CLINTON CALLS 'TRUCE' IN CALIFORNIA MARIJUANA WAR

The battle over marijuana is shifting from the police
station and courtroom to the doctor's office and research
lab. When voters in California and Arizona decided last
fall to legalize the medicinal use of marijuana, the
federal government vowed to keep sending the message that
the weed is a dangerous drug. The administration warned
doctors they would face retaliation for recommending a
substance that has "no currently accepted medical use."
Now, in the face of rising criticism from the medical
community, including a lawsuit challenging the government's
stance, the White House is deciding not to interfere with
doctors who discuss using marijuana as a treatment. In a
recent letter to the California Medical Association, the
administration also acknowledged the need to review
scientific research, as well as fund further
investigations, on the medicinal benefits of marijuana.

The new stance underscores the complexity of the challenge
facing the administration as it tries to deal with a law
that it clearly doesn't like but which is popular among
many in the powerful medical establishment. "The White
House has declared a truce in its war on California
doctors," says Marcus Conant, a prominent AIDS physician
and plaintiff in a lawsuit seeking to prevent punishment of
doctors who recommend marijuana. "We are once again free
to practice medicine without fear of DEA [Drug
Enforcement Agency] agents harassing us for simply trying
to do our job."

In its letter, the White House left the door open to reclassifying
marijuana as a Schedule II drug "when there is adequate scientific
evidence" it has legitimate uses. Schedule II drugs such as
morphine are illegal, but can be prescribed for medicinal purposes.

Administration officials reject the idea that they have
yielded to critics, insisting the letter merely clarifies
their previous stance. When it comes to actively
encouraging marijuana use, however, there remains a legal
limit, explains an administration official. "Doctors cannot
recommend or prescribe marijuana with the intent that a
patient run down to the corner to buy drugs," he says. The
letter leaves open a gray area as to what constitutes a
"recommendation." Simply advising someone on the efficacy
of marijuana for treating a problem is not going to incur
the wrath of federal prosecutors, the administration
official admits. "These are hard lines to draw," he says.

"The government wants to have it both ways," says Graham
Boyd, one of the attorneys for the doctors suing the
government. Their aim is to avoid a suit over restricting
doctors' freedom of speech while still trying to intimidate
physicians, he says. THE government's leverage comes from
the DEA, which can revoke a doctor's prescription
authority. According to court documents, DEA agents in
January visited Robert Mastroianni, a California physician,
and questioned him about his recommendations of marijuana.

Thomas Ungerleider, a University of California, Los Angeles
medical school faculty member who has done research on
medical marijuana for 20 years, says that a DEA agent
apologized privately to him for this effort to intimidate
physicians. "He said, 'We've been told to get someone and
make an example of him,' " Dr. Ungerleider recounts. DEA
officials declined to comment on their investigations. But
the administration official did not rule out some legal
action against doctors in the future.

Despite the tough talk, the tone of the administration's
position has clearly changed. In January, White House drug
czar Barry McCaffrey offered to fund a review of existing
research on the medicinal use of marijuana. A two-day
workshop convened last month by the National Institutes of
Heath discussed its use for treating a variety of ailments.

The meeting concluded that certain areas of medicinal use of
marijuana are worth further study, says Reese Jones, a
psychiatrist who attended the session.