et hoe . Le te ao a? ¥ Z . Cato kee : dot +IF ft ! ate 2 - 2 Sra fb hte. Lheghe 5 é ia Z oy = # Aerg & Ae4 . ,é Fh See ' a a t.0b-, - va yh frit he salheet fu he A tttrte tie a aiid “ & ried vd Ratt Winine ren nem Sh dem Department of Justice ah | | | si Tos Emmet Daly, Deputy Attorney General At San Francisco “\ From: W. R, Creighton, Chief, BNE Date Jan. 16, 1958 Subject: x fat led ~ Reference is hereby made to letter addressed $0 you by Garl M. Bowman, M.D. under “ date of December 19, 1957. It appears that Doctor Bowman is interested in clarifying i certain figures and statements appearing in "Narcotic Addiction Report to Attorney : General Edmund G. Brown by the Citizens' Advisory Committee..." in March of 195). . These clarifications are to be passed along to Dr. Lawrence Kolb of the Peeatate * Department of the United States Public Health Service. wy X they wr eben Pr Ti “ At the time that material for the "report" was being gathered the files on medical *s narcotic users reported by physicians throughout the State contained approximately < ta 32,000 names. These reports of physicians are required to be made in compliance iv ¢ with the State law as set forth in Section 11425 of Article 3 Chapter 4, Division 10, yt . Health and Safety Code, | +: "A physician prescribing or furnishing a narcotie to an habitual user shall within Ae “ five days after first prescribing or furnishing the narcotic personally report in 3 3y writing by registered mail, over his signature, to the State ‘Divigiote Sy 34 } wrhe report shall contain all of the following: Y gt (a) Name of the patient. x (b) Address of the patient. oo X \ tS} Character of the injury or ailment. IX (s Quantity and kind of narcotic used. i e) A statement as to whether or not the patient is an addict." >: It should be emphasized that these reports do not necessarily Lesbian that the } person is an addict. I am including with this letter a few of the report forms and, a, &8 will be noted, there are two very important questions to be answered by the '.. Yeporting physician, as follows: 1. Has patient previously used narcotics? 2. Addicted? Answer to #1, approximately 65% positive or a total of 20,800 having previously used narcotics. Answer to #2, approximately 55% or a total of 17,600 addicted, in the opinion of the attending physician. Wost of those that have been reported as addicted are included in the figure of 20,800 as having previously used narcotics. It is difficult to approximate the number of persons thus reported to this bureau that were not actually entitled to the narcotic } aoge prescribed, however I feel that 5% or 1600 would be a close figure. Hanacanpsnnitgiterin en ttre EE a LUTTE AERC, an COPY Bnmet Daly -2~ January 16, 1958 Gonsideration must be given to the total number of reported cases being reduced by death and a much lesser number being cured of the condition for which the narcotics Were indicated. Since the 195) report the file herein referred to has been reduced by transferring the reports of inactive cases, or cases where information is had that the patient had died, to an inactive file. To date the active file numbers approxi~ mately 20,000 as compared with the 32,000 in 195. ‘This is gradually building up however and in another year or two may reach the estimated 32,000 previously reported or even pass that total as the population of the state is ever on the increase. To determine the all-out picture at this time as compared with 195h, the same formula _ Set forth above could, in my opinion, be applied. ' Dr. Bowman's letter indicates that "people in the east" are quoting the Committee | Report that the 32,000 cases in file are part of a total of 52,000 addicts in > | California, It is unfortunate, to say the least, that persons in terminal stages | of carcinoma and other incurable death dealing diseases should be placed in the | category of the illicit drug addict. Regarding the second point in Dr. Bowman's letter wherein reference is made to profits in the traffic as set forth in the Committee Report under Chapter V "Enforcement" sub-heading "Narcotics and Organized Crime", the figures showing profits appear to be correct. According to the information in this report heroin could possibly be purchased in Mexico or the Orient for from $500 to $1000 per pound. Continuing, we read that there are 7680 grains to the pound. Actually there are 7000 grains avoirdupois to the pound or a differential of 680 grains. Narcotics are always weighed by avoirdupois weight which is 37.5 grains per ounce or an even 7000 grains per pound. Apothecaries' weight is 80 grains to the ounce or 7680 grains to the pound and is not standard in the United States for narcotic drug weights. Therefore rather than 153,600 capsules of one grain each to the pound, there would be but 10,000 capsules of one grain each obtained from the pound (reduced 20 times). In an estimation such as that which has been set forth in this paragraph, this difference is unimportant, however I feel that in view of the fact that we have been commenting on the subject, this particular matter should be brought to your attention. The price of $5.00 to $8.00 per capsule (one grain to each capsule) is not out of line. Current prices in California vary from $3. 50 to $7.00 per grain. WRC :bb/vn W. R. CREIGHTON, Chief