We are still looking for a good design for this space, but we still want you to have the LATEST in news about medical marijuana.
click on http://intraspec.ca/marijuana.php and find out all the latest news / views and scroll below.
LATEST JUNE NEWS!
Shannon Kari, National Post Published: Monday, June 01, 2009
Medical marijuana advocates are planning a court challenge aimed at legalizing all cannabis use, in response to the latest restrictions announced by Health Canada.
The federal government announced last week that it would allow designated producers to grow marijuana for as many as two medical users, instead of a maximum of one, permitted under the old regulations.
The previous rules were ruled unconstitutional by a Federal Court of Canada judge in January, 2008, because they did not provide for a sufficient legal supply of cannabis for medical users without having to use the black market.
Health Canada appealed unsuccessfully to the Federal Court of Appeal and Supreme Court, which refused in April to hear the case.
It was the eighth time in the past decade that Health Canada has lost in court trying to uphold its medical marijuana policies and regulations, each time over restrictions on supply.
The federal government's decision to allow producers to grow for no more than two users is a "mockery" of the courts, said lawyer Ron Marzel, who was part of the successful Federal Court challenge to the previous regulations.
The most recent restrictions for medical producers that were struck down were virtually identical to ones that were found to be previously unconstitutional by the Ontario Court of Appeal. The rules "create an alliance between the government and the black market," to supply "the necessary product" wrote the appeal court in October, 2003.
One option for medical users is to go back to the Federal Court to ask it to find that the two-to-one ratio is also invalid.
However, the response from Health Canada would likely be to start another round of appeals in court, observed Mr. Marzel.
"It is time for the vicious cycle to end. It means we have to take it to the next level, to show the government it cannot thumb its nose at our courts," said Mr. Marzel.
The lawyer explained that he is organizing a court challenge this summer on behalf of a number of people in Ontario facing marijuana trafficking charges, and has asked that all charges be dismissed.
If he is successful, it would effectively mean that there is no prohibition on possessing or producing marijuana, for medical or recreational use.
"This is the only way. The courts have repeatedly given the government time to come up with a workable solution. They didn't do it. Health Canada has brought this upon itself," suggested Mr. Marzel.
For several months in Ontario in 2003 there was no valid prohibition against simple possession of marijuana, as a result of a Superior Court decision related to the flaws in the medical marijuana regulations.
Similar arguments will be made by Mr. Marzel in asking a court to strike down all prohibitions, unless Health Canada enacts regulations that allow for a legitimate supply for medical users.
LATEST APRIL NEWS!
Top court ends government pot monopoly
By Janice Tibbetts, Canwest News Service April 23, 2009
OTTAWA — Canadians who are legally permitted to smoke pot to treat illness won a victory in the Supreme Court of Canada on Thursday when it refused to hear an appeal of a ruling that put an end to the federal government monopoly.
A three-judge panel, without giving reasons, rejected the Justice Department's application to challenge a Federal Court of Appeal decision that gave licensed producers the right to grow marijuana for more than one patient.
The Supreme Court's decision to stay out of the matter effectively upholds the 2008 ruling, which dismissed the government's argument that the industry would be thrust into deregulation if the court loosened federal restrictions.
The decision was a victory for a group of patients who challenged the federal regulations, arguing that the government-issued pot, supplied by Prairie Plant Systems in Manitoba, is too weak and that they should have the option to find their own supply.
The appeal court decision struck down government regulations that authorized users who cannot grow their own marijuana to designate a grower, or obtain government-issued weed.
The patients sought the right to buy marijuana from Carasel Harvest Supply Corp., which, under the current regime, was not allowed to supply more than one patient with medical marijuana.
There are about 2,000 people legally allowed to use marijuana for medical purposes, but the lower court found only 20 per cent buy it from the government supplier.
Justice Department lawyer Sean Gaudet argued in the appeal court that statistics weren't enough to conclude the government-supplied marijuana was inadequate, or forced people to seek drugs on the black market.
Moreover, sanctioning growers to supply more than one patient would allow the industry to develop "without safeguards" and exacerbate the risk that marijuana will be diverted to improper use, he said.
Rules may be tightened on smoking medical marijuana
OTTAWA — Canadians who have permission from the federal government to smoke marijuana for medicinal purposes are now facing impending restrictions about where they can light up.
Health Minister Leona Aglukkaq said Wednesday in the House of Commons that the government is concerned about the issue of smoking medical marijuana in public.
"That's why I have instructed my officials to examine this issue and develop options," said the health minister.
The federal government has been under pressure to clarify the rules around medical marijuana use in public. One recent request for clarification came from a bar owner in Burlington, Ont., who faced allegations of discrimination when he asked a medical marijuana user not to smoke outside his business.
The existing Marijuana Medical Access Regulations, which came into force in 2001, do not stipulate where patients can use their marijuana. While users must abide by any federal or provincial legislation and local bylaws that restrict smoking cigarettes in public places, there are no other specific prohibitions on medical pot use in public.
The government says the issue has been on its radar for some time and that it is responding to public concern in developing the new rules. It has not set a deadline for the new regulations to be in place but the department doesn't anticipate the process being too lengthy.
Health Canada officials will develop proposed regulations and present them to the health minister, who will make the final decision on the regulations.
A member of the British Columbia Compassion Club Society, a health centre that provides access to medicinal cannabis, says the organization understands the need for clear rules but hopes they are no more strict than the ones imposed on cigarette smokers.
Jayce Sale said however, that they are concerned about the impact of heavier regulations.
"It gets into a slippery slope because medical marijuana users have that right to use it and so by creating more barriers around where they can do it is a concern because it's limiting options for them," she said.
Steve Kubby, now a California resident who was a licensed medical marijuana user when he lived in Sechelt, B.C., said he is also concerned about the Canadian government's decision to take a tougher stand on medical marijuana use.
"We don't have those kinds of requirements for other people when they use their medicines," said the 62-year-old who uses cannabis daily to ease the effects of his rare form of cancer.
"It is just so difficult to understand how someone that is struggling with cancer as I am . . . my society would want to send police with guns to terrorize me and my family, tell me where I can and cannot smoke, to arrest me if I happen to be using cannabis in the wrong place or at the wrong time."
In 2004, Kubby was hiking in a park and confronted by an off-duty RCMP officer who took his joint, threw it on the ground, and told him he had no right to smoke it there even when Kubby explained he was a registered patient under the government's medical marijuana program.
He sought clarification from Health Canada who told Kubby in a letter soon after the incident that, "While Health Canada advises authorized persons not to consume marijuana in public, there are no legislated restrictions on such action." The RCMP later apologized to him.
He said people that are using marijuana for medical reasons already have enough to worry about without having to abide by rules about where to use it.
"Patients have such a struggle just to get through each day that all these layers of regulations and laws hurt people, they don't protect people, they hurt people," he said.
About 2,800 people are authorized to possess marijuana under the federal government program.
To write about your outrage at this possible ruling write to the Health Minister here.
Aglukkaq.L@parl.gc.ca
LATEST MARCH NEWS!
End Prohibition was in attendance at both the Manitoba and Ontario NDP conventions, held simultaneously on March 6-8.
In Ontario, we saw many of our friends and allies elected to the
Provincial Council, and we were able to distribute lots of flyers and
newsletters to delegates at the convention. We congratulate Andrea
Horwath on becoming the new leader of the Ontario NDP!
