Iowa Pharmacy Board Rejects Medical Marijuana, Ignoring Court Order

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Iowa Pharmacy Board Rejects Medical Marijuana, Ignoring Court Order stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 06- 5-09 02:03 PM   |   Updated: 06- 8-09 11:58 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Iowaphoto
Scott Galenbeck

The Iowa Board of Pharmacy sidestepped a court ruling this week, which had ordered it to consider whether the state should reclassify marijuana as having medical value.

The Iowa board was ordered by a district court judge to consider whether "marijuana has accepted medical use in the United States." Thirteen states have deemed that marijuana has accepted medical use and have legalized it with doctor approval. Those thirteen states, of course, are "in the United States," which would appear to make for an open and shut case for the Iowa board.

The effort to reclassify marijuana in Iowa is led by the American Civil Liberties Union and local medical marijuana users. One such user, George McMahon, receives 300 joints monthly from the federal government. He's one of four patients grandfathered into the Compassionate Investigational New Drug program ended by President George H.W. Bush in 1991.

Advocates included a Drug Enforcement Administration ruling that determined marijuana did have accepted medical use. (That ruling was rejected by political appointees in the federal government.)

The pharmacy board was fully informed by assistant attorney general and counsel to the board Scott Galenbeck of its job. "Judge Novak's ruling states," Galenbeck read to the board, "'The board must determine whether the evidence presented by petitioner is sufficient to support a finding that marijuana has accepted medical use in the United States and does not lack accepted safety for use in treatment under medical supervision.' A couple sentences before that the judge stated if the board believes that evidence presented by petitioner was insufficient to support such a finding it should have stated such in its order."

The board had previously rejected the ACLU effort. The civil liberties group appealed to the district court, setting up this week's rematch.

Yet the Iowa board, instead of asking whether it has "accepted medical use in the United States," asked whether Iowa should approve of it, which is not a question for the board but for the Iowa legislature.

The meeting was held in downtown Des Moines with only a handful of the public in attendance. "I was going to ask maybe if we could have this gentleman sit rather than walk through the room taking pictures," Galenbeck said of a Huffington Post reporter at the meeting.

Story continues below
advertisement

The board was unanimous. Board Member Margaret Whitworth complained of "a lack of science and any up-to-date more recent information."

"I have a very difficult time saying that there was any type of scientific evidence-based type of evidence given to us that day. The fact that the other states have done this does not mean that Iowa has to follow suit. We need to have a lot of evidence," said board member Ed Maier.

"I would agree with that," said board member DeeAnn Wedemeyer-Oleson, who then launched into a story about how she had told her father when she was in high school that everybody else was allowed to stay out late at night so she should have the privilege, too.

"And he said, 'Well, if all your friends jumped off the bridge, does that mean you should jump off the bridge?' So, to me this whole other 12, what is now 13 states, allowing medical marijuana use is not at all sufficient to allow the Board of Pharmacy to make a decision," she determined.

"I'd have to agree," said Ann Diehl, a board member. "I don't have anything else to add but I didn't see any, what I would call, scientific based evidence."

Board member Susan Frey went as far as to blame the board's own counsel for not properly explaining to the court why they had rejected reclassifying pot in the first place.

"When controlled substances are classified, it's classified on the eight criteria that Scott [Galenbeck] presented in our legal brief to the court. And I think that that was not addressed appropriately to the court and not all of those counts were presented and also certainly not here at our hearing. So I would say that, again, I would back the comments that we need science-based evidence, that there are acceptable uses and that those uses are within the realm of safety for the public," she analyzed.

She moved to reject the request and the motion carried without objection.

Randall Wilson, the ACLU attorney, told the Huffington Post that the point of the court's order "was lost on the board." He'll now return to the court and note that the board once again ignored the law.

"It was not surprising, but it was disappointing. I felt the board could have been better briefed," said Wilson, who noted the members "entered into value judgments" instead following the letter of the law.

McMahon has been in the federal pot program for 19 years. He testified at the first hearing but health problem kept him from the second. The attorneys briefed him on the result, however. "I thought it was wonderful and horrible. The wonderful thing was for everyone to get an insight into what that bunch of men is like -- or those men and women. They just bald-faced stood up and told the judge to forget what he said, they were going to do what they wanted anyway," McMahon told the Huffington Post.

If McMahon and his attorneys succeed in forcing the pharmacy board to reschedule marijuana into a class that admits its medical value, they hope it'll get a boost in the legislature. The drug is now contradictorily listed in two separate categories, one which says it has medical value and one which says it has none. With the board's decision, that situation continues for the time being.

"I hoped they would do the right thing, but I really didn't have much confidence in them," said Carl Olsen, a paralegal and who first filed the case. "They were pissed off because I got the ruling against them. So they just denied it again and basically did pretty much the same thing they did the first time, which isn't going to make the judge very happy."

Max Knauer III, a Huffington Post citizen journalist, reported from Des Moines. He is a retired educator and part-time correspondent for the Iowa Bystander. Ryan Grim reported from Washington, D.C. He is the author of This Is Your Country On Drugs: The Secret History of Getting High in America, due out later this month

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

The Iowa Board of Pharmacy sidestepped a court ruling this week, which had ordered it to consider whether the state should reclassify marijuana as having medical value. The Iowa board was ordered by...
The Iowa Board of Pharmacy sidestepped a court ruling this week, which had ordered it to consider whether the state should reclassify marijuana as having medical value. The Iowa board was ordered by...
Filed by Ryan Grim
 
Comments
90
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 Next › Last » (3 pages total)
- Kalarchis I'm a Fan of Kalarchis 4 fans permalink
photo

They want more scientific evidence...except that we can't get any scientific evidence (non-foreign, anyway,) because the government won't let anybody do any real studies on pot. But they shouldn't even need more evidence. All you have to do is get a stoned guy and a drunk guy in a room together. The stoned guy will space out and ask for some chips, and the drunk guy will try to dance, trip over the chair, and bust his chin on the floor. Then he'll get back up and do it again because it was fun. Which one is legal again?

Meanwhile, people in those 13 states are using pot to treat nausea, loss of appetite, pain, insomnia, etc., from things like chemotherapy. And they want more evidence. What a horrible mockery of sense and justice.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:30 PM on 06/15/2009
photo

http://www.docuticker.com/?p=26350. Medical Marijuana: Review and Analysis of Federal and State Policies

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:43 AM on 06/09/2009

Dear DeeAnn Wedemeyer-Oleson :
Just because your father could not produce a logical argument when you were asking for permission to stay out late, does not mean the argument your old man hit you over the head with has any logical merit ,he simply ducked the situation ,parroted something he heard --- probably from his own father- rather than discussing the situation with you.
The judge Ordered YOU as a member of the board to find out ( that means investigate ) not pretend to be smart and fall back on logical fallacies from your family past. If you can't see your specious argument for what it is you have no place on any board that influences public policy.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:29 AM on 06/08/2009
- Epiphany2b I'm a Fan of Epiphany2b 13 fans permalink
photo

"The information presented by the petitioner was not sufficient on which to base a decision." Are we to assume the petitioner did not prepare his case sufficiently, and failed to present scientific evidence to support his claims? Where were the organizations fighting for approval, MMP and others, which would have come prepared?

I find it hard to believe that Pharmacists would not have kept up with all the many studies being done which prove that it is effective, information on which other states have based their decisions. There is no reason to discount all the scientific evidence, refuse to look for that information for themselves to be more informed, then base their decision on the fact that the petitioner didn't spoon feed them information they should already have. That is assuming the Board of Pharmacists is made up of pharmacists. Or perhaps they are political appointees serving no other function than to monitor the licenses of the states pharmacists. Their comments make them look very stupid.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:35 AM on 06/07/2009
photo

US Government Holds Patent For Medical Marijuana, Shows Hipocrisy

Just check out US Patent 6630507 titled "Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants" which is assigned to The United States of America, as represented by the Department of Health and Human Services.

The patent claims that "Cannabinoids have been found to have antioxidant properties, unrelated to NMDA receptor antagonism. This new found property makes cannabinoids useful in the treatment and prophylaxis of wide variety of oxidation associated diseases, such as ischemic, age-related, inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. The cannabinoids are found to have particular application as neuroprotectants, for example in limiting neurological damage following ischemic insults, such as stroke and trauma, or in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and HIV dementia."

The patent was obtained in October of 2003.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:04 PM on 06/07/2009
- kindGSL I'm a Fan of kindGSL 15 fans permalink
photo

From the story we see the lawmakers once again making law based on their own religious prejudices against us.

"the members "entered into value judgments" instead following the letter of the law."

