What Rescheduling Will Mean for Marijuana

By Dr. Chris Meyers

The Drug Enforcement Administration announced in early 2024 that it would act on President Joe Biden’s call to reclassify marijuana, moving it from the tightly controlled Schedule I category that it has been in since 1970 to the less restrictive Schedule III status of the Controlled Substances Act. That triggered a long process of hearings and reviews that will not be completed until after the presidential election in November.

The news drew strong reactions from critics: 25 Republican lawmakers sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland protesting any changes to federal marijuana laws. They argued that the decision “was not properly researched … and is merely responding to the popularity of marijuana and not the actual science.”

As a philosopher and drug policy expert, I focus on assessing arguments and evidence rather than politics or rhetoric. So, what are the arguments for and against rescheduling cannabis?

Scheduling Under Controlled Substances Act

The Controlled Substances Act places each prohibited drug into one of five schedules based on known medical use, addictive potential and safety. Schedule I drugs – which, along with marijuana, also includes heroin, LSD, psilocybin, ecstasy (MDMA) and quaaludes – is the most restrictive category.

Schedule I substances cannot be legally used for any purpose, including medical use or research, though an exception for research can be made with special permission from the DEA. The criteria for inclusion in the Schedule I category is that the substance has a high potential for abuse, is extremely addictive and has “no currently accepted medical use.”

Schedule II, which is slightly less restrictive than Schedule I, includes drugs that are addictive and potentially unsafe but also have some accepted medical use. These include strong opioids such as fentanyl, as well as cocaine, PCP and methamphetamine. Though they are still tightly regulated, Schedule II drugs can be used medically with a prescription or administered by a licensed physician.

Schedule III is much less restrictive and is intended for substances with legitimate medical use and only moderate risk of abuse or dependency. This category includes low-dose morphine, anabolic steroids and ketamine.

Schedule IV – which includes the sedative Valium, the weak opioid tramadol and sleep medicines such as Ambien – is even less restrictive.

The least restrictive category is Schedule V, which includes cough syrups with codeine and calcium channel blockers such as gabapentin and pregabalin. All scheduled drugs require a doctor’s prescription and can be distributed only by licensed pharmacies.

Schedule III Would Only Legalize Some Medical Use

The push to reschedule is largely to make federal laws consistent with state medical marijuana programs that – as of October 2024 – are legal in 38 states plus the District of Columbia.

Moving marijuana to Schedule III would not change its legal status in states where it is banned. It would make marijuana legal at the federal level but only for medical use. Recreational use would still be federally prohibited, even though it is currently legal in 24 states plus Washington.

Rescheduling, however, might not make medical marijuana any easier for patients to access and could even make it much harder for some. Currently, getting a medical marijuana card is quite easy in most states. In Washington D.C., where I live, patients can self-certify.

If marijuana is reclassified as Schedule III, medical marijuana programs will have to start requiring a doctor’s prescription, just like with all other scheduled substances. And it could be distributed only by licensed pharmacies, which would put medical dispensaries that are now selling it without a license from the Food and Drug Administration out of business.

Rescheduling, however, would give medical marijuana legitimacy as a bona fide medicine. And the intent of the move is to increase access, even if it is unclear how rescheduling would achieve that.

So, assuming that rescheduling would have the intended effect of expanding access to medical marijuana, should it be rescheduled?

Medical Uses of Marijuana

Though there are three criteria for Schedule I in the Controlled Substances Act, the DEA in fact relies on only the medical use criterion. This was the basis of the DEA’s proposal to reschedule marijuana. The fact that almost 75% of Americans live in a state with a medical marijuana program suggests that marijuana has an accepted medical use.

More importantly, Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act already includes dronabinol, which is delta-9 THC, the active ingredient in marijuana. Although dronabinol is synthesized in the lab rather than extracted from the cannabis plant, it is the exact same molecule. The FDA approved THC in the form of dronabinol in 1985 for treating anorexia caused by HIV/AIDS as well as nausea and vomiting due to chemotherapy. Placing marijuana in the same schedule as its primary active ingredient makes a lot of sense.

Another argument in favor of rescheduling is that it would open up new opportunities for medical research into marijuana’s effects, research that is currently hampered by its Schedule I status. This work is critical because the system of cannabinoid receptors through which marijuana causes its therapeutic and psychoactive effects is crucial for almost every aspect of human functioning.

Research has shown that cannabis is effective not only in treating nausea and AIDS but also chronic pain and some symptoms of multiple sclerosis.

There is also good evidence that marijuana can help treat other conditions, including Lou Gehrig’s disease (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or ALS), glaucoma, irritable bowel syndrome, insomnia, migraine, post-traumatic stress disorder and Tourette syndrome. Keeping marijuana in the Schedule I category severely hampers research that might establish more effective treatments for these conditions.

Balancing Risks and Benefits

Those opposed to rescheduling cite possible health risks associated with marijuana consumption. Heavy use is linked to an increased risk of developing schizophrenia. However, the increased risk of schizophrenia from cannabis use is comparable to that caused by watching excessive television, eating junk food or smoking cigarettes.

Long-term marijuana use can also lead to sleep problems and diminished visuospatial memory. It can also cause gastrointestinal trouble, such as cannabis hyperemesis syndrome, which is characterized by nausea, vomiting and abdominal pain. The symptoms, while extremely unpleasant, are temporary and occur only after consuming marijuana. The condition disappears in people who stop using.

Marijuana use can also be addictive. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about three out of every 10 regular marijuana users meet the diagnostic criteria for cannabis use disorder.

All of the concerns above are legitimate, though it is worth noting that virtually no effective medicine is free from undesirable side effects. And although marijuana can be habit-forming, it is not as addictive as alcohol, tobacco, oxycodone, cocaine, methamphetamine or benzodiazepines. None of those other drugs are categorized as Schedule I, and alcohol and tobacco are not scheduled at all.

Unlike most other prescription medications, marijuana use is associated with many benefits. For example, in states where marijuana has been legalized, worker’s compensation payments have fallen by an average of 21% among people over 40. Researchers think that this is because marijuana helps workers better manage chronic pain. The use of marijuana for pain management also helps to reduce dependency on opioids. One study found that U.S. counties with one or two marijuana dispensaries had an average of 17% fewer opioid-related fatalities compared with counties with no dispensaries.

Research also shows that marijuana use can help to prevent Alzheimer’s by blocking the enzymes that produce amyloid plaques. It also shows promise for reducing a person’s risk of developing Type 2 diabetes by helping the body regulate insulin and glucose levels.

All of these benefits add up to marijuana users having an overall lower rate of premature death than nonusers.

Chris Meyers, PhD, is an Adjunct Professor of Philosophy at George Washington University. His main area of research is in moral psychology, moral theory, and applied ethics/public policy. Meyers is the author of “Drug Legalization,” a textbook that looks at the pros and cons of prohibiting recreational drugs.

This article originally appeared in The Conversation and is republished with permission.

Cannabis Advocates Push Back on California Plan to Ban Hemp THC

By Crystal Lindell

The cannabis industry is pushing back on plans by California Gov. Gavin Newsom to impose emergency regulations that would effectively ban all food and beverage products containing Delta-8 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) derived from hemp.

The proposed regulations would require that any products intended for human consumption have no detectable levels of Delta-8 THC or other intoxicating hemp cannabinoids; establish a minimum age to purchase hemp products at 21; and limit the number of servings of hemp products to five per package.

When hemp was legalized by Congress in 2018, the thinking was that hemp had such minimal amounts of THC that no one could possibly use it to get high. But cannabis companies soon found ways to tweak the chemical composition of hemp-derived THC and other cannabinoids (CBD) to make them more potent. Edibles containing delta-8 THC are now widely sold as candy, cookies, gummies and beverages – even in states where medical and recreational cannabis are still illegal.

