Australia’s medicinal cannabis industry, once touted as the miracle cure for everything from stubbed toes to existential dread, is now revealing its true colours – and they’re not so green and wholesome after all. Recent investigations have peeled back the tie-dye curtain to expose a cesspool of dubious practices, gaping regulatory black holes, and a cavalier attitude towards patient safety that would make even the most hardened snake oil peddler blush.
This “wonder drug,” championed by hipsters and desperate patients alike, was supposed to be the panacea of the 21st century. Instead, it’s shaping up to be nothing more than a cash grab, with profit-hungry vultures circling vulnerable patients like moths to a flame – or should we say, stoners to a dispensary. As accusations of reckless prescribing and marketing tactics fly, one can’t help but wonder: Is this the second coming of reefer madness, now with a shiny “medical” label slapped on for good measure?
The Dispensed Controversy: A Tale of Two Tragedies
At the heart of the controversy are telehealth platforms and clinics specialising in medicinal cannabis prescriptions. These businesses, operating in a regulatory grey area, have led to an explosion in cannabis prescribing, raising alarm bells among medical professionals and regulatory bodies alike.
A Suicide and a Psychotic Episode
One such company, Dispensed, has found itself at the center of a storm following the suicide of a 41-year-old patient and the hospitalization of another due to acute psychosis. Both men had been prescribed medicinal cannabis despite having histories of mental health conditions that should have precluded such treatment.
The New South Wales coroner is now preparing a report into the death of the 41-year-old man, who had three university degrees but struggled with auditory hallucinations and was on antipsychotic medication at the time of his death.
The father of the deceased, grappling with the loss of his son, expressed grave concerns about the prescribing process: “Our real concern is that a doctor can talk to someone over the phone, not do any checks and balances and prescribe medicinal cannabis.” He noted that his son’s regular GP and psychiatrist were unaware of the cannabis prescription, highlighting a dangerous disconnect in patient care.
Even more disturbing, the family claims that Dispensed continued to send medicinal cannabis to their son after being notified of his death, raising serious questions about the company’s practices and oversight.
The Case of the 31-Year-Old with Schizophrenia
The case of another Dispensed patient, a 31-year-old man with schizophrenia, further illustrates the potential dangers of this unchecked system. Despite his mother’s desperate pleas to the company about his condition and risk of psychosis, Dispensed allegedly continued to sell him THC-containing medicinal cannabis. The result was a rapid deterioration of his mental health, leading to hospitalisation and an involuntary treatment order.
Expert Opinions: The Dangers of Unchecked Prescribing
Professor Brett Emmerson, chair of the Queensland branch of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists, stated unequivocally that prescribing medicinal cannabis to patients with a history of psychosis or schizophrenia is inappropriate. “One of the most common causes, over many years as a psychiatrist, of people (with schizophrenia) relapsing is the fact that they get their hands on THC,” he explained.
The regulatory response has been swift but perhaps too late for some patients. The pharmacist who founded Dispensed, Adam Riad Younes, has been banned from supplying medicinal cannabis, and two doctors working for the company have had their ability to practise suspended. However, these actions raise questions about how such practices were allowed to proliferate in the first place.
The Kickback Controversy: Doctors for Sale?
The problem extends beyond a single company. A year-long investigation by A Current Affair has uncovered troubling financial ties between doctors prescribing cannabis and the suppliers of these products. In a secret audio recording, Sydney GP Yan Ren, who runs the Flowers of Life clinic, admitted to receiving payments from a cannabis supplier for prescriptions she wrote, describing it as “like an educational fee.”
Another company, Humacology, allegedly offered doctors $50 for every script they wrote for existing patients, a practice that skirts dangerously close to kickbacks. While Humacology denies these allegations, the incident highlights the murky waters of the medicinal cannabis industry.
Dr. James Stewart, an award-winning cannabis doctor, claims he has been offered money by several major suppliers to prescribe their products. “When you get businessmen coming into healthcare they put profits before patients,” he warned, estimating that 40% of practitioners in the field may be engaging in unethical practices. The use of telehealth clinics where nurses consult with patients and doctors later review notes to write prescriptions has also come under fire. Dr. Stewart criticised this practice, stating, “If you’re a prescribing doctor you should speak to the patient.”
Regulatory Gaps and Responses
The Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) has taken action in some cases, using immediate action powers to impose conditions on practitioners’ licences when there is “a serious risk to the public, or strong public interest, requiring restrictions on a practitioner’s registration.”
Critics argue that the current regulatory scheme was never intended to cover the rapid expansion of the medicinal cannabis industry. Professor Emmerson noted, “No-one anticipated … there would be a burgeoning market of single-issue clinics and companies who want one thing — people using their products to make money.”
The TGA Steps In: Legal Action and Warnings
The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) has also stepped into the fray, initiating court proceedings against CDA Clinics QLD Pty Ltd and its former director, Dr. Benjamin Jansen, for alleged unlawful advertising of medicinal cannabis. The company’s website, CDA Express, allegedly enabled patients to purchase prescription-only medicines containing cannabidiol (CBD) after completing a ‘virtual consultation’ process involving an online questionnaire.
The TGA alleges that such advertising is unlawful because medicinal cannabis products are prescription-only medicines that cannot be advertised directly to consumers under the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989. The agency warns that advertising prescription-only medicines directly to consumers could create inappropriate demand and lead to unnecessary or harmful prescribing.
In response to these issues, the TGA has emphasised its role in enforcing advertising requirements for therapeutic goods in Australia. The agency provides an online form for reporting non-compliant advertising and maintains a database of investigation outcomes. The TGA also has a range of compliance and enforcement tools at its disposal, from education and advice to more serious actions depending on the nature of the breach and potential risk to the public.
A Call for Vigilance and Reform
As the medicinal cannabis industry continues its unchecked expansion, the need for stringent oversight and regulation becomes increasingly urgent. The current landscape, with its problematic mix of telehealth platforms, financial incentives, and inadequate safeguards, has created an environment ripe for exploitation and potential harm to vulnerable patients.
For both consumers and healthcare professionals, a heightened sense of scepticism is not just advisable – it’s essential. While the TGA’s efforts to encourage reporting of unlawful advertising and provide resources on proper cannabis use are commendable, they seem woefully inadequate in the face of such widespread issues. A significant reason for this burgeoning disaster was at their own hand.
The TGA in bowing to ‘vote for medicine’ mania in years passed allowed a caveat, a ‘loophole’ if you like that essentially gave a green light to cannabis formulations that had NOT been fully double-blind, placebo accounted for exhaustive clinical trials. This tacit free-pass for ‘medicines’ that have not met the gold standard for clinical trials is the major source of this nightmare, and one that the TGA needs to rectify, not just ‘monitor.’
The ultimate challenge lies in fundamentally reshaping an industry that has, thus far, prioritised rapid growth and profit over patient welfare. Until we see a dramatic shift in this paradigm, the promise of medicinal cannabis as a breakthrough treatment remains overshadowed by its potential for misuse and exploitation. It’s time for a serious reevaluation of how we approach, regulate, and utilise cannabis, with a renewed focus on evidence-based practices and patient safety above all else.
Sources
Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) – Advertising enforcement and outcomes
Court proceedings against CDA Clinics QLD Pty Ltd and its former director, Dr Benjamin Jansen
New details on the medicinal cannabis doctor alleged to be putting profits before patients
Medicinal cannabis doctors investigated by authorities after suicide and hospitalisation of patients
Leave a Reply