker.
@21
Shouldn’t it be left up to the doctors who is and is not a good candidate for a transplant?
That still doesn’t make it right if a doctor allowed personal prejudices rather than medical expertise to affect that decision.
@22
Will you be there for the 2008 Global Meth March, too?
There’s no such thing as a Global Meth March. When you figure out why, maybe you’ll be able to refrain from humiliating yourself here.
As I’ve said before, a hefty chunk of the blame should fall squarely on the shoulders of Tim’s doctor who obviously knew far too little about the treatment of his condition to know that marijuana use can get you disqualified from a transplant.
Again, as I’ve already fully explained to you, this is equivalent to blaming the guy who left his car unlocked more than the car thief.
In fact, drug laws had nothing to do with the disqualification.
No, but the misperceptions over the drug, created in order to sustain our drug laws, did play the major role in the disqualification.
You clearly stated that what he did was legal. He got what you’re apparently marching for — use of pot to deal with his symptoms. It was a medical decision and if you want to change that, you should go into medicine, do the research and publish peer-reviewed papers.
Much of that research is blocked by the federal government, Einstein.
The government can’t force doctors to perform procedures — especially when resources are so scarce.
I’m not asking them to. You’re inventing an argument I’m not making here.
There are only 6,000 organs for 98,000 people who need transplants. ALL other things being equal, if one guy doesn’t use pot and the other guy does, even a micro-slim chance that he’s addicted is a reasonable tie-breaker.
You can’t become chemically addicted to pot, you buffoon. You can only become psychologically addicted, which means that there isn’t even a biochemical withdrawal to deal with. If you think that someone couldn’t abstain from smoking pot if they knew their life depended on it, you’re a far bigger idiot than even I first suspected.
Lee @ 23 “That still doesn’t make it right if a doctor allowed personal prejudices rather than medical expertise to affect that decision.”
And the FACTS you have to back up that opinion are???
You WANT pot to be legal. We get that. However, because a (transplant) COMMITTEE of highly-trained physicians doesn’t agree with you, doesn’t mean they’re all personally prejudiced.
Lee @ 24 “Much of that research is blocked by the federal government…”
Ahhh… a Vast Conspiracy??!!
Best to sleep with one eye open, Lee. Those black helicopters are comin’ to get ya!
Your car theft analogy, BTW, is irrelevant. I’m not blaming the victim (in this particular case). I’m blaming the guy who advised the victim, “go ahead and leave your car unlocked… and leave the keys in the ignition, too! I’ve never heard of anyone stealing a car before.”
“You can’t become chemically addicted to pot, you buffoon.”
Bullshit. Just because it isn’t highly likely, doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. Instead of reading your NORML propaganda, try looking up some medical facts, you buffoon.
“You can… become psychologically addicted. If you think that someone couldn’t abstain from smoking pot if they knew their life depended on it, you’re a far bigger idiot than even I first suspected.”
Apparently, your friend Timmy couldn’t stop smoking the herb long enough to get approved for a transplant. Looks like he, his doctor and all of you pot pushers are the real idiots. He’s dead because of you.
@25
And the FACTS you have to back up that opinion are???
From the original article:
These beliefs come out of personal prejudices, not from scientific study. That’s the problem.
You WANT pot to be legal. We get that. However, because a (transplant) COMMITTEE of highly-trained physicians doesn’t agree with you, doesn’t mean they’re all personally prejudiced.
In this case, that’s what happened. There are a lot of misperceptions about marijuana, and that’s what happened here.
@26
Ahhh… a Vast Conspiracy??!!
And a well known one dumbass.
Best to sleep with one eye open, Lee. Those black helicopters are comin’ to get ya!
Excuse me? Do you want me to do some quick Googling and post all of the insane “left-wing conspiracy crap” you’ve peddled on this blog?
Your car theft analogy, BTW, is irrelevant. I’m not blaming the victim (in this particular case). I’m blaming the guy who advised the victim, “go ahead and leave your car unlocked… and leave the keys in the ignition, too! I’ve never heard of anyone stealing a car before.”
Again, from the original article:
Many people within the medical marijuana community did not know that this could happen until recently. People within the medical marijuana community don’t expect other doctors to treat them as addicts. Many of the doctors they deal with are more educated and more up-to-date on the realities. This caught people in the patient community by surprise.
