• Cannabis & Hemp - Hot Off The 'Net

    Denver Mile High Marijuana Summit

    Listen to the Denver Mile High Marijuana Summit, November 6.

    Speakers:

    Rick Doblin, PhD Founder and Executive Director, MAPS

    Jeff Jones Oaksterdam University, Prop 19, California

    Ethan Nadelmann Executive Director, Drug Policy Alliance

    Aaron Houston Executive Director, SSDP

    Sue Sisley, MD Arizona Medical Marijuana Initiative

    Steve Fox Director of Government Relations, MPP

    Mason Tvert Executive Director, SAFER

    Brian Vicente Executive Director, Sensible Colorado

    Part 1:

    Part 2:

    Or watch in Quicktime format.

    http://www.maps.org/colorado2010/summit/mmjsummit.mov

  • Letter of the Week

    Letter Of The Week

    SELF-MEDICATION SHOULD BE A RIGHT

    I am extremely disappointed that the East Valley Tribune would oppose
    Prop. 203, the medical marijuana initiative. I thought the Tribune
    was pro freedom. Apparently I was wrong.

    Prop. 203 is substantially different from the medical marijuana laws
    in California, Colorado and Montana. If people are opposed to the
    use of marijuana for medical reasons, they should not use it. But
    don’t dictate to me what I may put into my own body in the privacy of
    my own home.

    It seems to me that the right to self-medicate should be a
    fundamental right. Apparently the East Valley Tribune disagrees.

    Kirk Muse

    Mesa

    Pubdate: Wed, 27 Oct 2010

    Source: East Valley Tribune (AZ)

    Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v10/n867/a05.html

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

    Could legalizing marijuana help cure breast cancer?

    Drug Policy Question of the Week – 11-4-10

    As answered by Mary Jane Borden, Editor of Drug War Facts for the Drug Truth Network on 11-4-10. http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/3132

    Question of the Week: Could legalizing marijuana help cure breast cancer?

    This was the title of an article that recently received top placement on AlterNet.org. October has been National Breast Cancer Awareness Month.

    Scientific journals like Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, Molecular Cancer Therapeutic, and Molecular Cancer have all published fairly recent pre-clinical studies concerning the potential of cannabinoids as treatments for breast cancer. These studies also extol the safety of cannabinoid therapies.

    The human body contains an internal system interrelated with molecules in the cannabis – marijuana – plant. A neurological signaling structure called the endocannabinoid system is now known to govern numerous bodily processes like appetite, pain, and even the birth of new brain cells. Cannabinoid receptors, called CB1 and CB2, are located in various cell membranes and activated by the body’s own cannabinoid molecules, as well as those unique to the cannabis plant (THC, CBD) or synthetically-derived.

    The latest research is proving that cannabinoids, as part of this bodily system, plays a mitigating role in breast cancer.

    A breast cancer diagnosis will confront about 1 in 8 American women this year. Some 40,000 will die from it. Therapies involve invasive surgery, heavy radiation, and toxic chemotherapy.

    Over the decades, a labyrinth of governmental agencies with multi-billion dollar budgets has enforced marijuana laws while thwarting clinical research and reinforcing anti-marijuana stereotypes.

    Numerous efforts have challenged the U.S. Government’s monopoly control over cannabis, but they haven’t dislodged the federal government’s grip on this policy.

    To accelerate the clinical trials that will develop promising cannabinoid-based breast cancer treatments, an untried question might be asked, could legalizing marijuana help cure breast cancer?

    Article in Breast Cancer Research & Treatment: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20859676

    Article in Molecular Cancer Therapeutics: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19887554

    Article in Molecular Cancer: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2917429/pdf/1476-4598-9-196.pdf

    Article by Mary Jane Borden on AlterNet:  Could legalizing marijuana in California help cure breast cancer?

    These facts and others like them can be found in the Medical 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]

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

    Do marijuana users need treatment?

