DEA versus. HHS: Who’s to Blame Cannabis Still Being a Schedule 1 Drug?

[ad_1]

Does Marijuana Have Medical Value? That is the question

And the answer depends on who you ask.

On the one hand, we have 36 states plus the District of Columbia that are saying yes with their legal medical cannabis programs. Then, at the federal level, authorities insist that the answer is no, which keeps marijuana in the category of Schedule 1 substances, which means that it has no accepted medical value and that it has a high potential for abuse.

The Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) recently sent a letter to the White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) asking for help in resolving the long-standing dispute over the violation of the Quality Act. cannabis-related information, Marijuana Moment reported.

What Happened – DEA Vs. HHS

Two federal agencies – the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) have traded blame on which of them is responsible for setting up an independent study and evaluated by peer reviewers on the medical potential of marijuana. .

The IEC says federal law requires a peer review of the scientific evidence that was used to reject cannabis rescheduling proposals.

“The HHS claims the DEA was responsible for IQA compliance because the DEA released the assessment without HHS approval,” the group said. “The DEA claims that compliance was the responsibility of HHS because the assessment was performed by HHS. “

CEI noted that the scientific evidence the HHS provided to the DEA that was used to keep marijuana classified as a Schedule 1 substance is flawed.

“Follow the science”

New peer review data could help pave the way for a rescheduling of cannabis, CEI points out.

“Our view is that both agencies have failed in their obligations under the law. HHS should have peer reviewed the information before sending the report to [Food and Drug Administration], given that the HHS knew the information would be released and relied on for regulatory action by the FDA, as required by law, ”according to CEI’s letter to the White House. “And the DEA should not have published the HHS assessment without first ensuring that the IQA requirements had been met (by organizing the peer review itself if the HHS did not.” did not). “

The group further noted that “President Biden is committed to“ follow the science. ”And that’s all we asked that independent scientific experts be asked to follow the science and report if they believe the scientific claims of the HHS are correct.We believe that once done, these scientific experts will agree, with the vast majority of states and medical organizations, that marijuana has certain medical uses and, as such, does not cannot be properly classified as a Schedule I drug.

In 2016, the DEA rejected a petition to consider reprogramming cannabis based primarily on the HHS findings.

Could peer review make a difference?

Some legal experts believe that while a peer review could help collect more scientific data on cannabis, it will not be enough for the reprogramming of marijuana.

“While peer review is useful, it will never get to the core issue of federal marijuana policy,” Shane Pennington, an attorney who has been implicated in lawsuits against the DEA over, told Marijuana Moment. planning for marijuana.

“This is because the FDA’s scientific assessment of marijuana … is flawed by the DEA’s long-standing five-part test to determine if marijuana has a currently accepted medical use for treatment in the United States.” , did he declare. “This five-part standard distorts science, and it was designed to do so.”

Photo: Courtesy of CRYSTALWEED cannabis on Unsplash

[ad_2]