Bullshit. Just because it isn’t highly likely, doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. Instead of reading your NORML propaganda, try looking up some medical facts, you buffoon.
Ok, here are some medical facts
If you’ll notice, that’s a medical drug rehab center’s web site. Even they don’t lie about this any more.
Apparently, your friend Timmy couldn’t stop smoking the herb long enough to get approved for a transplant. Looks like he, his doctor and all of you pot pushers are the real idiots. He’s dead because of you.
Grow up, asshole. He did everything he could. You’re actually attempting in this comment thread to blame Timothy for all of this? What a fucking dirtbag you are. Get a goddamn life.
Lee @ 28
Did you read the article? Setting aside, for the moment, that there is no link to the originals source material, it sounds like ONE of the lawsuits MIGHT be legit. However, I am not going to take seriously lawsuits by either the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies or the Wo/Men’s Alliance for Medical Marijuana.
If you want to cite the RULINGS on those lawsuits, you might have something relevant to say.
On the addiction issue… Here is just ONE example from the U of Wisconsin: http://www.uhs.wisc.edu/displa.....;cat_id=38
Sure as hell sounds like physical addiction.
I don’t blame Timothy. I blame his doctor, you and the rest of the pro-pot crowd that encouraged him to plunge headlong into a treatment without fully researching the ramifications. I blame the pro-pot crowd for the propaganda claims that marijuana is a panacea — giving hope to those in medical distress. There are plenty of other medicines that help with nausea and appetite. The only difference is that they don’t have a cult following and they don’t give you a cool buzz when you use them. (I have friends who have serious medical issues that require just this kind of treatment.)
@29
Did you read the article?
Setting aside, for the moment, that there is no link to the originals source material, it sounds like ONE of the lawsuits MIGHT be legit. However, I am not going to take seriously lawsuits by either the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies or the Wo/Men’s Alliance for Medical Marijuana.
Ok, then here’s more information:
http://www.maps.org/mmj/
http://www.canorml.org/news/de.....rules.html
And here’s information on the DEA’s own judge ruling that they shouldn’t be doing what they’re doing:
http://blog.light-of-reason.co.....-research/
How far down this path do you want to go before you just admit that you’re wrong? How thoroughly are you going to humiliate yourself before you figure it out?
Continuing…
@29
As for the addiction claims made there, I’d love to see the data and the methodology they used. As someone who has regularly smoked marijuana for 10+ years, I know for a fact that it’s not physically addictive. I don’t need a study to tell me that.
A lot of research is done in order to support a public health agency or a private enterprise by providing inaccurate data in order to support whoever’s paying them (this is why there has been so much baseless propaganda about tobacco from both sides – from the tobacco companies that it’s harmless, and from the public health agencies that second-hand smoke is far more dangerous than it really is).
Smart people can see through it.
I don’t blame Timothy. I blame his doctor, you and the rest of the pro-pot crowd that encouraged him to plunge headlong into a treatment without fully researching the ramifications.
That’s ridiculous. Pro-pot people don’t encourage people to use medical marijuana for political reasons. And I’ve already explained that it was not an expected result that doctors on transplant committees would bury their heads in the sand like this.
I blame the pro-pot crowd for the propaganda claims that marijuana is a panacea — giving hope to those in medical distress.
For a lot of people, it is. That’s not propaganda. That’s the truth. Marijuana is very effective for dealing with a number of symptoms of serious illnesses and also for a range of other treatments.
There are plenty of other medicines that help with nausea and appetite. The only difference is that they don’t have a cult following and they don’t give you a cool buzz when you use them. (I have friends who have serious medical issues that require just this kind of treatment.)
For starters, marijuana is actually healthier and has less side effects than some of the other drugs. Also, different people respond to drugs differently. Some may find the alternative drug effective. Others may not. But there’s absolutely no reason to limit people’s options, or to denigrate those who find that a particular option works better for them.
Does anyone know if they reject people as transplant recipients if they have a drink once or twice a week?
@9 How can you be ok with people using marijuana for medical purposes but also advocate for stiffer penalties for growing it? How is a person needing marijuana for medical purposes supposed to obtain said marijuana if no one can grow it?
