DOCTOR TOD'S ABOVE TRADER JOE'S

It was injury added to insult when Tod Mikuriya, MD, fractured a
shinbone last month and was unable to attend a fundraising party
organized on his behalf by colleagues and friends. The funds are
being raised to defray the costs of Mikuriya's prosecution by the
Medical Board of California. After a lengthy hearing in September
2003, an administrative law judge found that the Berkeley-based
psychiatrist had "violated the standard of care" in approving cannabis
use by 16 patients. All the complaints against Mikuriya had come from
law enforcement rather than patients or their loved ones. None of the
complaints alleged that a patient had been harmed.

The Medical Board placed Mikuriya on probation for five years, fined
him $75,000, required that his practice be monitored by another
doctor, and denied him the right to see patients at his home office.
"I've had a permit from the city to see patients here since 1971,"
Mikuriya said ruefully. "The office is on a separate floor from my
residence and has its own entrance..."

Mikuriya, 71, has hired an appeals specialist to challenge the Medical
Board's verdict in Superior Court. He has resumed practice in a leased
"suite" on the second floor of a mall on San Pablo Ave. -513 El
Cerrito Plaza-conveniently located above Trader Joe's. Since his leg
still can't bear weight (and will be in a cast till September),
Mikuriya is being driven to and from work by his assistant, John
Trapp. He's seeing patients two or three days a week and trying to
stay on the sunny side. "The new office is a short walk from the BART
station and the bus stop on San Pablo, and right off the freeway," he
says. The phone number is still 510-548-1188.

The prospect of being monitored by a colleague was one aspect of his
punishment that Mikuriya considered tolerable because Frank Lucido,
MD, had agreed to be the monitor. (Monitoring a physician entails
reviewing his/her charts every month and discussing procedures as
needed.) The Medical Board enforcement officer assigned to supervise
Mikuriya's probation, Craig Leader, initially raised no objection to
Lucido. But last week Leader phoned Mikuriya to say that the
arrangement was unsatisfactory. Mikuriya says he asked why and was
told that Lucido "would be biased." [Frank Lucido is a physician in
good standing with the Medical Board, has offices in Berkeley, and
experience with cannabis-using patients. Anybody who knows him knows
that he's conscientious and would take his responsibilities as a
monitor seriously.] Mikuriya says,. "I thought it was odd that Leader,
after telling me that Frank Lucido would be biased, said 'Oh, and Tom
Campbell says hello.'" Campbell is the Medical Board investigator who
built the case against Mikuriya.

Mikuriya told Leader he didn't have $75,000 to cover the fine. Leader
asked for three years' worth of financial information, which Mikuriya
is reluctant to provide. "The Medical Board has shown that they have
lower standards of confidentiality," he says. A

According to his attorney, Charles Bond, it is very unusual for the
Board to demand payment before the end of the probationary period.
"According to the California Medical Association and colleagues I've
checked with," he says, "the Board doesn't expect payment at the
outset. Tod is getting special treatment."

There are numerous grounds for appeal to the Superior Court, according
to Bond, starting with "the unusual method in which the state singled
out Tod for prosecution and proceeded to prosecute him using evidence
obtained from law enforcement and relying on an expert who had never
recommended or approved cannabis use." Bond also argues that a
"statement" published in the Board's January 1997 newsletter on which
Administrative Law Judge Jonathan Lew based his ruling against
Mikuriya has no legal force because it was not approved in compliance
with the Administrative Practices Act.

The Medical Board's endless harassment of Dr. Tod looks personal but
is actually political. By prosecuting Mikuriya, Attorney General
Lockyer is scoring points with every right wing lawyer in his office
and every cop and sheriff in the California Narcotics Officers
Association. Mikuriya is getting the Dennis Peron treatment, reserved
for the bravest, most far-out radical thinkers, those whom the Drug
Warriors know must be done in physically, bled dry financially,
character-assassinated or otherwise driven from the leadership if our
movement is to be contained.

SCHWARZENEGGER VETOES SB-420 "CLEAN-UP BILL"

Gov. Schwarzenegger has vetoed SB 1494, a bill intended to clarify SB
420, which was intended to clarify Prop 215, which didn't need
clarification, it needed respect from law enforcement.

