This was completely expected, but still aggravating for some reason: Edit: Better link: http://www.safeaccessnow.org/article.php?id=6703 http://americansforsafeaccess.org/downloads/CRC_Petition_DEA_Answer.pdf This is actually a good thing because it stops the government from using the stall tactic that it has been using for the last 9 years. Now the matter can be addressed again using new information that has been developed since 2002.
They're just diggin themselves a bigger and bigger hole and eventually people are gunna smarten up and take that dirt and bury them with it...if you're catchin my drift.
Yes DEA receives petition to reschedule marijuana. DEA requests a scientific and medical evaluation and rescheduling recommendation from the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). The National Instutes of Health (NIH) is an agency of the DHHS. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) is part of the NIH. The NCI publishes an article on their website describing the medical uses of cannabis. How can the DHHS recommend keeping cannabis on Schedule I when one of its own agencies is identifying cannabis as a Complimentary Alternative Medicine? The 2002 petition was submitted with information available in 2002. The denial of the petition was based on information available in (approx) 2004. Any new action will include newer information (maybe like the NCI articles?).
i heard that norml or some other organization was actually anticipating this denial and that they would sue the dea, ill try to find the link edit: couldnt find the original but
Are you kidding me.. What's their response to why the national cancer institute acknowledges the medical value of marijuana (being a federal bureau)? This honestly makes me rage.
DEA are a bunch of children in suits that need to be eliminated. They have very little positive impact within our communities. Just another way for the guy next door with a stick up his ass and a blindfold on his eyes to get a job.
I'm pretty amazed at the size of the balls on this gal Leonhart. I hope they sit her ass in the U.S. Court of Appeals and make her read aloud the plethera of medical studies showing the benefits of the good weed.
Remember that this petition was submitted in 2002, and the information used to deny the petition was gathered within a few years of the petition being submitted. The NCI information was not published then. Much has changed since then, even more than the article on the NCI website. The DEA has proposed to move organically derived THC to Schedule III to allow cheaper generic versions of Dronabinol/Marinol onto the market. This of course means THC derived from cannabis plants. The DEA has licensed 55 drug companies to work with THC and other cannabinoid analogues (synthetic and organic) to produce drugs. The source of organic material would be the the farm/laboratory @ The University of Mississippi. The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) and ElSohly Laboratories, Inc. (the U. Miss. lab that supplies the government with research marijuana) are sponsoring the annual symposium of the International Cannabinoid Research Society in 2011. The FDA approved a study on the efficacy of smoked and vaporized cannabis in the treatment of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The FDA approved phase III clinical trials of Sativex (organically derived THC and CBD) for cancer pain. These are just some of the developments since the original petition was submitted in 2002. This is not to mention the many studies that have been done showing the potential of cannabis and cannabinoids for medical applications. Although this seems like a "no brainer", it will still be an uphill legal battle to get cannabis rescheduled. There are a lot of forces working against it
It took them 9 years to come up with that BS? All it takes is 2 hours for the average person to sit down and watch a documentary on marijuana to convince them of its benefits.
It likely took them about 2 seconds, as their story has not changed in some time. I cannot help but think of the US Government supposedly submitting their patent application for CBD in 2001 and approved in 2003 was it? With this petition first active in 2002, is it any wonder the DEA stalled and gave themselves a 10 year head start to squashing marketplace competition, allow their patent to be approved, and research opportunities handed off to their corporate sponsors/keepers? (We cannot forget, most of the FDA's funding comes from big pharma, a huge conflict of interest.) I think it played out just as they wanted it to play out. Hopefully the "delay and stall" tactic is unraveling for the DEA, but there is such a head start built in, once again, it will be hard for things not to be shut out to Americans in favor of massive corporate profits, just like politics in general now. Americans MUST know that their own government is placing people in jail while they themselves hold a patent. Again and again, I come back to this point. I cannot think of anything more unjust and infuriating.
The important thing to remember about U.S. Patent #6630507 is that it is a patent for an application or a method and not for the substance itself: While this is yet another argument for rescheduling cannabis, it does not lead to a monopoly on the "substance" cannabis by the DEA.