DEA reasoning for no reclassification - Cannabis Law and Politics - International Cannagraphic Magazine Forums

jump /injack · 08-12-2016, 08:20 PM

Good articles at Leafly.com periodically and a gold mine of information on various strains and its attributes when used for pain alleviation instead of using opiates. there is a problem with cannabis that it might be mis-classified and should be called an herb [it already is know as such] or botanical, something we see being done daily in our National politics and so get easily shelved by using "1984" double speak and getting away with it; targeted voting for pro cannabis would be a start.

"Colorado attorney and inaugural member of the Marijuana Policy Advisory Committee Robert Hoban explains why: “The term 'medicinal' is problematic because it carries with it the connotation that is often confused with FDA approval or pharmacological recognition. This term has consumer, patient, and legal significance beyond cannabis. And it will be difficult for mainstream health care to grasp or recognize this accordingly.”

Hoban believes we should replace the word “medicinal” with a term that more accurately describes whole-plant cannabis — e.g. “herbal” or “botanical.” This, in turn, could inspire more intelligent policy while eliminating confusion among “mainstream health care, science, policymakers, and patients.”

It would be funny if just by calling cannabis an herb that it could be re-classified same as thyme or basil.

Here’s Why the DEA Will Never Reschedule Cannabis
By Jeremy Kossen — 8/11/2016

“Marijuana in its natural form is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man.” — Hon. Francis Young (deceased), DEA Administrative Law Judge, 1988

After nearly a century of “reefer-madness”-inspired paternalistic federal obstructionism, the Drug Enforcement Agency’s announcement that it won’t reschedule cannabis should come as no surprise. Predictably, the agency announced plans on Thursday to make research easier by ending the federal government’s monopoly on research-grade marijuana production.

The DEA, Food & Drug Administration, and Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) — “The Triad” — acknowledge cannabis contains constituents that, when used independently, or synergistically, can provide significant therapeutic benefits. However, they contend that a plant-based medicine of variable chemical composition that can be smoked (but, doesn’t have to be), can’t be medicine. (Millions of patients and their physicians, of course, disagree.)

BREAKING: Outrage Follows DEA Refusal to Reschedule Cannabis
How can the DEA justify its decision?

The DEA can classify a drug Schedule I if it meets (any of) the following criteria:

No currently accepted medical use;
Lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision;
High abuse potential

Common sense (and science) tell us none of these apply to cannabis. In fact, it wasn’t long ago — Sept. 6, 1988 — that one of the DEA’s own administrative judges concurred. In what should have been a landmark decision, the now deceased Hon. Francis Young, ruled (emphasis mine):

"[The evidence] clearly shows that marijuana has been accepted as capable of relieving the distress of great numbers of very ill people. ... It would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious for DEA to continue to stand between those sufferers and the benefits of this substance.”

Brookings Institute Report Denounces War on Drugs

Young continued, “The record here establishes conclusively that at least 'a respectable minority' of physicians has 'accepted' marijuana as having a 'medical use in treatment in the United States.' That the others may not, makes no difference. ... Nothing more can reasonably be required.”

The judge concluded that there’s “no lack of accepted safety for [the] use of [cannabis] under medical supervision and that it may lawfully be transferred from Schedule I to Schedule II."

After rejecting Young’s ruling, the DEA revised internal guidelines on what constitutes “accepted medical use,” implementing an eight-factor analysis.
What is “accepted medical use?”

The DEA narrowly defines “accepted medical use.” Among other requirements, the drug's chemistry must be known and reproducible, and have an “adequate” number of “gold standard,” human-controlled trials.

“Gold standard” research doesn’t exist because, ipso facto, government policy obstructs research. It took years for the first-ever whole-plant cannabis study — Dr. Sue Sisley and the MAPS Foundation’s PTSD study — to get approved.

(Notably, since 1999 the federal government has held a patent on cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants, claiming, “cannabinoids [are] useful in the treatment...of a wide variety of oxidation associated diseases.”)

How GW Pharma Could Use U.S. Patents to Shape the Future of Medical Cannabis
What is “accepted safety for use under medical supervision?”

