Uncategorized

8/29/2011 – Last week was a busy one for elected officials caught with pot in Connecticut. A former alderman from Ansonia, CT was sentenced in a federal court to 3 years in prison for his role in growing more than 1400 cannabis plants. Joseph Cassetti, 61, owned many of the properties where the plants were seized in 2008. Two other men in their twenties were convicted of selling and distributing the cannabis.

Next was Rhode Island State Representative Robert A. Watson who failed to reach a plea deal in a DUI case. Watson was stopped by East Haven, CT police in April at a sobriety checkpoint. He tested below the legal limit for alcohol, blowing a 0.05 percent. But a urinalysis showed THC and cocaine.

In an interesting twist, Watson claims to be using cannabis to treat pancreatitis. He said that he did not smoke any marijuana the day of his arrest. Watson also said he kept marijuana on hand for medical use.

Watson, a Republican, has held his seat since 1993. He was the House Minority Leader at the time of his arrest but was quickly removed from that role by his legislative peers.  Still, Watson has retained his seat and has not announced any plans to resign.

Watson did vote “Yes” in 2009 for the medical marijuana law now in place. Yet when Rhode Island considered a bill to decriminalize marijuana possession for adults this year Watson fought hard against it.

In a Feb. 2011 speech to the Greater Providence Chamber of Commerce Rep. Watson put his opposition to a variety of bills into a now-infamous statement: “I suppose if you’re a gay man from Guatemala who gambles and smokes pot, you probably think that we’re onto some good ideas here.”

Watson refused to apologize for the statement, even when pressured by Guatemalan-American groups.

Rep. Watson is essentially the only openly-green medical cannabis patient in the Rhode Island General Assembly. It is not known if he is officially a participant in the state’s program. RI allows access though caregivers and home cultivation. Governor Lincoln Chafee has kept the three state-approved RI dispensaries from opening.

Because Watson failed to reach a plea deal in Connecticut last week the case against him will continue.

Chris Goldstein is a respected marijuana reform advocate. As a writer and radio broadcaster he has been covering cannabis news for over a decade. Questions?  [email protected]

Hospitals routinely screen new born babies for drugs. If a mother uses a drug, such as Cannabis then the baby may drink the plants ingredients or metabolites in breast milk, thus baby urine or feces can provide evidence of the mother’s drug use and allow the state to take control of the child. Cannabis should be an easy drug to detect, THC can stay in the body for an extended period of time, unlike cocaine or speed or alcohol. However, detecting THC in babies just got a little bit trickier.

A study published in the Journal of Clinical Biochemistry demonstrated that baby urine containing a tiny amount of baby soap would give a positive result on a drug test for THC, the active ingredient in the plant. A positive test for your baby can result in child abuse allegations and the involvement of social services. Hence, the authors suggest that laboratories, which conduct drug tests for THC should be aware of these potential sources of error that exist in the real world.

So, what do you do when your baby tests positive for marijuana? We know what the consequences of the failing the tests are…but what does the science say about pregnancy, babies, and breast milk?

The science demonstrates that cannabinoid receptor activation (i.e. CB1 and CB2 receptors) is a natural and important component for proper development. Mammals, including humans, produce endocannabinoids, which are THC-like compounds. These THC-like compounds include anandamide and 2-AG. Anandamide and 2-AG activate the same receptors as THC, and are found in bovine and human breast milk. Adding THC to the mix of endocannabinoids in breast milk may lead to changes in development but scientists just aren’t sure if any of these differences in animals translate into long term changes in human development.

The developmental effects of THC exposure remain unclear, but the blocking of cannabinoid receptor activation during early development is considered to have “catastrophic” effects. Studies by Ester Fride and colleagues have demonstrated the importance of having an endocannabinoid system that is functioning properly. For example, one of the studies by Fride et al. showed that the administration of SR141716A, a drug which prevents CB1 receptor activation, will kill 50% of baby mice within 2 days, due to a disruption of feeding behavior. In another experiment from the same study, THC was able to reverse the disruption in feeding behavior induced by SR141716A.

Additional studies in mice and rats have shown that prenatal or postnatal exposure to cannabis or cannabinoids may lead to subtle changes in breast milk and development. However, many of these animal studies do not have much, if any human data to corroborate them. Always keep in mind that drugs abuse studies are difficult to interpret, as most subjects use multiple drugs and socioeconomic status seems to play the biggest role-money, health care, and your parents level of education can have a bigger impact on healthy development than Cannabis. Interestingly, a study found that among poor mothers living in the northeast, marijuana was the least common drug used and the health of a newborn seem to be most affected by polydrug use, including: alcohol, tobacco, and cocaine.

