Feds Stick To Court Argument That Marijuana Is Dangerous

[420]

Two weeks after President Obama signed legislation prohibiting federal interference with state medical marijuana laws, his administration has told a federal judge in Sacramento that pot is still a dangerous drug with no medical value.

The U.S. attorney's office, representing Obama's Justice Department, made the argument in a court filing Wednesday opposing a challenge to the long-standing federal law that classifies marijuana as a Schedule One drug along with heroin, LSD and ecstasy – substances that have a high potential for abuse and no safe medical use.

While there may be "some dispute among doctors as to whether marijuana is medicine," there is ample evidence to support the government's conclusion that "this psychoactive, addictive drug is not accepted as safe for medical use at this time, even with medical supervision," Assistant U.S. Attorney Gregory Broderick wrote.

Lawyers for alleged marijuana growers countered that the government presented no credible evidence that marijuana carries the potential hazards of legal substances, like tobacco and alcohol, and that the administration's position makes even less sense in light of the law Obama signed Dec. 16.

That law, part of an overall government financing bill for the year, bars the federal government from spending money to prevent California and 21 other states from "implementing their own state laws that authorize the use, distribution, possession or cultivation of medical marijuana."

Congress can't rationally "justify a finding that marijuana has no medical benefits while demanding that the distribution of medical marijuana be protected from federal government interference," said Zenia Gilg, lawyer for one of seven defendants charged with growing marijuana on national forest land in Trinity and Tehama counties.

The written arguments come two months after a hearing ordered by U.S. District Judge Kimberly Mueller over prosecutors' objections. She said defense lawyers had presented expert declarations showing "new scientific and medical information" raising questions about the continued classification of marijuana in Schedule One, which effectively outlaws its possession nationwide.

At the hearing, the defendants called doctors and researchers who asserted marijuana's medical benefits and relative safety. The administration presented its own expert, a Harvard professor and former drug official in the George W. Bush administration who said pot is both addictive and dangerous.

In Wednesday's filing, the Obama administration said a single expert's testimony is enough to show the legally required "rational basis" for marijuana's current classification. But Broderick, the government's lawyer, also said that "most mainstream physicians agree that marijuana is a dangerous drug," citing the American Psychiatric Association's observation that pot use can have "serious side effects."

Although some ingredients of marijuana have government-approved medicinal use, Broderick wrote, there are no adequate long-term studies attesting to the medical value or safety of marijuana. In fact, he said, "there is no standard, 'medical' marijuana," and neither patients nor their doctors know which substances they're ingesting.

Gilg argued that there are many such studies, but none the government will accept because it has refused to release federally approved marijuana supplies to independent researchers.

News Moderator: 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Feds stick to court argument that marijuana is dangerous - SFGate
Author: Bob Egelko
Contact: begelko@sfchronicle.com
Photo Credit: Ted S. Warren / Associated Press
Website: SFGate: San Francisco Bay Area - News,Bay Area news, Sports, Business, Entertainment, Classifieds - SFGate

 

[wobbler]

"still a dangerous drug with no medical value" ......... ?

That's funny, a few years ago didn't the whole board of an International Tobacco Company declare one after the other that Nicotine was not harmful or addictive............Yeh, it must be true ( rolls eyes ).

 

[TrueBliss]

His own administration does not listen to him.

 

[Colesdad]

the Obama administration said a single expert’s testimony is enough to show the legally required “rational basis” for marijuana’s current classification.........

So, all it takes is one person's opinion to make/uphold a law.

This is the reason the United States invades some countries to establish a democracy, so that the people there have a voice instead of ONE PERSON deciding the law.

 

[c526]

there is no we the people,its do as your told.

 

[gentlhart]

...a singe expert's testimony...

An expert in what? Clearly not cannabis.

 

[420 Motoco]

Its truly amazing! Its just not the Obama administration (all of Capitol Hill and politics give me the craps) and its not because they are 'square heads' they know whats going on. The big Pharmies line their pockets to keep it illegal. The same old excuse though? It embarrases me that our Government can keep using the same line. Its not about smoking, digesting, capsules, edibles or anything do do with euphoria. Its all about using the concentrated oil with no euphoria. I know most know nothing about the no euphoria on potent concentrate but if you did, you quickly understand. You simply won't need any man-made meds, end of story, end of the pharmies. This is why Alcohol/Tobacco is legal, it simply feeds into the medical wheel. Take a look around, only true expansion I see going on is new hospitals. Wars, cigs, booze, GMO's, cancer epidemic (funny, just seen on the news its going down, BS) pollution and the list goes on. Simply all about the money/quan/greed and no body makes more quan than the big pharmies. Yes, they buy governments. Rant of 2015.

Peace Brothers and Sisters

 

[c526]

wasnt that long ago the bossman(potus) said"I feel weed is safer than alcohol" but its(booze) still for sale in my town,in every town.

420Motoco has it,until pharma quits paying,we aint going anywhere.

If the US gov would say eff it and legalize it,the world would follow suit,and within 3 years the world would be free,Its not Just us here,it really is decisions for earth,Gdam bs.

 

[cleanslate]

Its truly amazing! Its just not the Obama administration (all of Capitol Hill and politics give me the craps) and its not because they are 'square heads' they know whats going on. The big Pharmies line their pockets to keep it illegal. The same old excuse though? It embarrases me that our Government can keep using the same line. Its not about smoking, digesting, capsules, edibles or anything do do with euphoria. Its all about using the concentrated oil with no euphoria. I know most know nothing about the no euphoria on potent concentrate but if you did, you quickly understand. You simply won't need any man-made meds, end of story, end of the pharmies. This is why Alcohol/Tobacco is legal, it simply feeds into the medical wheel. Take a look around, only true expansion I see going on is new hospitals. Wars, cigs, booze, GMO's, cancer epidemic (funny, just seen on the news its going down, BS) pollution and the list goes on. Simply all about the money/quan/greed and no body makes more quan than the big pharmies. Yes, they buy governments. Rant of 2015.

Peace Brothers and Sisters

A very concise and accurate rant too. Well said.

 

[dingusmcgee]

to go in front of a judge and argue this stupidity takes a special kind of character. the US Attorney needs to review how to present evidence (ie; with facts and data) as all they've done here is to provide an uninformed opinion to the court.

 

[wobbler]

there is no we the people,its do as your told.

We have an old saying down here that you probably have also.
"There is no Justice.......Just us."

 

[cleanslate]

This court case is yet another example of the futility of the debate over cannabis being a "good drug" vs "bad drug." When the cannabis plant was labeled as a drug -- and a dangerous narcotic at that -- in the early 20th century the framing of the discussion was dictated by the prohibitionists giving them the initiative to continue passing increasingly severe laws against the plant and those who use it.

Laws are notoriously ambiguous and often sloppily crafted and this of course leads to appeals to courts to interpret the law. Laws written to prohibit cannabis are especially imprecise. The 1937 Hemp Stamp Act defined "marihuana: as all parts of the Cannabis Sativa L. specifically. Cannabis Indica was not mentioned in the act, yet Cannabis Indica (very commonly used in medicines up till then) was also prohibited. This same definition is carried over into the 1970 Controlled Substances Act. Even though Cannabis Indica is not specifically named in the law it has effectively become defined as "marihuana" by many court interpretations.

What this goes to show is that from their inception the anti cannabis laws are based on profound botanical ignorance about the nature of the cannabis plant. There is no really scientifically precise and consistent definition of what a drug is vs. a herbal/dietary supplement within the Federal government.

This is the FDA definition of a drug:

A substance recognized by an official pharmacopoeia or formulary.
A substance intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease.
A substance (other than food) intended to affect the structure or any function of the body.
A substance intended for use as a component of a medicine but not a device or a
component, part or accessory of a device.
Biological products are included within this definition and are generally covered by
the same laws and regulations, but differences exist regarding their manufacturing
processes (chemical process versus biological process.
Drugs@FDA Glossary of Terms

Cannabis last appeared in the United States Pharmacopeia in 1942. So it doesn't meet that first criteria of the FDA definition of a drug. It does in fact meet the second definition as a substance intended for curing and treatment of disease, although the federal government insist that it doesn't -- being more like snake oil medicine at best and highly addictive and detrimental to health at worst.

If cannabis is an awkward fit into the drug "shoe" then what is it? Food does not fall within the FDA definition of a drug. Cannabis is first and foremost an important and highly nutritious food for humans going back at least 10,000 years. Cannabis was one of the first cultivated food crops--perhaps the first according to Carl Sagan. We then discovered that is was an excellent fiber and of course a very powerful medicine for all sorts of maladies and conditions. At some point during the long, evolving, relationship with the plant someone discovered that heated or burned cannabis imparted wonderfully enlivening and conscious altering effects. So for thousands of years humans considered cannabis to be a food, fiber and medicine; not a drug, but a herbal medicine.

