fbpx
Home Resources Articles (Archives) Medical Marijuana Research Thwarted by DEA

Medical Marijuana Research Thwarted by DEA

(Winter 2015) A report issued by researchers at the Brookings Institution urges the federal government to clear the way for medical marijuana research in the U.S., saying that the government is hindering study in an area that has widespread implications for both public health and safety. The document also notes that since voters have legalized medical marijuana in many states, federal law is hampering physician-patient relationships.

Since 1972 marijuana has been listed by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) as a Schedule I controlled substance, meaning the drug could be easily abused and has no medical use. Classifying marijuana as a Schedule II drug would implicate that it could have medicinal properties and open up easier pathways to research than the complex registration and application process that exists now.

In effect, a circular loop is slowing scientific research on the medicinal properties of marijuana. Its study is restricted because it is classified as a Schedule I drug. However, marijuana is listed under Schedule I because of the lack of research, scientific evidence, into the drug’s medicinal benefits.

Since its classification as a Schedule I drug, four attempts have been made to either remove or reclassify marijuana. The last petition, led by then-governors Christine Gregoire and Lincoln Chafee, has been in the DEA’s hopper since 2011. Because of the DEA’s pushback against marijuana, the Brooking’s report authors suggest working with Congress to change the law. The CARERS Act, introduced by Senators Cory Booker, Rand Paul and Kirsten Gillibrand, is currently backed by 15 senators and, if passed, would reschedule marijuana to Schedule II, thus making research on the drug significantly easier.

See more Legal & Legislative Updates articles.


DISCLAIMER: This publication is designed to provide accurate information regarding the subject matter covered. It is provided with the understanding that those involved in the publication are not engaged in rendering legal counsel. If legal advice is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.