Dale Gieringer of California NORML sends the following account of the
convoluted situation: "SB 1494 made it clear that the possession and
cultivation quantity limits in SB 420 were not intended to limit
patients' legal right to have as much medicine as they need - a right
guaranteed by the text of Prop 215 - but were only intended to define
how much patients with state ID cards could have and still be
protected from arrest.

"In his veto message, Gov. Schwarzenegger erroneously stated that SB
1494 violated the original agreement behind SB 420. In fact, SB 1494
accurately stated the intent of the task force, which had been
accidentally misstated by poor drafting language written in a
last-minute legislative rush.

"This move augurs poorly for supporters of marijuana reform, since it
suggests that the Governor is in the pockets of right wing law
enforcement interests in Sacramento, who were the major opponents of
SB 1494.

"Ironically, the Governor's veto appears likely to aggravate legal
uncertainty surrounding medical marijuana, since the limits in SB 420
conflict with Prop 215. A legal challenge in the courts now seems
certain.

"One additional irony of the Governor's veto is that it extends
protection from arrest to all medical marijuana patients, not just
those with identification cards, as intended in SB 420. The clean-up
bill made it clear that only patients with ID cards were protected
under the limits, but the original text of SB 420 mistakenly extended
this to all 'qualified patients.' The Governor's veto therefore
undercuts the incentive for patients to obtain a card in the first
place."

Dale's sweet, trusting nature is revealed by his assumption that the
drafters of SB-420 "accidentally misstated" the intent of the task
force with respect to allowable quantity. In the pick-up basketball
community you'd run into competitive types who "accidentally
misstated" the score when things got tense towards the end of a game;
and they'd always accidentally misstate it in their own favor. Always.

CMCR RESPONDS TO CRITICISM

Drew Mattison, PhD, co-director of the Center for Medical Cannabis
Research, and his assistant Heather Bentley responded to our criticism
of the "Cannabinoid Therapeutics" conference they organized in
Paestum, Italy. They tried to put a positive spin on the fact that
drug companies and federal agencies had funded the event: no state
money was spent.

Mattison claims that the CMCR was mandated to hold a conference
focused on synthetic drugs - including 'antagonist' drugs that block
the cannabinoid receptor system - by a line in the Marijuana Research
Act that refers to "alternate means of administration." Quite a stretch.

The CMCR was created by the Marijuana Research Act of 1999 and
received a total of $8.7 million from the California legislature over
the course of three years (2000-2002). The CMCR staff solicited
proposals and gave grants to 18 scientists to conduct studies, some of
which won't be completed until 2006. The staff designated funds to pay
themselves and keep the Center in operation through that year.
Additional funds have been sought from foundations, the feds, and the
private sector.

Mattison rejected the idea that the poor quality of marijuana supplied
by the National Institute on Drug Abuse had dissuaded seriously ill
Californians from enrolling in CMCR's clinical trials. "Our
participants have never held that belief," he said. "Our participants
have not complained about potency except about it being too potent.
Some experienced psychoactive effects before they experienced pain
relief." Mattison and Bentley have visited the federally licensed farm
in Mississippi and report that NIDA is now removing the sticks and
seeds from its product. Mattison added that NIDA can provide marijuana
"blended for increased potency," and did so for at least one CMCR study.

In response to our suggestion that CMCR analyze the contents of
marijuana that people are actually using in California, Bentley said,
"I'm not sure that's really within our scope." But she allowed, "We do
use a UC lab to test the cannabis that we get from NIDA. We keep it in
storage so we need to test it because cannabis degrades over time."

The fact that a lab is already in the loop encouraged us to press our
proposal. There are many skilled growers in California who, if only
they had access to an analytical lab, could develop strains with
different cannabinoid ratios for use in treating various conditions.
And there are many patients and doctors who would appreciate having
the data. "It would lead to real advances," I averred, "and your
center would win the hearts and minds of millions of people in
California."

Bentley also had an answer to our complaint about the CMCR's failure
to track which conditions Californians are actually using cannabis to
treat. "We didn't have any applications for such a study," she noted.

The CMCR staff has been marching under a double standard. They can
pro-actively organize a 'Cannabinoid Therapeutics' conference in
Italy, but can't suggest that a California researcher gather the basic
facts on medical marijuana use in the state.