评论
打印
It gets more complicated for the public
当“某些”制药公司反对大麻合法化，
when “some” pharmaceutical companies fight weed legalization,
并借此获批，走上研发合成大麻的道路时，
and then receive approval to develop synthetic cannabis.
公众面临的问题就更加复杂了。
Because another hurdle, can be the weed itself.
因为还有一个障碍，那就是大麻本身。
"With the current DEA regulations,
根据目前DEA的规定，
the only way federal researchers can study cannabis is to study it from one source
联邦研究人员研究大麻只能研究一个来源，
and that's a farm in Mississippi that the National Institute of Drug Abuse regulates."
那就是国家药物滥用研究所（简称“NIDA”）管理的密西西比州的一个农场种植的大麻。
"The problem is that there's a huge variety of products that are available online, in dispensaries,
“问题是，大家到网上或是到药房就能买到各种各样的大麻制品，
which have had favorable responses associated with them.
药效也还不错。
There are not reports of kids responding beautifully to NIDA farm products."
而且，也没有报道反映NIDA农场的大麻药物对儿童病患的疗效格外可观啊。”
If you compare the potency between what doctors receive from NIDA
如果将医生从NIDA那里拿到的大麻药物
versus what a recreational user can get at a dispensary,
与非法服用管制药的患者能从药房买到的大麻药物相比较，
the difference is pretty striking.
你会发现，两者还是存在着惊人的差别。
"And this constant approach where we ignore the specific product which has been associated with plausible response,
“我们一直采用的无视被与合理反应联系在一起的特定产品，
and we substitute it either with a pure pharmaceutical product, or a NIDA farm product doesn't make sense.
要么用纯医药产品替代它，要么用NIDA农场的大麻药品替代它的做法根本就讲不通。
We should really study what seems to be working.
我们应该研究的是至少看起来有效的那些药。
But I also understand the other side of this argument,
但我也理解这个问题的另一面，
that we want to use the best standardized products.
也就是我们是希望使用最标准化的大麻药品的。
And when you depend on those products which are available in dispensaries
而且，如果你指望的是在药房就能买到的那些大麻药品的话，
they are known and notorious for not being adequately consistent."
你要知道，那些药都是出了名的剂量不稳定。”
For any kind of clinical trial, doctors need to control the variables.
无论是哪种类型的临床试验，医生都需要控制变量。
"It's not to say that what may be purchased through a dispensary is necessarily less pure.
“并不是说从药房买的纯度就一定不够。
We don't know if it has the exact percentages that are listed on the label or what the purity is
只是我们不知道它真实的纯度是否和标签一致或者它的纯度具体是多少，
and whether it's been run through screenings for pesticides or things like heavy metals."
以及是否通过了杀虫剂检测或者重金属检测。
"The farm can't keep up with all the federal researchers
“农场也无法为联邦的所有研究人员提供研究用的大麻药品，
so if the DEA allowed other sources of cannabis that are well vetted.
所以，如果DEA能批准其他经过严格审查的大麻来源就好多了。
That's an important next step.
这项工作非常重要，也是接下来我们努力的目标。
Recently hemp was made legal
最近大麻被合法化了，
and that is very exciting for us because hemp could be a source for cannabidiol
这对我们来说是非常激动人心的一个消息，因为大麻可以作为大麻二酚的来源了，
because right now as researchers we don't have a good source."
而作为研究人员，我们现在实在是没有很好的别的来源。”
"There's a huge interest in the medical field to better understand efficacies,
“医学领域现在对大麻有着浓厚的兴趣，我们希望能够更好地了解它的疗效，
side effects, tolerability, what sort of best ways to deliver it."
副作用，耐受性，以及最佳的呈现方式。
"The chief mission at this point is to have rational, scientifically-based, medically-based regulation of research.
“在这方面，我们的主要任务是对研究进行理性、科学、基于医学的监管。
And that really requires action from Congress.
但这需要国会的配合。
Epidiolex, is now Schedule 5,
比如，附睾酮现在是5级管制药品，
meaning the DEA says that it has accepted medical use and limited abuse potential.
也就是说，DEA认为，它的药效已经得到了认可，但仍有一定的滥用风险。
So it's hard for me to understand how the DEA can say that one product is Schedule 1, and one product is Schedule 5.
所以，我就很难理解，DEA怎么能说一种大麻药品是一级管制药品，另一种就是五级管制药品呢？
And that is the chief quandary, I think.
我认为，这就是当前最主要的困境。
I don't know how we can reconcile that without simply changing the designation of all marijuana products.
如果不改变对所有大麻产品的定性的话，我不知道怎么样才能解决好这个问题。
We have to recognize that marijuana in general does have therapeutic potential,
我们必须认识到，总体而言，大麻确实有潜在的医疗效果的，
and that at the very least it should be scheduled as a Schedule 2 drug,
至少也应该划入二级管制药行列，
meaning it's a drug that has some acceptable use but still has potential for abuse.
也就是说，应该认可它的药效，同时承认它还是有一定的滥用风险。
That would be scientifically rational.
从科学的角度来讲，这样做才合理。
We have a tough challenge before us.
我们正面前一项十分艰巨的挑战。
But I think we need to balance our desire to do things that are most scientifically rigorous
但我认为，我们需要平衡我们追究最为科学严谨的做法的愿望
with the need to make real forward progress with these diseases
以及在这些疾病上取得真正的进展的需要，
that are so severe and for which the need for new therapies is so desperate."
因为这些病不仅十分严重，对新疗法的需求也是十分迫切。”
