Politicians Go Pop: The Rise of Pop Politics

pop politics

Oh, pop politics is so avant-garde! http://www.smithsonianmag.com

Our nation is moving toward a phenomenon we can understand as “pop politics”. We are seeing our political culture and our popular culture merge in ways it never has before, resulting in new and problematic attitudes regarding important issues faced by our country.

During the 2013 People’s Choice Awards, host Kaley Cuocco announced to viewers that 475 million people participated in voting for the show’s award winners. That is 3 times more than the amount of people who voted in the 2012 presidential election. Cuocco went on to say that according to a loophole in the Electoral College, our new president should be Taylor Swift. Although no such loophole exists, what does exist is our country’s growing need to be entertained, even when facing issues that we wouldn’t normally perceive as needing to have an “entertainment value”. The tidal wave of pop politics has reached our shores.

Related Article: An End to the Electoral College

pop politics

Those moobs are hypnotizing… http://www.visualnews.com

Although we may ‘never ever ever’ seriously consider a ‘Swift 2016” presidential campaign, the idea of pop-culture icons having a place in the political world is nothing new.  What is new, however, is the amount of pop-culture we are continually saturated with, and how this saturation is affecting the way we relate to political and social issues.

According to Nielson Ratings, the first presidential debate between President Barrack Obama and republican challenger Mitt Romney drew in 67.2 million viewers, the most viewers for the first of the three debates since 1980.

Who would have thought that Romney’s attack on Big Bird and Obama’s nap could make for such riveting T.V.? But pop politics strikes again, and that’s what we remember, and that’s what viewers unconsciously tune in to see. The slips ups, the mishaps, we watch the debates and discuss them with the same “omg tone” that we use when discussing the latest elimination on American Idol.

Consequently, due to pop politics, the line between what is important and what we keep in our lives for entertainment value has become increasingly distorted. This distortion is problematic as pop politics becomes more important than regular politics.

Related Article: Team Red=Team Blue, the Syria Episode

According to a Pew Center for the People and Press study published in September 2012, those in the 18-to-29 age demographic are the biggest consumers of satire and entertainment, but score the lowest for consumption of news and factual information. Our pop-culture has always had fun at the expense of politics, but due to the new and overly pervasive nature of our popular culture, our country faces a crisis of changing priorities.

pop politics

No one. abcnews.go.com

A change in priorities to the tune of pop politics doesn’t have to be a bad thing though. For example, when my favorite reality show comes on, I always make sure I stop whatever I’m doing so I can watch it. My favorite reality TV show is the presidential debates. I loved the part during the last episode when Romney talked about having binders full of women, but I think my favorite part was when Obama got all aggressive and told Candy Crawly to check the transcript. If the evening’s twitter feed was any indication, my favorite parts were pretty much the same as everyone else’s favorite parts. Seemingly, pop politics affords an incentive for staying up to date with politics.

However, while all of the commentary was entertaining, did anyone remember what they actually debated? This is part of what contributes to our larger issue. This new pop politics method of political participation runs the risk of causing us to base our vote not on what really matters, but on the superficial aspects of each candidate that our popular culture encourages us to focus on.

During an October 2012 broadcast on National Public Radio, author and television critic Bob Mondello argued that,

We have spent the last decade training the public to watch contests on television and then vote.  American Idol, Dancing with the Stars, they all start with a field of candidates who compete against each other and then the TV audience determines who’s won.

The debates are set up similarly to reality competition shows. In both situations we are encouraged to watch for the purpose of reacting, but in only one situation does our reaction have the power to impact our paychecks, jobs, and personal liberties. The debates have always been set up this way, but only in the last 15 years have we experienced this onslaught of competition reality television.

Related Article: Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan Are the World’s Biggest Liars: Fact

Now, we talk about debate performance, but not the issues debated on, and performance is what our culture has been conditioned to remember. Were they smiling or smirking? On a scale of Paul Ryan to Marco Rubio, how much water did each of them drink? Why do we care? As Mondello goes on to state,

We’ve left serious political discourse and entered White House Idol territory.

pop politics

America’s most cherished educators. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com

Could it be that pop politics has left our minds warped? Now all of this isn’t to say that satire and social media are negative additions to society’s political conversation.  In a 2009 survey conducted by the USC Annenburg School of Communication and Journalism,

Those individuals who got their news from sources like The Daily Show and The Colbert Report were actually the most informed individuals in the survey.

This makes sense because the jokes in these shows aren’t funny if you don’t know what they’re talking about. While shows based on satire shouldn’t be the only tool we use for information, they are a great stepping stone to get the public engaged in issues that really matter.  Thanks to technology, we have many avenues of information available to us, but we need to make sure we are choosing the source of the information wisely, and not solely based on the pop politics trap.

If you get your news mostly from conservative or liberal centered news sources, why not change the channel or open another internet window and check out what a news source from the other side has to say? Better yet, read anything and everything you can get your hands on for a more well-rounded view on the issues.

pop politics

A natural born leader. malialitman.wordpress.com

In addition, we need to remain cognizant of the line between the things we say to poke fun at candidates, and the comments the candidates actually make. For example, Tina Fey’s impersonation of 2008 vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin, made quips like, “I can see Russia from my house” part of the cultural lexicon. Unfortunately, many Americans actually believed that Sarah Palin had said those words.

Related Article: TVs, Brains, and Zombies Oh My: TV’s Effect on the Mind

As in the case of Tina Fey and Sarah Palin, we may misunderstand information that has the power to change our entire perception of the candidate. We need to pay attention to what the candidates actually say and believe, and then we can listen to all the satire we want without fear of being misinformed. We will be able to embrace “pop politics” and make our new cultural reality something that works for us, not against us.

As we reflect back on the role pop-culture plays in our political consciousness, here is one last thing to consider. A January 4th 2013 petition posted on the official white house website is calling for the Obama Administration to authorize a recurring C-SPAN reality show featuring Vice President Joe Biden and his interactions with elected officials, foreign dignitaries, and everyday American families.  Personally, I think this all sounds like a bunch of malarkey, but it certainly proves that the relationship between politics and popular culture has reached a new level. As the 2016 election season approaches and political parties consider who they want to represent them, the best choice to me seems pretty clear: vote Biden/Swift 2016.

 

Sources:

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

http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/peoples-choice-awards-2013-the-hunger-games-victorious-with-five-awards/

http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/newswire/2012/first-presidential-debate-draws-67-2-million-viewers.html

http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/04/presidential-debate-drew-more-than-70-million-viewers/?smid=tw-share&_r=0

http://responsibility-project.libertymutual.com/articles/mixing-pop-culture-and-politics

http://www.people-press.org/2007/04/15/public-knowledge-of-current-affairs-little-changed-by-news-and-information-revolutions/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdDqSvJ6aHc

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/04/joe-biden-reality-show-petition_n_2411185.html

Fear Mongering: The Media on the Government Shutdown

Fear mongering isn’t just done by cultists and tyrants. Although many of the dictators of today and days past did have it down to a T, our media happens to be one of the best fear mongering machines around. How about the North Korea debacle of recent times? It was the only subject on the news, only to be dismissed again by the masses and forgotten until the news took another recent shot at it. And Syria? We have only been following news on Syria when there are horrendous events happening leading up to what seems to be an intervention initiated by the US. Fear mongering is central to every major subject covered by the media.

Related Article: Imminent Western Intervention in Syria

No wonder our government doesn’t tell us everything; we would be in a constant state of hysteria, running around and threatening each other to protect our family and property. Let’s say, for instance, that beyond the fear mongering hype we knew there was to be a global crash of all computer systems and all the data was to be reset because we were dawning on a new millennium. Oh right, the panic of Y2K. Oh HOOO!!! What if we knew precisely when the world was going to end? Ahh.. December 21, 2012. Boy did that rattle the cages.

Related Article: NOT Another 9-11 Article

Fear mongering is omnipresent in all facets of our lives. Maybe I can spin it another way to get you riled up [after all I am representing a media of sorts, and boy do we like to spin things (tops, pizzas, balls, mouse scrollers, clocks, globes)]. The media is making the government shutdown seem more severe than it needs to be. Let us explore a couple of facts about our government:

How about the fact that there have been 18 government shutdowns since 1976! Take a good look at that list of reasons why the government shut down. Most of them are political disputes that couldn’t be solved so they took the battle to the people, showing their supporters how they stood by their policies and wouldn’t budge. No possible fear mongering there.

How about the fact that neither you nor I were influenced by the shutdown? Nothing actually happened (to us and our daily lives) when the government took a break. In fact our government probably saved a whole lot of money during the shutdown.

Another fact is that Obamacare is in high demand, causing its own shut down of government websites resulting in a blindsided president? Wasn’t Obamacare at the root of the problem of politicians disagreeing in the first place? And yet here it is slowly starting to function and in extreme demand. If you’re going to practice fear mongering, start screaming about the failure of the Obamacare website.

Lastly, it is a fact that the stock market didn’t crash due to the shutdown, people didn’t withdraw all their funds to cause a high volatility in the market place, and investors just kept on investing. So much for all that fear that was being tossed around.. but the government shutdown did happen, and it may happen again if budget problems aren’t solved.

Related Article: TVs, Brains, and Zombies Oh My!

All the while the people of this great country will stand by and listen to live broadcasts in order to be the first to know of any revolts or uprisings taking place. And for what? To be prepared damnit! If the media practices fear mongering and says the situation is severe then we should go buy water and food supplies for the next couple of months, go get a gun to protect ourselves (not that we shouldn’t anyway), and of course find ways to secure our wealth and protect our property! All this for something that is purely word of mouth. If only the game “telephone” was this effective at getting a point across.

Oh misery! What is the point? I am not saying we should be oblivious to world events. In fact it is important that we embrace world events such as the recent protests in Egypt over governmental control, instead of blindly accepting the fear mongering that is fed to us. However, we often forget that a great deal of media is formed on opinion, and the stronger opinions always jump out at us more than the calm, forgetful opinions and facts. Maybe it is time to turn off the news? Maybe it is time to forget about the 9 o’clock updates of recent events on channel 9, 7 , 5, 2, etc. The saying “ignorance is bliss” perfectly pertains to the media and its relentless fear mongering.

Cheers to being ignorant of the media and its senseless fear mongering!

 

 

Research:

Government Shutdown in the United States

PRY: The danger of dismissing North Korea’s nuclear threat

North Korea on high alert, threatens US ships with “horrible disaster”

Y2K Bug Britannica

December 21 2012

Government shutdown? Panic on the markets? Buy stocks.

Obamacare website problems blindsided the President

ObamaCare Facts

 

Wondergressive: Clouds of Western Intervention Loom over Syria

Wondergressive: Imminent Western Intervention in Syria

Wondergressive: NOT Another 9-11 Article

Wondergressive: World Protests: Can You Hear Me Now?

Wondergressive: TVs, Brains, and Zombies Oh My!

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

 

World Protests: Can You Hear Me Now?

In the last couple days mass protests have been spotted in Egypt comprised of the supporters and the opponents of former President Mohamed Morsi. On one side there is an army ready to enact its ultimatum to overthrow the government and instate a new political power. On the other side is the Muslim Brotherhood that would take on the deadly army in order to preserve the former president’s reign and ensure that democracy under Islamic law stays.

The people of Egypt fear what is happening to their beloved country and the economic crisis that is taking place and so the protests rage and violence ensues.  The Military Coup will most likely result in a dictatorship being reinstated, but who is to say that a president within a “brotherhood” is not like a dictator himself. Furthermore, the phrase”will most likely result in” is still an ‘up in the air’ statement. But desperate times call for desperate measures, and with the Military Coup, we may see the fall of democracy in Egypt take place while the immediate reinstatement of military power to rule over all is enacted, ‘temporarily’ of course. One thing is for sure: the people of Egypt all just want peace and prosperity for their children, their friends, their family, and their country. Just like those of the past, they rally together, on one side or the other, showing their pride and commitment to what they believe is most important. The world has heard their cry, a reaction for good or bad will be delivered, like it has been in the past.

What past you say? Let us take a stroll down memory lane and explore several world protests most significant to our mother Earth.

