16 Apr 2013

Marijuana studies under Trudeau shelved before results Analyzed

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Ralph Miller was barely 30 years when he was hand-picked to lead a Canadian commission on whether marijuana should be legalized.

As research director, it was his job to guide a small army of scientists to investigate the nonmedicinal impact of a much-demonized drug during the late 1960s and early 1970s.

On May 29, 1969, then-prime minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau appointed Gerald Le Dain, a former dean of Osgoode Hall Law School and a future Supreme Court justice, to lead the inquiry. Le Dain hired the Miller — one of the few scientists who had a foot in both academia and the alternative culture. He was working at McMaster University at the time and had come to Canada a few years earlier from his native Detroit.

It has been described as one of the most comprehensive royal commissions ever conducted. The inquiry lasted almost four years. Nearly 30 public hearings took place across the country. Miller’s group oversaw 120 projects examining the physiological, psychological and behavioural effects of marijuana and other illegal drugs. They looked at extent and patterns of use, the social context of these drugs, how they played in mass media, legal and illegal sources of distribution, their role in law enforcement and the correctional system, among other things.

Around the same time, research funded by Ontario’s Conservative government was underway in Toronto to study the long-term effects of marijuana smoking in male and female volunteers. Dr. C.G. (Bill) Miles’ series of studies for the Addiction Research Foundation fed into the commission’s work though only portions of the results from the male studies were ever published.

By the time the commission issued its last of four reports in 1973, the perceived “drug crisis” in Canada was already waning. The commissioners were divided on whether pot should be legalized or decriminalized and much of the innovative research was left unanalyzed, according to Miller. The material was packed into boxes bound for the national archives. Miller says he would be willing to advise keen graduate students on how to start unpacking some of that rich data.

the Toronto Star spoke with Miller by email at an ashram in Rishikesh, India, and later by phone in West Vancouver, B.C., where he still consults on the impact of marijuana as well and holistic psychology.

“I have gotten a lot of mileage (kilometerage?) out of my Le Dain cannabis research,” he quipped by email.

Here is an edited transcript of his remarks on the collision of marijuana, science and politics from that time.

What prompted the commission?

“There was a lot of talk that drugs were destroying our youth, that hospitals were full of young people gone crazy on the use of drugs and that crime had gone up from drugs.

That was the crisis that caused Trudeau to say what is going on here.

All it was originally going to be was a departmental inquiry about marijuana issues. And then of course concern about LSD, psychedelics and so on.

At that point, coke hadn’t really reared its head in Canada much and heroin was entirely restricted to the West Coast.

Their great mistake, the Cabinet’s, is that they didn’t specifically exclude anything. They didn’t consider alcohol and tobacco to be drugs because in the general population it isn’t.

I made a point on logical grounds and in terms of physiological and socioeconomic effects, we had to include alcohol.

So the interim report did include alcohol, but not tobacco.

But I wrote all the tobacco stuff and stuffed it in the final report with only general approval at the end because they didn’t want to tackle that as well.

But when you look at the alcohol and drug research, it makes everything else a bad joke.

That’s why I quit working in the area.

They weren’t interested in the problem, in terms of the socio-economic impact of drugs, which means alcohol and tobacco. Added up, everything else is nothing compared to alcohol and tobacco problems.”

How did you land the job?

“They couldn’t find anyone in Canada qualified who also had a foot in the alternative culture.

I had given a talk on the non-medical use of drugs as part of a university conference. Le Dain heard about that and called me personally at McMaster to meet with him.

At that time, I had a giant Afro (dark brown, black) and had recently escaped from the U.S. to McMaster.

I purposely didn’t spiff myself up.

Le Dain himself was a conservative man, but brilliant, funny and intellectually honest.

I thought this was going to be just another government blah, blah, blah and I wasn’t really interested.

In my interview he never mentioned my hair.

Now my hair is trimmed up. I have my vice-president Biden hairdo on now.

No one else had ever been paid to work full time in these areas. Not only doing the original research, but surveying anyone who had ever done any LSD or any cannabis research. No one else had ever been in a position to do this before.

I was easily the world expert in cannabis.

What were some of the highlights of your research?

There were some amazing and funny things.

We got permission to use the RCMP airport at Rockcliffe. We wanted to see how fast stoners could drive around, what they would run over, if they could park.

That’s where the first driving studies were done.

We tested marijuana and alcohol on runways they weren’t using at the time.

We had regular stoners rating as high as they ever got and still driving around in the RCMP airport.

We did the first and only survey of every RCMP officer, went through all of their chemical analysis records in detail. And three months later, we had the meeting with the RCMP officers.

They were very embarrassed because they were expected to have all this data on marijuana and crime.

Other than busting people for simple possession and small dealers, they had nothing, except some guys who got busted for marijuana and were already under suspicion for gang rape a few weeks earlier. There was one case of a young man who turned out to be schizophrenic. He had taken hash and assaulted his parents. But it wasn’t clear it was even in the same month.

They said they were sure the world literature would support them, which it didn’t.

So that blew away the marijuana-causing-crime issue.

The LSD crimes were a young man naked worshipping the golden boy statue in front of the capitol building in Manitoba; some guys naked running through Stanley Park; and three people caught inappropriately dressed worshipping the trees in the park.

One of the crimes was he pulled into a gas station while high on LSD and tried to get them to service six imaginary automobiles. How’s that for heavy crime?

The worst one of all? A woman was caught attempting to fornicate with a peanut-vending machine.

The RCMP officers writing this down must have had a hoot but the head commissioners didn’t think this was funny at all. They were highly embarrassed.

We surveyed every psychiatric hospital and every hospital and major clinic with a psychiatric ward or outpatient clinic.