The DEA points to the fact there aren't any FDA-approved botanical cannabis products and thus no accepted safety standards. Big surprise! The government has long impeded research — a point they’ve (indirectly) acknowledged with today’s announcement.
What constitutes “high potential for abuse?”

The litmus test: Are people using the substance for non-medicinal purposes? News flash: Numerous scheduled drugs are diverted to non-medicinal use (see below). Notably, only 9 percent of people who try marijuana develop a use disorder. Alcohol clocks in at 15 percent, while nicotine takes the cake at 33 percent.

Here’s Why Cannabis Legalization Doesn’t Lead to Higher Teen Use Rates

Technically, the risk for psychological and physical dependence should decrease as you work your way down the schedules. But, the government applies this rule haphazardly, with more dangerous drugs appearing on lower schedules:

Opioids appear on four out of five schedules. From 1999 to 2014, more than 165,000 people died in the U.S. from overdoses related to prescription opioids. During the same period, there were no reported fatal overdoses from cannabis.
Schedule IV drugs, including Xanax, Soma, Klonopin, and Valium, were involved in 30 percent of fatal drug overdoses. To put that in perspective, at 3.07 deaths per 100,000 people, the rate of fatal benzodiazepine-related overdoses is 50 percent higher than the homicide rate of many large cities. (The eighth-largest city, San Diego, has a homicide rate of 2.4 / 100,000.)

And, I kid you not…

“Crack,” “Crank,” “Ice,” “Meth,” and “Speed” (they literally list those names) are technically Schedule II drugs. And LSD precursor and hallucinogenic — LSA — is Schedule III.

Further, federal officials don’t consider that by expanding access to cannabis, we can reduce abuse of more dangerous drugs like opioids and alcohol. States passing medical marijuana laws experienced a 25-percent drop in fatal opioid overdoses. Similarly, studies suggest that when states enact medical marijuana laws, they experience a significant decline in alcohol consumption and suicide rates. On average, suicide rates for 20 to 29-year-old males decrease 11 percent, while rates for 30 to 39 year olds drop 9 percent.

Prescription Drug Use Falls in Medical Cannabis States
We Need to Rethink Scheduling

Restricting cannabis as a Schedule I drug is morally indefensible. It’s time to rethink the lack of wisdom of our scheduling system. As I argue in my forthcoming book, Schedule ZERO: The Case for Rethinking Cannabis and Scheduling, we need to create a system that addresses the (legitimate) concerns of critics while recognizing the very real needs of patients.

Research and common sense suggest cannabis is safer than alcohol and many other drugs — while also providing tremendous therapeutic value. But our politically — not scientifically — driven scheduling scheme has failed.

Colorado attorney and inaugural member of the Marijuana Policy Advisory Committee Robert Hoban explains why: “The term 'medicinal' is problematic because it carries with it the connotation that is often confused with FDA approval or pharmacological recognition. This term has consumer, patient, and legal significance beyond cannabis. And it will be difficult for mainstream health care to grasp or recognize this accordingly.”

Hoban believes we should replace the word “medicinal” with a term that more accurately describes whole-plant cannabis — e.g. “herbal” or “botanical.” This, in turn, could inspire more intelligent policy while eliminating confusion among “mainstream health care, science, policymakers, and patients.”

The decades-long issues we’ve had accurately recognizing (and appreciating) cannabis for its impressive therapeutic versatility are not serving the public interest. Until we rethink our antiquated scheduling system, we will continue to impede scientific progress. At the end of the day, it’s patients who needlessly suffer.

aridbud · 08-13-2016, 04:26 AM

I signed a petition earlier this week which I received from Drug Policy Alliance.

Here's the response from my congress person regarding the electronic signing:

August 12, 2016

Dear *****,

Thank you for contacting me about marijuana policy. I appreciate knowing your thoughts on this important issue.

I support reforming our marijuana laws. In fact, I am a cosponsor and strong supporter of the CARERS Act (H.R. 1538). The bill would 1) allow VA doctors to recommend medical marijuana; 2) allow states to set their own medical marijuana policies and eliminate federal prosecution of patients, providers, and businesses in states with medical marijuana programs; and 3) reschedule marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule II, recognizing legitimate medical use.