Many studies have looked at the effect of Cannabis use during pregnancy and the results suggest that there are not clear consequences. A review article published by Dr. Ethan Russo walks the reader through the human studies on pregnancy, here are of some of the examples from his article:

• “A variety of studies have demonstrated transient effects of cannabis on endocrine hormone levels, but no consistent effects seem to occur in chronic settings (Russo et al.2002).”
• “Studies are hampered by the obvious fact that laboratory animals are not human in their responses. Estrous cycles and behaviors in animals are not always analogous to menstrual cycles and other physiological effects in women.”
• “In a study of 171 women, 25% of pregnancies ended spontaneously within 6 weeks of the last menses. Cannabis exposure seemed to have no observable effect in these cases (Wilcox, Weinberg, and Baird 1990).”
• “In 1987, the Ottawa group compared effects of cannabis, tobacco, alcohol and caffeine during gestation (Fried et al. 1987). Whereas tobacco negatively affected neonatal birth weight and head circumference, and alcohol was associated with lower birth weight and length, no effects on any growth parameters were ascribable to maternal cannabis usage.”
• “In a subsequent study (Witter and Niebyl 1990), examination of 8350 birth records revealed that 417 mothers (5%) claimed cannabis-only usage in pregnancy, but no association was noted with prematurity or congenital anomalies. The authors suggested that previously ascribed links to cannabis were likely confounded by concomitant alcohol and tobacco abuse.”
• “A group in Boston noted a decrease in birth weight of 79 g in infants born to 331 of 1226 surveyed mothers with positive using drug screen for cannabis (p =0.04) (Parker and Zuckerman 1999), but no changes in gestation, head circumference or congenital abnormalities were noted.”
• “The largest study of the issue to date evaluated 12,424 pregnancies (Linn et al.1983). Although low birth weight, shortened gestation and malformations seemed to be associated with maternal cannabis usage, when logistic regression analysis was employed to control for other demographic and exposure factors, this association fell out of statistical significance.”
• “Dreher has extensively examined prenatal cannabis usage in Jamaica (Dreher 1997; Dreher, Nugent, and Hudgins 1994), wherein the population observations were not compounded by concomitant alcohol, tobacco, or polydrug abuse. This study is unique in that regard, no less due to the heavy intake of cannabis (“ganja”), often daily, in this cohort of Rastafarian women. No differences were seen between groups of cannabis-using and non-cannabis-using mothers in the weight, length, gestational age or Apgar scores of their infants (Dreher, Nugent, and Hudgins 1994). Deleterious effects on progeny of cannabis smokers were not apparent; in fact, developmental precocity was observed in some measures in infants born to women who smoked ganja daily.”

The research on this subject doesn’t end there. Researchers have administered cannabinoids to children; cannabinoids may have a role in pediatric medicine as young children do not appear to get “high” from cannabinoids such as THC. Below Ester Fride discussed two of the clinical trials on cannabinoids and children:

“The gradual postnatal increase of anandamide and its CB1 receptors (see Video of Pre- and postnatal development of the endocannabinoid CB receptor system below) is accompanied by a gradual maturing response to the psychoactive potential of D9-tetrahydrocannabinol and anandamide in postnatal mice between birth and weaning (Fride and Mechoulam, 1996b).

This observation has important implications for cannabinoid therapy in children, since psychoactive side effects may be expected to be minor when treated with cannabinoids at a young age. Indeed, very high doses of D8-tetrahydrocannabinol (approximately 0.64 mg/kg/treatment) were given to children between the ages 3 and 13 years who were undergoing chemotherapy for the treatment of various hematologic cancers, over long periods of time (up to 114 treatments, based on 4 treatments/24h during the days of chemotherapy). The anti-emetic effects were impressive, whereas the side effects were minimal (Abrahamov and Mechoulam, 1995). In a case report study (Lorenz, 2003), eight children (ages 3–14 years) with a variety of severe neurological diseases were treated with D9-tetrahydrocannabinol (0.04–0.12 mg/kg/day). Significant improvements in behavioralparameters including reduced spasticity, improved dystonia, increased interest in the surroundings and antiepileptic activity were reported without notable adverse effects.

It is not clear, how, in the first study, the anti-emetic effects were achieved (presumably via the area postrema) and in the second, positive neurological benefit was derived in the absence of adverse psychological effects.

Is it possible that a differential CB1 receptor distribution appears during development, or that differential maturation of brain pathways is responsible for the clinical success? Clearly, further animal experiments and clinical investigations of cannabinoid treatment in the developing organism are warranted.”

The scientific evidence discussed here suggests that Cannabis may be used during pregnancy with little risk or consequence to your health or the baby’s health (One parenting website suggested that the biggest risk to a child is the parents state of mind after use).

