News in English 2016

[savuseppo]

Cannabis oil: What is the best and healthiest way to produce cannabis oil?

What is Cannabis oil?
Concentrated cannabis extracts, also known as Cannabis oils because of their sticky and viscous appearance, are increasingly mentioned by self-medicating patients as a cure for cancer. In general, preparation methods for Cannabis oil are relatively simple and do not require particular instruments. The purpose of the extraction, often followed by a solvent evaporation step, is to make cannabinoids and other beneficial components such as terpenes available in a highly concentrated form. Cannabis oil is usually taken orally, by ingesting a small number of drops several times a day. Please find here some information on the question whether cannabis can cure cancer.

How is Cannabis oil prepared?
Various methods have been described for the preparation of Cannabis oil. The most popular method, as described by former (skin)cancer patient Rick Simpson from Canada, suggests the use of naphtha or petroleum ether as a solvent for the extraction. Following the success of Simpson oil, a number of related recipes have sprung up, emphasizing small but significant changes to the original recipe. Examples include focusing on safer solvents such as ethanol, or preventing exposure to organic solvents altogether, by using olive oil.

What is naphtha or petroleum-ether?
In general, petroleum-ether and naphtha refer to very similar products, even though different names may be used around the world; e.g. in some countries naphtha is equivalent to diesel or kerosene fuel. Both solvents are a mixture of petroleum hydrocarbons (PHCs), often available in a wide range of qualities. All the solvent components should be considered harmful and flammable, and some of them, such as hexane and benzene, may be neurotoxic. Both naphtha and petroleum-ether are considered potential cancer hazards according to their manufacturers. Moreover, products sold as naphtha may contain added impurities (e.g. Coleman® fuel) which may have harmful properties of their own.

Are residual solvents a health risk?
Although Cannabis oils are usually concentrated by evaporating the solvents that were used for extraction, this does not completely eliminate residual solvents. As a result of sample viscosity, the more concentrated an extract becomes, the more difficult it will be to remove the residual solvent from it. In such a case, applying more heat will increase solvent evaporation, but simultaneously more beneficial components (such as cannabinoids or terpenes) may be lost as well. The use of non-toxic solvents should therefore always be advised, so that potential residues are not harmful to health.

What is the best and healthiest way to prepare Cannabis oil?
Recently, an analytical study was performed to compare several generally used preparation methods on the basis of cannabinoids, terpenes, and residual solvent components. Solvents tested included ethanol, naphtha, petroleum-ether, and olive oil. Based on this study, the following recommendations can be made:

As extraction solvents, ethanol and olive oil were shown to perform the best, extracting the full range of terpenes and cannabinoids present in cannabis plant material very efficiently. Additionally these solvents are safe for consumption.
Unfortunately, pure ethanol also extracts large amounts of chlorophyll from cannabis material, which will give the final extract a distinct green, and often unpleasant, taste. Removing chlorophyll by filtering the ethanol extract over activated charcoal was found to be effective, but it also removed a large proportion of cannabinoids and terpenes, and is therefore not advised. Additionally, in many countries consumption-grade ethanol is an expensive solvent, as a result of added tax on alcohol products.
Of the solvents tested, this leaves olive oil as the most optimal choice for preparation of cannabis oil for self-medication. Olive oil is cheap, not flammable or toxic, and the oil needs to be heated up only to 100°C (by placing a glass jar containing the product in boiling water for 1-2 hours) so no overheating of the oil can occur. After cooling down and filtering the oil it is immediately ready for consumption. As a trade-off, however, olive oil extract cannot be concentrated by evaporation, which means patients will need to consume a larger volume of it in order to get the same therapeutic results.
Preheating of cannabis to ‘activate’ (decarboxylate) the cannabinoids may result in loss of terpenes as a result of evaporation. If the full range of terpenes is desired in the final Cannabis oil, dried buds and leaves can be used directly for extraction, without preheating

http://420intel.com/articles/2016/02/04 ... nnabis-oil

[savuseppo]

Italy to legalize marijuana for medical use; New proposal allows cultivation at home

More than 250 lawmakers from across the political scale have shown support to a proposed decriminalization of producing, distributing, selling and consuming marijuana in Italy. If this will be pushed through, Italy will become the biggest European country to legalize marijuana. The new proposal also allows people to cultivate marijuana inside their house.

According to International Business Times, this new move of the country towards the legalization of marijuana has been found to be far-fetched from how they viewed the said drug 10 years ago. This is because they have voted for an anti-drug bill, removing any difference between soft and hard drugs. Sentences for pot smokers and heroin addicts were also increased.

Now, under the new proposal, people beyond 18 years old will be allowed to cultivate a maximum of five plants at home. The Local further reported that growers could also team up in forming 'cannabis social clubs' that comprises up to 50 people and 250 plants. Moreover, the farmers have to consume and share the product while notifying authorities about their activities. They are prohibited to sell and gain profit from it.

Others are allowed to store up to 15 grams of marijuana in their homes and carry a maximum of five grams. Higher quantities are also allowed as long as for medical use.

The cross-party committee of lawmakers Intergrupo Parlamentare Cannabis Legale crafted the proposal, said The Daily Chronic. A junior minister for foregin affairs named Benedetto Della Vedova then sponsored the proposal.

Meanwhile, it was said that the punishment for violators of the terms of being a medical grower has already been eased. As Justice Minister Andrea Orlando has put it, it does not decriminalize those who grow weed. Approved growers caught violating the terms will have to pay a fine rather than receive a prison sentence. However, those caught growing cannabis for personal use with no license might still be imprisoned for a year and pay a four-million euros-worth of fine.

Despite all these new proposals, some laws still remain. This includes the strict ban of smoking in public areas as well as the advertisement, export and import of all cannabis products.

http://420intel.com/articles/2016/01/19 ... ation-home

[savuseppo]

How much does legal marijuana cost?

Oregonians can consume legal weed without emptying their wallets.

The Beaver State is home to the lowest average price of dispensary cannabis at $214 an ounce, according to an analysis by Perfect Price, a company that tracks the prices of a variety of goods including groceries, cleaning supplies and cannabis. The company looked at menu prices for cannabis flowers from about 6,000 dispensaries in six states with more than 200 dispensaries: Oregon, Colorado, Washington, Arizona, California and Michigan.

