Pages

Friday, May 6, 2011

Banning the Safer Plants


What the politicians need acknowledging

Opium, Cannabis and Coca Leaf are safer substances then the 'licit' substances of Alcohol, Coffee and Tobacco

Opium versus alcohol.

Cannabis versus alcohol.

Coca Leaf versus Coffee and Tobacco.
In each major category of intoxicant used by our species, there appear to be one or two drug plants that researchers have noted, are more controllable, hence safer, than all the other plants or synthetics in that category. Coca leaf stands out among all the stimulants, licit and illicit, as the easiest to control and the one least likely to produce toxicity or dependency.

Prohibition PROMOTES HARD (Concentrated) Drugs
http://freedomofmedicineanddiet.blogspot.com/2011/04/harvey-wiley-father-of-drug-problem.html

Prohibition PROMOTES HARD Drug Abuse
http://freedomofmedicineanddiet.blogspot.com/2008/03/drug-war-promotes-drug-abuse-over-drug.html

Drug Warriors Ignore Pharmakokinetics
http://freedomofmedicineanddiet.blogspot.com/2008/03/drug-warriors-ignore-pharmacokinetics.html

Drug War Criminal Mercantilism Public Health Subversion
http://freedomofmedicineanddiet.blogspot.com/2008/03/criminal-mercantilism-public-health.html


Drug experts say alcohol worse than crack or heroin
http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/11/01/us-drugs-alcohol-idUSTRE6A000O20101101


Thursday, May 5, 2011

Continuing Delaying Legalization


I just saw the Republican Presidential candidate debate from South Carolina.

I heard two candidates address the drug issue, in this order- Ron Paul and Gary Johnson.

As so prefaced by the moderator:

Ron Paul would legalize "cocaine" and "even heroin" *if* the States allowed it.

Gary Johnson would legalize Marijuana and tax it like alcohol and or Tobacco, though despite admitting that 90% of the problem was prohibition, could not mention the word 'legalization' nor even 'decriminalization' for anything else, with only the mention of 'harm reduction' for other substances -- frankly a diverse array of substances.

None could bother to mention "Coca" nor "Coca Leaf" nor "Coca Leaves" nor "Opium"

That lapse, IMHO maintains ignorance of how prohibition monopolizes the "cocaine" and "opiate" markets for these drugs most problematic forms, particularly injections and "crack", while really only truely 'banning' the safest and most benificial forms.

That lapse is quite a remarkable omission, given the implications of health care (let alone court-incarceration) costs; it bespeaks a reality of protecting multi-billion dollar MARKETS -- aka Coffee, Tobacco and pharma, by governments of controlled fraternalists, propping up a multi-billion dollar cigarette-pharamecutical racketerring enterprise for protecting the markets such things notably as the 100 million deaths from the most dangerous -- Virginia Bright Leaf Tobacco, from the foreign market threat of safest stimulant -- South American E. Coca, involving a Washington, D.C. Federal Triangle powerhouse law firm heavily involved with pharamecutical and Tobacco industrial interests, indeed being the law firm coordinating the cigarette industry legal defense with other law firms, the previous employer of the current U.S. AG Eric Holder now coordinating the DOJ's attacks upon Medical MJ, and even advising the private Drug Policy Foundation and other drug policy reform organizations.

Johnson's end of comment about such matters should be a health rather then a court matter sound promising.

However, that he can acknowledge prohibition's harms, while limiting its repeal to only MJ is not.

1:30 AM update:
http://www.wepolls.com/r/153407/Who-won-May-fifth's-GOP-presidential-primary-debate

186 votes Texas Rep. Ron Paul 70%

58 votes Former Godfather Pizza CEO Herman Cain 21%

15 votes Former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson 5%

6 votes Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum 2%

4 votes Former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty 1%

2 votes None of the Above 0%

Vote on this question

With Ron Paul, the candidate that would legalize cocaine and even heroin if the States allowed it at 70% and Gary Johnson who would only legalize Marijuana at 5%- "cocaine" and "heroin" are hardly the devil words they used to be, being largely replaced with "prohibition".

