Keeping the lid on pot

Of course the government should allow more research on medical marijuana! It is outrageous that the DEA overruled one of its own judges for no valid reason. Enough evidence for the benefits of pot exists that many states have permitted its medical usage (which the DEA has also reacted strongly against). It is time to fully explore the benefits of this plant. It is safer and more effective than many prescription drugs, and no one has ever overdosed on marijuana. Ever. Recent studies have even shown that there is no increased risk for lung cancer, even among heavy smokers.

It is far more logical to study and document the benefits (and possible risks) of an easy to grow plant that has never killed anyone, than to jail cancer patients and waste billions of dollars enforcing a prohibition that has been even less successful than the Prohibition on alcohol in the past.

Why is the Bush administration so afraid of science?

This nonsense must stop. Many Americans understand the impact and cost alcohol has on this country, yet there is no discussion of reinstating prohibition. It has yet to be proven that medical marijuana works? Tell that to the thousands of citiZens that rely on that drug to improve their life and medical situation. Someone is talking to the wrong scientists and/or research teams. We need to get over this fear mongering that punishes the wrong folks. I would like to discuss this with our congress folks and senators who receive FREE medical treatments. Maybe we should take a gander at that in the future.

The DEA,and Big Pharma are tied together.They do not care about people who suffer!! Why mess with a natural product?To make a synthetic drug is ridiculous and usually harmful...unless of course it makes BIG MONEY for those greedy bastards! Why mess with a good thing? LEGALIZE!!!!!!

I also believe it should be used for medical reasons and researched in any way,but not just that i think it should be legalized for personal use(in adults,responsible adults!)

The historical evidence reveals that US prohibition of marijuana rests on racist and paternalistic foundations. It is absolutely not based on science. What keeps the ban intact today is legislative inertia and the lobbying of corporate interests that stand to lose a great deal of money were the status quo to change.

All of this is beside the point – the medical research in question faces no genuine criticisms. The DEA's move in this situation is either pure politics or pure incompetence, neither of which serve the interest of the American people.

The jury is not still 'out' on this one. Responsible doctors all agree that cannabis is a harmless substance that can be used medicinally to help alleviate their patients most painful symptoms. Calling it 'pot' derisively throughout this article shows that you are one of the very few doctors who favor drug-policy-politics over their Hippocratic oath. Shame on you.

Everything should be explored to the fullest extent possible so we know the capabilities of the drug. pot being examined by medical professionals should not be a big deal. the professionals are experts and will not abuse the drug but rather explore the possibilities to find out the true potential, if any.

We are talking research here, right? Why would we inhibit the study of what may be? What are we afraid to find out. If the benefits of cannabis therapies are non-existent, as the government would have us believe, then why not let some bona-fide researchers do proper testing with more efficient strains than are currently supplied by UMISS? It is important for us to be an open minded society and allow science to make logical conclusions based on the evidence and findings without prejudice. To disallow proper samples for testing and to allow testing to firms that are only concerned with finding out what is wrong with cannabis and not what is right. gis immoral treatment of a natural substance like cannabis has got to end.

Right now, we have the technology and peer-reviewed science to save millions of lives with a harmless extract from the cannabis plant called Cannabidiol, also known as CBD. Cannabidiol is totally safe and non-psychoactive. Lives could be saved now, using CBD in cannabinoid lozenges, produced by a company I founded — except for the fact that CBD has been determined by Congress to be a Schedule 1 Drug.

CBD alone is not intoxicating, but it appears to relieve convulsion, inflammation, anxiety, and nausea, and to inhibit cancer cell growth. Recent studies have shown cannabidiol to be as effective as atypical antipsychotics in treating schizophrenia. In November 2007, it was reported that CBD reduces growth of aggressive human breast cancer cells in vitro and reduces their invasiveness. It thus represents the first non-toxic exogenous agent that can lead to down-regulation of tumor aggressiveness. It is also a neuroprotective antioxidant that provides powerful protection from paralysis in spinal injuries.

CBD works by blocking the activity of a gene called Id-1 which is believed to be responsible for the aggressive spread of cancer cells away from the original tumour site – a process called metastasis. Past work has shown CBD can block aggressive human brain cancers. The latest work found CBD appeared to have a similar effect on breast cancer cells in the lab.

CBD is totally safe and completely non-psychoactive. The US government not only knows about CBD, it even hold a patent on the use of cannabinoid medicines. So why does our own government continue to make CBD a Schedule 1 Drug and thereby sentence my cousin Lisa to death?

It’s a tragic situation and, in light of the emerging new science supporting CBD, it is criminal for the US government to continue its destructive and misinformed war on the medical use of cannabis.

Lest this discussion leads readers to believe that reseach needs to be done in order to find "proven" medical benefits from cannabis use, I wanted to post this here to preempt any comment from someone saying that "there is no such proof". I know of 10 positive randomized controlled trials published in the last decade alone in the United States that were conducted at renowned academic medical centers like UC San Diego, UC Davis, UCSF, U Chicago, and Columbia University that were published in prestigious medical journals that
solidly and repeatedly showed efficacy and safety for the use of marijuana for specific medical conditions. Of course we always need further research to study many other conditions (neurodegenerative, inflammatory, etc), and additional routes of administration and drug interactions with larger and larger study groups. But there is enough basic research to show that cannabis's (=marijuana) placement in Schedule I (meaning no medical uses, no safety of use) is erroneous. Here are the citations:

1. Ellis RJ, Toperoff W, Vaida F, van der Brande G, Gonzales J, Gouaux B, Bentley H, Atkinson JH. 2008. Smoked Medicinal Cannabis for Neuropathic Pain in HIV: A Randomized, Crossover Clinical Trial. Neuropsychopharmacology 1-9.
Published online 8/6/08.

2. Wilsey B, Marcotte T, Tsodikov A, Millman J, Bentley H, Gouaux B, Fishman S. 2008 A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Crossover Trial of Cannabis Cigarettes in Neuropathic Pain. The Journal of Pain, Vol 9, No 6 (June): pp 506-521.

