At that time we could not use the federal government's marijuana to show that it might be beneficial because NIDA has a mandate from Congress that they could only supply marijuana for research to show that it might be dangerous. Subsequently NIDA has changed their mechanism so we can look for benefit.

[Donald Abrams, MD, also commented on the biased federal approach to research. In the late '90s Abrams conducted a federally funded study to determine the safety of smoked marijuana in AIDS patients taking protease inhibitors.] At that time we could not use the federal government's marijuana to show that it might be beneficial because NIDA has a mandate from Congress that they could only supply marijuana for research to show that it might be dangerous, ... Subsequently NIDA has changed their mechanism so we can look for benefit.

[Abrams described a historically significant episode that revealed how the medical establishment -not just the government- has upheld prohibition.] In 1997 after the law was changed in California, Jerome Kassirer, who was Editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine, wrote an editorial on medical marijuana called 'federal foolishness,' saying 'We know this drug works, everybody has their anecdotal experience of people who have benefited from it, get over it, reschedule it, make it schedule 2.' Unfortunately, ... he very shortly thereafter became no longer the editor in chief of the New England Journal of Medicine.

In our studies of HIV patients with painful feet -peripheral neuropathy- animal studies have already demonstrated that marijuana, where opioids don't work, works for nerve pain.

Smart enforcement I think is what is going to get us there; and utilization of the tools that MSHA already has.

The aggregates industry may end up being like the dolphins getting stuck in the net with the tuna. If they amend the (Mine Safety) Act, I don't see how they are going to differentiate between the different categories of mining.