In the United States, cannabis is considered a Schedule 1 substance under the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. This means cannabis is illegal to possess, sell, or distribute in the United States. This is not only true for medicinal cannabis, but also for recreational cannabis. In the United States, federal law prohibits the possession, sale, or distribution of cannabis. Therefore, if you are an American citizen who lives in the United States, it is illegal to possess, sell, or distribute cannabis.
Medical cannabis is a very topical issue at the moment, and the ever-growing momentum behind the use of medical marijuana for medicinal purposes has certainly caught the attention of decision-makers at the highest levels of government. In the UK, successive governments have taken a more relaxed and less restrictive attitude to the medicinal use of cannabis, while in the USA, the medical use of cannabis is currently prohibited.
The medical cannabis debate is a contentious one, with a lot of misinformation and confusion. The cannabis plant is an ancient medicine with a long history of use, and its potential medicinal applications are well-documented. However, it is still a hugely controversial topic. The UK has set out the guidelines for its rollout of medicinal cannabis, but also managed to set a ban on growing the plant for recreational use. The Netherlands is also leading the way in terms of use and research, with countries across Europe following suit. But this isn’t the case everywhere in Europe.
Alfredo Pascual: Hello, everyone. My name is Alfredo Pascual and I am the Vice President of Investment Analysis at Fast Forward Innovations. And today I will be moderating this panel with Tjalling Erkelens, CEO of BEDROCAN, and Alex Agius Saliba, Member of the European Parliament. First, let Tjalling and Alex tell us something about themselves and how they got into the cannabis industry, or in Alex’s case, politics. Tjalling Erkelens: Thank you, Alfredo. Yes, my name is Tjalling Erkelens, CEO and founder of BEDROCAN. BEDROCAN is one of the oldest companies and we have a strong European orientation. Since 2003 we have been producing high quality cannabis for medical purposes on behalf of the Dutch Ministry of Health. So we’ve been doing this for 18 years. One of the company’s founding principles is that we always say we work for patients, and we do the work at the highest level of quality. Standardization is one of those quality legs under the stool. Moreover, we have the corresponding certificates, so that GMP and everything related to quality assurance is taken care of in our company. That’s what I am. Alfredo Pascual: Thank you, Tjolling. Alex? Alex Agius Saliba: First of all, thank you very much for the invitation. I think it will be a very interesting discussion, which will cover some very important points that I think should also be discussed at European level. I am Alex Agius Saliba, the new MEP; this is my first mandate in the European Parliament for Malta’s smallest Member State, the Socialist and Democratic Group. I am also a regular member of the European Parliament’s Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection, as well as the Committee on Petitions and the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs. I started to study this issue because I visited people, patients, in my area. And even in my Member State there were obstacles, problems which, although laws were passed, prevented the production of medicinal cannabis. There are still some barriers in the supply chain for patients and in fact the ability to fully use medicinal cannabis compared to other prescription drugs. That is why I have launched this initiative both within my group and at EU and European Parliament level with other groups, with other Members, in order, I think, first of all to try to make people aware of these barriers, these problems, in order to have real access, both in terms of physical access and in terms of practical access. With a product that is finally affordable and accessible to patients. And we launched this initiative, a bipartisan initiative. Bringing together and pooling MSM from different EU Member States, from different political groups, to raise awareness and increase political pressure and awareness at EU level. If cannabis patients are to be less stigmatised, more attention needs to be paid to research. And more attention should be paid to the harmonization of national laws on access to medicinal cannabis. Alfredo Pascual: Alex, that’s the European Alliance for Medicinal Cannabis you were talking about, right? Alex Agius Saliba: Yes. Alfredo Pascual: That is how it works, for example, in the European Parliament. It’s EMS. And you have already found support from various parties in Parliament, can you tell us anything about that? Alex Agius Saliba: Yes, as I said, this is a bipartisan initiative that brings together many parliamentarians from different groups. I am thinking of the EU level and the political institution. If an initiative like this does not have the support of both parties, it will ultimately be very difficult to get your program approved. So I think the figures are very encouraging for the first members, the first MEPs who have joined this coalition. We now have more than 40 Members representing almost all the political groups in the European Parliament. There is also a very good geographical balance and a very good representation of the different member countries. We are also close to agreeing on the common goals and the specific goals we will pursue as an alliance. But essentially, our goal is to focus specifically. And I think that’s the starting point of our discussion. Since