Category Archives: Medical Cannabis

Cannabis strains that help certain ailments and diseases from 420.ag


 

 

1966776_678729982189031_1533101949_n

 

Here is a list of cannabis strains with ailments and diseases that each strain is said to help specifically for. If you have a degenerative or other type of disease, these strains may help!

Afghani = Emotional Stability
Afghanica = Nausea, Pain
AFGHANIE X HAZE = PMS, Lower Body Pain
Afghooie x Haze = PMS
AK-47 = Pain, Nausea, Depression, Insomnia, Headache
Alien Train Wreck = Asthma
Apollo 13 = Back Pain
Auntie Em = Crohn’s Disease, MS
AURORA B = Nausea, Joint Pain, Arthritis
Aurora Indica = Nausea, joint pain, arthritis
Berry-Bolt = Insomnia, Joint pain
Big Bang = Stress, Anxiety, Sedation
Big Kahuna = Back Pain, Arthritis, Herniated disc pain
BillieJack = ADD’s
Black Domina = Emotional Stability
Black on Blue Widow = HIV, Back pain
Black Vietnamese = Nausea, Muscle Spasms, Pain
Black/Blue Widow = HIV/AIDS, Back Pain
Blackberry = Digestive Disorders
Blackberry’s mother = Nausea, Joint Pain, Arthritis, HIV
Blue Fruit = Crohns Disease, Muscle spasms
Blue Moon Rocks = Anxiety, Depression, Insomnia
Blue Satellite = Pain, Nausea, Anxiety, Muscle Tension, Insomnia
Blue Satellite x Jack Herer = Depression, Nausea
Blueberry = Nausea, Insomnia, Pain
Bog Sour Bubble = Pain, Anxiety
Bonzo Bud = Body pain, Migraine
Bubble Gum = Fibromyalgia
Budacolumbia = Nausea
Burmaberry = Migraine, Depression
Burmese = Pain
Burmese pure = Anxiety, Depression
C99 x Great White Shark = Anxiety
Cali-O = Nausea
Cambodian x Orange Pekoe = Cerebral, Alert
Catalyst = PMS
Chronic = Muscle Spasms, Appetite Stimulant, Anti-emetic
Cinderella 99 = Epilepsy, MS, Nausea
CIT = Insomnia, Pain, Nausea
Citral = Insomnia
Cripple Creek = Hepatitis C, Degenerative Disc Disease, IBS, Interstitial Cystitis, Chronic Rotator Cuff Disease, HIV/AIDS
Deep Chunk = Joint Pain, Insomnia
Dynamite = Asthma, Crohn’s Disease, Hepatitis C
East Coast Sour Diesel = Epilepsy, Fibromyalgia, Radiculopathy
El Nino = Nausea, Insomnia
Fieldale Haze = Anxiety, Back pain
Fig Widow = Back pain, Psychosis
Firecracker = Depression, Anxiety, Nausea
G-13 = Depression, Pain, ADD, ADHD
G13 x HP = Nausea, Joint Pain, Insomnia
Grapefruit = Arthritis, Hepatitis C, Pain, Nausea
Green Queen = Epilepsy, Neck/spine pain
Green Spirit = Nausea, Headache, Body pain
Green Spirit x Timewarp x Herijuana = Insomnia, Migraine, Joint pain
Haze = ADD/ADHD
Heavenly Man = Stress
Herijuana = Pain, Nausea, Insomnia
Herijuana x Trainwreck = Diabetic neuropathy, Joint pain, Insomnia, MS
Hindu Kush = Social Anxiety
Ice Princess x Bubblegum = Migraine
Jack Herer = Anxiety, Fibromyalgia
Jacked #14 = Nausea
John Paul Jones = Body pain
Juicy Fruit = Insomnia, Joint pain, Anxiety
Kali Mist = Nausea, Depression
Kal-X = Body pain
KILLER QUEEN = Depression, Back Pain
Killer Queen = Depression, Back pain
Krinkle x Kush x Freezeland = MS muscle spasms
Lavender = Chronic Pain
Leda Uno = Insomnia
Legends Ultimate Indica = Insomnia, IBS, CROHN’S DISEASE, Joint/Muscle Pain
Legends Ultimate Indica x Herijuana = Muscle spasms, Pain
Lemon Chemo = Insomnia, Back pain, Migraine
Lemon Haze = Fibromyalgia
Lifesaver = Nausea, Headache, Pain, Insomnia
Lollipop = Cachexia, Degenerative bone and disc disease, Edema, General pain, General seizures, Glaucoma, Migraine, MS, Nausea, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
Lowryder = Nausea, Pain, Headache
LSD = Nausea, Anxiety, Depression, Headache
M39 = Anxiety, Depression
Magic Crystal = Migraine, PMS, Depression, Nausea
Mango = Back pain, nausea
Mango x Northern Lights # 5 = Pain, nausea, insomnia, anxiety
Master Kush = Nausea
Medicine Woman = Diabetic neuropathy, general pain, general seizures, glaucoma, Hepatitis C, muscle spasms, nausea, radiculopathy
Misty = Hepatitis C, back pain, insomnia, nausea
Mountainberry = Insomnia, migraine, pain
Mr. Nice = Chronic Pain, Muscle Spasms
New York Diesel = Migraine
NL#5 = Social Anxiety
Northern Lights #1 = Arthritis
Northern Lights #2 = Nausea, insomnia
Northern Lights = Anxiety, radiculopathy, insomnia
Northern Lights x Cinderella 99 = Depression
Northern Lights x Jamaican = Arthritis
Northern Lights x Shiva = Pain, Toothache
NORTHERNBERRY = General Pain
NYC SOUR DIESEL = Edema, Epilepsy, Fibromyalgia, Radiculopathy
Oak Goo = Pain, anxiety
OG Kush = Social Anxiety
OG KUSH PURPLE = Leg Pain, Knee, Butt Pain
Oregon 90 = Joint Pain, RLS, Pain, Nausea, Insomnia
Original Mystic = Epilepsy
Phaght Betty = Cachexia, degenerative bone/disc disease, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
Purple Kush = Stress, Anxiety
Queen Bee = Neck/spine pain
Reeferman’s Hash Plant = Chronic Pain
Romulan = Chronic Pain
Sensi Star = Migraine, PMS, Back Pain
Shiskaberry x Dutch Treat = Migraine, anxiety, insomnia, nausea
Shiskaberry x Hash Plant = Anxiety, nausea
Skunk #1 = Nausea
Slow Train = Back Pain
Snow White = PMS, Head aches
Sonoma Coma = General Relaxation, Induce Sleep
SOUR CREAM = Insomnia, Joint Pain, Nausea
Stardust 13 = Pain, nausea, insomnia
Strawberry Cough = Back pain, depression
Super Impact = Nausea, insomnia, muscle pain, depression, anxiety
Super Impact x AK-47 = Pain, insomnia, mood
Super Silver Haze = Nausea, depression, RLS, Arthritis, Bladder Problems
Super Thai = Depression
Swamp Mix = Depression
Sweet Blu = Degenerative bone/disc disease, diabetic, neuropathy, edema, fibromyalgia, muscle spasms, nausea, neck/spine pain
Sweet Tooth #3 = Depression, mood
Trainwreck = Anxiety, Arthritis, Diabetic Neuropathy, Depression
Trainwreck x Herijuana = Nausea, Anxiety, arthritis, diabetic neuropathy, depression
TW x LUI = Arthritis, nausea
TX = Arthritis, asthma, general pain, general seizures, glaucoma, MS
Ty’s Northernberry x Reeferman’s Herijuana = Appetite Stimulant, Spasms
UBC Chemo x Grapefruit = Muscle/Joint Pain
Ultra Green = Insomnia
Wakeford = Anxiety, nausea, insomnia
White Rhino = Body pain, back pain, joint pain, insomnia
White Russian = Pain, nausea
White Russian x AK47 x White Widow = Chronic Pain, Insomnia
White Widow = Cachexia, Hepatitis C, PTSD
White Widow x Big Bud = Depression, White Widow, Cachexia, Hepatitis C, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
Wisp = Nausea, headache
WR = Muscle pain, nausea, insomnia
XXX = General Relaxation, Sleep

