• Cannabis & Hemp - Drug Policy - Question of the Week

    How is marijuana’s potency determined

    Drug Policy Question of the Week – 9-6-10

    As answered by Mary Jane Borden, Editor of Drug War Facts for the Drug Truth Network on 9-6-10. http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/3052

    Question of the Week: How is marijuana’s potency determined?

    The World Drug Report 2009 states,

    “The amount of THC in a cannabis sample is generally used as a measure of ‘cannabis potency.’”

    As described in that report,

    “The secretion of THC is most abundant in the flowering heads and surrounding leaves. The amount of resin secreted is influenced by environmental conditions during growth …, sex of the plant, and time of harvest.”

    The report also notes that,

    “Most data on cannabis potency are derived from the analysis of seized [marijuana] samples. This means that these samples need to be representative of the entire seizure so that inferences and extrapolations can be made.”

    As described in a 2004 report from the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Addiction,

    “Data on the THC content of cannabis products in the USA have been collected by [Dr.] ElSohly et al. (1984, 2000) for many years as part of the University of Mississippi Potency Monitoring Project. Samples were submitted by law enforcement agencies and it is assumed that they are representative of the market.”

    To assist data analysis, details concerning the aforementioned environmental conditions, the type of cannabis, and the size of the plant canopy if known accompany the seized samples to a lab at University of Mississippi’s School of Pharmacy. Here they are put through a series of chemical tests to determine their THC percentage, as well as percentages of the cannabinoids, CBD, CBN, and CBC. One of their recent reports read,

    “As of March 15, 2009, the Project has analyzed and compiled data on 65,247 Cannabis, 1365 Hashish, and 476 Hash Oil samples.”

    That’s since the project’s inception.

    These facts and others like them can be found in the Marijuana chapter of Drug War Facts at www.drugwarfacts.org.

    Questions concerning these or other facts concerning drug policy can be e-mailed to [email protected]

    is marijuana’s potency determined?
  • Drug Policy - Hot Off The 'Net

    The Next Frontier Of Drug Policy Reform

    by Ethan Nadelmann

    Ethan Nadelmann is the founder and executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance.

    For those of us who fought long and hard to reform the notorious 100-to-one crack/powder cocaine disparity in federal law, the Fair Sentencing Act, signed by President Obama on August 3, is at once a historic victory and a major disappointment. It’s both too little, too late and a big step forward.

    The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, which punished the sale of five grams of crack cocaine the same as 500 grams of powder cocaine, reflected the bipartisan drug war hysteria of the day and was approved with virtually no consideration of scientific evidence or the fiscal and human consequences. The argument for reform has always been twofold: sending someone to federal prison for five years for selling the equivalent of a few sugar packets of cocaine is unreasonably harsh, and it disproportionately affects minorities (almost 80 percent of those sentenced are African-Americans, even though most users and sellers of crack are not black).

  • Drug Policy

    CMA Journal Article Backs Drug Injection Site

    Federal government accused of ignoring addicts by opposing Vancouver site

    An article in the Canadian Medical Association Journal slams the federal government for its efforts to shut down Insite in downtown Vancouver, Canada’s only safe injection site for drug addicts.

    Injection booths at Insite in Vancouver. Insite is the first legal supervised injection site in North America and is located in Vancouver’s east side. Injection booths at Insite in Vancouver. Insite is the first legal supervised injection site in North America and is located in Vancouver’s east side. (Jonathan Hayward/Canadian Press)A co-author of the paper has told CBC News he believes the federal government should stand aside, allow the centre to operate, and abandon an appeal to the Supreme Court

    “We’ve concluded after reviewing the evidence that Insite is doing what it’s supposed to be doing, and furthermore that we’re very concerned that the federal government has misled on the science,” said Dr. Michael Rachlis, a professor of health policy at the University of Toronto.

    Insite was established in 2003, when there was a Liberal government in Ottawa, but has been fighting for its survival since the Conservatives came to power in 2006.

    ‘We’re calling on the federal government to drop the current action they have in the Supreme Court.’ — Michael Rachlis, University of Toronto

  • Drug Policy

    What makes drugs illegal?

    Drug Policy Question of the Week – 8-31-10

    As answered by Mary Jane Borden, Editor of Drug War Facts for the Drug Truth Network on 8-23-10. http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/3042

    Question of the Week: What makes drugs illegal?

    It all has to do with a federal law passed in 1970. According to a 2009 Congressional Research Service report,

    “With increasing use of marijuana and other street drugs during the 1960s, notably by college and high school students, federal drug-control laws came under scrutiny. In July 1969, President Nixon asked Congress to enact legislation to combat rising levels of drug use. Hearings were held, different proposals were considered, and House and Senate conferees filed a conference report in October 1970. The report was quickly adopted by voice vote in both chambers and was signed into law as the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970. … Included in the new law was the Controlled Substances Act.”

    The CSA can be found under Title 21 of the U.S. Commercial Code. Subchapter I, Sections 801-971 specify drug control and enforcement.

    Under the CSA, drugs are classified into one of five schedules. In theory, Schedule I is reserved for those drugs determined to be the most dangerous and to require the most control. Drugs in Schedules II-V are thought to be safer and thus progressively less tightly controlled.

    Schedule I drugs include heroin, MDMA, Ibogaine, LSD, Marijuana, Mescaline, Peyote, Psilocybin, Tetrahydrocannabinols, and GHB. Schedule II drugs include opium, coca, cocaine, fentanyl, and methadone. Anabolic steroids, buprenorphine, and ketamine are found in Schedule III with diazepam (or valium) and zopiclone (or Lunesta) in Schedule IV. In small dosages often for cough syrups, opium and its analog codeine can also be found in Schedule V.

    These facts and others like them can be found in the Crime chapter of Drug War Facts at www.drugwarfacts.org.

    Questions concerning these or other facts concerning drug policy can be e-mailed to [email protected].

  • Drug Policy

    Google to Run Just Say Now Ads Censored by Facebook

    UPDATE!

    From FireDogLake http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/08/25/google-to-run-just-say-now-ads-censored-by-facebook/

    By: Michael Whitney Wednesday August 25, 2010 12:21 pm

    Good news from Google: the search giant has accepted our marijuana legalization ads.

    The ads were removed by Facebook, which said the ads featuring a marijuana leaf were in violation of its policy – a decision the social networking site made after serving no fewer than 38 million impressions of the ads earlier this month. The ads will begin running on Google’s advertising network immediately.

    Google’s decision to run the ads is an affirmation that the search network is mature enough to run ads that are clearly political speech.

    Bruce Fein, former Associate Attorney General for President Ronald Reagan and Just Say Now advisory board member, had this to say:

    “Facebook’s concocted prissiness over political advocacy is more to be disparaged than imitated. Freedom of expression is made of sterner stuff.  Google deserves applause for exposing Facebook to shame.”

    Ouch.

    These ads were also accepted by Google:

    You can see  the censored ads and sign our petition to Facebook protesting their decision here.

  • Cannabis & Hemp - Drug Policy

    Facebook Blocks Ads For Pot Legalization Campaign

    From the Huffington Post at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/24/facebook-blocks-ads-for-p_n_692295.html.

    Facebook Blocks Ads For Pot Legalization Campaign

    by Ryan Grim

    For a typical college student, if it didn’t happen on Facebook, it didn’t happen. That gives the social networking behemoth an out-sized influence on the confines of political debate, if that debate falls outside what Facebook deems acceptable discourse.

    Proponents of marijuana legalization, which is on the California ballot in 2010, have hit a Facebook wall in their effort to grow an online campaign to rethink the nation’s pot laws. Facebook initially accepted ads from the group Just Say Now, running them from August 7 to August 16, generating 38 million impressions and helping the group’s fan page grow to over 6,000 members. But then they were abruptly removed.