    Drug Policy Question of the Week – 10-27-10

    As answered by Mary Jane Borden, Editor of Drug War Facts for the Drug Truth Network on 10-27-10. http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/3120

    Question of the Week: Do marijuana users need treatment?

    First, with respect to life saving treatment, marijuana is fairly safe. According to the World Health Organization in 1998,

    “There are no confirmed cases of human deaths from cannabis poisoning in the world medical literature.”

    Further, Drug Abuse Warning Network data showed no emergency room marijuana deaths from 2004 to 2008.

    The National Institute of Drug Abuse in its December 2007 edition of Addiction Science and Clinical Practice stated,

    “Marijuana produces dependence less readily than most other illicit drugs. Some 9 percent of those who try marijuana develop dependence compared to, for example, 15 percent of people who try cocaine and 24 percent of those who try heroin.” (p. 5)

    This 9 percent translates into around 9.4 million individuals based on the 104 million Americans who in 2009 were believed to have ever tried marijuana.

    NIDA estimates that around 4.3 percent of Americans have been dependent on marijuana, as defined in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.

    Describing withdrawal, the NIDA report noted that, marijuana withdrawal

    “does not appear to include major medical or psychiatric consequences and may be considered mild compared with heroin and severe alcohol withdrawal syndromes.” (p. 10)

    Ironically, one treatment showing great promise for marijuana withdrawal is its own active ingredient, THC. The NIDA report concluded that,

    “THC reduced craving and ratings of anxiety, feelings of misery, difficulty sleeping, and chills. … These findings were replicated in an outpatient study, which found that moderate oral dosage of THC (10 mg, three times daily) suppressed many marijuana withdrawal symptoms and that a higher dosage (30 mg, three times daily) almost completely abolished [them].” (p. 11)

    These facts and others like them can be found in the Treatment and Marijuana chapters 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 Question of the Week – 10-20-10

    As answered by Mary Jane Borden, Editor of Drug War Facts for the Drug Truth Network on 10-20-10. http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/3111

    Question of the Week: How accurate is government data?

    This is an interesting question since we covered drug use and arrest estimates during the last few Drug Truth Network shows. While government statisticians may attempt to calculate best estimates and even though their work may represent the only numbers on a subject, several reports suggest that readers should be mindful of data limitations and skeptical about results.

    Recall that the 2009 National Survey on Drug Use and Health contained the caveat,

    “2002 and later data should not be compared with 2001 and earlier data from the survey series to assess changes over time.” (p. 8 )

    The recent “Reducing Drug Trafficking Revenues and Violence in Mexico” report from the RAND Corporation used the following quote from 2006 National Drug Control Strategy published by the Office of National Drug Control Policy as an example of questionable data:

    “Mexican traffickers receive more than $13.8 billion in revenue from illicit-drug sales to the United States; 61 percent of that revenue, or $8.5 billion, is directly tied to marijuana export sales.” (p. 36)

    But after analyzing these numbers, RAND researchers concluded,

    “We are not aware of any publicly available documents that provide empirical support for these figures. Not only does this make it difficult to assess whether the figures are correct; it also makes it difficult to understand what these figures actually cover.” (p. 28)

    A 2003 report called the Numbers Game from the Transnational Institute summarized one of the main problems with data related to illegal drugs,

    “the obstacles to statistical data collection are daunting [because] The illegal nature of the industry precludes direct measurement.” (p. 2)

    The report also noted,

    “Morals and ideology tend to play an extremely strong role in those debates. For these reasons, all illicit drug data can be manipulated for political gain.” (p. 3)

    These facts and others like them can be found in the Drug Usage and U.S. Policy chapters of Drug War Facts at http://www.drugwarfacts.org.

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

    Do marijuana users need treatment?

  • Question of the Week

    How accurate is government data?

    Drug Policy Question of the Week – 10-20-10

    As answered by Mary Jane Borden, Editor of Drug War Facts for the Drug Truth Network on 10-20-10. http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/3111

    Question of the Week: How accurate is government data?