@29 The reason that marijuana is not considered a legit medicine by the US Government is that there isn’t any corporate lobby pushing to make it recognized as a legit medicine. Viagra can and has killed people. Why isn’t it illegal? Is getting an erection absolutely necessary, no. But there are a lot of older men willing to pay a lot of money to ensure that they can get an erection, therefore there’s a strong corporate lobby to make sure that Viagra is legal and available. Because it’s necessary? No, because it’s profitable. There isn’t any way to make marijuana profitable for drug companies, therefore you won’t see any corporate lobbyist pushing for its legalization.
ewp @ 33
Just like you can’t manufacture Vicodin at home, you shouldn’t be allowed to cultivate pot. You get it just like any other controlled drug — at the pharmacy. And even if, God forbid, they make it over the counter, as I’m sure lots of pro-pot folks would like, you could still keep it behind the counter with the Sudafed.
@32
Does anyone know if they reject people as transplant recipients if they have a drink once or twice a week?
Mickey Mantle got a liver transplant.
In seriousness though, people with alcoholism do get rejected, but not people who have been recreational drinkers throughout their life.
@36,
Interesting. Then there appears to be a double standard.
Lee @ 31 “As someone who has regularly smoked marijuana for 10+ years, I know for a fact that it’s not physically addictive. I don’t need a study to tell me that.”
I see… your subjective (and intoxicated?) opinion trumps medical research. Uhh… yeah.
I’m sorry to hear of your 10-year illness. I mean, you’re only smoking it for the health benefits… you’re not getting stoned, right?
You know, I may not be the best person to speak about intentional intoxication as I’ve never been drunk or high. When I did get serious painkillers in the hospital afer surgery, the first thought that went through my mind was, “why the f*&# would anyone want to feel like THIS??!!” I immediately asked to be put on different medicine, even if it meant feeling pain.
And I can understand, to an extent, why someone living a hellish life might lean on the crutch of pot to cope. I can understand, to an extent, medicinal need. I cannot understand, however, why someone would be so weak as to need to get high to cope with life in general.
Pro-pot people don’t encourage people to use medical marijuana for political reasons.
Sure they do. They think that flaunting the law brings about change. They claim some higher knowledge (no pun intended) than what is accepted by the mainstream medical community.
“I’ve already explained that it was not an expected result that doctors on transplant committees would bury their heads in the sand like this.
Your own comment in the original post said it was “… a common misunderstanding about medical marijuana patients.”
If it is a COMMON misunderstanding, then it follows that it is an expected result. As for your “bury their heads in the sand” comment, that is purely propaganda. Did you ever consider that they might have reviewed the legtimate papers written on it and come to the logical conclusion that, all things being equal between two patients, the one that smokes pot is a higher risk?
“Marijuana is very effective for dealing with a number of symptoms of serious illnesses and also for a range of other treatments.”
Show me a link to placebo-controlled studies.
@37
Interesting. Then there appears to be a double standard.
In what sense? Keep in mind two other things – if you’re going in the direction I think you’re going in:
1) Alcohol affects the liver – marijuana does not
2) Marijuana has medicinal uses – alcohol does not
Very sorry to hear about Tim’s passing.I don’t really know the donor guidelines but I do know their going to take care of the paying customer first.It’s very sad this day in age that every aspect of our life has some sort of pricetag on it.The bottom line is as long as you can smoke cigerettes and drink alcohol you should be held under the same scrutiny as a pothead regarding transplants.This bullshit this government gets away with catergerizing marijuana with lsd,heroine and cocaine is absurd.All you people need to smartin up and quit supporting this pseudo democracy and practice your right wheather it be civil disobedience or free speech.There’s a lot of bad shit going on and Timothy Garon is just another casualtie of war on the domestic front.
@38
Wow, still eager to embarrass yourself, aren’t you?
I see… your subjective (and intoxicated?) opinion trumps medical research. Uhh… yeah.
It’s very simple, Mark. If something is chemically addictive, you will feel withdrawal when you stop using it. I smoked cigarettes for 2 years and quit. I went through withdrawal. I’ve smoked pot since my first year in college in 1993. Yet I do not experience any withdrawal at all when I go without it for a few weeks or months.
I’m sorry to hear of your 10-year illness. I mean, you’re only smoking it for the health benefits… you’re not getting stoned, right?
