For far too long the federal government’s war on cannabis consumers has been a bipartisan effort.

At worst, politicians of both political persuasions have proactively lobbied for tougher pot penalties (or actively opposed efforts to amend such laws); at best, leaders of both major parties have done nothing at all.

When will this situation change? When the core constituency of both major political parties — Republican and Democrat — compel their leaders to make drug law reform a primary part of their legislative platforms.

In practice, this means that Republican leaders need to know that their base cares just as much about marijuana law reform as they do about shrinking the size and scope of government. Conversely, Democrat leaders need to be made aware that their supporters are just as passionate about ending the war on cannabis consumers as they are about addressing issues like climate change and health care.

Is this day coming?

NORML Advisory Board Member Norm Stamper believes so. Writing today on the Huffington Post blog he proclaims, correctly, that a record number of influential progressive publications and pundits are now calling for fundamental changes in drug law reform. A quick review of conservative-leaning websites and periodicals identifies a similar trend.

For decades conventional political wisdom has dictated that drug law reform is the so-called ‘third rail’ of mainstream politics, when in fact just the opposite is true. American voters of all political persuasions are ready to embrace common-sense marijuana policies.

The question is now: Are they ready and willing to demand them from their political leaders?

Much has made — by the mainstream media and others — of the claim that cannabis use causes certain types of mental illness, specifically schizophrenia and psychosis.

Most notably perhaps, a team of researchers writing in the July 28, 2007 edition of the prestigious scientific journal The Lancet, boldly proclaimed that smoking cannabis could boost one’s risk of a psychotic episode by 40 percent or more.

Naturally, this alarmist rhetoric received wall-to-wall coverage by the mainstream press. Even more troubling, the supposed ‘pot-and-schizophrenia’ link was one of the primary reasons cited by British PM Gordon Brown, ex-Home Secretary Jacqui Smith and others as the impetus for reclassifying cannabis (from a verbal warning to a criminal offense punishable by up to five years in jail) in the United Kingdom.

Of course, there was a fatal flaw with The Lancet’s argument — one that, oddly enough, every single MSM outlet failed to mention. Empirical data did not support the investigators’ hypothesis that smoking marijuana was associated with increased rates of schizophrenia or other mental illnesses among the general public — a fact that even the authors begrudgingly admitted when they declared, “Projected trends for schizophrenia incidence have not paralleled trends in cannabis use over time.”

Which brings us to 2009.

Two years after The Lancet’s dire predictions, a team of researchers at the Keele University Medical School have once and for all put the ‘pot-and-mental illness’ claims to the test. Writing in a forthcoming edition of the scientific journal Schizophrenia Research, they compare long-term trends in marijuana use and incidences of schizophrenia and/or psychoses in the United Kingdom. And what do they find?

“[T]he expected rise in diagnoses of schizophrenia and psychoses did not occur over a 10 year period. This study does not therefore support the specific causal link between cannabis use and incidence of psychotic disorders. … This concurs with other reports indicating that increases in population cannabis use have not been followed by increases in psychotic incidence.”

Should we expect an apology — or even better, a change in policy — from the Gordon Brown regime any time soon? Or at the very least, will some sort of ‘correction’ be forthcoming from the mainstream news media?

I wouldn’t hold my breath.

We’ve added a new feature to our blogs!  Now whenever there is a new post to this NORML Blog or to the NORML Daily Audio Stash blog, the title and link will be sent out via Twitter.  You can follow @NatlNORML to receive the updates from the NORML Blog and follow @RadicalRuss to get the latest commentary on the Stash.  You can find everybody’s coverage of NORML by searching the hashtag #norml, which will be attached to all our updates.  Finally, don’t forget to re-tweet our updates to your followers to help spread the growing truth about cannabis!

Fox News is running an alarmist story today under the outrageous headline, “Marijuana Not Only Gets You High, It Damages Your DNA.”

The ‘news’ story, which several other mainstream media outlets are also promoting, is based on a new British study assessing the effects of, ahem, “calf thymus DNA treated in vitro (in a Petri dish) … with the smoke generated from 1, 5, and 10 cannabis cigarettes.”

Yes, really.

So how did Fox “We report, you decide” News summarize this non-story? Let’s take a look.

What Fox News reported: “Smoking marijuana not only gets you high, but it also alters your DNA.”

What the study actually said: “[T]hese results provide evidence for the DNA damaging potential of cannabis smoke, implying that the consumption of cannabis cigarettes may be detrimental to human health with the possibility to initiate cancer development.”

What Fox News reported: “There have been many studies on the toxicity of tobacco smoke,” researcher Rajinder Singh said in a news release. “Cannabis in contrast has not been so well studied.”

What Fox News didn’t report: From the March 2009 issue of the scientific journal Medicinal Research Reviews, “Research on the chemistry and pharmacology of cannabinoids and endocannabinoids has reached enormous proportions. … [A]pproximately 15,000 articles on Cannabis sativa L. and cannabinoids and over 2,000 articles on endocannabinoids (are available in the scientific literature).”

What Fox News reported: “Singh said cannabis smoke contains 400 compounds including 60 cannabinoids. It also contains 50 percent more carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons including naphthalene, benzanthracene, and benzopyrene, than tobacco smoke, Singh added.”

What Fox News didn’t report: From the November 2007 issue of the scientific journal Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, “Vaporization of marijuana does not result in exposure to combustion gases, … and [was] preferred by most subjects compared to marijuana cigarettes. … The Volcano [vaporizer] device is an effective and apparently safe vehicle for THC delivery, and warrants further investigation in clinical trials of cannabis for medical purposes.”

What Fox News reported: “‘The smoking of 3-4 cannabis cigarettes a day is associated with the same degree of damage to bronchial mucus membranes as 20 or more tobacco cigarettes a day,’ the team wrote in the journal.”

Except for the fact that it isn’t. In fact, here’s what Donald Tashkin of the UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, had to say about the subject earlier this month in an interview with the McClatchy newspaper chain. (**Note: Dr. Tashkin has performed US-government sponsored studies of marijuana and lung function for over 30 years and is considered to be the United States’ — if not the world’s — foremost expert on the subject.)

“What we found instead was no association (between marijuana smoking and cancer) and even a suggestion of some protective (anti-cancer) effect. … Early on, when our research appeared as if there would be a negative impact on lung health, I was opposed to legalization because I thought it would lead to increased use and that would lead to increased health effects. But at this point, I’d be in favor of legalization (of marijuana). I wouldn’t encourage anybody to smoke any substances. But I don’t think it should be stigmatized as an illegal substance. Tobacco smoking causes far more harm. And in terms of an intoxicant, alcohol causes far more harm.”

Just for the record, in 2006, Tashkin led the largest population case-control study (yes, Dr. Tashkin actually performed research on humans, not ‘calf thymus DNA’) ever to assess the use of marijuana and lung cancer risk. The study, which included more than 2,200 subjects (1,212 cases and 1,040 controls), reported that marijuana smoking was not positively associated with cancers of the lung or upper aerodigestive tract – even among individuals who reported smoking more than 22,000 joints during their lifetime.

Let the folks at Fox put that in their pipe and smoke it.

They say that every action spurs an opposite reaction. Well, that certainly seems to be the case in Congress.

Just days after Massachusetts Democrat Rep. Barney Frank, along with 13 cosponsors, reintroduced HR 2835, the Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act of 2009 in Congress, Republican Rep. Mark Kirk (Illinois) has called for federal legislation to sentence certain first-time marijuana offenders to up to 25 years in prison.

UPDATE!!! UPDATE!!! It gets even worse. Check out some of the comments and coverage from Rep. Kirk’s press conference (WTF is “koosh?!”), which took place this afternoon. You can also offer your opinions regarding this misguided and mean-spirited proposal on Alternet.org and the ever-popular Huffington Post blog. You can also send Rep. Kirk and his colleagues a strong message by making your thoughts known on The Hill.com’s Congress blog here.

