vol1 - Page 346

 able to use marijuana compared to the population using THC_ I_/
 Despite these severe restrictions, marijuana was found to be an
 effective antiemetic_ In fact, more than half of the physicians
 in the program reported marijuana cigarettes to be very or
 moderately effective in patients receiving profoundly emetogenic
 anticancer_dzn/gs known to induce severe vomiting and nausea° il-q/
 The perc_ntage of California patients who discontinued marijuana
 therapyfor reasons of side effects was actually lower than in
 patients who received oral THC in combination with Compazine (or
 other antiemetics), ill/
 b. 9/mns_9/_ x
 DEA attempts to disregard the importance of Chang's
 findings in his 1979 studyo I121/ It is not disputed that
 marijuana was found to have significant antiemetic properties in
 the context of the Chang/NCX double-blind randomized study. !iI/
 DEA first argues that the purpose of the Chang study was to
 compare the antiemetic effectiveness of THC to a placebos DEA
 omits specifying that the Chang study includes not only oral THC
 19__/ ACT Brief at 84_
 Ii0/ DEA General Exhibit, Seventeenth Annual Report of the
 Research Advisory Panel, 1986, to the Governor & Legislature,
 CRAP, San Francisco, 1987, at I0.
 ...... iii/ /__o at ii.
 ii_/ DEA Brief at 31-32o
 II// _ Chang, Delta_9oTetrahydrocannabinol as an antiemetic in
 Cancer Patients Receiving High-Dose Methotrexate, at 819 in
 Affidavit of Dro David Ettinger_ Exhibit 4o
 40 -