I think we should have equal protection under the law. They think we should all be eliminated as a people and as individuals. Pot law isn't the only thing they use against us. It is all about racism and their homicidal religion.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:21 AM on 06/07/2009
- countryrds I'm a Fan of countryrds 3 fans permalink

This change is occurring right in front of us and they can continue this obstructionism and ignoring the facts or be be exposed nationwide. This board is completely irrelevant and meaningless. Let the light of day expose these liars and hacks for what they are.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:03 AM on 06/07/2009
photo

If we get lucky may the same judge who made the gay marriage ruling will
give use our rights too.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:19 PM on 06/06/2009
- kindGSL I'm a Fan of kindGSL 15 fans permalink
photo

I don't see how they can justify discriminating against us. We have rights too.

Rev. Sister Lauren
THC Ministry

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:23 AM on 06/07/2009

This judge needs to assign an experienced third grade teacher to explain to the board what is required of it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:51 PM on 06/06/2009
- Kirk59 I'm a Fan of Kirk59 10 fans permalink
photo

From the questions and comments of the Board members quoted here, they look to be woefully incompetent at making a medical/scientific decision. They appear instead to be political appointees, no doubt under the influence of Big Pharma, an group who would like to see no competition from Marijuana.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:51 PM on 06/06/2009
photo

I will be doing my best to track down who appointed them, as well
as educate them that cannabis is a healing herb, not a drug demonized
since 1937 and the 1972 CSA.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:54 PM on 06/06/2009
- kindGSL I'm a Fan of kindGSL 15 fans permalink
photo

Don't forget to look into and mention how they are, in fact, discriminating against us.

It is a religious discrimination and has NO PLACE being put into our laws.

Just ignoring the facts to continue to have a way to hurt us is criminal. It is a dereliction of their duties to the citizens who entrusted them with their office. Didn't they have to take an oath? I bet this blatant ignoring of the laws (meant to protect the citizens) violates it. They should be impeached.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:28 AM on 06/07/2009
- LeeCalif I'm a Fan of LeeCalif 65 fans permalink

DeeAnn Wedemeyer-Oleson : HUH?!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:12 PM on 06/06/2009
photo

more like DUH !!!!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:38 PM on 06/06/2009
photo

I'm surprised. The University of Iowa Medical Center has some of the most forward ideas for treating almost the untreatable. I expected that they would have had more influence in this decision, but I guess nobody can trump the pharms.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:37 PM on 06/06/2009
- kindGSL I'm a Fan of kindGSL 15 fans permalink
photo

Shouldn't the lawmakers make their own effort to find out before they vote?

Anyone could go on line and find out pretty quickly that marijuana does have medical value, I really don't think there is much controversy on that. There is the truth, well documented, and the deniers, easily disproved. They could have easily determined that themselves if they had spent any time on it.

Don't they have some obligation to the people to make themselves informed before they vote on an issue of such import to so many people? Where is their compassion? Where is their sense? It looks like they were voting based on 100% prejudice to me.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:34 AM on 06/07/2009

Pharmacists are drug dealers . . . and don't like COMPETITION . . .so NATURALLY they would oppose any drug they cannot control or charge outrageous prices for . . .

If weed was not so easy to "home school" it would be legal and drug and alcohol companies would have to find a way to live with it . . .

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:39 PM on 06/06/2009
photo

Exactly. The fact that Cocaine IS legal for medicinal use in every state proves this point. We can't make it for free at home = no competition for the drug companies = no problem (regardless of the dangers of the drug, the addictive component, etc).

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:05 PM on 06/06/2009
- Earl Brown I'm a Fan of Earl Brown 20 fans permalink
photo

wow, imagine that... more officials playing politics with peoples health. this is sickening. denying people medicine for your own political gain.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:23 PM on 06/06/2009
- kindGSL I'm a Fan of kindGSL 15 fans permalink
photo

It is not even going to be a political gain for them in the long run.

Racist discrimination is a BIG political loser once people realize that was what it is all about, and are called out and embarrassed by it publicly.

Rev. Sister Lauren
THC Ministry

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:38 AM on 06/07/2009
- logan9 I'm a Fan of logan9 5 fans permalink

Please email the Iowa Board of Pharmacy. Tell them that there is overwhelming scientific evidence, which substantiates marijuana as medicine. And the fact that they can't recognize this is further evidence of the pharmaceutical industry's power over morality and just living. Their ruling is fraudulent!

debbie.jor­genson@iow­a.gov

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:51 AM on 06/06/2009

Can a pharmacist decide to disobey the board?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:08 AM on 06/06/2009
- kindGSL I'm a Fan of kindGSL 15 fans permalink
photo

It is a religious discrimination. Someone should complain about that too, it might lead to a lawsuit that gets you the answers you want more quickly.

Rev. Sister Lauren
THC Ministry

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:42 AM on 06/07/2009
Page: 1 2 3 Next › Last » (3 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect