AMA Calls for Review of Medical Marijuana’s Legal Status-New Policy Marks Historic Shift

[kpete]

Source: Common Dreams

AMA Calls for Review of Medical Marijuana’s Legal Status
New Policy Marks Historic Shift From Prior Stance

HOUSTON - November 10 - In a move considered historic by supporters of medical marijuana, the American Medical Association's House of Delegates today adopted a new policy position calling for the review of marijuana's status as a Schedule I drug in the federal Controlled Substances Act. The old language in Policy H-95.952 had previously recommended that "marijuana be retained in Schedule I," which groups marijuana with drugs such as heroin, LSD and PCP that are deemed to have no accepted medical uses and to be unsafe for use even under medical supervision.

The revised policy, adopted today, states, "Our AMA urges that marijuana's status as a federal Schedule I controlled substance be reviewed with the goal of facilitating the conduct of clinical research and development of cannabinoid-based medicines, and alternate delivery methods." It goes on to explain that this position should not be construed as an endorsement of state medical marijuana programs.

"This shift, coming from what has historically been America's most cautious and conservative major medical organization, is historic," said Aaron Houston, director of government relations for the Marijuana Policy Project, who attended the AMA meeting. "Marijuana's Schedule I status is not just scientifically untenable, given the wealth of recent data showing it to be both safe and effective for chronic pain and other conditions, but it's been a major obstacle to needed research."

Drugs listed in Schedule II, for which medical use is permitted with strict controls, include cocaine, morphine and methamphetamine. A pill containing THC, the component responsible for marijuana's "high," is classed in Schedule III, whose looser requirements allow phoned-in prescriptions.


Read more: http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2009/11/10-1

---

AMA PDF: http://americansforsafeaccess.org/downloads/AMA_Report_Executive_Summary.pdf

[abqmufc]

1. 100% decriminalize and leaglize.....both most be done.

As they are different. One simple act could begin a flood of ecological and economic sustainability in the world.

[zonkers]

2. what do you mean by ecological sustainability?

[pattmarty]

4. Hemp?

[zonkers]

5. Ah, gotcha.. I just looked Hemp. Never really grasped all the possibiliites...

(snip) Hemp provides low cost high quality food. It can be used for both people and animal food. Hemp contains high amounts of protein, amino acids, and essential fatty acids that are necessary to maintain a healthy life. Hemp seed is the only seed which contains these oils with almost no saturated fat. Hemp has many non-food uses. Hemp is most known for its fiber. Hemp fiber is extremely versatile. It is known for its strength, length, durability, and its resistance to rot. Hemp fiber may be better than cotton. One acre of hemp will produce as much fiber as two or three acres of cotton. Cotton farming requires the use of many pesticides and herbicides, while hemp uses very few. Hemp is also stronger, softer, and lasts longer than cotton.

Hemp fiber is also made into a wood-like composite which is twice as strong as wood. Using hemp when making plywood and fiberboard makes the board stronger, lighter, and longer lasting. Hemp board is often used in building due to its durability in earthquakes, hurricanes and other severe weather. An added bonus is that hemp products are bio-degradable.

Hemp is made into paper products as well. Using hemp can eliminate our dependence on trees. One acre of hemp produces the same amount of paper as four acres of trees. Hemp can be harvested four times a year at 1/4th the cost of wood pulp paper and with 1/5th the pollution. Hemp only takes 90-100 days to mature, while most trees take 50-500 years. Hemp paper can be recycled ten times because of its long fibers. Most tree-based paper can only be recycled three times. Hemp paper production can reduce waste-water contamination. It reduces the need for acids and can be bleached in an environmentally-friendly way instead of with harsh chlorine compounds. Hemp paper does not yellow and is acid free.

Hemp can be made into body care products, lubrications, household stain removers, varnishes, resins, and paint. The paints and varnishes made with hemp are non-toxic. Research is being done to use hemp in manufacturing biodegradable plastic products. These products include plant based cellophane, recycled plastics, and resins made from hemp seed oil, to name but a few. Eco-friendly hemp can replace most toxic petro-chemical products. The most hazardous toxic waste comes from petro-chemicals. Hemp can safely, cleanly, and completely replace them.

Hemp could end our dependency on fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are non renewable resources. They also contain chemicals that threaten the environment. Hemp burns with burns with virtually no ash or sulfur. Carbon dioxide is released when it is burned. The amount of carbon dioxide taken from the atmosphere equals the amount released – it does not contribute to worsening the global warming or greenhouse effect. It is estimated that if we dedicated 6% of U.S. land to hemp cultivation, it could supply all current demands for oil and gas. This production would not add any carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Hemp could also be converted to methanol and fuel our cars in the future. Hemp is both beneficial for the American consumer and the environment. Hemp is the only crop capable of making America energy independent.

Read more: http://www.stateuniversity.com/blog/permalink/Is-Hemp-the-Answer-To-Our-Energy-Problems-.html#ixzz0WUBK8xNe

[Uncle Joe]

11. Kicked and recommended for the O.P. and this post.

Thanks to kpete and zonkers.:thumbsup:

[winyanstaz]

15. Yup..legalizing marijuana would mean jobs.....

and America needs jobs now.

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

16. No wonder it's illegal...

[alittlelark]

28. +1

[defendandprotect]

67. And RAYON a fantastic fabric . . . cool in summer, warm in winter ..... silky!!

[defendandprotect]

66. Hemp can help replenish the Ozone Hole . . . if I recall correctly?

Didn't take the time to go into the link --
but think that's right????

[abqmufc]

89. Exactly.....

Regardless of what you and I may feel about flower of a hemp plant and its (currenlty) illegal THC properites, the issue to my point is that b/c of our classification of the drug known as marijuana (personally I used cannabis or sativa, its true names) we can't explore the potentials and economy of hemp.

For example simple things like hemp paper, hemp clothes, hemp based food supplments (have you noticed the rise in hemp milk and protien powders) cannot be produced in the USA. Go look at any label of a hemp based product....it is not made in the USA b/c it can't. Or at least the hemp was not grown in the US. So while the market demands such products from hemp (see addidas shoes and your local co-op supplement aisle)the US economy cannot truely reap the rewards...nor can its workers. Furthermore, this goes beyond what we know and have used hemp for in the past. This goes into the very core of the ecological issues we face today. Hemp has been reasearched by many countries in the EU to have massive benefits for plant based fuels, plastics, and other products that rely on petrolium.

