14 ms·

Federal chokehold on marijuana stymies studies on epilepsy, autism

229 points by chc2149 8y ago

stephengillie 8y ago
> Federal law vs. state law: While the DEA was insisting on thoroughly vetting everyone who came into contact with the tiny amount of marijuana product used in our study, the reality was that less than a mile from the hospital, anyone could walk into a boutique shop or dispensary and buy it. Why does a drug have to be legalized to be studied? If it can be purchased down the road, why are you involving the DEA at all? Is it solely in the pursuit of funding? Or will some journals not publish research if the DEA is not involved? (Legitimate question.)
- carbocation 8y ago
  I don't think scientists are excited about criminal charges for possession and distribution.
  - stephengillie 8y ago
    Just as with video piracy, the civil disobedience to support the market is a necessary risk that supporters must be willing to make.
    - maze-le 8y ago
      It is one thing to share a movie and possibly be fined with XXX$ because of "piracy". Its quite another thing to risk your respectability, career and future research funding -- all hanging in the balance when a federal felony charge is thrust upon you.
      - stephengillie 8y ago
        Isn't piracy also a federal crime, thus the FBI warning on all non-pirated DVDs?
        Broken_Hippo 8y ago
        Crimes have different sorts of consequences. A drug felony will usually haunt folks for life. A doctor or pharmacist will likely lose their license - even if they don't, most places won't employ them. Slews of places won't employ them after that drug charge. Some places withhold benefits and some will turn them down for housing. Yes, some of this happens with other crimes as well, but there are special restrictions for folks convicted of drug crimes in many places. Most folks caught for piracy wind up with a lawsuit instead of a felony from the government. I couldn't find numbers with a quick google search of how many folks actually got a criminal charge instead of a lawsuit, honestly - most of the articles talk about getting sued and being "guilty" in that respect. Getting sued has completely different consequences. You might not pass a background check (so you might not have your research position), but it might not affect you much. You do not have to check the "have you ever been convicted of a felony" box that is popular in many states. And so on.
        FireBeyond 8y ago
        > A doctor or pharmacist will likely lose their license - even if they don't, most places won't employ them. Yep, in my state, a simple Dept of Health Provider Credential Search (whether by public or prospective employer) will give you Enforcement Action: YES in nice big bold red type as soon as any such thing happens.
  - tzakrajs 8y ago
    Good luck finding someone in these progressive bastions willing to arrest you.
    - carbocation 8y ago
      These crimes are federal, not local, so that's not relevant.
- Thriptic 8y ago
  Marijuana is defined as a schedule one drug by the DEA, meaning they believe it has no accepted medical value and should not be studied. Being in possession of or trying to purchase this drug for a medical study would therefore be illegal. Publishing the results would be admitting you performed a federal crime and you would be arrested. Additionally, human studies require approval by an on site or third party institutional review board prior to initiation to validate that they are ethical. It is unlikely that an IRB would approve such a study because it would be viewed as unethical and it would shift some liability to the university. Its possible to perform studies with illegal drugs that are not schedule one however. For example, cocaine is schedule 2, and I helped work on a study where we purchased cocaine legally from Sigma and administered it to animals to study something which actually had nothing to do with the stimulant effects of the drug.
  - stephengillie 8y ago
    But the study would be okay if they merely interviewed individuals who purchased cannabis for their own recreation? What if these individuals were using it recreationally according to a schedule suggested by the interviewers?
    - Thriptic 8y ago
      Suggesting that study participants use a drug of unknown purity, composition, and dosing would definitely not be ok or safe. Encouraging illegal activity generally is not ok. Interviewing self-professed users without instructing them to use the drug would likely be ok but of limited value.
      - drewrv 8y ago
        I don't know about other legal states but here in Washington the purity, composition, and dose of cannabis products are highly regulated and come with standardized labels.
        mywittyname 8y ago
- bluGill 8y ago
  When studying a drug for medical purposes you want to know it is pure. Down the street how knows how much active ingredient you actually get (this is the problem with herbs in general - they do not all contain the same amount of active ingredient, and it is possible something unknown in half the samples is the real active ingredient) Marijuana has been studied overseas.
  - stephengillie 8y ago
