White House admits "some" medical value to cannabis - if big pharma supplies it

[RainDog]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/07/11/white-house-admits-marijuana-has-some-medical-value/

...a single passage, under their "facts about marijuana," seems to loosen a bit from the generation-old line that there is no value to cannabis whatsoever.

"While there may be medical value for some of the individual components of the cannabis plant, the fact remains that smoking marijuana is an inefficient and harmful method for delivering the constituent elements that have or may have medicinal value," the report says.

Still, today's medical marijuana patients and proprietors don't have much to cheer in the report, as it goes on to insist that smoking the marijuana plant itself is harmful and dangerous, especially for teens, and perpetuates the largely discredited "gateway drug" theory.

Critics are likely to see the passage as offering a bit of wiggle room for major (pharmaceutical) producers looking to grow marijuana to extract its psychoactive ingredient, THC, or other cannabinoid compounds that have been demonstrated to help abate symptoms of some chronic diseases, like wasting syndrome in AIDS patients or nausea in cancer patients.

iow, they continue to lie.

here's the report: http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/strategy/2011ndcs/chapter1.html#FM

...Making matters worse, confusing messages being conveyed by the entertainment industry, media, proponents of "medical" marijuana, and political campaigns to legalize all marijuana use perpetuate the false notion that marijuana use is harmless and aim to establish commercial access to the drug. This significantly diminishes efforts to keep our young people drug free and hampers the struggle of those recovering from addiction.

first, let me just say... :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: so, how many kids take anti-convulsants for things like behavior disorders, or SSRIs or ritalin or a host of other drugs that have proliferated in the last two decades. honestly - who do they fucking think they are kidding? here's a report from 2002 in the NYTimes -

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/19/us/children-s-use-of-prescription-drugs-is-surging-study-shows.html

Prescription drug use is growing faster among children than among the elderly and baby boomers, according to a new study that says spending on prescription medicines for pediatric patients has increased by 85 percent over the past five years.

oh yeah, but I forgot - those are drugs that make money for pharmaceutical cos. These are also drugs that are prescribed for children even tho the effects on children have not been studied. These are drugs that can cause death and permanent damage - and yet, they're okay for children. And, what do you know,

As states begin to require that drug companies disclose their payments to doctors for lectures and other services, a pattern has emerged: psychiatrists earn more money from drug makers than doctors in any other specialty.

How this money may be influencing psychiatrists and other doctors has become one of the most contentious issues in health care. For instance, the more psychiatrists have earned from drug makers, the more they have prescribed a new class of powerful medicines known as atypical antipsychotics to children, for whom the drugs are especially risky and mostly unapproved.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/27/health/psychology/27doctors.html

and teenagers abuse these drugs and give them to friends. yet they are prescribed.

Despite successful political campaigns to legalize "medical" marijuana in 15 states and the District of Columbia, the cannabis (marijuana) plant itself is not medicine. While there may be medical value for some of the individual components of the cannabis plant, the fact remains that smoking marijuana is an inefficient and harmful method for delivering the constituent elements that have or may have medicinal value. As always, the FDA process remains the only scientific and legally recognized procedure for bringing safe and effective medications to the American public. To date, the FDA has not found smoked marijuana to be either safe or effective medicine for any condition (see more on medical marijuana below).

here is more obfuscation. In a move from declaring the plant itself is not medicine (an outright LIE), they then try to elide the idea of whole-plant cannabis with medical concerns about smoking of the same. this is linguistic sleight of hand. This refuses to acknowledge that cannabis may be made into oil, may be added to foods, may be used as a suppository (not that such a situation would be most people's first choice, but as a way to keep down medicine for people with nausea...it might be choice) - or that cannabis may be taken via a vaporizer which, while it still may contain some particulants, does not contain the levels from a reefer cigarette.

however, there is general agreement that smoking cannabis does waste THC from the plant simply b/c cannabinoids are burned off and not inhaled from the mere act of smoking. this inefficiency, however, does not equal "no medical value."

So I have to wonder... the FDA doesn't find (smoked) marijuana to be effective medicine - yet a doctor like Donald Abrams, who has spent years working with AIDS patients, noted the patients themselves preferred whole-plant, smoked cannabis b/c it was superior to marinol in terms of efficacy and rapidity of onset of its anti-nausea effects. Again and again anecdotal reports from other patients have led doctors to relay to their other patients that people undergoing chemotherapy report better outcomes with cannabis rather than marinol. this observational data passed along from doctor to patient seems to have never reached the ears of anyone at the FDA.