In short, it could be a shift from a chemical based economy and idustry back to a biological plant based industry with less toxins and poisions that are currently used to transform curde oil into the things we use today.

I am not saying it will all be utopian and hemp will save the day, but I am saying its a proven desired product on the global market and we are left on the sideline.

See the Hemp Revolution video for moree info (a bit old now (mid 90s) but worth it)......netflix has it last time i checked.
So the point is b/c we've made pot illegal, the USA has forced themselves to outsource the demand for products that are made from hemp. And we've limited our research potential on a product that many in the media (Popular Scinece is the biggie) and other countries (Dutch and Germans are two) who have demonstrated the future potential of this plant.

For those hung up on the drug impacts......please the movie The Union done in British Columbia (again on Netflix). It states (first place I saw this) the true methodology behind the studies that "prove" cannabis kills brain cells. PLEASE look that one up. Anything would lose brain cells if they were forced to breath the smoke from 10,000 cannabis cigarettes (w/o oxygen) in under an hour. The brain cells died b/c they (the monkeys) died from suffocation.

I mean if synthetic THC is legal and perscribable but the actual plant is illegal....it's about control

[Betsy Ross]

7. Legalized MJ means legalized hemp as well

Food, medicine, fuel, and innumerable industrial uses from a crop which is easy on the environment and can be grown almost anywhere with lower water requirements. Pest resistant and not requiring heavy fertilization, hemp with or without THC is an ecologically friendly crop.

[Stumbler]

12. Which is why it's universally opposed by BigAg, BigPharma, BigOil, BigTimber, etc

Remember, in today's USA, competition is only good when it's employees competing with each other over crappy, low-wage jobs. Competition among CEOs and other employers is absolutely unaccpetable.

Industrial hemp poses a threat to a number of existing industries, who would have to compete against another product. We can't allow the strangle-hold of our Petroleum, Corn, Cotton, Timber, and Synthesized Drug suppliers to be threatened by this renewable, decomposable "green" product. (Actually, hemp wouldn't compete w/ Pharma, but marijuana would)

When you understand this fact, then it makes sense why our government classifies marijuana as a bigger threat than cocaine or meth.

[bertman]

20. Thank you, Stumbler. Excellent synopsis.

[Hardrada]

29. Big Liquor too.

[DissedByBush]

51. William Randolph Hearst

He was behind the initial push for making marijuana and hemp illegal.

This sleazy yellow journalist pushed the "Negroes will lure our white daughters with the devil drug" Anslinger lies in his newspapers.

He had a good reason.

Hemp threatened his investments in timber and wood-pulp paper mills.

[defendandprotect]

68. Right . . . "big threat" to the elites who control our natural resources . ..!!

[abqmufc]

91. you are correct ....but

it might be the one issue (as lame as that sounds) that gets the majority of the lazy asses of their couch and mobilize.

I believe that the movement toward legalization and decriminalization is not all good. I do think that DuPont and Dow others are striking deals to control seed stock, and genetic manipulation of the plant.

Also its known that the major tobacco companies have all copyrighted "their brand of cannabis cigarettes" and have just been waiting to market them.....now that tobacco smoke is about illegal in most places, maybe big tobacco is ready to push the switch in our drug laws to help their industry out?

Who knows, I don't necessarily trust what might happen, but then again we might be able to control this policy shift b/c the people might actual care enough to do something about it.....I think we already have begun to do just that with State laws and city codes (see Seattle, Boston, Denver who all have let small possession go with a ticket and no criminal offense).

[valerief]

23. Will Dow or Monsanto EVER allow it? Oh, it would be too good to be true. nt

[abqmufc]

92. I think they have their hands in the policy shift

Control of seed stock, trademarks and copyrights already in place on strands and the like.

Major tobaco with copyrights on cigarette brands and labels.

Drug companies doing the same (see beer aisle or pain medicine aisle in grocery store).

The issue is are we (those concerned) going to ensure any policy shift is done to our liking and not to control of the government?

[tridim]

42. All true, except for pest resistance

Spider Mites disagree, they LOVE Cannabis. Fortunately they are easy to get rid of organically.

Other common pests shouldn't be a problem unless (until?) hemp is turned into a monoculture crop by industry.

[druidity33]

79. spider mites

are a predominately indoor growing problem. Hemp has no known natural predators (none that affect harvesting and processing anyway) but Marijuana does. They are significantly different. In fact, if you're growing Marijuana you don't want hemp growing anywhere near your plants... cross pollination via wind could potentially make your plants useless. It'll taste the same/similar, but won't 'get you anywhere'.

:shrug:

[Enthusiast]

81. Actually hemp

is very fibrous. Even the bud is very harsh when smoked. Ask me how I know.

[druidity33]

107. when i was in Amsterdam

at the Hash museum, they had a lecture/talk about growing hemp and the differences between the plants. At the end of the talk they passed around samples of 'hemp' for smoking that looked EXACTLY like excellent MJ. It did taste kinda funny and did absolutely NOTHING for me (except give me a mild headache) but i could see how someone would be fooled when purchasing it. I know i've smoked "ditchweed" when i was young and stupid and that was HARSH and RUINOUS stuff. Not the same as the 'hemp' i sampled in Amsterdam.

:shrug:

[Enthusiast]

80. Not to worry, Monsanto

will have a patent on certain genetically modified hemp that is resistant to all sorts of pests. :sarcasm:

[abqmufc]

93. I don't think thats sarcasm that is the policy driving force!

[Chulanowa]

17. He's spouting "miracle weed" nonsense

"No man, no, it's not that I want to get high, man, it's just like, you know man, you can do so many things with it, man. It could save the world, man."

I'm all for full legalization of the stuff, but this argument cracks me up every time.

[harmonicon]

24. I feel the opposite way to that

I could give a shit about getting high, and I don't really give a fuck if I'm "harshin'" someone's "buzz" by saying I don't give a damn if it's illegal for them to get stoned either.

