Beware perils of pot psychosis

A demonstrator smokes a marijuana joint on Parliament Hill in April 

2010. (PAWEL DWULIT / CP) 

 

PAUL BRIAN

Pot is potentially psychologically dangerous in the short and long-term in unpredictable and extreme ways.
Hopefully, Justin Trudeau will take the scientific evidence into account about the potential dangers of marijuana, including its ability to trigger panic attack disorders, anxiety, depression, paranoid psychosis and schizophrenia, before moving ahead with full legalization.

These risks are amplified if there’s a family history of mental illness. While the majority of adverse affects for users may range from minor memory loss or paranoia to lethargy, the more serious impacts of “bad trips” and negative reactions can be truly devastating.

Imagine feeling physically and mentally like you are dying after smoking pot and then waking up for the next five years feeling full of paranoia, disorientation and dissociation because it has triggered a psychosis and panic attack disorder.

Much material has been published about the health and potential mental benefits of medical marijuana. There’s also been muted criticism of legalization because of the danger that minors will get more access to the drug or that it will lead to overall social deterioration. It stands to reason, however, that the aspect of psychological dangers be fully investigated before the Liberal majority government moves ahead with its promise.

An Australian study last year found that daily pot users are up to seven times more likely to commit suicide, 60 per cent less likely to finish high school or to get a college degree and are eight times more likely to use illegal drugs later in life.

A 2015 British study cited in the Lancet medical journal found that daily pot users are five times more likely to develop psychosis. It further found that exposure to high-potency “skunk” marijuana was the largest single factor in the development of psychosis in the 461 mentally ill patients they assessed.

Nor has Colorado, which would serve as Canada’s model for legalization, enjoyed a smooth journey, with at least two deaths attributable to pot use, according to the New York Times, including a man who murdered his family after ingesting edible pot candies and another who became panicked and jumped off a balcony to his death.

Crime in Colorado has dropped, and obviously masses of people are not smoking pot and dying, but the state does have a full-fledged mental health crisis on its hands and its suicide rate has risen to the sixth-highest in the United States. Attributing that alarming statistic to pot use would be speculation at best, particularly as long-term data about rising ER visits and mental illness is not yet available, but it is worth noting a possible correlation in rising suicide rates and the more widespread use of pot in the state.

Colorado’s legalization has been a revenue windfall, as it would be for Canada, but at what psychological cost? One in three Canadians polled support legalization of pot, but what is concerning is the assumption, especially among many who have never really looked into pot or used it, that increased pot use is inherently benign. This broader attitude is what should really cause parents concern.

As for the false parallel pot advocates draw with alcohol, that’s another matter. Alcohol is more physically dangerous and certainly can contribute to a host of psychological difficulties, although it doesn’t tend to produce psychosis when a young adult first has two beers. Another problem is that the blood-alcohol levels can be easily measured in roadside tests, while the THC blood content from pot cannot be easily assessed.

Trudeau hasn’t elaborated on specifics of the legalization process and the timeline is unclear, although he has said it is one of his priorities.

The fact is that treating pot as just another regulated substance like alcohol or tobacco or a medicine like Tylenol is, simply put, absurd. Presumably, advocates of weed legalization are aware that the mental illnesses it can trigger last years and be very serious. That said, perhaps legalization will result in weed with lower THC content and stronger regulation, as well as public education, which would be a big plus. But if the media and government keep advancing the idea that it is basically harmless, we will all be poorly informed and youth will be in danger.

Assuming legalization for recreational purposes does go ahead, all products should carry a warning that marijuana is a powerful psychoactive substance causing unpredictable and sometimes alarming reactions.
Trudeau has said his research led him to the conclusion that pot is no more harmful than cigarettes or alcohol.

This is a deceptive statement, perhaps unintentionally so. Physically, it’s true, but psychologically, pot is far more unpredictable. The next time someone smokes a cigar and begins to feel that they’re about to die, do let us know, Justin.

A surprising amount of people either don’t know about the psychiatric dangers of pot or believe it can only happen to people who are already mentally unstable. That is not the case. Let’s see the coming debate as an opportunity for greater education.

Health effects of marijuana largely unknown, experts say

by Jasper Craven

BURLINGTON — Public health experts said Thursday there is inadequate information on the health effects of marijuana, but said lawmakers interested in legalizing the drug should perhaps look to tobacco regulation for guidance.

“When it comes to marijuana, particularly regarding the health consequences of marijuana use and the most effective public health policies to regulate this product, we are largely learning as we go,” said Shayla Livingston, a public health analyst at the Department of Health.

About 40 people attended the event, which was hosted by the Vermont Public Health Association. The crowd included Debby Haskins, executive director of the anti-legalization group SAM-VT, and Harry Chen, the state’s health commissioner.

Experts shared an assessment developed through analysis of 180 scientific studies on marijuana’s public health impacts. Much of the data came from states that have recently made recreational cannabis legal, such as Colorado and Washington.

“We take a data-driven, decision-making process where we want to lead with science, [and] use the best available data to inform policy decisions,” said Heidi Klein, the director of Health Surveillance at the Vermont Department of Health.

There is strong evidence to show that marijuana use impairs social functions, may increase psychotic symptoms and makes car accidents more likely.

Research is unclear about the relationship between marijuana use and brain function, anxiety, and skier safety.

“I was just on the phone today with someone in Colorado, and they said ‘yeah we would really like that, too,’” Livingston said about the lack of research on skiers who are under the influence of pot. “Similar tourist industry, similar problem. But we don’t have any research there yet.”

Vermont Health Commissioner Dr. Harry Chen. Photo by Erin Mansfield/VTDigger

At one point, Commissioner Chen asked Livingston if there was strong data regarding the potency of edible products.

“The research on edibles, particularly, is very limited,” Livingston said.

Colorado has recently developed equivalency equations between edible and smoked marijuana products.
“When we are looking at health effects [of edibles], it’s going to be very hard because most of the literature is on smoked marijuana,” Livingston said.

Livingston also presented a list of “critical unknowns,” a set of key questions about marijuana legalization in the state that are difficult to answer. They include how marijuana legalization will impact the number of consumers, the age at which consumers begin using and the number of days per week that consumers will use cannabis.

Kerry Cork, an attorney at the Public Health Law Center, spoke to the group via Skype, offering recommendations for how the state could look to tobacco laws when crafting marijuana legislation.
“As we’ve been looking at the growth of marijuana legislation, we’ve seen parallels in tobacco control legislation,” Cork said. “And also similar challenges in e-cigarette legislation.”

Cork’s recommendations included restricting flavored marijuana products, banning the public use of pot and defining specific regulations on the advertisement and promotion of marijuana products. She also said marijuana products should have health warnings and childproof packaging, much in the same way that tobacco products do.

With the data assessment complete, a group of stakeholders is scheduled to discuss a set of recommendations for the Legislature to consider when drafting marijuana laws.

The stakeholder group is composed of many factions, including doctors, marijuana advocates, medical dispensary employees and state education and public safety employees.

Livingston said it will be hard for all the voices to coalesce around one set of recommendations, but said she is confident a set of proposals would be ready to present to the Legislature convenes in January.

“It will be hard for all the stakeholders to agree, but it’s been easier because there’s an assumption built in that legalization will happen,” Livingston said.

Canada Is on the Brink of Making Marijuana Legal

By Jacob Sullum 

Justin Trudeau, Canada's new prime minister, intends to establish a Colorado-style system for regulating the recreational grass market. Steve Dipaola/Reuters

Liberal Party leader Justin Trudeau, Canada's new prime minister, ran on a promise to legalize marijuana.

The Liberal platform includes this plank (bold added):
We will legalize, regulate and restrict access to marijuana.

 

Canada’s current system of marijuana prohibition does not work. It does not prevent young people from using marijuana and too many Canadians end up with criminal records for possessing small amounts of the drug.

Arresting and prosecuting these offenses is expensive for our criminal justice system. It traps too many Canadians in the criminal justice system for minor, non-violent offenses. At the same time, the proceeds from the illegal drug trade support organized crime and greater threats to public safety, like human trafficking and hard drugs.

To ensure that we keep marijuana out of the hands of children, and the profits out of the hands of criminals, we will legalize, regulate, and restrict access to marijuana.

We will remove marijuana consumption and incidental possession from the Criminal Code, and create new, stronger laws to punish more severely those who provide it to minors, those who operate a motor vehicle while under its influence, and those who sell it outside of the new regulatory framework.

We will create a federal/provincial/territorial task force, and with input from experts in public health, substance abuse, and law enforcement, will design a new system of strict marijuana sales and distribution, with appropriate federal and provincial excise taxes applied.

"While U.S. states led the way by becoming the first places in the world to legalize and regulate marijuana in 2012," says Marijuana Majority Chairman Tom Angell, "it looks like Canada could soon leapfrog ahead of us and become the first country in North America to legalize cannabis nationwide."

Canada already allows medical use of marijuana, and last June the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously ruled that qualifying patients have a right to obtain not just dried buds but any form of cannabis they find useful. Now the Liberals intend to eliminate penalties for marijuana use and establish something like a Colorado-style system for licensing and regulating marijuana businesses serving the recreational market. "We're going to get started on that right away," Trudeau told CTV last month.

Legalization is also supported by the New Democratic Party, which currently controls the second largest bloc in Parliament but fell to third place in the recent  elections, as well as the Green Party, the Libertarian Party and the Marijuana Party. Bloc Québécois supports decriminalization of possession for personal use.

By contrast, the outgoing prime minister, Tory Stephen Harper, is an unreconstructed drug warrior who recently called marijuana "infinitely worse" than tobacco, although he had trouble backing up that claim.

Harper tried to use Trudeau's support for legalization against him, apparently with little success. The Liberals won 184 seats in the 338-member House of Commons (up from 34), compared with the Conservatives' 99 (down from 159).

A recent CBC survey found that 56 percent of Canadians favor legalizing marijuana, while another 30 percent would eliminate criminal penalties for marijuana use. Although only 38 percent of Conservatives supported legalization, another 37 percent favored decriminalization, and just 26 percent wanted to maintain criminal penalties for users.

6,600 federal inmates to be released this weekend

 

by CNN Wire 

The biggest federal inmate release on record will take place this weekend.
About 6,600 inmates will be released, with 16,500 expected to get out the first year. More than 40,000 federal felons could be released early over the next several years, the U.S. Sentencing Commission said.

The sentencing commission decided a year ago to lower maximum sentences for nonviolent drug offenders and to make the change retroactive, with the inmate releases effective November 1, 2015. Sentences were reduced an average of 18%, the commission said.

Early release will be a challenge for the inmates as well as the judicial bureaucracy.

Housing is a problem
Samuel Hamilton spent 32 years in prison and was let out last year.

“When I was released it was like the stimuli of so many people, just so many people moving at one time and just crossing the street. … I chose everything with caution,” he said.

And even though Hamilton had gotten a master’s degree behind bars, it didn’t seem to matter when he tried to re-enter the workforce.

“You find yourself not getting the job just because of your criminal history,” he said.

But the biggest problem, Hamilton said, was finding a place to live.

“We see so many people coming home without housing,” he said.

Most of the inmates will be under supervision, either in halfway houses run by the Bureau of Prisons or by probation officers.

Doug Burris, chief U.S. probation officer for the Eastern District of Missouri, said his district will supervise about 167 inmates and that the influx will be challenging but manageable.

‘We have had a full year to prepare’
Two-thirds of those going to the St. Louis area will reside in halfway houses and the rest will go directly into the community.

“We have had a full year to prepare for this,” he said. “The U.S. Courts have made it clear that if the workload becomes too strong, that they have supplemental funding. We’re optimistic that this is going to work just fine.”

Burris said he would like additional funding for drug treatment, job training and more officers. If the inmates break the law, probation officers can petition the court to have inmates’ supervision revoked and return them to prison, he said

“We’ve been down this road twice before,” Burris said. “We had two prior crack releases and those went just fine.”

Inmates released early don’t re-offend at a higher rate than other inmates, the sentencing commission found.
After crack cocaine sentencing guidelines were changed in 2007, a five-year study was conducted. It found 47.8% of crack cocaine inmates who served their full terms re-offended, compared to 43.3% of crack cocaine inmates released early.

Half of released inmates had cocaine offenses
About half the inmates to be released were convicted of crack and powder cocaine offenses, followed by methamphetamine at 31.2%, heroin at 7.4% and marijuana at 8.9%. About 2.7% of the inmates were convicted of Oxycodone offenses and 1% Hydrocodone offenses.

About 25% of those coming out are noncitizens. The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement said it will take 1,700 of those released into custody by next week.

“Seven-hundred sixty-three of these individuals have already been issued final orders of removal, while the others are in varying stages of processing and removal proceedings,” ICE said.

Over the next few years, 20,000 Hispanics will be released, along with 14,000 blacks and 11,000 whites.
The state expected to receive the largest number of inmates is Texas, with 2,829, followed by by Florida at 1,200 and Iowa at 785.

Federal judges held re-sentencing hearings across the country during the last year.

Senior U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein, who presided over thousands of hearings, said he looked at the facts of the criminal’s behavior, the inmate’s behavior in prison and their family support while assessing whether an offender would be a danger to the community.

“The first question the judge asks himself is, ‘If I release this person now or shorten the sentence now, will he be a greater danger to the community?’ and the statistics say very clearly no,” he said.

‘Who’s going to watch these people?’
New York City Police Commissioner Bill Bratton said the main problem will be finding adequate staffing to supervise the released inmates. Because of the budget resolution in Congress, the parole department cannot hire more parole officers, he said.

“So who’s going to watch these people when they go out on parole?” he said. “And that’s effectively what’s going on, they’re going to be out on parole.”

With the commission study concluding that getting out early didn’t really matter — the re-offense rate was about the same — that leaves the question: Who benefits from early release, the Bureau of Prisons or the prisoners themselves?

The Sentencing Commission said that over time, sentence reductions could result in a savings of up to 79,740 bed years. A bed year, according to the report, is the equivalent of one federal prisoner occupying a prison bed for a year.

The average cost of incarceration for a federal inmate in 2013 was $29,291.25, according to the Federal Register, the daily Journal of the U.S. government.

Based on that average, the total savings to the Bureau of Prisons could be $2.3 billion.

The U.S. Bureau of Prisons declined comment for this story.

Marijuana’s role in fatal crashes unclear

Limitations in state’s study make it difficult to draw conclusions

• 

  WSP Trooper Ben Taylor administers a field sobriety test to a driver who nearly crashed her car into a concrete barrier on state Highway 500 in December 2011. The driver was arrested on suspicion of DUI. (Steven Lane/The Columbian)

By Andy Matarrese,

Of the roughly 3,000 Washington drivers involved in fatal crashes from 2010-2014, almost two-thirds of them tested positive for drugs or alcohol, but a large portion of those crashes seemed to have involved some combination of alcohol, marijuana or other drugs, obscuring how often marijuana was a factor.

The Washington Traffic Safety Commission looked at information filed through the state’s fatal crash reporting system and analyzed it against toxicology results for dead and surviving drivers in fatal crashes.

The study did not track fatal crashes against changing laws for recreational marijuana use.

The researchers also found 84 percent of drivers who tested positive for any cannabis in 2014 were positive for one of its more intoxicating ingredients, compared to 44 percent in 2010.

During that period in Clark County, of the 98 drivers tested following fatal crashes, 56 tested positive for driving having used a drug.

Sixteen tested positive for only alcohol; three for one of the active ingredients in marijuana; one for residual traces of the drug, which is more of an indicator of past use; and nine for a combination of the two or other drugs. The commission released the data Thursday.

There are some limitations to the state’s report, namely that it’s not a very representative sample of drivers, said Staci Hoff, research director at the commission.

“This describes an already high-risk group,” she said. They’re the kind of people who will use and drive, and are likely more reckless than other drivers.

Other studies the commission cites, ones that found the causal relationship between crashes and pot use to be minimal, didn’t distinguish different THC compounds in testing, often didn’t collect test samples soon enough and have problematic sample sizes.

The number of drivers in fatal crashes who tested positive for only delta-9-THC — a psychoactive chemical that enters the blood and brain soon after consuming marijuana — was very small, as it often is in such studies. Small sample sizes make it difficult to draw conclusions.

Whittling out all the drivers who had used alcohol or another drug leaves only 56 people who tested positive for the quickly intoxicating compound of THC.

“Because of small sample sizes, they look at drivers who not only had THC; they had alcohol, they had other drugs,” she said. “Not only can we not make those inferences, no one else really can at this point.”
Many more used alcohol or some sort of combination of drugs.

“Really, I think that the message that comes out of this report is the combination of THC and alcohol — not only is this increasing, but that driver group revealed itself as the most high risk,” Hoff said.

Hoff expects opponents and supporters of marijuana legalization will try to find something they like in this or any marijuana research, which is part of why the commission’s study has its limitations listed so close to the front cover.

“I just think there are so many limitations to what’s already been put out there, and even the conclusions based on those studies are just insane,” she said. “As a researcher, I’m just appalled daily.”

The best studies she’s seen, ones with the most well-done research, indicate that active THC ingredient noted by the commission does increase risk behind the wheel.

What that means will become clearer with time and more research.

“It could be a long time before we determine the level of impairment due to marijuana,” she said.

Joint research: Former UA professor Sisley ready to begin pot study

By Ethan McSweeney

---

Dr. Sue Sisley was wearing red scrubs and a smile as she strode into the marijuana-emblazoned office of a company called Weed Depot in a north Scottsdale business park.

Sisley started seeing patients via video out of a conference room in this office that serves as a headquarters for a marijuana dispensary after the UA terminated her contract last summer, which set off a controversy that turned into a cause célèbre for pot activists.

For years, Sisley attempted to begin research on the effects of marijuana in treating post-traumatic stress disorder, only to be faced with setback after setback—the biggest of which being her dismissal from the UA College of Medicine.

The end may now be in sight, however. Sisley and fellow researchers said they expect to begin the three-year study in January or sometime in early 2016.

By Ethan McSweeney / The Daily Wildcat
Dr. Sue Sisley works on her laptop in a conference room in Weed Depot in Scottsdale. After five years of efforts, Sisley is about to begin a study on the effects of marijuana in treating post-traumatic stress disorder.

“Fortunately, after five years, we have persevered and we are now in a position to finally implement this study,” Sisley said.

The last thing that’s needed is final approval from the Drug Enforcement Administration so marijuana plants can be provided for the study, the researchers said. That approval can only be given once the renovations to Sisley’s research site in Phoenix are complete.

Dr. Sisley

Underneath the red scrubs, Sisley was wearing an Arizona Alumni shirt. She pulled out a UA hat, too, but she cautioned that she was not trying to appear “flippant” with the university.

She said there are plenty of good people doing good work at the UA. She’s a graduate of the UA College of Medicine, class of 1995, and worked at the College of Medicine–Phoenix campus.

Sisley’s interest in using marijuana to treat PTSD began because, she said, she has spent about 20 years treating veterans—at the Phoenix Veterans Administration hospital and her own private practice.

Working with these veterans, she noticed the debilitating effects of PTSD on their lives. She estimates that dozens of the veterans she treated over the years committed suicide.

Some veterans would tell her that they felt smoking marijuana helped when it came to coping with PTSD.
“I have people in my practice who are reporting that marijuana has saved their lives, and I’m as skeptical as anyone,” Sisley said. “I felt a duty to at least study the plant rather than just dismissing claims as erroneous or as coming from a bunch of drug-seeking stoners.”

So, working with the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies, or MAPS, she crafted a study to look at the effects of marijuana in treating PTSD about five years ago.

The Food and Drug Administration approved the study in 2011, followed by the UA’s Institutional Review Board, which is needed to conduct research at the university.

Funding the study was another matter.
Sisley lobbied the Arizona State Legislature in spring 2014 to use money from the state’s medical marijuana revenues to fund her study, an effort that ultimately failed.

In late June 2014, Sisley received notice that her contract with the UA had been terminated. She said the UA caved to political pressure from the Legislature and ousted her from her position the College of Medicine–Phoenix.

Sisley said state Senate President Andy Biggs, R-Gilbert, and other legislators took issue with her lobbying style at the state Capitol. She cited an August 2014 report in the New York Times that quoted Biggs as saying that a UA lobbyist told him that there “will not be a problem going forward” after he complained about Sisley’s lobbying.
“This is a classic case of science being trumped by politics,” Sisley said.
The UA contests that version of the story.
Chris Sigurdson, vice president of communications at the UA, said in an email that the university did not reject Sisley’s research and offered to host it with another principal investigator—the lead researcher for a study.
MAPS, which sponsors Sisley’s research, declined the UA’s offer to do the study with another researcher at the helm, Sigurdson says.

“Had they agreed,” Sigurdson said, “we would be working on the study today.”

He also points out that the UA successfully lobbied the state Legislature in 2013 to allow medical marijuana to be studied on university campuses, laying the groundwork for the study to take place.

“The UA unreservedly supports academic freedom in research and instruction,” Sigurdson said. “Political pressure has not been a factor in our willingness to conduct medical marijuana research or influenced the assignment of any of our employees.”

After the UA
Whatever the reasons were for her termination, Sisley said she needed another site in Arizona that would host the research.

“Other people would have been devastated and walked away but there was no way I was going to turn my back on this study,” Sisley said.

Sisley said she reached out to Northern Arizona University and Arizona State University, but couldn’t work out a deal for research with either. She then turned to hospitals around Arizona to host the study with no luck.

As she searched for a new site that would allow her to conduct the research, Sisley’s fame grew among marijuana legalization activists. MAPS counted about 400 media reports about her in the months after her dismissal from the UA, she said.

Sisley joked that she should send UA administrators a gift basket because her termination brought widespread media attention to her research efforts. However, she said she never wanted to be a marijuana activist and that she was “forced” into becoming one because she encountered so many obstacles to trying to do research with marijuana.

She has spoken at events from a conference at Walter Reed Military Medical Center to a pro-marijuana rally in Seattle and has been interviewed on CNN.

Sisley maintains an official Facebook page for herself that has accrued more than 2,400 likes. The page’s cover photo imposes an image of Sisley against a backdrop featuring depictions of marijuana plants.

Howard Baer, founder and owner of Weed Depot, is one pot supporter who was drawn to Sisley’s cause.

He said he learned about the UA controversy and offered the office space in Scottsdale for the study. Sisley declined the offer, because she said she didn’t want to be associated with the marijuana industry.

He then offered Sisley space in a conference room in the office for Sisley to use personally for her telemedicine practice. She accepted that offer.

“She can have anything she wants from us,” Baer said.

Sisley said she had been trying to find a space to do the study in Arizona that was not associated with pot legalization advocates, but found it difficult without the backing of a university or a hospital. She said she didn’t want the optics of “being in bed” with the marijuana industry.

After months of difficulties in finding a place, Sisley finally relented. The study will be housed in a warehouse near the Deer Valley Airport in north Phoenix that is located next to a marijuana grow site, satisfying city zoning regulations, she says.