Wednesday, May 4, 2011

Obama's Continuation of Tobacco-Pharma Criminal Mercantilism- More

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/05/04/exclusive-doj-plan-to-arrest-state-licensers-tax-dispensaries-could-doom-medical-marijuana-industry/

[excerpt]

A recent letter from the Department of Justice (DOJ), threatening state employees in charge of implmenting medical marijuana laws with prosecution, has forced some governors to re-evaluate and even veto popular legislation -- all seemingly in violation of what the medical marijauana community thought was a cease-fire with the federal government.

Facing the threat of seeing otherwise innocent state employees thrown in jail, lawmakers are responding in an entirely human fashion: what Allen St. Pierre, executive director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), called "the old need to CYA -- cover your ass."

Ultimately, the administration's confusing legal position has led to a stagnation of medical marijuana reform efforts, with some states simply deciding it's not worth the risk.

It also represents a significant change in momentum for the prohibition reform movement as a whole, and one that's taken them almost entirely by surprise.

In 2009, Attorney General Eric Holder's Justice Department issued a memo stating that it would not prosecute medical marijuana patients, suppliers or caregivers in states that have passed voter initiatives to legalize the drug's use -- so long as they were all abiding by that state's laws.

Earlier this month, however, the Justice Department sent a letter to the governor of Washington, warning that state employees may be prosecuted if they are in any way involved in the licensing of production or distribution of marijuana.

"The prosecution of individuals and organizations involved in the trade of any illegal drugs and the disruption of drug trafficking organizations is a core priority of the Department," department attorneys wrote. "This core priority includes prosecution of business enterprises that unlawfully market and sell marijuana."

"Any" without regard to efficacy nor safety, to say nothing of U.S. AG Holder's previous lip service to USC 10th Amendment values - the U.S. Department of "Justice" is guilty of reckless endangerment for the sake of cigarette-pharma racketeering.

Oklahoma's Contempt for the U.S.C. 8th Amendment

This U.S. State, the one with the highest penalties for growing MJ of an upwards of 99 Years Imprisionment.

Brett Wilkins writes:
http://morallowground.com/2011/04/26/oklahoma-lawmakers-approve-life-imprisonment-for-making-hashish/

...the Oklahoma state legislature have approved a bill– House Bill 1798– that would make hash-making a felony and punish first-time offenders with a minimum mandatory sentence of two years in the slammer, and a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. Get convicted a second time, and your sentence will be doubled and you can kiss suspended sentences or parole goodbye.

Life in prison for processing a plant that has been used for medicinal purposes for nearly 5,000 years? Yup, Oklahoman lawmakers are one smart bunch. That’s why they overwhelmingly voted in favor of House Bill 1798; it passed the House by a vote of 75-18 and breezed through the Senate, 44-2. This, by the way, is the same House that voted to outlaw Shari’a law in a state where about 0.16% of the population is Muslim.

Mark Woodward, a spokesman for Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs (because marijuana is soooo dangerous), told the Associated Press that the bill should “send a message” that illegal drugs won’t be tolerated in the state.


Indeed. Soooo dangerous. Such an 'offense' mandating such sentences, in comparision to those say for:

Whatever happened to the U.S.C.'s 8th Amendment?

Monday, May 2, 2011

Dr. Grinspoon's Warning About The Pharmaceutical Industry

Excerpt of presentation the final day of the 40th anniversary NORML conference held April 21-23, 2011 in Denver, Colorado

Sunday, May 1, 2011

Government-Media Supresses Info of Cannabinoids Kill Cancer Cells

This fits with Donald Tashkin's Reversal on MJ
Forwarded to me by Barry Chamish:

Cannabinoids Kill Cancer And Our
'Government' Has Known for 36 Years
By GSA
4-25-11

Below is a repost of an article published on Americans for Safe Access website: www.safeaccessnow.org in November of 2003. The article describes how cannabinoids, the active components of marijuana, inhibit tumor growth in laboratory animals and also kill cancer cells. Then it finishes off by saying that the US government has known for more than 35 years and that the media which would normally go crazy about a cancer cure story like this, doesn't at all and in fact seem to be burying the story rather than promote it in any way. I for one am amazed at the government's stance on marijuana and their failed war on drugs, which is more like a war on it's own country. I guess too many people get rich off of the war on drugs.

by Steve Kubby, Sierra Times
November 10th, 2003

A new study published in Nature Reviews-Cancer provides an historic and detailed explanation about how THC and natural cannabinoids counteract cancer, but preserve normal cells.