Entheobotanist Christian Ratsch writes "No other plant has been with humans as long as hemp. It is most certainly one of humanity's oldest cultural objects. Wherever it was known, it was considered a functional, healing, inebriating, and aphrodisiac plant.Through the centuries, myths have arisen about this mysterious plant and its divine powers. Entire generations have revered it as sacred.... The power of hemp has been praised in hymns and prayers."(Ratsch 1997).

In 2013 The American Herbal Pharmacopoeia added two monographs on cannabis to the pharmacopoeia.
American Herbal Pharmacopoeia
This is the authoritative standards for medicinal herbs, the equivalent to the American Pharmacopeia for drugs. The AHP considers cannabis to be a herb and not a drug. Cannabis is and always has been used by humans as a medicinal herb, in truth it is the herb of herbs: the quintessential medicine and supplement for the critically important endocannabinoid system.

Cannabis should be governed by DSHEA of 1994. Congress defined the term "dietary supplement" in the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) of 1994. A dietary supplement is a product taken by mouth that contains a "dietary ingredient" intended to supplement the diet. The "dietary ingredients" in these products may include: vitamins, minerals, herbs or other botanicals, amino acids, and substances such as enzymes, organ tissues, glandulars, and metabolites. Dietary supplements can also be extracts or concentrates, and may be found in many forms such as tablets, capsules, softgels, gelcaps, liquids, or powders. They can also be in other forms, such as a bar, but if they are, information on their label must not represent the product as a conventional food or a sole item of a meal or diet. Whatever their form may be, DSHEA places dietary supplements in a special category under the general umbrella of "foods," not drugs, and requires that every supplement be labeled a dietary supplement.

If cannabis was governed by DSHEA instead of the CSA it would be as available as any other herbal medicine. Under DSHEA a herb doesn't have to go through FDA drug trials. The herb is considered innocent (causing no harm) until proven guilty (harmful). Herbs, and cannabis in particular, are much more complex than simple compound Big Pharma drugs. They are not well suited for randomized, placebo, blind trials that the FDA requires for drugs. There are common, regularly used, herbs/plants such as borage (Borago officinalis) - euphoria and
fennel (Foeniculum vulgare) - highly hallucinogenic, that are psychoactive and not even on the FDA's radar as being potentially dangerous.

The question is why are pro-cannabis activists hoping and begging for a rescheduling of cannabis on the CSA schedule? Arguing that it is safer than other drugs, playing into the prohibitionists' trap of endless circular arguments of, is it a "good drug" or "bad drug." It is a rigged game setup by the powerful to serve their sociopathic agenda. We must opt out of that game. That is the tangled web that the early 20th century prohibitionists spun to rupture the relationship we had with cannabis for thousands of years. A long, beneficial, and symbiotic relationship that developed long before there were any governments on the face of the Earth. It is an unalienable right of humans to continue that relationship with the healing, herb, cannabis. Cannabis is not a drug, it is a plant; the healing "herb of herbs."

 

[420 Motoco]

Great read! I especially liked the last paragraph! Thanks!

This court case is yet another example of the futility of the debate over cannabis being a "good drug" vs "bad drug." When the cannabis plant was labeled as a drug -- and a dangerous narcotic at that -- in the early 20th century the framing of the discussion was dictated by the prohibitionists giving them the initiative to continue passing increasingly severe laws against the plant and those who use it.

Laws are notoriously ambiguous and often sloppily crafted and this of course leads to appeals to courts to interpret the law. Laws written to prohibit cannabis are especially imprecise. The 1937 Hemp Stamp Act defined "marihuana: as all parts of the Cannabis Sativa L. specifically. Cannabis Indica was not mentioned in the act, yet Cannabis Indica (very commonly used in medicines up till then) was also prohibited. This same definition is carried over into the 1970 Controlled Substances Act. Even though Cannabis Indica is not specifically named in the law it has effectively become defined as "marihuana" by many court interpretations.

What this goes to show is that from their inception the anti cannabis laws are based on profound botanical ignorance about the nature of the cannabis plant. There is no really scientifically precise and consistent definition of what a drug is vs. a herbal/dietary supplement within the Federal government.

This is the FDA definition of a drug:

A substance recognized by an official pharmacopoeia or formulary.
A substance intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease.
A substance (other than food) intended to affect the structure or any function of the body.
A substance intended for use as a component of a medicine but not a device or a
component, part or accessory of a device.
Biological products are included within this definition and are generally covered by
the same laws and regulations, but differences exist regarding their manufacturing
processes (chemical process versus biological process.
Drugs@FDA Glossary of Terms

Cannabis last appeared in the United States Pharmacopeia in 1942. So it doesn't meet that first criteria of the FDA definition of a drug. It does in fact meet the second definition as a substance intended for curing and treatment of disease, although the federal government insist that it doesn't -- being more like snake oil medicine at best and highly addictive and detrimental to health at worst.

If cannabis is an awkward fit into the drug "shoe" then what is it? Food does not fall within the FDA definition of a drug. Cannabis is first and foremost an important and highly nutritious food for humans going back at least 10,000 years. Cannabis was one of the first cultivated food crops--perhaps the first according to Carl Sagan. We then discovered that is was an excellent fiber and of course a very powerful medicine for all sorts of maladies and conditions. At some point during the long, evolving, relationship with the plant someone discovered that heated or burned cannabis imparted wonderfully enlivening and conscious altering effects. So for thousands of years humans considered cannabis to be a food, fiber and medicine; not a drug, but a herbal medicine.

Entheobotanist Christian Ratsch writes "No other plant has been with humans as long as hemp. It is most certainly one of humanity's oldest cultural objects. Wherever it was known, it was considered a functional, healing, inebriating, and aphrodisiac plant.Through the centuries, myths have arisen about this mysterious plant and its divine powers. Entire generations have revered it as sacred.... The power of hemp has been praised in hymns and prayers."(Ratsch 1997).

In 2013 The American Herbal Pharmacopoeia added two monographs on cannabis to the pharmacopoeia.
American Herbal Pharmacopoeia
This is the authoritative standards for medicinal herbs, the equivalent to the American Pharmacopeia for drugs. The AHP considers cannabis to be a herb and not a drug. Cannabis is and always has been used by humans as a medicinal herb, in truth it is the herb of herbs: the quintessential medicine and supplement for the critically important endocannabinoid system.

Cannabis should be governed by DSHEA of 1994. Congress defined the term "dietary supplement" in the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) of 1994. A dietary supplement is a product taken by mouth that contains a "dietary ingredient" intended to supplement the diet. The "dietary ingredients" in these products may include: vitamins, minerals, herbs or other botanicals, amino acids, and substances such as enzymes, organ tissues, glandulars, and metabolites. Dietary supplements can also be extracts or concentrates, and may be found in many forms such as tablets, capsules, softgels, gelcaps, liquids, or powders. They can also be in other forms, such as a bar, but if they are, information on their label must not represent the product as a conventional food or a sole item of a meal or diet. Whatever their form may be, DSHEA places dietary supplements in a special category under the general umbrella of "foods," not drugs, and requires that every supplement be labeled a dietary supplement.

If cannabis was governed by DSHEA instead of the CSA it would be as available as any other herbal medicine. Under DSHEA a herb doesn't have to go through FDA drug trials. The herb is considered innocent (causing no harm) until proven guilty (harmful). Herbs, and cannabis in particular, are much more complex than simple compound Big Pharma drugs. They are not well suited for randomized, placebo, blind trials that the FDA requires for drugs. There are common, regularly used, herbs/plants such as borage (Borago officinalis) - euphoria and
fennel (Foeniculum vulgare) - highly hallucinogenic, that are psychoactive and not even on the FDA's radar as being potentially dangerous.

The question is why are pro-cannabis activists hoping and begging for a rescheduling of cannabis on the CSA schedule? Arguing that it is safer than other drugs, playing into the prohibitionists' trap of endless circular arguments of, is it a "good drug" or "bad drug." It is a rigged game setup by the powerful to serve their sociopathic agenda. We must opt out of that game. That is the tangled web that the early 20th century prohibitionists spun to rupture the relationship we had with cannabis for thousands of years. A long, beneficial, and symbiotic relationship that developed long before there were any governments on the face of the Earth. It is an unalienable right of humans to continue that relationship with the healing, herb, cannabis. Cannabis is not a drug, it is a plant; the healing "herb of herbs."

 

[J9BLACK]

Its truly amazing! Its just not the Obama administration (all of Capitol Hill and politics give me the craps) and its not because they are 'square heads' they know whats going on. The big Pharmies line their pockets to keep it illegal. The same old excuse though? It embarrases me that our Government can keep using the same line. Its not about smoking, digesting, capsules, edibles or anything do do with euphoria. Its all about using the concentrated oil with no euphoria. I know most know nothing about the no euphoria on potent concentrate but if you did, you quickly understand. You simply won't need any man-made meds, end of story, end of the pharmies. This is why Alcohol/Tobacco is legal, it simply feeds into the medical wheel. Take a look around, only true expansion I see going on is new hospitals. Wars, cigs, booze, GMO's, cancer epidemic (funny, just seen on the news its going down, BS) pollution and the list goes on. Simply all about the money/quan/greed and no body makes more quan than the big pharmies. Yes, they buy governments. Rant of 2015.

Peace Brothers and Sisters

If more and more people can and do consume cannabis, especially in big places like Caifornia and Colorado...and if cannabis can prevent some forms of cancer, why wouldn't the cancer rate start to go down?

 

[420 Motoco]

Hi j9BLACK,

The Wife and I do consulting/caretaking and 90% are cancer patients. Cancer in the US is an epidemic and growing. We thought the same thing you questioned. Recently the word is spreading faster but amazingly the medicine isn't (the proper medicine being the cannabis concentrated oil, good quality with high THC/CBD concentrate, not the cut down product that is an afterthought of trimming the flowers). Most people we meet have already tried the concentrate. It was the cut down version and with it improper instructions to use it which is down the hatch, suppositories or sub-lingual. So most who try the concentrated oil fail curing their cancer or other ailments, stop using it and then start spreading the word the only thing the concentrate is good for is getting stoned. The Wife and I get the leftovers for the ones that haven't given up but western medicine failed and sent home to hospice/pass. Chemo/Radiation is a major fail. The statistics from the pharmies on chemo/radiation treatment are false on their success rate and almost like clockwork the cancer returns, especially in late stage cancers.

A worthy mention; we were approached by a newly formed company who is interested in the medicinal side of the industry and told us they have a list of at least 10,000 people who are wanting cannabis concentrated oil for their treatment. Most of the people on the list was from Cali and Colorado. Cannot tell you how many people just in Cali are looking for the correct oil (you would think it would be all over). Cut down versions of the concentrate and improper use, false information on the web, big pharmies playing a big part on keeping the oil on the shelf is your answer with some detail why.

If more and more people can and do consume cannabis, especially in big places like Caifornia and Colorado...and if cannabis can prevent some forms of cancer, why wouldn't the cancer rate start to go down?

 

[Indica420]

If more and more people can and do consume cannabis, especially in big places like Caifornia and Colorado...and if cannabis can prevent some forms of cancer, why wouldn't the cancer rate start to go down?

It will.

 

[Indica420]

They are putting off the inevitable. We can't win this fight now, but we will in the end. They are simply stalling so that they (gov't, big pharma, and big alcohol) can enjoy their ride for the meantime. They know the end is right around the corner.

Legalization is near. This is nothing more than a small speed bump along the way.

I think some of these people will end up burning in Hell if there is a Hell. There are kids living with seizures every day, and they will continue to die because they can't get good medicine. Cancer patients, like myself, will continue to suffer because of a few greedy and powerful people. But the day will come, and they will fall.

I seriously don't know how they sleep at night, but that's not my problem.

 

[420 Motoco]

Hi Indica,

We are on the same page. The Pharmies are scrambling, and hell isn't good enough for these yahoo's! You mentioned cancer. Are you using the concentrate for your cure? If so there are some good reads here. Cannabis Oil Dosing Tutorial: Tacking Method

They are putting off the inevitable. We can't win this fight now, but we will in the end. They are simply stalling so that they (gov't, big pharma, and big alcohol) can enjoy their ride for the meantime. They know the end is right around the corner.

Legalization is near. This is nothing more than a small speed bump along the way.

I think some of these people will end up burning in Hell if there is a Hell. There are kids living with seizures every day, and they will continue to die because they can't get good medicine. Cancer patients, like myself, will continue to suffer because of a few greedy and powerful people. But the day will come, and they will fall.

I seriously don't know how they sleep at night, but that's not my problem.

 

[Indica420]

I can't get it, and I don't have the funds to move. I'm in Ohio. I'm SOL until Ohio votes it in. Even if I could move, I don't have the funds to buy it.

 

[c526]

Legalization is near. This is nothing more than a small speed bump along the way.

I love the positive attitude,but how many of us "criminals" have to die first? this speed bump ive been waiting on since 1980.

I risk everything,just to cure myself and others,I refuse to turn into a pill zombie,and when you live with a DR the dinner conversations can get "warm"

I dont care if the world ever goes rec,I believe in the freedom to choose but its the medical exploration and cures that I want.but that wont happen in my life time,there is zero money in cures,I am hopeful,but doubtful I will see it in my lifetime.