Medical marijuana is legal in 23 states while cannabis for recreational use is legal in Colorado, Washington, Oregon, Alaska and the District of Columbia. Though nearly half the country has legalized marijuana in some form, not every legalized state has fully operating dispensaries. Strict regulation and registration processes can often delay operations after a state has decided to legalize the sale of cannabis.

Legal recreational marijuana went into effect in Oregon in July 2015, however, sales didn't start until October because dispensaries had to complete the registration process. As the recreational market begins to mature over the next three years, prices are expected to drop below $150 an ounce, according to economics consulting firm ECONorthwest.

Colorado and Washington, which both have fully operational recreational markets, are the second and third cheapest at $225 and $238 an ounce, respectively.

Average dispensary prices in major cities within the analyzed legalized states

Among the cities in the states analyzed, Aurora, Colo., had the cheapest average dispensary prices at $192 an ounce. Grand Rapids, Mich. had the most expensive marijuana prices at $392 an ounce. Denver, which has a high concentration of dispensaries, has an average price of $219 an ounce, while Detroit offers Michiganders some cost relief with an average dispensary price of $282 an ounce -- slightly below the state average of $301 an ounce.

The other two states included in the study, Arizona and California, had average dispensary prices of $290 and $299 an ounce, respectively.

http://420intel.com/articles/2016/02/05 ... ana-cost-0

[savuseppo]

US Legal Marijuana Sales to Hit $22 Billion by 2020

The legal sales of pot will reach $21.8 billion in 2020, up from $5.4 billion last year. The legalization of marijuana has and will spread rapidly from state to state.

The data from a new report titled "The State of Legal Marijuana Markets" explain that part of the forecast has as a foundation the sales in Colorado and Washington, where pot use for medical and recreational use is already legal. The research shows that the rise will be rapid year by year:

Demand is expected to remain strong in 2016 with legal markets projected to grow to $6.7 billion, a 24% increase over 2015

The huge majority of the rise in sales will be due to recreational use, which was only 8% of the market in 2014 but is anticipated to be 53% in 2020.

State legalization may be still expanding by the time a national law is passed to legalize marijuana use nationwide. This will leave states that have not supported legalization in a quandary. The report forecast:

Majority support for legalization is fueling a national policy shift The industry’s continued expansion was matched by equally strong growth in popular support for cannabis legalization nationally. According to Gallup, 58% of Americans now support legalization of cannabis for adult use, up from 36% in 2005; a separate poll by Harris found 81% of Americans support legalization for medical use.

http://420intel.com/articles/2016/02/05 ... llion-2020

[savuseppo]

One way to fight the opioid epidemic? Medical marijuana

The opioid painkiller and heroin epidemic has led to a record number of deadly drug overdoses, with the US recording an all-time high of 47,000 overdose deaths — two-thirds of which were opioid-related — in 2014. In states like New Hampshire, the crisis is so bad that it's overtaken the economy and national security as voters' top concern.

But as awareness of the crisis grows, one of the more exotic policy ideas for dealing with the epidemic has gotten relatively little attention: legalizing medical marijuana.

The idea: Medical marijuana is an effective painkiller, so it can substitute some opioid painkillers that have led to the current overdose epidemic. And since marijuana doesn't cause deadly overdoses and is less addictive than opioids, replacing some use of opioids with pot could prevent some overdose deaths.

But this isn't just a theory. A growing body of research has supported the idea. It's not definitive research by any means. But with so many Americans dying from opioid overdoses each year, it certainly merits consideration by lawmakers who want to keep medical marijuana illegal at the federal and state levels.

Medical marijuana is an effective painkiller

To understand the opioid epidemic, it's crucial to understand that America has a pain problem. According to a 2011 report from the Institute of Medicine, about 100 million Americans suffer from chronic pain (such as lifelong back pain), more suffer only from acute pain (such as a temporary injury), and many of these cases go untreated. These are the kinds of figures doctors were worried about in the 1990s and 2000s when they began prescribing opioids at record numbers — by 2012, enough to give a bottle of pills to every adult in the country — and essentially caused the opioid epidemic.

Doctors generally did this with good intentions: They were misleadingly told by drug companies that opioids were both effective and had a lower risk of abuse than other painkillers on the market. So they thought they finally had their way to treat the US's pain problem without leading to addiction and overdoses.

Physicians were obviously wrong to believe that about opioids. But the general point is they were trying to address a serious medical problem to the best of their abilities — a problem that remains to this day. The fact that opioids are now reviled as a result of the epidemic doesn't remove the underlying issue that tens of millions of Americans suffer from debilitating pain and doctors need a way to address that issue.


Well, medical marijuana appears to offer one way to help deal with America's pain problem without the risks of opioids.

The best review of the research to date on medical marijuana, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, looked at 79 studies that tested cannabis's medicinal effectiveness among nearly 6,500 patients.

MEDICAL MARIJUANA APPEARS TO OFFER ONE WAY TO HELP DEAL WITH AMERICA'S PAIN PROBLEM WITHOUT THE RISKS OF OPIOIDS

The review concluded that there's "moderate-quality evidence" for medical marijuana treating chronic pain and muscle stiffness among multiple sclerosis patients, and "low-quality evidence" for pot improving nausea and vomiting due to chemotherapy, weight gain in HIV infection, sleep disorders, and Tourette's syndrome. And marijuana was linked to short-term adverse effects such as dizziness, dry mouth, nausea, fatigue, drowsiness, and confusion.

So the evidence suggests marijuana is good for treating chronic pain without any huge side effects.

What about opioids? While there is research that opioids effectively treat acute pain, there is no good evidence for their treatment of chronic pain.

Opioids also produce much worse side effects than marijuana. For one, there's the very real risk of overdose — a risk that only grows as people use opioids longer, since they develop tolerance for the painkilling effects but not the overdose causes. And there's the risk of addiction: Not only can patients get addicted to opioid painkillers, but their addiction can, according to other research, lead to the use of heroin, an opioid that is cheaper, more potent, and deadlier than painkillers.

Marijuana could substitute opioids as a painkiller without any of these vicious side effects. Of course, pot wouldn't work for everyone — just as the effectiveness of medications for other types of health issues can vary from patient to patient. But it could possibly replace some opioid use, and that would prevent some opioid deaths.

That's not entirely hypothetical. A growing body of research shows that legalizing medical marijuana really does reduce the number of opioid deaths.

Medical marijuana legalization appears to lead to fewer opioid deaths

A working paper from David Powell and Rosalie Pacula of the RAND Corporation and Mireille Jacobson of the University of California Irvine concluded, "Our findings suggest that providing broader access to medical marijuana may have the potential benefit of reducing abuse of highly addictive painkillers."