we are specifically focusing on medicinal cannabis, we will not address non-medical use. Although I have my own opinion on that too. But as an alliance, we will not address these issues. But more importantly, we want to end the stigma of patients using primarily medicinal cannabis. That is a problem; it is a problem in a number of Member States. I would say that in almost all member states, medicinal cannabis. Although scientific and medical, we know it can improve our patients’ quality of life. He can also offer specific treatments for a range of conditions. This subject is still considered taboo in a number of EU Member States, which is why it is one of our priorities. Facilitate the oversupply of medicinal cannabis to patients in Europe. As I said, I am originally from Malta. In fact, we are also one of the innovators of legislation that also helps the medical and cannabis industries succeed. But at the same time, when you go in and talk to patients, you discover that there are still some barriers to accessibility. Price and cost I don’t always point the finger at the manufacturers, but it is a problem and a challenge in the supply chain. Moreover, one of the main challenges is the existence of different technical standards in the various EU Member States, which also makes it difficult to target specific markets in the same supply chain. The harmonisation of national legislation on access to medicinal cannabis will therefore also be one of our priorities. One of our priorities is to promote research projects into the benefits of medical cannabis for patients; research is essential in this area. We will therefore continue to be persistent, especially when it comes to projects financed by European funds. and identify the real needs of patients, and ensure patient participation and consent procedures. Alfredo Pascual: That’s a lot, Alex. Alex Agius Saliba: Basically, these are our main objectives. There is now political momentum, especially following the inclusion of medicinal cannabis in the scope of Directive 2010-24. And this is also one of the drivers we are pushing for. But also after the exclusion of cannabis and cannabis resin from the 1961 UN Convention. A political process is under way at EU level, and gaining momentum in the European Parliament, to make patients’ rights more accessible. And as I said, one of the priorities that we will insist on is to include access to medical cannabis in the next EU health programme and to ensure that cannabis, medical cannabis, is not seen as taboo and continues to be seen as taboo compared to other prescription drugs that our patients have access to. Ultimately, then, it is the rights of patients that are our top priority, not the interests of the industry. We are direct advocates for patients’ rights. Patients get full access, adequate access and a better quality of life – that is our main goal. Alfredo Pascual: Thanks, Alex. And that’s a lot, and we’ll talk more about the details, the kind of legislation you’re looking at, for example, and other things. But let’s move on to Tjalling, and Tjalling, my question to you is: What do you expect from this initiative? What hope do you have? And just a clarification on that, in case it was misunderstood. Rather than being excluded from the 1961 Convention, cannabis was removed from List 4 but remained in List 1. So it was a good idea, but only to make sure the audience wasn’t confused. Yes, Tjolling? Tjalling Erkelens: Yes, many things are being considered at this time. And I appreciate the level of knowledge that is being created here, and the awareness that is being created, and I’m very happy to hear that. Let me start with this. Your first point, Alex, and this is very important to me, is about recreational and medicinal cannabis. Although the product appears to be the same, I think they are apples and pears. And your approach is absolutely correct when you say that if you have an opinion about the recreational market, it should be separated from the medical market. And that’s what I’ve always said. In this context, I am neither against nor for the recreational use of cannabis. However, there are still problems. But I don’t think we should get into a situation where, for example, recreational outlets are used by patients to access the product they really need. This separation is a very important thing. I would recommend that the entire industry also opt for this separation. If you bet on one horse, you can’t bet on two in this context. Don’t do that, it won’t work. And in fact, we already have many examples around the world that show that mixing pharmaceuticals and recreational drugs in the same company doesn’t work. Returning to the EU, I have said it many times: Harmonisation of the rules. Everyone is beginning to understand that this is a need. We have a Europe, we have a number of countries doing pretty much the same thing, and suddenly there is a product that divides the whole of Europe. We see several initiatives; Denmark is conducting an experiment which will be completed shortly. France has just launched an experiment. No, Germany has its own repayment program. The Netherlands has its own non-repayment programme, all kinds of differences which must be taken into account at least at European level. But to make matters worse, we also have the world. And because cannabis is on the list of controlled substances, it’s been removed from list 4, and I’m very happy about that, but it’s still a registered product. In this connection, we in Europe must keep an eye on what is happening in the UN, because the UN is in fact the legislator in the area of controlled substances. So if we continue to look around and see what’s really