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
  • 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.

The Purple Brain: America's New Reefer Madness

By Marsha Rosenbaum and Paul Armentano, AlterNet. Posted June 23, 2007.


The ONDCP is spreading new propaganda that the pot grown in the 1960's and '70s is far weaker than today's "pot 2.0," making absurd and unsubstantiated claims of "brain damage."

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

More than 70 years in the making, the long-awaited sequel to the notorious 1936 film, Reefer Madness has arrived. It's called The Purple Brain, and just like its unintentionally campy predecessor, its purpose is to frighten Americans about marijuana.

The particular target audience for the Feds' new production is the millions of parents who may have, without incident, experimented with marijuana in the 1970s, when they were about the same age as their children are today.

The plot is as follows: Sure, the pot you and your 40-something peers once enjoyed may have been innocuous, but that's only because it bears no resemblance to the super-potent weed of today -- strains with such foreboding names as "Train wreck," "AK-47," and "The Purple." As proclaimed by Drug Czar John Walters recently, "[W]e are no longer talking about the drug of the 1960s and 1970s -- this is [in computer parlance] Pot 2.0."

To top off this frightening message, unsubstantiated claims of "brain damage" resulting from the use of this super-pot are new buzzwords in today's Prevention circles.

If ever there was an attention-getting script for scaring the hell out of parents, this is it.

Fortunately, while the headlines are grabbing, the story lacks credibility.

Growers in the business of selling marijuana have always attached pet names to selected strains of pot. In the 1970s, popular varieties included "Acapulco Gold" and "Maui Wowie." Today, as in the past, most of these labels are little more than clever marketing gimmicks devised by producers and sellers to distinguish their particular product in a highly competitive marketplace.

While a handful of potent strains may be available in limited quantities today, these varieties compose only a minute percentage of the overall marketplace -- at a price tag that is cost-prohibitive to anyone but the most wealthy of aficionados. For others, marijuana remains essentially the same plant it has always been, with its relatively mild rise in average potency akin to the difference between beer and wine.

Unlike alcohol -- or even aspirin, -- today's marijuana still poses no risk of fatal overdose, regardless of the strength of its primary psychoactive ingredient, THC. Moreover, cannabis consumers readily distinguish between low and high potency marijuana and moderate their use accordingly.

Finally, despite claims that marijuana alters the brain, it is important to note that THC -- regardless of its potency -- is surprisingly non-toxic to the adult as well as the teenage brain. Recently scientists at the Nathan S. Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research reported that they could find "no ... evidence of cerebral atrophy or loss of white matter integrity" attributable to cannabis use in the brains of frequent adolescent marijuana users (compared to non-using controls) after performing MRI scans and other advanced imaging technology. Separate studies assessing the cognitive skills of long-term marijuana smokers have also reported no demonstrable deficits.

Of course, marijuana is an intoxicant that should be avoided until and unless an individual has reached an age of mental and physical maturity, and this might be well into his or her twenties.

But as we urge adolescents to abstain or at least delay, let's not forget the lessons we've learned after two decades of drug education that has failed to convince students to "just say no." When teens ultimately learn the truth, exaggerated campaigns like The Purple Brain do little more than create skepticism about anything adults tell them about drugs, not to mention fueling their natural curiosity.

What's really frightening is that when teens realize they've been deceived about marijuana, they tend to disregard warnings about the very real dangers of hard drugs like cocaine and heroin. It's this latter scenario that ultimately trumps The Purple Brain as the real horror show.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: propaganda, marijuana

Marsha Rosenbaum is the Director of the San Francisco office of the Drug Policy Alliance and the author of Safety First: A Reality-Based Approach to Teens and Drugs. Paul Armentano is the Senior Policy Analyst for NORML and the NORML Foundation in Washington, DC.

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:
Funded by the alchohol industry, no doubt
Posted by: UnEasyOne on Jun 23, 2007 4:12 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nobody but dopers buy Reefer Madness. They just watch and giggle. No doubt, after a short time this garbage will be the same thing.