3. Corey-Bloom J, Wolfson T, Gamst A, Jin S, Marcotte T, Bentley H, Gouaux B. Short-Term Effects of Medicinal Cannabis on Spasticity in Multiple Sclerosis. 2008. Poster presented at the 60th Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Neurology (Chicago, IL). Available at: http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/geninfo/jcb_aan_poster.pdf.

4. Wallace M, Schulteis G, Atkinson JH, Wolfson T, Lazzaretto D, Bentley H, Gouaux B, Abramson I. 2007. Dose-dependent Effects of Smoked Cannabis on Capsaicin-induced Pain and Hyperalgesia in Healthy Volunteers. Anesthesiology. 107(5):785-796.

5. Haney M, Gunderson EW, Rabkin J, Hart CL, Vosburg SK, Comer SD, Foltin RW. 2007. Dronabinol and marijuana in HIV-positive marijuana smokers. Caloric intake, mood, and sleep. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2007;45(5):545-54.

6. Abrams DI, Jay CA, Shade SB, Vizoso H, Reda H, Press S, Kelly ME, Rowbotham MC, Petersen KL. 2007. Cannabis in painful HIV-associated sensory neuropathy: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Neurology 68:515-21.

7. Abrams DI, Vizoso HP, Shade SB, Jay C, Kelly ME. Benowitz NL. 2007. Vaporization as a Smokeless Cannabis Delivery System: A Pilot Study. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics 82, 572578.

8. Haney M, Rabkin J, Gunderson E, Foltin RW. 2005. Dronabinol and marijuana in HIV(+) marijuana smokers: acute effects on caloric intake and mood. Psychopharmacology Aug ;181:170-8.

9. Abrams DI, Hilton JF, Leiser RJ, Shade SB, Elbeik TA, Aweeka FT, Benowitz NL, Bredt BM, Kosel B, Aberg JA, Deeks SG, Mitchell TF, Mulligan K, Bacchetti P, McCune JM, and Schambelan M. 2003. Short-Term Effects of Cannabinoids in Patients with HIV-1 Infection. A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial. Annals of Internal Medicine, 19 August 2003, 139:258-266.

10. Soderpalm AH, Schuster A, de Wit H. 2001. Antiemetic efficacy of smoked marijuana: subjective and behavioral effects on nausea induced by syrup of ipecac. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2001 Jul-Aug;69(3-4):343-50. -

I testified about this at the AMA meeting this November, and the FDA
testified against me, ignoring the science and saying that there are no
currently accepted medical uses for marijuana in treatment in the United States and a lack of safety for its use under medical supervision. I talked to the FDA representative afterwards, and she told me of course we know about the research.
I was flabergasted. Currently the AMA is writing a report on this issue, due by Nov 09, and there is a concern that they will support Sativex, a pharmaceutical liquid cannabis extract from a British pharmaceutical company over medical-grade botanical cannabinoid medicine. Let's hope this ridiculous distinction doesn't happen. PS: For you evidence-based medicine afficinados, there is also a meta-analysis published for its use in the treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. (Rocha FCM, Oliveira LMQR, Da Silveira DX. 2008. Therapeutic use of Cannabis sativa on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting among cancer patients: systematic review and meta-analysis. European Journal of Cancer Care,
published online ahead of print, Accepted 2 November 2007, September 2008, 17:5,
431-443.)

Sunil Aggarwal, MD/PhD Student, University of Washington
see my doctoral dissertation:
Aggarwal S. 2008. The Medical Geography of Cannabinoid Botanicals in Washington State: Access, Delivery, and Distress. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Washington. Available at: http://sunilaggarwal.net.

The federal government's ban on more research on medical marijuana is just one of the most obvious outrages of the "war on drugs."

How ironic that author Hellerman refers to a laboratory concoction made by distilling or synthesizing something found in a natural herb as "a more traditional medicine." The definition of 'traditional medicine' has certainly gone through some changes in the last generation or three.

Elizabeth asks, "Why is the Bush administration so afraid of science?'"
I'll suggest one part of the answer: Science freed from political bounds will develop answers that will make some major segments of society very uncomfortable while other segments (corporate) will suffer economic losses.
That's not profound but still needs to looked at.

Who is bankrolling the prohibition and why? The hundred plus billion dollar crime industry built around cannabis products and other schedule 1 drugs will not pass lightly into the night even if everything is legalized for public consumption. It will, however, conform to market changes and "go legit" in every instance that it can. Less profit with less risk is preferable to high risk but the market will not be denied in any case. The demand (those who pay cash for their drugs successfully) is too great to ignore any longer especially when the cost of combatting the flow is as large and primarily ineffective. This country is in dire financial straights and legalizing cannabis products will both reduce exhorbitant costs aimed at prohibition and increase market tax (sales, sin, import, etc...) and incomes for employees of licensed and certified growers.
It is time to think SMART about drugs, drug use, and the heavy social toll of prohibition. Change the language on drugs, drug use, and drug abuse...think SMART and offer intelligent choices instead of outdated rhetoric like hard or soft on drugs.

It's outrageous the government continues to impede medical marijuana research. They have effectively created a Catch-22 situation, claiming that marijuana can't be medically legalized without FDA approval, but blocking the establishment of a legally licensed supplier of research marijuana to sponsor the approval. Our own (non-human) studies of marijuana vaporization have been delayed over 5 years by NIDA's and DEA's refusal to grant a DEA-licensed lab access to research marijuana. The net result of current policy is that it's easier for your teen-age kid to get marijuana than a clinical researcher.
This should be a no-brainer for the Obama administration – unblock marijuana research!

Of course the US government should allow more research on medical cannabis. Other countries like the UK, Spain, and Israel are going to beat the US on finding potential treatments and possible cures for diseases like Alzheimers; MS; ALS (Lou Gehrig disease); multiple cancers including lung, breast, and pancreatic; and a host of other illnesses. Should the US be left behind the cutting edge of science?

