Saturday, 30 April 2016

Legalization of marijuana in Washington had no effect on teens' access to drug

Study to be presented at Pediatric Academic Societies 2016 Meeting shows no change in proportion of adolescents who find it 'easy' to access marijuana after its recreational use was legalized for adults

American Academy of Pediatrics

BALTIMORE, MD - Despite concerns that legalizing marijuana use for adults would make it easier for adolescents to get ahold of it, a new study in Washington State shows that teens find it no easier now than before the law was passed in 2012.

An abstract of the study, "Adolescents' Ease of Access to Marijuana Before and After Legalization of Marijuana in Washington State," will be presented at the Pediatric Academic Societies 2016 Meeting in Baltimore on Sunday, May 1. Researchers compared 2010 and 2014 data from the Washington State Healthy Youth Survey. Each year's survey included questions about ease of access to marijuana, alcohol, cigarettes and other illicit drugs.

There was virtually no change in the proportion of teens who reported it was "easy" to access marijuana in 2010 (55 percent), compared to 2014 (54 percent) after the new law was enacted, according to the study.

This seemingly good news was tempered by additional findings suggesting that current public health efforts around drug abuse prevention may be less effective for marijuana than for other substances teens now perceive as more difficult to obtain.

Significantly more adolescents said it was "hard" to access alcohol in 2014 (47 percent, compared with 43 percent in 2010), cigarettes (53 percent in 2014; 42 percent in 2010), and other illegal drugs such as cocaine, LSD, and amphetamines (82 percent in 2014; 75 percent in 2010).

"It is both surprising and reassuring that teens didn't perceive that marijuana was easier to access after it was legalized for recreational use by adults," said senior investigator Andrew Adesman, MD, FAAP, chief of developmental and behavioral pediatrics at the Cohen Children's Medical Center of New York.

"It was interesting and somewhat concerning, though, that while teens responded that it was harder to access cigarettes, alcohol, and psychoactive drugs abuse in 2014 compared to 4 years earlier, they didn't report increased difficulty in obtaining marijuana during that same time period," he said.

Principal investigator Natalie Colaneri said she hopes the findings will prompt increased efforts to reduce teens' access to marijuana in Washington and other states now considering the legalization of adult recreational marijuana use.

"Given the detrimental health effects associated with adolescent marijuana use, it is important that states that choose to legalize marijuana take steps to minimize use by teens. States should specifically implement measures that make it more difficult for teens to access marijuana in the first place," she said.

Ms. Colaneri will present the abstract on Sunday, May 1, at 4 p.m. in room 302 at the Baltimore Convention Center. To view the abstract, visit http://www.abstracts2view.com/pas/view.php?nu=PAS16L1_2690.3

Please note: only the abstract is being presented at the meeting. In some cases, the researcher may have more data available to share with media, or may be preparing a longer article for submission to a journal. Contact the researcher for more information.

The Pediatric Academic Societies (PAS) Meeting brings together thousands of individuals united by a common mission: to improve child health and wellbeing worldwide. This international gathering includes pediatric researchers, leaders in academic pediatrics, experts in child health, and practitioners.
 
The PAS Meeting is produced through a partnership of four organizations leading the advancement of pediatric research and child advocacy: Academic Pediatric Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Pediatric Society, and Society for Pediatric Research.

Photo series emphasizes medicinal benefits of marijuana

by Erica Dalton

Astonishing, controversial photographs of self-ordained nuns cultivating and smoking cannabis were released in March by photographers Shaughn Crawford and John DuBois of Shaughn and John Photography. A manifold of media—some commending, some critical and some objective—quickly picked up the images and background story.

The fascinating pictures abetted a stimulation of necessary conversation surrounding the ethics of marijuana and its therapeutic uses. Regardless of personal opinion about the recreational use of marijuana, the photographs inspire reflection about the morality of denying an effective remedy to people who need its antidote.

Describing their mission on their website as an effort to “focus on unique stories and subcultures” and “to capture the authenticity of their subjects,” Crawford and DuBois certainly accomplished their purpose through capturing the cannabis-imbued depictions of Sister Kate and Sister Darcy.

The Sisters are not directly affiliated with the Catholic Church, but do seek to emulate the Catholic values of benevolence and humanitarian contribution, as reported by the Huffington Post. They call themselves the Sisters of the Valley and live together in their central California “abbey.”

Their goal is not to enable psychoactive recreation, but to provide healing to individuals in need. The cannabis they use in their medicinal blends actually contains little to no tetrahydrocannabinol—the element of marijuana with hallucinatory properties. Rather, it is high in cannabidiol—the medicinal element.

Marijuana’s curative property is a subject worth discussion and merit. The fact that so many people successfully use the plant as medicine—and so many medical professionals support it—begs the question: Why is there a lack of understanding, research and acceptance regarding medical marijuana use despite an abundance of testimonies regarding its curative abilities?

According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, there are currently two Food and Drug Administration-approved, pill-form medications containing cannabinoid chemicals and there has been an increase of states legalizing the use of the plant for medical purposes.

The FDA, however, does not currently recognize cannabis itself as medicine. This is because of a lack of large-scale clinical trials required for such an edict—indicatively due to widespread social indignation stemming from ignorance.

Crawford and DuBois’ intriguing photographs of Sister Kate and Sister Darcy with their plants and salves has helped bring attention to the issue. The captivating images of a union between spirituality and marijuana are distinctive and provocative for a society that, by and large, regards the plant as inviolable dope. These photographers shed light on the world of progressive medicine, obliterating stereotypes and providing an original, wholesome perspective.

Considering the sizeable population in the U.S.—and the world for that matter—that uses various forms of marijuana as a fundamental medical antidote, it’s essential that more attention be paid to the topic. When so many people are experiencing life-changing benefits from the plant, it seems horrific that society and the government denounce its use.

Many individuals have praised marijuana, claiming it as the sole reason they have successfully treated illnesses as serious as epilepsy and cancer, providing healthy lifestyles they feel they never would have otherwise attained or regained.

Rousing public interest through images that challenge society’s preconceived notion of cannabis as strictly contraband is a step in the right direction. The photographs Crawford and DuBois encapsulated of women devoted both to faith and medical marijuana allow a contemplation of the morality of refusing an effective treatment to sick people.

Hopefully, such novel depictions will create openness to education about the topic, as well as expedite the development of social consciousness concerning a valid form of medicine—a medicine that warrants more positive reception, support and research.

Cannabis researcher predicts Canada poised to become world leader

(iStock Photo)
Summary
Dozens of unlicensed marijuana dispensaries in Vancouver told to shut down today or face daily fines
 
'The hurdles associated with working with cannabis are related to its legal status,' says a UBC prof

VANCOUVER (NEWS 1130) – It’s deadline day for dozens of unlicensed pot dispensaries to shut down in Vancouver or face daily fines.

Many owners and their supporters are gathering at City Hall today for what they’re calling a peaceful protest. But it’s not all rallies and demonstrations in Vancouver’s muddled marijuana landscape.

The research community is looking forward to a much easier future with the pending legalization of pot, with some predicting Canada is poised to become a world leader in the study of cannabis.

“I think we are going to see an explosion in research in the coming five or 10 years,” says Zach Walsh, an associate professor of psychology at UBC who has studied possible therapeutic uses for marijuana.

“The hurdles associated with working with cannabis are related to its legal status. It’s scheduled in such a way that you need a whole bunch of Health Canada approvals to be able to store it and administer it,” he tells NEWS 1130.

Though Walsh says Health Canada has been quick to process and approve his applications when all the requirements are met, he believes the regulations have been much tighter than needed and looks forward to changes.

