Russ Belville to appear on CNN Radio’s “Cultural Distortion” this Sunday

CNN Radio, Sunday, January 31, 3:40 - 4:20pm Pacific... it just worked out that way!

I’m happy to let you all know that I will be on national radio this Sunday, which just happens to be my 42nd birthday!

I’ll be the guest of Kyle Allison and Shane Bell on the CNN Radio program “Cultural Distortion” which airs Sundays at 3pm Pacific.

I’ll be on from 3:40pm – 4:20pm talking about the War on (Certain American Citizens Using Non-Phamaceutical, Non-Alcoholic, Tobacco-Free) Drugs.

No, I didn’t request the interview to end by 4:20pm… it just worked out that way. Kyle and Shane are on Central Time.

CBS News: “Pot Measure One Step Closer To California Ballot”

As a general rule, NORML tends not to publicize or comment on ballot initiative drives — including campaigns we are involved in — until they have officially qualified for the ballot. But in this case, we (and the mainstream media) just couldn’t resist.

Pot Measure One Step Closer to California Ballot
via CBS.com

An initiative to make marijuana legal, and open to local taxation and regulation, is one step closer to getting on the California ballot this November.

Backers of the initiative on Thursday turned in nearly 700,000 signatures to state officials to place the measure on the state ballot, according to reports — far more than the 433,971 valid signatures required. California Secretary of State Debra Bowen has until June 24 to certify the initiative, the Sacramento Bee reports.

The measure, if approved by voters, would allow anyone over 21 years old to possess up to an ounce of marijuana or grow plants within a limited space for personal use. It would also allow local jurisdictions to tax and regulate it.

[Author's Note: There is a clause in the initiative that allows for municipalities, if they desire to do so, to establish regulations governing the retail distribution and sale of cannabis. Personal, non-commercial possess or cultivation of marijuana would not be subject to taxation under this initiative.]

… An April Field Poll found that 56 percent of California voters supported legalizing marijuana, and Mark DiCamillo, the poll’s director, said the initiative had a 50 percent chance of passing, the Los Angeles Times reports.

Next week, proponents of a statewide measure to legalize medical marijuana in South Dakota will also turn in signatures to the Secretary of State’s office to place the proposal on the November 2010 ballot. Petitioners claim that they possess nearly twice the number of signatures necessary to qualify for the ballot.

Separate ballot drives are under way in several other states, including Washington and Oregon.

Why Isn’t There More Medical Marijuana Research? Because The Feds Won’t Allow It, That’s Why!

It’s the ‘Catch-22’ that has plagued medical marijuana advocates and patients for decades. Lawmakers and health regulators demand clinical studies on the safety and efficacy of medical cannabis, but the federal agency in charge of such research bars these investigations from ever taking place.

But it took until now for the federal government to finally admit it.

A spokesperson for the U.S. National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) told The New York Times last week that the agency does “not fund research focused on the potential medical benefits of marijuana.”

Why is this admission so significant? Here’s why.

Under federal law, NIDA (along with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration) must approve all clinical and preclinical research involving marijuana. NIDA strictly controls which investigators are allowed access to the federal government’s lone research supply of pot – which is authorized via a NIDA contract and cultivated and stored at the University of Mississippi.

In short, no NIDA approval = no marijuana = no scientific studies. And that is, and always has been, the problem.

But to the folks over at NIDA, there’s no problem at all.

Speaking to The New York Times in a January 19, 2010 article entitled, “Researchers Find Medical Study of Marijuana Discouraged,” NIDA spokeswoman Shirley Simson said: “As the National Institute on Drug Abuse, our focus is primarily on the negative consequences of marijuana use. We generally do not fund research focused on the potential beneficial medical effects of marijuana.”

Since NIDA presently oversees an estimated 85 percent of the world’s research on controlled substances, the agency’s ban on medical marijuana research isn’t just limited to the United States’ borders; it extends throughout the planet.

Previous legal attempts to break NIDA’s bureaucratic logjam have failed to weaken the agency’s iron grip.

In 2007, U.S. DEA Administrative Law Judge Mary Ellen Bittner ruled that NIDA’s monopolization of marijuana research is not “in the public interest,” and ordered the federal government to allow private manufacturers to produce the drug for research purposes. But in January of last year, DEA Deputy Administrator Michele Leonhart set aside Judge Bittner’s ruling – stating that NIDA possesses “adequate” quantities of cannabis to meet the needs of clinical investigators, and that the agency monopoly on the distribution of marijuana for research is compliant with America’s international treaty obligations. (Notably, on January 26, 2010 President Barack Obama selected Leonhart to be the DEA’s full time Director.)

Most recently, in November 2009 the American Medical Association’s (AMA) Council on Science and Public Health declared, “Results of short term controlled trials indicate that smoked cannabis reduces neuropathic pain, improves appetite and caloric intake especially in patients with reduced muscle mass, and may relieve spasticity and pain in patients with multiple sclerosis.”

However, the Council lamented that despite these encouraging preliminary results, “[T]here is a contrast between the relatively small number of patients who have been studied over the past 30 years in controlled clinical trials involving smoked cannabis and survey data from patients with chronic pain, multiple sclerosis, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis that indicates a significant use of cannabis for self management.”

And just what is the precise reason for this “contrast?” The AMA failed to specify, but to anyone who has followed this issue, the answer is painfully obvious.

Nevertheless, the AMA still resolved, “[The] AMA urges that marijuana’s status as a federal Schedule I controlled substance be reviewed with the goal of facilitating the conduct of clinical research and development of cannabinoid-based medicines.”

But since any future clinical trials would still require NIDA approval — approval that the agency admits won’t be coming any time soon — it remains unclear what effect, if any, the AMA’s declaration will have on facilitating medical marijuana research. If history is any guide, it’s unlikely that the AMA request — much like the cries of tens of thousands of patients before it — will have any effect on NIDA at all.

[FYI... You can also comment on this essay on Alternet.org's newly launched SpeakEasy blog here or on the Huffington Post here.]

NORML’s Weekly Legislative Round Up

It’s January 2010, and that means it is time once again for NORML’s Weekly Legislative Round Up — your one-stop guide to pending marijuana law reform legislation around the country, along with tips for influencing the policies of your state.

** A note to first time readers: NORML can not introduce legislation in your state. Nor can any other non-profit advocacy organization. Only your state representatives, or in some cases an individual constituent (by way of their representative; this is known as introducing legislation ‘by request’) can do so. NORML can — and does — work closely with like-minded politicians and citizens to reform marijuana laws, and lobbies on behalf of these efforts. But ultimately the most effective way — and the only way — to successfully achieve statewide marijuana law reform is for local stakeholders and citizens to become involved in the political process and make the changes they want to see. We can’t do it without you.

Virginia: Members of the Virginia House Courts of Justice, Criminal Subcommittee are scheduled to hear testimony on Wednesday in favor of House Bill 1134, which seeks to dramatically reduce the state’s marijuana possession and cultivation penalties. Representatives from NORML’s national staff and state affiliate will be in attendance and testifying in support of this measure. You can read NORML’s written testimony to the subcommittee here; NORML’s letter in yesterday’s Washington Post appears here.

Virginia residents are urged to contact their House delegates today. If your delegate is one of the members of the House Courts of Justice, Criminal Subcommittee, then it is especially important that he or she hears from you today. Phone and e-mail contact information for these members is available here. A pre-written letter will be e-mailed to your Virginia state House member when you go here. Finally, those seeking to attend Wednesday’s hearing in Richmond should contact Sabrina at Virginia NORML at: sabrina@norml.org for further information. You can also track the legislative progress of this effort on Facebook at: http://www.facebook.com/vanorml.

New Hampshire: Lawmakers on the House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee held hearings last week on two pending proposals, HB 1652 (legalization) and HB 1653 (decriminalization). You can read NORML’s written testimony in favor of these measures here, and you can voice your support for these efforts here. You can also watch video highlights (and lowlights) from last week’s hearing, care of our friends at New Hampshire Common Sense, by clicking here.

Colorado: Members of the Colorado Senate, Health and Human Services Committee are scheduled to hear testimony Wednesday morning regarding proposed state regulations to Colorado’s medical marijuana law. You can read more about these controversial guidelines here, here and here, and you can contact members of the Committee here.

Washington: House Committee lawmakers rejected a pair of marijuana law reform proposals last week that sought to remove criminal penalties for the adult, personal use of marijuana. You can see how House members voted here. A Senate companion bill to decriminalize marijuana possession, SB 5615, still awaits floor action and can be supported by going here.

For information on additional state and federal marijuana law reform legislation, please visit NORML’s ‘Take Action Center’ here.

[UPDATE!!! For folks interested in the progress of New York's pending medical marijuana legislation, there's this report from today's New York Times.]

Beverly Hills NORML Director Cheryl Shuman testifies on the cruelty of banning medical marijuana patients from transplant lists

Recently the Los Angeles City Council held hearings on the thorny issue of medical marijuana dispensary regulation. For years city officials have abrogated their duty to create sensible regulations for the dispensaries that have proliferated across the Los Angeles basin. The number of dispensaries has ballooned to over 500 (not the 1,000+ often claimed) following an ineffective moratorium on the retail medical marijuana outlets.

As usual, the hearings were packed, with medical marijuana patients and activists flooding the chambers to add their testimony to the record.  One citizen petitioning her government for a redress of grievances was the Executive Director of the new Beverly Hills NORML 90210 (http://www.norml90210.org/become-a-member.php), Cheryl Shuman.  In sixty seconds of testimony, Cheryl recounts her own personal medical marijuana tragedy, one that has befallen many desperately ill patients who use cannabis — even legally — and require life-saving organ transplants:

Cheryl’s case is not unique.  All across America, hospitals are booting patients off of organ transplant lists because of their use of cannabis.  Being a legal user of cannabis for medicinal purposes in the now fourteen states that recognize that right is of no help; even legal medical marijuana patients are essentially given a death sentence by hospital and insurance bureaucracies for their use of a safe, non-toxic herbal remedy.

Timothy Garon was a Seattle musician who had contracted Hepatitis C.  Garon was on a waiting list for a life-saving liver transplant.  The state of Washington recognizes Hep C as a qualifying condition for the medical use of cannabis.  Garon’s physician, Dr. Brad Roter, authorized Garon to smoke pot to alleviate his nausea and abdominal pain and to stimulate his appetite while he awaited.  Garon had become dangerously thin and malnourished and the cannabis therapy helped bring him back from the brink of death.

But unbeknown to Dr. Roter, hospital transplant programs have strict rules that forbid “substance abusers” from qualifying for organ transplants.  Seattle’s University of Washington Medical Center told Garon that if he ceased his marijuana use and tested clean for 60 days, he could have his liver transplant.  Another medical center specified six months of marijuana abstinence before they’d save his life with surgery.

Doctors had told Garon he had about two weeks to live and he died on May 1, 2008.  The cruelest irony is that cannabis is one of the few therapies Garon could have taken for pain and nausea that is not hepatoxic (liver-killing) and laden with a list of other nasty side effects.

In Hawaii, Kimberley Reyes suffered from cirrhosis and hepatitis and was given thirty days to live.  She applied for and received approval for a life-saving liver transplant, only to have the rug pulled out from under her three days later when her insurance company, Hawaii Medical Service Association, discovered cannabis in her system, which she had used to relieve feelings of nausea, disorientation and pain.  Ten days later she, too, was dead.

In Washington, Jonathan Simchen suffers from kidney failure. Doctors at Virginia Mason and University of Washington medical centers deny him a life-saving kidney transplant because of his participation in the Washington State medical marijuana program.  According to Alisha Mark, a spokeswoman for Virginia Mason, “any patient who smokes any product — tobacco, cloves, medical marijuana — would be precluded from receiving a transplant here.”

In Georgia, a man named Walter emailed me after reading these transplant stories:

My name is Walter and my kidney transplant was denied by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Georgia due to the fact I smoke marijuana.

In January I went to the University of Minnesota/Fairview Transplant Center for an evaluation. In order to be completely honest with all the doctors I made them aware of the fact that I smoke marijuana and have for quite some time. I also made them aware that the use of marijuana has helped me with the decline of my appetite due to end stage of renal disease. With the exception of the hospital shrink, no one seemed to have a problem with it and even commented that my smoking had nothing to do with my kidney.

Blue Cross Blue Shield approved the evaluation but [after] having received the paperwork from Minnesota has declined my transplant, stating “Kidney transplantation has not been shown to be more beneficial than other alternative treatments for patients with ongoing substance abuse. Thus, I recommended denial of kidney transplantation” (Ronald Hunt MD – Medical Director).

Jim Klahr is a well-known medical marijuana activist here in Oregon who also suffers from cirrhosis and hepatitis C.  In an ironic twist, he sits on the state’s advisory committee on medical marijuana, yet hasn’t used his most effective medicine for his pain and nausea since 2004 because he’s terrified of losing his chance for a liver transplant.  “I’ve capitulated because basically I don’t have much of a choice,” says Klahr.  Paul Stanford of The Hemp & Cannabis Foundation, the state’s largest medical marijuana clinic, estimates at least 30 Oregonians who use medical weed have died in the past 10 years after hospitals denied them new organs.

We understand why hospitals have strict qualifying criteria for transplant candidates.  Transplant organs are in high demand and doctors want every recipient to have the best chance at survival possible.  Hospitals screen their transplant lists for “substance abusers” because it really doesn’t make much sense to put a new liver into an alcoholic who will just go out and drink that organ into cirrhosis and failure as well.  It’s foolhardy to give a new kidney to a heroin addict who would then possibly share needles and come down with another life-threatening disease.

But in the case of cannabis users, the concern for the chance of post-transplant survival is misplaced.  According to new research at the University of Michigan, cannabis use has no impact on the long-term survival rates of liver transplant recipients.  After studying 1,489 liver transplant patients, 155 of whom were cannabis users, over a span of eight years, researchers concluded, “Patients who did and did not use marijuana had similar survival rates. Current substance abuse policies do not seem to systematically expose marijuana users to additional risk of mortality.”

The cases of Cheryl Shuman and all these victims of a cruel and needless discrimination against desperately ill cannabis consumers illustrate why existing medical marijuana laws, while commendable, do not go far enough.  Cheryl Shuman, Tim Garon, Jim Klahr and others are all legal medical marijuana patients in their state, yet powerless under the law to force hospitals to keep them on the transplant lists.  This discrimination exists because cannabis is considered an “illicit drug of abuse” in the same category as heroin and LSD.  This is why cannabis must be removed from Schedule I, legalized for prescription by any doctor in any state, so that it may truly be treated like other medicines, including the prohibition on discrimination against a transplant patient for the use of his or her doctor’s prescriptions.