Of course I’m getting stoned. Who says that a drug can’t have medicinal uses but also be enjoyable?
You know, I may not be the best person to speak about intentional intoxication as I’ve never been drunk or high.
No shit.
When I did get serious painkillers in the hospital afer surgery, the first thought that went through my mind was, “why the f*&# would anyone want to feel like THIS??!!” I immediately asked to be put on different medicine, even if it meant feeling pain.
And I support your right to make those decisions about what medications you choose to take.
And I can understand, to an extent, why someone living a hellish life might lean on the crutch of pot to cope.
That’s a mischaracterization of medical marijuana. It’s not a crutch. It’s a medicine. It has certain properties that are beneficial to people. It can eliminate certain types of pain. It can increase appetite. For people with certain ailments, these effects are beneficial, even life saving.
can understand, to an extent, medicinal need. I cannot understand, however, why someone would be so weak as to need to get high to cope with life in general.
I don’t get high to “cope” with life. I get high because it’s an enjoyable experience. It enhances my enjoyment of music and movies. It makes my mind more creative. It makes sex better (big plus). And I find it beneficial for self-reflection, really digging deep into my own psyche and looking for ways to improve upon myself.
Sure they do. They think that flaunting the law brings about change. They claim some higher knowledge (no pun intended) than what is accepted by the mainstream medical community.
That’s baloney. Support for medical marijuana is absolutely not a cynical ruse to weaken our drug laws.
If it is a COMMON misunderstanding, then it follows that it is an expected result.
I said it was a common misunderstanding among the general public, but we still expect doctors to know better.
As for your “bury their heads in the sand” comment, that is purely propaganda. Did you ever consider that they might have reviewed the legtimate papers written on it and come to the logical conclusion that, all things being equal between two patients, the one that smokes pot is a higher risk?
No, I don’t. I believe that one has to be willfully ignorant to reach that conclusion.
Show me a link to placebo-controlled studies.
Here are a few:
http://www.hepatitis-central.c.....benef.html
http://www.washblade.com/2007/...../10069.cfm
And a compilation of links here:
http://www.mpp.org/library/med.....udies.html
Are you done making an ass of yourself yet?
Lee @ 41
From what I could interpret, only one of those studies — the UCSF one with 50 people — appeared to be placebo-controlled, but it isn’t clear whether it was double-blind.
Interesting excerpt from it: “Marijuana cut the daily pain experienced by patients in the first group by an average of 34 percent, compared to an average of 17 percent for the placebo group”
So, while it cut pain, it also showed that there is a significant placebo effect.
The question one would have to ask in Garon’s case is whether Marinol was offered and/or if it would have made a difference in the transplant decision.
By the way… just a suggestion to you and your pro-drug friends: If you want to be taken seriously in the field of medicine, make sure your “gift shop” doesn’t sell this stuff:
http://www.maps.org/catalog/index.php?cPath=24
Do they also offer a catalog that sells pipes and containers for hiding your weeeeed?
If you truly want to help people like Garon and you’re not politically motivated for your own selfish needs, drop the argument for legalization and push to make it a controlled MEDICINE.
@42
From what I could interpret, only one of those studies — the UCSF one with 50 people — appeared to be placebo-controlled, but it isn’t clear whether it was double-blind.
Oh, please. Do you really think anyone can still be taking you seriously at this point?
Interesting excerpt from it: “Marijuana cut the daily pain experienced by patients in the first group by an average of 34 percent, compared to an average of 17 percent for the placebo group”
So, while it cut pain, it also showed that there is a significant placebo effect.
Of course there’s a placebo effect. How does that negate the added effect? Are you dense?
The question one would have to ask in Garon’s case is whether Marinol was offered and/or if it would have made a difference in the transplant decision.
I have no idea. And since the only difference between using Marinol and using smokeable marijuana is the effect one’s lungs, rather than the liver, it’s an irrelevant question.
By the way… just a suggestion to you and your pro-drug friends: If you want to be taken seriously in the field of medicine, make sure your “gift shop” doesn’t sell this stuff
A bunch of psychedelic posters? Hahaha. What’s wrong with you?
Do they also offer a catalog that sells pipes and containers for hiding your weeeeed?
