Medical Marijuana Laws by State

An Overview of High-CBD, Low-THC Medical Cannabis Laws: Flawed Legislation that Leaves Most or All Patients Behind

In 2014, 11 states enacted laws that were intended to allow patients with intractable seizure disorders to use certain strains of medical cannabis preparations. Unlike the 23 states that have what MPP considers effective medical marijuana laws,¹ these 11 laws only allow strains that are low in THC (which has medical value, including by relieving nausea) and high in another beneficial compound of marijuana, cannabidiol (CBD). In some cases, the laws only allow CBD by itself, despite the fact that whole plant extracts — not CBD alone — are what has been so beneficial to patients with seizures.²

While it is commendable that legislators are trying to protect patients with seizures, these 11 laws unfortunately leave behind the vast majority of patients who could benefit from medical cannabis, including those with severe pain, AIDS or cancer wasting, and muscle spasms. They also leave behind patients whose seizures respond only to strains of cannabis with greater quantities of THC.

Even patients with intractable epilepsy who could benefit from high-CBD oils cannot expect much relief from these laws. All but one or two of them — Missouri’s and possibly Florida’s — fail to allow for realistic, in-state access. The 23 effective laws allow in-state access that doesn’t rely on a university, a doctor, or any other risk-averse actor breaking federal law. The effective laws also don’t rely on the federal government reversing its decades-long obstruction of medical marijuana research and access. In contrast, the new high-CBD laws typically either have no provisions for in-state access, rely on federal permission, or rely on risk-averse actors breaking federal law. Until federal law changes, which could take years, most these laws will be of little or no help to patients.

SOURCE – MPP – Marijuana Project Policy

Approved Conditions: Epilepsy “that, as determined by a neurologist, does not respond to three or more treatment options overseen by the neurologist.”

Type of Cannabis: “Hemp extracts,” with less than 0.3% THC and at least 15% CBD.

Means of Access: It’s not entirely clear. Probably out-of-state providers, but they would have to jump through many hoops. It’s not clear if the health department or research institutions could also produce extracts (though that is unrealistic because it would rely on them breaking federal law).

Workability Issues: There is no feasible, in-state access. It is possible patients could obtain extracts from Nevada (where dispensaries are not yet open) or Colorado (where patients must be state residents). This would only work if those states’ labs and dispensaries are willing and able to comply with Utah’s requirements: The extracts must come with a certificate of analysis from a testing lab in the state where the extract originated, and the lab must transmit the certificate to the Utah Department of Health.

SOURCE – MPP – Marijuana Project Policy

Write Your Senators:

Your voice counts. Please write your state lawmakers in support of a comprehensive medical cannabis bill.
This is a good place to start:
https://www.mpp.org/states/mississippi/