Readers should be careful not to mistake Dr Vroom’s lack of knowledge about the medical use of cannabis with a lack of available information (BCMJ 2010;52:436).
The website for the Canadian Consortium for the Investigation of Cannabinoids (www.ccic.net), an organization of Canadian physicians and researchers examining the therapeutic potential of cannabis, and that of Canadians for Safe Access (www.safeaccess.ca), a medical cannabis patient advisory group, have dozens of recent peer-reviewed publications.
If Dr Vroom would prefer more traditional research sites, PubMed lists more than 12000 studies on “cannabis” and more than 15000 studies on “marijuana.”
The fact that cannabis has an excellent reputation as a recreational drug in no way negates the evidence of the efficacy and relative safety of its medical use.
That cannabis has been in use as a medicine for thousands of years hardly makes it experimental. Dr Vroom’s apparent difficulty in accepting that cannabis is a medicine highlights the barriers faced by patients seeking not only relief of symptoms such as MS-related spasticity, but also support for adherence to pharmaceutical drugs for HIV/AIDS and hepatitis C, or to reduce their use of opioid analgesics for chronic pain.
Dr Vroom is simply wrong in claiming that Health Canada created “medical marijuana” to address pressure from advocacy groups: the Supreme Court of Canada found the prosecution of patients who gain medical benefit from cannabis use to be unconstitutional.
What we can all agree on is that Health Canada’s federal medical cannabis program has done little to address the many questions and concerns physicians may have about this treatment option despite having placed physicians as gatekeepers to this program.
Adding to the existing stigma around this treatment option by discouraging his patients to even inquire about cannabis is an ill-considered and inappropriate response to the very real medical issues faced by critically and chronically ill Canadians.
—Philippe Lucas, MA
—Rielle Capler, MHA
Co-founders, Canadians for Safe Access
Above is the information needed to cite this article in your paper or presentation. The International Committee
of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommends the following citation style, which is the now nearly universally
accepted citation style for scientific papers:
Halpern SD, Ubel PA, Caplan AL, Marion DW, Palmer AM, Schiding JK, et al. Solid-organ transplantation in HIV-infected patients. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:284-7.
About the ICMJE and citation styles
The ICMJE is small group of editors of general medical journals who first met informally in Vancouver, British Columbia, in 1978 to establish guidelines for the format of manuscripts submitted to their journals. The group became known as the Vancouver Group. Its requirements for manuscripts, including formats for bibliographic references developed by the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM), were first published in 1979. The Vancouver Group expanded and evolved into the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), which meets annually. The ICMJE created the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals to help authors and editors create and distribute accurate, clear, easily accessible reports of biomedical studies.
An alternate version of ICMJE style is to additionally list the month an issue number, but since most journals use continuous pagination, the shorter form provides sufficient information to locate the reference. The NLM now lists all authors.
BCMJ standard citation style is a slight modification of the ICMJE/NLM style, as follows:
- Only the first three authors are listed, followed by "et al."
- There is no period after the journal name.
- Page numbers are not abbreviated.
For more information on the ICMJE Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals, visit www.icmje.org