The Administration steadfastly opposes drug legalization. Legalization runs counter to a public health approach to drug control because it would increase the availability of drugs, reduce their price, undermine prevention activities, hinder recovery support efforts, and pose a significant health and safety risk to all Americans, especially our youth.

So, why is alcohol legal then? If this view holds true for cannabis, why doesn't the Obama administration reconstitute prohibition for alcohol as well? Is it because, as a nation, we understand that adults have the right to make choices for themselves and, in spite of wider availability of alcohol via legalization, the problems of prohibition - the crime, the cartels, the unregulated product - were worse? And... seems to me the decriminalization experiment in Portugal did not hinder recovery support efforts - because these efforts were funded.

Roger Pertwee, the leading pharmacologist in GB disagrees with the administration's stance. Instead, he supports decriminalization for adult use as a way to make access to youth more difficult.

ahhhh, but here we get to the REAL truth of this report.

As a result of this extensive research, several marijuana-based medications have been found to be safe and effective by the FDA and are available for doctors to prescribe. Dronabinol, a synthetic form of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the most active ingredient in marijuana, is used to treat nausea and vomiting caused by chemotherapy. It is also used to treat loss of appetite and weight loss in people who have AIDS. Nabilone, a synthetic drug that mimics marijuana's main ingredient, is also prescribed to treat nausea and vomiting caused by cancer chemotherapy. Other medications based on one or more marijuana components are being carefully studied.

Pharmaceutical cos have, at this moment, petitioned the DEA to reschedule THEIR versions of cannabis medicine... and this report seems like it's supposed to be the grease to make everyone swallow the lie that cannabis should only be rescheduled if it benefits a pharmaceutical company.

This is the opening to make cannabis illegal for people in this nation to cultivate while allowing it to be grown in Japan... lovely... big pharma could name their brand "nuclear wasted," and then sell it to people here. Actually, Japan should try to plant cannabis all over their nuclear wasted landscape because of the phytoremedial value of hemp and other plants, like sunflowers, to remove harmful toxins from soil... but I digress.

This tactic was something NORML saw the moment this idea was introduced. The irony here, of course, is that many of the people who have been doing research into medical marijuana are also serving in advisory positions for GW Pharmaceuticals, the company in GB that would contract with Japan for the American medical market and that already grows cannabis to make whole-plant based Sativex - for Canada, the UK and Germany.

Sativex IS cannabis, not a synthetic. And doctors and professors and pharmacologists support the end of cannabis prohibition because of what they see as reefer madness on the part of the govt - that the effect of prohibition, as with alcohol, is worse than the effect of legalization for the general population.

Sativex: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sativex

Sativex is distinct from all other pharmaceutically produced cannabinoids currently available because it is derived from cannabis plants, rather than a solely synthetic process. Sativex is a pharmaceutical product standardised in composition, formulation, and dose. Its principal active cannabinoid components are the cannabinoids: tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD).

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/02/23/dea-to-legalize-marijuana-only-for-big-pharma-group-claims/

With this, we have fully entered into bizarro world. Whole plant cannabis is bad but whole plant cannabis grown by a pharmaceutical company via yet another company in Japan is good.

so sick of the bullshit.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PoliticAverse]

2. You can't have medicines that people can grow at home - where's the monopoly profit in that?...

[russspeakeasy]

18. Actually, there is...look at the ag seed business...huge, $$ !

[RainDog]

3. GW Pharmaceuticals demonstrates how they use whole-plant cannabis to make Sativex

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Un5JSkNX5oQ

"cannabis would not have survived over millennia as a medicine if it had been weak (medicine.)"

this segment from a BBC program shows GW Pharmaceuticals growing cannabis, curing it, taking the WHOLE PLANT and turning it into a liquid by using a solvent to extract the THC and CBD and then allowing the solvent to evaporate, leaving behind a viscous oil.

The administration statement the cannabis (marijuana) plant itself is not medicine. While there may be medical value for some of the individual components of the cannabis plant... is OBVIOUSLY A LIE when you can see, in this video, the process by which GW Pharmaceuticals creates Sativex.

This propaganda-based prohibition needs to end. The lies are too obvious.

[BanzaiBonnie]

4. They'll be promoting the Monsanto version...

GMO, ROund-Up treated varity of cannabis

[Javaman]

5. in other words...

It's only beneficial of their biggest donors make a profit from it.

[katnapped]

6. Do we need still more proof

That O is a Republican? Sheesh...that's their whole plank right there ("if someone can't make a profit off of it, what's the point?")

