Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

New Studies Destroy the Last Objection to Medical Marijuana

By Bruce Mirken, AlterNet. Posted May 2, 2007.


New research on "vaporization" has demonstrated that all those fears about the ill effects of smoking marijuana are 100 percent obsolete.
Advertisement

Anyone who advocates for medical marijuana sooner or later runs into arguments about smoking: "No real medicine is smoked." "Smoking is bad for the lungs; why would any doctor recommend something so harmful?" It's a line of reasoning that medical marijuana opponents have used to great effect in Congress, state legislatures, and elsewhere. Indeed, the FDA's controversial 2006 statement opposing medical marijuana was couched in repeated references to "smoked marijuana."

But new research demonstrates that all those fears of "smoked marijuana" as medicine are 100 percent obsolete.

The smoking argument was the closest thing to a scientifically meaningful objection to medical marijuana. While marijuana smoke, unlike tobacco, has never been shown to cause lung cancer, heavy marijuana smoking has been associated with assorted respiratory symptoms and a potentially increased risk of bronchitis. That's because burning any plant material produces a whole lot of substances such as tars, and carbon monoxide that are not good for the lungs.

Nevertheless, inhalation is clearly the best method for administering marijuana's active components, called cannabinoids. Cannabinoids such as THC are fat-soluble molecules that are absorbed slowly and unevenly when taken orally, as in the prescription THC pill Marinol. This means that Marinol typically takes an hour to two hours to work, and dose adjustment is nearly impossible. Patients often report that when it finally kicks in, it hits like a ton of bricks, leaving them too stoned to function.

For that reason, The Lancet Neurology noted a few years ago, "Smoking has been the route of choice for many cannabis users because it delivers a more rapid 'hit' and allows more accurate dose titration." Because the effect is nearly instantaneous, patients can simply take as many puffs as they need, stopping when they've achieved the needed effect without excessive intoxication.

So far, no pharmaceutical product -- not even Sativex, the much-touted marijuana spray now marketed in Canada -- achieves this combination of rapid action and simple, accurate dose adjustment.

Back in 1999, the Institute of Medicine's White House-commissioned report on medical marijuana conceded marijuana's medical benefits, saying that what is needed is "a nonsmoked rapid-onset cannabinoid drug delivery system."

The new studies -- one from the University of California, San Francisco, and the other from the University at Albany, State University of New York -- confirm that such a system is here. It's called vaporization, and has been familiar to medical marijuana patients for many years, but few outside the medical marijuana community know it exists. Unlike smoking, a vaporizer does not burn the plant material, but heats it just to the point at which the THC and the other cannabinoids vaporize. In the Volcano vaporizer tested at UCSF, the vapors are collected in a detachable plastic bag with a mouthpiece for inhalation.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: drugs, marijuana legalization

Bruce Mirken is communications director for the Marijuana Policy Project.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
This is not news
Posted by: Benjaminsjw on May 2, 2007 12:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I, together with a friend of mine, built a vaporizer 10 years ago. We had read about it on internet, which was already then an important source of knowledge. It basically consisted of a soldering iron with the tip removed, hooked to a dimmer switch, mounted inside a bottle. It worked nicely, though it took us a while to properly adjust the temperature.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» It's news to me Posted by: launcher
I have been using a vaporiser for 6 years now....
Posted by: Princeps on May 2, 2007 1:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They have been commercially available in the UK for quite a while, if you know where to purchase them (Camden Market anybody) and a search on the web will detail many suppliers.

A really good model can cost up to £400, but a perfectly OK one is as low as £60. Really helped me when I stopped smoking tobacco while allowing me to continue marijuana smoking recreationally.

Amazing that vaporisation as a medical delivery system is only now being touted.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I love Camden.... nm Posted by: JoshuaLudd
Overblown danger
Posted by: bornxeyed on May 2, 2007 1:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'd say the perceived dangers of actually smoking the stuff are way out of proportion to the actual effects in any case.

