Section 7) Psychic or physiological dependence liability.

It was widely acknowledged when the Controlled Substances Act was passed into law that marijuana did not have the severe dependence liability required by schedules I or II, and that marijuana's placement in schedule I was meant to be temporary pending the review of current research by a forthcoming national commission, which recommended marijuana's decriminalization.

When marijuana's status as a schedule I drug was reviewed in the mid 1980's, marijuana's retention in schedule I was based on a presumption that marijuana may have a severe dependence liability.

The U.S. Court of Appeals has ruled that the Controlled Substances Act mandates that a drug's abuse potential is the primary criterion in determining a drug or substance's appropriate schedule.

Marijuana use has never fit the conventional definitions of drug dependence, and the some of the nation's most respected pharmacologists indicate that marijuana does not produce much of a drug dependency problem in the U.S.

The discarded cell membrane perturbation theory held that marijuana produced dependency by stimulating the pleasure centers of the brain.

Modern research has characterized the pleasure/reward system in the brain, and the key role of the neurotransmitter dopamine in this systems natural operation. Drugs which affect dopamine production have reinforcing characteristics which explain self-administration in animal models. Research has indicated that heroin, cocaine, amphetamines, and many other drugs of abuse affect dopamine production in the brain.

Research made possible by the receptor system breakthrough and other advances in neurobiological research indicates that marijuana has no effect on dopamine production, explaining why animals will not self-administer marijuana and providing further support for the assertion that marijuana has a significantly low potential for abuse to justify lower scheduling under existing provisions of the Controlled Substances Act, and that schedule I status is in contravention of federal law.

References Cited in Section 7.

Abood, M.E., and Martin, B.R., "Neurobiology of Marijuana Abuse," Trends in Pharmacological Sciences 13:201-206, 1992.

Castaneda, E., Moss, D.E., et al.,, "THC Does Not Affect Striatal Dopamine Release: Microdialysis in Freely Moving Rats" Pharmacology, Biochemistry & Behavior. 40,:587-591, 1991.

Di Chiara, G. and Imperato, A., "Drugs abused by humans preferentially increase synaptic dopamine concentrations in the mesolimbic system of freely moving rats." Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 85:5274, 1988. Cited in Izenwasser and Kornetsky, C. (1992)

Frascella, J., Brown, R. (eds.), Neurobiological Approaches to Brain-Behavior Interaction. National Institute on Drug Abuse Research Monograph 124. (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govt. Print. Off.,) 1992.

Heath, R.G., "Drug Addiction: Relation to the Brain Mechanism for Reward and Implication for Survival." In Nahas, G., Frick, H.C., Drug Abuse in the Modern World: A Perspective for the Eighties: An International Symposium Held at the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Columbia University. (New York: Pergamon Press,) 1981. pg. 1- 6.

Herkenham, M., "Cannabinoid Receptor Localization in Brain: Relationship to Motor and Reward Systems," In P.W. Kalivas and H.H. Samson (eds.), The Neurobiology of Drug and Alcohol Addiction. Annals of the American Academy of Sciences. 654:19-32, 1992.

Herkenham, M., Lynn, A.B., et al., "Cannabinoid Receptor Localization in Brain," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 87:1932-1936, 1990.

Hoebel, B., Hernandez, L., et al., "Microdialysis in the Study of Psychostimulants and the Neural Substrate for Reinforcement: Focus on Dopamine and Serotonin." In Frascella, J., Brown, R. (eds.) Neurobiological Approaches to Brain-Behavior Interaction. National Institute on Drug Abuse Research Monograph 124. (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govt. Print. Off.,) 1992. pg. 1-34.

Hollister, L.E. "Health Aspects of Cannabis", Pharmacological Reviews, 38(1):1-20. 1986.

Institute of Medicine, Marihuana and Health. (Washington, D.C., National Academy Press,) 1982.

Izenwasser, S., Kornetsky, C., "Brain-Stimulation Reward: A Method For Assessing the Neurochemical Bases Of Drug-Induced Euphoria." In Watson, R.A. Drugs of Abuse and Neurobiology. (Boca Raton: CRC Press,) 1992.

NORML v. DEA, 559 F.2d 735 (1977)

U.S. Code Congressional and Administrative News. 91st Congress -- Second Session, 1970. Vol. 3. Legislative History. Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 [P.L. 91-513]. pg. 4566 - 4657.

U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment (1993) Biological Components of Substance Abuse and Addiction, OTA-BP-BBS-117 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office,) September 1993.

U.S. Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration. Docket No. 86-22. Schedules of Controlled Substances; Hearing on Petition to Reschedule Marijuana and its Components. 51 Fed. Reg. 22,946 (1986)