[stockholmer]

34. + infinity (your short statement sums up the entire corporatist government/big business nexus)

The problem with the US experiment is not big government per se, it is big government that has morphed in all areas over the last 100 years into nothing more than an enforcement mechanism for the systemic controllers. Agencies that should be for the public good are simple the tools of the elite designed to to crush all competition from small and mid-size firms.


This started in the USA during the so-called Progressive Era under Theodore Roosevelt, wherein huge monopolies like Standard Oil, etc, utilized a 'don't throw me in the briar patch' argument to get the force of government into regulating business practices (regulations that many times in the 100 years since they have written, then had a bought and paid for Congress pass). Far from creating a free market, this quashed their rivals in so many cases, and made it exceedingly hard for small entrepreneurs to compete.

The US Animal ID act is a perfect example, wherein a small sized chicken farmer has to pay exorbitant licensing fees per chicken, thus forcing them out of business, whilst monstrously huge consortiums like Tyson, etc, simply are allowed to buy one large bulk license that covers millions of birds.

Check out New Left historian Gabriel Kolko, who in his book "The Triumph of Conservatism: A Reinterpretation of American History, 1900-1916."
In it, he lays out a case for the rise of modern corporatist system during the Progressive Era.
This in turn, allows for the violation of a anti-fascistic principle – No socialization of losses and privatization of gains
(ie the confluence of big business and big government in mutual reinforcement)

http://www.amazon.com/Triumph-Conservatism-Gabriel-Kolko/dp/0029166500


Kolko was soon joined by other New Left historians such as William Appleman Williams in challenging the reigning "corporate liberal" orthodoxy. Rather than "the people" being behind these "progressive reforms," it was the very elite business interests themselves responsible, in an attempt to cartelize, centralize and control what was impossible due to the dynamics of a competitive and decentralized economy.

.............in advancing the corporate liberalism idea whereby the old Progressive historiography of the "interests" versus the "people" was reinterpreted as a collaboration of interests aiming towards stabilizing competition . According to Grob and Billias, "Kolko believed that large-scale units turned to government regulation precisely because of their inefficiency" and that the "Progressive movement - far from being antibusiness - was actually a movement that defined the general welfare in terms of the well-being of business" . Kolko, in particular, broke new ground with his critical history of the Progressive Era. He discovered that free enterprise and competition were vibrant and expanding during the first two decades of the twentieth century; meanwhile, corporations reacted to the free market by turning to government to protect their inherent inefficiency from the discipline of market conditions. This behavior is known as corporatism, but Kolko dubbed it "political capitalism." Kolko's thesis "that businessmen favored government regulation because they feared competition and desired to forge a government-business coalition" is one that is echoed by many observers today . Former Harvard professor Paul H. Weaver uncovered the same inefficient and bureaucratic behavior from corporations during his stint at Ford Motor Corporation (see Weaver's The Suicidal Corporation <1988>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabriel_Kolko
http://users.crocker.com/~acacia/kolko.html
http://miltenoff.tripod.com/Kolko.html
http://www.stateofnature.org/liberalElitesAnd.html

[theaocp]

7. *ahem* "Some" medical use, huh? Explain this, you frauds!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1450244

[RainDog]

17. I also posted this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1462200&mesg_id=1462200

and included videos with presentations from Rosenfeld, Dr. Ethan Russo and Dr. Donald Abrams in other posts on the thread.

...because, honestly, I believe what those people who are doing research into this field have to say, not reports from bureaucrats whose job it is to continue to support a failed policy.

[Mimosa]

8. Cancer patients say smoking marijuana is more effective than the synthetic marinol drug.

Who's a phony?

[RainDog]

22. what's interesting about this

is that the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) gave a grant to Dr. Donald Tashkin in 2002 to perform a large (1212 cancer patients, over 1000 non-cancer patient controls) study in order to prove that smoked cannabis increased the risk of cancer.

Dr. Tashkin was the person who identified carcinogens in marijuana smoke back in the 1970s.

The study indicated that increases in cannabis use did not result in higher rates of lung or pharyngeal cancer. Tobacco smokers, however, did show an increase by smoking more tobacco cigarettes.

The most interesting finding was among the population of the study that smoked both cannabis and tobacco - that group showed a slightly lower risk of lung cancer than the group of tobacco-only subjects.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052501729.html

Study Finds No Cancer-Marijuana Connection

The largest study of its kind has unexpectedly concluded that smoking marijuana, even regularly and heavily, does not lead to lung cancer.