32 years of smoking pot every day and I rarely have a cough or any signs of bronchitis, despite being a pack-a-day tobacco smoker for 20 of those years, though none for the last 10, and having parents who smoked cigarettes like chimneys.

Just another example of practice not living up to theory, in that regards. While no doubt smoking has some negative effect, given that it's been found that THC actually prevents lung cancer, it might also prevent bronchitis, etc, also.

Not that vaporizers aren't an improvement, at least in the sense that you aren't damaging yourself, but they sure are hard to carry around or conceal from the authorities.

But hey, if it gives the powers-that-be some sort of sense of relief that no one will be ruining their happy, happy lungs with nasty, nasty smoke - after all, that is what industrial pollutants are for - then let's get Medicare to pay for those nifty, nifty glass jars and heating coils this minute.

Now, where do I pick up my prescription and my seeds for "Northern Lights"?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Overblown danger Posted by: Johnny Hempseed
» RE: Overblown danger Posted by: icj
» RE: Overblown danger Posted by: bornxeyed
» Seeds Posted by: famouspipeliner
Illegal grass: a Big Brother tool for controlling America's Have-nots.
Posted by: HughScott on May 2, 2007 3:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In 1982, when I was a B727 captain for Continental Airlines flying from LAX to Houston on a many-stopper, the senior flight attendant complained that a Coach passenger had smoked pot during cruise in the aft lavatory.

As proof, she showed me marijuana residue the careless toker had left in the lav.

Clearly outraged, the stew wanted me to call police after landing at our next airport, El Paso, and have the idiot arrested. Instead, I told her I would wait until Houston to keep our trip on schedule.

Before the Houston arrival, I talked to the pot user in Coach, racked his ass for being stupid and told him to leave the cabin ASAP after landing, which he did. When the plane was empty, the flight attendant, again outraged but for a different reason, demanded to know why I didn't call the cops.

My answer: "I forgot."

I had a good reason for protecting the unthinking toker. He would’ve have faced five years in Huntsville State Prison for smoking dope in a state where careless drivers could commit negligent vehicular homicide and not even get a ticket -- ala Laura Bush when she was a teenager.

The same biased justice system exists today. On one hand, our Big Brother government (the feds) slaps poor minorities with jail terms for trying to escape their miserable existence with marjuana while rich and middleclass kids who get caught using pot get a free pass, thanks to their lawyers. Another example of our Republican-created, two-class Have and Have–not society.

Hugh E. Scott, editor of King-George.biz -- the only website with hardcopy proof of White House corruption.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Flying the friendly skies.. Posted by: bornxeyed
Pot Propaganda
Posted by: LeeAnnG on May 2, 2007 6:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In spite of a wide variety of studies, including the Canadian one a couple of years back, that demonstrate effectively that marijuana has little, if any, ill effects, articles like this:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070501/ap_on_he_me/marijuana
_mental_health;_ylt=AkIJmVAz8sqj7qnJnqCsncYDW7oF

keep appearing. It's amazing how the establishment is intent upon convincing everyone that marijuana is a menace. (Note that I had to divide the site because it was too long for the comments. This is on Yahoo's "popular" articles, and has been for about 3 days.)