Regarding Cannabis use, the most severe consequences to the mother and her baby appear to result from interactions with law enforcement, social services, and baby soap.

VIDEO: Pre- and Postnatal Development of the Endocannabinoid System by Ester Fride Ph.D

Jahan Marcu is currently investigating the pharmacology of cannabinoid receptors. He was working at the California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute when exciting discoveries were made showing enhanced anti-cancer effects with THC and CBD from the Cannabis plant. The findings were published in the Journal of Molecular Cancer Therapeutics. In 2009 he received the Billy Martin Award from the International Cannabinoid Research Society (ICRS). Jahan is currently the vice-chair the Medical and Scientific Advisory Board at Americans for Safe Access (ASA). Questions?   Contact   [email protected]

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent any University, business or affiliates. While the information provided in this blog is from published scientific studies it is not intended to diagnose or treat any disease.

6/5/2011 – The Connecticut Senate passed Governor Dan Malloy’s decriminalization bill on June 4th. Time is running short for the legislative session and the bill is getting one last push. Recent amendments lowered the amount of cannabis adults can posses from one ounce to half an ounce.  Offenders would pay a $150 fine the first time and $200-$500 on further occasions. Those under the age of 21 would also have their driver’s license suspended for 60 days.

All of the Republicans in the Senate voted against the bill. The legislation must still pass a floor vote in the House.

More from the CT Mirror:

Backers of the bill said it would allow law enforcement to shift priorities to more important matters.

“This would free up court time, probation officer time, police time, to focus on the much more serious stuff,” said Malloy’s chief criminal justice adviser, Michael Lawlor.

They also argue that the lower penalties for small amounts of marijuana-roughly 30 joints by their estimate-will still deter use as much the current penalties do.

Sen. Eric D. Coleman, D-Bloomfield and co-chairman of the legislature’s Judiciary Committee, said the current penalties don’t deter use. What they do is saddle people caught with a small amounts of marijuana with a criminal record that harms their job, education and military opportunities.

Read full article

Governor Malloy, a Democrat, is a former prosecutor and crafted the decriminalization bill. His Republican predecessor, Jodi Rell, vetoed a similar bill that passed both houses in 2009. There are thirteen US States that treat small amounts of marijuana as a civil offense.

See NORML’s decrim map here

Chris Goldstein is a respected marijuana reform advocate. As a writer and radio broadcaster he has been covering cannabis news for over a decade. Questions?  [email protected]

This relaxed Portland cafe provides the perfect setting for medical marijuana patients to socialize and sing everything from Sinatra to Sublime.

PORTLAND, Ore. – Lights dim. A white-haired man of perhaps 50 approaches the stage. He’s wearing a blue suit jacket, open-neck shirt, black leather loafers and sunglasses, indoors, at night. He’s got the Sinatra panache down.

Then, the voice, a rich baritone, sweeps over the audience of a couple dozen glazed and grinning pot smokers.

“Day and night, night and daaaaay,” he croons the Sinatra standard into a mic in his right hand. “Only you beneath the moon or under the sun, whether near to me or far, it’s no matter darling where you are.

“Dum dum, dum dum de-doo-dee-dum.”

The audience yelps and coos in appreciation.

This is karaoke night at Portland’s Cannabis Cafe, a combination of the bar from Cheers and a street-side pot palace in Amsterdam. It is perfectly legal in this smoky room for medical marijuana patients to burn, eat, rub, filter and roll marijuana.

There are cancer patients, AIDS patients and sufferers of smashed vertebrae and pinched nerves. There are also those who find refuge under Oregon’s “severe pain” allowance – tell a marijuana-friendly doctor you’ve got pain, and you’ve pretty much got weed.

Since the medical marijuana law’s passage in 1998, nearly 40,000 patients have gotten access.

The pot in the cafe is brought in by patients or donated by growers. Money doesn’t change hands unless it’s to buy a sandwich or coffee. The price of admission: a $20 monthly charge and a $5 door fee.

The cafe has farmer’s markets of donated weed-laden goodies, a weekly comedy show and even an employees’ night. On Thursdays, it’s karaoke. An ill-lit stage catches an occasional cloud of puffy white smoke blown from a pipe or a bong or a vaporizer.

The Sinatra crooner, unlike many tonight, has got the goods.

The rest of the evening will be spent alternatively cringing and clapping at the cluster of medical marijuana users who make it their business to be at the cafe when karaoke kicks off at 7 p.m.

From table to table, the stories pour out of them. Most declined to provide their names.

Teresa Sheffer was hit by a train while driving in Alto, Mich. It broke every major bone on her right side and left her with damage to her spine. Now her pain sometimes gets so severe it forces her to huddle in her house, alone.