More construction is still needed inside the warehouse to clearly separate the marijuana grow from the study before final DEA approval, Sisley said.

Rick Doblin, founder and executive director of MAPS, said this is the culmination of a long-fought effort to begin a critical piece of marijuana research.

“It’s been like pushing a boulder up a hill,” he said. “It’s been extremely slow and problematic, but we’re getting there inch by inch, step by step.”

A ‘redesigned’ study
Marcel Bonn-Miller, an adjunct assistant professor of psychology in psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania, heard about Sisley’s dismissal from the UA last summer and reached out to MAPS to offer his assistance on the research.

He brought in Dr. Ryan Vandrey, an associate professor in the Behavioral Psychology Research Unit at Johns Hopkins University, who has experience in research with marijuana.

After looking at the study, the two determined that they would need to redesign the study in order to maximize the “meaningful findings” that could be discovered with the research, said Bonn-Miller, who also works at the Philadelphia VA hospital.

“The only thing that stayed the same was that we were looking at different types of marijuana on PTSD symptoms,” Bonn-Miller said.

Bonn-Miller will be the coordinating principal investigator for the research, meaning he will be overseeing the entire study.

He said Sisley doesn’t have the experience Bonn-Miller and Vandrey have in marijuana research, because she has worked as a clinician, not a researcher.

This isn’t to discount the efforts Sisley had put into getting the research started, Bonn-Miller said. Sisley’s study as it was had been approved by the FDA and the UA’s institutional review board.

The study will take place at two locations—in Phoenix with Sisley and in Baltimore at Johns Hopkins with Vandrey. 38 patients will be seen at each site for a total of 76 subjects.

Patients, who have been screened and vetted for the study, will come into the sites to smoke different strains of cannabis, Vandrey said. The study will take three years to complete once it begins.

Bonn-Miller, as principal investigator, will write the findings when the research is complete.

Bonn-Miller and Vandrey emphasized they don’t have an agenda going into this study and added that they’re not interested in marijuana activism. Sisley said she wants to present the findings from the study whether it bodes well or not for marijuana legalization advocates.

“We’re trying to streamline these things and give a balanced view of what’s going on without the agenda,” Bonn-Miller said.

The redesigned study also received a $2.2 million grant from the Colorado Department of Health in December, securing the funding that eluded Sisley and MAPS before.

“It’s a good collaboration,” Bonn-Miller said about working with Sisley and MAPS. “I think their enthusiasm and stick-to-itiveness and coupled with our background has really helped push this forward relatively quickly.”

The trouble with pot research
The hurdles to this study aren’t unfamiliar territory for Doblin.
Doblin founded MAPS in 1986 originally to develop medicinal uses for MDMA and then marijuana. In 1992, Doblin worked with a researcher from the University of California, San Francisco, to try to study the effects of marijuana on AIDS patients, only for the research to be stonewalled by federal regulators for four years.

Vandrey said he’s encountered extremes on both sides of the debate on marijuana’s effectiveness—people who are totally for pot and people who are totally against it.

The state of marijuana in the U.S. now is much different than it was even five years ago when Sisley began her efforts.

Arizonans may see marijuana legalization on the ballot in 2016, where they could join Colorado, Washington, Alaska and Oregon as states that allow marijuana for recreational use. Several other states have legalized medical marijuana and decriminalized its use.

This trend of state legalizing pot, however, does not necessarily indicate research on marijuana will be easier in the near future, Doblin said.

The problem is marijuana remains federally illegal and is classified a Schedule I substance by the FDA.

Doblin said that momentum may prove to better legitimize marijuana’s medicinal purposes.

“That’s going to change the dynamics and will build even more support for research into marijuana’s medical uses,” he said, “because hopefully the resistance to it will be reduced.”

As for MAPS’s original goal of turning marijuana into a legal prescription drug in the U.S., Doblin estimated that may be about 10 years away.

“It’s still a long road,” he said.
Sisley said after the years of trying to get the research started and her activism for marijuana, her primary concern remains with helping the veterans she’s treated over the years.

“I feel the weight of these veterans on my shoulders every day,” she said.

For now, construction awaits completion at the Phoenix warehouse where patients will soon be coming to smoke marijuana for the study and Sisley and fellow researchers will begin compiling data.

The DEA requires secure storage for the cannabis that will be used in the study. For that Sisley, acquired a safe, one of the only things inside the warehouse now that’s not construction equipment.

That gray safe sits on the concrete floor, waiting for marijuana to be stored inside.

Teen perception survey sparks concern

DEBBY JONES, prevention specialist for YouthThink, leads an exercise for eighth graders from District 21 and St. Mary’s Academy during “Do Something Day” that challenged them to become more socially and emotionally literate so they could proactively deal with stress and develop a healthy lifestyle.

By RaeLynn Ricarte

#Fifty percent of adults get drunk once a week and 60 percent use marijuana — that’s the perception of a majority of 425 middle school students in The Dalles, according to Debby Jones, prevention specialist for YouthThink. 

#“They are hearing this somewhere so I think we have to peel the onion back and find out what’s making them think that way,” she said. “We need to try to find out why our youth believe what they do and what we can learn from them.”

#When asked if she thought students might have been responding to the survey as a joke, Jones said the same model is used for questioning as followed by the state, which ensured accurate results.

#“I think surveys are accurate,” she said. “These are nationally recognized and done year after year so they have a way of asking the same question several times in different ways to ensure the answer is truthful. “

#Jones delivered the results of the perception survey to The Dalles City Council Oct. 12. 

#She wanted to give them information for consideration when they decide whether or not to opt-out of allowing recreational pot stores to open in town.

#Currently, marijuana can only be sold in dispensaries but state laws will be in place to accommodate recreational sales in other locations by mid-2016.

#“If young people get started using marijuana under the age of 12, they are more likely to smoke and drink also,” said Jones.

#She said YouthThink does not oppose medicinal use of marijuana or people growing their own plants for private use. 

#However, she said commercial sales of pot at retail outlets might make it easier for teens to obtain the drug, and are likely to increase peer pressure.

#“They see people sitting outside restaurants here drinking and think it would make them look cool,” said Jones. “I think that seeing stores selling marijuana for recreational use will have that same effect. 

#She said it is important to teach children that the majority of people do not abuse alcohol or drugs. 

#She that is especially important to point out when students who admit to consuming alcohol admit that their first drink, on average, was at 10 years and 8 months of age. 

#“The majority of our sixth graders are not drinking but, when they do, it’s at a younger age,” said Jones.

#She said the results of a 2013-14 Oregon student wellness survey of sixth, eighth and 11 graders showed a higher monthly rate of drug use in Wasco County than the state average. 

#Jones said adding those results to the perception survey that involved six classes of students shows the need for a community conversation about prevention issues.“Even though children believe the majority of adults are abusing alcohol and/or drugs, more than 90 percent also believe their parents would be disappointed if they did,” she said. 

#According to Jones, area youth also tend to think that alcohol, tobacco and drug use among their peer is much higher than statistics show and YouthThink would like to find out why they have that mindset. 

#To get the truth out YouthThink has launched the “Most of us Don’t” campaign to encourage students to re-think their perceptions. They are also being encouraged to practice “social and emotional literacy” to learn proactive ways to deal with stress and negative feelings so they can develop a healthy lifestyle. 

#“We’re trying to take learning styles into account with our public awareness campaign and we have a lot of different strategies to us,” said Jones. 

#“We’ve just got to tap into how their brain works — they are very good at letting us know – and move forward with that.”

#She said in the course of the community conversation about these issues, adults will be challenged to explain what “drinking responsibly” or “using marijuana responsibly” really means. 

#“We want to take the veil off this conversation and give families factual information that will empower them,” said Jones.