Any comments on the above article? I'd love to read some reactions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Pot Propaganda Posted by: Gisele
» RE: Pot Propaganda Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Pot Propaganda Posted by: icj
» RE: Pot Propaganda Posted by: kelt65
» RE: Pot Propaganda Posted by: fanny666
» RE: Pot Propaganda Posted by: rotorooter
vapers good, smoking better to releave pain.
Posted by: greggwyck on May 2, 2007 7:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
i am a disabled vetern of the iraq war. i have used the vaperisor and it works to releave a majorty of my pain. but the intensity of the vaperized thc is weaker than smoking. almost no coughing but the lack of caughing seems to not to have the strength that i need to releave my pain. i refuse to use painkillers like vicodin and oxy, because of their addictive properties. thats why i break the law. as we keep feeding our pain with these distructive drugs causing addiction, easy overdose and death. i have gotten so igh that i could not function for about 30 seconds. yet when i take a painkiller i cant drive or walk well and am at rick of destroying my liver. no thanks. weed does seem to have an addictive properties but i have never found my self bent over in my bed willing to do almost anything for that opiat buzz that these painkillers produce. i will never do that to my body ever again. for example i am starting a new job soon and have had to quit smoking to pass my urinalist. this is lame because if i was taking vicodin and had a perscription their would be no need for me to go 3 week in dier pain. the laws are dumb and it sucks that corperate america is stupid enough to think that if you smoke pot you cant work their. when i see higher ups on the corperate ladder using crack and cocaine. that exits your system in 3 days but the drug testing is really to catch thouse of us who need this miracle drug to releave pain. it can take up to 2 months for thc to exit the body depending on how much you smoke. anyways i think it is better to have people that get stoned than a bunch of addicts breaking all kinds of laws while trying to get their next fix.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: opiates Posted by: sasquuatch55
» RE: opiates Posted by: Ian MacLeod
» RE: vapers good, smoking better to releave pain. Posted by: ProgressiveRedStateResident
» my injuries. Posted by: greggwyck
» RE: my injuries. Posted by: fanny666
» RE: my injuries. Posted by: greggwyck
» RE: my injuries. Posted by: greggwyck
» RE: my injuries. Posted by: fanny666
» RE: my injuries. Posted by: greggwyck
» RE: my injuries. Posted by: fanny666
» RE: my injuries. Posted by: Ian MacLeod
» RE: my injuries. Posted by: Ian MacLeod
» RE: my injuries. Posted by: Ian MacLeod
» Ian: Posted by: greggwyck
» RE: Ian: Posted by: Ian MacLeod
What was the name of this article?
Posted by: LiberalRedneck on May 2, 2007 8:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was going to write a uh response but uh kind of forgot uh what the topic was. Oh well, it was a good response.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» you're DRUNK, aren't you? nm Posted by: JoshuaLudd
» RE: no, Posted by: oregoncharles
Medical efficacy
Posted by: wildbill on May 2, 2007 9:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Okay, but I also just heard that someone else did a study that indicates marijuana doesn't actually have any medical benefits, so if I take both at face value, it's a wash.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» blowing smoke up your arse Posted by: brasilaron
» RE: blowing smoke up your arse Posted by: Ian MacLeod
» RE: Medical efficacy Posted by: peaknik35
» RE: Medical efficacy Posted by: Ian MacLeod
» RE: Medical efficacy Posted by: fanny666
» RE: Medical efficacy Posted by: ProgressiveRedStateResident
» RE: Medical efficacy Posted by: greggwyck
The bottom line on medical marijuana.
Posted by: HughScott on May 2, 2007 10:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Last month, I had a prostate cancer scare which happens a lot to men my age, 71.

The first thing I thought about after the initial shock wore off (I'm OK, it turned out) was buying marijuana to offset nausea from the anticipated chemo.

If I do get cancer someday, I would like that option, numbing nausea with pot. But noooooooo! Big Brother says it would be bad for me -- as if getting stoned is worse than puking my guts out and losing 75 pounds like my father did before he died from lung cancer at age 83.

If President Bush ever got cancer, Air Force One would fly in Acapulco Gold from Mexico, assuming that hasn't happened already. It's all about kontrol, folks -- Big Brother over our bodies instead of us, the owners.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Try comparing tobacco to cannabis - mind-boggling.
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on May 2, 2007 10:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look at what tobacco companies have done with their 'nicotine delivery devices':

1) They breed high-nicotine strains of tobacco so that their customers will get a higher dose of nicotine.

2) They include tiny slivers of fiberglass in their cigarettes, which puncture the delicate lining of the lung aveoli, leading to greater absorption of nicotine into the bloodstream.

3) They spent billions on massive PR operations, complete with 'tobacco science institutes', that are being copied by the fossil fuel industry in their own war against stopping global warming.