This reminds me of a movie called "Wild in the Streets." I saw it with a friend when it came out in 1968. We were both in our late teens and we thought it was hilarious - if a bit ridiculous. The basic premise is that a psychedelic-dealing rock star mounts a big (and successful) campaign to get the vote for 14 year olds. They feed LSD to congress and wind up tossing everybody over 30 into camps where they're fed massive doses of LSD every day. When my buddy and I walked into the lobby, we were laughing at how ludicrous the plot was. we had both considered it to be decent satire though and were discussing it in kind of an animated fashion as were the other young people I saw.

The audience had been about equally divided though, between the young and the over thirty crowd (a distinctly different generation) and I got my biggest laugh of the evening when I looked around and saw that the older group was universally grim-faced, talking in hushed tones, shaking their heads in dismay. They had taken that s**t seriously!

The split isn't so much generational now - but it still exists. I'm sure this film will expose the new divide as clearly as that one did.

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

» Speaking of LSD Posted by: Gulliver
it is about PROFITmaking
Posted by: richholland on Jun 23, 2007 4:22 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
in Holland marihuana is legalised but it is not allowed for a bar to sell alcohol and weed.

Marihuana is very dangerous because it makes people soft,
alcohol and tobacco makes people violent and nervous.
Those are the slaves that work for the RICH.
Because you are so fat and nervous you have to fight all over the world.
Working, smoking, drinking
Even instead of fucking you have porno and laptopdancing.

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

» RE: it is about PROFITmaking Posted by: morticia
» RE: it is about PROFITmaking Posted by: surfreality
» RE: it is about PROFITmaking Posted by: richholland
» RE: it is about PROFITmaking Posted by: albrechtkrausse
Excellent Propaganda
Posted by: LeaderofMen on Jun 23, 2007 5:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I admit I've not seen this new film.

But I did see Reefer Madness. Of course it was totally ridiculous. Everyone knows that being high doesn't cause anyone to be violent. Nervous - er, paranoid - in some cases, yes. But violence is NOT a symptom of being high.

All of the so-called research that the gov't has produced about marijuana is classic propaganda. There has never been an OD on pot. People don't shoot up high schools because they're high. Drag race deaths don't happen because drivers have rolled a spliff and smoked it. Wars aren't started by people doing bong hits.

Alcohol has a clear and long-running history of being the destroyer of marriages, the cause of economic ruin, the creator of gang violence, traffic deaths, fetal defects and its syndrome... the list is virtually endless. WE ALL KNOW THIS.

The only people who might believe the claims of this new film are die-hard Christians (because they'll believe anything, as has been proven during the last 6 years of the Bush administration), those who think Bush is Christ incarnate, and those who have never smoked a joint.

The rest of us are laughing our asses off at this latest attempt to tell us that potent pot is cause for alarm.

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

Say it ain't so
Posted by: mizipi on Jun 23, 2007 5:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Surely reefer is dangerous, Iraq is full of WMD's, Saddam did 9-11, Osama hates freedom and liberty, George and Jesus are bosom buddies, Dick Cheney loves the Constitution, tax breaks for the rich are good for the economy.............but seriously, all this crap about how much more potent the pot is today as compared to the 1970's, BS. Give me some good 'gold' or redbud', stems, seeds and all.......better yet, let's do away with reefer, take a hint from the Middle East and get high on hashish.
I've been smoking non-tobacco products for over 30 years, and here I am, reading stuff on Alternet. Does that make me eligible to be called a pot-head?

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

» RE: Say it ain't so Posted by: Shey
» RE: Say it ain't so Posted by: Solar Wind
Another Reagan legacy
Posted by: sausage on Jun 23, 2007 6:02 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In 1977 President Jimmy Carter said in a speech before Congress:Therefore, I support legislation amending Federal law to eliminate all Federal criminal penalties for the possession of up to one ounce of marijuana. This decriminalization is not legalization. It means only that the Federal penalty for possession would be reduced and a person would received a fine rather than a criminal penalty. Federal penalties for trafficking would remain in force and the states would remain free to adopt whatever laws they wish concerning the marijuana smoker.

I always viewed decriminalization a halfway, halfassed, hard to grasp concept and thought, when I was a dues paying member back in the Seventies, that NORML should have gone for the whole enchilada of legalization. But half a loaf is better than none.

Unfortunately pot smokers got no loaf, for three short years after Carter's speech endorsing the concept of marijuana decriminalization the nation elected Ronald Reagan.

Here's an example of this Republican god's knowledge of marijuana:“I now have absolute proof that smoking even one marijuana cigarette is equal in brain damage to being on Bikini Island during an H-bomb blast.”

I'm sure whichever of Reagan's speech writers pinned the above statement had just polished off a joint rolled from sinsemilla buds.

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

» RE: Another Reagan legacy Posted by: somegirl
» RE: Another Reagan legacy Posted by: VannaLaRoche
Legalize mind pigmentation.
Posted by: HughScott on Jun 23, 2007 6:09 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the privacy of their own homes, I believe Americans have the right to color their brains any hue they want.

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

the great marijuana lie
Posted by: Mamarianne on Jun 23, 2007 6:27 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The last paragraph says it best. It is hard to talk to teens about drugs because of the great marijuana lie. I wonder how many lives that lie has ruined!

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

well
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Jun 23, 2007 6:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Brain damage from smoking pot occurs ONLY from depriving the brain of oxygen.. by SMOKING it. As we all know from cigarettes... it is nearly if not actually impossible to smoke that much. More potent pot actually means LESS chance of brain damage because less would have to be smoked to serve its purpose.

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

Does anyone here remember the commercial a few years ago
Posted by: LPB on Jun 23, 2007 8:15 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
that showed a teenage girl and her date sitting on the couch smoking a joint? The guy was getting ready to put some kind of move on the girl, who was too stupidly stoned to notice, apparently! I immediately had a talk with my teen-aged daughter to inform her that unless she was mixing it with something or unconscious, she was not likely to be rendered too stupid to notice some guy putting his hands on her. We had to have a couple of talks regarding the lies the government was telling in its ads, because it was very important to me that she believe what I told her about the dangers of other drugs, such as roofies, crack, etc.
It's infuriating that our government would spread such mis-truths in its effort to control the behavior of citizens.

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

government drugs
Posted by: snowhound on Jun 23, 2007 8:33 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There has been a sharp rise over the last decade in the prescription of psychiatric drugs for children, including antipsychotics, stimulants like Ritalin and antidepressants.
Last year, the United States spent $10 billion on the newer antipsychotic drugs, which include medications such as Zyprexa, Risperdal, Seroquel and Geodon. Meanwhile the government continues to attack a natural drug that has helped thousands of people suffering from AIDS and Cancer. The reason for this is that if pot was legalized for medicinal purposes, it would cut into the Drug industries profits. I'd give my 5 year old a puff of weed before I'd ever give him the poisonous chemicals our government allows to be prescribed for children.

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

» RE: government drugs Posted by: Ian MacLeod
» RE: government drugs Posted by: snowhound
» RE: government drugs Posted by: Shey
» RE: government drugs Posted by: snowhound
gordie
Posted by: gordie on Jun 23, 2007 9:05 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Clearly, the writers do not work with kids who are victims of pot,
and become stoned out their basic abilities to be able to study
or even communicate with their buddies. I suggest they visit
their local ER's that are experiencing a rise in pot emergencies.
"smarty" answers do not suffice for facts, nor for denying that
marijuana growers have increased the potency by up to 12%.
Think it's not a dealer's draw to be able to sell kids stronger
stuff? Grow up or spend some time taking kids histories!

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

» RE: gordie Posted by: sausage
» Pot "emergencies" don't exist. Posted by: JoshuaLudd
» RE: Pot "emergencies" don't exist. Posted by: Ian MacLeod
» RE: Gordie Posted by: Shey
» Gordie, potatoes are more lethal... Posted by: brotherjonah
» RE: gordie Posted by: bambic
» RE: Pot emergency Posted by: snowhound
» RE: Pot emergency Posted by: Ian MacLeod
» RE: gordie Posted by: grailsnail
Why I don't smoke marijuana
Posted by: willymack on Jun 23, 2007 9:34 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was a drug abuse counselor back in my Navy days. It didn't take long to discover that the usual arguements against its use ( gateway drug, destruction of physical and mental health, moral degredation, etc.) were mere speculation and not firmly rooted in FACT. I don't smoke marijuana because the notion of setting something afire and inhaling the smoke-just as with tobacco-for the purpose of getting "high" seems absurd in the extreme. What other people think and do is none of my business.

