|
 Fractal420
Psycellium
 
Registered: 06/21/13
Posts: 5,913
Last seen: 11 months, 14 hours
|
 60 days to Save Delta8-THC (and possibly hemp)  1
#26909087 - 08/31/20 05:08 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Src= https://cannabusiness.law/dea-just-dropped-a-bomb-on-the-hemp-industry-part-2-delta-8-thc/
In a long-anticipated action, the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) issued an interim final rule (IFR) today on the implementation of the hemp provisions of the Agricultural Improvement Act of 2018 (Farm Bill) as it relates to marijuana and tetrahydrocannabinols (THC) under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). You can read the IFR by clicking here.
As I will discuss, the IFR threatens to destroy the hemp/CBD industry. Fortunately, it is not set in stone. You can submit comments on it through October 20, 2020 by clicking here and following the online instructions at that site for submitting comments. To ensure proper handling of comments, you should reference “RIN 1117- AB53/ Docket No. DEA-500” on all correspondence.
In this article, I discuss the IFR’s criminalization of synthetic forms of hemp-derived THC, including what is arguably the hottest new cannabinoid on the market, delta-8 THC.
I. INTRODUCTION
As most readers of this blog know, the DEA is the US federal agency charged with enforcing the CSA. Far from being even-handed, the DEA is the primary player and policy shaper in the notorious and failed “War on Drugs”, particularly with respect to cannabis. It has aggressively and persistently asserted itself into the hemp industry, despite the Farm Bill’s express removal of hemp, a lawful form of cannabis, from the CSA. The issuance of today’s IFR, which will be published in the Federal Register tomorrow (August 21, 2020) and is effective immediately, continues the DEA’s pattern of unwanted and aggressive interference with a lawful industry.
The IFR starts off by deceptively downplaying its intent: “This interim final rule merely conforms DEA’s regulations to the statutory amendments to the CSA that have already taken effect, and it does not add additional requirements to the regulations.” In fact, a careful reading of the IFR reveals its intent to be much different. It is not an overstatement to assert that adoption and enforcement of the IFR will severely disrupt, and potentially destroy, the hemp industry.
In this article, I discuss the DEA’s criminalization of delta-8 THC (D8), a relatively unknown cannabinoid derived from hemp that is quickly gaining in popularity. Even if you do not have much knowledge about D8, I hope you will not dismiss this issue since it is a particularly egregious example of overzealous regulation by the DEA that will continue to dog the entire hemp/CBD industry if it is allowed to persist.
II. THE DEA IS IMPROPERLY CRIMINALIZING DELTA-8 THC DERIVED FROM HEMP
My office receives calls about D8 every day. Of the minor cannabinoids, which include CBG, CBN, and CBC, D8 is rapidly moving into a major position. This is primarily due to the fact that it produces a psychoactive effect (ie, it gets you high) but is derived from lawful hemp. I recently posted a detailed description and legal analysis of D8, including a section on why the federal Analogue Act does not apply, which you can read by clicking here.
It is clear that D8 which is naturally expressed in the hemp plant is not a controlled substance. However, producing and marketing it currently presents a unique legal issue: what is the legal status of D8 that is derived from cannabidiol (CBD) or some other hemp-derived cannabinoid? This issue is important because most D8 on the market is a derivative of CBD. Current hemp cultivars do not express D8 in sufficient concentrations or quantities to be economically viable to extract it for commercial purposes. However, converting CBD into D8 can be profitable under the right circumstances. The IFR contains language which appears to be directed at this form of D8:
“The [2018 Farm Bill] does not impact the control status of synthetically derived tetrahydrocannabinols (for Controlled Substance Code Number 7370) because the statutory definition of “hemp” is limited to materials that are derived from the plant Cannabis sativa L. For synthetically derived tetrahydrocannabinols, the concentration of delta-9 THC is not a determining factor in whether the material is a controlled substance. All synthetically derived tetrahydrocannabinols remain schedule I controlled substances.” (emphasis added)
Based on this language, all cannabinoids that are derived from hemp with a delta-9 THC concentration not exceeding 0.3% are lawful. However, the Rule specifically states that any synthetically derived THC remains an illegal Schedule I controlled substance. This begs the question of what is meant by the term “synthetic”. According to Wikipedia, “a synthetic substance or synthetic compound refers to a substance that is man-made by synthesis, rather than being produced by nature. It also refers to a substance or compound formed under human control by any chemical reaction, either by chemical synthesis or by biosynthesis.” (emphasis added)
What this means is that D8 created by a chemical reaction (such as by converting CBD to D8 through the use of a catalyst) will likely be deemed by the DEA to be an illegal synthetic THC. Based on this position it is possible that the DEA will prosecute people and/or initiate civil forfeiture actions against people who are producing and/or selling D8.
