Controlled Substances
1
Business Case: Overlooking the Controlled Substance Act
Colton White
Buscom 201 Section 07
May 1st, 2020
Introduction
The world of drugs is not only complex but can be seen simple to those that choose to
keep an open mind. In today’s day in age, various companies produce drugs for individuals to be
taken every day in various quantities. These substances can range from naturally grown remedies
to pain such as kratom, to pills such as Adderall that grant laser focus and energetic effects. The
difference between kratom and Adderall, however, is that one is illegal in multiple states and the
other has almost an identical compound to that as meth. This can be identified as a flaw in the
ranking of controlled substances and as new studies arise regarding the effects of certain
substances, we need to adapt our views of these frowned upon drugs in relation to those
prescribed.
Drug, defined by the dictionary is, “a medicine or other substance which has a physiological
effect when ingested or otherwise introduced into the body.” (2020). This tends to be a very
broad term and houses the possibilities of minor things such as caffeine to be considered a drug.
With this being said, the DEA or United States Drug Enforcement Administration, classifies the
majority of the drugs with potential abuse as controlled substances. The FDA and the DEA work
together to determine what should be considered a controlled substance and proceed to rank them
in classifications referred to as schedules. There are exactly five schedules for which a drug can
be ranked, due to their effectiveness in medicine as well as their potential abuse (DEA, n.d.).
What brought us to this point is known as the Controlled Substance Act (CSA) of 1970, stating
that drugs need to be put in groups and then regulated based on factors such as level of abuse.
Those who manufacture or distribute controlled substances must do so by first registering with
the DEA (CSA Schedules, 2018).
“The Congress of the United States enacted into law the Controlled Substances Act
(CSA) as Title II of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970.1 The
CSA serves as the legal foundation of the government's fight against drugs of abuse.”.(CSA
Schedules, 2018) The CSA, signed by President Nixon can arguably be the first step towards
what we know as the war on drugs. At this point in time, drugs were represented as our number
one public enemy by Nixon, and funding for things such drug control and treatment increased
drastically. Although, a man known as John Ehrlichman later admits this was all a politically
scheme for Nixon’s elections. After the 1968 campaign Nixon had two relative enemies, antiwar
and people of color. Nixon thought that if he could associate people of color and hippies with
marijuana and heroin then he can ultimately alter the view of their cultures (A Brief History of
the Drug War, n.d.). How do you do this? You do this by classifying drugs as schedule one
temporarily, for which that drug was marijuana. In 1972 however, decriminalization for
marijuana was recommended but ignored after that.
After 50 years, this is still a great system. Although, I do believe that there are some
changes to be made. I feel as if this CSA has trapped us in the 70’s, not allowing wiggle room for
Controlled Substances
2
things such as research. With new studies coming out frequently regarding the effects of
everyday drugs such as caffeine, I think it is important to understand the drugs we view as
harmful as well. I had the intention of proposing Marijuana to be taken off the schedule one
category. Though, through investigation and reasoning, I believe this system of scheduling,
charging, and distributing controlled substances should be looked at twice.
PART 1: The Problem
When discussing the Controlled Substance Act, there isn’t a lot of controversy around
itself, but more so the social constructs around the act. Following the act, we determined a home
for each controlled substance based on abuse, medical use, and addictiveness. Because these drugs
are now in classified groups, laws can be made using the umbrella term instead of the specific drug
name. This provides inconsistency with laws and regulations and enables less harmfull substances
to coexist with extremely harmful substances under the same category. This pushes away drugs
like THC and Psilocybin, which are the psychoactive compounds in marijuana and mushrooms
and are currently on the Schedule I classification.
To understand the problem, we need to first understand the situation. There being five
controlled substance schedules, these are the DEA’s definitions for each:
- “Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently
accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse.” (DEA, n.d.)
o Heroin, LSD, Ecstasy, Peyote, Marijuana, Mushrooms, etc.
- “Schedule II drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with a high potential
for abuse, with use potentially leading to severe psychological or physical dependence.”
(DEA, n.d.)
o Cocaine, Morphine, Methamphetamine, Fentanyl, Adderall, Ritalin, etc.
- “Schedule III drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with a moderate to low
potential for physical and psychological dependence. Schedule III drugs abuse potential
is less than Schedule I and Schedule II drugs but more than Schedule IV.” (DEA, n.d.)
o Codeine, Ketamine, Anabolic Steroids, Testosterone, etc.
- “Schedule IV drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with a low potential
for abuse and low risk of dependence.” (DEA, n.d.)
o Xanax, Soma, Darvon, Tramadol, etc.
- “Schedule V drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with lower potential for
abuse than Schedule IV and consist of preparations containing limited quantities of
certain narcotics.” (DEA, n.d.)
o Lomotil, Motofen, etc.