Compare this to medical cannabis, an effective pain medication that doesn't cause strokes and heart damage (unlike the widely promoted Vioxx and Celebrex drugs); the only known effective anti-nasuea and appetite-stimulating medication for cancer and AIDS patients; the best treatment for glaucoma; a good calming medication for aggressive people (if only someone had smoked a joint with Cho, he might not have gone crazy on Prozac or Paxil or whatever it was he was on) - and it is also a great substitute for alcoholics who are trying to stop drinking themselves to death.

I suppose the real problem, from the point of view of the pharmaceutical and tobacco and alcohol companies, is that the plant is easy to grow and they'd lose a lot of profits if people switched to pot instead of the 'socially acceptable' corporate-sponsored drugs. Likewise, the police forces and distict attorney's offices that seize people's property under 'drug forefeiture laws' would lose a lot of income if cannabis was decriminalized.

Go down to your local DA office and ask them how much they make from cannabis-related seizures of cars and property every year - they won't tell you, but it's probably in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not more.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Another Pot Myth Debunked
Posted by: wieczerza19 on May 2, 2007 11:00 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Aside from their protests over the ill-effects of 'smoked marijuana', the anti-legal/medical weed folks love to tell everyone that stoners are lazy slackers who munch Doritos all day and never amount to anything. I am (to a certain extent) living proof that this assertion is also blatantly false.

I'm currently a junior at Northeastern University, and I have smoked pot 4-5 times daily since I was a junior in high school. Furthermore I have consistent access to some of the choicest headies in Boston (this means that when I smoke, I get high). My GPA for this past semster (just ended) was 4.0. My cumulative GPA for my ungergrad tenure is 3.57 (I can provide transcripts if anyone would like proof). I have had a steady marketing job aside from classes for over a year now, where I've had success and earned the respect and affection of my coworkers. While there's plenty still to come before I can evaluate my lifelong performance, I would be hard pressed to say that smoking weed every (I emphasize EVERY) day has had any sort of detrimental effect on my schooling, work, or life in general.

It's true that many less-avid tokers out there might take a couple of hits in the early afternoon and feel inclined to do almost nothing with the rest of their day. It's also true that my capacity to be almost always stoned and function normally had to develop through a rigorous schedule of (what else?) getting high. Be that as it may, for anyone to assert that smoking pot HAS to turn you into a lazy douchebag is completely ludicrous. Smart recreational use NEVER has to interfere with the ordinary life of anyone. In fact, I'm sure that there are plenty of Alternet readers out there who can corroborate this account - lawyers, journalists, physicians, musicians, and every other type of professional - who will tell you they've smoked pot for 20 years and have had great success.

By the way, I'm convinced that all one need do to function completely normally while high (as I'm doing right now) is to "play through" their highness. The thing about weed is that it makes you want to be lazy - you just have to convince yourself that you'll conduct your regular affairs with the added bonus of THC instead of sitting on the couch and watching Seinfeld.

Existing marijuana laws began as a knee-jerk reaction from a bigoted establishment to the enjoyment of cannabis by Mexican immigrants. Since then, countless billions and several thousand lives have been wasted trying to keep human beings from growing, possessing, or smoking a naturally-occurring substance. This substance has since been proven through scientific research to be (at the very least) far less detrimental to overall health than other already-legal drugs (read: alcohol, tobacco, etc.). Still, its prohibition remains in place, while crack heroine, and meth continue to rack up huge body counts and ruin lives across the country. That is the reality of this situation. Anything else really doesn't matter.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Another Pot Myth Debunked Posted by: Ian MacLeod
Drug Warriors - another "mistruth" exposed!
Posted by: Michael Boldin on May 2, 2007 11:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Great article here - just another example of the lies and distortions we've been told for decades. They want us to believe in all the harm we'll get - so instead we have to give up liberty and spend countless billions to make a plant "illegal"

Disgusting.