The DEA has overstepped its bounds and misinterpreted the 2018 Farm Bill. Specifically, the 2018 Farm Bill includes hemp-derived “cannabinoids” and “derivatives” in its definition of “hemp”. In other words, cannabinoids and derivatives of hemp are themselves “hemp” under the statute. For this reason, a derivative of hemp-derived CBD is itself “hemp” under the statute. (I explain this in more detail in the article referenced above.)
Additionally, the DEA’s prohibition of “synthetic” THC is improper because the Farm Bill itself contemplates that synthetic cannabinoids will be exempt from the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). The Farm Bill expressly removes “derivatives” of hemp from the CSA. The Chemicool Dictionary defines a derivative as “a compound that can be imagined to arise or actually be synthesized from a parent compound by replacement of one atom with another atom or group of atoms.” Wikipedia defines a chemical derivative as “a compound that is derived from a similar compound by a chemical reaction.” In this context, a “synthetic” cannabinoid from hemp is the same thing as a “derivative” of hemp. Thus, stating that all synthesized THC is illegal, including D8 and other forms of THC that do not contain more than 0.3% delta-9 THC, is a direct contradiction of the statutory language in the 2018 Farm Bill, which expressly removes hemp derivatives from the CSA.
III. CONCLUSION
The issue of D8’s legal status is new, at least with respect to hemp. Additionally, while it has been known and researched for several decades, D8 is relatively new to consumers. My clients are reporting rapid growth and quick acceptance by the market. While the DEA’s position is not surprising, it is frustrating. For readers of my blog who are not interested in D8, this may appear to be a minor issue. However, it is a prime example of the DEA’s attempt to chip away at the significant progress that has been made with hemp and its cannabinoids during the past 5 years. I encourage you to comment on the link provided above and to reach out to your elected officials. While D8 may be totally unknown to most people, hemp is not. It is a popular issue with both Democrats and Republicans, and our leadership needs to understand that the DEA is threatening it
This link lets you comment on the issue
https://beta.regulations.gov/document/DEA-2020-0023-0001
Comment and support D8 legality in all 50 states
--------------------
Dreaming of That face again.
It's bright and blue and shimmering.
Grinning wide
And comforting me with it's three warm and wild eyes.
Prying open MY third eye
Edited by Fractal420 (09/02/20 04:11 AM)
|
Fractal420
Psycellium
Registered: 06/21/13
Posts: 5,913
Last seen: 11 months, 14 hours
|
Re: 60 days to Save Delta8-THC [Re: Fractal420]
#26911093 - 09/01/20 01:07 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Anyone sign and let their opinion be known?
--------------------
Dreaming of That face again.
It's bright and blue and shimmering.
Grinning wide
And comforting me with it's three warm and wild eyes.
Prying open MY third eye
|
psillyboy
Florida man
Registered: 09/26/14
Posts: 582
Loc: In the 60's
Last seen: 14 hours, 54 minutes
|
Re: 60 days to Save Delta8-THC [Re: Fractal420]
#26911620 - 09/01/20 10:33 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
There are no links to IFR in this thread to click.
--------------------
"True terror is to wake up one morning and discover that your high school class is running the country - K. Vonnegut
“The real truth, that dare not speak itself, is that no one is in control. Absolutely no one.” ― Terence McKenna
"LSD is a psychedelic drug which occasionally causes psychotic behavior in people who have never taken it." - Timothy Leary
|
 badchad
Mad Scientist
Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 13,379
|
Re: 60 days to Save Delta8-THC [Re: Fractal420]
#26911700 - 09/01/20 11:19 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I'd guess the hemp industry supports this. They want agriculturally derived CBD to be the only game in town. Regardless, plenty of synthetic cannabinoids are Schedule 1. If delta 8 takes off, it's likely to be scheduled in the same way others are.
--------------------
...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge. It is an indellible experience; it is forever known. I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did.
Smith, P. Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27.
...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely.