Maybe. Who cares?
If you truly want to help people like Garon and you’re not politically motivated for your own selfish needs, drop the argument for legalization and push to make it a controlled MEDICINE.
Please. I’m not in this fight for my own selfish needs. I can use marijuana whenever I want. I’m a wealthy white male in a city that does not pursue personal use cases or even try to bust small-time dealers. I fight for legalization because our marijuana laws are filling up our prisons needlessly, creating more income for organized crime, wasting our taxpayer dollars, and claiming victims among the less privileged every day. The fact that marijuana is illegal has nearly as many negative repercussions for you as it does for me. I’m just the only one of us who’s smart enough to understand that.
@35 The fact is you cannot buy marijuana at the drug store, so your support for medicinal uses without a means to purchase combined with your support for stiffer penalties for growing marijuana makes absolutely no sense. What you support is the status quo because it allows you the illusion of being compassionate. What exactly is the government protecting us from by making marijuana illegal? It can’t kill you. You can grow it your back yard. All the justifications used to support prohibition, such as it’s a gateway to more dangerous drugs, it’s addictive, it’ll fry your brain. Have all been proven to be false by numerous peer reviewed studies. Nixon put together a blue ribbon commission to study the policy, and the result was a recommendation to de-criminalize marijuana. DEA agents, judges and medical professionals have all weighed in on the side of de-criminalization. Yet our government and people like you cling to lies to justify prohibition. Why?
Another problem with having pot be dispensed by pharmacists is the pharmacist may choose to not fill the pot prescription, because they don’t beleive in it, like what they are doing with the morning after pills.
Let me see if I got this right. Doctors and hospitals shouldn’t decide the criteria for who are the best candidates for an organ transplant, rather people like Woody Harrelson should have the last word on transplant matters?
@46
Let me see if I got this right. Doctors and hospitals shouldn’t decide the criteria for who are the best candidates for an organ transplant, rather people like Woody Harrelson should have the last word on transplant matters?
No, you’re still missing the point. Let me give you a more extreme example to make this clearer. Let’s say a hospital denied a transplant for someone because he was black. That’s their right, isn’t it?
The point is that medical centers need to have medical justifications for these kinds of decisions. And even then, that’s not all there is to this.
Let’s say for instance that a person was denied a life-saving transplant because doctors determined that he’d eaten too much fast food in his life and therefore his life wasn’t worth saving. Or if they determined that the person didn’t exercise a lot in their life. Would that be fair?
Lee @ 43
“I fight for legalization because our marijuana laws are filling up our prisons needlessly”
Now it is completely clear that you are only capable of spouting talking points. This myth has been debunked in other threads — including, I believe, ones in which you’ve participated. The number of people serving prison time for simple pot posession/use is NEGLIGIBLE. Most often, drug crimes involve harder drugs and when they only involve pot, they typically involve other crimes beyond chillin’ on the couch with a joint, listenin’ to a little Led Zep.
Lee @ 47
Your “black” example is bullshit. One cannot change their race, but it is a CHOICE to smoke marijuana.
You, yourself, have admitted that there can be psychological addiction. I believe — and correct me if I’m wrong — you acknowledge that post-transplant pot use is bad. So… ALL other things being equal, if two patients are vying for a single transplant organ and one of them smokes medical pot, you’re saying the CHANCES of them relapsing to pot smoking post-surgery are IDENTICAL? You’re saying that the transplant committee shouldn’t take into consideration the odds of the patient’s post-surgical compliance?
The only way you take pot smoking and the POTENTIAL for post-surgical (psychological) addiction out of the mix is if all 98,000 people vying for the 6,000 organs ALL smoke pot. And I highly doubt that.
@48
Now it is completely clear that you are only capable of spouting talking points. This myth has been debunked in other threads — including, I believe, ones in which you’ve participated.
What? No one goes to jail in this country because marijuana is illegal? Are you kidding?
The number of people serving prison time for simple pot posession/use is NEGLIGIBLE. Most often, drug crimes involve harder drugs and when they only involve pot, they typically involve other crimes beyond chillin’ on the couch with a joint, listenin’ to a little Led Zep.
