Marijuana* ('medical' or otherwise) is not a "narcotic" under federal law, nor is it considered a narcotic in the medical community.
They are pretty stingy when it comes to the former.
Probably; they are unaware of a lot. But the government doesn't have to give special permission for research using cocaine like they do with marijuana. Doctors can actually prescribe cocaine, not that they do, and certainly not for snorting or ingestion. But they could. (They use it in ERs as a topical anesthetic).
Colloquial use vs legal use vs medical use of the term narcotic, with all three kinds of use of the term having changed over time.
It used to be that cocaine was not considered a narcotic under federal law. Is it still that way?
For some medical research using cocaine, the government indeed does sometimes give special permission for using cocaine. Whether such special permission is required or not, I don't know. Perhaps I could ask some attorneys for a medical research center or two.
Whatever happened to the lingering question some had about the use of drugging of terrorism suspects or other related persons of interest in light of "torture" being defined as such that it wouldn't exclude drugging up detainees to mess with their mind as long as it wouldn't result in generally recognizable permanent tissue damage? Could the government still -- under the current Administration -- have them smoke a bud?
I am just surprised that the TSA hasn't yet pushed to drug all passengers as a condition of being permitted to be a passenger on a flight. A knocked out passenger can't really do a whole lot on their own. Can never be too safe.