#She said the city’s contribution in 2015-16 of $13,000 has helped YouthThink fulfill its mission, something she wanted to thank the council for on her visit earlier this month. “We all just need to be working together because saying, ‘Just don’t do it,’ doesn’t work,” Jones said. “And raising a generation that is going to be healthy is also an economic development issue.”

Support for Marijuana Legalization Continues to Grow Into the Future

With support for pot prohibition becoming a "fringe position" and older opponents of reform dying off, the prospects for pot are looking better than ever.

By Keith Stroup / NORML

Photo Credit: Shutterstock.com/ Iakov Filimonov

Public policy, in a democracy, depends on the will of a majority of the citizens. Only when a clear majority favor a change in policy can that change occur, and even then, when working with elected legislators, these is always a significant lag between a change in the public attitudes, and a change in public policy. Most elected officials, with an eye towards being re-elected, find it safer to vote for the status quo, until it is unavoidably obvious they are on the losing side.

Fortunately, in half the states citizens have the option of going around their elected state legislatures and changing public policy by a voter initiative – a direct vote of the people. Which explains how the marijuana legalization movement has been so successful over the last few years. As public attitudes have increasingly shifted against prohibition, and in support of legalization, we have had the ability to ask the citizens in several states to approve legalization, despite the trepidation of their state elected officials.

And that has allowed us to enact legalization in a few states several years earlier than would have been the case if we would have had to move the proposal through the state legislature. For that, we are truly benefiting from the successes of the Progressive movement of an earlier era, for the concept of a voter initiative.

The Latest Gallup Poll
But none of that matters unless a proposed change in policy enjoys the support of a majority of the public. And as the latest Gallup Poll results underscored, the support for legalizing marijuana continues to increase, and there is every reason to believe that trend will only increase in the coming years. And the political implications of that are obvious.

More specifically, this latest Gallup Poll found that 58 percent of the public nationwide now support the full legalization of marijuana, matching the highest level of support Gallup has ever found over 46 years of polling on the question.

Gallup first polled the American public about their support for legalizing marijuana in 1969, the year before NORML was founded, and found the support level at only 12 percent. That number rose to 28 percent by 1977, before beginning a decline, falling to 23 percent by 1985. Support then again began to rise gradually over the next 25 years, until finally reaching 50 percent in 2011. Gallup found support peaking at 58 percent in 2013, before showing a decline to 51 percent in 2014 (those numbers are within the 4 percent margin of error for their telephone survey of just over 1,000 respondents), and then rebounding to 58 percent again in 2015.

These latest 2015 findings were overwhelmingly favorable in all age groups, with a majority level of support in all age categories, except seniors (my own group), and even there we are showing big gains.

Younger Americans, Democrats and independents are the most likely to favor legalizing cannabis, while Republicans and Americans over the age of 65 are least likely to do so. Among those poll respondents age 18 to 34, 71 percent endorse legalization. Among respondents age 35 to 49 years of age, 64 percent support legalizing marijuana. Among those age 65 and up, support fell to 35 percent, but this too reflected a sharp increase in support.

We Are Outliving Our Opponents
At NORML we have often joked that our strategy, if all else failed (and there were certainly decades when we were making very little measurable progress), was to out-live our opponents. We were only partially kidding, as we were aware that younger Americans were far more supportive of legalization than were older Americans, and eventually we would win.

The most significant implications of this latest Gallup data is the likelihood that this trend will continue for many years in the future, as more seniors are replaced by younger Americans, making it possible for us in the next few years to adopt legalization in many more states that offer a voter initiative; and importantly, in many other states that do not, by way of the state legislature. Even elected officials can only ignore the will of the public for so long, before either supporting that change, or being replaced by those who do. It is only a matter of time.

The poll’s authors suggested the future looks positive for those who favor legalization. “Given the patterns of support by age, that percentage should continue to grow in the future. … These trends suggest that state and local governments may come under increasing pressure to ease restrictions on marijuana use, if not go even further like the states of Colorado, Oregon, Washington and Alaska in making recreational marijuana use completely legal.”

Or as NORML Deputy Director Paul Armentano has pointed out, continuing to support marijuana prohibition is now a “fringe position” in America. “These results ought to embolden campaigning politicians, as well as elected officials, to take a more pronounced stance in favor of legalizing and regulating cannabis in a manner that is consistent with the desires of the majority of their constituents.”

This is an important point to keep in mind when thinking about who might be elected the next US president, and whether that individual will continue “the Obama policy” of allowing the states to determine their own marijuana policy, without interference from the federal government. With support for full legalization reaching nearly 60 percent nationwide, it will be difficult, and likely politically impossible, for the next president to change that policy, regardless of her/his personal views.

We have, after a long and sometimes frustrating public debate covering several decades, finally won the hearts and minds of a majority of the American public, and with that, the power to move marijuana legalization forward full speed, until it is the law of the land. We are now the majority.

It’s a wonderful time to be a marijuana smoker.

Despite Benefits, Pot Could Still Be Harmful To Your Health

Matt Picht , Cliff Judy 

 

There's been a lot of positive pot press recently. The drug's medical uses have gained widespread acceptance, and there's more and more support for full legalization.

"The time is long overdue for us to remove the federal prohibition on marijuana," Democratic Sen. Bernie Sanders told a crowd.

But for all its beneficial effects, there is a flip side — cannabis can have severe health consequences.
First up, addiction. Yes, you can get addicted to marijuana; about 9 percent of cannabis users develop a dependence on the drug, and the risk is higher for adolescents and heavy users. Though that 9 percent is markedly lower than addiction numbers for other drugs like nicotine.

And addicted or not, it's also possible to build up a tolerance to marijuana. Both dependency and tolerance can lead to a host of unpleasant withdrawal symptoms for people who try to quit.

Acute paranoia and anxiety or panic attacks are well-known possible side effects of cannabis use. Psychotic episodes, schizophrenia and increased severity of mental illness symptoms have also been associated with pot use in some studies.

There's some research suggesting regular pot use might affect brain development in teenagers, and the drug has been shown to harm memory centers in lab rats.

Still, marijuana does have several medical benefits; two cannabis-based chemicals have been shown to help treat nausea, chronic pain and potentially a host of other conditions.

We should also point out there are plenty of drugs used in modern medicine with far more known harmful side effects than pot — morphine, pentobarbital, and amphetamine are a few examples.

There's still a lot that we don't know about marijuana — research on the drug has been severely hampered due to legal and ethical concerns.

Understanding the drug's health effects will be more important as pot use becomes more and more widespread. From 2002 to 2013, marijuana use in America rose from 4.1 percent to 9.5 percent.

Why Does Cannabis Cause Paranoia in Some But Helps Anxiety in Others?

By Bailey Rahn

Most people can recall a time they got way too high and experienced a bit of a paranoid episode. Sometimes it manifests as mild worrying, and other times you find yourself in the fetal position at the top of a Doritos pile dialing 911 because surely this high will be the death of you (true story, guys). Paradoxically, others use cannabis as a tried-and-true way to annihilate their anxiety. Even PTSD patients are using medical marijuana to treat stress and panic symptoms with remarkable rates of success.

Why does marijuana have such a polarizing effects on fear and anxiety?

Cannabis and Brain Chemistry

When it comes to cannabis and paranoia, it’s literally all in your head. Cannabinoids (e.g. THC and CBD) bind to receptors throughout the brain, many of which are focused in the amygdala. The amygdala is involved in emotional processing, governing responses such as fear, stress, and paranoia. When THC acts upon the amygdala, it modifies the neural communication for better or for worse.

THC can overexcite the neural pathways and lead to anxiety and paranoia, especially in individuals who are new or unaccustomed to cannabis. The mechanisms by which this happens are still unclear to researchers, but the body’s endocannabinoid system seems to be full of hints.