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

» Why are so many republicans so dumb? Posted by: brotherjonah
» Allow me to clarify. Posted by: Illiteratilumen
Where is the film?
Posted by: picklebarrela55 on Jun 23, 2007 10:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't find any information on this film. Can anyone provide a link or something?

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

» RE: Where is the film? Posted by: picklebarrela55
Grow you own-
Posted by: WitchyNy on Jun 23, 2007 10:54 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Pot. Vegetables. Fruit. Wheat. Animal food.....

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

» RE: Grow you own- Posted by: Shey
» RE: Grow you own- Posted by: Illiteratilumen
Where os any actual reference to the movie?
Posted by: alblazo on Jun 23, 2007 10:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How can someone write an article about a movie and not provide at least one hyperlink to the trailer for the movie or at least something from the producers of the movie? There's not even a single mention of who the producers are except the writer's reference to "the feds." What kind of crap writing is this?
~Rev El

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

» RE: Too high to use google? Awesome! Posted by: VannaLaRoche
This film is an argument for legalization
Posted by: KeepsonTickn on Jun 23, 2007 11:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
According to the article, this movie says "You parents know that marijuana used to be harmless." Then it goes on to say that marijuana producers are following the lead of the tobacco industry and increasing potency. It then asserts that the modified marijuana is dangerous.

It would stand to reason then, that the government should legalize marijuana production and monitor its quality, to protect our kids from the bad stuff that could evolve with unregulated production.

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

mick3
Posted by: mick3 on Jun 23, 2007 12:24 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've used pot for pain and insomnia for decades, and guess what! I'm still compos mentis. Very much so, just ask my straight friends. But until politicians turn honest and much less selfish, they will continue to protect, or even advance, their precious careers upon the lives of those vicimized by bad law. How they can sleep at night or, as is the current fad, call themselves "Christian" is quite beyond comprehension. But then, it takes a lot of hypocrisy to do what they do, anyway.
I say, "Go MPP and all that lot."

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

re
Posted by: picklebarrela55 on Jun 23, 2007 1:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't even tell if there is actually a movie or not. I looked online and can't find any information on it.

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

Brain Freeze.....
Posted by: picket on Jun 23, 2007 3:52 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Big Brother spends billions yakkin about Cannabis.

"Brain's Cannabinoid System 'mellows' Seizures."...Medical News Today 8/06 "The same brain machinery that responds to the active substance in MJ provides a central "on-demand" protection against seizures researchers have found.

How many more years will it take for the DEA to reschedule Cannabis from a Schedule I....no known medical use?

Forever.....NO ONE CARES....ask your Congressman!!!!

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

Pot Advertisement
Posted by: lessbread on Jun 23, 2007 4:25 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Assuming for the moment that this film exists, it seems to me that it will only serve to advertise the use of marijuana.

I smoked some AK-47 a couple of years ago. It was killer...

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

» RE: Pot Advertisement Posted by: MartianBachelor
» RE: Pot Advertisement Posted by: lessbread
the real problem
Posted by: Shey on Jun 23, 2007 6:28 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The real drug problem in this country today is the proliferation of anti-depressants, anti-psychotics prescribed for simple depression, anti-hyperactive drugs for kids, and the obscene, non stop TV commercials that tout their benefits.
Do some Googling, skip the Pharmaceutical Co. sites and the FDA sites and even the NIH site, and read about the real life experiences of real people who have gone through the nightmare of trying one anti-depressant after another, including legal "mix and match" prescriptions mixing anti-psychotics with SSRIs, (the most common class of anti-depressant) only to experience everything from "emotional flatlining" to an increase of all the symptoms these drugs supposedly alleviate, including feeling suicidal (not just in "teenagers"). And the hell they go through trying to withdraw from these legal drugs. Then ask yourself why the federal government, beholden to the pharmaceutical industry lobby second only to Big Oil, wants to keep pot illegal.

