'High' Lights of New NJ Medical Marijuana Rules

By Brian Thompson / Source nbc

Advocates have been waiting overtime for the rules and regs to come out on the Garden State's new Medical Marijuana law, and now, finally, the draft rules are out.

So what bureaucrat decided there should be three grades of medical pot, categorized as "Low," "Medium" and yes, "High?"

There is a suggestion that the growers and dispensers can label their weed as "organic."

That's because no pesticides will be allowed at the two indoor Alternative Treatment Centers that will be authorized for plant cultivation only.

However, you won't see "organic" advertised on the outside of the 4 to 8 Alternative Treatment Centers designated as  "dispensaries."

The rules  prohibit outside advertising.

As a matter of fact, they ban advertising of the price of medical marijuana, so don't expect any price wars.

Not that it will be cheap for non-profit organizations to get into the Alternative Treatment Center (ATC) business.

Applicants must pony up $20,000 for an application (although $18,000 is refundable if your application is rejected).

It is unlikely the two ounces a month that can be sold to qualified individuals will be cheap.

One example, if you sign up for residential home delivery, the Alternative Treatment Center must put two employees in the delivery vehicle, with separate lock boxes for the drug and the cash.

Oh, and did we mention no advertising? The vehicles must be unmarked -- no "pot mobiles" rolling down Garden State roads.

If you go to an ATC to buy your product, you can't smoke it there.

In fact, it doesn't sound like the ATC's will be much of a gathering place because they will be banned from selling food or beverages (as in no coffee house atmosphere -- Starbucks should be pleased).

Nor will they be allowed to sell marijuana-themed T-shirts and other paraphernalia -- at least not to the general public.

However, they can sell the same to their state-approved customers. Go figure.

Three kinds of marijuana can be sold: dried leaves, oral lozenges, or topical formulations to put on your skin.

One more item of note, "The ATC shall establish, implement and adhere to a written... drug-free... workplace."

For patients looking for pain relief, it appears they'll have to wait a lot longer than the legislative authors intended.

The rules say the first sale won't be allowed til next summer as the ATC's are allowed to ramp up.

All 97 pages of the proposed rules are on-line at the NJ Department of Health and Senior Services website -- there still has to be a public hearing before they become final.

The Buzz About Proposition 19

California -- Under current state law, the possession, cultivation, or distribution of marijuana generally is illegal in California. Possession of less than one ounce of marijuana is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine, while selling marijuana is a felony and may result in a prison sentence. In November 1996, voters approved Proposition 215, which legalized the cultivation and possession of marijuana in California for medical purposes.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2005, however, that federal authorities could continue to prosecute California patients and providers engaged in the cultivation and use of marijuana for medical purposes.

Despite having this authority, the U.S. Department of Justice announced in March 2009 that the current administration would not prosecute marijuana patients and providers whose actions are consistent with state medical marijuana laws.

Proposition 19 changes state law by legalizing the possession and cultivation of limited amounts of marijuana for personal use by individuals age 21 or older, and authorizing various commercial marijuana related activities under certain conditions. Nonetheless, these marijuana related activities would continue to be prohibited under federal law and it is not known to what extent the federal government would continue to enforce them. Currently, no other state permits commercial marijuana- related activities for non-medical purposes.
Under the measure, persons age 21 or older generally may possess, process, share or transport up to one ounce of marijuana; cultivate marijuana on private property in an area up to 25 square feet per private residence or parcel; possess harvested and living marijuana plants cultivated in such an area; and possess any items or equipment associated with the above activities. 


The possession and cultivation of marijuana must be solely for an individual's personal consumption and not for sale to others, and consumption of marijuana would only be permitted in a residence or other "non public place."
The smoking of marijuana in the presence of minors is prohibited.
The measure also sustains existing laws that prohibit driving under the influence of drugs or that prohibit possessing marijuana on school grounds. Any person age 21 or older who knowingly gives marijuana to a person age 18 through 20 could be sent to county jail for up to six months and fined up to $1,000 per offense.


Prop 19 allows local governments to adopt ordinances and regulations regarding commercial marijuana related activities including marijuana cultivation, processing, distribution, transportation, and retail sales.
However it does not permit the transportation of marijuana between California and another state or country nor permit sales to persons under 21.
Whether or not local governments engaged in this regulation, the state could, on a statewide basis, regulate the commercial production of marijuana.
The state could also authorize the production of hemp, a type of marijuana plant that can be used to make products such as fabric and paper.


Prop 19 requires that licensed marijuana establishments pay all applicable federal, state, and local taxes and fees currently imposed on other similar businesses.
In addition, the measure permits local governments to impose new general, excise, or transfer taxes, as well as benefit assessments and fees, on authorized marijuana related activities.
The purpose of such charges would be to raise revenue for local governments and/or to offset any costs associated with marijuana regulation.
In addition, the state could impose similar charges.


Prop 19 could result in savings to the state and local governments by reducing the number of marijuana offenders incarcerated in state prisons and county jails, as well as the number placed under county probation or state parole supervision. These savings could reach several tens of millions of dollars annually.


The measure would result in a reduction in costs for enforcement of marijuana related offenses and the handling of related criminal cases in the court system.
Proposition 19 is carefully crafted to decriminalize personal marijuana use and production so those over 21 years of age may decide if it is something they wish to consume.
By so doing it enhances freedom of choice, engenders respect for the law, protects children, regulates marijuana use and production, and significantly reduces burdens on our police, justice, and correctional systems.


Vote YES on Prop 19 to halt victimless crimes.

Source: Red Bluff Daily News (CA)
Author: Richard Mazzucchi
Website: redbluffdailynews

Marijuana Tracking on The Way in Colorado

Denver -- Colorado wants to set up a first-in-the-nation tracking system of medical marijuana purchases to deter people from buying vast amounts of pot and selling it on the black market.
Patients and marijuana advocates fear they will be harassed by a Big Brother-type intrusion as computers and video cameras monitor every ounce of pot sold in the state. Officials are also considering fingerprinting marijuana patients and keeping tabs on pot with radio-frequency devices.
"This is a matter of my functioning daily living," said Diane Bilyeu, a 49-year-old woman who sometimes consumes up to 2 grams of pot in a day to treat her chronic pain since losing her right arm and leg in a 1997 car accident. "Some days I need more or less. I don't know what business it is of the government's."
Officials say the regulations will provide basic protections to ensure that the system isn't being abused by drug dealers and users.
Medical marijuana has been legal in Colorado since 2000, but the recent proliferation of marijuana dispensaries prompted state lawmakers this year to pass a series of new regulations.
It is an issue playing out around the country with 14 states allowing medical marijuana and possibly more to come under November ballot measures.
No state has gone so far to track pot purchases from seed to sale like Colorado is proposing, and regulators say their tracking plans could be a model for other states.
Montana lawmakers are expected to consider medical marijuana tracking in that state when they convene next year.
Specifics of Colorado's tracking plans haven't yet been drafted. Regulators say they'll have a plan by January to use video surveillance and a central computer system to flag multiple purchases.
Other ideas include using biometrics to track patients, requiring a fingerprint scan before each sale to make sure the customer matches the marijuana card. They are also considering mandating that medical pot include radio-frequency identification devices, somewhat like coded tags on library books, to keep track of who's getting what.
In addition, tracking could include requiring dispensaries to capture patient driver's licenses on camera to record their purchases.
"It's akin to the protections that are in place for pharmacies, or a wagering line at a horse or dog track," said Matt Cook, the senior director for medical marijuana enforcement for the Colorado Department of Revenue. "You need to maintain the public confidence in what is going on, and the only way to do that is through these systems."
Cook said the state has no clue how much medical marijuana now is ending up on the black market because it lacks central tracking. An unscrupulous buyer could shop at several dispensaries and stock up on large quantities of pot, with no way to notice that Patient X is buying marijuana from multiple businesses.
Cook described a scenario where a patient card is used to buy marijuana several times in one day from dispensaries located far apart. Under the tracking system, the state would be alerted of possible fraud and would notify all dispensaries not to sell to that patient until the state can verify that it is indeed the same person buying all the pot, which would be done through video surveillance soon to be required at pot shops.
But patients are vowing to fight tracking plans. They're especially alarmed that state regulators have yet to issue specifics on how the tracking would work.
"It seems like there could be an ulterior motive here," said Randy James Martinez of Commerce City, 42, who uses medical marijuana for diabetic neuropathy. "Why do they need to keep such close track? Opiate abuse is far more prevalent and far more destructive than any marijuana use or abuse."
A public hearing is planned on the tracking rules in January, but the tracking wouldn't require lawmaker approval because it would be considered an agency regulation.
A marijuana activist who sits on the rulemaking panel, Brian Vicente of Sensible Colorado, said patients and dispensaries fear an onerous intrusion and are still waiting to hear how tracking would work.
"Right now I'd say there's a lot of fear and a lot of confusion out there," Vicente said.
Associated Press Writer Amy Hanson in Helena, Mont., contributed to this report.