“We will not sit on our hands as drug peddlers target our children with dangerous and unregulated hemp products containing THC at our retail stores,” Newsom said in a statement. “We’re taking action to close loopholes and increase enforcement to prevent children from accessing these dangerous hemp and cannabis products.”

But the advocacy group Cal NORML says Newsom’s regulations go too far and would make it impossible to sell any products containing hemp-derived CBD. It wants the rules modified to allow for non-intoxicating levels of THC. . 

“In practice, it’s impossible to eliminate detectable but non-intoxicating traces of THC from natural hemp extracts,” the group said. “THC is readily detectable at levels of 1 billionth of a gram, far below the threshold of human sensitivity.”

Cal NORML says the practical result of Newsom’s proposal would be to ban a host of hemp products that some people use to treat health conditions. It wants California to adopt Colorado’s definition of non-intoxicating hemp. That state allows hemp extracts with a CBD:THC ratio of at least 15:1 and no more than 1.75 milligrams of THC per dose. 

“There’s no danger that minors will try to get high on hemp products with less than 2 mg of THC, especially when other, much more potent marijuana products are readily available at bargain prices on the illegal market,” the group said.

“[Cal NORML] does not take issue with the regulations’ intent to block the sale of hemp products with intoxicating levels of THC in liquor stores, gas stations, smoke shops and convenience outlets, often with inadequate labeling and in a manner accessible to minors.”

As currently drafted, Cal NORML says the proposed regulations would violate the mandate of California’s medical marijuana law to provide “safe and affordable” access to cannabis for all patients in medical need.

Another advocacy group – One Hemp – is threatening a lawsuit against Newsom for exceeding his authority to enact emergency regulations without the approval of the state legislature.

“Newsom’s overreach is shameful,” said Jared Stanley, founding member of One Hemp.  “Other states have successfully banned Delta 8 products while also protecting natural hemp products through a simple solution that would safeguard ALL California’s children, not just some.”

“These rules signify that the Governor intends to turn his back on my daughter and millions in the disabled community,” says Stephanie Bohn, whose 10-year old daughter recently marked one year without seizures after she started taking natural hemp CBD.

“Governor Newsom, please acknowledge children like my daughter – the ones with intractable seizures and debilitating insomnia that conventional pharmaceuticals don't help. The only thing that offered rescue was full-spectrum CBD. This is more than a policy issue, this is a life-or-death issue.”  

One Hemp says parents of disabled children in California are “panic buying CBD products” before the proposed regulations take effect. 

The hemp rules await final approval from the California Office of Administrative Law. If they are approved, sellers of hemp products will be required to immediately impose purchase restrictions and remove items with detectable THC levels.

DEA Delays Decision on Reclassifying Marijuana Until After the Election

By Crystal Lindell

The Drug Enforcement Administration has likely eliminated any possibility of marijuana being rescheduled until after a new president is sworn into office next year. The agency will hold a public hearing on the matter on December 2nd —  nearly a month after the presidential election —  according to a notice published yesterday in the Federal Register. 

The hearing will help determine if marijuana should be re-classified under Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) from its current status as an illegal Schedule I substance. 

Moving marijuana to schedule III would place it in a category of drugs that are considered to have an accepted medical use. Rescheduling would also indicate that cannabis has less potential for abuse than Schedule I and II substances, with only moderate to low risk of physical or psychological dependence. 

But the DEA has also made it clear that rescheduling does not equal legalization, noting that “the manufacture, distribution, dispensing, and possession of marijuana would remain subject to the applicable criminal prohibitions of the CSA.” 

To make a cannabis-based medicine legal under Schedule III, the Food and Drug Administration would first have to approve it for a specific medical condition, which would likely require a lengthy clinical trial process that could take years to complete.

The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), an advocacy organization that has long fought for cannabis to be legalized, says it’s not surprised that the DEA wants to have public hearings. 

“Hearings are an integral part of the rescheduling process. To think that the DEA, which historically has opposed any changes to cannabis’ prohibitive status, would sign off on the most significant proposed change in federal marijuana policy in over fifty years absent such hearings was always wishful thinking,” said NORML Deputy Director Paul Armentano.

“That said, the scientific evidence in favor of removing cannabis from Schedule I remains overwhelming. Cannabis clearly has legitimate therapeutic value and it possesses a superior safety profile compared to other Schedule I or Schedule II controlled substances.”

The Biden Administration initiated the regulatory process to review the scheduling of cannabis in late 2022, a review that has dragged on for nearly two years. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recommended marijuana be moved to Schedule III in August 2023.

But the Justice Department and DEA Administrator Anne Milgram – who has the final say on rescheduling – have yet to approve the HHS recommendation.  The DEA published the proposed change in cannabis’ classification in May in the Federal Register. That notice drew over 43,000 responses during a 60-day public comment period, with numerous requests for a public hearing.

Seeing the process take so long is frustrating. With 38 states and the District of Columbia allowing medical cannabis, it’s clear that marijuana has a legitimate medical use – a fact confirmed by the HHS recommendation to reschedule. So why are the DOJ and DEA dragging their feet?  

Holding the public hearing after the presidential election also risks that it won’t be done at all, depending on who wins and what their policy preference is on the matter. 

Although Democratic nominee Kamala Harris is likely to continue President Joe Biden’s push to have marijuana reclassified, we can’t be sure what she would do. Republican nominee Donald Trump has also indicated in recent days that he favors “decriminalizing” marijuana, but we also don’t know with certainty what he would do. 

With so many states having already legalized the medical and recreational use of marijuana, it’s become increasingly clear that there are no compelling health-related reasons to continue classifying cannabis as a Schedule I controlled substance. And the longer the DEA delays changing marijuana’s status, the more it should make all of us question how much health concern there really is behind the Controlled Substances Act.

Rates of Cannabis Use Disorder Rising for Medicare Patients

By Pat Anson

A new FDA study is documenting the growing use of cannabis by seniors and how some are being diagnosed as having “cannabis use disorder” by their doctors.

A research team led by FDA epidemiologist Silvia Perez-Vilar, PharmD, analyzed the health data of nearly 56 million Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 and older. They looked for Medicare claims that included at least one of the many billable diagnostic codes for cannabis use disorder (CUD).

There are over three dozen such codes, which include everything from cannabis intoxication and dependence to delusions, psychosis and “perceptual disturbance” – a diagnosis that can mean anything from not being able to recognize words to seeing things that aren’t there. There are even CUD codes for “unspecified” symptoms of cannabis use and for being in remission.

The research findings, recently published in JAMA Network Open, found that Medicare claims for CUD have steadily risen in recent years, especially in states where cannabis was legalized for medical or adult recreational use.

“Rates of cannabis-related disorder encounters increased from 2017 through 2022 among US Medicare-insured older adults. We observed the highest rates in states or territories that legalized adult and medical use of cannabis,” they wrote. “Overall, data suggest that increasing rates of health care encounters documenting cannabis-related disorders among older adults might be associated with the type of cannabis legalization.”

What were these “increasing rates” documenting CUD? In states where cannabis is legal, about 45 CUD cases were filed in 2022 for every 10,000 Medicare claims. That’s about 0.45% of all claims – not a large amount by any means. The CUD rate was even lower in states where cannabis is illegal, less than 0.28%.

Those may be rock bottom rates, but the researchers noted that “differences in cannabis use patterns and perception of risk may influence policy changes.” Exactly what kind of policy changes are warranted aren’t spelled out, but it implies there should be more screening for CUD.  

Another recent JAMA study called for U.S. primary care physicians to start screening all patients for CUD, regardless of age or even whether they currently use cannabis. Patients identified as high risk cannabis users should then be referred for “possible addiction treatment.”

Treatments for CUD are currently limited to counseling and cognitive behavioral therapies. Unlike opioid use disorder, there are no FDA-approved pharmaceutical treatments for CUD, although there are several such drugs in the pipeline. One is being tested in clinical studies by Indivior, the company that makes Suboxone for opioid use disorder.

Cannabis vs. Opioids

Many patients who live with pain are turning to cannabis as an alternative to opioids, which are increasingly difficult to obtain. In a recent PNN survey, over 30% of pain patients said they had used cannabis for pain relief. Many did so because they couldn’t get an opioid prescription or had problems getting one filled.

“I have a medical marijuana referral and my doctor at the Cleveland Clinic flat out refuses to write me any prescriptions for any opioids. Bunch of BS,” one patient told us.

“I am very lucky. My pain management doctor supports medical cannabis,” said another. “Since my (opioid) dose has been cut in half, it does provide a bit of relief and helps me sleep a few hours.”

“My pharmacy ran out of oxycodone & hydrocodone. My pain doctor switched me over to hydromorphone and so far I've been able to get that filled. If I'm no longer able to get that, I'll have to consider medical marijuana,” wrote another pain patient.

About 10% of U.S. adults over age 50 reported using cannabis within the past year, a number that’s expected to rise when the federal government reschedules cannabis as a less dangerous drug. As more seniors experiment with cannabis, they’ll have to get used to the fact that it carries a stigma, just like opioids. And there’s a good chance their doctor will be evaluating them for signs of CUD.  

“Many older adults are turning to cannabis for help with increased pain syndromes—osteoarthritis, degenerative joint diseases, as well as insomnia,” Brooke Worster, MD, an associate professor and cannabis expert at Thomas Jefferson University, told Fortune.   

“The question really is, how do we recognize and avoid abuse or CUD, which is important and only now being recognized and discussed in the medical community more regularly.” 

Should Every Patient Be Screened for Cannabis Use Disorder?

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

With the federal government on the verge of rescheduling cannabis as a less dangerous drug, and 38 states and the District of Columbia already allowing its medical and/or recreational use, it seems likely we’ll be hearing a lot more about cannabis use disorder.

A case in point is a large study, recently published in JAMA Network Open, that calls on primary care physicians to start screening all patients for cannabis use disorder (CUD).  It’s estimated that about 14.2 million Americans have CUD, a number that’s expected to grow as legal cannabis becomes more widely available.

The study found that 17% of primary care patients reported using cannabis in the last three months, usually to manage pain and other symptoms. Researchers say over a third of them (34.7%) used cannabis so frequently they were at moderate to high risk of CUD.

"Given the high rates of cannabis use, especially for symptom management, and the high levels of disordered use, it is essential that health care systems implement routine screening of primary care patients," wrote lead author Lillian Gelberg, MD, from the UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine.

“This group could benefit from a primary care clinician–based brief intervention to prevent those at moderate risk for cannabis use disorders from developing more serious CUD and to evaluate and refer high-risk users for possible addiction treatment.”

What is cannabis use disorder and how is it assessed? For the UCLA study, researchers used a screening tool known as ASSIST (Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test) that was originally developed by the World Health Organization and then modified to include cannabis.

Patients were asked if they’ve used cannabis in the last three months. If they said “yes,” five more questions were asked to assess why they use cannabis; how often they use it; if they’ve experienced tolerance or withdrawal; if they’ve tried unsuccessfully to reduce or stop using cannabis; and if it has interfered with any aspect of their lives.

Answer “yes” to one or two of those additional questions and a patient could then be diagnosed with CUD, even if they’ve used cannabis safely and responsibly for years. Their doctor could then select from dozens of diagnostic codes for CUD, ranging from cannabis dependence and intoxication to psychosis and hallucinations. All of the codes are billable for the doctor, so there is an incentive to use them.

Critics say this way of diagnosing people with CUD is fraught with problems, not unlike the way many pain patients have been diagnosed with opioid use disorder and forced into addiction treatment.

“This is my take too,” says Paul Armentano, Deputy Director of NORML, which advocates for full marijuana legalization. “Given that more than three-quarters of the (UCLA) cohort acknowledged consuming cannabis products ‘to manage symptoms,’ it’s hardly surprising that many if not all of these respondents would also report long-term regular use of the substance, as well as other criteria that overlap with signs of so-called cannabis use disorder.”

Armentano says several studies have documented declines in CUD, even after states legalized cannabis use.  

“To date, not a single legalization state has ever repealed or even rolled back their marijuana laws. This speaks to the reality that these regulations are working largely as intended and that the majority of those who consume cannabis do so in a responsible manner that poses little risk to either themselves or to others,” Armentano said in an email. 

In Washington State, one of the first states to legalize recreational cannabis, a recent study estimated that one in every five primary care patients had CUD, with 6.5% having moderate to severe CUD. Like the UCLA study, researchers said their findings underscore “the importance of assessing patient cannabis use in clinical settings.” 

“Knowledge of patient use provides an opportunity to discuss risks and limited benefits of cannabis use and potentially safer treatment alternatives for those using cannabis for medical reasons. For patients with higher risk cannabis use (eg, daily), psychometrically valid brief assessments for (diagnostic) symptoms of CUD can identify and gauge CUD severity,” they concluded. 

CUD Medications in the Pipeline

Treatments for CUD are currently limited to counseling and cognitive behavioral therapies such as meditation. Unlike opioid use disorder, there are no FDA-approved pharmaceutical treatments for CUD. That could soon be changing, as more drug companies recognize the potential value of CUD medication to their bottom lines.  

Indivior, the maker of Suboxone and Subutex for treatment of opioid use disorder, is conducting clinic trials on a synthetic drug -- called AEF0117 – that is designed to treat CUD by inhibiting a cannabinoid receptor in the brain that makes people feel “high.”

Indivior bought the worldwide rights to AEF0117 from a French pharmaceutical company for $100 million — which tells you how much value they think the drug could have. Indivior executives call AEF0117 “a unique opportunity to address a growing unmet public health need.”

“We have tested over a dozen potential treatment medications in our Cannabis Research Laboratory, and this is the first to decrease both the positive mood effects of cannabis and the decision to use cannabis by daily smokers,” said Margaret Haney, PhD, a professor of neurobiology at Columbia University who supervised the trials for Indivior.

According to ClincalTrials.gov, over a hundred clinical trials are currently underway or recruiting participants for a variety of potential CUD therapies. Most are treatments that already exist for other conditions and would be repurposed for CUD. One is gabapentin, a nerve drug currently used to treat seizures, shingles and pain. Other treatments being tested for CUD include transcranial magnetic stimulation, high blood pressure medication, and drugs used to help people stop smoking tobacco. 

Another anecdotal sign about the growing awareness of CUD can be found in the Federal Register, which has received over 17,000 comments so far about the Justice Department’s proposal to reclassify marijuana as a less restrictive Schedule III substance.

Nearly 700 of the comments mention CUD, with many containing boilerplate language claiming that “1 in 3 past year marijuana users met the clinical criteria for Cannabis Use Disorder.”

That theme is widely promoted by the addiction treatment industry, which maintains there is no clinical evidence “that the therapeutic benefits of medical cannabis or medical marijuana outweigh the health risks.”

There are currently no established medical guidelines or a “standard of care” that specifically address how to screen for CUD. But with cannabis use growing and healthcare providers coming under scrutiny for how they deal with substance abuse issues, future guidelines that require doctors to screen for CUD may be inevitable.

“How much longer will clients, families, social workers, and other mental health clinicians continue to be shortchanged by this situation? The time is well overdue to undertake formal cannabis use screening with well-established instruments during the mental health intake evaluation process, especially with adolescents and young adults,” wrote Jerrold Pollak, PhD, a clinical neuropsychologist, in Social Work Today.

One of the biggest hurdles for routine CUD screening may be patient reluctance to discuss their cannabis use. A survey of older U.S. adults found that less than 40% had discussed their cannabis use with a healthcare provider. Many fear being dropped by their doctor or being cut off from medication if they disclose that they’re using cannabis.

A Compound Found in Cannabis Could Make Opioids Safer

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

What gives the cannabis sativa plant it’s pain-relieving properties?

Most people will tell you it’s cannabidiol (CBD) and/or tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the two most well-known chemical compounds found in cannabis.  

But researchers at University of Arizona Health Sciences say terpenes -- aromatic compounds that give cannabis its distinctive “skunky” smell – have analgesic effects as well. In fact, in a new study published in the journal PAIN, they report that cannabis terpenes are just as effective as morphine in reducing neuropathic pain in laboratory animals.

“A question that we’ve been very interested in is could terpenes be used to manage chronic pain?” lead researcher John Streicher, PhD, a Pharmacology Professor at UA’s College of Medicine in Tucson, said in a press release. “What we found is that terpenes are really good at relieving a specific type of chronic pain with side effects that are low and manageable.”

Terpenes are found in all plants and are the main component of essential oils. Terpenes give lavender, sage and eucalyptus oils their distinctive smells, which are used to promote relaxation or even reduce pain and inflammation. In nature, terpenes help plants attract pollinators such as bees or to protect themselves from predators.

Most plants have only two dominant terpenes, but cannabis has up to 150 terpenes. Streicher and his colleagues tested five of the cannabis terpenes by injecting them into mice with chemotherapy-induced neuropathic pain.

They found that each of the five terpenes reduced nerve pain significantly, at levels similar to or even better than morphine. And when combined with morphine, the analgesic effects were enhanced even further.

Perhaps the most striking discovery is that the mice showed no signs of euphoria or “liking” terpenes – a sign that they may not have abuse potential.

“We looked at other aspects of the terpenes, such as: Does this cause reward? Is this going to be addictive? Is it going to make you feel awful?” Streicher said. “What we found was yes, terpenes do relieve pain, and they also have a pretty good side effect profile.”

In addition to injections, researchers also administered terpenes to the mice orally and through inhalation from a vaporizer. The results were the same. The mice had significant pain relief with no side effects or signs of addiction.

More research is needed, but some cannabis companies are already incorporating terpenes into their products. Lemon Kush, for example, is a marijuana strain that contains limonene, a terpene that smells like lemon, while the hybrid Blue Dream has a terpene that’s also found in blueberries.

“A lot of people vape or smoke terpenes as part of cannabis extracts that are available commercially in states where cannabis use is legal,” Streicher said “We were surprised to find that the inhalation route didn’t have an impact in this study, because there are a lot of at least anecdotal reports saying that you can get the effects of terpenes whether taken orally or inhaled.”

The next step for Streicher and his research team is to study whether terpenes can block the abuse potential of opioids, while at the same time enhancing their analgesic effects.

“This brings up the idea that you could have a combination therapy, an opioid with a high level of terpene, that could actually make the pain relief better while blocking the addiction potential of opioids,” Streicher said.

Public Comments Sought on Marijuana Rescheduling

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

The U.S. public is finally getting a chance to comment on the federal government’s historic decision to reclassify marijuana from a Schedule I substance with a “high potential for abuse” to a less restrictive Schedule III drug with “moderate to low potential for physical and psychological dependence.”

After months of foot dragging, the Justice Department published a notice in the Federal Register today giving the public 60 days to comment on the proposed rescheduling. Written comments must be submitted or postmarked on or before July 22. Online comments can be made here.

Every step in this process has been fraught with delays. And there may be more.

The Food and Drug Administration completed a review last August – nearly a year after it was requested by President Biden -- finding “credible scientific support” for marijuana’s rescheduling. But the FDA report was not made public until January, after a lawsuit was filed by two pro-cannabis lawyers seeking its release when the agency didn’t respond to requests under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

Another four months passed before the Justice Department, which oversees the Drug Enforcement Administration, submitted to the Federal Register a notice about the proposed rescheduling. Since the DEA is charged with enforcing the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) and determines how drugs are scheduled, public notices involving the CSA are almost always signed by the DEA administrator.

This one, however, is signed by Attorney General Merrick Garland, not DEA Administrator Anne Milgram – a sign that her agency is not yet on board with marijuana’s rescheduling.

“DEA has not yet made a determination as to its views of the appropriate schedule for marijuana,” Garland wrote. “The CSA vests the Attorney General with the authority to schedule, reschedule, or decontrol drugs… The Attorney General has delegated that authority to the DEA Administrator, but also retains the authority to schedule drugs under the CSA in the first instance.”

According to an Associated Press report, Milgram told her staff in March that marijuana’s rescheduling “had been taken over” by Garland and the DOJ. The DEA wanted more time for studies to determine whether marijuana has an accepted medical use, a request that was rejected.

Former DEA Administrator Tim Shea believes the rescheduling process was hijacked by DOJ for political reasons.

“If she (Milgram) had supported it she would have signed it and sent it in,” Shea told the AP. “DEA was opposed to this and the politics entered and overruled them. It’s demoralizing. Everybody from the agents in the streets to the leadership in DEA knows the dangers this brings.”   

Asked recently during a congressional hearing what her views are on marijuana. Milgram ducked the question.

“Since DEA is ultimately the decider of scheduling and rescheduling, and the DEA administrator is in that role, it would be inappropriate for me to make comments about this process or parts of that process,” Milgram said.

‘Evidence Supports Marijuana for Pain’

Reclassifying marijuana as a Schedule III substance – in the same category as codeine and ketamine – may be historic, but it’s not the full “legalization” that many cannabis supporters have been calling for.  

Under the CSA, legal access to Schedule III substances requires a prescription from a licensed doctor that is filled at a licensed pharmacy. Any new medical marijuana products would also have to go through a lengthy and costly clinical trial process to assess their safety and effectiveness. Even if they pass that test, they would likely only be approved by FDA for certain conditions.  

Garland’s notice in the Federal Register is largely based on the FDA’s 2023 review, which states there is good evidence that marijuana is helpful in treating chronic pain and mixed evidence it could be useful in relieving nausea, anxiety, epilepsy and PTSD.

“FDA’s review of the available information identified mixed findings of effectiveness across indications, ranging from data showing inconclusive findings to considerable evidence in favor of effectiveness, depending on the source. The largest evidence base for effectiveness exists for marijuana use within the pain indication (in particular, neuropathic pain). Numerous systematic reviews concluded that there exists some level of evidence supporting the use of marijuana for chronic pain,” Garland wrote.

As for marijuana’s potential for abuse, Garland cited findings that marijuana poses less of a health risk than illicit drugs and even some legal medications such as oxycodone and benzodiazepines.

“The rank order of the comparators in terms of greatest adverse consequences typically ranked heroin, benzodiazepines, and cocaine first or in immediately subsequent positions, with marijuana in a lower place in the ranking,” Garland wrote.

“For overdose deaths, marijuana is always in the lowest ranking among comparator drugs. These evaluations demonstrate that there is consistency across databases, across substances, and over time. HHS thus concluded that although abuse of marijuana produces clear evidence of a risk to public health, that risk is relatively lower than that posed by most other comparator drugs.”

The opening of a public comment period does not mark the end of the rescheduling process. The DEA/DOJ will need time to review and evaluate thousands of comments, which will be followed by an administrative hearing and a final ruling that is subject to presidential review. Even then, the final rule has to be published in the Federal Register, followed by a 30 or 60-day wait period before the rule takes effect. 

During that process, and until a final rule is published, marijuana remains a schedule I controlled substance that is illegal under federal law. About three-quarters of states have already legalized marijuana for medical or recreational purposes.