Learn more: http://www.maps.org/mmj/

http://www.ohiopatient.net

A more detailed account of the DEA Nixing Craker is at

http://www.counterpunch.org/gardner01162009.html

Team Obama should see to it that the federal contract to cultivate marijuana for medical research is decoupled from the contract to chemically analyze samples confiscated by law enforcement. In fact, the feds should stop testing confiscated stashes. It serves no practical purpose. It's a waste of taxpayer dollars.

Fred Gardner

My opinion on pot:
30 years of de facto legal availability of cannabis for adults in the Netherlands have not resulted in higher levels of its use than in neighbouring countries, and lower levels of use than in the USA, the UK and France, where prohibition is practiced religiously.
The Dutch “coffeeshops” have falsified the assumptions of prohibition-which is probably the reason why some countries pressure the Netherlands government to close the coffeeshops. The unfounded belief in positive effects of prohibition can no longer be allowed to determine international drug policy.
Cannabis is a plant that contains powerful psychoactive drugs. For that reason, the cannabis market needs to be adequately regulated, not prohibited. Prohibition increases the health risks related to cannabis use (which fortunately aren’t larger than those of alcohol and tobacco). Prohibition creates a lucrative black market. By enhancing its attractiveness to young people, prohibition probably increases cannabis use.
Personally, I find cannabis a wonderful drug. I prefer the Dutch word
“ roesmiddel”, literally pleasure substance, or intoxicant. It has improved the quality of my life, as has my alcohol consumption.
The continued ban on cannabis is a disgrace. The health risks connected to cannabis use don’t require prohibition, but regulation.
Fredrick Polak, psychiatrist, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
fpolak@planet.nl

Correction: I meant to say above that President Nixon rejected the Schaffer Commission's recommendations and instead classified marijuanha as Schedule 1.

The government should encourage unobstructed research in all areas of marijuana science.

I think we should have pot for people who are sick can use pot. And also see what other health problems it can help with.

It is disappointing but in no way surprising that the DEA has rejected the findings of their administrative law judge in this matter. After all, they did the same thing in 1989 when Judge Francis Young ruled, after two years of exhaustive scientific hearings, that marijuana is one of the safest therapeutic substances known and should be made available by prescription. The research is being done - thousands of peer-reviewed scientific articles on marijuana and its constituent components, cannabinoids, are published every year - just primarily overseas. American researchers are being blocked from doing even FDA-approved studies for lack of access to research materials, materials Prof. Craker would have produced at UMass Amherst, but scientists in Israel, Italy, England, Switzerland and elsewhere are busy unlocking the potential of therapeutic compounds that show potential for treating an astonishingly broad spectrum of difficult-to-treat conditions.

Without a doubt in my mind, the answer is yes.

I don't see how even the most hardcore prohibitionists could possibly be against this. What's the worst that could happen?

I know; maybe that marijuana actually does have some benefit and the DEA will have to stop telling their senseless lies?

If Obama is serious in regards to taking a scientific/reasonable approach to his policies, this would be a terrific first step.

Allow researchers to study it! Continuing the status quo merely supports ignorance and suppresses science.

Yes, the government should definitely allow more research on medical marijuana!

There is absolutely no good reason not to follow up on the already very promising results of medical marijuana. It has shown to be useful in treating the symptoms of a diverse and growing list of health issues.

The medical policies of the Obama administration should be based on science, not politics and definitely not the fear mongering of the DEA under Bush.

YES,YES,YES!

I am not going to wast your time or mine explaining, you know the facts or should and you should know this question is not going away(Even if the Obama team wants it to)

I completely agree with Elizabeth, and the millions of Americans who feel the same way. Even the American College of Physicians, the second largest Doctors organization in the country agrees that further research is necessary and needed. It's high time, (pardon the pun), for the Government to admit that the so-called "war on Drugs" has been a waste of billions of dollars of taxpayers money. Both legal action and incarceration of patients, smoking marijuana for medical reasons, is not only a waste of taxpayers money, but it hinders responsible members of our communities to be able to get to a point of contributing to these communities. I personally know of 4 people, afflicted with our rare genetic disorder, who after being approved in their states to use marijuana for medicinal purposes, have returned to working and leading fairly "normal lives" because of the positive effects of the drug.
The Bush administration brought embarrassment to our scientific communities during the past 8 years because of their restrictive measures imposed on research. The US has a chance now to regain our scientific and technological edge in the world and we can only hope that the Obama administration will realize this and take measures to correct it.
As both a former healthcare professional, now disabled because of glaucoma, chronic pain, severe stomach problems, and other health problems related to my genetic disorder, I plan on doing everything I can to educate the public and this new administration so that one day, I may be able to return to being a productive member of our society.

Dr. Gupta,

As a Multiple Sclerosis patient diagnosed in 2004, I can only praise the benefits of using marijuana over everything my Doctor wanted to prescribe me.

No self-injected steroids, why should I have to hurt myself to feel better ? and no side effects. No Opiate pain killers, No anti-depressants. All at a fraction of the cost.

My creator had vision in the things he saw. I have faith in God's medicine, not the modern PHARMINSANITY the Federal Government wants for me.

Rev. Ray Green
Iowans 4 Medical Marijuana

"I asked a spokesman in the Transition Press Office if Obama would support research like Craker’s. He couldn’t say."

Obama promised a "science based approach" and now the spokesman couldn't say?? The DEA is a thorn in the side of democracy. This agency is only protecting it's funding like it's done for over 30 years. They know the truth but refuse to let it out of the bag. Pot makes up for over 60% of their budget. Anything positive that comes out of a study hurts their cause. The DEA has no regard for American Rigths or the Constitution itself.

"As president, I will go over the budget, line by line, getting rid of the programs that don't work" -President-Elect Barack Obama

In the midst of such a severe financial meltdown, I can see no reason why the federal government should continue to spend hundreds of billions of dollars prohibiting the advancement of medicine (and the incarceration of its users instead of rehabilitation of disease sufferers) when countless studies on the medicinal properties of Cannabis have proven the government's rulings are if at the very least outdated.