Source: Associated Press 
Author: Kristen Wyatt, The Associated Press

Marijuana Legalization Measure Gets Big Lift

By John Wildermuth, Chronicle Staff Writer 
Source: San Francisco Chronicle 

California -- In a dramatic shift of sentiment, nearly half of California's likely voters now want to legalize marijuana use in the state, according to a new Field Poll. "The numbers have flipped (on Proposition 19) since our July poll," said Mark DiCamillo, the poll's director. "That's a major change in the direction of public feelings on legalizing marijuana."
The survey results being released today are especially meaningful since the first ballots for the Nov. 2 election will be cast in a little more than a week from now, starting Oct. 4.
The poll also found that voters remain strongly opposed to Proposition 23, which would suspend AB32, the state law limiting greenhouse gas emissions. Proposition 25, which would end the two-thirds requirement to pass a state budget, holds a solid lead, but the race appears to be rapidly tightening.
But it's California's effort to become the first state in the nation to legalize the sale and use of recreational marijuana for adults 21 and older that's being watched across the country.
Forty-nine percent of those likely voters now support Prop. 19, with 42 percent opposed. In a July poll, 48 percent of those surveyed planned to vote against the ballot initiative, with 44 percent backing legalization.
The reversal came despite a total absence of paid advertising for either side. Neither supporters nor opponents of the measure have raised much money for the Prop. 19 campaign, so far relying on word-of-mouth and media coverage to get their stories out.
That hasn't kept California voters from paying attention to the race, however. The poll found that 84 percent had seen or heard about the effort to legalize marijuana. By contrast, fewer than 40 percent of the voters had heard anything about the other two ballot measures in the survey.
Nine percent of voters are undecided on Prop. 19, which DiCamillo said isn't much of a surprise.
"Everyone knows about it, and it isn't that complicated an issue," he added.
For supporters, the bump in the numbers shows that their message is getting through.

Proposition 19: California's marijuana legalization debate

Source latimes


For the first time in almost four decades, Californians will vote on an initiative that would legalize possession and cultivation of marijuana. The measure, on the Nov. 2 ballot, would make it legal for anyone 21 or older to possess, share or transport up to an ounce of marijuana for personal use and to grow up to 25 square feet per residence or parcel. Cities and counties would be authorized to regulate and tax commercial marijuana production and sales.

California Action Alert: Schwarzenegger Must Decide Marijuana Infraction Measure Next Week!

 By: Paul Armentano, NORML Deputy Director

Outgoing California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has until Thursday, September 30, to decide the fate ofSenate Bill 1449 — which would reduce adult marijuana possession charges from a criminal misdemeanor to a civil infraction.That gives reformers one final week to lobby for this sensible reform. If you have not yet contacted the Governor in support of this historic legislation, please do so today.