“If you have an ounce of cannabis, will you need to have a Level 5 safe bolted to the floor in a room that records the access of anyone coming in or out as if you are dealing with more dangerous drugs? I think that should change and I believe we will see a real increase in cannabis research,” he says.

Walsh says doctors are desperate for those studies as more Canadians consider cannabis for medical uses.

“Hopefully, we can find the funding and make a hospitable climate. I think Canada could be positioned to become a real world leader when it comes to cannabis research.”

Walsh predicts the stigma surrounding the medical use of marijuana will begin to disappear and that many patients using drugs for pain relief will look at other options.

“Even things like Aspirin and Tylenol have some pretty negative side effects when it comes to your stomach and your liver — there’s actually a lot of mortality associated with the long-term use of aspirin and other non-steroidal anti-inflammatories — so I think we are going see cannabis as a substitute for some of that acute pain management,” he explains.

“Hopefully, also for opiates. We’ve already seen some of that in the US. We know that Canada is having a real problem with opiate overdoses and the problems associated with opiate pain medication,” Walsh adds.

“I think there is a lot of opportunity for cannabis to become a medicine of first resort rather than a medicine of last resort.”

One in six children hospitalized for lung inflammation positive for marijuana exposure

Colorado researchers say few states where marijuana use is legal restrict its use around children

American Academy of Pediatrics

BALTIMORE, MD - A new study to be presented at the Pediatric Academic Societies 2016 Meeting found that one in six infants and toddlers admitted to a Colorado hospital with coughing, wheezing and other symptoms of bronchiolitis tested positive for marijuana exposure.

The study, "Marijuana Exposure in Children Hospitalized for Bronchiolitis," recruited parents of previously healthy children between one month of age and two years old who were admitted to Children's Hospital Colorado (CHC) between January 2013 and April 2014 with bronchiolitis, an inflammation of the smallest air passages in the lung.

The parents completed a questionnaire about their child's health, demographics, exposure to tobacco smoke, and as of October 2014, whether anyone in the home used marijuana. Marijuana became legal in Colorado on January 1, 2014.

Of the children who were identified as having been exposed to marijuana smokers, urine samples showed traces of a metabolite of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the psychoactive component of marijuana, in 16 percent of them. The results also showed that more of the children were THC positive after legalization (21 percent, compared with 10 percent before), and non-white children were more likely to be exposed than white children.

The findings suggest that secondhand marijuana smoke, which contains carcinogenic and psychoactive chemicals, may be a rising child health concern as marijuana increasingly becomes legal for medical and recreational use in the United States, said lead researcher Karen M. Wilson, MD, MPH, FAAP, an associate professor of pediatrics at the University of Colorado School of Medicine and section head at CHC. Most states with legal marijuana do not restrict its combustion around children, she said.

"Our study demonstrates that, as with secondhand tobacco smoke, children can be exposed to the chemicals in marijuana when it is smoked by someone nearby," Dr. Wilson said. "Especially as marijuana becomes more available and acceptable, we need to learn more about how this may affect children's health and development." In the meantime, she said, "marijuana should never be smoked in the presence of children."

Dr. Wilson will present the abstract, "Marijuana Exposure in Children Hospitalized for Bronchiolitis," at 11:30 a.m. on Tuesday, May 2, in room 342 at the Baltimore Convention Center. To view the abstract, visit http://www.abstracts2view.com/pas/view.php?nu=PAS16L1_4460.8.

Please note: only the abstract is being presented at the meeting. In some cases, the researcher may have more data available to share with media, or may be preparing a longer article for submission to a journal. Contact the researcher for more information.

The Pediatric Academic Societies (PAS) Meeting brings together thousands of individuals united by a common mission: to improve child health and wellbeing worldwide. This international gathering includes pediatric researchers, leaders in academic pediatrics, experts in child health, and practitioners.

The PAS Meeting is produced through a partnership of four organizations leading the advancement of pediatric research and child advocacy: Academic Pediatric Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Pediatric Society, and Society for Pediatric Research.

Don't throw out the Controlled Substances Act because of racist, biased war on marijuana

John Hudak

The Controlled Substances Act is not outdated. It is a law structured in a way meant to protect science, medicine, patients and the public. It is not absolutist. It has an administrative structure built into it to control for mistakes, new scientific discoveries and even evolving public or medical understanding.

Today's federal drug laws appear to have done a disservice to marijuana, locking it into an inappropriate schedule where it is banned outright. But in reality, negative drug policy around marijuana is not the fault of the CSA. Instead, a variety of other factors -- mainly attributed to biased lawmakers -- have hindered the law from working properly when it comes to the drug.


The initial placement of marijuana in Schedule I, the government's most restrictive category of drugs, can easily be considered a mistake -- though perhaps "mistake" is too meek a term, particularly in the face of alcohol and tobacco being left off the schedules.

In fact, marijuana's strict scheduling emerges from the cultural and racial antipathy felt by Richard Nixon, the activist president who signed the Controlled Substances Act into law. Nixon's aides suggested the war on marijuana was racially motivated, and Oval Office tapes highlight his contempt for the counterculture movement as well as racial minorities.

The tapes also make it clear that Nixon wanted to link marijuana use and its negative effects to two groups he held in contempt: African-Americans and hippies. Nixon even appointed a commission to look into the ills of marijuana: the Shafer Commission.

When the group issued its report entitled "Marihuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding," which explained that marijuana was not as dangerous or addictive as it had widely been perceived, Nixon called his handpicked chairman, former Republican Pennsylvania governor Ray Shafer, into the Oval Office to be chastised.

So, while marijuana's placement in Schedule I was not a result of deep scientific expertise, that does not mean that the CSA is to blame for the continuing policy problems. The CSA has avenues to correct error or compensate for new information or data. Rescheduling is one such remedy.

Under administrative rescheduling, the attorney general asks the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Food and Drug Administration to examine whether a substance is properly scheduled. The attorney general takes those recommendations and ultimately makes a determination. If a substance is determined to be improperly scheduled, a rulemaking process commences that ultimately reschedules the substance.

That the rescheduling process exists means that the architects of the CSA understood the need for legal flexibility and thought that avenues for revision should be built into the law.

However, due to cultural biases and stigma that have been cemented into society, science and bureaucracy, those avenues have largely failed marijuana. The nearly century-long institutional effort by the U.S. government to paint marijuana as anathema to society, in all forms and under all circumstances, has been devastatingly successful.

How has that effort played out? Beyond promoting propaganda that stoked public, congressional and media fears of marijuana, the government also decided that it was of greater interest to fund research that focused on marijuana's addictive properties rather than its possible medical efficacy.

The government stifled the ability of the scientific community to build knowledge and expertise in as robust a way as research has explored the efficacy of other controlled substances, even as research came to discover the endocannabinoid system and developed an understanding of how cannabinoids impacted certain human systems and cellular processes.

The federal government set up a DEA-mandated monopoly through the National Institutes on Drug Abuse for the growth of research grade marijuana -- not for all Schedule I drugs, just marijuana. For decades, the supply from that monopoly was often insufficient to meet clinical researchers' needs.

Until recently, all marijuana research proposals needed to go through an additional, unique review by the Public Health Service that added a bureaucratic layer, hindering research.

So what was the result? Decades of federal policies -- entirely separate from the CSA -- limited the ability of the scientific community to produce the type of research that could demonstrate that medical value. In order for marijuana to be rescheduled to Schedule II, it requires demonstration of an "accepted medical use." Yet government policy has effectively created a "cannabis Catch-22″ for research, ensuring that regardless of reality, marijuana will remain Schedule I.

