Pubdate: Thu, 01 Jun 2006
Source: In These Times (US)
Section: Vol. 30
Copyright: 2006 In These Times
Contact: http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/about/contact/
Website: http://www.inthesetimes.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/207
Author: Salim Muwakkil
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/decrim.htm (Decrim/Legalization)

SCIENCE - THE DRUG WAR'S LATEST VICTIM

Despite a wealth of new information regarding the therapeutic 
potential of marijuana, the U.S. government refuses to alter its 
prohibitionist restrictions.

The war on drugs is an attack on rationality. Reason lost yet another 
skirmish recently when the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 
announced on April 20 that "no sound scientific studies" supported 
the medical use of marijuana.

The announcement flatly contradicts the conclusion of virtually every 
major study on the efficacy of medical marijuana, including two 
performed by the government. In a New York Times article the 
following day, Dr. Jerry Avorn of Harvard Medical School said "this 
is yet another example of the FDA making pronouncements that seems to 
be driven more by ideology than science."

Avorn's criticism is one regularly leveled at the Bush 
administration, namely, that it is using politics to trump science. 
Last year, for example, the ACLU released a report titled "Science 
Under Siege" that detailed efforts by the Bush administration to 
hamper scientific inquiry in the name of ideology and national security.

The report found the administration has censored and prescreened 
scientific articles before publication, suppressed environmental and 
public health information, and increased restrictions on materials 
commonly used in basic scientific research.

For two years the Union of Concerned Scientists has circulated a 
petition statement which now contains the signatures of 9,000 U.S. 
scientists, including 49 Nobel Prize winners and 63 National Medal of 
Science recipients. The statement complains that the Bush 
administration advocates "policies that are not scientifically 
sound," and sometimes has "misrepresented scientific knowledge and 
misled the public about the implication of its politics." This comes 
on the heels of a host of other accusations against the 
administration--charges of censoring a NASA scientist on issues of 
global warming and burying data on the morning-after Plan B contraceptive.

But the FDA announcement on marijuana is perhaps the most blatant 
effort to ignore scientific reality. Critics charge that the 
statement was issued to bolster opponents of various medical 
marijuana initiatives that have passed in 11 states.

The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and John P. Walters, the 
director of national drug control policy (the Drug Czar) oppose the 
use of medical marijuana. The Times quoted Walters' spokesman Tom 
Riley, who said the FDA's statement would put to rest what he called 
"the bizarre public discussion" that has helped legalize medical 
marijuana. But Riley failed to note that some of that discussion was 
sparked by an exhaustive DEA investigation into cannabis (the 
scientific name for marijuana) from 1986 to 1988. The comprehensive 
study examined evidence from doctors, patients and thousands of 
documents regarding marijuana's medical utility.

Following a hearing on the study's findings, the DEA's administrative 
judge Francis L. Young released a ruling on Sept. 6, 1988, that 
noted, "Nearly all medicines have toxic, potentially lethal effects. 
But marijuana is not such a substance ..." Marijuana in its natural 
form, he said, "is one of the safest therapeutically active 
substances known to man. By any measure of rational analysis, 
marijuana can be safely used within a supervised routine of medical care."

He recommended that "(The) provisions of the (Controlled Substances) 
Act permit and require the transfer of marijuana from Schedule I to 
Schedule II. It would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious for 
the DEA to continue to stand between those sufferers and the benefits 
of this substance."

The New England Journal of Medicine, the American Academy of Family 
Physicians, the American Public Health Association, AIDS Action 
Council and dozens of other medical groups have endorsed medical 
marijuana. Anecdotal evidence from Oregon, one of the states that 
legalized marijuana's medical uses,"adds to the mountain of data 
supporting the medicinal value of pot," according to a May 1 
editorial in the Eugene (Ore.) Register-Guard.

Despite this and a growing wealth of new information (particularly 
new research on cannabanoid medicine by Dr. Raphael Mechoulam out of 
Hebrew University in Jerusalem) regarding the therapeutic potential 
of marijuana and its various analogues, the U.S. government refuses 
to alter its prohibitionist restrictions on marijuana use or research.

Although the Bushites' rejection of scientific reality is 
particularly egregious, governmental irrationality about marijuana 
has been bipartisan. Indeed, more people suffered pot arrests during 
the Clinton administration than in any other before or since. 
Washington, in general, seems particularly susceptible to distorted 
reasoning or magical thinking when considering this ancient herb.

Isn't it a sign of mental disorder when distorted reasoning is 
unchanged by empirical evidence? What is it about marijuana that 
drives our politicians insane?

Salim Muwakkil is a senior editor of In These Times, where he has 
worked since 1983, and an op-ed columnist for the Chicago Tribune. He 
is currently a Crime and Communities Media Fellow of the Open Society 
Institute, examining the impact of ex-inmates and gang leaders in 
leadership positions in the black community.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth Wehrman