2025 will be a decisive year for cannabis policy in Switzerland
The Siegenthaler parliamentary initiative comes into a new phase: the draft law is sent to consultation and the topic is discussed publicly. This is precisely why it is important to emphasize a clear separation between medical application and Recreational Consumption . Medcan consciously is committed to the interests of the patients because we know how crucial this differentiation is for a factual and fair discussion.
Distorted perception of medical application
The discussion about the medical application of cannabis is often overshadowed by the debate about Recreational Consumption . In their practice, doctors in particular experience problematic consumption patterns such as mixed consumption with tobacco, high doses or uncontrolled use. These experiences shape the opinion of many specialists, who then unconsciously transfers their concerns about the Recreational Consumption to medical application. But this is exactly where the problem lies: the framework conditions could not be more different.
Medical application is not Recreational Consumption
A medication that is administered under medical supervision with precisely defined active ingredients, firm doses and clear intake requirements is not comparable to a joint from the Freundeskreis. This equation leads to unnecessary stigmatization of medical use. Another obstacle is the skeptical attitude of many specialists. Instead of relying on scientific knowledge, personal anecdotes and individual negative experiences are often weighted higher than the entire study situation. Especially when it comes to the question of effectiveness, an evidence is always required, which is a level above what is currently available. As a result, the discussion remains ideological instead of concentrating on scientific facts.
The reality for patients in Switzerland
Despite the legal option of receiving cannabis on a prescription, many affected persons continue to experience significant hurdles:
- Health insurance companies reject the assumption of costs as if the Narcotics Act was only a recommendation.
- Many doctors avoid the ordinance for fear of stigmatization or lack of experience.
- Pharmacists often encounter the topic with prejudices.
- The police continue to look at patients with mistrust.
All of this means that many people with chronic illnesses do not feel taken seriously and have to fight for their therapy.
Inequality in care
A particularly critical point is the financial burden: While financially well-off people can afford their cannabis medication, people with lower income often face an insurmountable hurdle. Chronically ill people who could benefit the most from cannab an therapy must apply several hundred francs per month themselves. This inequality means that potentially effective therapy is only accessible to a small part of those affected.
Time for a clear separation
The medical use of cannabis deserves its own evaluation, regardless of the leisure debate. A well -founded view is crucial that is based on controlled studies, clinical experience and individual indications. The story shows that many substances were first demonized, then celebrated as a panacea and finally found their appropriate place.
Let us further clarify and share our experiences as a patient. This is the only way we can change something in the long term.
