Officials In Obama’s Drug Czar Office Wanted To Decriminalize Marijuana

But they never made their case publicly.

By Jason Cherkis

Alessandro Garofalo/Reuters

So close, President Obama, but so far.

WASHINGTON ― Officials at the Office of National Drug Control Policy under President Barack Obama wanted to take a more lenient stance on marijuana, with one former official telling HuffPost that staff pushed to ease federal prohibitions against the drug. But they never made that case directly to the public.

“ONDCP was in favor of decriminalizing but not legalizing,” explained former deputy director A.

Thomas McLellan, who worked in the White House office during Obama’s first term.

Such a policy shift could have given a shot of momentum to efforts to relax marijuana laws across the country. But it never happened, in large part because officials were worried it would consume the office at a time when they needed to focus on the more pressing issue of the opioid epidemic.

The Office of National Drug Control Policy, which is more commonly known as the drug czar’s office, also determined that it couldn’t publicly support decriminalizing marijuana because of a provision in the legislation that authorized its existence.

The bipartisan 1988 law that created the drug czar’s office declared that “the legalization of illegal drugs is an unconscionable surrender in the war on drugs.” A later measure reauthorizing the office stipulated that no federal funds be used to study the legalization of marijuana or other Schedule I drugs and that the office had to “oppose any attempt to legalize” cannabis. As long as that language existed, Obama era staffers felt limited in their ability to speak out, let alone to signal real support for decriminalization.

“It forced the office to take a policy position that it may or may not agree to,” Michael Botticelli, the former director of the drug czar’s office, told HuffPost. “[It] hamstrings you into a policy position that might be the policy of the day but that might change.”

The anti-marijuana language in the statute not only hamstrung the office in taking new policy positions; it encouraged pro-marijuana advocates to question the office’s credibility on the issue.

“The existence of that statute, that prohibition, has been something that our movement has held up to criticize ONDCP,” said Tom Angell, the founder of Marijuana Majority. “Taking that off the table would be good for us and it would also be good for them. … It makes them look political in ways that their scientists probably don’t want to be.”

Officials within the drug czar’s office during the Obama administration agreed with Angell. Many suggested privately that the statute undermined their authority. “It makes it look like the office’s primary purpose is to oppose marijuana,” said another former employee.

The statute also made answering questions about marijuana policy complicated. When Botticelli was a deputy within the office, Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) introduced legislation to remove the by-then-controversial language on marijuana. The bill went nowhere. Botticelli struggled even to answer questions on the subject.

Operating within these political and legal constraints, Botticelli and others adopted more nuanced approaches to their work. The office pushed to obtain more federal funding for treatment.

It supported states that sought to route those addicted to illegal substances like opioids away from the criminal justice system and into treatment. Botticelli supported the Justice Department’s efforts to shed the more onerous drug war era initiatives such as requiring mandatory minimum sentences for even low-level drug possession.

In a December 2015 interview on “60 Minutes,” Botticelli declared the war on drugs a failure.

“We can’t arrest and incarcerate addiction out of people,” he said. “Not only do I think it’s really inhumane, but it’s ineffective and it cost us billions upon billions of dollars to keep doing this.”

Later in that interview, Botticelli was asked about legalizing marijuana, not just decriminalizing penalties for its use. He said he was against states’ commercializing the drug. “It becomes an addiction to, unfortunately, a tax revenue that’s often based on bad public health policy,” he said.

His predecessor had had similar reservations about outright legalizing marijuana.

The closest Botticelli came to addressing the decriminalization issue directly occurred when District of Columbia residents voted to ease restrictions on marijuana use. “I might not agree about legalization, but I do agree with our own ability to spend our own money the way that we want to,” he said.

Neither Botticelli nor his office would go much further than that during the eight years of the Obama presidency. Had they done so, they would have incurred blowback from both parties in Congress and alienated drug prevention advocates who oppose marijuana use. More importantly, the controversy would likely have distracted from the more critical opioid epidemic. That crisis ended up driving home the argument for a public health approach to drug addiction.

“You have to figure out if the juice is worth the squeeze,” said the former drug czar employee.

Of course, taking a stand in favor of marijuana decriminalization might also have given advocates a major boost in their efforts to change the conversation around marijuana policy.

Now, under the Trump administration, any internal angst over marijuana is likely moot. Soon after taking over the Justice Department, Attorney General Jeff Sessions began reversing the previous administration’s reforms. Sessions has instructed his prosecutors to vigorously enforce mandatory minimum sentences.

Those changes are “very alarming,” Botticelli told HuffPost.

“It seems like we are moving backwards instead of forward,” he said. “And to a position that I think doesn’t have a lot of science and evidence. We’ve tried that approach for a very long time, and it doesn’t seem to really have made a significant difference.”

DIY: Four Smoking Devices You Can Make at Home

 

 

By Allie Beckett

 

Got weed but no pipe? You’re in the right place!

It’s a commonly overlooked problem — you have a pocketful of potent herb but nothing to consume it with! Well, let me show you some easy tricks for making homemade smoking devices for when you’re in a pinch.

Apple Pipe

The classic apple pipe — a smoker’s favorite party trick. Perfect for when you’re mid-hike and you realize you forgot a bowl or papers. Simply turn your snack into a foolproof pipe! Try taking your apple pipe to the next level by using some unconventional fruits and veggies such as strawberries, bananas, or even zucchini! 

Here’s the rundown on how to create an apple pipe; all you’ll need is an apple (or another piece of fruit) and a pen. First, remove the stem from the top of the apple and push a pen straight down into the center of the apple. Then, make a second tunnel by pushing the pen horizontally into the apple, connecting the two tunnels. Finally, stuff that top hole with some sticky herb and puff away! That’s it! Bonus, you can throw it out without littering afterward! Watch this YouTube video for additional instruction. 

Starburst Pipe

Another munchie-turned-pipe genius invention of the internet — the starburst pipe.  This DIY pipe is easy to make, sustainable, and tasty. And this pipe is one you can get creative with and build it however big or small you’d like. Start with lining up about seven starburst candies that you’ll use to build the stem of the pipe. Then, take a pen and create a hole through the center of each starburst. 

Gently stick the “bageled” starburst together to create the stem. Using an additional piece of candy, make an “L-shaped” tunnel that will connect the pipe’s stem to where the bowl will be. Create a bowl piece and “Voila! Light up and taste the rainbow! Watch this YouTube video for additional instruction. 

Book Paper Joint

When you’re feigning for a joint with no papers to be found, look no further than the nearest thin-grade paper book (dictionaries, encyclopedias, etc.). The pages of these often-thick books are thin enough to replace your average joint paper in a pinch, but most books will have thick pages that will burn harsh. All you’ll need to make this joint a reality is thin paper and an envelope. Simply tear out the paper, customize it to the size you’d like, then roll a joint like you normally would. When it comes time to seal, grab that envelope, wet the sticky part with your tongue and rub it across the edge of the joint paper. The stickiness from the envelope will transfer to the paper allowing the joint to stick and seal together. And there you have it — a legal way to literally burn prohibition. Learn how to roll a joint with this Youtube video. 

CornCob Pipe

Throwing it back to some serious OG tech with this DIY corncob pipe. Another sustainable, munchie-turned-pipe that’s perfect for camping, hiking, or when you can’t find anything else in your grandma’s kitchen. All you’ll need to make this #tbt pipe is an ear of corn, a knife, and some kind of hollow stem. First, break (or cut) the corncob in half, make sure the center of the cob is thick enough to make a quality bowl piece. Remove the corn on the outside (you don’t have to if it’s just for one or two uses) and dig out the center of the cob with your knife in a twisting motion — and please, be careful. Once you have your corncob bowl, it’s time to make/find a stem. Back in the good ole days, they used to use a wild rice stalk … now I don’t blame you if you don’t happen to have one of those laying around. So get creative and use any kind of hollowed stem — an emptied out pen, a metal straw, a piece of hollowed wood, etc. You can use a drill to quickly hollow out a large stick or something similar for the mouthpiece. Once you have your stem ready, cut a hole into the side of the corncob for the stem to fit nice and snug. Make sure the holes have a little bit of airflow between them, then light up and chief away! Watch this YouTube video for additional instruction. 

Bonus: If you don’t have any corn, you can make this same pipe by replacing the corncob with a segment of a large wood stick to make a fully wooden pipe.
  

The effects of alcohol and marijuana on academic performance

By Livia Areas-Holmblad

 

Researchers from various universities in Connecticut analyzed the combined impact of alcohol and marijuana on the academic performance of college students and found that even moderate use of both substances can negatively impact a person’s grade point average (GPA).

Shashwath Meda, senior clinical research associate at the Olin Neuropsychiatry Research Center at Hartford Hospital, explained that what motivated him to lead the research was “the simple fact that alcohol and marijuana are prevalently abused in colleges, yet there is almost no scientific study that examines both these variables together on academic performance.”

“The current study to our knowledge is the first one looking at combined effects of pot and alcohol in college students over an extended period of time where drug use is very prevalent,” he said. “We find something strikingly similar to what was reported in a similar study in high school students recently that showed teenagers who were followed over a 7-year period showed that those who used both marijuana and weed tend to get worse grades at school.”

The researchers examined data collected over two years by the Brain and Alcohol Research in College Students, which included monthly survey answers — regarding alcohol and marijuana use patterns — from 1,142 freshmen in college (aged 18 to 23) and examined their math, verbal, and writing Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores.

The researchers also collected individual information on the GPA of each student for each academic semester and separated students’ records into three groups: medium/high quantity users of both substances; students who consumed no and/or low amounts of marijuana but medium/high amounts of alcohol; and students that didn’t use or used very small amounts of both substances.

  Socioeconomic status, family history of alcoholism, and demographics were some other factors accounted for in the study. Meda said that it’s important to note that the sample was gathered based on a convenience sampling of two local Connecticut colleges. “The demographics of students and their background when considered nationwide could be very different,” he said.

Although there were no significant discrepancies on pre-baseline academic achievements or pre-college SAT scores, students who used moderate to high quantities of alcohol and low marijuana had lower GPAs than their sober peers.

Medium/high users of both alcohol and marijuana were found to have a lower predicted GPA than those who did not use or moderately used either of the substances — at the outset examination as well as throughout the period of the study. 

Meda’s team also found that those who used substantial amounts of alcohol alone but little to no marijuana did not have a consistent decrease in GPA scores during the 2-year period. “From what we can see in this current sample, educational disadvantage from heavy drinking fades over time, but the effect of combined alcohol and marijuana use does not,” he said. “It’s important to keep in mind that an absence of a statistical effect does not mean alcohol might not be interfering with academic performance. There is extensive evidence of both acute and chronic alcohol having a detrimental effect on brain functioning, so the lack of a significant finding in our analysis should perhaps be kept in context and not overextended.”

Meda also said that the lack of a proven educational disadvantage linked to increased alcohol use “was indeed a surprising finding but there might be several possible reasons why this might have been the case in our study.”

He explained that perhaps alcohol wasn’t linked to a decreased academic performance because it is metabolized by our bodies very differently than marijuana is, thus it is possible that…

 

brain functions of those who have been consuming alcohol alone may have adapted over time to its effects. Another possible explanation is that “students consuming alcohol alone might have been cognizant enough to see their grades drop and either worked harder to reach a better GPA or could have just switched to easier courses,” Meda said. “[Perhaps] compared to folks using both substances, they perhaps just spent less time socializing and missing classes. All of these are informed suppositions, we did not have enough information in the study to test these hypotheses.”

The researchers noted that their findings mirror those of previous studies on alcohol and/or marijuana, which have suggested that poor academic outcomes are often associated with drug use.
“Studies have shown that folks who abuse drugs while in college often tend to drop out, face delayed graduation and generally have poorer outcomes post-graduation, like having a hard time finding a job, hard time keeping a job, and etc.,” Meda said. “Our study doesn’t imply causation in any way. 

It’s a purely associative or correlative study — like perhaps 95 percent of the scientific literature. Nevertheless, we feel it’s a step in the right direction.” 

A follow-up analysis conducted by the team suggested that the students who had curbed their substance use over time were able to recover and display improved academic performance or higher GPA scores. “We feel that early provision of information, intervention, and monitoring might be key — both by parents at home and the colleges — especially in the first semester,” Meda concluded.
 

Everyone agrees ‘driving while high’ is bad. But what does that even mean?

By Keith Humphreys

A woman exhales while smoking marijuana during the annual 420 marijuana rally on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on April 20, 2016. (Justin Tang/Canadian Press via Associated Press)

 

While several states have legalized using marijuana, nobody is in favor of driving under its influence. But as states crack down on high driving, they're struggling to figure out what counts as driving high, and how they can reliably test for it.

Currently, if police determine they have reason to suspect a driver of being under the influence -- perhaps due to erratic driving or other behavior -- they can administer a field sobriety test. But unlike alcohol, there's no on-scene breathalyzer for marijuana, and so in order to confirm marijuana use, officers must take drivers to police stations to administer a blood test.

But even if after all that, officers are able to get that test and prove a driver had marijuana in his or her system, there's a debate over what level really means the driver was actually under the drug's influence.

To combat marijuana-impaired driving, some states have established a clear legal standard for judging whether someone is driving under the influence: 5 milligrams of THC (the primary intoxicant in marijuana) per milliliter of blood.

But new research shows that even substantially impaired marijuana users would not be caught under this standard if they consumed pot in edible form.
Unlike alcohol, which is nearly exclusively consumed in beverage form, marijuana can be consumed via a variety of methods. While it's primarily smoked, as the legalization and commercialization of marijuana has spread, cannabis-infused sodas, tinctures, cookies, and candies have become increasingly popular.

That poses a challenge for regulators: Because edible cannabis is absorbed through the stomach rather than the lungs, most researchers suspect that edible and smoked marijuana affect the body differently. One such researcher, Johns Hopkins University professor Ryan Vandrey, recently studied whether consuming marijuana edibles raises blood levels of THC sufficiently for a stoned driver to be defined as legally impaired.

Participants in Vandrey’s study consumed marijuana brownies of varying strength that matched the levels of THC commonly available in the recreational and medical markets. The study continuously monitored participants’ blood for the presence of THC over several days. Although the marijuana brownies caused significant decrements in participants’ attentiveness, physical coordination and ability to concentrate, only 11 percent of them ever had a THC blood level over the legal limit.

In other words, although the participants would have been very high-risk drivers, current law defined 89 percent of them as nonimpaired.

“Our findings tell me that 5 nanograms of THC per milliliter of blood is just not a good marker for intoxication,” Vandrey says. Attorney and highway safety expert Stephen Talpins agrees, arguing that the current standard is “a license to use with near impunity. There should be zero tolerance for people driving with any amount of THC in their blood.”

A zero tolerance standard would solve most of the problems of marijuana edible-impaired drivers going undetected, although a few of Vandrey’s study participants never showed any detectable level of THC in their blood. But a zero-tolerance standard might unfairly convict heavy pot users of impaired driving, because small amounts of THC can linger in their blood for days or even weeks after their most recent toke.

Detecting and deterring marijuana-impaired driving thus remains a significant headache for policymakers and law enforcement. More research like Vandrey’s is clearly needed to guide the development of policy that is both firm and fair, but there’s no guarantee lawmakers will wait for scientific results on the topic — especially amid evidence that the rates of marijuana-impaired driving are on the rise.

Study: Cannabis Use May Subside Effects of Aging

 

 

By Barry Bard

 

A recent study by German researchers at the University of Bonn and Hebrew University concluded that “a chronic low dose of THC restores cognitive function in old mice” and could prevent human brains from “slowing down” later in life.

  The researchers gave mice of varying ages daily doses of THC for one month straight. 

While two-month-old mice lost cognitive skills, the 12-18-month-old mice demonstrated a “considerable performance boost, even putting them on par with younger mice who’d abstained.”

To arrive at this conclusion, the researchers tested the subject’s recognition of “familiar objects” and had the mice go through “a water maze in known and new configurations.” The group of elderly mice displayed no negative side effects from the THC while the younger mice lost cognitive skills.

All told, the older mice that consumed THC demonstrated noticeable improvements in test performance. The conclusion: a dose of THC a day boosts the endocannabinoid system and, if comparable in humans, could result in a better qualify of life for the elderly.

Given the promising findings, researchers plan to conduct a similar experiment on older “human brains” via a clinic trial sometime this year. Cannabis could very well help keep older brains sharper for a longer period of time, and one of the study’s co-authors, Andras Bilkei-Gorzo, said just that:

“If we can rejuvenate the brain so that everybody gets five to 10 more years without needing extra care then that is more than we could have imagined.”

Cannabis might just be a Sorcerer’s Stone for the elderly.
 

How Does Islam Regard Cannabis And Marijuana Use?

By Melissa Sherrard

Cannabis is a complicated and controversial topic among followers of Islam, mainly because neither their holy book, the Qur'an, nor their Prophet Muhammad (the chosen messenger of their God, Allah) directly address whether using the herb is proper or not. Some Muslims consider marijuana “ḥalāl” (which means “permissible") and acceptable for responsible recreational use, while others think that cannabis is a narcotic that we should only use in cases of medical need.

The modern Islamic world is vast, and many ancient tribal cultures exist throughout Africa, Asia, and Europe that have traditions of using cannabis that predate the religion's presence. In fact, the practice of using marijuana is so well-steeped in some areas that the prospect of its complete prohibition impossible, even though some Muslim-majority countries enforce some of the harshest punishments for drug crimes. For instance, followers of Sufism (a mystical movement within Islam) openly consumes cannabis as part of their ritual practices and to reach higher states of consciousness.

However, most Islamic scholars and religious authorities make the argument that because marijuana has intoxicating effects on one's state of mind and sensory perception that its status as “haram” (religiously forbidden) is unquestioned. They cite the hadith (an Arabic term for a report or saying) of Muhammad that says “If much intoxicates, then even a little is haraam" and claim that since cannabis alters our consciousness and exhibits various effects over our minds and bodies that it meets the standards as “khamr” - an intoxicant.

The exception to this view is that its use as a medicine is acceptable, under a physician's guidance and supervision, just as the use of opium is permissible under necessary circumstances. Most Muslims would not consider using cannabis to treat a valid medical ailment a sinful act, but rather a necessary step to regaining one's health.

In the end, it's almost impossible to make a general statement about how the Islamic religion “feels” about cannabis, as much of the arguments both for and against marijuana use are based on personal interpretation. The discussion continues among Muslims about whether they believe that cannabis is permissible to use, or not.

Marijuana strain may be helping Tucson girl fight for her life

By Johanna Willett 

Annalise Lujan started collecting pop-tabs for the Ronald McDonald House at the age of 4.

She wanted to be a doctor someday, or maybe a gymnast. She definitely wanted to help people.

“She is just a giving soul and loves to help others,” says Maryann Estrada-Lujan, Annalise’s mother.

“She wanted to be a doctor for the Ronald McDonald House and work for free. She has just always been a giving person.”

On April 2, Annalise, now 12, vomited before a competition with her Tumbleweeds Gymnastics team. She insisted on competing, but threw up again during the third event, her mother says. She said she felt better after that, but during the fourth and final event, she couldn’t walk. Her parents took her to the hospital.

On April 3, she had her first seizure.

Annalise was hospitalized at Banner-University Medical Center Tucson on April 4 and soon put into a medically-induced coma to prevent further brain damage, Estrada-Lujan says.

She turned 12 on April 18, and on April 21 was taken by a medical helicopter to Phoenix Children’s Hospital.

There, the Robins Elementary School student was diagnosed with febrile infection-related epilepsy syndrome, or FIRES, a rare brain disorder that causes continuous seizures and eventually death or some level of brain injury in previously healthy school-aged kids. Anti-epileptic drugs typically don’t help.

The cause of the syndrome is a mystery. Some believe it is initiated by an infection affecting the immune system or a fever triggering a genetic response in the body. But those are just two prevailing opinions, says Dr. Eric Marsh, assistant professor of neurology and pediatrics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine and the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. Marsh has been treating the few patients who have come down with the rare form of epilepsy since 2000.

But there is hope for Annalise, because on May 8, she woke up.

Pop tab premonitions

The Arizona Daily Star first wrote about Annalise in 2010 when her uncle’s pop-tab collection inspired the 4-year-old to start her own. About a year later, Annalise appeared in the paper again after deciding to grow out her hair for Locks of Love.

“I want them to feel better,” she told the Star in 2010 when asked about her pop-tab collection.

That first year, she donated about 70,000 pop-tabs to the Ronald McDonald House in Tucson. She has continued to collect the tabs and donate them each year on her birthday, averaging about 60 pounds of pop-tabs each year, Estrada-Lujan estimates.

“She got a ribbon and put a pop-tab on it and wore it as a bracelet, and people would ask, ‘Why are you wearing that?’ and she would say, ‘I’m collecting it for sick kids at the Ronald McDonald House,’” Estrada-Lujan says. “Every year for her birthday, she donates her tabs.”

The nonprofit’s website says that “1,267 pop-tabs make one pound,” and “150 pounds helps one family stay the night at the house.”

Last year, the Ronald McDonald House in Tucson made about $4,000 from recycling pop-tabs, says Kate Maguire Jensen, the president and CEO of Ronald McDonald House Charities of Southern Arizona.

And even in Phoenix, Annalise’s collection continued.

“In ICU they heard her story so the nurses started a little jar and are collecting,” Estrada-Lujan says.

“She is still collecting for the Ronald McDonald House and she has been asleep.”

That is bittersweet for the family, which hasn’t been able to make use of the house in Phoenix.

Annalise tested positive for MRSA, an infection that is caused by staph bacteria and is resistant to most antibiotics, according to the Mayo Clinic.

Because many of the kids who do stay at the Ronald McDonald Houses have vulnerable immune systems, the nonprofit “has a very strict policy relating to infectious diseases to ensure, as best we can, the health, welfare, safety and comfort of the families staying at the Ronald McDonald House,” writes Nancy Roach, the executive director of Ronald McDonald Charities of Phoenix in a prepared statement.

“While we never want to turn anyone away, there are, unfortunately, times when we have to make very difficult decisions like this one.”

Estrada-Lujan has been sleeping on the couch in her daughter’s room, and her husband has been commuting every few days while their 13-year-old son finishes school.

“Who knew she would be advocating for them, and now we’re going to need to use those services?” Estrada-Lujan says.

Intractable epilepsy

Annalise went to the hospital the first time after that gymnastics competition in early April.

“She competed with us all season and when she got to state this year is when she got sick,” says Courtney Jolly, Annalise’s coach and owner of Tumbleweeds Gymnastics. “We all thought she had a stomach bug because she threw up, and that’s when she went to the hospital.”

Banner confirmed the stomach virus theory and sent Annalise home with some medication. After the first seizure, the hospital attributed it to dehydration, hooked Annalise up to an IV and sent her home with additional medication, Estrada-Lujan says.

When Annalise returned to the hospital after the second seizure, the doctors kept her.

“She had continuous seizures, and they weren’t able to break status even after several attempts with medications,” Estrada-Lujan says. “They put her into a medically-induced coma to save her brain from further permanent damage.”

At Phoenix Children’s, the family met Dr. Angus Wilfong, the division chief of pediatric neurology at Barrow Neurological Institute at Phoenix Children’s, and learned about FIRES.

Estrada-Lujan spent the night learning everything she could about the syndrome.

That’s where she first discovered the drug cannabidiol, or CBD, a strain of marijuana that has been increasingly studied as a treatment for FIRES and other intractable, or hard-to-treat, forms of epilepsy.

Medicinal marijuana

Last year, Wilfong (who was working at Texas Children’s Hospital until late last year) and seven other doctors published a study on the use of cannabidiol in treating FIRES. In the study, they found that the Schedule 1 drug reduced the frequency and duration of seizures and allowed the patients to be weaned from other medications.

“This stems from the whole medicinal marijuana craze that is out there,” says Dr. Eric Marsh, one of the doctors who authored the study. “There are lots of anecdotes that were on social media that suggested that marijuana high in cannabidiol and very low in THC could be anti-epileptic.”

The liquid CBD oil is low in THC, the compound in the cannabis plant that produces the high.

When Estrada-Lujan learned about it, she began advocating for its use in Annalise’s treatment. Nothing else seemed to be working.

“I wanted to know if my daughter was eligible,” she says. “Dr. Wilfong was new to Arizona and didn’t have his license to use it here, so he got with his partner, Dr. John Kerrigan, who had his license for this Schedule 1 drug.”

Estrada-Lujan hopes that successful treatment of the syndrome with CBD oil will help other families like theirs who didn’t know about the option Annalise is trailblazing.

The process to use the drug requires approval from federal agencies such as Drug Enforcement Administration, Marsh says.

During that process, Annalise remained in a coma.

There are still a lot of questions surrounding the use of cannabidiol as a treatment for FIRES.

Because there isn’t really an option to give an ill child a placebo, it’s hard to know whether the success of patients was a result of cannabidiol, timing or some other combination of factors, Marsh says.

Questions remain about dosage, when to use it and defining the ideal patient.

Also unknown are the effects cannabidiol use might have on the developing brains of these young patients. Using medicinal marijuana with THC over time probably would lower the IQ of a young patient, Marsh says, but not enough data exist on the impact of cannabidiol.

“Some parents are desperate, and they are willing to try anything, but it is not a miracle, and you have to be careful,” Marsh says.

On Saturday, May 6, Annalise was given a dose of Epidiolex, the same liquid CBD extract used in the study.

After three treatments of CBD oil, Annalise stopped seizing continuously, Estrada-Lujan says.

“I was there when she woke up,” she says. “It was amazing. It was truly amazing to see eyes again.”

Rehab road

Annalise is now awake and breathing on her own. She can follow basic commands.

“Open your mouth. Squeeze my finger. Stick out your tongue,” Estrada-Lujan says.

To get off the ventilator, Annalise had to prove she could breathe independently by successfully “sprinting,” or breathing without a ventilator for designated amounts of time.

At every stage, her community has rallied around her.

“I told her coach that she would be sprinting to prove she had strong enough lungs to get off the ventilator, so her teammates were all sprinting at Tumbleweeds,” Estrada-Lujan says. “They were sprinting while she was sprinting.”

The Tumbleweeds team has made cards for Annalise and sent a leotard to hang in her room, Tumbleweeds coach Jolly says.

“She’s very energetic and always has a smile on her face,” Jolly adds.” She’s caring for the other girls and constantly supportive of them. She’s just an all-around great kid.”

As Annalise begins therapy, the process will uncover the extent of the syndrome’s effect on her brain. She’s still having a few seizures for 8 to 10 seconds, but only one or two in the last week. They’re not continuous like before, her mom says.

“We don’t know how much brain damage has been done,” Estrada-Lujan says. “She needs speech therapy. She has tried to speak, and you can make out a few things. We don’t know what her motor skills are and the memory loss she has had.”

Her ability to speak is limited, comparable to that of a 3- or 4-year-old, her mom says. It takes her time to process information.

Two GoFundMe pages currently tell Annalise’s story. One, set up by Estrada-Lujan’s aunt, Margaret Geittmann, has a goal of $100,000 to help with medical expenses. That campaign had raised more than $15,000 as of Friday. The second campaign seeks to cover the cost of Annalise’s therapy, with a goal of $5,000. That campaign had raised almost $4,000 by Friday.

Estrada-Lujan hopes that Annalise can complete some of her therapy at Tumbleweeds.

“All of our physicians and staff are happy to see she is doing well and are encouraged by the progress she has made thus far,” writes Kerrigan, the director of the pediatric epilepsy program and clinical neurophysiology laboratory at the Barrow Neurological Institute at Phoenix Children’s, in a prepared statement.

“While cannabidiol (CBD) is potentially one of the treatment avenues that has played a role in her progression, we can’t say for certain it’s what led us to this point, as we have been actively caring for and providing various treatments throughout her stay at Phoenix Children’s. Controlled scientific trials of CBD are currently underway, which will hopefully clarify its role as a possible treatment for children with severe forms of epilepsy.”

Annalise is making progress and working hard, but the road ahead will be a long one. Estrada-Lujan hopes they will be discharged in the next few weeks. Then they can come home to Tucson.

“To me it was so devastating because she is such a beautiful talented and kind little girl,” says Geittmann, a registered nurse who lives in Illinois. “She has done so much for others, and so it’s time that we come together and do this for her.”

Marijuana Officially Decriminalized in Israel

By JNS

“Every moving thing that liveth shall be for food for you; as the green herb have I given you all.” Genesis 9:3 (The Israel Bible™)

(Shutterstock)

Israel’s new cannabis decriminalization policy, approved by the government in March, officially came into effect Sunday, commencing a new legal approach towards the recreational use of marijuana in the Jewish state.

The new government policy shifts the responsibility of enforcing marijuana laws from police to civil authorities. Yet recreational cannabis use is not fully legalized in Israel, and the Israel Police clarified that “even under the new enforcement policy, cannabis use will stay illegal in the public sector,” reported Yedioth Ahronoth.

Possessing more than 15 grams of cannabis remains illegal in Israel. Further, individuals caught carrying less than 15 grams may still be apprehended depending on whether or not the marijuana is determined to be for personal consumption or distribution, based upon the way it is packaged.

If police determine the cannabis is for personal use, the individual’s criminal past will be checked; if no drug-related offenses are found, the individual will be fined NIS 1,000 ($280).

Second-time cannabis offenses will result in a NIS 2,000 ($560) fine, third-time offenders will be investigated for drug offenses and have the violation added to their criminal record, and fourth-time offenders will be indicted. A refusal to pay fines could result in a prison sentence of up to one year.

Dro-tein Puts A Cannabis Twist On Protein Powder By Adding CBD

By James McClure  

California-based entrepreneur Ross Clark is putting a cannabis spin on the gym with Dro-tein - a protein powder that packs servings of the non-psychoactive cannabis extract CBD. So it has the medicinal benefits of marijuana but it doesn't get you high at the gym.

To find out more about Dro-tein, we reached out to Clark and talked about the hemp-based protein powder that he hopes will beef up the fight against cannabis stigmas.

What is Dro-tein?

