Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
29. they also say it has "no safety level". BULLSHIT. DEA jude Francis Young, 1988:
Thu Aug 11, 2016, 05:07 PM
Aug 2016

it has no safety "level" because it's NOT DANGEROUS AT ALL, maybe.


http://www.ccguide.org/young88.php





Point 3. The most obvious concern when dealing with drug safety is the possibility of lethal effects. Can the drug cause death?

4. Nearly all medicines have toxic, potentially lethal effects. But marijuana is not such a substance. There is no record in the extensive medical literature describing a proven, documented cannabis-induced fatality.

5. This is a remarkable statement. First, the record on marijuana encompasses 5,000 years of human experience. Second, marijuana is now used daily by enormous numbers of people throughout the world. Estimates suggest that from twenty million to fifty million Americans routinely, albeit illegally, smoke marijuana without the benefit of direct medical supervision. Yet, despite this long history of use and the extraordinarily high numbers of social smokers, there are simply no credible medical reports to suggest that consuming marijuana has caused a single death.

6. By contrast aspirin, a commonly used, over-the-counter medicine, causes hundreds of deaths each year.

7. Drugs used in medicine are routinely given what is called an LD-50. The LD-50 rating indicates at what dosage fifty percent of test animals receiving a drug will die as a result of drug induced toxicity. A number of researchers have attempted to determine marijuana's LD-50 rating in test animals, without success. Simply stated, researchers have been unable to give animals enough marijuana to induce death.

8. At present it is estimated that marijuana's LD-50 is around

1:20,000 or 1:40,000. In layman terms this means that in order to induce death a marijuana smoker would have to consume 20,000 to 40,000 times as much marijuana as is contained in onemarijuana cigarette. NIDA-supplied marijuana cigarettes weigh approximately .9 grams. A smoker would theoretically have to consume nearly 1,500 pounds of marijuana within about fifteen minutes to induce a lethal response.

9. In practical terms, marijuana cannot induce a lethal response as a result of drug-related toxicity.

10. Another common medical way to determine drug safety is called the therapeutic ratio. This ratio defines the difference between a therapeutically effective dose and a dose which is capable of inducing adverse effects.

11. A commonly used over-the-counter product like aspirin has a therapeutic ratio of around 1:20. Two aspirins are the recommended dose for adult patients. Twenty times this dose, forty aspirins, may cause a lethal reaction in some patients, and will almost certainly cause gross injury to the digestive system, including extensive internal bleeding.

12. The therapeutic ratio for prescribed drugs is commonly around 1:10 or lower. Valium, a commonly used prescriptive drug, may cause very serious biological damage if patients use ten times the recommended (therapeutic) dose.

13. There are, of course, prescriptive drugs which have much lower therapeutic ratios. Many of the drugs used to treat patients with cancer, glaucoma and multiple sclerosis are highly toxic. The therapeutic ratio of some of the drugs used in antineoplastic therapies, for example, are regarded as extremely toxic poisons with therapeutic ratios that may fall below 1:1.5. These drugs also have very low LD-50 ratios and can result in toxic, even lethal reactions, while being properly employed.



14. By contrast, marijuana's therapeutic ratio, like its LD-50, is impossible to quantify because it is so high.

15. In strict medical terms marijuana is far safer than many foods we commonly consume. For example, eating ten raw potatoes can result in a toxic response. By comparison, it is physically impossible to eat enough marijuana to induce death.

16. Marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man. By any measure of rational analysis marijuana can be safely used within a supervised routine of medical care."