The study by Manuel Guzmán of Madrid Spain found that cannabinoids, the active components of marijuana, inhibit tumor growth in laboratory animals. They do so by modulating key cell-signalling pathways, thereby inducing direct growth arrest and death of tumor cells, as well as by inhibiting the growth of blood vessels that supply the tumor.

The Guzman study is very important according to Dr. Ethan Russo , a neurologist and world authority on medical cannabis: "Cancer occurs because cells become immortalized; they fail to heed normal signals to turn off growth. A normal function of remodelling in the body requires that cells die on cue. This is called apoptosis, or programmed cell death. That process fails to work in tumors. THC promotes its reappearance so that gliomas, leukemias, melanomas and other cell types will in fact heed the signals, stop dividing, and die."

"But, that is not all," explains Dr. Russo: "The other way that tumors grow is by ensuring that they are nourished: they send out signals to promote angiogenesis, the growth of new blood vessels. Cannabinoids turn off these signals as well. It is truly incredible, and elegant."

In other words, this article explains several ways in which cannabinoids might be used to fight cancer, and, as the article says, "Cannabinoids are usually well tolerated, and do not produce the generalized toxic effects of conventional chemotherapies.
Usually, any story that even suggests the possibility of a new treatment for cancer is greeted with headlines about a "cancer cure" ­ however remote in the future and improbable in fact it might be. But if marijuana is involved, don't expect any coverage from mainstream media, especially since mainstream editors have been quietly killing this story for the past thirty years

That's right, news about the abilility of pot to shrink tumors first surfaced, way back in 1974. Researchers at the Medical College of Virginia, who had been funded by the National Institutes of Health to find evidence that marijuana damages the immune system, found instead that THC slowed the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice - lung and breast cancer, and a virus-induced leukemia.

The Washington Post reported on the 1974 study - in the "Local" section - on Aug. 18, 1974. Under the headline, "Cancer Curb Is Studied," it read in part: "The active chemical agent in marijuana curbs the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice and may also suppress the immunity reaction that causes rejection of organ transplants, a Medical College of Virginia team has discovered." The researchers "found that THC slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers, and a virus-induced leukemia in laboratory mice, and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent."
"News coverage of the Madrid discovery has been virtually nonexistent in this country. The news broke quietly on Feb. 29, 2000 with a story that ran once on the UPI wire about the Nature Medicine article," complained MarijuanaNews.com editor Richard Cowan , who said he was only able to find the article through a link that appeared briefly on the Drudge Report Web page. "The New York Times, The Washington Post, and Los Angeles Times all ignored the story, even though its newsworthiness is indisputable: a benign substance occurring in nature destroys deadly brain tumors," added Cowan.

On March 29, 2001, the San Antonio Current printed a carefully researched, bombshell of a story by Raymond Cushing titled, "POT SHRINKS TUMORS; GOVERNMENT KNEW IN '74." Media coverage since then has been nonexistant, except for a copy of the story on Alternet.

It is hard to believe that the knowledge that cannabis can be used to fight cancer has been suppressed for almost thirty years , yet it seems likely that it will continue to be suppressed. Why?

According to Cowan, the answer is because it is a threat to cannabis prohibition . "If this article and its predecessors from 2000 and 1974 were the only evidence of the suppression of medical cannabis, then one might perhaps be able to rationalize it in some herniated way. However, there really is massive proof that the suppression of medical cannabis represents the greatest failure of the institutions of a free society, medicine, journalism, science, and our fundamental values," Cowan notes.

Millions of people have died horrible deaths and in many cases, familes exhausted their savings on dangerous, toxic and expensive drugs. Now we are just beginning to realize that while marijuana has never killed anyone, marijuana prohibition has killed millions.