A good read on this issue:

What if All Drugs were Legal?
http://www.populistamerica.com/what_if_all_drugs_were_legal

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I...uhh...
Posted by: LANCE on May 2, 2007 11:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I started to read this but...uhh...I got the munchies. I'll get to it...uhh...later.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

a more tasteful vaporizer...
Posted by: Aurality on May 2, 2007 12:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
also folks, there is a single already patented vaporizer pipe (non-electrical) that is available in some shops.

it is made of bird's eye maple, has a chrome bowl-piece that screens can be used with... but more importantly has a screw-on top that contains a ceramic tablet. (flame hovers, tablet heats up, tankí is vaporized quite nicely.)

i'm not sure now what the name of this implement is, but do a search & i'm sure you'll see it come up.

costs about $75.oo and is well worth-it healthwise.

~ GwT

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Cannibis is great for pain, cancer, MS, and is a nice night-cap.
Posted by: Ghoulman on May 2, 2007 1:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... as far as anyone can tell after 5000 years of positive use and no deaths, is that weed does nothing for confusion. :D

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Destroys the Last Objection??
Posted by: launcher on May 2, 2007 1:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've been in the field of neuroscience for over 12 years, and I've never come across a single study (or set of studies published over a short time period) that any researcher would claim ends debate on a scientific topic. A "Definitive" study, yes. An "End of Story, Let's Move On" study, no.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Also
Posted by: wieczerza19 on May 2, 2007 1:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've got a nice little ditty from gotvape.com that's essentially a bong (water tobacco device) with a huge slide. This comes witha heat gun, which is placed directly into the slide. It's great - huge rips of vapor and hand-held control over the process. It's a little time-consuming, but my favorite model yet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Drug War Facts
Posted by: fanny666 on May 2, 2007 2:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Drug War Statistics

I post this on pretty much every drug reporter article, but it's a good resource. Call your rep at 202-224-3121 and quote something, tell them what you think. Civil disobedience via smoking is fine, but let's try to end the War on Drugs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Drug War Facts Posted by: liberalibrarian
leagalize it and tax it
Posted by: eosrk on May 2, 2007 3:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and maybe we as mankind would be able to travel beyond the stars....or a real spaceship that can travel beyond the speed of light....but crackpot leaders can't even travel beyond one block before they create kaos.

Before Prohibition, there were crimes; during Prohibition, crimes were warlike, just like the Drug War of today; After Prohibition, the nation calmed down.

It's as simple as that, but we're talking about government, whom believe they protection morals of our people....or certian people....while causing kaos for everyone else!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Even Jesus got stoned
Posted by: eosrk on May 2, 2007 3:36 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I mean, in ancient times, the peaceful nations were stoned, and peaceful, it was the "Crusaderlike" nations that went out and caused all the shit, like now!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The original UCSF study
Posted by: fanny666 on May 2, 2007 3:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Go to www.pubmed.com and enter 17296917

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pot heads: if you've ever used illegal substances you're a criminal
Posted by: ateo on May 2, 2007 4:10 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't think that just because you disagree with a law that makes it acceptable for you to disobey it. You are morally tainted forever once you violate the law and become a criminal.

None of you who use or have used illegal substances are any better than any other sort of criminal. Although you surely like to sit on your moral high horse and condemn men who act fully within the law such as military personnel (omg baby killers!!!) or President Bush. They are good men of high moral standing and you are nothing but a criminal.

Keep that in mind at all times please. You're basically an amoral anarchist if you choose to violate the law and use drugs. The only difference between you and a felon coming out of prison is you haven't been caught. Morally and as far as your value as a human being goes you are identical.

Rest easily hippies, one day my Christian soldiers will come for you in the night.

P.S. I'm very serious. Everything on the internet is serious business.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» He doesn't sound like it. Posted by: slydad
» The Burning Bush Posted by: famouspipeliner
» This Hippie Posted by: famouspipeliner
» That wasn't necessary. Posted by: slydad
» P.S. Posted by: famouspipeliner
» :) Posted by: nor cal surfer
» can you hear the laughter? Posted by: nor cal surfer
» Can I get a cell next to Dubya? Posted by: kettleblack
Prohibition is Ludicrous
Posted by: indiaberlin on May 2, 2007 8:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How is it, that a plant, that grows naturally in the wild, and is not processed in any way, is illegal?
Most of us know about the Harrison Act of 1927 (?) and how cotton growers raised their voices because hemp was in direct competition with the cotton crop.