Please keep in mind that this is not to be considered as “medical advice” as the information given in this article is intended to be for informational purposes only, and is not intended to claim any specific cure of any ailment or disease through the specified strains, but is to be considered more of a guideline to help you decide what might be best for you in choosing the best strain for you.

CONTINUE READING….

Advertisements

State seizes 11-year-old, arrests his mother after he defends medical marijuana during a school presentation


By Radley Balko April 17

From the website run by investigative journalist Ben Swann:

On March 24, cannabis oil activist Shona Banda‘s life was flipped upside-down after her son was taken from her by the State of Kansas. The ordeal started when police and counselors at her 11-year-old son’s school conducted a drug education class. Her son, who had previously lived in Colorado for a period of time, disagreed with some of the anti-pot points that were being made by school officials. “My son says different things like my ‘Mom calls it cannabis and not marijuana.’ He let them know how educated he was on the facts,” said Banda in an exclusive interview with BenSwann.com. Banda successfully treated her own Crohn’s disease with cannabis oil.

After her son spoke out about medical marijuana, police detained him and launched a raid on Shona Banda’s home. “Well, they had that drug education class at school that was just conducted by the counselors… They pulled my son out of school at about 1:40 in the afternoon and interrogated him. Police showed up at my house at 3… I let them know that they weren’t allowed in my home without a warrant… I didn’t believe you could get a warrant off of something a child says in school.” Banda continued, “We waited from 3 o’clock until 6 o’clock. They got a warrant at 6 o’clock at night and executed a warrant into my home. My husband and I are separated, and neither parent was contacted by authorities before [our son] was taken and questioned.”

The police apparently found 2 ounces of cannabis oil in her home. She fears that the state will now attempt to take her son away. She has a custody hearing on Monday.

I contacted the Garden City Police Department to verify some of the details that have been reported online. A spokesman confirmed that officers had searched Banda’s home, though he denied it was a raid. He also said the initial anti-drug program was put on entirely by the school — the police had no involvement. At that event Banda’s son apparently contradicted some of the claims made about marijuana. The school then contacted the child protection agency, which then contacted the police. Officers from the department showed up at Banda’s at home and asked her permission to conduct a search. She refused. They then obtained a warrant and searched her home. The spokesman wouldn’t comment on exactly what was found, except to say that there was “evidence” of drug activity. Banda was then arrested and her son was seized from the home. Currently, there are no criminal charges against her. The spokesman wouldn’t comment on whether charges may be forthcoming. He added that possession of marijuana is illegal in Kansas, without exception.

The absurdity here of course is that a woman could lose her custody of her child for therapeutically using a drug that’s legal for recreational use an hour to the west. It seems safe to say that the amount of the drug she had in her home was an amount consistent with personal use. (If she had been distributing, she’d almost certainly have been charged by now.)

This boy was defending his mother’s use of a drug that helps her deal with an awful condition. Because he stuck up for his mother, the state arrested her and ripped him away from her. Even if he is eventually returned to his mother (as he ought to be), the school, the town, and the state of Kansas have already done a lot more damage to this kid than Banda’s use of pot to treat her Crohn’s disease ever could.

Banda’s supporters have now set up a legal defense fund page for her at Go Fund Me.

Read more from The Watch:

Absurd appeals court ruling embodies everything that’s wrong with drug raids

By Radley Balko April 17

Illinois: The use of medical marijuana and hospice


CANNABIS

Staff Report

Jan. 1, 2014, medical marijuana was legalized in Illinois for patients who qualify for the substance. This will be an evolution in end-of-life care and symptom management. Every patient deserves to live comfortably with the most dignity as possible.

“We always want to strive to provide the highest quality of care,” said Passages Hospice Founder Seth Gillman. “We have to keep an open mind to any medications or opportunities available to our patients.”

Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn (D) signed a medical marijuana law into place for Illinois Aug. 1, 2013. The law is going to be one of the strictest medical marijuana laws signed in the United States. There will be a four-year pilot program for 60 state-run dispensaries that will be under 24-hour surveillance.

The U.S. is lagging compared to other countries when it comes to the use of medical marijuana. Israel has used the drug for medicinal purposes since 2005 for terminally ill patients.

Passages Hospice strives to maintain its role as an innovative leader in hospice care and pain management. Medical marijuana can alleviate symptoms associated with terminal illnesses, such as cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, multiple sclerosis and many others.

The drug will be used as treatment for a variety of symptoms, such as loss of appetite, nausea, pain, anxiety and sadness. The substance will also eliminate some of the negative side effects associated with drugs like morphine.

Medicinal use of marijuana has been around for many centuries. The Cannabis sativa plant has elements with pain relieving properties. Cannabinoids are the active ingredients in cannabis associated with the relief of pain and vomiting along with appetite stimulation.

The most common cannabinoid in the plant is Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), which is the psychoactive chemical component that causes a high. This component is the reason medical marijuana has been so controversial. Fortunately, researchers have been able to develop strains of marijuana that contain little traces of THC, but just enough to have beneficial effects for medical purposes. This will allow patients to still maintain a clear head and carry out day-to-day activities.

“As part of our dedication to unique and innovative programs, we are anxiously awaiting approval for a medical marijuana licensure,” said Gillman. “Passages has always supported a patient’s right to live comfortably and on their terms.”

For more about Passages Hospice, visit www.passageshospice.com or call 888-741-8985.

Posted Jan. 29, 2014

CONTINUE READING…

Senate bill would legalize medical marijuana in Pa.


By Steve Esack and Tim Darragh, Call Harrisburg Bureau

8:58 p.m. EST, January 28, 2014

HARRISBURG — Sydney Michaels wore a pink jogging suit, a pink eye patch and a feeding tube that sustains her life.

With hands folded, she sat quietly on her dad’s lap as he patted her service dog and her mother used a microphone to urge lawmakers to support a bipartisan bill the small-town family believes will help Sydney overcome the epileptic seizures that could one day kill her.

"Sydney is now 4 years old and is stuck on three anti-epileptic drugs which offer her no relief," Julie Michaels, of Connellsville, Fayette County, said Tuesday at a rally at the state Capitol. "Senate Bill 1182 will give our child a chance — a chance to experience life."

Senate Bill 1182 would legalize marijuana for medical purposes under a system of regulation and security to be developed by the Pennsylvania State Police and departments of Agriculture, Health, and Drug and Alcohol Programs

Read more: http://www.mcall.com/news/local/elections/mc-pa-medical-marijuana-0128-20140128,0,7247863.story#ixzz2rp3SniKk
Follow us: @mcall on Twitter | mcall.lv on Facebook

GOP lawmaker introduces Ga. medical marijuana bill


1240572_660269460659087_518412026_n

 

 

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: January 28, 2014

ATLANTA – An effort to bring medical marijuana to Georgia under certain circumstances gained momentum today as more than 80 lawmakers signed on to sponsor a bill introduced by a member of the Republican House leadership.

In introducing the bill, Rep. Allen Peake, R-Macon, was joined by parents of children suffering from medical conditions who say the use of cannabis oil could ease their children’s symptoms and improve their quality of life.

“It will be a monumental task to get this bill done,” said Peake, who serves as secretary/treasurer for the House Majority Caucus. “But if we can do it this session, for these parents and these kids, it will be worth every ounce of political influence I have to get it done.”