We need to close the disparity between state and federal government marijuana laws, and protect states that have moved forward to protect patients. I support the rights of states to allow for medical marijuana, and I believe that the [state]medical marijuana system can be used as a model in other parts of the country. I will continue working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle on this issue.

It is my honor to serve the 1st Congressional District of [state]. Your thoughts and comments on this and other issues are important to my work in Congress. Thank you for taking the time to share your views with me. I encourage you to visit my website, www.**************.house.gov, where you can find updates on my work in Congress and sign up for my e-newsletter. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can assist you in any way.

I'll keep making my voice heard, even if only signing petitions and voting for those in favor of change! Never thought medical marijuana would be available, nor the states that have legalized. Instead of gripe, contact those who favor and support legitimate issues regarding reform!

yesum · 08-13-2016, 05:08 AM

DEA reasoning for no reclassification: 'Baby needs a new pair of shoes'.

punkenstien · 08-13-2016, 07:29 PM

DEA reson for not reclassifying= Payoff from big pharma finally cleared

MJPassion · 08-13-2016, 08:41 PM

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

_tessarecting · 08-13-2016, 08:45 PM

fuck the DEA

jump /injack · 08-13-2016, 10:26 PM

Signing petitions work, the people who sign petitions also vote and the politicians know it. That 15% tax bill [ca.] was killed in committee that was put up for this coming November vote in California and there was a petition online at NORML the cannabis herb organization. This November the Bill to Legalize cannabis is on the ballot and there is so much wrong with it Medical Users would have to be crazy to vote for it and if I had any thing to do with the business of cannabis I'd put a lot of thought to not voting for it.

