vol1 - Page 264

 Despite this consistent pattern of long term,
 high dose use of marijuana there Is no evi-
 dence Mr° Randall has suffered any untoward
 physical or mental effects_ Mr. Randall
 reports no #high g and I have never seen him
 intoxicated on marijuana. He has a sound
 mind and functions in a competent, respon _
 sible manner_ Nor is there any evidence or
 indication of biological injury to Mro
 _'_ Randall as a result of his use of marijuanao
 While there may be reason for concern over
 potential long term effects, marijuana, for
 this patients is as safe as any of the
 conven_aliy available glaucoma control
 drugs.
 The government's assertion that marijuana is munsafe
 for use under medical supervision n for ilhe reduction of elevated
 intraocu!ar pressures lacks credibility and is unsupported in the
 extensive research which has been conducted relative to mari-
 juana's IOP-lowering properties or the governmentts massive
 .... _ twenty-year effort to clinically define marijuana's potentially
 adverse effects. Such groundless assertions should be dismissed
 without comment.
 After listening to a similarly incoherent argument
 against marijuana's medical use, the D°C. Superior Court ruledr
 #In any event it is unlikely that [mari_uana_s] _l_iqht, specuq
 lative and unde_onstrabie harms cold_/_q___h_9_qDsidered more
 important than dg_eD___esrig_/_. _-q/
 ___9./ Affidavit of Robert Randall, Exhibit 3 IND 14.412 from
 Richard North to FDA 7.
 _/ Randall Exhibit at i, p_____q. ___Li, D.C. Super. Ct._
 D.C. Crimo NOo 65923-75_ _Criminal Law and Procedure; Medical
 Necessity, _ _e DaiW_oTt__W___eDg.__s VOlo 104, NOo 250_
 December 28_ 1976 pp. 2249 - 2253.