going on, because there are some very interesting initiatives. In particular, the INCB is already working on a more detailed document for countries to advise them on the cultivation and processing of cannabis for medicinal use. I think that these are very interesting initiatives that the European Union should also pay attention to. And again, I must congratulate Europe on this, where all, all these patients are really suffering, I am very aware of that at the moment. I think we are on a path in Europe that will eventually lead to proper access to products. If we compare it to Canada and the United States, North America in general, we see that access to what we call recreational cannabis may have become easier. But even in these countries, patients still often complain about access or problems with access. Both the problem of getting the right products and the problem of the quality of the products are problematic. Yeah, the last thing I want to mention in terms of what Alex was just talking about is the price, the price of the product. This is a very important matter and we see that in Europe, mainly because of the way it is currently organised, or should I say disorganised, we see a huge price increase when products cross the border. Exporting products therefore essentially makes it harder for patients to access them. When I see Dutch patients paying at the pharmacy, they only pay about six euros per gram of product. And I see that Maltese patients, for example, can pay up to 20 euros per gram. for the same product, and we’re talking about Europe. So I always wonder what’s going on. Is it a regulatory issue? Is it a question of greed? Anyway, what’s up? I would also like to stress this once again. Again, as Alex said, it’s not that he already knows, and I’m very glad you said that, it’s that the manufacturers themselves don’t set those prices, and we never did. In fact, the price in the Netherlands has dropped since the program began in 2003. In the beginning, patients were paying up to 10 euros a gram, now they are down to 6 euros a gram, and we are now at 18. This shows that if the program works well, the price can and should go down more or less. Alfredo Pascual: Alex, you mentioned harmonisation, education and research as key elements of your initiative. And it reminds me strongly of the non-legislative resolution of the European Parliament that dealt with the issue of medicinal cannabis in early 2019. I think it was February or something. And this message has resonated widely; see how the European Parliament now supports medicinal cannabis. It’s been all over the news, and this 2019 resolution has gotten a lot of attention. But two years later, the resolution has had no practical effect. And correct me if I’m wrong, but that was a lot of nice words; yes, we should support research, we should harmonize, but nothing happened, right? So let me be a little more aggressive: What will you do now to ensure that the outcome of your initiative is not yet another non-legislative resolution that says a lot of nice things but has no practical consequences? Alex Agius Saliba: This is one of the greatest challenges facing the European Parliament. We have a lot of good intentions, but at the end of the day we need to turn rhetoric and good intentions into action. And these are not just resolutions like the series of resolutions we have and vote on in every committee; they are about patients’ rights. Access to medication, medically prescribed medication. But it is also a big problem when it comes to prescribing, and when it comes to the big barriers that still exist in a number of member states that make it difficult for doctors to prescribe medicine and cannabis, because again the burden they have to carry does not make sense to me. And it defines attitudes toward cannabis and cannabis medications as taboo, as something unusual, as something that should be prescribed by doctors who are qualified to assess a patient’s medical condition, not by the MMP. It is still handled in a reasonable manner. And yes, what we’re trying to address, and what we ultimately want to achieve, is to put our money where our mouth is. And we still have a lot of work to do. Once again, with regard to the resolution, I think it was an important step, an important political message that Parliament sent. But, as you rightly point out, I’m not here to sound too pessimistic. There have been a number of success stories in a number of participating countries. Germany and Portugal, and Malta. Alfredo Pascual: Do you know if that was the result of that resolution? Alex Agius Saliba: I don’t think, and this is my point, that this is the result of this resolution. As a result, Member States no longer consider medicinal cannabis a taboo subject. But still, I think the most important thing, and they keep emphasizing this. The greatest asset of the European project is the single European market. And Tjalling has explained very well that it is not logical that patients in a certain EU member state have to pay X amount of money to get access to medicinal cannabis. And then patients from another EU Member State have to pay double; that does not make sense. When we have an internal market, when we have free movement of goods, services, people, products, and we have these differences. Imagine we have Malta, one of the smallest Member States, Luxembourg, do not give me examples of my Member State, a small market. I know that in the supply chain it is more difficult to go directly to the smaller markets. But imagine if manufacturers had to produce and sell their products based on uniform regulatory standards for each of the 27 EU Member States. How can a Maltese patient