The new findings "were against our expectations," said Donald Tashkin of the University of California at Los Angeles, a pulmonologist who has studied marijuana for 30 years.

"We hypothesized that there would be a positive association between marijuana use and lung cancer, and that the association would be more positive with heavier use," he said. "What we found instead was no association at all, and even a suggestion of some protective effect."

Federal health and drug enforcement officials have widely used Tashkin's previous work on marijuana to make the case that the drug is dangerous. Tashkin said that while he still believes marijuana is potentially harmful, its cancer-causing effects appear to be of less concern than previously thought.

[metalbot]

28. That's not a surprise, but it isn't necessarily positive

Most "patients" would tell you that taking an Ambien with a few beers is more effective than taking an Ambien. It's also more fun.

Marijuana is a drug with some pretty pleasant side effects. If it's only effect was to eliminate the nausea associated with chemotherapy, there'd be no wide support for legalizing it (though there would also be no reason for it to be illegal to begin with).

I've always felt that medicinal marijuana was a step in the wrong direction. If you are willing to lie a bit, there is nobody in California who is not capable of getting a medical marijuana card. Given that recreational users are already willing to break the law to get high, it's not a stretch that they might be willing to exaggerate some imaginary symptoms to a doctor. Since anyone can get a prescription, there's a de facto legalization that doesn't actually support the underlying issue: you should have a reasonable freedom of choice about what you do with your body. We've set some standards as a society about what "reasonable" means: tobacco and alcohol. Any arguments in favor/opposition for any substance should simply be less/more harmful than what we have legal today.

[RainDog]

31. I don't think I understand your statement

are you trying to say that smoking marijuana is the equivalent to taking a few beers with ambien for cancer patients?

cause, if that's the case, it seems you don't really know what you're talking about in regard to this medicine for cancer patients. when you have to vomit your guts out and are unable to keep down medication taken orally because of the same - maybe you'll get it. your remark is incredibly shallow.

and you're right - if the only effect was to eliminate nausea, it wouldn't be illegal. right now the whole-plant cannabis medicine, Sativex, is used for MS - and, notably, is appears to stop progression of the disease. If not for the conservative mindset in this nation, the news would be about the reality that this plant has so many applications for use in human life someone would have to be a fucking idiot to refuse to make it legal.

btw, not everyone in the U.S. lives in California.

if you read about the negative effects of tobacco and alcohol, it's obvious cannabis should be legal by your metric too, which I would assume you know.

however, to AT THIS MOMENT, refuse to acknowledge the medical value of cannabis is akin to claiming creationism is a viable alternative to teaching the theory of evolution.

[wordpix]

44. it worked for a friend who was nauseous following an operation b/c she took prescribed painkillers

that made her sick. The dope smoking worked like a charm and she never got hooked---pot isn't very addictive, unlike narcotics that are legalized

[Harry J Asslinger]

9. Can these guys spontaneously combust? ...please?

This is infuriating. What thorough jackassery. Even going as far as to encapsulate medical in quotations. The enormous torrent of bullshit that these past two weeks have bought is flabbergasting. I have no doubt it is in response to the Global Commission, subsequent media coverage of the War On Drugs, and the introduction of HR 2306. It looks as if July will be reefer madness month.

Pharma will get what they want from the DEA and the FDA. They're all very fond of each other, and that they can push Sativex to try and slowly kill medical marijuana is just too good for them. Not to mention the inevitable psychological bombardment from Sativex advertising.

[RainDog]

10. I also found the use of quotations for the word medical infuriating

what a bunch of wankers, honestly.

Yes, the Global Commission called for an end to the WoD, former President Carter called for an end to the war on Americans called the WoD, the 10 year survey of the Portuguese experiment was released - and in response the administration issues a little doublespeak about cannabis in order to make it possible to create a two-tier system of legality.

Reminds me of Orwell's Animal Farm.

[piratefish08]

11. is Nixon back?

who built the Hot Tub Time Machine?

[Volaris]

12. I'm mostly ok with the idea that weed can be legalized...

for medical as well as recreational use by adults, as well being a very useful cash crop for farmers. But what I'm NOT ok with is any legalization scheme that puts its legal distribution squarely and ONLY in the hands of the Pharma. Industry...why should I PAY THEM to sell me something I can otherwise go outside and grow myself? Its like having cucumbers or tomatoes outlawed unless I buy them from Burpee....just.....fuck off.

[RainDog]

13. exactly

this administration doublespeak is like something out of a dystopian novel in which corporations own people, rather than vice versa.

[FiveGoodMen]

24. The is the end-game that we're in.

This is what 'Ownership Society' really meant.

They own us.

[RainDog]

27. I have hope

not because the federal govt gives me reason for hope, but because I have seen that the American people are not duped by this propaganda when they have access to real information.

I have hope because of what people are doing in various states - because people have not and will not give up on bringing down this thuggish, racist prohibition.

Something that gives me hope, as well, in terms of social changes in societies is from a history I've been reading about the fall of communism in eastern Europe. Those who started reforms within the various govts. there had no thought that change could happen so quickly and that the forces of oppression could be ousted without bloodshed in most of those countries - tho that is exactly what happened.

In that situation, Gorbachev was the one who made it possible for reform to happen - as the person with control over the most powerful army, etc. he made it possible for reforms because he refused to endorse police state tactics - because the Soviet economic system did not have the funds to do so.

Knowing that Philadelphia saved 2 million dollars last year by easing marijuana law, knowing that California and Colorado could lead the way by creating industries and R&D that will create jobs - I think people here, like people in eastern European communist countries, will finally vote with their actions and in the voting booth to change state laws.

The federal govt does not have the money or the resources to intervene across this entire nation.

Additionally, when people recognize that Sativex is cannabis - if and when it is approved here (it's in phrase III trials now - and, again, is already available in other western nations) people will also recognize they do not have to pay the prices the pharmas will demand for this medicine - and they'll make their own.

[Harry J Asslinger]

30. Like points of light growing all across the nation

I do wonder how far a banal and spurious report like this travels along in influencing opinions. Those usually in "favor" of prohibition have simply inherited it as part of the status quo, and as such do not make an effort of looking for reports like these (unless they happen to enter a discussion on the issue). The period of thunderous change might just be coming in 2012.

It would be lovely if Sativex turned out to be the proverbial straw. It would very readily point out the hypocrisy.

[RainDog]

33. I hope that's the case - a change in 2012

I hope Colorado legalizes cannabis.

I guess that's a great quandary for drug warriors - do you continue to keep life saving and life enhancing medicine away from Americans in order to prop up lies or do you just lie through your teeth and hope no one notices.

Sativex already points out the hypocrisy, even tho it's not legal here.

what a joke to have to consider moving to another country for medicine for a disease b/c your own is so bassackward.

[slipslidingaway]

14. knr nt

[RainDog]

15. From Jan. 2010: 8 in 10 Americans favor legalizing medical marijuana

Here's the ABC News poll: http://abcnews.go.com/PollingUnit/Politics/medical-marijuana-abc-news-poll-analysis/story?id=9586503&page=1

In addition, 51% of Americans under the age of 65 support legalization of cannabis for personal use. 53% of Democrats support this and 63% of those described as liberals support this.

RawStory reported this info by saying that the medical marijuana debate among Americans is over. Obviously they were referring to Americans who do not hold positions that allow them to dictate to others by lying.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/01/18/10-americans-favor-legalizing-medical-marijuana-poll/

Why do more liberals support this overall - when, obviously, most of us are not actually using cannabis? The answer appears to be that social conservatives tend to be less well educated and do not analyze information they are given.

Lazar Stankov, in the peer-reviewed journal Intelligence, reported this:

Conservatism and cognitive ability are negatively correlated. At the individual level of analysis, conservatism scores correlate negatively with SAT, vocabulary, and analogy test scores. At the national level of analysis, conservatism scores correlate negatively with measures of education and performance on mathematics and reading assessments.

Obviously you don't have to be an idiot to support the WoD, but it seems that it helps.

[wildbilln864]

16. k & r! nt

[OneGrassRoot]

19. K&R! n/t

[Blue Owl]

20. Dear White House:

1) open mouth;
2) remove big pharma's corporate ballsack;
3) turn around and walk the other way.

[ooglymoogly]

21. Dear WH: Lets face it, you are just a bunch of flim flam frauds.

Toadies to the big boy mobsters who run this place with an iron fist.

[RainDog]

37. just for the record - Clinton was no better on this issue than Obama

and there are plenty of democrats who do not want to look at the medical evidence that indicates prohibition is not only a lie, but is doing a disservice to people with severe illnesses in this nation.

what I fault Obama for is not upholding his promise that his administration would not DENY SCIENCE in order to placate the beliefs of the most ignorant among us.

[Plucketeer]

23. "so sick of the bullshit"

LOL! Some Weedagra from Pfizer would cure that!

[RainDog]

25. sigh

I hear that cannabis is pretty amazing because it has so many uses - industrial, medicinal and otherwise.

what's also weird, at least to me, is that this guy named Rick Simpson, in Nova Scotia, has been giving away what he calls hemp oil and claims it is a cure for cancer. Unlike GW Pharmaceuticals, tho, it seems that Simpson only uses the buds of the plant. However, for all intents and purposes, the oil that he makes is created in pretty much the same way as Sativex - on a one-person scale.

I watched a video he made about his claims and about how he creates the oil. Simpson tells people to use an amount about the size of a piece of rice (this is very concentrated stuff) - three times a day.

I wish someone would do a controlled study on his claims.

not that I have any current experience, but it seems I remember that cannabis was conducive to...some things that a lot of people enjoy.

One day, if this stuff is ever legal, I have a funny story to tell about that - even tho, or rather, especially because the joke was on me.

[Plucketeer]

26. Well...

once again, if there's a way for big money to control this stuff, we'll have access to it. I'm SO TIRED of the total control of EVERY FRIGGIN thing that might turn a penny profit. I'm honestly glad I'm in my "golden years". With luck, I might have another 20 to get thru. Even those might be too much to have to endure. No suicidal thoughts, mind you - just dealing with realities.

[jmowreader]

29. Why does every government statement on marijuana predicate on smoking?

All the "this is why we're not going to legalize marijuana" statements talk about "smoked marijuana."

I agree with them: if the ONLY way you could ingest marijuana was to smoke it, they'd have a point because, in addition to all the particulates, tar, etc., in marijuana smoke, you're probably wasting 90 percent of the active ingredients in cannabis by setting it on fire and inhaling the smoke.

It makes one wonder: have these people never heard of a hash brownie? Unlike tobacco, which under no circumstances may be eaten (the nicotine will kill you if you do), marijuana can be eaten, it can be vaporized...for all I know you could soak a lid of weed in a gallon of Absorbine for a week and make "happy liniment."

[RainDog]

32. it's how propaganda works

you don't talk about the truth - you create a little bubble you call truth and argue from that.

[felix_numinous]

35. It is foolish to disrespect the public

-most people can see right through their double standards and know everyone connected to drug policy is in it for the $$$$$$$$$$$.

This authoritative stance just alienates everyone and perpetuates a counter culture lifestyle. Compared to countries where herbs and medicines are legal and the public has been completely informed and educated in a realistic way about self medication, our health is substandard.

Our whole medical paradigm fosters an ignorant dependent relationship, and enables the public to be continually poisoned by the environment, food industry and untested drugs. For profit medical industry has ruined American's health both physically and psychologically--and ruined the public trust.

[RainDog]

36. what especially irks me about this pronouncement

is the arrogant bullshit of putting the word medical in quotes in relation to cannabis medicine - which ignores 5000 years of history as well as the most advanced research into this subject.

then, of course, there is the "think about the children" elision of adult choice with children - parents need to educate their children about different substances, educate them (not try to scare them) about risks and about the parents' own values - i.e. children shouldn't drink alcohol or ingest cannabis. or have sex. we don't disallow sex because it's a problem for children, either.

and to claim they care about keeping drugs away from children when pharmaceutical cos have free range to get doctors to prescribe medications off label - like anti-convulsants for bipolar disorder, for instance, medical problems for which such drugs ARE NOT APPROVED yet are allowed because... why, exactly?

the double standards are ridiculous and, yes, it creates a situation in which these people and their offices lose any respect.

I was hoping, at least, for some benign neglect - some "we have better things to do and more important priorities," rather than interfering with the implementation of state laws VOTED UPON BY PEOPLE IN THOSE STATES.

considering the federal prohibition is based upon lies - the states seem to have every MORAL right to do right by their citizens until the federal govt decides to stop lying in order to justify its existence.

[felix_numinous]

38. You know, the schizophrenic public announcements

that allowed the The National Cancer Institute announcement touting benefits a couple months back--followed by the draconian old school rap about public menace seems indicative of multiple influences. President Obama says he will discourage marijuana arrests....then the DEA goes nuts arresting MMJ providers.

Makes you wonder what is really going on behind closed doors when following drug policy is like listening to someone with multiple personality disorder. One week all is well.....the next week comes a wave of crackdowns....:crazy:

My hope that all of this instability is indicative that things can still change in the public favor--I hope so!!!

I wanted to add: I think there are many 'rogue' elements who are acting independently of the executive and legislative branches--they have unlimited funds and I think it is VERY difficult to rein them in when they are used to having such independent power. I think not only the DEA but branches of FBI and NSA and other departments are acting as sovereign powers right now--and I often wonder if they control some 'public announcements' too.

Many people's impression of 'the government' is that it is one entity, but right now these different departments have gotten out of control--they have become bloated and greedy to hang onto their very existence, so are willing to lie to the public to sustain themselves. The MIC/PIC are Frankenstein monsters.

[RainDog]

39. this issue is going to change because of the votes by citizens at the state level

of course, even when that happens, legislatures have tried to overturn those votes and have refused to implement laws that create policies to reflect the will of the people.

this is what happened for more than a decade in Arizona and in Washington D.C. in regard to medical marijuana.

...and, in that case, those legislators need to be removed from office b/c they're not doing their jobs.

[RainDog]

40. however, I should add that those states that don't allow initiatives, etc.

have also had decent legislators who have proposed laws to stop this stupid WoD.

the problem is that EVERY state has idiots who are legislators who think they are justified to continue prohibition b/c of their own ignorance.

[RainDog]

46. you know, if they need to cut the deficit -

they could at least decriminalize (via the Frank/Paul bill) and then they could cut down the size of the DEA.

I think you've got a GREAT idea.

and just to add, cause I didn't before -

I agree with you that there are different agendas going on.

and when some of those with agendas engage in blatant lies, they're gonna be called on this.

I'm just really amazed at the positive results from so much research into cannabinoids. I think our grandchildren will look back on this time of prohibition and wonder how so many people could've been so stupid.

[bertman]

41. Excellent post, RainDog. Too late to REC but here's a kick.

The PLAN is:

-Keep marijuana illegal until Big Pharma can get enough "synthetic" marijuana or derivatives approved by the FDA so it can take over the pot-growing bidness in the U.S. Of course, this will be done under the guise of the Federal DEA and military groups like Xe 'taking down' these illegal operations. Then the land will be confiscated and sold to the Big Drug Boys.

-Now that it has been PROVED (by proclamation of our Federal Overseers) that marijuana has no legitimate value the effort to ERADICATE home-growers will skyrocket, filling our Corporate Prison complex with SLAVE LABOR that will be approved for use doing 'community service work' for America's wonderful corporations by our budget-conscious legislators and "leaders".

-The effort to take over pot production will stimulate a domestic war inside the U.S. akin to what the Mexican people are dealing with now. But, hey, that's good for the ANTI-TERRORIST bidness. We all know that anyone who would grow, use, or advocate for the legalization of an ILLEGAL DRUG is most certainly a terrorist. There's a BOOM in sales of military hardware (pun intended) for the WAR on DRUG TERRORISM. We ALWAYS find money for weapons no matter how bad the economy is. (Am I the only one who has noticed this?) Any American who has ever even said a good thing about marijuana will be subjected to intense scrutiny and maybe even rendition to some other nation where torture is Legal (unlike within the borders of the USA). Every email, handwritten note, phone conversation, tweet, twit, and twaddle will be recorded, analyzed, and used to prosecute the domestic terrorists who refuse to acknowledge that the DEVIL created marijuana after he lost the battle with GAWD for the hearts and minds of human beans the planet over.

-Mass paranoia infecting the American citizenry will require massive prescribing of LEGAL drugs to EVERY American as part of the daily regimen to eliminate any memory of or positive association with the DEVIL WEED.

-An UPSTANDING CITIZENS LEAGUE will be formed of anyone who is unemployed, willing to work for shit wages, and swear allegiance to a DRUG-FREE America. All members of this citizens security force will be provided with side arms and shoulder-fired weaponry, as well as a license to shoot-to-kill anyone who is deemed a DRUG TERRORIST. Training in target selection and marksmanship will be subcontracted to Xe and Prison Corporation of America.

Invest now. Armaments and pharmaments. You can't lose. Capitalism is THE American Way.

[RainDog]

42. LOL

thanks, bertman!

I think the plan is a bit simpler than all that. I think the DEA wants to be able to make Sativex legal and continue to harass state/local providers as well as people who grow for their own recreational use.

the irony, of course, is that GW Pharmaceuticals is a British Company that wants to have Japan do the labor and then sell to people in the U.S.

...another job subtraction strategy.

Not to mention that the U.S. grows some of the finest in the world, so I've heard.

USA! USA! :)

[bertman]

43. We are Truly Number One. Or close. Or at least runners up. Or a close fifth.

USA! USA!



