The rest of the forum please ignore my FRAT if the sight of another Diaz thread angers you, but Kizer is a respected forum member and he'll be deciding whether to grant a retroactive exception in a couple months.
I'm posting the next paragraphs from another thread, but the idea is this: the main concern about marijuana use in MMA has to do with when a fighter is under the influence AT THE TIME OF THE FIGHT. But the Commission uses a testing method that detects the signs of usage as much as a month before the test. So it's practically worthless as a means of testing for the real perceived safety risk.
It's like urinalysis testing for DWIs. There's a lot of scientific evidence that urine testing sometimes indicates a .08 or higher equivalent reading when the blood alcohol concentration is actually lower because of urine pooling. Lots of states did the right thing and moved away from it altogether, even though blood testing is move cumbersome, and breath testing is subject to its own litigation issues. Some states like Minnesota still defend it, and a Minnesota Supreme Court decision as recent as a couple weeks ago found that it is illegal to have a certain urine test level, and that the accuracy of the test itself is irrelevant. So they essentially criminalized a test reading rather than actual bad behavior in order to save the stupid test. They can get away with it because everyone hates drunk drivers. So it's OK to have a sloppy test. If you were driving with a blood alcohol level half the legal limit, tough. I guess you shouldn't have been drinking. adjusts puritanical neckerchief
I get that it's difficult to test for marijuana intoxication, but the solution is not to nail down a month range of use and treat a positive test as evidence that a fighter was under the influence during the fight. In DWI cases, drug recognition experts use visual observations to make a conclusion about the immediate influence of narcotics. Is that workable in MMA? Could a doctor perform that sort of assessment for later corroboration with traditional test results? I don't know, but it's problematic to express concern about things like the numbing effect of marijuana when the Commission isn't taking steps to test for CURRENT intoxication.
There is no reason, regardless of whether Diaz made a bonehead administrative mistake regarding applying for a medical exemption, that the Commission should be hammering a guy for a year of his livelihood when there is no actual evidence that he was under the influence during the fight, and a doctor has written him a legitimate prescription. The idea of throwing the book at Diaz may be very satisfying for the kinds of people who get off on pointing out how foolish other people are, and for people who like demonizing marijuana, but it's an abuse of power plain and simple to seek disproportionate punishment for behavior that is at worst the result of being lazy and scatterbrained.
I'd like to see the Commission forgive Diaz for the most moronic of administrative oversights, and evaluate what it would do if had received his application for an exemption prior to the fight. Recognize a physician's judgement about a medical treatment would result in no harm to the Commission's integrity. Then the COmmission can use this as an opportunity to brainstorm ways to test for the real safety risk: intoxication at the time of the fight. Perhaps a doctor could assess the fighters prior to the fight for actual visual signs of intoxication, the sorts of indicators drug recognition experts use to determine intoxication. I think people would respect the Commission for addressing the real problem, and I think the Commission could feel good about "doing the right thing" in light of the value of Nick's livelihood and the desire of the fans to see him active at this critical time.
Love always, 2Jupes.
Well put 2Jupes 
-Until Keith Kizer
and his beard
ttt
I miss 2Chromes....
Really, Kizer is in the position to revolutionize how the Commission approaches the problem of marijuana intoxication, and I think it would really reflect well on his administration it it's willing to be innovative and progressive.
Gnarly219 - I miss 2Chromes....
I'm sorry, I promise this will stop ASAP.
You can call the pre-fight assessment a Diaz Assessment. Let it be written.
Not to be a tin-foil hat wearer or anything, but I kinda broke out the aluminum (aluminium for you brits) headgear for this most convenient of scenarios after the controversial loss and accepted rematch.
Very well-stated sir, but as they say:
They're gonna do what they're gonna do, and I honestly believe Nick doesn't give a shit either way.
TTT for respected forum member, Mr. Keith Kizer
I didnt know Keith Kizer posted here
^Yep.. he used to post alot more
Kizer has done a lot of great posting here. I'm sure it's hard to enter an internet lion's den when you're handling a high-profile problem, but I think he'd appreciate a constructive, practical discussion about the wider problem of marijuana use in MMA.
He`s probably working until at least 4:00 to 5:00pm (PST)
Then we wait.
For as long as we have to.
But no later than 6:00 pm PST.
he last logged in 13 days ago.
Ttt 
Until KK
I sent an APB to every hair salon in Nevada, so I'm sure he'll be by shortly.