08-12-2016, 08:20 PM	#1
jump /injack Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 994	DEA reasoning for no reclassification Good articles at Leafly.com periodically and a gold mine of information on various strains and its attributes when used for pain alleviation instead of using opiates. there is a problem with cannabis that it might be mis-classified and should be called an herb [it already is know as such] or botanical, something we see being done daily in our National politics and so get easily shelved by using "1984" double speak and getting away with it; targeted voting for pro cannabis would be a start. "Colorado attorney and inaugural member of the Marijuana Policy Advisory Committee Robert Hoban explains why: “The term 'medicinal' is problematic because it carries with it the connotation that is often confused with FDA approval or pharmacological recognition. This term has consumer, patient, and legal significance beyond cannabis. And it will be difficult for mainstream health care to grasp or recognize this accordingly.” Hoban believes we should replace the word “medicinal” with a term that more accurately describes whole-plant cannabis — e.g. “herbal” or “botanical.” This, in turn, could inspire more intelligent policy while eliminating confusion among “mainstream health care, science, policymakers, and patients.” It would be funny if just by calling cannabis an herb that it could be re-classified same as thyme or basil. Here’s Why the DEA Will Never Reschedule Cannabis By Jeremy Kossen — 8/11/2016 “Marijuana in its natural form is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man.” — Hon. Francis Young (deceased), DEA Administrative Law Judge, 1988 After nearly a century of “reefer-madness”-inspired paternalistic federal obstructionism, the Drug Enforcement Agency’s announcement that it won’t reschedule cannabis should come as no surprise. Predictably, the agency announced plans on Thursday to make research easier by ending the federal government’s monopoly on research-grade marijuana production. The DEA, Food & Drug Administration, and Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) — “The Triad” — acknowledge cannabis contains constituents that, when used independently, or synergistically, can provide significant therapeutic benefits. However, they contend that a plant-based medicine of variable chemical composition that can be smoked (but, doesn’t have to be), can’t be medicine. (Millions of patients and their physicians, of course, disagree.) BREAKING: Outrage Follows DEA Refusal to Reschedule Cannabis How can the DEA justify its decision? The DEA can classify a drug Schedule I if it meets (any of) the following criteria: No currently accepted medical use; Lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision; High abuse potential Common sense (and science) tell us none of these apply to cannabis. In fact, it wasn’t long ago — Sept. 6, 1988 — that one of the DEA’s own administrative judges concurred. In what should have been a landmark decision, the now deceased Hon. Francis Young, ruled (emphasis mine): "[The evidence] clearly shows that marijuana has been accepted as capable of relieving the distress of great numbers of very ill people. ... It would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious for DEA to continue to stand between those sufferers and the benefits of this substance.” Brookings Institute Report Denounces War on Drugs Young continued, “The record here establishes conclusively that at least 'a respectable minority' of physicians has 'accepted' marijuana as having a 'medical use in treatment in the United States.' That the others may not, makes no difference. ... Nothing more can reasonably be required.” The judge concluded that there’s “no lack of accepted safety for [the] use of [cannabis] under medical supervision and that it may lawfully be transferred from Schedule I to Schedule II." After rejecting Young’s ruling, the DEA revised internal guidelines on what constitutes “accepted medical use,” implementing an eight-factor analysis. What is “accepted medical use?” The DEA narrowly defines “accepted medical use.” Among other requirements, the drug's chemistry must be known and reproducible, and have an “adequate” number of “gold standard,” human-controlled trials. “Gold standard” research doesn’t exist because, ipso facto, government policy obstructs research. It took years for the first-ever whole-plant cannabis study — Dr. Sue Sisley and the MAPS Foundation’s PTSD study — to get approved. (Notably, since 1999 the federal government has held a patent on cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants, claiming, “cannabinoids [are] useful in the treatment...of a wide variety of oxidation associated diseases.”) How GW Pharma Could Use U.S. Patents to Shape the Future of Medical Cannabis What is “accepted safety for use under medical supervision?” The DEA points to the fact there aren't any FDA-approved botanical cannabis products and thus no accepted safety standards. Big surprise! The government has long impeded research — a point they’ve (indirectly) acknowledged with today’s announcement. What constitutes “high potential for abuse?” The litmus test: Are people using the substance for non-medicinal purposes? News flash: Numerous scheduled drugs are diverted to non-medicinal use (see below). Notably, only 9 percent of people who try marijuana develop a use disorder. Alcohol clocks in at 15 percent, while nicotine takes the cake at 33 percent. Here’s Why Cannabis Legalization Doesn’t Lead to Higher Teen Use Rates Technically, the risk for psychological and physical dependence should decrease as you work your way down the schedules. But, the government applies this rule haphazardly, with more dangerous drugs appearing on lower schedules: Opioids appear on four out of five schedules. From 1999 to 2014, more than 165,000 people died in the U.S. from overdoses related to prescription opioids. During the same period, there were no reported fatal overdoses from cannabis. Schedule IV drugs, including Xanax, Soma, Klonopin, and Valium, were involved in 30 percent of fatal drug overdoses. To put that in perspective, at 3.07 deaths per 100,000 people, the rate of fatal benzodiazepine-related overdoses is 50 percent higher than the homicide rate of many large cities. (The eighth-largest city, San Diego, has a homicide rate of 2.4 / 100,000.) And, I kid you not… “Crack,” “Crank,” “Ice,” “Meth,” and “Speed” (they literally list those names) are technically Schedule II drugs. And LSD precursor and hallucinogenic — LSA — is Schedule III. Further, federal officials don’t consider that by expanding access to cannabis, we can reduce abuse of more dangerous drugs like opioids and alcohol. States passing medical marijuana laws experienced a 25-percent drop in fatal opioid overdoses. Similarly, studies suggest that when states enact medical marijuana laws, they experience a significant decline in alcohol consumption and suicide rates. On average, suicide rates for 20 to 29-year-old males decrease 11 percent, while rates for 30 to 39 year olds drop 9 percent. Prescription Drug Use Falls in Medical Cannabis States We Need to Rethink Scheduling Restricting cannabis as a Schedule I drug is morally indefensible. It’s time to rethink the lack of wisdom of our scheduling system. As I argue in my forthcoming book, Schedule ZERO: The Case for Rethinking Cannabis and Scheduling, we need to create a system that addresses the (legitimate) concerns of critics while recognizing the very real needs of patients. Research and common sense suggest cannabis is safer than alcohol and many other drugs — while also providing tremendous therapeutic value. But our politically — not scientifically — driven scheduling scheme has failed. Colorado attorney and inaugural member of the Marijuana Policy Advisory Committee Robert Hoban explains why: “The term 'medicinal' is problematic because it carries with it the connotation that is often confused with FDA approval or pharmacological recognition. This term has consumer, patient, and legal significance beyond cannabis. And it will be difficult for mainstream health care to grasp or recognize this accordingly.” Hoban believes we should replace the word “medicinal” with a term that more accurately describes whole-plant cannabis — e.g. “herbal” or “botanical.” This, in turn, could inspire more intelligent policy while eliminating confusion among “mainstream health care, science, policymakers, and patients.” The decades-long issues we’ve had accurately recognizing (and appreciating) cannabis for its impressive therapeutic versatility are not serving the public interest. Until we rethink our antiquated scheduling system, we will continue to impede scientific progress. At the end of the day, it’s patients who needlessly suffer. Last edited by jump /injack; 08-12-2016 at 08:45 PM..
	Quote 1 members found this post helpful.

