You wouldn't know it from their Web site, but it turns out the White House drug czar's office is legally required to provide the public with facts that are, well, factual. Under the Data Quality act, all government agencies, including the Office of National Drug Control Policy, are responsible for "ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information."

You could print out the material on ONDCP's site, throw a dart at the printout, and probably hit an assertion that's at least suspect. We picked one we found particularly egregious – the demonstrably false title of the drug czar's publication, "Marijuana: The Greatest Cause of Illegal Drug Abuse."

On Oct. 16, 2008, my colleague, Nathan Miller, an attorney here, filed a petition calling on the drug czar to correct the title, which obviously refers to the long discredited "gateway theory" fantasy (see Question 6).

On Dec. 28, the drug czar's chief scientist, David Murray (who isn't a scientist, by the way -- his degree is in anthropology) responded, but didn't really address the substance of the claim. His letter is pretty short and straightforward if you want to look at it, but basically he made two bizarre arguments: 1) that titles are inherently statements of opinion or policy and therefore not subject to DQA standards, and 2) that the word "cause" shouldn't be read to refer to the gateway theory.

Nathan responded last week, pointing out that Murray had failed to adequately address the underlying falsehood as he is legally required to do. We'll see how that goes.

Voting on change.org’s “Ideas for Change in America” came to a close today with “Legalize the Medical and Recreational Use of Marijuana” coming in as the most popular idea. The top ten ideas will be presented to President-elect Obama during a press conference on Friday.

Change.gov, Obama’s official transition Web site, has twice opened up voting in a similar feature called “Open for Questions.” Each time, a question about marijuana policy reached the top ten. And each time, the transition team brushed off the question by simply stating that "President-elect Obama is not in favor of the legalization of marijuana.” It will be interesting to see how he responds this time, as the question includes medical marijuana, something Obama has been fairly supportive of in the past.

As of 5:00 p.m. today, the marijuana policy question had received 19,530 votes – 4,500 more than “Appoint Secretary of Peace in Department of Peace and Non-Violence,” which came in second on the list.

In addition, change.gov has opened voting in a new online forum called the “Citizen’s Briefing Book.” “Ending Marijuana Prohibition” is currently the most popular idea.

Join Nydia as she answers this week's question: Does marijuana affect brain performance? Don't forget to subscribe to our alerts!

I must not be high enough to understand what exactly the point is of this latest ad from the drug czar's office -- the behaviors depicted in it seem typical for lots of teenagers, straight or stoned. Still, I'm happy to help them get their message out, whatever it is. Feel free to use the comments section and give me your own interpretations.

This week, the U.S. Department of Justice announced penalties against the Rite Aid drugstore chain for a variety of violations of the Controlled Substances Act. These included having "knowingly filled prescriptions for controlled substances that were not issued for a legitimate medical purpose" and failing to account for shortages or surpluses "of the most highly abused drugs, including oxycodone and hydrocodone products."

For these rather serious offenses involving highly addictive narcotics, Rite Aid Corporation will pay $5 million in fines. No one will go to jail or get a criminal record.

In comparison, California medical marijuana dispensary owner Charles Lynch, who scrupulously followed state and local laws to provide medicine to legitimate patients, is facing 100 years in federal prison. Unlike Rite Aid, Lynch is being treated like a dangerous drug dealer -- when he is manifestly nothing of the sort. Reason magazine has been following the case closely, and produced a compelling video available on this page. Lynch's request for a new trial was rejected earlier this month, and he now faces sentencing Feb. 23.

    The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration has rejected the decision of Administrative Law Judge Mary Ellen Bittner and blocked a medical marijuana research project at the University of Massachusetts Amherst -- a project considered vital if marijuana is ever to be an FDA-approved medicine. The DEA's ruling, dated Jan. 7, was only released today.

    MPP and other supporters of research reacted with outrage. "It's no surprise that an administration that has rejected science again and again has, as one of its final acts, blocked a critical research project," said Aaron Houston, MPP's director of government relations. "With the new administration publicly committed to respecting scientific research and valuing data over dogma, this final act of desperation isn't surprising, but the true victims are the millions of patients who might benefit."

    Professor Lyle Craker had applied for permission to cultivate marijuana for use in medical research. At present, marijuana for research can only be obtained through the National Institute on Drug Abuse -- a government monopoly that does not exist for any other Schedule I drug. Because NIDA's marijuana is of notoriously poor quality and has only been inconsistently available to researchers, scientists and advocates consider Dr. Craker's project essential to the advancement of medical marijuana research.