See for yourself:

Turned-off Cannabinoid Receptor Turns On Colorectal Tumor Growth:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/08/080801074056.htm

New Cannabis-like Drugs Could Block Pain Without Affecting Brain, Says Study:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080912091728.htm

Marijuana Cuts Lung Cancer Tumor Growth In Half, Study Shows:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/070417193338.htm

Separating The Therapeutic Benefits Of Cannabis From Its Mood-altering Side-effects:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/11/071129151109.htm

Marijuana May Be Effective For Neuropathic Pain:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080626150628.htm

Cannabis: Potent Anti-depressant In Low Doses, Worsens Depression At High Doses:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071023183937.htm

There is no need to scientifically investigate marijauna because it has already been investigated by a large portion of the population including George W. Bush: Marijuana is the Nation's most commonly used illicit drug. More than 94 million Americans (40 percent) age 12 and older have tried marijuana at least once, according to the 2003 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH).

Sadsitic, criminal factions inside the USG have been telling us how dangerous marujuana is and now they have patented it as a neuroprotectant, anti inflammmatory and anti-oxident medicine Pat. # 6,530,507. Also cannabis made known to us as marijuana, from Harry Anslinger, has been used by makind for well over 2700 years as recently proven through study of anctient grave sites http://jxb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/59/15/4171. It is high time to investigate dangerous narcisisstic sociopaths who profit from prohibition and charge them with the crimes against humanity that they have been perpetraiting for over 70 years.

Marijauna is as legal as cigaretts and tobacco. It is prohibition that is illegal. It is time to stop studying marijuana and start investigating those who are reaping the profits of prohibition though governmnet sanctioned thievery and torture of persons who exercise their right to the control of their minds and bodies.

Its time we stop punishing ourselves over marijuana, a drug far less harmful than cigarettes or tobacco, anp probably less harmful than coffee or asprin. If we were to tax and regulate marijuana, consumption would go down, our control over use of the drug would increase and it would become an important source of government revenue. The science is clear that marijuana is a great medicine. The federal government needs to stop interfering in state efforts to allow medical use of this incredible herb.

It only makes sense to allow research. Currently, it seems like the DEA is afraid to hear that it is harmless. All other substances included in the CSA are easily available for research, why isn't marijuana.

Give us some truth for once, we deserve it.

After numerous studies from countries like the Netherlands, Israel, Spain, Canada, and Britain; it's about time we take studying marijuana seriously. Initial studies show promising results treating Multiple Sclerosis, ALS, Gliomas, MRSA, and even Alzheimers. Why would we ignore ANY treatment for those suffering from these debilitating and fatal diseases? When politics trumps treatment, we all loose...

Yes the gov't should allow testing. If nothing else so they can "officially" see what millions already know. That cannabis is an effective, SAFE alternative for many conditions and illnesses. I have severe fibromyalgia, severe-recurring depression and high-level anxiety. I have been taking oromorph twice a day for about 4 years and immediate release morphine for breakthrough pain. Valium and tramadol for anxiety and muscle relaxer. I finally decided I had to take my health into my own hands when my teeth started falling out. Thanks to cannabis I've been able to cut the morphine dose in half and am completely off the buproprion for depression. I feel better than I have in years and I can finally sleep through the night. Even a seemingly simple thing like being regular makes a big differance. I even started taking karate classes with my 8 year old daughter. BTW I'm 52 and was diagnosed with fibro in 1992 after two years of exclusionary testing. Nothing the doctors could give me or do for me worked for me as well as 1 gram of vaporized cannabis. Please do whatever is necessary to legally bring this medicine to those who need it. Really the only problem I have with cannabis is that I stand the chance of losing everything to prohibition.
Thank You

Patients Out of Time was a participant in the DEA-Craker case. The four surviving patients that are in the Investigational new Drug Program for cannabis are on our Board of directors. No one knows more about the quality of the U. of MS medicine than they. i challenged the veracity of Dr. El Sohly under oath concerning the quality of his product and my testimony was accepted by Judge Bittner.

In a Nature article, A. Frood, June 26, 2007, wrote a quote from El Sohly, "People that say the supply is not there and the quality is not there (sic). I can tell you categorically that is not true".

POT wrote back, "Contrary to representatives that calim under oath that the quality of medical marijuana provided under a US federal program is accepatable, Patients Out of Time, a 501c3 educational charity that has all five living cannabis patients in ite leadership, say that staement is false".

Patients Out of Time is willing to repeat that statement any time any place.

To inspect the quality of the federal medicine please search the internet for Patients out of Time's April 2006 conference held in Santa Barbara, CA an accredited conference on cannabis therapeutics in clinical use under the authority of the AMA and the ANA. Here you will find video of three patients opening new cans of federal cannabis and examining the contents with multiple cameras in attendance.

More clinical presentations, about 60, can be found on google and You Tube video, key word: Patients Out of Time.

Thanks for your attention to this subject. Al Byrne

http://www.medicalcannabis.com

Please tell me what is more traditional than a plant that has been used for medical purposes for thousands of years?

Oh yes...something that lines the pockets of pharmaceutical companies...I forgot that that was the other meaning of traditional...

I am 100% in favor of legalizing marijuana for adults, at the very least the federal government needs to stop ignoring that marijuana has many medicinal properties and stop prosecuting people for using it as a medication.

I have Bipolar Disorder, Generalized Anxiety Disorder with Panic Disorder, ADHD, and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Over the past four and a half years, I have been prescribed many drugs (Effexor, Zoloft, Xanax, Restoril, Vistaril, Neurontin, Lamictal, Lexapro, Wellbutrin, Abilify, Seroquel, Adderall, Remeron, Risperdol, Ambien, Roserem, Trazodone, Invega, Ultram, etc) to help treat these disorders.

Until four months ago, I strictly followed my doctors' orders and allowed them to continue adjusting meds and dosages in an attempt to find the right "cocktail" to help me lead a stable life. When I finally gave up, I was taking 14 pills per day and my prescriptions totaled over $1600 per month.

In September, I said enough is enough and I stopped all those drugs, except a lower dosage of Wellbutrin and Adderall. I began smoking marijuana three or four times a week. Since then, I have not had a single panic attack, I am finally able to sleep soundly without nightmares, I don't constantly worry about everything, I went from severe depression with suicidal ideations to mild depression which is continuing to improve, and I no longer have to put up with side effects such as, insomnia, irritability, amenorrhea, anorgasmia, dry mouth, high blood sugar, loss of libido, headaches, bladder problems, constipation, loss of appetite, hypertension, nausea, involuntary muscle spasms, not to mention what all of those drugs were doing to my liver.

I think it is cruel that the leaders of America are denying people such as myself access to this life-saving treatment and threatening us with incarceration. We must put an end to this injustice!

I believe the government of the United States should allow more research on medical marijuana. The government keeps marijuana as a schedule 1 drug, meaning it has no accepted medical use. At the same time, marijuana is grown in Mississippi and sent to a select few people who are part of the government's own medical marijuana program. I would think that would make the U.S. government guilty of marijuana distribution under their own laws, but at the very least this policy is terribly hypocritical. How can marijuana have medical value for a few people but for everyone else, it is a dangerous drug? If Cannabis wasn't such a valuable agricultural resource that could replace the petroleum and timber/pulp paper industries, it would be a medicine by now. It's time for America to wake up and realize that the government has been lying about marijuana for over 70 years, and the war on drugs is a nightmare. Think about it.

Of course more research is necessary ...... its so obvious to the point where it not even necessary but should be allowed for use by the public. The United States is 200 years old and this plant has been used for thousands of years.

I would like to see some more Television coverage of Medical Marijuana and the tons of supporting evidence in the scientific community. Even on Obamas new interactive government sites Change.org and Change.com Legalizing Marijuana already was in the top citizen voted requests.

I am glad that you are asking this question. I think that this question is a no brainer for most but to answer your question I must pose a question to you and everyone else.

Do you think we should arrest sick and/or dying people who arent hurting anyone for using a substance that has not and cannot kill anyone?

or better yet...

If 11 or more asprin can kill you but it would take ingesting over 1 TON of Cannabis (obviously humanly impossible) then why shouldnt we at least allow for medical use of cannabis if or even recreational use for those who are 21 and older?

Both cigarette and alcohol use can also kill and both substances are available over the counter to adults but yet again cannabis use cannot kill however it is illegal.

It has been proven in many studies overseas to have great medical use in many fields. It would be a shame to not see the new administration ignore the facts after making such claims about using science to guide or government.

The challenge we face as a community is not answered with a simple yes or no. There is a paranoia due to the biggest obstacle which is the use of marijuana as a recreational drug. This confuses the issue.

Should more research be done? Yes
Is it cost effective for medical research companies? That is their decision.

I will say however, marijuana is not what it once was, the levels of THC are so much higher. People are being treated for marijuana abuse like never before. Ask Ricky Williams of the Miami Dolphins how easy it is to abstain!

My suspicion is that there is way more to the "NEED" to research than meets the eye!

Dan Callahan, LMSW
http://www.TheLastResortPa.com

I have Ankylosing Spondylitis and Fibromyalgia and am in pretty constant pain despite being on 8 different medications. I went to a Pain Specialist who put me on Fentanyl patches, which did nothing despite increasing the dosage 3 times. Now they want to put me on Methadone, but my PCP is concerned and feels I'd be better off using medical marijuana than ever increasing amounts of narcotic pain meds. Fortunately I live in Oregon, where medical marijuana is an option. For me it's considerably more effective than the narcotic pain meds I've been given. It helps me to be more functional, to be able to do some housework, go to church and actually sleep.

To me the only reason marijuana is illegal is a political one. With all the uses for hemp (paper, cloth, oils), and the medicinal qualities of marijuana, it ludicrous that we can't take advantage of this God given plant..

It's absurd to disallow research on this plant. There's a huge different between drug dealers and recreation usage, which is what I understand the DEA is meant for, and research into using the plant as a medicine.

It's insane to treat them both the same.

The fact that one of the top issues voted on both instances change.gov was open to questions was related to marijuana reform would seem to indicates some action needs to be taken. The war on drugs has failed and evolved to a war on citizens. Regardless of ones position on legalization a few approach must be taken. Albert Einstein once said “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”. My most sincere plead to the Obama administration is to stop the war on the disenfranchised; be it the poor, minorities, homosexual, addicts, whatever has driven them to feel like second class citizens is a real issue that needs to be addressed. Let all of us participate and be a part of the solution.

I agree with "some doctors" who say it is beneficial medicinally for said ailments and many others.
Any person or organization interested in the welfare of others would certainly approve studies aimed at such, especially studies of our natural world.
This seems elementary and the fact that someone would go to such lengths to prohibit a good cause speaks great volumes.
Thank you for the informative blog and your interest in a long-neglected issue.

The DEA has a death grip on marijuana and is effectively blocking scientific inquiry. There is only one federal study being done–one in the entire country–and it has been closed to new applicants since 1992. There are five patients still involved in this study– the Investigational New Drug, or IND study. Irv Rosenfeld is one of the patients in this IND study. Every month, the federal government sends Irv 300 marijuana cigarettes—government rolled joints. Irv can smoke ten joints a day and has been legally doing so for over 20 years. In all that time the federal government never once asked Irv how he's doing. It fell to a private organization, Patients Out of Time, to gather Irv and the other patients together and study them. They subjected these patients to IQ tests, psychological exams, x-rays, lab work, MRIs, pulmonary function tests, etc. Except for minor pulmonary changes, which they attribute to the poor quality of the federal government’s marijuana, they are all doing fine. Their conditions are under control and marijuana is the only medicine they are using.

It is a disgrace that the federal government is prohibiting independent research on medical marijuana. They are well aware that the results of this research will show, like the Patients Out of Time study shows, that marijuana is a safe and effective therapeutic agent for a wide variety of medical conditions and symptoms.

Of course they should!

Cannabinoids have been found to actually kill cancer cells.

Obviously there is so much potential for cannabis. It would be insane, and truly sad not to research it because some racism and fear-mongering in the 1930's led to the illegality of this amazing 'wonder-drug'.