Related Article: Conservation Efforts of Earth

French and American Revolutions

The French and American revolutions were caused by the aristocratic rule that undermined the people and exploited their freedoms. Both of these revolutionary periods took a long time to resolve the ongoing problems of tyrannical monarchy. The French Revolution lasted some 10 years from 1789-1799; overthrowing the monarch King Louis XVI, giving power to a republic, and finally ending with the Consulate under Napoleon Bonaparte.  The American Revolution era lasted some 20 years starting around 1763 and finally ended in 1783 when a peace treaty marked the full separation from British power. The world watched and learned as nations became independent of monarchs and set examples for future nations to follow.

March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!

Martin Luther King Jr.’s words will never be forgotten as they rang through the ears of 250,000 supporters of the civil rights movement rallied together on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. The March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom was an effort to end racism in the United States of America and the support it received helped pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, finally freeing a people from oppression and racism. The movement became of staple in the society of America and an example for bringing rights to others in the future. Even now as we struggle with gay marriage being accepted we frequently reference what Martin Luther King Jr. set out to accomplish.

Tiananmen Square Protests of 1989

Probably the most memorabe in my mind would be the Tiananmen Square protests where students led demonstrations against the slow reform process that was taking place in China. The students followed astrophysicist and professor Fang Lizhi, who preached liberty and democracy after returning from tenure in America. The student protests inspired people in Beijing to follow suit, proclaiming the need for human rights and human power, only to be met with military resistance and martial law. The famous image of this protest was the “Tank Man” where one anonymous and yet to be named man stood in front of 4 military tanks as a sign of protest against military ultimatums. To this day this image is referenced during talk of peace or protest.

February 15, 2003 Anti-War Protest

Let’s not forget one of the most recent cries for peace that spread from DC, looped around the world through  more than 600 cities, and came back around to ring in president Bush’s ears: The all expansive War on Terrorism. In Rome 3 million people cried out against the war with the slogan: “stop the war, no ifs or buts”. Madrid rallied just over 1 million people to stop the war. The US had over 150 cities rallying to support peace and to stay out of Iraq. The world cried out for peace on February 15, 2003. Sadly, the world at large was ignored, and the invasion of Iraq took place only a month later on May 20, 2003, finally ending in 2011 after 2 years of withdrawing troops from Iraq. The message remains though, with one of the biggest rallies for peace to date, that we as a people want to coexist peacefully.

Related Article: War On Drugs

Where these are only 5 other protests out of many, many more significant protests, it is important to remember what they stood for: Hope. A hope for change, a hope for a better life, and a hope for peace. This article, of course, was not an attempt in any way to mock anyone or to devalue the lives that have been lost in any of the public outcries that have taken place in the past and that will unfortunately follow. This was simply a tribute and a remembrance to what has passed, inspired by the recent events in Egypt.

To all my brothers and sisters in Egypt, to all the supporters and opponents of Morsi, and to all the protesters of the world that are straining to have their voices heard: I wish you the least bloodiest road to your goal and may peace and prosperity find you. May we all live in a world where protests are a thing of the past, and where violence and war are no longer necessary or even thought of.

Finally, in the spirit of America’s Independence Day, I wish that all other countries, oppressed or yearning for freedom, may one day be able to cheer, as we privileged Americans do, for their own country’s Independence and Freedom. Happy July 4th America!

Cheers!

 

Research:

Egypt Crisis: Protesters

Brotherhood of Morsi

Newyorker Military Coup

Army Ousts Egypt’s President

President Mohamed Morsi

French Revolution

Louis XVI of France

Napoleon Bonaparte

American Revolution

March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom

I Have a Dream Speech

Civil Rights Act of 1964

Voting Rights Act of 1965

Ten states to tackle gay marriage

Tiananmen Square Protests

Fang Lizhi

Tank Man

Anti War Protests

Invasion of Iraq

Independence Day, Fourth Of July

Wondergressive: War on Drugs

Wondergressive: Conservation Efforts of Earth

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

Gossip Through the PRISM: The NSA’s Shenanigans

Pink_floyd_-_dark_side_of_the_moon

“Truth, through the lens of gossip” or “What is legal, through the lens of Law” (Pink Floyd Dark Side of the Moon Album Cover)

When pressed to think about clandestine organizations, I’m often lead down the thought path towards action/sci-fi secret outfits such as Nick Fury’s S.H.I.E.L.D., James Bond’s MI6 (though this is actually a real government organization), and George Orwell’s dogs from Animal Farm. Often times I’ll even muse about how awesome it would be if one of these such organizations existed in real life.