Can you tell us a bit about Dro-tein?
Dro-tein was founded in early 2016 with one goal in mind: to bring the hemp plant and all of its benefits to mainstream markets and every household by combining it with protein powders.

How did this idea come about?
It kinda hit me while I was trying to make regular protein powder. While figuring that out, I got the idea of infusing protein powder with cannabis.

So what's in Dro-tein?
There are 5 grams or protein and 20 milligrams of CBD per scoop. We recommend starting with half a scoop. So for the recommended dosage, you're looking at 2.5 grams of protein and 10 milligrams of CBD.

We basically built a little medicinal snack. In the future, we're going to be coming out with big jugs that will have 20-25 grams of protein per scoop with 5-10 milligrams of CBD.

Right now, we have two flavors. Cherry vanilla, which is more of a hint of cherry with a stronger vanilla taste. And then milk chocolate, which I like to compare to a milkshake whether you make it with milk or water.

What else do you recommend putting it in?
Any type of milk - including almond milk, coconut milk, soy milk. Ice cream and desserts. Oatmeal, pudding, yogurts. Both the cherry vanilla and milk chocolate have a very creamy flavor, so mixing them with something sweet and creamy works best. But some juices like orange juice or cranberry juice also work great with the cherry vanilla.

Is there anything it doesn't work well in?
You wouldn't want to use soda, but that's about it. Either flavor is great in coffee and cappuccino.

Do people use it for anything other than exercise?
Yeah, the exercise angle is really just to tie it in with the world outside of the cannabis industry. Inside the industry, you're looking at pain relief, you're looking at anxiety relief, you're looking at depression relief. There's multiple reasons to use CBD.

So it's not just for gym rats.
No, I have a couple friends who suffer from depression, and they're using it on the regular. I have back-pain users, Crohn's users - this is turning into so much more than I imagined, which is awesome.

How can people buy it?
We're selling it online right now. And selling in stores should be right around the corner.

Can you ship outside of California?
Dro-tein is 100 percent hemp-derived, so it's not an illegal product. It's in a gray area. But it's under the federal limit for THC - testing at essentially zero THC - so we are able to ship to all states where hemp is legal.

Busting Cannabis Stereotypes

It looks like Dro-tein is the first of its kind.
Yeah, no one's doing this.

So how do you market something that hasn't been done before?
I'm trying to market Dro-tein against stereotypes. My whole branding campaign is about doing more. We have a long list of negative words associated with the hemp and marijuana plants. Words like 'lazy' and 'stoner.' We're trying to change that by bringing a positive connotation by helping people do more.

Using CBD relieves muscle aches and spasms, helps physical recovery and reduces inflammation. But it's also proving to people that cannabis consumers aren't lazy.

What sorts of challenges do you face when marketing this kind of product?
Right now it's harder to get into the protein market with a hemp product than to hit the hemp market with a protein product.

Protein is a household item. Something we're very familiar with. But CBD often has a negative connotation around it. So we hope that combining the two will make CBD more familiar to the customer.

If we brand correctly, we can connect this industry with the NFL, the NBA even the Olympics. High-profile athletes could be benefitting from something such as Dro-tein.

Cannabis and Sports

Is that your goal - to break into major league sports?
My goal is to get into the world of professional athletes and to work with the NFL and other leagues. The connection to mainstream culture and cannabis culture is right around the corner. So I want to have a Super Bowl commercial in five years. I want to have one saying, 'Dro-tein is the national sponsor of the NFL.'

Do you think NFL will be the first major league to allow medical marijuana use? 
Yeah, the NFL. I don't think any of the other leagues are talking about it right now. Other than hockey, it's the most dangerous sport by far. The issue is getting a lot of attention because of that. And professional football players could help get the most done for the legalization movement - after veterans with PTSD.

Is there an athlete right now that you'd like to see become the face of cannabis in sports? Who will be the Wheaties-type rep for marijuana?
I'd like to see someone with a connection to cannabis - who uses medical marijuana. And someone who's highly respected.

That doesn't seem likely right now. Not while athletes who get busted are being turned into tabloid fodder - like with Ricky Williams.
That's what really irks me about the whole thing. The media puts such a negative light on all of it. We need to change that. Latching onto negatives doesn't add anything to the conversation about cannabis.

Nor does cracking pot jokes when people get busted.
No. We all know cannabis is a fun industry that gets a lot of laughs. But it's not a laughing matter when we consider the number of people we have getting addicted to pain pills, causing them to go to heroin, and dying from overdoses or committing suicide because of addiction.

We need to connect cannabis culture with the seriousness of the opioid epidemic. It gives me chills just thinking about how many lives have been lost to opioids because some of my friends are in that number.

Getting into the Canna-Business

How did you get involved in cannabis industry?
I had a couple friends at an early age that had already been addicted to pain medicine after getting in a car wreck or getting hurt playing sports or something else. I didn't think too much of it at that point my life. I was pretty young and immature.

Then a couple years later, I actually got injured playing basketball. I was just playing around and tore my MCL. That's around the time that I found cannabis. That was in Arizona, when they were opening their eyes a bit and becoming more like LA. At that point, I had had multiple friends pass away, or their lives were permanently altered from the side effects of pain pills.

So all of this has developed my 'green heart' if you will.

Was that difficult given that you grew up in Oklahoma - one of the most anti-cannabis states in America right now?
Yeah, my mom and sister come from that prohibitionist background in Oklahoma. They used to believe gateway drug nonsense.

Did you?
Oh yeah, 100 percent. I was sold on it. That's how I grew up. I wasn't a super-religious kid. I was sold that it was a gateway, that it's as close to shooting up as you can possibly get. All the things that you saw in the media until about 15 years ago.

What changed your mind?
After I got hurt, I was sitting on the couch, icing my knee. And my friend comes in with a pot brownie that was supposedly from Amsterdam. I don't see how that's possible.

You don't want to know where he hid it on the plane.
Exactly. So I consumed just a little tiny chunk of it and felt better.

What kind of advice would you give to activists and entrepreneurs who are trying to break down the stigmas that you used to believe?
Honestly, research. There is so much research online that no one should be scared anymore. No one should be having these feelings any more.

Federal Health Minister Must Explain Tobacco and Marijuana Policy Discrepancies

 SOURCE Imperial Tobacco Canada

MONTREAL - Tomorrow, on World No Tobacco Day, the federal Health Minister has an opportunity to explain the disturbing degree of incoherence in her recent approach to regulating tobacco and marijuana. While the Minister proposes plain and standardized packaging for tobacco products, despite cigarette packages already having a 75 per cent health warning and being hidden from public view at point of sale, she says all that is required for marijuana is a restriction on packaging or labelling to ensure product packaging is not appealing to young persons.

"Public explanation is needed as both marijuana and tobacco are substances with known health risks," said Eric Gagnon, Head of Corporate and External Affairs, Imperial Tobacco Canada. "This suggests that marijuana and tobacco should face a similar regulatory framework, but the Minister appears to be headed in the opposite direction, giving far more leniency to the marijuana industry."

Moreover, the youth usage rate for marijuana is higher than that for tobacco, and the Health Minister acknowledges that Canadian youth have the highest rate of marijuana use in the world at a time when tobacco use and youth smoking are at an all-time low in the country.  

"There is clear policy incoherence, which is even more apparent considering the Minister claims the goal with both marijuana and tobacco legislation is to protect youth," notes Gagnon. "How can two legislative frameworks, for products that both carry known health risks, have the same stated goal yet vastly different approaches?"

The federal government has gone to great lengths to claim its goal is to eliminate the black market for marijuana and suggests that taxes on marijuana will be kept low to allow competition with the illegal market. Yet, governments across Canada have and continue to tax cigarettes to an extent that it has contributed to the creation of an illegal market, which now accounts for more than 20 per cent of the tobacco market in the country.

