cannabisnews.com: FDA's Report Illuminates Wide Divide on Marijuana





FDA's Report Illuminates Wide Divide on Marijuana
Posted by CN Staff on April 21, 2006 at 21:53:43 PT
By Kate Zernike
Source: New York Times
USA -- A Food and Drug Administration statement on Thursday denying any medical benefits of marijuana reinforced the divide between federal officials and the states that have approved the drug's use to ease some medical conditions."It's consistent with the long-held federal view on this medicine, and that is that marijuana is the equivalent of heroin and cocaine," said Nathan Barankin, a spokesman for California's attorney general, Bill Lockyer. "California voters disagree."
State officials said the announcement would not affect their laws. But they and federal officials said it clarified the federal government's intention to continue enforcing its laws against marijuana, even in states that allow it for medical purposes."It's a very good statement so that people can clearly see what the policy of the United States government is," said Rogene Waite, a spokeswoman for the Drug Enforcement Administration. While it has always been the drug enforcement agency's policy to enforce laws against marijuana, Ms. Waite said, "now it's clearly out there, so that people don't have to look everywhere to figure this out." Several officials in the 11 states that allow medical marijuana disputed the F.D.A.'s contention that there was no research supporting the drug's medical use. They noted, in particular, a 1999 review by the National Institute of Medicine, part of the National Academy of Sciences, the nation's most prestigious scientific advisory panel, which found marijuana to be "moderately well-suited" to some conditions, including wasting disease from AIDS and the nausea that often results from chemotherapy. State officials said that most of their laws had been passed by citizen initiatives."The decision was made by the voters. It's not based on any conditions," said James M. Cameron, assistant attorney general in Maine, where the law allowing marijuana use under some conditions took effect in December 1999. "Really, there's nothing that's going to happen — any third parties judging whether these substances are effective — that is going to change Maine law."But Mr. Cameron and other officials said they had warned people who used marijuana that they were protected under state law only, and could be prosecuted under federal laws."The Vermont attorney general's office had always been concerned about the message that the med marijuana program gave that it was legalizing it, when it remains illegal under federal law," said John Treadwell, an assistant attorney general in that office.A United States Supreme Court decision last year affirmed the federal government's right to enforce those laws in those states.State officials said they did not believe that the ruling would increase the number of federal prosecutions."There's sort of a détente," Mr. Barankin said, in California. "Both sides respect that we have laws that differ. Federal law enforcement agencies for the most part have shown some respect for California law by only going after those individuals who seem to be clearly not in the medical marijuana business for the medical part of it — which are the same people the state law is going after."The Food and Drug Administration issued its announcement in response to calls from opponents of medical marijuana in Congress, and it was welcomed by the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, which has long made marijuana its top priority.Advocates of medical marijuana said the real impact would be in trying to pass new legislation in states like Connecticut, New Jersey and New Mexico. "We're going to have members of state legislatures say, 'But even the F.D.A. has said there's no medical value,' " said Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance, which works to loosen drug laws. "That's where it's going to hurt."The Supreme Court decision killed efforts to allow medical marijuana in Connecticut, Mr. Nadelmann said, adding, "It had no legal impact, but it created a perception."Others said the decision would continue to frustrate efforts to research the potential medical benefits of marijuana. In Vermont, for example, a statute enacted several years ago called for a research program on the therapeutic effects of marijuana. When a legislative group asked more recently why that had not been conducted, the Vermont Health Department said it could not be done under federal law, Mr. Treadwell said.Source: New York Times (NY)Author: Kate ZernikePublished: April 22, 2006Copyright: 2006 The New York Times Co.Contact: letters nytimes.com Website: http://www.nytimes.com/Related Article & Web Sites:Drug Policy Alliancehttp://www.drugpolicy.org/IOM Reporthttp://newton.nap.edu/html/marimed/F.D.A. Dismisses Medical Benefit From Marijuana http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread21756.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #20 posted by OverwhelmSam on April 22, 2006 at 16:32:20 PT
Let's Look at it the Right Way
A weapon thrust in your direction presents an significant opportunity to shift and stike back at your opponent with deadly force. ~Bruce Lee
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #19 posted by sam adams on April 22, 2006 at 16:01:37 PT
rhetoric
in pickup basketball, we had a saying "let the offense call the fouls". It means if you're on defense and you just fouled somebody, don't volunteer the information. Let them say it.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #18 posted by konagold on April 22, 2006 at 15:58:24 PT:
Bill Maher comments
AlohaIf you did not see Bill Maher last night, try tune in to the HBO rebrodcasts this week as his comments on the fda report were spot onAloha
Rev. Dennis Shields
http://thereligionofjesuschurch.org
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #17 posted by Taylor121 on April 22, 2006 at 15:45:00 PT
It will hurt...