With background understanding of each drug schedule, it comes off as fair
in regard to how a drug is scheduled. Schedule I has high abuse and it has absolutely no medical
value. Meaning marijuana and psilocybin have no medical benefits whatsoever. Unlike schedule
I, schedule II is accepted in the medical field for potential use. Meaning there is more of a use for
morphine, methamphetamine, and fentanyl than there is for THC. This can be a very clear
problem when discussing new studies that counteracts these ideas. Studies proving naturally
occurring compounds have positive effects when micro dosed.
Controlled Substances
3
Another problem with the drug scheduling has to do with manufacturing and distributing
both illegally and legally. More recently, Trump had a DEA temporary ban on Fentanyl
analogues and allowed the ban to proceed for the next 15 months. This sparked a lot of
controversy amongst the scheduling of these drugs. Fentanyl does have a medical use, but it also
has a place for abuse, “Even though everyone agrees that fentanyl analogues are dangerous—up
to 100 times more potent than fentanyl, which is itself 50 times more potent than heroin—“
(Strohman, 2020). Through this spark of controversy, Andrew Strohman, a healthcare data
analysis, suggests that characterizing fentanyl as a schedule II is a “Mixed bag”. Allowing
fentanyl to be a schedule II drug allows manufactures to not only make the drug but distribute
them as well. Although these controlled substances have harsh restrictions and are only given to
credentialed providers, it will never have the illicit restrictions and supreme limited access as that
of a schedule I. This is because government entities crack down on illegal manufacturing and
distribution which can ultimately lead to saving more lives.
The negative to classifying a controlled substance as a schedule I is just as important as
well. This is because drugs that are under a schedule I category significantly limits the amount of
research you can do, if any. As David Nutt says from the Imperial College of London, putting a
substance into schedule I makes it difficult to find drugs similar in effect that may be a success in
the medical field (Nutt, 2015). This is a big reason that marijuana research is being delayed year
after year, holding us back from a medical discovery whether it be good or bad. The same can be
said for other controlled substances included in the schedule I.
PART 2: The Solution
This may seem as if it a tough situation to beat, and that is because it is. Not only because
drugs and substances play a large role in modern day, but because this is a controversial issue
where two parties must agree before action is taken. Being a part of the war on drugs movement,
both right and left will have vast opinions regarding the scheduling of drugs. So, a solution that
will work is a solution that won’t step on toes.
While this is already a controversial issue, some believe that the system is okay how it is
and shouldn’t be touched. Rather, policy makers and those creating substances should be aware
of these class schedules beforehand as well as the flaws of research when placed as schedule I.
Although this isn’t a solution, it is something that could be agreed upon by everyone. This would
be the simplest and most cost-efficient change. Basically stating, don’t change, adapt.
Why not change and adapt an alternative way? We see more and more studies arising
from the shadows regarding natural remedies such as marijuana proving to be helpful. This is a
system that allows you to access morphine for pain treatment, which is essentially heroin, but not
marijuana. Most importantly these are the statements that are leading us to revolutionary
discoveries. You ask questions, get answers, and adapt. This is a superior form of adaptation, but
it is easier said than done.
Although Adderall has a high medical use, it also has a high addictiveness and abuse use as well.
Fentanyl has a high medical use, and also a high addictiveness and abuse. Though, the difference
between these addictions are dramatically different. The withdrawals, the addictiveness, the
Controlled Substances
4
abuse, it is all different, but these two substances are housed in the same schedule. This is why
these factors such as abuse, and medical use need to be examined individually. Another example
is that nicotine is more addictive than heroin, on paper that looks bad, but we all know the
addiction to heroin is different than the addiction to nicotine. This allows the comparison to be
unequal.
So, the question boils down to; What do you do? The answer would be to separate the
qualifications for each controlled substance schedule. You cannot rank one drug by medical use,
addictiveness, and abuse, especially if the research for said substance is limited. This results in
less harmful drugs such as THC to be extracted from society when it could pose a miracle-like
benefit. Medical use, abuse, and addictiveness are all things that should be reviewed together but
feel as if medical benefits out way the abuse and addictive factor. If we want something to work,
controlled substances need to have two individual rankings after research has been concluded.
PART 3: The Benefit
Although the solutions are miniscule, the changes are profound. Redesigning controlled
substance scheduling will separate the medical benefit to the scheduled rankings. Meaning
methamphetamine, although has a surprising medical benefit should be placed on the schedule I
classification for abuse, addictiveness, and for charges and trafficking. On the medical side
however, remain noticed and available, happily sitting in the schedule II classification. This not
only allows for these controlled substances to remain in the medical field, but it also recognizes
that although this may have a medical use, it is schedule I for addictiveness and abuse. This will
allow for testing and research to be done with all drugs, for every drug and substance is viewed as
if it has a medical use. With this being said, benefits will range all across the board with improved
testing and more efficient data.
Viewing every single substance as a possible medical benefit will allow for better
restrictions on widely used drugs and open doors for substances we’ve been pushing away. Along
with this, successful testing of schedule I substance will allow a better understanding of their
effects whether negative or positive. It will allow us to rule out medical use once and for all and
help us understand the effects of recreational use whether it be prolonged use or not. All-in-all, the
more research we can do on these certain drugs, the more breakthroughs we can find.