However, I do think it's completely insane that hemp production is illegal.

[redqueen]

87. Yes, but you actually know what you're talking about.

As opposed to... well... some others on this thread.

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

26. you know absolutely jack about it, I am certain

I suggest researching the myriad of new studies that prove cannabis kills tumors. Or you might want to do a little research into the human body's use of endo(self-produced)-cannabinoids as homeostatic regulators for just about every single system, including the immune.

[jaysunb]

41. Welcome to DU

good post !

[FirstLight]

54. right ON... got links?

I am interested in the immune studies a lot! pm me if you need to

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

84. Right Here!

The best sources to start researching this stuff are:

Dr. Bob Melamede. He Chairs the Science Dept at the University of Colorado Colorado Springs and his focus is the endocannabinoid system. He is an amazing guy. The page for his Biol408 course, "Endocannabinoids and Medical Marijuana", can be found here:
http://www.uccs.edu/~rmelamed/endocannabinoids_and_medica.html

If you hunt around his page you will find astonishing material, including the textbook for the course in .pdf format!

Another terrific source would be the Granny Storm Crow List, a compendium of links to studies on MMJ. It was compiled by an older MMJ activist and is amazingly comprehensive and awesome. It has been folded into "Weedipedia" (yeah, I know....):
http://www.weedipedia.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=Weedipedia

Happy learning!

[FirstLight]

85. thanks!

..it is riduculous that something that grows wild and is just as benevolent as echinacea or valerian should be criminalized like this.
here's hopin for some legalization !

[abqmufc]

97. Links to video info (if you don't read much)

Here is a link to info on the video Hemp Revolution from IMDB
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113290/

I bet you can find some video clips of it on Youtube. It's a bit corny b/c of the "hippie" vibe it gives off. But if you can get through that pay attention to the auto fuel section (over a 1,000 miles driven and zero carbon deposits in the exhaust system? WOW) and the replacement of plastics section (we've already seen this in the market with soy based biodegradable plastics). Pretty cool stuff IMO.

Also "The Union the Business of Getting High"
http://www.theunionmovie.coThe Union: The Business Behind Getting Highm/TheUnionWeb.html

This is the only documentary that reveals some interesting facts about various medical studies that stated negative health impacts.

Both videos are on Netflix.

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

99. "The Union" is a great film !

Thanks for posting info.

[dixiegrrrrl]

27. There is hemp growing all along road side ditches here.

It was legally grown during WW2, farmers were paid to grow it. Commercial hemp has very little TCH.
The whole hemp argument is sane, makes sense, but is different than the smoke-able stuff.
Which is also grown all over around here.
So I have been told.....

[tridim]

33. Cannabis is effective medicine for many. Period.

That debate has already been settled.

It's only during the past decade that the "miracle" effects are starting to be (re)discovered.

[Chulanowa]

109. No argument there. I know its medicinal uses

I'm also aware of all the other stuff it can be used for.

I just think it's funny that apparently nobody who supports legalization ever wants to smoke the stuff. At least to hear them talk, anyway. Oh, it's always 100% sober altruism, nobody would ever think of lighting up...

You can see the silly, yes?

[abqmufc]

113. So untrue

But b/c we'v been stereotyped for so long as to "that is all we want cannabis/hemp legalized for" (and decriminalized) (recreational effects) most avoid that OBVIOUS answer (b/c its a nice high, unlike beer) and focus on the counter arguments to why it has remained illegal.

That is it does have economic, ecological, medical uses and needs that we are left on the sidelines b/c we keep it illegal.

[SteveM]

34. I'm 61 -- my hippie (and hippie stereotype) days are over. It's medicine...

Even the less expensive leaf (as opposed to the more expensive bud) of marijuana can be used for arthritic pain and applied topically as a tincture. Why shouldn't my 90-year-old mother be able to legally avail herself of this rather old formula? Now, she has to take a battery of drugs orally, with uncertain positive effect.

The world is saved one person at a time.

[abqmufc]

94. Please see...

the web search result when you type in "hemp base fuel" or "hemp products".


I am not saying a miracle I am saying "possibly an ecological sustainable economy".

By that I mean, hemp uses less water and need for pesticides than soy beans and cotton. Cotton for clothes and soy bean for fuel. Hemp also uses less resoucres (including time) to grow to maturity and therefore one can argue its better (in an ecological sustainable economic model) than timber for paper. Companies in N. CA have also show its better in building materials than Redwood.


Again not saying its a miracle....you did. I am saying its a plant that we've made illegal and b/c of that we cannot reap the benefits that clearly obvious to the rest of world and major compnaies. (See addidas and Simple shoes, look at the RiceDream HempMilk, Hemp Protein power, hemp clothers, etc)

We've allowed ourselves to be exluded (as a Naiton) to a billion dollar industry just in the clothing, textile, paper, and fuel potential hemp has b/c of hemp is (according to the DEA and US government) marijuana.

For further info, spend an hour watch the Hemp Revolution on Netflix, and please don't put words my mouth in the future.

thanks.

[abqmufc]

100. So a car running on a fuel is nonsense?

A fuel that research proves it uses less water to grow (than other plant based fuel alternatives), produces less carbon (when burned) is nonsense? (see hemp revolution video)

A textile that uses less chemicals than cotton to mature and less water than cotton is nonsense? (see same video)

This is what I mean. The facts are out in front of you. One should not make judgments but rather question what one means. I've spent over 10 years in the academic world researching this (nothing published), I've spent another 10 years working in the environmental policy field, mostly working with American Indian Tribes. Some of these tribes have attempted to exercise their sovereignty by growing industrial hemp for economic development (textile and fuel)....however, the Federal government has violated treaties and federal law and banned this.

This is how i know. I've spent years researching the potential of hemp as an ecological sustainable and economic sustainable replacement to petroleum. It won't work on a global scale as we don't have the water and land to do that....but it can and should be allowed to be researched. I suspect we'd find the benefits are pretty great.

[byronius]

6. But...but...but... haven't you seen Wild In The Streets?

Or read those Reader's Digest articles about how whacky tobacky grows breasts on baboons that only smoked ten thousand joints a day for three years? Plus, it made them forgetful.

Why, the Taliban might have the right idea, here. Take the researchers that completed the only two long-term studies of marijuana use, you know, the ones that point to a lower cancer rate than the general population, just take 'em all out and shoot them. Because no matter what the truth is, it all started with black people, don't forget that.

:sarcasm:

Is that icon really necessary? No.

Freedom, it's a-coming.

I love my beautiful state of California. Now if we could just get rid of the Dork.

[pattmarty]

14. After your next gubernatorial he'll be "terminated".

[SlingBlade]

86. Yep, I'm with ya 100% on this

K & R

[Flaneur]

3. Good on the AMA for moving ever so slightly, but...

...marijuana should not be a controlled substance. We should treat it like herbal supplements.

[boppers]

18. LOL, I don't think herbal supplements should be treated like herbal supplements.

They're black-market drugs that are "legal" until, well, people start dropping like flies from the "safe" herbal supplements.... no dosage regulation, no testing required. I use them myself, but I'm completely aware that they can be more dangerous than tested drugs, and would like more testing and data on them.

[Flaneur]

43. Nobody's dropping dead like flies from smoking pot.

That's kind of the point I was trying to make about how pot should be regulated. Not much, in my view. It is about the least dangerous therapeutic substance known to man, to paraphrase a DEA administrative law judge.

[boppers]

44. Well, it has side effects (everything does), and hopefully this will open up more research.

Most pot smokers I know don't actually drop dead, they just act like it. :D

[defendandprotect]

69. Read the "side effects" of our pharmaceutical drugs . . . WOW!!!....

[boppers]

71. Ayup. List all the possible side effects....

Pot, too, though. Imagine what the "side effects" disclaimer would likely have to list:
Nausea and Upset Stomach
Anhedonia
Depression
Anxiety
Hallucinations
Increased risk of heart attacks
Increased risk of stroke
Increased risk of Cancers of the Mouth, Lung, Stomach, Bowels, Bladder
Birth Defects
Impotence
Memory Loss
Hormonal Imbalance
Reduced Immune System Function
(etc. etc.)

...All the "side effects" that happen to different people, with different exposure, to pot....

Hell, just imagine if every *beer* came with a list of side effects. I wonder which list would be longer, beer or pot?

I think part of the problem with not having pot treated as a medical drug is that a lot of this research *hasn't* been done, at least, to the same level as other drugs.

[defendandprotect]

73. Looks like you have a right wing list there . . . ???

Now . . . take any high blood pressure medicine and take a look at side effects --

Go to http:www.askapatient and put in any drug name


See the actual side effects people suffer --

most of them not even listed --

[boppers]

74. Science doesn't have wings, though interpretation of science does.

Also, did you mean http://www.askapatient.com/ ?

I put together a small list, as an example, the big list is, well, much bigger, for most well-studied drugs and substances. Actually *understanding* any list is also important. For example,
1.) french fries have known carcinogens in them,
2.) as do apples.
3.) Tofu is linked to senility.

All three points are true, but need careful examination, and qualification, before running around and making global, incorrect, statements, about the above truths. Same thing with "drugs", "herbals", and "supplements".

[defendandprotect]

75. Science is merely and only observation of nature . . .

You're talking about an artificial chemical industry which is making everyone ill --

All of our medicines are plant based -- that's what most of the models are, but filled

with artificial chemicals.

French fries have "carcinogens" . . . only if they're grown using petrochemical fertilizers . . .

or fetal matter -- or fried.

However, the pharmaceutical companies are thieves ripping off Medicare/Medicaid -- every one

of them!

The true dangers from these artificial chemicals aren't even listed --

[boppers]

77. The carcinogens in fries come from frying them.

Cooking is chemistry.

[abqmufc]

95. Yep and my fear of legalization....will hemp/cannabis be free from such chemicals?

[defendandprotect]

102. Probably not, at this point, though I presume people have older seeds?

and also if we returned to natural means of growth that the chemicals/fertilizers

would wear off. But, that's all presumption.

[clixtox]

76. Complete B.S.!

In fact many of those supposed "side effects" are actually mitigated, a lot, or a little, or actually reversed with therapeutic cannabis.

Anhedonia, the inability to experience joy, is obviously bogus, as are probably all of the remainder.

Nausea and Upset Stomach - eased, among the most common therapeutic uses is mitigating/easing these two issues.
Anhedonia - must be a joke to include this.
Depression - significant therapeutic viability.
Anxiety - significant therapeutic viability.
Hallucinations - this could be a possibility although I doubt they would be very intense or disabling.
Increased risk of heart attacks - unlikely since cannabis reduces stress.
Increased risk of stroke - no correlation ever corroborated/show me the link.
Increased risk of Cancers of the Mouth, Lung, Stomach, Bowels, Bladder - It is looking more and more like the exact opposite might be closer to the truth.
Birth Defects - pure fear mongering without any basis.
Impotence - again, fear mongering.
Memory Loss - no demonstrated truth to this, often convenient, fable.
Hormonal Imbalance - How is that? Crazy accusation!
Reduced Immune System Function - Same as above, that's crazy!

Millions, if not tens of millions of Americans are regular, constant cannabis users, most smoking marijuana with a pipe or rolling papers. If these "side effects" were occurring, even occasionally, almost everyone would be aware of them.

As was mentioned up-thread, cannabis is among the safest therapeutic substances extant. Scary safe to the pharmaceutical industry which generates billions of dollars dealing harmful and often useless drugs to ingenuous patients.

That's just the way it is...

[boppers]

78. More research is needed.

For example, Anhedonia is a good effect in some situations, and not in others.

Denying that any drug had an effect is silly, unless one wants to sell the drug. For example, anhedonia is a great treatment for manic-depressives... no high, no crash.... good. Most SSRI's work on this principle.

As far as going point by point, we can slam studies at each other all day and night, but my central point would be that we need to really test, and not accept the past results. Science is science, and new results inform.

As far as the contentions about existing studies, yes, more tests can be run.

Denying past results, OTOH, is a rejection of science.

[clixtox]

90. What test/study results? You are blowing smoke and it doesn't smell medicinal!

Unless you post some links to these supposed "studies" for me to be "denying" it is rude to accuse me of something I couldn't possibly have done.