Osmond, H. Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436
|
Fractal420
Psycellium
Registered: 06/21/13
Posts: 5,913
Last seen: 11 months, 14 hours
|
Re: 60 days to Save Delta8-THC [Re: badchad]
#26911838 - 09/01/20 12:23 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
The hemp industry is suing the DEA actually
I’ll make the link “clickable”
Update: now at the bottom you can go straight to the rule and make a comment on it. It’s up until Oct 20, and especially in illegal states, this is a great resource to have
For the other links, I suggest checking out the source article
PS Delta8 is not a “synthetic” cannabinoid, it’s made from CBD I think but that doesn’t make it synthetic. Under the farm act it’s all “hemp”. can’t ban a cannabinoid with medical activity just cause it’s psychoactive. Obviously that’s just a repeat of what happened to delta9.
--------------------
Dreaming of That face again.
It's bright and blue and shimmering.
Grinning wide
And comforting me with it's three warm and wild eyes.
Prying open MY third eye
Edited by Fractal420 (09/01/20 12:41 PM)
|
badchad
Mad Scientist
Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 13,379
|
Re: 60 days to Save Delta8-THC [Re: Fractal420]
#26911989 - 09/01/20 01:33 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Fractal420 said:
PS Delta8 is not a “synthetic” cannabinoid, it’s made from CBD I think but that doesn’t make it synthetic. Under the farm act it’s all “hemp”. can’t ban a cannabinoid with medical activity just cause it’s psychoactive. Obviously that’s just a repeat of what happened to delta9.
I agree with your overall assessment that this will come down to interpretations of specific terms like "synthetic" or "derivative." Generally though, "medical use" has been defined and interpreted as an FDA approved drug, which Delta8 won't meet. Though I haven't seen the actual data, it sounds like its pharmacological properties are similar to other synthetic cannabinoids already in Schedule 1.
--------------------
...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge. It is an indellible experience; it is forever known. I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did.
Smith, P. Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27.
...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely.
Osmond, H. Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436
|
Fractal420
Psycellium
Registered: 06/21/13
Posts: 5,913
Last seen: 11 months, 14 hours
|
Re: 60 days to Save Delta8-THC [Re: badchad]
#26913081 - 09/02/20 02:08 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
So, we’re scheduling THC again?
“So much progress”. Right. Btw this would affect anything made from CBD as those would be “synthetic derivatives” too, like CBG, CBN, CBC, etc
Example: CBN can be made from THC - same process. “Synthetic derivative”
Because of the hemp industry, I doubt D8 is actually gonna be scheduled, but I’m disappointed also in users that don’t seem to even care about scheduling the next thc 
There are 113 known ones, and 112 became legal with the Farm Act
We’re all aware this isn’t JWH right but a natural cannabinoid?
--------------------
Dreaming of That face again.
It's bright and blue and shimmering.
Grinning wide
And comforting me with it's three warm and wild eyes.
Prying open MY third eye
Edited by Fractal420 (09/02/20 02:23 AM)
|
sk8fast
Tripping skater
Registered: 08/02/10
Posts: 407
Last seen: 27 days, 21 hours
|
Re: 60 days to Save Delta8-THC [Re: badchad]
#26915772 - 09/03/20 02:22 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
badchad said:
I'd guess the hemp industry supports this. They want agriculturally derived CBD to be the only game in town. Regardless, plenty of synthetic cannabinoids are Schedule 1. If delta 8 takes off, it's likely to be scheduled in the same way others are.
Delta8-thc is in the cannabis plant
|
Fractal420
Psycellium
Registered: 06/21/13
Posts: 5,913
Last seen: 11 months, 14 hours
|
Re: 60 days to Save Delta8-THC [Re: sk8fast]
#26916736 - 09/04/20 03:09 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Yup. Hemp also, if one were to make a distinction between the two (really just one plant, but let’s say we just adhere to the 0,3% delta9 definition). Delta 8 is not Delta 9, and I’ve been using both the past few days, they are certainly different, also worth mentioning the analog act doesn’t cover delta 8 either, there’s really no reason for it to be illegal except it “can get you high”
I notice this stuff has sort of a come up, plateau, and a slow fade. Lasts a while though like any distillate
--------------------
Dreaming of That face again.
It's bright and blue and shimmering.
Grinning wide
And comforting me with it's three warm and wild eyes.
Prying open MY third eye
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds 
Bridgetown Botanicals 
Buy Bali Kratom Powder 
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order
Edit 
Reply 
veggie
motaman
luvdemshrooms
geokills
