Stephen C. Webster of Raw Story brings news that the Feds are learning that cannabis is safely indicated for the relief of pain and anxiety. Webster writes:
“The classification of marijuana as a Schedule I drug as well as the continuing controversy as to whether or not cannabis is of medical value are obstacles to medical progress in this area,” they wrote. “Based on evidence currently available the Schedule I classification is not tenable; it is not accurate that cannabis has no medical value, or that information on safety is lacking."From the US National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health and The Open Neurology Journal:
Recent advances in understanding of the mode of action of tetrahydrocannabinol and related cannabinoid in-gredients of marijuana, plus the accumulating anecdotal reports on potential medical benefits have spurred increasing re-search into possible medicinal uses of cannabis. Recent clinical trials with smoked and vaporized marijuana, as well as other botanical extracts indicate the likelihood that the cannabinoids can be useful in the management of neuropathic pain, spasticity due to multiple sclerosis, and possibly other indications. As with all medications, benefits and risks need to be weighed in recommending cannabis to patients.No shit.
Let's assume that after President Obama is elected to his second term Health and Humans Services Secretary Kathleen Sibelius announces soon afterwards that cannabis has been removed from Schedule 1:
The HHS Secretary can even unilaterally legalize cannabis: "[I]f the Secretary recommends that a drug or other substance not be controlled, the Attorney General shall not control the drug or other substance."a federal tax rate is adopted; and, she proposes that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives become the lead agency in enforcement provided that states can craft law to cultivate and distribute.
Montana has already trained a generation of growers. The state enjoys numerous brewery pubs and wine tasting venues for local product.
I've proposed that Deadwood get out ahead and draft legislation to make it a cannabis friendly zone in its quest to become an adult destination.
Assuming that home growing law looks like home brewing and wine making, what would state law need to include about liability insurance requirements for commercial resale and how would law enforcement be guided by probable cause?
8 comments:
Dude - I understand the desire to apply some sanity to this whole thing; but it's not a Federal Govt study per your lead. The article clearly states that a University of California department made the recommendations via State funding.
Related: WTF has happened to Al Franken? Talk about disappearing.
I figured he was off the deep end when he voted to confirm Michelle Leonhart (Bush holdover) as DEA head. That was hard to swallow. She's a tool with a hateful spirit.
While direct funding for this study did not come the Feds, CMCR has received some funding from the National Intitutes of Health, Duff; but, will change the post title.
Drug maker Eli Lilly also provided funding for this research.
Good question, Duff: the Dems lit the path for her.
"One of the most interesting lines of questioning came from Senator Sessions, who asked Ms. Leonhart about her views on the legalization of marijuana and Mexican drug cartels. Ms. Leonhart agreed with Senator Sessions that it is dangerous to legalize marijuana, because she feels that many people focus on the financial benefits of legalizing marijuana while ignoring the social costs of legalization. She flatly stated that she would enforce federal drug laws in all areas regardless of state law. Senator Sessions also asked Ms. Leonhart how DEA can help defeat Mexican drug cartels. Ms. Leonhart did not have a specific answer to this question, but indicated that she thought more could be done by DEA, and she would do so if confirmed."
Wow . . . I didn't know he freaking "introduced" her at the committee hearing - and along with Amy Klobuchar. One would surmise on the surface that these two would bring some sanity to the table - like what part of the war on drugs has been a success folks? 40 freaking years of what? Diane Feinstein is a brain-dead shill for the defense industry - so I got nothin for her.
Watching our southern neighbors' leaders one-by-one beginning to take steps to "defuse" the situations in their counties, after they jumped Obomba about the drug war and its impact on their countries (at the OAS meeting in Cartagena this Spring). He won't do anything, but they will.
Now we hear BS out of the Presidents camp that "in his second term he'll take on the war on drugs". Mmmm hmmm.
Our next Presidential term could see three Supreme Court justice appointments.
Jeez . . . I think we need another option here Dude.
Rules to drive by: 420 Mag.
I was a subject in a DOT funded study completed by the Psych Dept at USD during the Winter of '72/73.
Focus: Comparison of driving attitudes/reactions among subjects while sober, grossly inebriated (everclear and oj in huge tumblers), and yet again while smoked up on some USDA produced cannabis.
While this is one of the studies the Nixon Administration chose to shit-can regarding this subject (so they could jail obvious political enemies), the results of the study were predictable.
Alcohol inebriation resulted in more aggressive behavior which produced accidents; while cannabis smoking (hey, the stuff wasn't bad) produced more cautious behavior behind the wheel.
Science labs will produce an "intoxicant" exam for cannabis just as they have for alcohol. Governments only need to produce a contract for them to do so to make it happen. You'd think the boneheads would figure that one out.
Got $25 for being the subject. Good time except for chugging two 16 oz tumblers of everclear and oj at 8 in the morning on an empty stomach. Smoking two large joints down to the "blue circle" at four in the p.m. produced a similar intoxicant level. We wuz blitzed.
The testing managers (PhD candidates) released us when our pulse-rates returned to normal levels.
Nixon. Thanks again, asshole.
Duff: something just struck me. DoJ has filed a lawsuit against a dispensary in Nancy Pelosi's district rather than sweeping in an seizing everything.
It generates millions for local government while other California cities struggle.
What if the word 'medicinal' implies FDA approval and Big Pharma is yelling lawyer-up?
It makes sense to at least go through the motions of cannabis through the process of approval while advancing alcohol-analogous statutes.
Post a Comment