Massive amounts of research have been done around the world, especially in Europe, to learn more about the chemistry and pharmacology of cannabis.

Although there have been some studies done in the USA, generally the results have been suppressed or skewed because the permission to possess cannabis is, and has been for 60+ years, tightly controlled by the Federal Government. They have sponsored almost all scientific investigations and often refused to release results because of how they contradict the propaganda and conventional wisdom. He who pays the piper usually calls the tunes!

You wrote, "Denying that any drug had an effect is silly, unless one wants to sell the drug. For example, anhedonia is a great treatment for manic-depressives... no high, no crash.... good. Most SSRI's work on this principle." I didn't deny that cannabis had effects, I just disagreed that those effects included most, or all, of those you mentioned in your, or someone's, list of cannabis "side effects".

You wrote, "As far as going point by point, we can slam studies at each other all day and night, but my central point would be that we need to really test, and not accept the past results. Science is science, and new results inform." We could? Why don't you start since you have made some claims that I aver are completely bogus and contrived. Start with anhedonia, I would be fascinated to learn more about where you gleaned any information that indicated causation unequivocally! Especially in an environment where the use of cannabis is illegal and suppressed, those, who for whatever reason imbibe, are, of course, bound to be poor testing candidates for any objective psychological or psychiatric analysis.

New results absolutely inform, I agree with you about that, especially if the studies are objectively conducted and financed by an entity interested in the truth rather than grist for their propaganda mill.

I certainly am not interested in selling cannabis, I want it to be given away to those who can use it to improve their lives.

Why not?

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

98. Bullsquat

"Anhedonia" as a legitimate side effect? Are YOU stoned?? What a pathetic joke.

Here's a fact: CO (my state) is one of 14 in this nation where deaths from prescription drugs outnumber traffic accident fatalities.

[defendandprotect]

104. Our artificial chemicals and other insanities put into our "medicines" are killing people . . .

and making them irreversibly ill --

What needs to be rejected is our artificial chemical industry --

Return to plant based medicines -- and the knowledge of them.

[abqmufc]

101. Here are some more FACTS

In 1974, California Governor Ronald Reagan was asked about decriminalizing marijuana (hmmm then on and started DARE as President).

After producing the Heath/Tulane University study, the so-called "Great Communicator" proclaimed, "The most reliable scientific sources say permanent brain damage is one of the inevitable results of the use of marijuana." (L.A. Times)

The report from Dr. Heath had concluded that Rhesus monkeys, smoking the equivalent of only 30 joints a day, began to atrophy and die after 90 days.



In 1980, Playboy and NORML finally received for the first time after six years of requests and suing the government an accurate accounting of the research procedures used in the infamous report:

When NORML/Playboy hired researchers to examine the reported results against the actual methodology, they laughed.


The Facts:
Suffocation of Research Animals

As reported in Playboy, the Heath "Voodoo" Research methodology involved strapping Rhesus monkeys into a chair and pumping them with equivalent of 63 Colombian strength joints in "five minutes, through gas masks," losing no smoke. Playboy discovered that Heath had administered 63 joints in five minutes over just three months instead of administering 30 joints per day over a one-year period as he had first reported. Heath did this, it turned out, in order to avoid having to pay an assistant's wages every day for a full year.

The monkeys were suffocating! Three to five minutes of oxygen deprivation causes brain damage "dead brain cells." (Red Cross Lifesaving and Water Safety Manual) With the concentration of smoke used, the monkeys were a bit like a person running the engine of a car in a locked garage for 5, 10, 15 minutes at a time every day!

The Heath Monkey study was actually a study in animal asphyxiation and carbon monoxide poisoning.

Among other things, Heath had completely (intentionally? incompetently?) omitted discussion of the carbon monoxide the monkeys inhaled.

Carbon monoxide, a deadly gas that kills brain cells, is given off by any burning object. At that smoke concentration, the monkeys were, in effect, like a person locked in a garage with the car engine left running for five, 10, 15 minutes at a time every day!

All subsequent researchers agree the findings in Heath's experiment regarding marijuana were of no value, because carbon monoxide poisoning and other factors were totally left out and had not been considered in the report. This study and others, like Dr. Gabriel Nahas' 1970s studies, tried to somehow connect the THC metabolites routinely found in the fatty tissue of human brains, reproductive organs, and other fatty areas of the body to the dead brain cells in the suffocated monkeys.

Now, in 1999, 17 years have passed and not a single word of Dr. Heath's or Dr. Nahas' research has been verified! But their studies are still hauled out by the Partnership for a Drug Free America, the Drug Enforcement Administration, city and state narcotics bureaus, plus politicians and, in virtually all public instances, held up as scientific proof of the dangers of marijuana.

This is U.S. government propaganda and disinformation at its worst! The public paid for these studies and has the right to the correct information and history being taught in our taxpayer sponsored schools.

In 1996, Gabriel Nahas, in France, sued Mishka, the translator of the French edition of this book, "L'Emperor est Nu!” for damages. Mishka wrote that Nahas' studies were viewed by the world as garbage. The French court, upon hearing all the testimony by Nahas, and after Nahas had spent an equivalent of tens of thousands of American dollars on legal fees, awarded him its highest insult: one franc, the equivalent of approximately 15 cents American for damages, and no legal fees!

Taken from....
http://www.jackherer.com/chapter15.html

[defendandprotect]

105. Thank you for the info -- especially on past lies -- !!

[boppers]

112. "63 Colombian strength joints"?

How many hogs heads is that?

Bad science is not refuted by other bad science. Heath's work looks like it's utter crap.

[defendandprotect]

103. Thank you . . . as I mentioned to him, it looked like a "right wing" list . . .a joke ...

[Zhade]

108. Complete fucking horseshit. For example, pot TREATS nausea, it doesn't cause it.

It doesn't cause hallucinations. It doesn't give you cancer, but in fact -- and this is medically proven, mind you -- kills tumors.

It's been scientifically proven to be a beneficial plant.

The facts prove you wrong, and as a patient who uses it to not go blind from glaucoma I don't appreciate your spouting ignorance as if it were truth. Uninformed people like you are a threat to my health.