have the same price and access as a German patient? As a Latin American patient, this doesn’t make sense. And that’s why we need to do something about it. We must therefore make use of the European instruments available to us to combat this ongoing injustice. And that’s why I said in my first testimony, again, I’m not representing the manufacturers, the manufacturers here. But we cannot keep pointing the finger at manufacturers because of this price issue, because products are not available for, say, three months, four months. I have seen this in my own country, for example. We have one of the most popular products. But one of our products had been out of stock for three months. This was not due to the manufacturers or the supply chain, but to the bureaucracy that unfortunately still exists. And we have to fight this system. Because, as I said, medical cannabis is a prescription drug, just like all the other drugs we have. And that, I think, should be and remain an open goal for our alliance. Alfredo Pascual: Alex and Tjalling, I believe that in the past the European Commission has said that cannabis-based medicines are covered by European pharmaceutical legislation, just like all other medicines. And there is nothing to stop companies from getting a marketing authorisation for cannabis-derived medicines, as has already been the case for Epidiolex with the centralised procedure, and then for Sativa X in several EU Member States. And there is European harmonization in this regard, because if a company has clinical trials that confirm the efficacy and safety of a drug, they can go to the EMA and get approval for a drug derived from cannabis. But I guess what I’m saying is that you would like to see a uniform framework for access to cannabis products that are not clinically tested, right? And my question is, from a practical point of view, do you think there is any possibility of harmonizing access to medical cannabis in this regard? After all, Article 168 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU leaves responsibility for health policy to the Member States, right? And I find it very difficult to believe that we will be able to convince, I don’t know, Hungary to have the same access to medical cannabis as Germany. And when we talk about harmonisation, do we mean that we want the whole of the EU to be like the Netherlands, Germany or one of the most developed countries? Or do we want to find something between the more developed countries that have medicinal cannabis and those that don’t? Ultimately, even a deterioration for patients in countries with a better system? Tjalling Erkelens: If I may begin by saying that one of the biggest problems is the lack of science. Because, as Alex said, it’s the doctor who prescribes the medication. As a result, there are a number of products on the market today that have little or no clinical evidence to address this problem. You mentioned GW Epidials as a product that has been clinically tested and market approved. Alfredo Pascual: To a new level. Tjalling Erkelens: Yes. But one of the biggest problems is that the most sought after and healthy products right now is hemp flour, dry flour. This is one of the main products for which it is almost impossible to obtain clinical data on such a specific product, a dried herbal product. GW did all this, I am very familiar with their process in this regard and the time it took them to bring this product to market. If there is a current need for a certain type of food, e.g. B. Flour crumbs are more appropriate for some patients. That’s the time when we have to agree and overcome some hurdles, when we have to say what’s really necessary to validate the product, the cannabis product, in the marketplace. Which product can we approve from a pharmaceutical point of view and which not? And it’s a decision we all look forward to. Because if we take this decision, cannabis flower can be a real miracle drug, but it has to be so and so before we can allow it on the market. And, of course, clinical trials are needed. Governments can intervene in clinical trials. I know that the Dutch government has started clinical trials to assess the quality of the products it puts on the market. Although we are a manufacturer, let me remind you that it is the government that is marketing our product. So they have that responsibility, and they take it on now, after all these years, but they take it on. I congratulate them, but at the same time it is only the Netherlands. We therefore need much more, and I would be very pleased if this were also supported at European level. Make an exception, let’s say, in the pharmaceutical approach to cannabis, make that exception that allows a certain type of product that is most in demand by patients, make that exception, as Germany has done, allow it on the market in a controlled way, it’s a controlled substance. And by the way, cannabis is not the harmless product everyone is probably talking about. But cannabis isn’t, and we all know that; that’s why we need to be careful with cannabis. But I’m not going to talk about that now. But I also see this as a very important task for the European Union. Alfredo Pascual: One second, Alex. Question for both of you. Don’t you think that a first step towards a harmonized European medicinal cannabis system would be to start with quality issues, in the sense of what Tjalling mentioned or implied in terms of standardization? Because I think it’s an easy step, don’t you? Got an EC monograph for the flower. Let’s define what we’re talking about when we talk about cannabis flowering. Let’s define what we are talking about when we talk about full spectrum extracts. And even this small step, which