Leading Anti-Marijuana Academics Are Paid By Painkiller Drug Companies

[bobandtorey]

As Americans continue to embrace pot—as medicine and for recreational use—opponents are turning to a set of academic researchers to claim that policymakers should avoid relaxing restrictions around marijuana. It's too dangerous, risky, and untested, they say. Just as drug company-funded research has become incredibly controversial in recent years, forcing major medical schools and journals to institute strict disclosure requirements, could there be a conflict of interest issue in the pot debate?

VICE has found that many of the researchers who have advocated against legalizing pot have also been on the payroll of leading pharmaceutical firms with products that could be easily replaced by using marijuana. When these individuals have been quoted in the media, their drug-industry ties have not been revealed.

Take, for example, Dr. Herbert Kleber of Columbia University. Kleber has impeccable academic credentials, and has been quoted in the press and in academic publicationswarning against the use of marijuana, which he stresses may cause wide-ranging addiction and public health issues. But when he's writing anti-pot opinion pieces forCBS News, or being quoted by NPR and CNBC, what's left unsaid is that Kleber hasserved as a paid consultant to leading prescription drug companies, including Purdue Pharma (the maker of OxyContin), Reckitt Benckiser (the producer of a painkiller called Nurofen), and Alkermes (the producer of a powerful new opioid called Zohydro).

Denver's Marijuana Gold Rush Is Forcing Out Locals. Read more here.

Kleber, who did not respond to a request for comment, maintains important influence over the pot debate. For instance, his writing has been cited by the New York State Association of Chiefs of Police in its opposition to marijuana legalization, and has been published by the American Psychiatric Association in the organization's statement warning against marijuana for medicinal uses.

Could Kleber's long-term financial relationship with drug firms be viewed as a conflict of interest? Studies have found that pot can be used for pain relief as a substitute for major prescription painkillers. The opioid painkiller industry is a multibillion business that has faced rising criticism from experts because painkillers now cause about 16,000 deaths a year, more than heroin and cocaine combined. Researchers view marijuana as a safe alternative to opioid products like OxyContin, and there are no known overdose deaths from pot.

 

https://news.vice.com/article/leading-anti-marijuana-academics-are-paid-by-painkiller-drug-companies

[outsideinthecold]

This post confirms once again I am in error.

 

I thought prescription opioids were responsible for over 20,000 deaths each year in the US; a total that does not include the 25% of the suicides committed by folks taking anti-depressants.

 

Nationwide 16,000 deaths-per-year is less than two-a-day in Michigan so that isn't so bad, is it?

 

I wonder what would happen if two bodies washed ashore every day on Michigan beaches?

 

Or if suicide and/or opioid overdose deaths risen in states that have approved (and better yet supported) medical marijuana?

 

Personally I think there is more blood on the hands of all prohibitionists than the drug cartels and that's saying a lot.

Edited September 8, 2014 by outsideinthecold