Actually, the largest number of people in jail for drugs are involved in marijuana distribution. And despite what happens here, there are parts of the country where marijuana possession still gets you an automatic sentence. Those people would not be in jail if they were part of a regulated industry (not to mention that the people participating in the industry would likely be more reputable as well, or at least have better regard for the law).
@49
Your “black” example is bullshit. One cannot change their race, but it is a CHOICE to smoke marijuana.
I said it was an extreme example in order to demonstrate a point. The parallels between fast food and exercise are closer to what we’re talking about here, obviously. Sorry for not dumbing down that comment for you, it was meant for Troll.
You, yourself, have admitted that there can be psychological addiction. I believe — and correct me if I’m wrong — you acknowledge that post-transplant pot use is bad. So… ALL other things being equal, if two patients are vying for a single transplant organ and one of them smokes medical pot, you’re saying the CHANCES of them relapsing to pot smoking post-surgery are IDENTICAL?
No. The first mistake you’re making is that you’re once again conflating medical marijuana use with marijuana addiction. The second is that a person can be psychologically addicted to food, sex, sugar, or coffee. Is it right for a transplant board to deny you a transplant because you’ve eaten red meat or had sex in your life?
You’re saying that the transplant committee shouldn’t take into consideration the odds of the patient’s post-surgical compliance?
No, I’m saying that it’s wrong to assume that a medical marijuana user has a psychological addiction. In fact, I find it ridiculous to suggest that a person couldn’t stop using pot if they knew their life depended on it. Even people who get lung cancer from cigarettes are able to stop smoking cigarettes (which are far, far, more addictive) when in that situation.
The only way you take pot smoking and the POTENTIAL for post-surgical (psychological) addiction out of the mix is if all 98,000 people vying for the 6,000 organs ALL smoke pot. And I highly doubt that.
But pot is far from the only thing that one can have a psychological addiction to. People get psychologically addicted to all kinds of substances, from sugar to caffeine to chocolate. You’d have to filter out all the people who eat candy or go to Starbucks too.
Lee @ 43
“I have no idea. And since the only difference between using Marinol and using smokeable marijuana is the effect one’s lungs, rather than the liver, it’s an irrelevant question.
Ahh… you’re a biochemist now? Marinol is different from pot in more than just the delivery system. And since you admit that you have no clue whether its use would have impacted the transplant decision, you have no way of knowing relevance.
@49
You, yourself, have admitted that there can be psychological addiction. I believe — and correct me if I’m wrong — you acknowledge that post-transplant pot use is bad.
Actually, I missed this part. It’s an open question as to whether post-transplant pot use is bad, but patients should obviously err on the side of caution. Considering that the risk appears to be from ingesting moldy marijuana, marinol would probably be ok, but I’m not certain.
@51
Ahh… you’re a biochemist now? Marinol is different from pot in more than just the delivery system. And since you admit that you have no clue whether its use would have impacted the transplant decision, you have no way of knowing relevance.
Well, unless you can show me that marinol is less safe than smoked marijuana, then it is irrelevant to the discussion. Neither should be used as a basis for denying a transplant.
Lee @ 52
The AP-sourced article says, “Many doctors agree that using marijuana – smoking it, especially – is out of the question post-transplant.”
Not “a bad idea” or “not suggested” — “out of the question.” It also says the mold is common.
My point was that, statistically-speaking, a person who has regularly smoked pot prior to a transplant is more likely to fall back to pot use after the transplant than someone who has never used it. In other words, the odds of having a psychological addiction to something you’ve never tried is ZERO. Even if the odds of a pre-transplant smoker having a psych addiction are ZERO+.1, that is still enough of a tiebreaker with all other conditions being equal — especially when you have 92,000 people who won’t get a transplant at all.
@54
My point was that, statistically-speaking, a person who has regularly smoked pot prior to a transplant is more likely to fall back to pot use after the transplant than someone who has never used it.
Sure, and a person who has had alcohol before is more likely, statistically-speaking, to have a drink after the transplant than someone who has never had a drink before. But they don’t deny transplants on the basis of having been an occasional drinker before.
In other words, the odds of having a psychological addiction to something you’ve never tried is ZERO. Even if the odds of a pre-transplant smoker having a psych addiction are ZERO+.1, that is still enough of a tiebreaker with all other conditions being equal — especially when you have 92,000 people who won’t get a transplant at all.