In the last few days, these musings seem to have come to fruition with the recent uproar in regards to the awesomely named “secret organization” called PRISM.

I used quotes for two reasons. The first reason is that PRISM is hardly a secret. The plans have been available in the local planning office for the last nine months. By “local planning office,” I mean to say the internet and by “nine months,” I mean to say 5 years.

The second reason for my implicative use of quotation marks is that PRISM is a tool used by the National Security Agency (NSA).

PRISM is a kick-ass GUI that allows an analyst to look at, collate, monitor, and cross-check different data types provided to the NSA from internet companies located inside the United States.

So the NSA uses PRISM -my instinct here is to complain about acronyms. I’ve decided not to as my name is one of them- PRISM is a tool that collects data and this data is collected from internet companies.

Tech companies are legally required to share information under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (Fisa). Those requests have to be made via a Fisa court …. The companies are not obliged to make the process easier for the NSA.

From the Director of National Intelligence’s June 8th memorandum (please read this):

Under Section 702 of FISA, the United States Government does not unilaterally obtain information from the servers of U.S. electronic communication service providers. All such information is obtained with FISA Court approval and with the knowledge of the provider based upon a written directive from the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence.

Most importantly the information used cannot and I mean cannot:

be used to intentionally target any U.S. citizen, or any other U.S. person, or to intentionally target any person known to be in the United States. Likewise, Section 702 cannot be used to target a person outside the United States if the purpose is to acquire information from a person inside the United States.

So if all of this is true, where is the scandal? Why the uproar? Nobody in the US is being targeted without a reasonable tie to an international terror institution. Well, let’s have a “chat” with Edward Snowden to find out.

Recently Edward Snowden took it upon himself to disclose practices and policies used by the NSA. Practices and Policies which, in Edwards opinion, were immoral and inappropriate.

What I’m doing is self-interested: I don’t want to live in a world where there’s no privacy and therefore no room for intellectual exploration and creativity.”

In his recent revelation as the NSA whistle blower, Edward speaks out about the injustice he has witnessed.

The government has granted itself power it is not entitled to. There is no public oversight. The result is people like myself have the latitude to go further than they are allowed to,”

Supposing that the world was naive enough to believe that everybody followed the law as they should, there would be no problem with the NSA’s use of tools like PRISM.

The problem with this is that the NSA bends the laws to their own purposes. Just as lawmakers, cops, and even people avoiding speeding tickets do. Our legal system is a cacophony of loopholes and short cuts. When you work for the government, the law changes from “what shouldn’t I do” to “what all am I allowed to do” and “how far can I go with this.”

How can we challenge the gross misuse of United States Law?


Sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_%28surveillance_program%29

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

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data

http://gizmodo.com/what-is-prism-511875267
http://www.dni.gov/files/documents/Facts%20on%20the%20Collection%20of%20Intelligence%20Pursuant%20to%20Section%20702.pdf

http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1fx8zs/what_is_prism/

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57588253-83/what-is-the-nsas-prism-program-faq/

http://theweek.com/article/index/245360/solving-the-mystery-of-prism

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance

Note: When sifting through information concerning current events, I’ve found that the “facts” seem to change on a daily basis. These changes come from all sides. It seems that the need to be first has far outweighed any sort of journalistic integrity and this is very, very disconcerting. The government, the people, and the generally unconcerned all have constantly changing opinions and sources of info. I would just like to ask everybody to please use their best judgment when spreading information. Gossip is the worst (out of all the things). Remember we are all in this life together. The only way to Be Always Growing is to be doing this together. That being said: I welcome any and all corrections that you may have. Thanks for reading-JR

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

A Case Against Gun Control

2nd amendment

communities.washingtontimes.com

Even before the tragic shooting at Sandy Hook, law-makers have been eager to renew the Assault Weapons Ban and to push for stricter legislation. After that horrific event, however, the zeal for gun control has been ramped up to eleven.

Senator Dianne Feinstein (CA-D) has introduced a bill that would severely limit what firearms Americans can own.

President Obama has also endorsed “common sense” gun control restrictions, and urged Congress to support such measures. It’s almost impossible to go a day without seeing some report or editorial on the controversial issue. perception of crime

The popular perception throughout the country is that violent crime, and in particular gun violence, is getting worse.

Despite what gun control proponents and the media would have you believe, there isn’t an epidemic of violence in America. The reality is that crime has dropped dramatically in America for at least the last two decades. The US is as safe as it’s been in a long time. crime rate The gun control debate is complicated and multi-faceted, and for now I will only focus on one aspect of it. Like this father who lost his child in the Sandy Hook shooting, supporters of gun control often ask “Why does anyone need an assault weapon?”

There are several problems with this question. Firstly, this is supposed to be a free nation. Gun owners don’t have to justify why they need anything, just as no one is supposed to have to justify owning two cars, a home stereo system, a pair of shoes, or anything that they happen to enjoy, as long as they do so peacefully. Additionally, the criteria that define an “assault weapon” are largely meaningless. They focus on aspects of a gun that makes them look scary and military-like, including pistol-grips, barrel shrouds and foldable or detachable stocks, rather than characteristics that would actually make a firearm more dangerous than any other.

However, I’ll play along. Why does anyone need weapons like these? Although I believe strongly in the freedom-oriented answer that no one needs a reason, but rather simply that we have a right to own firearms, history has provided many examples of why gun ownership is such an important civil right. It can also be argued that the Second Amendment largely serves to ensure that our other Constitutional rights remain guaranteed.

Human beings have the biological right to defend themselves, and for the last 500 years firearms have been the weapon of choice. Not just from murderers and burglars, people also have the right to defend themselves from tyrannical governments, which was one of the fundamental principles that gave rise to the United States. The lesson of history is absolutely crystal clear: Step One in subjugating a society is to disarm them. The Second Amendment was designed disallow this.

Slavery is rightfully called the Original Sin of the United States, and most people understand the tremendous efforts undertaken to rid this country of that evil institution. Fewer people recognize, however, the perverse legal machinations that helped preserve the power of white slaveholders at the expense of slaves and free blacks. In 1834, likely in response to a Nat Turner-led slave uprising a few years earlier, skittish Tennessee lawmakers altered their state constitution to exclude blacks from owning and keeping firearms. In the 1840s, the State Supreme Courts of both North Carolina and Georgia similarly reinterpreted state law to bar blacks the right to armed self-defense. Most tragic of all, in the infamous Dred Scott case the US Supreme Court decided that blacks were not citizens and couldn’t be accorded the same rights as whites. It’s clear that early Americans fully understood that a disarmed black populace was essential to preserving the institution of slavery:

“[Citizenship] would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognized as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, singly or in companies, without pass or passport, and without obstruction, to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased at every hour of the day or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of law for which a white man would be punished; and it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went. And all of this would be done in the face of the subject race of the same color, both free and slaves, inevitably producing discontent and insubordination among them, and endangering the peace and safety of the State.”

After the Civil War, with blacks ostensibly given the same rights as white citizens, people found different ways to keep Freedmen under their boot. The Ku Klux Klan was founded by mostly white southerners in the late 1860s with the intent to use violence and coercion against blacks in order to maintain white supremacy. In the first few years after the war, the KKK murdered and terrified thousands of blacks and those who worked to support the recently Freedmen. They staged political riots and made it almost impossible for blacks to vote. They also confiscated firearms from the former slaves, helping to ensure that blacks would be largely defenseless against the assault.

Adam Winkler, UCLA professor and author of Gun Fight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America, contends:

It was a constant pressure among white racists to keep guns out of the hands of African-Americans, because they would rise up and revolt.” he said. “The KKK began as a gun-control organization. Before the Civil War, blacks were never allowed to own guns. During the Civil War, blacks kept guns for the first time – either they served in the Union army and they were allowed to keep their guns, or they buy guns on the open market where for the first time there’s hundreds of thousands of guns flooding the marketplace after the war ends. So they arm up because they know who they’re dealing with in the South. White racists do things like pass laws to disarm them, but that’s not really going to work. So they form these racist posses all over the South to go out at night in large groups to terrorize blacks and take those guns away. If blacks were disarmed, they couldn’t fight back.”

Racial overtones continued to affect the gun control debate after the end of World War II. In 1967, the Black Panthers staged an armed stand-in of the California State Capitol in response to legislative attempts to ban the open carry of loaded firearms. That event, along with recent high-profile political assassinations and race riots in Los Angeles and Detroit, heavily influenced the Gun Control Act of 1968. The letter of the law is race-neutral and I don’t believe that the law was explicitly written to disenfranchise minorities. However, in practice the Gun Control Act serves to strip away the Second Amendment rights from blacks and hispanics much more than it does from whites. Among other prohibitions, the law restricts the right of both felons and of any “unlawful user” of a controlled substance to keep and bear firearms. Considering that 80% of state prisoners are black or hispanic, it is clear that this law disproportionately affects minorities, and prevents them from enjoying the full benefits of citizenship.

I do not wish to suggest that current calls for stricter gun regulation are racist in origin or intent, but rather I want to emphasize how such restrictions have been used in the past to disenfranchise minorities and why Americans should be leery of further intrusions on the Second Amendment.

The primary purpose of firearms is to be able to defend yourself and your property, in the 19th century as well as today. Strict gun laws have the effect of disarming law-abiding citizens and emboldening criminals who are undeterred by legislation written by some politician in Washington. Chicago witnessed over 500 murders in 2012 despite having some of the strictest gun laws in the country. Mayor Rahm Emanuel commented on the ongoing violence in the Second City and himself conceded that gun laws do not prevent criminals from gaining access to illegal firearms: 

“Chicago has reached an unfortunate and tragic milestone, which not only marks a needless loss of life but serves as a reminder of the damage that illegal guns and conflicts between gangs cause in our neighborhoods.”

ben franklin

decryptedmatrix.com

As the famous (and never too-oft repeated) Ben Franklin quote goes,

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Only in this case, people and politicians are clamoring to subvert essential liberties in order to obtain a decrease in safety and to corrode our rights.As a free nation, we must not further sacrifice our rights for an illusory Siren-song, one that promises eternal sanctuary but rather delivers increased vulnerability and pretense to further erode our basic freedoms.

We always have to struggle to preserve our liberty, especially in times of hardship. After all, the Second Amendment says that

…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

It doesn’t add “unless something really tragic happens.”

 

Sources:

http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/assault-weapons

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/04/obama-to-appeal-to-public-law-enforcement-for-support-on-new-gun-control-laws/

http://www.gallup.com/poll/150464/americans-believe-crime-worsening.aspx

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/01/29/emotional-father-of-sandy-hook-victim-heckled-by-gun-nuts/,

http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/cramer.racism.html

http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/60/393/case.html

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2011/09/21/love-your-gun-thank-the-black-panthers-says-new-book/

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2005677025/

http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/sites/default/files/9038.pdf

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/4/chicago-murder-rate-far-worse-strict-gun-control/

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/chicago-grim-milestone-500-murders-2012-article-1.1229420

Clouds of Western Intervention Loom Over Syria

syria  bashar al assad

Bashar al-Assad (Source)

The growing discord in Syria once again threatens to entangle the American military in another experiment in nation-building.

Keeping with the traditions (and ignoring the consequences) of the Military-Industrial Complex, the United States is currently engaged in seemingly unending military operations in over a half-dozen nations. These of course include Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, but the President has also acknowledged military actions in Yemen, Somalia, and also the African countries of Uganda, South Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo and the Central African Republic.

 The next big question is if the West is going to intervene and assist rebels in overthrowing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, as the US and Great Britain helped overthrow Muamarr Gaddafi in Libya in 2011.

 The violence in Syria, which the BBC estimates has claimed the lives of 60,000 since March of 2011, has been widely decried in the West. In early December Secretary of State Hillary Clinton described the predicted Syrian use of chemical weapons as being a “red line” in the sand, that once crossed would be grounds for UN/US intervention. Top generals in Britain have also signaled the possibility of providing military assistance to the Syrian rebels.

