Former Chief Administrative Law Judge at the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)
Position:
Pro to the question "Should marijuana be a medical option?"
Reasoning:
"The evidence in this record [9-6-88 ruling] clearly shows that marijuana has been accepted as capable of relieving the distress of great numbers of very ill people, and doing so with safety under medical supervision. It would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious for DEA to continue to stand between those sufferers and the benefits of this substance in light of the evidence in this record.
The record here establishes conclusively that at least 'a respectable minority' of physicians has 'accepted' marijuana as having a 'medical use in treatment in the United States.' That the others [physicians] may not makes no difference... Nothing more can reasonably be required. That some doctors would have more studies and test results in hand before accepting marijuana's usefulness here is irrelevant."
Experts
PhD's and JD's (lawyers) with significant post-doctoral involvement in medical marijuana issues; judges who have presided over medical marijuana cases. [Note: Experts definition varies by site]
Involvement and Affiliations:
Former Chief Administrative Law Judge, US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)
Education:
None found
Contact Info:
Phone: None found Fax: None found E-Mail:
None found Website:
None found
, Sep. 6, 1988