Dear Members of the Medical Board of California, Division of Medical Quality:

It is a pleasure to be able to speak to you all again.  More and more I believe we share a commitment to bettering California medicine. I want our relationship to continue to build on honesty and respect. 

I have given you, on previous occasions, substantial documentation of the safety and efficacy of cannabis as medicine for a wide range of symptoms and illnesses.  If anyone has misplaced or lost any of what I consider core documents on medical cannabis, please feel free to email me, and I can send the documents back as attachments. [webmaster's note: these documents are rewritten in a variety of formats throughout this site.]

I want to remind you of the inappropriate targeting and investigation of doctors for having recommended cannabis as medicine.  This is evidenced by investigations having been begun on 9 (or 10 now) of the 15-20 most outspoken doctors in California regarding this safe and effective medicine.  To characterize this as 9 of 60,000 reports, as was done at the last meeting, is misleading.

I still contend that almost all of these investigations were initiated my some element of law enforcement, and probably none by a patient or legal guardian.

I also need to remind the Board of the well-documented cultural bias of law enforcement to cannabis.  I checked again at 11pm last night, and the California Narcotic Officer's Association website (www.cnoa.org/position-papers-1.htm) still has the following untruth: "There is no justification for using marijuana as a medicine." This is thoroughly contradicted by the federal government's own 1999 Institute of Medicine report. books.nap.edu/books/0309071550/html/137.html

As you will recall last meeting, I flatly contradicted Deputy AG Mary Agnes Matyszewski characterizations of what doctors can and can't do.  I think by now that Dr. Wender's has a letter from Ann Brick, one of the attorney's who represented physicians and patients throughout the litigation that lead to victory for physicians in Conant v McCaffrey  in the US District Court (Judge Alsop) and was reaffirmed by the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Conant v. Walters.  Her letter, as well as the confirmatory interview with Graham Boyd, another of her co-counsel in this case, are presented to you in my packet, and point out the inaccuracies of Ms. Matyszewski. Lest this look like I am picking on Ms. Matyszewski, I should point out that none of the other attorneys corrected her error, and in fact, our current chief of Enforcement, Ms. Jane Jerzak, was seen "nodding adamantly" during Ms. Matyszewski comments.  I hope that the attorneys are now willing to acknowledge their misinterpretation, and that the MBC can begin to rethink how it wants to approach a new field of medicine, where those with the most knowledge are overwhelmingly the ones under investigation and therefore muzzled from speaking of their case. And in a shameful display by your legal counsel last meeting, one was effectively muzzled from saying things that had no relevance to his case, except for one accidental word.

Now I have worked as a Steering Committee member of the Bay Area Chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility, and I know that busy committee members DO have to rely on their staff, but first and foremost you need to have staff that you can rely on to steer you correctly.

Now where do we go from here?

First I would like some accountability for the misinformation that has been generated by your legal staff, both present and past.  I was surprised to hear at last meeting that Mr. Thornton was still being used as a consultant.  His mischaracterizations at the May meeting were enough to make me think he had been fired.  An acknowledgement from the attorneys of their misunderstandings, and a willingness to learn the law will be a good start and a necessary beginning.

In summary:

I suggest that you continue to educate yourselves and your attorneys on this safe and effective medicine, and the laws that apply.

I will be happy to help organize a teaching session for your staff and any Board member interested. I have a number of knowledgeable attorneys and experienced doctors who would be well qualified to put on a half-day seminar, which would contain what I would consider core knowledge for your staff, as well as Board members.

I suggest that when there are inappropriate complaints from someone who doesn't know or misinterprets the law (and this includes most of law enforcement, unfortunately), you are obligated to inform them of the law.

If there continue to be inappropriate or harassing reports, there have to be sanctions against the reporters who have an agenda other than appropriate medicine.

The MBC, as a guardian of medical quality in California, cannot continue to allow itself to be used in this inappropriate and destructive way.  Your charge is much too important to be diverted this way.

On a complementary note, I am heartened to hear that the CMA/MBC working group on medical cannabis has been making some progress in discussing cannabis practice standards.

But I am disheartened that none of the most knowledgeable doctors have been consulted on this. I would hope to be able to help review the work before it is set in stone. (In case you didn't know it, my ridiculously inappropriate investigation was closed last August, one full year after it was started.)

The California Medical Association and the Medical Board of California should stand up to law enforcement and make a statement that they should cease interfering with California medicine.

I call on the MBC to cease and desist the inappropriate investigations and legal proceedings against doctors, and try to regain the credibility that this has cost you.

Sincerely,

Frank H. Lucido MD

Copyright pending. All rights reserved medboardwatch.com.