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

» No, Shey... the real problem... Posted by: JoshuaLudd
» very true. Posted by: JoshuaLudd
BC Bud turned me off of pot
Posted by: Gitaiba on Jun 23, 2007 7:49 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I live in Seattle, and the pot that comes across the border here is obscenely strong, particularly compared the stuff I smoked as a kid in New Mexico. The stuff in New Mexico was mild and pleasant, and just made me horny, hungry, and tired. I most strongly wished to lay in a La-Z-Boy and have an attractive man bring me a sandwich.

The first time I smoked pot here, the world spun out of control, I couldn't think, and I got horribly paranoid. Turned me off of pot altogether, though I'd rarely smoked it in the first place. Maybe the drug warriors should work to make all pot much stronger.

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

» Did it smell funny? Posted by: brotherjonah
This film is ludicrous
Posted by: jack alexander on Jun 23, 2007 11:54 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm a substance abuse counselor and have been for the last 20 odd years. I smoked it while getting my degree and certification. We learned a lot about the history of prohibition of drugs during my courses and it all boils down to the lifestyle one adapts to in the current drug scene that is bad for you, not the drugs themselves. Prior to prohibition drugs were freely available, and yes, there were some who had problems with drugs. Most did not. They had homes, farms, businesses and families. The criminalization of substances created several elitist industries: Courts, Police, Jails, and Prisons--not to forget the associated support services for them. Big business this, and yes, big Pharma has a lot to do with the continuing harm caused by prohibition--as they also sell substances controlled by another big business or two, namely doctors and pharmacies. A good deal of their substances are harmful as compared with natural substances.

As much as I have disdain for the law-enforcement community I belong to Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. If you google them (LEAP) you will find in their pages a good deal for what we have been saying here. Prohibition doesn't work for the good of the people. Just like war doesn't work, etc...

On a final note, in support of the big pharma claims made by myself and others above I highly recommend seeing Michael Moore's new film: Sicko. It has been discussed in these forums this week. In it you will learn of the ill intent of the government and big business about your medical needs. It can be seen at this direct link:

http://www.ichblog.eu/content/view/1729/2/
Information Clearing House Blog - Sicko - The Movie in Full - Michael Moore

regards... jack

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

12% increase in THC....
Posted by: brotherjonah on Jun 23, 2007 11:59 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Would be the difference between smoking 7 joints a day and smoking 8 joints a day.

What kind of a stupid argument is an increase of 12%?

Why not go for the Whole Enchilada and mention that Hashish is anywhere from 50% to 75% more potent than raw weed? Or that people who cook the stuff into brownies and cupcakes actually get 3 or 4 times the dose of THC because they aren't letting as much of it go "up in smoke"?

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

Better yet, why not resurrect the terrorism link lie?
Posted by: brotherjonah on Jun 24, 2007 12:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You know, smoke a joint, finance a suicide bomber...

Never mentioning that the top bananas in al Qa'aeda are more closely tied to the Oil Industry than to dope...

You know, medicinal marijuana must be on the agenda in Congress or in the legislatures of quite a few states, in order for this crap to be pushed off on us all of a sudden.

They don't spend solid advertising money for nothing.

Not unless it's for expanding the war and therefore making their buddies richer...

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

the kind is a good thing...
Posted by: art guerrilla on Jun 24, 2007 4:38 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...*anyone* who has ever indulged knows that; *anyone* who tries to maintain otherwise is a suspected fool, tool, or foaming-at-the-mouth 'puritan'...

(of course, it usually doesn't take much to discover that the 'puritan' has THEIR drugs (legal or otherwise) that THEY think is just hunky-dory...)

1. the point about the 'high thc' pot being more expensive and generally affordable only by our 'betters' is true...

2. further, there have ALWAYS been growers/heads who have grown 'gourmet' pot and bred for potency, etc... just not as widespread as now...

3. that also doesn't explain that hash and hash oil which concentrate potency (REGARDLESS of the thc % of the source materials) have been around for thousands of years and yet hash/oil madness seems to be an unreported 'crime'...

4. of course, the whole drug war in general, and reefer madness in particular, were driven by misinformation, hysterical exaggerations, and prejudice against minorities and malcontents; it has NOTHING to do with factual evidence, sincere public health concerns, or 'protecting' people from harmful substances...