At the Manitoba convention, one of our members was able to get a
resolution passed into party policy, calling for the province to start
their own medical marijuana program. He was also able to speak with many
elected NDPers and schedule a meeting with the NDP Health Minister to
discuss the problems in the federal medical marijuana program.
This is the eighth drug policy resolution which End Prohibition has
helped to pass into NDP policy in various provinces since we were
founded in 2005.
You can see a list of all provincial and federal NDP drug policy
resolutions here: http://www.endprohibition.ca/resolution.php
<http://www.endprohibition.ca/resolution.php>
Request Canada Government Cover Vaporizer Costs for Medical Marijuana Patients.
----------------
1) get a letter from your doctor saying "this person needs a vaporizer to avoid the dangers of smoking"
2) get a written estimate from the store you plant to buy it from
3) Photocopy your license card, showing your name address and pot license number, but cover over storage amounts and plants (where necessary)
3) write a letter saying this is my doctors letter, my estimate, my license, please send me the volcano immediately
5) send it to ODSP who will send it to essential services. they are the ones who pay for the device, just like bath seats, oxygen tanks, diabetes stuff, all that stuff that they usually cover.
Government to develop public consumer pot smoking regulations
Rules may be tightened on smoking medical marijuana
By Meagan Fitzpatrick, Canwest News Service
March 25, 2009
OTTAWA — Canadians who have permission from the federal government to smoke marijuana for medicinal purposes are now facing impending restrictions about where they can light up.
Health Minister Leona Aglukkaq said Wednesday in the House of Commons that the government is concerned about the issue of smoking medical marijuana in public.
"That's why I have instructed my officials to examine this issue and develop options," said the health minister.
The federal government has been under pressure to clarify the rules around medical marijuana use in public. One recent request for clarification came from a bar owner in Burlington, Ont., who faced allegations of discrimination when he asked a medical marijuana user not to smoke outside his business.
The existing Marijuana Medical Access Regulations, which came into force in 2001, do not stipulate where patients can use their marijuana.
While users must abide by any federal or provincial legislation and local bylaws that restrict smoking cigarettes in public places, there are no other specific prohibitions on medical pot use in public.
The government says the issue has been on its radar for some time and that it is responding to public concern in developing the new rules. It has not set a deadline for the new regulations to be in place but the department doesn't anticipate the process being too lengthy.
Health Canada officials will develop proposed regulations and present them to the health minister, who will make the final decision on the regulations.
A member of the British Columbia Compassion Club Society, a health centre that provides access to medicinal cannabis, says the organization understands the need for clear rules but hopes they are no more strict than the ones imposed on cigarette smokers.
Jayce Sale said however, that they are concerned about the impact of heavier regulations.
"It gets into a slippery slope because medical marijuana users have that right to use it and so by creating more barriers around where they can do it is a concern because it's limiting options for them," she said.
Steve Kubby, now a California resident who was a licensed medical marijuana user when he lived in Sechelt, B.C., said he is also concerned about the Canadian government's decision to take a tougher stand on medical marijuana use.
"We don't have those kinds of requirements for other people when they use their medicines," said the 62-year-old who uses cannabis daily to ease the effects of his rare form of cancer.
"It is just so difficult to understand how someone that is struggling with cancer as I am... my society would want to send police with guns to terrorize me and my family, tell me where I can and cannot smoke, to arrest me if I happen to be using cannabis in the wrong place or at the wrong time."
In 2004, Kubby was hiking in a park and confronted by an off-duty RCMP officer who took his joint, threw it on the ground, and told him he had no right to smoke it there even when Kubby explained he was a registered patient under the government's medical marijuana program.
He sought clarification from Health Canada who told Kubby in a letter soon after the incident that, "While Health Canada advises authorized persons not to consume marijuana in public, there are no legislated restrictions on such action." The RCMP later apologized to him.
He said people that are using marijuana for medical reasons already have enough to worry about without having to abide by rules about where to use it.
"Patients have such a struggle just to get through each day that all these layers of regulations and laws hurt people, they don't protect people, they hurt people," he said.
About 2,800 people are authorized to possess marijuana under the federal government program
Obama Administration to Stop Raids on Medical Marijuana Dispensers
WASHINGTON — Attorney General
Eric H. Holder Jr. on Wednesday outlined a shift in the enforcement of federal drug laws, saying the administration would effectively end the Bush administration’s frequent raids on distributors of medical marijuana.
Speaking with reporters, Mr. Holder provided few specifics but said the Justice Department’s enforcement policy would now be restricted to traffickers who falsely masqueraded as medical dispensaries and “use medical marijuana laws as a shield.”
In the Bush administration, federal agents raided medical marijuana distributors that violated federal statutes even if the dispensaries appeared to be complying with state laws. The raids produced a flood of complaints, particularly in California, which in 1996 became the first state to legalize marijuana sales to people with doctors’ prescriptions.
Graham Boyd, the director of the
American Civil Liberties Union drug law project, said Mr. Holder’s remarks created a reasonable balance between conflicting state and federal laws and “seem to finally end the policy war over medical marijuana.” He said officials in California and the 12 other states that have authorized the use of medical marijuana had hesitated to adopt regulations to carry out their laws because of uncertainty created by the Bush administration.
Mr. Holder said the new approach was consistent with statements made by
President Obama in the campaign and was based on an assessment of how to allocate scarce enforcement resources. He said dispensaries operating in accord with California law would not be a priority for the administration.
Mr. Holder’s comments appeared to be an effort to clarify the policy after some news reports last month interpreted his answer to a reporter’s question to be a flat assertion that all raids on marijuana growers would cease. Department officials said Mr. Holder had not intended to assert any policy change last month but was decidedly doing so on Wednesday.
Ethan Nadelmann, the founder of the Drug Policy Alliance, said Mr. Holder was telling the
Drug Enforcement Administration that it should leave legitimate growers of medical marijuana untouched. “The message from the Bush Justice Department was ‘watch out — we have the authority to go after everybody,’ ” he said.
On other matters, in his first wide-ranging conversation with reporters as attorney general, Mr. Holder said the Justice Department was still reviewing the case files of detainees held at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, to determine whether they could be released or would be tried in a civilian criminal court or some other legal forum. He said it was possible that some detainees like the
Uighurs held in Cuba could be released into the United States.
He also said the department was “monitoring” developments related to accusations of abuse of detainees by the
Central Intelligence Agency, but stopped short of endorsing the appointment of a special prosecutor. “We will let the law and facts take us to wherever we need to go,” he said.
Mr. Holder said the department should be open to preserving a healthy newspaper industry. He said he would consider adjusting enforcement of antitrust statutes if that would help news organizations develop collective distribution systems.
The Financial Crisis Just Might Lead to Legal Pot US news
NEW YORK -- In 1977, President Jimmy Carter asked Congress to decriminalize marijuana possession (it never did). The next year, the Ladies Home Journal described a summer jazz festival on the White House's South Lawn where "a haze of marijuana smoke hung heavy under the low-bending branches of a magnolia tree."
The late 1970's may have been the high-water mark for permissiveness regarding marijuana. But advocates of decriminalized pot believe a confluence of factors, especially the country's economic malaise, are leading to another countrywide reappraisal of the drug.
