Feds Ease Rules For Health Research On Marijuana Extract

[Robert Celt]

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration is easing the rules for researchers who study an extract of the marijuana plant.

The change means less paperwork for researchers when they change the study dosage of CBD -- or cannabinol -- an active chemical in marijuana. Some health researchers think the component could be used as a seizure treatment without producing a side effect "high."

The Pennsylvania Medical Society applauded the change in a press statement: "Pennsylvanian physicians overwhelmingly prefer additional research and clinical study on the medical use of cannabis before the state moves to permit its medical use."

Tom Angell, who leads the nonprofit group Marijuana Majority, called the DEA's recent move a very small step in the right direction.

"It will make research into CBD ever so slightly easier for scientists who are examining its medical benefit," Angell said. "There's a lot more we'd like to see the Obama administration do to open up access to medical marijuana to patients that need it."

The DEA's new rule only applies to CBD, not THC --tetrahydrocannabinol -- the component of marijuana that causes psychological effects. By email, Mason Tvert, spokesman for the Marijuana Policy Project, said that omission suggests that agency officials are "still not ready to take a rational approach to marijuana-related research."

Some patients will need both THC and CBD, Tvert said.

"What about researchers who might want to study both?" he said.

The Marijuana Policy Project has compiled an online list of federal barriers to medical marijuana research.

One DEA restriction requires investigators to purchase study marijuana from a facility at the University of Mississippi. But researchers have complained that the one-source "monopoly" deters interest in medical marijuana studies, Angell said.

"There's a lot of sort of bureaucratic hoops you need to jump through since marijuana is irrationally a Schedule 1 narcotic," said state Sen. Daylin Leach, who is leading the push to approve medical marijuana in Pennsylvania.

"What we really need is to have the Schedule 1 designation just eliminated," said Leach, D-Montgomery.

A Schedule 1 designation means marijuana is among the class of drugs considered the most dangerous with a high potential for abuse or dependence.

Recent reports suggest that the Food and Drug Administration has sent a recommendation to the DEA to reschedule marijuana, but it's not clear in what category health officials think pot should be placed.

"Two of the things we try to balance when we think about the safety of using these drugs, either as research tools or as medications, is balancing the likelihood that someone may go on to abuse, become dependent or become addicted to a drug in relation to the potential therapeutic benefit," said behavioral pharmacologist Sara Jane Ward, a researcher with the Center for Substance Abuse Research at the Lewis Katz School of Medicine at Temple University.

"Most of my colleagues in the field of studying cannabinoids, really strongly believe that is should be scheduled down from a Schedule 1," she said.

Ward studies how different drugs affect the body. Though her work is with animals rather than humans, she said it took many months to become registered as an approved cannabinoid researcher.

News Moderator: Robert Celt 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Feds Ease Rules For Health Research On Marijuana Extract
Author: Taunya English
Contact: News Works
Photo Credit: Brennan Linsley
Website: News Works

 

[420 Warrior]

Recent reports suggest that the Food and Drug Administration has sent a recommendation to the DEA to reschedule marijuana, but it's not clear in what category health officials think pot should be placed.

So is it the DEA who controls and has the final say in the scheduling of drugs in the first place? And why wouldn't that job be part of the FDA to begin with? Why would a law enforcement agency be placed in charge of classifying what's considered medicinal and what's not medicinal? Are they doctors or law enforcement officers? IDK but, The food and drug administration just seems like the best choice for a federal agency to be handling things like what schedule drugs are placed because they are the scientists that study food and drugs before they are given government approval, right? So I guess my question is why the FDA would need the DEA's approval in the first place? Couldn't they just reschedule it by themselves? or at least recommend to congress for rescheduling? What the hell does the DEA have it's hands in it for when their only job should be to enforce the laws, not make the laws.

"Two of the things we try to balance when we think about the safety of using these drugs, either as research tools or as medications, is balancing the likelihood that someone may go on to abuse, become dependent or become addicted to a drug in relation to the potential therapeutic benefit," said behavioral pharmacologist Sara Jane Ward, a researcher with the Center for Substance Abuse Research at the Lewis Katz School of Medicine at Temple University.

Oh, you mean like opiates (pain killers), alcohol and tobacco? No abuse, dependency or addiction with those approved substances I guess? No safety issues associated with those things, right?...WRONG!!! Do these people even hear themselves saying this shit? Before these people even open their mouths they need to ask themselves if what they say can be applied to pain meds, alcohol and/or tobacco because if they say their worried about the effects of Cannabis and give a reason their worried about abuse or safety or addiction or really any other negative effects they claim (without merit) that Cannabis has and they don't bother to apply those same issues to those other approved things, then they are just spouting shit out of their mouths without even thinking before speaking.

I always like to pose this question to naysayers as a fun little Q&A for them, I'll say..."legal status aside, give me one thing that's bad about Cannabis that you can't say the same thing about alcohol and/or tobacco as well as pain meds? And when you answer this question, have the scientific facts to back up what you say." Their always left speechless and confused with nothing but some kind of reefer madness answer that I can quickly disband with fact. It's kind of funny but sad at the same time.

 

[Radogast]

What the hell does the DEA have it's hands in it for when their only job should be to enforce the laws, not make the laws.

Exactly, but it is the same for substance abuse clinics claiming marijuana is a highly abused substance. They have a say because they are stakeholders making money off the enforcement process, not because they have a legal right to have a say.

I always like to pose this question to naysayers as a fun little Q&A for them, I'll say..."legal status aside, give me one thing that's bad about Cannabis that you can't say the same thing about alcohol and/or tobacco as well as pain meds? And when you answer this question, have the scientific facts to back up what you say." Their always left speechless and confused with nothing but some kind of reefer madness answer that I can quickly disband with fact. It's kind of funny but sad at the same time.

I usually say, "What is bad about marijuana that isn't worse about alcohol, tobacco, and cigarettes?"
Direct health damage aside, they all cause more traffic accidents when used, even smoking cigarettes.