Seriously, why not just legalize it and tax it? I honestly believe its because the U.S. government either doesn't want any competition because they are actually allowing all the of the illegal substance(s) to enter the U.S. and somehow it is a trade off somewhere down the line (such as so that country X, Y, or Z can earn enough money to pay us back money they have borrowed, or possibly because they need help with all of the private little wars that our tax dollars are funding for the Spooks/CIA to fight) or the government just doesn't know how to properly regulate the many aspects that would be mountains of paperwork should they elect to legalize it.

It's ridiculous. The police in cities typically bitch about all the paperwork they have to go through for those they bust with marijuana, who are, for the most part, normally law abiding tax payers who happened to get caught. They don't flee, they put up a fight, they don't even insult the police when they get caught. This is the dilemma...if I were a cop, I'd probably just take the stuff and then flush it to avoid the hassle. Wouldn't the time of the police be better spent preventing serious crimes like rape, murder, and violence? It sure seems to me that marijuana should be waaaaaaaaaay down on the list of priorities for the police.

Additionally, it clogs up the judicial system. They should make things illegal like giving government contracts to those companies with political ties, or recruiting children to become soldiers while they are in high school!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Christian?
Posted by: Obomsawin on May 2, 2007 8:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Remarks like this from self proclaiming Christians grieve me deeply. Why would the world be at all interested in a Christ, who supposedly would send His followers after them in the middle of the night? I wouldn't either! What a terrible witness!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Carcinogens in Cannabis smoke
Posted by: chomsky on May 2, 2007 11:51 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've been trouble by the following paradox about the health facts of cannabis:

Cannabis smoke, like any plant that is smoked, contains several chemicals known to cause cancer.

But, study after study shows, their is zero risk of getting cancer from smoking pot, no one has ever gotten lung cancer from smoking it. In fact, some studies suggest that the risk of cancer decreases slightly.

Why does something that contain a variety of carcinogens not increase the risk of cancer?

The only answer that makes any sense to me is that cannabis has anti-carcinogenic properties, meaning a cure for cancer. The anti-carcinogens counteracts the carcinogens, and they break about evenly.

I have not seem many studies about using cannabis to prevent cancer. But if cannabis could hold the key to stopping cancer, I think it's worth looking into.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Sure . . . Posted by: slydad
» Spaniards Posted by: brasilaron
Finally, a voice of sanity in a hot-button topic
Posted by: xbj on May 3, 2007 7:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks for printing this. As someone who has avoided pot and fought it my entire life because of the dangers of smoking it, I knew nothing about this until some very interesting discussions on Alternet.

A word to the wise in the "Medicinal Pot" lobby; push this method (and ONLY this method) and jettison the Big Tobbacco funding and completely separate your movement from advocating smoking anything; indeed, come out against smoking PERIOD, and you WILL win the battle.

As long as the medicinal marijuana movement remains a backdoor attempt to give Big Tobbaco yet another lease on life with a newly legalized product that they will quickly add as many carcinogenic additives and pesticides through industrialization, mass production, and growing on massive farms ASAP, it will fail and continue to fail, because people in the industrialized world at least have finally waken up to the very real dangers of smoking anything and aren't about to legalize another carcinogenic product (and believe me, poterettes, marketed and designed to be chainsmoked, will be every bit as carcinogenic IF NOT MORE than cigarettes are today.)

Push vaporization and decry smoking, and you've got a real chance, because it makes sense, because REAL science (and not bought and paid for Big Tobacco whore shill science) backs it up.

And get those idiots in BC smoking huge joints off the friggin' streets for starters...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A $30 Billion/yr Black Market product made legal?
Posted by: owlbear1 on May 3, 2007 8:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wonder how many banks would have problems if all those drug traffickers suddenly didn't have to launder their cash?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Inconclusive
Posted by: samba on May 3, 2007 3:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The study cited is too short term to draw conclusions from.
As for making the case the medical marijuana is totally safe-don't bet on it. There 's fairly thorough study just released showing ,aparently that those with a propensity for shizoid disorders have increased manifestations under the influence of marijuana. The study was quite clear that this effect was only n those wth such disorders,or the propensity,and was not a problem for those of "normal" psychology. Needless to say many of the press reports just said pot causes schizophrenia.