Not Your Parents’ Pot: Cannabis Is More Potent Now

By Dr. Ty Schepis

Eventually, most adults reach a point where we realize we are out of touch with those much younger than us.

Perhaps it is a pop culture reference that sparks the realization. For me, this moment happened when I was in my late 20s and working with adolescents in school settings to help them quit smoking. When other drugs would occasionally come up, I didn’t understand some of the slang terms they used for these drugs. Many people may have that feeling now when the topic of cannabis comes up – especially in its different and newer forms.

As a professor of psychology, I focus my research on substance use in adolescents and young adults. A major change during my time in research is the legalization and explosion of cannabis availability across the U.S.

There are arguments for and against increasing legalization of cannabis for adult use in the U.S., but expanded access to legal cannabis also may have unintended consequences for adolescents. These consequences are compounded by the increasing potency of some cannabis products.

I use the word “cannabis” since it refers to the plant from which the drugs are derived. It also serves as a catch-all term for any substance with chemical compounds from cannabis plants and addresses concerns that the word marijuana has some long-standing racist overtones.

Cannabis now comes in a larger variety of forms than it used to. When most people over 40 think of cannabis, they imagine its dried form for smoking. This cannabis was not particularly strong: The average THC concentration of cannabis seized by the Drug Enforcement Agency in 1995 was 4%, while it was roughly 15% in 2021.

In addition to the smoked form, some might remember an edible form, often baked into a dessert like a brownie, or hashish, which is derived from more potent parts of the cannabis plant.

Today there are many different cannabis concentrates that have high levels of THC, typically ranging from 40% to 70%, and more than 80% in some cases, depending on the method of extraction. These include oils that can be vaporized by vape or dab pens, waxier substances and even powders.

Differences in Cannabis Products

THC and cannabidiol, or CBD, are the most common chemicals in cannabis. Each one interacts with the brain in different ways, producing different perceived effects.

CBD does not produce the same “high” that THC does, and cannabidiol may have benefits as a medication for severe epilepsy, as well as other potential but as yet unproven medical uses. The differences between THC and CBD come from how they interact with cannabinoid receptors – the proteins onto which these drugs attach – in the brain and body.

However, CBD can also make people sleepy, alter mood in unintended ways and cause stomach upset. Never use a CBD product without consulting a physician.

THC is the chemical most strongly associated with the high from cannabis. By increasing the amount of THC, concentrated products can increase blood levels of THC rapidly and more strongly than nonconcentrates such as traditional smoked cannabis.

Cannabis concentrates also come in many different forms that range from waxy or creamy to hard and brittle. They are made in a variety of ways that may require dry ice, water or flammable solvents such as butane.

The myriad names for cannabis concentrates can be confusing. Concentrate names include “budder,” which refers to a yellowish paste like frosting; “shatter” is made similarly to budder but comes in a thin, brittle and translucent form; there’s also “wax” or “crumble,” which confusingly is not waxy but is more like a powdery or grainy substance; and “keef” or “kief,” which is powdery in nature and derived from the most potent parts of the cannabis plant. It is similar to hashish.

The names change regularly and can vary by guide or from person to person. It is best to ask what a term means from an open and curious place than to act as if you know all the terminology.

Many concentrates are vaporized and inhaled. Vaporizing is different than smoking, as vaporizing heats the concentrate until it becomes a gas, which is inhaled. Smoking involves burning the compound to produce an inhaled gas.

Many who vaporize concentrates call it “dabbing.” This refers to the dab of concentrate to heat, vaporize and inhale. Another way to vaporize cannabis concentrates is to use a vape pen. Vape pens are sometimes also called dab pens, depending on the local terms.

Cannabis and Adolescents

One of the reasons why young people are drawn to these sorts of products is that vaping or dabbing the concentrated form makes it easier to hide cannabis use. Vaping cannabis does not create the typical smell associated with weed.

A 2021 systematic review found that past-year cannabis vaping nearly doubled from 2017 to 2020 in adolescents - jumping from 7.2% to 13.2%. A more recent study in five northeastern U.S. states found that 12.8% of adolescents vaped cannabis in the past 30 days, a more narrow time frame that suggests potential increases in use. In addition, a 2020 study found that one-third of adolescents who vape do so with cannabis concentrates.

Cannabis use by adolescents is scary because it can alter the way their brains develop. Research shows that the brains of adolescents who use cannabis are less primed to change in response to new experiences, which is a key part of adolescent development. Adolescents who use cannabis are also more likely to experience symptoms of schizophrenia, struggle more in school and engage in other risky behaviors.

The risks of cannabis use are even greater with concentrates because of the high levels of THC. This is true for both adolescents and adults, with greater risk for symptoms of schizophrenia such as hallucinations and delusions, mental health symptoms and more severe cannabis use.

The best analogy is with another drug – alcohol. Most people know that a 12-ounce beer is much less potent than 12 ounces of vodka. Cannabis in smoked form is closer to the beer, while a concentrate is more like the vodka. Neither is safe for an adolescent, but one is even more dangerous.

These dangers make early conversations with kids about cannabis and cannabis concentrates critically important. Research consistently shows that expressing disapproval of drug use makes adolescents less likely to start drug use.

Start these conversations early – ideally before middle school. You can find some helpful online resources to guide the conversation.

While these conversations can be uncomfortable, and you can look like the out-of-touch adult, they can be a major step toward preventing adolescents from using cannabis and other drugs.

Ty Schepis, PhD, is a Professor of Clinical Psychology at Texas State University. His research receives funding from the Food and Drug Administration and the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

This article originally appeared in The Conversation and is republished with permission.

Can Cannabis Help Prevent Dementia?

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

People use cannabis for a variety of reasons. Some use it to relieve pain. Others use it to help them sleep, improve their appetite, or reduce anxiety and stress. Still others use cannabis because it makes them feel good.

A new study suggests there’s another unexpected benefit from consuming cannabis, especially when it’s used recreationally: It may help middle-aged adults ward of dementia.

Researchers at SUNY Upstate Medical University looked at health survey data that assessed the subjective cognitive decline (SCD) of over 4,700 U.S. adults between the ages of 45 and 64. Memory loss and confusion are symptoms of SCD, which is considered an early sign of dementia.

To their surprise, researchers found that participants who only used cannabis recreationally had significantly lower risk of SCD – as much as 96% less risk compared to non-users. Those who used cannabis for medical reasons or combined it with recreational use also had lower odds of SCD, but the difference was not statistically significant.

“We found that non-medical cannabis use was significantly associated with reduced odds of SCD in comparison to non-users. Several factors might explain this observation. Non-medical use of cannabis often contains THC, which has a psychoactive component that creates the ‘high’ sensation. Whereas CBD is non-psychoactive and often used for anxiety and chronic pain management,” the SUNY research team recently reported in the journal Current Alzheimer Research.

One likely reason for the disparity in SCD between recreational and medical users is that those who consume cannabis for health reasons may have comorbid medical conditions – such as diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease and musculoskeletal disorders -- that raise their risk of dementia.

Another consideration is sleep. One of the primary reasons people use cannabis is to help them fall asleep faster and stay asleep longer. Recreational use of cannabis has the added benefit of improving sleep quality. A recent study found that insomnia is associated with a 51% higher risk of dementia risk.

The frequency of cannabis use and whether it was smoked, vaped or ingested had no significant connection to SCD risk.

Although the study found no direct cause-and-effect relationship between cannabis, SCD and dementia, researchers think it’s worth exploring further. More than six million Americans have Alzheimer’s disease or some form of dementia, a number that’s expected to double by 2050. 

“Despite the advancement of medicine and technology, dementia remains incurable and non-preventable. While some medications can slow symptom progression, they are only effective if started during early stages and cannot reverse its course,” SUNY researchers concluded. “Given the widespread use of cannabis in the U.S., it is imperative to pursue further research to understand the mechanism underlying the reduced odds of SCD among non-medical cannabis users.”