"There is momentum of the sort I haven't seen since I've been involved in this," says Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the New York-based Drug Policy Alliance, which supports easing marijuana laws.
He says incidents like then-candidate Barack Obama's early admission of pot use or the flap over Olympic swimmer Michael Phelps's bong-smoking may lead to initial public hand-wringing, but in the end they tend to legitimize pot use. So does the growing recognition of medical marijuana.
But, he adds, "the economic crisis is the single most important factor" in this new shift in perceptions.
article continued url below.......
http://www.alternet.org/drugreporter/131522/the_financial_crisis_just_might_lead_to_legal_pot_/?page=entire
Subject: THE RICK SIMPSON CRUSH CANCER TOUR 2009
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2009 20:09:36 -0200
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvNsqTaY7ZA
I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE.....
THE TOUR ,WHICH WOULD BRING FORWARD NOT ONLY A CURE FOR CANCERS,BUT WOULD END THE LAWS ON HEMP.....
IS IT AGAIST THE LAW TO CURE CANCERS?
WE AT PHOENIXTEARS WILL BE ATTACKING IT TILL WE PREVAIL...
WHEN I FIRST MET RICK,4YS AGO...I WAS NIEVE...I THOUGHT EVERYONE WANTED A CURE FOR CANCERS...AND I THOUGHT RICK JUST DINT GO TO THE RIGHT PLACES...I ASKED HIM IF HE HAD CONTACTED TERRY FOX FOUNDATION...HE SAID NO..
SO I ASSUMED IT WAS JUST A MATTER OF A FEW EMAILS AND THEN IT WOULD HAPPEN.....4YRS LATER I HAVE YET TO SEE ONE REPLY FROM ANY CANCER INDUSTRY FOUNDATION OR POLITITION ,GOVERNMENT ETC.....REPLY...BUT I HAVE A PAPER TRAIL-ONE DAY-THE DEAD WILL SPEAK
CANCER IS A FRAUD
DESIGNED TO TAKE YOUR ASSETS
PROFIT FROM A VERY CURABLE CONDITION.....
IF WE HAD SUCH A THING AS JUSTICE.....
THESE COMPANIES AND CORPERATIONS AND GOVERNMENTS ETC WOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE-CHARGED WITH COMPLICITY IN GENOCIDE
AND GENOCIDE....AND THEIR ASSETS FORFEITED ,AS THEY ARE PROCEEDS OF CRIME,AND BROUGHT TO JUSTICE
WHEN ENOUGH SHEEP WAKE UP-MAYBE
CANCER IS HUGE.....THAT PUT STUFF IN EVERYTHING TO CAUSE IT
FOOD RIGHT UP ....KNOWNLY....IMMUNITY THAT GOD WOULD NOT HAVE....6 MILLION HUMANBEINGS DIE FROM TREATMENT AND OR CANCERS A YEAR.....POPULATION CONTROL?MASS MURDER?
THE GREATEST GENOCIDE IN MAN KINDS HISTORY IS HAPPENING RIGHT IN FRONT OF OUR EYES...
THE GENOCIDE OF THE HEMP CULTURE
THE HUMAN BEINGS THAT USE HEMP....PINCH ME
I OFTEN WONDERED HOW THE HOLOCAUST COULD HAPPEN>>>
I SEE HOW......
WITH ALL THESE EXPERTS AND THE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS AT THEIR DEPOSAL.....NAME ONE THING THEY FOUND A CURE FOR???
KILLING US
$2700RAISED... HOW MANY PEOPLE WANT A CURE FOR CANCERS
TERRY FOX FOUNDATION RAISED 400 MILLION-
DR MANUAL GUZMAN COULDNT GET FUNDING....FOR THC AND CANCER
KEEP SENDING YOUR MONEY AND SUPPORTING A FRAUD
CANCER SOCIETY ARE THE SAME-FRAUD
NOW FOR THE PEOPLE THAT USE HEMP
300 MILLION GLOBALLY? OR A BILLION
YOU WANT AN END TO BEING PERSITCUTED??
WELL HEMP CAN SAVE THE WORLD
WWW.JACK HERER.COM
IT CAN PROVIDE EVERY THING WE NEED-FACT
WWW.PHOENIXTEARS.CA
YOU CAN MAKE YOUR OWN CURE-INSTUCTIONS INCULDED-FREE OF CHARGE....
IF WE DONT STAND UP AS ONE-WE WILL PERISH ONE AT A TIME
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGXlpp9a0sM
and if you cant stand help us bring forward a cure
for the childrens sake
WE NEED TO RAISE AT LEAST 250,000
IN ORDER TO DO THIS TOUR....
may 2nd is not far off
will you be apart of a miracal
please give-the end of this genocide depends on it
www.phoenixtears.ca
thank you
RICK SIMPSON
344 LITTLE FORKS RD
SPRING HILL G.D.
NOVA SCOTIA,CANADA
BOM 1WO
902 545 2285
WITHIN THE NEXT FEW DAYS IF THE FUNDS ARE NOT RAISED
we will not be able to do this tour
please give
thank you
Subject: Ont. wants federal clarity on medical pot
By Jorge Barrera, Canwest News Service March 12, 2009
Ottawa needs to clarify the rules surrounding the possession and consumption of medical marijuana, says Ontario's minister of government services in a letter requesting a meeting with the federal health minister to discuss the issue.
Confusion surrounding the rules regarding medical marijuana and conflicts with Ontario's liquor laws have resulted in several complaints before the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario from medical marijuana users who allege discrimination after they were forbidden from smoking pot along with cigarette smokers outside drinking establishments.
"I am writing to ask for your assistance in clarifying Health Canada's policy on the possession and consumption of medical marijuana and the appropriate circumstances where the product can be used," wrote Government Services Minister Ted McMeekin, in his March 10 letter to federal Health Minister Leona Aglukkaq.
"It is essential that Health Canada act to formally clarify its intention and direction regarding the consumption of medical marijuana."
McMeekin suggested the federal government formally clarify medical marijuana rules in its recently introduced bill to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act which aims to toughen punishment for drug crimes.
"Is the federal government prepared to clarify its intent related to the above issue in the form of a legislative or regulatory change?" wrote McMeekin.
The Ontario minister also asked for information from Health Canada on the affects of second-hand marijuana smoke.
A spokesperson for Aglukkaq said the federal government was "considering next steps" on regulating medical marijuana without providing any details. Josee Bellemare, however, admitted the existing rules do not specify where medical marijuana users can light up.
"The authorized person is advised in an information package not to consume controlled substances in a public place and not to expose others to any effects related to the inhalation of secondary smoke," said Bellemare.
Ted Kindos, the owner of Ted's Tap and Grill in Burlington, Ont., is facing a human rights complaint for asking a medical marijuana smoker not to light up outside his business. Kindos is frustrated by the tension between liquor laws and rights given medical marijuana users. He has turned to the Federal Court to require Health Canada to expressly condition any medical marijuana permits upon compliance with provincial liquor licensing laws.
"I don't have any qualms with them smoking it as long as there is no affect on a small business to jeopardize a license that has been put in place," he said.
Amateur Ottawa comedian Russell Barth, who has filed a human rights complaint against the Ontario government, said he was pleased with the province's move, but doubted the federal government would act to clarify the rules.
