ACTUALLY ENDORSED JOHN McCAIN
FOR PRESIDENT, SAYING HE "LIKED
AND RESPECTED HIM."
WELL, THREE WEEKS INTO THE
ROLLOUT OF MINNESOTA'S MEDICAL
MARIJUANA PROGRAM, THE NUMBERS
OF PATIENCE ENROLLING CONTINUES
TO BE LOWER THAN MANY EXPECTED.
PATIENTS SAID THE PROBLEM IS
DOCTOR WON'T HELP THEM SIGN UP.
SO FAR, ONLY 298 HEALTH CARE
PRACTITIONERS REGISTER WITH THE
STATE AND ONLY 183 PATIENTS
HAVE BEEN APPROVE IN THE STATE
REGISTRY TO PICK UP THEIR
PRESCRIPTIONS.
IN A SURVEY OF MINNESOTA
DOCTORS, THE MINNESOTA MEDICAL
ASSOCIATION FOUND STRONG
OPPOSITION AMONG DOCTORS TO THE
PROGRAM.
THE SURVEY FOUND THAT ONLY --
68% OF MINNESOTA DOCTORS SAY
THEY WON'T TAKE PART IN THE
PROGRAM.
ONLY 9% SAY THEY WILL.
17% SAY THEY ARE UNDECIDED AND
7% SAY THEIR PATIENTS WOULDN'T
QUALIFY.
JOINING US TO TALK ABOUT WHY SO
MANY DOCTORS ARE NOT ON BOARD
WITH THIS PROGRAM IS THE
PRESIDENT-ELECT OF THE
MINNESOTA MEDICAL ASSOCIATION,
DR. DAVID THORSON.
THANK YOU FOR COMING IN.
THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.
WHAT IS THE PROBLEM?
WHY ARE THE DOCTORS SAYING
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO TAKE PART
IN THIS?
IT'S A COMPLEX PROBLEM.
THE PHYSICIANS REALLY DO
EMPATHIZE WITH THESE PATIENT
WHO HAVE TRIED OTHER THING AND
NOT FOUND SOMETHING THAT WORKED
BUT WE'RE ALSO HELD ACCOUNTABLE
FOR DOING EVIDENCE-BASED
MEDICINE AND THERE REALLY ISN'T
MUCH EVIDENCE FOR MEDICAL
MARIJUANA -- YET -- BECAUSE OF
THE WAY IT'S BEEN CLASSIFIED BY
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AS A
SCHEDULE I DRUG, SIMILAR TO
HEROIN AND OTHER DRUGS.
WE CAN'T DO STUDIES ON THEM.
SO IF I SESSIONS ARE SAYING,
"HOW DO I HAND MY PATIENTS OFF
TO SOMEBODY ELSE CERTIFYING
THEY HAVE A DISEASE AND HAVE A
SHARED DECISION-MAKING
CONVERSATION WITH THE PATIENT,
TALKING TO THEM ABOUT RISK,
BENEFITS, POTENTIAL SIDE
EFFECTS?"
AND THEN HAND THEM OFF AND HAVE
NO IDEA WHAT THEY'RE GETTING.
ARE DOCTORS BEING SAID TO
SAY, YES, PATIENT AS HAS ONE OF
THE NINE MEDICAL CONDITIONS --
BASICALLY, THE DOCTOR IS ASKED
TO SAY, YES, THIS PATIENT HAS
GLAUCOMA.
I THINK MOST DOCTORS IF YOU ASK
THEM TO WRITE A LETTER, THEY
PROBABLY WOULD.
WHAT'S THE PROBLEM HERE?
IS IT THE FACT IT'S THE DOCTOR
THAT THAT'S GOT TO GET THE
PATIENT INTO THE STATE SYSTEM?
THAT'S PART OF IT.
THE DOCTOR WAS PUT IN THE
POSITION OF SAYING, "I HAVE TO
CERTIFY THEY HAVE AN ILLNESS
AND CERTIFY," AND SUNS THEY
WILL HAVE MARIJUANA DISPENSE TO
THEM BY A PHARMACIST.
THERE'S A LACK OF BIDIRECTIONAL
COMMUNICATION.
