In Reply—Comment on Medical Cannabis for Obstructive Sleep Apnea: Premature and Potentially Harmful

Abstract

We thank Scharf et al for their interest in our article.1Kolla B.P. Mansukhani M.P. Olson E.J. St Louis E.K. Silber M.H. Morgenthaler T.I. Medical cannabis for obstructive sleep apnea: premature and potentially harmful.Mayo Clin Proc. 2018; 93: 689-692Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF Scopus (3) Google Scholar We appreciate the additional details that they have provided in their letter as to the process by which the Minnesota Department of Health and the Office of Medical Cannabis approve qualifying medical conditions. As we previously alluded, most state laws protect prescribing providers to a degree; however, efforts to change federal law have failed in this regard. Finally, we agree that the medical community can provide expert guidance and needs to be an integral part of the processes leading to the approval of conditions that qualify for the use of medical cannabis. Comment on Medical Cannabis for Obstructive Sleep Apnea: Premature and Potentially HarmfulMayo Clinic ProceedingsVol. 93Issue 11PreviewWe recently read with interest “Medical cannabis for obstructive sleep apnea: premature and potentially harmful” by Kolla et al1 competently summarizing the current evidence for the recent approval of obstructive sleep apnea as a certifying condition for the use of medical cannabis in the state of Minnesota. We share the authors’ doubt to the scientific validity of this recent action. It would be helpful for the readers of Mayo Clinic Proceedings to know additional background relating to the evolving medical and legislative landscape of medical cannabis. Full-Text PDF