navigate projects
 
Alex Grey About

 

 

   

CCLE's Written Comments to the DEA
RE: Notice of Intent to Place 2C-T-7, BZP, and TFMPP into Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (68 Fed. Reg. 52872-52875)



October 7, 2003

Administrator
Drug Enforcement Administration
United States Department of Justice
Washington, DC 20537
Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative / CCR

RE: Notice of Intent to Place 2C-T-7, BZP, and TFMPP into Schedule I
of the Controlled Substances Act (68 Federal Register 52872-52875)


Dear Sir or Madam:

The undersigned, Richard Glen Boire, as counsel for the Center for
Cognitive Liberty & Ethics (CCLE) pursuant to 21 CFR 1308.44 and 21
CFR 1316.49, hereby files a waiver of an opportunity for a hearing,
together with a written statement regarding the CCLE's position on the
matters of fact and law involved in the proposed inclusion of 2,5-
dimethoxy-4-(n)-propylthiophenethylamine (2C-T-7), N-Benzylpiperazine
(BZP), and 1-(3-triflouromethylphenyl)piperazine (TFMPP) into Schedule I
of the Controlled Substances Act.

(A) The CCLE is an independent nonprofit law and policy center working
in the public interest to foster cognitive liberty the right of each
individual to think independently and to use the full spectrum of his or her
mind. The CCLE encourages social policies that respect and protect the
full potential and autonomy of the human intellect. As an organization
charged with defending freedom of thought and mental autonomy, the
CCLE has a direct and vital interest in this matter. The CCLE maintains
that the fundamental right to control one's own intellect and mental
processes is violated whenever the federal government prohibits particular
psychoactive substances and makes an otherwise law-abiding citizen a
federal criminal for simply possessing or using that drug to occasion a
particular mode of thinking.

(B) The CCLE submits comments on the following points of fact and law:

1. Insufficient data exists to support proposed inclusion of 2C-T-7, BZP,
and TFMPP into Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act.


2. Prohibiting the mere possession of 2C-T-7, BZP, and TFMPP is a substantial
infringement of the fundamental right of adults to freedom of thought.

(C) Taking the above points in order CCLE submits the following comments for the
record:


1. Insufficient Data Exists to Support Proposed Inclusion of 2C-T-7, BZP, and
TFMPP into Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act.


In order to place a substance into Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act, there
must be sufficient evidence to make the following three findings:

(1) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse,
(2) The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in the
United States, and
(3) There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance
under medical supervision. (21 U.S.C. 811 and 21 U.S.C. 812)

With respect to criterion (1) above, insufficient data as to the abuse potential of all three
substances exists. Indeed, no data on the record demonstrates that these substances
have a potential for abuse, let alone that they have a "high potential" for abuse. The
DEA's notice of intent to schedule these drugs does not present evidence that the
named drugs are being abused. Rather, the notice merely documents incidents of use.
The DEA presents insufficient data upon which to conclude that any of the named drugs
are being abused.

Ingestion of a non-scheduled, unregulated substance or drug to produce an effect on
the central nervous system is neither a criminal act nor necessarily a threat to personal
or public safety. The CCLE submits that inclusion into Schedule I of the Controlled
Substances Act of drugs or other substances based on evidence that does not
distinguish incidents of use from actual abuse potential does not meet the first inclusion
criterion above and is therefore improper.

2C-T-7

The DEA's notice of intent to permanently schedule 2C-T-7 notes that the substance
has been encountered by law enforcement, observed at rave parties, and sold over the
internet. (68 Federal Register at 52873.) While these observations suggest that 2C-T-
7 may be being used, they provide no basis on which to make a determination about the
substance's abuse potential.

The notice also reports that three deaths have been associated with the "abuse" of 2C-
T-7. (Ibid.) The DEA presents no information to contextualize these cases. Taken in
isolation and with insufficient use pattern data in which to contextualize these cases,
these accounts provide no useful epidemiological information on which to determine the
abuse potential of the drug. Further, two of these deaths are linked to poly-drug use
and cannot be clearly attributed to the abuse of 2C-T-7.

In a prior notice of intent to schedule 2C-T-7, printed in 67 Federal Register at 47343-
47345, the DEA improperly equated the sharing of information about 2C-T-7's effects
with abuse of that substance. That notice stated:


Abuse of 2C-T-7 in the United States was first reported in 1997; an
individual posted his experience associated with the oral ingestion of 20
mg of 2C-T-7 on the Lycaeum website on the Internet. In the year 2000,
the abuse of 2C-T-7 by young adults began to spread in the United States
as evidenced by widespread discussion on drug website forums and the
sale of the substance from an Internet company. The information being
discussed on these websites includes the route of administration,
recommended doses, and narratives from individuals describing their
experiences and effects after self-administering 2C-T-7. Self-reported
experiences and other information posted on these websites indicate that
2C-T-7 is being abused orally (10-50 mg) or intranasally; the oral route is
the most common route of abuse. (67 Federal Register at 47343.)
 


In the above statement, the DEA equates the free expression concerning the effects of
an unscheduled compound with "abuse" of that compound. The Internet is a medium for
communication via which people share information about a myriad of topics, including
the effects on the mind of all sorts of legal and illegal drugs and other technologies.
DEA fails to show why, if a given compound is legal and discussion about that
compound is protected by the First Amendment (indeed, the First Amendment protects
discussion of even illegal drugs), an Internet post or any other writing about the mental
effects of the compound is equivalent to "abuse" of the compound.

BZP and TFMPP

The DEA's notice of intent to schedule BZP and TFMPP states that the "abuse" of these
substances has been growing as evidenced by "the increasing encounters by law
enforcement agencies since the 1990's" and the fact that these substances are
marketed over the Internet. (68 Federal Register at 52873-4.) While these
observations suggest that these substances are being used, they fail to provide
sufficient evidence as to the abuse potential of these substances. Accordingly, the DEA
has not satisfied the first criterion for placing these substances in Schedule I.


2. Prohibiting The Mere Possession Of 2C-T-7, BZP, and TFMPP For Any And All
Purposes, Violates The Fundamental Right Of Adults To Freedom Of Thought.

Placing 2C-T-7, BZP, and TFMPP in Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act will
make criminals out of otherwise law-abiding citizens who merely possess these
substances, and/or ingest them responsibly to occasion a particular mode of thinking.
Freedom of thought is inextricably linked with the freedom and autonomy of each citizen
to self-determine his or her own brain chemistry. By placing these substances into
Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act, the right of peaceful, responsible, and
intelligent Americans to modulate their own thinking processes is infringed upon.
Occasioning a particular state of mind, by using 2C-T-7, BZP, or TFMPP (as discussed
above), is not synonymous with abuse, nor does it necessarily present any danger to
others

On these grounds, the Center for Cognitive Liberty & Ethics objects to the scheduling of
2C-T-7, BZP, and TFMPP.

All notices to be sent pursuant to the proceeding should be addressed to:

Richard Glen Boire, Esq.
Center for Cognitive Liberty & Ethics
PO Box 73481
Davis, CA 95617-3481 USA

Respectfully submitted,

//

Richard Glen Boire
Counsel for the
Center for Cognitive Liberty & Ethics