The DEA wants to remove the barriers to cannabis research, a
spokesman told a NewDomain in a lengthy interview today. But how and when
will it reschedule cannabis as a Schedule II drug? [Exclusive]
In an interview with aNewDomain today, DEA staff coordinator Russ Baer wouldn’t confirm the Santa Monica Observer report that the DEA will reschedule cannabis as a prescription-only Schedule II drug on Aug. 1, 2016. But he did comment at length about the agency’s thoughts around legalizing medical cannabis and how rescheduling cannabis from its current Schedule I status would have to work.
Baer, in his comments, went well beyond the prepared statement the agency gave to the The Houston Chronicle and other media covering the story earlier today. Check out his comments and our takeaway below.
“This is a complicated plant.”
First off, the decision to reschedule cannabis isn’t a simple one because cannabis biochemistry is so complex, Baer said, and the variety of forms medical cannabis now takes are many.
“What is under-reported right now is how complex the marijuana plant is,” he added, pointing out that it has hundreds of chemical actors, or cannabinoids.”
THC (delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol) and Cannabidiol (CBD) are two main ones, but even those are dramatically different. “Also, we are talking about synthetic THC, CBD (based treatments), oils, extracts edibles.” The challenge for researchers and government agencies is to “identify the parts of the plant that might have benefit, and separating out (the beneficial) parts from the ones that “aren’t beneficial or harmful.”
That the DEA is thinking about various cannabinoids as well as the many forms nascent treatments, like THC tablets for nausea in AIDs and cancer patients or CBD for easing seizures in epileptic children suggests the DEA may not be contemplating an all-or-nothing decision for cannabis, where it’s all prescription-only or nothing.
If the DEA is truly thinking hard about the different parts of the plant and the some 480 compounds it contains, as well as all the forms medical cannabis can take, that suggests a more comprehensive, structured approach is possible.
Consider this thoughtful editorial that ran a few days ago in The Denver Post. In it, cannabis policy attorney Tom Downey examined the myriad of ways the DEA decision could go.
The DEA, Downey said, “could partially legalize medical marijuana, and the federal government could usher in a new era with a comprehensive and multi-structural approach to pot policy” by rescheduling cannabis to a “federal prescription system,” leaving state decisions on medical and recreational use intact.
As you’ll see below, many of the DEA’s comments today stand in line with such an approach.
“We aren’t holding ourselves to any artificial timeframe.”
Since April, media reports have been reporting that the DEA will announce its decision on how or whether it is rescheduling cannabis, or medical cannabis products. is due on June 30 or July 1. That date comes from a 28-page DEA memo sent to a group of US senators in April.
But that letter, the DEA’s Baer told aNewDomain, was leaked. But plans change. “We are not holding ourselves to any artificial timeline,” he added.
But the DEA “does already have the FDA’s scientific and health recommendation” a required step in rescheduling.
One of the interesting things about the leaked DEA letter, though, is that it fully outlines the multi-step process the DEA must go through whenever it is considering the rescheduling of a drug.
That is what is required by The Controlled Substances Act of 1970, he said, “and the CSA is what drives us.”
The CSA “requires us to go through our own analysis, an eight factor analysis,” Baer added. Part of that is getting the FDA’s recommendation on the matter, “and that has already happened,” he said.
“But we also have to take into account not just the FDA recommendations, but recommendations from lawyers, chemists, pharmacologists …”
The DEA is “an enforcement agency, we don’t make policy, we enforce the law … the Controlled Substance Act (of 1970) delineates what our concerns ought to be … and we follow it in every instance,” he said, remarking that “everyone thinks the DEA can do anything to anyone at any time.
But it can’t. We have to act with the authority vested to us by congress, and it’s all described in the CSA.”
The supposition that the DEA can just summarily go in and change the legality of this or that drug is a big misconception the media seems to have right now, he said. The DEA follows the law, not the other way around.
And laws can change. “Congress could create and pass legislation that reschedules any substance .. they could pass a law to reschedule cannabis, Baer added.
This comment, we should not, seems relevant in light of news yesterday about the Medical Marijuana Research Act of 2016. The legislation was introduced by US representatives Sam Farr (D-CA) , Andy Harris (R-MD), Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) and H. Morgan Griffith (R-VA).
Brian Schatz (D-HI), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Chris Coons (D-DE) and Thom Tillis (R-NC) are introducing similar legislation in the Senate, too.
In a statement about the Senate bill yesterday, Farr said the
legislation is about “helping people …. as more states pass their own
medical marijuana laws, it’s time for Congress to reexamine federal
policy. This bill does just that by supporting research so policy
decisions about the role of medical marijuana are based on science and
facts instead of rhetoric,” he said.
Also, a sweeping bipartisan cannabis legalization bill that stalled in the Senate last year is reportedly being resurrected this year by US Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC). Called The Compassionate Access, Research Expansion, and Respect States Act of 2015, or
the Carers Act for short, that bill called for the decriminalizing
medical cannabis so it is available to patients and researchers, while
leaving states free to make medical or recreational cannabis available
to citizens if they wish.
“We do want to remove the roadblocks for research … “
One of the main reasons the DEA wants to reschedule cannabis, according to media reports, is so that it can make research easier.
“We do want to remove the roadblocks for research,” the DEA’s Baer told aNewDomain in this interview, pointing out that there are security issues and paperwork that make doing so with an illegal Schedule I substance more daunting.
This suggests that the DEA is seriously leaning toward to rescheduling at least some cannabinoids, like CBD, for instance, in the interest of spurring research.
“We want there to be research on
marijuana and its component parts, there needs to be (more) studies
about both the benefits and the adverse effects about marijuana,” he
said, adding: “We want to remove the roadblocks
for (cannabis research.) We want to know more about cannabis— we need
rigorous scientific research — the DEA stands behind the scientific
process.
“Safe medical cannabis use requires rigorous peer-reviewed
studies,” Baer continued. “That’s true whether it’s for PTSD
(patients) smoking cannabis or children with epileptic conditions … we
support all (studies), but what we don’t support are decisions made on
anecdotal evidence.”
“We are told by NIDA, also, that there are medical studies out there also preliminarily indicate CBD is beneficial,” Baer added.
“We’re not going to go chase after the mom who picks up cannabinol (CBD) in (one) state for her epileptic child and takes it to another state … .”
Further, DEA doesn’t want to have to go after such smokeable marijuana users as veterans with PTSD, he said.
“Marijuana is important, but most of our attention is elsewhere,” Baer explained. The
cannabis rescheduling question may be top of mind with the nation’s
media and the growing legal cannabis industry at large, but the DEA has
bigger fish to fry.
“We have limited resources, remember,” Baer said. “Marijuana is important, but our efforts are mainly focused
on the nation’s growing opioid crisis,” he said. “We’re focusing on
fentanyl, fentanyl compounds and on preventing the deaths caused by
opioid addiction.” Chasing around private citizens sneaking cannabis
tinctures into their bags “just isn’t a priority right now.
No comments:
Post a Comment