Connect with us

Letter from the Editor

Published

on

Affordable medicine—good for patients and providers

The cost of medical cannabis—or, some would say, the high cost of it—has been getting a lot of attention in the media these days. Recent news reports have focused on the huge disparity in pot prices around the county, with some regions asking for as low as $70 an ounce and others, like New York City, demanding upwards of $1,200 for the high-grade hydroponic stuff.

The increased scrutiny has brought about much buzz in the cannabis industry. Some, particularly those in the medical-cannabis community, feel that the asking donation for marijuana should be kept low to keep it accessible to low-income patients. Others say cannabis, medicinal or otherwise, is simply a commodity and that providers have the right to ask for however much the market will bear for their product.

Both arguments have their merits. The cannabis revolution now sweeping the country is being driven by the concept of compassion—the idea that no one should suffer needlessly when a natural and effective remedy is readily at hand. If the cost of that remedy is such as to put it out of the reach for thousands, then where’s the compassion? But providing pot is an expensive and risky undertaking. If growers and distributors don’t make enough money to justify their overhead and their exposure, then where’s the incentive to grow or distribute?

But as many collectives across the street have already shown, there’s a middle ground here—a way to satisfy the concerns of both camps while also keeping medicinal cannabis accessible to those who can least afford it. We know of numerous cannabis clubs that have set up private programs to provide medicine to low-income patients either for free or on a sliding scale. Since the clubs operate as nonprofits, the costs of these efforts are factored into the cost of running the operation.

We think that all California collectives and dispensaries would do well—both for the communities they serve and for themselves—to adopt such programs.

For storefront dispensary operators, who occupy a gray zone between what law enforcement types will tolerate and what will bring them crashing through the door, such low-income programs might help generate goodwill in the community by showing that they—the operators—are people of good will. It’s also the right thing to do.

For caregivers in collectives where every member contributes his or her labor to the operation and everyone pays the same amount to reimburse costs, low-income programs would quickly reveal that some members simply don’t have the financial resources as others in the group. Like most people, limited-income cannabis patients—particularly those in collectives based in more upscale communities—are often reluctant to admit they’re struggling. Providing needy patients access to their medicine without further straining their pocketbooks would be in keeping with the very philosophy behind collectives by acknowledging that we’re all in this together.

Too often, we in the medical-cannabis industry fall into the trap of believing that the groups we support—NORML, Americans for Safe Access, the Marijuana Policy Project and others—will handle such issues as affordable medicine. But these are advocacy groups, and while they recommend affordable access, it’s up to the providers of medical cannabis to decide whether to embrace that recommendation.

Many collectives and dispensaries have already embraced it, to their eternal credit. Here’s to hoping that others learn from their example.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *