31 May 2013

Finding a Place for Medical Marijuana

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

The legalization of medical marijuana is prompting cities and towns across the region to consider zoning restrictions to limit where dispensaries may open. With state regulations in effect as of Friday, and the dispensary application process scheduled by the state for this summer and fall, many communities are feeling time is short to regulate what some see as an unwelcome neighbor.

Milford passed zoning restrictions last week; Framingham and Natick are looking at working together on zoning that could allow dispensaries on Route 9 in the neighboring towns; and Newton, amid several inquiries from prospective dispensary operators, is reviewing its zoning bylaw to see whether it is adequate for dealing with the new state law.

“What we’re doing is actually taking some time to internally review the regulations, since they still just came out, and we have not made any specific plans to alter the usual zoning requirements for new businesses, but we are looking into it,” said Dori Zaleznik, Newton’s commissioner of health and human services.

Massachusetts voters approved the legalization of medical marijuana via statewide ballot in November. The measure calls for a maximum of 35 nonprofit dispensaries across the state, with at least one and not more than five in each of the state’s 14 counties.MAS

Communities cannot ban dispensaries but can impose zoning laws that restrict their location, according to a March 13 ruling from Attorney General Martha Coakley.

Many municipalities have already passed or are considering a moratorium — typically lasting from six months to a year — on permits for a dispensary to buy time for reviewing their zoning regulations.

Milford decided it did not need a moratorium and went straight to zoning changes, approved by Town Meeting on May 20.

The amendment, which must still pass muster with the attorney general’s office, allows dispensaries in two of the town’s three industrial districts as long as they are not within 200 feet of a residential zone, school, place of worship, park, playground, or youth center.

The limitation translates into about 1,000 acres along Fortune Boulevard and Maple and Beaver streets available as the site of a dispensary, according to Larry Dunkin, Milford’s town planner.

Natick has already passed a moratorium, and Framingham’s Town Meeting was considering one this week.

Both communities are looking at allowing dispensaries along some part of Route 9.

Robert Halpin, Framingham’s town manager, said the moratorium would give his community some time to get a better sense of the regulations and how they are being implemented.

“I think there’s a discussion to be had with Natick,” he said. “We can talk about Route 9 and other approaches.”

Natick Town Administrator Martha White said it makes sense to work with Framingham on a shared approach.

“Since we share Route 9, and that may well be the area that’s zoned for these facilities, we want to be sure to keep each other’s communities informed and to work it out together, so we’re not negatively impacting each other,” she said.

Although many municipalities in the area see a moratorium as a first step before evaluating their zoning options, Newton is not sure that one is necessary.

“So at this point, we don’t believe we’ll need a moratorium, but we don’t know as we go through the review what we’ll end up doing,” said Zaleznik.

When the city gets inquiries, she said, staff are telling prospective dispensary operators that they should get through the first phase of the state’s two-phase application process before they look for a location in Newton.

“And hopefully by then, we will have figured out our approach,” said Zaleznik.

Despite the local moves to limit dispensaries, which by law are supposed to cultivate their own marijuana to fill prescriptions for the drug, prospective proprietors are not put off, said Bruce Bedrick, CEO of Kind Clinics and MEDBOX, based in West Hollywood, Calif.

“We’re used to that — it’s all part of the process,” said Bedrick, who serves as a consultant for the application process and also markets his technology to keep marijuana supplies secure. “People have to get comfortable with the use. Once people realize it’s just average everyday people trying to pick up medicine, I think in a few years we’ll all look back and laugh at this.”

Bedrick, whose local office is in Natick, would not say exactly how many clients he has or where they are looking to locate a dispensary, but he suggested interest is healthy, with “not many spots left” on his client roster that will max out at 35.

He praised the state Department of Public Health, and said generally the new regulations are solid.

“It’s actually great for our clients because we’re all about transparency and regulation and safety and security,” he said. “The only thing we feel is cumbersome is the verification of $500,000.” He was referring to the minimum amount that applicants must have in escrow as part of the new regulations.

Adam Fine, a lawyer with a Colorado-based firm, Vicente Sederberg LLC, that opened offices in Boston and Needham in connection with last fall’s legalization vote, also applauded the state for creating a strong regulatory environment that balances patient needs with public safety concerns.

“I think overall people are very pleased with the comprehensive nature of the regulations and the fact the Department of Public Health took a measured, thoughtful approach,” he said.

Like Bedrick, Fine could not say which towns and cities are being eyed for dispensaries, but he did say Middlesex, Norfolk, and Suffolk counties seem to be garnering the most interest.

“The anecdotal information I’m getting is the most populous areas make the most sense because there will be more patients to serve,” he said.

Locally, one of the biggest issues that dispensaries will face might have nothing to do with zoning or moratoriums, but rather finding space to lease, he said. Part of his firm’s role is to help educate landlords, Fine said.

“Finding a location that is going to be able to house these dispensaries can be a challenge,” he said. “There are landlords that . . . until it’s completely legal under federal law, they don’t want to be a part of it.”

Source: Boston Globe (MA)
Author: Lisa Kocian, Globe Staff
Published: May 29, 2013
Copyright: 2013 Globe Newspaper Company
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.boston.com/globe/

29 May 2013

How America Learned To Stop Worrying & Love MJ

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

For nearly a century, the United States has been one of the fiercest advocates and practitioners of marijuana prohibition in the world. At the height of the America’s anti-pot fervor in the 1950s and ’60s, one could even receive life imprisonment for simple possession of the drug.

But the puritanical fervor that once dominated the national discussion surrounding cannabis has been conspicuously absent of late. Earlier this month, the Colorado State legislature, by order of a November referendum, passed bills to implement the legalization and regulation of recreational marijuana use. Washington State voters also approved legalization by referendum on election day. And these events have recently been followed by more good news for supporters of cannabis law reform.

The Organization for American States recently suggested that marijuana legalization could be a way to cut down on drug-violence in the western hemisphere. Perhaps most important, the movement has finally found a voice on Capitol Hill, as representatives Earl Blumenauer and Jared Polis submitted legislation earlier this year that would end federal prohibition of the drug, and allow states to tax and regulate it as they see fit. As Bill Keller put it recently in the New York Times, “Today the most interesting and important question is no longer whether marijuana will be legalized — eventually, bit by bit, it will be — but how.”

Indeed, the feeling that the further liberalization of marijuana laws is inevitable is backed up by the polling trends. According to Gallup, as recently as 2005, two-thirds of Americans opposed legalization of marijuana. Now 48% percent of the population supports it. And a similar poll from Pew puts the number even higher – at 52%. But what exactly explains this sudden change in American attitudes towards pot?

Undoubtedly, part of the reason for the increased acceptance is demographic. It might make you feel old to read this, but on Friday, both Bob Dylan and Tommy Chong celebrated birthdays, turning 72 and 74 respectively. The aging of these counterculture icons hasn’t directly changed American attitudes towards marijuana, of course, but it does underscore the fact that the vast majority of Americans living today came of age during a time when marijuana was widely in use. The data bear out the prevalence of marijuana use in today’s society, with 48% of Americans claiming they have tried the drug at least once.

But familiarity with marijuana isn’t by itself going to drive changes in the legal code. Political consensus is necessary too. And while national political leaders aren’t necessarily falling over themselves to endorse marijuana legalization, there isn’t a lot of room in the current political climate to defend it, either. The political right has done an excellent job over the past thirty years convincing the American public of the limitations of government. They have argued that even when the government has the best of intentions it can be astoundingly ineffective at achieving its stated goals, and often creates unintended and pernicious consequences to boot. This is the same argument that has led to deregulation of industry, historically low tax rates, and legislative efforts like welfare reform. It’s only logical to extend it beyond social welfare programs to something like drug policy.

And supporters of ending marijuana prohibition do indeed point to the unintended consequences of the policy as reason to legalize. According to the FBI, in 2011, 1.5 million people were arrested on drug charges, and roughly half of those were for marijuana, costing billions per year in law enforcement and court costs. And that doesn’t count the human toll on those arrested, like potential loss of work, government benefits, the right to vote, and student aid. Meanwhile, the government simply hasn’t come anywhere close to achieving the stated goal of marijuana prohibition, which is to prevent drug addiction. According to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, since the beginning of the so-called war on drugs, the addiction rate in America has remained steady at 1.3%, despite the fact that each year state and local governments spend more and more money – over $1 trillion in total – fighting the drug war.

What’s more, the unintended consequences of marijuana prohibition do not stop at our borders. In fact, the brunt of the side effects may be being felt in places like Mexico. And as my college Tim Padgett wrote this week, it would appear that America’s allies in the Western hemisphere are looking seriously at ending marijuana prohibition as a strategy for reducing the drug violence that is ravaging much of Latin America. A study issued this month by the Organization of American States declared that it’s now time to seriously consider legalizing pot in order to cut down on this violence. It’s estimated, for instance, that legalizing marijuana in America could eliminate one-third of Mexican cartel’s $30 billion annual haul.

We are in a political moment where social conservatism has been somewhat sidelined as a political force by the growing influence of libertarianism in the Republican party. This dynamic emphasizes the tension between liberty and morality that has been with us since the founding of our country, and at this moment liberty appears to be ascendant. But make no mistake, the puritanical impulses that once made America the leading voice in marijuana prohibition haven’t gone anywhere — and advocates of reform should know that pendulums, once set it motion, swing back again.

Source: Time Magazine (US)
Author: Christopher Matthews
Published: May 28, 2013
Copyright: 2013 Time Inc.
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.time.com/time/

28 May 2013

Study To Look at Whether MMJ Really Helps Users

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

A $2.2-million federally funded study soon will help answer the question: Does medicinal marijuana really help? The grant from the National Institute on Drug Abuse funds a four-year project that began this monthat the University of Michigan. Researchers will track the progress of 800 recipients of medicinal marijuana prescriptions.

Michigan, where more than 135,000 patients are now in a 4-year-old statewide registry of approved medical marijuana users, is one of 20 states in which medical marijuana is used to ease pain and symptoms from cancer, seizures, glaucoma and other conditions, according to the researchers. Michigan voters approved a measure allowing medical marijuana in 2008.

Past research on medical marijuana’s effect has mostly focused on lab studies where participants are given different levels of marijuana or a placebo, then report whether their pain is lessened.

But those studies tend to last hours or a few days, and they fall short of determining whether the marijuana has a long-term effects on their lives in more practical ways — at work, with family or in social settings, said the U-M study leader Mark Ilgen,whose past research includes substance use, abuse, suicide and post-traumatic stress disorder.