The CSA hasn't failed marijuana. Instead, the federal government has prevented the CSA from working properly when it comes to marijuana. If you want marijuana rescheduled, don't blame the law; blame the hundreds of lawmakers who consistently vote down reasonable marijuana reforms.

Senate passes bill to allow critically ill children to access medical cannabis

by Matt Mahoney and Associated Press,

https://tribwtic.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/medicalmarijuanacropped.jpg?w=400&h=225&crop=1

HARTFORD — A bill that would allow minors with certain debilitating conditions to use Connecticut’s medical marijuana program cleared its final legislative hurdle in the state legislature late Friday night.

The proposal, which had already cleared the House of Representatives, was set to be considered Friday by the Senate. After nearly four hours of heated debate with opposing parties, the Senate eventually voted in favor. The bill now heads to Governor Malloy’s desk, where he is expected to sign it into law.

Sen. Toni Boucher, a Wilton Republican and chief opponent of the legislation, nearly sent it off course with 25 possible amendments, however they were all ultimately shot down.

Boucher voiced concerns about children using “mind-damaging substances,” saying the harm could be worse than their underlying conditions.

Proponents, on the other hand, say they heard from many anguished parents about their children’s suffering from conditions such as extreme seizures being eased by the drug.

The governor was among the earliest supporters of expanding medical marijuana statutes to include access for children with critical ailments.

Although opponents stressed that this could send a “dangerous” message to children as an endorsement for recreational cannabis, the proposed legislation is restricted to only the most serious of illnesses and disorders. Those conditions include cerebral palsy, cystic fibrosis, irreversible spinal cord damage and severe epilepsy.

In addition, medical marijuana dispensaries could not provide qualified children any marijuana product that is smoked, vaporized or inhaled.

Medical marijuana has been legal for adults in the state of Connecticut since 2014. Approximately 100 children will be affected by the new law according to legislative testimony.

Survey suggests medical cannabis lowers opioid use in chronic pain patients

Robin Huebner

FARGO -- With mounting attention focused on the nationwide abuse of prescription painkillers, a new report seems to come at an opportune time for those supporting a proposed medical marijuana measure in North Dakota.
However, a Sanford Health physician who specializes in pain management said there's a selection bias to the information, and it won't change how medicine is practiced.
The survey, published in The Journal of Pain, shows medical cannabis use is associated with 64 percent lower opioid use in chronic pain patients. Opioid use has come under increased scrutiny in part due to an associated surge in heroin abuse. There have already been several fatal heroin overdoses in Fargo-Moorhead this year.
Rilie Ray Morgan, chairman of the North Dakota effort to get medical marijuana on the November ballot, welcomes the survey news.
"If we can provide those patients with some relief that has very little chance of addiction, I think it just benefits patients and society as a whole," Morgan said.
As part of the survey, 244 chronic pain patients who patronized a medical cannabis dispensary in Michigan between November 2013 and February 2015 were asked about changes in their opioid use before and after starting medical cannabis.
In addition to a decrease in opioid use among participants, cannabis use was associated with a 45 percent increase in quality of life, fewer medication side effects and fewer medications used.
Dr. Manuel Colón, Sanford pain specialist and anesthesiologist, cautions that it's merely a survey, not a scientific study. It lacks a control group and a study group.
"The group has already been pre-selected," Colón said.
He said there's not enough data to suggest that medical cannabis would help more than it hurts, and much more study is needed.
"I would warn that substituting one addictive drug for another is not necessarily going to be the answer here," Colón said.
Morgan maintains that the cannabidiol, or CBD, in medical marijuana is different than tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, in marijuana used recreationally.
"The CBD's don't have the addictive qualities that THC's do," he said.
Morgan said doctors should take a hard look at the practice of prescribing opioids, and medical marijuana should at least be an option for physicians and patients to explore.
Supporters are circulating petitions in hopes of putting the legalization of medical marijuana to a statewide vote in North Dakota this fall. They need 13,452 signatures by July 11 to get the measure on the ballot.
Medical marijuana was legalized last year in Minnesota. A dispensary is expected to open in Moorhead this summer.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued new recommendations in March aimed at reducing the number of pain pills being prescribed nationwide. Colón said Sanford Health is reviewing them.

Nation's biggest pharmacy endorses medical marijuana


A Walgreens in Boulder, Colorado.
A Walgreens in Boulder, Colorado.
Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Friday, 29 April 2016

See which five UK police forces have 'freed the weed'

A NUMBER of police forces in the UK are turning a blind eye to cannabis – but only if it is used for personal consumption.

A police officers clears a weed farm  
GETTY SPLIFFING: Police forces are relaxing their attitude to weed
 
Avon and Somerset Police yesterday confirmed it will not hunt down marijuana smokers unless they are part of a "more harmful situation and endangers vulnerable people".

They will still crack down on those who make and sell the Class B drug or smoke it in front of schools and children.

A spokesperson told Daily Star Online: "We do not proactively seek out people who use cannabis but we do take a rigorous approach to dealing with anyone found in possession of it and they will always be dealt in one of a number of ways.

"They will either be offered intervention, such as educational programmes, given a caution, asked to voluntarily attend a police station for interview or they may be arrested.

"We regularly receive information from the public about suspected cannabis cultivation sites. As the public would expect we research that intelligence and act on what we’re told."

It follows Durham, Derbyshire, Dorset and Surrey police forces who have all announced a lenient stance on dope smokers.

Avon and Somerset said that cannabis was still a public concern, however.

There have been increased daily complaints about weed "cultivation sites" that encourage growing the marijuana plant.

A spokesman added: "These sites are taken very seriously as they can often involve vulnerable people being forced to grow cannabis against their will."

Last year Durham Police said said people who grew cannabis for their own use was not a priority.
A map of the places you can smoke weed  
DAILYSTAR
BLAZING: See where you can roll up around the world

And the Met have experimented with a relaxed attitude to possession to focus on serious crime in some London boroughs.

The news comes as several countries across the world have "freed the weed".

Australia, California, Portugal and North Korea have decriminalised the drug – but potheads will need a valid prescription to get their hands on it.

Marijuana Shops Break Sales Record In April

Retail sales for recreational and medicinal marijuana use up more than 30% during cannabis holiday

by Carolyn M. Brown

iStock_000084760405_Medium

It’s no surprise to cannabis retailers that April 20 is the biggest sales holiday in the cannabis industry. Total U.S. marijuana retail sales on April 20, 2016 exceeded $37.5 million and saw an almost 30% increase in customer traffic over last year’s 4-20 holiday, according to MJ Freeway’s retail sales data figures. While customer traffic was up, customers spent on average $20 less per transaction on April 20, 2016, versus April 20, 2015.

The “4-20″ calendar date is widely recognized as a holiday by cannabis enthusiasts, sparking events and cannabis-driven tourism. The cannabis industry, which totaled $5.7 billion in sales in 2015 and is expected to clear $7.1 billion in 2016 according to the Arcview Industry Report, sees the most customer traffic and highest sales on April 20.

Other findings revealed that individual marijuana licensed retail locations– dispensaries and delivery services – sold on average $10,822 in retail sales on April 20, $6,208 on April 19, and $5,442 on April 18. Cannabis retail customer traffic increased by more than 29% on April 20, 2016 compared to April 20, 2015.

The state with the total highest average sales of marijuana per day per retail licensed location for April 20 was Colorado. The state with the highest total dollar amount sold on April 20 was California. When equalized by population, Colorado outsold California in total dollar sales on April 20 by 3 times.

“Consumer traffic increased in 2016, but retailers used discounts and price incentives to lure customers.” Jeannette Ward, MJ Freeway’s data & marketing director, points out. “For states, the comparison is telling from a total dollar sales and tax revenue perspective.