There's only one reason why marijuana's been prohibited so long, that's because the violence it generates isn't committed in this country. Everyone, and I mean *everyone* thinks marijuana's such a non-issue, kids smoke it, police make arrests, sometimes people get arrested for trafficking. It's not like the alcohol prohibition when Al Capone and his gangsters left bodies in the streets and the violence was so great that the country demanded the prohibition be ended. This time is different; no bodies in the streets this time, right?

Wrong. The ONLY difference this time is the murders are committed in Mexico and the bodies are lying in Mexican streets. The Mexican Drug Cartels murdered more than 5,700 people last year to send the government a message to leave their operations alone. That's 5,700 fathers, mothers and children murdered, beheaded and soaked in baths of acid in order to protect the Cartel's incomes from selling marijuana into the U.S. This year it's predicted an even greater number of people will be killed.

Whatever good reason there is to have the prohibition it ISN'T worth the lives of these people. License reputable businesses to legally produce and sell marijuana to adults!

My poor mother would have benefitted from marijuana the last few years of her life as she was bed-ridden with multiple, major issues and had glaucoma (though it's doubtful she would have as she never smoke or drank anything in her life). If there are medical benefits, the government should not be trying to deny patients from benefitting.

It's strange that (1) the government keeps alcohol legal, despite the fact alcohol is responsible for more deaths on the highway and costs related to healthcare than all other drugs combined, and marijuana is illegal (2) politicians are reluctant to ease restrictions on marijuana for fear of being stereotyped as 'soft on drugs,' despite the distorted logic of classifying marijuana with other harsher drugs (isn't that akin to 'grouping' a bubblegum thief and a mass murderer under the same title of 'criminal?') That simply does not make sense (3) 600K (?) arrests per year on possession charges, yet we have prison overcrowding, resulting in release of more violent criminals to make way for those arrested for possession, etc etc etc . . . and the beat goes on . . . .

Even if this is the most evil, dangerous drug out there (which I doubt), wouldn't it be a GOOD THING to investigate and sceintifically document it? Regardless of one's view of consumption safety, the research must be done so those very views can be properly informed. If academic research is monopolized by government allowances, then where does common-place research take place? Illegal drug farms, that's where! Who would you rather get your "facts" from???

as a chronic pain patient with a variety of conditions, like osteoporosis (have broken many many bones, including spinal fractures that are excrutiating), allergies to all opiates, intolerant to NSAIDS, glaucoma, Pot holds the promise of a means of me having a productive life.....I cannot hardly move dueto pain, I am disabled and in low 60's in age and not ready to give up. Suicide has been an option that I do not wish. Can anyone imagine the box I am in.....I am also allergic to most antibiotics, IVIgG caused a near fatal allergic reaction, I am back on extremely high dose prednisone just to survive. People who do not suffer cannot understand the devastation of unremitting handicap, uselessness, and pain. and the personal destruction it causes in families. Gov't decides on my quality of life or forces me into bad decision and illegality......My God, is there no mercy or understanding in these arrogant idiots.

Yes, unbiased research should be done.

Elizabeth, I agree with you. In my opinion, one reason why the Bush administration is so against medicinal marijuana is because they are an antiquated bunch. Once they are off to greener pastures (dead), I could see research begin with little opposition. Another reason, IMO, is that the drug companies wouldn't be making much money if it were something that could just be grown from Mother Earth. I've seen cancer patients that benefit from the "munchies" and eat shortly after a chemo treatment.

In her 2007 ruling, Drug Enforcement Administration law judge Mary Ellen Bittner determined that the private manufacturing of cannabis by the University of Massachusetts is "in the public interest" because there is "currently an inadequate supply of marijuana available for research purposes."

How ironic. While pot is only a phone call away for America's teenagers, it remains out of reach for those qualified researchers who wish to study its therapeutic utility in clinical trials.

Meanwhile, investigators in Europe - where the private production of medical-grade cannabis is less restricted - are developing various cannabis-based drugs to treat debilitating conditions like multiple sclerosis and chronic pain. One such drug - a cannabis plant-based extract known as Sativex - is already legal by prescription in Canada, Spain and in the United Kingdom.

The DEA's rejection of Judge Bittner's decision clearly puts politics and ideology before science. President Obama has pledged to end this practice. He can start here.

Paul Armentano
Deputy Director
NORML | NORML Foundation
Washington, DC

Note: Mr. Armentano is the author of book, "Emerging Clinical Applications For Cannabis & Cannabinoids: A Review of the Recent Scientific Literature, 2000 — 2009." He is a former consultant to GW Pharmaceuticals, manufacturers of Sativex.

After more than 17,000 research projects, over 200 medical applications, the LaGuardia report, the Schaffer Commission, over 70 international, national, state and local medical organizations which have asked for immediate legal access and/or further research, how
can you ask such a question? How much more research is needed?

Recent trials in Italy have shown that marijuana is effective in the treatment of MSRA, (the flesh-eating disease), which kills more people in the US than hiv/aids. How can we ignore this?

A person should ask, why does a government, "for the people, by the people", deny "the people" the possibility of medical advancements that would improve the quality of life, not only for Americans, but for the world?

"Should the government allow more research on medical marijuana?" We have been researching marijuana since the 1950's.
We have learned a great deal about this ancient medicine. It's time for human trials. It's time for application. It's time for change.

YES, it's time for a scientific approach to this problem. Stop arresting sick and dying people

The jury is not out. The jury has been in for 5000 years.
Cannabis is the safest of all drugs even aspirin is far more dangerous to people and aspirin can be found in every medicine cabinet in the country. Cannabis should be in the medicine cabinet too and should be legalized and regulated in its use just like Alcohol is.

Regardless of the law Cannabis will be used.

"Should the government allow more research on medical marijuana?"

What a ridiculous question! How could the answer possibly be "no!"? The comments here have been in the affirmative, without a single contrary response.

For what kind of defense could a "no!" elicit? "Marijuana is terribly bad, so terribly bad that to study how terribly bad it is would be far too terrible!" How can something be so dangerous that it is better to not know exactly how dangerous it is?