[boppers]

111. THC kills tumors.

Smoking pot causes tumors. Both claims are true, and scientifically proven.

In some patients, it treats nausea, in others it causes it.

This is a bit like arguing with a tobacco industry executive about whether or not tobacco is "safe". Yes, it's a plant that has benefits, and side effects.

[abqmufc]

114. so does eating pot cause cancer?

If so then cannabis is cancerogenic. If not then I'd look at the papers, the fuel source (butane?) that was used to burn cannabis to inhale. So me the study that say Cannibas causes turmors.

I've found the ones that say the reduce (kill) the size of tumors. Remember tobacco may or may not cause cancer....but it is proven the chemicals added to cigarettes, the papers, and filters are very cancering causing. Otherwise how do explain 1000 of years of cultures who smoked tobacco but have no record of cancer?

[boppers]

117. I haven't seen any papers on oral ingestion effects and cancer

As far as the chemicals released upon smoking, even without filters and papers, there's "more carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons including naphthalene, benzanthracene, and benzopyrene, than tobacco smoke"... http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090615095940.htm and see also http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071217110328.htm

As far as explaining how cultures where the mean life-span was 35 and was dying much earlier from things other than late life cancer, well, that's kind of obvious, isn't it?

[abqmufc]

118. Thanks, but.

I appreciate the links. You are correct I guess tobacco in an organic state does produce cancer. Now to what degree and how much impact does pesticides, other chemicals in the papers, and filters contribute to the likelihood of tobacco? I used tile mortar for 3 months on a remodel it causes cancer according to the label. Yet its not at the level that we've banned it....but to what degree of exposure? Another example is the sun, it natural gives one cancer (increase by environmental factors of course). These are the questions I look at.

I don't disgaree that tobacco causes cancer but I've truely not seen one legit study that states cannibas causes cancer (outright, with no other influecences). The studies that I've seen used are scare tactics and been proved bad science. Most statements in Congress are proven lies (like the ax murdering kid from FL who smoke a joint once).

As for the last comment....well it depends, many tribal elders in the SW would argue that point. The Hopi, the Navajo, the Pueblos once lived long and healthy lives. It was actually once the "whiteman" (western culture as a Spainard would not claim to be white)that their lives shortened. This due to diseases and diets (loss of traditional foods). So I'd agrue that one a bit more as tirbal peoples have been traditionally using tobacco for centuries. Not until recently (again when Western culture influcenced tribal lifestyles) did disease (like cancer) become any issue.

[Zhade]

115. There is NO evidence it causes tumors. None.

You are lying, or woefully misinformed.

[boppers]

116. Yeah, who needs science?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090615095940.htm

[abqmufc]

119. Question on this.

"In conclusion, these results provide evidence for the DNA damaging potential of cannabis smoke, implying that the consumption of cannabis cigarettes may be detrimental to human health with the possibility to initiate cancer development," the article states. "The data obtained from this study suggesting the DNA damaging potential of cannabis smoke highlight the need for stringent regulation of the consumption of cannabis cigarettes, thus limiting the development of adverse health effects such as cancer.".......

That doesn't sound too convincing to me......"provide evidence" is very different than "we fully believe and without a doubt can prove...." wouldn't you say?

And it states "could increase the risk of cancer"....does not state IT causes cancer. So it could excelerate the risk of cancer from the sun........who knows.

Lots of stuff causes cancer and its on the street (building materials). I am not saying the research is bad, but I am saying the last European study I saw (http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSTRE4A26JV20081103) has some serious flaws b/c they did not ask the subject about past mental health issues in the family. (therefore they didn't disqualify the obvious....that they could have been mentally ill w/o smoking cannabis). the link I've provided states this was the case in the 2007 study.

I just go back to the 1st thing I learned in Garduate School....you can make any reaearch give you the results you want. No science is pure science as all research is bought and paid for and thus is influenced the outcome.

[boppers]

120. You're right to question cause and effect.

The reason cancer is so difficult is because it's really a class of hundreds, maybe thousands, of different mutations. While some mutations are *more likely* to lead to a diagnosis of cancer, the vast majority of mutations are corrected by the body. So, while smoking (tobacco, cannabis, cloves) doesn't guarantee cancer, we can look at larger pools of data, and say "smokers are more likely to be diagnosed with cancer than non-smokers".

[abqmufc]

122. Agreed, thanks

...in my work we are seeing more and more cancer due to unknown causes. IE: environmental factors. I am very pleased the head of Air for EPA (Gina McCarthy)is addressing mutli-pollutant health issues. This is big as before we've not really looked at the mixtures of things that can make us sick. (Like Ozone, mercury and NO2 in the air and the total impact, not the impact of each pollutant seperatley.)

She implied that we may beign to see rulemaking addressing multi-pollutant impacts to health.

[fascisthunter]

121. I Love how Science Daily Has a SeroQuel XR drug ad right next to that article

you linked to. Did big Pharma pay for this study?

also, "may" is a significant word.

In these studies, the most common Seroquel side effects included:

Dry mouth -- in up to 44 percent of people (see Seroquel and Dry Mouth)
Drowsiness -- up to 34 percent
High triglycerides -- up to 23 percent
Headaches -- up to 21 percent
Agitation -- up to 20 percent
Dizziness -- up to 18 percent
High cholesterol -- up to 16 percent
Weakness -- up to 10 percent
Constipation -- up to 10 percent
Fatigue -- up to 10 percent.

Some other common side effects (occurring in 2 to 10 percent of people taking the drug) included:

Indigestion or heartburn
Vomiting
Increased appetite
Lethargy
Nasal congestion
Abdominal pain (stomach pain)
Back pain
Weight gain (see Seroquel and Weight Gain)
Shakiness (tremor)
Sore throat
Fever
Rapid heart rate (tachycardia)
Irritated or runny nose
Vision problems.