Kick and rec. n/t ms liberty Aug 2016 #1
Like all bureaucratic entities: Once you establish your fiefdom, you struggle to maintain funding. TheBlackAdder Aug 2016 #63
Grrr. How fucking backward. cali Aug 2016 #2
Yep. babylonsister Aug 2016 #3
What a bunch of buzzkills. kysrsoze Aug 2016 #52
+100 librechik Aug 2016 #67
Idiocracy! GeorgeGist Aug 2016 #4
The DEA has a vested interest in keeping marijuana illegal... Raster Aug 2016 #5
Wouldn't the federal government bring in more tax money on the sale of Marajuana? yeoman6987 Aug 2016 #8
it could potentially... HOWEVER, the DEA is only concerned about maintaining the status quo... Raster Aug 2016 #10
And the status quo is high alcohol taxes scscholar Aug 2016 #53
yes, but the DEA is protecting their own turf. Warren DeMontague Aug 2016 #30
I don't think the DEA should make this decision bluedye33139 Aug 2016 #6
Congress doing something? Calculating Aug 2016 #11
Yes, after a majority of states have legalized cannabis bluedye33139 Aug 2016 #12
it's not 'sneaking' anything. People get medical benefit from it AND people should be able to Warren DeMontague Aug 2016 #31
I have always supported full legalization bluedye33139 Aug 2016 #42
I think the moral point was that one could easily argue to voters that sticking Warren DeMontague Aug 2016 #44
Hence the campaign to sneak cannabis into use as a poorly regulated medicine bluedye33139 Aug 2016 #48
I think we're gonna get there. Warren DeMontague Aug 2016 #49
DEA worried about losing it's funding. Time for an executive order. sarcasmo Aug 2016 #7
God bless Obama for standing up to the pothead wing 6chars Aug 2016 #9
Hillary, to her credit, has come out for rescheduling it to II. Warren DeMontague Aug 2016 #32
that is to her credit 6chars Aug 2016 #34
Nah, she took that position a while back, in the primaries Warren DeMontague Aug 2016 #37
Executive order from whom? The sitting President who appointed the last two Chakab Aug 2016 #16
Many of his appointments have been absolute shit. villager Aug 2016 #51
Hillary? SammyWinstonJack Aug 2016 #56
Cannabis remaining a Schdeule 1 drug is how DEA agents keep their jobs. MohRokTah Aug 2016 #13
What does Hillary think of this issue? Calculating Aug 2016 #14
Her position is that there should be "more research" on marijuana before anything Chakab Aug 2016 #17
I see Calculating Aug 2016 #21
Pretty much. Chakab Aug 2016 #46
to quote the great Upton Sinclair: TheSarcastinator Aug 2016 #15
Fuck the DEA, their own people say it is a horrible organization that needs to go away. Rex Aug 2016 #18
nailed it! thank you and fuck the DEA! N/T wildbilln864 Aug 2016 #20
Fuck the DEA Calculating Aug 2016 #22
When there own top folks quit and turn against then to the point of advocating how to hide drugs Rex Aug 2016 #23
reefer madness at it's highest level spanone Aug 2016 #19
By that logic my Mom's grilled cheese sandwiches should be banned. MindPilot Aug 2016 #24
This is going to come to a head during Clinton's presidency. Egnever Aug 2016 #25
Oregon is having success with legal marijuana, too. Warren DeMontague Aug 2016 #28
Did not intend to leave anyone out Egnever Aug 2016 #61
How likely is it to gain an accepted medical use if it remains enforced by the DEA Johonny Aug 2016 #26
there are multiple ways to reschedule or deschedule it. Congress can do it, the executive can do it Warren DeMontague Aug 2016 #27
Indeed, the DEA doesn't want to lose their status quo. joshcryer Aug 2016 #40
I think if CA legalizes, that alone will force some kind of change. I hope. Warren DeMontague Aug 2016 #43
I forget CA is like the world's second largest economy. joshcryer Aug 2016 #45
they also say it has "no safety level". BULLSHIT. DEA jude Francis Young, 1988: Warren DeMontague Aug 2016 #29
How progressive... PoutrageFatigue Aug 2016 #33
Thanks Obama. aikoaiko Aug 2016 #35
He doesn't Calculating Aug 2016 #36
He's also the one appointing these agency heads that have policy positions that are totally contrary Chakab Aug 2016 #47
"no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States," nationalize the fed Aug 2016 #38
Such bullshit. There are plenty of clinical studies that prove the AgadorSparticus Aug 2016 #39
Surprise, administration that gets loads of funding for prohibition wants it to stay. joshcryer Aug 2016 #41
Yeah, I read recently that the last year of alcohol prohibition saw as many raids and arrests as all Warren DeMontague Aug 2016 #68
The DEA guy said it was 'based on science'. Shandris Aug 2016 #50
more like math. Warren DeMontague Aug 2016 #55
Interesting article in High Times SticksnStones Aug 2016 #54
I haven't read HT regularly for a long time Nevernose Aug 2016 #57
Yeah, their site has really evolved technically SticksnStones Aug 2016 #59
Their mistake is assuming Calculating Aug 2016 #64
Agreed, although SticksnStones Aug 2016 #65
Well that would make their jobs obsolete malaise Aug 2016 #58
What do you want to do, take profits away from the Prison Industrial Complex? Oneironaut Aug 2016 #60
fascinating medical research outside the u.s. 6chars Aug 2016 #62
When it comes to illegal drugs, Obama and Clinto need to look at the evidence. Vattel Aug 2016 #66
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»DEA Rejects Attempt To Lo...»Reply #29