The researchers looked at both treatment admissions for opioid pain reliever misuse and state-level opioid overdose deaths. They found relative decreases in misuse and deaths in states with medical marijuana dispensaries, but they didn't find decreases in states that allow medical marijuana without dispensaries. So the big factor in reducing misuse and deaths seemed to be not just medical marijuana legalization but also access to medicinal pot through dispensaries.

The study also found that legal opioid painkiller distribution didn't seem to decline in states with pot dispensaries, which, according to researchers, suggests people are replacing illegally obtained opioids with pot. But the overall result is still less misuse and fewer deaths.

Pacula and Jacobson's research isn't the first to produce these kinds of results. Another study, published in JAMA, found medical marijuana laws reduce opioid overdose deaths, although it was less rigorous than Pacula and Jacobson's analysis.

Now, the studies show a correlation, not causation. But given that medical marijuana and opioids can fill such similar roles, there's good reason to believe there's some causal connection in the data. So there's a solid empirical case that legalizing medical marijuana might literally save lives — by keeping people off opioids.

The research isn't perfect, but the opioid epidemic needs solutions now

An overdose prevention rescue kit.

A perfectly valid response to all of this is that the research isn't settled, and there haven't even been large-scale clinical trials that support medical marijuana — the same type of trials that are typically necessary to get medications approved by the Food and Drug Administration.

The lack of large-scale clinical trials seems to be why some presidential candidates are cautious toward medical marijuana. Hillary Clinton, for one, said, "I don't think we've done enough research yet. Although I think for people who are in extreme medical conditions and have anecdotal evidence that it works, there should be availability under appropriate circumstances. But I do think we need more research, because we don't know how it interacts with other drugs. There's a lot we don't know."

It is true that the research on medical marijuana could be more rigorous. The JAMAreview, after all, found only "moderate-quality evidence," not "high-quality evidence," for pot as a chronic pain treatment. There should be more studies and large-scale clinical trials, especially if they can prove good ways to separate pot's psychoactive effects while keeping its maximum medical benefits — as low-THC, high-CBD strains of marijuana purport to do.

At the same time, there's a tremendous sense of urgency to the opioid epidemic. Tens of thousands of Americans are dying from opioid overdoses each year. In 2014, there were a record 47,000 drug overdose deaths on the US, nearly two-thirds of which were opioid-related, according to federal data.

Medical marijuana would not stop all of these overdoses, but it could help. At the very least, the idea merits consideration as the opioid epidemic gets more attention.

http://420intel.com/articles/2016/01/21 ... -marijuana

[savuseppo]

Recent Studies Find Cannabis Highly Effective Against Depression, PTSD

Recent scientific studies regarding the use of cannabis (marijuana) and its healing powers are further disproving the government’s biased and inaccurate stance against its medical use. The government refers to marijuana as a “gateway” drug to harder substances and schedules it along side them even though it has proven to be safer than alcohol.

Taking these claims into consideration, scientists across the country have taken it upon themselves to research the chemical makeup of marijuana and prove to the public the benefits that it holds. Through the research of endocannabinoids, a stress-regulating chemical found in the brain that is also found in marijuana, scientists are producing evidence to prove that marijuana usage could benefit those who suffer from depression.

Chronic depression is one of the most common mental illnesses in America with about 6.7% (14 Billion) of the country’s population suffering from the disease. With depression being such a common disease in America, scientists from the University at Buffalo have conducted research which claims that endocannabinoids, a chemical makeup found in the brain, are similar to the chemical makeup of marijuana.

Using animals as test subjects, scientists Samir Haj-Dahmane, PhD and Roh-Yu Shen, PhD studied the effects that stress held on the animals. When introduced to a stressful environment, the animals’ level of endocannabinoids dropped significantly, leading the animals to feel stress. When introduced to marijuana, the levels of endocannabinoids increased and the animals began to show signs of relieved stress.

While Haj-Dahmane cautions that this research is still in its early stages, it is an idea to consider. If the cause of stress is a reduction in endocannabinoids, and marijuana usage increases endocannabinoids in the bodies of animals, does it not make sense that marijuana could potentially be used medicinally to reduce stress in humans as well?

Furthering the idea of using marijuana to combat depression, this article from Huffington Post piggybacks on the aforementioned University of Buffalo study looking further into the complex makings of diagnosed depression. Huffington Post posed a critical question in the closing of their article stating, “some research has suggested that regular and heavy marijuana smokers are at a higher risk for depression, although a causal link between cannabis use and depression has not been established.”

Depression is a very complex illness because the factors that cause it are so widespread and depend on instances that have happened in an individual’s life. While there are no confirmed cases of heavy marijuana usage causing or relieving depression, it is important to consider all aspects of the illness to better regulate and learn what dosages, frequencies, and strains of marijuana can better help those suffering from depression.

Focusing on PTSD, another mental illness that affects many Americans, this article from Science Daily discusses the usage of marijuana in individuals suffering from PTSD and how their symptoms have declined over the time of their usage. The researchers from New Mexico (the first state to legalize medicinal marijuana use) used the “CAPS” method, which is essentially a method that is used with PTSD patients to ask questions about a traumatic experience that a patient experienced and measure their response on a 0-4 scale.

Researchers learned from this experiment that those patients who received medical marijuana showed a 75% reduction in all three areas of PTSD side effects. As stated with other research results, these studies are still in the developmental process and require more testing and circumstantial research to truly validate the correlation between medical marijuana usage and a decrease in depression among people.

With the thought of marijuana possibly becoming another medication to add to the list of antidepressants, it is important to think about the current, long list of antidepressants currently in the market to help “treat” patients. With marijuana being a natural substance and untampered by other chemicals, it makes for a neutral medication that can easily be combined with other prescriptions without the risk of overdose (because there are no recorded cases of marijuana overdose in the DEA database to date). Other antidepressants, however, cannot make these claims.

As discussed on Natural Blaze, antidepressants come with long, unattractive lists of side effects, and are extremely risky to mix with each other or other substances (such as alcohol). SSRI antidepressants, as discussed in the article, bring on unattractive side effects such as irritability and violent outbursts, but they are not alone. Other antidepressants can cause mood swings, weight loss or gain, schizophrenia, and other side effects, while marijuana causes none of these.

Research and development in marijuana studies is still a work in progress, though there are new scientific breakthroughs regarding benefits of medicinal marijuana use daily. With medical marijuana studies producing more positive outcomes than negatives, it is becoming more and more ignorant to be in disbelief that marijuana heals more people than it makes “couch potatoes.”

The use of “all natural” products is a rising trend in America, from foods to hygiene products, so why should we not entertain the idea of a natural medication and relieve ourselves of the worries of side effects caused by manmade chemical substances?

http://420intel.com/articles/2016/01/05 ... ssion-ptsd

[savuseppo]

A Bob Marley-Branded Line of Pot Just Hit the Market

In one state, for now.

There has been no shortage of famous names looking to cash in on the blossoming legal marijuana market through branding deals. But, now one name in particular that has long been associated with pot products and paraphernalia has an official line of branded goods.

A line of cannabis and related products bearing the name of iconic reggae musician Bob Marley officially launches today. The brand, called Marley Natural, produces a line of cannabis strains and infused oils; they will initially be carried in a handful of dispensaries in California (where medical marijuana is legal) before expanding in that state over the next month. That expansion will continue to other states where the drug is legal throughout the rest of this year and, by next year, they will be sold internationally, the company said in a press release Friday morning.

The cannabis products (both in flower and oil form) are available in a range of categories, from the milder Marley Green to the “more physical, full-body experience” of Marley Black.

The company is also launching a line of body care products, including lotion and soap, made with hemp seed oil and Jamaican botanicals as well as a line of wood and glass marijuana-smoking accessories. Those products are available to buy online.

“We source our products in an environmentally and socially responsible way, as we believe Bob would have wanted,” Tahira Rehmatullah, Marley Natural’s general manager, said in a statement.

The branded pot—named after Marley, who died from melanoma cancer in 1981—will be sold with the permission of the legendary musician’s family. It is part of a 30-year worldwide exclusive licensing agreement with Marley Natural’s parent company, Privateer Holdings, a cannabis-focused investment firm. Seattle-based Privateer announced the creation of Marley Natural more than a year ago. Privateer’s other cannabis industry holdings include Leafly, a Yelp-like website for cannabis reviews and merchant listings, as well as Tilray, a British Columbia-based facility that produces and distributes medical marijuana across Canada.

Last year, Privateer announced the involvement of Founders Fund—the investment firm founded by billionaire Peter Thiel—in a $75 million Series B funding round that closed last November. The firms did not confirm the size of that investment, only pegging its value in the “multi-millions” of dollars. But Founders Fund’s involvement represented one of the first examples of institutional investors testing the waters of a cannabis market that is predicted to hit $6.7 billion this year as more and more states establish legal markets despite the drug remaining illegal on the federal level.

http://fortune.com/2016/02/05/bob-marle ... ana-brand/

[savuseppo]

ASA Releases New Report on State Medical Marijuana Programs

With the release last year of the first detailed analysis and comparison of state medical marijuana laws, Americans for Safe Access (ASA) created a patient-focused tool to identify effective programs and problem areas. That groundbreaking report was followed today by the release of ASA’s new, far more detailed report on state programs, which reflects the many new states that have added programs as well as others that have improved their existing programs.

Like the original report, this latest white paper enables advocates, policy makers and concerned citizens to compare and contrast from the patient's’ point of view the 40 different approaches currently in place in the U.S. Unlike last year’s, this report takes a much closer look at the regulatory frameworks for ensuring product quality and safety. By examining in detail the differences in how state medical cannabis programs have been designed and implemented, ASA’s latest report shines a light on the what’s working and what’s not in ways that can assist policy makers in making the programs under their oversight as broadly effective as possible in ensuring a consistent supply of quality-controlled medicine for the qualifying patients who need it.

A number of states -- including Illinois, Maryland, New Hampshire, New Mexico, and Washington -- have adopted regulations that reflect the best practice standards set forth by the American Herbal Products Association (AHPA). In addition to the AHPA Recommendations for Regulators, states are also incorporating the laboratory testing standards set forth in the American Herbal Pharmacopoeia Cannabis Inflorescence Monograph. These authoritative, expert standards mean states no longer a need to omit these protocols or “reinvent the wheel” for medical cannabis product safety regulations.

Those expanded regulations to assure product quality and safety are the focus of the new rubric employed in this latest report on state programs. While states got credit in our original report for implementing regulations based on the AHPA and AHP, for 2016 we have taken a far more fine-grained approach to evaluating the extent to which each state program has adopted the recognized industry standards for everything from cultivation, manufacturing and distribution to laboratory testing for product identity and purity. Also included are measures of the ease of access for qualifying patients – arguably the most important criteria for programs – as well as the degree of civil protections from discrimination state law provides patients. These laws all make a difference in patient's’ lives, and in some cases may mean the difference between life and death.

Given the weight of product safety in the updated report's scoring system, there are some grades that may stand out and raise certain questions. For example, states like Maryland, New York, and New Hampshire all received similar letter grade scores as long time states providing safe access, such as Arizona and Rhode Island. In most instances, this is due the lack of product safety regulations, or having outdated product safety regs that are no longer consistent with best practices. For states like Arizona and Rhode Island, the adoption of up-to-date product safety regulations will bring the overall grades in line with best performing states.

Much has changed in the nearly two decades since California passed the first medical marijuana law. Today, more than 275 million Americans, or about 85% of U.S. population, live where some form of medical cannabis use is legal locally. We estimate that these programs serve approximately two million patients under physician’s’ supervision. Within those various programs, physicians now recommend cannabis-based treatments for over 50 qualifying medical conditions and symptoms. That expansion has not created the problems opponents feared. States with medical cannabis programs have not experienced increased rates of teen use of cannabis. In fact, those states have seen unexpected benefits, including significant drops in opioid overdoses as well as in highway fatalities.

The takeaway from the report is that states are capable of implementing high quality medical cannabis programs, but not nearly enough are do so in a way the serves patients well in all of the ways that these programs impact patients. This report highlights the given strengths and weaknesses that a state program has, and makes it clear where lawmakers and regulators can make improvements. Patients and caregiver activists can utilize this tool by showing their state officials what key features and protections their programs lack. Every medical cannabis law in the country has room for improvement, and this report can serve as the guide make those improvements become reality. Of course, states would be more free to create medical cannabis laws and regulations the best serve the greatest number of patients if the federal government would permanently end their interference with state programs. Passage of the CARERS Act would do just that, and would signal to lawmakers and regulators that their medical cannabis guidepost should be focused on improving patient outcomes rather than avoiding federal raids.

http://www.safeaccessnow.org/asa_releas ... a_programs

[savuseppo]

German goverment plans to regulate medical marihuana like other prescribable narcotics

There is a great news from Germany! The ministry of health just released a very progressive draft to regulate medical marihuana like other prescribable narcotics, this means every doctor can prescribe it and patients can buy it in every pharmacy. The proposal includes a provisional arrangement to make it reimbursable and covered by health insurance.