"There is no reason I should not be allowed to alleviate my symptoms in the same place people are using tobacco for habit, addiction and pleasure," said Barth.
© Copyright (c) Canwest News Service
California Goes GREEN....
http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20090313/us_time/08599188495600
Currently, marijuana offences comprise more than three-quarters of all drug crimes. This drains police resources that are better spent elsewhere. Under a regulated market, police would have resources freed up to investigate violent crimes and property offences. This benefits us all. Bill C-15 does nothing to address this problem. Indeed, it makes it worse.
http://www.whyprohibition.ca/content/vote-no-bill-c-15-0
LATEST JANUARY NEWS!
The most comprehensive constitutional challenge to Health Canada's medical marijuana policy and practice will conclude next week in the B.C. Supreme Court. A decision will be heard in BC Supreme Court (800 Hornby St.) on the 2nd of February at 9am, marking the final chapter of this nearly five-year charter challenge.
This court case is the most extensive legal challenge ever mounted against Canada's much-maligned federal medical cannabis program. It stems from a May 2004 RCMP raid of a medical cannabis research and production facility near Sooke, BC overseen by the The Vancouver Island Compassion Society (VICS), a non-profit medical cannabis organization located in Victoria, BC.
More details here!
http://www.facebook.com/ext/share.php?sid=52867706433&h=iIMV8&u=rY2SK
"EndProhibition campaign Updates" Drugsense
http://drugsense.org/temp/TKhlkx3MZhJV.html
http://drugsense.org/temp/8t4nsnfSUsIg.html
"First Medicinal Raid under Obahma" Americans for Safe Access
http://www.safeaccessnow.org/article.php?id=5654
"America begins to ease up on marijuana smokers" By Ian Mulgrew, Vancouver Sun
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/America+begins+ease+marijuana+smokers/1153728/story.html
LATEST OCTOBER NEWS!
LATEST JULY NEWS!
The following interview appears in the May/June edition of the The
Commonwealth - Saskatchewan's NDP newsletter.
Dana Larsen is the founder of a group called "End Prohibition, NDP
Against the Drug War." He is currently the federal NDP candidate for the
riding of "West Vancouver - Sunshine Coast - Sea-to-Sky Country." The
Commonwealth sat down with Dana at the Saskatchewan NDP Convention to
discuss his views on the war on drugs, politics and the NDP.
CW: Tell me about your organization.
Larsen: End Prohibition is a group of NDP members working together to
help end Canada's failed and misguided "war on drugs." I formed End
Prohibition in 2005 along with some other New Democrats, and now we have
over 600 members across Canada, as well as more than 1500 members in our
facebook group.
We are working to build awareness about the harms of our current
prohibitionist drug policies, and to create solidarity within the NDP
for a new approach to this issue.
CW: What kinds of drug policies do you support?
Larsen: We support the drug policy of the federal NDP, which is to
change our focus on the use of psychoactive substances, and treat it as
primarily a health issue instead of a criminal one.
We should definitely be supporting harm reduction, which includes
creating needle exchange and supervised injection sites in any
communities which need one.
But we need to go further, and create a system based upon accurate
education, reduction of harm, regulated access and responsible use. I
believe that we should regulate access to psychoactive substances in
terms of potency and potential for harm, instead of the current system
which simply prohibits everything except for alcohol and tobacco, and
varies only in the severity of the sentence.
Illegal drugs vary widely in their effects, the reasons they are used
and their potential for harm. There are big differences between
psychedelics, stimulants, depressants and so on, but our laws treat them
all essentially the same.
Growing your own marijuana should be legal, and adults should be able to
buy marijuana in a taxed and regulated way. Safe versions of many other
currently banned drugs should also be legally available to adults, while
more addictive and dangerous substances should be available for
therapeutic use under a doctor's supervision.
CW: Why do you think this issue is important?
Larsen: From the opium fields of Afghanistan to the grow-ops in our
cities, from urban gun crime to our overflowing prisons, the war on
drugs touches us all.
Our drug policies are the underlying reason for many other problems in
our society. Just like alcohol prohibition led to city shootings, police
corruption and overcrowded prisons, so too does our drug war cause far
more social problems than it solves.
I believe that these issues are intrinsic to the New Democratic Party.
If we go back to the 1933 Regina Manifesto, it states that we support
"the creation of a legal system which must not be based, as is the
present one, upon vengeance and fear, but upon an understanding of human
behaviour."
CW: What challenges have you faced?
Larsen: There is broad support for drug policy reform within the NDP.
Every single time we have had a resolution go to the floor of a
convention it has passed. Our group has helped pass drug policy
resolutions in BC, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario as well as
federally. We have also received support for our work from many elected
New Democrats at all levels of government.
However, too often we see the provincial NDP parties supporting bills
which seek more imprisonment and an expanded drug war, even though these
prohibitionist policies go against the spirit of what the NDP stands
for, and even their own party policy as passed at a convention.
CW: How can people join?
Larsen: Anyone can join up for free at our website,
www.endprohibition.ca, and we have an email chat list to keep in touch.
All our members get a button and a free subscription to our sporadic
newsletter. Also, I try to come to every provincial NDP convention to
meet with our local members and promote drug policy resolutions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The prospect of cops forcibly jabbing a needle into your arm and taking a
blood sample on the side of a highway in suspected DWI cases is perhaps the
most egregious portend of police state America in history, but one Texas
lawyer has taken a stand to denounce the program as completely illegal.
Law enforcement programs in Texas, Ohio and other areas have trained cops to
pull suspected drunk drivers over and forcibly extract blood, even against
their will, a form of legalized police brutality that outstrips anything in
Soviet Russia or Communist China.
A cadre of jackbooted vampires are set to be out in force this holiday
weekend in search of your blood. Citing the fact that the 4th amendment
protects against "unreasonable searches and seizures" matters not to these
thugs, who will hold you down if need be while sinking a needle into your
arm in another case of "guilty until proven innocent".
Dallas lawyer Avery McDaniel told CBS 11 News, "If an officer believes that
you're intoxicated and you refuse, they will get a search warrant and they
will physically hold you down and take your blood."
"What if someone is diabetic, or if the person's on blood thinners,"
McDaniel asks. "They're not prepared or trained if something goes wrong."
An Arizona lawfirm that specializes in DWI cases explains on their website
why the 20 hours training that officers receive to carry out such a
procedure is not sufficient: "Up until a few years ago, when officers opted
for a blood test, they would transport the DUI suspect to a hospital or
other similar type medical facility where trained medical personnel would
draw blood in a clinical setting. … The vast majority of the police officers
calling themselves phlebotomists are not graduates of a full phlebotomy
program and certainly cannot be considered medical personnel. … While these
police 'phlebotomists' are performing an invasive medical procedure, their
first concern is not for the safety of the blood draw subject, but gathering
evidence."
McDaniel's point about cops performing an invasive medical procedure on the
side of a highway being a completely unsafe environment is correct, but the
main outrage here is the fact that this program is flagrantly
unconstitutional and downright un-American.
Attacking the program on the foundation that the cops aren't trained
properly to carry out the procedure may be an alternative avenue through
which to shoot it down, but officials could easily beef the training program
and claim the contention has been resolved.
The central core of opposition to this nightmare should be that the program
is completely anathema to any notion of a free society, due process and the
right to be treated as innocent until proven guilty.
Click here for the video:
June 2008
Compilation of Case Studies and Case Reports in Cannabis Research, 1970 – present (International Association For Cannabis As Medecine)
May 2008
Pot Eases Neuropathic Pain (Vancouver Sun)
April 2008
Vaporization as a Smokeless Cannabis Delivery System: a Pilot Study (Clinical Pharmacological Therapeutics)
Cannabis, Mental Health and Context: The Case For Regulation by Paul Armentano
Senior Policy Analyst
NORML | NORML Foundation
Updated May 2, 2007 Recent warning published in the United Kingdom and in America this week suggesting that cannabis' primary psychoactive compound THC may trigger mental illness, including psychosis and schizophrenia, warrant a serious reply.
 According to news from the Associated Press and others, investigators at London's Kings College reported that the administration of doses of synthetic THC temporarily interfered with activity in the inferior frontal cortex, a region of the brain associated with paranoia, while administration of the non-psychoactive compound cannabidiol (CBD) stimulated relaxation. The reports go on to suggest that chronic use of cannabis may precipitate various types of mental illness and cite a separate unpublished study indicating that cannabis use may exacerbate symptoms of schizophrenia. Such clinical findings and suggestions are not new. Scientists have known for decades that THC is psychoactive and that peak blood levels of its primary active metabolite 11-OH-THC are occasionally associated with temporary feelings of dysphoria, paranoia, and even panic attacks. (These events, when documented, typically occur in cannabis naïve users.)
Conversely, scientists have also been long aware of CBD's anxiolytic and anti-psychotic effects. In fact, many experts speculate that it is the lack of CBD in Marinol (the synthetic THC oral prescription pill) that is responsible for the drug's enhanced psychoactivity. By contrast, CBD occurs naturally in whole-plant cannabis, and is believed to modify and/or diminish some of the psychoactivity associated with THC when cannabis is inhaled.
Fears that chronic cannabis use may be positively associated with various mental illnesses, particularly schizophrenia, are also long-standing. However, a recent meta-analysis investigating the use of cannabis use and its impact on mental health reported that those who use cannabis in moderation, even long-term "will not suffer any lasting physical or mental harm. ... Overall, by comparison with other drugs used mainly for 'recreational' purposes, cannabis could be rated to be a relatively safe drug." 1
Cannabis In Context
The phrase "relatively safe" is appropriate in any discussion regarding cannabis and mental health. No substance is harmless and in many cases, the relative dangers of a drug may be increased or decreased depending on set and setting. Cannabis is no different.
There is limited data suggesting an association, albiet a minor one, 2-3 between chronic cannabis (primarily among adolescents and/or those predisposed to mental illness) and increased symptoms of depression, psychotic symptoms, and/or schizophrenia. 4-6 However, interpretation of this data is troublesome and, to date, this observation association is not well understood. 7-9 Identified as well as unidentified confounding factors (such as poverty, family history, polydrug use, etc.) make it difficult, if not impossible, for researchers to adequately determine whether any cause-and-effect relationship exists between cannabis use and mental illness. Also, many experts point out that this association may be due to patients' self-medicating with cannabis, 10 as survey data and anecdotal reports of individuals finding therapeutic relief from both clinical depression and schizotypal behavior are common within medical lore, and clinical testing on the use of cannabinoids to treat certain symptoms of mental illness has been recommended. 11
Most recently, a large-scale study by investigators at London's Institute of Psychiatry reported that those patients diagnosed with schizophrenia who had previously used cannabis did not demonstrate exacerbated symptoms of the illness compared to age-adjusted controls who had not used cannabis. "This [finding] argues against a distinct schizophrenia-like psychosis caused by cannabis," they concluded. 12
Investigators in the study did not address whether cannabis consumers had greater odds of contracting schizophrenia when compared to otherwise matched controls who did not have a history of cannabis use. However, a 2006 review by Britain's Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) previously concluded, "For individuals, the current evidence suggests, at worst, that using cannabis increases lifetime risk of developing schizophrenia by one percent." 13
Nevertheless, until this association is better understood, there may be some merit to various government warnings that adolescents (particularly pre and early teens) and/or adults with pre-existing symptoms of mental illness refrain from using cannabis (and/or other psychoactive substances), particularly in large quantities. This statement, however, is hardly an indictment of cannabis' relative safety when used in moderation by adults or an endorsement of the federal government's efforts to criminally prohibit its use for all Americans. If anything, just the opposite is true.
Health Risks Call For Regulation, Not Prohibition
Health risks connected with drug use -- when scientifically documented -- should not be seen as legitimate reasons for criminal prohibition, but instead, as reasons for legal regulation. Specific to cannabis, if studies demonstrate that those "who first used marijuana before age 12 [are] twice as likely as adults who first used marijuana at age 18 or older to be classified as having serious mental illness,"14 then this is an argument in favor of legally regulating cannabis in a manner similar to alcohol, so that better safeguards may be enacted restricting adolescents from legal access to it. 15 These concerns, however, do not support criminally prohibiting the responsible use of the cannabis by adults any more than fears regarding the abuse of alcohol by a minority of teenagers support a blanket prohibition on the use of beer by adults.
In addition, if as some suggest, "as many as one in four people may have a genetic profile that makes marijuana five times more likely to trigger psychotic disorders," 16 this claim is yet another argument in favor of regulation. If there does exist a minority population of citizens who may be genetically prone to potential harms from cannabis (such as, possibly, those predisposed to schizophrenia), then a regulated system would best identify and educate this sub-population to pot's potential risks so that they may refrain from its use, if they so choose.
To draw a real world comparison, millions of Americans safely use ibuprofen as an effective pain reliever. However, among a minority of the population who suffer from liver and kidney problems, ibuprofen presents a legitimate and substantial health risk. However, this fact no more calls for the criminalization of ibuprofen among adults than do these latest allegations, even if true, call for the current prohibition of cannabis.
Finally, there lies the fact that cannabis prohibition has forever undermined the federal government's ability to educate its citizens, particularly young people, to the potential risks of marijuana when and where they present themselves. Ending prohibition and enacting a legal, regulated cannabis market would likely restore this lost credibility, as evidenced by the fact that science-based, federal education campaigns regarding the health risks of tobacco and drunk driving have greatly reduced smoking and driving under the influence among teenagers. Conversely, similar rhetorically-based campaigns regarding teen pot use have fostered increased levels of illicit drug use among their target audience. 17-18
As concluded by the Netherlands Drug Policy Foundation, cannabis' "health risks are remarkably limited, but cannabis is not completely harmless." As a result, the Foundation determined: "There ought to be a special legal regulatory system for cannabis because its use definitely does entail health risks. If cannabis was completely harmless, the same rules could be applied as to tea. Cannabis should not be made freely available, but the rules on cannabis can be very general and lenient." Placed in this context, the administration's latest anti-pot campaign does little to advance the government's position in favor of tightening prohibition, and provides ample ammunition to wage for its repeal.
Endnotes> |
From: Brian (05/02/07 03:44:25)
Let's get active folks!
---------------------------------------
From: kalix (01/10/07 04:04:54)
ive been smoking marihuana for the past 35 years. i think norml already existed when i started, its a great idea, but mj is still illegal. guess what guys, its not working. if all us potheads start smoking publicly, in large groups (1000+), all over the country at the same time every day, i bet it will be legal fast. norml stop lobbying! organize us! we are ready and willing to reclaim our rights. or maybe, while we still have prohibition we will still need norml?