Results show that pain was reduced, he said.

Experts, however, disagree about the magnitude of the pain reduction and how it compares with other pain medications, he said.

Still, he added, any pain reduction for the sufferer is welcome.

Just as important as pain mitigation is whether that change helps the sufferer with everyday life. The longer term functioning of medical marijuana users is really unknown, he said.

“Maybe they’re functioning better because of a better (pain) control, or maybe they’re … withdrawing socially because of the marijuana use,” he said.

Part of the study will be based on participants’ reports of how they’re faring; other data will include results of drug screens for other substances or arrest records, for example, Ilgen said.

The goal is to determine who does better and who does worse with medical marijuana, and what factors make the difference, he said.

The study eventually may be used by policy makers still struggling to understand the impact of the medical marijuana laws.

Just as important, Ilgen noted, “I see this as a starting point for more research.”

Participants cannot sign up. They must be approached by research staff at their first doctor’s appointment that is part of the process to become a registered medical marijuana user in Michigan.

Source: Detroit Free Press (MI)
Author: Robin Erb, Free Press Medical Writer
Published: May 26, 2013
Copyright: 2013 Detroit Free Press
Website: http://www.freep.com/
Contact: [email protected]

26 May 2013

Colorado Offers Window Into MMJ Industry

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

At Leela European Cafe, a quirky, 24-hour coffee shop and bar in the heart of downtown, a bartender was quick with her thoughts on Colorado’s experience with the legal sale of medical marijuana.

“It’s really easy to get,” said Cara Wanek, 25, who says she uses it to calm her anxiety, boost her appetite and help her sleep. “And it’s delicious.” That’s exactly what Illinois is trying to avoid. While Colorado is not quite the Wild West of medical marijuana, it offers a window into the opportunities and consequences that arise when a state allows the legal sale of a long-banned drug.

The state’s therapeutic cannabis industry launched in earnest in late 2009, triggering a “green rush” that boosted the state’s economy. Big Marijuana added thousands of new jobs, revitalized aging industrial warehouses and shuttered storefronts, and generated millions of tax dollars for the federal, state and local governments.

At the same time, state officials acknowledge they were unprepared to license, inspect and regulate medical marijuana businesses, leaving millions of fees and taxes uncollected and a significant swath of the industry unchecked. And recently released police data show a modest uptick in certain crimes near marijuana businesses in Denver.

But as the nation’s first highly regulated, for-profit market, Colorado has served as a model for other states seeking to get in on the action.

In crafting legislation that would allow for the legal sale of the drug to certain patients beginning in 2014, Illinois lawmakers looked to build upon the experience in Colorado, where pretty much anyone with a long-ago injury can get a doctor’s approval to purchase up to 2 ounces of pot at a time — enough to stuff two small sandwich bags.

Illinois’ proposed statute is far more restrictive, placing tighter limits on who can legally purchase the drug and where it can be grown and sold.

The bill, which would allow people with 42 defined conditions to purchase the drug legally over a four-year trial period, was approved by the Senate on May 17. It awaits the signature of Gov. Pat Quinn, who has said he is “open-minded” about the prospect.

As the governor contemplates a decision, experienced pot entrepreneurs in and around Denver are watching closely with the hope that the time and money they’ve spent shaping and supporting the Illinois bill will pay off.

“Everyone is looking at Illinois and New York because that’s where the population is,” said Kayvan Khalatbari, a 29-year-old Nebraska native who was one of the pioneers in the Denver marijuana scene. “The ball is rolling, and with more and more states coming on all the time, we see opportunities everywhere.”

If Quinn signs the bill, Illinois would become the 20th state, plus the District of Columbia, to allow the sale of medical marijuana. Dispensaries could open as soon as next year.

In Colorado, legalization of the drug for medicinal purposes was approved by voters in 2000. But because the drug remained illegal at the federal level, most users remained underground, growing as many as six plants each for their own medical needs.

The industry didn’t emerge until 2009, after an Obama administration memo suggested that federal authorities would not aggressively challenge state laws.

Almost overnight, Colorado was swamped with retail dispensaries and large-scale operations to grow the plants. The state, which didn’t have an adequate regulatory or tax structure in place, soon had more weed shops than Starbucks.

By the next spring, when lawmakers scrambled to pass regulations, more than 2,000 companies had filed with the state to sell medical marijuana.

“We didn’t get off to a great start because we didn’t have the time or the staff to tool up,” said Ron Kammerzell, the Colorado Department of Revenue’s enforcement director. “We’re still, in a way, playing catch-up.”

At the end of 2010, the first year of regulated medical marijuana in Colorado, the state’s industry had more than 1,100 businesses, including dispensaries and manufacturers of marijuana-infused products, according to state statistics.

Today, there are 675.

“A majority of the people who came in in 2009 to make a quick buck are either broke or in jail,” said Norton Arbelaez, a tall, loquacious Oklahoma native who practiced medical malpractice law in Louisiana before he and a friend founded River Rock Wellness, a two-store medical marijuana operation in Denver.

“There were a lot of bozos in this business in the beginning,” Arbelaez said. “For the most part, those of us still around are the ones who are doing it right.”

In the roughly three years since the regulations took effect, sales have ballooned to nearly $200 million, generating $5.4 million in state sales tax in 2012.

In addition, operators have paid the state more than $10 million in application and licensing fees.

The most successful of Colorado’s 479 registered retail dispensaries log annual sales greater than $3 million.

Kayvan Khalatbari’s venture, Denver Relief, started with $4,000 and a half-pound of marijuana.

Wedged between a salon and an urgent care center on Denver’s near south side, the 25-employee operation expects sales of $1 million to $2 million this year. It has made money from day one, Khalatbari said.

But even as the legal sale of the drug emerged from rogue growers’ basements, retail owners and growers said they still operate in an environment of fear.

Because state laws run counter to a 43-year-old federal law that classifies cannabis as a Schedule 1 controlled substance, companies say they face hurdles that other businesses typically don’t encounter.

Banking is difficult, insurance is hard to come by, and operators fret that their nascent enterprises could be shut down at any time by federal regulators.

Operators say most banks won’t lend to enterprises that handle a product that is illegal under federal law. As a result, the vast majority of Colorado’s marijuana enterprises are financed solely with their own and private investors’ money.

Many lack business bank accounts and pay all of their bills — workers’ paychecks, utilities, contractor fees and mortgages — with cash or money orders.

Another issue is taxes. On average, small businesses pay an effective tax rate of about 20 percent on net income, according to the Small Business Administration. Marijuana purveyors, by contrast, say they pay an effective tax rate of 60 to 70 percent.

That’s because the federal tax code prohibits the deduction of standard business expenses for those who deal in controlled substances — marijuana included — even in states where it is legal.

“It’s a very heavy-overhead business that requires a lot of capital,” said Rhett Jordan, co-owner of Native Roots Apothecary, an upscale medical marijuana shop on the 16th Street Mall, Denver’s answer to Michigan Avenue.

Inside the spa-like shop, 30 airtight glass jars filled with buds sit behind a counter. A “bud-tender” helps patients choose the product best suited for their ailment. Chocolates, candies, tinctures and tiny jars filled with concentrated cannabis, called hashish, are arranged much like jewelry inside a glass case. Cameras are everywhere.

Customers range from local business magnates to musicians and construction workers.

Jordan, who said he has relatives in Illinois, has a keen interest in opening a dispensary in Chicago.

If and when Illinois opens the door to medical marijuana, weed retailers like Native Roots will face a much different regulatory environment. The number of dispensaries will be limited to 60 statewide and the number of growers to 22, one for each state police district.

Illinois also will be more restrictive on what diseases can be treated with medical marijuana. Of the roughly 108,000 Coloradans who hold state-issued medical marijuana cards, more than 101,000 reported using cannabis in part to treat “chronic pain,” a catchall category that will not be recognized in Illinois.

While the tighter restrictions in Illinois likely mean a smaller pool of potential customers, industry veterans in Colorado are confident the law eventually will loosen.

Colorado law, just like the one proposed in Illinois, requires growers to raise their plants indoors, under tight security. Installing robust security systems, which include high-definition cameras, automatically locking doors and shock sensors, can cost more than $100,000.

The state’s marijuana cultivation centers range in sophistication, security, employment and quality of product. Some have a thousand plants; some have more than 30,000. Most are grown indoors in modified warehouses; some use greenhouses surrounded by 10-foot-high electrified fences.

To prevent theft and diversion of the product to the black market, operators are required to invest in sophisticated software that tracks the plant from “seed to sale,” a Colorado mandate that Illinois’ legislation adopted.

Each crop, on average, takes about four months to grow. Monthly electric bills range from $3,500 to more than $15,000. The retail value of the inventory inside can easily stretch to several million dollars.

The plants are finicky and prone to mold and mildew, so temperature, humidity levels and air circulation are closely regulated.

Some operators grow their plants hydroponically, some prefer dirt, and others such as Gaia Plant-Based Medicine use a dirtlike product made of crumbled /coconut husks.

The company’s indoor cultivation center, a single-story brick building with barred windows, sits across the street from a Denver Police Department outpost in an industrial area on the northeast side of town between the airport and downtown.

A few years ago, many of the aging buildings here were empty. Today, they’re the headquarters for metropolitan Denver’s marijuana growers. The fragrant, unmistakable aroma of pot plants wafts down the street.

“If you look all around Denver, we came in and rented undesirable spaces,” said Meg Sanders, Gaia’s co-owner and chief executive. After Gaia opened a retail dispensary in east Denver, a Starbucks and a grocer moved in, Sanders said. “It becomes a hub.”

Anecdotes like this abound in Denver, running contrary to what many feared would happen to their neighborhoods once the marijuana industry moved in. Visions of drug-addled stoners and nefarious pushers flooding the city’s streets never materialized.

Two Denver City Council members and the head of the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce said complaints to their offices about marijuana dispensaries and growing operations are rare.

Colorado’s medical marijuana experiment has gone well enough, in fact, that voters in November were emboldened to push forward another constitutional amendment that will allow anyone 21 or older to buy the drug for recreational or “adult use” purposes as early as 2014.

It represents a major opportunity for Sanders, 47, who left the financial world in late 2010 to ride the marijuana wave.

Inside her discreet cultivation center, a Zen-style front waiting room makes way to an open warehouse, where tattooed workers trim marijuana plants, separate leaves from flowers and weigh product.

One-thousand-watt sodium lights cast a bright glow through ajar doors that lead to separate grow rooms.

Sanders had just returned from Illinois, where she spent time in Chicago meeting with potential growers and retailers and a day in Springfield to “help with the legislative process.”

She wants to ensure Illinois doesn’t make the same mistakes as Colorado, and that those who participate in the industry can learn from her company’s initial struggles. When she and other investors took over Gaia two years ago, it was hemorrhaging money.

The company finally turned the corner and became profitable this quarter, she said. For the full year, the three-store company projects revenue of $5 million to $7 million.

“It’s been far more challenging than anyone thought because the rules kept changing,” Sanders said. But with more than $3.5 million of their own money financing the venture, she and her investors remain bullish.

“There are few other industries that have insatiable demand,” she said. “Every single product we put on the shelves is sold each month. It pays for itself very quickly, and that’s what makes it so appealing.”

Source: Chicago Tribune (IL)
Author: Peter Frost, Chicago Tribune Reporter
Published: May 26, 2013
Copyright: 2013 Chicago Tribune Company, LLC
Website: http://www.chicagotribune.com/

26 May 2013

DECRIMINALIZE MORE THAN JUST POT, EXPERTS URGE

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

The personal use of illegal drugs, including heroin and crack cocaine, should be decriminalized as part of a federal-provincial strategy to tackle drug abuse, a B.C.-based national coalition of drug policy experts argue.

In a report to be released Thursday, the coalition denounces the Harper government’s aggressive war on drugs, which puts the emphasis on law enforcement while steering money away from harm-reduction initiatives like Vancouver’s supervised injection site.

“While countries all around the world are adopting forward-thinking, evidence-based drug policies, Canada is taking a step backwards and strengthening punitive policies that have been proven to fail,” states a summary of the 112-page report from the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition, which is based at Simon Fraser University’s Centre for Applied Research in Mental Health and Addiction.

The “stunning display of unimaginative thinking” has failed to decrease the flow of drugs into Canada while hampering efforts to deal with drug-related health problems.

“Despite Canada’s significant investment in drug control efforts, drugs are cheaper and more available than ever,” the report notes.

Among the recommendations is a call to legalize, regulate and tax the sale of marijuana to adults, taking advantage of an underground business that generates an estimated $357 million in annual sales in B.C. alone, according to the authors.

By far the most controversial recommendation calls for the end to prohibition of not only “soft” drugs like marijuana, but products like heroin, cocaine and methamphetamines.

The report notes that at least 25 jurisdictions in the world have moved to decriminalize at least some drugs, with Portugal (in 2001) and the Czech Republic (in 2010) ending criminal bans for all drugs.

“After decriminalization and similar to Portugal, drug use (among Czechs) has not increased significantly but the social harms of drug use have declined,” the report stated.

“In Portugal, decriminalization has had the effect of decreasing the numbers of people injecting drugs, decreasing the number of people using drugs problematically, and decreasing trends of drug use among 15 to 24 year olds.”

The coalition lists as its “partners” more than 70 organizations, including the B.C. Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS, the Central Alberta AIDS Network Society, the Canadian Cancer Survivor Network, and the Canadian Association of Nurses in AIDS Care.

Its report is harshly critical of the federal government’s anti-drug and tough-on-crime policies introduced since Stephen Harper became prime minister in 2006, including minimum mandatory sentences for certain drug offences.

Among the targets is the five-year National Anti-Drug Strategy, which was renewed for another five years in 2012 at a cost of $528 million. The program devotes most of its money (roughly 70 per cent) to law enforcement, according to the report.

It also goes after the Canadian Forces’ substantial investment in counter-narcotics missions in the Caribbean Sea and the eastern Pacific, involving warships and aircraft operating with U.S. forces.

It complains about the lack of support of, and in the case of the Vancouver supervised injection site aggressive opposition to, “harm-reduction” programs like needle exchanges that “save lives and protect everyone’s health,” according to the Newfoundland AIDS Committee.

The Harper government has never flinched from its strong support for get-tough measures against drug offences, often sneering at academic studies suggesting that its measures, while popular among many Conservative party supporters, had debatable or even counterproductive results.

In 2007, for instance, then-health minister Tony Clement declared that the “party’s over” while speaking of his party’s contempt for the former Liberal government’s approach to illicit drug use.

The coalition report cites 2011 Health Canada statistics indicating that B.C. has the highest percentage of people who have used marijuana at least once in their lives, with the B.C. rate of 44.3 per cent well above the national average of 39.4 per cent.

Health Canada said 12.1 per cent of British Columbians said they smoked pot over the past year, second to Nova Scotia’s 12.4 per cent and well above the national average of 9.1 per cent.

 

Source: Vancouver Sun (CN BC)
Copyright: 2013 The Vancouver Sun
Contact: http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/letters.html
Website: http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/477
Author: Peter O’Neil

25 May 2013

Marijuana Tied To Better Blood Sugar Control

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

People who had used marijuana in the past month had smaller waists and lower levels of insulin resistance – a diabetes precursor – than those who never tried the drug, in a new study.

The findings, based on surveys and blood tests of about 4,700 U.S. adults, aren’t enough to prove marijuana keeps users thin or wards off disease. And among current pot smokers, higher amounts of marijuana use weren’t linked to any added health benefits, researchers reported in The American Journal of Medicine.

“These are preliminary findings,” said Dr. Murray Mittleman, who worked on the study at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston.

“It looks like there may be some favorable effects on blood sugar control, however a lot more needs to be done to have definitive answers on the risks and potential benefits of marijuana usage.”

Although pot smoking is a well-known cause of “the munchies,” some previous studies have found marijuana users tend to weigh less than other people, and one suggested they have a lower rate of diabetes. Trials in mice and rats hint that cannabis and cannabinoid receptors may influence metabolism.

The new study used data from a national health survey conducted in 2005-2010. Researchers asked people about drug and alcohol use, as well as other aspects of their health and lifestyle, and measured their insulin and blood sugar levels.

Just under 2,000 participants said they had used marijuana at some point, but not recently. Another 600 or so were current users – meaning they had smoked or otherwise consumed the drug in the past month.

Compared to people who had never used pot, current smokers had smaller waists: 36.9 inches versus 38.3 inches, on average. Current users also had a lower body mass index – a ratio of weight to height – than never-users.

When other health and lifestyle measures were taken into account, recent pot use was linked to 17 percent lower insulin resistance, indicating better blood sugar control, and slightly higher HDL (“good”) cholesterol levels.

However, there was no difference in blood pressure or blood fats based on marijuana use, Mittleman’s team found.

A Causal Link?

Mittleman said that in his mind, it’s still “preliminary” to say marijuana is likely to be responsible for any diabetes-related health benefits.

“It’s possible that people who choose to smoke marijuana have other characteristics that differ (from non-marijuana smokers),” and those characteristics are what ultimately affect blood sugar and waist size, he told Reuters Health.

Dr. Stephen Sidney from the Kaiser Permanente Division of Research in Oakland, California, said he wonders if cigarette smoking may partially explain the association. Marijuana users are also more likely to smoke tobacco, he told Reuters Health.

“People who use tobacco oftentimes tend to be thinner,” said Sidney, who has studied marijuana use and weight but didn’t participate in the new study. “So I really wonder about that.”

Another limitation with this and other studies, Sidney and Mittleman agreed, is that all of the data were collected at the same time, so it’s unclear whether marijuana smoking or changes in waist size and blood sugar came first.

“The question is, is the marijuana leading to the lower rate (of diabetes) or do they have something in common?” said Dr. Theodore Friedman, who has studied that issue at Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science in Los Angeles.

He and his colleagues think the link is probably causal. “But it’s really hard to prove that,” Friedman, who also wasn’t involved in the new research, told Reuters Health.

One possibility is that the anti-inflammatory properties of marijuana help ward off diabetes, he said. But he agreed that more research is needed to draw out that link.

“I want to make it clear – I’m not advocating marijuana use to prevent diabetes,” Friedman said. “It’s only an association.”

SOURCE: http://bit.ly/10Ty3La — The American Journal of Medicine, online May 16, 2013.

Source: Reuters (Wire)
Author: Genevra Pittman
Published: May 23, 2013
Copyright: 2013 Thomson Reuters

24 May 2013

The Cannabis Is Out Of The Bag

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

This week, the Colorado General Assembly put the finishing touches on legislation aimed at taxing and regulating the commercial distribution of marijuana for recreational use.  The process has been haunted by the fear that the federal government will try to quash this momentous experiment in pharmacological tolerance — a fear magnified by the Obama administration’s continuing silence on the subject.

Six months after voters in Colorado and Washington made history by voting to legalize marijuana, Attorney General Eric Holder still has not said how the Justice Department plans to respond.  But if the feds are smart, they will not just refrain from interfering, they will work together with state officials to minimize smuggling of newly legal marijuana to jurisdictions that continue to treat it as contraband.  A federal crackdown can only make the situation worse — for prohibitionists as well as consumers.

Shutting down state-licensed pot stores probably would not be very hard.  A few well-placed letters threatening forfeiture and prosecution would do the trick for all but the bravest cannabis entrepreneurs.  But what then?

Under Amendment 64, the Colorado initiative, people 21 or older already are allowed to possess up to an ounce of marijuana, grow up to six plants for personal use and keep the produce of those plants ( potentially a lot more than an ounce ) on the premises where they are grown.  It is also legal to transfer up to an ounce “without remuneration” and to “assist” others in growing and consuming marijuana.

Put those provisions together, and you have permission for various cooperative arrangements that can serve as alternative sources of marijuana should the feds stop pot stores from operating.  The Denver Post reports that “an untold number” of cannabis collectives have formed in Colorado since Amendment 64 passed.

Washington’s initiative, I-502, does not allow home cultivation.  But UCLA drug policy expert Mark Kleiman, who is advising the Washington Liquor Control Board on how to regulate the cannabis industry, argues that collectives ostensibly organized to serve patients under that state’s medical marijuana law could fill the supply gap if pot stores never open.

It is also possible that Washington’s legislature would respond to federal meddling by letting people grow marijuana for personal use, because otherwise there would be no legal source.

With pot shops offering a decent selection at reasonable prices, these alternative suppliers will account for a tiny share of the marijuana market, just as home brewing accounts for a tiny share of the beer market.  But if federal drug warriors prevent those stores from operating, they will be confronted by myriad unregulated, small-scale growers, who will be a lot harder to identify, let alone control, than a few highly visible, state-licensed businesses.

The feds, who account for only 1 percent of marijuana arrests, simply do not have the manpower to go after all those growers.  Nor do they have the constitutional authority to demand assistance from state and local law enforcement agencies that no longer treat pot growing as a crime.

Given this reality, legal analyst Stuart Taylor argues in a recent Brookings Institution paper, the Obama administration and officials in Colorado and Washington should “hammer out clear, contractual cooperation agreements so that state-regulated marijuana businesses will know what they can and cannot safely do.” Such enforcement agreements, which are authorized by the Controlled Substances Act, would provide more security than a mere policy statement, although less than congressional legislation.

Taylor, who says he has no firm views on the merits of legalization, warns that “a federal crackdown would backfire by producing an atomized, anarchic, state-legalized but unregulated marijuana market that federal drug enforcers could neither contain nor force the states to contain.” Noting recent polls finding that 50 percent or more of Americans favor legalizing marijuana, he says the public debate over that issue would benefit from evidence generated by the experiments in Colorado and Washington.  That’s assuming the feds do not go on a senseless rampage through these laboratories of democracy.

Source: Odessa American (TX)
Copyright: 2013 Odessa American
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.oaoa.com/
Author: Jacob Sullum

23 May 2013

Michigan Driver Who Uses MMJ Wins Appeal

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

The Michigan Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that medical marijuana users aren’t automatically breaking the law if they’re caught driving after using the drug.

The court unanimously overturned an appeals court decision in the case of a Grand Traverse County man, Rodney Koon. He was stopped in 2010 for speeding — going nearly 30 mph over the limit. Koon admitted having smoked medical marijuana earlier, and a blood test revealed the drug in his system.

It’s illegal for Michigan drivers to consume marijuana. But the state high court said medical marijuana users have some protection. The court says police must show that a driver actually was “under the influence” of marijuana for a charge to stick.

Michigan voters approved medical use of marijuana in 2008.

The medical marijuana law “shields registered patients from prosecution for the internal possession of marijuana,” the judges said.

At the same time, the law prohibits driving “while under the influence of marijuana.” But it fails to specify what level of marijuana in the body constitutes being “under the influence,” the opinion said.

The court suggested lawmakers consider setting a marijuana limit, similar to a blood alcohol level.

“It goes almost without saying that the (medical marijuana law) is an imperfect statute, the interpretation of which has repeatedly required this Court’s intervention,” the justices said. “Indeed, this case could have been easily resolved if the (law) had provided a definition of ‘under the influence.’”

Ruling: http://drugsense.org/url/9bqm5UTK

Source: Associated Press (Wire)
Published: May 22, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Associated Press

23 May 2013

Michigan Driver Who Uses MMJ Wins Appeal

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

The Michigan Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that medical marijuana users aren’t automatically breaking the law if they’re caught driving after using the drug.

The court unanimously overturned an appeals court decision in the case of a Grand Traverse County man, Rodney Koon. He was stopped in 2010 for speeding — going nearly 30 mph over the limit. Koon admitted having smoked medical marijuana earlier, and a blood test revealed the drug in his system.

It’s illegal for Michigan drivers to consume marijuana. But the state high court said medical marijuana users have some protection. The court says police must show that a driver actually was “under the influence” of marijuana for a charge to stick.

Michigan voters approved medical use of marijuana in 2008.

The medical marijuana law “shields registered patients from prosecution for the internal possession of marijuana,” the judges said.

At the same time, the law prohibits driving “while under the influence of marijuana.” But it fails to specify what level of marijuana in the body constitutes being “under the influence,” the opinion said.

The court suggested lawmakers consider setting a marijuana limit, similar to a blood alcohol level.

“It goes almost without saying that the (medical marijuana law) is an imperfect statute, the interpretation of which has repeatedly required this Court’s intervention,” the justices said. “Indeed, this case could have been easily resolved if the (law) had provided a definition of ‘under the influence.’”

Ruling: http://drugsense.org/url/9bqm5UTK

Source: Associated Press (Wire)
Published: May 22, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Associated Press

23 May 2013

How To Legalize Pot

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

THE first time I talked to Mark Kleiman, a drug policy expert at U.C.L.A., was in 2002, and he explained why legalization of marijuana was a bad idea.  Sure, he said, the government should remove penalties for possession, use and cultivation of small amounts.

He did not favor making outlaws of people for enjoying a drug that is less injurious than alcohol or tobacco.

But he worried that a robust commercial marketplace would inevitably lead to much more consumption.  You don’t have to be a prohibitionist to recognize that pot, especially in adolescents and very heavy users, can seriously mess with your brain.

So I was interested to learn, 11 years later, that Kleiman is leading the team hired to advise Washington State as it designs something the modern world has never seen: a fully legal commercial market in cannabis.  Washington is one of the first two states ( Colorado is the other ) to legalize the production, sale and consumption of marijuana as a recreational drug for consumers 21 and over.  The marijuana debate has entered a new stage.

Today the most interesting and important question is no longer whether marijuana will be legalized – eventually, bit by bit, it will be – but how.

“At some point you have to say, a law that people don’t obey is a bad law,” Kleiman told me when I asked how his views had evolved.

He has not come to believe marijuana is harmless, but he suspects that the best hope of minimizing its harm may be a well-regulated market.