The government has to do anything to prevent a foreseeable court decision, patients are sueing for the right to grow their own medicine.

The ministry of health document also contains the suggestion to establish a cannabis agency according to the UN Single Convention. This agency will run a state monopol on the medical marihuana market and give licenes to companies to grow the cannabis.

For now it’s just a proposal but the outcoming law must be good enough to satisfy the Federal Administrative Court.

More is coming soon!

German Hemp Association: Cannabis als Medizin soll ein Arzneimittel wie jedes andere werden

http://www.alternative-drogenpolitik.de ... -regulate/

[savuseppo]

Is Beer Afraid of Weed?

The word on the street is that the beer manufacturers are keeping a watchful eye on what is happening in the world of retail cannabis, mostly because they fear that an eruption of legalization efforts across the United States (like what it is predicted to happen in 2016) may turn the American beer drinker into a loyal stoner and eat away at the profits of its over $100 billion marketplace.

Although it may seem the cannabis industry has a long way to go before it is pulling down the kind of revenue comparable to the national brew houses, some of the latest statistics show that the business of marijuana is really not far from casting a shadow on brewers like Anheuser-Busch InBev and SABMiller, and this with only a handful of states allowing recreational pot sales.

A new ArcView Market Research report finds that legal cannabis sales are expected to reach $6.7 billion in the United States before the end of 2016. Impressively, analysts predict the total market will soon surpass the National Football League (NFL) as more states legalize pot sales across the nation — giving way to a cannabis industry that does nearly $22 billion in sales by 2020.

To put this in perspective, the national craft beer market currently rakes in around $20 billion in sales, while the NFL pulls down somewhere around $12 billon.

“I think that we are going to see in 2016 this next wave of investors, the next wave of business operators, and people who’ve sort of been watching or dipping their toe in, really starting to swing for the fences and take it really seriously,” ArcView CEO Troy Dayton told Fortune.

A recent report from Quartz indicates that members of the brewing industry in attendance of last week’s Beer Industry Summit touched on the rise of cannabis sales in some of their panel discussions. Although beer drinkers are a loyal breed of consumer, the brewing industry is concerned that as more states move towards legalization, it will cause them to lose another percentage of their customer base to marijuana. They fear this loss of market share could be a real possibility because the ongoing spiel among national marijuana advocacy groups, like the Marijuana Policy Project, is that weed is a safer alternative to drinking alcohol.

And with alcohol killing in upwards of 88,000 people annually in the U.S., it makes sense that eventually some will give serious consideration to weed, as a legal and safer alternative to achieving a buzz.

It has been speculated for many years that one of the primary hang-ups for nationwide marijuana legalization is the alcohol industry. Some reports have shown that companies who generate massive profits by selling beer, wine and liquor are in bed with federal lawmakers to the tune of millions of dollars. Unfortunately, this has prevented some politicians from standing up in favor of ending pot prohibition for fear that too loud a voice might cause them to lose substantial campaign contributions, and ultimately force them out of a job as one of American’s great uncivil servants.

Still, the marijuana industry continues to grow at an impressive rate, which will eventually lend itself to becoming just as, if not more powerful that other producers of socially acceptable inebriants sold all over the United States. The only real obstacle standing in the way of cannabis competing head to head with the brewing industry is that it remains illegal in the eyes of the federal government. Once Uncle Sam finally loosens the leash on this issue, it is conceivable that that weed could one day surpass beer sales, and perhaps even be featured in advertisements during the Super Bowl.

What do you think? Will beer drinkers turn to cannabis as it becomes legal across the nation?

http://420intel.com/articles/2016/02/06 ... fraid-weed

[savuseppo]

Plan Colombia to Become 'Peace Colombia'?

Amid signs of hope that the South American country's 50-year armed conflict is winding down, Colombia's President Juan Manuel Santos met with Barack Obama at the White House this week to mark 15 years since the initiation of the Plan Colombia aid package.

The two congratulated each other on the success of the program, which has delivered some $10 billion to Colombia in mostly military aid since 2001. They also discussed a proposed new aid program that Santos is calling the "second phase" of Plan Colombia and which Obama proposed to be called "Peace Colombia."

Obama said he supports a package of $450 million annually to support the peace process in Colombia—an increase over last year's $300 million. This would go towards implementing the reforms to be instated following a peace deal with the FARC guerillas—with a continued focus on drug enforcement. Obama said the U.S. "will keep working to protect our people as well as the Colombian people from the ravages of illegal drugs and the violence of drug traffickers."

The White House meeting set off much media discussion in Colombia about what the massive aid program has meant for the country.

Bogotá daily El Espectador ran an interview with Colombian MIT scholar Pascual Restrepo, who called Plan Colombia a "partial failure." He found that it brought greater security to Colombia, but its gains in reducing coca production were offset by increases in production in Peru (another example of what has been called the "balloon effect").

One of the FARC peace negotiators, Pastor Alape blasted Plan Colombia as a "painful national tragedy," emphasizing the years of grave human rights abuses by the U.S.-backed security forces. Former army commander Gen. Jorge Enrique Mora quickly shot back, saying that "Colombians don't care what the FARC thinks about Plan Colombia or the decisions of the government."

While the power-brokers bicker, peasant and indigenous communities across Colombia are organizing meetings to arrive at their own "National Agenda for Peace," emphasizing the changes that need to happen on the ground to address the roots of the conflict.

Just days before Santos met with Obama, some 300 delegates from campesino and community organizations met in the city of Ibagué for the First Agrarian, Ethnic and Popular Peace Summit. It issued a statement demanding that the needs of rural communities be placed at the center of post-conflict reforms.

And despite widespread assumptions in the U.S. media that FARC controls Colombia's cocaine trade, evidence continues to mount that the country's security forces have at least as much of a hand in it.