"If the Minister truly believes her policy approach to marijuana is effective, then surely it can be applied to tobacco," said Gagnon. "Instead, Parliament is about to have the spectacle of the Minister arguing on one day that branding on tobacco packaging lures youth to smoking and should be banned, while on the next day suggesting that branding should be allowed for marijuana to help compete against black market."

Tomorrow is an opportunity for the federal Health Minister to demonstrate that she is serious about the health of Canadians, but focusing on excessive and ineffective measures that make it easier for illegal traffickers to counterfeit legal tobacco products is not the way to demonstrate that commitment. The Health Minister and her department officials should acknowledge the importance of alternative products – such as heated tobacco or vaping products – and prioritize the introduction of clear regulations, making them known and available to adult consumers, as soon as possible.

France wants to scrap prison terms for cannabis use

Chris Harris

France will introduce a new law by the end of the year to soften punishments for cannabis use, officials say.

The legislation, a key promise of President Emmanuel Macron’s election campaign, will end prison terms for marijuana consumers.

–– ADVERTISEMENT ––

But the changes will stop short of decriminalising use of the drug, according to government spokesman Christophe Castaner.

France is one of half-a-dozen countries in the EU that still criminalises cannabis use, in contrast to Portugal.

Currently those caught using the drug in France face up to a year in jail and a fine of up to 3,750 euros.

Castaner said on average drug offences take up six hours of police time, and the same for magistrates.

“Is the system effective? No,” he said. “What is important today is to be efficient and above all to free up time for our police so they can focus more on essential matters.”

Patrice Ribeiro, of France’s police officers’ union, is supportive of the proposed changes.

“It is a good idea that takes into account reality,” he said. “Most police officers who stop consumers tell them to throw the joint away and then let them go.”

Uruguay and a handful of US states, notably those on the west coast, have legalised recreational use of cannabis.

Cannabis use remains illegal in the EU, but it has been decriminalised – offenders commit a civil rather than a criminal offence and are often fined or given rehabilitation – in Portugal, Spain (only in public places), Luxembourg, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.

The lowdown on medical marijuana: Does it really have benefits?

by Abel Anderson

LONDON – These days, more and more people are using medical marijuana for a variety of reasons, but do you really know what conditions medical marijuana can treat? As with most treatments, doctors understand that there are risks to prescribing medical marijuana to their patients (such as negative impact on memory and the risk of dependency) but when medical marijuana treatment is prescribed, it is believed that those risks are not as great as the potential benefits that can be achieved by the treatment. In the case of medical marijuana, these benefits include:

Treatment of glaucoma
This is probably the most common use of medical marijuana. Glaucoma is characterized by pressure in the eyeball, which leads to damage in the optic nerve and eventual loss of vision.

Easing the pain of multiple sclerosis
Multiple sclerosis can cause painful muscle contractions. Even patients who don’t respond to other treatments for this symptom see a reduction in pain after just a few days of medical marijuana use.

Relieving arthritis pain
Marijuana has been shown to be effective in alleviating pain, promoting good-quality sleep, and reducing inflammation. All of these benefits help people to manage the symptoms of discomfort associated with rheumatoid arthritis.

Slowing the progression of Alzheimer’s disease
The THC compound in marijuana slows the formation of amyloid plaques in the brain by blocking the enzyme that creates them, thereby slowing the progression of the disease.

Slowing the spread of some cancer cells
Cannabidoil stops the spread of some cancers by turning off the gene that makes cancer cells spread.

Treatment of anxiety and depression
This is one of the most prevalent uses of medical marijuana. Marijuana boosts the mood and can be a mild sedative, both of which can ease the symptoms of depression and anxiety.

Helping to control epileptic seizures
Studies have shown that marijuana can help to prevent epileptic seizures. THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, controls seizures by promoting relaxation. It has also been shown to help control the seizure disorder known as Dravet’s Syndrome.

Relieving the side effects of chemotherapy
Two of the common side effects of chemotherapy – pain and nausea – can be mitigated with the use of medical marijuana.

The hype around medical marijuana is about more than just people trying to “score” marijuana legally. It has been shown through numerous studies to have many real medical benefits for those suffering from a variety of medical conditions. From young to old, medical marijuana can significantly improve the quality of life of many people with painful, debilitating conditions and side effects. As previously stated, marijuana use (like the use of most drugs) can have negative side effects, but most doctors who prescribe it do so because they believe that the benefits trump the side effects. It’s important to always talk to a doctor and get a prescription before using marijuana as a treatment for anything.

Federal Prosecutors Hit Back at Media Criticism of Sessions Sentencing Memo

by Ian Mason

The National Association of Assistant United States Attorneys (NAAUSA) held a conference call with journalists this week to try to set the record straight on the “Sessions Memo” sentencing policy.

“For years we kind of sat on the sideline and let other organizations like Families Against Mandatory Minimums [FAMM] and the ACLU [the American Civil Liberties Union] get a story out there that was just not factually accurate,” NAAUSA President Lawrence Leiser told the journalists, explaining why he felt it necessary to host the call:

The Department of Justice has not urged us, suggested, or had anything to do with this call. This is something we decided to do on our own because there is a lot of misinformation out there and the media is subject to that misinformation from these organizations that have an agenda that we believe is contrary to the public’s best interest.

NAAUSA represents more than 1,500 assistant U.S. attorneys, the line prosecutors of the federal criminal justice system, and convened the call after almost two weeks of mainstream media hysteria over Attorney General Jeff Sessions’s May 10 memo that overturned the sentencing policy of his predecessor in the Obama administration, Eric Holder. In 2013, Holder issued a controversial memo to all federal prosecutors, commanding them to omit facts, most typically, drug weights, from certain narcotics cases, deliberately undercharging and withholding information from federal judges to avoid triggering the mandatory minimum sentences that Congress has prescribed for serious drug offenders.

The Holder Memo reversed long-standing DOJ policy, which called for prosecutors to charge defendants with the “most serious readily provable offense” in all cases. The stated aim was to “refine our charging policy regarding nonviolent, low-level drug offenders.” It created a list of criteria such as being “non-violent,” not a member of a drug cartel, no extensive criminal history, and more.

The Sessions Memo returned to the policy crystallized in the 2003 Ashcroft Memo, named after President George W. Bush’s Attorney General John Ashcroft, of charging defendants in all cases with the most serious offense prosecutors feel will succeed at trial, but importantly, allows U.S. Attorneys and other high-level prosecutors to pursue lesser charges in exceptional cases where they explain their decision in writing.

“Clearly one of the primary purposes of this time honored policy is to promote consistent application of the law across our country. Consistency of charging policy is one of the hallmarks of justice,” Leiser said of the “most serious readily provable offense” charging guideline.

The announcement of a return to this policy, albeit with the added discretion given to U.S. attorneys for exceptional cases,  set off hand-wringing and outrage throughout the press, citing concern for the “low-level” drug offenders in the new sentencing regime.

The Baltimore Sun ran an op-ed, calling it “foolish.” The New York Post published a column by Reason magazine editor Jacob Sullum calling the memo “dumb and dangerous,” saying it “signals a return to unfair, ineffective drug policies that have been rightly repudiated by politicians across the political spectrum.” Sullum calls the sentences a relic of the “Just Say No era.”

Even the conservative Washington Examiner‘s Patrick Wohl hit Sessions on the memo, saying it “doesn’t target serious drug offenders” and calling for sentencing reform.

