Home | Community | Message Board

MushroomCube.com
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Capsules   OlympusMyco.com Olympus Myco Bulk Substrate   Mushroom-Hut Mono Tub Substrate   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1
InvisibleveggieM

Registered: 07/25/04
Posts: 17,538
35 Years Ago, a Judge Said Marijuana Did Not Belong in Schedule I. HHS Finally Agrees. * 2
    #28460569 - 09/06/23 01:30 PM (8 months, 7 days ago)

35 Years Ago, a Judge Said Marijuana Did Not Belong in Schedule I. HHS Finally Agrees.
September 6, 2023 - Reason

The 1988 case highlighted the DEA's stubborn insistence that marijuana has no "accepted medical use."

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) last week recommended that the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) move marijuana from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act, the law's most restrictive category, to Schedule III, which includes prescription drugs such as anabolic steroids and Tylenol with codeine. Thirty-five years ago today, Francis Young, the DEA's chief administrative law judge, likewise concluded that marijuana did not belong in Schedule I, which also includes illegal drugs such as heroin, LSD, psilocybin, and MDMA.

Although Young's conclusions ultimately were rejected by DEA Administrator John Lawn, his decision was a milestone in marijuana reform that highlighted the irrationality of the drug's legal classification. It is worth another look now that the DEA, in response to the HHS recommendation, may finally acknowledge, after half a century of steadfast resistance, that marijuana does not meet the statutory criteria for Schedule I.

Young's 1988 ruling came after 16 years of litigation that demonstrated how determined the DEA was to maintain the total prohibition of marijuana, no matter what the relevant evidence showed. In 1972, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) and two other groups petitioned the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs (BNDD), the DEA's predecessor agency, asking it to move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule V, the least restrictive category, or deschedule it entirely. The BNDD initially refused even to consider the petition, claiming that it would violate the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs.

Even if that might be true, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled in 1974, "the point is not obvious or clear-cut, but requires a reflective consideration and analysis." The appeals court said the BNDD's position "should have been reflected in an action denying the petition on the merits." As the D.C. Circuit saw it, the agency's shortcut was inconsistent with "the kind of interchange and refinement of views that is the life-blood of a sound administrative process."

On remand, Young noted, the DEA held a three-day hearing, after which an administrative law judge "found in NORML's favor on several issues." But the agency's acting administrator "entered a final order denying NORML's petition 'in all respects.'"

NORML again appealed to the D.C. Circuit, which in 1977 told the DEA to try again. The appeals court questioned the DEA's interpretation of the Controlled Substances Act and ordered it to seek a review of marijuana's classification from the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (now HHS), then follow the rule-making process required by the statute. In 1979, the department concluded that marijuana should stay in Schedule I, and 10 days later, without any further proceedings, the DEA again rejected NORML's petition.

NORML once again asked the D.C. Circuit to intervene. In an unpublished 1980 order, the appeals court said that "reconsideration of all the issues in this case would be appropriate" and again remanded the matter to the DEA. So after three rebukes by the D.C. Circuit and another HHS review, the case finally landed in front of Young in 1986, 14 years after the original petition.

At this point, the issue had been narrowed to whether marijuana should be moved from Schedule I to Schedule II, which includes many prescription opioids, along with cocaine, amphetamines, Ritalin, and some barbiturates. In making that judgment, Young focused on two Schedule I criteria: The substance has no "currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States" and lacks "accepted safety" for use "under medical supervision."

Based mainly on doctors' practices and opinions, along with patients' experiences, Young concluded that marijuana did have a "currently accepted medical use" as a treatment for the nausea and vomiting caused by cancer chemotherapy. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had implicitly recognized that fact in 1985 when it approved Marinol—a synthetic version of THC, marijuana's main active ingredient—as an anti-emetic. But as Young noted, smoked marijuana had several advantages over Marinol: It did not require swallowing a capsule and keeping it down, an obvious challenge for people who are nauseated and vomiting; it did not entail metabolism of THC through the liver, which some patients found produced unpleasant psychoactive effects; it could deliver relief immediately; and it allowed patients to titrate their doses based on that immediate effect.

"The overwhelming preponderance of the evidence in this record establishes that marijuana has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States for nausea and vomiting resulting from chemotherapy treatments in some cancer patients," Young wrote. "To conclude otherwise, on this record, would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious," in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act.

Young also ruled that marijuana had a "currently accepted medical use" as a treatment for spasticity caused by multiple sclerosis and other conditions. "It would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious to find otherwise," he said.

As for marijuana's safety under medical supervision, Young noted that "marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man." After reviewing the relevant research, he found that "there are simply no credible medical reports to suggest that consuming marijuana has caused a single death." By contrast, it was well-established that both over-the-counter and FDA-approved prescription drugs could kill people when consumed in large doses. For aspirin, Young noted, the ratio of the lethal dose to the effective dose was about 20 to 1, while the ratio for many prescription drugs, such as Valium, was 10 to 1 or even lower. With marijuana, he said, that ratio "is impossible to quantify because it is so high."

Based on "the facts established in this record," Young said, "one must reasonably conclude that there is accepted safety for use of marijuana under medical supervision." And again, "to conclude otherwise, on this record, would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious."

The DEA, of course, had a long history, well illustrated by this case, of making "unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious" decisions. Unfazed by Young's findings, Lawn decided that marijuana belonged in Schedule I because its medical use was not sufficiently accepted. He officially rejected NORML's petition in 1992.

This time the D.C. Circuit upheld the DEA's decision. In its final appeal, NORML argued that the DEA had shown bias by ignoring relevant evidence. The appeals court did not buy it.

"The need to remand a case several times is not evidence per se of agency prejudice," the D.C. Circuit said in 1994. "Nor do we think the statements cited by petitioners show that the Administrator was unfair, especially when considered in the context of a reasonable preference for rigorous scientific proof over anecdotal evidence, even when reported by respected physicians."

In the years since, that "anecdotal evidence" has been reinforced by research indicating that marijuana is effective at relieving various symptoms, including epileptic seizures and neuropathic pain as well as nausea and muscle spasms. But that additional evidence has not swayed the DEA, which has rejected every petition asking it to reschedule marijuana, most recently in 2020.

In rejecting that petition, the DEA noted its 2016 denial of a similar request, a decision that was based on a "scientific and medical evaluation" by HHS. While "DEA recognizes the possibility that drugs containing marijuana or its derivatives might, in the future, be proven to be safe and effective for the treatment of certain conditions and thus approved" by the FDA, it said in 2020, marijuana would remain in Schedule I until that happened.

That denial resulted in a lawsuit emphasizing that many states had approved marijuana as a medicine. In 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled that the case was not ripe because the petitioners had "failed to exhaust their administrative remedies with the DEA." But in a concurring opinion, one member of the three-judge panel acknowledged the force of the petitioners' claims. "In an appropriate case," 9th Circuit Judge Paul Watford, a Barack Obama appointee, wrote, the DEA "may well be obliged to initiate a reclassification proceeding for marijuana, given the strength of petitioners' arguments that the agency has misinterpreted the controlling statute by concluding that marijuana 'has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.'"

That obligation begins now in light of the HHS recommendation, which resulted from a review that President Joe Biden ordered last October. By urging the DEA to reschedule marijuana, HHS implicitly rejected the DEA's position that "accepted medical use" requires FDA approval. And although the practical effects of moving marijuana to Schedule III would be relatively modest, leaving federal prohibition essentially untouched, it would be nice to see the DEA admit, for once, that it was wrong.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinethirtygoats
Male
Registered: 12/29/11
Posts: 1,992
Last seen: 2 months, 20 days
Re: 35 Years Ago, a Judge Said Marijuana Did Not Belong in Schedule I. HHS Finally Agrees. [Re: veggie] * 1
    #28461520 - 09/07/23 01:04 PM (8 months, 6 days ago)

Guess what.

Dumb people have a lot of money. The dumbest people have the most money.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDave Bowman
Albert Hoffmans Apprentice
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 08/30/07
Posts: 2,126
Loc: Your Imagination
Last seen: 1 month, 12 days
Re: 35 Years Ago, a Judge Said Marijuana Did Not Belong in Schedule I. HHS Finally Agrees. [Re: veggie]
    #28462000 - 09/07/23 10:51 PM (8 months, 6 days ago)

The difference from it being Schedule III to Schedule I are actually quite significant, even if they are "just" on paper.  I believe this would open the door to allow dispensaries to use banks and accept credit cards, and help to legitimize those businesses. 

The basic fact of the matter is that cannabis and it's derivatives do not meet the definition of having no medical use, so the move in scheduling is nice for this fact as well.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinemorrowasted
Worldwide Stepper
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/30/09
Posts: 31,569
Loc: House of Mirrors
Last seen: 4 hours, 26 minutes
Re: 35 Years Ago, a Judge Said Marijuana Did Not Belong in Schedule I. HHS Finally Agrees. [Re: Dave Bowman]
    #28462233 - 09/08/23 09:03 AM (8 months, 5 days ago)

It's a big deal for my industry. Even in states with legal cannabis, nurses who work for any place that accepts Medicare funds are often subject to cannabis testing, at least pre-employment. Moved to schedule III, it's entirely possible that healthcare employers will stop testing for cannabis unless there is cause to suspect intoxication on the job. Or at least enable nurses to fail for cannabis if they have a prescription, as with xanax, adderall, and other controlled substances of potential abuse

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Capsules   OlympusMyco.com Olympus Myco Bulk Substrate   Mushroom-Hut Mono Tub Substrate   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Ed Rosenthal (Marijuana Guru) Trial Update bowling-name 7,385 12 03/27/03 11:15 AM
by Middleman
* The Next Front in the Marijuana Battle ChiefThunderbong 3,235 4 07/05/04 10:07 AM
by ChiefThunderbong
* Stoudamire is arrested on marijuana charges motamanM 3,502 3 07/09/03 08:31 AM
by Sev
* Priest Arrested for Marijuana Cultivation snatchcakes 5,226 17 06/13/08 07:52 PM
by skippytdi
* Former Dallas Cowboy Lauds His 20 Year Marijuana Use socratesmind 4,682 4 03/03/03 11:26 PM
by rhizo
* Western NC tribal voters approve recreational marijuana use veggieM 234 1 09/12/23 01:44 PM
by Dave Bowman
* MARYLAND GOV. EHRLICH SIGNS MARIJUANA LAW motamanM 5,293 3 05/27/03 06:27 AM
by Seuss
* South for the Marijuana motamanM 1,981 2 09/07/03 02:27 PM
by Hans_Moleman

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: motaman, veggie, Alan Rockefeller, Mostly_Harmless
744 topic views. 0 members, 7 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.023 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 15 queries.