Table of Contents
Table of Contents

Table of Contents
Table of Contents






















Buy this book.
Buy this book.








Copyright 1999 by the National Academy of Sciences








Institute of Medicine

 




Acknowledgments


This report covers such a broad range of disciplines--neuroscience, pharmacology, immunology, drug abuse, drug laws, and a variety of medical specialties, including neurology, oncology, infectious diseases, and ophthalmology--that it would not have been complete without the generous support of many people. Our goal in preparing this report was to identify the solid ground of scientific consensus and to steer clear of the muddy distractions of opinions that are inconsistent with careful scientific analysis. To this end we consulted extensively with experts in each of the disciplines covered in this report. We are deeply indebted to each of them.

     Members of the Advisory Panel, selected because each is recognized as among the most accomplished in their respective disciplines (see page iii), provided guidance to the study team throughout the study--from helping to lay the intellectual framework to reviewing early drafts of the report.

     The following people wrote invaluable background papers for the report: Steven R. Childers, Paul Consroe, Howard Fields, Richard J. Gralla, Norbert Kaminski, Paul Kaufman, Thomas Klein, Donald Kotler, Richard Musty, Clara Sanudo-Pellectual frameworkster, Stephen Sidney, Donald P. Tashkin, and J. Michael Walker. Others provided expert technical commentary on draft sections of the report: Richard Bonnie, Keith Green, Frederick Fraunfelder, Andrea Hohmann, John McAnulty, Craig Nichols, John Nutt, and Robert Pandina. Still others responded to many inquiries, provided expert counsel, or shared their unpublished data: Paul Consroe, Geoffrey Levitt, Raphael Mechoulam, Richard Musty, David Pate, Roger Pertwee, Clara Sanudo-Pe Craig Nichols, John Nutt, and RWalker, and Scott Yarnell. Miriam Davis, consultant to the study team, provided excellent written material for the chapter on cannabinoid drug development.

     The reviewers for the report (see page iv) provided extensive, constructive suggestions for improving the report. It was greatly enhanced by their thoughtful attention. Many of these people assisted us through many iterations of the report. All of them made contributions that were essential to the strength of the report. At the same time, it must be emphasized that responsibility for the final content of report rests entirely with the authors and the Institute of Medicine.

     We would also like to thank the people who hosted our visits to their organizations. They were unfailingly helpful and generous with their time. Jeffrey Jones and members of the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative, Denis Peron of the San Francisco Cannabis Cultivators Club, Scott Imler and staff at the Los Angeles Cannabis Resource Center, Victor Hernandez and members of Californians Helping Alleviate Medical Problems (CHAMPS), Michael Weinstein of the AIDS Health Care Foundation, and Marsha Bennett of the Louisiana State University Medical Center. We also appreciate the many people who spoke at the public workshops or wrote to share their views on the medical use of marijuana (see Appendix A).

     Jane Sanville, project officer for the study sponsor, was consistently helpful during the many negotiations and discussion held throughout the study process. Many Institute of Medicine staff members provided greatly appreciated administrative, research, and intellectual support during the study. Robert Cook-Deegan, Marilyn Field, Constance Pechura, Daniel Quinn, and Michael Stoto provided thoughtful and insightful comments on draft sections of the report. Others provided advice and consultation on many other aspects of the study process: Clyde Behney, Susan Fourt, Carolyn Fulco, Carlos Gabriel, Linda Kilroy, Catharyn Liverman, Dev Mani, and Kathleen Stratton. As project assistant throughout the study, Amelia Mathis was tireless, gracious, and reliable.

     Deborah Yarnell's contribution as research associate for this study was outstanding. She organized site visits, researched and drafted technical material for the report, and consulted extensively with relevant experts to ensure the technical accuracy of the text. The quality of her contributions throughout this study was exemplary.

     Finally, the principal investigators on this study wish to personally thank Janet Joy for her deep commitment to the science and shape of this report. In addition, her help in integrating the entire data gathering and information organization of this report was nothing short of essential. Her knowledge of neurobiology, her sense of quality control, and her unflagging spirit over the 18 months illuminated the subjects and were indispensable to the study's successful completion.



Previous Table of Contents Next