Serious Seroquel Side Effects
Some side effects with Seroquel are potentially serious and should be reported immediately to your healthcare provider. These include, but are not limited to:

Signs of diabetes, such as high blood sugar, increased thirst, frequent urination, or extreme hunger (see Seroquel and Diabetes)
Large or rapid weight gain
Suicidal thoughts
Dizziness or fainting when going from a sitting or lying-down position to standing
Feelings of internal restless or jitteriness
Any abnormal muscle movements (these abnormal movements can become permanent if Seroquel is not stopped quickly)
Signs or symptoms of neuroleptic malignant syndrome, which can include:

A high fever
Stiff muscles
Confusion
Irregular pulse or blood pressure
An increased heart rate (tachycardia)
Sweating
Irregular heart rhythms (arrhythmias)

Signs of an allergic reaction, including:

Unexplained rash
Hives
Itching
Unexplained swelling
Wheezing
Difficulty breathing or swallowing.

[boppers]

124. Yowza, that's quite the list.

I suppose it might be worth it for somebody bi-polar, but that's a heck of a lot of reported side effects.

[Zhade]

123. That link does not say what you suggest.

Now I know -- you're lying.

[boppers]

125. So, what causes tumors, then?

Tumor fairies?

[Wizard777]

8. It's about time! Frankly I think the drug schedules should ONLY apply to medical use.

Not recreational use. The schedules cannot be used to prohibit religious uses.

[FatDave]

9. It's about time.

It was ridiculous to have ever been listed as Schedule I.

[winyanstaz]

10. At last...some real physicians speaking up loudly in a way all can see....

I am glad to see this..and it's about damn time too.

[NCDem60]

31. Maybe they are hoping that if........

....people get stoned they will forget about health care reform.

[Mithreal]

36. Agreed, a distraction. AMA has been getting well deserved bad press

People so desperate that any hint of good news brings a smile and a cheer, while it is the AMA that has ruined health care and any chance at real HCR for what, 60 years now.

The members of the AMA are concerned about one thing, return on their investments. Real HCR would hurt their stranglehold on the profession. Unfortunately for us they have been given backroom deals at the WH Cheney style.

[Flaneur]

130. Oh, that's ridiculous. The AMA policy change has been in the works...

...for at least a year. It was pushed by the AMA Student Section, who passed a similar resolution last year.

[Libertas1776]

13. Hey,

maybe if the AMA gets high enough, they'll start warming up to universal health care and stop blocking it like they have for the past 70 years. They do really need to loosen up. :smoke:

[tridim]

32. The AMA officially supports the current HCR bill

:shrug:

[Libertas1776]

35. Which isn't universal health care

or more correctly, as I should have said, single payer, something the AMA has derailed since FDR.

[tridim]

38. True, but I'm still glad to have their support on HCR.

[Wizard777]

19. Will the Cops and Lawyers leave the practice of Medicine to the Doctors?

[bertman]

21. So, this means that Congress will approve a scientific study to last fifty years to

determine if there are any harmful effects from cannabis. Once we have a definitive study, they'll say, we MIGHT consider decriminalizing it for medical use.

It's good that the AMA is showing some progress on this, but I'll feel good about it when they suggest that we re-instate alcohol prohibition until we have time to study it to see what the effects are.

Suggestion, if you want to know how marijuana consumption affects individuals, allow it to be decriminalized, then people who have been smoking it for many years will gladly admit to their doctors that they have been potheads and will tell them how much they have smoked. The doctors will then be able to make some better guesses as to the long-term effects.

Sorry, but I see this as just one more way to keep the herb from being legalized or even decriminalized on a federal level.

[valerief]

22. Sounds like big pharma wants to make some buckos off Mary Jane. nt

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

25. let em try!

Big Pharma has opposed MMJ from the start because they know, like many patients, that the safest and most efficacious form is the natural one! That's why substitutes like Marinol and Sativex (both available currently with prescriptions) are not nearly as effective as whole cannabis flower when vaporized, extracted into a glycerin or alcohol suspension or (my personal favorite) eaten in one of my beautiful girlfriend's delicious ganja cinnamon rolls.

They hate the fact that the safest and most effective medicine known to man is easy to grow. This is a slap in the face to Big Pharma!

[krabigirl]

47. +1. Those cinnamon rolls sound great.

[Enthusiast]

82. I hate Big Pharma.

[Hardrada]

30. Legalize pot and a lot of small town cops will have to find

something constructive to do with all their free time.

[wordpix]

37. FINALLY! Narcotics are legal for medical purposes but MJ is not. Go figure

:shrug: :crazy:

[humbled_opinion]

39. Slowly America will wake up to the all the possiblities that

de-criminalizing Marijuana has. I think FDR once told Americans to go have a beer which helped end the Great Depression and created a massive industry for tap rooms, bars, clubs etc.. A wonderful day awaits when President Obama says everyone go "Smoke a joint and relax"....

:smoke:

[tridim]

40. It'd be cool if he could have bong summits instead of beer summits.

Maybe in his second term. ;) :smoke:

[humbled_opinion]

45. Nice....

:headbang:

[Mike K]

64. Obama's First Betrayal:

While candidate Obama never actually pronounced that would consider promoting decriminalization or legalization of marijuana if elected, he certainly conveyed the clear impression that he would, having once frankly and unapologetically responding to a question about his own use by saying, "Yes. I inhaled. . . frequently!"

Shortly after he was elected he announced his first "town hall" and he asked the public to submit questions and he promised to respond to the most voluminous categories.

The way he kept his promise to the millions of questions he received, including mine, concerning his position on marijuana he not only brushed it off in a typically contemptuous right-wing authoritarian manner, he preceded the curt dismissal with the ridiculing remark, "I don't know what this says about so many respondents. . ." The interesting thing is it would have been better had he not even mentioned receiving so many questions about marijuana, but he chose to make it clear, obviously to the Conservative element, that he is anti-pot.

In the same way as Bill Clinton's absurdly mendacious, "Ah didn't inhayle," comment revealed his character and told me what to expect from him, Obama's refusal to intelligently discuss marijuana prohibition told me we are in for at least four years of mediocre performance and a lot of disappointment.

My impression of Barack Obama is that of a typically deceitful, self-serving politician.

[humbled_opinion]

110. Whatever....

What did you expect, Obama to jump on your bandwagon right off the rip so the wacky Right could start calling him Snoop Dog? Get a grip and know that many things are happening behind the scenes that are going to work out just fine....:toast:

[krabigirl]

46. It's about time!

It works wonders for migraines.

[aikanae]

48. Follow the Money: Pot in a pill

There are 27+ patents for cannabis based medicines, up from 4 just 10 years ago. They are finally figuring out (after about 20+ years of trying) how to isolate and get the active ingredients of pot into a pill - and it won't make you high. They will never allow "home-grown" use as long as a corporation can make money on it. We should feel lucky were allowed to grow tomatoes in our backyard. It's a matter of time before herbal supplements are restricted. There's attempts every year to stop them v. regulate them.

While the the American Medical Association claims pot has no medical value, Big Pharma is busy getting patents for marijuana products. http://www.alternet.org/drugreporter/90469/
http://www.nowpublic.com/health/big-pharma-pushes-patents-pot-based-pills
$40 billion market http://www.csdp.org/news/news/medmar10_8_08.htm

[rurallib]

49. Aha! I was beginning to think the AMA had grown a heart.

I am old enough to remember when the AMA endorsed the cigarettes that killed my Mom and Dad.
It is all about a large stack of the Benjamins

[Better Believe It]

50. K & R

[Kali]

52. wow

that IS a shift

[BanzaiBonnie]

53. In other words, let's figure out a way to patent

something off of it so we can make money.

[Mythbuster]

55. Anyone else here with MS??

I'll speak for many MS patients when I say that if you've ever tried it for MS discomfort, you would know instantly that it should be legalized. :smoke:

[unaffiliated liberal]

56. I don't have MS but

In the past few years I hit the medical MJ "trifecta" -- chronic pain due to spinal injury from an accident, early stage glaucoma, and last year -- the BIG C.

Still, NJ is jerking around with the compassionate medical marijuana act.

My doctors will prescribe all the narcotic pain medication I ask for but I won't ask because that garbage is addictive and deadly. I've been through withdrawal four times in the past eight years. And I won't take a chance on MJ until it's at least legalized for medical use because I'd rather not lose my home and my freedom. There's a case right now here in Jersey where they're trying to put some poor MS sufferer in jail FOR TWENTY YEARS because he grew some pot for his own use to relieve his MS.

MJ is a miracle drug, IMO. I started getting migraine headaches after the spinal fusion I had due to an accident. Doctors had me on Imitrex but it only helped if I took it as soon as I saw the aura that preceded my migraines. A buddy suggested I try MJ and even though I only used it a few times, mainly because I haven't been able to locate a safe, regular supply, I haven't had a migraine ever since.

I went to my eye doctor a few days after smoking and my pressure was almost normal -- without any other medication.

I get better relief from pain from MJ, without any of the side effects of synthetic narcotics like hydrocodone or oxycodone.

Yet here in NJ the powers that be would rather fill jails with pot heads than face real criminals. They build their arrest records on low hanging fruit because they're too shit-scared to fight real crime and real criminals.

And now, with our new governor, the Bush appointed former federal prosecutor, Governor Arbuckle, I doubt Trenton will ever pass the compassionate use act that's been languishing in the senate for months and months.

K&R anyway. Maybe if the AMA is coming to its senses the rest of them will follow. I sincerely hope so.

[Mythbuster]

60. Yeah, it's almost funny...

they'll string you out like Rush Limbaugh on everything they can concoct, but outlaw a harmless, completely natural plant.

[24601]

57. No, but my mom's chemo was about as bad as the cancer that

killed her. If MJ had been available to help her cope, it would have had my support 100%.

[unaffiliated liberal]

58. I'm very sorry to hear about your mom

I can't understand why some people insist on denying others relief in their time of need. What is the difference to them?

They make me sick, literally.

[24601]

62. Thanks, she had a 4-year fight with multiple meyloma.

In Feb, it will be 11 years.

[Mythbuster]

63. Very sad

That must have been a very painful time for her, and her family as well. Maybe one day, compassion, instead of cash, will be enough to to encourage bipartisanship so we can get a few things done for the people.

[Mythbuster]

59. They say

that it works very well for chemo patients. I really sucks that they withhold some very benign treatments that have proven track records like MJ.

[kurtzapril4]

65. I have MS

And I have smoked it for relief of my symptoms, as have friends of mine with MS.

It had been 20 or more years since I smoked pot. It's gotten a lot stronger. Gave me anxiety attacks, scary, but it helped. It really helps others with MS. If I could find weak pot...I'd smoke it. JMO.

[Mythbuster]

70. I can so relate!

Yep... it ain't like it was 25 years ago for me either, it's much better now. But, maybe that's why it is so effective. It alleviates several of my symptoms and I just feel better overall.

[Lautremont]

61. I'll have to wait to see what Archbunker Stevens has to say before I make up my mind.

[JackInGreen]

72. K&R

For SOME sense from that direction.
Not nearly enough, but baby steps...one day this child will learn to walk. Shame it's crawling at this point in life...but none the less.

[pleah]

83. K&R

[voteearlyvoteoften]

88. Free the pot prisoners

The innocence project could extend to those wrongly imprisoned for marijuana crimes.
And arrests should be removed from public records. And another thing,
stop the bullshit drug testing that detects pot for 30 days, but most others for just a few days.

[abqmufc]

96. And give the gold medal back the snowboarder!

As Robin Williams said in his stand up....how F#@$ is cannabis a performance enhacnement? That makes me laugh every time.

[defendandprotect]

106. 100,000 people a year are dying from medical malpractice in our hospitals . . . !!!

compare that with pot -- !!

:evilgrin:

EDITED:

PS: Just want to add here that we constantly prove over and again the inferiority

of patriarchy and the superiority of war NATURE -- drugs, plants, natural medicines and means --


STOP the patriarchal war on nature -- it's suicidal!!

[BadGimp]

126. I'll toke to that...

You know what is .....

Darn I forgot what I was gonna say.

Np

[David Zephyr]

127. One more kick.

Big story.

[defendandprotect]

128. We should keep moving on this .... it would unravel a lot of social problems . . . $$$$$$

and illegitimate power --

[bamacrat]

129. Tax it regulate it legalize it make some fucking money and make millions happy and relaxed.