{"componentChunkName":"component---common-build-tags-template-js","path":"/tag/handicapped/","result":{"data":{"allArticle":{"edges":[{"node":{"id":"Article_2009-markdown","title":"What's Holding back Telehealth for Cannabis Evaluations?","slug":"whats-holding-back-telehealth-for-cannabis-evaluations","content":"\n\n\nWhen it comes to the availability of physician recommendations for\nmedical cannabis to patients, consumers across the country have an\nenormous problem: access. Although there have been many thoughts about\nwhy this access problem exists, I attribute it to the ignorance of\nlegislators regarding the benefits of medicinal cannabis and the\nreluctance of my fellow physicians to educate themselves about the\nconditions for which medical marijuana is a very effective treatment.\n\nA perfect example of the former is the recently passed [requirements in\nNew York\nState](https://www.health.ny.gov/regulations/medical_marijuana/). The\nlaw there lists several medical conditions that patients must have to be\nentitled to see a medical marijuana physician. Unfortunately, one of the\nmost commonly reported conditions, chronic\npain (a condition that cannabis has been [scientifically\nproven](http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000216)\nto treat effectively), is not included in the list! This exclusion bars\npain suffers from accessing an effective and much-needed treatment.\n\nThe laws in New York aren't just limiting for patients, though; if a\nphysician in New York wants to participate as a medical marijuana\nphysician, he or she is now required to take a four-hour continuing\nmedical education course at a cost of \\$250, a law that makes New York's\neducation requirements the most stringent in the United States.\n\n### Low Levels of Physician Interest\n\n[Marijuanadoctors.com](http://Marijuanadoctors.com), an information site\nand national clearinghouse that connects patients with physicians\nwilling to certify them, surveyed 500 New York doctors in the early\n2015. The purpose of this survey was to gauge the number of doctors who\nwould potentially participate in the state's medical marijuana program.\n\nAfter the company informed physicians about New York's stringent and\nexpensive training requirements, however, only one physician of the 500\noriginally surveyed was actually interested in participating in cannabis\nrecommendations! Is it fear of being investigated by the FDA? Ignorance\nas to the benefits of cannabis in treating the acceptable medical\nconditions? Time consuming training? I'm sure it's a combination of all\nthree but it makes cannabis access much more difficult, if not\nimpossible, for patients.\n\nWhy Telehealth Access\n---------------------\n\nFor access to medical cannabis evaluations, Telehealth is the best\noption by far. During a Telehealth appointment, a patient can meet with\na doctor via a remote platform from wherever he or she chooses. This\nsaves them the trouble of driving to a doctor's office (sometimes in a\nquestionable part of town and at a great distance), parking, waiting and\nmissing out on other obligations. Telehealth fills an important gap in\nthe current medical marijuana access structure: by bringing medical\nexaminations to patients rather than making them trek to a provider's\noffice, more patients can obtain the access to the care they need. At\nthe conclusion of the virtual meeting, if the doctor feels the patient\nwould benefit from cannabis, they can download a recommendation letter\nimmediately for use at a dispensary. This allows the patients to have\ninstant access for products to help their medical condition. It's\nobvious that Telehealth plays an important role in doing away with many\nof the barriers medical marijuana consumers previously faced. In many\nstates, however, Telehealth care is impossible to access for cannabis\nrecommendations. Why? Because in all states other than California and\nNevada, its illegal!\n\nThe Current State of Telehealth\n-------------------------------\n\nIn enlightened states like\n[California](http://www.mbc.ca.gov/Licensees/Prescribing/Medical_Marijuana.aspx)\nand [Nevada](http://dpbh.nv.gov/Reg/Medical_Marijuana/), where\nTelehealth cannabis evaluations are legal, patients can be \"seen\"\nremotely at their own convenience. Why don't more states allow this? The\nanswer, I believe, is the reluctance of physicians to suggest this to\nthe governing bodies as well as the Medical Boards allowing it. Is it\nfear of liability? Fear of the FDA? Financial gain? Telehealth is\nacceptable in 29 states right now. Why not for cannabis?\n\nUnfortunately, in-person examinations are required in the other 21\nstates that allow medicinal cannabis, make accessing medical marijuana\nvirtually impossible for many qualified patients. For example, if a\npatient is housebound, elderly, lacking transportation or unwilling to\nvisit an area of the city where medical marijuana clinics are often\nlocated, that patient is essentially denied care. This is especially\nunfortunate because seniors are currently the fastest-growing\ndemographic\nof medical marijuana users, and they are also especially likely to have\ndifficulty attending in-person consultations. Telehealth care has the\npotential to expand the reach of medical marijuana and help underserved\npopulations gain access to effective cannabis treatments.\n\nThere are many companies that presently use remote platforms to perform\nTelehealth patient evaluations and prescribe medication, some more much\nmore dangerous than cannabis, when appropriate. They have been around\nfor several years, insurance companies use them as a way to increase\naccess and they are growing by leaps and bounds. Patients are flocking\nto these sites for the convenience and privacy that they provide. Why\nshould cannabis recommendations be any different for a medication that\nhas been used medicinally for thousands of years and has a patient\nsafety record that is unbeatable?\n\nAccess for All\n--------------\n\nIn states like California and Nevada, where it's legal, Telehealth is\nalready a convenient and effective form of reaching out to connect\nphysicians and patients who need medicinal cannabis. In the states that\nhaven't caught on to the changing tides, however, it's imperative that\nconsumers speak out on behalf of Telehealth access. Promote Telehealth\nto your legislators and explain to them that they are restricting your\naccess to care.\n\nIt is not enough to only increase the number of physicians who perform\nevaluations. We must push for being able to do this remotely. Doing this\nwill help ensure that Telehealth care is available to every patient who\nneeds it and to provide medicinal cannabis access for all.\n\n\n","image":{"childImageSharp":{"fluid":{"base64":"","aspectRatio":1.5151515151515151,"src":"/static/c1dc6a777afb6022172c65c56f03371c/14b42/051fa528f01d232757d893219799aab2.jpg","srcSet":"/static/c1dc6a777afb6022172c65c56f03371c/f836f/051fa528f01d232757d893219799aab2.jpg 200w,\n/static/c1dc6a777afb6022172c65c56f03371c/2244e/051fa528f01d232757d893219799aab2.jpg 400w,\n/static/c1dc6a777afb6022172c65c56f03371c/14b42/051fa528f01d232757d893219799aab2.jpg 800w,\n/static/c1dc6a777afb6022172c65c56f03371c/47498/051fa528f01d232757d893219799aab2.jpg 1200w","srcWebp":"/static/c1dc6a777afb6022172c65c56f03371c/58556/051fa528f01d232757d893219799aab2.webp","srcSetWebp":"/static/c1dc6a777afb6022172c65c56f03371c/61e93/051fa528f01d232757d893219799aab2.webp 200w,\n/static/c1dc6a777afb6022172c65c56f03371c/1f5c5/051fa528f01d232757d893219799aab2.webp 400w,\n/static/c1dc6a777afb6022172c65c56f03371c/58556/051fa528f01d232757d893219799aab2.webp 800w,\n/static/c1dc6a777afb6022172c65c56f03371c/99238/051fa528f01d232757d893219799aab2.webp 1200w","sizes":"(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px"}}}}}]}},"pageContext":{"limit":12,"skip":0,"numPages":1,"currentPage":1,"id":5308,"name":"Handicapped","slug":"handicapped","country":"US"}},"staticQueryHashes":["3949754563","4179947113","4202924991"]}