5. IF the banking system (and other vested interests in the so-called war against some drugs) were to lose their cash cow of skimming and laundering drug money, the whole damn house of cards WOULD collapse tomorrow...

6. tens of thousands of people are killed in amerika each year from LEGAL drugs, approximately one zillion times more than 'die' from pot use... (the ones that die from pot use are victims of lead poisoning, courtesy your local drug pigs...)

come the revolution, pot smoking will be encouraged...

art guerrilla
aka ann archy

eof

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

Right On!
Posted by: lmwilker on Jun 24, 2007 7:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think what the writers of this sort of propaganda don't know or acknowlege is that many people who began experimenting with pot in the 70s are still experimenting with pot in their 40s and 50s. By then the "Kids," some now in their 20s, have seen that their parents and their parents' friends didn't go on to harder drugs. That they are decent, kind, hardworking people. Homeowners. Pet owners. Mom. Dad. Normal.

I remember in elementery school, Catholic, actually, the big anti-drug program featured a tale of a girl who took LSD and thought she was a great artist and in a manic state wrote short stories and painted. Then she bit the head off of her canary and jumped out of her 10th floor window. When the police entered her room they found her writings just scribbles and the canvases smeared with blood. Ridiculous stuff though the poster of the Speedy Alka Seltzer guy riding a hypodermic needle with the lightning bolt legend "Speed Kills" was pretty cool and valid.

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

Doesn't anybody realize...
Posted by: bambic on Jun 24, 2007 9:41 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
how many thousands of people self-medicate with weed (and other street drugs) because they have no access to health care or prescription drug coverage?
Before I was arrested for possession of a weed pipe, I was smoking marijuana because it not only alleviated my chronic back pain, it kept my depression and anxiety at a level which the prescription drugs I am currently taking don't come close to doing.
So, because I am on probation, I am given a monthly piss test. And it's okay when they find the Hydrocodone (highly addictive), the Xanax (also addictive) and the Wellbutrin.
I know I'd be much better off with just the weed, but I'll end up back in jail.
What's funny is that I am on Social Security Disability, so the government pays for my meds (Medicare/Prescription Solutions program).
The pharmaceutical companies do indeed run this nation.

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

All-round drug propaganda...
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Jun 24, 2007 10:05 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
On the one hand, you've got the pharmaceutical industry running multimillion dollar campaigns aimed at convincing the target that 'drugs are good'. The ads are all the same, involving lots of happy people walking through green fields with blissful smiles on their faces.

On the other hand, you've got the 'war on drugs' rhetoric that targets the non-approved drugs, and the 'health concerns' surrounding tobacco and to a lesser extent, alcohol. This leads the consumer confused - are drugs good, or are drugs bad?

The solution has been to label pharmaceuticals as medicines, while attempting to avoid classification of alcohol or tobacco. This is probably the main reason why there are separate federal agencies for each category - pharmaceuticals have the FDA, illegal drugs have the DEA, and alcohol and tobacco have the ATF.

Cannabis is relatively harmless and has noted medical benefits in pain, depression and nasuea treatment. Tobacco kills more people every year than any other substance known - but tobacco is legal.

Methamphetame really does cause damage to brain neurons, which has been highlighted for some amphetamine derivatives (such as for MDMA, or Ecstasy) and ignored for others (such as Ritalin, or Adderall). Unlike cannabis, ritalin really DOES kill people. Medical methamphetamine use is considered OK by the FDA and the DEA, but cannabis is still not allowed.

Obviously, the reasons behind this state of affairs have nothing to do with health and everything to do with the politics and economics of the corporatocracy.

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

» Multi-Billion.. Posted by: brotherjonah
The wealthiest of weed aficionados? Seriously?
Posted by: cbrislain on Jun 24, 2007 11:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While a handful of potent strains may be available in limited quantities today, these varieties compose only a minute percentage of the overall marketplace -- at a price tag that is cost-prohibitive to anyone but the most wealthy of aficionados.

Really? Because last I checked, the difference between "good" and "average" was at most about a 25% increase in price, although most of the time the "super" strains that are mentioned above (Train Wreck, etc.) can be had for the same price as anything else.