Put simply, our body contains receptor sites that are not only filled by marijuana’s cannabinoids, but also by naturally-produced compounds called endocannabinoids that act a lot like those compounds found in cannabis. Shortages of these endocannabinoids have been observed in brains that have been exposed to excessive stress and trauma, which could explain why THC has a relaxing, anti-anxiety effect in some people.

In theory, cannabinoids from marijuana replenish these regulatory compounds, resulting in a therapeutic effect. This connection has been pertinent in PTSD studies and could hold promising implications for other mood disorders as well.

Pre-Existing Anxiety Affects Your Cannabis Experience

A 2009 review of anxiety and cannabis studies concluded that “frequent cannabis users appear to have higher levels of anxiety than non-users,” and that “a considerable number of subjects developed anxiety disorders before the first symptoms of cannabis dependence.” That led researchers to believe that anxiety-prone people tend to use cannabis as a self-prescribed anxiety medicine, opposing the idea that cannabis is what’s causing the anxiety.
While these cannabis use trends are helpful in understanding broad behavioral tendencies, researchers acknowledge that anxiety is highly individualized based on a number of risk factors:

• Genetic vulnerability
• Personality
• Gender
• History of paranoid episodes
• Presence of anxiety disorder
• Basal anxiety levels
• Abstinence states

And when you throw cannabis into the mix, a few other risk factors emerge:

• Frequency of use
• Dose
• Cannabinoids
• Set and setting

While anxiety is no doubt unique and nuanced in every individual, researchers noted that regular users tend to see a decrease in anxiety whereas occasional and new users were more likely to experience heightened paranoia. Anxiety was also more likely to occur in high doses of THC.
It’s impossible to say how cannabis will affect you personally unless you’ve already tried it for yourself, but understanding what biological and environmental factors are at play can certainly help guide you to a better experience.

How to Avoid Cannabis-Induced Anxiety and Paranoia

If you’re susceptible to or worried about cannabis-induced paranoia, fear not – there are ways to prevent, even counter, that anxiety. Here are just a few tips:

• Try a low-THC and/or high-CBD strain. CBD is a non-psychoactive compound that combats anxiety and counteracts THC’s psychoactive effects, resulting in a calmer and more clear-headed experience.
• Go easy on the dose. Smoking and vaporizing offer better dose control than oils and edibles, so consider starting there if you’re worried about getting too high.
• Find a comfortable place. Set and setting is pivotal to the experience, so get to a happy place to reduce panic and paranoia.
• Partner up with the right strain. Every strain has something different to offer on a chemical level, so keep track of which ones worked for you. Sativa strains tend to deliver racier, high-energy effects while indicas tend to be more relaxing.

Bernie Sanders' Stance on Marijuana Can Pave the Way For Pollution Free Transportation

The Washington Post reports that Presidential Candidate Bernie Sanders proposes to remove Marijuana from the Schedule 1 Federal list of dangerous drugs:

Sanders's plan would not automatically make marijuana legal nationwide, but states would be allowed to regulate the drug in the same way that state and local laws now govern sales of alcohol and tobacco. And people who use marijuana in states that legalize it would no longer be at risk of federal prosecution.
His plan would also allow marijuana businesses currently operating in states that have legalized it to use banking services and apply for tax deductions that are currently unavailable to them under federal law.

I am sure a lot of people are talking about this because of several reasons, Marijuana is less dangerous than alcohol and tobacco, lots of people especially minorities are doing time in prison for non-violent offenses related to Marijuana use, and as evidenced by the multiple thousands of people who have moved to my state of Colorado to seek Medical and now Recreational Marijuana, its a big deal.

However there is something profoundly revolutionary about this -- by providing a way for Marijuana's non-intoxicating cousin Hemp to be a legal product for its various uses, from paper, to clothes, biofuel, food and especially reducing our carbon by CO2 absorption.

Hemp cultivation and production do not harm the environment. The USDA Bulletin #404 concluded that hemp produces four times as much pulp with at least four to seven times less pollution. (Popular Mechanics, Feb. 1938).
Consider a few more facts about hemp:
• Hemp does not require herbicides or pesticides.
• Hemp can be grown in a wide range of latitudes and altitudes.
• Hemp replenishes soil with nutrients and nitrogen, making it an excellent rotational crop.
• Hemp controls erosion of the topsoil.
• Hemp converts CO2 to oxygen better than trees.
• Hemp produces more oil than any other crop, which can be used for food, fuel, lubricants, soaps, etc.
• Hemp nut is a very healthy food, being the highest protein crop (after soybean) and high in omega oils.
• Hemp can be used for making plastics, including car parts.
• Hemp makes paper more efficiently and ecologically than wood, requiring no chemical glues.
• Hemp can be used to make fiberboard.
• Hemp can be used to make paint.
• Hemp can produce bio-fuel and ethanol (better than corn).
• Hemp can be grown more than once per year.
• Hemp fibers can make very strong rope and textiles.

Of all the reasons for Corporations to make weed 'scary' from conspiracy theories that I have heard, DuPont wanted to make synthetic Nylon replace Hemp rope, to Wood Pulp companies wanted to do away with their competitor Hemp paper (which apparently our Constitution was written on), the most obvious might be Big Oil
Consider this evidence:

14) Henry Ford's first Model-T was built to run on hemp gasoline and the car itself was constructed from hemp! On his large estate, Ford was photographed among his hemp fields. The car, 'grown from the soil,' had hemp plastic panels whose impact strength was 10 times stronger than steel. (Popular Mechanics, 1941.)

15) In 1938, hemp was called 'Billion Dollar Crop.' It was the first time a cash crop had a business potential to exceed a billion dollars. (Popular Mechanics, Feb. 1938.)

16) Mechanical Engineering Magazine (Feb. 1938) published an article entitled 'The Most Profitable and Desirable Crop that Can be Grown.' It stated that if hemp was cultivated using 20th-century technology, it would be the single largest agricultural crop in the U.S. and the rest of the world.

The well known 'Reefer Madness' propaganda movie released in 1936 was integral to reducing the Billion dollar hemp industry to Zero, and Fossil Fuel Oil stepped in and became the polluting Trillion dollar industry.
One of my fellow musicians that I got to know this past year at our 420 performance, wrote a song which celebrates this issue
"Cannabis Car"

And new companies are bringing this concept to reality.
And not just the car made from hemp, but what is more dangerous to Big Oil's bottom line, powered by hemp biofuels.

From the Guardian UK:

But surely if it was mass-produced, this one drawback could be overcome and its many benefits as an efficient biofuel could be harnessed.
As far as research and implementation of hemp for biofuel, the US is way ahead of Europe and there are a range of websites dedicated to the use of hemp as a fuel for cars.

In the UK, companies such as Hemp Global Solutions have been set up very much with climate change and the reduction of carbon emissions in mind, but there is little, if any, research in this country that has looked into the viability of the hemp plant as a fuel for cars.
So why was there not a single mention of this miracle crop, that, in addition to being able to be used as fuel, can also be used as paper, cloth, converted into plastic and is a rich food source containing high levels of protein?

While we environmentally concerned citizens await the mass distribution of affordable electric cars, in the meantime if we were able to cheaply grow and produce Hemp biofuel, then in a few years we could eliminate the need for Fossil Fuel based Diesel.

And unlike fossil fuels, Hemp has many other uses than just a source of fuel, and it eats Carbon Dioxide, rather than produce it.
Bernie Sanders is on to something big, and its not just about the War on Drugs, it's about revolutionizing our Fuel Energy supply.

Court ruling highlights federal, state discord over medical marijuana

By Peter Hecht

In 1991, amid the AIDS crisis in San Francisco, a former jazz and blues singer named Lynnette Shaw was hired as the intake officer at the San Francisco Cannabis Buyers Club, California’s first medical marijuana dispensary.