FDA Finds ‘Credible Scientific Support’ for Marijuana as Pain Reliever

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

It took a lawsuit to prompt its release, but the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has finally made public a lengthy FDA review explaining why it thinks marijuana should be rescheduled as a Schedule III controlled substance. Such a move would make it legal under federal law for marijuana to be used for medically approved purposes, such as pain relief.

The FDA review was completed last August, nearly a year after it was requested by President Biden. But the 252-page review was not released until Friday, after a lawsuit was filed by two pro-cannabis lawyers when HHS didn’t respond to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.

Medical marijuana is already legal in 38 states, but cannabis remains classified as a Schedule I substance by the Drug Enforcement Administration, making its sale or use illegal under federal law. The DEA is expected to make its decision on rescheduling soon.

The FDA looked at seven potential medical uses of cannabis: pain, anorexia, anxiety, epilepsy, inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), nausea, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

After reviewing clinical studies of cannabis, and the views of academic and professional medical societies, the FDA said they found “mixed findings of effectiveness.” The strongest evidence was for pain relief, anorexia and nausea.

“The available data indicate that there is some credible scientific support for the use of marijuana in the treatment of pain.”

— FDA review

“The largest evidence base for effectiveness exists for marijuana use within the pain indication (in particular, neuropathic pain),” the FDA said. “On balance, the available data indicate that there is some credible scientific support for the use of marijuana in the treatment of pain, anorexia related to a medical condition, and nausea and vomiting, with varying degrees of support and consistency of findings.”

Perhaps just as importantly, the FDA found no evidence of “unacceptably high safety risks” when marijuana was used therapeutically. That is a key finding for marijuana to be rescheduled by the DEA. The risk of marijuana being used nonmedically was also low, compared to substances like alcohol, heroin, cocaine, prescription opioids and anti-anxiety drugs.

“The rank order of the comparators in terms of greatest adverse consequences typically places heroin, benzodiazepines and/or cocaine in the first or immediately subsequent positions, with marijuana in a lower place in the ranking, especially when a utilization adjustment is calculated. For overdose deaths, marijuana is always in the lowest ranking among comparator drugs,” FDA said.

“These evaluations demonstrate that there is consistency across databases, across substances, and over time that although abuse of marijuana produces clear evidence of a risk to public health, that risk is relatively lower than that posed by most other comparator drugs.”

The FDA said the “vast majority” of professional medical organizations do not recommend marijuana, but they don’t specifically recommend against it either. The lone exception is the American Psychiatric Association, which warns that long-term use of marijuana can worsen psychiatric conditions, such as paranoia and hallucinations.

Reclassifying marijuana as a Schedule III substance – in the same category as codeine and ketamine – would certainly be historic, but it won’t resolve the many differences between federal and state regulation of cannabis.

Under federal law, legal access to Schedule III substances requires a prescription from a licensed doctor that is dispensed from a licensed pharmacy. Medical marijuana products would also have to go through the FDA’s lengthy and costly clinical trial process to assess their safety and effectiveness. Even if they pass that test, they would only be approved by FDA for certain conditions.  

Is It Safe for Doctors to Recommend Medical Cannabis?

By Dr. Joseph Parker

Nearly two-thirds of oncologists and pain management specialists say they are worried about the legal repercussions of recommending medical cannabis to their patients. This is not an unreasonable fear.

According to one survey, 60% of doctors fear professional stigma, and for good reason. I have seen colleagues call the DEA to report that a physician who certified patients for cannabis was selling marijuana from their office.  As absurd as this might seem, once the DEA gets rolling, they can always find an excuse to prosecute a physician treating pain or addiction. 

Cannabis may soon be moved from a Schedule I controlled substance, with no approved medical use, to a less restrictive Schedule III, where it would be regulated like codeine. This might relax some of those physicians, but I’m not sure it will.

There are many politicians and law enforcement officers who simply believe that marijuana is evil. The extreme was former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who said at one time that marijuana was “only slightly less awful” than heroin. 

Sessions may truly believe this, but the comparison has no basis.  Heroin can cause respiratory depression and death.  Cannabis cannot.  Heroin works on the endorphin receptors in the brain to trigger a dopamine-mediated reward response, which can lead to what I call “true” addiction. 

Cannabis works predominately through the endocannabinoid system, though it can indirectly influence the release of dopamine and other brain areas associated with the reward system. That’s because the endocannabinoid system and CB1 receptors play a regulatory role in the release of various neurotransmitters, including dopamine.

When tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) binds to CB1 receptors, it can affect the release of dopamine and other neurotransmitters, which contributes to the pleasurable and rewarding effects associated with cannabis use.

I am not saying that someone cannot develop a cannabis substance use disorder or dependence. They certainly can, just like you can with caffeine, sugar or gambling, for that matter.  What I’m saying is that cannabis can make people feel good and want more, but it is nowhere near as dangerous as heroin.  It is also not neurotoxic, like methamphetamine, which can cause the death of brain cells with a single use. 

Some studies actually show a neuroprotective effect from cannabis. And, when taken by itself, cannabis cannot cause an overdose death. This is important. 

Every time the U.S. government targets something, they pay an army of statisticians to generate scary-sounding numbers. For example, you will hear claims that a rise in fatal car accidents was “associated” with cannabis. What exactly does that mean?  It means that a large percentage of accidents involve people who use cannabis, which is unsurprising since about 40% of the adult U.S. population has or is using cannabis.

Those same accidents show a much higher correlation with caffeine.  Caffeine use could be “associated” with probably 90% of all car accidents.  But correlation, of course, does not prove causation. 

These arguments present no evidence that cannabis caused the accidents.  However, the news media can get sloppy about scientific accuracy.  A study will say that a certain number of accidents “involved” cannabis, and the media will report that the cannabis “caused” the accident.

CBD vs. THC

For some reason, Sessions was also obsessed with CBD (cannabidiol). CBD is not THC, which is psychoactive and has a significant effect on a user’s mental processes.  CBD is considered non-psychoactive by a majority of experts, including the World Health Organization.

THC has a higher affinity for CB1 receptors, which are primarily found in the brain and central nervous system, and is a partial agonist for both CB1 and CB2 receptors. Activation of CB1 can cause euphoria and relaxation. It also alters sensory perception, impairs short-term memory, induces anxiety and paranoia, and impairs motor coordination.

CBD does not directly activate those receptors or have those effects. It is instead considered a negative allosteric modulator of CB1 receptors. CBD modifies the CB1 receptor response to THC and actually moderates some of the psychoactive effects of THC.  

There is also evidence that CBD can be anxiolytic and antipsychotic, while THC has been linked (not proven) to be associated with schizophrenia and psychosis.  THC can lead to the release of dopamine, which accounts for the euphoria, but at too low a level to be compared with more addictive substances.

CBD has been found in at least one study to be effective in the treatment of heroin addiction, and in another study to increased motivation, possibly giving us something to treat symptoms of schizophrenia.

Does this all mean it is safe to recommend cannabis to your patients?  Not really. While cannabis has been shown in several replicated studies to be helpful in the treatment of chronic pain, right now it is not safe for doctors to prescribe or recommend. 

Even in states where cannabis is legal for medical use and federal courts have upheld the right of physicians to recommend it, I would argue that the DEA takes a different view.

In the recent prosecution of a physician for “overprescribing” opiates, prosecutors claimed at a press conference that they started investigating the doctor after a call from local police regarding an overdose death.  Evidence later showed this was not the case.  The doctor was actually first targeted for agreeing to certify patients for their state’s medical cannabis program. 

You can help educate your patients about cannabis, but send them on to someone who does not prescribe controlled substances. Until physician rights are restored and protected in this country, it’s just not safe to recommend cannabis.