If cannabis did not exist and then one day, researchers emerging from the deepest jungles of the Amazon discovered cannabis, not only would the government encourage the research, but the discoveries that research unlocks would bring more funding and a declaration that these researchers had discovered the miracle plant! It can feed you, clothe you, house you, treat your illnesses, expand your mind, and provide all the fuel oil you need, Mr. President! Send more researchers!

Instead we debate whether we can even talk about considering perhaps studying maybe if it someday could possibly be used in very limited medical situations involving very few people with only the most devastating of conditions. All because a few uptight people are afraid letting cancer patients smoke a doobie after chemo will lead our nation's teenagers over the abyss into a Cheech & Chong lifestyle that will eventually lead to heroin.

I have personally seen too many medical marijuana patients to count, all of whom live fuller more productive lives, with less reliance on dangerous toxic pharmaceuticals, because of cannabis. I'm way past studies; I've seen the proof with my own two eyes.

It will be nice when the scientific and medical community catches us to the people on this issue.

"Radical" Russ Belville
Associate Director – Oregon NORML
Host – NORML Daily Audio Stash
Host – The Russ Belville Show on XM Satellite Radio

The kids and adults that use marijuana will continue to use it, so why not just legalize. The nurses, dentists, postmen, and accountants , not to mention all the social security recipients, will then be taxed, do you have any idea how much $$$ would be generated, but the govt. will continue to pander to big pharma, and the dealers will continue to make the big $$$$.

"Should the government allow research on medical marijuana?"

Since when should the government allow or disallow research on any potential pharmaceutical product?

We have safeguards in place already.

Clinical research includes assessments of risks as well as benefits. Labeling is one of the chief concerns when any new product is introduced. There are processes in place that protect human subjects in clinical research. That's as far as government regulation should go.

If we treated all psychotropic substances the way we do marijuana, our pharmacy shelves would quickly be depleted.

The government needs to get out of the way of industry innovation.

Our absurd Drug Policy in this country is rooted in PROFIT and dictated behind often pseudo-scientific fear mongering. Illicit drugs, whether it be a soft drug like marijuana or a "hard" drug like heroin, create law enforcement jobs, cottage industries (for everything from drug sniffing dogs to hi-tech detection equipment) and a for profit prison system that often looks the other way on basic humane treatment in favor of meeting the bottom line.

This is because of a simple equation:

Illegal Recreational Drugs = Highly Profitable, Hi-Growth Black Market Industry.

Because of the enormous amounts of wealth in the illegal drug industry (that some believe is among the 5 largest industries in America – legit or not), Illegal Drug Trade Kingpins defend themselves through deadly force. This violence carries over to the streets where small time dealers seek the American dream in the highly profitable, high-reward Illicit Drug Trade.

We are either the most ignorant country on the planet or our eyes are largely closed to the truth.

Connect the dots and the inescapable conclusion is the War on Drugs has been an abysmal and COSTLY failure. It needs to end.

Legalize, Regulate and TAX. Let a legal free market set prices and most of all END THE VIOLENCE as a result.

Dr Gupta I would like to comment on the use of "pot". I am a 67 year old X employer of many young men . In my years I have found that beer and hard booze was much more detramental to my employees than the use of "pot" I found that employees who drank booze on a regular basis had more family violence than my employees who smoked pot .The people who smoked "pot" had a much more happy and loving interaction with there wife and family , And the most important thing is they were allways at work on time. Sometimes I wonder why this mellowing drug is banned and the other, booze that brings violence to many families is okay.

we can blame racism and william randolph hearst for our draconian marijuana laws, but this country will fold before we admit that it has any medicinal value.

"sean in santa rosa"

I am a psychiatrist who has spent most of his career in public mental health administration. I have served as a senior faculty member at several medical schools, and have always been active in some form of research. There is no question but that medical and basic science research with cannabis should proceed, and with government support. But the point of further research with cannabis should not be simply to justify re-scheduling or de-scheduling the substance; we have more than enough data for that already. Research of at least two general types needs to be done.

One type of research should attempt to correlate medical benefits with specific composition and/or strain; several writers here have mentioned this issue. Two examples of work along these lines include: (1) GW Pharmaceutical, a British company, with its high-end medicinal cannabis extracts currently standardized to THC:CBD ratio (they have developed a number of them, and are trying to get the first, Sativex, approved by the FDA currently), and (2) the cruder, down-and-dirty work of the Corrals at WAMM in northern California, who kept records of the reports of their medicinal cannabis consumer members in order to determine patient needs and plan their cultivation efforts. The Corrals’ work was important, and the federal government rewarded them for it by raiding their community and destroying their medicinal plants. These two types of research, while different in sophistication and precision, are similar in that they both attempt to answer questions about what types of cannabis—in terms of strain or composition—are best for which clinical problems. When Sativex is eventually approved by the FDA, it will have succeeded only at the expense of criminalizing Americans for attempting something similar in a more “homegrown” fashion.

A second type of research that needs to be done is naturalistic, population-based, and public-health-oriented. Actually, the WAMM work fits this model because the Corrals attempted to answer questions using naturalistic, real-world methods; that is, their members used the medicine and they gathered data in the context of that medicinal usage. The research did not use laboratory-based scientific controls or exclusion criteria for subjects. But that is not necessarily a limitation; real-world research can often be more useful and informative than clinical trials conducted using short-term, tightly controlled regulatory models (as required by the FDA). But beyond strictly clinical questions, there is much research to be done to find out what happens to population-based health indices when cannabis is legitimately accessible in the society. Mr. Christenson’s entry here is a case in point, and I believe his observations are on the money. Despite all the hype about cannabis and schizophrenia, as best I can tell alcohol has done vastly more mental, as well as physical, health damage to individuals among the many psychiatric patients that I have seen and continue to see day in and day out. With cannabis legitimately accessible, for medical or for general personal use, I would expect to see the incidence of alcohol-related problems decrease, as I have met many individuals who use alcohol rather than marijuana only because of the legal issue—not out of preference.