The modest Cannabis Buyers Club would eventually transform into a flamboyant weed emporium on Market Street that founder Dennis Peron dubbed “the five-story felony.” Shaw, who would partner with Peron in backing California’s Proposition 215 medical marijuana law, went another direction months before the initiative passed in 1996. She ventured across San Francisco Bay to establish California’s first locally permitted and regulated medical marijuana provider.

Peron eventually drew the ire of state narcotics officers, who raided his club. Shaw and her small-town marijuana dispensary, serving patients with HIV, cancer and other illnesses, drew something else: a nearly two-decade legal battle with the United States Justice Department.

In 2011, over protests from local officials, a federal seizure order shuttered the Marin Alliance for Medical Marijuana in the Marin County hamlet of Fairfax. Shaw was left destitute, ultimately living on welfare and food assistance.

But on Oct. 19, Shaw won a major court ruling that marijuana advocates hail as a potentially landmark rebuke to federal drug policies and government interference in states where cannabis is legal for medical or recreational use.

In a sternly written decision, U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer in San Francisco threw out a federal injunction against the Marin Alliance for Medical Marijuana. He ruled that the Justice Department was defying the will of Congress and improperly intruding on California’s medical marijuana laws.

This week, Shaw, who still lives in Fairfax, was celebrating and making plans to reopen the historic dispensary, launched in 1996 and licensed by the city in 1997. “I am looking at my Facebook page,” Shaw said. “I’m getting thousands of messages right now. I’m getting cheered all over the world.”

Breyer’s ruling was seen as a major test for an amendment to federal appropriations bills signed by President Barack Obama in 2014 and again this year that banned any expenditure of Justice Department funds to prevent states from implementing laws “that authorize the use, distribution and possession of medical marijuana.”
Marijuana advocates and the two California representatives who sponsored the amendment – Reps. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Huntington Beach, and Sam Farr, D-Carmel – called its passage an end to federal raids on medical marijuana providers in the Golden State and beyond.

This decision ends the marijuana war. It really does.

Lynnette Shaw, Marin Alliance for Medical Marijuana

But federal authorities, who in 2011 had launched sweeping raids and property forfeiture actions against California dispensaries, argued in court briefs that the Justice Department retained the right to enforce federal law against individuals or businesses. U.S. prosecutors said such criminal and civil “actions do not prevent a state from implementing its own laws” on marijuana.

Breyer last week provided a blistering rejection of the government’s argument. “It defies language and logic for the government to argue that it does not ‘prevent’ California from ‘implementing’ its medical marijuana laws by shutting down these same heavily regulated medical marijuana dispensaries,” he wrote.

Breyer’s ruling added: “Californians’ access to legal medical marijuana has been substantially impeded by the closing of dispensaries, and the closing of MAMM (the Marin Alliance for Medical Marijuana) in particular.”
Months before the judge’s ruling, Rohrabacher and Farr had sent a pointed letter to then-U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder. They took issue with public statements by Justice Department officials that they retained the right to prosecute medical marijuana cases in states, such as California, with legal medicinal use.

“As the authors of the provision in question, we write to inform you that this interpretation of our amendment is emphatically wrong,” the California representatives wrote Holder on April 8. “Rest assured, the purpose of our amendment was to prevent the Department from wasting its limited law enforcement resources on prosecutions and asset forfeiture actions against medical marijuana patients and providers, including businesses that operate legally under state law.”

After Breyer’s ruling, Shaw’s attorney, Greg Anton, declared: “The war on marijuana is winding down – and marijuana won.”

Unsettled landscape

Shaw’s battle with the government began in 1998, when the Justice Department won a court ruling to shutter the Marin Alliance and five other California dispensaries for violating the federal Controlled Substances Act by distributing medical marijuana.

Yet the government never enforced the injunction and the dispensary stayed open as Shaw filed legal appeals and even ran as a Libertarian and “marijuana peace” candidate for lieutenant governor in 2006, winning 142,851 votes – just under 2 percent – in the November general election.

In December 2011, then-U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag in San Francisco threatened Marin Alliance’s landlord with seizure of the property in addition to up to 40 years in federal prison for drug dealing by providing medical marijuana within 1,000 feet of a Little League field.

The town of Fairfax protested. Then-Mayor Larry Bragman wrote Haag that the medical marijuana provider was legally operating under 84 permit conditions “in a model of effective local oversight.” In follow-up correspondence, Bragman said the dispensary was a critical provider of medicinal relief in a Marin County region with “exceptionally high rates of breast and prostate cancer.”

Nevertheless, the dispensary closed in 2011 under the federal threats.

Shaw said she never earned more than $30,000 a year from the small cannabis club, which at its peak employed seven people and provided marijuana for 2,000 patients a month from some 45 medicinal cultivators.

With her dispensary closed and Shaw barred from working in the cannabis industry as she pursued legal appeals, she went broke. She said she took in as many as four roommates at a time to keep from losing her house to foreclosure.

After last week’s ruling, Shaw said she is looking for investors and engaging Fairfax officials about reopening the dispensary somewhere in town.“I’m now fed-proof!” said Shaw, 61. “Fed-proof nationwide. Thank God!”

But the legal landscape may remain unsettled for Shaw as well as other medical marijuana providers and businesses.

Federal authorities still are pressing a civil case to shutter Oakland’s Harborside Health Center, a massive dispensary that claims to serve 120,000 clients as the largest marijuana provider in the world.

In 2012, Haag filed a property forfeiture case, saying “marijuana superstores such as Harborside” pose a threat to California’s medical marijuana laws by increasing the likelihood of putting “marijuana in the hands of individuals who do not have a demonstrated medical need.”

Steve DeAngelo, Harborside’s executive director, said Breyer’s ruling in the Marin Alliance case means the Justice Department can’t spend any funds to pursue the case based on Congress’ order.

“Our position is they now are prevented from even sending a lawyer into court to argue to close Harborside down,” DeAngelo said. “The only thing they can do is drop the case. Congress has spoken. Obama has signed the bill. It is time for this travesty to end.”

‘They have to obey Congress’

Yet in a conflicting case in eastern Washington, U.S. District Judge Thomas Rice this month imposed federal prison sentences of 12 months to 33 months on three medical marijuana defendants in a group that cannabis advocates dubbed the Kettle Falls Five.

The defendants claimed they were legal medical marijuana patients in a state where both medical and recreational use is permitted. But U.S. prosecutors said their more than 100 total plants violated Washington state’s 15-plants-per-person medical cultivation limit and left them open to federal prosecution for growing marijuana for profit, a charge the defendants denied.

Matt Kumin, a San Francisco cannabis industry lawyer, said he expects the Justice Department to appeal the Marin Alliance case to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, where he said a positive ruling for Shaw is far from assured.

In July, the 9th Circuit Court in San Francisco ruled against a dispensary in that city, the Vapor Room, in a key tax case. The Vapor Room had sought to escape a federal tax statute, which bars business deductions for illegal narcotics trafficking. The Vapor Room argued it was a legally permitted business under California marijuana law. The court said the federal tax statute still applies.

“I have a feeling the 9th Circuit is not going to be friendly,” said Kumin, who said he fears a legal reversal for the Marin Alliance. “I’m not optimistic. That said, every victory we get is huge. The cat is out of the bag. The wall continues to fall.”

For her part, Shaw insists Breyer’s ruling means the wall has indeed fallen – and she is victorious over the federal drug enforcement establishment.

“I’ve never read a decision like this that was just so blazing,” Shaw said. “How are they going to appeal? They have to obey Congress. This decision ends the marijuana war. It really does.

“They ruined my life. But guess what? The truth has set me free.”

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/article41732283.html#storylink=cpy

Justin Trudeau Prepares To Tackle Marijuana Legalization

 By Kristy Kirkup, 

OTTAWA — As Justin Trudeau prepares to tackle the politics of legalizing pot as part of his Liberal government's legislative agenda, industry experts say he will have access to a world-class marijuana framework set up under the Conservative government.

Chuck Rifici, co-founder of Canada's first publicly traded marijuana manufacturer, says a renowned production and distribution system has already been established under the medicinal umbrella.

Rifici — also a volunteer chief financial officer for the Liberal party's national board of directors — credits Stephen Harper for the country's expansive marijuana infrastructure.

"I'm sure it's not something he would like to have on his resume but I think only a Conservative government could have created MMPR (Marijuana for Medical Purposes Regulations)," he said. "I think if another government had been in power the Conservative base would have been up in arms ...

"Obviously the courts have forced them along the way, but they've put in a very robust ... system."

In 2013, the Conservative government announced Health Canada would no longer produce pot for patients — a decision that sparked the creation of commercial industry for medical marijuana.

Trudeau's Liberals have promised to legalize and regulate the recreational use of marijuana.

"Canada's current system of marijuana prohibition does not work," the Liberal election platform said.

"We will remove marijuana consumption and incidental possession from the Criminal Code and create new, stronger laws to punish more severely those who provide it to minors, those who operate a motor vehicle while under its influence and those who sell it outside of the new regulatory framework."

The first step in the path to legalization will be to establish a provincial, territorial and federal task force to hear from public health, substance abuse and public safety experts.

Donald MacPherson, the director of the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition, said Canada is well-positioned to tackle this issue.

There has been a vigorous discussion underway in the academic and public health community for the last decade because many believed legalization was inevitable, he added.

MacPherson says he would like to see the Liberal government to move forward on this undertaking early in its four year term — though "that doesn't mean rushing it."

He also says it is important to fund research to monitor and evaluate the regulatory system once it is up and running.

"I think that's essential," he said. "This is new territory with an old substance so it is not going to be earth shattering ...

Brian Vicente, a Colorado-based lawyer heavily involved in the U.S. campaign to bring cannabis into a regulated market system, has been watching Canadian developments closely.

"I think it is a landmark change for Canada and I think they're on the cutting edge of what will be essentially an international movement," he said.

The Canadian task force is expected to mirror what was done in Colorado.

Those discussions were fascinating, Vicente said.

"We really made sure that they were diverse and all stakeholders were at the table including industry folks, including law enforcement, including elected officials, community members.

"It was really the first time in history that we had someone who had grown marijuana sitting in the same room as a sheriff or a law enforcement agent and law enforcement was not trying to arrest them."

Recreational marijuana is now legal in five American jurisdictions: Colorado, Alaska, Oregon, Washington and Washington, D.C.

Medical marijuana: Health Minister Jack Snelling indicates Government genuinely considering legalising cannabis for health use

Sheradyn Holderhead Political Reporter
 
MEDICAL marijuana will get the green light in South Australia if experts assessing an interstate trial find it has therapeutic benefits and is safe, State Parliament has heard.
Health Minister Jack Snelling gave the strongest indication yet that the State Government is genuinely considering legalising cannabis for medical use despite Labor voting against a Greens motion on the issue in the Upper House on Wednesday.

JHealth Minister Jack Snelling gave Parliament the strongest indication yet that the State Government is genuinely considering legalising cannabis for medical use.

He emphasised that any changes to the law must be “based on science rather than politicians based on emotion”.
“NSW is undertaking clinical trials of medical cannabis. The SA Government supports the clinical trials and has an SA Health observer on the expert panel,” he said.

“SA will co-operate with NSW in any way they ask us to support their trial. The results from that trial will be assessed by experts and they will make a determination about the use of cannabis as a medicine.
“If that determination is that there are some products that have a therapeutic use and are safe, and a change of legislation is required, we will bring legislation to the House.”

Mr Snelling said that while the Government did not believe cannabis was a harmless drug, there were recorded medical benefits.

“Available evidence highlights the long-term harmful effects of cannabis use, including increased risk of respiratory diseases associated with smoking (including cancer), dependence, decreased memory and learning abilities, and decreased motivation in areas such as study, work or concentration.

“There is, however, evidence for therapeutic benefits from cannabis, including antispastic, analgesic, anti-emetic, and anti-inflammatory actions.

“Many of these therapeutic uses of cannabis and products derived from cannabis are still experimental.”
Greens health spokeswoman Tammy Franks said her motion called on Labor to show leadership on the issue in-line with the premiers of Victoria, NSW and Queensland.

The Liberals, Xenophon Group and Dignity for Disability supported the motion which passed the Upper House.

“We continue our calls to the Minister for Health to act more decisively on medical cannabis reform to ensure that South Australians do not continue to suffer needlessly or, in extreme cases, leave the state entirely in order to access treatment,” she said.

“A welcome step forward made as a result of today’s debate, however, was a promise extracted from the Government speaker that South Australians will be able to take part in the NSW trials, as sick and suffering patients in Victoria and Queensland can currently do.”

Earlier this month, the State Government said it would take a cautious approach to the Federal Government’s plan to legalise cannabis crops to be grown specifically for medical use on seriously ill patients.

Federal Health Minister Sussan Ley announced a proposal to amend the Narcotic Drugs Act to allow the controlled cultivation of cannabis for medicinal and scientific purposes, paving the way for state governments to consider a cannabis-growing industry.

New Setback for Medical Marijuana Spray

image courtesy of gw pharmaceuticals

By Pat Anson, Editor

A British drug maker has announced more disappointing results from clinical studies on the use of a medical marijuana spray to treat cancer pain.
GW Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ: GWPH) said results from two new Phase III studies showed that its Sativex oral spray worked no better than a placebo in treating cancer pain. That was the same finding the company reported in January from an earlier study involving nearly 400 patients in the United States, Mexico and Europe.

However, patients in the U.S. did show “statistically significant improvement” in their pain levels when Sativex was taken along with an opioid pain medication. GW and its partner, Otuska Pharmaceutical, have requested a meeting with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to explain that finding. Sativex is getting a “fast track” review from the agency as a treatment for cancer pain.

"In light of the missed primary endpoint in the first trial earlier this year, these additional results are not a surprise. Nevertheless, we are encouraged by data across the trials which consistently show positive outcomes for U.S. patients when analysed as a separate cohort," said Justin Gover, GW's Chief Executive Officer.

"We believe that this finding may provide important guidance in determining the optimal target patient population for Sativex and look forward to a discussion with the FDA on a potential path forward."
Sativex is composed primarily of two cannabinoids, CBD and THC, which are administered in an oral spray. 

Sativex is already being sold in Europe, Canada and Mexico to treat muscle tightness and contractions caused by multiple sclerosis. Canada also allows Sativex to be used for the treatment of neuropathic pain and advanced cancer pain.

The spray is not currently approved for use in the U.S. for any condition. It is estimated that over 400,000 cancer patients in the U.S. suffer from pain that is not well controlled by opioid pain medications.

"While the results overall have been disappointing, and not necessarily wholly consistent with clinical experience, nonetheless they suggest that Sativex may have a useful role in the treatment of certain subgroups of patients with advanced cancer pain who have exhausted opioid treatments," stated Dr. Marie Fallon, Professor of Palliative Care, University of Edinburgh and a principal investigator in the Phase III program.

"In particular, the U.S. patients enrolled in this program showed a useful therapeutic benefit whereas results in European patients were generally not favorable. These U.S. patients were less frail, hence the Sativex intervention was subjected to less ‘noise,’ providing clearer results and valuable guidance in determining the optimal target patient population for Sativex. This is a patient population with a significant unmet need and I believe that this important observation for Sativex warrants further investigation." 

Cancer patients in all three studies were given Sativex or a placebo spray 3-to-10 times a day over a 5-week period. Patients remained on opioid therapy during the studies. Sativex was well tolerated, with the only side effects in some patients being dizziness and somnolence.

GW is developing other cannabis-based medicines to treat epilepsy, glioma, ulcerative colitis, type-2 diabetes, and schizophrenia.