U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk to push tougher sentences for more-potent marijuana
via The Chicago Tribune

U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk will call for legislation Monday that would toughen drug-trafficking laws regarding a highly potent form of marijuana, with penalties of up to 25 years in prison for a first-time offense.

The law would target offenders who sell or distribute marijuana that has a THC content exceeding 15 percent.

… Drug dealers are increasingly cross-breeding plants to produce high-potency variants of marijuana, which are called “kush” in street slang when they have 20 percent THC, Lake County Sheriff Mark Curran said. “When you amplify the strength of it, you are increasing the harm to the system,” said Curran, who supports the legislation, which would amend a federal law. “They are more dangerous behind the wheel of a vehicle. It’s not a good idea to have people that messed up.”

… The Republican North Shore lawmaker said he plans to release more information during a news conference in Chicago on Monday, where he will be joined by representatives from the Lake County Sheriff’s Department, the Lake County Metropolitan Enforcement Group and Waukegan Police Department.

Okay, where to begin? Well, we can start with U.S. Representative Mark Kirk. According to the Congressman’s website, Rep. Kirk is “pro-personal responsibility.” Unless, of course, we’re talking about allowing responsible adults (or patients) the choice to relax (or medicate) in the privacy of their own homes with a substance that is objectively safer than alcohol (or most prescription pharmaceuticals). Then, naturally, all bets are off.

Representative Kirk’s website also alleges that the five-time-elected Congressman is “pro-science.” Unless, of course, we’re talking about cannabis — in which case he is actually “pro-ideology” and “anti-science.” After all, if Rep. Kirk was truly interested in the science of cannabis he would already know that:

1) According to a 2008 review (see page 12) of marijuana potency by the University of Mississippi, the average THC in domestically grown marijuana — which comprises the bulk of the U.S. market — is less than five percent, a figure that’s remained unchanged for nearly a decade.

2) THC — regardless of potency — is virtually non-toxic to healthy cells or organs, and is incapable of causing a fatal overdose. Currently, doctors may legally prescribe a FDA-approved pill that contains 100 percent THC, and curiously, nobody among Rep. Kirk’s staff or at the Lake County Sheriff’s office seems to be overly concerned about its potential health effects.

3) Survey data gleaned from cannabis consumers in the Netherlands—where users may legally purchase pot of known quality—indicates that most cannabis consumers prefer less potent pot, just as the majority of those who drink alcohol prefer beer or wine rather than 190 proof Everclear or Bacardi 151. When consumers encounter unusually strong varieties of marijuana, they adjust their use accordingly and smoke less.

Of course, if Rep. Kirk (write him here!) was really concerned about potential risks posed by supposedly stronger marijuana, he would support regulating the sale of drug (as opposed to jailing first-time pot sellers for a quarter of a century) so that its potency would be consistent and this information would be publicly displayed to the consumer. This same advice applies to the members of the Lake County Sheriff’s Department and the Waukegan Police Department — who claim “we don’t make the laws; we just enforce them” — yet seem to have no problem whatsoever lobbying for increased federal pot penalties while on company time.

Fortunately, the likelihood is that Rep. Kirk’s proposed legislation will be all bark and no bite. One, I suspect that few if any of Rep. Kirk’s colleagues in Congress will even consider supporting such an asinine measure. Two, even if such legislation were to become law (and it won’t) — who would test each and every seized marijuana sample for THC potency and who would pay for it? Currently, only the University of Mississippi engages in such potency testing, which is highly expensive and requires the use of a gas chromatography mass spectrometer device. In short, it appears that the misguided Congressman from Illinois is simply trying to make headlines.

One can’t blame him for trying. After all, across the pond, unsubstantiated claims regarding the dangers of often-talked-about-but-never-actually-defined supposedly “lethal” ’skunk’ weed caused a national frenzy and resulted in Parliament hastily deciding to reclassify pot possession offenses from a verbal warning to up to five years in jail. Never mind that, under Britain’s short-lived experiment with decriminalization, marijuana potency actually fell — as did the number of adolescents using the drug.