    Andrew Noyes, a spokesman for Faceboo

    k, said that the problem was the pot leaf. “It would be fine to note that you were informed by Facebook that the image in question was no long[er] acceptable for use in Facebook ads. The image of a pot leaf is classified with all smoking products and therefore is not acceptable under our policies,” he told the group in an email, which was provided to HuffPost.

    Noyes is on vacation and didn’t respond to an email. A request sent to Facebook’s general press address generated an auto-reply indicating that the company receives many requests and intends to respond. [Scroll down for a Facebook statement.]

    Facebook’s ad rules, however, only ban promotion of “[t]obacco products,” not smoking in general. Since the 1970s, shops selling marijuana paraphernalia have sought ways around the law by disingenuously claiming their products are “for tobacco use only.” The Just Say Now campaign is arguing the exact opposite: No, really, it’s for marijuana, not tobacco.

    The censorship is a blow to the campaign, which is gathering signatures on college campuses calling for legalization and registering young people to vote. “It’s like running a campaign and saying you can’t show the candidate’s face,” said Michael Whitney of Firedoglake.com, a blog that is part of the Just Say Now coalition.

    Conservative college students condemned the site’s restrictions. “Our generation made Facebook successful because it was a community where we could be free and discuss issues like sensible drug policy. If Facebook censorship policies continue to reflect those of our government by suppressing freedom of speech then they won’t have to wait until Election Day to be voted obsolete,” Jordan Marks, the head of Young Americans for Freedom, told HuffPost in an email. YAF was founded in the 1960s and William Buckley’s estate; Buckley was a longtime supporter of marijuana legalization. Marks is a member of the Just Say Now board.

    Aaron Houston, the executive director of Students for Sensible Drug Policy, said that Facebook was out of touch with its customers.

    “Their business will suffer if they don’t reverse this decision. We’re way beyond reefer madness and censorship. Facebook should get with the times,” he said.

    While Facebook is banning the ad, a number of conservative and liberal blogs and news outlets have agreed to run it beginning on Tuesday. The Nation, The New Republic, Human Events, Red State, Antiwar, Reason, Drug War Rant, Stop The Drug War, Daily Paul, Lew Rockwell, The Young Turks, MyDD, AmericaBlog, Pam’s House Blend and Raw Story are among them.

    To protest Facebook’s decision, Just Say Now is launching, naturally, a Facebook petition, cognizant that the social networking company often responds to user feedback. The group is also asking people to replace their profile picture with an image of a censored pot leaf.

    “By censoring marijuana leaves, Facebook is banning political speech. This is unfair, and unacceptable,” reads the petition. “Facebook should reverse its decision and allow the free discussion of U.S. drug policy that the country is ready for.”

    UPDATE: The Libertarian Party has had the same problem. Spokesman Kyle Hartz emailed HuffPost to say that after initially approving the ad, Facebook reversed its decision and censored the ad on July 23rd.

    “Thanks for writing in to us,” a Facebook representative wrote to the party. “I took a look at your account and noticed that the content advertised by this ad is prohibited. We reserve the right to determine what advertising we accept, and we may choose to not accept ads containing or relating to certain products or services. We do not allow ads for marijuana or political ads for the promotion of marijuana and will not allow the creation of any further Facebook Ads for this product. We appreciate your cooperation with this policy.”

    UPDATE II: Facebook spokesman Noyes says in a statement: “The image in question was no longer acceptable for use in Facebook ads. The image of a marijuana leaf is classified with all smoking products and therefore is not acceptable under our policies.”

    UPDATE III: Facebook objects to the pot leaf under medical circumstances, as well. As Washington, D.C.’s city council was debating how to write regulations to permit the cultivation and sale of medical marijuana, the District of Columbia Patients’ Cooperative took out Facebook ads to encourage city residents to attend the hearings, the cooperative’s Nikolas Schiller tells HuffPost. Facebook shut it down, though the hearings went on regardless. The ads contained a pot leaf and were, like the others, initially approved and later rejected.

