I'm not saying give it to everyone nor do other advocates and patients I know -- that's unfair to advocates and is painting a picture of irresponsibility. I mentioned that my doctors support and suggest my use and I'm telling you I don't want you preventing me from following my doctor's advice. We want a choice. I support testing, research, smoke free alternatives, and more accurate dosing. But your comments remind me of a U.S. TV guy named Sanjay Gupta. I believe his opinions killed people and sent people who were helping other sick people to jail so perhaps my reaction is a bit knee jerk. Sanjay was hated by anyone who worked on Prop 215 in CA. He has since recanted his position and supports the right of people to use until there is better research. He's now spent two hours on prime time TV saying he's sorry, but doesn't bring back the dead and the jailed. He even admits that. I now realize you are in the UK. If you are a researcher, you know that the mechanism of many approved drugs today remains unknown. You also know that this drug was in wide medical use for a long time and testing on anything good it does in recent history has been forbidden. It is unique in this aspect, I believe. I object to your opinions where they suggest that patients like Charlotte should die waiting for an approved solution and your "what if" suggestions. That's the fearmongering. Do the research, but don't prevent my use today. I do not have the luxury of time. If you don't allow "speculation" in terms of good effects, should I object to your evidenceless speculation about the bad effects, such as stroke (when studies in Israel seem to show it protects the brain after stroke)? Scientists in my country have been trying to prove it's harmful since the fifties. They've mostly failed. I am not recommending this for use for anyone. I will even say I think it's more addictive than many advocates claim. I'm not sure it's good for people with heart issues, but I'm not a doctor. I'm a migraine sufferer (among other things) with severe, life threatening neuroleptic sensitivity. I think people should have the right to try it given the particular toxicity of antinausea drugs when at least THC's effectiveness is proven by my pharmaceutical board and yours. The anecdotal evidence is sometimes overwhelming. In any normal circumstance, this drug would have been researched extensively based on that anecdotal evidence. I've been a member of clubs for two decades now and known hundreds of patients who feel they benefit from this drug. I support their right to use in the absence of better solutions and I reserve the right to occasionally get upset at people who suggest I don't have a right to chose health. The American Medical Assiciation has strongly supported medical marijuana from the beginning of the movement. I assume they know something about evidence based medicine. You do your research, but let my doctor treat my conditions without your judgment. Your opinion kills people. That's all.