    The long and difficult process of seeking approval culminated on Feb. 12, 2007, in a ruling by Judge Bittner that Craker should be allowed to proceed. But such administrative law judge rulings are not binding on the DEA. In the nearly two years since the ruling, several small, pilot studies have shown marijuana to safely and effectively relieve nerve pain that afflicts millions suffering from HIV/AIDS, multiple sclerosis and other conditions, making more advanced research -- including strains custom-tailored for various conditions, which was one of the goals of Craker and his colleagues -- vital.

    "Once again, science has taken a back seat to ideology in the Bush administration, with research that could benefit millions needlessly stalled," Houston said. "They can delay progress, but they cannot stop it."

In its December issue, the Canadian Journal of Psychiatry published an essay by psychiatrist Stephen Kisely, who divides his time between Griffith University in Queensland, Australia, and Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, titled, "The Case for Policy Reform in Cannabis Control." Kisely's essay is so full of logic and common sense that the best thing to do is just quote it at length:

"The lack of evidence for prohibition is highlighted by the fact that penalties bear little relation to the actual harm associated with cannabis. The Runciman Report, commissioned by the Police Federation in the United Kingdom, no less, concluded that both alcohol and tobacco were more harmful than cannabis; nonetheless, there is no suggestion that prohibition should play a part in controlling their use. ...

"Despite the emphasis on supply reduction, a comparison of the United States, Australia, Canada, and 3 European countries showed that cannabis consumption is unaffected by expenditure on law enforcement. Changing the legislation on cannabis could produce substantial savings or redeployment of police resources to more effective areas. If anything, consumption of cannabis continues to grow irrespective of the degree of law enforcement, and the increase has not been greater in countries where laws have been liberalized. In the 11 American states that effectively decriminalized cannabis use in the 1970s, use has not risen beyond that experienced by comparable states where it is prohibited. ...

"The failure of prohibition to reduce cannabis use is in contrast to the success of strategies to reduce tobacco use. Smoking is falling in high-income countries and is now less than cannabis use in some surveys of young Canadians. ...

"Approaches to dealing with cannabis should be similar to those for tobacco and alcohol."

For several weeks now, change.org has been running a competition called "Ideas for Change in America" in response to Barack Obama’s call for increased citizen involvement in government. "Legalize the Medical and Recreational Use of Marijuana" is currently the top-rated idea.

The competition, which is now in its final round of voting, allows anyone to post an idea to the organization’s Web site and vote on ideas that matter to them. When voting ends on January 15, the top 10 ideas will be presented to President-elect Obama at an event at the National Press Club in Washington. Change.org will work with organizations like MPP to create plans for implementing the top 10 ideas and will likely receive a slew of press when voting closes.

Please head over to change.org and vote for the ideas you want to see represented.

You may have noticed that many of my reports on this blog are about how some local public officials in California are subverting the state’s medical marijuana laws. Well, today, headlines in California are telling the story of the patients who are fighting some of these scofflaws in court.

In San Bernardino - a county that refused to implement the state’s patient ID card program and sought to overturn the law requiring it to do so – medical marijuana patient Scott Bledsoe filed a lawsuit yesterday requesting that a judge order the county to follow the law.
 

Bledsoe relocated to California from Florida so that he could follow his doctor’s advice to use medical marijuana without fear of arrest. Little did he know that in San Bernardino, he wouldn’t be able to obtain an ID card to prevent his arrest because the county’s sheriff deputies are actually trained to ignore the state's 12-year-old medical marijuana law.

On the same day, on the other end of the state, patient advocacy group Americans for Safe Access filed a lawsuit against Solano County for its refusal to follow state law and implement the ID program.

California’s courts have already resoundingly sided with patients on this issue; needless to say, the odds are severely stacked against both San Bernardino and Solano counties.

People suffering from Parkinson's disease have a high rate of psychosis, which may be induced or worsened by drugs used to treat the illness. A recently published study in the Journal of Psychopharmacology suggests that a marijuana component called cannabidiol (CBD) may be a helpful treatment for this condition.

This was a small, uncontrolled pilot study, but CBD produced rapid and fairly dramatic reductions in psychotic symptoms. And the growing body of evidence regarding CBD's anti-psychotic properties has important implications beyond Parkinson's patients. For example, there is some evidence that THC can worsen psychotic symptoms, but at least one study has implied that CBD, if present in sufficient quantities, can counter this effect.