A Prominent Researcher Proposed a Legal Marijuana Program for Patients While Gathering Clinical Data
A senior pharmacologist proposed an interim "compassionate access" program allowing physician-referred patients legal marijuana for six months while collecting quantitative data on four conditions: nausea, wasting, spasticity, and chronic pain.
Quick Facts
What This Study Found
Writing in Drug and Alcohol Dependence, Leo Hollister (a highly respected pharmacologist) proposed a practical solution to the medical marijuana impasse.
The evidence supporting therapeutic marijuana use was insufficient for FDA approval, yet many patients maintained it was necessary for their treatment. His proposed interim solution: a structured 6-month program of legal marijuana availability, similar to the previous "compassionate IND" program, combined with post-marketing surveillance techniques to collect quantitative data.
Four conditions were prioritized for data collection: nausea and vomiting from chemotherapy or other causes, weight loss from debilitating illnesses, spasticity from neurological diseases, and chronic pain syndromes.
This approach would simultaneously provide patient access and generate the structured clinical data needed for regulatory decisions.
Key Numbers
Six-month program proposed. Four priority conditions: nausea/vomiting, wasting, spasticity, chronic pain. Model based on compassionate IND precedent.
How They Did This
Commentary proposing a policy framework combining compassionate access with structured data collection. Referenced the historical compassionate IND model and post-marketing surveillance methodology.
Why This Research Matters
This proposal from a respected establishment researcher represented a pragmatic middle ground: providing access while generating evidence. The framework anticipated the structure that many state medical marijuana programs eventually adopted, though without the rigorous data collection component.
The Bigger Picture
While this specific proposal was not adopted, its spirit influenced the development of state medical marijuana programs. The idea of combining access with data collection remains relevant to current debates about how to generate evidence for cannabis therapeutics.
What This Study Doesn't Tell Us
A policy proposal rather than a research study. The practicality of collecting quantitative data from a compassionate access program was not demonstrated. The proposal did not address regulatory and legal barriers to implementation.
Questions This Raises
- ?Could a structured access-with-data program work in practice?
- ?Would the data collected be rigorous enough for FDA consideration?
- ?Why has no jurisdiction implemented this specific model?
Trust & Context
- Key Stat:
- Four conditions prioritized: nausea, wasting, spasticity, chronic pain
- Evidence Grade:
- A policy proposal from a senior researcher. Provides informed perspective on resolving the access-versus-evidence tension but is not a research study.
- Study Age:
- Published in 2000. State medical marijuana programs have expanded dramatically, though few have implemented the structured data collection this proposal envisioned.
- Original Title:
- An approach to the medical marijuana controversy.
- Published In:
- Drug and alcohol dependence, 58(1-2), 3-7 (2000)
- Authors:
- Hollister, L E(2)
- Database ID:
- RTHC-00095
Evidence Hierarchy
Summarizes existing research on a topic.
What do these levels mean? →Frequently Asked Questions
What was proposed?
A six-month legal marijuana access program for physician-referred patients, combined with structured data collection similar to post-marketing drug surveillance, for four priority conditions.
Was this ever implemented?
Not in its exact form, but state medical marijuana programs adopted similar access principles. The rigorous data collection component was largely not implemented.
Read More on RethinkTHC
- CBD-oil-quality-guide
- anxiety-medication-after-quitting-weed
- cannabis-chemotherapy-nausea
- cannabis-chronic-pain-research
- cannabis-epilepsy-CBD-Epidiolex
- cbd-anxiety-research-evidence
- cbd-for-weed-withdrawal
- cbd-vs-thc-difference
- medical-benefits-of-cannabis
- quitting-weed-before-surgery
- quitting-weed-medication-interactions
- quitting-weed-pregnancy
- quitting-weed-pregnant
- seniors-older-adults-cannabis-risks-medications
- weed-breastfeeding-THC-breast-milk
- cannabis-law-and-your-rights-complete-guide
- how-much-weed-legally-possess-state-guide
- crossing-state-lines-with-weed-legal-felony
- medical-card-worth-it-2026-benefits-costs
- how-much-weed-legally-grow-home-state-rules
Cite This Study
https://rethinkthc.com/research/RTHC-00095APA
Hollister, L E. (2000). An approach to the medical marijuana controversy.. Drug and alcohol dependence, 58(1-2), 3-7.
MLA
Hollister, L E. "An approach to the medical marijuana controversy.." Drug and alcohol dependence, 2000.
RethinkTHC
RethinkTHC Research Database. "An approach to the medical marijuana controversy." RTHC-00095. Retrieved from https://rethinkthc.com/research/hollister-2000-an-approach-to-the
Access the Original Study
Study data sourced from PubMed, a service of the U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.
This study breakdown was produced by the RethinkTHC research team. We analyze and report published research findings without making health recommendations. All interpretations are based solely on the published abstract and study data.