Peake said the bill, known as “Haleigh’s Hope Act,” would revive a long-dormant research program allowing academic institutions to distribute medical marijuana to those suffering from specific medical conditions. Haleigh Cox is a young girl who suffers from a medical condition that causes severe seizures, and Peake was spurred to draft the bill after meeting with her and her parents.

The effort has grown as families have united to petition lawmakers to support the bill. Corey Lowe, a former police officer, was among three families who joined Peake at the Capitol today. Lowe’s 12-year-old daughter, Victoria, was diagnosed with mitochondrial disease and can have up to 100 seizures a day if not controlled.

“It’s a start, and that’s all we are asking for is a start, to provide some relief for our children and grandchildren,” Lowe said. “As their parents, we are here to fight for our children.”

A state law passed in 1980 established the academic research program allowing for the limited use of medical marijuana for those diagnosed with glaucoma and cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy and radiation, but the program ceased soon after when the federal government stopped delivery of legal cannabis, according to a legislative research memo.

The proposed bill would add seizures to the list of medical conditions allowed in the program, and Peake said the cannabis oil being distributed would be “limited in scope, tightly restricted, well regulated and managed by doctors.” The drug would be administered orally in a liquid form, and Peake was adamant that it would not open the door to widespread, recreational use of marijuana in the state.

“I am concerned as anyone that we would get to a slippery slope of a broader scope of marijuana use in the state,” Peake said. “I promise you I will fight that with every bit of energy in me. I promise you, this is not legalized marijuana for recreational use. We are not going down that path.”

Peake said he has received the support of the Medical Association of Georgia, the largest group of physicians in the state, and does not expect to see opposition from law enforcement groups. Twenty states provide some form of access to medical marijuana, Peake said.

On the long list of bill co-sponsors were Rep. John Meadows, chairman of the Rules Committee, which sets the daily agenda in the House, and Rep. Wendell Willard, chair of the House Judiciary Committee.

“It’s been proven medically that this has a benefit for those individuals who are suffering from seizures,” Willard said. “If that can bring some relief, I think it would be appropriate to address that with an exception in the law.”

Shannon and Blaine Cloud, whose 8-year-old daughter Alaina suffers from seizures, said they were surprised by how quickly the effort has gained momentum in the past three weeks.

“We’re thankful that a lot of these representatives’ hearts have been touched by our children,” said Shannon Cloud. “And, truly, they want to help and they want to do the right thing and they want to make sure our kids get the medicine we know can give them a better quality of life.”

CONTINUE READING…

Talking Marijuana with Dr. Jeffrey Miron


June 17, 2013 by Brett Wilkins in Civil Liberties, Crime & Punishment, Drugs, Featured, The Best of Moral Low Ground, U.S. Government

 

Moral Low Ground editor-in-chief Brett Wilkins recently interviewed Dr. Jeffrey Miron about marijuana prohibition, medical marijuana and the market implications of legalization. This article was originally published in the Medical Marijuana Review.

(Photo: Dr. Jeffrey Miron)

(Photo: Dr. Jeffrey Miron)

Why is a Harvard University economics professor proclaiming “marijuana should be legalized for just about everything”? Does he see prices for medical marijuana sliding down due to increased competition from private companies? We decided to find out by interviewing Dr. Jeffrey Miron, senior lecturer and the Director of Undergraduate Studies in Economics at Harvard University, as well as a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute, the nation’s leading libertarian think-tank.

As an unabashed and outspoken champion of individual liberty, Dr. Miron has stirred the pot by publicly advocating for the legalization of all drugs, a move he says would save tens of billions of dollars annually for federal, state and local governments. We recently spoke with Dr. Miron about the future of medical marijuana, the economics of newly minted canna-businesses and the Obama’s administration approach to the war on drugs.

MediRevew: You have written that “just as the harms of alcohol prohibition were worse than the harms of alcohol itself, the adverse effects of marijuana prohibition are worse than the unwanted consequences of marijuana use,” and that legalization is the better policy. What’s the biggest obstacle to legalization?

Miron: I think the big obstacle to legalization is the entrenched interests of people whose job it is to continue prohibiting marijuana, whether that’s local vice squads, federal agencies like the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Drug Czar’s office or the White House. And there are some entrenched interests that people don’t always think about.

One example is the treatment sector. A lot of people are coerced into getting drug abuse treatment because they’re, say, caught in a routine traffic stop with marijuana in their car, and they’re able to get that arrest to go away if they go through some court-ordered treatment. But they’re not people who need drug abuse treatment, so there’s a lot of extra demand created for the treatment sector. So this sector also has a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.”

MediReview: Given President Obama’s campaign promise of a hands-off approach to medical marijuana and the Justice Department’s Ogden Memo (directing federal resources only against medical marijuana providers who violate state law), what do you make of the Obama administration’s crackdown on medical marijuana?

Miron: I think that the administration, first of all, focuses on the electoral consequences. I don’t think they’ve seen it so far as in their interest to be soft on medical marijuana, or on any drugs. It seemed that way at the beginning, but that changed rather quickly. [The administration] knows that it would give the Republicans an issue if it came down strongly in favor of medical marijuana, or supported the recreational legalizations in Colorado and Washington. And so I think they just don’t want to go there. They want to let public opinion shift so much on its own. They’re sort of going along with public opinion, not trying to make public opinion.