Anecdotally I can tell you I know someone who got ,emphyzema after 40 years of daily pot smoking-he never smoked tobacco in his life. His doctor told him he had to stop smoking pot.
It's harder to control the dose,but ingesting is a far better way to use cannabis. The indian farmers have ,for hundreds of generations drank Bhang after a days work in the fields,which relaxes their muscles ,and thoughts after a hard days work,and stimulates appaetite for the evening meal. Ingesting cannabis can have a salubrious effect on the digestive system as well ,and the psyoactive aspects are integrated better when processed through the gut then going directly to the brain through respiration.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Legality by Roe VS Wade
Posted by: OncejesterwasI on May 4, 2007 12:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After pondering on this for a bit, I spent the better part of last night reading the Roe VS Wade decision. If the Supreme Court can strike down abortion laws as unconstitutional based on doctor/patiant confidentiality, then why couldn't they find medical marijuana to be a privicy issue as well. Roe VS Wade set the precidence, all we gotta do is push it through.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

did you know!!!
Posted by: greggwyck on May 4, 2007 12:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
that illegal drugs are the number 10 financhel economy world wide.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hemp for ethanol?
Posted by: Jeanne on May 4, 2007 2:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Besides its medical uses, wouldn't hemp (maybe not the exact plant as medical cannabis is derived from?) be a wonderful source of ethanol? You won't be competing for the food crop (corn) and it literally grows like a weed!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

is Marihuan in your new health insurance system
Posted by: richholland on May 4, 2007 10:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
in the dutch health insurance system (mixed state/private companies), obligatory to everyone.
a doctor can prescribe marihuana by asthma or/and cancerpatients.
However this is not the case in all euro countries.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obomsawin
Posted by: Obomsawin on May 5, 2007 10:12 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Terrorism? The definition of terrorism includes any action that could potentially threaten another's life and/or health, therefore speeding could indeed be viewed as terrorism. Do we really want to go there?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

To all you "heathens"!
Posted by: SamFox on May 6, 2007 12:01 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here is a bit of something for those who call themselves Christians. I am a Christian. Jesus did a lot for me & is the most faithful person in my life. What does His Word (It is NOT fiction) say about herbs?

Gen 1:11-12 (read the whole chapter)
11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Gen 9:3
Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

Ps 104:14-15
14 He causes the grass to grow for the cattle, and herb for the service of man: that he may bring forth food out of the earth;
15 And wine that makes glad the heart of man, and oil to make his face to shine, and bread which strengthens man's heart.
1 Tim 5:23
23 Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities.

As a Christian I am for RE legalizing cannabis & hemp.
I doubt there are many "black op ninja" Christians out there. But it sounds nice to those who quote stupid remarks by those who say they are Christians as an excuse to reject the Bible & Jesus' work to give mankind the opportunity to be cleansed from sin.

Fellow Christians: do your home work on how & why cannabis was made illegal. It has to do with protecting synthetic Rx drug makers, synthetic fabrics & the cotton industry's profits than any thing else.

Cival disobediance? Worked for cival rights...Thank you MLK & Norma Parks! Cannabis: Reformers Mark Embrey & Ed Rosenthal plus many others. (Sorry if I misspelled the names.) Ever heard if Angel Raich?

There are examples of those who disobeyed unjust decrees or laws in the Bible. Judges 6:11, Gideon thrashing wheat to hide it from his enemies--Exodus 1:17, the mid wives in Egypt--Joshua chapt. 2, Rahab at Jericho--Peter & John in the book of Acts 4:19-20.

Just be sure the law is really unjust, like cannabis & hemp prohibition or racial discrimination.

SamFox

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Kaneh bosm! Posted by: garry minor
This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.