Of course, as the latest actions of the so-called “pro-science, pro-personal liberty” Congressman show, facts play virtually no role in political drug policy debate, and ignorance hardly disqualifies someone from holding elected office.

Massachusetts Democrat Barney Frank, along with over a dozen cosponsors, reintroduced legislation in Congress today to strengthen legal protections for state-authorized medical marijuana patients.

The bill, entitled the Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act of 2009, seeks to amend the discrepancy between federal law and the laws of over a dozen states that have enacted regulations governing the therapeutic use of cannabis.

Thirteen states – Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Michigan, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington – have enacted laws prohibiting medical marijuana patients from state prosecution.  Passage of the the Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act would ensure that medical cannabis patients or providers who are compliant with state law, such as Charles Lynch (who was sentenced today in federal court), would no longer have to fear arrest or prosecution from federal law enforcement agencies.

Previous versions of the Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act were introduced in both the 108th and 109th Congress, but failed to receive a public hearing or a committee vote.

While campaigning for the presidency, Barack Obama promised not to use Justice Department resources “to try and circumvent state (medical marijuana) laws” — a pledge that has been repeated in recent months by US Attorney General Eric Holder.  Nevertheless, agents from the US Drug Enforcement Administration have continued to target medical marijuana providers in states that allow for the drug’s use, and federal prosecutors have continued to bring federal anti-drug charges against defendants who were acting in accordance with their state’s cannabis laws.

To support the Medical Marijuana Patient Protection Act of 2009, please log on to NORML’s Take Action Center here.

(LA Times) The owner of a Morro Bay pot dispensary who emerged as a key figure in the national debate over medical marijuana was sentenced to one year and one day in prison today by a federal judge in Los Angeles.

Charles Lynch, 47, dressed in a dark suit, sat with his hands clasped and stared straight ahead as the sentence was imposed by U.S. District Court Judge George H. Wu. Lynch declined the opportunity to address the court moments earlier. His mother, seated in the courtroom gallery nearby, fought back tears as Wu said he saw no way around imposing a sentence of at least one year.

Lynch’s case made headlines nationwide and came to symbolize the tension between conflicting state and federal marijuana laws. Cultivating, using and selling doctor-recommended marijuana is allowed under some circumstances in California and about a dozen other states, but such activities are banned entirely under federal law.

Lynch was prosecuted for illegally distributing marijuana from his Central Coast Compassionate Caregivers facility, despite having the blessing of Morro Bay’s mayor, city attorney and other civic leaders.

The Obama Administration had signaled that it will not seek prosecutions and raids against medical marijuana dispensary owners who are acting in accordance with state laws.  Charles Lynch couldn’t have followed state laws more scrupulously, but that is a moot point in the federal courthouse, where defendants cannot even mention the medical nature of their legal state-approved business.

This case highlights the need to pass Rep. Barney Franks’ Medical Marijuana Protection Act of 2009, to be introduced later today.  The bill would protect providers and patients in the thirteen medical marijuana states from harassment and prosecution by federal authorities (more on that bill later today).

In the meantime, we can appeal to the man who can bring us some Change We Can Believe In, President Obama, who in the stroke of a pen can commute Charles Lynch’s sentence just as easily as former President Bush commuted former VP Chief of Staff Scooter Libby’s sentence in the CIA agent-outing Valerie Plame case.  Mr. Lynch would remain convicted and retain a criminal record, but he would be spared of any prison time.  Or President Obama could do the truly honorable thing and pardon Mr. Lynch just as easily as former President Ford pardoned former President Nixon, absolving him of any conviction or prison time.

The Change we’d like to see is our Federal Government respecting the will of the people in thirteen states regarding medical use of marijuana and our President living up to his campaign promises to focus his Justice Department resources on more urgent matters.

Call President Obama at 202-456-1111.
Tell him to commute the sentence of
Charles Lynch or pardon him outright!

Statewide efforts to enact medical marijuana law reform still remain in play in nearly a dozen states.

Here are some highlights and ways that you can help.

New Jersey: Last Thursday, members of the state assembly Health and Senior Services Committee substituted, then approved, Assembly Bill 804: the New Jersey Compassionate Use Medical Marijuana Act. The bill will now go before the full Assembly.

However, as substituted by the Committee, neither qualified patients nor their caregivers would be authorized to grow cannabis medicinally under the law. Instead, patients will be required to obtain their medicine from yet to be established ‘nonprofit Alternative Treatment Centers.’ (Read all of the changes made to the measure here.)

A less restrictive version of this proposal, Senate Bill 119, was approved by the Senate in February. If the Assembly ultimately approves A 804, members of the Senate would have to approve the Assembly’s changes.

Further information about this effort, visit the Coalition for Medical Marijuana - New Jersey or go here.

New York: Legislation (Assembly Bill 7542) to exempt qualified medical cannabis patients from state arrest and prosecution continues to move through the state Assembly. So far, members of the Committees on Health, Codes, and Ways and Means have all signed off on the proposal, which is now before the Assembly Committee on Rules. A companion bill, Senate Bill 4041-A, remains pending before the Senate Committee on Codes. If you live in New York, you can contact your elected officials and urge them to support this effort by going here or here.

Delaware: Last week, members of the Senate Health & Social Services Committee approved Senate Bill 94, an act that seeks to allow for the use of medical cannabis by state-authorized patients. The full Senate is expected to take action on the measure in the coming weeks. If you live in Delaware, please urge your state Senator to move expeditiously on SB 94 by going here.

Illinois: House lawmakers adjourned last week without taking a floor vote on Senate Bill 1381, the Compassionate Use of Medical Cannabis Pilot Program Act. However, this does not mean that SB 1382 is dead! House members may call the bill for a floor vote later this fall. If not, the bill will carry over to January 2010, where lawmakers will once again take up the measure. To get involved in this effort, please visit Illinois NORML or go here.

New Hampshire: If you live in New Hampshire and you have not yet contacted Governor John Lynch and urged him to protect patients who use marijuana medicinally, you can do so by going here or here. Gov. Lynch is the only hurdle that stands in the way of patients and their medicine in the Granite state, so make your voice heard now.

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

Marijuana chemical may slow multiple sclerosis
via insciences.org

Armed with a $1.5 million National Institutes of Health grant, Temple researchers are studying more effective ways to treat multiple sclerosis. And their research utilizes synthetic cannabinoids based on chemicals derived from the marijuana plant.

… Using a compound (O-1996) synthesized by scientists at the Medical College of Virginia and the company Organix, Tuma and Ganea performed animal studies and found that the synthesized chemical affected cannabinoid receptors present primarily on immune cells.

… “This is a totally new approach to treating this disease, “says Adler, director emeritus and senior advisor for CSAR and Laura H. Carnell professor of pharmacology research. “These cannabinoids hold enormous potential, and that’s encouraging since we’re limited in options when it comes to preventing or reversing MS.”

Okay, follow along with me if you can.

The U.S. National Institutes of Health appropriates over one million dollars to fund medical research — not to investigate the therapeutic effects of natural cannabinoids (bad!), but rather to investigate the therapeutic effects of synthetic chemicals (good!) that are designed to mimic the effects of natural cannabinoids.

Equally ironically, the research is taking place at Temple University in Pennsylvania — where any use of natural cannabis (bad!) as a medicine is criminally illegal, but where research into the use  faux cannabis (good!) is embraced.

Makes sense, right? Well about as much sense as the federal government claiming that pot (bad!) has no medical utility while simultaneously patenting certain natural occurring chemicals in the plant — those that the Feds hope to one day profit from (good!) — as, you guessed it, a medicine.

Any questions?