---------------------------------------
From: shane (01/11/07 09:30:25)
stop wasting tax money on marijuana prohibition, we waste $7Billion each year. Let's spend it on something useful?
---------------------------------------
From: Hannah (01/11/07 09:42:07)
Is this the life you want for yourselves and your children - I know it's fun to try but isn't it part of the thrill that you are taking an illegal substance?By legalising this drug you are potentially creating these kind of situations for thousands throughout the world. Could you live with that?? PS To those of you who use weed to self-medicate and object, tell me your problem and I will outline a number of treatments that could and would be better......
---------------------------------------
From: not an H (01/12/07 08:14:40)
I found a funny from a spokeman who stated the populace can get Marinol instead of smoking marijuana. So the idea is to change dealers? Instead of paying the chap down the street $200 for what you want you go to the pharmacy and pay them $300? Yep, logic wins and champions the govt...BOYCOTT DUPONT! They helped start it! Make them SET IT RIGHT!
---------------------------------------
From: RunnYnozE (01/14/07 07:50:55)
Everything the government has said about cannabis since 1937 has been proven to be untrue. Why is this? Follow the money. As a kid, I remember the "Stamp it out" posters which, at the bottom of the poster, in tiny print, you could barely see these words" Sponsored by The American Brewers Association "
---------------------------------------
From: J.W. Rice (01/26/07 03:55:05)
I think the drug test frenzy occurring with employers is BS. The test can't confirm that a worker was stoned on the job. Alcohol is eliminated within 24 hours, but marijuana is detectable in urine for weeks. A worker could be an alcoholic and pass any drug test given, but someone who enjoys a joint at home on a Friday could be fired a week later.
Please NORML, help employers and the government see the light and correct this messed up mentality. LEGALIZE 420!
Stay high, everyone...
---------------------------------------
From: anonymous (01/27/07 02:09:41)
The criminalization of mj was a direct result of propaganda from timber and interest groups. (hemp has many uses, from fuel to paper. In fact the constitution is printed on hemp paper.) We are tired of being looked down upon by the society for using an 'illegal' drug in a responsible, spiritual and medical way when legal drugs such as alcohol and tobacco cause millions of deaths. This is a double standard that has to stop.
---------------------------------------
From: Randwolfe (01/28/07 03:50:52)
A lot of people do not get that the government is in the business of making criminals. Each one created helps produce profits for what is now the private-sector criminal justice system. Who better to criminalize than millions of mellow cannabis users.
States are taking the initiative. Each state that passes a MMJ initiative, helps to break down the wall put up by the unjustice system.
Cannabis "fits" our brains. Even animals seek it out in nature. Chimps love it. |
| Health Canada 1500% Cannabis Mark-Up Increases Suffering of Critically Ill Canadians April 16, 2007: Canadians for Safe Access (CSA) was shocked to learn of the 1500% Health Canada mark-up of medical cannabis distributed to critically and chronically Canadians. "This is a direct result of the unbeneficial monopoly that Health Canada has granted itself in regards to medical cannabis access and supply, and this policy is adding significantly to the suffering and financial strain of some of our sickest citizens" said CSA spokesperson Philippe Lucas, himself a federally-registered medical cannabis user. CSA are calling on the government to immediately forgive the $143,000 of debt owed to Health Canada by cancer patients, people living with HIV/AIDS, hep-C sufferers and others who are unable to pay for this for this product, and for Health Canada to begin discussions with provincial health authorities about cost-coverage for medical cannabis, whether it comes from Health Canada or community-based compassion societies, which currently provide medicine to over 10,000 people in Canada. "We do all we can to provide cannabis as inexpensively as possible. It is astonishing that even though Health Canada is in the position to provide this medicine at lower costs, it choses to exploit the participants in this program. Ultimately costs have to be covered for medical users" said Rielle Capler, spokesperson for the British Columbia Compassion Club Society, Canada's oldest and largest non-profit medical cannabis dispensary. Additionally, CSA joins MP Libby Davies, Senator Pierre-Claude Nolin and the Canadian AIDS Society in calling for a financial/performance audit of this federal program, and for Health Canada to work with compassion clubs to develop a regulatory scheme for community-based access to medical cannabis. Canadians for Safe Access discovered this inexcusable mark-up through an Access to Information Act request of the production contract between Health Canada and Prairie Plant Systems, the sole licensed medical cannabis producer in Canada since 2001. Sadly, it is but one of the many serious problems with a federal program that is only protecting 1700 of the estimated 1 million critically and chronically ill Canadians currently using medical cannabis. This and other issues will be part of a constitutional challenge of the Marihuana Medical Access Division launched by the Vancouver Island Compassion Society that will be heard in the B.C. Supreme Court from May 9th-18th. Contacts:
Cannabis Nightmare: Medical Marijuana Users’
Worst Fears Come True
OTTAWA, February 3, 2006 - When will seriously ill Canadians be entitled to their constitutional right of having access to the therapy of their choice, without fear of prosecution? This question is posed by the Canadian AIDS Society (CAS) in response to Tuesday’s police raid and confiscation of Tom Shapiro’s medical marijuana.
“The whole premise behind the development of the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations is to provide Canadians access to medical marijuana without fear of legal repercussions,” says Gail Flintoft, chair of the Canadian AIDS Society board of directors. “This is a worst case scenario. It is something we feared, something people authorized to possess marijuana and especially those who hold a license to produce marijuana feared would happen when delays in processing applications lead to licenses expiring before renewals are received.”
On average, Health Canada states that they process applications within a 6 week period. It has now been 16 weeks since Mr. Shapiro’s license expired, and he reportedly had submitted a renewal application before his license expired.
“When will seriously ill Canadians be placed as the top priority in the government’s medical marijuana program?” asks Kim Thomas, acting executive director of CAS. “As an organization that represents people living with HIV/AIDS, we encourage people to apply to the program so that they can be relieved of the stress they face when they access their treatment illegally. It is difficult to get people to buy in to this program when situations like this occur.”
People living with HIV/AIDS often use marijuana medicinally to manage symptoms such as pain, nausea and appetite loss.
The Canadian AIDS Society has a position statement on HIV/AIDS and the therapeutic use of cannabis and will be releasing a report in June 2006 with recommendations about how to address the barriers to access to medicinal marijuana and the medicinal marijuana program. Police seize medical marijuana from AIDS sufferer |
Last Updated Feb 2 2006 08:36 AM CST
http://www.cbc.ca/news/credit.html |
| A Regina man whose medical marijuana was seized by the Regina police is worried he's going to be charged with drug offences. Tom Shapiro has AIDS and takes marijuana to relieve nausea. "I'm going to pay for this with my health," he said. He also grows the drug in his basement, having been first approved for a medical marijuana grow operation five years ago. Shapiro said he was waiting for Health Canada to approve his annual application when police showed up at his door late Tuesday afternoon with a search warrant. He said he, his wife and 20-year-old stepson sat on the living room sofa in handcuffs for several hours while police checked with Health Canada. "They phoned back and said, 'He is illegally running his grow operation because his licence is expired,'" he said. Shapiro says police took his marijuana plants and most of his grow equipment. Police told him they would be back in a few days to charge him if he didn't clear things up with the federal government. He was later told to show up at the police station, where he expects he'll be charged. Shapiro said he's expecting approval to come through soon and is frustrated by what he considers a bureaucratic delay. As of Dec. 2, 2005, there were 1,186 Canadians who use marijuana for medical purposes, Health Canada says. Of those, 859 are allowed to cultivate the plant. The rest buy their product from Health Canada. |
Marijuana or Cannabis an Excellent Alternative Medicine
Cannabis indica, cannabis sativa, cannabis americanus, Indian hemp and marijuana (or marihuana) all refer to the same plant. Cannabis is used throughout the world for diverse purposes and has a long history characterized by usefulness, euphoria or evil depending on one’s point of view. Medical professionals in the western world have forgotten almost all they once knew about the therapeutic properties of marijuana, or cannabis.
Analgesia, anti-convulsant action, appetite stimulation, ataraxia, antibiotic properties and low toxicity have been described throughout medical literature. For the most part the therapeutic aspects of cannabis remain to be re-explored under modern clinical conditions. In fact, from 1839 to its removal from availability to physicians in 1937 at least 12 separate therapeutic uses for cannabis were described:
- analgesic-hypnotic
- appetite stimulant
- gastrointestinal sedative
- anti-epileptic
- anti-spasmodic
- prophylactic and treatment of the neuralgias, including migraine and tic douloreuz
- anti-depressant
- tranquilizer
- anti-asthmatic
- oxytocic
- anti-tussive
- topical anesthetic
- withdrawal agent for opiate and alcohol addiction
- childbirth analgesic
- antibiotic
Meanwhile, cannabis continues to be denied to sufferers by the government, despite efficacious preliminary results and entreaties of numerous patients to unresponsive government agencies rationalizing their intransigence by a "we can’t be too careful" stance.
Physicians and patients in increasing numbers continue to relearn through personal experience the lessons of the 19th century. Many people know that marihuana is now being used illegally for the nausea and vomiting induced by chemotherapy, and many other medical ailments.
Some know that it lowers intraocular pressure in glaucoma. Patients have found it useful as an anticonvulsant, as a muscle relaxant in spastic disorders, and as an appetite stimulant in the wasting syndrome of human immunodeficiency virus infection. It is also being used to relieve phantom limb pain, menstrual cramps, and other types of chronic pain, including migraines.
One of marihuana's greatest advantages as a medicine is its remarkable safety. It has little effect on major physiological functions. There is no known case of a lethal overdose.
On the basis of animal models, the ratio of lethal to effective dose is estimated as 40,000 to 1! By comparison, the ratio is between 3 and 50 to 1 for secobarbital, and between 4 and 10 to 1 for ethanol.
Marihuana is also far less addictive and far less subject to abuse than many drugs now used as muscle relaxants, hypnotics, and analgesics. The chief legitimate concern is the effect of smoking on the lungs. Cannabis smoke carries more tars and other particulate matter than tobacco smoke. But the amount smoked is much less, especially in medical use, and once marihuana is an openly recognized medicine, solutions may be found such as vaporization, tinctures, extracts and oils.
At present, the greatest danger in medical use of marihuana is its illegality, which imposes much anxiety and expense on suffering people, forces them to bargain with illicit drug dealers, and exposes them to the threat of criminal prosecution.
Further, polls and voter referenda have repeatedly indicated that the vast majority of North-Americans think marihuana should be medically available to the public and even decriminalized or legalized for simple possession.
Most physicians seem to take little active interest in the subject of marijuana as medicine, and their silence is often cited by those who are determined that marihuana shall remain a forbidden medicine.
Meanwhile, many physicians pretend to ignore the fact that their patients with cancer, AIDS, multiple sclerosis, asthma or migraines are smoking marihuana for relief; some quietly encourage their patients yet fearing retribution from medical associations or their peers.
In a 1990 survey, 44% of oncologists said they had suggested that a patient smoke marihuana for relief of the nausea induced by chemotherapy. If marihuana were actually unsafe for use even under medical supervision, as its Schedule I status explicitly affirms, this recommendation would be unthinkable. It is time for physicians to acknowledge more openly that the present classification is scientifically, legally, and morally wrong.
Marijuana or cannabis will continue to be used effectively as medicine for a wide range of medical problems. The government and medical community need to recognize that all patients have a right to use a completely natural medicinal plant that helps their specific medical condition, and make it readily available for public medical use.
More reasonable laws and regulations controlling drug research are required to permit significant medical inquiry to begin so that we can fill the large gaps in our knowledge of cannabis.
Medicine, being an empirical art, has not hesitated in the past to utilize a substance first used for recreational purposes for the pursuit of the more noble purposes of healing, relieving pain and teaching us more of the workings of the human mind and body.
written from excerpts by:
Tod H. Mikuriya M.D
Dr. Lester Grinspoon
James B. Bakalar
Cannabis, Mental Health and Context: The Case For Regulation by Paul Armentano
Senior Policy Analyst
NORML | NORML Foundation
Updated May 2, 2007 Recent warning published in the United Kingdom and in America this week suggesting that cannabis' primary psychoactive compound THC may trigger mental illness, including psychosis and schizophrenia, warrant a serious reply.
According to news from the Associated Press and others, investigators at London's Kings College reported that the administration of doses of synthetic THC temporarily interfered with activity in the inferior frontal cortex, a region of the brain associated with paranoia, while administration of the non-psychoactive compound cannabidiol (CBD) stimulated relaxation. The reports go on to suggest that chronic use of cannabis may precipitate various types of mental illness and cite a separate unpublished study indicating that cannabis use may exacerbate symptoms of schizophrenia. Such clinical findings and suggestions are not new. Scientists have known for decades that THC is psychoactive and that peak blood levels of its primary active metabolite 11-OH-THC are occasionally associated with temporary feelings of dysphoria, paranoia, and even panic attacks. (These events, when documented, typically occur in cannabis naïve users.)
Conversely, scientists have also been long aware of CBD's anxiolytic and anti-psychotic effects. In fact, many experts speculate that it is the lack of CBD in Marinol (the synthetic THC oral prescription pill) that is responsible for the drug's enhanced psychoactivity. By contrast, CBD occurs naturally in whole-plant cannabis, and is believed to modify and/or diminish some of the psychoactivity associated with THC when cannabis is inhaled.
Fears that chronic cannabis use may be positively associated with various mental illnesses, particularly schizophrenia, are also long-standing. However, a recent meta-analysis investigating the use of cannabis use and its impact on mental health reported that those who use cannabis in moderation, even long-term "will not suffer any lasting physical or mental harm. ... Overall, by comparison with other drugs used mainly for 'recreational' purposes, cannabis could be rated to be a relatively safe drug." 1
Cannabis In Context
The phrase "relatively safe" is appropriate in any discussion regarding cannabis and mental health. No substance is harmless and in many cases, the relative dangers of a drug may be increased or decreased depending on set and setting. Cannabis is no different.
There is limited data suggesting an association, albiet a minor one, 2-3 between chronic cannabis (primarily among adolescents and/or those predisposed to mental illness) and increased symptoms of depression, psychotic symptoms, and/or schizophrenia. 4-6 However, interpretation of this data is troublesome and, to date, this observation association is not well understood. 7-9 Identified as well as unidentified confounding factors (such as poverty, family history, polydrug use, etc.) make it difficult, if not impossible, for researchers to adequately determine whether any cause-and-effect relationship exists between cannabis use and mental illness. Also, many experts point out that this association may be due to patients' self-medicating with cannabis, 10 as survey data and anecdotal reports of individuals finding therapeutic relief from both clinical depression and schizotypal behavior are common within medical lore, and clinical testing on the use of cannabinoids to treat certain symptoms of mental illness has been recommended. 11
Most recently, a large-scale study by investigators at London's Institute of Psychiatry reported that those patients diagnosed with schizophrenia who had previously used cannabis did not demonstrate exacerbated symptoms of the illness compared to age-adjusted controls who had not used cannabis. "This [finding] argues against a distinct schizophrenia-like psychosis caused by cannabis," they concluded. 12
Investigators in the study did not address whether cannabis consumers had greater odds of contracting schizophrenia when compared to otherwise matched controls who did not have a history of cannabis use. However, a 2006 review by Britain's Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) previously concluded, "For individuals, the current evidence suggests, at worst, that using cannabis increases lifetime risk of developing schizophrenia by one percent." 13
Nevertheless, until this association is better understood, there may be some merit to various government warnings that adolescents (particularly pre and early teens) and/or adults with pre-existing symptoms of mental illness refrain from using cannabis (and/or other psychoactive substances), particularly in large quantities. This statement, however, is hardly an indictment of cannabis' relative safety when used in moderation by adults or an endorsement of the federal government's efforts to criminally prohibit its use for all Americans. If anything, just the opposite is true.
Health Risks Call For Regulation, Not Prohibition
Health risks connected with drug use -- when scientifically documented -- should not be seen as legitimate reasons for criminal prohibition, but instead, as reasons for legal regulation. Specific to cannabis, if studies demonstrate that those "who first used marijuana before age 12 [are] twice as likely as adults who first used marijuana at age 18 or older to be classified as having serious mental illness,"14 then this is an argument in favor of legally regulating cannabis in a manner similar to alcohol, so that better safeguards may be enacted restricting adolescents from legal access to it. 15 These concerns, however, do not support criminally prohibiting the responsible use of the cannabis by adults any more than fears regarding the abuse of alcohol by a minority of teenagers support a blanket prohibition on the use of beer by adults.
In addition, if as some suggest, "as many as one in four people may have a genetic profile that makes marijuana five times more likely to trigger psychotic disorders," 16 this claim is yet another argument in favor of regulation. If there does exist a minority population of citizens who may be genetically prone to potential harms from cannabis (such as, possibly, those predisposed to schizophrenia), then a regulated system would best identify and educate this sub-population to pot's potential risks so that they may refrain from its use, if they so choose.
To draw a real world comparison, millions of Americans safely use ibuprofen as an effective pain reliever. However, among a minority of the population who suffer from liver and kidney problems, ibuprofen presents a legitimate and substantial health risk. However, this fact no more calls for the criminalization of ibuprofen among adults than do these latest allegations, even if true, call for the current prohibition of cannabis.
Finally, there lies the fact that cannabis prohibition has forever undermined the federal government's ability to educate its citizens, particularly young people, to the potential risks of marijuana when and where they present themselves. Ending prohibition and enacting a legal, regulated cannabis market would likely restore this lost credibility, as evidenced by the fact that science-based, federal education campaigns regarding the health risks of tobacco and drunk driving have greatly reduced smoking and driving under the influence among teenagers. Conversely, similar rhetorically-based campaigns regarding teen pot use have fostered increased levels of illicit drug use among their target audience. 17-18
As concluded by the Netherlands Drug Policy Foundation, cannabis' "health risks are remarkably limited, but cannabis is not completely harmless." As a result, the Foundation determined: "There ought to be a special legal regulatory system for cannabis because its use definitely does entail health risks. If cannabis was completely harmless, the same rules could be applied as to tea. Cannabis should not be made freely available, but the rules on cannabis can be very general and lenient." Placed in this context, the administration's latest anti-pot campaign does little to advance the government's position in favor of tightening prohibition, and provides ample ammunition to wage for its repeal.
Endnotes> |
From: Brian (05/02/07 03:44:25)
Let's get active folks!
---------------------------------------
From: kalix (01/10/07 04:04:54)
ive been smoking marihuana for the past 35 years. i think norml already existed when i started, its a great idea, but mj is still illegal. guess what guys, its not working. if all us potheads start smoking publicly, in large groups (1000+), all over the country at the same time every day, i bet it will be legal fast. norml stop lobbying! organize us! we are ready and willing to reclaim our rights. or maybe, while we still have prohibition we will still need norml?
---------------------------------------
From: shane (01/11/07 09:30:25)
stop wasting tax money on marijuana prohibition, we waste $7Billion each year. Let's spend it on something useful?
---------------------------------------
From: Hannah (01/11/07 09:42:07)
Is this the life you want for yourselves and your children - I know it's fun to try but isn't it part of the thrill that you are taking an illegal substance?By legalising this drug you are potentially creating these kind of situations for thousands throughout the world. Could you live with that?? PS To those of you who use weed to self-medicate and object, tell me your problem and I will outline a number of treatments that could and would be better......
---------------------------------------
From: not an H (01/12/07 08:14:40)
I found a funny from a spokeman who stated the populace can get Marinol instead of smoking marijuana. So the idea is to change dealers? Instead of paying the chap down the street $200 for what you want you go to the pharmacy and pay them $300? Yep, logic wins and champions the govt...BOYCOTT DUPONT! They helped start it! Make them SET IT RIGHT!
---------------------------------------
From: RunnYnozE (01/14/07 07:50:55)
Everything the government has said about cannabis since 1937 has been proven to be untrue. Why is this? Follow the money. As a kid, I remember the "Stamp it out" posters which, at the bottom of the poster, in tiny print, you could barely see these words" Sponsored by The American Brewers Association "
---------------------------------------
From: J.W. Rice (01/26/07 03:55:05)
I think the drug test frenzy occurring with employers is BS. The test can't confirm that a worker was stoned on the job. Alcohol is eliminated within 24 hours, but marijuana is detectable in urine for weeks. A worker could be an alcoholic and pass any drug test given, but someone who enjoys a joint at home on a Friday could be fired a week later.
Please NORML, help employers and the government see the light and correct this messed up mentality. LEGALIZE 420!
Stay high, everyone...
---------------------------------------
From: anonymous (01/27/07 02:09:41)
The criminalization of mj was a direct result of propaganda from timber and interest groups. (hemp has many uses, from fuel to paper. In fact the constitution is printed on hemp paper.) We are tired of being looked down upon by the society for using an 'illegal' drug in a responsible, spiritual and medical way when legal drugs such as alcohol and tobacco cause millions of deaths. This is a double standard that has to stop.
---------------------------------------
From: Randwolfe (01/28/07 03:50:52)
A lot of people do not get that the government is in the business of making criminals. Each one created helps produce profits for what is now the private-sector criminal justice system. Who better to criminalize than millions of mellow cannabis users.
States are taking the initiative. Each state that passes a MMJ initiative, helps to break down the wall put up by the unjustice system.
Cannabis "fits" our brains. Even animals seek it out in nature. Chimps love it. |
