Jump to content

Why The Fda And Dea Will Never Reschedule Marijuana


Recommended Posts

heres the letter from dea head from august 2016

https://www.dea.gov/divisions/hq/2016/Letter081116.pdf

 

blah blah science, blah blah children.

 

but did you know the actual requirements of the fda for rescheduling?

 

lets take a look at this presentation by dr throckmorton

 

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AboutFDA/CentersOffices/OfficeofMedicalProductsandTobacco/CDER/UCM438966.pdf

 

of course this presentation is dr throckmorton's personal opinion and may or may not be the official FDA opinion. but seeing as he is the guy at the FDA, i cant really see his professional opinion being different than his professional fda opinion.

 

in this slide we have the 8 scientific factors...

post-33152-0-10997700-1480689939.jpg

 

these 8 factors are amazingly written. you can see how "scientific" it is. because there are no factors that check the risk/reward benefit. there are 3 factors dedicated to abuse, which every substance on earth is abused by humans (food, alcohol, oxycontin etc).

 

does anyone know where the actual 8 factor analysis of marijuana is? i mean, i want to see the full analysis from the fda/dea done in 2016. where is it?

 

 

this slide shows the flowchart of the fda role in rescheduling drugs. obviously you can see that the DEA controls the process 100%. its the DEA's job to enforce the law, not change the laws.

post-33152-0-09281800-1480689997.jpg

 

and then this slide shows you what the fda is concerned about , really. its all about the children.

post-33152-0-32398700-1480690008.jpg

 

in the rest of the presentation it reinforces at every step how the fda will only schedule carefully "manufactured" and safe and reliable medicine.

Central Messages

• FDA has clear role in supporting scientific

and rigorous assessment of marijuana,

including product development

• The promise of safety, efficacy and

reliability is not good enough

every step of the FDA is to ensure it supports "product development" of medicines from the marijuana plant.

 

hope this clears things up.

post-33152-0-10997700-1480689939_thumb.jpg

post-33152-0-09281800-1480689997_thumb.jpg

post-33152-0-32398700-1480690008_thumb.jpg

Edited by bax
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reschedule Marijuana, Says Former Attorney General Eric Holder

 16

BY TOM ANGELL ON FEBRUARY 24TH, 2016 AT 8:56 AM | UPDATED: FEBRUARY 24TH, 2016 AT 11:16 AMHEALTH & MEDICINELAW & POLITICSPEOPLEUNCATEGORIZED

The man who once had the power to initiate a federal reclassification of marijuana now says he supports it.

“I certainly think it ought to be rescheduled,” Eric Holder, the former U.S. attorney general, said in anewly published interview. “You know, we treat marijuana in the same way that we treat heroin now, and that clearly is not appropriate.”

Cannabis is currently classified under Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act, the most restrictive category, which is supposed to be reserved for drugs with no medical value and a high potential for abuse.

As attorney general, Holder could have directed the federal government to begin reviewing that status but did not do so before leaving office last April. His successor, Loretta Lynch, has said she personally opposes legalizing marijuana but has called the Obama administration’s approach to generally letting states enact their own laws without interference “effective.” She hasn’t clearly weighed in on the question of rescheduling.

While still heading up the Justice Department, in September 2014, Holder called rescheduling“something that I think we need to ask ourselves, and use science as the basis for making that determination.”

Holder’s new comments on the issue came as part of a PBS Frontline special on heroin that debuted on Tuesday.

In the interview, which was conducted last September but kept under wraps until now, Holder also says it’s time for the U.S. to consider decriminalizing marijuana.

“I think that certainly that ought to be a part of the conversation,” he said. “You know, where do we want to be as a nation? Now, there’s certain drugs I just can’t see. It’s hard for me to imagine ever decriminalizing crack cocaine, drugs like that. But the whole question of should marijuana be decriminalized, I mean, that’s a conversation I think that we should engage in.”

While only Congress can change or remove criminal penalties on marijuana, under the Controlled Substances Act the attorney general can unilaterally begin the process that could lead to the drug’s rescheduling by directing the secretary of Health and Human Services to review scientific information on its effects and risks. After receiving the health analysis, the attorney general could then make a scheduling determination.

While part of the Obama administration, Holder often deflected questions about his administrative power on rescheduling by focusing on the fact that Congress could also act on the issue.

Last February, for example, he said reclassification “is something that would be well informed by having Congressional hearings and Congressional action informed by a policy determination that I think the administration would ultimately be glad to share.”

In November 2014 he said, “I think the question of how these drugs get scheduled and how they are ultimately treated is something for Congress to work on.”

President Obama himself seems to share that reluctance to take administrative action on the issue. In an interview with CNN in January 2014, he called rescheduling “a job for Congress.” When interviewer Jake Tapper pointed out that federal agencies have the power to reclassify drugs, the president refused to believe it. “It’s not something by ourselves that we start changing,” he said. “No, there are laws undergirding those determinations.”

Just last month, the president reportedly told a member of Congress, “If you get me a bill [to reschedule marijuana], and get it on my desk, I’ll probably sign it.”

Even in the new PBS interview, Holder still alludes to Congressional action when speaking about rescheduling.

Moving marijuana out of Schedule I — the most restrictive category — to Schedule III or lower would have a number of impacts.

Such reclassification, for example, would protect federal employees who use marijuana from a Reagan-era executive order that puts them at risk of losing their jobs.

Additionally, only drugs under Schedules I and II are affected by the tax provision (known as “280E”) that prevents state-legal businesses from deducting normal operational expenses from their federal taxes.