Even states with a broad and well-utilized medical market like California cannot match the sales traffic and spend of a regulated medical and adult use state like Colorado; not even close. April 20 sales results show that states with medical and adult-use cannabis markets win the revenue game.”

Reporting by BlackEnterprise.com reveals that while the naysayers continue to perpetuate the story that people of color are being left out of the cannabis industry, black businesses are benefiting from legalized marijuana. People of color may not be bustling at the seams as cannabis farmers or dispensary owners. Consumers shouldn’t be misled: people of color, African Americans in particular, are in the cannabis scene.

“Retailers need to be careful to ensure that discounts to drive traffic don’t eat unnecessarily into profit margins and that increased traffic is sustained with successful loyalty and rewards programs. We can manage that for our retail partners,” says Sue Jensen, director of solution services for MJ Freeway.

The next big cannabis retail sales holiday is July 4, which ranks as the third-highest holiday in total cannabis retail dollar sales following 4-20 and New Year’s Eve.

Why Is Obama Prosecuting Medical Marijuana Cases in Defiance of Congress and the Constitution?



The highly-rated strain of medical marijuana 'Blue Dream' is displayed among others in glass jars at Los Angeles' first-ever cannabis farmer's market at the West Coast Collective medical marijuana dispensary in Los Angeles, California on July 4, 2014.
Medical marijuana on display at West Coast Collective medical marijuana dispensary in Los Angeles, California, July 4, 2014.
Frederic J. Brown/Getty Images

President Barack Obama has a complicated history with medical marijuana. In his autobiography, and elsewhere, Obama frankly described using marijuana as a teen: “I inhaled frequently. That was the point.” When he was running for president, Obama famously said he wouldn’t be using federal resources to “circumvent state laws on the issue” of medical marijuana. But not long after he got into office, his administration began a crackdown on growers and dispensers in states that had legalized it.

By 2012, he had publically changed his tune from 2008, arguing that not to enforce federal anti-pot statutes in states where medical marijuana was legal would be to “nullify congressional law.”

Since then, though, Congress passed a measure explicitly telling the Obama administration to cease spending funds to prevent medical marijuana providers from operating in states that have legalized it.

Ironically, Obama has opted to ignore this particular legislation and continues to prosecute these cases, essentially nullifying congressional power. In so doing, the president has not only directly contradicted himself multiple times over, but he has set up a historic clash that threatens the constitutional balance of power between Congress and the executive branch, one that could go all the way to the Supreme Court.

At least 24 states, plus the District of Columbia and various territories, have enacted comprehensive medical marijuana laws. Enterprising individuals in these states are the ones implementing the infrastructure around the laws by growing and dispensing marijuana to qualified patients. They invest capital. They obtain licenses and permits.

But, in some cases, the Drug Enforcement Agency and the Department of Justice continue to raid their operations, take their money and marijuana, and send them to federal prison. Under the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, the DOJ can prosecute medical marijuana providers for federal crimes, even if their conduct is wholly legal under state law. This is not the constitutional question at hand, though.

To be sure, the DOJ allows most state dispensaries to operate without interference and has promulgated nonbinding guidelines limiting federal prosecutions. But the nebulous guidelines give the DEA and DOJ wide discretion for when to prosecute, and defendants have no redress when their cases fall outside of these advisory guidelines. The penalties are harsh. Most operations trigger a mandatory minimum 10-year sentence. Possession of a firearm adds another 5 years.

While many had hoped that Obama would halt federal medical marijuana prosecutions, or make them a low priority, that has clearly not been the case. As Rolling Stone reported in 2012, Obama’s justice department was pacing to exceed George W. Bush’s administration in terms of medical marijuana raids, with more than 100 in his first three years alone.

Since then, the administration has continued to prosecute numerous dispensary operators and growers. The National Organization for Reform of Marijuana Laws has a partial list of dozens of pending defendants.


Lawmakers, however, have signaled in the last few years that they have had enough. Congress included a provision in the 2015 spending bill prohibiting the DOJ from using any funds to prevent states that have legalized the use, distribution, possession, or cultivation of medical marijuana from implementing these laws.

Reps. Sam Farr, Democrat of California, and Dana Rohrabacher, Republican of California, cobbled together a bipartisan coalition interested in protecting medical marijuana users and dispensaries, protecting states’ rights, and saving money by focusing taxpayer funds on more serious crimes. The same prohibition was renewed for 2016.

Without exception, both those who spoke on behalf of the provision and those who spoke against it made clear that its intent was to stop the DOJ from raiding dispensaries and prosecuting growers, operators, and patients.

In doing so, Congress was using the “power of the purse” as a check on executive power, one of its most important constitutional prerogatives. As James Madison wrote in the Federalist Papers, this power “may, in fact, be regarded as the most complete and effectual weapon with which any constitution can arm the immediate representatives of the people, for obtaining a redress of every grievance, and for carrying into effect every just and salutary measure.”

Despite the firm precedents surrounding Congress’ appropriating power, however, the DOJ remains defiant. Last year, in order to continue trying these cases, the DOJ argued that the bipartisan provision only prohibited prosecuting states and state officials, not individuals involved in the medical marijuana trade.

Farr and Rohrabacher fired back a letter calling that interpretation “emphatically wrong” and reiterating that “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.”

It would be hard for the amendment’s authors to be any clearer than that. But Farr and Rohrabacher followed up with another letter complaining that the DOJ’s interpretation of the spending prohibition was “a tortuous twisting of the text of [the amendment] and common sense.” In a twist, the pair asked the administration to investigate whether any of its own prosecutors should themselves be prosecuted under the Anti-Deficiency Act that makes it a felony to spend federal funds without authorization.

The DOJ’s interpretation not only defies the intent and plain meaning of the spending prohibition, it is exactly the opposite of what the administration itself said the amendment would do when it lobbied Congress to vote against the measure. The DOJ at that time warned Congress that passing the law would prevent medical marijuana prosecutions and could also hinder recreational marijuana prosecutions.

Hypocrisy aside, the administration’s position has an ugly historic antecedent. After Congress passed the Boland Amendment in the early 1980s prohibiting the use of funds to support the Nicaraguan Contras, members of the Reagan administration attempted to sidestep this spending prohibition. This resulted in the Iran-Contra scandal and led to prosecutions of many of Reagan’s top national security advisors.

While the abuses of the Obama administration are slightly less blatant—mainly because they aren’t being carried out in secret—the principle is the same. And courts have begun to weigh in on this latest constitutional battle.

In October, San Francisco federal Judge Charles Breyer granted a motion to prohibit the DOJ from spending funds to enforce a civil injunction that closed down the Marin Alliance dispensary in California. Judge Breyer stated that the DOJ’s interpretation “tortures the plain meaning of the statute” and “is at odds with fundamental notions of the rule of law.”

But other federal district judges in California and Washington have denied motions to prohibit spending on criminal prosecutions of medical marijuana growers and dispensers. The defendants have appealed to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals arguing that federal prosecutions and the very threat of them prevent states from implementing their own marijuana laws as they see fit and prevent states from recruiting risk-averse people to implement the infrastructure.

The 9th Circuit consolidated appeals in three of these cases with a dozen defendants and heard arguments in December. I am counsel for one of the defendants in these appeals and we are currently awaiting the 9th Circuit decision, which could be appealed to the Supreme Court by either side depending on the ruling.

Although Barack Obama has advocated for ending the use federal resources to “circumvent state laws” on medical marijuana, and advocated for curbing spending, and advocated for reducing lengthy federal drug sentences, his administration continues to defy a Congressional measure that achieves all of these goals. In so doing, it not only meddles in state affairs, it threatens to upset the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches that has served the country since its founding. It’s time for the president to take a deep breath, exhale, and move on.