Joseph Parker, MD, is Chief Science Officer and Operations Officer at Advanced Research Concepts, a company developing solutions to the challenges of space travel and space-related medical issues.  In clinical practice, Dr. Parker specialized in emergency medicine and served as Director of Emergency Medicine at two hospitals. Prior to that, he had a distinguished career in the U.S. Marines and Air Force. 

In 2022, a federal jury convicted Dr. Parker on two counts of unlawful opioid prescribing. He has filed an appeal as he awaits sentencing.

Rescheduling Won’t End Conflict Between Federal and State Marijuana Laws

By Paul Armentano, Guest Columnist 

Ten months after the Biden administration requested the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) “to initiate the administrative process to review expeditiously how marijuana is scheduled under federal law,” Secretary Xavier Becerra confirmed that the agency has recommended cannabis be removed from its Schedule I classification and placed in a lower schedule.

While the explicit details of HHS’ recommendation are not public, Bloomberg reports that the agency seeks to have cannabis moved to the less restrictive Schedule III of the federal Controlled Substances Act. 

The HHS recommendation now goes to the Drug Enforcement Administration, which will conduct its own scientific review. In the past, the DEA has employed its own five-factor test (which differs from HHS’ criteria) to determine whether or not cannabis ought to be rescheduled. On four prior occasions, most recently in 2016, the agency determined that cannabis failed to meet any of its five criteria.  

While it remains unknown at this time how the DEA will ultimately respond to HHS’ request, many are already speculating about the potential implications of such a policy change. And while some entities, particularly those involved in the commercial cannabis industry, have lauded the proposed change as a “giant” step forward, others – like myself – have been far more restrained.

That’s because reclassifying cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III is neither intellectually honest, nor does it sufficiently address the widening chasm between state and federal marijuana laws. 

Specifically, reclassifying cannabis to a lower schedule within the CSA continues to misrepresent the plant’s safety relative to other controlled substances such as oxycodone and hydrocodone (Schedule II), codeine and ketamine (Schedule III), benzodiazepines (Schedule IV), or alcohol (unscheduled). More importantly, rescheduling marijuana fails to provide states with the explicit legal authority to regulate it within their borders as best they see fit, free from federal interference.  

To date, 38 states regulate the production and distribution of cannabis products for medical purposes. Twenty-three of these states regulate the possession and use of marijuana for adults. All of the state laws are currently in conflict with federal marijuana laws. Rescheduling cannabis to Schedule III will not change this reality. 

That’s because Schedule III substances are regulated only for prescription use by the federal government. That means legal access to these substances is limited to patients who possess a prescription from a licensed physician and who have obtained the product from a licensed pharmacy.

Currently, no state government regulates cannabis in such a manner – nor is it likely that any state will reconstruct their existing laws and regulations to do so in the future. 

Simply put, if marijuana is rescheduled, state laws authorizing citizens to possess cannabis for either medical or social purposes will continue be in violation of the federal law, as would the thousands of state-licensed dispensaries that currently serve these markets. And the DEA would still possess the same authority it has now under federal law to crack down on these state-regulated markets should it elect to do so. 

Some have suggested that rescheduling the cannabis plant may provide greater opportunities for investigators to conduct clinical research into its eventual drug development, but this result is also unlikely. That is because many of the existing hurdles to clinical cannabis research, such as the limits placed upon scientists’ access to source materials, are marijuana-specific regulations and predate cannabis’ Schedule I classification.

Other impediments, such as requiring the US Attorney General to approve marijuana-specific research protocols are statutory and are not specific to marijuana’s scheduling in the CSA. 

For these reasons, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) holds the position that the only productive outcome of the current scheduling review would be a recommendation to deschedule cannabis – thereby removing it from the Controlled Substances Act altogether and providing states with greater discretion to establish their own distinct marijuana policies. (A case in point: In 2018 Congress removed from the CSA hemp plants containing no more than 0.3 percent THC, as well as certain cannabinoids derived from them.)

Descheduling would remove the threat of undue federal intrusion in existing state marijuana programs and would respect America’s longstanding federalist principles allowing states to serve as “laboratories of democracy.”

By contrast, rescheduling simply perpetuates the existing contradictions between state and federal cannabis laws, and it fails to provide any necessary legal recognition from the federal government to either the state-licensed cannabis industry or those adults who use the plant responsibly in compliance with state laws.

Paul Armentano is the Deputy Director for NORML, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.

HHS to DEA: Marijuana Is Not Heroin

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

The top U.S. health agency is asking the Drug Enforcement Administration to reclassify marijuana as a Schedule III drug under the Controlled Substances Act, putting cannabis in the same risk category as codeine, ketamine and steroids. Marijuana is currently classified as a Schedule I substance, the same as heroin and LSD.  

Bloomberg News was first to report that a top administrator in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) wrote a letter to DEA Administrator Anne Milgram asking for the change. Although 38 states and the District of Columbia have legalized recreational or medical marijuana, it remains illegal under federal law.

President Biden asked HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra nearly a year ago to review marijuana’s legal status, saying the classification of marijuana on the same level as heroin “makes no sense” and that people shouldn’t go to jail for marijuana possession.

“I can now share that, following the data and science, @HHSGov has responded to @POTUS’ directive to me for the Department to provide a scheduling recommendation for marijuana to the DEA. We’ve worked to ensure that a scientific evaluation be completed and shared expeditiously,” Becerra posted on Twitter Wednesday.

Although the Biden administration favors the move, rescheduling will not be a slam dunk. Marijuana falls under the jurisdiction of the Department of Justice, not HHS, and Milgram reports to Attorney General Merrick Garland, not Becerra. Conservative states where marijuana remains illegal are also likely to oppose the move.

Rescheduling has long been the goal of marijuana advocates, but some are disappointed that HHS is recommending it be moved to Schedule III, where it will still be regulated as a controlled substance.

“The goal of any federal cannabis policy reform ought to be to address the existing, untenable chasm between federal marijuana policy and the cannabis laws of the majority of US states. Rescheduling the cannabis plant to Schedule III of the US Controlled Substances Act fails to adequately address this conflict,” said Paul Armentano, Deputy Director of NORML, a marijuana advocacy group.

“Just as it is intellectually dishonest to categorize cannabis in the same placement as heroin, it is equally disingenuous to treat cannabis in the same manner as anabolic steroids. The majority of Americans believe that cannabis ought to be legal and that its hazards to health are less significant than those associated with federally descheduled substances like alcohol and tobacco. Like those latter substances, we have long argued the cannabis plant should be removed from the Controlled Substances Act altogether.”

The DEA will now conduct its own scientific review of marijuana. On at least four previous occasions, the DEA has refused to reschedule marijuana because there were inadequate safety studies and little scientific evidence supporting its use.

Another major hurdle under federal regulations is that before a substance can be used for a medical purpose, its “chemistry must be scientifically established to permit it to be reproduced in dosages which can be standardized.” That would imply that cannabis or pharmaceutical companies would need to produce marijuana medication in measured doses that are FDA approved and only available by prescription.

There is little consistency in labeling, regulating or testing of cannabis.products sold in states where it is legal. Many products are mislabeled, with concentrations of CBD (cannabinoids) and THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) that are well above or below their label claims.

“It will be very interesting to see how DEA responds to this (HHS) recommendation, given the agency’s historic opposition to any potential change in cannabis’ categorization under federal law,” said Armentano. “Since the agency has final say over any rescheduling decision, it is safe to say that this process still remains far from over.”

Although nearly a third of U.S. adults with chronic pain have used cannabis as a pain reliever, professional medical associations have been reluctant to endorse its use. In 2021, the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) released a position statement saying it could not endorse the use of cannabinoids to treat pain, citing too many “uncertainties” about the clinical evidence.