The day before Santos' Washington meeting, two National Police officers were arrested when their truck was stopped at a checkpoint in Buenavista, Córdoba department and was found to be hauling 200 kilos of cocaine. Under the watch of the current National Police commander, Gen. Rodolfo Palomino, 1,337 members of the 90,000-strong force have been suspended under suspicion of corruption.

http://www.hightimes.com/read/plan-colo ... e-colombia

[savuseppo]

NYU/UCLA $2.4 million to study non-psychotropic cannabinoids to suppress chronic cancer pain

Chronic pain affects more than 50 million adults in the U.S. Upwards of 9 out of 10 cancer patients suffer from pain, with oral cancer ranked consistently as one of the most painful cancers. This chronic pain management represents a major socioeconomic and clinical challenge because the side effects of existing treatments--mainly prescribing opioids--greatly limit their effectiveness, especially over time.

Alternatives to opioid treatment are found in synthetic and naturally occurring cannabinoids (CBs) which have demonstrated effectiveness in numerous chronic inflammatory and neuropathic disorders in both human and animal models. However, major impediments to the widespread use of CB-based therapies are their psychotropic side-effects, mediated by the activation of central nervous system (CNS) CB1 receptors (CB1Rs).

In other words, cannabis-based drugs work wonders to alleviate chronic pain for patients, but up until now they have come with undesirable psychotropic side effects--patients "get high."

"We have developed a novel class of drugs, peripherally-restricted cannabinoids (PRCBs), that are free of central nervous system side effects, for treating chronic pain," said Igor Spigelman, PhD, professor in the Division of Oral Biology & Medicine, UCLA School of Dentistry. Brian L. Schmidt, DDS, MD, PhD professor in the NYU College of Dentistry Department Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and director of NYU's Bluestone Center for Clinical Research and the NYU Oral Cancer Center, added: "With this funding, we propose to broaden our research to determine the antitumor potential of PRCBs, their effectiveness against cancer pain, and also against chemotherapy-induced neuropathic pain."

The purpose of the five-year, $2,494,784 R01 grant from the National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute (NIH/NCI) is to test PRCBs for oral cancer and chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy pain reduction. To this end, the research team proposes three specific aims for their investigations:

1. To examine the efficacy of novel PRCBs against the chronic pain symptoms of oral cancer. The team hypothesizes that cancer pain can be alleviated by decreasing sensory fiber activation and by reducing tumor burden. Molecular and clinical assays will be used to quantify the anti-proliferative and apoptotic effects of PRCBs. Other experiments will measure the decrement and restoration of orofacial function following PRCB administration. The team will also study the effectiveness of continuous PRCB administration and the possible development of tolerance to the PRCBs for the relief of cancer pain symptoms.

2. To examine the effects of novel PRCBs on proliferation and apoptosis of human oral carcinoma cell lines. Using state-of-the-art sensors which can monitor the reduction in the cancer tumor's size or rate of growth in real time, the researchers look to measure the dose-response rates of their synthetic cannabinoids being administered.

3. To determine the effectiveness of PRCBs to suppress or prevent the painful symptoms of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathies (CIPNs) without the psychotropic effects of traditional CB treatment. CIPN is a major side effect of chemotherapeutic agents. The researchers have developed their synthetic cannabinoids which have been shown to suppress CIPN symptoms in male rats via CB1R activation, at doses that produce no CNS side effects, and without development of tolerance to daily dosing. Given potential advantages of PRCBs over brain-penetrant cannabinoids, it is important to test if pretreatment with PRCBs can prevent the development of CIPN.

The research team looks to achieve these aims through the use of innovative and validated operant assays which provide a measure of cerebral processing and orofacial function in mouse oral cancer and rat CIPN models. Gender differences in cancer and CIPN pain sensitivity and their responsiveness to PRCBs will be determined. The researchers note, to their knowledge, that no one has studied gender differences in CBR responsiveness in CIPN.

Therefore, putative gender differences in responsiveness to PRCBs in CIPN and their causes must be explored. It is also important to establish dose parameters for continued suppression of CIPN symptoms during continuous PRCB administration. The team will also look at whether PRCBs are more or less effective in reducing oral cancer pain in male versus female mice. While oral cancer pain affects men more often than women, it can be profoundly difficult to relieve in both sexes.

"In order to further characterize PRCBs, we plan to perform pharmacokinetic studies and determine their receptor targets with tissue-specific transgenic mice," said Dr. Schmidt.

"We will be looking at how the synthetic cannabinoid moves through and out of the body, charting the time-course of its absorption, bioavailability, distribution within the tissues, and measuring the body's ability to effectively metabolize the drug."

In order to measure potential off-target actions and peripheral side effects of PRCBs, the researchers will use a suite of invasive and non-invasive physiological tools, assessing the potential development of tolerance to PRCBs after chronic administration.

"We are keenly interested to determine if pre-treatment with PRCBs may actually prevent oral cancer pain and reduced oral cancer proliferation," said Dr. Schmidt. "Successful completion of the proposed studies would allow us to translate pre-clinical findings to a clinical trial; thus this work would improve outcomes for cancer patients."

From a public health perspective, the researchers note that, tragically, approximately half of all oral cancer patients will not be cured with surgery, chemotherapy, or radiation therapy. Oral cancer is the sixth most common cancer in the US; however, in certain regions of the world it is the most common cancer. The intensity of oral cancer pain escalates with disease progression, and terminal patients generally experience debilitating pain during their final months of life. Currently, there is little that can be done for these patients. The global burden of oral cancer pain is enormous.

http://420intel.com/articles/2016/02/08 ... nic-cancer

[savuseppo]

Dabbing, Vaping, and Edibles: Is There a ‘Healthy’ Way to Get High From Marijuana?

A few years ago, the options for stoners seeking a different way to get high were slim. But in the age of legal medical marijuana (at least in some states), there are more ways than ever to toke.
As of June, weed was legal medicinally in 23 states and Washington, D.C., including four (Alaska, Colorado, Oregon, and Washington) where the drug is legal for recreational purposes, too.
Under federal law, however, marijuana remains illegal — listed as a Schedule I drug(aka a drug “with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse”).
But while some people do use the drug just to get high, others swear by its medical powers: in alleviating pain and anxiety, and quelling nausea. And pot’s potent ingredient — a cannabinoid (or chemical compound) called tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) — can be consumed or applied via foods, lotions, medicines, and more dangerous forms of inhalation, such as “dabbing.”
The negative side effects of weed are hotly debated. While some research shows marijuana users experience memory loss and even reduced IQ, research is mixed. For instance, marijuana smoke is an irritant to the throat and lungs, and smokers report more symptoms of chronic bronchitis. But despite the fact marijuana smoke also has many of the same carcinogens as cigarette smoke, a pot habit doesn’t seem to increase the risk of lung cancer.
While docs aren’t sure why this is, it could be twofold: that for research purposes, it’s hard to ID straight marijuana smokers from those who smoke both cigs and pot; or that marijuana may have protective effects on lung tissue.
In general, most researchers agree more conclusive studies are needed to determine all of the possible health impacts of marijuana.
As for all of the ways to use as of today? Yahoo Health asked experts to shed light on the common methods of using marijuana (and what to expect from each).

Smoking

Lighting up might be the most popular way to get high — and one of the quickest. “When you smoke, THC goes into the brain almost instantaneously,” Ruben Baler, PhD, the Health Science Administrator at the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA), tells Yahoo Health.
When it does, THC interacts with cannabinoid receptors in the brain, affecting regions involved in pleasure, thinking, and coordination.
Side effects can range from feeling stoned to psychotic bouts, if you have an underlying risk, says Baler. More serious symptoms could include cardiovascular side effects from inhaling smoke.
Of course, how much you’re affected is influenced by a slew of factors, including how much you smoked, the potency of THC in the joint, and your past experiences with the drug, says Baler.
In general, though, higher concentrations of THC are more likely to lead to negative effects — and these days, higher concentrations in joints are common. To help paint the picture: In the 1990s, the average joint had about 3 percent THC. In 2013, that had risen to a figure closer to 12.5 percent (and is likely to be increasing).

Vaping

Smoking not your thing? Vaporizers are small machines that heat cannabis up to a temperature at which the plant doesn’t ignite, but the active ingredients boil — creating a vapor where cannabinoids are released. Mitch Earleywine, PhD, a professor of psychology at the University at Albany-SUNY who studies marijuana, says that research he’s conducted (published in the Harm Reduction Journal) shows that people who vape see fewer respiratory irritations than those who smoke. “Because the cannabis never really catches on fire, you don’t get those ashy irritants,” he says. “There really isn’t a smoke, so much as a mist.”
It’s worth noting that using a vaporizer pen — a pen-like device similar to an e-cigarette that vaporizes active ingredients in the cannabis oil — is not the same as using a vaporizer, Earleywine says, since “standard vaporizers use plant material.” Meanwhile, vape pens use concentrates from the oil — which not only can be higher in concentration but, during extraction, may pose a risk of exploding. There is also no medical literature on vape pens, he says.


Dabbing

“Drug abusers are very creative,” says Baler of a headline-making form of administration called dabbing. What are dabs? Concentrated doses of cannabis made by extracting chemicals from the plant, he explains, using solvents like butane to heat it up. You’re left with a waxy, honey-looking paste that you can put into an e-cigarette or burner, which then produces smoke that you inhale.
The problem: Dabbing — specifically the extraction process — can be seriously dangerous, as butane is known to cause explosions, says Baler. He also says the doses can contain between 40 and 80 percent THC — extremely high concentrations compared with the 12.5 percent THC in street pot.
Earleywine notes that some data suggest that people who dab have reported developing a tolerance to the drug more rapidly than if they were smoking, and that a subset reported more withdrawal symptoms.

Edibles

Everything from chocolate and baked goods to drinks can be infused with THC. "The key with edibles is dosage,” says Earleywine. If you overdo it, serious adverse reactions are possible. But in terms of overdosing — or dying from too much marijuana — it’s not very likely, Baler says. What is more likely: extreme anxiety, panic attacks, or injuring yourself because of marijuana’s effects on judgment, perception, and coordination, he explains.
So why are people more likely to overdo it on edibles? When you consume marijuana — rather than smoking it — your body responds differently. When you smoke, THC goes straight from your lungs to your brain; you’ll likely feel the high within minutes. But because of the digestion process, it can take an hour to 90 minutes to feel the effects of an edible, notes Earleywine, so you may consume more early on, mistakenly thinking the pot is just not kicking in. Also, your liver transforms consumed THC into a different compound, 11-hydroxy-THC — which has greater psychoactive effects than regular THC, says Earleywine.
Another issue? It’s hard to tell what you’re actually putting in your body. “The potency of THC in edibles varies widely — it’s really Russian roulette,” says Baler. In fact, aJAMA study found that fewer than one in five edible labels accurately reflect THC content.
If you’re purchasing an edible in a state where it’s legal to do so, like Colorado, most labels say products contain about 10 milligrams of THC per serving (sometimes, this is the amount in just one marijuana-infused gummy). But while 10 milligrams may be a standard dose for experienced users, Earleywine says anyone who hasn’t used may want to start with 5 milligrams — or even half of that.

Topical ointments

Earleywine says skincare products that contain THC and CBD (a non-psychoactive cannabinoid thought to have anti-inflammatory properties) also have lots of fans. The effects may not be very noticeable, though.
“These don’t really reach the central nervous system — they don’t enter the bloodstream — so if they do help pain and inflammation, it’s got to be through the periphery,” he says. “These shouldn’t be intoxicating or make folks fail drug tests.” Topicals tend to be used by those seeking the therapeutic benefits of THC (to reduce soreness, inflammation, or pain) or folks who don’t want the smell of smoke or the unpredictability of edibles.
Earleywine also notes that there have been attempts to make transdermal patches to get THC into the bloodstream, which work somewhat like nicotine patches. They would likely be used for anything from a high, to relief from pain or anxiety. While these may work, Earleywine says he hasn’t seen any published data on their effectiveness.

Manmade ‘marijuana’

To some extent, marijuana is used in hospitals, too. Marinol® — an FDA-approved medication — is essentially THC that is created in a lab. The drug is mainly used for appetite stimulation for patients with AIDS and nausea as it relates to chemotherapy.
The problem: Synthetic THC doesn’t have other cannabinoids in it, as smoke does — and because of that (and absorption issues that go back to consuming THC), it may make you feel more high than pot that’s smoked, says Earleywine. This poses a problem for patients hoping to reap the healing properties of THC — like pain relief or stimulation of the appetite — instead of the high.
Editor’s note: Synthetic THC, as in Marinol, is not the same thing as the “synthetic marijuana” that has recently been making headlines. Many kinds of “synthetic marijuana,” also known as K2 or “Spice,” are illegal and considered Schedule I substances by the DEA — and are far from safe.

http://420intel.com/articles/2016/02/08 ... -marijuana

[savuseppo]

Anchorage Assembly to finalize marijuana regulations at Tuesday meeting

The Anchorage Assembly will vote on two ordinances at a Tuesday meeting that will finalize marijuana regulations within the municipality. While both ordinances are expected to pass, lawmakers are less certain about which of the eight amendments will be included in the new regulations.

