Posted on Aug 11, 2016
U.S. affirms its prohibition on medical marijuana
8.9K
151
57
23
23
0
RP Members and Connections I posted an article a couple of days ago about the State of New Jersey and a decision to allow the use of marijuana for PTSD.
See what the Federal Government had to say about it!
https://www.rallypoint.com/shared-links/n-j-vets-who-want-to-use-marijuana-to-relieve-ptsd-waiting-on-christie
The government refused again Thursday to allow the use of marijuana for medical purposes, reaffirming its conclusion that the drug’s therapeutic value has not been proved scientifically and defying a growing clamor to legalize it for the treatment of a variety of conditions.
In an announcement in the Federal Register and a letter to petitioners, the Drug Enforcement Administration turned down requests to remove marijuana from “Schedule I,” which classifies it as a drug with “no currently accepted medical use” in the United States and precludes doctors from prescribing it.
The decision keeps the federal government at odds with 25 states and the District of Columbia, which have passed laws allowing medical use of marijuana to some degree. Members of Congress have called for its reclassification and on Wednesday, the National Conference of State Legislatures adopted a resolution asking the federal government to remove marijuana from Schedule I.
"Right now, the science doesn't support it," Chuck Rosenberg, acting administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration, said in an interview Thursday. Citing a lengthy analysis conducted by the Food and Drug Administration, he said the decision "is tethered to the science."
See what the Federal Government had to say about it!
https://www.rallypoint.com/shared-links/n-j-vets-who-want-to-use-marijuana-to-relieve-ptsd-waiting-on-christie
The government refused again Thursday to allow the use of marijuana for medical purposes, reaffirming its conclusion that the drug’s therapeutic value has not been proved scientifically and defying a growing clamor to legalize it for the treatment of a variety of conditions.
In an announcement in the Federal Register and a letter to petitioners, the Drug Enforcement Administration turned down requests to remove marijuana from “Schedule I,” which classifies it as a drug with “no currently accepted medical use” in the United States and precludes doctors from prescribing it.
The decision keeps the federal government at odds with 25 states and the District of Columbia, which have passed laws allowing medical use of marijuana to some degree. Members of Congress have called for its reclassification and on Wednesday, the National Conference of State Legislatures adopted a resolution asking the federal government to remove marijuana from Schedule I.
"Right now, the science doesn't support it," Chuck Rosenberg, acting administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration, said in an interview Thursday. Citing a lengthy analysis conducted by the Food and Drug Administration, he said the decision "is tethered to the science."
U.S. affirms its prohibition on medical marijuana
Posted from washingtonpost.com
Marijuana
What Would You Do
Medical
PTSD
Government
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 24
17
17
0
Here's my (conspiracy) theory on this. The pharmaceutical industry owns most politicians. They see the writing on the wall about the benefits of marijuana, and want to lock up the money from it. So they are pressuring the government to keep it illegal while they work on ways to take the active ingedients and put them into pills or shots. Then they will conduct the drug trials, and the government will approve the pills for sale, but by prescription only. So they will have the only legal means to profit from medical marijuana. But for all that to work, marijuana in plant form has to stay illegal as a medicine.
That's my theory. I'd elaborate some more, but I need to wrap my baked potato in the tin foil from my hat.
That's my theory. I'd elaborate some more, but I need to wrap my baked potato in the tin foil from my hat.
(17)
(0)
Capt Seid Waddell
LTC (Join to see), more likely big illegal pharma wants to keep it illegal because that keeps the price up. If pot was legal it would not cost any more to grow than alfalfa ($80-$220/ton depending upon location) and the pushers could not afford to stay in that business.
And it would not surprise anyone to hear that the cartels had politicians on their payroll.
And it would not surprise anyone to hear that the cartels had politicians on their payroll.
(1)
(0)
11
11
0
"The government refused again Thursday to allow the use of marijuana for medical purposes, reaffirming its conclusion that the drug’s therapeutic value has not been proved scientifically and defying a growing clamor to legalize it for the treatment of a variety of conditions."
Umm... Because it's schedule 1, we can't do Scientific Studies. We won't remove it from Schedule 1 because there are no Scientific Studies...
- Catch 22.....
Umm... Because it's schedule 1, we can't do Scientific Studies. We won't remove it from Schedule 1 because there are no Scientific Studies...
- Catch 22.....
(11)
(0)
SGM Erik Marquez
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS - Again, who is the we you refer to? You? Me? Then yes correct you and I can not do a scheduled 1 drug "research" project.