    Cannabis sold in WA State lists THC and THCa percentages. Most are in the 20%-25% range. Vape cartridges are 60%-90% THC.
- dsfyu404ed 8y ago
  The vast majority of universities are heavily subsidized by the federal government. If the DEA doesn't like what your researchers are doing they can likely throw the book at the university in a way that gets them cut off until the issue is resolved (which can take awhile). The last place a university wants enemies is in the federal government.
DocEasyE 8y ago
Great read thanks for the insight DR
edoo 8y ago
At worst it should be states' rights issue. It took a constitutional amendment to ban alcohol, the product of processed plants. The federal government, as per the constitution, has no right to impose such bans on the people.
- kamarg 8y ago
  I'm sure the sale of marijuana for use in the study would probably run afoul of the good old commerce clause that lets the federal government regulate sale of just about everything.
  - edoo 8y ago
    Basically because of the atrocity that was Wickard .v. Filburn, 317 US 111, 1942, if interested.
r_singh 8y ago
Pardon me if this sounds naive, but I'm slightly confused as to how recreational marijuana is legal in 9 states but the DEA still heavily controls cannabidiol as if it were still illegal?
- beojan 8y ago
  It's not "legal in 9 states", it's not prohibited by 9 states, but still prohibited federally.
  - vorpalhex 8y ago
    That's incorrect. Those states explicitly legalized the possession and consumption of marijuana. That legalization is in conflict with the federal prohibition - so consuming marijuana in those instances is not a state crime (any more then walking down the street or eating cake is) but might still be a federal crime in those cases where the federal government has the ability to charge you (interstate commerce).
    - acomjean 8y ago
      Thats my understanding of it. I'm in Massachusetts and one of the problem this new industry faces is banking. Banks are federally regulated many won't touch it (there are some "know you customer" anti money landing type laws). Thus it becomes a cash business, leading to all sorts of problems. Being Massachusetts though, although technically it should be legal since july, they haven't issued any permits to allow it to be sold. Those issues should be resolved with luck in another 2-3 years...
      - wavefunction 8y ago
        There are stores in some of the legalized states that are processing debit card transactions through some company in NYC. I expect it will be possible in MA stores.
        monocasa 8y ago
arcticbull 8y ago
At least they will be able to do the studies in Canada in short order.
KboPAacDA3 8y ago
Can these studies be conducted outside the USA, away from DEA and FDA control?
- jbob2000 8y ago
  Yes, all of the R&D money is about to move to Canada.
  - maitland 8y ago
    Funnily enough when government funding for sex/sexuality research gets constrained - normally during a Republican tenure - researchers move to Canada https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/relationships/the-big-brains-behind-canadas-goodsex/article37056097/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/relationships/the-big-b...
- entropy_ 8y ago
  Quoting(emphasis mine): "In March, Insys launched a multinational study of 190 children to evaluate cannabidiol as a first-line therapy for infantile spasms" That does seem to be the solution being pursued it seems
EvangelicalPig 8y ago
> In any case, my requests languished until I partnered with Insys Therapeutics and GW Pharmaceuticals Yay bribery and corruption. "Work with us and your problems will go away."
nopacience 8y ago
> In March, Insys launched a multinational study of 190 children to evaluate cannabidiol as a first-line therapy for infantile spasms. We are eager to see how well the compound performs when given in the first days and weeks of the condition. If it turns out to be effective, cannabidiol would represent a substantial improvement over current drugs, all of which have serious side effects: One, for example, causes irreversible vision loss in as many as one-third of the children who take it. Its ok to sell: "a drug that causes irreversible vision loss in as many as one-third of the children who take it" Its against the law: canabidiol from a plant, or even grow the plant yourself
- e40 8y ago
  This shows the derangement of the people in charge. Why is this? Why this derangement on the subject of cannabis? I've read a fair amount, and every time I've brought it up, I get downvoted to hell. So, I'll ask: Anyone have a hypothesis on why a large number of our leaders, who happen to be older white men, are insanely against this plant?
  - existencebox 8y ago
    No need to hypothesize. The rampup of the drug war under Nixon was largely to attack blacks, hippies (antiwar), and other counterculture figures. [0] "We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did." (John Ehrlichman, Nixon's domestic policy chief) In the interim, it became a wedge issue and via "tough on crime", an extension of certain party platforms, (also in that it has effectively become the status quo for some population segments) and I think persists largely as some combination of the above. [0] https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-rich...
    - mc32 8y ago
      >tough on crime" Yeah, Clinton and her “superpredators”. Decades later she follows thst gem up with “basket of deplorables”. Politicians will politick.
honkycat 8y ago
Everyone confused about the fucked up laws around drug control and the like in the united states: It is about locking up poor people in order to keep them from voting. It is about filling our prisons with non-violent offenders so we can force them to work for slave wages, and line the owners of the prisons and the politicians they fund's pockets. It's about political suppression, not about some moralistic crusade to protect people from drugs. "The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did." - John Ehrlichman
- andrewhn 8y ago
  I cant find this interview anywhere. I only see the far left leaning media sites reporting on it. No evidence this statement was actually made by John Ehrlichman. Do you have any?
  - WhatIsDukkha 8y ago
    https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/ https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/
  - kevin_b_er 8y ago
    https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-rich... https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/ https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/ His children dispute the claim, if that helps you, according the the CNN article. The man died in 1999 and it was reported years later.
  - jmcmichael 8y ago
    Forbes: https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2016/03/23/nixons-drug-war-an-excuse-to-lock-up-blacks-and-protesters-continues/#3909107d42c8 https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2016/03/23/nixons-d... CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-rich... The Independent: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/richard-nixon-used-america-s-war-on-drugs-as-excuse-to-target-anti-war-left-and-black-people-claims-a6948521.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/richard-ni... Channel4: https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-war-drugs-war-black-americans https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-war-drugs-... These were all in the first page of Google results with the query 'John Ehrlichman quote drug law'.
danschumann 8y ago
"an agency so entrenched in bureaucracy, that the will of the people is far from them" should be the definition of the term "Deep State". Doing BS for so long, they ignore the people. How people maintain cannabis as schedule I is Vogon levels of incompetence.
Dowwie 8y ago
Fortunately, the United States doesn't have a monopoly on cannabis research. For instance, Israel and Canada are funding studies.
thomasfedb 8y ago
I'm always amazed when cannabis is more tightly controller than cocaine — which is also an illicit drug that has legitimate medical uses.
- 3x 8y ago
  But it's not... the feds will utterly fuck you over for possessing cocaine. Just 5 grams of crack in many states is going to land you in jail for a long time. Maybe you mean for research purposes, but even that I would doubt. Such a shame because cocaine is a blissful, perfect drug and smoking crack is an especially excellent way to consume cocaine.
djrogers 8y ago
Why aren't these studies being performed in other countries with less restrictive laws?
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
- dang 8y ago
  Please don't respond to a bad comment by breaking the site guidelines yourself. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - jmcmichael 8y ago
    Sorry, you're right. I'd delete but it looks like HN won't allow me to do so now.
    - dang 8y ago
      I'll delete it for you and detach it from the GP.
      - jmcmichael 8y ago
        Thank you!
tmaly 8y ago
To get some historical perspective, this all started back with the stitch in time that saved nine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_switch_in_time_that_saved_nine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_switch_in_time_that_saved_... FDR's pressure on the supreme court brought about the abuses of the commerce clause. Before this, things like Prohibition required a constitutional amendment rather than a law like The Controlled Substances Act of 1970.
HIPisTheAnswer 8y ago
A society's diet dictates its form. We are to consume ethanol, caffeine, nicotine, and sugar, for those will create a manipulatable non-questionning society.
dwaltrip 8y ago
The organization MAPS is doing fantastic work in this space. MDMA-assisted psychotherapy for treating severe PTSD is getting ready for phase 3 trials, the last major step prior to FDA approval. Based on the very strong results in phase 2, the FDA has awarded it the "breakthrough treatment" status. If this passes, it will be an enormous game-changer for society's view on psychedelics. The results so far suggest also that it will be an immense help to the tens of millions of Americans who suffer from PTSD. I believe they are working on approval in Europe as well, but are not as far along. As for the article: MAPS is also doing work related to expanding marijuana research, but I haven't been following that as much. However, based on the above, I recommend donating if this is something you care about!

229 points by chc2149 8y ago

> Federal law vs. state law: While the DEA was insisting on thoroughly vetting everyone who came into contact with the tiny amount of marijuana product used in our study, the reality was that less than a mile from the hospital, anyone could walk into a boutique shop or dispensary and buy it. Why does a drug have to be legalized to be studied? If it can be purchased down the road, why are you involving the DEA at all? Is it solely in the pursuit of funding? Or will some journals not publish research if the DEA is not involved? (Legitimate question.)

carbocation 8y ago
I don't think scientists are excited about criminal charges for possession and distribution.
- stephengillie 8y ago
  Just as with video piracy, the civil disobedience to support the market is a necessary risk that supporters must be willing to make.
  - maze-le 8y ago
    It is one thing to share a movie and possibly be fined with XXX$ because of "piracy". Its quite another thing to risk your respectability, career and future research funding -- all hanging in the balance when a federal felony charge is thrust upon you.
    - stephengillie 8y ago
      Isn't piracy also a federal crime, thus the FBI warning on all non-pirated DVDs?
      - Broken_Hippo 8y ago
        Crimes have different sorts of consequences. A drug felony will usually haunt folks for life. A doctor or pharmacist will likely lose their license - even if they don't, most places won't employ them. Slews of places won't employ them after that drug charge. Some places withhold benefits and some will turn them down for housing. Yes, some of this happens with other crimes as well, but there are special restrictions for folks convicted of drug crimes in many places. Most folks caught for piracy wind up with a lawsuit instead of a felony from the government. I couldn't find numbers with a quick google search of how many folks actually got a criminal charge instead of a lawsuit, honestly - most of the articles talk about getting sued and being "guilty" in that respect. Getting sued has completely different consequences. You might not pass a background check (so you might not have your research position), but it might not affect you much. You do not have to check the "have you ever been convicted of a felony" box that is popular in many states. And so on.
        FireBeyond 8y ago
        > A doctor or pharmacist will likely lose their license - even if they don't, most places won't employ them. Yep, in my state, a simple Dept of Health Provider Credential Search (whether by public or prospective employer) will give you Enforcement Action: YES in nice big bold red type as soon as any such thing happens.
- tzakrajs 8y ago
  Good luck finding someone in these progressive bastions willing to arrest you.
  - carbocation 8y ago
    These crimes are federal, not local, so that's not relevant.
Thriptic 8y ago
Marijuana is defined as a schedule one drug by the DEA, meaning they believe it has no accepted medical value and should not be studied. Being in possession of or trying to purchase this drug for a medical study would therefore be illegal. Publishing the results would be admitting you performed a federal crime and you would be arrested. Additionally, human studies require approval by an on site or third party institutional review board prior to initiation to validate that they are ethical. It is unlikely that an IRB would approve such a study because it would be viewed as unethical and it would shift some liability to the university. Its possible to perform studies with illegal drugs that are not schedule one however. For example, cocaine is schedule 2, and I helped work on a study where we purchased cocaine legally from Sigma and administered it to animals to study something which actually had nothing to do with the stimulant effects of the drug.
- stephengillie 8y ago
  But the study would be okay if they merely interviewed individuals who purchased cannabis for their own recreation? What if these individuals were using it recreationally according to a schedule suggested by the interviewers?
  - Thriptic 8y ago
    Suggesting that study participants use a drug of unknown purity, composition, and dosing would definitely not be ok or safe. Encouraging illegal activity generally is not ok. Interviewing self-professed users without instructing them to use the drug would likely be ok but of limited value.
    - drewrv 8y ago
      I don't know about other legal states but here in Washington the purity, composition, and dose of cannabis products are highly regulated and come with standardized labels.
      - mywittyname 8y ago
bluGill 8y ago
When studying a drug for medical purposes you want to know it is pure. Down the street how knows how much active ingredient you actually get (this is the problem with herbs in general - they do not all contain the same amount of active ingredient, and it is possible something unknown in half the samples is the real active ingredient) Marijuana has been studied overseas.
- stephengillie 8y ago
  Cannabis sold in WA State lists THC and THCa percentages. Most are in the 20%-25% range. Vape cartridges are 60%-90% THC.
dsfyu404ed 8y ago
The vast majority of universities are heavily subsidized by the federal government. If the DEA doesn't like what your researchers are doing they can likely throw the book at the university in a way that gets them cut off until the issue is resolved (which can take awhile). The last place a university wants enemies is in the federal government.

DocEasyE 8y ago

Great read thanks for the insight DR

edoo 8y ago

At worst it should be states' rights issue. It took a constitutional amendment to ban alcohol, the product of processed plants. The federal government, as per the constitution, has no right to impose such bans on the people.

kamarg 8y ago
I'm sure the sale of marijuana for use in the study would probably run afoul of the good old commerce clause that lets the federal government regulate sale of just about everything.
- edoo 8y ago
  Basically because of the atrocity that was Wickard .v. Filburn, 317 US 111, 1942, if interested.

r_singh 8y ago

Pardon me if this sounds naive, but I'm slightly confused as to how recreational marijuana is legal in 9 states but the DEA still heavily controls cannabidiol as if it were still illegal?

beojan 8y ago
It's not "legal in 9 states", it's not prohibited by 9 states, but still prohibited federally.
- vorpalhex 8y ago
  That's incorrect. Those states explicitly legalized the possession and consumption of marijuana. That legalization is in conflict with the federal prohibition - so consuming marijuana in those instances is not a state crime (any more then walking down the street or eating cake is) but might still be a federal crime in those cases where the federal government has the ability to charge you (interstate commerce).
  - acomjean 8y ago
    Thats my understanding of it. I'm in Massachusetts and one of the problem this new industry faces is banking. Banks are federally regulated many won't touch it (there are some "know you customer" anti money landing type laws). Thus it becomes a cash business, leading to all sorts of problems. Being Massachusetts though, although technically it should be legal since july, they haven't issued any permits to allow it to be sold. Those issues should be resolved with luck in another 2-3 years...
    - wavefunction 8y ago
      There are stores in some of the legalized states that are processing debit card transactions through some company in NYC. I expect it will be possible in MA stores.
      - monocasa 8y ago

arcticbull 8y ago

At least they will be able to do the studies in Canada in short order.

KboPAacDA3 8y ago

Can these studies be conducted outside the USA, away from DEA and FDA control?

jbob2000 8y ago
Yes, all of the R&D money is about to move to Canada.
- maitland 8y ago
  Funnily enough when government funding for sex/sexuality research gets constrained - normally during a Republican tenure - researchers move to Canada https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/relationships/the-big-brains-behind-canadas-goodsex/article37056097/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/relationships/the-big-b...
entropy_ 8y ago
Quoting(emphasis mine): "In March, Insys launched a multinational study of 190 children to evaluate cannabidiol as a first-line therapy for infantile spasms" That does seem to be the solution being pursued it seems

EvangelicalPig 8y ago

> In any case, my requests languished until I partnered with Insys Therapeutics and GW Pharmaceuticals Yay bribery and corruption. "Work with us and your problems will go away."

nopacience 8y ago

> In March, Insys launched a multinational study of 190 children to evaluate cannabidiol as a first-line therapy for infantile spasms. We are eager to see how well the compound performs when given in the first days and weeks of the condition. If it turns out to be effective, cannabidiol would represent a substantial improvement over current drugs, all of which have serious side effects: One, for example, causes irreversible vision loss in as many as one-third of the children who take it. Its ok to sell: "a drug that causes irreversible vision loss in as many as one-third of the children who take it" Its against the law: canabidiol from a plant, or even grow the plant yourself

e40 8y ago
This shows the derangement of the people in charge. Why is this? Why this derangement on the subject of cannabis? I've read a fair amount, and every time I've brought it up, I get downvoted to hell. So, I'll ask: Anyone have a hypothesis on why a large number of our leaders, who happen to be older white men, are insanely against this plant?
- existencebox 8y ago
  No need to hypothesize. The rampup of the drug war under Nixon was largely to attack blacks, hippies (antiwar), and other counterculture figures. [0] "We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did." (John Ehrlichman, Nixon's domestic policy chief) In the interim, it became a wedge issue and via "tough on crime", an extension of certain party platforms, (also in that it has effectively become the status quo for some population segments) and I think persists largely as some combination of the above. [0] https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-rich...
  - mc32 8y ago
    >tough on crime" Yeah, Clinton and her “superpredators”. Decades later she follows thst gem up with “basket of deplorables”. Politicians will politick.

honkycat 8y ago

Everyone confused about the fucked up laws around drug control and the like in the united states: It is about locking up poor people in order to keep them from voting. It is about filling our prisons with non-violent offenders so we can force them to work for slave wages, and line the owners of the prisons and the politicians they fund's pockets. It's about political suppression, not about some moralistic crusade to protect people from drugs. "The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did." - John Ehrlichman

andrewhn 8y ago
I cant find this interview anywhere. I only see the far left leaning media sites reporting on it. No evidence this statement was actually made by John Ehrlichman. Do you have any?
- WhatIsDukkha 8y ago
  https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/ https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/
- kevin_b_er 8y ago
  https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-rich... https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/ https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/ His children dispute the claim, if that helps you, according the the CNN article. The man died in 1999 and it was reported years later.
- jmcmichael 8y ago
  Forbes: https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2016/03/23/nixons-drug-war-an-excuse-to-lock-up-blacks-and-protesters-continues/#3909107d42c8 https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2016/03/23/nixons-d... CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-rich... The Independent: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/richard-nixon-used-america-s-war-on-drugs-as-excuse-to-target-anti-war-left-and-black-people-claims-a6948521.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/richard-ni... Channel4: https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-war-drugs-war-black-americans https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-war-drugs-... These were all in the first page of Google results with the query 'John Ehrlichman quote drug law'.

danschumann 8y ago

"an agency so entrenched in bureaucracy, that the will of the people is far from them" should be the definition of the term "Deep State". Doing BS for so long, they ignore the people. How people maintain cannabis as schedule I is Vogon levels of incompetence.

Dowwie 8y ago

Fortunately, the United States doesn't have a monopoly on cannabis research. For instance, Israel and Canada are funding studies.

thomasfedb 8y ago

I'm always amazed when cannabis is more tightly controller than cocaine — which is also an illicit drug that has legitimate medical uses.

3x 8y ago
But it's not... the feds will utterly fuck you over for possessing cocaine. Just 5 grams of crack in many states is going to land you in jail for a long time. Maybe you mean for research purposes, but even that I would doubt. Such a shame because cocaine is a blissful, perfect drug and smoking crack is an especially excellent way to consume cocaine.

djrogers 8y ago

Why aren't these studies being performed in other countries with less restrictive laws?

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

dang 8y ago
Please don't respond to a bad comment by breaking the site guidelines yourself. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- jmcmichael 8y ago
  Sorry, you're right. I'd delete but it looks like HN won't allow me to do so now.
  - dang 8y ago
    I'll delete it for you and detach it from the GP.
    - jmcmichael 8y ago
      Thank you!

tmaly 8y ago

To get some historical perspective, this all started back with the stitch in time that saved nine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_switch_in_time_that_saved_nine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_switch_in_time_that_saved_... FDR's pressure on the supreme court brought about the abuses of the commerce clause. Before this, things like Prohibition required a constitutional amendment rather than a law like The Controlled Substances Act of 1970.

HIPisTheAnswer 8y ago

A society's diet dictates its form. We are to consume ethanol, caffeine, nicotine, and sugar, for those will create a manipulatable non-questionning society.

dwaltrip 8y ago

The organization MAPS is doing fantastic work in this space. MDMA-assisted psychotherapy for treating severe PTSD is getting ready for phase 3 trials, the last major step prior to FDA approval. Based on the very strong results in phase 2, the FDA has awarded it the "breakthrough treatment" status. If this passes, it will be an enormous game-changer for society's view on psychedelics. The results so far suggest also that it will be an immense help to the tens of millions of Americans who suffer from PTSD. I believe they are working on approval in Europe as well, but are not as far along. As for the article: MAPS is also doing work related to expanding marijuana research, but I haven't been following that as much. However, based on the above, I recommend donating if this is something you care about!