The introduction Tuesday of the “Justice Safety Valve Act” only intensified the criticism of Attorney General Sessions in the media. The act, which would reduce sentences for certain drug offenders and remove some mandatory minimums, was introduced this time by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), and Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR). When it was introduced in roughly the same form in both 2013 and 2015, it failed to pass.

Rolling Stone painted the act as an attempt to “rein in” Sessions. The left-wing magazine cites Sen. Paul’s pointing to John Horner and the now-released Weldon Angelos, who received long mandatory minimum sentences for their crimes, as examples of the flaws in Sessions’ approach. Tana Ganeva, the article’s author, fails to note that neither of these people would be affected in any way by the Sessions Memo. Angelos not only had a prior conviction, but received his mandatory minimum sentence not as a result of drug weights, but because he carried a firearm, twice, while he sold drugs.

Horner, also previously convicted, was sentenced in Florida state court, and his sentence would not even be affected by the Safety Valve Act’s passage.

All these pieces conflate the impact of the Sessions Memo with the penalties for drug crimes, which are set by Congress. If the sentences are really “repudiated by politicians across the political spectrum,” those politicians have, under both Democratic and Republican administrations and congressional majorities, left the sentences largely unchanged.

“The Department of Justice has an obligation under the United States Constitution to faithfully execute the laws passed by Congress, and it will do so,” DOJ Principal Deputy Director of Public Affairs Ian Prior told Breitbart News when asked about the issuance of the Sessions Memo.
“Ultimately, assistant United States attorneys do not make the law; we enforce it,” NAAUSA Treasurer Steve Wasserman explained to the reporters:

Mandatory minimums are a creation of the Congress, the people’s representative. Congress has carved out certain criminals and types of offenses that it believes require a minimum punishment. … The attorney general is simply saying we want you to follow the will of Congress and pursue these cases and criminals in a fashion that is keeping with the laws of the country.

The Holder Memo, by prohibiting prosecutors from mentioning facts they could readily prove to deliberately avoid these laws, substituted former Attorney General Holder’s criteria for how drug defendants should be charged not only for judgment of line prosecutors, but the specific command of Congress.

“There’s nothing … other than Eric Holders own personal opinion of what he considered to be a low-level offender, that provides that we should ignore the law,” Wasserman told reporters, explaining that the law, as written by Congress, which already includes several “safety valve” provisions and the discretion given to senior prosecutors under the Sessions Memo already provides ample avenues for sparing the truly deserving from long terms in prison:

Pursuing it doesn’t necessarily mean that the person initially charged with the mandatory minimum is going to end up with the mandatory minimum sentence. In fact, only about 13% of our federal prisoners are serving mandatory minimum sentences and the reason for that is that even though we may charge, the individual may meet the safety valve requirement … or they may be someone who is willing to cooperate with us … that allows us to go back to the court … and explain that this is someone who has provided us with what we call “substantial assistance” which allows the court to reduce the mandatory minimum.

The mandatory minimum sentences that sentencing reform advocates and their supporters in the media decry kick in at weights that are hardly typical of personal use or small-scale dealing. According to U.S. Sentencing Commission materials five-year minimums apply to first offenders only when caught with, for example, 100 grams of heroin (approximately 1000 doses), 500 grams of cocaine,  or 100 kilograms of marijuana. Ten-year sentences kick in at one kilogram of heroin, five kilograms of cocaine, 280 grams of crack cocaine, or a metric ton of marijuana.

“By definition, those are not low-level offenders. The drug traffickers who are selling those amounts, that are worth literally tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of dollars on the street, are not low-level offenders. They are significant drug traffickers,” Wasserman said.

Referring to non-profits like FAMM that journalists often cite for the idea the Sessions Memo will lead to long prison terms for sympathetic defendants caught up in the edges of the drug trade, Wasserman told reporters:

The people who have been in favor of sentencing reform have done their best to conflate the state and federal criminal justice systems and leave people with the impression that we are prosecuting, at the federal level, street corner dealers that have a small bag of cocaine or marijuana on them or some kid that’s smoking a joint in his college dorm room.

Part of the problem with this characterization of the Sessions Memo is the failure to distinguish between the federal criminal justice system and the state systems on which the Sessions Memo has absolutely no effect. According to 2013 Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) numbers, only around one in ten prisoners is incarcerated by the federal government. Those arrested by federal law enforcement or referred to U.S. attorneys’ offices for prosecution tend to be more serious offenders. For example, in 2012, the BJS estimated more than 99 percent of federal drug prisoners were in custody for trafficking, not simple possession. Wasserman noted:

There’s a tendency to conflate the state and federal system. We at the federal level don’t prosecute “low-level drug offenders.” We don’t prosecute users. Less than one percent of the federal prison population consists of inmates who are serving sentences for simple possession, and in almost every one of those cases, those individuals are couriers that plead down to a simple possession charge from a trafficking offense.

Pressed by a reporter on the opposition from some Americans to the implementation of Congress’s mandatory minimums, Wasserman offered a full-throated defense not only of the Sessions Memo, but also the wider tough-on-crime policies Attorney General Sessions advocated as a senator and now seeks to enforce as attorney general: “People are not in favor of going light on drug dealers. That’s a narrative that’s been pushed all too often by pro-sentencing reformers and, frankly, the media.

When people understand the facts, when they understand where we came from 25 years ago when crime was double what it is now, and there was revolving door justice, where drug traffickers were receiving a slap on the wrist, that we cut crime in half, that we have convinced many of these offenders who otherwise never would have cooperated to cooperate so we can continue to dismantle these drug trafficking organizations, then they understand that the mandatory minimums are actually useful. Sentences have gotten shorter, the prison population has gone down significantly, but we’re also starting to see crime tick back up.”

Canada Figured Out How to Win the Drug War

Don’t fight it.

By Daniel Denvir

On May 12, Lucie Charlebois, Québec’s minister of public health, proudly announced that two centers where people would be able to inject illicit drugs under a nurse’s supervision would soon open in Montreal. “I’m containing my emotions,” Charlebois exclaimed.

Earlier that same day, U.S. Attorney Jeff Sessions had directed prosecutors to seek the harshest possible charges in federal drug cases, presenting the conventional drug war wisdom as though its veracity required little explanation. “We know that drugs and crime go hand in hand,” said Sessions, accepting an award from a New York City police union. “They just do. The facts prove that so.”

Sessions’ facts are actually in short supply. The attorney general justified his new charging policy by pointing to rising murder rates and to an overdose crisis fueled by increasing opioid use. In reality, violent crime remains at close to the lowest levels they’ve been in a half-century, and there is no evidence that local, year-to-year fluctuations in particular cities represent a durable nationwide reversal. What’s more, experts have concluded that decades of mass incarceration played little if any role in lowering crime rates. At the same time, the lifesaving benefits from supervised injection sites are grounded in evidence, and experts say that they are urgently needed to confront the opioid overdose crisis.

Harm reduction is a public health approach to drug use premised on the idea that the aim of policy should be to maximize health and minimize damage.

Still, Sessions has pledged to “reverse [the] trend” of high potency, low-price opioids even though decades of imposing draconian sentences on drug dealers have done nothing of the sort. Instead, the drug war has incentivized dealers to adulterate the heroin supply with fentanyl, a dangerously potent synthetic opioid that is killing people in growing numbers. Because it is easier to smuggle smaller quantities of a stronger drug than larger quantities of a weaker one, under prohibition, the more potent a drug, the greater the profits and the lower the risk of detection. The result is that incredibly potent fentanyl, cheap to procure and easy to smuggle, is everywhere, and overdose deaths are skyrocketing.

Canada, for one, is trying something different.

The U.S. and our neighbors to the north have overlapping drug markets, and both countries face an extraordinary public health crisis from fentanyl and also from sometimes dangerous, new psychoactive substances adulterating the supply of cocaine, methamphetamine, and MDMA.

