As the federal government’s hearing on whether to loosen restrictions on marijuana is set to get underway on Monday, a striking question hangs over the proceeding: why won’t the government call its own scientist?
When the Drug Enforcement Administration first moved to reschedule marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III, it designated Dr. Luli Akinfiresoye — a pharmacologist in the agency’s Diversion Control Division — as its expert witness. Dr. Akinfiresoye appears to have authored the DEA’s scientific review of the drug, a comprehensive report the agency itself described as one that “reflects DEA’s current scientific knowledge regarding marijuana.” That document is not a casual summary. It catalogs, in detail, how much more dangerous marijuana has become.
The review traces how the potency of marijuana has climbed from roughly 3% THC in the 1990s to about 16% today, with concentrates often exceeding 60% — and some products approaching 90%. It links marijuana use to cannabis use disorder, documenting that millions of Americans now meet the criteria for addiction. It details the drug’s association with psychosis and schizophrenia, particularly among adolescents and young adults, alongside risks to the heart, the lungs, and the developing brain. It records the surge in marijuana-related emergency room visits and the alarming rise in accidental poisonings among young children who get into edibles.
Now, in the hearing that begins June 29 (DEA Hearing Docket No. 26-96), the government has decided it will not call Dr. Akinfiresoye after all. Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM) says her testimony is too important to leave out, and intends to bring the DEA’s own expert before the tribunal so her findings are heard.
The stakes are considerable. Rescheduling marijuana would send a powerful signal that the federal government views the drug as less dangerous — even as the science assembled by the government’s own pharmacologist points in the opposite direction. SAM argues that a decision of this magnitude should be driven by evidence and public health, not by the commercial interests of a fast-growing marijuana industry.
For SAM, the message is simple: the government compiled the evidence. The public deserves to hear it.