September 22, 2012 · 0 Comments
By Ron Marczyk, RN
The United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has agreed to hear oral arguments in Americans for Safe Access v. Drug Enforcement Administration, a lawsuit challenging the federal government’s classification of marijuana as a dangerous drug with no medical value.
The D.C. Circuit is scheduled to hear oral arguments on October 16th at 9:30 a.m.
Want to help? Ask your family doctor to sign on to support safe access!
You as a patient have a right to choose and be fully involved in your own plan of medical treatment.
But why is this case being heard now, after 10 years of stonewalling by the DEA?
Timing in life is everything. Is there a hidden agenda at work here?
This would give the DEA the right to say that they did reduce Schedule I for marijuana, but only a special “type” of the marijuana that is safe, because the high has been removed.
The strategy here is to give your opponent what they want, but not in the way they want it.
This case is about the falsification of the DEA’s original outdated, erroneous claims about medical marijuana that date all the way back to 1937, which are still struck on stupid.
If an organization with total control will not allow outside testing so that their claims are forever safe, Real science has a higher standard for what we call true. It is called… Falsification.
Why no outside testing?
Marijuana’s prohibition origins are that of a racial law backed up by bad science and twisted by political interests to protect profits then as now.
This case is about a paramilitary agency shutting down the free flow of scientific information and research on “marijuana,” but allowing corporations to profit using the same plant relabeled as “cannabinoids.”
This case is not about restricting information for national security reasons … this is a case about forbidding medical research that could help people who have cancer and other serious diseases. We’re talking prevention, possibly curing diseases, and vastly improving the lives of people who suffer.
Or are corporate profits being protected over the welfare of people? Corporations do not get sick, suffer from diseases, feel pain or suffer. Corporations are not people.
Think of it as forbidding the medical freedom to conduct research and publish data which may be contrary to “official DEA marijuana science.” This is the antithesis to the principle of the free flow of knowledge, which is at the heart of how medical science works.
The DEA is the sole agency that sets drug scheduling status, yet their mission statement only allows for the study of negative effects of marijuana. This conflict of interest drives the internal closed loop of circular thinking that has been frozen in time for the last 75 years and is about to fall like the Berlin wall!
Many small people in many small places doing small things can alter the face of the world!
This is a case that highlights official DEA science that has gone off the rails.
Marijuana prohibition has always been anti-science and it is a form of social control against people who use this gentle plant.
This past year, a pro-marijuana tipping point was reached when, for the first time, a majority of Americans polled by Gallup believed marijuana should be legalized for medical use.
“70 percent favored making it legal for doctors to prescribe marijuana in order to reduce pain and suffering. Americans have consistently been more likely to favor the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes than to favor its legalization generally.”
“The writing is on the wall. The two largest physicians’ groups in the country are saying that the Schedule 1 of marijuana is suspect and urgently needs reconsideration.” – Sunil Kumar Aggarwal, MD, PhD
“The American Nurses Association (ANA) recognizes that patients should have safe access to therapeutic marijuana/cannabis. Cannabis or marijuana has been used medicinally for centuries. It has been shown to be effective in treating a wide range of symptoms and conditions.”
“Position Statement: Providing Patients Safe Access to Therapeutic Marijuana/Cannabis,” American Nurses Association (ANA) website, March 19, 2004
Suppressing scientific medical information and not allowing independent research is a violation of freedom of speech.
Schedule I takes away the freedom of academic speech, freedom of self-expression, freedom of the medical press to publish, all free from government interference in the scientific process.
Again, should a paramilitary organization really be in charge of decisions I make with my doctor in private?
Suppression of scientific information that could relieve the pain and suffering of countless cancer patients, and which may prevent deaths from cancer, should be a crime requiring jail time. Should Harry Anslinger be posthumously tried for crimes against humanity for his leading role in marijuana prohibition?
The scientific case for the entire prohibition of medical marijuana rests on the truth or falsification of the following three medical claims made by the DEA, which are the heart of their case, their rationale for prohibition, and the reason why one in six U.S. prisoners are presently in jail over marijuana.
CLAIM #1: Marijuana has a very high potential for abuse.
This is a false claim.
Marijuana dependence is as about as bad as quitting coffee, according to NIDA.
CLAIM #2: Marijuana has no accepted medical use in the United States.
CLAIM #3: Marijuana lacks accepted safety data for use even under medical supervision.
If present-day scientific evidence could prove one or all of these statements as inaccurate, would Schedule I and prohibition be overturned? What method governs this process to get at the real scientific truth that strips the bias out of scientific research so the science can speak for itself?
In all the headlines and rush of positive cannabis medical news stories vs. government misinformation, sometimes we lose sight of the basic principles of the true meaning of what the scientific method and falsification stand for. These are not obscure footnotes debated by researchers; they are at the heart of what separates real science from junk science.
An example would be the DEA studying “marijuana.”
Preventing independent research by keeping cannabis Schedule I is the worst type of intimidation, because it targets the sick and ill, who are the least able to fight back and, in some cases, dying.
The scientific method is the best rational method invented for judging and separating competing claims for accuracy and truth. Why is this important?
Because we as humans all have our own personal biases, fears, prejudices, hidden agendas, financial motives, delusional and sacred ideas that control our conscious and unconscious beliefs, which prejudices our viewing of information and creeps into our conclusions. The scientific method and falsification corrects for this.
If you have a lack of an understanding about the rules governing scientific governing medical marijuana research, you could easily be fooled by all the intentional misinformation.
This is what drives new research and progress. Unfortunately, the above three claims have not been updated in 75 years!
Let’s see if the good people at GW Pharmaceuticals can help us falsify Schedule I.
The first line in the Sativex pipeline chart below clearly states that Sativex has been approved for multiple sclerosis spasticity (in the U.S.? In the last month? What happened? Did somebody forget to put an American flag on its status?).
In addition, the results of Sativex testing for cancer pain is about to be submitted to the United States FDA in short order. Please look at the other medical conditions that the FDA will soon also allow Sativex to treat. But marijuana, not so much.
The currently approved multiple sclerosis indication for Sativex represents only the start of Sativex commercial life.
Oh! But wait a minute — I must be all wrong about this! The DEA says marijuana never was medicine and never will be medicine.
“Soon after taking office, I directed the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy to ensure that our policies reflect what science tells us without distortion or manipulation. We appointed scientific advisors based on their credentials and experience, not their politics or ideology. I also have insisted that we be open and honest with the American people about the science behind our decisions.”
“Only by ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda, making scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology, and including the public in our decision making process will we harness the power of science to achieve our goals.”
?Editor’s note: Ron Marczyk is a retired high school health education teacher who taught Wellness and Disease Prevention, Drug and Sex Ed, and AIDS education to teens aged 13-17. He also taught a high school International Baccalaureate psychology course. He taught in a New York City public school as a Drug Prevention Specialist. He is a Registered Nurse with six years of ER/Critical Care experience in NYC hospitals, earned an M.S. in cardiac rehabilitation and exercise physiology, and worked as a New York City police officer for two years. Currently he is focused on how evolutionary psychology explains human behavior.