We deserve a system where medicine is decided by clinical need, not by what's in our wallet. And the numbers show that doing the right thing would actually save the
NHS billions – money that could go back into other vital services.
The article spelled out what we already feel: in the UK, cannabis is a medicine if you're rich enough to go private, and a crime if you're not. Private patients get legal access;
NHS prescriptions are almost non‑existent. That pushes many back to the street market – cheaper, less safe, and illegal. The law doesn't ask why you're using it, so poverty becomes a crime.
What the article doesn't mention is the potential
NHS saving. Independent research found that routine
NHS access to cannabis‑based medicines could save up to £4 billion a year – from fewer
GP visits, hospital stays, and opioid prescriptions. That's around £729 per patient per year. For the 5.45 million people with disabling chronic pain, the saving would be nearly £4 billion annually.
https://www.leafie.co.uk/news/cannabis-save-nhs-4-billion-each-year/
This is the Inverse Care Law in action: those with the greatest need (chronic pain, low income) are least likely to get
NHS care, while those who can afford private clinics get the medicine, even if it is at the expense of basic essentials. The system spends more on less effective treatments for the poorest – and saves nothing by excluding those most in need.
After 30+ years of
NHS service, becoming a cannabis patient myself transformed my perspective. Patient frustration is not personal, it is stigma power, where institutional authority marginalises groups. See the post on
MedBud: **"Stigma and Inequality: The Hidden Harms Faced by UK Cannabis Patients"**
https://forums.medbud.wiki/threads/...dden-harms-faced-by-uk-cannabis-patients.356/