MediReview: Public opinion is generally very much in favor of medical marijuana, and according to polls, a majority of Americans now even support recreational legalization. Do you feel that full legalization is inevitable?

Miron: Well, I hope that’s right, but I’m not positive that’s right. Pendulums can swing one way, and then sometimes the other way. There are certainly examples where public opinion has gone in one direction and then the other on lots of public policy issues, including drugs. So I don’t think we should assume it’s inevitable.

I think it’s plausible that marijuana will continue to move in the direction of medicalization and legalization. But if you’re sitting in Washington and you have the White House drug czar’s office right down the hall from you, and you have the DEA right there, and you have some Congressmen who are still screaming for prohibition, I think it’s pretty hard. And the federal government can interfere quite a bit with the decisions by states to try to medicalize and legalize.

The other reason why I don’t think we should assume [legalization] is inevitable is that very few major party politicians, on both sides of the aisle, are totally comfortable with the idea of letting states do what they want. The existing major parties don’t want to let states deviate from federal policy. Any federal politician who endorses letting states deviate is in trouble.

MediReview: If legalization does occur, do you foresee Big Pharma cornering the market on medical marijuana in the same way Big Agriculture dominates farming?

Miron: I’m not sure I would use the word ‘cornered.’ I think that in a fully legal market, we would likely see a substantial share of [marijuana] that was produced and sold by a relatively small number of companies, as we do with cars or beer or tobacco. But as long as the regulation of that industry is moderate at most, there will still be ample room for smaller firms to succeed. We see competition in the beer industry from overseas. We see lots of microbreweries.

[But] if you have a lot of regulation, then you’re going to limit the ability of the small producer to survive in the marketplace. An excellent example of that is the tobacco industry. It’s so costly, and there are all sorts of lawsuits and so many restrictions on advertising that it’s very hard for any newcomer to get into the tobacco industry in a profitable way, and so the big companies do rule that industry. But I don’t think we should be that concerned if a lot of the medical marijuana market is taken over by a relatively small number of companies… That’s just the way markets seem to work. And as long as there’s not too much regulation there will still be plenty of competition.

MediReview: Is this good for consumers? Do you see market forces and increased competition driving prices down?

Miron: I personally don’t think that prices are going to change dramatically. I wouldn’t be shocked if they went down by noticeable amounts, maybe 25 percent, perhaps even 50 percent, but I suspect that they won’t go down much at all. There are two reasons why.

One, I don’t think that current marijuana prohibition in the US is actually all that strong. I think that the amount of money that’s being spent trying to raise the price of marijuana relative to the size of the market is pretty miniscule. Therefore, they’re not having much effect in raising the cost.

Second, if you look at data and compare [marijuana] prices in the US to places where it’s almost entirely legal… they’re not that different. If you look at places like California where it’s very close to being legalized, prices aren’t that different from other places in the country. So I think that prices may go down, but they’re not going to go down a ton.

MediReview: Three years ago, you said that we can’t be sure if marijuana is effective medicine because DEA rules make it virtually impossible to carry out proper scientific trials. Consistent with its Schedule I classification, the federal government continues to emphatically insist marijuana has no accepted medical use. Do you think this is an accurate assessment?

Miron: The federal government continues to insist that smoked marijuana has no non-medical benefits, and in particular has no superior benefits compared to synthetic products or derivative products made from marijuana, such as Marinol… There certainly are legitimate studies and accepted evidence that some products like Marinol may be effective.

MediReview: You once said that the anecdotal evidence of medical marijuana’s effectiveness was “stunning.” Can you give examples?

Miron: Qualitatively, there are people who were resistant to the idea of using medical marijuana, but they were suffering from a serious condition… for which marijuana was widely thought to be useful and efficacious. And finally they were convinced by relatives or friends to try it and they did and then saw dramatic improvement.

But unfortunately, those people then became nervous that somehow it was still wrong to use marijuana or they were worried that they were putting their grandchildren in jeopardy by having them score marijuana for them at their local high school, and so they stopped, and when they did, their symptoms got worse again. So is that a perfectly controlled experiment? No. But is it a quasi-controlled experiment? Is that a little bit like an experiment? Yes, because you have a before, during and after. So that’s what I mean by anecdotal evidence, and it’s very suggestive.

MediReview: You also once said that the medical marijuana approach to legalization seems “sneaky.” What did you mean by that?

Miron: I do think has a real problem in that the way it’s implemented in many states looks like it’s just backdoor legalization. Many doctors seem to write [recommendations] without much compunction… and so that gives critics some basis in fact to say, “This is not just about helping sick people, this is about recreational use, and medicalization is helping to allow recreational use.”

Now, I have no objection to recreational use. I think [marijuana] should be legal for absolutely everything… And medicalization certainly has some benefits, because it means more people are able to purchase marijuana without the risk of going to jail, but it also has its unfortunate side effects of looking hypocritical, of looking like not telling the truth.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Tagged Cato Institute, harvard university, Jeffrey Miron, Jeffrey Miron drugs, marijuana, marijuana legalization, Marinol, medical marijuana, obama marijuana, public opinion marijuana

CONTINUE READING…

Summary Of Oral Arguments In Federal Cannabis Rescheduling Case


 

 

Summary Of Oral Arguments In Federal Cannabis Rescheduling Case

http://www.theweedblog.com/summary-of-oral-arguments-in-federal-cannabis-rescheduling-case/

October 17, 2012

Federal Appeals Court Hears Case On Medical Value Of Marijuana

By Jonathan Bair, Americans for Safe Access

This morning, the federal Appeals Court for the DC Circuit heard an appeal in the case called Americans for Safe Access v Drug Enforcement Administration. The case is an appeal of the DEA’s rejection of a petition filed in 2002 seeking to change the placement of marijuana as a Schedule I drug per the Controlled Substances Act. Based on the scientific evidence, ASA and our fellow plaintiffs feel that it is simply untrue that cannabis is a drug with a “high potential for abuse” and “without accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.” The hearing today offered a glimpse at the Court’s approach to this topic.

In front of a packed courtroom in Washington, the three-judge panel questioned ASA’s Chief Counsel Joe Elford and a federal lawyer about the merits of the scientific case, and the crucial legal issue of “standing.” Standing is a legal concept that restricts the right to sue to injured parties – people who are directly hurt by what they are fighting, and can get relief from a legal judgement. The issue of standing has been the reason why two prior appeals of the DEA’s classification of marijuana were rejected. In the past, patients have not been part of lawsuits against the Controlled Substances Act. The three judges were Merrick Garland, Karen Henderson, and Harry Edwards.

ASA’s Chief Counsel Joe Elford opened his appeal by arguing that the federal “Department of Health and Human Services plays a game of gotcha” by tightly controlling research access to cannabis and then claiming that there is not enough compelling research to justify reconsidering it as Schedule I. The Drug Enforcement Administration erred by determing that cannabis has a high potential for abuse when its findings determine its abuse and harm potential is less than other substances in less-controlled schedules, such as cocaine.

Elford opened his arguments with the issue of standing. He pointed to the affidavit of plaintiff Michael Krawitz, a veteran denied access to Veterans Administration services because of his medically necessary use of marijuana. The Veterans Administrastion’s harmful policy is based on marijuana’s status as a Schedule I substance. He also spoke of the many members of Americans for Safe Access, who are fearful of the consequences of cultivating their own cannabis for their medical needs, and that a medical necessity defense in court could be allowed if marijuana were not in Schedule I.

Elford then turned to the issue of the merits of the DEA’s position on marijuana’s medical value, to prove their position was “arbitrary and capricious” and therefore impermissible. The contention that there is not a complete consensus was argued to be an unreasonable interpretation of the regulatory standard, and that many of HHS’s standards are inapplicable to an organic substance. Significantly, the lack of access to marijuana for medical research is a consequence of the scheduling, yet the lack of suitable research is cited by the DEA as a reason for maintaining the schedule. Despite this lack of research access, ASA cited a growing body of high-quality scientific and medical research into the benefits of marijuana.

Judge Garland asked Elford if he was arguing that marijuana in fact meets HHS’s standard for studies. ASA’s counsel cited over 200 studies and argued that a circular standard is impossible to meet. He also said that, given that the schedule is relative, the DEA is ignoring even its own studies showing that marijuana has merely a “mild” potential for abuse.

Joe Elford concluded by arguing that Schedule I was an inappropriate classification of marijuana and it caused harm to patients and prevented meaningful medical research. Rescheduling marijuana would allow for a reasonable policy solution for suffering patients and uphold the intent of the Controlled Substances Act.

Judge Edwards asked about the standing of Mr. Krawitz, and his access to medical marijuana. The judges asked about access in medical states and noted that marijuana would not be legal just because it were rescheduled.

Federal counsel Lena Watkins then presented her position against appealing the DEA’s decision to continue cannabis in Schedule I. She noted that state legislatures or popular votes do not determine accepted medical use. She said that research is inadequate and has not progressed, and argued that the government does provide access for research. Turning to the abuse potential, Watkins said, “marijuana is the most widely abused drug in America,” and dependency is a factor in making that assessment.

The judges questioned the level of access provided for research, and Watkins said that fifteen studies of a specific federal “quality” metric have been allowed. Pressed to explain why these studies haven’t persuaded the DEA that marijuana has medical benefits, she said, “we don’t have the final results yet.” To many in the audience, the circular nature of the government’s position on the science of marijuana was clear. The judges then invited Elford to give a rebuttal.

Focusing on rebutting the government’s claims about research, Elford argued that there has been adequate study and even more since this case was filed in 2002, and noted that he would like to admit additional evidence to the case. Summarizing by turning the government’s “no substantial evidence” argument on its head, Elford said that both sides agree more research needs to be done and that research can only happen if marijuana is released from Schedule I. Requiring the DEA to make scientific determinations on a new schedule would lead to better policy and more relief for suffering patients.

The patients spoke out at a well-attended press conference after the hearing, and Americans for Safe Access is proud to have given patients a day in court. Many observers felt the judges were willing to consider the argument of Michael Krawitz’s direct harm from the Controlled Substances Act, and this issue of “standing” has been the Achilles heel of past lawsuits against Schedule I. However, Judge Garland asked at one point, “Don’t we have to defer to the agency? We’re not scientists. They are.”