Senate Bill 1449 amends the California Health and Safety Code so that the adult possession of up to 28.5 grams of marijuana is classified as an infraction, punishable by no more than a $100 fine — no court appearance, no court costs, and no criminal record.

Passage of bill would save the state millions of dollars in court costs by keeping minor marijuana offenders out of court. The number of misdemeanor pot prosecutions has surged in recent years, reaching 61,388 in 2008. Adults who consume marijuana responsibly are not part of the crime problem, and the state should stop treating them like criminals.

Governor Schwarzenegger, a Republican, has vetoed several different marijuana law reform bills in the past. Therefore, if you live in California, it is vital that you please e-mail or call Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s office and urge him to sign SB 1449 into law. For your convenience, a pre-written letter will be e-mailed to the Governor when you visit NORML’s ‘Take Action’ Center here.


Source NORML

What Pot Legalization Campaign Really Threatens

By David Sirota, Creators Syndicate 


California -- Here's a fact that even drug policy reform advocates can acknowledge: California's 2010 ballot initiative to legalize marijuana does, indeed, pose a  real threat, as conservative culture warriors insist. But not to public health, as those conservatives claim.
According to most physicians, pot is less toxic -- and has more medicinal applications -- than a legal and more pervasive drug like alcohol. Whereas alcohol causes hundreds of annual overdose deaths, contributes to untold numbers of illnesses and is a major factor in violent crime, marijuana has never resulted in a fatal overdose and has not been systemically linked to major illness or violent crime.


So this ballot measure is no public health threat. If anything, it would give the millions of citizens who want to use inebriating substances a safer alternative to alcohol. Which, of course, gets to what this ballot initiative really endangers: alcohol industry profits.
That truth is underscored by news this week that the California Beer and Beverage Distributors is financing the campaign against the legalization initiative. This is the same group that bankrolled opposition to a 2008 ballot measure, which would have reduced penalties for marijuana possession.


By these actions, alcohol companies are admitting that more sensible drug policies could cut into their government-created monopoly on mind-altering substances.
Thus, they are fighting back -- and not just defensively. Unsatisfied with protecting turf in California, the alcohol industry is going on offense, as evidenced by a recent article inadvertently highlighting America’s inane double standards.
Apparently oblivious to the issues the California campaign is now raising, Businessweek just published an elated puff piece headlined "Keeping Pabst Blue Ribbon Cool." Touting the beer’s loyal following, the magazine quoted one PBR executive effusively praising a rate of alcohol consumption that would pickle the average liver.


"A lot of blue-collar workers I've talked to say 'I've been drinking a six-pack of Pabst, every single day, seven days a week, for 25 years,’" he gushed, while another executive added "It's, like, habitual -- it's part of their life. It's their lifestyle."
Discussing possible plans to "develop a whole beer brand around troops" -- one that devotes some proceeds to military organizations -- the executives said their vision is "that when you see Red White & Blue (beer) at your barbecue, you know that money's supporting people who have died for our country."


Imagine marijuana substituted for alcohol in this story. The article would be presented as a scary expose about workers smoking a daily dime-bag and marijuana growers' linking pot with the Army. Undoubtedly, such an article would be on the front page of every newspaper as cause for outrage. Yet, because this was about alcohol -- remember, a substance more toxic than marijuana -- it was buried in a financial magazine and depicted as something to extol.
Couple that absurd hypocrisy with the vociferous opposition to California's initiative, and we see the meta-message.


We are asked to believe that people drinking a daily six-pack for a quarter-century is not a lamentable sign of a health crisis, but instead a "lifestyle" triumph worthy of flag-colored celebration -- and we are expected to think that legalizing a safer alternative to this "lifestyle" is dangerous. Likewise, as laws obstruct veterans from obtaining doctor-prescribed marijuana for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, we are asked to believe that shotgunning cans of lager is the real way to "support our troops."
These are the delusions that a liquor-drenched culture prevents us from reconsidering. In a society drunk off of alcohol propaganda -- a society of presidential "beer summits" and sports stadiums named after beer companies -- we've had trouble separating fact from fiction. Should California pass its ballot initiative, perhaps a more sober and productive drug policy might finally become a reality.