The late California psychiatrist Tod Mikuriya, M.D. (with whom Mr. Gieringer, who made an entry on this site, collaborated) was a pioneer in extending medical recommendations for cannabis use beyond the most common indications of nausea, appetite stimulation, pain, and inflammatory medical conditions, to more controversial indications such as the anxiety symptoms of PTSD, the mood instability of bipolar disorder, insomnia in a variety of conditions, and importantly as a harm-reduction substitution intervention for individuals with alcohol dependence (and a much smaller number with opiate dependence). Dr. Mikuriya was able to do this because the California medical cannabis law allows for broad physician discretion, in contrast to most if not all of the other state medical cannabis laws; in my view that makes California’s law by far the best. I mention Dr. Tod’s work because his recommendation of cannabis as a medically-reasonable (and in many cases preferable) alternative to alcohol is in fact the point at which medical application intersects public health. Making cannabis legitimately accessible in the population as a whole would very likely be a constructive public health intervention due to the likely reduction in alcohol-related problems alone, not to mention the public health benefits of decriminalization (i.e., fewer criminal records, disruption of families, etc.). This realization has in fact been the basis of the SAFER movement in Colorado, that led to the passage of a decriminalization initiative in Denver in November 2005 and got 40% of the vote with a similar statewide initiative in 2006.

It should be obvious that the implication of the above is that cannabis usage should be recognized as legitimate and taxed as an age-restricted, over-the-counter herbal remedy. How can anyone argue otherwise, given our current economic environment? At minimum, cannabis taxation would bring $15 billion annually into the economy, and with any legitimate development of the industry at all, probably at least double that amount.

By the way, my view of the Michael Phelps discussion: It is moralizing hysteria. I do not know Phelps, but on the face of it, going from getting a DUI at the age of 19 to being photographed using marijuana is a step up, not a step down! It involves breaking fewer laws, less medical risk, and less risk to others. The “Oh-for-shame-let’s-criminalize-him crowd” reveal to the rest of us that they have not yet crossed over into the 21st century.

Christopher Glenn Fichtner, M.D.

I think the most important element to consider here is that many people (especially young people) are not equipped to make sound, rational judgments concerning their own drug use – even if that drug is marijuana. Marijuana IS a gateway drug – not for everyone, but for enough people to where we should consider it dangerous and support those drug treatment programs that provide care for the condition.

Glenn

http://www.rehabinfo.net/

Glen,

The term 'gateway drug' is absurd. As science is discovering, addiction is something that people are likely born with genetic predisposition to. I was a binge drinker in my youth. It was the first 'drug' I eve tried, and it got me into more trouble than pot could ever do. I haven't drank in over two years and use pot recreationally and have used it medicinally to treat nerve pain that I have. Of course teeners ren't equipped to make the est decision regarding the use of any substance, but we may want to look to the dangers of alcohol before we continue this inane policy on pot.

Of course, the aspect that substance abuse councilors ALWAYS prefer to look past is that illicit drug trade and use has chiefly caused the rise in gang violence and organized crime. How do we reverse that? We end drug prohibition, an put the gangs ad kingpins out of business.

Wouldn't it be even better Glenn, to prevent kids from being able access marijuana in the first place? I mean that's what the prohibition's supposed to be for and I know you support it!

The problem with the prohibition is that it doesn't stop people from buying marijuana and nor does it stop other people from selling it. If it did then we wouldn't have a problem. But here we are, seventy years after the start of the prohibition and today we have 15 million regular marijuana smokers, and every single DAY 6,000 people use marijuana for the first time – that's over two million new users every year!!

As a parent, results like these just aren't good enough! I'm not going to support any policy that's allowed over 100 million people to obtain and consume marijuana during its lifetime. What madness is that!!

We need to underprice the drug dealers with marijuana that's legally grown and sold to adults. That one change will strip all the drug dealer's customers from them and permanently drive them from our streets.

If we want to keep marijuana away from kids then we need to support its lawful sale to adults!

Note to Glenn Dorsey,

Just FYI, one of the original reasons that marijuana was outlawed was the fear that heroin addiction would lead to the use of marijuana - exactly backwards from the current nonsense you picked up.

During the hearings for the Marihuana Tax Act in 1937, Harry Anslinger, the head of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics was asked specifically if there was any connection between marijuana and heroin. He replied that there was no connection at all – they were used by two different classes of people who didn't associate with each other.
You can find the full text of his testimony at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/taxact/taxact.htm

In 1951, the story changed, Anslinger was up before Congress asking for more money to enforce the marijuana laws. Unfortunately for him, just before he testified, the head of the Federal addiction research program testified that they knew for certain that all of the reasons given to outlaw marijuana in 1937 were completely wrong. Marijuana didn't do any of the things that had been alleged in 1937.

Anslinger was left with no excuse for his call for more money to enforce the marijuana laws so he made up the idea that marijuana is the certain stepping stone to heroin. In doing so, he contradicted all the research, as well as his own testimony from 1937. Regardless, it has been the basis of US marijuana policy ever since.

You can read the full history of the gateway myth at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/gateway_myth.htm

More importantly, more recent research shows that marijuana actually helps people get off of harder drugs. It provides the anxiety relief they are seeking without screwing them up so bad they can't function.

Cliff,

I would echo your salient points and add that most despicable about that 1937 campaign to make pot illegal was a campaign to misinform and scare the public. The government funded propaganda, which would be unthinkable today was conducted with outright lies rooted in unabashed bigotry, racism and xenophobia.

If pot had never been made illegal (as no drug should be), then of alcohol, nicotine and marijuana, the last one we'd be talking about cracking down on would be marijuana. In fact, if modern America didn't have such a distorted image of the truth about pot, and was able to compare and contrast the effects of the Big Three vices – I truly believe marijuana would be the dominant industry. Which brings me to an oft-forgotten but crucial point – the alcohol lobby can not be left out of the discussion of decriminalization and legalization of pot. Why? Because if they aren't ultimately included in the business plan they know that future profits are in jeopardy to the a far superior and safer social intoxicant than alcohol who's effects are more than well-documented and nearly the polar opposite of THC.