A national nonprofit drug policy reform group is mounting a challenge to the Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) proposal to ban two psychedelic substances. Experts say the new federal restriction would be detrimental to ongoing research initiatives.
In a prehearing statement filed with DEA’s administrative court on Tuesday, Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) laid out a series of issues with the agency’s controversial plans to classify 2,5-dimethoxy-4-iodoamphetamine (DOI) and 2,5-dimethoxy-4-chloroamphetamine (DOC) as Schedule I drugs under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).
The statement was submitted by SSDP on behalf of 20 graduate students, post-doctoral researchers, staff scientists and professors who work with the psychedelic substances. It was jointly filed with psychedelics researcher Raul Ramos.
The petitioners argue that DEA has failed to meet the statutory burden of demonstrating that either psychedelic compound has high abuse potential, while ignoring research indicating that the drugs hold significant therapeutic potential.
The filing points out that there are no documented cases in medical literature of “distressing responses or death” related to human consumption of DOI, nor has there been any established evidence of a high risk of dependence.
“DOI and DOC are available for purchase from legitimate chemical synthesis companies because they are used in scientific research and there is no evidence of diversion from these companies,” it says. “There is no evidence of the illicit sales of DOI.”
Additionally, the research that has been conducted over the last 35 years on these psychedelics, including studies funded by federal health agencies, has yielded evidence that they may be effective treatment options for chronic, acute and neuropathic pain, addiction to opioids and alcohol and other mental health disorders.
Placing the compounds in Schedule I is therefore unjustified because that classification is reserved for drugs with high abuse potential and no demonstrated medical value, the petitioners argued.
“DOI and DOC are important research chemicals with basically no evidence of abuse,” Brett Phelps, an SSDP alum and legal counsel for the nonprofit, said in a press release on Tuesday. “We are excited to fight on behalf of SSDP scientists so that they can continue the critical work they are doing with these substances.”
Elijah Ullman, chair of SSDP’s Science Policy Committee, added that “DEA’s proposed rulemaking to place DOI in Schedule I of the Controlled Substance Act defies scientific study and will make it more difficult for researchers to work on the serotonin 2 receptor,” a primary target of psychedelics that plays a key role in modulating learning, memory and mood.
“There is a plethora of evidence demonstrating that DOI does not have significant potential for abuse yet the DEA continues on an anti-scientific tirade of ignoring facts,” he said.
The prehearing statement is being filed about a month after a federal court dismissed a case challenging the constitutionality of DEA’s process for adjudicating scheduling actions as the agency seeks to ban the two psychedelic compounds.
Prior to that ruling, DEA had formally cancelled the planned administrative hearing, which came in response to an agency administrative law judge staying the proceeding in light of the now-dismissed lawsuit.
It’s unclear what DEA’s next move will be in the psychedelics scheduling proposal, but the plaintiff in that case told Marijuana Moment last month that he intends to appeal the court’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
These are the latest development in a years-long dispute over DEA’s efforts to schedule the psychedelics, which it first attempted to do in 2022, only to withdraw the proposal amid pushback from the scientific community. The agency separately withdrew from a proposal to ban five different tryptamine psychedelics in 2022.
Last December, DEA announced that it would be trying to enact the DOC and DOI ban again. The agency’s notice about the scheduling proposal still lacks evidence that directly connects the compounds to serious adverse health events or demonstrated a high abuse potential.
“To date, there are no reports of distressing responses or death associated with DOI in medical literature,” it says. “The physiological dependence liability of DOI and DOC in animals and humans is not reported in scientific and medical literature.”
DEA said that anecdotal reports posted by people online signaled that the substances have hallucinogenic effects, making it “reasonable to assume that DOI and DOC have substantial capability to be a hazard to the health of the user and to the safety of the community.”
It did point to one report of a death of a person who had used DOC in combination with two other unspecified drugs—as well as two reports of hospitalizations that it said were attributable to the use of DOC with other drugs—but scientists say that hardly constitutes reason enough to place them in the most strictly controlled schedule.
“DOI and DOC could lead to significant breakthroughs in treating some of today’s most challenging health issues, but this is not just about keeping two chemical compounds available for research; it’s about preserving the integrity of scientific inquiry, advancing medical treatment, and ultimately, impacting lives positively,” SSDP Executive Director Kat Murti said.
“The DEA’s current path is a disservice to science, health, and the principles of justice and compassion,” she said. “Let’s stand together to advocate for sensible drug policy and ensure that potential treatments can reach those in need without undue government interference.”
In the background of this development, the Justice Department’s public comment on its proposal to move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III under the CSA officially closed on Monday. It’s expected that an administrative hearing will be similarly scheduled once that’s complete, as multiple interested parties—including former DEA leaders and state attorneys general—have made the request.
The requests are seen by reformers as a way not only to push back on the Biden administration’s rescheduling plan but also to potentially delay the formal implementation of the action amid an effort by opponents to shoot it down.
Read SSDP’s prehearing statement on DEA’s proposed psychedelics ban below:
Photo courtesy of Wikimedia.
Marijuana Moment Read More