But sitting six paces from the stage with a pipe in front of her and a thick pinch of locally grown pot packed into her friend’s bong, she’s relaxed. If there is a point to the Cannabis Cafe, it is to give people who smoke pot a place to do it together.

“It’s a family here,” Sheffer said. “You see other people with the same problems, but it’s not a hospital. It’s a reason to get out of the house so you’re not just a hermit in the dark with pain pills.”

Read more: The Marietta Daily Journal – Singing smoking soothing

Read more by Beth Mann on Karaoke as Cheap Therapy

6/20/2011 – NJ Assemblyman Reed Gusciora is expected to introduce a bill this week to decriminalize the possession of up to 14 grams of marijuana by adults. A look at the Uniform Crime Report from the NJ State Police reveals some striking statistics for marijuana arrests. The 2009 report contains the most recent published data available, although preliminary data on 2010 points to an increase for cannabis violations.

In 2009 the Garden State arrested 26, 254 people for marijuana. Eight-five percent of the arrests (22, 439) were for possession of less than 50 grams. Currently, adults caught with anything from a joint to two-ounces are treated the same way; with a custodial arrest and a criminal prosecution.

In 2009 New Jersey performed more arrests for marijuana than for all other drugs combined. Fifty-six percent of all drug possession arrests were for marijuana.

The same year saw 3,815 arrests for Sale/Manufacture of marijuana. This is compared to 8,128 arrests for sale/manufacture of cocaine or opium products in 2009. Yet fewer NJ residents were arrested in possession of cocaine or opiates (14,609) than for marijuana (22,439).

The conclusion that could be drawn that enforcement of cannabis prohibition laws in New Jersey is focused on the individual user rather than those selling. This is different compared to other drugs.

Some additional information from the NJ UCR

– Forty-two percent of persons arrested for drug abuse violations were under the age of 21.

– Males accounted for 81 percent and females 19 percent of the arrests.

– Fifty-four percent of total persons arrested in 2009 were white, 45 percent were black and 1 percent were other races.

– The Hispanic ethnic origin accounted for 14 percent of the arrests and 86 were non-Hispanic.

Fourteen US states allow a civil citation to be issued at the point of encounter with police.  A nominal fine is levied at a later time and the offense is treated similar to a traffic violation for speeding. The decrim states on the east coast include: Maine, New York, Massachusetts and Connecticut.

Chris Goldstein is a respected marijuana reform advocate. As a writer and radio broadcaster he has been covering cannabis news for over a decade. Questions?  [email protected]

The International Association for Cannabinoid Medicine published a bulletin highlighting the preliminary results from an observational clinical trial studying the effects of Cannabis on post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

“According to an observational study by scientists of MaReNa Diagnostic and Consulting Center in Bat-Yam, Israel, presented at the Cannabinoid Conference 2011 in Bonn, Germany, the use of cannabis may improve symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder. As a part of their routine consulting work, they assessed the mental condition of 79 adult PTSD patients, who applied to the Ministry of Health in order to obtain a license for the medical use of cannabis. Only part of them (about 50 per cent) got cannabis licenses and constitutes the study group. They were followed for a period of about two years.”

One of the oldest known medical uses for Cannabis is in the treatment of psychiatric disorders, as described in the ancient Ayurvedic texts from India (Russo 2005). This ancient medicinal claim is proving itself true through recent scientific studies. Scientists studying fear conditioning in animals discovered that the CB1 receptor is necessary for the extinction of adverse memories (Marsciano 2002). Researchers studied mice that are genetically bred without the CB1 receptors. These mice without CB1 receptors have an impaired ability to extinguish fear. Scientists have also tried using the drug Rimonbandt, which blocks the CB1 receptor and seen similar results (Lutz 2007).

The CB1 receptor is the most abundant protein in the human protein, and anyone who has activated this receptor with THC can tell you about its effect on memory. This memory impairment associated with Cannabis can be harnessed for medical uses.

The CB1 receptor is part of the endocannabinoid system (ECS). The ECS is a natural part of our body and among many things it controls things such as eating, sleeping relaxing, and memory. Conceptually, by adding THC to the brain, the ECS is turned on and begins to do its work. THC from the Cannabis plant and our body’s endocannabinoids may control the extinction of adverse memories by acting through the CB1 receptor. Adverse memories underlie or cause many anxiety disorders such as PTSD. You don’t have to be a veteran to receive relief from Cannabis for a psychiatric disorder. The extinction of adverse memories through the CB1 receptor is emerging as a universal mechanism in the brain.