seems small compared to the fact that we have a whole European market, would be very useful. Because today several countries, even Holland, Germany and Denmark, all lie next to each other, but one of these three countries has a different flower monograph. Of course they look very similar, but we are talking about three different products when we talk about flowers in the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark. Tjalling Erkelens: Technically, you said, they are very similar, but technically the differences are significant. But again, you’re right. Alfredo Pascual: That’s what I mean, right? So let’s start with a good one, shall we? If countries are going to allow a special arrangement for access to medicinal cannabis products without clinical trials, we should at least define what those products should look like qualitatively, right? Tjalling Erkelens: Yes. Alex Agius Saliba: Alfredo, you are absolutely right on this point, and it is one of the things and one of the issues that we will defend. We have this gap, there are small differences in terms of the definition in each of the Member States, but these small differences have a big impact, let us say. So we disagree on the basic definitions. That is why it is so important for us to continue to invest in research. I think that this is the most important thing, that there is more attention from each Member State, from the Union as such. We have the Horizon Europe programme, which can continue to help our industries in this respect, and can continue to boost the standardisation bodies in each Member State. To have more knowledge and to work together, and I think that’s the key, to work together and not in silos. Because ultimately, that’s the question. And also, as I said in my first speech, I think we’re going to send a very strong message. We are very ambitious when we talk about harmonising standards; I think that is the ultimate task we want to accomplish. We can’t do it overnight, it takes time, and we know that. But patients can’t keep waiting and staying in this vacuum that we have, and so we would be sending a very strong signal, a very strong signal. Including access to medical cannabis in the next EU health programme would send a very strong message. This would be a strong signal for further cooperation. However, in the area of health care, EU competence is limited. I still believe, and there have been some very good examples of this in the past, that together we can coordinate better. If we cooperate more closely, especially with regard to the standardisation bodies in the various Member States. After all, they are all members and cooperate with the EEA. But at the end of the day, I don’t think I’m an expert on many of the problems we see. But when I meet patients, industrialists, investors who want to invest in these industries. I think some of the biggest shortcomings that we have, some of the biggest problems that we have with medical cannabis and patient access, come directly from the lack of coordination between the different standard-setting bodies. They are all part of the European Medical Association and the EMA. It is therefore very important that there be a higher level of coordination, based on research and common basic definitions. Alfredo Pascual: Tjolling, do you believe this? Tjalling Erkelens: I couldn’t agree more. It has to be shared at certain levels, let’s say at the political level where politicians have to overcome their own shadows and where stigmas exist. I think there’s more than enough evidence now that cannabis is effective in some patients, that’s true. Having said that, but this is an action in itself, we need to convince the politicians of this issue. Ensure broad support for this issue. The second thing is really at a lower level, below the political level, to really coordinate the levels of quality that we need in this sector. And I’m going to go back to the beginning, so at the very least, and certainly, we need to separate the recreational products, but also the wellness products. So wellness is not medicine and medicine is not wellness. Although they sometimes overlap, we should be very careful about this. So what is real medicine, what are wellness products? What are some of the compounds in cannabis? So CBD, THC, all these compounds, how do you separate them. We are on the right track to do that, at least what the European Union has done is create some common sense about THC in CBD products, which I think is a very clear statement from the EU in that regard. But does it meet international standards? So what do the WHO, the Incb, the UN in general say? What are their standards? So we need to make an effort in this area and, in the meantime, patients need access, and I fully agree with that. So we need some kind of quick fix in Europe as well that says: Okay, this baseline, this is where we start. At the very least, that’s necessary, and then we’ll go a little further. Holland will do it. We had a case, and I’m just using it as an example. We have allowed a standard deviation of cannabinoid content of 20%, and this is a technical issue, but I want to mention it. This means that when you say my product, it still contains ten percent CBD. With a standard deviation of twenty percent, the product could be between eight percent. That is, twenty percent less and twenty percent more than the advertised value. That’s eight to 12 percent. Now Hollande says we will do it soon, and I think there are European reasons for that. We’re back to what the pharmaceutical standard is – a 10% deviation. Alfredo Pascual: That is what is happening in Germany. Tjalling Erkelens: This has already happened in Germany. So you have to