Veterans Say Cannabis Reduces Drug Use and Improves Quality of Life

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the Department of Defense (DoD) have long taken a dim view of medical cannabis. VA providers are not allowed to recommend or prescribe cannabis, and veterans who admit using cannabis will have it recorded in their VA medical records, which could potentially lead to drug testing or “adjustments” in their treatment plans.

Despite those barriers, cannabis use among U.S. military veterans is growing. In a 2019-2020 survey, nearly 12% of veterans reported using cannabis, with younger veterans (20.2%) and those with psychiatric conditions (24%) even more likely to be cannabis users.

A new study helps explain the popularity of cannabis among veterans. In an anonymous survey of 510 veterans who use medical cannabis, 91 percent said it improved their quality of life and nearly half said it helped them reduce their use of over-the-counter and prescription drugs, including opioids, anti-depressants, muscle relaxers and anti-inflammatory medication.

Veterans who were Black, female, served in combat, and those with chronic pain were most likely to report a desire to reduce their use of “unwanted” medications.

“Many of the respondents reported that medicinal cannabis treatment helped them to experience a greater quality of life, fewer psychological symptoms, fewer physical symptoms, and to use less alcohol, fewer medications, less tobacco, and fewer opioids,” researchers reported in the journal Clinical Therapeutics.

“These findings should inform clinicians who work with the veteran population, as cannabis may be an effective means of helping veterans, especially women and racially minoritized members of this population, to reduce unwanted medication use.”

Previous research has suggested that medical cannabis may play a “harm reduction role” by helping people reduce or even stop their use of opioid pain medication. But a recent study found otherwise. In an analysis of prescription data for over 150,000 chronic pain patients, researchers found that opioid prescribing declined only slightly in states after medical marijuana was legalized.

The VA is also holding the line against using cannabis as a treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).  While many veterans use cannabis to relieve symptoms of PTSD and several states consider PTSD an approved use of medical cannabis, the VA maintains that “cannabis can be harmful,” especially when used long-term, and is “not recommended for the treatment of PTSD.”

Our Bodies Produce Chemicals Similar to THC in Cannabis

By Drs. Prakash and Mitzi Nagarkatti, University of South Carolina

Over the past two decades, a great deal of attention has been given to marijuana – also known as pot or weed. As of early 2023, marijuana has been legalized for recreational use in 21 states and Washington, D.C., and the use of marijuana for medical purposes has grown significantly during the last 20 or so years.

But few people know that the human body naturally produces chemicals that are very similar to delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, the psychoactive compound in marijuana, which comes from the Cannabis sativa plant. These substances are called endocannabinoids, and they’re found across all vertebrate species.

Evolutionarily, the appearance of endocannabinoids in vertebrate animals predates that of Cannabis sativa by about 575 million years.

It is as if the human body has its own version of a marijuana seedling inside, constantly producing small amounts of endocannabinoids.

The similarity of endocannabinoids to THC, and their importance in maintaining human health, have raised significant interest among scientists to further study their role in health and disease, and potentially use them as therapeutic targets to treat human diseases.

THC was first identified in 1964, and is just one of more than 100 compounds found in marijuana that are called cannabinoids.

What Are Endocannabinoids?

Endocannabinoids were not discovered until 1992. Since then, research has revealed that they are critical for many important physiological functions that regulate human health. An imbalance in the production of endocannabinoids, or in the body’s responsiveness to them, can lead to major clinical disorders, including obesity as well as neurodegenerative, cardiovascular and inflammatory diseases.

We are immunologists who have been studying the effects of marijuana cannabinoids and vertebrate endocannabinoids on inflammation and cancer for more than two decades. Research in our laboratory has shown that endocannabinoids regulate inflammation and other immune functions.

A variety of tissues in the body, including brain, muscle, fatty tissue and immune cells, produce small quantities of endocannabinoids. There are two main types of endocannabinoids: anandamide, or AEA, and 2-arachidonoyl glycerol, known as 2-AG. Both of them can activate the body’s cannabinoid receptors, which receive and process chemical signals in cells.

One of these receptors, called CB1, is found predominantly in the brain. The other, called CB2, is found mainly in immune cells. It is primarily through the activation of these two receptors that endocannabinoids control many bodily functions.

The receptors can be compared to a “lock” and the endocannabinoids a “key” that can open the lock and gain entry into the cells. All these endocannabinoid receptors and molecules together are referred to as the endocannabinoid system.

The cannabis plant contains another compound called cannabidiol, or CBD, which has become popular for its medicinal properties. Unlike THC, CBD doesn’t have psychoactive properties because it does not activate CB1 receptors in the brain. Nor does it activate the CB2 receptors, meaning that its action on immune cells is independent of CB2 receptors.

Endocannabinoids Help Us Feel Better

The euphoric “high” feeling that people experience when using marijuana comes from THC activating the CB1 receptors in the brain.

But when endocannabinoids activate CB1 receptors, by comparison, they do not cause a marijuana high. One reason is that the body produces them in smaller quantities than the typical amount of THC in marijuana. The other is that certain enzymes break them down rapidly after they carry out their cellular functions.

However, there is growing evidence that certain activities may release mood-elevating endocannabinoids. Some research suggests that the relaxed, euphoric feeling you get after exercise, called a “runner’s high,” results from the release of endocannabinoids rather than from endorphins, as previously thought.

The endocannabinoids regulate several bodily functions such as sleep, mood, appetite, learning, memory, body temperature, pain, immune functions and fertility. They control some of these functions by regulating nerve cell signaling in the brain. Normally, nerve cells communicate with one another at junctions called synapses. The endocannabinoid system in the brain regulates this communication at synapses, which explains its ability to affect a wide array of bodily functions.

Research in our laboratory has shown that certain cells of the immune system produce endocannabinoids that can regulate inflammation and other immune functions through the activation of CB2 receptors.

In addition, we have shown that endocannabinoids are highly effective in lessening the debilitating effects of autoimmune diseases. These are diseases in which the immune system goes haywire and starts destroying the body’s organs and tissues. Examples include multiple sclerosis, lupus, hepatitis and arthritis.

Chronic Pain Linked to Low Levels of Endocannabinoids

Recent research suggests that migraine, fibromyalgia, irritable bowel syndrome, post-traumatic stress disorder and bipolar disease are all linked to low levels of endocannabinoids.

In a 2022 study, researchers found that a defect in a gene that helps produce endocannabinoids causes early onset of Parkinson’s disease. Another 2022 study linked the same gene defect to other neurological disorders, including developmental delay, poor muscle control and vision problems.

Other research has shown that people with a defective form of CB1 receptors experience increased pain sensitivity such as migraine headaches and suffer from sleep and memory disorders and anxiety.

We believe that the medicinal properties of THC may be linked to the molecule’s ability to compensate for a deficiency or defect in the production or functions of the endocannabinoids.

For example, scientists have found that people who experience certain types of chronic pain may have decreased production of endocannabinoids. People who consume marijuana for medicinal purposes report significant relief from pain. Because the THC in marijuana is the cannabinoid that reduces pain, it may be helping to compensate for the decreased production or functions of endocannabinoids in such patients.

Deciphering the role of endocannabinoids is still an emerging area of health research. Certainly much more research is needed to decipher their role in regulating different functions in the body.

In our view, it will also be important to continue to unravel the relationship between defects in the endocannabinoid system and the development of various diseases and clinical disorders. We think that the answers could hold great promise for the development of new therapies using the body’s own cannabinoids.

Prakash Nagarkatti, PhD, and Mitzi Nagarkatti, PhD, are Professors of Pathology, Microbiology and Immunology at the University of South Carolina. They receive funding from the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health.

This article originally appeared in The Conversation and is republished with permission.