We’ll find out whether the judges felt the DEA’s science is adequate, or if patients can sue for a medical necessity defense against harsh marijuana laws, when the judges rule. We don’t expect it for a few months. This opportunity is thanks to the brave plaintiffs who took on the federal government on behalf of many others.

Jonathan Bair is ASA’s Social Media Director. Recordings of any kind were not allowed in the courtroom.

Source: Americans for Safe Access

CONTINUE READING….

Law Blog Fireside: The Lawyer Protecting Oakland’s Medical Pot


By Joe Palazzolo
iStock

Oakland, Calif., is trying to keep the federal government from seizing its biggest medical-marijuana dispensary.

On Wednesday, the city took a bold step: It sued the feds, arguing that the U.S. attorney for Northern California is barred from seizing the property by the five-year statute of limitations on civil forfeiture.

Sure, it’s illegal to sell medical marijuana under federal law, but President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder have said publicly they wouldn’t pursue people who are in compliance with state law. A 2009 Justice Department memo gave the same guidance to U.S. attorneys.

California, of course, permits the sale of medical marijuana, and Oakland strictly regulates and taxes its dispensaries. Harborside Health Center, the property at issue here, has been open since 2006 and sells more than $20 million of pot annually, according to its owner.

The lawsuit argues that the Justice Department can’t snatch up Harborside Health Center, because of the doctrine of estoppel, which says, in essence, you can’t say one thing and do another. U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag has said Harborside has grown into a large-scale operation that isn’t legal even under California law.

Law Blog caught up with Cedric Chao, who is representing Oakland. When he’s not suing the federal government, Mr. Chao is co-chairman of Morrison & Foerster LLP’s international litigation and arbitration practice.

Law Blog: So this is the first case of its type?

Cedric Chao: We’re not aware of a city pushing back on a forfeiture action against a medical cannabis dispensary.

LB: We noticed you refer to medical marijuana as “cannabis” throughout the lawsuit. Any reason?

CC: No, but people refer to it both ways.

LB: You argue that DOJ can’t go after Harborside because it opened six years ago — exceeding the five-year statute of limitations. Isn’t there a good argument that, since Harborside continued to break federal law until this year, the clock shouldn’t start ticking until after the dispensary stopped selling medical cannabis?

CC: Well there’s actually a case out there in the Sixth Circuit that addresses this issue. In the context of a gambling operation, it held that the statute of limitations began on the first discovery of illegal conduct by the government and that the government was not allowed to claim that the statute of limitations was reset every single day.

LB: I guess the government can’t credibly argue it wasn’t aware of the Oakland dispensaries until now.

CC: They had websites, they had advertisements, they wanted the patient population to know they had safe access to medical cannabis.

LB: But the fact remains. Medical marijuana is illegal under federal law. How do you convince a federal judge that just because the attorney general tells his troops not to go after certain individuals that means it’s OK to break federal law?

CC: Seventeen states plus the District of Columbia have agreed that it is lawful to sell cannabis for medical purposes, so, clearly, there’s a division of thought. And clearly the top officials of our government also believed there were medical benefits to cannabis, otherwise they would not have said publicity that DOJ’s resources will not be used to prosecute where patients, caregivers and dispensaries are acting in conformity with state law. They well knew that people were hanging on their every word. So how is it, after their words and actions and people acting in reliance on those, can they reverse course and say, “Never mind?”

LB: So you’re doing this case pro bono?

CC: Yes.

LB: It’s a controversial issue. Do you worry about getting pegged as the cannabis lawyer?

CC: As a lawyer, you take an oath and you have a client and you do the best for your client. This issue has important public ramifications, and if I didn’t think it was important, I wouldn’t take it.

LB: Thanks, Cedric.

CONTINUE READING…

Note from a friend: Medical Marijuana and diabetes with obesity


 
leaf
Roland A. Duby
I have a patient/friend who was 430 pounds, ate up with diabetes, and had to have oxygen all day, He got around on a little home scooter
for old people, but he ain’t old, just 58. He also had sleep apnea and heart problems along with low blood oxygen. I was visiting him after
not seeing him for a few years and that is the condition I found him in. He used to be 300 lbs and in a band and very active. He told me that
his doctor gave him 6 months to live. I told him about hemp oil and the experiences I have had and the miracles I have seen. He told
me he was hoping I had a joint but we would have to sneak downstairs to smoke so his wife would not know. I told him fuck that, I have some
oil and you can eat it, but we should show this Rick Simpson movie to your wife. He ate some oil and then hollered for his wife. she watched
it and said go for it. I gave him a ten gram tube and hugged everyone goodbye.

I got a call a month later and he told me that the stuff was a miracle, and his diabetes was gone. His blood oxygen is up to 75% and he can
walk to the corner store and back.

I got another call 3 months later and he told me he has lost over 100 pounds and is mowing his own lawn, and people see him walking around
in the grocery store and can’t believe their eyes. He said his preacher saw him and told him praise the lord cause they had prayed for him,
and he told his preacher to thank the ones who prayed for marijuana because that is what saved his life! The preacher said “what?’ and he
told the preacher that he eats one drop of marijuana oil a day and it cured all of his problems! The preacher said “Do you mean hash oil?”
and that is when he smoked his first joint with his preacher!