Law Would Allow Evictions for Smoking at Home

Law Would Allow Evictions for Smoking at Home
File photo by Gustavo Turner/L.A. Weekly

A proposed law would let landlords evict you for smoking medical marijuana inside your own home.

The legislation by Assemblyman Jim Wood, a Democrat from Sonoma County, would apply optional no-smoking rules originally intended for tobacco products to cannabis.

"Landlords have the authority to prohibit tenants from smoking tobacco in the home, the same rationale applies for cannabis," Wood said. "AB 2300 would clarify that this authority applies to smoking cannabis as well."

The lawmaker said the bill passed the powerful Assembly Judiciary Committee this week.

In cases where landlords prohibit smoking, his office said, tenants could still maintain their medical marijuana rights by using edibles or oil-based capsules.

Wood cited research by UC San Francisco that suggests second-hand cannabis smoke is just as bad for your cardiovascular system as that from cigarettes.

"Tobacco and marijuana smoke share thousands of chemicals that result from burning dried plant material, and many of these chemicals are harmful," said Matthew Springer, professor of medicine at UC San Francisco's Division of Cardiology.

"The adverse cardiovascular effects of secondhand marijuana smoke have only recently begun to be studied, and we are seeing that just a few minutes of exposure to secondhand smoke from tobacco and marijuana have the same negative effect on the ability of arteries to carry enough blood, with marijuana causing a longer-lasting effect than tobacco."

Pro-medical marijuana groups, otherwise neutral on the bill, reportedly want Wood to add an exemption for those who use vaporizers to consume cannabis.

The argument is that vaping is not the same as burning and smoking pot. It's not clear if the legislator will go for the idea.

"This is about protecting families that live in close proximity to others," Wood said. "Second hand smoke can be a real problem, especially for families who live in apartments or other multi-family residencies."

Quit delaying medical marijuana law

Lynn Wolf 


(Photo: Gannett file)

I am a health care worker who relocated to Guam in December 2015 and I have discovered many wonderful things about living here. I never imagined I would find such a warm, welcoming community.

The people of Guam immediately made me feel at home. Among Guam’s many obvious positives such as its beautiful weather and beaches are its cultural and family traditions, tolerance of the GLBT community and scores of community events and festivals.

I do not understand why it is taking Guam so long to enact the medical marijuana law approved by the voters in November 2014. At work, on a daily basis, I see patients who would greatly benefit from medical marijuana to control their pain, seizure disorders and other medical and psychological conditions.

Narcotic drug use is at an all-time high and has many negative side effects. Medical marijuana has proven to be a safe alternative for many people.

Along with the medical benefits of marijuana, there are social and political benefits to the sale of marijuana — 24 states and the District of Columbia have thriving medical marijuana dispensaries.

(Some) have even legalized recreational use of marijuana. Recently published statistics have shown medical marijuana to have many positive impacts, such as increased tax revenues benefiting schools and public health programs, and the crime rates in many of these states have significantly lowered.

It goes without saying that an infusion of tax dollars is desperately needed by local school districts to help improve and maintain public schools here in Guam.
The politicians of Guam seem to be purposely delaying the opening of dispensaries by dragging their feet in the legislative process. Seventeen months is not a reasonable amount of time to enact any law passed by popular vote.

There are plenty of states with successful programs that Guam could use as a template to speed up the process of opening dispensaries.

Please stop procrastinating and get the medical marijuana dispensaries open for the health and well-being of the people of Guam. Call your local representative and ask them to expedite enacting this law!

5 Ways Marijuana Will Change As It Becomes A Mainstream Product

From new packaging to celebrity endorsements, this is how you'll buy weed once it's legal everywhere.

The mainstreaming of marijuana is well underway. You can see it in the Keurig-type vape pods, the lifestyle brands, and the handbags. You can see it in how people talk about it openly, and how strong majorities want it legalized.

And you can see it in actual legislation: 23 states and the District of Columbia already have some form of legality, and four states—California, Nevada, Arizona, and Massachusetts—could open the doors to recreational use this November.

Marijuana is losing its grungy, pothead, "gateway drug" reputation and becoming something more modern, artisanal, and premium, according to a new survey from Sparks & Honey, a trend-tracking agency, and High Times magazine.

"In many ways, our morality about marijuana is outpacing legislation," says Sean Mahoney, S&H's editorial director. "It's an interesting time to see how culture is changing because of the changing views of marijuana, but also how culture is changing marijuana. It goes in both directions."

Based on a survey of 1,000 people in states that have legalized pot (all had tried weed in the last five years), the report looks at how weed is coming out of the closet and how different groups view the drug.

For example, men are more likely to use the term "marijuana" when discussing food (as in the recipes in this cookbook). Women are more likely to refer to "cannabis," which has a more wholesome connotation than weed, ganja, or kush.

More than 50% of people want to buy cannabis at the grocery store (good luck with that). And people interested in religion were quite likely to talk about marijuana online (18% of those according the survey)—certainly more than people working in religion.
Here are some trends the report sees expanding and deepening:
Flickr user erocsid

New packaging

Cannabis will be packaged in easier-to-consume ways—whether it's pre-dosed, or paired with other products like wine. "Cannabis-infused food products will create a new expectation of product labeling, alongside calorie and carb counts. Expect clear cannabis dosage and ingredient information," the report says.
Flickr user erocsid

Origin is important

We'll see more marketing of cannabis based on provenance—as in other types of food—and its specific mood properties. "In the future, we’ll see even more attention paid to the process of cultivating marijuana, and passing on a sense of provenance to the consumer," the report says. "We will see more innovation around ways for consumers to ingest curated doses of cannabis, with an optimum mood state in mind."
ChameleonsEye via Shutterstock

Weed is not a drug

Cannabis will go from being a drug that gets you high to being something that offers "relief" and "wellness." "While regulated by strict laws, weed is an ingredient that is shedding its old skin and becoming part of a wellness movement," the report says. "The way we think of using cannabis-infused products [is] also changing. . . . Cannabis-infused wellness items could be the next tea tree oil or aloe vera."
Steve Hubbard via Shutterstock

Weed's aesthetic

Weed will change everyday design and even remake public spaces. "Marijuana is evolving from bean bag to Eames chair. Some call it the Whole Foods-ification of marijuana, or the coffee shop effect," the report says. Bars, restaurants, concert halls, and amusement parks will begin to incorporate "universal design language of cannabis," just like the language of alcohol pervades today. "It's not about putting pot leafs on T-shirts. It's about incorporating it into our day-to-day," Mahoney says.
Leafs by Snoop

Weed gets endorsements


Consumer-facing brands use celebrities to sell their products. Weed will be no different. Baltimore Ravens lineman Eugene Monroe already supports cannabis research. Snoop Dogg and Whoopi Goldberg have weed companies. The report expects "further [endorsements from] sportsmen and marijuana partnerships, particularly in regions where marijuana is legalized and local athletes are leveraged as mainstream mouthpieces."

In other words, weed will go from being a thing grown and marketed amateurishly to being a product sold professionally and creatively by marketing agencies like Sparks & Honey (how convenient).

Even if some legal restrictions remain, the public's acceptance of weed will see those barriers come down, Mahoney believes. "Where there's obstruction and confusion, there is a resilient, crafty, and quite advanced group of people who are pushing this industry forward. They're going to find ways to solve any problems," he says.

Federal drug act needs a rewrite based on science, not just rescheduling for marijuana

Bill Piper

OPINION: Congress and President Obama are under pressure to reschedule marijuana. Ideally, marijuana reform should be part of a broader bill rewriting the Controlled Substances Act. Johannes Jansson / Norden.org
 
Congress and President Obama are under pressure to reschedule marijuana. While rescheduling makes sense, it doesn't solve the state/federal conflict over marijuana (de-scheduling would be better). But more important, it wouldn't fix the broken scheduling system. Ideally, marijuana reform should be part of a broader bill rewriting the Controlled Substances Act.

The Controlled Substances Act created a five-category scheduling system for most legal and illegal drugs (although alcohol and tobacco were notably omitted). Depending on what category a drug is in, the drug is either subject to varying degrees of regulation and control (Schedules II through V) -- or completely prohibited, otherwise unregulated and left to criminals to manufacture and distribute (Schedule I). The scheduling of various drugs was decided largely by Congress and absent a scientific process -- with some strange results.

For instance, while methamphetamine and cocaine are Schedule II drugs, making them available for medical use, marijuana is scheduled alongside PCP and heroin as a Schedule I drug, which prohibits any medical use. Making matters worse, the CSA gives law enforcement -- not scientists or health officials -- the final say on how new drugs should be scheduled and whether or not old drugs should be rescheduled. Unsurprisingly, law enforcement blocks reform.

Starting in 1972, the Drug Enforcement Administration obstructed a formal request to reschedule marijuana for 16 years. After being forced by the courts to make a decision, the agency held two years of hearings. The DEA chief administrative law judge who held the hearings and considered the issue concluded that marijuana in its natural form is "one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man" and should be made available for medical use.

Similar hearings on MDMA, aka ecstasy, concluded that it also has important medical uses. In both cases, the DEA overruled its administrative law judge and kept the drugs in Schedule I, unavailable for medical use.

The current drug scheduling system is also structurally flawed. For instance, Schedule I is for drugs that are highly addictive and have no medical value, while the other schedules are for drugs with medical value but varying degrees of safety and addiction risks.

There are no categories, however, for drugs that have no medical value but have not proved to be highly addictive either, such as various synthetic drugs like Spice or bath salts. Nor are there categories for drugs that are waiting to be evaluated for medical use.

In a report published in the esteemed medical journal The Lancet, researchers at the Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs proposed an alternative method for drug classification in the United Kingdom that might work in the United States. This new system uses a nine-category matrix to assess the harms of a range of licit and illicit drugs.

The new evidence-based classification system recognizes the fact that alcohol and tobacco cause far more individual and social harms than marijuana, LSD and MDMA, which have less potential for harm relative to other legal and illegal drugs.

The Controlled Substances Act was passed in 1970. Forty-six years and eight presidents later, it remains almost exactly as it was enacted (the only major changes have been more draconian penalties such as mandatory minimum sentencing or prohibiting students arrested for drugs from receiving student loans).

While federal drug policy hasn't changed much since President Nixon, individual states have moved in a new direction. Twenty-four states and the District of Columbia have legalized marijuana for medical use; four states and the District have legalized marijuana for nonmedical use. The federal system is too inflexible to keep up and should be thoroughly redesigned.

At a minimum, responsibility for determining drug classifications and other health determinations should be completely removed from the DEA and transferred to a health or scientific body. Congress should overhaul the entire scheduling process to ensure that decisions on whether to criminalize a drug or not, and whether and how to regulate it, are decided by an objective, independent scientific process.

An independent body such as the National Academy of Sciences should be appointed to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the drug scheduling system. This evaluation should determine if each drug is properly classified, the best way to assess the risks and benefits associated with current and emerging drugs, and how to best redesign the scheduling system.

Treating drug use as a health issue instead of a criminal justice issue will require fresh thinking.

Marijuana companies have budding aspirations for pot legalization in Canada



WATCH: Health Canada has received nearly 300 applications from companies wanting to provide medical marijuana now, but with budding aspirations for when the federal government legalized weed. Robin Gill reports.
Vancouver Island’s Tilray is one of 30 companies that can legally produce medical marijuana in Canada.

It’s been quietly producing pot in Nanaimo for two years, with scientists and horticulturalists working side-by-side in a 60,000 square-foot facility that somewhat resembles a maximum security prison.

But behind the concrete and fencing, is a company that was named a top employer in the city in 2014 — bringing an $46-million economic windfall to the city.

“The market is continuing to grow at a rapid pace and we can see a lot of opportunities in the medical marijuana space,” Tilray CEO Greg Engel told Global News.

Engel’s company has its sights on expanding its business even further, with hopes of building a second facility and selling its pot worldwide.

Canada could be poised for a green rush, with Health Canada weeding through hundreds of applications from aspiring growers who want to cash in on growing industry and the federal government set to announce legislation to legalize pot next year.

WATCH: Feds announce timeline for marijuana legalization legislation. Mike Le Couteur reports.


Sales of both medical and recreational marijuana could amount to as much as $10 billion a year, according to a recent study from CIBC World Markets.


The cannabis industry is sparking an interest among investors.

Connor Cruise, CEO of Brassneck Capital Corp., invested in a licensed cannabis company and helped take it public.

“There’s a lot of upside to this,” he said, adding spin-off industries could also thrive as Canada’s cultivates its pot industry and the government moves to legalize marijuana for recreational use.

“Everything from lighting to fertilizers to technology companies,” he explained. “A lot of larger companies haven’t touched this space because it’s been a grey or black market. But now with it getting legalized, you’re going to see more of that come into it and I think that’s great.”


Marijuana growing companies are also proving to be a safer bet than some more traditional resource investments.

“If you take a look at the stock markets, oil has gone down, but all the marijuana stock have held steady .. last six months,” said Justin Dhaliwal.

Dhaliwal, son of former Liberal cabinet minister Herb Dhaliwal, has also applied to build a greenhouse in suburban Vancouver to provide medical marijuana.

He thinks there’s plenty of room in the industry for more competition — especially once pot is legalized for recreational use. “Recent reports state that, once it’s legal for recreational [use], the demand is upward of 100 metric tonnes.”

But Dhaliwal said it’s not just a matter of investing for a profit, but investing that profit back into society.

“This being a medicinal product… I think we can use our profits to also invest into research and development, which will only benefit the entire industry as a whole.”

Thursday, 28 April 2016

Alabama Legislature approves Leni's Law to decriminalize cannabis derivative

Lenis Law families.jpg
Families who helped push through the passage of Leni’s Law were at the Alabama State House on Wednesday. From left are Meggan Jackson of Lester and her son, Caden; Kari Forsyth of Athens and her daughter, Chesney; and Brittany Townsend of Hueytown and her daughter, Kenna. (Mike Cason/mcason@al.com) ( )

By Mike Cason

A bill to allow people with seizure disorders or other debilitating medical conditions to use a product that comes from the same plant as marijuana was passed by the Alabama Legislature today.

The state Senate approved the bill, called Leni's Law, by a 29-3 vote.

The House later voted 95-4 to concur with the bill and send it to Gov. Robert Bentley, who could sign it into law.

The bill would decriminalize cannabidiol, derived from cannabis, for those with certain medical conditions.

The bill is named after Leni Young, an Alabama child whose family moved to Oregon so she could use cannabidiol to treat severe seizures.

The product is legal there and in some other states, but not in Alabama.

Young's father told lawmakers earlier this year that Leni's condition had improved markedly since the move.

The bill would expand on Carly's Law, passed two years ago, that authorized a UAB study on using cannabidiol to treat seizure disorders.

Preliminary results from the UAB study have been promising, Sen. Paul Sanford, R-Huntsville, the Senate sponsor of Leni's Law, said today.

UAB reported in March that 50 percent of 51 people in the study saw sustained improvement in seizure control.

Parents who believe their children could benefit have been leading advocates for both bills, making repeated trips to the State House.

Some were in the House gallery when the bill passed tonight.

Kari Forsyth of Athens was there with her daughter, Chesney, 11.

Chesney has cerebral palsy but was progressing until age 3 when the seizures began disrupting her life, Forsyth said.

Forsyth said her hopes are that cannabidiol can stop Chesney's seizures, help with muscle spasms and help Chesney walk again.

Meggan Jackson of Lester said her son, Caden, 7, started having seizures just before age 2 but was still doing fine until age 5, learning to read and playing baseball.

But Caden now uses a feeding tube and wears a helmet to protect him when the seizures strike.
"We're out of options besides brain surgery," Jackson said.

She said she trying cannabidiol is a much better option than surgery.

An indication of the seriousness of Caden's condition is that he takes more than a normal adult dose of valium, his mother said.

"Giving marijuana to him is the least of my worries," she said.

Caden took part in the UAB study and saw some improvement, Jackson said.

One point of contention has been the level of THC, an ingredient in marijuana that causes a high.

Two weeks ago, the House passed the Leni's Law bill, by Rep. Mike Ball, R-Madison, but it allowed THC content of only 1 percent.

Proponents say a THC allowance of up to 3 percent is needed.

The Senate changed Ball's bill to allow 3 percent before approving the bill today.

Proponents of the change say that even at that level, it would not be practical for anyone to use it to get high.

The Senate also broadened the allowed use of cannabidiol to cover anyone with a debilitating medical condition. The bill had restricted the use to those with seizure disorders.

At a public hearing in March, a doctor representing the Medical Association of the State of Alabama spoke in opposition to the bill, saying the Legislature should not get ahead of the scientific research.

Attorney General Luther Strange also spoke in opposition to the bill at the hearing.

Sanford said he gets many emails, calls and Facebook messages about the legislation. He said he's been changed by meeting the families whose children suffer from debilitating conditions and who are looking for hope.

"When you meet one of the families, and you see their children and you see the pain in the eyes of those parents and then put myself in their shoes and realize how blessed I am and how much strength that those families show for the situations that they have, how could I not help them?" Sanford said.

Coming Out to Your Kids About Cannabis

Catherine Hiller

As a parent, you may have been dreading the question even more than “Is Santa Claus really real?”
When your little one asks, “Did you and daddy (or mommy) smoke pot?” what exactly do you say?

It’s even worse when your young son or daughter inquires, in a voice of disdain, eyes blinking (oh, yuck) “Do you, like, ever use weed?” Present tense. Here and now. Truth and consequence. What do you do? Tell it like it is? Lie? Prevaricate?
Where Do You Live?
A lot depends on where you live. If you reside in a state where adult-use cannabis is legal, it’s much easier to be honest about it with everybody in your life, children included. Many pot-smoking parents have never hidden their grinders or their pipes, any more than drinking families hide their whiskey or their ice buckets.

Some families in Washington, Colorado, Oregon, and Alaska are lucky enough to live the dream that most cannabis users can only imagine: being totally open about pot, as if using herb were a perfectly safe, natural and unremarkable way to feel better (shh: it is).

What Is Your Job?
Even where legal, however, if you’re known as a pothead it might hurt your career or reputation. You don’t want little Cristabel lisping to your boss, “Mommy smokes a joint every night before dinner.”
If you’re in the arts or in tech, cannabis consumption probably won’t hurt you professionally, but if you’re in education, medicine or law, it probably will.
The vast majority of Americans cannot be completely candid about cannabis because of legal, professional, and social consequences, and this affects what they tell their children. These parents must fashion an individualized, age-appropriate response to the question, “Do you smoke pot?”
If You Have Little Children
When the children are little, say, under six, it’s probably best to avoid the subject by basically hiding your consumption (and accouterments) from them.

If they don’t see it or smell it, your children may not ask you about it for a while. If they catch you in the act, you might choose to evade the issue, “Oh, this? It’s an herbal cigarette I sometimes smoke when I get headaches/backaches/stomachaches.”

Nothing is more boring to children than adult health issues, and they will likely drift away.

You aren’t exactly lying, and, importantly, you aren’t asking your child to hide what you do. Asking a little girl or boy to keep a secret is like asking a dog not to chew a bone.
Grade School and DARE
With grade-school children, the question demands a more nuanced approach, unless the infamous DARE program, which invites children to report on their parents, is running in your local school.
DARE has been largely discredited as preventing drug use; indeed, many say it stimulates, rather than discourages, an interest in drugs.

Nonetheless, certain districts still participate in the program, which brings uniformed policemen into classroom to instill fear and disseminate misinformation.
If your child is subject to DARE, continued discretion is essential so that Liam doesn’t confide to the friendly policeman that daddy sometimes uses weed to get chill.
You might consider getting together with other parents to keep DARE out of your school.
If your grade school is DARE-free, you might tell your children that some adults drink alcohol and some consume cannabis and some do neither or both. If asked, you can be honest about which group you’re in, minimizing the importance of inebriants in your life. “Sometimes” you have a drink; “once in a while” you have a smoke.
You should probably add that because cannabis is illegal in your state and you don’t want to pay a big fine, you’re quiet about your cannabis use and you expect Darcy to be quiet about it as well. Don’t bring up jail: it’s too scary and is very unlikely.
When the Kids are in Middle School
As your children get into middle school, you might have teachable moments discussing who benefits when cannabis is illegal. You can discuss how the pharmaceutical industry and the paper industry lobbied hard in the thirties to get cannabis declared illegal to protect their own products.

Middle school children are old enough to understand that cannabis legality is also a social justice issue. After all, whites and African-Americans use cannabis at comparable rates, but in New York state, African-Americans are four times as likely as whites to go to prison for it. If the law isn’t racist, its application is.

The High School Years
It’s unlikely that your children will get to high school before asking you whether you smoke pot, but if that’s the case, tell them the truth.
High school kids are likely to know friends who use weed, and they themselves may have already tried and enjoyed it. Perhaps they are really asking you about it for a goof!
If you can trust your child to be discreet, a policy of honesty is best. Denial will only lead them to distrust you, especially if Jason and Polly have already found your stash (as they probably have).

The Drug Policy Alliance has an excellent online booklet, “Safety First,” which offers advice about navigating rocky teenage shoals. You want to offer good advice without being a prude. You want to tell the truth and be a guide - both at the same time.
Perhaps you can share a memory of a time you didn’t get into a car with an intoxicated driver but called home instead. Reassure Lily once again that you’ll always pick her up and drive her home, no matter how late, no questions asked. Safety first!
Private Morality and the Law
From an early age, children have a strong sense of justice. Their most impassioned cry is “That’s no fair!” You can probably judge for yourself when they’re old enough to learn the difference between private morality and the law.
Some laws are bad, and some principled people resist bad laws. Laws about slavery were resisted by people who sheltered runaway slaves. During World War II, Danes broke the law when they began wearing yellow stars signaling they were all Jews. Today, environmentalists sometimes gather on private property, or in public places, chaining themselves to bulldozers or fences on behalf of their cause.
Certain parents break the law to provide cannabis medicine to their epileptic children. Others believe, with Thomas Jefferson, that the people should not “let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take.”
Jefferson would surely have hated both alcohol and marijuana prohibition, which were both colossal failures that encouraged criminal activity.
You might tell Danielle that you and millions of people find cannabis helpful in various ways, even though its official classification as a Schedule 1 drug indicates it’s harmful, with no medical benefits.

Federal prohibition is based on this false premise.
You might say that for thousands of years cannabis has been used as a medicine and to get people high, without a single overdose. This is a safe and helpful plant, appropriate for adult consumption, sometimes as an alternative to alcohol or pharmaceutical drugs.
A Few Caveats
You should say that it’s best to postpone using cannabis or alcohol or drugs because studies have shown that early habitual users are more likely than others to have substance use problems later on.
You should tell your child that pot impedes short term memory and learning, so it’s stupid to get high before class.
You should tell them that recent studies have shown that the brain continues to develop until a person is about 22. Until then, it’s probably best to minimize using psychoactive drugs.
This isn’t a scare tactic: it’s just common sense.
A Happy Ending
If you’ve been fairly honest about cannabis with your kids, they are likely to be honest about it, and other things, with you.
After they graduate from college, perhaps you’ll be passing them a joint as you watch the sun go down.
Perhaps Strawberry will say, “No thanks, Mom. I’m not really into it.” Perhaps Dom will take a hit, exhale, and say, “Dad, it’s so cool we can do this together.”
This article originally appeared on Green Flower Media, which helps people learn everything about cannabis today from the world’s top experts.

Regina police also expect fewer possession charges as marijuana legislation nears

By
Kevin Martel
 

Following the words of Canada's head of police chiefs, officers in Regina believe possession charges for small amounts of marijuana could drop as federal legislation to make pot legal gets closer.

One week ago, the president of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police and Saskatoon Chief Clive Weighill said he suspected there would likely be fewer minor possession charges across the country as we get closer to spring of 2017, the time at which the Liberal government has planned to introduce law to legalize marijuana use.

Regina police were asked if that could be the case in the Queen City.

"I'm guessing it likely would happen here as well but again we lay the charges based on the evidence that we have. When it goes to court the judge would make a decision," explained Deputy Chief Dean Rae.

"I guess it's hard to predict. It may be the result," added Chief Troy Hagen, who is retiring in June.

Hagen said they'll stay the course and Rae agreed, saying officers in the city will enforce the laws that are in place right now and will continue to do so until they change. The chief said the federal government expects the laws currently in place to be adhered to, and it's not like the law has been repealed, he explained.

Given that, Hagen added police exercise a good deal of discretion while handling these sorts of cases now.

"In every case where there's a small amount of marijuana present, is someone charged? No. It's never been that way," he revealed. "There are a number of instances, and has been for a long time, where in some cases minor possession has not warranted a charge."

Ultimately, he said police are the ones who the lay the charge but it's up to the courts to decide whether somebody has a criminal record.

Column: The Drug War Has Failed; Let’s Use a Different Approach



Since the early 1970s, the U.S. has spent $1 trillion in a war on drugs. Yet, illegal drugs are cheaper and more widely available than ever. Nearly 10 percent of Americans used illegal drugs last year.

Domestic consumption exceeds $100 billion, and crime, lost productivity and related health care cost us almost $200 billion annually. Last year in New Hampshire, 433 people died from opioid overdoses, three times our traffic fatalities.

U.S. taxpayers have spent over $8 billion attempting to eradicate opium production in Afghanistan, yet cultivation there has reached record levels, supplying three-quarters of global demand and providing a major source of funding for the Taliban.

Over the past decade to meet U.S. demand for illegal drugs, Mexican drug cartels murdered 100,000 people. Over 200 of last year’s New Hampshire drug overdose deaths were caused by the opioid fentanyl, manufactured by these drug cartels and smuggled across our open border. For this and several other reasons, Americans deserve a secure border with Mexico.

Unfortunately, in response to this abject and deadly policy failure, we keep hearing more of the same from most of our political leaders: double down yet again on the drug war with more unfunded spending loaded onto our nation’s already maxed-out credit card.

In a stunning admission of this failure, all inmates and all law enforcers I met during a visit to the Cheshire County jail told me that the current prosecution and incarceration approach is nothing more than an expensive revolving door.

Inmates leave jail more addicted and with a bigger drug supply network than when they arrive.

As with so many of our pressing and long-unresolved national challenges, we need to open up to new approaches so that we can do much more with fewer taxpayer dollars. It’s time to face down controversy and engage in a thorough, evidence-based drug policy rethink.

About one-third of us inherit brains wired for proneness to addiction. Serious life stresses — such as childhood physical, sexual or psychological abuse, deaths, violence, addiction or family breakdown involving an adult family member, and major emotional blows at any time of life — are triggers that can turn proneness into self-medication with drugs or alcohol, and then to addiction. Over the past year, about 5 percent of Americans suffered a substance addiction.

Once an individual becomes psychologically dependent on an opioid, stimulant or alcohol, the addiction usually becomes part of the brain chemistry for a lifetime. Clean addicts I met in the Cheshire County jail floored me when they told me that they cannot stop their nightly dreams about getting a heroin needle back into their arms. Addiction is not a failure of willpower. Even arrest, prison, loss of career, family and dignity are not enough to stop it.

For heroin and the other “hard” drugs, we can learn from the eight European nations and Canada that have shifted taxpayer funding from drug use prosecution and incarceration to drug-assisted treatment programs. Using this policy, Switzerland has reduced drug-overdose deaths to a rate one-twentieth of New Hampshire’s.

Additional economic and quality of life benefits include reductions in drug-related property crimes, illegal drug use, disease, and major increases in addiction treatment retention. In Switzerland, property crimes among enrolled heroin addicts dropped by 90 percent.

Opioid addiction cannot be cured, but can be effectively managed with a seamless bundle of services that remain available to the addict for years or even a lifetime. These services can include a maintenance dose of opioid receptor blocking drugs like Suboxone or Vivitrol administered in clinics in combination with drug abuse tests and mental health and life counseling.

For those exiting prison with criminal records and little to no money, these programs must include assistance with job counseling, transitional housing and transportation. Notable success has also been seen in a program of detox, then abstinence combined with instantly available 24/7 support from a trained and trusted coach.

These programs must be made available to drug addicts immediately and on demand and when offenders exit jail or prison. While addicts are usually drug free on release, their addiction remains as powerful as when they were arrested and most will relapse immediately if wait times for services are longer than even minutes.

In New Hampshire, this program bundle would cost very roughly $500 per month per addict — far less than the costs of prosecution, incarceration, property crimes, disease, income loss and welfare services for children.

For marijuana, like alcohol, Congress should grant states their power under the 10th Amendment to legalize, regulate and tax it as each state may see fit. We need to admit that prohibition has failed.

I’ve been told by a recent graduate that at my local high school in Hanover, marijuana can be had free for the asking every day and is far easier to obtain than alcohol.

States opting to legalize should consider requiring child-proof packaging and labels disclosing potency and health effects, including the fact that marijuana use involves performance and brain developmental effects (though far less in the aggregate than tobacco or alcohol). States legalizing should also ban advertising and public use, license in-state producers, allow personal production in limited quantities, and extend DUI laws to cover marijuana metabolite blood levels.

Washington State is one of four to have legalized and taxed the sale of cannabis products. Over its first year in full effect, Washington saved most of the $20 million previously spent on marijuana law enforcement and collected $83 million in tax revenues, with revenues used to fund prevention, treatment, research and education programs.

Early data show that traffic fatalities and youth marijuana use have not increased. Studies in medical marijuana states show no gateway drug effect, with no increase in use of hard drugs by either adults or youth.

Present addiction treatment programs are fragmented and poorly funded. Only one in ten Americans who could benefit even attempts to access existing programs. States wishing to legalize and tax marijuana could use the proceeds to increase funding for addiction treatment.

New Hampshire is making the mistake of funding still-insufficiently expanded treatment programs using Obamacare Medicaid dollars, a source highly likely to evaporate given already perilous federal debt levels.

Jim Rubens, of Hanover, has written a book on addiction, was past president of Headrest, a Lebanon-based substance abuse counseling center, and is a Republican running for U.S. Senate.