Despite a vast amount of scientific information on the effect of cannabinoids on memory, the first clinical trial on Cannabis and PTSD is yet to be completed. This clinical trial is an obvious next step that will test the effect of CB1 receptor stimulation on adapting to fear. This is something scientists have not been successful at studying; researchers have only been approved to study the effect of CB1 receptors on anxiety disorders indirectly through genetically altered mice and by blocking the receptor.

Cannabis and cannabinoids may offer a benefit in the treatment of anxiety disorders, such as phobias (fears) or PTSD, and the pain that is often associated with them. The implications of the current scientific data suggest that Cannabis and cannabinoids can treat a wide range of anxiety orders. If you are feeling nervous about the speculation of using Cannabis to treat anxiety disorders, just remember the title from Nature magazine’s 2002 article, “Never Fear, Cannabinoids are Here (Sah, 2002).”

 
Bibliography

Lutz, B. (2007). The Endocannabinoid System and Extinction Learning. Molecuar Neurobiology, 36:92-101.

Marsciano, G. (2002). The Endogenous Cannabioid System Controls the Extinction of Adverse Memories. Nature, 530-534.

Russo, E. (2005). Cannabis in Inida: ancient lore and modern medicine. In R. Mechoulam, Cannabinoids as Therpeutics.

Birkhäuser Verlag/Switzerland. Sah, P. (2002). Never Fear, Cannabinoids are Here. Nature, 488-489.

Jahan Marcu is currently investigating the pharmacology of cannabinoid receptors. He was working at the California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute when exciting discoveries were made showing enhanced anti-cancer effects with THC and CBD from the Cannabis plant. The findings were published in the Journal of Molecular Cancer Therapeutics. In 2009 he received the Billy Martin Award from the International Cannabinoid Research Society (ICRS). Jahan is currently the vice-chair the Medical and Scientific Advisory Board at Americans for Safe Access (ASA). Questions?   Contact    [email protected]

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent any University, business or affiliates. While the information provided in this blog is from published scientific studies it is not intended to diagnose or treat any disease.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – April 4, 2012

ATTORNEYS WILLIAM H. BUCKMAN AND ANNE M. DAVIS

CONTACT: Anne Davis Esq. 732 477 4700, William Buckman Esq. 856 608 9797 or Chris Goldstein 267 702 3731

CONSTITUTIONAL LAWSUIT FILED OVER FAILED NJ MEDICAL MARIJUANA PROGRAM

Trenton- Today a lawsuit was filed against the State of New Jersey over the failure to implement the Compassionate Use Medical Marijuana Act. Named in the suit are the Department of Health and Senior Services (DHSS) Commissioner Mary O’Dowd and the newly appointed director of the Medicinal Marijuana Program John O’Brien.

Civil rights attorneys William H. Buckman of Moorestown and Anne M. Davis of Brick brought the suit on behalf of a New Jersey medical patient who would qualify for cannabis access. The suit also represents one of the few medical doctors who have registered with NJ to recommend medical marijuana.

The compassionate use law was passed in January 2010 with a six-month implementation timeline. But since 2010 a series of politically motivated regulatory, legislative and bureaucratic delays have kept the program from operating at all. None of the six approved Alternative Treatment Centers have been fully permitted by DHSS to open.

“We represent a patient who suffered actual damages as a result of these delays,” said Anne Davis, “He cannot utilize the cannabis because New Jersey’s lack of a working program means he could lose his disability pension if he tested positive for cannabis.”

Davis continued, “Our neighbors with AIDS, cancer, MS and the worst of medical conditions have testified before the legislature and changed the law. Now, patients and doctors have to go to court to win the rights that they should have already been afforded.”

The lawsuit gathers more than two years of facts demonstrating that those in charge of the implementation process for New Jersey’s medical marijuana program have been unable or unwilling to put the law into place.

“Today we are filing suit to require the DHHS to do what every other citizen must do – follow the law,” said William Buckman, “We are also insisting that pursuant to the legislature’s will, sick people have access to medical marijuana without fear of arrest.”

For more information about this advisory please contact Anne M. Davis Esq. 732 477 4700, William H. Buckman Esq. 856 608 9797 or Chris Goldstein 267 702 3731

Today, I woke up to find that the Supreme Court of the United States ruled by a 5-to-4 vote that officials may strip-search people arrested for any offense,  however minor, before admitting them to jails even if the officials have no reason to suspect the presence of contraband.

Now, I’m no Constitutional know-it-all by any stretch of the imagination, but I seem to recall something called, oh what is it…oh that’s right: The Fourth Amendment, which goes a little something like this:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses,  papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall  not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause,  supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place  to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Interesting. The HIGHEST COURT IN THE LAND just rolled back the Fourth Amendment…because it can.

