Stigma, risks, and benefits of medicinal cannabis use among Australians with cancer.

PURPOSE: People with cancer who use medicinal cannabis do so despite risks associated with limited clinical evidence, legalities, and stigma. This study investigated how Australians with cancer rationalise their medicinal cannabis use despite its risks. METHODS: Ten adults (5 males and 5 females; mean age of 53.3) who used cannabis medicinally for their cancer were interviewed in 2021-2022 about how they used and accessed the substance, attitudes and beliefs underpinning their use, and conversations with others about medicinal cannabis. RESULTS: Participants had cancer of the bowel, skin, oesophagus, stomach, thyroid, breast, and Hodgkin lymphoma for which they were receiving treatment (n = 5) or under surveillance (n = 5), with most (n = 6) encountering metastatic disease. Cannabis was used to treat a variety of cancer-related symptoms such as pain, poor sleep, and low mood. Cannabis was perceived as natural and thus less risky than pharmaceuticals. Participants legitimised their medicinal cannabis use by emphasising its natural qualities and distancing themselves from problematic users or riskier substances. Cost barriers and a lack of healthcare professional communication impeded prescription access. Similarly, participants navigated medicinal cannabis use independently due to a lack of guidance from healthcare professionals. CONCLUSION: Findings highlight the need for robust data regarding the harms and efficacy of medicinal cannabis and dissemination of such information among healthcare professionals and to patients who choose to use the substance. Ensuring healthcare professionals are equipped to provide non-judgmental and evidence-based guidance may mitigate potential safety and legal risks.

A Review of Legal Regulation of Religious Slaughter in Australia: Failure to Regulate or a Regulatory Fail?

While religious slaughter is not a new practice in Australia, it has recently attracted public concern regarding questions of animal welfare following unfavourable media coverage. However, the details of religious slaughter practices, including related animal welfare provisions, appear to be poorly understood by the Australian public, and no existing literature concisely synthesises current regulations, practices, and issues. This paper addresses this gap by examining the processes associated with various types of religious slaughter and associated animal welfare issues, by reviewing the relevant legislation and examining public views, while highlighting areas for further research, particularly in Australia. The paper finds shortcomings in relation to transparency and understanding of current practices and regulation and suggests a need for more clear and consistent legislative provisions, as well as increased independence from industry in the setting of the standards, enforcement and administration of religious slaughter. A starting point for legal reform would be the relocation of important provisions pertaining to religious slaughter from delegated codes to the responsible act or regulation, ensuring proper parliamentary oversight. In addition, more active public engagement must occur, particularly with regard to what constitutes legal practices and animal welfare standards in the Australian context to overcome ongoing conflict between those who oppose religious slaughter and the Muslim and Jewish communities.