    This is an interesting question since we covered drug use and arrest estimates during the last few Drug Truth Network shows. While government statisticians may attempt to calculate best estimates and even though their work may represent the only numbers on a subject, several reports suggest that readers should be mindful of data limitations and skeptical about results.

    Recall that the 2009 National Survey on Drug Use and Health contained the caveat,

    “2002 and later data should not be compared with 2001 and earlier data from the survey series to assess changes over time.” (p. 8 )

    The recent “Reducing Drug Trafficking Revenues and Violence in Mexico” report from the RAND Corporation used the following quote from 2006 National Drug Control Strategy published by the Office of National Drug Control Policy as an example of questionable data:

    “Mexican traffickers receive more than $13.8 billion in revenue from illicit-drug sales to the United States; 61 percent of that revenue, or $8.5 billion, is directly tied to marijuana export sales.” (p. 36)

    But after analyzing these numbers, RAND researchers concluded,

    “We are not aware of any publicly available documents that provide empirical support for these figures. Not only does this make it difficult to assess whether the figures are correct; it also makes it difficult to understand what these figures actually cover.” (p. 28)

    A 2003 report called the Numbers Game from the Transnational Institute summarized one of the main problems with data related to illegal drugs,

    “the obstacles to statistical data collection are daunting [because] The illegal nature of the industry precludes direct measurement.” (p. 2)

    The report also noted,

    “Morals and ideology tend to play an extremely strong role in those debates. For these reasons, all illicit drug data can be manipulated for political gain.” (p. 3)

    These facts and others like them can be found in the Drug Usage and U.S. Policy chapters of Drug War Facts at www.drugwarfacts.org.

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

  • Cannabis & Hemp - Question of the Week

    Marijuana Facts from Drug War Facts

    Drug Policy Question of the Week – 10-13-10

    As answered by Mary Jane Borden, Editor of Drug War Facts for the Drug Truth Network on 10-13-10. http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/3102

    Question of the Week: Sixteen commonly asked questions concerning marijuana are answered in a new Fact Sheet now available in the Marijuana chapter of Drug War Facts called, “Marijuana Facts from Drug War Facts.” In PDF format, you can find it on the web at http://drugwarfacts.org/cms/Marijuana. It is Fact #2.

    This fact sheet provides answers to 16 commonly asked questions about marijuana, many of which have been answered during these Drug Truth Network shows.

    As typical of Drug War Facts, the answer to each question is referenced from credible sources, usually government data, clinical studies, or think tank reports. Included with each Fact is a direct quotation or numbers referenced directly from the source, along with a link to back to that source.

    Mike Gray, the Co-chairman of Common Sense for Drug Policy, the organization that produces Drug War Facts, expressed the need for the fact sheet by stating,

    “The debate on whether to tax and regulate marijuana should be a fact-based one so that California can develop the most effective policy. It is too easy when it comes to marijuana for people to lose sight of what is true and what is false, what is myth and what is reality.  We are providing this resource to the media to make sure the debate remains elevated to fact-based information.”

    This new marijuana fact sheet can be used as a handout at rallies, meetings, and other events. The Fact Sheet’s two pages can easily be printed front/back to make an easy-to-use one page flyer.

    Each fact on this new marijuana fact sheet can be found in the Marijuana, Drug Usage, or Gateway Theory chapters of Drug War Facts at www.drugwarfacts.org.

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

  • Announcements

    Alan Randell receives the MAP Published Letters Gold Award

    Pubdate: Sat, 30 Oct 2010
    Source: Burnaby Now, The (CN BC)
    Copyright: 2010 Alan Randell
    Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v10/n861/a07.html
    Author: Alan Randell
    Award: With this published letter Alan Randell receives the MAP
    Published Letters Gold Award for 500 published letters
    http://mapinc.org/lte_awards/lte_gold.htm

    DRUG PROHIBITION PART OF PROBLEM

    Dear Editor:

    Re: No easy answers to gang violence, Burnaby NOW, Oct. 20.