Sad to say it, but this will hurt. MPP, DPA, and NORML are going to have to educate everyone on why the FDA's statement was political motivated before anyone will want to pass a state bill.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #16 posted by FoM on April 22, 2006 at 12:51:23 PT
Sam
I also wondered why he would make that statement. It sounds too much like they won or something to me.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #15 posted by Sam Adams on April 22, 2006 at 12:46:46 PT
thanks for nothing, Lockyer
"There's sort of a détente," Mr. Barankin said, in California. "Both sides respect that we have laws that differ. Federal law enforcement agencies for the most part have shown some respect for California law by only going after those individuals who seem to be clearly not in the medical marijuana business for the medical part of it — which are the same people the state law is going after."Really? What about WAMM? They were in it for the business money? That's interesting, isn't it a non-profit made up of mostly terminally ill people?  Could it really be that Lockyer and most of the rest of the political class don't really care about sick people and are really colluding to find just the right amount of repression, raiding, and stealing that the public and media will tolerate?Look at this. The most powerful Democrat on the Congressional Ethics committee just got caught stealing millions, from us taxpayers. Criminals, all of them. No wonder they don't want Wesley Clark, he isn't good enough at lying and stealing for the rest of the DNC:http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/04/22/democrat_quits_post_on_ethics_panel/
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #14 posted by Sam Adams on April 22, 2006 at 12:41:37 PT
couple things
"It's a very good statement so that people can clearly see what the policy of the United States government is," said Rogene Waite, a spokeswoman for the Drug Enforcement Administration."Oh, we know what federal policy is all right, Rogene. Take corporate drugs like Vioxx and drop dead, or take cannabis and we'll throw you in jail. Thanks for clarifying!And this:"We're going to have members of state legislatures say, 'But even the F.D.A. has said there's no medical value,' " said Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance, which works to loosen drug laws. "That's where it's going to hurt."Wow, if I was him I'd never say anything like this publicly. Wake up man, what are you doing?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by runderwo on April 22, 2006 at 12:00:26 PT
DAMMADD
What is their point? I just don't get it. The guy's kid died of an overdose of a legal prescription pharmaceutical. So now he takes up the cause against marijuana, which never hurt anyone? I think he doesn't really care about what happened to his kid - or he would accept that had his kid "overdosed" on marijuana instead of a legal drug, he would be alive and healthy today.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by Richard Zuckerman on April 22, 2006 at 10:54:16 PT:
THE FDA ARE CHRONIC SCREWUPS!
The FDA rushed approval of various drugs and substances (such as Fluoride) which were later found to have dangerous side effects, so much that a Commission has been set up to monitor the substances approved by the FDA. There is (or was) also a scandal involving the FDA employees having a personal business interest in the formation of the food pyramid.The FDA makes a sweeping generalized statement against med pot, without addressing the many scientific studies and anectodal evidence supporting med pot, almost as if the FDA are agents of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy.I will only vote for Libertarian Party, Ralph Nader, or, as a last resort, considering Mitchel Cohen's position that the Green Party has been infiltrated by Democrats, Green Party. I do not want the government forcing me to accept their vaccination or prohibiting me from gaining access to vitamins, minerals, hormones! The survival of this nation requires Republicans and Democrats to step down. Otherwise, the illegals will, and are, entering this country in droves. Our employment, economy, freedoms, and environment, would suffer if the U.S. Senate gives the illegal aliens "Amnesty"! Before very long, this nation would become a slum like Mexico City! The Congressional Immigration law of circa 1986 has been an utter failure. Relying up HACKS like the FDA has not been much better.Richard Paul Zuckerman, P.O. Box 159, Metuchen, New Jersey, 08840-0159
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by whig on April 22, 2006 at 10:53:58 PT
Thank you!
Steiner is calling on all Americans to join the fight against all organizations which, by virtue of this stance, work to erode and destroy family values and use sick people to further their agendas.Family values. Yes, family values. That's the code.I'd like to thank Steiner for using this phrase, because it tips his hand and it lets everyone know what his agenda is. This is the signal that he is speaking for the religious right agenda. He is declaring himself part of the Pharisee cult which has marginalized itself politically and is on the way out.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by Hope on April 22, 2006 at 10:50:21 PT
CQ..thank you for OT article you posted...excerpt
Yet Bush's defense of Rumsfeld was entirely substance-free. Bush simply told reporters in the Rose Garden that Rumsfeld would stay because "I'm the decider and I decide what's best." He sounded much like a parent telling children how things would be: "I'm the Daddy, that's why."This, indeed, is how Bush sees the presidency, and it is a point of view that will cause him trouble.Bush has never understood what presidential scholar Richard Neustadt discovered many years ago: In a democracy, the only real power the presidency commands is the power to persuade. Presidents have their bully pulpit, and the full attention of the news media, 24/7. In addition, they are given the benefit of the doubt when they go to the American people to ask for their support. But as effective as this power can be, it can be equally devastating when it languishes unused - or when a president pretends not to need to use it, as Bush has done.Apparently, Bush does not realize that to lead he must continually renew his approval with the public. He is not, as he thinks, the decider. The public is the decider. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by Hope on April 22, 2006 at 10:35:51 PT
Steven Steiner
He's certainly dedicated to the big pharmacuetical industry. That's so strange, especially under the circumstances of the tragedy that befell his son.I worry that he despised his son and is still persecuting the child, even after his death.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by FoM on April 22, 2006 at 10:19:06 PT
Press Release from DAMMADD
 Anti-Drug Group Applauds FDA Announcement Denying The Medicalization Of Smoked MarijuanaFor Immediate ReleaseALBANY, N.Y./EWORLDWIRE/April 22, 2006 --- DAMMADD (DADS AND MAD MOMS AGAINST DRUG DEALERS) and other parent groups from all over the country have been petitioning the FDA to make a ruling on the medicalization of marijuana. After years of letter writing, the FDA agreed with arguments against legalization and with the 1999 report by the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Science. In the report, there were six recommendations made, with recommendation number 5:"If there is any future for marijuana as a medicine, it lies in its isolated components, the cannabinoids and their synthetic derivatives. Isolated cannabinoids will provide more reliable effects than crude plant mixtures. Therefore, the purpose of clinical trials of smoked marijuana would not be to develop marijuana as a licensed drug, but such trials could be a first step towards the development of rapid-onset, nonsmoked cannabinoid delivery systems." Pro drug organizations such as the Drug Policy Alliance and the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) have worked to spin the truth to deceive the American public and ignore the new and upcoming cannabis medicine Sativex that has received phase III trial approvals from the FDA. In a statement issued April 21 on http://www.commondreams.org/news2006/0421-06.htm MPP Director of Government Relations Aaron Houston alleges the position adopted by the FDA is political, that it reflects "the decline of the FDA as an independent scientific agency," rather than a non-partisian decision-making authority.DAMMADD Founder Steven Steiner said, "The bottom line is these organizations are using the medicalization issue as a stepping stone for full legalization of marijuana."Steiner is calling on all Americans to join the fight against all organizations which, by virtue of this stance, work to erode and destroy family values and use sick people to further their agendas. Further information is available in videos at Americans For Drug Free Youth Web site, www.afdfy.org, at the Otto Moulton memorial library. For more information visit www.dammadd.org or at www.afdfy.org, call toll free 866-DAMMADD, or write to P.O. Box 95, Tioga Center, New York 13845. CONTACT:
Steven Steiner
DAMMADD
PO Box 95
Tioga Center, NY 13845
PHONE. 607-687-4151
FAX. 607-687-4240
EMAIL: stevensteiner dammadd.org
http://www.dammadd.orgSOURCE: DAMMADD 
http://newsroom.eworldwire.com/view_release.php?id=14322
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by Hope on April 22, 2006 at 09:19:23 PT
Paul
I agree with FoM. You are doing amazing good things, looks to me like, and you are a gentle man. Please be careful. There are those who bear unreasonable and unnatural hatreds towards reformers.I so admire your strength and the ability you have to get out there amongst them. Thank you.Power to you.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by FoM on April 22, 2006 at 08:34:31 PT
Paul
Thank you for all you are doing. All I want is for you not to get in trouble so please be careful.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by Dankhank on April 22, 2006 at 08:32:43 PT
step by step
Great work, Paul ...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by paulpeterson on April 22, 2006 at 08:00:15 PT
FoM
Meanwhile, out in rural Iowa, a small band of dissidents are moving forward with a plan to decriminalize small amounts of cannabis, with an exemption for medical users. Buena Vista County now has an ordinance on the agenda drafted by myself.Yesterday the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors came out to our farm to discuss these matters. He asked, instead of bringing the matter up on thbe agenda Tuesday, that I await his signal that the County Prosecutor has completed his evaluation of the matter. When I asked if he wanted me to just forget the proposal, he replied, "oh no, please don't do that-and don't be concerned about the negativity that everybody expects from the county attorney-some of our members just want his evaluation before any further discussion."He agreed with me that first timers should get only a fine-no jail time and no criminal record-he doesn't want kids losing the right to go to college. He strongly embraces the concept of medical exemption. He did tell me to forget about my provision to allow people to grow some marijuana plants (which I had already known was dead in the water anyway). He agrees that with two people not running for reelection and two others not facing the voting booth this year, this is a perfect time to move on this. I promised him that if they passed even a symbolic plan, my very next move would be to get out to the local hospital to enlist doctors willing to try this on certain populations. I also told him we would then try to enlist the DEA in a sanctioned research program here, in quiet Storm Lake, Iowa.   He hugged my mom and said he has no problem with me giving her, his friend, marijuana if it helps her-but he said she looks too spunky at 93 to need it. Then the guy even told me he would like to see people have the right to die with dignity-assisted suicide! I remarked that I believe my ideas pose a real alternative to people being in pain to the point that they want to check out. Then he said, true, but there is a point where even marijuana would not give the quality of life-there has to be compassion and a way out when that occurs.   We are truly blessed to have, in some small, quiet enclaves in this nation, some people that have their heads on straight and willing to take on difficult issues.   I am proud to be able to say to him I will wait as long as necessary for his call, since I trust his attitude so much. So don't look for any big news soon-this county prosecutor is known to procrastinate on county business. I will check back in with you'se here at Cannabis News when anything more starts to shake. Over and out. PAUL PETERSON
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by MikeEEEEE on April 22, 2006 at 07:32:51 PT
Exactly what they want
Ms. Waite said, "now it's clearly out there, so that people don't have to look everywhere to figure this out." Exactly what they want: They don't want people to figure out the truth.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by charmed quark on April 22, 2006 at 06:37:43 PT
"smoked marijuana"
I noticed that the full FDA release said "smoked marijuana" had no medical use. Were they implying that other delivery forms, such as vaporization or oral ingestion, might? Or did they just throw in "smoked" to help prejudice the concept of marijuana use, making the cigarette connection?-CQOT - if you want to get really scared, read this essay by John W. Dean about the character traits of George W. and how these might cause him to start some really scary "October Surprises" to try to shore up the party's election.
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20060421.html
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by OverwhelmSam on April 22, 2006 at 04:40:12 PT
A Delay Tactic
Gee, they are throwing everything but the kitchen sink now. I see it as a signal of victory. Bring it on Bush administration. LOL 
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment