Fracking Worse Than You Think: Delusional America and Special Interest Gangs

fracking water

Mam, your water’s just fine, a pungent gasoline smell is normal nowadays. news.nationalgeographic.com

A recent peer reviewed study has revealed that greenhouse gas emissions from drilling and fracking are 50% worse than previously thought. According to the Harvard study US fossil-fuel-industry methane leaks are dramatically higher than the official estimates have claimed. Not surprisingly, the coal seam gas industry in Australia (one of the largest in the world) has rejected the study outright.

The report, published in the US journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, directly challenges the EPA’s decision to cut its methane emission (produced from fossil fuel extraction) estimates by 25% for 1990 – 2011. The report states that:

We find that [methane] data from across North America instead indicates the need for a much larger adjustment of the opposite sign

Fracking is altering the climate far faster than we first thought. However, before we continue with fracking, let’s first understand the difference between Australia’s coal seam gas and America’s natural gas.

Coal Seam Gas Vs. Natural Gas:

As an end-use product, coal seam gas is the same as natural gas...The only difference between CSG and natural gas is in the way that it is formed by nature. CSG is composed predominantly of methane and small percentages of nitrogen and carbon dioxide. The coal seam is both the source and the reservoir, which is different from the sandstone reservoirs of conventional oil and shale gas. As coal forms over millions of years, large quantities of methane-rich gas are generated and trapped in coal seams by water and ground pressure. CSG is trapped in the coal in tiny fractures, or cleats, under hydrostatic pressure. CSG is extracted at low pressures from coal.
Shale gas is methane held within shale layers, rather than a coal seam. Shale is much harder than coal and always requires fracturing ('fracking') to allow the gas to flow.
fracking graphic

Seems pretty technical boys, just throw in all the chemicals you can’t pronounce. http://www.usatoday.com

While natural gas produces less CO2 than coal, the savings become irrelevant when considering the amount of methane that is sprayed into the atmosphere from methane leaks at well sites and while transporting the fuel. The reason for all the worry is that methane traps about 20 times more heat over a 100 year period compared to CO2, despite remaining in the atmosphere for less time.

Related Article: What is the Solution to Smog? A Vacuum! 

A natural gas addiction has infected the U.S. with fracking spreading across the country like a viral epidemic. Fracking is the process of harvesting natural gas, or shale gas.  It involves mixing dangerous chemicals with large quantities of water and sand and injecting the mixture into shale wells at extremely high pressure. It is for this reason that fracking is believed to be poisoning well water all across the U.S. and in other areas of the world. According to the NRDC (Natural Resources Defence Council):

Over the last decade, the industry has drilled thousands of new wells in the Rocky Mountain region and in the South. It is expanding operations in the eastern United States as well, setting its sights most recently on a 600-mile-long rock formation called the Marcellus Shale, which stretches from West Virginia to western New York.  Fracking is a suspect in polluted drinking water in Arkansas, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming, where residents have reported changes in water quality or quantity following fracturing operations.

fracking U.S.

The U.S. is ripe for the fracking! http://www.geomore.com

Immense wells of shale gas are spread across most of the U.S. mainland.  These sites each undergo several fracking pumps. Although the media portrays natural gas as the new and improved, next-gen, problem free energy source, it couldn’t be further from the truth. Pipeline incidents and injuries abound and reports of polluted drinking water continue to pop up across the nation with greater frequency. Studies have directly linked shale gas fracking to:

The EPA still has not issued its report on the effect of fracking on drinking water. Despite all of the science pleading with us to reconsider our actions, fracking continues unimpeded.

Related Article: A Cheaper Alternative to Pollution

 

Fracking Denial and Delusions

By far the worst issue surrounding fracking is that as a whole, we still seem to have no clue that fracking is even taking place, let alone destroying the water supply and decimating the health of 1000’s of people as well as the land.  I suppose this isn’t surprising though as many nations are just as clueless about climate change. Afterall, climate denial is a real thing, actively and directly supported by a large number of the 90 institutions that are responsible for climate change since the industrial revolution. So, why shouldn’t the natural gas and fracking industries involve the same type of nonsense?

 

fracking climate

Superhuman denial abilties…
http://www.frankejames.com/

The truth is that human beings, especially us good ol’ Americans, will buy into anything given the opportunity. People are often fooled into passionate belief, and the denial campaigns and propaganda of billion dollar industries do a great deal of fooling.

Related Article: Climate Change too Fast for Evolution 

Let’s consider climate change again: Many Americans continue to believe that climate change is either a hoax or an over-dramatized issue.  This ignorance is a wrench in the spokes of global progress, especially in light of increasingly volatile weather patternsincreasing extinctions in land and marine lifewarnings from scientists across the globe; and the potential loss of trillions of dollars due to the costly effects of climate change.  This is cognitive dissonance in its purest form: we know the facts, but we are refusing to change.

 

Crony Capitalism and Special Interest

Despite America’s lack of progress in reducing emissions, most Americans’ desire a green, renewable energy policy. This applies to fracking as well; a large number of Americans are completely against it. Unfortunately though, oil, coal, and gas companies are at the top of the special interest dole list.

Special interest comes in the form of better government subsidies, tax cuts, court rulings, and allowances. We all know it takes place, and it has been widely practiced and wildly accepted. It is called crony capitalism, and it has been an an ongoing, yet somehow overlooked problem in America.

Related Article: Team Red = Team Blue

fracking george bush

No. Well, for the entertainment value, yes. bigdanblogger.blogspot.com

When Bush appointed Dick Cheney to lead an energy task force to revolutionize America’s energy policy, Cheney quickly organized a private meeting with fossil fuel giants at the head of the fracking movement. Companies such as Exxon Mobil, Conoco, Shell Oil, BP America and Chevron made the top of the list.  Today, these companies are still given billions of dollars in tax cuts and subsidies despite raking in hundreds of billions of dollars in private profit. According to PBS:

In 2005, Bush, who has received more from the oil and gas industry than any other politician, signed an energy bill from the Republican-controlled Congress that gave $14.5 billion in tax breaks for oil, gas, nuclear power and coal companies. The Energy Policy Act of 2005, which was based on recommendations by Cheney’s energy task force, also rolled back regulations the oil industry considered burdensome, including exemptions from some clean water laws. All of this transpired only one year after Congress passed a bill that included a tax cut for domestic manufacturing that was expected to save energy companies at least $3.6 billion over a decade.

During the time that Bush and Cheney, both of whom are former oil executives, have been in the White House, the oil and gas industry has spent $393.2 million on lobbying the federal government. This places the industry among the top nine in lobbying expenditures. The industry has also contributed a substantial $82.1 million to federal candidates, parties and political action committees, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. 80 percent of the industry’s contributions have gone to Republicans.

It is clear that special interest is taking place and is supporting companies in defiance of America’s health, wealth, and overall best interest. The truth is that a complete multi-industry infiltration of the U.S. government has taken place. Men and women with stake in the fracking, agriculture, pharmaceuticals and more are casting votes and making decisions that directly benefit the industries and leave citizens stripped of their money and power.

 

Monsanto the Usurper

The most obvious example of a corporation infiltrating the U.S. government is that of Monsanto. Monsanto, in case you didn’t know, is responsible for destroying thousands of local farms, using known harmful herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides, using chemicals responsible for colony collapse disorders in bees, and much more.

Related Article: The Senate is Useless and Should be Dismantled

Monsanto and Monsanto products are banned in several countries.  Numerous petitions to cut government ties to Monsanto have circulated, yet to no avail.  I wonder, why they didn’t succeed?

First, follow this link to view a list of 71 senators who voted against your right to know if what you are eating is GMO. Oh, and that’s despite 90% of the population saying they would be in favor of mandatory labeling.

fracking monsanto us

Whoa, there must be some huge cracks in the U.S. government for these people to slip through. https://www.facebook.com/GrowFoodNotLawns

Next, check out the following list of U.S. government/Monsanto ties and the answer will be obvious.

David Beier 
MONSANTO POSITION: Head of Government Affairs for Genetech, (Now Monsanto)
FEDERAL POSITION: Chief Domestic Policy Advisor to Vice President Gore

William Conlon:
MONSANTO POSITION: Worked for Monsanto’s Legal Team
FEDERAL POSITION: Department of Justice

Sam Skinner:
MONSANTO POSITION: Worked on Monsanto’s Legal Team
FEDERAL POSITION: Department of Justice

Robert Fraley:
MONSANTO POSITION: Executive Vice President and Chief Technology Officer
FEDERAL POSITION: Serves as advisor in public agencies, including the USDA, among others

Michael A. Friedman:
MONSANTO POSITION: Senior Vice President for Clinical Affairs at G.D. Searle &Co. (Merged with Monsanto)
FEDERAL POSITION: Acting Commissioner of the FDA

Marcia Hale
MONSANTO POSITION: Director of International Government Affairs
FEDERAL POSITION: Assistant to President Clinton and Director of Government Affairs

Arthur Hull Hayes:
MONSANTO POSITION: Consultant to Searle’s (merged with Monsanto) Public Relations Firm
FEDERAL POSITION: Previously was FDA Commissioner

John L. Henshaw:
MONSANTO POSITION: Director of ESH Quality & Compliance
FEDERAL POSITION: Senior Advisor to U.S. Secretary of Labor

Rob Horsch:
MONSANTO POSITION: Vice President of Product and Technology Cooperation
FEDERAL POSITION: Advisor to the National Science Foundation and the Department of Energy

Michael Kantor:
MONSANTO POSITION: Board of Directors, also represented Monsanto as a lawyer
FEDERAL POSITION: U.S. Secretary of Commerce

Gwendolyn S. King:
MONSANTO POSITION: Monsanto Board Member
FEDERAL POSITION: Commissioner of SSA 1989-1992

Richard J. Mahoney:
MONSANTO POSITION: CEO of Monsanto for 14 years
FEDERAL POSITION: Serves as Director of U.S. Soviet, Japanese and Korean Trade Councils, a Member of the U.S. Government Policy Committee

Margaret Miller:
MONSANTO POSITION: Oversaw the Approval of rBGH, was a top Monsanto scientist
FEDERAL POSITION: In, 1991, Margaret was appointed Deputy Director of the FDA

George Poste:
MONSANTO POSITION: Sits on Monsanto’s Board of Directors, previously a Monsanto Animal Specialist
FEDERAL POSITION: In 2002, Poste was appointed head of Bioterrorism division of Homeland Security

William D. Ruckelshaus:
MONSANTO POSITION: Member of the Monsanto Board of Directors
FEDERAL POSITION: In 1970, he was the first Chief Administrator for the EPA, later the acting director of the FBI, then Deputy U.S. Attorney General

Donald Rumsfeld:
MONSANTO POSITION: Previous CEO of Searle (merged with Monsanto), he successfully had ASPARTAME legalized while in that position.
FEDERAL POSITION: Appointed to Secretary of Defense in 1975, then appointed to Secretary of Defense again in 2002

Suzanne Sechen:
MONSANTO POSITION: Worked on Monsanto-funded rGBH in connection with her graduate work at Cornell University
FEDERAL POSITION: FDA Reviewer on Scientific Data

Robert B. Shapiro:
MONSANTO POSITION: Previously the President and CEO of Monsanto, Chairman and CEO of Nutrasweet, and Chairman and CEO of Monsanto
FEDERAL POSITION: Previously Served as President’s Advisory Committee on Trade Policy and on the White House Domestic Policy Review of Industrial Innovation

Islam Siddiqui:
MONSANTO POSITION: Former Vice President of CropLife America, which represented Monsanto
FEDERAL POSITION: Chief Agricultural Negotiator for the Office of the Trade Representative

Michael Taylor:
MONSANTO POSITION: Former Attorney for Monsanto for seven years, previous h Head of the Monsanto Washington D.C. Office
FEDERAL POSITION: Former FDA Deputy Commission for Policy. In 2010, appointed by the FDA as a senior advisor of the FDA Commissioner

Dr. Charles Thomas:
MONSANTO POSITION: Previous Monsanto Researcher in charge of the Manhattan Project, creating the atomic bomb. Later, became Monsanto’s Chairman of the board.
FEDERAL POSITION: Previously Served as a consultant to the National Security Council and as a U.S. Representative of the United Nations’ Atomic Energy Commission

Clarence Thomas:
MONSANTO POSITION: Former lawyer for Monsanto, a notorious chemical polluter. Thomas would later cast the decisive vote in 2000 on the Supreme Court, ratifying the stolen election that put George W. Bush Jr. into office
FEDERAL POSITION: In 1991, was appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court

Anne Veneman:
MONSANTO POSITION: Previously served on the Board of Directors of Calgene, a Monsanto Biotech subsidiary
FEDERAL POSITION: In 2001, was appointed Head of the USDA

Jack Watson:
MONSANTO POSITION: Former Staff Lawyer with Monsanto in Washington D.C.
FEDERAL POSITION: Chief of Staff to President Carter

Seth Waxman:
MONSANTO POSITION: Hired by Monsanto to prosecute two Farmers who fought against Monsanto’s Seed Policies in 2002
FEDERAL POSITION: Former U.S. Solicitor General

Dr. Virginia Weldon:
MONSANTO POSITION: Retired Senior Vice President for Public Policy at Monsanto
FEDERAL POSITION: Previously, was a member of the FDA’s Metabolism & Endocrine Advisory Committee

Rufus Yerxa:
MONSANTO POSITION: Former Chief Counsel at Monsanto
FEDERAL POSITION: In 1993, was nominated as U.S. Deputy to the World Trade Organization

Toby Moffett:
MONSANTO POSITION: Monsanto Consultant
FEDERAL POSITION: U.S. Congressman (D)

Dennis DeConcini:
MONSANTO POSITION: Monsanto Legal Counsel
FEDERAL POSITION: U.S. Senator (D)

Josh King:
MONSANTO POSITION: Director, International Government Affairs
FEDERAL POSITION: White House Communications (Clinton)

Carol Tucker-Forman:
MONSANTO POSITION: Monsanto Lobbyist
FEDERAL POSITION: White House Appointed Consumer Advisor (Clinton)

Linda Fisher:
MONSANTO POSITION: Vice President, Government & Public Affairs
FEDERAL POSITION: Deputy Administrator EPA (Clinton, Bush)

Lidia Watrud:
MONSANTO POSITION: Manger, New Technologies
FEDERAL POSITION: USDA, EPA (Clinton, Bush, Obama)

Hillary Clinton:
MONSANTO POSITION: Rose Law Firm, Monsanto Counsel
FEDERAL POSITION: U.S. Senator (D), Secretary of State (Obama)

Roger Beachy:
MONSANTO POSITION: Director, Monsanto Danforth Center
FEDERAL POSITION: Director USDA, NIFA (Obama)

 

How to Patch a Sinking Ship

It appears that industries spanning every sector, including fracking, agriculture, pharmaceuticals and more are playing a game with the U.S. government, swapping players each season for their own sake, not mine and yours. When congress, the congress of the people, stops acting in the people’s best interest we have a serious problem. Right now we are in the heart of the danger zone. What are we to do?

permaculture fracking system

So, let’s make this happen immediately. shadesofgreeninc.org

In a capitalistic society you are a consumer first and foremost.  A capitalistic society feeds on your spending, and it feeds you with the sweet satisfaction of ‘things.’  You have power in your purchases; use your buying power to support sustainability-minded companies. If companies are getting away with infiltrating and orchestrating sections of the government, then why not make sure they are excellent companies willing to appease, not disease the masses.

Buy local, support the little guy. Sure, it may sometimes be more expensive, but try not spending your money on a few of your monthly non-essentials and you’d be surprised how quickly your savings add up.

Related Article: Income Inequality in America

Become more independent and deplete your dependence on ‘the system’ by making purchases with awarenessFind satisfaction in the little things and start wanting less. Become more aware of how each and every decision you make affects the rest of the world.  Imagine that everyone else on planet Earth is you; what effect would you like to have on yourself?

Grow a garden, go foraging for food, or keep honeybees. Learn about permaculture and begin practicing a zero-waste lifestyle. It’s way easier than you think, and is actually really fun.

Arguably the most important thing you can do is vote. Contact your elected officials  and tell them what you think. Demand that they act as your representative, not a rogue speaker. Help fight fracking by joining organizations that fight to stop it.

Educate yourself and spread awareness about issues that are important to you.

Consider. Constantly consider the effect you are causing.

 

 

 

Source:

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/harvard-fracking-study-rings-methane-alarm-bells-in-australia-20131126-2y87s.html#ixzz2lu8UBq6R

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2013/03/12/factbox-csg-australia

http://epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/ch4.html

http://www.dartgas.com/content/Document/Factsheets/What%20is%20CSG.pdf

http://www.nrdc.org/energy/gasdrilling/

http://www.nature.com/news/is-fracking-behind-contamination-in-wyoming-groundwater-1.11543

http://www.nicholas.duke.edu/news/radioactive-shale-gas-contaminants-found-at-wastewater-discharge-site

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/04/fracking-could-cause-elevated-levels-of-air-pollutants-near-gas-wells/256158/

http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2012/03/reproductive-problems-death-animals-exposed-fracking

http://www.npr.org/2012/01/05/144694550/man-made-quakes-blame-fracking-and-drilling

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/monsanto-petition-tells-obama-cease-fda-ties-to-monsanto/2012/01/30/gIQAA9dZcQ_blog.html

http://www.businessinsider.com/epa-data-links-groundwater-contamination-fracking-2012-10

http://www.dangersoffracking.com/

http://www2.epa.gov/hfstudy

http://www.fractracker.org/map/

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/americans-uninformed-about-fracking-says-new-study-16762

http://www.pewresearch.org/2006/02/28/both-reds-and-blues-go-green-on-energy/

http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/347/oil-politics.html

http://www.organicconsumers.org/gefood/countrieswithbans.cfm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/monsanto-petition-tells-obama-cease-fda-ties-to-monsanto/2012/01/30/gIQAA9dZcQ_blog.html

http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_27635.cfm

http://justlabelit.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Mellman-Survey-Results.pdf

http://www.monsanto.com/whoweare/pages/robert-fraley-bio.aspx

http://organicconsumers.org/monsanto/revolvedoor.cfm

http://www.rense.com/general33/legal.htm

http://www.aiard.org/meetings/2004forum/horsch.htm

http://www.monsanto.com/whoweare/pages/gwendolyn-king-bio.aspx

http://www.nytimes.com/1983/08/02/business/talking-business-with-mahoney-of-monsanto-farm-subsidy-complications.html

http://organicconsumers.org/monsanto/revolvedoor.cfm http://www.gao.gov/assets/200/196503.pdf

https://webapp4.asu.edu/directory/person/629659

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Rumsfeld#Career_in_government_.281962.E2.80.931977.29

http://www.gao.gov/assets/200/196503.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_B._Shapiro

http://www.gao.gov/assets/200/196503.pdf

http://www.nap.edu/booksearch.php?booksearch=1&record_id=4548&term=monsanto&chapter=338-353

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/07/supreme-court-monsanto-seeds_n_1946361.html

http://www.organicconsumers.org/corp/veneman.cfm

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/20/business/justices-signal-a-monsanto-edge-in-patent-case.html?_r=0

http://beckerexhibits.wustl.edu/mowihsp/bios/weldon.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rufus_Yerxa

http://www.organicconsumers.org/corp/foremancfa.cfm

http://one.gaslandthemovie.com/take-action/contact-elected-officials

 

 

 

https://wondergressive.com/news/90-companies-responsible-climate-change/

https://wondergressive.com/news/fooling-people-into-passionate-belief/

https://wondergressive.com/news/warning-weather-hazards-ahead/

https://wondergressive.com/news/unprecedented-changes-and-extinctions-occurring-in-marine-life/

https://wondergressive.com/news/climate-change-too-fast-for-evolution/

https://wondergressive.com/news/costly-climate-changes/

https://wondergressive.com/news/ask-an-astrobiologist-global-warming-and-what-to-expect/

https://wondergressive.com/news/indiana-blue-laws-exemplify-crony-capitalism-time-to-punish-politicians/

https://wondergressive.com/news/mystery-of-the-dyingdisappearing-honeybees-solved/

https://wondergressive.com/news/bowman-monsanto-court-case/

https://wondergressive.com/news/afraid-to-wake-up-conquering-fear-and-living-the-lives-we-want/

https://wondergressive.com/news/the-wonderful-healthier-life-changing-and-life-lengthening-world-of-fasting/

https://wondergressive.com/news/awareness-and-dealing-with-rejection/

https://wondergressive.com/news/edible-landscapes/

https://wondergressive.com/news/healthy-honey-bees/

Climate Change Caused by 90 Companies Since Industrial Revolution

climate change factory

Land of beauty, prosperity, and climate change… vimeo.com

A recent analysis on climate change has revealed that just 90 companies are responsible for 63% of all greenhouse gas emissions since 1854, the dawn of the Industrial Revolution. The companies range from private corporations such as BP and Exxon to government-run companies. 83 of the 90 companies are oil, gas, and coal based energy companies, with the remaining 7 companies being cement manufacturers. Information from the climate change analysis comes from public records and data from the US Department of Energy’s Carbon Dioxide Information and Analysis Center.

Related Article: A Cheaper Alternative to Pollution

The author of the analysis, Richard Heede, from the Climate Accountability Institute of Colorado concluded in the study that

There are thousands of oil, gas and coal producers in the world, but the decision makers, the CEOs, or the ministers of coal and oil if you narrow it down to just one person, they could all fit on a Greyhound bus or two.

Heede exhibited concern over the fact that many of the companies, besides being the presiding polluters of history, are also sitting on huge reserves of fossil fuel which represent a potential for an even more daunting future afflicted by climate change.

Related Article: Sweden is Running Out of Trash

Former US President Al Gore was very excited about the study as it is one of the most major efforts to hold individual carbon producers accountable for climate change rather than governmental policy. Gore stated that:

This study is a crucial step forward in our understanding of the evolution of the climate crisis. The public and private sectors alike must do what is necessary to stop global warming. Those who are historically responsible for polluting our atmosphere have a clear obligation to be part of the solution.

The actual solution itself is tough to set in stone. Global industrial emissions since 1751 stand at 1,450 gigatonnes. If we are to slow down and eventually halt extreme climate change, a necessary step is to understand who is producing greenhouse gases and who should be held ultimately responsible.  Unfortunately, it is difficult to decide who we should be pointing the finger at regarding climate change. According to Naomi Oreskes, professor of the history of science at Harvard,

There are all kinds of countries that have produced a tremendous amount of historical emissions that we do not normally talk about. We do not normally talk about Mexico or Poland or Venezuela. So then it’s not just rich v poor, it is also producers v consumers, and resource rich v resource poor.

Another aspect of the issue that clouds facts is the climate denial movement.  Oreskes has already shown in the past that several of the top companies from the study are some of the major sources of funds used in the global campaign of climate denial. Despite evolution not being able to keep up with climate change, marine life being destroyed, and weather becoming increasingly more extreme across the planet, companies and governments around the world maintain a stance of cold apathy to the problem or at worse vehement denial.

Related Article: Costly Climate Changes

How about some highlights from Heede’s study? Sure thing:

  • Government run companies in the former Soviet Union produced more greenhouse gases than anyone else at approximately 8.8% of the total.
  • Chinese run companies came in a close second at 8.6% of total emissions.
  • ChevronTexaco was the leading emission producer among private companies at 3.5% total emissions, followed by Exxon, and BP.

Operations of the companies currently span the globe, which is very disconcerting for those of us concerned about climate change because

These entities extract resources from every oil, natural gas and coal province in the world, and process the fuels into marketable products that are sold to consumers on every nation on Earth.

climate change action

There is hope after all! http://www.myseek.org/

This is where Heede hits upon the most important point in the study: consumers. Despite the profundity of this study, why point fingers at the producers when we are just as much, if not more at fault for climate change as consumers. Although there are countries like Germany paving the way for a green world, most countries aren’t, and we are still enjoying the life that greenhouse emissions have provided.  Our daily purchases are the reason these companies exist, and the reason they continue to influence climate change.  Despite income inequality, we are all living like kings and queens relative to our ancestors, due in major part to harmful greenhouse emissions.

Related Article: The Ugly Face of Overpopulation

If we are to live in harmony with the environment, we must also live in harmony with ourselves and make decisions that reflect our true values.  Don’t waste your money, but instead use your buying power as a consumer to influence the world in a more positive way. If we don’t start making dramatic changes soon (some climate change scientists have already said it is far too late), the future may not be as grand as we all hope for.

 

Sources:

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-013-0986-y

http://sploid.gizmodo.com/the-actual-probability-of-earth-going-to-hell-in-the-ne-1467435315/@kcampbelldollaghan

 

https://wondergressive.com/news/income-inequality-in-america-whats-the-big-deal/

https://wondergressive.com/news/20-biggest-wastes-money/

https://wondergressive.com/news/the-ugly-face-of-overpopulation/

https://wondergressive.com/news/germany-sets-example-for-global-climate-battle/

https://wondergressive.com/news/cheaper-alternative-pollution/

https://wondergressive.com/news/solution-smog-vacuum/

https://wondergressive.com/news/warning-weather-hazards-ahead/

https://wondergressive.com/news/climate-change-too-fast-for-evolution/

https://wondergressive.com/news/costly-climate-changes/

https://wondergressive.com/news/ask-an-astrobiologist-global-warming-and-what-to-expect/

https://wondergressive.com/news/indiana-blue-laws-exemplify-crony-capitalism-time-to-punish-politicians/

https://wondergressive.com/news/refuse-reduce-reuse-recycle-rot/

https://wondergressive.com/news/fresh-air-turned-into-gasoline/

https://wondergressive.com/news/unprecedented-changes-and-extinctions-occurring-in-marine-life/

An Argument Against the Critics of Cannabis Use (Part 2)

[no_toc]

*Note: This article is part of a larger report featured on Wondergressive entitled ‘Cannabis Cures Cancer and More: A Through History and Review of the Evidence

Copyright © 2013 [Eric Feinberg]. All Rights Reserved.

To read Part 1 of this post please click here.


What the Critics Have to Say About Cannabis

(And Why They’re Wrong…)

 

Critics are quick to point out the consistently noted dangers of cannabis ingestion.  These are the same arguments that have been used for decades.  They remain aggressively debated without compromise, despite decades of rational evidence suggesting falsity and fallacy. The seemingly valid concerns regarding cannabis use that top the critics’ list are: the gateway drug theory, short-term memory loss, psychosis, decreased intelligence, harm from cannabis smoke, depression, an elevated heart rate, and worries over driving while high. Let’s allow science and logic to save the day, shall we?

Psychosis

An historically major issue concerning cannabis is the worry that it may induce schizophrenic symptoms or intensify various forms of latent schizophrenia. The subjective experience of ingesting cannabis is highly personal and varies greatly among users around the world. Common experiences include:

  • Greater enjoyment of food taste and aroma

    blogs.sfweekly.com

    blogs.sfweekly.com

  • An enhanced enjoyment of music
  • A greater enjoyment of comedy and humor
  • Distortions in perception of time and space
  • Short-term memory loss
  • Improved long-term memory recall
  • Creative thinking
  • New perspectives
  • Increased libido
  • Elevated mood
  • Heightened sensitivity to external stimuli
  • Relaxation

At extremely high doses common experiences include:

  • Altered body image
  • Auditory/visual illusions
  • Hallucinations (extremely rare)
  • Mild dissociation of mind and body
  • Panic attacks
  • Paranoia

While the vast majority of the effects of cannabis are viewed as positive, panic attacks and paranoia are obviously unwanted.  Between 20 and 30 percent of recreational users experience intense anxiety and/or panic attacks after smoking cannabis.

Related Article: The Incredibly Diverse Medicinal Properties of Cannabis 

While these symptoms usually occur due to thoughts of legal ramification for ingesting cannabis, exaggerated worry over a thought process, or general anxiousness over trying something new, it has been reported that the symptoms can happen spontaneously as well. It is possible and plausible that these symptoms could lead to greater and more persistent symptoms of psychosis. However, there are multiple aspects of the psychosis worry that needs to be discussed.

First, through our increasing knowledge of cannabinoids and the role they play on the endocannabinoid system, researchers have discovered that certain cannabinoids have a marginally stronger effect than others with regards to producing hallucinations  delusions, and subjective psychological stress.

While the THC (the most psychoactive cannabinoid found in cannabis) offers incredible physio/psychological health benefits, it has been linked to being the sole culprit of producing more schizophrenia-like symptoms.

Related Article: The History and Legality of Cannabis Use Around the World 

When comparing multiple subjects under the influence of only THC, a mixture of THC and CBD (cannabidiol), and no cannabinoids, researchers found that only THC produced subjectively negative psychological effects.  The subjects with no additional cannabinoids in their system and the subjects with the mixture of THC and CBD both experienced a nearly identical psychological effect.  The only major difference was that the subjects who had ingested the mixture reported less anhedonia (unable to experience pleasure)  then the other two groups. The researchers concluded that if anything, their research highlighted

the importance of distinguishing between different strains of cannabis.

Once we break cannabis down into its component cannabinoids it is easy to see why users describe such incredibly varied experiences. Cannabidiol is extremely effective in treating and preventing symptoms of schizophrenia, as research continues to suggest.  Many researchers believe that cannabis legalization will herald a revolution in the treatment of various psychological disorders, including schizophrenia. According to a 2005 double-blind study analyzing the antipsychotic effects of cannabidiol, researchers found that:

cannabidiol treatment was accompanied by a significant increase in serum anandamide levels, which was significantly associated with clinical improvement. The results suggest that inhibition of anandamide deactivation may contribute to the antipsychotic effects of cannabidiol potentially representing a completely new mechanism in the treatment of schizophrenia.

Other studies on the topic affirm that many subjects report

no clinically significant adverse effects

while self treating themselves with cannabis.

Even in the Netherlands, where cannabis use is widespread and often harshly judged internationally, scientists have reported an utter lack of evidence that cannabis use leads to schizophrenia.  The report states that:

A group of Dutch scientists say that there is no proof that cannabis induces schizophrenia. These findings will be embarrassing for the Dutch government, which has been bearing down on Marijuana Coffee Shops saying the drug induces schizophrenia.

The truth is that  much of the research done thus far has been skewed and largely unscientific.   Under proper guidance, and using the correct strains, researchers all around the world agree that cannabis is a wonderfully effective psychotropic medication. Researchers discussed the consistently shown promise and proof of cannabis as an effective psychotropic medication in the British Journal of Psychiatry:

I considered Arseneault et al‘s (2004) search for evidence of the association between cannabis and psychosis as quite skewed. They did not explore the evidence regarding positive, therapeutic or beneficial psychoactive effects of cannabis in mental health in the context of appropriate, rational and clinical usage…Signalling, mostly inhibitory, suggests a role for cannabinoids as therapeutic agents in central nervous system disease where inhibition of neurotransmitter release would be beneficial. Evidence suggests that cannabinoids inhibit the neurotransmitter glutamate, counteract oxidative damage to dopaminergic neurons and may be potent neuroprotective agents (Croxford, 2003)…knowing [cannabis’] potent neuroprotective function, its potential role in psychiatric practice should not be discarded lightly.

The most important thing to remember is that symptoms of schizophrenia generally (nearly always) precede cannabis use. Schizophrenia and general psychosis have far more to do with genetic make up than anything else (refer to the graph).

Research regarding the connection between cannabis and psychosis, especially symptoms of schizophrenia, remains historically lacking and skewed with regards to component cannabinoids in cannabis.  Cannabis produces highly varied subjective experiences, and research has revealed that each cannabinoid within cannabis has a markedly different effect on individuals. Multiple recent studies have shown that cannabis, specifically the cannabinoid CBD, is a highly effective agent in treating schizophrenia and other psychological disorders.  Most importantly, symptoms of schizophrenia precede cannabis use in the vast majority of cases.  There is currently no clear evidence that cannabis is directly responsible for causing psychosis and schizophrenic symptoms in users. 

 

Depression

This is one of the most commonly used arguments against the use of cannabis as a form of medicine or recreation.  Like the psychosis argument debunked above, the depression argument is always portrayed in a skewed and exaggerated fashion.  The most important thing to remember as we discuss this is that correlation does not imply causation.

forum.grasscity.com

forum.grasscity.com

It is well known that many already depressed individuals (ranging from mild to incapacitating depression) use cannabis as a form of self-medication.  This often takes place after finding no success with taking a whole slew of expensive, addictive, and biologically destructive prescription drugs handed out by the oh so helpful DSM devotees.

Related Article: The Power of Hemp Seeds: Behold Powerful Nutrition

What researchers have found is that the vast majority of people who use cannabis to treat their depression find it to be highly physically/psychologically therapeutic and helpful. All people react differently, just like with any substance.  Regardless of subjective experience it is clear at the biological level that cannabis has an anti-depressant effect on the body and mind.  With regards to decreased depression associated with cannabis use an additional study incorporated:

Over 4400 adult internet users [who] completed The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale and measures of marijuana use. We employed an internet survey in an effort to recruit the most depressed and marijuana involved participants, including those who might prove unwilling to travel to the laboratory or discuss drug use on the phone or in person. We compared those who consumed marijuana daily, once a week or less, or never in their lives. Despite comparable ranges of scores on all depression subscales, those who used once per week or less had less depressed mood, more positive affect, and fewer somatic complaints than non-users. Daily users reported less depressed mood and more positive affect than non-users. The three groups did not differ on interpersonal symptoms.

Cannabis users, whether they ingested the substance less than once a week or every day, reported far less depressive symptoms and far more happiness and satisfaction than non-users.  The study goes on to say that:

The media continues to report links between marijuana and depression. In a recent review, Degenhardt, Hall, and Lynskey (2003) identified a modest relationship only among problematic users. Many studies show no link between cannabis and depression despite appropriate statistical power, measurement, and design (Fergusson & Horwood, 1997; Fergusson, Lynskey, & Horwood, 1996; Green & Ritter, 2000; Kouri, Pope, Yurgelun-Todd, & Gruber, 1995; McGee, Williams, Poulton, & Moffitt, 2000; Musty & Kaback, 1995; Rowe, Fleming, Barry, Manwell, & Kropp, 1995). One neglected source of depression among marijuana users may stem from medical use. Separate analyses for medical vs. recreational users demonstrated that medical users reported more depressed mood and more somatic complaints than recreational users, suggesting that medical conditions clearly contribute to depression scores and should be considered in studies of marijuana and depression. The data suggests that adults apparently do not increase their risk for depression by using marijuana.

Just like we discussed in all of the other arguments, the public only sees what the media picks and chooses to show, which is usually negligible data that has been exaggerated and skewed to fit their hype.  The previous study also brought up an excellent point that has never been discussed before: are the results of studies concerning cannabis and depression that get aired by main stream media corrupted by reports of depression that originate from medical suffering?  The use of cannabis is so wide spread around the world, especially in the US, that it should not be discounted.

Related Article: Cannabis Protects Brain From Damage While Binge Drinking

Besides, just like in the psychosis argument, it is clear that depression generally precedes cannabis-use.  Furthermore, studies suggest that:

After adjusting for differences in baseline risk factors of marijuana use and depression, past-year  marijuana use does not significantly predict later development of depression.

To reiterate, cannabis exhibits an antidepressant-like behavior in more ways than one, and is often used to treat even incapacitating depression successfully.

Finally, in a longitudinal study completed in 2009 regarding cannabis and suicide,researchers found that:

Although there was a strong association between cannabis use and suicide, this was explained by markers of psychological and behavioural problems. These results suggest that cannabis use is unlikely to have a strong effect on risk of completed suicide, either directly or as a consequence of mental health problems secondary to its use.

The depression argument is false in many of the same ways as the psychosis argument.  In the vast majority of cases depressive behavior precedes cannabis use. Additionally, in most cases where cannabis is used to self-treat depression it is found to be successful.  Cannabis is a clear biological antidepressant and exhibits incredible therapeutic properties. Depression is highly subjective and everyone experiences it differently.  The truth is that in multiple studies both light and heavy cannabis users report far less depressive symptoms than non-users.  There is no evidence whatsoever that cannabis use predicts or causes depression.  Many depressed people use cannabis and report positive results far more often than people using contemporarily prescribed prescription medication. 

 

Driving While Stoned

(*Note: this report does not advocate driving while under the effects of any substance, including cannabis.  The aim of this section is to view the credible findings on how cannabis affects drivers.)

The claim that ingesting cannabis somehow affects driving ability makes sense at first glance.  Unfortunately all of the reports historically presented by mainstream media have focused on theory and self-report tactics, rather than actual evidence and proof.  They continuously focus on potential ratios, theoretical effects, and skewed speculation.

Related Article: Federal Judge Urges Decriminalization of Marijuana 

Biologically, it is true that

cannabis impairs driving behavior. However, this impairment is mediated in that subjects under cannabis treatment appear to perceive that they are indeed impaired. Where they can compensate, they do.

Despite biological theories for how cannabis might potentially affect a driver, experiments using driving simulations in the lab find that:

drivers who drank alcohol overestimated their performance quality whereas those who smoked marijuana underestimated it. Perhaps as a consequence, the former invested no special effort for accomplishing the task whereas the latter did, and successfully. This evidence strongly suggests that alcohol encourages risky driving whereas THC encourages greater caution, at least in experiments.

The [findings] contrast with results from many laboratory tests, reviewed by Moskowitz (1985), which show that even low doses of THC impair skills deemed to be important for driving, such as perception, coordination, tracking and vigilance. The present studies also demonstrated that marijuana can have greater effects in laboratory than driving tests. The last study, for example showed a highly significant effect of THC on hand unsteadiness but not on driving in urban traffic.

It is apparent that despite multiple laboratory studies displaying favorable results, real world driving tests are even more positive. When we actually test the effects of cannabis on drivers in the real world, we see very little safety issues, if any at all.

Drivers under the influence of cannabis, unlike alcohol, realize they are under the effects of a substance and successfully compensate for their altered state of mind by driving slower and by giving themselves more space between other vehicles. One of the first actual road tests with cannabis studies drivers in the lab, on the highway, and in congested urban areas.  The results affirmed that as far as cannabis’ effect on actual driving performance:

Driving quality as rated by the subjects contrasted with observer ratings.  Alcohol impaired driving performance according to the driving instructor but subjects did not perceive it; marijuana did not impair driving performance but the subjects themselves perceived their driving performance as such….Thus there was evidence that subjects in the marijuana group were not only aware of their intoxicated condition but were also attempting to compensate for it…drivers become overconfident after drinking alcohol…and more cautious and self critical after consuming low THC doses by smoking marijuana.

Drivers under the effects of cannabis pay more attention to the road; drive more slowly, and leaving themselves more room between other cars.

Related Article: Portugal Decriminalizes All Drugs; 10 Years Later the Results are Mind Blowing

The truth is that alcohol is a far more serious problem than cannabis when it comes to driving. Studies performed from 1982 to 1998 demonstrate time and time again that alcohol is significantly more dangerous than cannabis on the road. Alcohol use is also far more prevalent in crash statistics.

Blood and/or urine from fatally injured drivers in Washington State were collected and tested for the presence of drugs and alcohol. Drug and/or alcohol use was a factor in 52% of all fatalities. Among single vehicle accidents, alcohol use was a factor in 61% of cases versus 30% for multiple vehicle accidents. Drugs most commonly encountered were marijuana (11%), cocaine (3%), amphetamines (2%), together with a variety of depressant prescription medications.

The study even found that it was far less likely to find alcohol in a person’s system in the presence of cannabis, implying that cannabis use lessened the prevalence of alcohol use on the road:

Trends noted included an association of depressant use with higher blood alcohol levels, while  marijuana use was associated with lower blood alcohol levels.

With regards to comparisons between cannabis and illicit substances overall, Accident Analysis & Prevention, a peer-reviewed journal, reported in its July 2004 article titled “Psychoactive Substance Use and the Risk of Motor Vehicle Accidents,” by K.L.L. Movig, et al.:

The objective of this study was to estimate the association between psychoactive drug use and motor vehicle accidents requiring hospitalization.

The risk for road trauma was increased for single use of benzodiazepines and alcohol…High relative risks were estimated for drivers using combinations of drugs and those using a combination of drugs and alcohol.  Increased risks, although not statistically significant, were assessed for drivers using amphetamines… No increased risk for road trauma was found for drivers exposed to cannabis.

With regards to comparisons between cannabis and substance-free drivers:

The largest study ever done linking road accidents with drugs and alcohol has found drivers with cannabis in their blood were no more at risk than those who were drug-free. In fact, the findings by a pharmacology team from the University of Adelaide and Transport SA showed drivers who had smoked marijuana were marginally less likely to have an accident than those who were drug-free. A study spokesman, Dr Jason White, said the difference was not great enough to be statistically significant but could be explained by anecdotal evidence that marijuana smokers were more cautious and drove more slowly because of altered time perception. The study of 2,500 accidents, which matched the blood alcohol levels of injured drivers with details from police reports, found drug-free drivers caused the accidents in 53.5 per cent of cases. Injured drivers with a blood-alcohol concentration of more than 0.05 per cent were culpable in nearly 90 per cent of accidents they were involved in. Drivers with cannabis in their blood were less likely to cause an accident, with a culpability rate of 50.6 per cent. The study has policy implications for those who argue drug detection should be a new focus for road safety. Dr White said the study showed the importance of concentrating efforts on alcohol rather than other drugs.

The BBC and CNN both filmed their own research on the actual effects of cannabis on driving ability.  The BBC study focused on a single driver and found that he actually drove better while ‘high’; driving more cautiously and paying more attention to the driving test.  The CNN study was a bit more extensive and controlled.

The study, conducted in Washington where recreational cannabis use is legal, focused on 3 volunteers who drove under the effects of different amounts of cannabis.  They drove alongside a driving instructor with drug recognition experts (police officers with specific drug recognition training) watching them from outside the vehicle.  The volunteers included a heavy daily user, a weekend user, and an occasional user.  Even at 7x the legal limit of driving under the influence, 5x the legal limit, and 4x the legal limit respectively, all of the volunteers passed their driving tests, received positive reviews from the driving instructor, and would not have been pulled over by the drug recognition experts.

Related Article: Uruguay to Legalize Marijuana

States with medical marijuana laws are also reporting that since cannabis became legal medically and/or decriminalized, they have witnessed decreases in deaths resulting from car accidents:

A report from the University of ColoradoMontana State University, and the University of Oregon found that on average, states that have legalized Medical cannabis had a decrease in traffic-related fatalities by 8-11%.

It’s just safer to drive under the influence of marijuana than it is drunk….Drunk drivers take more risk, they tend to go faster. They don’t realize how impaired they are. People who are under the influence of marijuana drive slower, they don’t take as many risks

From a theoretical point of view it makes sense that people would be concerned over potential risks of ‘driving while stoned.’  However, the research speaks for itself.  Laboratory and real world test results have confirmed time and time again that cannabis does not have a detrimental effect on driving ability.  People under the effects of cannabis, unlike alcohol, realize their altered state of mind and compensate successfully for it.  In most instances cannabis users drive more safely; driving slower, paying more attention to the road, and remaining more cautious and vigilant. Cannabis does not pose any serious danger to drivers or anyone else on the road. 

atheistfoundation.org.au

atheistfoundation.org.au

 

Cannabis Smoke and Lung Damage

patients4medicalmarijuana.wordpress.com

patients4medicalmarijuana.wordpress.com

There are endless reports that claim cannabis harms the lungs and bronchial airways, as well as increasing the risk of lung cancer. What you’ll quickly notice though is that the studies these reports are quoting from are completely theoretical studies based on comparisons with cigarette smoke, as opposed to actual findings from research. Additionally, they only focus on one mode of cannabis ingestion, one that destroys many of the medical benefits of cannabis; smoking.

It is true that there are over 50 potentially carcinogenic substances found in cannabis.  Additionally, because smoked cannabis is not completely dry and is smoked without a filter, there is roughly 4 times more tar than the amount found in cigarettes. One can see why studies would speculate that cannabis may increase the risk of lung cancer.  As usual, when you look at the actual science, the opposite is true.

Related Article: Smoking: A Pre-existing Condition Under Obamacare

First of all, there is currently not a single known case of cancer originating from the ingestion of cannabis. As stated numerous times in this report, there has never been a death that cannabis was directly responsible for.

Endless studies, despite a hypothesis to the contrary, are unable to find an increased risk of cancer due to cannabis use.  in fact, as stated previously,

studies indicate that THC has anti-tumorigenic and anti-metastatic effect against lung cancer [and most other forms of cancer].

A study in 2005, the largest ever conducted of its kind, left Donald Tashkin, a pulmonologist at UCLA‘s David Geffin School of Medicine, scratching his head.  Tashkin and his research team had hypothesized an association between cannabis and lung cancer, but even after 30 years of observing thousands of subjects they were unable to find a connection between cannabis and lung cancer.

We hypothesized that there would be a positive association between marijuana use and lung cancer, and that the association would be more positive with heavier use. We expected that we would find that a history of heavy marijuana use – more than 500 to 1,000 uses – would increase the risk of cancer from several years to decades after exposure to marijuana. What we found instead was no association at all, and even a suggestion of some protective effect.

kushsmoke.com

kushsmoke.com

The heaviest users in Tashkin’s study smoked more than 60 joint-years worth of marijuana, or more than 22,000 joints in their lifetime. Moderately heavy users smoked between 11,000 and 22,000 joints.

That’s an enormous amount of marijuana [however] in no category was there any increased risk, nor was there any suggestion that smoking more led to a higher odds ratio. There was no dose-response, not even a suggestion of a dose response, and in all types of cancer except one, oral cancer, the odds ratios were less than one. This is the largest case-control study ever done, and everyone had to fill out a very extensive questionnaire about marijuana use. Bias can creep into any research, but we controlled for as many confounding factors as we could, and so I believe these results have real meaning.

That being said, Dr. Tashkin wisely notes:

It’s never a good idea to take anything into your lungs, including marijuana smoke.

Smoke does not belong in your lungs, and just as this report does not advocate driving while under the effects of cannabis, it equally does not recommend smoking cannabis.  What this report does suggest is using a vaporizer, cooking the cannabis into food, or making a cannabis oil.  All of these methods make this entire argument irrelevant as they do not involve any form of smoke.

The media has bombarded the public with seeming ‘proof’ that cannabis leads to lung cancer.  The truth is that all of this ‘proof’ has been entirely speculative.  Despite cannabis smoke containing carcinogens and up to 4 times more tar than the amount found in cigarettes, long term studies confirm that there is no increased risk of lung cancer from smoking cannabis.  On the contrary, the cannabinoids found in THC work to fight against cancer and even protect healthy cells.  Most importantly, because cannabis can be ingested in many ways that don’t involve smoke, this entire argument is irrelevant.

 

*Note: This article is part of a larger report featured on Wondergressive entitled ‘Cannabis Cures Cancer and Everything Else: A Through History and Review

 

Sources:

 

Psychosis

340.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_cannabis#Psychoactive_effects

341.

http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletters/

342.

http://bjp.rcpsych.org/

343.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anhedonia

344.

http://www.scielo.br/

345.

http://www.cannabis-med.org/studies/ww_en_db_study_show.php?s_id=171

346.

http://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/

347.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/12283.php

348.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/36942.php

349.

http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/185/1/78.1.full

350.

http://socialsciences.people.hawaii.edu/publications_lib/Cannabis%20and%20SPD.pdf

351.

http://bjp.rcpsych.org/

352.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12617697?dopt=Abstract

 

Depression

353.

http://www.ukcia.org/research/AnxietyWithDepressionResearchReview.pdf

354.

http://www.ukcia.org/research/AnxietyWithDepressionResearchReview.pdf

355.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-20012048-10391704.html

356.

http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/178/2/107.full.pdf

357.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1317988/?tool=pubmed

358.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1317988/?tool=pubmed

359.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15964704

360.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed

361.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16968348

362.

http://www.jneurosci.org/content/27/43/11700.full

363.

http://www.ukcia.org/research/AnxietyWithDepressionResearchReview.pdf

364.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19949196

 

Driving While Stoned

365.

http://www.bmj.com/press-releases/

366.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21976636

367.

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/

368.

http://www.ukcia.org/research/driving/02.php

369.

http://www.ukcia.org/research/driving/02.php

370.

http://www.erowid.org/plants/cannabis/cannabis_driving4.shtml

371.

http://www.ukcia.org/research/medline/8.htm

372.

http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.source.php?sourceID=000783

373.

http://www.ukcia.org/research/driving/index.php

374.

375.

376.

http://www.heraldnews.com/news/x1926904908/

377.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Colorado

378.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montana_State_University

379.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Oregon

380.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_cannabis

381.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2011/12/02/driving-stoned-safer-than-driving-drunk/

 

Cannabis Smoke and Lung Damage

382.

http://www.mrc.ac.uk/Newspublications/News/MRC006135

383.

http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-help/about-cancer/

384.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10613339

385.

http://articles.latimes.com/2006/may/05/opinion/oe-grinspoon5

386.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2277494/

387.

http://www.aacrmeetingabstracts.org

388.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulmonologist

389.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UCLA

390.

http://www.cannabis-med.org/english/bulletin/ww_en_db_cannabis_artikel.php?id=219#2

391.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaporizer_(cannabis)

 

An Argument Against the Critics of Cannabis Use (Part 1)

 

[no_toc]

*Note: This article is part of a larger report featured on Wondergressive entitled ‘Cannabis Cures Cancer and Everything Else: A Through History and Review

For part 2 of this article please click here

Copyright © 2013 [Eric Feinberg]. All Rights Reserved.


What the Critics Have to Say About Cannabis

(And Why They’re Wrong…)

 

Critics are quick to point out the consistently noted dangers of cannabis ingestion.  These are the same arguments that have been used for decades.  They remain aggressively debated without compromise, despite decades of rational evidence suggesting falsity and fallacy. The seemingly valid concerns regarding cannabis use that top the critics’ list are: the gateway drug theory, short-term memory loss, psychosis, decreased intelligence, harm from cannabis smoke, depression, an elevated heart rate, and worries over driving while high. Let’s allow science and logic to save the day, shall we?

 

Gateway Drug

Many critics of cannabis use claim that cannabis is a gateway to harder and more persistent drug use.  They are implying that if a person uses cannabis, recreationally or medically, they are more likely to use dangerous drugs like cocaine (again, ironically listed as a schedule 2 drug) or heroin.  Although multiple studies have found that cannabis users are more likely than non-users to engage in the use of more ‘hardcore’ substances (meaning higher addiction potential and/or more biologically detrimental), there are endless holes in this argument.

Related Article: The Incredibly Diverse Medicinal Properties of Cannabis 

First, let’s start with the fact that there is no definitive evidence that cannabis use is responsible for the ingestion of harmful drugs. According to former US Surgeon General Dr. Joycelyn Elders:

Much of their [US drug-policy leaders] rhetoric about marijuana being a ‘gateway drug’ is simply wrong. After decades of looking, scientists still have no evidence that marijuana causes people to use harder drugs. If there is any true ‘gateway drug,’ it’s tobacco.

Alcohol and tobacco are more accessible and far more likely to be used by teens, consequently making those substances more likely to lead to further drug use.  As stated by Elders, they are the true gateway drugs. In one of the most highly credible and sourced assessments on the science of drug use, the Institute of Medicine stated that:

In fact, most drug users do not begin their drug use with marijuana–they begin with alcohol and nicotine, usually when they are too young to do so legally…

There is no evidence that marijuana serves as a stepping stone on the basis of its particular physiological effect.

Starting to see the trend here?  Alcohol and tobacco are far more dangerous and addictive than cannabis.  If the gateway drug theory did have any legitimacy, it would have to be applied to alcohol and nicotine, two completely legal substances, before it could be attributed to any other substance.

Related Article: The History and Legality of Cannabis Use Around the World 

The best analogy I’ve ever encountered for the ridiculousness of the gateway drug theory comes from Lynn Zimmer, PhD, Professor Emeritus at Queens College at the City University of New York:

In the end, the gateway theory is not a theory at all.  It is a description of the typical sequence in which multiple-drug users initiate the use of high-prevalence and low-prevalence drugs.

A similar statistical relationship exists between other kinds of common and uncommon related activities.  For example, most people who ride a motorcycle (a fairly rare activity) have ridden a bicycle (a fairly common activity).  Indeed, the prevalence of motorcycle riding among people who have never ridden a bicycle is probably extremely low.  However, bicycle riding does not cause motorcycle riding, and increases in the former will not lead automatically to increases in the latter.

Nor will increases in marijuana use lead automatically to increases in the use of cocaine or heroin.

Not surprisingly, a study of 4,000 participants suggests that cannabis use discourages the use of harder drugs. Another study suggests that any trace of the gateway effect disappears by age 21. What is more likely to lead to additional drug use is not cannabis itself, but the overly harsh penalties of cannabis use.  Karen Van Gundy, who is a sociologist at the University of New Hampshire, did not set out to disprove the gateway theory, but nevertheless found that, rather than cannabis itself:

If we overly criminalize behaviors like marijuana use among teens, this could interfere with opportunities for education and employment later on, which, in turn, could be creating more drug use.

The gateway drug theory is weak and unfounded.  It is in fact not a credible theory at all. It has no place in the realm of science.

 

Decreased Intelligence

It is a propaganda technique that we have been hearing for nearly the entire 20th century and it continues into the 21st century; cannabis makes you stupid, a loser, a burnout.

While there is clear evidence that cannabis, like other substances, alters perception and brain function, there is no evidence that cannabis alters brain function in a purely negative way.  Additionally, there is absolutely zero evidence that the biological effects of cannabis are permanent.  On the contrary, science tells us that all of the consistently noted negative biological aspects of cannabis are entirely temporary.

Related Article: The Power of Hemp Seeds: Behold Powerful Nutrition

According to Igor Grant, MD, Executive Vice Chairman at the University of California, San Diego Department of Psychiatry:

Smoking marijuana will certainly affect perception, but it does not cause permanent brain damage. ‘The findings were kind of a surprise. One might have expected to see more impairment of higher mental function. Other illegal drugs, or even alcohol, can cause brain damage

If we barely find this tiny effect in long-term heavy users of cannabis, then we are unlikely to see deleterious side effects in indivduals who receive cannabis for a short time in a medical setting

If it turned out that new studies find that cannabis is helpful in treating some medical conditions, this enables us to see a marginal level of safety.

420tribune.com

420tribune.com

Dale Gieringer, PhD, State Coordinator of CalNORML explains that the notion that cannabis decreases intelligence is based entirely on a study that was later proven to be inaccurate:

Government experts now admit that pot  doesn’t kill brain cells.

This myth came from a handful of animal experiments in which structural changes (not actual cell death, as is often alleged) were observed in brain cells of animals exposed to high doses of pot. Many critics still cite the notorious monkey studies of Dr. Robert G. Heath, which purported to find brain damage in three monkeys that had been heavily dosed with cannabis. This work was never replicated and has since been discredited by a pair of better controlled, much larger monkey studies, one by Dr. William Slikker of the National Center for Toxicological Research [William Slikker et al., ‘Chronic Marijuana Smoke Exposure in the Rhesus Monkey,’ Fundamental and Applied Toxicology 17: 321-32 (1991)] and the other by Charles Rebert and Gordon Pryor of SRI International [Charles Rebert & Gordon Pryor – ‘Chronic Inhalation of Marijuana Smoke and Brain Electrophysiology of Rhesus Monkeys,’International Journal of Psychophysiology V 14, p.144, 1993].

Neither found any evidence of physical alteration in the brains of monkeys exposed to daily doses of pot for up to a year.

The surprising truth is that cannabis actually promotes the creation of new neurons in hippocampal regions of the brain, the part of the brain most responsible for memory. Xia Zhang, an expert at the Neuropsychiatry Research Unit, Department of Psychiatry, at the University of Saskatchewan in Canada along with other medical researchers, points out that cannabis is the only illicit drug ever found to promote the creation of brain cells:

We show that 1 month after chronic HU210 [high-potency cannabinoid] treatment, rats display increased newborn neurons [brain cell growth] in the hippocampal dentate gyrus [a portion of the brain] and significantly reduced measures of anxiety- and depression-like behavior.Thus, cannabinoids appear to be the only illicit drug whose capacity to produce increased hippocampal newborn neurons is positively correlated with its anxiolytic- [anxiety reducing] and antidepressant-like effects.

Multiple long-term studies have found that there is no significant difference in cognitive decline between heavy users, light users, and nonusers of cannabis. Intelligence, or a lack thereof, depends on a great deal of variables, including genetic makeup, nutritional status, health status, formal education, and age-related developmental processes, but cannabis use is not one of them.

Related Article: Cannabis Protects Brain From Damage While Binge Drinking

From a social standpoint, studies have even found that kids who use cannabis and other illicit substances usually have a higher IQ than their peers. Additional studies found that:

College students who smoke cannabis demonstrate comparable or even higher grades than their  cannabis abstinent classmates, and are more likely to pursue a graduate degree.

The short answer is yes, cannabis alters your mind and body, like any other substance in the world, but it does not make you stupid (certainly you’re not going to claim any of these highly successful cannabis-users are stupid), and all of the physiological and psychological effects are temporary.

Barack Obama Smoking Cannabis: weedquotes.blogspot.com

Barack Obama Smoking Cannabis: weedquotes.blogspot.com

 

Memory Loss

Critics of cannabis use argue that memory loss, especially short-term memory loss, occurs more prominently in cannabis smokers.  They also claim that it is a permanent effect. All of these claims are either exaggerated or wrong. We’ve already discussed how all the effects of cannabis ingestion are completely temporary; the same applies to memory.

To begin, it is true that cannabis has a noticeable effect on short-term memory as well as working memory, while the user is under the influence.  Cannabis affects working memory through the mechanisms stated above, by encouraging neurogensis, or the creation of neurons, in the hippocampus region of the brain. Although this has a positive effect on memory overall, it disrupts short-term memory while the user is ‘high’ by creating ‘noise’ in the hippocampus. These effects are detectable at least 7 days after heavy cannabis use,

but appear reversible and related to recent cannabis exposure rather than irreversible and related to  cumulative lifetime use.

Furthermore, after extensively studying cannabis use, lead researcher and Harvard professor Harrison Pope came to the conclusion that:

From neuropsychological tests chronic cannabis users showed difficulties, with verbal memory in  particular, for ‘at least a week or two’ after they stopped smoking. Within 28 days, memory problems vanished and the subjects ‘were no longer distinguishable from the comparison group.’

These tests affirm that the physio/psychological effects of cannabis are temporary and reversible.

Related Article: Federal Judge Urges Decriminalization of Marijuana 

As for the seriousness of the temporary effects on short-term memory, studies have found that the effect is negligible. Researchers from the University of California, San Diego School of Medicine headed by Dr. Igor Grant analyzed data from 15 previously published controlled studies involving 704 long-term cannabis users and 484 nonusers and found that:

long-term cannabis use [is] only marginally harmful on the memory and learning. Other functions such as reaction time, attention, language, reasoning ability, perceptual and motor skills [are] unaffected. The observed effects on memory and learning, [show] long-term cannabis use [causes] ‘selective memory defects’, but that the impact [is] ‘of a very small magnitude.’

In fact, rather than having deleterious effects on memory, Ohio State University scientists have shown that

specific elements of marijuana can be good for the aging brain by reducing inflammation there and  possibly even stimulating the formation of new brain cells.

Research supports this claim as past studies have revealed that cannabinoid receptors stimulated by cannabinoids in cannabis act as an anti-inflammatory agent and serve to improve memory in old rats.

Surprisingly, recent research into the activity of the hippocampus suggests that the key to a good memory is forgetting.  Think of the brain as a computer with enormous hard drive space. Despite this incredible amount of storage, it is still finite. The more memories our brains create, the harder it is for our working memory to properly remember and recall.  In this way, forgetting a few things actually isn’t a bad thing. It is in fact highly beneficial overall.

Another important point is that different cannabinoids found in cannabis affect memory centers in the brain in remarkably different ways.  Through further legalization, scientists will have the freedom to perform more extensive research, while growers will have the opportunity to create strains of cannabis that have an even more minimal effect on the memory centers of the brain.

These studies reveal that in the short run, short-term and working memory are disrupted by the ingestion of cannabis by creating new neurons in the memory centers of the brain.  These additional neurons disrupt working memory by acting as additional ‘noise’ to the active, recalling mind. These short-term memory lapses are completely temporary though, and in the long run the brain is actually left with additional neurons and a more expansive memory center.  To use the analogy of a computer again, think of heavy-cannabis ingestion as a temporary lapse in primary memory functionality for the sake of upgrading the storage capabilities of secondary memory. 

 

Elevated Heart Rate

It is true that many cannabis users describe symptoms of panic and consequently an elevated heart rate, especially during their first time trying cannabis.  What still remains debated is whether cannabis itself biologically causes heart rate to increase.

Related Article: Portugal Decriminalizes All Drugs; 10 Years Later the Results are Mind Blowing

The most well known study done on the correlation between cannabis and heart rate, and subsequently the only truly credible and widely used study, is one performed by a man named Dr. Murray A. Mittleman.  Mittleman’s study focused on:

information on cannabis use from 3,882 middle-aged and elderly patients who had suffered heart attacks. A total of 124 patients were identified as current users, including 37 who reported smoking the drug up to 24 hours before their attack, and nine who had used it within an hour of experiencing symptoms.

Mittleman’s conclusion was that the first hour after taking cannabis heart attack risk is 4.8 times higher than during periods of non-use. In the second hour, the risk drops to 1.7 times higher. According to Mittleman this was the first study to document that smoking cannabis could trigger a heart attack, but that the trigger mechanism remained unknown. So what’s the issue with this constantly cited study?

Besides the fact that any type of smoke entering the lungs produces the same effect (it is not necessary and not medicinally optimal to smoke cannabis, a subject that is covered later in this report), Dr. Lester Grinspoon, who is one of the world’s foremost cannabis researchers as well as Associate Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and a former senior psychiatrist at the Massachusetts Mental Health Center in Boston for 40 years, explains why this study should be dismissed.  Dr. Grinspoon tells an interviewer, in response to Mittleman’s study:

..let me say that since 1967 there have been numerous reports and studies, each of which the American media has blown out of all proportion, stating one or another supposed ill effect of marijuana use. I can list them, if you’d like. ‘Increase in the size of the ventricles, decrease in testosterone, destruction of chromosomes.’ All were front-page stories, none of them have ever been replicated. In other words, they didn’t pan out scientifically. Of course, the studies that contradicted them ended up on page 31 or thereabouts, if they got mentioned at all… I would point out that out of 3,882 patients, we’re talking about 9 who used marijuana within an hour of the onset of a heart attack. That’s around 0.2%. By sheer mathematics, given that people sleep eight hours per day or so, we can deduce that 6.7% of those patients emptied their bowels within an hour of onset. It’s incredible to me that the numbers here could be said to constitute a significant risk factor.

So, as is typical of the main stream media, a report was utterly sensationalized and relatively negligible data was heralded as proven truth. Dr. Grinspoon elaborates on the shortcomings of the study by reminding the interviewer that:

[Mittleman] put that increase [in heart rate] at 40 beats per minute. In truth, that number is closer to 20 beats per minute, which is probably consistent with running up the stairs in one’s house...I blame the media far more than I do Dr. Middleman. I read his abstract, and in its conclusion he cautioned against making too much of the data…in 1997, Kaiser Permanente did a large-scale study which included more than 65,000 admitted marijuana users, and they could not demonstrate any impact of marijuana use on mortality. If marijuana use really was a significant risk factor for heart attack, it is hard to believe that it didn’t turn up there. Again, I’m not saying that there is absolutely no risk demonstrated here. But given the history of the research since 1967, I’d be surprised if these findings don’t go down the same chute as all of the other front-page scare stories.

It’s really not that hard to believe.  We have seen the same baseless scare tactics take place 20 years ago, 40 years ago, 60 years ago, 100 years, and more!

Related Article: Uruguay to Legalize Marijuana

With regards to actual significant scientific data, cannabis has in fact been shown (as stated in the ‘Cannabis Cures Everything’ section of this report) to treat and protect the heart, as well as help prevent heart disease through the interaction with the endocannabinoid system of the heart and surrounding regions of the body. It is consequently a likely tool for fighting and preventing obesity (along with hemp seeds). The science is still emerging, but what little research exists strongly suggests that cannabis will serve an extremely positive role in keeping the heart healthy in the future.

 

The single study that is consistently used to argue that cannabis poses a danger to cardiovascular health is far from significant and only became prominent through sensationalized media.  Repeat studies suggest the cannabinoids found in cannabis play a pivotal role in cardiovascular health and the prevention of heart disease. 

 

 

*Note: This article is part of a larger report featured on Wondergressive entitledCannabis Cures Cancer and Everything Else: A Through History and Review

 

Source List:

Gateway Theory

296.

http://www.justice.gov/dea/docs/marijuana_position_2011.pdf

297.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Schedule_II_drugs_(US)

298.

http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.source.php?sourceID=000815

299.

http://www.progress.org/drug45.htm

300.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joycelyn_Elders

301.

http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/sourcefiles/IOM_Report.pdf

302.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Medicine

303.

http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.source.php?sourceID=000233

304.

http://www.csdp.org/publicservice/medicalmj08.htm

305.

http://www.webmd.com/parenting/news/20100902/

 

Decreased Intelligence

306.

http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000235

307.

http://www.erowid.org/plants/cannabis/cannabis_effects.shtml

308.

http://norml.org/library/health-reports/item/norml-s-marijuana-health-mythology#10

309.

http://health.ucsd.edu/news/2003/06_27_grant.html

310.

http://norml.org/library/health-reports/item/norml-s-marijuana-health-mythology#12

311.

http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/sourcefiles/JCI25509v1.pdf

312.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocampus

313.

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/medical/cannabisuseandcognitivedecline.htm

314.

http://jech.bmj.com/content/early/2011/10/28/

315.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1435998/

316.

http://coedmagazine.com/2009/02/06/

 

Memory Loss

317.

http://loopylettuce.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/marijuana-myth-short-term-memory-loss/

318.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hipo.10081/abstract

319.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short-term_memory#Relationship_with_working_memory

320.

http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F3-540-26573-2_15

321.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11576028

322.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Pope

323.

http://www.bostonmagazine.com/2012/09/medical-marijuana-in-massachusetts/5/

324.

http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/images/pdfs/Reuters_062703.pdf

325.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_California,_San_Diego_School_of_Medicine

326.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/11/081119120141.htm

327.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2586121/?tool=pmcentrez

328.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/18039493/#.UTDOgTAqby-

329.

http://www.livescience.com/7271-key-good-memory-forget.html

330.

http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101001/full/news.2010.508.html

 

Elevated Heart Rate

331.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/664296.stm

332.

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Tobacco/cessation

333.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lester_Grinspoon

334.

http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle-old/129/marijuanarisk.shtml

335.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19357846

336.

http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/meeting_abstract/120/

337.

http://www.pagepress.org/journals/index.php/hi/article/view/1162

338.

http://www.pagepress.org/journals/index.php/hi/article/view/1162

339.

http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/pdf/1743-7075-7-32.pdf

 

The Incredibly Diverse Medicinal Properties of Cannabis

 

Copyright © 2013 [Eric Feinberg]. All Rights Reserved.

 

*Note: This article is part of a larger report featured on Wondergressive entitled ‘Cannabis Cures Cancer and Everything Else: A Thorough History and Review

                                                

Cannabis (commonly called pot, ganja, weed, marijuana, etc.) is the most diversely effective and efficient medicine known to man, with the added benefit of having far less harmful side effects than most prescribed drugs, not being physically addictive, being minimally psychologically addictive and being impossible to overdose on. Unlike most substances approved by the FDA, Nobody has ever died from ingesting cannabis. It is one of the least toxic substances known to man; less toxic than much of the food we eat as well as many non-nutritious substances we consume, especially alcohol, tobacco, and even sugar.

Even more amazingly, studies all around the world have concluded with exponentially growing empirical affirmation that cannabis completely and totally cures cancer.  It additionally acts as a preventative, stopping cancer from ever coming back.  Don’t believe me?  Continue reading, or just ask the US government; they own the patent for cannabis as a successful cure and/or treatment for a whole array of medical conditions.

Related Article: The Power of Hemp Seeds: Behold Powerful Nutrition

Before we delve into the medicinal benefits of cannabis, we must first understand the vehicle through which cannabis performs its medicinal magic, the endocannabinoid system.

The Endocannabinoid System 

Cannabis is one of the most highly effective medicinal substances in the world.  It has the power to treat and/or cure a countless number of illnesses and syndromes, including a whole array of different types of cancer. But how can a single substance have such an extraordinary effect on our biology? It all begins with the endocannabinoid system.

The endogenous cannabinoid system, also known as the endocannabinoid system (ECS), wasn’t fully discovered until 1992. All vertebrates share the endocannibinoid system along with various invertebrates. It is made up of compounds called endocannabinoids and cannabinoid receptors, and is found throughout your entire body: in the brain, organs, tissue, and cells of all shapes and functions.

The endocannabinoid system plays a vital role in pre and post-natal life. The purpose of the endocannabinoid system remains uniform throughout our bodies; to maintain a stable internal environment amidst an endless stream of external fluctuations, a process called homeostasis. It modulates energy intake, and is also in charge of nutrient transport, metabolic storage, and much, much more. 

Related Article: Cannabis Protects Brain From Damage While Binge Drinking

Because the discovery of the endocannabinoid system is relatively new, and despite there being over 12,000 scientific articles concerning the endocannabinoid system, there are still gaps in our understanding.  There is still a significant amount of research that needs to be done, and educating people on the actual science of cannabis’ activity in the body will help to clear the smoke of ignorance and closed mindedness. Once people embrace the current research that is taking place, further research into more specific and particular roles of the endocannabanoid system will take off at lightning speed. What we do know is the following:

Cannabinoid receptors are found in every part of the body and are believed to be more numerous than any other receptor system in our biological system. When cannabinoid receptors are stimulated, a variety of physiologic processes ensue. Researchers have identified two cannabinoid receptors: CB1, predominantly present in the nervous system, connective tissues, gonads, glands, and organs; and CB2, predominantly found in the immune system and its associated structures. Many tissues contain both CB1 and CB2 receptors, each linked to a different function. Researchers are currently seeking to discover additional cannabinoid receptors as studies suggest that they do exist. As for endocannabinoids:

Endocannabinoids are the substances our bodies naturally make to stimulate these receptors. The two most well understood of these molecules are called anandamide and 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG). They are synthesized on-demand from cell membrane arachidonic acid derivatives, have a local effect and short half-life before being degraded by the enzymes fatty acid amide hydrolase (FAAH) and monoacylglycerol lipase (MAGL).

Phytocannabinoids are plant substances that stimulate cannabinoid receptors. Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, is the most psychoactive and certainly the most famous of these substances, but other cannabinoids such as cannabidiol (CBD) and cannabinol (CBN) are gaining the interest of researchers due to a variety of healing properties. Most phytocannabinoids have been isolated from cannabis sativa, but other medical herbs, such as echinacea purpura, have been found to contain non-psychoactive cannabinoids as well.

The information above focuses on the two most well known endocannabinoids in the body, as well as the most well known cannabinoids in cannabis, but there are far more. Cannabinoids are split into three categories:

Cannabinoids appear throughout all of nature.  For example, besides being found in cannabis and humans, cannabinoids are found in large abundance in chocolate, flax seeds, and breast milk.  Additionally, hemp seeds aid the body in creating natural cannabinoids with the help of omega fatty acids.

Related Article: Federal Judge Urges Decriminalization of Marijuana 

Due to the nearly identical structure of phytocannabinoids and endocannabinoids, as well as their identical mechanism of bonding to the same receptors in our body, we have a natural form of cannabis flowing through us at all times. What this means is that the compounds found in cannabis fit perfectly well into our own body‘s natural systems, ensuring highly efficient and proper uptake of the plant’s remarkably beneficial multitude of cannabinoidal compounds.

 

Cannabis Cures Cancer

This is more than just a theory or hypothesis.  There is an insurmountable pile of evidence that cannabis cures/treats cancer (and a multitude of other illnesses) in a large amount of cases, and may even prevent it from coming back. The amount of evidence is daunting, and the science is sound.

It is through the encocannabinoid system that cannabis is able to perform its magic.  Cannabis has the ability to treat and/or cure a constantly growing list of illnesses, including cancer. Dependent on the individual and the type of cannabinoid used, most types of cancer have been observed responding positively to the introduction of cannabis in the system, including cancer found in the breast, prostate, lung, thyroid, colon, skin, pituitary gland, ovary, pancreas, as well as melanomaleukemia and more! The cannabinoids in cannabis act through the body’s natural endocannabinoid system to cure and/or treat cancer in several ways, the most prominent and well researched being:

 

Related Article: Cancer Cells Avoid Chemotherapy

One of the greatest benefits of cannabis as medicine is that it stimulates and acts in harmony with a system that is already present throughout the body.  Instead of prescribing five or more different, highly addictive pills to treat various symptoms, and additional pills to treat the endless side effects (often worse than the illness itself) of all the pills, doctors are able to use cannabis and the cannabanoids within it, as a single, natural medicinal source without any physical addiction potential and little to no harmful side effects.  Plus, don’t forget, it is impossible to overdose on.

 

Cannabis Cures Everything Else

Along with treating various forms of cancer, cannabis can be used to treat a constantly growing list of other diseases and syndromes as well.  It may even slow the aging process. Additionally, the cannabinoids found in cannabis are exceptional anti-oxidants and neuroprotectants.  It is such a remarkable substance that it is able to treat seemingly opposite illnesses simultaneously, like obesity and eating disorders/malnutrition.  Again, the key is the activation and involvement with the endocannabinoid system. Cannabis has shown results ranging from promising potential to revolutionary effectiveness in curing and/or treating:

  1. Addiction
  2. ADHD
  3. AIDS/HIV
  4. Alcoholism
  5. Alzheimer’s Disease
  6. Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS)
  7. Anorexia
  8. Anxiety
  9. Arthritis
  10. Asthma
  11. Atherosclerosis
  12. Autism
  13. Auto-Immune Diseases
  14. Bacterial Infections
  15. Bipolar Disorder
  16. Blood Disorders
  17. Bone Loss (reverses bone loss)
  18. Brain Damage From Binge Drinking
  19. Brain Injury/Stroke
  20. Cachexia
  21. Cancer
  22. Cluster Headache
  23. Crohn’s Disease
  24. Cystic Fibrosis
  25. Depression

  26. Dermatitis
  27. Diabetes
  28. Dystonia
  29. Eating Disorders
  30. Epilepsy
  31. Fever
  32. Fibromyalgia
  33. Flu
  34. Fungal Infection
  35. Gastrointestinal Disorders
  36. Glaucoma
  37. Glioma
  38. Heart Diseases
  39. Hepatits 
  40. Herpes
  41. Huntington’s Disease
  42. Hypertension
  43. Incontinence

  44. Infant Mortality
  45. Inflammation
  46. Insomnia 
  47. Liver Fibrosis
  48. Mad Cow Disease
  49. Menopause
  50. Migraine
  51. Motion Sickness
  52. MRSA
  53. Multiple Sclerosis 
  54. Muscular Dystrophy
  55. Nail Patella Syndrome
  56. Nausea/Vomiting (including nausea due to chemotherapy)
  57. Neuroinflammation
  58. Nicotine Addiction
  59. Obesity
  60. OCD
  61. Pain

  62. Pancreatitis
  63. Parkinson’s Disease
  64. Periodontal Disease
  65. Phantom Limb Pain
  66. Poison Ivy Allergy
  67. Proximal Myotonic Myopathy
  68. Psoriasis
  69. PTSD
  70. Restless Leg Syndrome
  71. Schizophrenia
  72. Scleroderma
  73. Septic Shock
  74. Sickle Cell Disease
  75. Siezures
  76. Sleep Apnoea
  77. Spinal Cord Injury
  78. Stress
  79. Tourette’s Syndrome
  80. Traumatic Memories
  81. Wasting Syndrome
  82. Withdrawal
  83. and more…
 (*Note: each of these words link to an individual study)
 
Related Article: The Greatest Medical Discovery of Our Time: Starve Cancer by Eating
 

It is because the cannabinoids in cannabis are so influential on the endocannabinoid system, a system that spans every part of our body, that they are able to have such an effective, overarching, revolutionarily positive effect. Keep in mind that the above is what researchers have found with limited funds, little time, and immense legal obstacles. The golden age of cannabis research hasn’t even started yet.

 

Cannabis Oil: Run From the Cure

The most medicinally beneficial way to ingest cannabis is by making a high potency cannabis oil.  It should be clear now from this report that cannabis is far more effective than conventional medicine for a near-endless variety of ailments. This is especially true for cancer.

Cancer cells have recently been seen avoiding chemotherapy, which explains why chemotherapy only has a 2.3% success rate, with the cancer often returning even in seemingly successful cases. Many patients also describe the side effects of conventional cancer therapies, especially chemotherapy, being even worse than cancer symptoms.  In some cases, chemotherapy even shortens patients’ life expectancy, leading to a shorter life filled with pain and suffering.

The point is, no matter what type of conventional medicine you use, your chances of survival are bleak, and the side effects are horrendous. On the other hand, there is a medicine available that has been proven to completely cure cancer in the majority of cases, as well as having little to no adverse side effects.  Additionally, it is as non-toxic as a substance can get, and is impossible to overdose on.  Plus, it focuses on treating the side effects of cancer along with the cancer itself.  At this point, you recognize that I’m referring to cannabis, but in this case, I’m referring specifically to cannabis oil, also called hemp oil and hash oil (though hemp oil could also refer to a pressed oil derived from hemp seeds which contains a relatively low amount of medicinally superior cannabinoids, namely THC.  To avoid confusion I will refer to it only as cannabis oil).

Related Article: 15 Year Old Invents a 3 Cent Cancer Treatment Using Google

Cannabis oil refers to a highly potent extract of cannabinoids from cannabis, especially THC, usually in the range of 40-90% purity (though there are claims of higher purity), in the form of a thick oil that can be taken daily. The same science discussed above applies to cannabis oil as the same cannabinoids are present, only with the oil they are in much higher concentrations. It is due to the increased potency in cannabinoids, specifically THC, that cannabis oil is the most medicinal and beneficial form of the medicine.

The use of cannabis oil became most prominent due to a documentary made by a man named Rick Simpson.  The documentary is called ‘Run From The Cure,’ ( the word cure referring to the conventional cures for cancer, like chemotherapy.  The documentary focuses on the science of the endocannabinoid system, how to make the oil and what to expect, doctor testimonials, research regarding cannabis’ effect on cancer, and testimonials from patients that have used cannabis oil to successfully cure their cancer.

Another story that is making ground breaking news is a story that is dubbed: Brave Mykayla.  It is the story of Mykayla Comstock, a 7 year old girl from Oregon who successfully used medical marijuana, specifically cannabis oil, to fully cure her leukemia.

Additional information on Rick Simpson, Rick Simpson Oil (cannabis oil created using Rick Simpson’s simple method), and how to make cannabis oil yourself can be found on Rick Simpsons personal website: http://phoenixtears.ca/.

Over 150 testimonials on the profound effects of cannabis oil have also been compiled.

Related Article: It’s a Mini-Me: Mice Clones Provide Personalized Cancer Treatment

Cannabis oil is effective to an unprecedented degree, so says science and the people who have used it successfully to treat their cancer. Unfortunately, unless you are approved to use cannabis medically, it is incredibly expensive and potentially dangerous to procure due to its legal status.  Something obviously needs to change, but what can be done?  What’s the next step? **This article is preceded by and continues in the report: Cannabis Cures Cancer and Everything Else: A Through History and Review.

*Note: Although it does not specifically contain a discussion on cannabis oil, this exceptional video speaks extensively on the overall science of cannabis’ effects on the endocannabinoid system, presents testimonials from doctors and patients, and discusses various government funded/peer reviewed studies verifying cannabis’ extraordinary effects. It is the video I recommend to anyone even remotely interested in the subject, and is a great introduction to the plethora of research on the issue.  It contains the following credible credits:
 
Dr. Robert Melamede, Ph.D.
Associate Professor and Biology Chairman
Biology Department at the University of Colorado
CEO and President of Cannabis Science
“Cannabinoids kill cancer cells in many cases, people are not aware of this”
 
Dr. Manuel Guzman, Ph.D.
Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
Professor at the Complutense University, Madrid, Spain
“Cannabinoids have the effect of inducing death in cancer cells”
 
Dr. Prakash Nagarkatti, Ph.D.
Vice President for Cannabinoid Research
University of South Carolina Columbia Distinguished Professor
“Cannabinoids can be used effectively as anti-cancer agents”
 
Dr. Sean McAllister CPMC Scientist
California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute
http://thesethgroup.org/videos.html
“Cannabidiol inhibits aggressive breast cancers”
 
Dr. Donald Tashkin, M.D.
University of California, Los Angeles
Emeritus Professor of Medicine
Medical Director of the Pulmonary Function Laboratory
“THC actually has an anti-tumor effect”
 
Dr. Robert Sterner, M.D.
UCSD General Surgeon
Graduate of Harvard & UCLA
“Marijuana seeks out cancerous cells and preferentially kills them”
 
Dr. Jeffrey Hergenrather, M.D.
Addiction Medicine Specialist
President of the Society of Cannabis Clinicians
“There are multiple mechanisms of action in which cannabis kills cancer cells”
 
Dr. Bonni Goldstein, M.D.
Canna Centers, Medical Director
Cannabis Researcher and Scientist
“Cannabidiol has been found to make cancer cells commit suicide”
 
Dr. Josh Wurzer, Researcher
Laboratory Director, SC Laboratories
Cannabis Researcher and Scientist
“Health benefits attributed to THC is actually because of the CBD content”

Final Thoughts

It should now be clear by reading this report that cannabis and hemp remain illegal for utterly irrational reasons that are actually damaging society as a whole.  Most importantly, cannabis should not be labeled a schedule 1 substance as it contains, at the very last, a substantial amount of medicinal value.  This medicinal effect comes with the added bonus of having little to no danger of addiction, overdose, or biological harm; something that cannot be said about most other substances approved by the FDA. Even aspirin, a substance millions of people around the world pop like candy, kills 1000’s of people every year.  Let’s not forget that the most popular pain killer in the world has been found to substantially increase heart attack risk.

A slew of studies…show diclofenac — sold under the brand names Voltaren, Cambia, Cataflam and Zipsor — is just as likely to cause a heart attack as the discredited painkiller Vioxx (rofecoxib), which was pulled from the U.S. market in 2004.

We have so many issues with modern medicine, yet a cheap (free if you grow it) natural, highly effective medicine/pain killer already exists in the form of cannabis. Why is it still only available to less than half the country, and only after jumping through extraordinary loopholes? Even more ludicrous, although medical cannabis users are practicing their legal state right, and moreover, the natural right to peacefully preserve their own lives, they are still labeled by the federal government as criminals deserving up to life sentences behind bars.  This is alarmingly unreasonable and irresponsible decision making at best. At worst it is pure foolishness and downright criminal in itself.

Related Article: Portugal Decriminalizes All Drugs; 10 Years Later the Results are Mind Blowing

Regardless of medicinal comparisons between substances, what is important is that people have as many medicinally effective substances available to them as possible, without interference from Big Brother.  As Lynn Zimmer, PhD, former Professor Emeritus at the Queens College, City University, New York explains:

The question is not whether marijuana is better than existing medication. For many medical conditions, there are numerous medications available, some of which work better in some patients and some which work better in others. Having the maximum number of effective medications available allows physicians to deliver the best possible medical care to individual patients.

**Note: This article is part of a larger report on Wondergressive entitled ‘Cannabis Cures Cancer and Everything Else: A Through History and Review

 
 
 

Source List:

Intro

1.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis

2.

http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/

3. 
http://www.learn-from-my-self-improvement-journey.com/drug-side-effects.html

4. 
http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000253

5.

http://healthland.time.com/2010/10/19/is-marijuana-addictive-it-depends-how-you-define-addiction/

6.

http://www.ibtimes.com/%E2%80%98medical%E2%80%99-marijuana-10-health-benefits-legitimize-legalization-742456

7.

http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000145

8.

http://www.cannabismd.net/toxicity/

9.

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/126104-overview

10.

http://healthland.time.com/2012/02/02/should-sugar-be-regulated-like-alcohol-and-tobacco/

11.

http://patft.uspto.gov

 

The Endocannabinoid System

 

143.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endocannabinoid_system

144.

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1361971-overview

145.

http://www.mendeley.com/catalog/endocannabinoid-system-physiology-pharmacology-1/

146.

http://www.laboratoire-prism.fr/

147.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endocannabinoids#Endocannabinoids

148.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endocannabinoids#Cannabinoid_receptors

149.

http://norml.org/library/item/introduction-to-the-endocannabinoid-system

150.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18426504

151.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endocannabinoid_system

152.

http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/2/1/17

153.

http://alcalc.oxfordjournals.org/content/40/1/2.full

154.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15340387

155.

http://scholar.google.com/

156.

157.

http://druglibrary.org/Schaffer/Library/studies/iom/iom2.htm

158.

http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/2/1/17

159.

http://www.nature.com/ijo/journal/v30/n1s/full/0803272a.html

160.

http://www.thblack.com/links/RSD/

161.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0009308402001469

162.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anandamide

163.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2-Arachidonoylglycerol

164.

http://www.news-medical.net/health/Phytocannabinoids.aspx

165.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrahydrocannabinol

166.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabidiol

167.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabinol

168.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echinacea#Medicinal_effects

169.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabinoid

170.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabinoid#Phytocannabinoids

171.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabinoid#Endocannabinoids

172.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabinoid#Synthetic_and_patented_cannabinoids

173.

http://www.sciencenews.org/sn_arch/10_12_96/food.htm

174.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22706678

175.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014299904007423

176.

https://wondergressive.com/2012/08/17/power-of-hemp-seeds/

177.

http://cannabisdigest.ca/

178.

http://www.sci.sdsu.edu/classes/psychology/psy760/readings/Fride.pdf

179.

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/cannabis/patient/page2

180.

http://alcalc.oxfordjournals.org/content/40/1/2.full

181.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabinoid#Cannabis-derived_cannabinoids

 

Cannabis Cures Cancer

 

182.

183.

http://forum.grasscity.com/medical-marijuana-usage-applications/

184.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21244344

185.

https://sites.google.com/site/marylandsafeaccess/Home/cannabis-cancer—the-science

186.

http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/2/1/17

187.

http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org

188.

189.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/08/19/us-cancer-cannabis-idUSTRE57I02Z20090819

190.

http://www.alternet.org/drugs/

191.

192.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14451-marijuana-takes-on-colon-cancer.html

193.

http://www.news-medical.net/news/20120107/

194.

http://jcem.endojournals.org/

195.

http://www.aacrmeetingabstracts.org

196.

http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/66/13/6748.full

197.

http://www.fasebj.org/

198.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16908594

199.

200.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22963825

201.

http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/64/16/5617

202.

https://wondergressive.com/

203.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/19/marijuana-and-cancer_n_1898208.html

204.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16908594

205.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/

206.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19047095

207.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2280761/

208.

http://www.vaughns-1-pagers.com/medicine/prescription-drug-side-effects.htm

209.

http://www.umsl.edu/~keelr/4380_ss08_wiki/99102bea6bf4899dbcf52f4d60c5d161.html

 

Cannabis Cures Everything Else

210.

http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2011/08/

211.

212.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC20965/?tool=pmcentrez

213.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12669182

214.

http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/4/1/16

215.

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0033961

216.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15550443

217.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17140265

218.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15204022

219.

http://www.cannabismd.net/anorexia/

220.

http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/178/2/107.full

221.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3790227.stm

222.

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/medical/tashkin/tashkin1.htm

223.

http://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/19591373/

224.

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/health&id=6989085

225.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/

226.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19969046

227.

http://www.ukcia.org/research/CannabinoidsInBipolarAffectiveDisorder.pdf

228.

http://www.anesthesia-analgesia.org/

229.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19634029

230.

https://wondergressive.com/

231.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21418185

232.

http://jco.ascopubs.org/content/24/21/3394.full

233.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21410463

234.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19220500

235.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21910367

236.

http://www.cannabis-med.org/data/pdf/2002-01-2.pdf

237.

http://www.tokeofthetown.com/

238.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/

239.

http://blog.norml.org/2012/12/12/study-cannabis-associated-with-lower-diabetes-risk/

240.

http://www.cannabis-med.org/studies/ww_en_db_study_show.php?s_id=139

241.

http://psychcentral.com/

242.

http://jpet.aspetjournals.org/content/332/2/569.abstract

243.

http://jpet.aspetjournals.org/content/320/3/1127.full

244.

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/22/medical.marijuana/index.html

245.

http://www.examiner.com/

246.

http://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/19344127/

247.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20117132

248.

http://www.ukcia.org/medical/glaucoma.php

249.

http://jpet.aspetjournals.org/content/308/3/838.abstract

250.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20590615

251.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/

252.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC521080/?tool=pmcentrez

253.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/

254.

http://drseanbreen.tumblr.com/

255.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1571997/?tool=pmcentrez

256.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15159678

257.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2664885/?tool=pmcentrez

258.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17712817

259.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17412522

260.

http://www.jneurosci.org/content/27/36/9537.full

261.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1237039/?tool=pmcentrez

262.

http://www.cannabismd.net/migraine-headaches/

263.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2873996/?tool=pmcentrez

264.

http://www.webmd.com/news/20080904/marijuana-chemicals-may-fight-mrsa

265.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/

266.

http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090211/NEWS01/302119895

267.

http://www.mpp.org/assets/pdfs/library/MedConditionsHandout.pdf

268.

http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/sourcefiles/IOM_Report.pdf

269.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2750822/?tool=pmcentrez

270.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/

271.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC166302/?tool=pmcentrez

272.

http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleid=99760

273.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/

274.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2253501/

275.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11739835

276.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20233580

277.

http://fisioterapiamarlenemuller.com.br/

278.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/122/

279.

http://www.jpsmjournal.com/article/S0885-3924(01)00252-4/fulltext

280.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2757311/?tool=pmcentrez

281.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2789283/?tool=pmcentrez

282.

http://www.salem-news.com/articles/august182007/leveque_med_restless_81807.php

283.

http://www.cannabis-med.org/studies/ww_en_db_study_show.php?s_id=171

284.

http://rheumatology.oxfordjournals.org/content/

285.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1575049/?tool=pmcentrez

286.

http://abstracts.hematologylibrary.org/cgi/content/abstract/112/11/4826

287.

http://www.newscientist.com/

288.

http://science.iowamedicalmarijuana.org/pdfs/lungs/Carley%202002.pdf

289.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6978699

290.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12832507

291.

http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000221

292.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12152079

293.

http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/sourcefiles/IOM_Report.pdf

294.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15548217

295.

http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/2/1/17

 

Cannabis Oil: Run From the Cure

392.

https://wondergressive.com/2012/12/14/cancer-cells-avoid-chemotherapy/

393.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15630849

394.

http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/Chemotherapy/Pages/Definition.aspx

395.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hash_oil

396.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp_oil

397.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hash_oil

398.

http://hightimes.com/activism/hager/6014

399.

400.

401.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com

402.

http://phoenixtears.ca/make-the-medicine/

403.

404.

 

Final Thoughts

 

405.

http://www.healthsentinel.com/

406.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/02/12/171832741

407.

http://www.rxlist.com/voltaren-drug.htm

408.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4054991

409.

http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.source.php?sourceID=000233

Babies and the ‘Cost of Inaction’

I, Healthyheartbeatz, a grown man of 25, have a soft spot for children in need. Me, with all of my bravado and manliness, me with all of my outspokenness and inclination to argue, YES I still cringe every time I see a helpless child in need on TV or displayed in an advertisement. That may have to do with my ridiculous sensitivity and sympathy, not to mention I am also very much so captivated by puppies, but that is besides the point of course! Children are our future and taking care of them is priority! We can’t let them turn into mindless zombies, something must be done!

Why must you bother me with all of this? Well, I stumbled upon a series of recent studies put together by (FXB) Center for Health and Human Rights that of course made me cringe and fired up my synapses in order to reach out to you, our Wondergressivers (ererers). But let’s take it easy, I am not in any way trying to make you, our loving reader, pay anything or donate anything. This is a news group dedicated to researching and informing others! Naturally that is exactly how this will all play out, and without any final request other than for the lot of you to be “in the know”-

Onwards! The studies discussed were particularly interesting because they emphasize that poor kids that are suffering around the world are specifically suffering from inaction even when we are wasting 40% of our food as well as 25% of our freshwater daily. Sudhir Anand, speaking on a panel at The Forum at Harvard School of Public Health

Failing to intervene nutritionally to aid malnourished children can stunt them for life and failing to provide antiretroviral drugs to parents can turn their children into orphans, putting them at increased risk of falling into crime, drug abuse, prostitution, and other societal ills.

Just think, all of our non-action towards the kids of tomorrow acts as a catalyst for failure in the future. Who knows when the next Einstein will be neglected or the next Copernicus will starve to death or the next Socrates will be condemned by society… wait, just a second. Countess Albina du Boisrouvray, a passionate supporter of helping the children of the world and founder of (FXB) Center for Health and Human Rights, said in an interview:

There are more than a billion of these children around the world, they are living in extreme poverty. They live by codes of conduct completely divorced from ours, and the older they get, the harder it will be to reintegrate them, even at great cost. Each day, they drift further and further.  A huge percentage of the world’s adults are going to be almost a different species. This is terrible for society and for the economy — for everything officials are supposed to be worried about — as well as terrible for the kids.

But of course it’s not only the poor who are suffering, we have kids suffering daily from our public school failures as well as neglected children of our country.

There is no link to donate, there is no outcry to change your ways, its a simple message, a pass off of knowledge. So don’t forget our youngins. Babies are our future, past, present, and just about everything else. Without babies we wouldn’t exist. Some babies are super lucky being thrown into traffic and surviving unscathed. Other babies are watched over by angels as they simply survive unforeseen complications at their birth. Just a little baby power to end on a high note. Preacher OUT!

 

Research:

(FXB) Center for Health and Human Rights

The Cost of Inaction

Cost of Doing Nothing

Wasted Resources

Forum at Harvard School of Public Health

Neglect – American Humane Association

Wondergressive: Public School Failure in America

Wondergressive: TV and the Brain

Wondergressive: Fat Poor Kids

Babies (film)

Baby Survives Car Crash in Russia

Baby Born With Heart Out of Body

Laughing Baby – Caution You Will Laugh/Giggle/Tehehehe

Feet First! Take Better Care of Your Feet

feet

Help your feet feel better
(nelsonjane.blogspot.com)

Put your best foot forward. We at Wondergressive enjoy taking good care of our feet. To do so you must be actively thinking about what is best for them. Everyday, people cram their feet into shoes that don’t fit. Flashy styles and inexpensive shoes are often right for the eye or the pocket book but they take a toll on the toes, arches, and foot overall.

Our entire bodily alignment is based on the foundation of our feet. Yet, as Pam Werner, from sun and moon yoga studio puts it…

..Our feet are often neglected and abused by wearing uncomfortable or improperly fitted shoes and rarely walking barefoot. Walking barefoot utilizes the foot muscles, which strengthens them as well as helps recreate and maintain healthy arches. It also allows the feet to be free, spread, and get fresh air.

That’s right, walking barefoot helps your feet and body alignment immensely. Think that walking is a bit too slow? Consider trying barefoot running. A study at Harvard examined the amount of force placed on the foot. This study was conducted by Daniel E. Lieberman and others to show the differences between force applied while barefoot…

and with shoes on.

As you can see the force applied while wearing shoes dips slightly while weight is transferred between the heel and the forefoot. This blip of applied energy is believed to encourage injury in the long run.

Related Article: The Wonderful, Healthier, Life Changing, and Life Lengthening World of Fasting

Aside from actually using them, there are several things that you can do to take better care of your feet. The first, of course, is to develop a healthy yoga practice. You will not regret it, unless you have a history for regretting doing things that make you feel awesome and comfortable inside your own skin. In every yoga pose (asana) each foot acts as a point of reference. That goes without saying as the entire body should act as a reference point. The second thing that you can do is quite easy: Keep hydrated. Your feet sweat a lot. From Yoga Pam (see above):

There are 250,000 sweat glands in each pair of feet that release nearly a cup of moisture every day. There are more sweat glands per inch of our feet than anywhere else in the body, and their function is to keep the skin moist and supple.

That’s reason alone to get those basement digits some fresh air. They deserve it, you know, after they’ve lugged you around for an entire lifetime. To help with other foot problems check out foot.com for a comprehensive resource on all things foot health related.

Related Article: The Almighty Escapism: Creating Distraction

Get your own yoga starter kit and BPA free water bottle!

 

 

Sources:
Yoga for the Foot

Running Barefoot

Foot.com

Cannabis Cures Cancer and More: A Thorough History and Review of the Evidence

//

 

 

 
Copyright © 2013 [Eric Feinberg]. All Rights Reserved.

Cannabis (commonly called pot, ganja, weed, marijuana, etc.) is the most diversely effective and efficient medicine known to man, with the added benefit of having far less harmful side effects than most prescribed drugs, not being physically addictive, being minimally psychologically addictive and being impossible to overdose on. Unlike most substances approved by the FDA, Nobody has ever died from ingesting cannabis. It is one of the least toxic substances known to man; less toxic than much of the food we eat as well as many non-nutritious substances we consume, especially alcohol, tobacco, and even sugar.

Even more amazingly, studies all around the world have concluded with exponentially growing empirical affirmation that cannabis completely and totally cures cancer.  It additionally acts as a preventative, stopping cancer from ever coming back.  Don’t believe me?  Continue reading, or just ask the US government; they own the patent for cannabis as a successful cure and/or treatment for a whole array of medical conditions.

So why then is cannabis labeled as a schedule 1 drug, or in laymen terms, a dangerous, highly addictive substance devoid of any medical benefit? Tobacco has absolutely no medical benefits, is proven to cause cancer, is proven to kill hundreds of thousands of people worldwide, and is one of the most physically and psychologically addictive substances on the planet. However, tobacco, like alcohol, isn’t even scheduled.  Additionally, cannabis is scheduled as even more dangerous, more addictive, and less medicinally beneficial then cocaine or methamphetamine, which are labeled as schedule 2 substances.  As another example of the illogical scheduling process, psilocybin mushrooms, LSD, and DMT, which have been proven to be highly effective to cure cluster headaches as well as an invaluable tool in psychotherapy, are labeled as schedule 1 drugs despite these psychedelics having little to no addiction potential. Are you starting to see how silly this is?  So what gives?

Let’s walk through this one step at a time.  We are going to go over the historical use and legality of cannabis, the current legal status of cannabis around the world, the effects of keeping cannabis and other drugs illegal, and finally, the miraculous medicinal properties of cannabis. Feel free to jump around, but to gain a fully comprehensive understanding of this complex issue, I highly recommend reading all of this information.

[toc]

Historical Use

Cannabis has an extremely long history of use. Although cannabis is indigenous to Central and South Asia, it spread all over the world very early in human history.  While humans in Taiwan were growing hemp as early as 8,000 BCE, the historical use of cannabis as a physical and psychological medicine began over 5,000 years ago.

Researchers even found over two pounds of still green, highly potent cannabis in a basket near the recently discovered 2700 year old Ice Man.  It has been historically used by JewsChristians, Muslims, Hindus, Taoists, Buddhists, and Atheists alike. Cannabis was even used by the ancient Greeks and Romans, as well as in medieval Islamic countries.

Cannabis is a natural human pastime, embedded into our epigenetic expression. It was used for centuries as a form of relaxation, as a tool for meditation during religious ceremonies, and as a way to foster creativity. Additionally, hemp is one of the oldest domesticated plants known.  Hemp was used in various industries, optimizing productivity, efficiency, and waste management. Then one day, cannabis and hemp were suddenly seen as cesspools of sin originating from the pits of hell.

Historical Legality 

To understand the history and legality of cannabis you must also understand the history of hemp. The difference between these plants is that industrial hemp contains little to no THC (meaning it can’t get you high) and is also more fibrous and tough, making it more useful as a productive material. Additionally, hemp seeds are highly nutritious, containing the most easily digestible protein in the world, as well as a nearly perfect ratio of omega 6 to omega 3 fatty acids.

As mentioned above, both plants were used all over the world for various purposes since time immemorial. The plants were brought to the new world for the first time (in Chile) by the Spaniards in 1545.  Cannabis seeds may have been brought to Brazil even earlier in the 16th century by African slaves. Cannabis and hemp were used widely in England and America even before the US existed.  Both cannabis and hemp were grown in the original colonies by the boat load and exported to international buyers.  Hemp was used as a cheap yet high quality textile source for clothing and rope. It was also used to make paper products (the first two copies of the Declaration of Independence were written on hemp), dyes, housing, etc. and began gaining prominent use in many other fields as scientific innovation progressed.

420magazine.com

420magazine.com

Even before the early colonial era, cannabis was used as a highly effective pharmacological agent and was listed as a viable option to cure many ailments. Even today, hemp is considered one of the most important and functionally diverse materials on the planet and would pave the way for incredible innovation and efficiency in more industries than you could probably name if given the legal opportunity (refer to the picture). So why did cannabis and hemp become illegal?

Both hemp and cannabis were made illegal for multiple reasons, but the most prominent reasons were due to money, ignorance, and irrational racism.  All around the world cannabis and hemp were being criminalized simply by default; by tossing them in a category with substances that were highly addictive (opium, morphine, etc.). There was no consideration for each substance’s individual pros and cons, and certainly no empirical scientific basis.  Anything with even the slightest amount of potential for addiction was just labeled together as a harmful/addictive substance, and that was that.  The US took a similar approach.

As the US began to buckle down and ensure that all of their medicine was regulated and safe, they also realized that it would be a good time to help rid the country of addictive substances like opium.  Although there wasn’t any serious problem with cannabis abuse, our ancestors figured that once opium and morphine were no longer freely available, people would turn to one of the most readily available and easily procured substances in the country: cannabis.  States began arbitrarily tossing it into the growing legislation of criminalized substances, not giving much thought to the actual dangers or potential pit falls of such an action.

In an attempt to make substance regulation laws more uniform, all states were encouraged to regulate cannabis in the same way, essentially handing over control to the federal level. Up until this point cannabis was still legal and available as a medicine; it was simply regulated while its recreational use was criminalized. Then along came Harry Anslinger, the future head of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, and a nuclear bomb of lies, deceit and propaganda was dropped onto the US and the world at large.

 

Harry Anslinger Versus Science

Harry Anslinger claimed that cannabis, which he referred to as “marijuana” to incite racial fear and rage, (the word marijuana originates from the Spanish word marihuana, which is Mexican Spanish for cannabis) was the most dangerous and fatal substance ever known to mankind.  He developed highly racist rhetoric devoid of any science and contrary to statements made by the American Medical Association at the time.  He paraded in front of congress and across the country spouting his ridiculous, unfounded claims.  Here are some classic Harry Anslinger quotes actually used as ‘fact’ by prominent newspapers and regurgitated as reasons for stricter cannabis laws by congress in the 1930’s:

There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others.

…the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races.

Marijuana is an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death.

Reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men.

Marihuana leads to pacifism and communist brainwashing.

You smoke a joint and you’re likely to kill your brother.

Marijuana is the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind.

We recognize these claims as utterly ridiculous nowadays, but congress back in the day wasn’t very bright. I guess some things never change.

Anslinger and his buddies were also directly responsible for the propaganda video entitled “Reefer Madness,” depicting young men and women becoming violent, sex crazed, and downright insane after smoking cannabis.  “Reefer Madness” was seen as a legitimate informational source at the time of its release and for many decades afterward.  It is now shown to students as a form of retrospective humor. Anslinger used baseless scare tactics in an attempt to bolster criminalization laws in the US regarding cannabis, and even more astounding, industrial hemp, which can in no way get a person high.

Many seemingly separate parties were involved with the criminalization and illegality of cannabis/hemp. Big name players such as the banker Andrew Mellon, industrial wood company Dupont, and media mogul William Randolph Hearst were all directly and passionately involved in the senseless fight against cannabis/hemp for the sake of their wallets. William Randolph Hearst owned a string of newspapers across the nation. Unfortunately for Hearst, he had a great deal of money invested in timber, and hemp is far more efficient, cost effective, and environmentally friendly than wood.  What’s a man to do?  Make your competition illegal of course.

Anslinger used Hearst’s publications to create an onslaught of propaganda that reached millions of households, killing two birds with one stone by furthering his career and outlawing hemp. Because cannabis and hemp were viewed as the same plant at the time (which is like comparing a Great Dane to a Shih Tzu and saying they are the same animal because they are both dogs), after congress passed the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937, the production of industrial hemp, despite being unable to get people high, was also criminalized and exorbitantly taxed.

Various highly researched, credible reports (from the American Medical Association, members of the DEA, medical professionals, and patients) like the La Guardia Report, were issued by medical journals in 1944 directly refuting every single claim made by Anslinger. These reports were blatantly ignored.

After 1937, cannabis and hemp continued to become more and more controlled with increasingly harsh criminal/mandatory sentencing.  Cannabis and industrial hemp were eventually made completely illegal in the 50’s through a series of further restrictions and mandates. Eventually both substances were listed as schedule 1 narcotics, losing any and all hope of finding a place in society.

What should you take out of this brief history lesson?  Congress made cannabis(a great medicine) and hemp (a product that would revolutionize countless industries) illegal because of a silly, sensationalized, utterly unscientific movie shown to school children.  They disregarded the claims made by experts and medical professionals.  They ignored the pleas for rational thought and sensibility.  They had no reason to make cannabis illegal, and still don’t. I guess that’s why times are changing so quickly!

 

Contemporary Legality

In the latter half of the 20th century, rational substance reform finally began to take a turn with actual long term medical/economic/political/social implications of each individual substance in mind. It became clear that the historical basis for keeping cannabis illegal is entirely political and has nothing to do with science.  Just think, even main stream media and most countries around the world still refer to cannabis with a name spawned from mindless propaganda; marijuana.war on drugs political cartoon

People all around the world have begun to see that the war on drugs has completely failed in every way imaginable, actually leading to more drug use and significantly more violence worldwide. This is due to the fact that the war on drugs only fights the symptoms of a disease deeply ingrained into our society, and I’m not talking about drug use; I’m referring to gangs/organized drug cartels. In response to the effectiveness of incarceration on drug crimes, the Public Safety Performance Project found that:

Once incarcerated, drug dealers tend to be quickly replaced by new dealers and, as during the crack epidemic, the new recruits can be younger and more prone to violence than their predecessors. Thus while drug dealers no doubt deserve punishment, most leading researchers, and many law enforcement officials, now agree that incarcerating the foot soldiers in drug gangs, not to mention drug users, has a negligible impact on crime. Moreover, by creating job openings in drug-dealing organizations, it draws more people into criminal lifestyles and may in certain cases exacerbate crime.

The war on drugs is also one of the major reasons the US has the highest rate of incarceration in the entire world, with more than 1% of the entire population currently behind bars, and an additional 2% of the population on supervision, probation, or parole. That accounts for about 3% of the US population under correctional supervision. By a large margin, the US has the largest percentage of prisoners based on population in the world. The International Centre for Prison Studies at King’s College in London lists some startling statistics:

More than 9.8 million people are held in penal institutions throughout the world, mostly as pre-trial detainees (remand prisoners) or as sentenced prisoners. Almost half of these are in the United States (2.29m), Russia (0.89m) or China (1.57m sentenced prisoners).

After Nixon and all subsequent presidents became serious about the war on drugs and started punishing non-violent, hard working Americans for ingesting substances responsibly and safely, from 1960 to 1980 the number of total arrests nationwide rose by 28% while the number of drug related offenses rose by more than 127%, with the number continuing to rise exponentially. Nearly 40% of all federal and state inmates are non-violent drug offenders. Moreover, more than half of all drug-related arrests are entirely cannabis related.

This is a staggering waste of financial resources.

Taxpayers spent about $68.7 billion in 2008 to feed, clothe, and provide medical care to prisoners in county jails, state and federal prisons and facilities housing legal and illegal aliens facing possible deportation. From 1982 to 2002, state and federal spending on corrections, not adjusted for inflation, rose by 423%, from $40 to $209 per U.S. resident. Corrections spending, as a share of state budgets, rose faster than health care, education, and natural resources spending from 1986 to 2001. The average cost of housing a prisoner for a year was about $24,000 in 2005, though rates vary from state to state.

That incredible spending increase from 1982 to 2002 coincides precisely with the increase of drug arrests due to the failed ‘war on drugs.’ This is an especially important point to consider since drug offenses are almost entirely non-violent, and rehabilitation costs significantly less for tax payers.

Treatment delivered in the community is one of the most cost-effective ways to prevent such crimes and costs approximately $20,000 less than incarceration per person per year. A study by the Washington State Institute for Public Policy found that every dollar spent on drug treatment in the community yields over $18 in cost savings related to crime. In comparison, prisons only yield $.37 in public safety benefit per dollar spent. Releasing people to supervision and making treatment accessible is an effective way of reducing problematic drug use, reducing crime associated with drug use and reducing the number of people in prison.

The war on drugs only serves to bolster the monstrous prison-industrial complex of the US, increasing the profits of private prisons across the nation. Despite the statistics, the US continues to permanently destroy the lives of hard-working, non-violent citizens. Additionally, private prisons and jails are a total loss of revenue.

the benefit to counties where private prisons are built and operated can be quite scant — some receive less than $2 per prisoner per day from the private prison operator…the federal government agreed to pay CCA [one of the largest private prison firms] almost $90 per day for each detained immigrant at a San Diego facility.

Today, private companies imprison roughly 130,000 prisoners and, according to one group, 16,000 civil immigration detainees in the United States at any given time. As states send more and more people to prison, they funnel ever greater amounts of taxpayer money to private prison operators. By 2010, annual revenues of the two top private prison companies alone stood at nearly $3 billion.

Above all, the war on drugs does a great job of pouring public money into the hands of dangerous cartels and various private entities.

Famous, influential, intelligent individuals all around the world are voicing their opinion that cannabis, and additionally hemp, should at the very least be decriminalized.  These individuals include prominent politicians, actors/actresses, presidents, comedians, performersphilosophersscientists, economists, doctorsjudges and more.

The people who advocate the decriminalization/legalization of cannabis along with other substances are from every walk of life; many don’t even ingest cannabis. The one thing they have in common though is that their opinions are founded in scientific evidence, empirically tested data, and time tested proof. Previous and current presidents and politicians have admitted to smoking “pot,” (including president Obama who admitted to smoking pot regularly with his high school friends) yet they continue to stagnate with reform at the federal level (despite, again, the federal government owning the patent on cannabis as a medicine).  Amidst all the hurtles and lack of progress, let’s take a look at what is changing within the US and the world at large.

 

Compared to the rest of the developed world, America is definitely lagging behind a significant amount of its rational, forward-thinking brethren. As recent examples, the Czech Republic legalized medical cannabis, Ireland legalized medical cannabis, and the United Kingdom is currently working to legalize cannabis completely, as medical cannabis is already legal. Additionally, in an attempt to combat gang crime, increase economic development, and provide its people with a cheap or free form of potent and effective medicine, Uruguay recently legalized cannabis.

As seen on the map, a significant number of countries around the world have chosen to legalize medical cannabis and/or cannabis as a whole with strong domestic and international support due to the positive effects of the decriminalization of cannabis. There is a surprisingly large number of countries with sensible cannabis laws.

Many political leaders, heads of agencies, and medical professionals are also pointing out how ridiculous it is that extremely addictive, highly toxic substances like tobacco and alcohol go unchecked while a harmless substance like cannabis remains globally demonized. Ask yourself, if alcohol were discovered today would it even be legal? In the UK, the chief drug adviser Prof. David Nutt was fired for pointing out the dangers of alcohol and nicotine and further explaining that they are for more dangerous and harmful than cannabis. Another UK drug adviser recently resigned from his job in protest of David Nutt’s silencing.

In America, progress is slow, but the wheels of rationality are beginning to turn. The most cited (and dubbed a genius by his peers) federal judge in America recently urged for the legalization of cannabis for the sake of economic development and to “let the punishment fit the crime.” 15 separate states have decriminalized or legalized the personal use of cannabis, while 19 states have passed medical cannabis laws. 9 other states currently have pending medical cannabis laws. As you’ve probably smelled, Washington and Colorado became the first two states to legalize the recreational use of cannabis, with seven more states likely to legalize cannabis as well within the next couple years. Another piece of great news is that the Kentucky Senate Committee voted unanimously to approve legal hemp. The country is waiting with bongs in hand to see how the federal government will react.

dont-smoke-weedIn an interview with Barbara Walters concerning cannabis legalization in Colorado and Washington President Obama said:

It does not make sense from a prioritization point of view for us to focus on recreational drug users in a state that has already said that under state law that’s legal.

President Obama’s response was typical of all political speech; evasive and vague.  While tokers all around the country take bets on the fed’s actions, there is a significant amount of pressure on the white house to legalize cannabis at the federal level.  Various bills are being presented in Congress to repeal cannabis laws and broaden economic opportunities. Although there are steps you can take, like signing this petition to give states the right to regulate cannabis however they want, decisions and movement at the federal level remain slow and stagnant as usual.

One of the strangest pieces of this entire puzzle is that despite continued sentiments from the US federal government that cannabis is still a  hellish scourge upon the planet, the federal government has been supplying high grade medical cannabis to select patients since 1978.

Come on America, even the utter craziness that is North Korea has 100% legalized cannabis, and they’re the world’s mentally challenged cousin. Maybe that’s why their attempts to scare the world with a video featuring a nuclear missile hitting New York failed utterly; through their glazed, blood-shot eyes the video looks state of the art!

So, countries all around the world along with a growing number of US states are decriminalizing cannabis for personal use, legalizing cannabis as a medicine (or entirely legalizing it), and the US government owns a patent on medicinal cannabis as well as supplies certain patients with medical cannabis for life.  What’s all the hype over cannabis?  It just so happens that cannabis is a wonder-drug; a miracle for millions; potentially billions.

 

The Endocannabinoid System 

Cannabis is one of the most highly effective medicinal substances in the world.  It has the power to treat and/or cure a countless number of illnesses and syndromes, including a whole array of different types of cancer. But how can a single substance have such an extraordinary effect on our biology? It all begins with the endocannabinoid system.

The endogenous cannabinoid system, also known as the endocannabinoid system (ECS), wasn’t fully discovered until 1992. All vertebrates share the endocannibinoid system along with various invertebrates. It is made up of compounds called endocannabinoids and cannabinoid receptors, and is found throughout your entire body: in the brain, organs, tissue, and cells of all shapes and functions.

The endocannabinoid system plays a vital role in pre and post-natal life. The purpose of the endocannabinoid system remains uniform throughout our bodies; to maintain a stable internal environment amidst an endless stream of external fluctuations, a process called homeostasis. It modulates energy intake, and is also in charge of nutrient transport, metabolic storage, and much, much more. 

Because the discovery of the endocannabinoid system is relatively new, and despite there being over 12,000 scientific articles concerning the endocannabinoid system, there are still gaps in our understanding.  There is still a significant amount of research that needs to be done, and educating people on the actual science of cannabis’ activity in the body will help to clear the smoke of ignorance and closed mindedness. Once people embrace the current research that is taking place, further research into more specific and particular roles of the endocannabanoid system will take off at lightning speed. What we do know is the following:

Cannabinoid receptors are found in every part of the body and are believed to be more numerous than any other receptor system in our biological system. When cannabinoid receptors are stimulated, a variety of physiologic processes ensue. Researchers have identified two cannabinoid receptors: CB1, predominantly present in the nervous system, connective tissues, gonads, glands, and organs; and CB2, predominantly found in the immune system and its associated structures. Many tissues contain both CB1 and CB2 receptors, each linked to a different function. Researchers are currently seeking to discover additional cannabinoid receptors as studies suggest that they do exist. As for endocannabinoids:

Endocannabinoids are the substances our bodies naturally make to stimulate these receptors. The two most well understood of these molecules are called anandamide and 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG). They are synthesized on-demand from cell membrane arachidonic acid derivatives, have a local effect and short half-life before being degraded by the enzymes fatty acid amide hydrolase (FAAH) and monoacylglycerol lipase (MAGL).

Phytocannabinoids are plant substances that stimulate cannabinoid receptors. Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, is the most psychoactive and certainly the most famous of these substances, but other cannabinoids such as cannabidiol (CBD) and cannabinol (CBN) are gaining the interest of researchers due to a variety of healing properties. Most phytocannabinoids have been isolated from cannabis sativa, but other medical herbs, such as echinacea purpura, have been found to contain non-psychoactive cannabinoids as well.

The information above focuses on the two most well known endocannabinoids in the body, as well as the most well known cannabinoids in cannabis, but there are far more. Cannabinoids are split into three categories:

Cannabinoids appear throughout all of nature.  For example, besides being found in cannabis and humans, cannabinoids are found in large abundance in chocolate, flax seeds, and breast milk.  Additionally, hemp seeds aid the body in creating natural cannabinoids with the help of omega fatty acids.

Due to the nearly identical structure of phytocannabinoids and endocannabinoids, as well as their identical mechanism of bonding to the same receptors in our body, we have a natural form of cannabis flowing through us at all times. What this means is that the compounds found in cannabis fit perfectly well into our own body‘s natural systems, ensuring highly efficient and proper uptake of the plant’s remarkably beneficial multitude of cannabinoidal compounds.

 

Cannabis Cures Cancer

This is more than just a theory or hypothesis.  There is an insurmountable pile of evidence that cannabis cures/treats cancer (and a multitude of other illnesses) in a large amount of cases, and may even prevent it from coming back. The amount of evidence is daunting, and the science is sound.

It is through the encocannabinoid system that cannabis is able to perform its magic.  Cannabis has the ability to treat and/or cure a constantly growing list of illnesses, including cancer. Dependent on the individual and the type of cannabinoid used, most types of cancer have been observed responding positively to the introduction of cannabis in the system, including cancer found in the breast, prostate, lung, thyroid, colon, skin, pituitary gland, ovary, pancreas, as well as melanomaleukemia and more! The cannabinoids in cannabis act through the body’s natural endocannabinoid system to cure and/or treat cancer in several ways, the most prominent and well researched being:

 

 

One of the greatest benefits of cannabis as medicine is that it stimulates and acts in harmony with a system that is already present throughout the body.  Instead of prescribing five or more different, highly addictive pills to treat various symptoms, and additional pills to treat the endless side effects (often worse than the illness itself) of all the pills, doctors are able to use cannabis and the cannabanoids within it, as a single, natural medicinal source without any physical addiction potential and little to no harmful side effects.  Plus, don’t forget, it is impossible to overdose on.

 

Cannabis Cures Everything Else

Along with treating various forms of cancer, cannabis can be used to treat a constantly growing list of other diseases and syndromes as well.  It may even slow the aging process. Additionally, the cannabinoids found in cannabis are exceptional anti-oxidants and neuroprotectants.  It is such a remarkable substance that it is able to treat seemingly opposite illnesses simultaneously, like obesity and eating disorders/malnutrition.  Again, the key is the activation and involvement with the endocannabinoid system. Cannabis has shown results ranging from promising potential to revolutionary effectiveness in curing and/or treating:

  1. Addiction
  2. ADHD
  3. AIDS/HIV
  4. Alcoholism
  5. Alzheimer’s Disease
  6. Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS)
  7. Anorexia
  8. Anxiety
  9. Arthritis
  10. Asthma
  11. Atherosclerosis
  12. Autism
  13. Auto-Immune Diseases
  14. Bacterial Infections
  15. Bipolar Disorder
  16. Blood Disorders
  17. Bone Loss (reverses bone loss)
  18. Brain Damage From Binge Drinking
  19. Brain Injury/Stroke
  20. Cachexia
  21. Cancer
  22. Cluster Headache
  23. Crohn’s Disease
  24. Cystic Fibrosis
  25. Depression

  26. Dermatitis
  27. Diabetes
  28. Dystonia
  29. Eating Disorders
  30. Epilepsy
  31. Fever
  32. Fibromyalgia
  33. Flu
  34. Fungal Infection
  35. Gastrointestinal Disorders
  36. Glaucoma
  37. Glioma
  38. Heart Diseases
  39. Hepatits 
  40. Herpes
  41. Huntington’s Disease
  42. Hypertension
  43. Incontinence

  44. Infant Mortality
  45. Inflammation
  46. Insomnia 
  47. Liver Fibrosis
  48. Mad Cow Disease
  49. Menopause
  50. Migraine
  51. Motion Sickness
  52. MRSA
  53. Multiple Sclerosis 
  54. Muscular Dystrophy
  55. Nail Patella Syndrome
  56. Nausea/Vomiting (including nausea due to chemotherapy)
  57. Neuroinflammation
  58. Nicotine Addiction
  59. Obesity
  60. OCD
  61. Pain

  62. Pancreatitis
  63. Parkinson’s Disease
  64. Periodontal Disease
  65. Phantom Limb Pain
  66. Poison Ivy Allergy
  67. Proximal Myotonic Myopathy
  68. Psoriasis
  69. PTSD
  70. Restless Leg Syndrome
  71. Schizophrenia
  72. Scleroderma
  73. Septic Shock
  74. Sickle Cell Disease
  75. Siezures
  76. Sleep Apnoea
  77. Spinal Cord Injury
  78. Stress
  79. Tourette’s Syndrome
  80. Traumatic Memories
  81. Wasting Syndrome
  82. Withdrawal
  83. and more…
 (*Note: each of these words link to an individual study)
 

It is because the cannabinoids in cannabis are so influential on the endocannabinoid system, a system that spans every part of our body, that they are able to have such an effective, overarching, revolutionarily positive effect. Keep in mind that the above is what researchers have found with limited funds, little time, and immense legal obstacles. The golden age of cannabis research hasn’t even started yet.

 

What the Critics Have to Say 

(And Why They’re Wrong…)

 

On the flip side, critics are quick to point out the consistently noted dangers of cannabis ingestion. These are the same arguments that have been used for decades.  They remain aggressively debated without compromise, despite decades of rational evidence suggesting falsity and fallacy. The seemingly valid concerns regarding cannabis use that top the critics’ list are: the gateway drug theory, short-term memory loss, psychosis, decreased intelligence, harm from cannabis smoke, depression, an elevated heart rate, and worries over driving while high. Let’s allow science and logic to save the day, shall we?

 

Gateway Drug

Many critics of cannabis use claim that cannabis is a gateway to harder and more persistent drug use.  They are implying that if a person uses cannabis, recreationally or medically, they are more likely to use dangerous drugs like cocaine (again, ironically listed as a schedule 2 drug) or heroin.  Although multiple studies have found that cannabis users are more likely than non-users to engage in the use of more ‘hardcore’ substances (meaning higher addiction potential and/or more biologically detrimental), there are endless holes in this argument.

First, let’s start with the fact that there is no definitive evidence that cannabis use is responsible for the ingestion of harmful drugs. According to former US Surgeon General Dr. Joycelyn Elders:

Much of their [US drug-policy leaders] rhetoric about marijuana being a ‘gateway drug’ is simply wrong. After decades of looking, scientists still have no evidence that marijuana causes people to use harder drugs. If there is any true ‘gateway drug,’ it’s tobacco.

Alcohol and tobacco are more accessible and far more likely to be used by teens, consequently making those substances more likely to lead to further drug use.  As stated by Elders, they are the true gateway drugs. In one of the most highly credible and sourced assessments on the science of drug use, the Institute of Medicine stated that:

In fact, most drug users do not begin their drug use with marijuana–they begin with alcohol and nicotine, usually when they are too young to do so legally…

There is no evidence that marijuana serves as a stepping stone on the basis of its particular physiological effect.

Starting to see the trend here?  Alcohol and tobacco are far more dangerous and addictive than cannabis.  If the gateway drug theory did have any legitimacy, it would have to be applied to alcohol and nicotine, two completely legal substances, before it could be attributed to any other substance.

The best analogy I’ve ever encountered for the ridiculousness of the gateway drug theory comes from Lynn Zimmer, PhD, Professor Emeritus at Queens College at the City University of New York:

In the end, the gateway theory is not a theory at all.  It is a description of the typical sequence in which multiple-drug users initiate the use of high-prevalence and low-prevalence drugs.

A similar statistical relationship exists between other kinds of common and uncommon related activities.  For example, most people who ride a motorcycle (a fairly rare activity) have ridden a bicycle (a fairly common activity).  Indeed, the prevalence of motorcycle riding among people who have never ridden a bicycle is probably extremely low.  However, bicycle riding does not cause motorcycle riding, and increases in the former will not lead automatically to increases in the latter.

Nor will increases in marijuana use lead automatically to increases in the use of cocaine or heroin.

Not surprisingly, a study of 4,000 participants suggests that cannabis use discourages the use of harder drugs. Another study suggests that any trace of the gateway effect disappears by age 21. What is more likely to lead to additional drug use is not cannabis itself, but the overly harsh penalties of cannabis use.  Karen Van Gundy, who is a sociologist at the University of New Hampshire, did not set out to disprove the gateway theory, but nevertheless found that, rather than cannabis itself:

If we overly criminalize behaviors like marijuana use among teens, this could interfere with opportunities for education and employment later on, which, in turn, could be creating more drug use.

The gateway drug theory is weak and unfounded.  It is in fact not a credible theory at all. It has no place in the realm of science.

 

Decreased Intelligence

It is a propaganda technique that we have been hearing for nearly the entire 20th century and it continues into the 21st century; cannabis makes you stupid, a loser, a burnout.

While there is clear evidence that cannabis, like other substances, alters perception and brain function, there is no evidence that cannabis alters brain function in a purely negative way.  Additionally, there is absolutely zero evidence that the biological effects of cannabis are permanent.  On the contrary, science tells us that all of the consistently noted negative biological aspects of cannabis are entirely temporary.

According to Igor Grant, MD, Executive Vice Chairman at the University of California, San Diego Department of Psychiatry:

Smoking marijuana will certainly affect perception, but it does not cause permanent brain damage. ‘The findings were kind of a surprise. One might have expected to see more impairment of higher mental function. Other illegal drugs, or even alcohol, can cause brain damage

If we barely find this tiny effect in long-term heavy users of cannabis, then we are unlikely to see deleterious side effects in indivduals who receive cannabis for a short time in a medical setting

If it turned out that new studies find that cannabis is helpful in treating some medical conditions, this enables us to see a marginal level of safety.

420tribune.com

420tribune.com

Dale Gieringer, PhD, State Coordinator of CalNORML explains that the notion that cannabis decreases intelligence is based entirely on a study that was later proven to be inaccurate:

Government experts now admit that pot  doesn’t kill brain cells.

This myth came from a handful of animal experiments in which structural changes (not actual cell death, as is often alleged) were observed in brain cells of animals exposed to high doses of pot. Many critics still cite the notorious monkey studies of Dr. Robert G. Heath, which purported to find brain damage in three monkeys that had been heavily dosed with cannabis. This work was never replicated and has since been discredited by a pair of better controlled, much larger monkey studies, one by Dr. William Slikker of the National Center for Toxicological Research [William Slikker et al., ‘Chronic Marijuana Smoke Exposure in the Rhesus Monkey,’ Fundamental and Applied Toxicology 17: 321-32 (1991)] and the other by Charles Rebert and Gordon Pryor of SRI International [Charles Rebert & Gordon Pryor – ‘Chronic Inhalation of Marijuana Smoke and Brain Electrophysiology of Rhesus Monkeys,’International Journal of Psychophysiology V 14, p.144, 1993].

Neither found any evidence of physical alteration in the brains of monkeys exposed to daily doses of pot for up to a year.

The surprising truth is that cannabis actually promotes the creation of new neurons in hippocampal regions of the brain, the part of the brain most responsible for memory. Xia Zhang, an expert at the Neuropsychiatry Research Unit, Department of Psychiatry, at the University of Saskatchewan in Canada along with other medical researchers, points out that cannabis is the only illicit drug ever found to promote the creation of brain cells:

We show that 1 month after chronic HU210 [high-potency cannabinoid] treatment, rats display increased newborn neurons [brain cell growth] in the hippocampal dentate gyrus [a portion of the brain] and significantly reduced measures of anxiety- and depression-like behavior.Thus, cannabinoids appear to be the only illicit drug whose capacity to produce increased hippocampal newborn neurons is positively correlated with its anxiolytic- [anxiety reducing] and antidepressant-like effects.

Multiple long-term studies have found that there is no significant difference in cognitive decline between heavy users, light users, and nonusers of cannabis. Intelligence, or a lack thereof, depends on a great deal of variables, including genetic makeup, nutritional status, health status, formal education, and age-related developmental processes, but cannabis use is not one of them.

From a social standpoint, studies have even found that kids who use cannabis and other illicit substances usually have a higher IQ than their peers. Additional studies found that:

College students who smoke cannabis demonstrate comparable or even higher grades than their  cannabis abstinent classmates, and are more likely to pursue a graduate degree.

The short answer is yes, cannabis alters your mind and body, like any other substance in the world, but it does not make you stupid (certainly you’re not going to claim any of these highly successful cannabis-users are stupid), and all of the physiological and psychological effects are temporary.

Barack Obama Smoking Cannabis: weedquotes.blogspot.com

Barack Obama Smoking Cannabis: weedquotes.blogspot.com

 

Memory Loss

Critics of cannabis use argue that memory loss, especially short-term memory loss, occurs more prominently in cannabis smokers.  They also claim that it is a permanent effect. All of these claims are either exaggerated or wrong. We’ve already discussed how all the effects of cannabis ingestion are completely temporary; the same applies to memory.

To begin, it is true that cannabis has a noticeable effect on short-term memory as well as working memory, while the user is under the influence.  Cannabis affects working memory through the mechanisms stated above, by encouraging neurogensis, or the creation of neurons, in the hippocampus region of the brain. Although this has a positive effect on memory overall, it disrupts short-term memory while the user is ‘high’ by creating ‘noise’ in the hippocampus. These effects are detectable at least 7 days after heavy cannabis use,

but appear reversible and related to recent cannabis exposure rather than irreversible and related to  cumulative lifetime use.

Furthermore, after extensively studying cannabis use, lead researcher and Harvard professor Harrison Pope came to the conclusion that:

From neuropsychological tests chronic cannabis users showed difficulties, with verbal memory in  particular, for ‘at least a week or two’ after they stopped smoking. Within 28 days, memory problems vanished and the subjects ‘were no longer distinguishable from the comparison group.’

These tests affirm that the physio/psychological effects of cannabis are temporary and reversible.

As for the seriousness of the temporary effects on short-term memory, studies have found that the effect is negligible. Researchers from the University of California, San Diego School of Medicine headed by Dr. Igor Grant analyzed data from 15 previously published controlled studies involving 704 long-term cannabis users and 484 nonusers and found that:

long-term cannabis use [is] only marginally harmful on the memory and learning. Other functions such as reaction time, attention, language, reasoning ability, perceptual and motor skills [are] unaffected. The observed effects on memory and learning, [show] long-term cannabis use [causes] ‘selective memory defects’, but that the impact [is] ‘of a very small magnitude.’

In fact, rather than having deleterious effects on memory, Ohio State University scientists have shown that

specific elements of marijuana can be good for the aging brain by reducing inflammation there and  possibly even stimulating the formation of new brain cells.

Research supports this claim as past studies have revealed that cannabinoid receptors stimulated by cannabinoids in cannabis act as an anti-inflammatory agent and serve to improve memory in old rats.

Surprisingly, recent research into the activity of the hippocampus suggests that the key to a good memory is forgetting.  Think of the brain as a computer with enormous hard drive space. Despite this incredible amount of storage, it is still finite. The more memories our brains create, the harder it is for our working memory to properly remember and recall.  In this way, forgetting a few things actually isn’t a bad thing. It is in fact highly beneficial overall.

Another important point is that different cannabinoids found in cannabis affect memory centers in the brain in remarkably different ways.  Through further legalization, scientists will have the freedom to perform more extensive research, while growers will have the opportunity to create strains of cannabis that have an even more minimal effect on the memory centers of the brain.

These studies reveal that in the short run, short-term and working memory are disrupted by the ingestion of cannabis by creating new neurons in the memory centers of the brain.  These additional neurons disrupt working memory by acting as additional ‘noise’ to the active, recalling mind. These short-term memory lapses are completely temporary though, and in the long run the brain is actually left with additional neurons and a more expansive memory center.  To use the analogy of a computer again, think of heavy-cannabis ingestion as a temporary lapse in primary memory functionality for the sake of upgrading the storage capabilities of secondary memory. 

 

Elevated Heart Rate

It is true that many cannabis users describe symptoms of panic and consequently an elevated heart rate, especially during their first time trying cannabis.  What still remains debated is whether cannabis itself biologically causes heart rate to increase.

The most well known study done on the correlation between cannabis and heart rate, and subsequently the only truly credible and widely used study, is one performed by a man named Dr. Murray A. Mittleman.  Mittleman’s study focused on:

information on cannabis use from 3,882 middle-aged and elderly patients who had suffered heart attacks. A total of 124 patients were identified as current users, including 37 who reported smoking the drug up to 24 hours before their attack, and nine who had used it within an hour of experiencing symptoms.

Mittleman’s conclusion was that the first hour after taking cannabis heart attack risk is 4.8 times higher than during periods of non-use. In the second hour, the risk drops to 1.7 times higher. According to Mittleman this was the first study to document that smoking cannabis could trigger a heart attack, but that the trigger mechanism remained unknown. So what’s the issue with this constantly cited study?

Besides the fact that any type of smoke entering the lungs produces the same effect (it is not necessary and not medicinally optimal to smoke cannabis, a subject that is covered later in this report), Dr. Lester Grinspoon, who is one of the world’s foremost cannabis researchers as well as Associate Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and a former senior psychiatrist at the Massachusetts Mental Health Center in Boston for 40 years, explains why this study should be dismissed.  Dr. Grinspoon tells an interviewer, in response to Mittleman’s study:

..let me say that since 1967 there have been numerous reports and studies, each of which the American media has blown out of all proportion, stating one or another supposed ill effect of marijuana use. I can list them, if you’d like. ‘Increase in the size of the ventricles, decrease in testosterone, destruction of chromosomes.’ All were front-page stories, none of them have ever been replicated. In other words, they didn’t pan out scientifically. Of course, the studies that contradicted them ended up on page 31 or thereabouts, if they got mentioned at all… I would point out that out of 3,882 patients, we’re talking about 9 who used marijuana within an hour of the onset of a heart attack. That’s around 0.2%. By sheer mathematics, given that people sleep eight hours per day or so, we can deduce that 6.7% of those patients emptied their bowels within an hour of onset. It’s incredible to me that the numbers here could be said to constitute a significant risk factor.

So, as is typical of the main stream media, a report was utterly sensationalized and relatively negligible data was heralded as proven truth. Dr. Grinspoon elaborates on the shortcomings of the study by reminding the interviewer that:

[Mittleman] put that increase [in heart rate] at 40 beats per minute. In truth, that number is closer to 20 beats per minute, which is probably consistent with running up the stairs in one’s house...I blame the media far more than I do Dr. Middleman. I read his abstract, and in its conclusion he cautioned against making too much of the data…in 1997, Kaiser Permanente did a large-scale study which included more than 65,000 admitted marijuana users, and they could not demonstrate any impact of marijuana use on mortality. If marijuana use really was a significant risk factor for heart attack, it is hard to believe that it didn’t turn up there. Again, I’m not saying that there is absolutely no risk demonstrated here. But given the history of the research since 1967, I’d be surprised if these findings don’t go down the same chute as all of the other front-page scare stories.

It’s really not that hard to believe.  We have seen the same baseless scare tactics take place 20 years ago, 40 years ago, 60 years ago, 100 years, and more!

With regards to actual significant scientific data, cannabis has in fact been shown (as stated in the ‘Cannabis Cures Everything’ section of this report) to treat and protect the heart, as well as help prevent heart disease through the interaction with the endocannabinoid system of the heart and surrounding regions of the body. It is consequently a likely tool for fighting and preventing obesity (along with hemp seeds). The science is still emerging, but what little research exists strongly suggests that cannabis will serve an extremely positive role in keeping the heart healthy in the future.

 

The single study that is consistently used to argue that cannabis poses a danger to cardiovascular health is far from significant and only became prominent through sensationalized media.  Repeat studies suggest the cannabinoids found in cannabis play a pivotal role in cardiovascular health and the prevention of heart disease. 

 

Psychosis

An historically major issue concerning cannabis is the worry that it may induce schizophrenic symptoms or intensify various forms of latent schizophrenia. The subjective experience of ingesting cannabis is highly personal and varies greatly among users around the world. Common experiences include:

  • Greater enjoyment of food taste and aroma

    blogs.sfweekly.com

    blogs.sfweekly.com

  • An enhanced enjoyment of music
  • A greater enjoyment of comedy and humor
  • Distortions in perception of time and space
  • Short-term memory loss
  • Improved long-term memory recall
  • Creative thinking
  • New perspectives
  • Increased libido
  • Elevated mood
  • Heightened sensitivity to external stimuli
  • Relaxation

At extremely high doses common experiences include:

  • Altered body image
  • Auditory/visual illusions
  • Hallucinations (extremely rare)
  • Mild dissociation of mind and body
  • Panic attacks
  • Paranoia

While the vast majority of the effects of cannabis are viewed as positive, panic attacks and paranoia are obviously unwanted.  Between 20 and 30 percent of recreational users experience intense anxiety and/or panic attacks after smoking cannabis.

While these symptoms usually occur due to thoughts of legal ramification for ingesting cannabis, exaggerated worry over a thought process, or general anxiousness over trying something new, it has been reported that the symptoms can happen spontaneously as well. It is possible and plausible that these symptoms could lead to greater and more persistent symptoms of psychosis. However, there are multiple aspects of the psychosis worry that needs to be discussed.

First, through our increasing knowledge of cannabinoids and the role they play on the endocannabinoid system, researchers have discovered that certain cannabinoids have a marginally stronger effect than others with regards to producing hallucinations  delusions, and subjective psychological stress.

While the THC (the most psychoactive cannabinoid found in cannabis) offers incredible physio/psychological health benefits, it has been linked to being the sole culprit of producing more schizophrenia-like symptoms.

When comparing multiple subjects under the influence of only THC, a mixture of THC and CBD (cannabidiol), and no cannabinoids, researchers found that only THC produced subjectively negative psychological effects.  The subjects with no additional cannabinoids in their system and the subjects with the mixture of THC and CBD both experienced a nearly identical psychological effect.  The only major difference was that the subjects who had ingested the mixture reported less anhedonia (unable to experience pleasure)  then the other two groups. The researchers concluded that if anything, their research highlighted

the importance of distinguishing between different strains of cannabis.

Once we break cannabis down into its component cannabinoids it is easy to see why users describe such incredibly varied experiences. Cannabidiol is extremely effective in treating and preventing symptoms of schizophrenia, as research continues to suggest.  Many researchers believe that cannabis legalization will herald a revolution in the treatment of various psychological disorders, including schizophrenia. According to a 2005 double-blind study analyzing the antipsychotic effects of cannabidiol, researchers found that:

cannabidiol treatment was accompanied by a significant increase in serum anandamide levels, which was significantly associated with clinical improvement. The results suggest that inhibition of anandamide deactivation may contribute to the antipsychotic effects of cannabidiol potentially representing a completely new mechanism in the treatment of schizophrenia.

Other studies on the topic affirm that many subjects report

no clinically significant adverse effects

while self treating themselves with cannabis.

Even in the Netherlands, where cannabis use is widespread and often harshly judged internationally, scientists have reported an utter lack of evidence that cannabis use leads to schizophrenia.  The report states that:

A group of Dutch scientists say that there is no proof that cannabis induces schizophrenia. These findings will be embarrassing for the Dutch government, which has been bearing down on Marijuana Coffee Shops saying the drug induces schizophrenia.

The truth is that  much of the research done thus far has been skewed and largely unscientific.   Under proper guidance, and using the correct strains, researchers all around the world agree that cannabis is a wonderfully effective psychotropic medication. Researchers discussed the consistently shown promise and proof of cannabis as an effective psychotropic medication in the British Journal of Psychiatry:

I considered Arseneault et al‘s (2004) search for evidence of the association between cannabis and psychosis as quite skewed. They did not explore the evidence regarding positive, therapeutic or beneficial psychoactive effects of cannabis in mental health in the context of appropriate, rational and clinical usage…Signalling, mostly inhibitory, suggests a role for cannabinoids as therapeutic agents in central nervous system disease where inhibition of neurotransmitter release would be beneficial. Evidence suggests that cannabinoids inhibit the neurotransmitter glutamate, counteract oxidative damage to dopaminergic neurons and may be potent neuroprotective agents (Croxford, 2003)…knowing [cannabis’] potent neuroprotective function, its potential role in psychiatric practice should not be discarded lightly.

The most important thing to remember is that symptoms of schizophrenia generally (nearly always) precede cannabis use. Schizophrenia and general psychosis have far more to do with genetic make up than anything else (refer to the graph).

Research regarding the connection between cannabis and psychosis, especially symptoms of schizophrenia, remains historically lacking and skewed with regards to component cannabinoids in cannabis.  Cannabis produces highly varied subjective experiences, and research has revealed that each cannabinoid within cannabis has a markedly different effect on individuals. Multiple recent studies have shown that cannabis, specifically the cannabinoid CBD, is a highly effective agent in treating schizophrenia and other psychological disorders.  Most importantly, symptoms of schizophrenia precede cannabis use in the vast majority of cases.  There is currently no clear evidence that cannabis is directly responsible for causing psychosis and schizophrenic symptoms in users. 

 

Depression

This is one of the most commonly used arguments against the use of cannabis as a form of medicine or recreation.  Like the psychosis argument debunked above, the depression argument is always portrayed in a skewed and exaggerated fashion.  The most important thing to remember as we discuss this is that correlation does not imply causation.

forum.grasscity.com

forum.grasscity.com

It is well known that many already depressed individuals (ranging from mild to incapacitating depression) use cannabis as a form of self-medication.  This often takes place after finding no success with taking a whole slew of expensive, addictive, and biologically destructive prescription drugs handed out by the oh so helpful DSM devotees.

What researchers have found is that the vast majority of people who use cannabis to treat their depression find it to be highly physically/psychologically therapeutic and helpful. All people react differently, just like with any substance.  Regardless of subjective experience it is clear at the biological level that cannabis has an anti-depressant effect on the body and mind.  With regards to decreased depression associated with cannabis use an additional study incorporated:

Over 4400 adult internet users [who] completed The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale and measures of marijuana use. We employed an internet survey in an effort to recruit the most depressed and marijuana involved participants, including those who might prove unwilling to travel to the laboratory or discuss drug use on the phone or in person. We compared those who consumed marijuana daily, once a week or less, or never in their lives. Despite comparable ranges of scores on all depression subscales, those who used once per week or less had less depressed mood, more positive affect, and fewer somatic complaints than non-users. Daily users reported less depressed mood and more positive affect than non-users. The three groups did not differ on interpersonal symptoms.

Cannabis users, whether they ingested the substance less than once a week or every day, reported far less depressive symptoms and far more happiness and satisfaction than non-users.  The study goes on to say that:

The media continues to report links between marijuana and depression. In a recent review, Degenhardt, Hall, and Lynskey (2003) identified a modest relationship only among problematic users. Many studies show no link between cannabis and depression despite appropriate statistical power, measurement, and design (Fergusson & Horwood, 1997; Fergusson, Lynskey, & Horwood, 1996; Green & Ritter, 2000; Kouri, Pope, Yurgelun-Todd, & Gruber, 1995; McGee, Williams, Poulton, & Moffitt, 2000; Musty & Kaback, 1995; Rowe, Fleming, Barry, Manwell, & Kropp, 1995). One neglected source of depression among marijuana users may stem from medical use. Separate analyses for medical vs. recreational users demonstrated that medical users reported more depressed mood and more somatic complaints than recreational users, suggesting that medical conditions clearly contribute to depression scores and should be considered in studies of marijuana and depression. The data suggests that adults apparently do not increase their risk for depression by using marijuana.

Just like we discussed in all of the other arguments, the public only sees what the media picks and chooses to show, which is usually negligible data that has been exaggerated and skewed to fit their hype.  The previous study also brought up an excellent point that has never been discussed before: are the results of studies concerning cannabis and depression that get aired by main stream media corrupted by reports of depression that originate from medical suffering?  The use of cannabis is so wide spread around the world, especially in the US, that it should not be discounted.

Besides, just like in the psychosis argument, it is clear that depression generally precedes cannabis-use.  Furthermore, studies suggest that:

After adjusting for differences in baseline risk factors of marijuana use and depression, past-year  marijuana use does not significantly predict later development of depression.

To reiterate, cannabis exhibits an antidepressant-like behavior in more ways than one, and is often used to treat even incapacitating depression successfully.

Finally, in a longitudinal study completed in 2009 regarding cannabis and suicide,researchers found that:

Although there was a strong association between cannabis use and suicide, this was explained by markers of psychological and behavioural problems. These results suggest that cannabis use is unlikely to have a strong effect on risk of completed suicide, either directly or as a consequence of mental health problems secondary to its use.

The depression argument is false in many of the same ways as the psychosis argument.  In the vast majority of cases depressive behavior precedes cannabis use. Additionally, in most cases where cannabis is used to self-treat depression it is found to be successful.  Cannabis is a clear biological antidepressant and exhibits incredible therapeutic properties. Depression is highly subjective and everyone experiences it differently.  The truth is that in multiple studies both light and heavy cannabis users report far less depressive symptoms than non-users.  There is no evidence whatsoever that cannabis use predicts or causes depression.  Many depressed people use cannabis and report positive results far more often than people using contemporarily prescribed prescription medication. 

lfp-blog.com

lfp-blog.com

 

Driving While Stoned

(*Note: this report does not advocate driving while under the effects of any substance, including cannabis.  The aim of this section is to view the credible findings on how cannabis affects drivers.)

The claim that ingesting cannabis somehow affects driving ability makes sense at first glance.  Unfortunately all of the reports historically presented by mainstream media have focused on theory and self-report tactics, rather than actual evidence and proof.  They continuously focus on potential ratios, theoretical effects, and skewed speculation.

Biologically, it is true that

cannabis impairs driving behavior. However, this impairment is mediated in that subjects under cannabis treatment appear to perceive that they are indeed impaired. Where they can compensate, they do.

Despite biological theories for how cannabis might potentially affect a driver, experiments using driving simulations in the lab find that:

drivers who drank alcohol overestimated their performance quality whereas those who smoked marijuana underestimated it. Perhaps as a consequence, the former invested no special effort for accomplishing the task whereas the latter did, and successfully. This evidence strongly suggests that alcohol encourages risky driving whereas THC encourages greater caution, at least in experiments.

The [findings] contrast with results from many laboratory tests, reviewed by Moskowitz (1985), which show that even low doses of THC impair skills deemed to be important for driving, such as perception, coordination, tracking and vigilance. The present studies also demonstrated that marijuana can have greater effects in laboratory than driving tests. The last study, for example showed a highly significant effect of THC on hand unsteadiness but not on driving in urban traffic.

It is apparent that despite multiple laboratory studies displaying favorable results, real world driving tests are even more positive. When we actually test the effects of cannabis on drivers in the real world, we see very little safety issues, if any at all.

Drivers under the influence of cannabis, unlike alcohol, realize they are under the effects of a substance and successfully compensate for their altered state of mind by driving slower and by giving themselves more space between other vehicles. One of the first actual road tests with cannabis studies drivers in the lab, on the highway, and in congested urban areas.  The results affirmed that as far as cannabis’ effect on actual driving performance:

Driving quality as rated by the subjects contrasted with observer ratings.  Alcohol impaired driving performance according to the driving instructor but subjects did not perceive it; marijuana did not impair driving performance but the subjects themselves perceived their driving performance as such….Thus there was evidence that subjects in the marijuana group were not only aware of their intoxicated condition but were also attempting to compensate for it…drivers become overconfident after drinking alcohol…and more cautious and self critical after consuming low THC doses by smoking marijuana.

Drivers under the effects of cannabis pay more attention to the road; drive more slowly, and leaving themselves more room between other cars.

The truth is that alcohol is a far more serious problem than cannabis when it comes to driving. Studies performed from 1982 to 1998 demonstrate time and time again that alcohol is significantly more dangerous than cannabis on the road. Alcohol use is also far more prevalent in crash statistics.

Blood and/or urine from fatally injured drivers in Washington State were collected and tested for the presence of drugs and alcohol. Drug and/or alcohol use was a factor in 52% of all fatalities. Among single vehicle accidents, alcohol use was a factor in 61% of cases versus 30% for multiple vehicle accidents. Drugs most commonly encountered were marijuana (11%), cocaine (3%), amphetamines (2%), together with a variety of depressant prescription medications.

The study even found that it was far less likely to find alcohol in a person’s system in the presence of cannabis, implying that cannabis use lessened the prevalence of alcohol use on the road:

Trends noted included an association of depressant use with higher blood alcohol levels, while  marijuana use was associated with lower blood alcohol levels.

With regards to comparisons between cannabis and illicit substances overall, Accident Analysis & Prevention, a peer-reviewed journal, reported in its July 2004 article titled “Psychoactive Substance Use and the Risk of Motor Vehicle Accidents,” by K.L.L. Movig, et al.:

The objective of this study was to estimate the association between psychoactive drug use and motor vehicle accidents requiring hospitalization.

The risk for road trauma was increased for single use of benzodiazepines and alcohol…High relative risks were estimated for drivers using combinations of drugs and those using a combination of drugs and alcohol.  Increased risks, although not statistically significant, were assessed for drivers using amphetamines… No increased risk for road trauma was found for drivers exposed to cannabis.

With regards to comparisons between cannabis and substance-free drivers:

The largest study ever done linking road accidents with drugs and alcohol has found drivers with cannabis in their blood were no more at risk than those who were drug-free. In fact, the findings by a pharmacology team from the University of Adelaide and Transport SA showed drivers who had smoked marijuana were marginally less likely to have an accident than those who were drug-free. A study spokesman, Dr Jason White, said the difference was not great enough to be statistically significant but could be explained by anecdotal evidence that marijuana smokers were more cautious and drove more slowly because of altered time perception. The study of 2,500 accidents, which matched the blood alcohol levels of injured drivers with details from police reports, found drug-free drivers caused the accidents in 53.5 per cent of cases. Injured drivers with a blood-alcohol concentration of more than 0.05 per cent were culpable in nearly 90 per cent of accidents they were involved in. Drivers with cannabis in their blood were less likely to cause an accident, with a culpability rate of 50.6 per cent. The study has policy implications for those who argue drug detection should be a new focus for road safety. Dr White said the study showed the importance of concentrating efforts on alcohol rather than other drugs.

The BBC and CNN both filmed their own research on the actual effects of cannabis on driving ability.  The BBC study focused on a single driver and found that he actually drove better while ‘high’; driving more cautiously and paying more attention to the driving test.  The CNN study was a bit more extensive and controlled.

The study, conducted in Washington where recreational cannabis use is legal, focused on 3 volunteers who drove under the effects of different amounts of cannabis.  They drove alongside a driving instructor with drug recognition experts (police officers with specific drug recognition training) watching them from outside the vehicle.  The volunteers included a heavy daily user, a weekend user, and an occasional user.  Even at 7x the legal limit of driving under the influence, 5x the legal limit, and 4x the legal limit respectively, all of the volunteers passed their driving tests, received positive reviews from the driving instructor, and would not have been pulled over by the drug recognition experts.

States with medical marijuana laws are also reporting that since cannabis became legal medically and/or decriminalized, they have witnessed decreases in deaths resulting from car accidents:

A report from the University of ColoradoMontana State University, and the University of Oregon found that on average, states that have legalized Medical cannabis had a decrease in traffic-related fatalities by 8-11%.

It’s just safer to drive under the influence of marijuana than it is drunk….Drunk drivers take more risk, they tend to go faster. They don’t realize how impaired they are. People who are under the influence of marijuana drive slower, they don’t take as many risks

From a theoretical point of view it makes sense that people would be concerned over potential risks of ‘driving while stoned.’  However, the research speaks for itself.  Laboratory and real world test results have confirmed time and time again that cannabis does not have a detrimental effect on driving ability.  People under the effects of cannabis, unlike alcohol, realize their altered state of mind and compensate successfully for it.  In most instances cannabis users drive more safely; driving slower, paying more attention to the road, and remaining more cautious and vigilant. Cannabis does not pose any serious danger to drivers or anyone else on the road. 

atheistfoundation.org.au

atheistfoundation.org.au

 

Cannabis Smoke and Lung Damage

patients4medicalmarijuana.wordpress.com

patients4medicalmarijuana.wordpress.com

There are endless reports that claim cannabis harms the lungs and bronchial airways, as well as increasing the risk of lung cancer. What you’ll quickly notice though is that the studies these reports are quoting from are completely theoretical studies based on comparisons with cigarette smoke, as opposed to actual findings from research. Additionally, they only focus on one mode of cannabis ingestion, one that destroys many of the medical benefits of cannabis; smoking.

It is true that there are over 50 potentially carcinogenic substances found in cannabis.  Additionally, because smoked cannabis is not completely dry and is smoked without a filter, there is roughly 4 times more tar than the amount found in cigarettes. One can see why studies would speculate that cannabis may increase the risk of lung cancer.  As usual, when you look at the actual science, the opposite is true.

First of all, there is currently not a single known case of cancer originating from the ingestion of cannabis. As stated numerous times in this report, there has never been a death that cannabis was directly responsible for.

Endless studies, despite a hypothesis to the contrary, are unable to find an increased risk of cancer due to cannabis use.  in fact, as stated previously,

studies indicate that THC has anti-tumorigenic and anti-metastatic effect against lung cancer [and most other forms of cancer].

A study in 2005, the largest ever conducted of its kind, left Donald Tashkin, a pulmonologist at UCLA‘s David Geffin School of Medicine, scratching his head.  Tashkin and his research team had hypothesized an association between cannabis and lung cancer, but even after 30 years of observing thousands of subjects they were unable to find a connection between cannabis and lung cancer.

We hypothesized that there would be a positive association between marijuana use and lung cancer, and that the association would be more positive with heavier use. We expected that we would find that a history of heavy marijuana use – more than 500 to 1,000 uses – would increase the risk of cancer from several years to decades after exposure to marijuana. What we found instead was no association at all, and even a suggestion of some protective effect.

kushsmoke.com

kushsmoke.com

The heaviest users in Tashkin’s study smoked more than 60 joint-years worth of marijuana, or more than 22,000 joints in their lifetime. Moderately heavy users smoked between 11,000 and 22,000 joints.

That’s an enormous amount of marijuana [however] in no category was there any increased risk, nor was there any suggestion that smoking more led to a higher odds ratio. There was no dose-response, not even a suggestion of a dose response, and in all types of cancer except one, oral cancer, the odds ratios were less than one. This is the largest case-control study ever done, and everyone had to fill out a very extensive questionnaire about marijuana use. Bias can creep into any research, but we controlled for as many confounding factors as we could, and so I believe these results have real meaning.

That being said, Dr. Tashkin wisely notes:

It’s never a good idea to take anything into your lungs, including marijuana smoke.

Smoke does not belong in your lungs, and just as this report does not advocate driving while under the effects of cannabis, it equally does not recommend smoking cannabis.  What this report does suggest is using a vaporizer, cooking the cannabis into food, or making a cannabis oil.  All of these methods make this entire argument irrelevant as they do not involve any form of smoke.

The media has bombarded the public with seeming ‘proof’ that cannabis leads to lung cancer.  The truth is that all of this ‘proof’ has been entirely speculative.  Despite cannabis smoke containing carcinogens and up to 4 times more tar than the amount found in cigarettes, long term studies confirm that there is no increased risk of lung cancer from smoking cannabis.  On the contrary, the cannabinoids found in THC work to fight against cancer and even protect healthy cells.  Most importantly, because cannabis can be ingested in many ways that don’t involve smoke, this entire argument is irrelevant. 

 

Cannabis Oil: Run From the Cure

The most medicinally beneficial way to ingest cannabis is by making a high potency cannabis oil.  It should be clear now from this report that cannabis is far more effective than conventional medicine for a near-endless variety of ailments. This is especially true for cancer.

Cancer cells have recently been seen avoiding chemotherapy, which explains why chemotherapy only has a 2.3% success rate, with the cancer often returning even in seemingly successful cases. Many patients also describe the side effects of conventional cancer therapies, especially chemotherapy, being even worse than cancer symptoms.  In some cases, chemotherapy even shortens patients’ life expectancy, leading to a shorter life filled with pain and suffering.

The point is, no matter what type of conventional medicine you use, your chances of survival are bleak, and the side effects are horrendous. On the other hand, there is a medicine available that has been proven to completely cure cancer in the majority of cases, as well as having little to no adverse side effects.  Additionally, it is as non-toxic as a substance can get, and is impossible to overdose on.  Plus, it focuses on treating the side effects of cancer along with the cancer itself.  At this point, you recognize that I’m referring to cannabis, but in this case, I’m referring specifically to cannabis oil, also called hemp oil and hash oil (though hemp oil could also refer to a pressed oil derived from hemp seeds which contains a relatively low amount of medicinally superior cannabinoids, namely THC.  To avoid confusion I will refer to it only as cannabis oil).

Cannabis oil refers to a highly potent extract of cannabinoids from cannabis, especially THC, usually in the range of 40-90% purity (though there are claims of higher purity), in the form of a thick oil that can be taken daily. The same science discussed above applies to cannabis oil as the same cannabinoids are present, only with the oil they are in much higher concentrations. It is due to the increased potency in cannabinoids, specifically THC, that cannabis oil is the most medicinal and beneficial form of the medicine.

The use of cannabis oil became most prominent due to a documentary made by a man named Rick Simpson.  The documentary is called ‘Run From The Cure,’ ( the word cure referring to the conventional cures for cancer, like chemotherapy.  The documentary focuses on the science of the endocannabinoid system, how to make the oil and what to expect, doctor testimonials, research regarding cannabis’ effect on cancer, and testimonials from patients that have used cannabis oil to successfully cure their cancer.

Another story that is making ground breaking news is a story that is dubbed: Brave Mykayla.  It is the story of Mykayla Comstock, a 7 year old girl from Oregon who successfully used medical marijuana, specifically cannabis oil, to fully cure her leukemia.

Additional information on Rick Simpson, Rick Simpson Oil (cannabis oil created using Rick Simpson’s simple method), and how to make cannabis oil yourself can be found on Rick Simpsons personal website: http://phoenixtears.ca/.

Over 150 testimonials on the profound effects of cannabis oil have also been compiled.

Cannabis oil is effective to an unprecedented degree, so says science and the people who have used it successfully to treat their cancer. Unfortunately, unless you are approved to use cannabis medically, it is incredibly expensive and potentially dangerous to procure due to its legal status.  Something obviously needs to change, but what can be done?  What’s the next step?

 

*Note: Although it does not specifically contain a discussion on cannabis oil, this exceptional video speaks extensively on the overall science of cannabis’ effects on the endocannabinoid system, presents testimonials from doctors and patients, and discusses various government funded/peer reviewed studies verifying cannabis’ extraordinary effects. It is the video I recommend to anyone even remotely interested in the subject, and is a great introduction to the plethora of research on the issue.  It contains the following credible credits:
 
Dr. Robert Melamede, Ph.D.
Associate Professor and Biology Chairman
Biology Department at the University of Colorado
CEO and President of Cannabis Science
“Cannabinoids kill cancer cells in many cases, people are not aware of this”
 
Dr. Manuel Guzman, Ph.D.
Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
Professor at the Complutense University, Madrid, Spain
“Cannabinoids have the effect of inducing death in cancer cells”
 
Dr. Prakash Nagarkatti, Ph.D. Vice President for Cannabinoid Research
University of South Carolina Columbia Distinguished Professor
“Cannabinoids can be used effectively as anti-cancer agents”
 
Dr. Sean McAllister CPMC Scientist
California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute
http://thesethgroup.org/videos.html
“Cannabidiol inhibits aggressive breast cancers”
 
Dr. Donald Tashkin, M.D.
University of California, Los Angeles
Emeritus Professor of Medicine
Medical Director of the Pulmonary Function Laboratory
“THC actually has an anti-tumor effect”
 
Dr. Robert Sterner, M.D.
UCSD General Surgeon
Graduate of Harvard & UCLA
“Marijuana seeks out cancerous cells and preferentially kills them”
 
Dr. Jeffrey Hergenrather, M.D.
Addiction Medicine Specialist
President of the Society of Cannabis Clinicians
“There are multiple mechanisms of action in which cannabis kills cancer cells”
 
Dr. Bonni Goldstein, M.D.
Canna Centers, Medical Director
Cannabis Researcher and Scientist
“Cannabidiol has been found to make cancer cells commit suicide”
 
Dr. Josh Wurzer, Researcher
Laboratory Director, SC Laboratories
Cannabis Researcher and Scientist
“Health benefits attributed to THC is actually because of the CBD content”
 
 

What’s the Next Step?

It should now be clear by reading this report that cannabis and hemp remain illegal for utterly irrational reasons that are actually damaging society as a whole.  Most importantly, cannabis should not be labeled a schedule 1 substance as it contains, at the very last, a substantial amount of medicinal value.  This medicinal effect comes with the added bonus of having little to no danger of addiction, overdose, or biological harm; something that cannot be said about most other substances approved by the FDA. Even aspirin, a substance millions of people around the world pop like candy, kills 1000’s of people every year.  Let’s not forget that the most popular pain killer in the world has been found to substantially increase heart attack risk.

A slew of studies…show diclofenac — sold under the brand names Voltaren, Cambia, Cataflam and Zipsor — is just as likely to cause a heart attack as the discredited painkiller Vioxx (rofecoxib), which was pulled from the U.S. market in 2004.

640px-VariousPillsWe have so many issues with modern medicine, yet a cheap (free if you grow it) natural, highly effective medicine/pain killer already exists in the form of cannabis. Why is it still only available to less than half the country, and only after jumping through extraordinary loopholes? Even more ludicrous, although medical cannabis users are practicing their legal state right, and moreover, the natural right to peacefully preserve their own lives, they are still labeled by the federal government as criminals deserving up to life sentences behind bars.  This is alarmingly unreasonable and irresponsible decision making at best. At worst it is pure foolishness and downright criminal in itself.

Regardless of medicinal comparisons between substances, what is important is that people have as many medicinally effective substances available to them as possible, without interference from Big Brother.  As Lynn Zimmer, PhD, former Professor Emeritus at the Queens College, City University, New York explains:

The question is not whether marijuana is better than existing medication. For many medical conditions, there are numerous medications available, some of which work better in some patients and some which work better in others. Having the maximum number of effective medications available allows physicians to deliver the best possible medical care to individual patients.

We recognize the legal hurdles and the hardships faced by patients fighting for the simple right to take a safe, proven to work medicine, but what is the next step?  What must occur to end the madness?

The next step is to step out of the historical shadow of basing medical and political decisions on myths and rumors. More unbiased research needs to be performed on the effects of cannabis on each and every part of the human body and psyche. The DEA, FDA, and NIDA have made further legitimate research an ongoing uphill battle.

A pro-marijuana group lost its legal battle this week when a federal appellate court ruled that marijuana would remain a Schedule I drug, defined as having no accepted medical value and a high potential for abuse. The court deferred to the judgment of federal authorities, quoting the DEA’s statement that “the effectiveness of a drug must be established in well-controlled, well-designed, well-conducted and well-documented scientific studies…. To date, such studies have not been performed.

But guess who bears responsibility for the studies the court claims are not being performed? The DEA itself, which through its ultra-tight restrictions on cannabis made it nearly impossible for researchers to obtain the substance for study, as well as the National Institute for Drug Abuse, which controls the availability of the tiny quantity of research-grade cannabis that is federally approved for production.

In response to the DEA’s actions against sensible substance users, the LA Times accurately labeled the DEA as

a terrified and obstinate toddler when it comes to basic science.

Probably the most ridiculous aspect of the FDA’s behavior is that they approve of multiple synthetic cannabinoids which precisely mimic natural cannabinoids found in cannabis, especially THC.  The only difference is that they and the pharmaceutical companies can add a few substances to the cannabinoid, call it a cocktail, and turn a significant profit on people in desperate need for something that works. So, synthetic cannabinoids which can be patented and sold at exorbitant rates are legal but naturally grown, free medicine containing the same exact cannabinoidal actions, as well as a wider range of medicinal benefits remains illegal.  It doesn’t get much more hypocritical or shameless than that.

We have the ability to breed specified strains of cannabis, and create particular synthetic cannabinoids to meet the precise needs of patients.  This incredible opportunity to create safe, effective, highly personalized medicine is stifled at the federal level, despite opposition from a majority of the US public.

The fact remains that Americans love cannabis. A recent survey of over 85,000 people revealed that at least 42% of Americans have tried cannabis. This is extremely surprising as only 20% of people in the Netherlands have tried cannabis, a country with extremely lax cannabis laws.

A second poll found that nearly 50% of Americans support legalizing cannabis, while 83% favor legalizing medical cannabis. Cannabis is such an American pastime that companies are planning to install cannabis vending machines in Washington and Colorado.  Does this mean that 42% of Americans should be in prison, and 83% of Americans should be on the wanted list for supporting an act listed as a felony?

Although Americans love their cannabis, they aren’t the only ones. According to data compiled from WHO World Mental Health Survey, the Addictions Foundation of Manitoba, the National Cannabis Prevention and Information Center, and the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, the prevalence of adult lifetime cannabis by country reveals that the countries with the highest rate of cannabis use are countries that are developed, economically superior, have relative political freedom, and are culturally similar to the US. There is no way all of these people should be considered criminals:

(*Percentages reflect any cannabis use during a person’s life for the stated ages in the stated year.)

 
  1. Canada: 44.5% (ages 15+ in 2005)
  2. United States: 42.4% (ages 14+ in 2002-2003)
  3. New Zealand: 41.9% (ages 16+ in 2004-2005)
  4. Denmark: 36.5% (ages 16-64 in 2005)
  5. Australia: 33.5% (ages 14+ in 2007)
  6. France: 30.6% (ages 15-64 in 2005)
  7. United Kingdom: 29.6% (ages 14+ in 2004)
  8. Italy: 29.3% (ages 15-64 in 2005)
  9. Spain: 28.6% (ages 15-64 in 2005-2006)
  10. Chile: 26% (ages 12-64 in 2009)
  11. Germany: 24.5% (ages 18-59 in 2003)
  12. Netherlands:  22.6% (ages 15-64 in 2005)
  13. Czech Republic: 20.6% (ages 18-64 in 2004)
  14. Scotland: 20.5% (ages 16-64 in 2004)
  15. Austria: 20.1% (ages 15-64 in 2004)

Millions of people worldwide use cannabis for an endless list of reasons.  Besides using it as a medicine, people all over the world responsibly use cannabis to experience:

a general alteration of conscious perceptioneuphoria, feelings of well-being, relaxation or stress reduction, increased appreciation of humor, music or the arts,joviality, metacognition and introspection, enhanced recollection (episodic memory), increased sensuality, increased awareness of sensation, increased libido, and creativity.

Why are the DEA/FDA stalling? They raid innocent people’s homes, destroying families and jailing individuals for hyperbolic amounts of time.  They go to all this effort to rid society of non-violent, victimless crimes.  All this fear and war over a substance that they admit is beneficial (ie. allowing synthetic cannabinoids to be used medicinally and still sending medically grown cannabis to individuals).  This is explicitly hypocritical and undoubtedly insane.

If the DEA/FDA are truly concerned over Americans’ safety, why are they not going after the truly dangerous substances. Research routinely finds that cannabis is strikingly safer than alcohol and tobacco within every measurable facet.

According to a 2006 United Kingdom government report, using cannabis is much less dangerous  than tobacco, prescription drugs, and alcohol in social harms, physical harm, and addiction.

The scheduling system is nonsensical and has no clear logical basis for the large majority of listed substances.

Another important point is that through the legalization of cannabis, the economy could be booming! Here is a list of some examples of how cannabis legalization has already positively affected the economy, and how further legalization will improve the economy in the future:

Furthermore, the tobacco industry is ready to put cannabis distribution into high gear.

Tobacco companies have the land to grow it, the machines to roll it and package it, the distribution to market it. In fact, some firms have registered trademarks, which are taken directly from marijuana street jargon. These trade names are used currently on little-known legal products, but could be switched if and when marijuana is legalized. during the run up to the 2010 election in which marijuana legalization was on the ballot in California, Altria took control of the web domain names AltriaMarijuana.com and AltriaCannabis.com. For those not in the know, Altria is the parent company of Phillip Morris, the manufacturer of Marlboro, Players, Benson & Hedges and many other popular brands of tobacco cigarettes.

theragblog.blogspot.com

theragblog.blogspot.com

Allow me to reiterate how much money Americans would be saving on ending the war on cannabis and reducing incarceration rates.  The Center for Economic and Policy Research commented on how cannabis legalization would affect incarceration rates and increase savings.

We calculate that a reduction by one-half in the incarceration rate of non-violent offenders would lower correctional expenditures by $16.9 billion per year and return the U.S. to about the same incarceration rate we had in 1993 (which was already high by historical standards). The large majority of these savings would accrue to financially squeezed state and local governments, amounting to about one-fourth of their annual corrections budgets. As a group, state governments could save $7.6 billion, while local governments could save $7.2 billion.

Cannabis has the potential to change everything for the better. It could also help alleviate the health care crisis as Americans would be able to grow their own highly effective medicine. Let’s not forgot about the multitude of uses for hemp. It’s no wonder so many industries are lobbying against cannabis and hemp legalization including:

(*Note: many companies pour large amounts of money into the Partnership for a Drug Free America)
 

All this information is great and all, but you’re probably wondering what you can do to help, right?  Here’s how you can get started.

 

What You Can Do

  1. Vote! Voting is one of the best ways to enact change.  It’s how Washington and Colorado were able to finally legalize cannabis.
  2. Talk to your representatives. Send an email to your house representative and your state senators. Let them know how you feel, and how you think they should vote.
  3. Sign petitions. Sign a petition to give states the right to decide their own cannabis laws. Sign a petition to legalize cannabis federally. Or, create your own petition to the White House and spread it around.
  4. Do your own research. Alter your perceptions so that they are founded on evidence and scientific data.
  5. Spread the world.  Share this report or other relevant information you find and help educate others. Don’t be afraid to talk to people and tell them about what you’ve learned.
  6. Don’t give up:  people’s freedom and lives are at stake!

 

 

Final Thoughts

I would like to take the time to point out that this report’s aim is to argue why cannabis should be recognized as a medicine, and to thoroughly point out how incredible it is that it is not. Although I am admittedly in favor of it, I am not arguing for recreational use.  Medicinal availability and options that work are the priorities here.

Virtually everything we encounter in life can be abused and unhealthily depended upon for happiness, be it video games, work, sex, masturbation, food, television, coffee, nail biting, reading, or even heavy metal.  If you are going to use cannabis recreationally, use it responsibly, and don’t abuse it to the point of dependence. A relatively small amount of very heavy cannabis users do report withdrawal symptoms when attempting to stop smoking, but symptoms are extremely mild and usually involve difficulty sleeping, loss of appetite, and moodiness for 1-7 days. Regardless, this shows that despite the safety, a socially harmful dependence remains possible, as is the case with everything in life. Remember, cannabis should be used in moderation (or as directed by your physician if you are using it medicinally).  Moderation is the key to happiness and health.

To put it simply, cannabis is not for everyone, but that does not mean people who safely and peacefully ingest cannabis should be seen as criminals.

A paradigm shift in information availability and critical thinking is occurring in humanity, an ubiquitous evolution on a global scale.  We are growing out of outdated traditions. More and more often we are basing our decisions on fact and evidence, rather than on opinion and stipulation. My hope is that by reading this report you will be sufficiently equipped with the proper information to understand an aspect of the changes that are occurring all around you. Become part of the solution. Don’t just listen; wonder, research, evaluate, consider…and be always growing.

 

 

Intro

1 Historical Use

2 Historical Legality

3 Harry Anslinger Versus Science

4 Contemporary Legality

84.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSrN2zIRwN8

85.
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/12/06/opinion/branson-end-war-on-drugs

86.
http://www.pewstates.org/uploadedFiles/PCS_Assets/2009/PSPP_1in31_report_FINAL_WEB_3-26-09.pdf

87.
http://www.sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/inc_newfigures.pdf

88.
http://web.archive.org/web/20080303025427/

89.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpus11.pdf

90.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpus11.pdf

91.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Drugs#Arrests_and_incarceration

92.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/p11.pdf

93.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ondcp

94.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41177.pdf

95.
http://www.justicepolicy.org/images/upload/10-06_FAC_ForImmediateRelease_PS-AC.pdf

96.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison%E2%80%93industrial_complex

97.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_prison

98.
http://www.aclu.org/files/assets/bankingonbondage_20111102.pdf

99.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/

100.
http://reason.com/archives/2012/04/22/4-industries-getting-rich-off-the-drug-w

101.
http://www.marijuanamajority.com/

102.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harvey-wasserman/hemp-is-the-hidden-key- to_b_765740.html

103.
http://www.rawstory.com/

104.
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/

105.
http://reason.com/blog/2012/12/14/obama-on-marijuana-legalization-if-not-n

106.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj5Sd3BRm_I

107.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2205434/

108.
http://terebess.hu/english/watts3.html

109.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JVOHgCFd-Q

110.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

111.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joycelyn_Elders

112.
https://wondergressive.com/2012/09/18/federal-judge-urges-legalization-of-marijuana/

113.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_politicians_who_admit_to_cannabis_use

114.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/

115.
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6630507.html

116.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/15/czech-republic-medical-marijuana_n_2693657.html

117.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/

118.
http://www.inquisitr.com/

119.
https://wondergressive.com/2012/10/12/uruguay-to-legalize-marijuana/

120.
http://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~haans/misc/mjdcrim.html

121.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/20/world-marijuana-laws_n_2167537.html#slide=1783274

122.
https://wondergressive.com/2012/09/19/if-alcohol-were-discovered-today-would-it-be-legal/

123.
https://wondergressive.com/

124.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8336635.stm

125.
https://wondergressive.com/2012/09/18/federal-judge-urges-legalization-of-marijuana/

126.
http://www.thecrimereport.org/news/inside-criminal-justice/2012-06-rethinking-tough-on-crime

127.
http://norml.org/laws

128.
http://norml.org/laws

129.
http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=002481

130.
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/12/05/us/washington-marijuana-legalization

131.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-next-seven-states-to-legalize-pot-20121218

132.
http://thejointblog.com/

133.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/

134.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/09/marijuana-legalization_n_2440352.html?utm_hp_ref=tw

135.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/02/pot-legalization-goes-federal/

136.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov

137.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ondcp/marijuana

138.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-06-07-pot-program_x.htm

139.
http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000257

140.
http://www.cracked.com/article_17165

141.
http://www.nknews.org/

142.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2013/feb/06/north-korea-new-york-flames-video

5 The Endocannabinoid System

143.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endocannabinoid_system

144.
http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1361971-overview

145.
http://www.mendeley.com/catalog/endocannabinoid-system-physiology-pharmacology-1/

146.
http://www.laboratoire-prism.fr/

147.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endocannabinoids#Endocannabinoids

148.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endocannabinoids#Cannabinoid_receptors

149.
http://norml.org/library/item/introduction-to-the-endocannabinoid-system

150.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18426504

151.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endocannabinoid_system

152.
http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/2/1/17

153.
http://alcalc.oxfordjournals.org/content/40/1/2.full

154.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15340387

155.
http://scholar.google.com/

156.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPkoV4F0Nyw

157.
http://druglibrary.org/Schaffer/Library/studies/iom/iom2.htm

158.
http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/2/1/17

159.
http://www.nature.com/ijo/journal/v30/n1s/full/0803272a.html

160.
http://www.thblack.com/links/RSD/

161.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0009308402001469

162.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anandamide

163.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2-Arachidonoylglycerol

164.
http://www.news-medical.net/health/Phytocannabinoids.aspx

165.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrahydrocannabinol

166.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabidiol

167.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabinol

168.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echinacea#Medicinal_effects

169.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabinoid

170.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabinoid#Phytocannabinoids

171.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabinoid#Endocannabinoids

172.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabinoid#Synthetic_and_patented_cannabinoids

173.
http://www.sciencenews.org/sn_arch/10_12_96/food.htm

174.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22706678

175.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014299904007423

176.
https://wondergressive.com/2012/08/17/power-of-hemp-seeds/

177.
http://cannabisdigest.ca/

178.
http://www.sci.sdsu.edu/classes/psychology/psy760/readings/Fride.pdf

179.
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/cannabis/patient/page2

180.
http://alcalc.oxfordjournals.org/content/40/1/2.full

181.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabinoid#Cannabis-derived_cannabinoids

6 Cannabis Cures Cancer

182.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QBlvCPeMwc

183.
http://forum.grasscity.com/medical-marijuana-usage-applications/

184.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21244344

185.
https://sites.google.com/site/marylandsafeaccess/Home/cannabis-cancer—the-science

186.
http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/2/1/17

187.
http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org

188.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNerRVJklsg

189.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/08/19/us-cancer-cannabis-idUSTRE57I02Z20090819

190.
http://www.alternet.org/drugs/

191.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ypbNYYMPXg

192.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14451-marijuana-takes-on-colon-cancer.html

193.
http://www.news-medical.net/news/20120107/

194.
http://jcem.endojournals.org/

195.
http://www.aacrmeetingabstracts.org

196.
http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/66/13/6748.full

197.
http://www.fasebj.org/

198.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16908594

199.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QBlvCPeMwc

200.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22963825

201.
http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/64/16/5617

202.
https://wondergressive.com/

203.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/19/marijuana-and-cancer_n_1898208.html

204.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16908594

205.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/

206.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19047095

207.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2280761/

208.
http://www.vaughns-1-pagers.com/medicine/prescription-drug-side-effects.htm

209.
http://www.umsl.edu/~keelr/4380_ss08_wiki/99102bea6bf4899dbcf52f4d60c5d161.html

7 Cannabis Cures Everything Else

210.
http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2011/08/

211.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sL6DgPk7N2s&feature=share

212.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC20965/?tool=pmcentrez

213.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12669182

214.
http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/4/1/16

215.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0033961

216.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15550443

217.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17140265

218.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15204022

219.
http://www.cannabismd.net/anorexia/

220.
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/178/2/107.full

221.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3790227.stm

222.
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/medical/tashkin/tashkin1.htm

223.
http://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/19591373/

224.
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/health&id=6989085

225.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/

226.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19969046

227.
http://www.ukcia.org/research/CannabinoidsInBipolarAffectiveDisorder.pdf

228.
http://www.anesthesia-analgesia.org/

229.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19634029

230.
https://wondergressive.com/

231.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21418185

232.
http://jco.ascopubs.org/content/24/21/3394.full

233.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21410463

234.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19220500

235.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21910367

236.
http://www.cannabis-med.org/data/pdf/2002-01-2.pdf

237.
http://www.tokeofthetown.com/

238.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/

239.
http://blog.norml.org/2012/12/12/study-cannabis-associated-with-lower-diabetes-risk/

240.
http://www.cannabis-med.org/studies/ww_en_db_study_show.php?s_id=139

241.
http://psychcentral.com/

242.
http://jpet.aspetjournals.org/content/332/2/569.abstract

243.
http://jpet.aspetjournals.org/content/320/3/1127.full

244.
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/22/medical.marijuana/index.html

245.
http://www.examiner.com/

246.
http://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/19344127/

247.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20117132

248.
http://www.ukcia.org/medical/glaucoma.php

249.
http://jpet.aspetjournals.org/content/308/3/838.abstract

250.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20590615

251.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/

252.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC521080/?tool=pmcentrez

253.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/

254.
http://drseanbreen.tumblr.com/

255.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1571997/?tool=pmcentrez

256.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15159678

257.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2664885/?tool=pmcentrez

258.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17712817

259.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17412522

260.
http://www.jneurosci.org/content/27/36/9537.full

261.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1237039/?tool=pmcentrez

262.
http://www.cannabismd.net/migraine-headaches/

263.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2873996/?tool=pmcentrez

264.
http://www.webmd.com/news/20080904/marijuana-chemicals-may-fight-mrsa

265.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/

266.
http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090211/NEWS01/302119895

267.
http://www.mpp.org/assets/pdfs/library/MedConditionsHandout.pdf

268.
http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/sourcefiles/IOM_Report.pdf

269.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2750822/?tool=pmcentrez

270.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/

271.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC166302/?tool=pmcentrez

272.
http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleid=99760

273.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/

274.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2253501/

275.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11739835

276.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20233580

277.
http://fisioterapiamarlenemuller.com.br/

278.
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/122/

279.
http://www.jpsmjournal.com/article/S0885-3924(01)00252-4/fulltext

280.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2757311/?tool=pmcentrez

281.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2789283/?tool=pmcentrez

282.
http://www.salem-news.com/articles/august182007/leveque_med_restless_81807.php

283.
http://www.cannabis-med.org/studies/ww_en_db_study_show.php?s_id=171

284.
http://rheumatology.oxfordjournals.org/content/

285.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1575049/?tool=pmcentrez

286.
http://abstracts.hematologylibrary.org/cgi/content/abstract/112/11/4826

287.
http://www.newscientist.com/

288.
http://science.iowamedicalmarijuana.org/pdfs/lungs/Carley%202002.pdf

289.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6978699

290.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12832507

291.
http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000221

292.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12152079

293.
http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/sourcefiles/IOM_Report.pdf

294.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15548217

295.
http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/2/1/17

8.1 Gateway Theory

8.2 Decreased Intelligence

8.3 Memory Loss

8.4 Elevated Heart Rate

8.5 Psychosis

8.6 Depression

8.7 Driving While Stoned

8.8 Cannabis Smoke and Lung Damage

9 Cannabis Oil: Run From the Cure

10 What’s The Next Step?

405.
http://www.healthsentinel.com/

406.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/02/12/171832741

407.
http://www.rxlist.com/voltaren-drug.htm

408.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4054991

409.
http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.source.php?sourceID=000233

410.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/

411.
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jan/22/nation/la-na-marijuana-court-20130123

412.
http://www.fdalawblog.net/fda_law_blog_hyman_phelps/

413.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1360-0443.1996.911115852.x/abstract

414.
http://skunkpharmresearch.com/

415.
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1821697,00.html

416.
http://www.livescience.com/25990-pot-vending-machines.html

417.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annual_cannabis_use_by_country

418.
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050141

419.
http://www.afm.mb.ca/Research/documents/CannUseCda.pdf

420.
http://ncpic.org.au/ncpic/publications/aic-bulletins/

421.
http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/stats07/gpstab08a

422.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adult_lifetime_cannabis_use_by_country#cite_note-EMCDDA-1

423.
http://cannabislink.ca/info/MotivationsforCannabisUsebyCanadianAdults-2008.pdf

424.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altered_state_of_consciousness

425.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphoria

426.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metacognition

427.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introspection

428.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Episodic_memory

429.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libido

430.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/31_07_06_drugsreport.pdf

431.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom

432.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1884956,00.html

433.
http://www.alternet.org/story/47815/pot_prisoners_cost_americans_%241_billion_a_year

434.
http://www.forbes.com/2007/09/29/marijuana-laws-work-biz-cx_qh_1001pot.html

435.
http://www.news10.net/news/local/article/144285/2/

436.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/09/medical-marijuana-license-mendocino_n_1193198.html

437.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/12/us/cities-turn-to-a-crop-for-cash-medical-marijuana.html

438.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/12/us/

439.
http://aznow.biz/small-biz/wegrow-phoenix-opens-cultivates-opportunities-arizona

440.
http://www.pasadenaweekly.com/cms/story/detail/how_does_your_pot_grow/8070/

441.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/06/medical-marijuana-denver-starbucks_n_891796.html

442.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/07/

443.
http://web.archive.org/web/20110718081238/http://www.prohibitioncosts.org/endorsers.html

444.
http://web.archive.org/web/20110718082820/http://www.prohibitioncosts.org/execsummary.html

445.
http://www.businessweek.com/debateroom/archives/2010/03/legalize_mariju.html

446.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/20/legalizing-pot-will-not-b_n_544526.html

447.
http://www.samefacts.com/2012/10/

448.
http://domainnamewire.com/2009/12/28/altria-gearing-up-to-smell-marijuana/

449.
http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/incarceration-2010-06.pdf

450.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp#Uses

451.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partnership_for_a_Drug-Free_America#Funding

452.
http://www.republicreport.org/2012/

453.
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/06/

454.
http://reason.com/archives/2011/06/23/the-golden-states-iron-bars

455.
http://www.alternet.org/story/148213/

456.
http://www.republicreport.org/2012/police-marijuana-cpac/

11 What You Can Do

12 Final Thoughts

Mystery of Death Solved: DMT is the Key

 

We now know what happens at death:

Resting comfortably in the recessed center of your brain, encased snugly within the corpus colossum, wrapped tightly between the dual-hemispheres of spongy nerve bundles, encased in the quarter-inch-thick armor-plating of skull, finally surrounded by your main and expressive organs with which you face the world, exists a tiny gland, long considered vestigial (serving little to no function), that holds the key to our interpretation of existence as we know it.  I’m speaking of the pineal gland. This minute spec, roughly the size of a grain of rice, is more heavily protected than even the heart with its literal cage of protection, because if something happens to your heart you die, but if something happens to your pineal, you can’t go to heaven.

Never heard of it?

This pineal gland has influences on both melatonin and pinoline, but our interest is in the gland’s role in the creation of dimethyltriptamine, or DMT. This chemical, DMT, may well be the reason we, as a species, are capable of sentience itself.

I’m not a chemist; break it down.

First, DMT is a narcotic, schedule 1. It’s scheduled as a highly illegal substance all over the planet, largely because DMT is one of the most potent psychedelics known to man. Intensely powerful. Yet, every day your pineal produces this stuff.

Secondly, DMT is the chemical that elicits dreams. That’s right. Each night as you drift to slumber-land, not only are you tripping on a psychedelic, but you’re also premeditatedly committing a federal offence; possession or consumption of DMT could land you a felony charge.

And third, this illegal gateway to dreamland is released in massive amounts at the moment of death. When I say massive, if a water glass of DMT evokes a dream, at death, an equivalent river excretes into your system. Any druggies reading this?

How have I not heard of this before?

Well, the pineal’s significance is neither a new idea, nor an unfounded one. Spanning the expanse of human civilization runs an undercurrent of worshipful adoration to the almighty pineal, more widely known as the inner eye, all-seeing eye, or the like – considered the body’s gateway to the soul.

Egypt had its Eye of Horus (now emblazoned on the US dollar bill). Hindu culture has its bottu (the familiar forehead dot). Even the ancient art of yoga recognizes the brow chakra, or ajna, as blossoming at the pineal, or third eye. That’s only to name a few.

The hell you say! The truth behind the cult of the pineal has gone largely unnoticed collectively, though the symbols themselves have been downright ubiquitous. Tibetan Buddhists, as well, have long carried a belief that the soul enters the fetus precisely 49 days after conception. Likely, reading this, you are not a Tibetan Buddhist – their numbers fall less than 20 million – and whether you subscribe to an eternal soul or not isn’t the point, because day 49 is the moment the pineal is formed in a fledgling brain.

Great, so what does all this have to do with death?

Well, on an experiential  level, shrooms distort perception, coke smacks you with raw energy, ecstasy grants superpower orgasms (ladies), and most notably, weed slows time – time distortion seems to go hand in hand with most psychedelics as well – so time passage then is totally subjective. Ask Einstein.

Meanwhile, among DMT smokers, out of the macrocosm of potential experiences, two major themes emerge nearly universally:

1) A stretching of time – they experience the hectic 6 or 7 minutes as a near eternity or lifetime. Imagine Cobb’s 50 year night in Inception.

2) They experience religious incarnations with a tilt toward whatever sect the subject is affiliated with.

Here’s the clincher: after death, while this massive psychedelic dose courses through the brain, there is this mysterious several minutes where the brain still functions. With our new perspective, however, we at last understand what these minutes are…

These few minutes after death, subjectively, are experienced as an eternity, engrossed in the DMT universe. Also, the trip itself is a highly personal experience dictated by the deepest realms of the subconscious.

Therefore, whatever at your deepest core you expect to happen when you die… Congratulations, that’s what’ll happen… Every religion was right.

Mystery solved. Peace on earth.

If you’re resourceful, you can find this stuff and try it. The bigger question now is: do you really want to know where you’ll be spending eternity?

 

Sources:

Vestigial

Pineal Gland

University of Wisconsin: Creation of DMT

Medical Hypothesis: Endogenous Hallucinogenics Central to Nervous System

Medical Hypothesis: Visions of Dream Sleep

DMT the Spirit Molecule 

Erowid N,N DMT Legal Status

Third Eye

Third Eye Images and Symbols Around the World

The Tibetan Book of the Dead

The Universe-Solved!

Theory of Relativity

Erowid: DMT Experience Reports

PopSci: The First Few Minutes After Death

Baseline of Health Foundation: Brain Functions Even After Death