Ah, but what does that look like? A few places, like the Netherlands, have had limited legalization; many jurisdictions have decriminalized personal use; and 18 states in this country have approved the drug for medical use.  ( Twelve others, including New York, are considering it.  ) But Washington and Colorado have set out to invent a whole industry from scratch and, in theory, to avoid the shortcomings of other markets in legal vices – tobacco, alcohol, gambling – that lurched into being without much forethought, and have supplied, along with much pleasure, much misery.

The biggest shadow hanging over this project is the Department of Justice.  Federal law still makes felons of anyone who trades in cannabis.  Despite the tolerant drift of the polls, despite evidence indicating that states with medical marijuana programs have not, as opponents feared, experienced an increase in use by teenagers, despite new moves toward legalization in Latin America, no one expects Congress to remove cannabis from the list of criminal substances any time soon.  ( “Not until the second Hillary Clinton administration,” Kleiman says.  ) But federal authorities have always left a lot of room for local discretion on marijuana enforcement.  They could, for example, declare that they will prosecute only drug producers who grow more than a certain amount, and those who traffic across state lines.

Attorney General Eric Holder, perhaps preoccupied with scandal management, has been slow to come up with enforcement guidelines that could give the states a comfort zone in which to experiment.

One practical challenge facing the legalization pioneers is how to keep the marijuana market from being swallowed by a few big profiteers – the pot equivalent of Big Tobacco, or even the actual tobacco industry – a powerful oligopoly with every incentive to turn us into a nation of stoners.

There is nothing inherently evil about the profit motive, but there is evidence that pot dealers, like purveyors of alcohol, get the bulk of their profit from those who use the product to excess.  “When you get a for-profit producer or distributor industry going, their incentives are to increase sales,” said Jonathan Caulkins of Carnegie Mellon, another member of the Washington consulting team.  “And the vast majority of sales go to people who are daily or near-daily consumers.”

What Kleiman and his colleagues ( speaking for themselves, not Washington State ) imagine as the likely best model is something resembling the wine industry – a fragmented market, many producers, none dominant.

This could be done by limiting the size of licensed purveyors.  It would help, too, to let individuals grow a few plants at home – something Colorado’s new law permits but Washington’s does not, because polling showed Washingtonians didn’t want that.

If you read the proposal Kleiman’s team submitted to Washington State, you may be a little boggled by the complexities of turning an illicit herb into a regulated, safe, consumer-friendly business.  Among the things on the to-do list: certifying labs to test for potency and contamination.  ( Pot can contain, among other nasty things, pesticides, molds and salmonella.  ) Devising rules on labeling, so users know what they’re getting.

Hiring inspectors, to make sure the sellers comply.

Establishing limits on advertising, because you don’t want allowing to become promoting.

And all these rules must account not just for smoking but for pot pastries, pot candies, pot-infused beverages, pot lozenges, pot ice cream, pot vapor inhalers.

One of the selling points of legalization is that states can take a cut of what will be, according to estimates, a $35 billion to $45 billion industry and earmark some of these new tax revenues for good causes.  It’s the same tactic used to win public approval of lotteries – – and with the same danger: that some worthy government function comes to depend on creating more addicts.

And how do you divvy up the revenues? How much goes to offset health consequences? How much goes to enforcement? How do you calibrate taxes so the price of pot is high enough to discourage excessive use, but not so high that a cheap black market arises?

All this regulating is almost enough to take the fun out of drugs.

And then there is the issue of drugged driving.

Much about the chemistry of marijuana in human beings remains uncertain, in part because the government has not supported much research.

So no one has come up with a pot version of the breathalyzer to determine quickly whether a driver is impaired.

In the absence of solid research, some legalization advocates insist stoned drivers are more cautious, and thus safer.  ( Hands up if you want Harold and Kumar driving your taxi.  Or piloting your airplane.  ) On this and much else, Washington and Colorado will probably be making it up as they go, waiting for science to catch up.

And experience tells us they are sure to get some things wrong.

New York decriminalized possession of small amounts of pot way back in 1977, with the condition that there be no “public display.” The lawmakers meant to assure that you partied at home, not in the parks or on the sidewalks.

They did not envision that this provision would create a pretext for throwing young black and Latino men in jail.  When police in New York City stop and frisk, which they do a lot in rougher neighborhoods, they order their targets to turn out their pockets and – whoa, public display, come with us, son! Gov.  Andrew Cuomo is promoting an amendment to curb that abuse of power.

On the opposite coast, California demonstrates a different kind of unintended consequences.  The state’s medical marijuana law is such a free-for-all that in Los Angeles there are now said to be more pot dispensaries than Starbucks outlets.

Even advocates of full legalization say things have gotten out of hand.

“It’s a bit of a farce when you can watch people come out of a dispensary, go around the corner and resell their drugs,” said Gavin Newsom, the lieutenant governor and former San Francisco mayor, who favors legalization.  “If we can’t get our medical marijuana house in order, how do we expect voters to deal with legalization?” He is now part of a group discussing how to impose more order on California’s medical marijuana market, with an eye to offering broader legalization in 2016.  And, he told me, his state will be paying close attention to Washington and Colorado, hoping somebody can, as Mark Kleiman puts it, “design a system that gets us to ‘orderly’ without getting us to ‘way too stoned.’ ”

Source: New York Times (NY)
Copyright: 2013 The New York Times Company
Contact: http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/lettertoeditor.html
Website: http://www.nytimes.com/
Author: Bill Keller

1 … 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 … 104