vol2 - Page 224
Page 224
Previous ,
Next ,
Original Image
Return to Index
i01. When it became clear that. my former "research
subject _ was becoming desperate, I agreed to try to help him_
102_ In February, 1987, ! submitted an IND proposal to
prOVide marijuana to this patient under the nCompassionate IND _
programs fashioned after the 1978 legal settlement of Mr.
Randall's sult against the FDA.
i03_ By law, the FDA is supposed to respond to an IND
request within thirty days_ I did not receive a response and
eventually contacted the FDA to find out what was going on.
104. Despite the fact that I have held a number of
......
previous INDUs in the specific aFea of marijuana's use in
glaucoma therapy, and functioned as an FDA_approved scientific
investigator for nearly a decade, FDA is treating my IND
application as if It were for some hove! program involving a
never before investigated product.
105. While FDA delays, the patient suffers_
106_ The law says marijuana has no accepted medical use i_
the United States° In reality marijuana is a highly effective
IOP-lowering drug which may be of critical value to some
glaucoma patients who, without marijuanas would progressively
go blind.
107o Marljuana's present classification is in error° _b<
j Drug Enforcement Administration, in reviewing this matter, must
, come to grips with the data and realize that our understanding
of marijuana had advanced beyond the confines of Schedule _°
108. In. my professional judgment, based on my direct
experience in research, and as a physiclan_ and on my reading
! ...........
Previous ,
Next ,
Return to Index