08-13-2016, 04:26 AM	#2
aridbud automeister Join Date: May 2013 Location: the best place on earth Posts: 5,589	I signed a petition earlier this week which I received from Drug Policy Alliance. Here's the response from my congress person regarding the electronic signing: August 12, 2016 Dear ***, Thank you for contacting me about marijuana policy. I appreciate knowing your thoughts on this important issue. I support reforming our marijuana laws. In fact, I am a cosponsor and strong supporter of the CARERS Act (H.R. 1538). The bill would 1) allow VA doctors to recommend medical marijuana; 2) allow states to set their own medical marijuana policies and eliminate federal prosecution of patients, providers, and businesses in states with medical marijuana programs; and 3) reschedule marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule II, recognizing legitimate medical use. We need to close the disparity between state and federal government marijuana laws, and protect states that have moved forward to protect patients. I support the rights of states to allow for medical marijuana, and I believe that the [state]medical marijuana system can be used as a model in other parts of the country. I will continue working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle on this issue. It is my honor to serve the 1st Congressional District of [state]. Your thoughts and comments on this and other issues are important to my work in Congress. Thank you for taking the time to share your views with me. I encourage you to visit my website, www.**********.house.gov, where you can find updates on my work in Congress and sign up for my e-newsletter. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can assist you in any way. I'll keep making my voice heard, even if only signing petitions and voting for those in favor of change! Never thought medical marijuana would be available, nor the states that have legalized. Instead of gripe, contact those who favor and support legitimate issues regarding reform! __________________ Seeds have the power to preserve species, to enhance cultural as well as genetic diversity, to counter economic monopoly and to check the advance of conformity on all its many fronts. Michael Pollan Happiness held is the seed; Happiness shared is the flower. John Harrigan Instant gratification takes too long. Carrie Fisher - RIP. afterthought autos** We are passionate breeders of unique quality cannabis autoflower hybrid seeds at down to earth prices; now 11 years running! https://www.icmag.com/ic/forumdisplay.php?f=65770
	Quote 2 members found this post helpful.

08-13-2016, 05:08 AM	#3
yesum IC Mag Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 3,397	DEA reasoning for no reclassification: 'Baby needs a new pair of shoes'.
	Quote 2 members found this post helpful.

08-13-2016, 07:29 PM	#4
punkenstien Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: Headed north to the promise land Posts: 89	DEA reson for not reclassifying= Payoff from big pharma finally cleared
	Quote 1 members found this post helpful.

08-13-2016, 08:41 PM	#5
MJPassion Observer Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: uni-verse Posts: 5,584	$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
	Quote

08-13-2016, 08:45 PM	#6
_tessarecting ஓ Join Date: May 2015 Posts: 3,852	fuck the DEA __________________
	Quote 1 members found this post helpful.

08-13-2016, 10:26 PM	#7
jump /injack Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 994	Signing petitions work, the people who sign petitions also vote and the politicians know it. That 15% tax bill [ca.] was killed in committee that was put up for this coming November vote in California and there was a petition online at NORML the cannabis herb organization. This November the Bill to Legalize cannabis is on the ballot and there is so much wrong with it Medical Users would have to be crazy to vote for it and if I had any thing to do with the business of cannabis I'd put a lot of thought to not voting for it.
	Quote