"PF Riley" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 04:52:32 GMT, "JG" wrote:

...Imagine that, a stimulant helping beat fatigue! What'll they
think
of next?!? g When are they gonna test meth, or crack?

Maybe... and I'd bet it would prove "useful" in this case.

Exactly my point. Granted, the side effects might make meth a bit
rougher than Ritalin, but their actions dopamine are about the same.

We seem to
give quite a bit of leniency towards cancer patients when it comes to
giving them drugs.

And well we should. How idiotic is it to tell someone with a terminal
illness what the heck he can/can't put in his body?!?

I can imagine myself, God forbid, undergoing cancer treatment...
smoking pot for the pain and anorexia and crank for the fatigue.
Wahooo!!!!!

The usually bozoish Ninth Circuit would likely agree:

Appeals court sets aside federal marijuana law
(from www.reutershealth.com; Health eLine, 12/17/03)
By Adam Tanner

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A federal appeals court allowed two very sick
California women on Tuesday to use marijuana, setting aside longstanding
federal drug laws that bar such cultivation even for medical purposes.

Growing marijuana for medical purposes is legal in California under a
1996 voter-approved state law, but the measure clashes with federal law.

Angel Raich, who has an inoperable brain tumor, and Diane Monson, who
suffers from severe back pain, last year sued U.S. Attorney General John
Ashcroft. They sought an injunction against the act, saying the 1970
federal Controlled Substances Act was unconstitutional.

A district court ruled against the women in March, but in a rare
afternoon ruling, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco
reversed the decision.

"We find that the appellants' class of activities -- the intrastate
noncommercial cultivation, possession and use of marijuana for personal
medical purposes on the advice of a physician -- is, in fact, different
in kind from drug trafficking," the three-judge panel ruled.

"Further, the limited medical use of marijuana as recommended by a
physician arguably does not raise the same policy concerns regarding the
spread of drug abuse."

The liberal court, with one judge dissenting, said the Controlled
Substances Act was likely unconstitutional as applied to the women.

"We find that the appellants have made a strong showing of the
likelihood of success on the merits of their case," the decision read.
"We find that the hardship and public interest factors tip sharply in
the appellants' favor."

In his dissent, Judge C. Arlen Beam wrote: "Plaintiffs do not show there
is a threat of future prosecution or a history of past prosecutions, at
least as applied to their unique factual situations. I would doubt
whether anyone can or will seriously argue that the DEA intends to
prosecute these two seriously ill individuals."

The Supreme Court has often overturned the 9th Circuit on cases it has
chosen to review, and lower court decisions on marijuana have sometimes
provoked anger from the Bush administration.

One such instance that irked White House officials involved a federal
judge sentencing "ganja guru" Ed Rosenthal in June to a single day in
jail -- the minimum possible punishment -- for growing marijuana in
violation of federal law.