The inconsistency of using the term “medical” in state programs authorizing the use of psychedelics

We need to come up with a better word for medical use of substances in schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act. Substances in schedule I have no medical use. The first state to enact such a program, California in 1996, used the term “compassionate” to describe non-prescription use. Whatever the term used, these are programs allowing naturally grown substances to be used as alternatives to prescription drugs. For example, see what an Iowa legislator is proposing:

House File 620 excludes people who obey the law and promotes crime.  A medical psilocybin act, just like a medical cannabis act, qualifies for federal registration under 21 U.S.C. § 822(d) because both are consistent with “public health and safety”.  Failure to notify the federal government that both Chapter 124F and Chapter 124E are consistent with “public health and safety” and qualify for federal registration makes no sense at all and needlessly exposes Iowans to federal jeopardy.

Another inconsistency in these act is using the term “medical” and excluding anyone with a “medical” license under chapters 152, 152E, 148, or 148C, from prescribing or handling the substances.  See § 124F.10(2) below.  Both of these acts continue to list the two substances in schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act, Chapter 124, which says they have no medical use and can’t be prescribed.

On page 5, line 21:
Sec. 4.  NEW SECTION.

Prior to giving a current employee an assignment or duty that arises from or directly relates to an obligation under this chapter, or hiring a prospective employee whose assignments or duties would include an assignment or duty that arises from or directly relates to an obligation under this chapter, a state employer or a political subdivision employer shall give the employee or prospective employee a written notice that the employee’s or prospective employee’s job duties may require the employee or prospective employee to engage in conduct which is in violation of the criminal laws of the United States.

On page 13, lines 3-16:
Sec. 11.  NEW SECTION.

None of the following individuals … licensed under chapter 152 … chapter 152E … chapter 148 … chapter 148C …

On page 19, lines 6-9:
Sec. 17.  NEW SECTION.

A local government shall not do any of the following: a. Revoke from, or refuse to issue a license or permit to, a psilocybin production establishment on the sole basis that the applicant or psilocybin production establishment violates federal law regarding the legal status of psilocybin.

On page 27, lines 13-19:
Sec. 26.  NEW SECTION.

A qualified medical psilocybin provider or a qualified therapy provider who recommends or administers psilocybin in compliance with this chapter shall not be subject to a civil or criminal penalty, or license discipline, solely for violating a federal law or regulation that prohibits recommending, prescribing, possessing, or dispensing psilocybin or a psilocybin product.

On page 28, lines 13-15:
Sec. 27.  NEW SECTION.

The employee’s use of psilocybin jeopardizes federal funding

Leave a Reply