 In his first public address since June, Assad recently addressed his nation’s woes by stating:

There are those who seek to partition Syria and weaken it. But Syria is stronger… and will remain sovereign… and this is what upsets the West.

From Assad’s defiant remarks to the predictable responses of Clinton, Obama and the UN alike, the whole situation seems stupidly predictable: The West is poised to once again militarily intervene in the affairs of another Middle Eastern nation.

Much like Mugatu, I feel like I’ve been taking Crazy Pills watching this slow entrenchment into a state of permanent war. How is it possible that the US, helmed by equally bloodlust-y Democrats and Republicans, remains utterly incapable of learning from the abundant mistakes of our past?

 It’s not as if one has to Indiana Jones these lessons of history from some hidden crypt. The US/UK led coup in Iran in 1953, which re-established the Shah to power, did not prevent the violence and reactionary backlash in that nation, but rather directly contributed to it. The Vietnam War was a prolonged, hellishly painful, and ultimately pointless disaster. The overthrow of the Taliban and installment of President Karzai in Afghanistan has not yielded the stable government we wished to create. Iraq remains a mess nearly a decade after our intervention. The US has sent military forces to central Africa to stabilize threats of terror in that continent, which will likely be just as fruitless.

 Despite these recent foreign policy failures, governments still seem prepared and willing to intervene in Syria.

 Wait, why shouldn’t the US intervene? It is, by all accounts, a fairly frightful place to call home by Western standards. Tens of thousands of people have died in the last two years alone. The economy is largely nationalized. The Assad regime is known to detain, torture and disappear political dissidents. Shouldn’t I, as a freedom-lovin’ individualist want to liberate the Syrians from their oppressive government?

I certainly want them to become a free people and I am cheering for the rebels to oust Assad and hopefully create a more liberal and open state. I am, however, very wary of the West’s ability to facilitate such a transition.

The relative failure of Iraq and Afghanistan’s new governments stem from the same cause: The nations we interfered with lack the basic institutions that allow our governments to function with at least a modicum of respectability. The ideas of a secular state, governmental transparency and the rule of law took thousands of years to gestate and mature into even semi-workable facsimiles in the West. To think that we can simply plant these republican seeds and expect them to flourish in nations that don’t have the history necessary to properly nourish them is not only laughable, but such expeditions have proven to be exceptionally dangerous and detrimental to cause of long-term liberty.

The United States and the West in general need to simply stop meddling in the affairs of other nations. The cries for intervention in Syria are not even consistent with situations in the rest of the world. If the US were truly principled in this matter, we would have already invaded North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela and even China for committing crimes against free society and democracy. We haven’t–and we won’t–because the State Department doesn’t see a payday in those nations that it apparently sees in Syria.

 The United States needs to return to the Monroe Doctrine of non-intervention. We need to remain neutral, not because we tacitly support the tyranny in despotic states, but rather because we have learned that interfering actually worsens and prolongs the pain felt in such failing states.

 I am not at all naïve enough to believe that such a reversal in US foreign policy is even possible at this stage. Tragically, the American Empire will continue to force its sticky, brass-knuckled fingers into the cookie jars of nations around the world, just like every other empire the world has ever seen. Though not for a long time yet, nations will eventually break and sever these fingers, chipping away our international influence.

The best way for the West to export its brand of freedom and democracy is through non-violence and voluntary free trade. If the US wishes to maintain its global position of military, political and economic dominance, we need to once again embrace liberty and withdraw our imperial intrusions from the rest of the world.

Sources:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/16/world/obama-admits-us-fight-of-al-qaeda-has-extended-to-somalia-and-yemen.html?_r=0

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/12/14/letter-president-war-powers-resolution

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-12-03/world/35622995_1_nonessential-international-staff-chemical-weapons-assad-government

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9670289/Britain-could-intervene-militarily-in-Syria-in-months-UKs-top-general-suggests.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20924452

http://www.refworld.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/rwmain?page=country&category=&publisher=&type=&coi=SYR&rid=&docid=4da56d83a2&skip=0