Rescheduling would also expand opportunities for scientific research into marijuana’s medical benefits.Douglas Throckmorton, deputy director of the Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, testified before the Senate last June that marijuana’s Schedule I status means there are “additional steps” that scientists wishing to study it must take.

Even moving cannabis down to just Schedule II would solve difficulties the U.S. Postal Service is causing for some newspapers that attempt to mail publications containing marijuana ads.

And more broadly, some advocates say that rescheduling move by the Obama administration would send a strong message to state lawmakers and international leaders that the federal government is finally beginning to address decades of mistakes on marijuana policy, which could spur further reforms.

 

http://www.marijuana.com/blog/news/2016/02/reschedule-marijuana-says-former-attorney-general-eric-holder/

 

 

Now we have actually moved backwards away from rescheduling because of Trump's attorney general pick Sessions:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

your posts are not on topic in this thread, resto. this is a thread about dea and fda.

My posts are about rescheduling marijuana. As you can see from the first sentence, bolded below, what I posted is valid in the contest of your thread here. You can't hide from the truth. Live with it.

 

The man (AG) who once had the power to initiate a federal reclassification .....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Malamute listens to crickets...."

 

Better get on it!  They are in Lansing this very second trying to screew you over.  GOGOGOGO!!!!

 

Drive to Lansing and start talking to representatives or you may lose more rights.

 

 This dog is tired. This liberal piece of shiit who has no idea what he is talking about is tired.

 

 Go fix your mistakes. Enjoy the republicans.  They are so special. 

 

try to find enough democrats to protect you. They are few and far between.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why they won't but, I'll tell you why they better. More than half of the country considers marijuana legal for medical use. 

 

At this point it is considered a treasonous law and it needs to be fixed. Not only is congress operating under treason, since less than 10% of the country supports them, they better start doing their job or they are looking at felony fraud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the 8 factor analysis of marijuana was printed in the federal register

 

Federal Register/Vol. 81, No. 156/Friday, August 12, 2016/Proposed Rules

 

can read it here, thanks christinew

https://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/fed_regs/rules/2016/fr0812.pdf

 

its interesting to read, because the DEA finds any possible way it can to modify the 8 factors, including adding in whatever moo poo they want.

 

so the petition to reschedule cannabis had this quote in it

Natural

cannabis typically would be no more

than 15 percent THC by weight. Thus it

is inconsistent that cannabis, with 15

percent weight THC, remains a

schedule I drug, while dronabinol, at

100 percent THC, is schedule III.

so in response the DEA/FDA/HHS/DOJ? or whoever actually wrote this said:

The HHS addressed this issue by

indicating that the modulating effects of

the other cannabinoids in marijuana on

D 9 -THC have not been demonstrated in

controlled studies. The HHS and the

DEA also note that the determination of

the abuse potential of a substance

considers not only psychoactive effects

but also chemistry, pharmacology,

pharmacokinetics, usage patterns, and

diversion history among other measures.

so factor 1 was focused just on number of people using marijuana and a rebuttal to the marinol question in the petition.

 

The HHS

mentioned that marijuana and Marinol

differ on a wide variety of factors and

these differences are major reasons for

differential scheduling of marijuana and

Marinol. Marijuana, as discussed more

fully in Factors 3 and 6, does not have

a currently accepted medical use in the

United States, is highly abused, and has

a lack of accepted safety.

Factor 2: Scientific Evidence of the

Drug Pharmcological Effects, if Known

 

the DEA/DOJ/HHS/FDA or whoever wrote this says marijuana causes STROKE AND DEATHS.

 

The DEA notes two recent reports that

reviewed several case studies on

marijuana and cardiovascular

complications (Panayiotides, 2015;

Hackam, 2015). Panayiotides (2015)

reported that approximately 25.6% of

the cardiovascular cases from marijuana

use resulted in death from data

provided by the French

Addictovigilance Network during the

period of 2006–2010. Several case

studies on marijuana usage and

cardiovascular events were discussed

and it was concluded that although a

causal link cannot be established due to

not knowing exact amounts of

marijuana used in the cases and

confounding variables, the available

evidence supports a link between

marijuana and cardiotoxicity. Hackham

(2015) reviewed 34 case reports or case

series reports of marijuana and stroke/

ischemia in 64 stroke patients and

reported that in 81% of the cases there

was a temporal relationship between

marijuana usage and stroke or ischemic

event. The author concluded that

collective analysis of the case reports

supports a causal link between

marijuana use and stroke.

HHS says cannabinoids kill cancer

 

The HHS cited a study (Sarfaraz et al.,

2005) demonstrating that WIN 55,212–2

(a mixed CB1/CB2 agonist) induces

apoptosis (one form of cell death) in

prostate cancer cells and decreases

expression of androgen receptors and

prostate specific antigens, suggesting a

potential therapeutic value for

cannabinoid agonists in the treatment of

prostate cancer, an androgen-stimulated

type of carcinoma.

(3) The petitioners mentioned on page

9 of exhibit B that ‘‘[t]here has never

been a lethal overdose of marijuana

reported in humans’’ and that ‘‘[t]here is

no known LD50 for any form of

cannabis.’’

As more fully discussed in Factor 3

below, the HHS and DEA conclude that

there are not adequate studies to

determine the safety of marijuana.

 

lol. money quote time

 

Moreover, the lack of overdose

deaths attributed to a drug is not

evidence that the drug is safe for

medical use.

yeah, overdose deaths on oxy, valium, methadone, who cares? marijuana is eeeevil and has no accepted safety. Edited by bax
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...