home

Government's Monopoly on Marijuana Challenged

It's about time. A researcher at the University of Massachussetts goes to court today to challenge the federal government's monopoly on growing marijuana for research purposes.

In a hearing due to start today before an administrative law judge at the Drug Enforcement Administration, professor Lyle Craker and his supporters will argue for a DEA license to grow the research drugs. It is the climax of a decades-long effort to expand research into marijuana and controlled drugs and of Craker's almost five-year effort to become a competing marijuana grower.

Professor Lyle Cacker is a University researcher of the medicinal properties of plants. Research has long been allowed on controlled substances, just not pot. For 36 years, the feds have not allowed anyone outside the University of Mississippi, with whom it has a contract, to conduct research on marijuana, fearing it would result in increased illegal use.

Cacker says the pot grown by the feds is of such low quality and purity it would make a lousy medecine even if the Government did approve its use in the future. Meanwhile, there are a lot of sick folks who could be helped by the substance.

Since the 1970s, however, researchers have found potential uses for marijuana, or its active ingredient THC, in relieving nausea and vomiting associated with chemotherapy and to help with appetite loss in AIDS patients. A synthetic form of marijuana's active ingredient has been made into a prescription drug, Marinol.

Doblin said there are potentially many other medicinal uses of marijuana, including the treatment of multiple sclerosis and AIDS-related neuropathy. He also said researchers believe that if they can perfect a method of "vaporizing" marijuana -- allowing it to be inhaled rather than smoked -- it would be easier to administer as medicine.

Cacker has some heavy-duty Congressional support:

Craker has backing from 38 members of Congress, the two senators from Massachusetts, numerous medical societies and even Grover Norquist, the president of the conservative Americans for Tax Reform.

It's time for the Government's monopoly to end. We'll follow Dr. Cacker's progress and report back.

< Torture Found at Second Iraqi Jail | Bush on Iraq: 'I'd Do It All Again' >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Government's Monopoly on Marijuana Challenged (none / 0) (#1)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    Sweet... now we'll get to listen to the Republicans explain why we really need the government doing this instead of the free market.

    My father was diagnosed with non Hodgkin’s lymphoma in April of 2004. He went through intense chemotherapy treatments from June through September of 2004. In the first month of his chemo treatments, he only took drugs that his doctors prescribed him. Nothing was helping and he was completely miserable. He was nauseous 24 hours a day 7 days a week. He couldn't eat because he kept throwing up and he couldn't sleep. One day a friend of his gave him some marijuana. At this point he figured, "what the hell." It really helped him get through the rest of his chemo treatments. In August of this year he was given 3 to 6 months to live without chemo treatments. The chemo is only meant to slow down his cancer and is not meant to cure him. His Oncologist tells me that with chemo he has a year at best. This round of chemo seems worse than the last of course we all wonder how much of that is the chemo and how much is the cancer. Once again, during his first month of chemo, he only took drugs his doctor prescribed. He had the same problems with the chemo treatments as he did last summer. The only thing helping him through this and keeping him "comfortable" is marijuana. This madness by the feds has to stop.

    I almost forgot... Before anyone asks, no, I am not the "friend" that gave him the marijuana. I don't smoke marijuana or take any kind of illegal drugs. In fact, according to the FBI standards for employment, I meet the criteria to hold a special agent position.

    what is it about this drug dealing government, did some drug king in mexico order bush to do something?

    Re: Government's Monopoly on Marijuana Challenged (none / 0) (#5)
    by SeeEmDee on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    (Warning for the congenitally obtuse; the following is delivered with a sarcastic and caustic tone.) Here's where the ostensible 'free trading' Repugs get to shine. Here's where we get to hear their ringing paeans to 'market forces' trumping big, bad, old 'socialized' economies where the government regulating of goods have caused enormous inefficiencies, leading to inferior products being marketed thanks to their having the government approval...like the schwag they make at Ol' Miss. Surely, this government, which trumpets the value of competition, can't have a vested stake in maintaining such a demonstrably inefficient monopoly at the taxpayer's expense...can it?

    Re: Government's Monopoly on Marijuana Challenged (none / 0) (#6)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    And yet, if you want to make your own beer at home, or wine, you're fine and dandy. Even though booze causes more deaths than any drug in history. Ignorance gone mad, that's what pot prohibition is about.

    Re: Government's Monopoly on Marijuana Challenged (none / 0) (#7)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    This plant is one of mother nature's most amazing creations. It's a real shame we are so araid of it because of 80 year old propaganda.

    Re: Government's Monopoly on Marijuana Challenged (none / 0) (#8)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    Ignorance gone mad, that's what pot prohibition is about.
    It's a plant that hates freedom.

    Re: Government's Monopoly on Marijuana Challenged (none / 0) (#10)
    by Johnny on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:55 PM EST
    If Jesus had toked up at the last supper instead of getting his cronies sloshed on wine and then participating in a ritualistic cannibalism, the world would be dramatically different. Other than the "it is dangerous because it is illegal, not illegal because it is dangerous" meme, there are no valid supportive arguments for the prohibition of pot. And yes, free enterprise produces the finest herb. But not adequate healthcare or water quality.

    Re: Government's Monopoly on Marijuana Challenged (none / 0) (#11)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:56 PM EST
    the only things wrong with my Dad at the end were depression and a lack of appetite. Pot could have fixed both of those. As far as I'm concerned the willfully ignorant gov't policies helped kill my Dad.

    Re: Government's Monopoly on Marijuana Challenged (none / 0) (#12)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:56 PM EST
    there are no valid supportive arguments for the prohibition of pot.
    See, I think there are, but if validity depends on your point of view, and you think it should be legal, you'll be looking a long time.

    Johnny you should have said "There are no valid supportive arguments for the prohibition of pot, by people with any intelligence"

    Re: Government's Monopoly on Marijuana Challenged (none / 0) (#14)
    by ltgesq on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:57 PM EST
    Let's see, marijuana is non carcinogenic, unlike tobacco, beer, or hard liquor. In eleven years of practice i have yet to see a single automobile accident caused by the ingestion of marijuana. In my fomer office not a single criminal lawyer out of 8 could tell me that they had ever seen a case where an individual caused an automobile accident by smoking pot. The practice years of the members of the firm were 50,45,53,27,23,18, and myself at 8 years. It is time for some sensible drug policies.

    Re: Government's Monopoly on Marijuana Challenged (none / 0) (#15)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:57 PM EST
    "There are no valid supportive arguments for the prohibition of pot, by people with any intelligence"
    This from a person who goes by "bigunit12". I'm sure it's a reference to Randy Johnson.

    Re: Government's Monopoly on Marijuana Challenged (none / 0) (#16)
    by Johnny on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:57 PM EST
    Well Patrick, convince me why it shouldn't be. Gateway drug: So is alcohol and cigarettes and model glue and and and... Dangerous: That has been beat to death. Alcohol wins that hands down. So too, do cigarettes. Leads to laziness: So what? So does being big and fat, which is also more dangerous and a bigger expense on the national economy than pot users. Kills brain cells: LMAO All I am looking for is a valid reason why it is classified along the same lines as white crap made out of ether and paint stripper. BTW, pot is carcinogenic. There is no such thing as a non-carcinogenic smoke. Most people simply cannot inhale enough in one day (I hear that;)) to suffer from tobacco-like side effects.