But then again, that pesky Constitution as well as laws that the public has resoundingly voted in favor of don’t seem to stop public officials from doing whatever the hell they want.

Take a look at Oaksterdam College, which the DEA and IRS raided on Monday, shutting down the cannabis industry trade school while carrying out a federal search warrant. And guess what? They don’t have to explain what they’re doing to anyone because all of the paperwork is “under seal” other than to confirm it is part of a (insert sarcastic laughter) “ongoing joint investigation.”

Now, Oakland doesn’t have a lot of money. But it does have a lot of crime. Which coincidentally occurred during this needless raid. In a different part of the city, seven people at Oikos Christian University were lined up and gunned down by a former student.

We will probably never know whether the limited police force raiding a successful trade school could have actually fought real crime only miles away. (You know, do that “life saving” thing that we pay them to do.)

Richard Lee, who runs the “cannabis college”, was detained then released. His home was raided by  agents with guns (because this wheelchair bound activist is such a threat. Where’s your raid on Wall Street?), according to Dale Sky Jones,  chancellor of  Oaksterdam. Four marijuana nursery workers were detained at Oaksterdam. No arrests were made.

Don Duncan of Americans for Safe Access writes:

This is a grave injustice against local patients and a slap in the face for a city that has led the state in sensible regulations for medical cannabis. Americans for Safe Access (ASA) helped to mobilize protesters this morning, and is working to frame this story in the media right now. We wish we did not need an Emergency Response Campaign but today’s events show that we still do.

So whose to blame for all of this needless militaristic force that descended upon a legitimate trade college going about their business?

These four attorneys stated in October that they would aggressively  prosecute many marijuana dispensaries as profit-making criminal  enterprises. Staying true to their word, three dispensaries in San Francisco, one in  Marin County and 50 in Sacramento have closed under  pressure, in addition to about 150 others throughout the state of California.

This team of legal vigilantes have made it their mission to defy their constituents’ wishes under the guise of “protecting the children”, whose schools may be too close to dispensaries. (Note: The “protecting the children” defense is almost always a cloak for politically motivated agenda.)

“Its a total waste of federal resources,” Stephanie Tucker,  spokesperson for the San Francisco medical cannabis task force, told The Huffington Post. “They’re attacking a peaceful, regulated community, and  it’s wasting money. Shame on them.”

Indeed shame on them. And shame on all of the legislators who have taken it upon themselves to rewrite The Constitution and hoist their own self-created political agenda upon a public that voted them into office.

God bless America…it’s going to need all the help it can get.

Beth Mann is a popular blogger and writer for Open Salon and Salon. She is also an accomplished artist with over 15 years of experience, as well as the president of Hot Buttered Media. She currently resides at the Jersey shore where she can be found surfing or singing karaoke at a local dive bar.

Contact: maryjane {at } freedomisgreen.com

Contributions by:

Jahan Marcu is currently investigating the pharmacology of cannabinoid receptors. He was working at the California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute when exciting discoveries were made showing enhanced anti-cancer effects with THC and CBD from the Cannabis plant. The findings were published in the Journal of Molecular Cancer Therapeutics. In 2009 he received the Billy Martin Award from the International Cannabinoid Research Society (ICRS). Jahan is currently the vice-chair the Medical and Scientific Advisory Board at Americans for Safe Access (ASA). Questions? Contact [email protected]

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent any University, business or affiliates. While the information provided in this blog is from published scientific studies it is not intended to diagnose or treat any disease.

Sometimes my typing get ahead of me…

Two important corrections to the blog: Rally in NYC: Marijuana is Safer for St. Pat’s

1-     State of New York decriminalized marijuana in 1977 not 1979.

2-     Marijuana in Public View is not a municipal code as stated in the blog.

Professor Harry Levine clarified today: “New York State Criminal Law 221.10 specifies that possession is a misdemeanor if it is ‘burning or open to public view.’  The phrase ‘MPV’ was invented by Andy Golub, a researcher, and as far as I know has never been used by the police or courts in New York.”

Further there are no specific municipal codes for marijuana in NYC but police practice has changed accounting for the 50,000 annual pot arrests despite decriminalization.

Corrections to East Coast gets serious about marijuana:

1- Omitted the bill active in North Carolina – that has been added.

3-     Finally in the same piece I did not highlight the strong medical cannabis caregiver network that exists in Maine. Added a link to the sixth paragraph.

Please send any questions or corrections to chris { at } freedomisgreen.com.

Thanks for your feedback!

Chris Goldstein

[Note – This guest blog was submitted by Samantha Miller of Pure Analytics.]

5/23/2011 – The testing of commercially available cannabis for cannabinoid profile and potency is becoming more prevalent. This is important information for patients and dispensaries who increasingly seek out these profiles.  The availability of cannabis testing promotes better access to medically important cannabis options such as CBD-rich cannabis, through identification. Laboratory testing is also key for strategic breeding programs and promotes the overall legitimization of cannabis for therapeutic use.  Right now the cannabis testing industry is unregulated.

An easy-to-read cannabinoid profile helps medical cannabis patients choose the strains that best suit the therapy requirements for their ailment.  The cannabinoid potency information provides guidance in determining an individual’s dosage through self-experimentation, often called “self-titration”.  Reliable cannabinoid profiles also support the ability for patients to achieve a repeat of therapeutic benefits without experiencing unwanted intoxication.

Today, because of increased awareness, patients are more interested in consuming cannabinoids other than THC.  Potency testing can play an important role in promoting knowledge and availability of non-THC options. First, through the identification of cannabis strains and cannabis products with medically important non-THC cannabinoids such as CBD. These cannot be detected by visual or other sensory means such as smell.

Secondly, through the use of lab testing to identify specific plants, they can be used in breeding programs designed to develop and isolate plants that are high in CBD, CBG or some other cannabinoid of interest. Laboratory testing can be used to identify the precise cannabinoid profile of plants to determine genetic traits that promote the development of non-THC dominant cannabis. Then cross-breeding can be undertaken based upon our understanding of the genetics of the expression of those cannabinoids.

The medical cannabis industry has the great potential to provide enhanced legitimacy with reliable laboratory testing.  One such area concerns human use and consumption where testing provides information not just on potency but assures the absence of harmful pesticides.

Cannabis laboratories are also generating a rapidly growing body of data. The development of this new database can be used to support the characterization of cannabis as a medicinal plant in the effort to re-schedule its classification in the federal Controlled Substances Act .

The prevalence of cannabis testing is certainly on the rise. The emerging cannabis testing industry is a dynamic environment driven largely by economic influences.  In the last decade the decision to test has largely been driven by weighing the costs and the benefits from a marketing perspective.

Today, a very competitive market exists for medicinal cannabis in California and other states.  New cannabis testing laboratories are starting-up on a frequent basis to serve a perceived economic opportunity.  Some activist groups have raised concerns over the nature of segments of the new cannabis lab industry.

There are non-qualified service providers, “dry labs” who outsource all analysis or even fabricate results. There are also unscrupulous laboratory instrument companies that are raising concerns by marketing expensive equipment to medical cannabis collectives to attempt their own testing.  As a response, patients and collectives are asking important questions about the reliability of the results.

The is no regulatory oversight for cannabis testing that compared to what already exists in most other fee-for-service analytical chemistry industries.  This makes the water a bit murkier when looking for a reputable and qualified service provider for cannabis testing services. In an environment where providing analytical results is regulated (drinking water, soil and food) a customer can simply choose from a list of service providers who have all been certified to the same set of standards for accuracy and precision in their work.

A regulated environment offers an agreed upon well-tested methodology.  There also would exist an agreed upon set of requirements for quality control of ongoing work such as requirements for the frequency and acceptance criteria of the calibration of equipment. In the absence of regulation these aspects of analysis, even providing results to a customer, can happen under widely varying circumstances.

The importance of a consistency for method validation and ongoing quality control become clear when you consider the multiple factors that affect accuracy. For example, the method of sampling at the dispensary or cultivator level can have serious influences on lab results. A single sample that is representative of the entire unit of plant material must be submitted for analysis to obtain a result that accounts for the variation within that unit.

The second tier of cannabis sampling, which occurs at the level of the laboratory, also has an influence. This is where the cannabis sample is prepared and extracted for analysis.  The process involves the use of precision weighing and volumetric measurement equipment which must be calibrated and verified at regular intervals.  The proper calibration of analytical equipment is also imperative to the production of reliable and repeatable data.  Key factors include the use of certified standards that have been third-party tested and certified for purity and concentration.

Proper maintenance of equipment is a final important element for ensuring that the results provided to the customer are delivered with the highest confidence level.

The good news is that in the absence of regulated oversight, cooperative work between existing labs to perform side-by-side testing of cannabis samples can provide an important element to fostering confidence at the consumer level.

A very important aspect of cannabis laboratory practice that varies between service providers is the choice of analytical equipment.  In general, the choice of equipment centers on the use of gas chromatography (GC) versus liquid chromatography (HPLC) for cannabinoid analysis.  As in every industry there is often an effort to promote what differentiates a service as what makes it better than another. In the case of GC versus HPLC some service providers have attempted to position their equipment as superior to another.  The truth is that types of equipment can provide accurate, reliable data for cannabinoid analysis.