But if a team at Johns Hopkins University, University of California, San Francisco,
University of Pennsylvania, University of Michigan, University of Pittsburgh
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, University of California, San Diego
Stanford University, Duke University
wanted to due research on a Sch 1 drug, they would ask for a license from the DEA and likley receive it.
So now, Bob, Kevin and Mary at Oregon State University can't decide to masters project on Marijuana a research team at an established medical research facility can if they and their backers want to.
Here is an excerpt from a Newsweek article.."To study marijuana in human subjects in the United States, researchers need to go through a number of steps. Marijuana is classified by the Drug Enforcement Agency as a Schedule 1 drug, a category that has the highest level of restriction, so researchers must apply for a license from the DEA before they begin their studies. Because of the fear of drugs being diverted for nonresearch purposes, the DEA has strict eligibility requirements for Schedule 1 licenses. Researchers also need approval from their institution (usually a university or research center), which can be a challenge—employers may be skittish about the fallout of studies on illicit drugs, whether from disgruntled university or foundation donors, bad press, or unforeseen consequences of the research."
I found many other cites to support my opinion.
But if a team at Johns Hopkins University, University of California, San Francisco,
University of Pennsylvania, University of Michigan, University of Pittsburgh
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, University of California, San Diego
Stanford University, Duke University
wanted to due research on a Sch 1 drug, they would ask for a license from the DEA and likley receive it.
So now, Bob, Kevin and Mary at Oregon State University can't decide to masters project on Marijuana a research team at an established medical research facility can if they and their backers want to.
Here is an excerpt from a Newsweek article.."To study marijuana in human subjects in the United States, researchers need to go through a number of steps. Marijuana is classified by the Drug Enforcement Agency as a Schedule 1 drug, a category that has the highest level of restriction, so researchers must apply for a license from the DEA before they begin their studies. Because of the fear of drugs being diverted for nonresearch purposes, the DEA has strict eligibility requirements for Schedule 1 licenses. Researchers also need approval from their institution (usually a university or research center), which can be a challenge—employers may be skittish about the fallout of studies on illicit drugs, whether from disgruntled university or foundation donors, bad press, or unforeseen consequences of the research."
I found many other cites to support my opinion.
(0)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
SGM Erik Marquez - If a process is made so onerous that no one can get it, you have effectively banned research.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/11/science/obama-administration-set-to-remove-barrier-to-marijuana-research.html?_r=0
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientists-want-the-smoke-to-clear-on-medical-marijuana-research/
This is the EXACT same argument used against Control Measures.
You say "apply for a DEA licence" which seems reasonable until sourcing (availability) and TIME are applied.
I'm sure you have lots of sources citing your opinion, however, I am sure I can come up with just as many showing mine. Research in the US on THC (et al) is "stalled" by Government Regulation, and being a Schedule 1 drug (CSA).
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/11/science/obama-administration-set-to-remove-barrier-to-marijuana-research.html?_r=0
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientists-want-the-smoke-to-clear-on-medical-marijuana-research/
This is the EXACT same argument used against Control Measures.
You say "apply for a DEA licence" which seems reasonable until sourcing (availability) and TIME are applied.
I'm sure you have lots of sources citing your opinion, however, I am sure I can come up with just as many showing mine. Research in the US on THC (et al) is "stalled" by Government Regulation, and being a Schedule 1 drug (CSA).
Obama Administration Set to Remove Barrier to Marijuana Research
The new policy could spur broad scientific study of a drug being used to treat dozens of diseases despite little rigorous evidence of its effectiveness.
(2)
(0)
SGM Erik Marquez
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS - And thanks for the discussion, I did not know research though technically available was effectively stopped through red tape and policy ..likley designed to create an unwritten "ban" on this research
(2)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
SGM Erik Marquez - Anytime! That's exactly the situation on this one. When you look at the "requirements to do research" everything looks reasonable, but when you dive into the "process to acquire materials" (and test on humans), that reasonableness disappears.
It would be the rough equivalent of "Concealed Carry License in DC." Sure it's Possible...but I want to say less than 30 have actually been issued (to the best of my knowledge). No, technically it's not banned, but it effectively is.
It would be the rough equivalent of "Concealed Carry License in DC." Sure it's Possible...but I want to say less than 30 have actually been issued (to the best of my knowledge). No, technically it's not banned, but it effectively is.
(2)
(0)
7
7
0
There's a lot of money being made in the traffic of illegal drugs and you can bet the farm that some of it is finding its way into campaign coffers
(7)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google