vol2 - Page 177

 27. The Georgetown T_C study was Operated under a double
 blind research protocol. Cancer patients receiving chemo-
 therapy were given two pills. One of the pills was active THC
 or Compazlne, a standard anti-emetic drugs The other pill was
 a placebos an inactive substance with no therapeutic value.
 Patients were on an inflexible, fixed dose routine and received
 their two pills every six hours following their chemotherapy
 treatments.
 28. Patients were then asked to self-evaluate their
 adverse effects_ including nausea and vomiting, and to sub-
 jectively estimate the quality of relief they received from the
 therapy.
 29. _t became obvious that some patients experienced a
 higher quality of relief from nausea and vomiting.
 30. First_ THC was profoundly psycho-active. Many older
 patients encountered problems on the synthetic. Even younger
 patients who had smoked marijuana and were familiar with the
 natural product's _high _ reported that THC had a much more
 powerful_ anxiety-provoklng effect. Other studies, including
 one performed by Mayo Clinic_ also noted this problem with
 synthetic THC. The Mayo study found that more than fifty
 percent of the older patients who received synthetic THC said
 they would rather vomit.
 31. Seconds THC was taken orally° In patients whose
 primary problem is severe vomiting, this oral route of admini-
 stration created obvious problems. Moreover, T_C, which is oil
 soluble, proved to be extremely erratic and unpredictable in