Agriculture Improvement Act: Hemp has been removed from the Controlled Substances Act

[IThinkImTurningJapanese]

Statement from FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D., on signing of the Agriculture Improvement Act and the agency’s regulation of products containing cannabis and cannabis-derived compounds

Today, the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 was signed into law. Among other things, this new law changes certain federal authorities relating to the production and marketing of hemp, defined as cannabis (Cannabis sativa L.), and derivatives of cannabis with extremely low (less than 0.3 percent on a dry weight basis) concentrations of the psychoactive compound delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). These changes include removing hemp from the Controlled Substances Act, which means that it will no longer be an illegal substance under federal law.

Just as important for the FDA and our commitment to protect and promote the public health is what the law didn’t change: Congress explicitly preserved the agency’s current authority to regulate products containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) and section 351 of the Public Health Service Act. In doing so, Congress recognized the agency’s important public health role with respect to all the products it regulates. This allows the FDA to continue enforcing the law to protect patients and the public while also providing potential regulatory pathways for products containing cannabis and cannabis-derived compounds.

We’re aware of the growing public interest in cannabis and cannabis-derived products, including cannabidiol (CBD). This increasing public interest in these products makes it even more important with the passage of this law for the FDA to clarify its regulatory authority over these products. In short, we treat products containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds as we do any other FDA-regulated products — meaning they’re subject to the same authorities and requirements as FDA-regulated products containing any other substance. This is true regardless of the source of the substance, including whether the substance is derived from a plant that is classified as hemp under the Agriculture Improvement Act. To help members of the public understand how the FDA’s requirements apply to these products, the FDA has maintained a webpage with answers to frequently asked questions, which we intend to update moving forward to address questions regarding the Agriculture Improvement Act and regulation of these products generally.

In view of the proliferation of products containing cannabis or cannabis-derived substances, the FDA will advance new steps to better define our public health obligations in this area. We’ll also continue to closely scrutinize products that could pose risks to consumers. Where we believe consumers are being put at risk, the FDA will warn consumers and take enforcement actions.

 

[SilverbladeTE]

long since time!
had nothing to do with genuine need, the War on Drugs was always about power:

• allowing the creation of a new "untermensch" class to abuse them and use as slaves and terrorize others with fear of similar treatment,
• allowing the so-called "intelligence agencies" to have a method of creating "black funds" (off the books for all their dirty deals)
• and having, like the War on Terror a never ending strife that could be used for political crap ala "1984"
  
  hemp is an incredibly useful plant and cannabis (when eaten) is vastly safer than alcohol and tobacco which are enormous killers.

 

[jesse's mom]

Well, good!

 

[IThinkImTurningJapanese]

long since time!
had nothing to do with genuine need, the War on Drugs was always about power:

That is a very reasonable argument.

Consider what will happen in the regions of the United States currently suffering an opioid crisis. The Rat Park experiment has shown that poor living conditions are conducive to addictive behaviors.

Hemp farming in the Appalachian region will bring opportunity for much more productive living.

 

[SilverbladeTE]

Drugs used to be available from pharmacies before the later 1950s and they had vastly less problems even when folk would routinely go in and buy them, including cocaine and heroin

a) generally you have to have an addictive personality and routinely abuse drugs for some time to become addicted, there are very few exceptions to this
~tobacco (inhaled nicotine and additives) is THE most addictive drug known, with very few uses resulting in addiction
~the UK still uses heroin as pain killer for severe trauma and end of life and very few trauma patients ever get addicted to it and get help to get off if they do. It's not a big deal in therapeutic care. But the War on Drugs lunacy prevented US patients getting heroin and it meant either not enough pain relief or increasingly the use of alternatives which were vastly more addictive/deadly than heroin (which also made the drug companies much more money....)

b) Prohibition proved beyond any doubt that banning drugs just causes more problems.
addictive drugs though should NOT be allowed to be seriously commercialized, ie, ban Big Business from ever being allowed into the arena, for example as proof of why that should be so, is in the UK the alcohol companies began selling extremely cheap very powerful sweet flavoured alcoholic drinks through supermarkets and alcoholism problems sky rocketed because booze was cheaper than bottled water!

IMHO you shouldn't be allowed to sell drugs, or firearms, or operate a chemical/nuclear installation unless the managers LIVE in the area! that would put a stop to the bull****!

c) drugs being criminalized catastrophically inflated the power of criminal organizations to levels that are actually FAR more dangerous than terrorism (check the death tolls, violence, murders, and the selling of poisoned/dangerous drugs as US is suffering from now)
look at how major banking organizations had multibillion dollar accounts with the cartels (which was actually part of what triggered the 2008 Financial Crisis, seriously!) and banks *knowingly* arranged payments for assassinations...and none of the banking scumbags got prosecuted.

d) the Alcohol and Tobacco companies didn't want a rival to their hegemony so prevented hemp use
Political scumbags in power always talk about "Capitalism", but that's NOT what we have, we have Corporate Fascism which is completely different, and Big Business makes sure to prevent the "Little guys" getting an even break or any threat to their domination (which also includes the world's ultimate ever boondoggle, the F-35 fighter at $300 million each, may as well drop gold bars on enemy's heads, AND it's a piece of crap, yeesh! military are getting over priced geegaws foisted on them as the corporations own the politicians)

e) the military experimented, unethically, on soldiers etc during the Cold War using marijuana, LSD and other drugs
they panicked because those drugs mellowed folk out and made them more empathic, LESS likely to commit violence or be influenced by fear/hate politics, which is part of why those drugs were really banned

I'd much rather folk mellowed out on weed, than got violent on booze, and alcohol is the most deadly drug to try and wean yourself off of (Delirium Tremens from alcohol abuse is extremely lethal)
seen far too much of it all, sigh.

 

[gbells]

I started CBD hemp oil about two weeks ago, right after it was made legal. Dr. Perlmutter recommended it as an anti-depressant. I found that it definitely had a strong anti-depressant effect and found it energizing (like caffeine but lasts 10 hours). I used the 24% oil form taken sublingually. It didn't relieve pain but that isn't important to me.

This is the one I take.
https://madebyhemp.com/product/hemp-oil-concentrate/
Proprietary Hemp Extract – Gold CBD Oil Concentrate (250mg, 750mg, 2500mg)