On Edit: RainDog, my post was only partially intended as irony. So much of it is based in reality that it is scary as hell.

[RainDog]

45. who knows which way the wind will blow

I guess I'm able to live with a little bit of blissful optimism because I do not believe there is any way the federales can stop people from growing - Philadelphia just relaxed their law for marijuana possession b/c a spokesperson said that doing so does not in any way interfere with the supply available.

over the last twenty years, the WoD created conditions for growers to learn so much about the plant, to share information, to share plants - to learn hybridization techniques - I just don't think that it's possible to get rid of cannabis or people who grow it. It's too easy to grow and the nation is too big and too many people - more than half under the age of 65, support legalization for personal use.

with all the medical information that's been published, as well, there are too many benefits, it seems, and people will not allow the federal govt to deny them access to something that may have MAJOR health benefits.

they just won't - and they won't let their loved ones suffer needlessly.

recreational marijuana use has had a traditional pattern - the age group with the most imbibers is 20-30. When people get married and have kids and move on in their careers - usage drops. Now, as more and more medical benefits are revealed, however, I think we'll see more older people turn to this plant for issues having to do with aging and illness - alzheimers, arthritis, cancer, diabetes...all auto-immune disorders.

so... the feds are gonna have a shoot out with grandma? I don't think so.

Marinol has been available for more than a decade and people do not prefer it for cancer treatment, etc. The big deal now, also, seems to be CBD - the other (out of the many) cannabinoid that has been studied quite a bit. Researchers keep identifying others - GW Pharm is smart to stay with the whole plant - they must've paid attention to what doctors have found in their studies.

I even think that most people in govt at the federal level know that cannabis is going to be legal - that it's just a matter of time. I think the majority of them think some sort of decriminalization is best, even.

Good old Eric Prince, last I heard, was being a loyal American in Dubai or some such - putting Xe outside of Congressional oversight. His group will probably be too busy creating mayhem and fostering hatred for this nation in the middle east to go after some guy in northern california.

Not only that, but CO is knocking the socks off the rest of the country - much more under the radar than CA - with its push toward some sort of legalization.

[bertman]

49. One of our stalwarts here on DU might not agree with your comment that

the attitude is changing. Reading his story of PROSECUTION to the hilt, job loss, lost income, etc. does not make me feel that we are gaining any ground.

A friend of mine got popped when the popo were chasing a perp through his yard and saw the plants he was growing for his own consumption (and for friends) but not for "pushing". $Ten Grand$ later he got the charges dropped. If he had not been able to raise the $10,000 from a relative he would have been pulling time for growing with intent to sell, because he could not afford a lawyer.

So, I revise my comment to "We're Number One in Incarcerating Non-Violent Americans for Possessing a harmless plant".

I'm trying to be optimistic, too.

[RainDog]

50. No doubt there are problems

however, as with the two cases you mention (I assume you're talking about Bernie - a folk hero) such actions don't stop other people.

but I'm not associated with growing in any way so I can't really say much about it with any certainty - other than to say that people have not stopped growing - and the actions by the current states that are allowing medical cannabis are making it easier, rather than harder, for people to grow their own for medicine or otherwise.

without a doubt our rate of incarceration is shameful and for-profit prisons are repulsive.

people thought, decades ago, that it was only a matter of (a short) time before laws caught up to reality, too. the difference now, I think, is the amount of research that has been done - in spite of hampering the same here (while funding it elsewhere - more ridiculousness) that indicates valid medicinal uses for something which is relatively affordable for people who are or will be on fixed incomes who can benefit from a natural, herbal treatment.

[madrchsod]

47. the Canadian government tried to grow pot......

they failed...badly.

home grown medical pot is the only way. big pharma will make shitty crap at a really obscene price. i "have heard" of people who grow their own to fight effects of their cancer treatment.

[RainDog]

48. have you ever heard about that guy from Canada, Rick Simpson?

he has vids on youtube about his hemp oil, mentioned above. people are claiming it has rid them of cancer. but there are no studies that I know of.

what someone needs to do is have both the person with the illness and his or her doctor interviewed - because all of those people were also under the care of doctors.

the U.S. already grows cannabis for some people - and, from what I hear, it's not so very good. It has 3% THC. But that means it also has more CBD since those two work in tandem and more THC means less CBD - and CBD is extremely useful for various illnesses.

Sativex is already available for prescription for people with MS in Canada. I wonder how those who have used it and other versions think they compare.

[dogmoma56]

51. the entire economy would collapse if we let individuals run small cottage industries an keep

money in the local communities