Even though research on drugs such as THC and psilocybin are restricted in society, that
doesn’t necessarily imply that research is nonexistent. Restriction on research is ultimately a
restriction on breakthrough as I stated previously. However, with the little research that has been
done, we have been able to introduce a few drugs into the market with active ingredients found in
schedule I controlled substances. One of these drugs is known as Epidiolex and has been approved
by the FDA. Epidiolex is an oral prescription that is used to treat two types of rare epilepsy with
the main ingredient being cannabinol, or CBD (Slowiczek, P. D., 2019). Drugs such as Epidiolex
are paving the way for our future prescriptions and as more uses for Epidiolex are discovered, it
will take time due to scheduling restrictions. Epidiolex represents the value of rethinking the
scheduling altogether and opens up reasonings to remove drugs such as marijuana off the schedule
I class.
Controlled Substances
5
Taking a look at a bigger picture, this business case needs to help economically and
provide an incentive for growth. Research on these drugs may not pose a benefit every time but
allowing substances to be looked at as a medical benefit may introduce a medical miracle some
time or another. This can be seen as “innocent until proven guilty”, but for controlled substances.
Looking at substances that have been pushed to the side such as marijuana has the ability to
introduce a prescription such as Epidiolex. After this discovery however, Epidiolex brought almost
300 million dollars in sales in the launch year alone (Clifford, 2020).
Allowing for us to take a second look at the CSA and question the scheduling process of
controlled substances will essential lead to marijuana legalization. There are too many benefits to
marijuana for it to be hidden in the schedule I class and with more research, marijuana being
medically available everywhere is in the near future. Looking at marijuana alone we can discuss
economic twist and turns, along with employment and business growth. Since weed has been
legalized state-wide in many regions of the United States, we have been granted the outside look
as the guinea pigs do their thing. In 2019 alone, Colorado brought in over $300 million in taxes
over this single plant. Cannabis company analytics, New Frontier, suggest that we could possibly
see over $100 billion in federal taxes in the next five years (Krishna, 2019). This same report
suggested 1 million jobs may be available if this were to succeed in the next five years. Along with
this, reports from ICF suggest in increase in labor income to be somewhere near $3.5 billion.
Suggesting the federal legalization of marijuana, or simply just a change in scheduled classification
can do all of this by itself. This allows us to see the major drawbacks we endure when being closed
minded about a simple plant.
Controlled Substances
6
References
_TylerTheTyler_. (2020, January 17). FDA-backed CBD drug brings in $296 million in 'incredible
launch year,' GW Pharma CEO says. Retrieved April 28, 2020, from
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/16/cbd-epilepsy-drug-does-incredible-296-million-in-sales-gwpharma-ceo.html
A Brief History of the Drug War. (n.d.). Retrieved April 28, 2020, from
https://www.drugpolicy.org/issues/brief-history-drug-war
An Overview and Update of the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://www.pharmacytimes.com/publications/issue/2007/2007-02/2007-02-6309
CSA Schedules. (n.d.). Retrieved April 28, 2020, from https://www.drugs.com/csa-schedule.html
Drug Classifications. (2019, June 25). Retrieved from https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminalcharges/drug-classifications.html
Drug Scheduling. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.dea.gov/drug-scheduling
Fordham. (2014, October 23). Drug-Free Campus Guidelines. Retrieved from
https://www.fordham.edu/info/21684/university_regulations/2891/drugfree_campus_guidelines/12
Krishna, M. (2020, March 10). The Economic Benefits of Legalizing Weed. Retrieved from
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/insights/110916/economic-benefits-legalizing-weed.asp
Lindsay Slowiczek, P. D. (2019, May 18). Epidiolex: Cost, side effects, dosage, and more. Retrieved
April 28, 2020, from https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/326061
Morphine Injection : Uses, Side Effects, Interactions, Pictures, Warnings & Dosing. (n.d.).
Retrieved April 28, 2020, from https://www.webmd.com/drugs/2/drug-3891/morphineinjection/details
Controlled Substances
7
Nutt, D. (2015, January 27). Illegal drugs laws: clearing a 50-year-old obstacle to research.
Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4307971/
Strohman, A., Holt, C., Holt, A. C., Andrew StrohmanHealth Care Data AnalystAndrew Cutler
Strohman, Health Care Data Analyst, & Fiscal Sustainability of Federal Health Care
ProgramsChristopher Holt. (2020, February 14). The Drawbacks of the Drug-Scheduling
Regime. Retrieved from https://www.americanactionforum.org/weekly-checkup/the-drawbacksof-the-drug-scheduling-regime/
Terry, M. (2020, March 4). The Median Cost of Bringing a Drug to Market is $985 Million,
According to New Study. Retrieved from https://www.biospace.com/article/median-cost-ofbringing-a-new-drug-to-market-985-million/