    “The aim of the District of Columbia Patients’ Cooperative use of targeted Facebook ads was to engender community support for the DC medical cannabis law which had been placed on ice for 12 years by Congress,” said Schiller. “We created the ads to target those on Facebook who are sympathetic to the subject and might be interested in coming to District Council hearings and meeting with elected officials. While we were able to organize through Facebook, our efforts were severely hampered by Facebook’s continued rejection of our ads. The ads ran between between January and May 2010, with the final rejection on May 10th–the ad stated “Have you spoken to your doctor yet? You will soon be able to use medical marijuana with a recommendation from your doctor!” and contained a cannabis leaf with the DC flag superimposed over it.”

    UPDATE IV: Johnny Dunn writes in to say that Facebook initially blocked ads for his t-shirts, which read “Legalize Gay Pot,” merging two pop-culture streams. He took the pot leaf off and they are now apparently in compliance.

    Ryan Grim is the author of This Is Your Country On Drugs: The Secret History of Getting High in America

  • Drug Policy - Question of the Week

    Question of the Week: Does student drug testing achieve drug free students?

    Drug Policy Question of the Week – 8-23-10

    As answered by Mary Jane Borden, Editor of Drug War Facts for the Drug Truth Network on 8-23-10. http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/3031

    Question of the Week: Does student drug testing achieve drug free students?

    As described in the July 2010 report from the U.S. Department of Education, entitled “The Effectiveness of Mandatory-Random Student Drug Testing,”

    “One approach to address student substance use is school-based mandatory-random student drug testing (MRSDT). Under MRSDT, students and their parents sign consent forms agreeing to the students’ random drug testing as a condition of participation in athletics and other school-sponsored competitive extracurricular activities.”

    These programs have the goals of (1) identifying students with substance use problems for referral to counseling or treatment services, and (2) deterring substance use among all students.

    Unfortunately, MSRDT has produced few results. Seven years ago, the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University found,

    “Drug testing is not associated with either significantly lower risk scores or lower estimates of student body drug use.”

    That same year, researchers in a Journal of School Health article concluded,

    “drug testing (of any kind) was not a significant predictor of student marijuana use in the past 12 months. Neither was drug testing for cause or suspicion.”

    A 2007 study in the Journal of Adolescent Health questioned deterrence, finding that,

    “No Drug and Alcohol Testing deterrent effects were evident for past month use.”

    The conclusions in the aforementioned 2010 Department of Education report mostly mirrored those of the prior studies, stating that mandatory random student drug testing has,

    “had no “spillover effects” on the substance use reported by students who were not subject to testing and had no effect on any group of students’ reported intentions to use substances in the future.”

    These facts and others like them can be found in the Drug Testing chapter of Drug War Facts at www.drugwarfacts.org.

    Questions concerning these or other facts concerning drug policy can be e-mailed to [email protected].

  • Drug Policy - Letter Writer of the Month

    Letter Writer Of The Month – July – Wayne Phillips

    Newshawk: Published Letters Awards www.mapinc.org/lteaward.htm

    DrugSense recognizes Wayne Phillips of Hamilton, Ontario for his
    three letters published during July. This brings his total published
    letters, that we know of, to 81. Wayne writes as the Communication
    Director for Educators For Sensible Drug Policy http://efsdp.org/

    You may read his published letters at
    http://www.mapinc.org/writer/Wayne+Phillips

  • Drug Policy - Hot Off The 'Net

    Lessons Not Learned Since Tragic Drug Raid in Atlanta

    By Bill Piper

    Money spent prosecuting and jailing low-level offenders is money not being spent on drug treatment or education.

    It’s been almost four years since Atlanta narcotics officers shot and killed 92-year-old Kathryn Johnston and planted evidence in a failed attempt to frame her – and her family is just now receiving justice in the form of a $4.9 million settlement. That of course won’t bring Ms. Johnston back. And despite some cosmetic changes to how drug law enforcement works, very little has changed. City officials will continue to pressure police officers to meet informal arrest quotas, police will continue to violently raid the homes of people suspected of only nonviolent offenses, and taxpayers will continue to foot the bill of a failed drug policy. Real reform is needed.