    Why do we continue to ban certain drugs when it is crystal clear to
    all but the most stubborn drug war warriors that not only prohibition
    doesn’t work but it causes even more harm – including, of course,
    gang violence – than if the users were left alone.

    Here are some of the reasons:

    . Politicians feel they need scapegoats:

    Human beings are suspicious of strangers or those who are different.
    Thousands of years ago, such feelings may have been a necessary
    factor in survival, but in the modern world, vestiges of this feeling
    still remain and we are all susceptible to urgings from our leaders
    that this or that minority is a deadly threat to society.

    The “good” citizens of Salem hanged innocent “witches.” Hitler
    consolidated his power by urging the majority to hate the Jews. Our
    present political leadership is merely goose-stepping in Hitler’s
    path by distracting the majority away from more serious problems by
    demonizing a vulnerable minority, those who use and/or sell certain
    drugs. Another advantage for the politicians in banning drugs of
    course is that such a strategy calls for bigger and more powerful governments.

    . The media needs scapegoats too:

    Aside from a few token articles, the media supports any program that
    results in people being punished by the law because that is what
    (they think) sells newspapers and increases TV ratings.

    And like the politicians, editors and publishers just love a law that
    enables them to work themselves into a rage about how society is
    going to hell in a hand basket because of a few rotten eggs that
    should be thrown into jail forthwith and the key thrown away.

    Prohibition is perfect for this practice because “it is for the children.”

    . Drug users are a minority:

    The prohibition of alcohol both in Canada and in the U.S., like all
    prohibitions, failed to achieve the hoped for results, but, because
    drinkers were the majority, politicians listened and acted to abolish it.

    Because the number of marijuana users is increasing, that drug may
    well be legalized before long, but the users and sellers of other
    illegal drugs such as heroin and cocaine will have to wait a little
    while longer until their drug is legalized.

    Once marijuana is legalized and it no longer possesses the lure of
    the forbidden fruit, you can be sure the popularity of another
    illegal drug will skyrocket until that drug becomes favoured by the
    majority and is legalized and the whole cycle begins again.

    . The police favour prohibition:

    This is a no brainer, of course. Drug prohibition is the greatest
    police employment booster ever.

    Alan Randell, Victoria

  • Letter of the Week

    Letter Of The Week

    Cannabis Cat and Mouse

    Pushing 60 now, I’ve long been tired of the cat-and-mouse game that
    using cannabis invokes. I totally lost any respect for the law at a
    tender age. Faith in government? What, the government that wants to
    see me in a cage? The prohibition has been quite corrosive on my and
    many of my comrades’ patriotism.

    We can restore respect for law, and law enforcement, as well as faith
    in the American way by ending this prohibition. We could even end up
    like the Dutch–who’ve managed to make pot boring in the eyes of that
    country’s youth and whose rates of use are but a small fraction of ours.

    The war on cannabis has its roots in racism, and is now the new Jim
    Crow. It has been a handy cudgel to whup on Mexicans, blacks and
    those darn hippies. Despite the claims, it has never had anything to
    do with public safety.

    This war on our own citizens can be ended. The passage of Prop. 19
    will force a large crack in the dike. Much of the delay, deceit, and
    obfuscation seen after the passage of Prop. 215 should be
    neutralized by Assemblyman Tom Ammiano’s recently introduced
    legislation to create a uniform statewide regulatory system. “If 19
    passes, we’ll be ready,” he asserts. Prop 19 includes language that
    allows modification by the Legislature. This was missing in 215.

    My ballot is marked Yes. I hope yours is, too.

    Jay Bergstrom

    Forest Ranch

    Pubdate: Thu, 21 Oct 2010

    Source: Chico News & Review, The (CA)