WE HAND THIS TO A PHARMACIST
AND HAVE NO IDEA WHAT DOSAGE
THEY'RE GETTING, RATIO OF
DOSAGE OF MEDICATIONS THEY'RE
GETTING, AND IF THERE ARE SIDE
EFFECTS, HOW WE'LL FIND OUT
OTHER THAN THEM CALLING THE
OFFICE AND US HAVING TO CALL
THEM.
I'VE HEARD THAT FROM SOME
DOCTORS, THE FACT THAT UNDER
THIS PROGRAM IT'S THE
PHARMACIST WHO HAS COMPLETE
CONTROL OF THE PRESCRIPTION.
I TALK TO LAWMAKERS SAID
DOCTORS, WHEN THEY WERE WRITING
THE BILL, DIDN'T WANT TO WRITE
THE PRESCRIPTIONS.
THEY SAID, "WE DON'T WANT TO
DEAL WITH THAT."
SO WHICH IS IT?
THERE'S A PROBLEM.
IT'S AN ILLEGAL DRUG.
IF DOCTORS WROTE THE
PRESCRIPTION, THEY COULD LOSE
THEIR LICENSE TO DISPENSE.
SO THIS WAS PUT UP AS FIREWALL
TO ALLOW -- PHYSICIANS TO
MAINTAIN THEIR LICENSE,
CERTIFICATE FANG ILLNESS THE
PHARMACIST COULD USE AS
DISPENSING INFORMATION FOR
DISPENSING MEDICAL MARIJUANA.
OKAY, I HAVE ALSO TALKED TO
DOCTOR WHO HAVE TOLD ME THAT
INITIALLY THEY SAID THEY WERE
WILLING TO SIGN UP THEIR
PATIENTS BUT THEN THE GROUP
PRACTICE THEY WORK WITH LOOKED
AT THIS AND SAID, NO.
WE ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE PART.
ARE THERE PHYSICIANS WHO WOULD
LIKE TO TAKE PART BUT ARE BEING
BLOCKED BY LARGE-GROUP
PRACTICES WHICH MOST DOCTORS
ARE MEMBERS OF?
WE HAVE HEARD ANECDOTAL
STORIES AND HAVE NOT DONE A
SURVEY.
"WERE YOU WILLING TO DO IT BUT
YOUR GROUP SAID NO?"
I KNOW WE HAVE TALK TO A NUMBER
OF DIFFERENT GROUPS DIFFERENT
APPROACHES TO THIS.
SOME SAID THEY WILL ALLOW
INDIVIDUAL PHYSICIANS TO DO AND
IT OTHERS SAID THEY'RE GOING TO
HAVE A CERTIFIER FOR MULTIPLE
PHYSICIANS, WHICH THE STATE NOW
ALLOWS.
I HAVEN'T BEEN AFORMED OF A
GROUP THAT -- INFORMED OF A
GROUP THAT SAID, NO, WE WILL
NOT DO IT AS AN ORGANIZATION.
IS THERE A SYSTEM FOR
PATIENT WHO WANT ACCESS TO THIS
TO GET ACCESS IN A WAY WHERE
DOCTORS DIDN'T FEEL
COMPROMISED?
I THINK BIDIRECTIONAL
COMMUNICATION FROM THE
PHARMACIST -- SO WE HAVE THAT
ABILITY TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT
THEY'RE DISPENSING -- SO WE CAN
LOOK AT OTHER MEDICATIONS THEY
HAVE AND BE ABLE TO FIND
POSSIBLE SIDE EFFECTS WE'RE
CALLED ABOUT THEM.
I THINK GETTING IT
RECLASSIFIED, RESCHEDULED, TO A
SCHEDULE II WHERE WE CAN STUDY
AND GET THE EVIDENCE --
THAT'S A TOUGH ONE THERE
BUT, PERHAPS, TWEAKING LAW
WOULD HELP, YOU'RE SAYING --
RIGHT.
-- SO DOCTOR WOULD BE
INVOLVE WITH PRESCRIBING.
RIGHT, RIGHT NOW WE HAVE NO
IDEA WHAT THE PHARMACIST IS
DISPENSING SO WE CAN'T PUT IN
OUR ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORD TO
SAY "YOU KNOW, WHICH IS WHAT
THEY'RE ON TOP OF OTHER MEDS TO
KNOW SIDE EFFECTS."
DOCTOR, THANK YOU SO MUCH
FOR COMING IN.