COLUMBUS, Ohio -- As Ohio's medical marijuana program embarks on its second year, health-care advocates are trying to better understand the prevalence of marijuana use, as well as its perceived safety.

Marijuana is the most commonly used illegal substance in the country, and the latest Ohio Health Issues Poll found nearly half of Ohio adults have a friend or family member who regularly uses the drug. Marcie Seidel, executive director of the Prevention Action Alliance, explained the polling also asked opinions on the risk of self-harm among regular marijuana users.

"As they know people more that are using marijuana regularly, the perception of harm seems to be going down. People don't think it's a very harmful or even somewhat harmful substance," Seidel said. "Those are very interesting and important takeaways that we need to be monitoring over time."

Of the Ohio adults who said they know someone who regularly uses marijuana, 30% said they perceive it as harmful, compared with 60% of those who do not know someone who regularly uses the drug. The polling also found 8-in-10 Ohio adults have not sought information about medical marijuana, and just 2% had a written recommendation from their doctor for its use.

Seidel said the polling will be helpful as the state tracks the impact of the medical marijuana program. She added people need accurate data and facts so they can make good decisions about their health, and cautioned there are many misconceptions about marijuana that are not based on research.

"Right now, marijuana is a booming business and it's a business that people think that they're going to become very rich and it's going to be very lucrative," she said. "So there will be information out there that might be designed to increase that business instead of giving good facts."

Marijuana is used by an estimated 44 million Americans age 12 and older each year, and more than 55,000 Ohioans purchased medical marijuana in 2019. Research and data is available online at PreventionActionAlliance.org/marijuana.



get more stories like this via email

The ruling on abortion by the U.S. Supreme Court has returned the issue to the states, fulfilling long-held goals of Republican lawmakers in Texas to ban and criminalize abortion.

With the 49-year-old Row v. Wade case overturned, a trigger law takes effect next month, banning abortions from the moment of fertilization - there is no exception for rape or incest.

Texas lawmakers were ahead of the high court, passing legislation last fall to prohibit abortions after six weeks. Aimee Arrambide, executive director of the Texas chapter of the abortion rights group Avow, said she expects half the states to follow Texas' lead.

"We've been ringing the alarm that what is happening in Texas, doesn't stay in Texas," said Arrambide. "And that the public health crisis Texans have been facing for nearly 10 months will be the reality in half the country. Our opponents are not going to stop until abortion is completely inaccessible in the country."

In his concurring opinion with the 6-3 vote, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said high court rulings that established a right to contraception, as well as gay rights should also be reconsidered.

Following the ruling, Texas GOP Gov. Greg Abbott said abolishing Roe v. Wade, "reinstated the right of states to protect innocent, unborn children."

New Mexico is now the closest state for many Texans seeking an abortion, but getting there may not be possible for low-income people who don't have the time, money or child care to travel out of state. Progress Texas Advocacy Director Diana Gomez said education is the next step.

"There are a lot of folks who don't know about the existence of abortion funds," said Gomez, "of infrastructures that are already in place to help people get abortions, and so we want to let people know about clinics in surrounding states."

In addition to Texas, 25 other states are expected to make abortion illegal, affecting the lives of 36 million people. University of Texas at Austin Associate Professor Kari White said entire regions of the country may soon be in the business of extreme criminalization.

"In a state like Texas," said White, "it's also going to criminalize a whole range of behaviors and practices for people who are trying to help someone get an abortion."

Prior to the court's ruling, a poll by Reuters showed about 71% of Americans - including majorities of Democrats and Republicans - believed pregnancy termination should be a patient-doctor decision.

Medical negligence cases in Washington and elsewhere have taken on a new shape during the pandemic, as hospital resources have been strained and the potential usefulness of certain treatments has ebbed and flowed.

Drugs like ivermectin, for instance, were touted online as a potential COVID-19 treatment but ultimately lacked scientific evidence to back up those claims.

Elizabeth Calora is a Tacoma lawyer who specializes in medical negligence cases. She said there are some legal requirements for determining if a health professional acted carelessly which have been affected by COVID.

"We need to figure out what a reasonably prudent provider should have been doing in that context," said Calora, "and it usually means talking to experts in the field and then determining if what the provider did in the moment or over the course of several visits violated that standard of care."

Calora said after that, the person has to prove that the breach is what caused the damages.

The Washington state Legislature modified evaluations of negligence cases in 2021 so that resources and staffing must be taken into account. For instance, hospitals have often lacked beds at the height of different COVID waves, a factor outside of doctors' or facilities' control.

Calora said the standard of care evolves over time. What was once an acceptable medical practice in the 1970s, for example, might not be anymore.

"But usually it happens in a much slower timeframe than what we experienced at the start of the pandemic," said Calora. "With COVID, you had physicians all over the world basically - it makes me think of throwing spaghetti on the wall to see what sticks. Everyone was trying everything they could."

Calora said the unforeseen nature of the pandemic has made it hard to bring medical negligence cases forward. However, she added that shouldn't discourage people from speaking with an attorney if they feel they or a loved one has been wronged.

"Even though things were bad," said Calora, "it doesn't give people license to practice beneath the standard of care."

Since the beginning of the pandemic, several states have passed "safe staffing" laws aimed at balancing patient-nurse ratios in hospitals. In Pennsylvania, health care advocates are calling on lawmakers to vote on legislation still stalled in committee.

Senate Bill 240, also known as the Patient Safety Act, would establish limits to the number of patients one nurse is responsible for during a shift.

Maureen May, president of the Pennsylvania Association of Staff Nurses and Allied Professionals, said it is about ensuring positive outcomes for patients.

"I want to be in a hospital bed in which I know that there are enough nurses to care for me and my family members," May asserted. "I want to be a nurse that works in a hospital and walks away from the bedside at the end of the day and know that I did everything I could to make sure my patients received the best care possible."

Many health care system administrators oppose safe-staffing legislation, saying it is costly to their bottom line. Senate Bill 240 and its companion House Bill 106, which has more than 100 co-sponsors, have been referred to each chamber's health committees and await a vote.

Sen. Maria Collett, D-Montgomery County, said the pandemic exposed the cracks in the health care system and the need for legislation such as the Patient Safety Act. She stressed it has been disappointing to see the legislation stalled by a few lawmakers, given the bipartisan support for the bill.

"If you're someone that's not going to stand with nurses, that's not going to stand with patients, then put your name on the record," Collett urged. "Vote no on this bill because the people in our communities deserve to know where we stand when it comes to protecting patient outcomes and protecting the hardworking nursing staff."

A 2017 study found patients were much more likely to survive when nurses followed a hospital-mandated patient-nurse ratio. Lower patient-to-nurse staffing ratios also have been associated with significantly lower rates of cardiac arrest, hospital-acquired pneumonia, respiratory failure and patient falls.