be between 9 and 11 years old. And things like that, and it’s still very technical. But these are the things we need to harmonise in Europe, starting with Europe. I think a good expert working group could establish these rules in principle. Cannabis has been a long time coming, and that’s another statement I want to make. Cannabis has been left out of the regulated world for so long. In this bubble, many discoveries have been made in the past. We know a lot about cannabis. Regulators, however, know nothing about cannabis; they have to learn it from scratch. I would therefore very much like to see an expert working group set up in the European Union to help the EMA develop standards and quality levels for these products and to identify patients’ needs. What do patients and their doctors want? What is really needed? Another example is the cannabis test. In the early 1920s, the Dutch government promoted cannabis tea. Then make a hemp tea. All active ingredients in cannabis are only formed at temperatures between 150 and 200 degrees Celsius. Take a guess! The temperature of the tea does not exceed 100 degrees Celsius, it is boiling water. Therefore, this product is not effective. But they didn’t know. Technically, there was no knowledge. So you need a strong weed and a strong cannabis task force. Alfredo Pascual: One last question to wrap up the conversation, and since you mentioned it, let’s wrap up the conversation about so-called wellness foods. Thus, non-medicinal CBD products sold in Europe are virtually unregulated. But again, there is no agreed framework. Or at least there is no coordinated application of EU rules, I would say. But in Europe we have Switzerland, which is a special case, not your country. But in the case of Switzerland, where CBD rules are quite unique. In principle, Switzerland allows the sale of products containing CBD. So if they contain less than one percent THC, things are much more complicated in Europe. Not only is the THC content not a drug, although it varies somewhat in some countries. But there is also the question of fine foods, for which manufacturers must obtain this authorisation before selling the products. Are you concerned about the current situation and what changes would you like to see? And a minute or two for everyone, because we need to close the panel. Tjalling Erkelens: A very short comment from me and then Alex can. I really like CBD as a wellness product. I would be careful; CBD enters the bloodstream; it crosses the blood-brain barrier. So CBD works on the brain, and we need to do more research on that. But as far as wellness products and setting levels go, it’s fine. Alex Agius Saliba: Again, this is the result of the confusion we experienced. At European level and the lack of harmonisation that we have. All these obstacles arise when the product in question is a prescribed product for which the industry has developed numerous standards. But then again, when it comes to CBD products for fitness, for medicinal purposes. In the EU, we essentially have an open-door policy. I have nothing against these products. But at the same time, it shows that when you have this issue and deal with it inconsistently, when you treat medical cannabis the way they continue to treat it, you end up with all these problems and all these issues. Again, I think a standard needs to be developed for these products to continue to protect consumers and patients who do not wish to purchase these products from accessing them. But ultimately it’s about learning more, doing more research, having the right standards, always providing the best protection for our users, our patients and our consumers. Alfredo Pascual: Thanks, Alex. Thank you, Tjolling. If you would like to say a few words in conclusion. Tjalling Erkelens: I can keep talking. No. I think we are on the right track; I am very happy with all the initiatives that I see emerging at national level as well. I think most countries in Europe that want something are doing their best to get it done. But now I am very happy with the European approach, because it means that eventually everything will be harmonised in Europe. And I support all your efforts, Alex, in this regard. And, of course, we’re willing to talk more, even beyond this place. I am willing to discuss this further and see how we can help in some way. Alfredo Pascual: Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you. Alex Agius Saliba: Finally, Alfredo and Tjalling, first of all thank you for this discussion. We are always very interested to hear different points of view. And also to have this direct contact with the industry, to see what is happening not only in Europe, but we have to compare our situation with other regions, other continents and with the developments there. And I think we need to look at the continents that ultimately regulate better than we do, that do a better job than we do. A number of initiatives are being systematically implemented in different EU Member States. But ultimately, there is no coordination. So the EMA, the European Commission, Horizon 2020, when it comes to targeting money, when it comes to attention, when it comes to priorities in our health policy. I think medical cannabis has to play a bigger role to ensure better coordination, better protection of our users, our patients, and greater accessibility because it is their fundamental right. It is the fundamental right of every patient in our union to have reasonable access to prescription drugs. And medicinal cannabis, yes, it is also a prescription drug. Alfredo Pascual: Thank you both, it was a great conversation, until next time.
Related Tags:
Privacy settings,How Search works,mjna stock price
