On the one hand, I’m thrilled to see that a study documenting the anti-cancer properties of cannabinoids is finally receiving some mainstream media attention.

On the other hand, I’m disappointed that its coverage is limited to a British tabloid that is better known for running anti-pot propaganda like this:

Cannabis killer knifed neighbour 100 times
via Metro.co.uk

A mentally ill man driven to violent frenzies by cannabis was sentenced to life yesterday for stabbing a man 100 times.

… Kashmiri, 50, of Tooting, south London, sexually assaulted the woman at her south London home in June, 2006, and returned five nights later to attack her.

… Kashmiri, whose violent episodes are triggered by cannabis, denied murder but admitted manslaughter due to diminished responsibility.  

Of course, I’m accustomed to reading “Reefer Madness” in the British press.

But I’m less accustomed to reading “Reefer Madness” when it comes from the mouth of an established medi-pot researcher like Dr. Wai Man Liu.

Cannabis may help the war on cancer
via Metro.co.uk

Cannabis could be used to treat many forms of cancer, new research suggests.

The drug contains an ingredient which slows tumour growth and prevents the reproduction of cancer cells, doctors say.

Its effects are seen in all cancers but particularly in those of the lung and brain, and leukaemia, it is claimed.

But scientists warned against smoking the drug, saying the only safe version was that created in the lab.

Researcher Dr Wai Man Liu said: ‘I’m in no way encouraging people to take up smoking the ganja – there would be more harm than good.’

Previous research has shown cannabis-based medicines can help cancer patients as a painkiller, appetite stimulant and in reducing nausea.

The drug has also long been used by multiple sclerosis and arthritis sufferers to reduce pain.

Its medicinal benefits come from the main active ingredient, THC. The latest research, by St George’s University of London, shows that THC can weaken cancer cells to make traditional chemotherapy more effective.

Dr Liu said: ‘It’s another weapon against the armour of cancer. We are quite close but need to jump through certain hoops. I believe it could be used in two to three years.’

Dr Joanna Owens, from Cancer Research UK, said the latest studies were encouraging but needed to be followed up with more trials. She added: ‘Making cancer cells more vulnerable to chemotherapy or radiotherapy is a great concept but it is still early days.’  

Having recently lost friends and family members to cancer, including one to leukemia, I can inform Dr. Liu that such a diagnosis — even when treated with standard radiation and chemotherapy — is a death sentence. For Dr. Liu to advise, with a straight face no less, that these patients would do “more harm than good” by smoking cannabis is a disgrace. Not only can cannabis alleviate cancer patients’ nausea and pain, elevate their mood, and increase their appetite, but also — as Dr. Liu’s own data demonstrates — it may help to alleviate the very disease that’s ravaging their bodies. Nevertheless, I suppose that Dr. Liu would rather have these patients shut up and die than expose the political hypocrisy surrounding criminalizing a plant.

Finally, as for Dr. Liu’s idyllic estimate that his pharmaceutically-approved pot-based anti-cancer drugs will be available in “two to three years,” don’t hold your breath (or, if you already have cancer, try not to die in the interim). I’m sure that these investigators made similar proclamations when they documented pot’s anti-cancer properties — in 1975!

Yet here we are 38 years later and the only ‘progress’ we’ve made on this issue is in the wrong direction — having moved from investigating the plant’s anti-cancer potential in animals to cells in vitro in a petri dish! Thank you Dr. Liu; now kindly get out of my sight.

Just last week, NORML reported on a BBC television reporter’s absurd ‘documentary’ that purportedly showed the “dramatic” and “unpleasant” effects of marijuana by injecting herself with pure THC on film-a manner of administering cannabis that no recreational user would ever engage in.

With this in mind, we were hardly surprised to see this recent headline from across the Atlantic: Cannabis-smoking mum stabbed herself to death. Never mind that she was on meth and thought her dog was talking to her.

Excerpts after the jump.

A mother driven insane by cannabis stabbed herself repeatedly through the chest with a carving knife after claiming she was spoken to by a dog.

Julie Cross told friends the animal was “trying to tell her something” before picking up the 5in blade and ramming it at least five times into her chest and abdomen.

An inquest was told the former receptionist, from Goring, used speed and cannabis on a daily basis and in the weeks running up to her death had slashed her wrists and smeared her blood across a crucifix and also hung a noose from her attic.

Katie Leason, spokeswoman for mental health charity Rethink, said the case further proved that cannabis causes severe mental illness. “We don’t believe there is any doubt about it now. There is a proven link between the drug and psychosis,” said Ms Leason….

It had led to her spending much of her last year in and out of the Mill View psychiatric hospital. The inquest heard that during what was described as a “very difficult life” Miss Cross had made repeated attempts on her own life, starting at the age of 14.

So here we have a woman who regularly heard voices, had a history of suicide attempts since childhood, who was using methamphetamine regularly (mentioned only ONCE in the article), and who finally, tragically, killed herself. To the British press, this scenario is clear evidence that marijuana will make you commit suicide!

And these are not the only ‘pot will make you nuts’ headlines coming from the UK. Note these other recent headlines and leads, the first of which is from the same publication as the above story:

Cannabis drove Brighton man to kill himself
The Argus (UK), February 22, 2008
“A web designer killed himself after being driven mad by cannabis.”

Cannabis users risk their sanity
Oxford Mail (UK), March 5, 2008
“Oxfordshire’s top drugs officer said the county is on the verge of a mental
health epidemic unless more is done to tackle cannabis abuse.”

Children as young as 10 on cannabis
Daily Post (UK), February 9, 2008

Hmm, so pot will drive us mad, target our children, and make us kill ourselves. Where have I heard this before?

For readers on this side of the pond who have not followed this story, “skunk” is the slang term British prohibitionists have chosen in their attempt to rebrand cannabis as this millennium’s most dangerous drug. (US authorities executed a similar game plan in the early 1900s when they successfully outlawed hemp by rebranding it “marijuana”.) For years now, British police and news reporters have blamed everything from psychosis and suicide to criminal acts like rape and murder on the after-effects of smoking “skunk,” aka allegedly super-potent pot.

Never mind that a recent study reported that so-called “skunk” only comprises a minute fraction of the UK’s marijuana market.

Never mind that teen use of cannabis in Great Britain recently fell to a record low.

Never mind that a legal pill containing 100 percent THC is available by a doctor’s prescription and that its side-effects do not include psychosis, suicide, rape, or murder.

And, most importantly, never mind that — to date — nobody in Britain or anywhere else on the planet is actually “injecting” the “main ingredient” in “skunk” (which, of course, is THC). Let’s not let facts get in the way of a good horror tale.

Of course, this pseudo-documentary — along with the recent rash of alarmist headlines — is all part of a concerted effort to push through PM Gordon Brown’s ill-conceived plan to recriminalize minor pot possession. And there’s no chance of government officials letting truth get in the way of that.