David Sirota is the author of the best-selling books Hostile Takeover and The Uprising.
He hosts the morning show on AM760 in Colorado and blogs at: http://www.OpenLeft.com/


Source: AlterNet (US)
Author: David Sirota, Creators Syndicate
Copyright: 2010 Independent Media Institute
Website: http://www.alternet.org/

'Cannabis Car' maker has high hopes

The vehicle is nicknamed the "Cannabis Car." Its body panels are composed of an impact-resistant composite material produced hemp of the cannabis family.

Calgary-based Motive Industries unveiled the official design for the car officially named the Kestrel.

If someone asks what these drivers have been smoking they can say nothing because the four-passenger Kestrel is an electric car. It is being produced for corporate and government fleets in Canada, but Motive is seeking manufacturing partners to license the technology.

Read more: The vehicle is nicknamed the "Cannabis Car." Its body panels are composed of an impact-resistant composite material produced hemp of the cannabis family.

Calgary-based Motive Industries unveiled the official design for the car officially named the Kestrel.

If someone asks what these drivers have been smoking they can say nothing because the four-passenger Kestrel is an electric car. It is being produced for corporate and government fleets in Canada, but Motive is seeking manufacturing partners to license the technology.

Read more: newsobserver

Marijuana Legalization Gains Momentum in California

By Michael Tracey


For all the punditry surrounding the Democrats’ impending electoral misfortunes, little attention has been paid to a California ballot initiative which, if successful, may foster greater lasting political implications: Proposition 19, or the legalization of marijuana for personal consumption among adults aged 21 and over.
As detailed in Ari Berman’s Rolling Stone piece earlier this month, an ideologically diverse coalition of advocacy organizations, student groups, academics, and politicians have joined forces to support the November initiative. The California NAACP endorsed Prop 19 in July, calling it a “civil rights issue.” Just this week California’s chapter of the SEIU – the state’s most powerful labor union – also threw its support and formidable campaign apparatus behind the measure.

Interestingly, praise for Prop 19 is not limited to what might be the expected left-leaning constituencies. Yes, there's strong student support for the initiative at UC - Berkeley and UC - Santa Cruz, but there's also Jordan Marks, Executive Director of the Young Americans Foundation – the nation’s largest conservative youth activist organization – who sits on the board of the Just Say Nowcampaign alongside prominent liberal bloggers Glenn Greenwald and Jane Hamsher. Law Enforcement Against Prohibition – a group comprised of former police officers, prosecutors, and judges who oppose current drug policy – have taken to the talk show circuit, assuaging the concerns of those who might assume that only shaggy-haired hippies care strongly about marijuana legalization. Even Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, famously fond of the occasional toke during his youth, has cautiously left the door open to backing the measure.

Predictably, the usual suspects have come out in favor of the status quo. Obama Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowske, joined by five of his predecessors, penned a laughably flawed piece in the Los Angeles Times arguing for the continued criminalization of marijuana. Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein, long an opponent of drug policy reform, was named chairperson of the anti-Prop 19 campaign. And Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown is also not a backer, despite evidence that Prop 19 could actually help California Democrats by driving progressive voter turnout in November.

From decreasing marijuana prohibition-related violence on the Mexican border, to freeing up space in our prisons for actual criminals, to providing much-needed tax revenue for state coffers – there are myriad of reasons to support legalization. Yes on Prop 19 is currently leading in the polls, but California ballot initiatives are notoriously unpredictable. Do your part by getting involved with the Just Say Now campaign and following @taxcannabis on Twitter. 

Source nation

Incarceration Nation — Marijuana Arrests For Year 2009 Near Record High

Source NORML
By Paul Armentano, NORML Deputy Director

This post is excerpted from NORML's weekly media advisory. To have NORML's media advisories delivered straight to your in-box, sign up for NORML's free e-zine here.]

Police prosecuted 858,408 persons for marijuana violations in 2009, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s annual Uniform Crime Report, released today. The arrest total is the second highest ever reported by the FBI, and marks a 1.3 percent increase in the number of arrests reported in 2008 (847,864).

According to the report, marijuana arrests now comprise more than one-half(approximately 52 percent) of all drug arrests reported in the United States. A decade ago, marijuana arrests comprised just 44 percent of all drug arrests.

Approximately forty-six percent of all drug prosecutions nationwide are for marijuana possession.

“The numbers tell the story; the enforcement of criminal marijuana laws and the prosecution of marijuana offenders, in particular minor marijuana possession defendants, is driving the present drug war,” NORML Deputy Director Paul Armentano said. “Those who claim otherwise would be better off advocating for a long-overdue reprioritization law enforcement resources and concerns.

“It makes no sense to continue to prosecute Americans for their use of a substance that poses far fewer health risks than alcohol or tobacco. A better and more sensible solution would be to legalize and regulate cannabis in a manner similar to alcohol, as is presently being proposed in California by Proposition 19.”

Of those charged with marijuana violations, approximately 88 percent (758,593 Americans) were charged with possession only. The remaining 99,815 individuals were charged with “sale/manufacture,” a category that includes virtually all cultivation offenses.

Regionally, the percentage of marijuana arrests was highest in the Midwest (62 percent of all drug arrests) and southern regions (56 percent of all drug arrests) of the United States, and lowest in the west, where pot prosecutions comprised only 40 percent of total drug arrests.

In 2007, the FBI reported 872,721 marijuana prosecutions in the United States, the highest total on record.

Marijuana Users Given 'Licence To Smoke'?

By Richard Alleyne Science Correspondent

Licensed suppliers of the drug would also be less likely to provide a "gateway" to harder, more dangerous drugs Photo: PA

Professor Roger Pertwee said making cannabis as available as alcohol would prevent drug-related crime, and reduce the chances of people being introduced to harder narcotics.

But he cautioned that it might be necessary to prevent vulnerable individuals obtaining the drug.

"You'd need to have a minimum age of 21, and I would suggest you might even have to have a licence," said Prof Pertwee, from the University of Aberdeen, who pioneered early research on the effects of cannabis in the 1960s and 1970s.

"You have a car licence and a dog licence; why not a cannabis licence?"

The idea would mean only those not suffering from a serious mental illness or at risk of psychosis would be legally allowed to buy the drug.

Research has shown an association between smoking cannabis and a greater chance of some individuals developing schizophrenia.

Prof Pertwee said cannabis appeared to increase the risk of psychosis in people already predisposed to the illness because of their genes or traumatic childhood.

He called for a greater debate on the recreational use of cannabis, and said in principle he was in favour of legalisation, if the right framework could be found.

"We need to explore all the various options," said Prof Pertwee, who is speaking at the British Science Festival at Aston University, Birmingham, this week.

"At the moment cannabis is in the hands of the criminals, and I think it's crazy.

"We're allowed to drink alcohol and smoke cigarettes. Cannabis, if it's handled properly, I think is no more dangerous than that."

He pointed out that currently anyone wanting to take cannabis was forced to grow it illegally or buy it from illegal dealers.

The drug was supplied with no indication of what it contained, or what might have been added to it. People also tended to smoke cannabis in groups, which increased the likelihood of psychological dependency.

Licensed suppliers of the drug would also be less likely to provide a "gateway" to harder, more dangerous drugs.

"I think this could be the way forward, but it might not work," said Prof Pertwee. "It depends on a private company being willing to produce a branded product."

Prof Pertwee also highlighted the danger posed by new cannabis-like drugs being manufactured in laboratories.

Some acted in a similar way to cannabis but were far more potent, while potentially having other as-yet unknown effects.

An example of one such drug was the painkiller JWH-081, which had been developed purely for research purposes.

The drug acts on the same cannabinoid receptors in the brain which are sensitive to the active ingredients in cannabis.

Anyone could find the recipes for making these drugs in the scientific literature, said Prof Pertwee.

"Any chemist could come along, read the paper, and make the compound," he added.

A loophole in the law opened the door to the drugs being used as "legal highs".

"It means you could buy these compounds and take them," said the professor. "I believe this is a major problem." 

Source telegraph

Cannabis Rx: Cutting Through the Misinformation

If an American doctor of the late 19th century stepped into a time warp and emerged in 2010, he would be shocked by the multitude of pharmaceuticals that today's physicians use. But as he pondered this array (and wondered, as I do, whether most are really necessary), he would soon notice an equally surprising omission, and exclaim, "Where's my Cannabis indica?"

No wonder -- the poor fellow would feel nearly helpless without it. In his day, labor pains, asthma, nervous disorders and even colicky babies were treated with a fluid extract of Cannabis indica, also known as "Indian hemp." (Cannabis is generally seen as having three species -- sativa, indica and ruderalis -- but crossbreeding is common, especially between sativa and indica.) At least 100 scientific papers published in the 19th century backed up such uses.

Then the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 made possession or transfer of Cannabis illegal in the U.S. except for certain medical and industrial uses, which were heavily taxed. The legislation began a long process of making Cannabis use illegal altogether. Many historians have examined this sorry chapter in American legislative history, and the dubious evidence for Cannabis addiction and violent behavior used to secure the bill's passage. "Under the Influence: The Disinformation Guide to Drugs" by Preston Peet makes a persuasive case that the Act's real purpose was to quash the hemp industry, making synthetic fibers more valuable for industrialists who owned the patents.

Meanwhile, as a medical doctor and botanist, my aim has always been to filter out the cultural noise surrounding the genus Cannabis and see it dispassionately: as a plant with bioactivity in human beings that may have therapeutic value. From this perspective, what can it offer us?

As it turns out, a great deal. Research into possible medical uses of Cannabis is enjoying a renaissance. In recent years, studies have shown potential for treating nausea, vomiting, premenstrual syndrome, insomnia, migraines, multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injuries, alcohol abuse, collagen-induced arthritis, asthma, atherosclerosis, bipolar disorder, depression, Huntington's disease, Parkinson's disease, sickle-cell disease, sleep apnea, Alzheimer's disease and anorexia nervosa.

But perhaps most exciting, cannabinoids (chemical constituents of Cannabis, the best known being tetrahydrocannabinol or THC) may have a primary role in cancer treatment and prevention. A number of studies have shown that these compounds can inhibit tumor growth in laboratory animal models. In part, this is achieved by inhibiting angiogenesis, the formation of new blood vessels that tumors need in order to grow. What's more, cannabinoids seem to kill tumor cells without affecting surrounding normal cells. If these findings hold true as research progresses, cannabinoids would demonstrate a huge advantage over conventional chemotherapy agents, which too often destroy normal cells as well as cancer cells.

As long ago as 1975, researchers reported that cannabinoids inhibited the growth of a certain type of lung cancer cell in test tubes and in mice. Since then, laboratory studies have shown that cannabinoids have effects against tumor cells from glioblastoma (a deadly type of brain cancer) as well as those from thyroid cancer¸ leukemia/lymphoma, and skin, uterus, breast, stomach, colorectal, pancreatic and prostate cancers.

So far, the only human test of cannabinoids against cancer was performed in Spain, and was designed to determine if treatment was safe, not whether it was effective. (In studies on humans, such "phase one trials," are focused on establishing the safety of a new drug, as well as the right dosage.) In the Spanish study, reported in 2006, the dose was administered intracranially, directly into the tumors of patients with recurrent brain cancer. The investigation established the safety of the dose and showed that the compound used decreased cell proliferation in at least two of nine patients studied.

It is not clear that smoking marijuana achieves blood levels high enough to have these anticancer effects. We need more human research, including well-designed studies to find the best mode of administration... Read More

Dr. Andrew Weil

Founder and director of the Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine