text: (delta-9-THO should be transferred from Schedule I to Schedule II of the 1971 Convention. The Commission also considered data contained in that document, as well as in the twenty-sixth report of the WHO Expert Committee on Drug Dependence. 52. Some representatives considered that the flexibility provided by such a transfer would be highly desirable in view of the therapeutic usefulness of dronabinol as a palliative during treatment of cancer. 53. Several other representatives had reservations regarding the transfer: they pointed out that the value of dronabinol in therapy did not seem to counterbalance its high potential for abuse, which would constitute a serious disadvantage if dronabinol would be transferred to Schedule II. They suggested, however, that WHO should continue collecting data on its therapeutic usefulness for another review. 54. By a vote of 23 in favour, 9 against and 7 abstentions, the Commission decided not to transfer dronabinol from Schedule I to Schedule II of the 1971 Convention. Later, one representative who had abstained from voting stated that he would have voted in favour of the transfer of dronabinol from Schedule I to Schedule II had instructions from his Government arrived sooner. - 15 - N-hvdroxv MDA. N-ethyl MDA. 4-methylamlnorex and midazolam 55. The Commission also considered four notifications from WHO recommending that midazolam (8-chloro-6-(o-fluorophenyl)-1-methyl-4H-imidazo-[l,5-a][1,4] benzodiazepine) should be included in Schedule IV of the 1971 Convention and that three substances, N-hydroxy MDA ((+)-N-[alDha-methyl-3,4-(methylenedioxy) phenethy1]hydroxylamine), N-ethyl MDA ((+)-N-ethyl-aipha-methyl-3,4-(methylene dloxy)phenethylamine and 4-methylaminorex ((+)- cis-2-amino-4-methyl-5-phenyl-2 -oxazoline), should be included in Schedule I of that Convention. 56. All representatives expressed their agreement on the WHO recommendations concerning midazolam, the two analogues of MDA and the analogue of aminorex. Several representatives expressed their appreciation of the valuable work done by WHO. By a vote of 36 in favour, none against and 3 abstentions, the 
analysis: The text appears to be discussing the classification of certain substances under the 1971 Convention, which suggests that it is related to health and the regulation of substances with potential abuse. The mention of therapeutic uses and potential for abuse also points towards the health sector.