Again, the same thing can be said about alcohol, but they don’t deny transplants to people who have had alcohol in their life, only to people who are alcoholics.
Lee @ 55
It seems like you’re finally seeing my point. Now it is a matter of degrees.
“…they don’t deny transplants to people who have had alcohol in their life…”
Do you know this for a fact? I believe the LEVEL of alcohol consumption is one of the criteria.
I could be wrong, but I would imagine they wouldn’t deny someone who HAD smoked pot at some point in the past, just like I doubt they would deny the occasional drinker.
What about someone who consistently has two beers every night after work? Do we call them an alcoholic? Yet, if they were to fill out a pre-surg form, they’d have to check the “1 or 2 drinks per day” section and they may well be denied on the CHANCE they have a problem. So smoking pot once or twice a day (or more?)…
I also found an interesting article on post-surg tobacco smoking (which is apparently very bad): “Recipients who also had hepatitis B virus or hepatitis C virus were more likely to smoke, as were those with a history of abusing substances (beyond alcohol).” (www.aasld.org/eweb/DynamicPage.aspx?webcode=press_release_lt17)
Again, it becomes a question of the definition of “abusing” or (psychological) “addiction.” If you light up a couple of times a day for a couple of months or more, is that viewed as “abuse” or addiction by a transplant surgeon?
And on the topic of Garon’s doctor… When I’ve looked up sites regarding liver transplant surgery, they consistently say things like:
So… It seems that even the occasional drink might get you booted. I still see a HUGE amount of the fault needing to be placed on Garon’s doctor’s shoulders. “No pot or booze” is common knowledge.
One last thing… I spoke to a close friend who is a doctor about aspergillosis. She said it is a baaaaad fungal infection. So, if it is a common issue with pot, I can see how surgeons would be very concerned.
I’m actually curious as to why YOU would want to smoke pot knowing the risk of aspergillosis. Is the buzz really worth it?
First I must say that I am biased because I met Tim through my husband 36 years ago. We both consider him a friend and kept in touch via phone once or twice a year.
In the Dallas newspaper, Tim’s story ran next to a story about a woman who was brought to this country illegally by her aunt as a child. She had 3 liver transplants on our $. She turned 21 and is in need of a 4th liver transplant. She no longer qualifies for insurance (paid by us), but found there is a loophole where she could declare herself illegal and qualify for coverage again. She’s going to get a 4th transplant! I wonder is she is really a good candidate for transplant since her first 3 failed. The point is not that she is here illegally, but that she has a history of rejecting organs that could be used to save others.
Tim deserved a chance. It was too soon to loose him. We will miss him.
@57 – Good point! And my thoughts and prayers are with you and your family during this difficult time.
@56
It seems like you’re finally seeing my point. Now it is a matter of degrees.
No, I still think you’re dead wrong about what you’re saying. Let me explain again.
Timothy Garon’s marijuana use was medical, not recreational. This is a huge distinction, but not even the only one. Alcohol actually affects the liver, whereas marijuana does not. Therefore, there’s more of a justification for eliminating those who use alcohol than those who use marijuana. You’re treating the two as the same even when they’re not.
Again, it becomes a question of the definition of “abusing” or (psychological) “addiction.” If you light up a couple of times a day for a couple of months or more, is that viewed as “abuse” or addiction by a transplant surgeon?
It depends. If you were authorized by a doctor to do so, it’s not abuse.
So… It seems that even the occasional drink might get you booted.
Of course it does. Alcohol affects your liver! Pot does not. Plus, medical marijuana is not an illicit drug. And no doctor worth his salt believes that marijuana is any more dangerous than the thousands of legal drugs given to Americans every day.
I’m actually curious as to why YOU would want to smoke pot knowing the risk of aspergillosis. Is the buzz really worth it?
Are you really that dumb? No one has ever died from using marijuana. Not one. Ever. In all of recorded human history. You can only get aspergillosis from impure marijuana. In other words, if we had a system where medical marijuana was legal and regulated, this wouldn’t even be an issue.
Second, considering that 20 million or more people in this country use marijuana, don’t you think you’d hear more about aspergillosis if it was an actual problem?
You’re still not understanding any of this. Please take a step back from your keyboard and think about it. You’re making a total ass of yourself.