Why Olivia Newton-John is more persuasive on medicinal cannabis than Pete Evans

Pete Evans and Olivia Newton-John have both called for an overhaul of Australia’s medicinal cannabis access scheme, but experts say her testimony will prove to be far more persuasive than the support of ‘Paleo Pete’.

Olivia Newton-John’s account of her use of medicinal cannabis will prove much more compelling in the fight for improved access to the treatment than the championing of the issue by celebrity chef Pete Evans, a leading drug expert has claimed.

Dr David Caldicott, senior lecturer in medicine at the Australian National University, said the singer’s words would carry more weight for one very solid reason: she is a patient.

In any discussion of drugs and drug policy, Dr Caldicott said, “the testimony of the patient and the individual is more persuasive”.

In a segment broadcast on 60 Minutes on Sunday night, the Grease star told Liz Hayes that she was “incredibly pro cannabis” and that she believed it was keeping her healthy as she battled stage four cancer, which has spread to her bones.

Her husband John Easterling said cannabis was not a cure for cancer, but used in conjunction with conventional treatment, it was helping restore her mobility and energy levels, while MRI scans of her tumours also showed encouraging signs.

Olivia Newton-John opened up about her battle with stage-four cancer in a segment on 60 Minutes. Picture: 9 Network

In a quirk of timing, the interview aired at the same time as celebrity chef Pete Evans presented a segment on medicinal cannabis on the Seven Network’s rival program Sunday Night.

Proponents of medicinal cannabis had expressed concern before the telecast that Evans’s controversial views on diet and vaccination would harm their cause.

“That’s an issue for Mr Evans to handle himself, but it’s much harder to attack Olivia Newton-John,” said Dr Caldicott. “I find the narrative provided by her and her husband very persuasive.”

Dr David Caldicott from ANU designed a course for the provision of medicinal cannabis in Australia.

OPINION: Vaccinating our kids shouldn’t be this hard

The concern about Mr Evans’ involvement in the medicinal cannabis cause was “more about optics than it is reality,” Dr Caldicott said, although he understood the concern.

He said it was also a reality that there was “quite a lot of overlap” among the ranks of medicinal marijuana advocates and anti-vaxxers.

“But it’s very important that people understand there is a genuine medical community that supports and prescribes medicinal cannabis,” he said.

Lucy Haslam from the advocacy group United in Compassion said Mr Evans “did a good job” on his Sunday Night segment, which featured the stories of sick people whose pain — and in some cases symptoms — had been alleviated by using cannabis.

Pete Evans during Sunday Night’s medicinal cannabis segment.

OPINION: Anti-vaxxers just don’t put their own kids at risk

“He didn’t say anything controversial, he gave a balanced view of the situation,” she said. “The people he spoke to were not looking to get high; they were looking to get well.

“I don’t think Pete is controversial in this space, but other people do. People look for excuses to bag Pete Evans out.”

Australian Medical Association President Dr Tony Bartone said he did not see Mr Evans’ program, so he could not make direct comment, but “we need to have scientific rigour behind the claims”.

“I understand the desire of those who want to use their influence outside their area of expertise .. but I’m well aware that they don’t possess the scientific rigour to clearly identify both the risks and the benefits (of medicinal cannabis),” he said.

Dr Bartone declined to comment on Olivia Newton-John’s testimony.

After the Sunday Night telecast, Evans was criticised by one of the people he interviewed, Gary Christian from the group Drug Free Australia, who accused him of using the medicinal cannabis issue as part of a push to legalise the drug’s recreational use.

Ms Haslam rejected that suggestion.

“Even if he was, so what?” she said. “It’s an easy throwaway line. I’ve had that thrown at me many times. It has nothing to do with what we’re fighting for.”

Former nurse Lucy Haslam from the advocacy group United in Compassion.

Lucy Haslam's son Dan who died of cancer at 25. Picture: Peter Lorimer

Ms Haslam, who has been championing medicinal cannabis since her son Dan died from bowel cancer in 2015 at the age of 25, said too many people still could not access the treatment.

“The system is driving people to the black market — and how can that be good public health policy? It’s failing,” she said.

Dr Caldicott said the “entire slant” of Australia’s medicinal cannabis access scheme “has been skewed towards avoiding hazard rather than providing benefit to patients”.

The fact that the prescribing of medicinal cannabis remained the responsibility of specialists rather than GPs was “a little ludicrous,” Dr Caldicott said.

“Our GP colleagues find it quite patronising that they’re considered not quite good enough to administer medicinal cannabis. There are far more dangerous drugs that GPs manage appropriately,” he said.

Australian Medical Association (AMA) President Tony Bartone. Picture: AAP /Mick Tsikas

Dr Bartone said Australia had “one of the best systems in the world” for the approval of new treatments, based on scientific evidence, “and that hasn’t been by accident”.

“There seems to be a popular thought running in commentary that (medicinal cannabis is) harmless and it should be out there now,” he said.

“But if this was drug XYZ, there would be stringent processes in place before it came to market. Those processes are being forgotten about.”

“Medicinal cannabis is currently available by the Special Access Scheme. Yes, it’s a little tedious, but that’s because it’s a very serious medication. It’s not a Panadol or panadeine ... It needs to go through the appropriate checks and balances.”