As a detox center it is very rare, in fact its almost never happened, that someone that smokes marijuana checks into a detox center. One of the main reasons this is so is due to the lack of a defineable toxicity level which is unlike alcohol, vicodin, dexadrine and other legal drugs. Finally local and state governments across the USA are recognizing that toxicity along with addictive qualities are better indicators of harm than dogma and misinformation. Eventually anyone that needs medical marijuana will be able to get it and less people will be incarcerated for having it. And hopefully no person will be forced to adjust their lives permanently due to over zealous enforcement of impractical laws. Except for the dangers of smoking much less harm is linked marijuana use than say alcohol(legal) use.

very few people actually need mj for medical conditions. a through review of doctors orders and you will see that most of those getting med mj could do better with some aspirin!

I disagree with you jrzshor. Take a look at the number of people in NJ with AIDS and Cancer. It's overwhelming. Try telling someone who is suffering of chronic nausea to just take an aspirin. Not to mention, there have been studies showing that THC can reduce brain tumors up to 50%! Med MJ patients have healthier alternatives to smoking pot such as vaporizing or eating foods that have been baked with "cannabutter". I don't think most doctors would put their license at risk to prescribe MJ to patients who could "do better with some aspirin". The legalization of medical marijuana in NJ will continue to be very controversial. I have a feeling the drug will be treated with more restrictions than even oxycontin, and will probably be difficult to obtain unless you're suffering from a "debilitating" disease.

OK- assume pot is legalized for "Medical use." Who sells it? Where? What sort of license is required by seller? Buyer? At what strength? What amount? For what application? Who produces it? Who determines how is it to be measured/ regulated? Tax it for revenue? If so, watch the drug cartels capitalize by offering stronger, more potent pot at less cost. How does the cop on the street recognize legal from illegal? How long before legalizing for recreational use? Who is liable for consequential accidents and injuries/ fatalities by operators under the influence? Who pays for the inevitable increase in demands for treatment? This is the proverbial camel with its nose under the tent. It defies reasonable, logical control and invites myriad unintended consequences.

I feel that people should be able to buy a permit to grow limited amounts of pot for any use. It should be secured with locks and only used for personal use. infractions of the terms would result in fines. This would bust the drug lords!

It's a lose, lose situation. But I offer this thought, "I hope no of us, or anyone for that matter, have to someday make a decision on our quality of life. Marijuana or morphine! This medical condition, which is inoperable or untreatable, is entitled to alternative "prescribed" pain relief vs. street prescribed relief.

"Inevitable increase in demands for treatment?" Nobody has ever need to got to treatment for pot. Unless their ignorant parents sent them. Marijuana is a thousand times safer and more effective than alcohol, tobacco, SSRI's, narcotic pain meds, anti-nausea meds, sleepin pills,and many other "legal" prescription drugs. It's time for America to wake up and see the damage prescriptions drugs are doing to our bodies and seek out healthy organic remedies like marijuana!

Mr. Winkler, cannabis is a legal medication in California. It is sold in regulation dispensaries. The dispensaries are not supplied by drug cartels. Believe it or not, there are good people who grow medication for the suffering. On the other hand it is the jack boot of prohibition that has created drug cartels. Remember Al Capone? Why do you think he was able to make so much money selling alcohol?

A doctor can prescribe incredibly strong painkillers at their discretion to appropriate patients, and have been able to for decades. These drugs can be incredibly debilitating, in terms of side-effects (coordination, et al), and of course accidents occur as a result. Someone taking powerful prescriptions is responsible under the same laws as those not; it's about proper judgement. All things considered, medical marijuana is far less intense, in regards to both effects, abuse, and addiction (non-physically addictive vs. for ex. opiate-based codones exhibiting high risk for addiction). Comparatively, there is absolutely no logically sound reason for one substance to be medicinally legal, and the other to not. Misconstrued social traditions fostered over the 20th century has lead us astray in faulty perceptions regarding marijuana. However, there is no excuse for a lack of information in this day anad age.

Schedule I • The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse. • The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States. • There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision. Ok, so there it is. Straight from the horse's mouth. Now I know the answer to this question, and it's a matter of money. I get it. But I am not sure if there is a more blatant, obvious contradiction than legalized tobacco.