BEFORE
AFTER
Posted on 12/12/2005 11:26:03 AM PST by minus_273
Woman died on cannabis drug trial
Sativex is made from the cannabis plant A woman developed mental health problems and later died after taking part in trials of a cannabis-based drug, an inquest has heard.
Diabetic Rene Anderson, aged 69 from Sheffield, was taken to hospital after starting to take Sativex to see if it would relieve pain she was suffering.
She died in March 2004 from acute kidney failure.
The continuing inquest is expected to have implications for the use of drugs derived from cannabis.
Useful relief
Mrs Anderson, a retired supermarket supervisor from Silkstone Close in Frecheville, had been taking part in a trial supervised by diabetes expert Dr Solomon Tesfaye.
He told the court he wanted to investigate whether cannabis could provide useful relief from the severe pain experienced by diabetic neuropathy sufferers.
Sativex, which is not yet licensed in the UK but has been granted a licence in Canada, had shown good results in multiple sclerosis sufferers, Dr Resfaye said.
He was first aware of Mrs Anderson's case when her family complained about her mental problems just days after her treatment began.
Admitted to hospital
The doctor said the dose of the drug, which is taken using an oral spray, was reduced but Mrs Anderson's daughter, Jackie Sadler, rang back two weeks later to tell of her mother's deterioration.
Sheffield coroner Chris Dorries heard how Mrs Anderson suffered a series of physical problems after she was admitted to hospital in October 2003, 23 days after starting to take Sativex
These included pneumonia which culminated in her death five months later.
The coroner said the purpose of the inquest was to examine what links there were, if any, between the experimental treatment and the physical deterioration which led to Mrs Anderson's death.
The inquest, which began on Monday, is expected to last five or six days.
Why? 100? 1000? 10000? You'd find fault with any number I gave you, so I'm not about to waste my time. You want to know? You look it up.
You make a specific claim & then ask others to do your homework to disprove it. Great debate tactic, there. It means one of two things - you don't have the facts or you're lazy.
>>>Are you still cranky for supporting that sheriff in Texas & getting called on it?<<<
The undercover cop in Tulia? Start another thread, ping me, and bring it on. You got nothin'
Thank you for proving my point that drug warriors only use emotionally based arguments just like the gun-grabbers.
After all, a few people may use guns or drugs irresponsibly, so we need to make them illegal for everybody.You decry the nanny state, yet you remain one of FR's biggest supporters.
Calm down, buddy. Have a toke.
cite a source for that remark.
I thought so. Doesn't support the statement at all.
Just another typical but feeble liberal denigration attempt. Like I said before. Not this time...just defending truth, justice and freedom while stamping out hypocrisy
How many deaths per year occur as a result of this?
read the thread.
BTW, off topic: I've lost 55 lbs. I'm gunnin' for 215. I'm working out with weights like crazy, walking like crazy, losing weight and building muscle.
I'm gonna be such a hottie.
Mr. Laz, we want to see your before and afters...you know, to inspire us lesser human folk
You're sounding like a libertarian.
Drat! I was trying to sound like conservatives used to sound.
Because marijuana is illegal and thus unregulated. Thanks for the pro-legalization argument.
Or both.
Whats funny is when you go from natural products to pharmacueticals people always seem to get killed. But the drug companies get a pass.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.