It is not as simple as the hardware.  A key factor to consider when reviewing the appropriate equipment for a given analysis is making sure the correct type of detector is being used. This is especially important for gas chromatograph analysis of cannabinoids.  In the case of GC there are options of FID (flame ionization detector), MS (mass spectrometer) and TCD (thermal conductivity detector).  Gas chromatograph units equipped with both FID and MS detectors have been shown to provide reliable results.

The TCD detectors commonly sold by instrument companies to dispensaries are not a good choice.  One reason is that the results are often influenced by the interference of other cannabinoids present aside from THC, CBD and CBN.

There are also a segment of cannabis laboratory service providers utilizing results from TLC or Thin Layer Chromatography, often referred to as “test strips.”  In some of these cases these test strips are promoted as being able to provide accurate potency results for cannabis.  In general, without specialized equipment, test strips are only viable for use to tell whether or not certain cannabinoids are present, but not how much is present (e.g. potency).

The most appropriate method for cannabinoid analysis is also determined by the type of sample being analyzed.  In today’s cannabis industry, the vast majority of samples submitted to laboratories for testing consist of processed, dried flowers intended for vaporization or combustion.  Testing by GC-FID, GC-MS or LC is appropriate for these samples when looking to identify cannabinoid profile and potency level.

But, for those samples that may contain the un-activated or “acid” form of THC and CBD when consumed, analysis by liquid chromatography is more appropriate.  Gas chromatography (GC) is unable to detect if these “acid” forms remain present, a consideration that is important when trying to consider dosage of an edible or tincture ingestible.  This is because analysis by GC essentially simulates what happens when cannabis is vaporized or combusted.  The acid forms of THC and CBD are converted to the active forms when heated. Heating is a part of analysis by GC.  This is important because many tincture and edible makers do not activate their cannabinoids through adequate heating of their products, leaving some cannabinoid in the “acid” form.

For a summary on the similarities and differences between GC and LC equipment see table 1.

Table 1.  Comparison of Gas Chromatography and High Performance Liquid Chromatography

Gas Chromatography	Liquid Chromatography
A low pressure stream of gas helps move the compounds to the detector	A high pressure stream of solvent helps move the compounds to the detector
The system is heated during analysis	The system is usually at ambient temperature during analysis
Detects total available THC, CBD and CBN and other activated cannabinoids	Detects THC, THCA, CBD, CBDA and other acid and non acid cannabinoids
Cannot detect cannabinoid acids	Can detect cannabinoid acids
Analysis does not produce significant waste	Analysis produces significant solvent waste

Clearly, the current cannabis laboratory environment is unregulated so consumers have to be savvy. Knowing what questions to ask a prospective cannabis lab is key.  To help the process a group of laboratory service providers* from various states along with an international advisor compiled a list of 10 questions to ask a cannabis scientist. This can act as a quick reference guide for those looking for a qualified laboratory partner.

10 Questions to ask your cannabis scientist

1. What training or expertise do you have to be able to perform cannabis analysis?

2. Which cannabinoids do you test for? Do you have reliable reference standards for all of them?

3. How is CBN related to THC, and why is it important to test for it?

4. What kind of samples do you test (flowers, edibles, tincture)? Have you optimized your extraction and analysis protocol for each kind of sample?

5. What do you do with left-over samples?

6. Are you aware of acidic cannabinoids? In samples such as edibles and tincture they can be present at high levels. How do you deal with that?

7. What is your analytical methodology for testing cannabis (HPLC, GC, TLC, other)? What are the limitations of your selected method?

8. What is the average THC/CBD content your lab has measured?

9. Did your lab ever test the same cannabis twice, with very different results? What was the explanation for that, and what has been changed to prevent it from happening again?

10. Analytical methods need to be ‘validated’ before you can be sure they are fully reliable. Have you done this already, and how did you do this.  Did it include a third party?  If you didn’t do it yet, how can I be sure my results will be accurate?

*Contributors: Arno Hazekamp (Netherlands), Samantha Miller (Pure Analytics), Paula Morris (Medea Labs), Noel Palmer (Montana Botanical Analytics), Jeff Raber (The Werc Shop) and Eric Taylor (California Botanicals).  Collectively the ACS, Alliance for Cannabis Science.

Quick reference – http://www.freedomisgreen.com/10-questions-to-ask-your-cannabis-scientist/

Guest blog was submitted by Samantha Miller of Pure Analytics.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent any University, business, affiliates or Freedom Is Green Media Group LLC. The information provided in this blog is not intended to diagnose or treat any disease.

Questions? Email science editor Jahan Marcu science(at)freedomisgreen.com