Government Forced NCI To Censor Medical Cannabis Facts


 

Government Forced NCI To Censor Medical Cannabis Facts

 

Thumbnail image for government_censorship_-1.jpeg

 

 

In March, the National Cancer Institute (NCI), a component agency of the National Institutes of Health, acknowledged the medicinal benefits of marijuana in its online treatment database. But the information only stayed up a few days, before it was scrubbed from the site.

Now, newly obtained documents reveal not only how NCI database contributors arrived at their March 17 summary of marijuana’s medical uses, but also the furious politicking that went into quickly scrubbing that summary of information regarding the potential tumor-fighting effects of cannabis, reports Kyle Daly at the Washington Independent.

Phil Mocek, a civil liberties activist with the Seattle-based Cannabis Defense Coalition, obtained the documents as a result of a Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) request he filed in March after reading coverage of the NCI’s action. Mocek has made some of the hundreds of pages of at-times heated email exchanges and summary alterations available on MuckRock, a website devoted to FOIA requests and government documents.

The treatment database on NCI’s website is called the Physician Data Query (PDQ). The PDQ entry on cannabis and cannabinoids is maintained by the Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) Editorial Board. The lead reviewer on the marijuana summary statement is CAM board member Donald Abrams, director of integrative oncology at the University of California-San Francisco cancer center.

Abrams advocates the use of cannabis in cancer treatment, and his wish to accurately portray its medical applications becomes clear early in the documents.

On March 24, just a week after the finished summary had gone online, Susan Weiss — chief of the Office of Science Policy and Communications within the National Institutes on Drug Abuse (NIDA) — sent NCI officials an email saying her agency had just become aware of the summary. Weiss told them the NIDA wanted the summary changed to acknowledge that the FDA hasn’t approved marijuana; to take away any implication that it was recommending prescribing marijuana; to highlight the supposed "addiction potential" of marijuana; and to link to the NIDA’s own page on the supposed "adverse effects of marijuana."

The NCI balked at the last two requests: "I am unaware of any convincing evidence indicating that marijuana is addictive," communications officer Rick Manrow of the the NCI reasonably said.

But the agency agreed the first two requests were fair. The CAM board grappled for days with how to cooperate with the NIDA without compromising its independence or editorial integrity. Meanwhile, yet more federal agencies offered their two cents’ worth.

"[A press officer with the FDA] contacted me this morning because he has been getting calls from FDA staff, as well as at least one high-profile reporter, asking about NCI’s ‘endorsement of medical marijuana.’ I provided him with the background I had," wrote Brooke Hardison, NCI media relations analyst. "He needs to provide information for staff at the FDA, and they are trying to figure out how to respond to this issue. I suggested that it might be good for him to have a conversation with those more closely involved in this issue."

Meanwhile, national attention to the story continued to grow, and NIDA, notoriously anti-pot, was worried about this whole "marijuana treats cancer" thing.

On learning that Ethan Nadelmann, founder and executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance had tweeted about the summary, the NIDA’s Weiss wrote to NCI, "We will be contacting our colleagues at ONDCP [Office of National Drug Control Policy] just to give them a heads up about it."

Weiss also wrote to her NIDA colleagues, saying "We think that ONDCP needs to be informed."

The ONDCP, of course, is the office of the Drug Czar. Current czar Gil Kerlikowske, as with all drug czars, is bound by law to oppose marijuana legalization for any purpose, even to save cancer patients.

In any event, the NCI caved to the NIDA’s demands by removing any implied support for prescribing marijuana — noting that the FDA hasn’t approved cannabis as as prescription drug — and, much to the consternation of lead reviewer Abrams, removing a reference to marijuana’s anti-tumor properties.

"You know, the epidemiological data from Kaiser and Tashkin do possibly support an anti-tumor effect in humans," Abrams wrote. "After reflecting for a few hours, I am not happy that NIDA has been able to impose their agenda on us. The text was vetted by the whole Board. I would ask that we [involve] the whole Editorial Board in the discussion before being bulldogged.

"I am considering resigning from the Board if we allow politics to trump science!" Abrams wrote.

All the relevant CAM board members eventually agreed to the version that went up on March 29 and 30. That last day was when Phil Mocek submitted his FOIA request and is thus the last day that appears in the records given to him.

It is interesting to note that, toward the end of the correspondence record, NCI and NIDA officials were discussing the latter agency providing further information on the supposed "adverse effects of marijuana" so that the CAM Board could "take it into consideration" during its May 6 meeting. Several NCI and CAM members said any "convincing evidence" could result in larger changes to the entry.

NIDA prepared a list of anti-marijuana talking points, including the claim that nine percent of cannabis users "become addicted to the drug" and a completely undocumented claim that marijuana use leads to permanent cognitive impairment, in the hopes of causing just such changes in the NCI’s entry.

But, the Independent reports, May 6 came and went without any additional changes being made to the database.

One can only imagine the kinds of behind-the-scenes wrangling that continues as we speak.

Cancer.gov-scrub sized.jpg

Graphic: NORML Stash Blog

"NCI apparently got a talking to from someone" ~ Radical Russ Belville, NORML.

Turns out Radical Russ was right, and NIDA was doing the talking.

CONTINUE TO ARTICLE FOR FURTHER INFORMATION….