By 1994, Oncologists Ranked Marijuana Ninth for Nausea and Most Would Not Prescribe It Even If Legal
A survey of 141 oncologists found they ranked marijuana ninth among antiemetics for mild nausea, believed it worked in about 50% of patients, and most said they would not prescribe it more even if legal restrictions were lifted.
Quick Facts
What This Study Found
Researchers surveyed two groups of practicing oncologists about their antiemetic preferences, receiving completed surveys from 141 physicians (78% response rate). The results revealed a notably cooled enthusiasm compared to earlier surveys.
Marijuana (in any form) ranked ninth for mild-to-moderate nausea and sixth for severe chemotherapy-induced symptoms. Most oncologists (65%) had prescribed marijuana or oral THC ten times or fewer in their careers. Only 3.5% had prescribed it more than 100 times.
Oncologists who had prescribed marijuana estimated it effectively relieved nausea in about 50% of patients, with unpleasant side effects in about 25%. Only 6% said they would prescribe it "much more frequently" if legal barriers were removed.
This was a marked shift from an earlier survey where 44% of oncologists had recommended illegal marijuana. By 1994, with better antiemetics emerging, cannabis had moved down the preference list.
Key Numbers
141 respondents (78% response rate). Marijuana ranked 9th for mild nausea, 6th for severe. 65% prescribed it 10 times or fewer. 3.5% prescribed it 100+ times. Estimated 50% efficacy, 25% adverse effects. Only 6% would prescribe more if legal.
How They Did This
Mailed questionnaire survey to two groups: a systematic sample from ASCO membership (N=120) and all adult oncologists in metropolitan Washington, D.C. (N=60). 78% response rate (141 respondents). Conducted before ondansetron approval.
Why This Research Matters
This survey showed that as better antiemetics became available, oncologists' interest in marijuana declined substantially. It provided evidence that cannabis was useful but not uniquely effective, a finding relevant to medical marijuana policy debates.
The Bigger Picture
This study captured the moment when cannabinoid antiemetics were being overtaken by newer drug classes, particularly serotonin antagonists like ondansetron. The finding that only 6% would prescribe more marijuana if legal challenged the narrative that legal barriers were the primary obstacle to medical cannabis use.
What This Study Doesn't Tell Us
Conducted just before ondansetron approval, so respondents had limited experience with the newer antiemetics. Response rates, while good, may still introduce selection bias. Oncologists' estimates of efficacy and side effects are subjective.
Questions This Raises
- ?Has oncologist opinion on cannabis antiemetics changed with the broader availability of medical marijuana?
- ?How does marijuana compare to modern serotonin antagonist antiemetics?
- ?Is there a role for cannabinoids as adjunct antiemetics?
Trust & Context
- Key Stat:
- Only 6% of oncologists would prescribe marijuana more frequently if legal barriers were removed
- Evidence Grade:
- A survey with a high response rate (78%) of practicing oncologists. Captures professional opinion but not clinical trial evidence.
- Study Age:
- Published in 1994, before ondansetron and other modern antiemetics became standard. The antiemetic landscape has changed dramatically.
- Original Title:
- Marijuana as an antiemetic drug: how useful is it today? Opinions from clinical oncologists.
- Published In:
- Journal of addictive diseases, 13(1), 53-65 (1994)
- Authors:
- Schwartz, R H(3), Beveridge, R A
- Database ID:
- RTHC-00050
Evidence Hierarchy
A snapshot of a population at one point in time.
What do these levels mean? →Frequently Asked Questions
Did oncologists think marijuana was effective for nausea?
Those who had prescribed it estimated about 50% efficacy, but ranked it ninth among available antiemetics for mild nausea, suggesting better alternatives existed.
Would they prescribe more if it were legal?
No. Only 6% said they would prescribe it much more frequently without legal restrictions, suggesting the barriers were clinical (limited efficacy, side effects) not just legal.
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-and-cancer-pain-beyond-chemo-nausea
Cite This Study
https://rethinkthc.com/research/RTHC-00050APA
Schwartz, R H; Beveridge, R A. (1994). Marijuana as an antiemetic drug: how useful is it today? Opinions from clinical oncologists.. Journal of addictive diseases, 13(1), 53-65.
MLA
Schwartz, R H, et al. "Marijuana as an antiemetic drug: how useful is it today? Opinions from clinical oncologists.." Journal of addictive diseases, 1994.
RethinkTHC
RethinkTHC Research Database. "Marijuana as an antiemetic drug: how useful is it today? Opi..." RTHC-00050. Retrieved from https://rethinkthc.com/research/schwartz-1994-marijuana-as-an-antiemetic
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.