I don't think "good" weed is something limited to aficionados, everyone gets it.

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

yo-yo
Posted by: colin nicholas on Jun 24, 2007 12:16 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've been smoking weed daily for well over 40 years.
For the last 12 years I have almost never been without,snd
light up each day at noon. I'm 73 and in good health.
I dont use cigarettes which I quit years ago,and i rarely drink alcohol,except for the odd beer on a hot day.
Weed mellows me out,makes me comfortably introspective,
and adds generally to all other pleasures.
Although I will admit,I'm not at my most lucid and articulate
when I'm high,so it's not necessarily great for socialising and getting into involved conversations.

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

Amerika Inc. and Legalized Collusion
Posted by: channing on Jun 24, 2007 2:12 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With Fascism comes Government Protection of Corporate Interests. Arguably, Legalization of Cannabis and Financial Support for broad medical research would lead to a loss in Legal Pharmaceutical Sales of around 50%... That 's 10's of Billions of unethical Profits currently being Extorted from the public through Government-Abetted Monopoly. Cannabis has long been scientifically recognized (in Non-Fascist circles) for its broad medical potential, naturally absent any major side-effects, but it has ONE BIG FLAW: IT CAN NOT BE MONOPOLIZED UNLESS IT IS OUTLAWED BECAUSE IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN AN ABUNDANT, ORGANIC, SIMPLE PLANT!

Sure, it fuels the Money-Laundering Industry. It also keeps a great underground network going, with its high-dollar Police-State always in hot pursuit. It also justifies the expansion of our "Prison Industry", with recipient benefits to the Construction Industry. That said, however, NONE of the other beneficiaries of Cannabis Law would exist if it was not such a threat to Big Pharma, Big Insurance, Big Health-Care.

It also should be noted that the SAME Fascists behind Marijuana Law are also behind Big War Inc., and Big Oil Inc, and Faux News Inc... Clearly our work is cut out for us, but the group of people behind all this RAPE of the PEOPLE are relatively few, we haven't yet got OUR act together to realize we can live without that 1% doing all the damage!

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

You need to take drugs to make drugs
Posted by: AmbiUbi on Jun 25, 2007 9:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How's this for ironic? I am an everyday smoker for about 10 years, almost 30 years old, and I work at a major pharmaceutical company to make the legal drugs that are actually harmful. Yes, I realize that irony almost everyday. But I am able to perform my job duties with competence.

It's a waste of taxpayer monies to keep persuing the outlawing of marijuana. I mean, for goodness sake's, it's a WEED. It's meant to grow easy in the wild. They will never control it.

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

Potent pot is safer
Posted by: stargazer2 on Jun 25, 2007 4:07 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most of the harm from pot comes from smoking the plant, but the THC is very harmless compared to many of the other chemicals that get burned when someone smokes pot. The higher the percentage of THC, the lower the percentage of many more dangerous elements in the smoke, and therefore the safer it is.

Unlike cigarettes that contain deadly added chemicals to make the tobacco dry faster, cure faster, burn more evenly, burn consistently without going out, have longer shelf life, keep the tobacco moist, create a variety of unnatural flavors, and many other things; pot growers are careful to keep their products organic. Ironically, this is the US government's own fault. The US used to send the military to spray pot fields in Mexico with a deadly herbicide called paraquat. When US pot smokers learned of this, the indoor pot growing industry boomed, eventually making the US a leading worldwide producer of pot. Growers soon realized that indoor pot gardens allowed them to experiment with growing techniques that produced much higher quality pot than the stuff that used to come from Mexican fields. Hundreds of new strains have been developed by US growers using advanced indoor growing, breeding, and propagation techniques. As a result, US pot is considered some of the best (and most potent) in the world, often winning awards in British Columbia and Amsterdam. And it all happened in response to the US governments efforts to poison pot that was destined for US consumption.

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

Some Marijuana Law History
Posted by: fanny666 on Jun 25, 2007 5:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Marijuana: The Facts

I also wish they said something about the movie, but I suppose now I have to watch it. We should all be aware of Pot Propaganda

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

Damn it.
Posted by: opeluboy on Jun 25, 2007 6:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]