Physicians were seeing these kids coming in seeming schizy and that they were smoking dope and assumed that the families will want to blame something outside. Because it’s either the parenting or the outside. Because genetics is very hidden and not clearly known at that time.

In Ottawa, study, No difference between number of schizophrenics to be expected (1-3 per cent of population in age groups) and number being reported as being caused by marijuana/LSD. Which means marijuana or LSD was not likely causing anything but was maybe concomitant in increasing the symptoms.

The psych hospitals were full of people with alcohol problems. Again, alcohol wiped everything else off the map.

Was the drug crisis exaggerated?

“A general but not well-defined fear fed into “drug crisis.”

Many believed marijuana was a gateway drug. But in those days, few people smoked marijuana who didn’t start with tobacco.

I just gave a talk on that in India.”

Where did the pot for your research come from?

“A field run by the U.S. government in Kentucky. They collected seeds from around the world and were growing them in different conditions there.

Kentucky pot was a dark, rich green.”

What happened?

“We ran out of money and all of the studies we did — the pharmacology studies — were left only in the not-finished, final statistical analysis.

They didn’t come up with the money for a follow-up until all of my staff members had jobs elsewhere.

That was in 1973/74.

All of our core research, even the data, is in the national archives. Most is still in microfiche. And most of it hasn’t been published other than in the reports. Except the stuff that we involved outside people who had their own research grants from universities in California and around Ontario that published on their own.

But I couldn’t do it free.

I had my two kids. No access to staff or computers.

I was living in a wonderful commune in Stanley Park, Vancouver. I worked at a rehab program.

When the commission was over, Trudeau put the word out to the prosecutors and the whole judicial system and police to not waste time on simple possession.

Trudeau couldn’t do much with it. There wasn’t the political will around the country. They were still very conservative about it.

And here we are, a half-century later just about, and now the issue is coming around again. It’s about time.

I’ve been disappointed that no one seems to be tracking down any of us about the political, socio-economic issues.

Even young Trudeau himself seems to be dealing with these issues and doesn’t mention his dad’s commission at all.

He’s fishing around for answers and his dad’s commission did the work. And people don’t even seem to recognize it.”

What was your final conclusion?

“The big plague of stoners bringing Canada to its knees is a farce.”

Source: Toronto Star Newspapers Ltd.
Link: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013/04/08/governments_research_on_marijuanas_effects_done_long_ago.html
Author:Diana Zlomislic

16 Apr 2013

Medical Pot for Illinois Patients

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

In 1976, the idea that marijuana could be a medicine was generally taken as laughable. Then a glaucoma patient named Robert Randall won a court ruling that he needed the drug to keep from going blind. His case started a movement that could finally make headway here. The Illinois House is set to vote this week on a bill to allow the therapeutic use of cannabis.

Illinois is not exactly on the cutting edge here. California took this step in 1996, and 18 states now grant access. Polls have consistently found a large majority of Americans believe that pot has medical uses and should be available for doctors to prescribe for treating illnesses.

They have good reason for those convictions. In 1999, a panel of the federal Institute of Medicine concluded, “Scientific data indicate the potential therapeutic value of cannabinoid drugs . . . for pain relief, control of nausea and vomiting, and appetite stimulation.” The American Medical Association has urged the federal government to allow research on the medical uses of marijuana.

Illinois legislators have repeatedly declined to let patients gain access to a drug that many say offers relief they get from nothing else. But lawmakers finally may be ready to pass a bill sponsored by Rep. Lou Lang, D-Skokie, creating a process to allow access to those with serious medical needs.

The nice thing about the delay is that Illinois has had the chance to learn from the good and bad of policy in other states. Under this measure, patients whose doctors prescribe cannabis would be able to get it, but under sensible controls.

In California, often decried for lax regulation and wide-open access, patients can grow their own pot, get prescriptions from doctors who work at marijuana dispensaries and qualify for vague ailments. Lang’s bill is designed to make sure legalization of medical marijuana does not amount to de facto legalization of recreational marijuana.

To that end, it requires patients to obtain prescriptions from doctors with whom they have pre-existing and ongoing relationships, and only for specific conditions, including cancer, HIV and multiple sclerosis, but excluding pain and mental illness. Patients would have to register with the state health department, undergo a background check and get an ID card.

The number of dispensaries would be limited to avert an explosion of storefront outlets, and they would be barred near schools, playgrounds and churches. Patients would not be allowed to grow their own pot, unlike in California. They would be permitted only 2.5 grams every two weeks — also unlike the Golden State, which imposes no limit. The bill requires drivers suspected of using pot to submit to field sobriety tests, on pain of having their licenses suspended.

It’s important to give doctors and patients the freedom to use cannabis for whatever medical value it has. It’s also important to treat it as a potent drug whose unchecked proliferation can bring troublesome side effects. This bill does both, and it deserves to pass.

Source: Chicago Tribune (IL)
Published: April 16, 2013
Copyright: 2013 Chicago Tribune Company, LLC
Website: http://www.chicagotribune.com/

15 Apr 2013

Weird 1972 Experiment In Marijuana Use

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

marijuana_grow_1In the winter of 1972, 20 young women took part in one of the weirdest scientific experiments in this country’s history.

For 98 days in a downtown Toronto hospital, their brains, hearts, kidneys, livers, blood and urine were rigorously tested and analyzed.  A team of nurses kept round-the-clock records of their behaviour, logged at half-hour intervals.

Just how was marijuana affecting the 10 who had to smoke it every day?

Forty-one years later, these women are still wondering what exactly happened to them during their three-month stretch as human guinea pigs.

Doreen Brown, who now lives in Cambridge, is one of the women who took part in the study while in her 20s.  She turns 63 this month.

In the late 1960s, Brown moved to downtown Toronto to live on her own after her mother died.  She was 17.

“I was full of grief, a brick wall,” says Brown.  “I did things I knew weren’t good for me.”

Acid, mescaline, marijuana.

Though high or tired, she never missed a shift as a department store secretary.

But by the time she was 21, the lifestyle was wearing on her.  When a co-worker told her a group of scientists was looking for female volunteers to participate in a marijuana study for money, she saw an escape.

“It was a very split-second decision,” Brown says.  “I didn’t like what I was doing.  I wanted a change and thought, ‘Why not?’ ”

The research was part of a million-dollar program, the last in a series of provincially funded experiments designed to answer one of the country’s most pressing questions, raised when then-prime minister Pierre Trudeau entertained the idea of legalizing marijuana.

The study was lead by C.G.  ( Bill ) Miles, a British psychologist working in Toronto.

In 1971, the Addiction Research Foundation opened a research and treatment hospital where Miles’ marijuana study, Project E206, would be held.

He assembled a team that included two behavioural psychologists, one doctor, a psychiatrist, a social worker and a full-shift complement of registered nurses and attendants.

The hospital welcomed the 20 women to the ward with a formal dinner on Jan.  31, 1972.

Brown, then 21, scanned the long table.  None of the women, aged 18 to 35, looked familiar, though some seemed to know each other.

The ward was clean and modern, with blue carpet underfoot and the smell of fresh paint in the air.

It seemed an ideal place for a personal reinvention.

“I was hoping that maybe in there I would solve some of my issues – to be more open, happier,” Brown says.  “I was definitely a lost soul at that point.  Directionless.  I needed help but I didn’t know where to go to get it.”

The women were quickly split into two groups in two different areas of the hospital.  Half of them – the experimental group – were required to smoke increasingly potent doses of marijuana twice a night, while the other half – the control group – did not.  Both sides could buy as many relatively mild joints as they wanted for 50 cents apiece at a store that also sold alcohol, junk food, toiletries, cigarettes and magazines.

And then they got to work.

A key element of the study was its microeconomy.  The women were required to cover the cost of their existence, except for their bed and water, for 98 days.  Whatever money they earned and did not spend on food, clothing or entertainment, they could keep.  A $250 bonus awaited those who stuck with the experiment until the end.  Those who quit early would lose the extra payout and up to 75 per cent of their savings.

They made their living on a primitive-looking wooden device, a Guatemalan backstrap loom, on which they wove colourful, fuzzy, woollen belts with knotted tassels.  For every belt that passed inspection – it had to contain at least two colours and measure 132 centimetres in length – the women received $2.50.

After a few days of practice, the task got easier.

One participant bought chalk from the ward store to draw murals on the lounge walls.  Another, a professional bartender, mixed drinks.  Women in both groups were known to walk around naked.  Living on locked, separate wards didn’t stop women from the two groups from communicating with each other or people in surrounding office buildings – like the men who were being held in the forensic psychiatry unit at the Clarke Institute, which was next door.  The women wrote friendly, short messages on large placards and flashed their signs through the large windows that faced the street and an interior courtyard.

The carefree vibe didn’t last long.

The joints became so potent that some sought a doctor’s note to get out of their nightly obligations, saying they felt too sick to smoke.

“We were asking them to take it away,” Brown says.  “They knew we wanted it taken away; there was no doubt.  I felt comatose.  I couldn’t do anything.

“It became torture,” Brown says.

In the last week, the women who were left on the mandatory smoking unit refused to continue.

On May 8, 1972, the women left the centre.

Brown expected relief, some sense of freedom, but she felt paranoid instead.

“It was very scary,” she says.  “I thought, ‘Where am I going to go? What am I going to do?’ I was afraid to get on the subway.

“I was hoping that being in there for those 98 days might give me some perspective.  But if anything, for me, it magnified my problems.”

She spent a few years in therapy and went to the University of Toronto to study political science and history.

In her late 30s, she got pregnant and moved to Cambridge to raise her son.  She still works full-time at a local hearing clinic.  She has a granddaughter.

She still wonders what became of the results of the experiment.

Brown says she made several inquiries during the ’80s and ’90s.  She would have been more aggressive but feared she might lose her job at the time if word got out that she had taken part in a marijuana experiment.

She’s less concerned now.

“I want to know, I want to know,” she says.  “The dosages.  What they found psychologically, physically.  I feel ripped off, taken advantage of.  It’s just like it didn’t happen.  I feel like, yeah, you gave three months of your life for what?

“Were the results that horrible that they didn’t give them to us? You wonder.  I think they might have supported legalizing marijuana.  That’s why they didn’t come out.  I don’t know.  It leaves you with a lot of questions.”

Miles died in 2009 at the age of 74, but there are still some people who can help fill in the blanks of the women-and-marijuana study.

Janet McDougall was one of the junior researchers on the project.

She recalls the group disbanding suddenly and being left virtually alone with a few binders and reels of brown data tape.  On Miles’ instructions, she sent portions of it to economists at Texas A&M University.

Among them was John Kagel, now a professor of applied microeconomics at Ohio State University.  “Our analysis showed these people were perfectly rational, worked their butts off.  There was a beautiful, inadvertent event where they went on strike because they were making them smoke too much marijuana and it was interfering with their earnings, which appeared to be a primary motivation for some of them going into the thing.”

Research today indicates that while frequent cannabis smoking may well have harmful effects – including dependence and susceptibility to lung infections – motivation is not a problem.

Junior researcher McDougall does not know where the rest of the research data is today.

Dr.  Harold Kalant, the renowned former director of biological and behavioural research at the Addiction Research Foundation who, at 90, still works for its successor, the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, knew in general terms what Miles was doing and what he found.

Did politics get in the way of Miles disseminating the data into a final report?

“My guess is that it probably wasn’t yielding anything that was going to have a direct influence on policy,” says Kalant.

For all the questions it raised, the study did answer at least one question convincingly, according to Ohio State’s Kagel.

“In terms of the central issue, if you legalize marijuana, were you going to get a bunch of stoned people just hanging out smoking dope all the time and not doing any work? This is fairly convincing evidence that wasn’t going to happen.”

Source: Record, The (Kitchener, CN ON)
Copyright: 2013 Metroland Media Group Ltd.
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://news.therecord.com/
Author: Diana Zlomislic

15 Apr 2013

Why Legal Pot Is Coming to Nevada

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

nevada-welcomeIt was no great feat, but as I predicted last October, Colorado and Washington have legalized pot, and Nevada is now in danger of losing our rightful place as the capital of forbidden fun.

On his tourism blog, Arthur Frommer wrote last year that we could “expect a torrent of new tourism to Seattle and Denver.”

The media is all over it, with a recent story filled with enough dumb pot puns and jokes to merit an editor’s termination, including references to “smoke signals,” grilled cheese sandwiches and food trucks, and fears that the feds could “harsh the mellow.”

Medical marijuana is already legal here, and Thursday a Nevada legislative committee approved the creation of medical marijuana dispensaries.

And last week, the Nevada Legislature took up a bill to legalize recreational marijuana.  It’s not going anywhere, but I applaud the Assembly Judiciary Committee for giving it a hearing.

Here’s why: There’s a better-than-even chance that recreational pot will be legal in Nevada after the 2016 election.

Wait, what’s that? you ask.

Let me explain.

For the first time, the Pew Research Center, the highly respected nonpartisan polling outfit, found that a majority of Americans favor marijuana legalization.

This wasn’t all that surprising, however, because a majority favored legalization for the first time in a Gallup poll last year.

More striking than the raw numbers is the trend, which points to rising support for legalization.

In fact, as an insightful recent piece in Talking Points Memo pointed out, the trend seems to parallel support for gay marriage.

The movement on gay marriage, recall, has been caused by a massive demographic shift whereby younger voters overwhelmingly favor marriage equality.  Same with marijuana.  Stay calm: Before you freak out, fearing the young are sitting around getting high all day, keep in mind that 6.9 percent of the population report using marijuana regularly, according to the most recent data.  Yes, that’s up from 5.8 percent in 2007, but way down from a high of 13.2 percent in 1979.

The real driver of the surge in popularity for both gay marriage and legalization of marijuana is a rapid increase in what I’d call the “Who Cares?” Caucus.  These younger voters – 1 in 5 of all voters in November were ages 18 to 29 – just don’t see the big deal with gay marriage or legal pot.

Conservatives have begun to throw in the towel on gay marriage, but on pot, some of them are actually leading the way, including National Review magazine, the organ of the establishment right.

So the trend is clear, and now, legalization advocates are looking for their next round of target states.  ( Just how the feds will react to this remains to be seen; marijuana is still illegal in the eyes of Washington.  )

Morgan Fox, a spokesman for the Marijuana Policy Project, told me that the big prize is California, home to 38 million people and a cultural bellwether for the rest of the nation.

But Nevada is also at the top of the list, he said.  It’s not hard to figure out why – we’re libertarian when it come to vices and have been able to integrate them into our culture and economy while maintaining a sense of normalcy.  ( OK, not entirely, but you get the point.  )

The voters rejected legal pot in the past, but that was seven years ago.

The target year is 2016, when lazy Democrats will get off the couch to elect the first woman president in American history.

Again, it’s happening.

Legalizers should temper their joy.  Yes, this is the right policy.  It could raise tax revenue and keep people out of the vortex that is the legal system.

And surely Nevada’s creative minds will figure out how to capitalize on legal pot.

But, as with end of the prohibition of gambling and alcohol, we need to put the right policies in place to deal with the relevant issues, including increased marijuana consumption, crime, underage use, driving while intoxicated, addiction, etc.

These are not simple issues, and while ending prohibition will relieve certain problems, it will create others.

If we don’t get the policy right, we could wind up with prohibition again.

So, in a way, it’s good that we aren’t taking action yet.  We can watch Colorado and Washington state, which are both pretty rational, decently governed states.  Then we can follow their lead, learning from their successes and failures.

But we need to start figuring this out, because it’s happening.  And 2016 will be here quick.

Source: Las Vegas Sun (NV)
Copyright: 2013 Las Vegas Sun, Inc
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.lasvegassun.com/
Author: J. Patrick Coolican

15 Apr 2013

MJ Research Funding Cut as Support for Drug Grows

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

As more states embrace legalized marijuana, the drug’s growing medicinal use has highlighted a disturbing fact for doctors: scant research exists to support marijuana’s health benefits.

Smoked, eaten or brewed as a tea, marijuana has been used as a medication for centuries, including in the U.S., where Eli Lilly & Co. (LLY) sold it until 1915. The drug was declared illegal in 1937, though its long history has provided ample anecdotal evidence of the plant’s potential medicinal use. Still, modern scientific studies are lacking.

What’s more, the federal government is scaling back its research funding. U.S. spending has dropped 31 percent since 2007 when it peaked at $131 million, according to a National Institutes of Health research database. Last year, 235 projects received $91 million of public funds, according to NIH data.

That’s left the medical community in a bind: current literature on the effects of medical cannabis is contradictory at best, providing little guidance for prescribing doctors.

“What’s happening in the states is not related to science at all,” said Beau Kilmer, co-director of RAND Corp.’s drug policy research center. Kilmer is also part of a group selected to advise the state of Washington on its legalization effort. “It’s difficult to get good information,” he said.

Two states, Washington and Colorado, have fully legalized the drug, 18 states allow its use for medical reasons and 17, including New York, have legislation pending to legalize it.

1999 Report

Donald Vereen, a former adviser to the last three directors of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, says that most doctors’ and policy makers’ knowledge on the subject stems from a 1999 report from the Institute of Medicine, an independent nonprofit that serves to provide information about health science for the government. The group summed up its findings saying cannabis appeared to have benefits, though the drug’s role was unclear.

The IOM report recommended clinical trials of cannabinoid drugs for anxiety reduction, appetite stimulation, nausea reduction and pain relief. It also found that the brain develops tolerance to marijuana though the withdrawal symptoms are “mild compared to opiates and benzodiazapines.”

“We don’t know that much more than what’s in that report,” said Vereen.

Vereen, for one, says marijuana’s effects on pain without the withdrawal symptoms associated with other medications are deserving of further study to develop better pain drugs.

Medical Benefits

Subsequent research suggests marijuana may help stimulate appetite in chemotherapy and AIDS patients, help improve muscle spasms in multiple sclerosis patients, mitigate nerve pain in those with HIV-related nerve damage and reduce depression and anxiety. It’s even been suggested that an active ingredient, THC, may prevent plaques in the brain associated with Alzheimer’s, according to a 2006 study by the Scripps Research Institute.

Still, fewer than 20 randomized controlled trials, the gold standard for clinical research, involving only about 300 patients have been conducted on smoked marijuana over the last 35 years, according to the American Medical Association, the U.S.’s largest doctor group.

A few small companies are trying to tap into an emerging market for marijuana therapies, which could exceed $1 billion in California alone, according to Mickey Martin, director of T-Comp Consulting in Oakland, California, which advises people who want to set up their own cannabis businesses.

$40 Weekly

His model of about 750,000 cannabis patients found that the estimated spending from California’s patient population is $1.1 billion, including $56 million in doctors’ fees and about $1 billion in medicine. That assumes roughly two-thirds of the patient population will pay $40 a week for medication, Martin said. Cannabis Science Inc., CannaVest Corp., and Medical Marijuana Inc. (MJNA) are among a handful of companies developing drugs based on cannabis research or medical marijuana itself.

Until more laws change, it will be difficult to study an illegal substance with the goal of turning it into a medication, researchers say. And since it’s illegal to grow, marijuana isn’t subjected to the rigorous quality control most medicines are, raising concerns patients may be at risk from contaminants, said Vereen.

Marijuana advocates point out inherent obstacles to conducting research: the National Institute on Drug Abuse controls all the cannabis used in approved trials, but the agency’s mandate is to study abuse of drugs, not health benefits.

FDA Dilemma

This creates dilemmas. The Food and Drug Administration, for instance, has approved a clinical trial studying whether marijuana can relieve symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder. The trial, however, which is in the second of three stages of clinical testing, is blocked. NIDA, which controls the legal testing supply of the drug grown at a University of Mississippi farm, has refused to supply the researchers with marijuana.

“NIDA is under a mandate from Congress to find problems with marijuana,” said Bob Melamede, CEO of Cannabis Science Inc. (CBIS), a Colorado Springs, Colorado-based company that develops medicines derived from marijuana. “If you want to run a study to show it cures cancer, they will not provide you with marijuana,” he said. “What you cannot do are the clinical studies that are necessary.”

Attempts to expand licensed facilities beyond the University of Mississippi farm, have been denied, including a petition from University of Massachusetts agronomist Lyle Craker. The Drug Enforcement Administration denied that request in 2011, reversing a 2007 recommendation from its own administrative law judge, Mary Ellen Bittner.

NIDA Projects

NIDA also administered the most projects from 2003 to 2012, overseeing $713 million split among 1,837 research efforts. The bulk of the funding in the past decade was devoted to evaluating marijuana’s risks, potential negative impacts on the brain and developing prevention and treatment strategies, according to NIDA.

“There’s been a significant amount of study, but not clinical research,” said Brad Burge, a spokesman for the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies, a non- profit research and advocacy group. What’s lacking, says Burge, is “research intended to move marijuana, the plant, through the path to prescription approval by the FDA.”

Contradictory Findings

For now, the research that does exist is often contradictory. A survey of 4,400 people found that those who consumed marijuana daily or at least once a week reported less depressed mood than non-users, according to a 2005 report in the journal Addictive Behaviors. A 2010, however, study in the American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse of 14,000 found that anxiety and mood disorders were more common in those who smoked almost every day or daily.

Still, people continue to swear by medical marijuana. Cathy Jordan, 63, was diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis at 36 and given 3 to 5 years to live. She smoked marijuana, a strain called Myakka Gold, on a Florida beach with friends, and from that day “the disease just stopped,” said her husband Bob, 65.

“All cannabis seems to work, and it’s slowed the progression,” he said in a telephone interview. They think marijuana may interfere with a neurotransmitter, glutamate, that can have harmful effects in the disease “but we’re just guessing here. All we know is when she doesn’t have it, she gets sick and when she does have it, she doesn’t get sick.”

On Feb. 25, they were raided for growing 23 plants for Cathy’s use. Bob was charged, though the prosecutors declined to press charges because of the medical records the couple supplied, he said. Currently, Cathy is the president of FL CAN, an advocacy group meant to generate support for changing marijuana policies.

Doctor Attitudes

Doctors’ attitudes are also shifting in favor of easing marijuana restrictions. The American Medical Association, the nation’s biggest doctor organization has called for a review of marijuana’s Schedule I status, a designation that declares it has no accepted medical use.

The American College of Physicians, the second-largest U.S. doctor organization with 133,000 members, also wants criminal penalties waived for doctors who prescribe marijuana and patients who smoke it. The drug could be useful to treat multiple sclerosis, nausea and pain, based on preliminary studies and pre-clinical lab work, the group said in a 2008 position paper calling for more research.

For the first time, a majority of Americans say they support legalization, according to a survey released April 4 by the Pew Research Center.

Restrictions Easing

As those views trickle up to law makers, there’s little doubt that the easing of marijuana restrictions on the state level will continue.

“We are in the middle of the river,” said Roger Roffman, a professor emeritus at the University of Washington’s school of social work who has studied marijuana use more than 20 years. “Change is happening so rapidly with both medical marijuana and non-medical marijuana, that it is too early to know what’s likely happening in terms of the effect.”

Source: Bloomberg.com (USA)
Author: Elizabeth Lopatto
Published: April 15, 2013
Copyright: 2013 Bloomberg L.P.
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.bloomberg.com/

13 Apr 2013

New Stricter State Proposal Would Allow MMJ

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Lawmakers have introduced a measure with stricter provisions than past failed efforts to legalize marijuana sales to New Yorkers who have a “severe debilitating or life-threatening’’ health condition.

The new bill, which ends such past ideas as letting people grow their own marijuana, would have the state Health Department regulate the process, which would include allowing a certain number of private for-profits or not-for-profits to grow the plants and sell the drug under new security protocols to patients with treatment plans approved by a physician, physician’s assistant or nurse practitioner.

The measure was introduced by its past sponsors, Assemblyman Richard Gottfried, a Manhattan Democrat, and Sen. Diane Savino, a Staten Island Democrat. Savino has more political power this year as one of five breakaway Democrats who jointly run the Senate with Republicans.

The bill has 68 co-sponsors, including 10 Senate Democrats. It has previously sailed through the Assembly.

Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo has opposed the idea of medical marijuana legalization, though advocates believe he could be flexible, especially since he is already promoting a plan to relax marijuana possession laws. Eighteen states and the District of Columbia have medical marijuana laws.

Advocates say the measure will more strictly regulate the drug than prescription painkillers; patient advocates in the past have said marijuana will be cheaper, less addictive and less dangerous than many of the painkiller prescriptions they take.

The bill defines those eligible to be certified by the Health Department to obtain marijuana as someone with a “serious’’ health condition, including cancer, glaucoma, multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injuries, epilepsy, diabetes, post-traumatic stress syndrome and others.

The patient would have to be under a doctor’s supervision. Patients who a doctor believes have less than a year to live also would be eligible to buy the drug. Medical marijuana also would be listed as one of the covered drugs on a new state prescription drug tracking system intended to reduce doctor and pharmacy shopping by addicts.

Marijuana could be grown and dispensed by hospitals, for-profit companies and not-for-profit corporations, and an excise tax would be imposed on the facilities, with part of the proceeds shared with local “host’’ communities.

“The bill is much more restrictive than the New York laws regulating highly dangerous drugs like morphine, Oxycontin or Valium,’’ Gottfried said.

“Anybody who ever had a family member suffer from a debilitating disease learns very quickly the limitations of modern medicine at treating pain,’’ added Savino.

The bill’s backers include the American Public Health Association, American Bar Association, New York State Nurses Association, Pharmacists Society of the State of New York, New York AIDS Coalition, the Independence Party of New York and the Drug Policy Alliance.

Critics, including some Senate Republicans and the state Conservative Party, have said marijuana could be diverted by patients to others not eligible for the drug and that the plan sends the wrong message, especially to teenagers, about a drug some call a gateway to stronger drugs.

Source: Buffalo News (NY)
Author: Tom Precious, News Albany Bureau
Published: March 28, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Buffalo News
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.buffalonews.com/

13 Apr 2013

Support for Legal Marijuana Reached Tipping Point

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

For the first time, a major US poll has found that a majority of Americans support legalization of marijuana.

The Pew Research Center announced Thursday that 52 percent of Americans say that marijuana use should be made legal, versus 45 percent who say it should not. The trend line has been moving gradually in the direction of majority support for more than 20 years. In 1991, only 17 percent supported legalization, while 78 percent opposed.

As with gay marriage, which has also seen a sharp rise in support in the past few years, the Pew poll found major generational differences in views on marijuana. Among Millennials – those now aged 18 to 32 – support is at 65 percent, up from just 36 percent in 2008. Among Generation X, those born between 1965 and 1980, support has risen dramatically, from 28 percent in 1994 to 54 percent today.

Half of Baby Boomers support legalized marijuana today, and among the over-65 Silent Generation support has doubled since 2002 – from 17 percent to 32 percent.

Among other noteworthy findings in the Pew poll:

Nearly three in four Americans (72 percent) say government efforts to enforce marijuana laws cost more than they are worth.

Sixty percent say the federal government should not enforce federal laws prohibiting marijuana use in states that have legalized it. Last November, voters in Colorado and Washington state approved the personal use of small amounts of marijuana.

Some 48 percent of Americans say they have tried marijuana, up from 38 percent a decade ago.

Republicans oppose legalization, while Democrats support it. Among Republicans, it’s 37 percent favoring legalization to 60 percent opposing. Among Democrats, 59 percent say legalize it and 39 percent say don’t.

Marijuana’s image as a “gateway” drug is fading. Today, 38 percent of Americans agree that “for most people the use of marijuana leads to the use of hard drugs.” In 1977, 60 percent felt that way.

Despite the trends, those opposed to legalization are not giving up. In a column in the Washington Post, former Bush administration official Peter Wehner writes that as Republicans search for new issues to champion, fighting drug use and legalization should be one.

“Today, many parents rightly believe the culture is against them. Government policies should stand with responsible parents – and under no circumstances actively undermine them,” writes Mr. Wehner, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington.

“Drug legalization would do exactly that. It would send an unmistakable signal to everyone, including the young: Drug use is not a big deal.”

But in fact, Wehner writes, “the law is a moral teacher,” and government can play a role in the shaping of character. Therefore, “Republicans should prefer that it be a constructive one, which is why they should speak out forcefully and intelligently against drug legalization.”

Source: Christian Science Monitor (US)
Author: Linda Feldmann, Staff Writer
Published: April 4, 2013
Copyright: 2013 The Christian Science Publishing Society
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.csmonitor.com/

13 Apr 2013

Medical Marijuana Plan Hits Snag

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

A North Shore couple hoping to receive one of the first licenses to produce medical marijuana under new federal regulations has run into a bureaucratic roadblock.

The Regional District of Central Kootenay last week denied a variance application to let the couple expand two outbuildings on their property to a combined 4,435 square feet ( 412 square meters ) – more than four times the maximum size allowed for a home-based business in a residential area – and increase the number of permitted employees from two to four.

One of the applicants, who spoke to the Star on condition of anonymity, explained that by applying for a variance rather than going through a rezoning process, they hoped to avoid a public hearing that would have made their location common knowledge.

“I didn’t want it put on the map where a large medical grow facility was,” he said.

They aren’t hiding the nature of their proposed business from the regional district or neighbours, he added, but do have security concerns if their address is widely advertised.

However, when the matter reached the regional district’s rural affairs committee this month, directors upheld a staff recommendation to reject the variance and suggested the applicants seek rezoning instead.

Committee chair Hans Cunningham said the decision was based both on the size of the proposed variance and their belief regulations to be introduced this year will insist that commercial medical marijuana operations be located in industrial or agricultural areas.

“I applaud [the applicants] in that they want to get a jump on what’s going on,” he said.  “But if we give them a variance and the government said ‘No, you have to be on agricultural or industrial land,’ they’re not going to get a license.  So it makes sense to do the rezoning.”

The decision followed a presentation by the proponents, who came with several letters of support from neighbours and a petition of 30 names.  ( A staff report also listed objections from other neighbours, but they mostly related to the operation’s size, not its purpose.  )

“They made a hell of a presentation,” said director Larry Binks.  “Letter perfect.  It was well written and well documented.” He was one of three directors who spoke against denying the variance, believing the subject of marijuana clouded the discussion.

The proponents had no obligation to disclose what sort of business they were planning, he noted.  Still, he too believes rezoning is the right path – but wishes the applicants had been warned at the outset the variance had little chance of succeeding.

‘EPICENTRE OF MARIJUANA’

The applicant who spoke to the Star said they’re considering their options and haven’t decided whether to apply for rezoning.  “I don’t feel I’ve been treated badly by the regional district,” he said.  “It turned out my variance was too big.  I was asking for a lot.”

Even so, they would still be among the smallest license-seekers, he said.

He also said this area is already home to a high density of marijuana grow-ops as part of an illicit “black and grey marketplace” and called the federal government’s new rules the first “white regulations,” which he hopes are the first step in legalizing marijuana for recreational use.

“This new well-regulated industry will simply absorb the black market in time as it takes the profit out of growing and selling marijuana in the black market,” he said.

“We believe Nelson is the epicenter of marijuana and that reputation can be exploited for the benefit of our entire community.  Our leaders should wake up to this fact and see that there is an incredible opportunity for our community in particular to reap huge benefits.”

He urged local politicians to welcome and encourage medical marijuana entrepreneurs with “open door policies, rules, zoning, and investment,” and avoid making decisions “out of ignorance, fear, and the propaganda they have been fed for years.”

WIDER DISCUSSION

The North Shore application, the first to reach the regional district, comes as local government considers its role in policing medical marijuana operations.

The new federal regulations – originally expected to be unveiled next month but apparently now delayed until October – are intended to license commercial production and distribution of medical pot while eliminating personal grow ops.

But a recent memo from RDCK planning staff asks how Health Canada’s procedures will mesh with the regional district’s permitting process and whether building and bylaw officers will inspect commercial operations.  It also wonders about the potential effect on neighbours and whether locations will be made public.

Staff consulted other jurisdictions and concluded the most practical solution is to focus on agricultural zones where licensed producers can operate in stand-alone buildings well away from homes.  They suggest existing operators not zoned agricultural could stay put but would be required to apply for rezoning.

The board referred the memo to its April meeting, when Kootenay Columbia MP David Wilks, who is helping draft the new legislation, will be present.

But the North Shore proponent said he’s disappointed the RDCK is “playing follow the leader” when he believes it should be setting the precedents.  “Our municipalities should be looking for ways to keep our cottage industry, by working with the new regulations for maximum Kootenay benefit,” he said.

Source: Nelson Star (CN BC)
Section: Front page
Copyright: 2013 Black Press
Website: http://www.bclocalnews.com/kootenay_rockies/nelsonstar/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/4866
Author: Greg Nesteroff

13 Apr 2013

Legal Marijuana Sales Set To Quadruple By 2018

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

U.S. legal marijuana sales are projected to hit $1.5 billion this year, and that could look like nothing in just a few years. Data from Medical Marijuana Business Daily shows that total sales could quadruple to $6 billion by 2018 on the back of legalization efforts in Washington and Colorado, as well as the growing medical marijuana industry.

The two states both legalized the recreational use of weed in November. Elsewhere, 18 states and Washington, D.C. have made medical marijuana legal, while 10 others have formal measures pending to legalize medical marijuana, according to the National Cannabis Industry Association.

That’s reflective of a wider acceptance of the drug. A recent Pew Research Center poll discovered a majority of Americans support pot legalization for the first time in more than four decades. As many as 52 percent of Americans support legalizing weed — 45 percent do not — and nearly three-fourths say the amount of money spent enforcing marijuana usage laws is not worth the cost.

Such growing support has led marijuana-tied businesses to pitch their companies to Wall Street investors, the Los Angeles Times reported in March. Take Vincent Mehdizadeh, founder of MedBox, an automated weed dispensing machine company. He’s seeking $20 million from investors in anticipation of potential expansion.

“Everybody’s loosening up a lot because they realize the momentum has shifted and the financial world is going to have to make room for this industry,” Mehdizadeh told the LAT. “Wall Street and investment banks are going to have to come along for the ride, eventually.”

Thinking about investing in the marijuana industry yourself? Be sure to keep the risks in mind. It was reported last year that 500 of the estimated 3,000 U.S. marijuana dispensaries either had been closed by the government or shut down in the past year.

Source: Huffington Post (NY)
Author: Caroline Fairchild
Published: April 8, 2013
Copyright: 2013 HuffingtonPost.com, LLC
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

13 Apr 2013

LEAP Looks To Make Marijuana Legal Across U.S.

posted in: Cannabis News | 1

The legalization of marijuana is becoming a topic that is sweeping the nation.  Washington and Colorado recently legalized marijuana use and several other states have or are looking into the issue as well.  In Nevada, a bill introduced by Democrat Joe Hogan would allow residents 21 and older to own up to one ounce of marijuana for recreational use and up to six marijuana plants as well as taxing marijuana sales.

The group Law Enforcement Against Prohibition ( LEAP ) is hoping Nevada joins Washington and Colorado in the legalization of marijuana, though the group’s reasons may surprise you.

LEAP

LEAP is comprised of former law enforcement officers, attorneys and judges who all took part in the “war on drugs,” which President Richard Nixon began in the 70s.  But LEAP argues that the war on drugs not only hasn’t been effective, it’s actually helped fuel the illegal drug trade in the United States.

“The war on drugs causes what it was designed to prevent,” former prosecutor James Gierach said.  “It works in reverse and what seems like a good idea is a bad idea.  It keeps the price of drugs high, but simple laws of economics tell us as we increase the price of drugs, the more someone is willing to supply it so there’s more drugs instead of less of it.”

Gierach said the war on drugs is actually doing more harm than good because of some basic reasons.  The first reason is because prohibition ensures that large numbers of unregulated drugs will be available for people The second reason is because Giearch said the drug cartels themselves are in support of prohibition.  Marijuana is the most widely used drug in the world, Giearch said.  And according to LEAP, by choosing to ban all use of the drug, it drives up the demand for the cartels.

“In 2011, a drug threat assessment was issued,” Gierach said.  “The DEA said cartels are producing 25,100 tons of marijuana a year.  Sixty percent of the money that goes to cartels in Mexico is from marijuana.”

But LEAP’s reasoning for supporting the regulation and taxation on marijuana rather than its prohibition goes further.  Whether it’s gun violence, gang violence and crimes, having to build more prisons, a blanket prohibition on drugs makes those issues worse.

“You name the crisis, the war on drugs makes it worse,” Gierach said.  “It corrupts the police, the kids, we fund terrorism and put guns in the hands of kids=C2=85The law enforcement agencies are working for the cartels and gangs to ensure they are the only outlets for these substances.”

Gierach said that by prohibiting the use of substances, it has led to the creation of synthetic drugs, which can be dangerous to the user’s health.

“The substitutes are much more dangerous, resulting in death, disease and paralysis,” Gierach said.

LEAP also believes that freeing up money that is spent on by often lengthy investigations into drug charges and cases could be used else where to other types of cases.

Nevada

What action Nevada takes on legalizing marijuana remains to be seen.  In the past, people have been in favor of the war on drugs because of different entities getting to keep part of the drug bust money.  But it also needs to be stopped, Gierach said.

“Al Capone was in favor of prohibition,” Gierach said.  “The cartels are.  The street gangs are.  Prohibition is the foundation for the business and helps it become the most valuable commodity on the face of the earth.”

LEAP is optimistic that the national consciousness about marijuana use is changing and he hopes to see all states adopt regulation laws on marijuana use=C2=85and sooner rather than later.

“The pendulum is swinging in regulation control land taxation of drugs,” Gierach said.  “Nationally and locally on a state basis, we can’t pay the price tags that come with prohibition.”

Marijuana has hit White Pine County with two grows found last year with an estimated worth of more than $30 million.  But whether AB 402 will make any movement this session remains to be seen.  Opponents to legalizing marijuana say that it can lead to addiction and that it could send the wrong message to children that it’s OK to do drugs.

State Senator Pete Goicoeceha is one who opposes legalizing marijuana and said that he will not be supporting AB 402.

“I’m very concerned about it, especially the tax they’re imposing,” Goicoechea said.  “It will allow you to have one ounce in your possession and it will be decriminalized.  It opens it wide open for more illegal narcotics.  You’ve got to pay a thousand dollar a gram tax on it, we’ll start seeing black market marijuana.  It’ll throw the gates open.  I will oppose the bill.  I think it’s a gateway drug.  I know it’s for people 21 and older, but it’s illegal for kids to smoke and they find their way.  It’s just a matter of time.”

Goicoechea also expressed concerns passing a bill that goes against current federal laws.

It’s clear the debate surrounding legalizing marijuana is far from finished.  Whether Nevada joins Washington and Colorado is an issue that is likely to see strong opinions on both sides.

Pubdate: Fri, 05 Apr 2013
Source: Ely Times (NV)
Copyright: 2013 The Ely Times
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.elynews.com/
Author: Lukas Eggen

1 … 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 … 41