The responses playing out in the two capitals, however, are based on two profoundly divergent models.

In 2015, Liberal Party Leader Justin Trudeau defeated Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper in a campaign where drug politics were front and center. During his nearly 10 years in office, Harper staunchly opposed harm reduction measures, including failed legal battles to shutdown Insite, Vancouver’s supervised injection center, and Providence Crosstown Clinic, which provides prescription heroin. Now, Trudeau’s government is shifting away from criminalization, moving to open supervised injection sites nationwide, to expand access to prescription heroin, and to legalize recreational marijuana.

The contrast with President Trump—who ran a law-and-order campaign and picked an attorney general who has claimed that “good people don’t smoke marijuana”—is stark.

In Montreal, the announcement of the injection sites coincided with the convergence of what organizers reported was more than 1,000 drug policy advocates and researchers from 70 different countries for the Harm Reduction International Conference.

Harm reduction is a public health approach to drug use premised on the idea that the aim of policy should be to maximize health and minimize damage. The harm reduction movement is made up of academics, health professionals, and activists—including active drug users—who for decades have used science and research to guide their activism and policy proposals, such as the introduction of clean needle exchanges and the rollout of naloxone, a drug that reverses opioid overdoses.

Monique Tula, executive director of the U.S.-based Harm Reduction Coalition, told attendees that the Trump administration’s approach represented “a wholesale rejection of science.”

“It’s completely regressive,” Tula said in an interview. “Utterly draconian policies, [there was] utter hysteria around the crack epidemic and the result then was to lock everyone up. The idea is if we put a dent in the supply then demand will go down accordingly. It’s not what happens.”

As with economics, supply-side drug policy is a god that fails time and again. By contrast, research has made it clear that supervised injection sites—where people can shoot up illicit opioids and other drugs while monitored by a nurse—save lives by preventing fatal overdoses and the spread of HIV and hepatitis C.

Those who wage the drug war, like global warming deniers, are continuing to cast evidence aside. The reason they do so is simple: The science doesn’t help their cause.       
 

In Montreal, Charlebois took reporters on a tour of a downtown site that will soon open its doors to injection drug users. It is bright, antiseptic, and will be available to those who need it 22 hours a day.

On their first visit, drug users will register in the waiting room and inform staff as to what drugs they plan on using, so that the facility can respond accordingly to a complication or overdose. The user then walks into the injection room and takes a seat at a booth with the relative privacy of a partitioned urinal, watched by staff sitting at a desk, like a nurses station, in the center of the room. If it’s busy, there’s a take-a-number sign like at a supermarket deli counter or the DMV.

It’s a remarkably banal location for people to safely use illegal drugs. Its very existence is a striking repudiation of the drug war.

Studies presented at the conference found evidence that crack users may successfully use marijuana to moderate their crack habit, that psychedelic drug use may decrease suicidality among sex workers, and that drugs sold in online cryptomarkets—markets like the website Silk Road, closed by U.S. law enforcement—appear less likely to be contaminated than those sold in traditional drug markets.

Another found that prescribing the opioid hydromorphone was a good substitute for prescription heroin. Heroin-assisted treatment, in which users can access diacetylmorphine, heroin’s active ingredient, has been shown to be an effective way to minimize the harms of heroin use—but in the U.S., it has been blocked by prohibitionist policies. Alarmingly, the U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price this month went so far as to criticize well-established opioid substitution treatments that provide users with methadone or buprenorphine.

“If we’re just substituting one opioid for another, we’re not moving the dial much,” said Price.

“Folks need to be cured so they can be productive members of society and realize their dreams.”

The dream of a cure, or of a drug-free America, however, is killing people.

“There’s real movement on the local level in the U.S., and some very thoughtful progressive stuff happening,” said Ethan Nadelmann, the founder and until recently director of the U.S.-based Drug Policy Alliance. “But obviously, Trump, and Sessions, and now Price—they’re maniacs basically.”

One of the most critical pieces of research presented at the conference was a study out of Vancouver, which tested the content of drugs being used at Insite. The results were disturbing: Fentanyl was identified in 83 percent of the heroin checked and, alarmingly, in much of the cocaine and methamphetamine as well.

But no one has ever died of an overdose at Insite. Rather, Insite saves lives: It has treated more than 6,900 overdoses since opening in 2003, more than 3,110 of which required naloxone, said Dr. Mark Lysyshyn, a medical health officer at Vancouver Coastal Health.

Indeed, drug overdose deaths in the United States have surpassed deaths from AIDS at the peak of that crisis in the mid-1990s. In 2015 drug overdose deaths rose 11 percent, reaching almost 53,000.

Heroin overdoses alone surpassed gun homicides. With AIDS, it took militant action from groups like ACT UP, the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power, to force the government to treat the disease as a public health crisis that required new medications and harm reduction measures like condoms and needle exchanges. It’s not just law-and-order but the emphasis on treatment and recovery that is preventing the harm reduction movement from gaining a similar foothold today: Getting clean is important for those people who choose or need to do so, but the premise that all solutions begin with recovery crowds out debate on how to keep continuing users healthy.

Even Canada’s bold reforms won’t be enough to confront an opioid crisis of staggering proportions.

In March alone, an estimated 120 people died from illicit drug overdose deaths in British Columbia.

At the conference, drug user activists protested Minister of Health Jane Philpott’s speech with signs reading “They Talk We Die,” demanding a faster and more dramatic response.

“Essentially [we need] to legalize drugs and regulate the market. We have problems like this in the food sector all of the time,” said Lysyshyn. “We get a product that’s contaminated, it’s recalled, within days, the problem is over. And that’s the type of solution that we need here too.”

Decriminalization for personal use would be a major first step. In Portugal, which decriminalized personal use in 2001, drug-related deaths and injection drug use–related HIV infections have plummeted. But decriminalization alone fails to deal with regulating the supply of drugs and reducing the terrible bloodshed that accompanies unregulated illicit markets in places where drugs are manufactured or trafficked, such as Colombia, Central America, and Mexico.

In Canada, it has been localities that have led the way in harm reduction. Vancouver opened the first legal needle exchange in North America and the first injection facility, even as the Harper government fought harm reduction measures from taking hold on the national level.

The United States, of course, is far less equipped to fight fentanyl. With Trump in office, advocates are pushing for localities to take the lead. Currently, supervised injection sites are under consideration around the country, including in Massachusetts and in metro Seattle. Prescription heroin, which will likely be one of the harm reduction movement’s top priorities if supervised injection sites begin to open, is slowly entering the discussion.

It’s a conversation, however, that the Trump administration seems determined to shut down, retreating to the comforting, zombielike illusion that government can use tough talk and mass imprisonment to will illicit drug use out of existence. Announcing the push for harsher sentencing, Sessions said that “together we will win this fight.”

It's almost like US drug policy isn't actually about controlling drugs themselves, but about controlling the poor, minorities and hippie progressives.  More...

But Americans are dying in extraordinary numbers. What we’re witnessing is not just an opioid crisis but a public health emergency in part created and disastrously exacerbated by the war on drugs.

This is a fight that targets drug users for stigmatization and incarceration—particularly and not coincidentally the minority subset of drug users who are poor or racially marginalized. It also facilitates the toxic adulteration of their drug supply. Prohibition ensures that drugs will be unregulated and potentially far more dangerous than they would be if the same regulatory approach that is applied to licit drugs—or, for that matter, food and cosmetics—were applied to illicit ones.

In free-market America, regulations often fall short, but they are far better than no regulation at all.

But measures to regulate drug quality are not under serious consideration anywhere in North America for a simple reason: It would require legalization, and that would be the end of the drug war.