COMMENTARY INSIGHTFUL

Thanks for Terry Maxwell's insightful commentary on medical marijuana
and the Supreme Court, "Medical Marijuana Debate" (Dec. 30, San Pedro
Valley News-Sun.)

Those who followed the case may recall that during the hearing on
Raich v. Ashcroft, Justice Stephen Breyer said rather than enacting
medical marijuana laws state by state, the FDA should be petitioned to
reclassify marijuana in a way that would allow doctors to prescribe
it.

Since then the FDA has been rocked by a drug safety crisis with
questions raised about the painkillers, Celebrex, Vioxx, Bextra and
Aleve as well as antidepressants.

Recently, the FDA approved a drug for severe pain, Prialt, made from
synthetic snail venom, despite the drug's extreme side effects.

FDA bureaucrats justified the move as another option for patients who
no longer find morphine effective.

The drug can only be delivered via a pump to the patient's spinal
sac.

Justice Breyer was extremely na.ve to believe the FDA would actually
reclassify cannabis for medical use.

First of all, advocates have been asking federal agencies to
reclassify cannabis for medical use for over 30 years.

Each attempt has been rebuffed by federal bureaucrats and reams of
scientific evidence discarded.

The Supreme Court is there to redress grievances like the long
suppression of cannabis for medical use and the harm this has caused
to generations of American patients.

The court has a duty to uphold the Constitution in this matter by
allowing the medical use of cannabis under the guidelines raised by
Raich.

Gary Storck, director of communications

Is My Medicine Legal YET?

www.immly.org

gstorck@immly.org

Via e-mail