The first of the ordinances, Title 21, deals with zoning and land use. A major concern voiced at the municipality's last public hearing were the proposed buffer zones between schools and businesses selling marijuana. Currently, the ordinance sets the buffer at 1000 feet.

Federal law requires that drug-free school zones be placed 1,000 feet from schools and playgrounds. The state requirement however, is 500 feet.

"The idea that we have students walk to school around those areas and not having to encounter that activity is one that I think makes the most sense in terms of looking at the safety of our students," said Ed Graff, Superintendent of the Anchorage School District.

While Graff and other school officials believe the 1,000 foot buffer is necessary, prospective marijuana business owners say this doesn't give them much space to establish their businesses in Anchorage.

"I can tell you personally if I'm downtown in different areas, that a thousand feet is really going to hinder different businesses doing business in Anchorage," said Terrisa Collins who testified at the public hearing.

"The big thing is there is not a bunch of industrial space in our community and there are a lot of folks that say even when they find industrial space, they are not running into them." said Assembly member Elvi Gray-Jackson.

Assembly member Patrick Flynn has proposed an amendment that would shorten the buffer zone to 500 feet, making it more favorable for marijuana businesses. Another amendment proposed by Assembly member Bill Evans would leave Girdwood as the only place outside of the Anchorage Bowl where the buffer zone would be 500 feet.

A third amendment to the ordinance calls for marijuana business owners to engage in responsible neighborhood planning with city councils.

The second ordinance, Title 10, deals with rules and regulations for marijuana businesses. If passed, the ordinance would ban on site consumption of marijuana, something that Gray-Jackson feels should be changed due to record tourism numbers expected to hit Anchorage in the summer.

"It's illegal to smoke it outside, tourists are going to need a place to smoke marijuana," Gray-Jackson said.

Assembly member Flynn has proposed an amendment that would allow businesses to offer on site consumption in a designated area with separate ventilation.

Along with on site consumption, Assembly member Pete Petersen is putting forth an amendment that would not allow inspections by sworn officers in the Anchorage Police Department, claiming routine inspections by police officers can carry a negative connotation.

Gray-Jackson says she feels both ordinances will pass.

"Now it’s time to put things in place, and if we need to fine tune a ordinance along the way then that’s what we will do. I mean that happens often," she said.

http://420intel.com/articles/2016/02/08 ... ay-meeting

[savuseppo]

A Critique of Studies Discounting Medical Marijuana for Neurological Disorders

Can we effectively use medical marijuana for neurological disorders? It is clear that more research needs to be done on the health risks and benefits of cannabis. Since cannabis is a Schedule 1 drug, it is difficult to do the proper testing that is needed. Therefore, many of the tests that are done primarily involve not the cannabis plant, but rather isolated THC, CBD, or some combination of the two (Ref. 1). However, other studies have shown that cannabis is greater than the sum of its parts (Ref. 2). Cannabis has 480 different compounds, including over 66 cannabinoids and around 200 terpenes (Ref. 3). What is known as the “entourage effect” is responsible for the interactions between the cannabinoids and the terpenes (Ref. 4). It is no surprise that the combination of 480 compounds can interact in complex ways that could not be predicted by studying their single counterparts.

The WoahStork team prides itself on bridging the gap between the scientific community and the cannabis industry.

Not only is the research limited, but the research that is done remains obscured with medical jargon and hidden in journals that often require the public to pay in order to view them. Fortunately, the experts at WoahStork are experienced academics and tokers. In this article, we look to review a study entitled “Systematic Review: Efficacy and Safety of Medical Marijuana in Selected Neurologic Disorders”.

Wikipedia is the definitive online reference for unbiased public knowledge. However, the writers of Wikipedia are ultimately human, and therefore subject to bias. A simple Wikipedia search for THC directs us to the section “Medical uses”(Ref. 5). What immediately struck the WoahStork staff as “bias” was the fact that Wikipedia splits this section up into multiple sections which all cite one article, Ref. 1, ten times across the majority of the section. The sentiment of Ref. 1 at first glance seems unbiased, but… let’s investigate further. A direct quote from Wikipedia states “The study found evidence supporting the effectiveness of cannabis extracts and THC in treating certain symptoms of multiple sclerosis, but found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of cannabis products in treating several other neurological diseases.”

This somewhat inconclusive study dominates the Wikipedia page for medical uses of THC. Essentially, the only other studies quoted are squeezed into a small section titled “Other studies in humans”. If Wikipedia truly attempted to be an unbiased source of information for medicinal uses of THC and cannabis, wouldn’t the writers focus on more than one study, which primarily had inconclusive results? Perhaps the number of reputable studies remains limited.

Let us dive into the study a bit further. First of all, the title states that it is a systematic review of neurological disorders. The questions they looked to answer were essentially its efficacy for treating multiple sclerosis, dyskinesias of Huntington disease and Parkinson disease, cervical dystonia, tics of Tourette syndrome, and seizure frequency in epilepsy.

Several of the key terpenes found in cannabis are found in a variety of other flowers. Terpenes are responsible for accentuating the effects of THC and CBD in a multivariate fashion. Known as the “entourage effect” terpenes and cannabinoids can bring out effects that are greater than the sum of their parts.

Why is it that the results were so inconclusive? The majority of the study was done on cannabis extracts and synthesized cannabinoids. Out of all of the cannabis extract brand names listed in Table 1, none of them seem to mention anything about terpenes, so we are led to assume that these extracts simply removed THC and/or CBD from the cannabis plant. It was stated that one problem with dosing was that the side effects for many patients became too severe. This is not too surprising, as studies on Dronabinol, purely synthesized THC, has undesirable side effects. It is often stated that CBD counteracts many of these side effects. While this is partially true, let us not forget about the impacts of terpenes as well. Beta Caryophyllene binds to CB2 receptors, limonene elevates the mood, which potentially reduces anxiety or paranoia associated with THC. The fact remains that there is lack of research on terpenes’ interaction with the cannabinoids, except for Refs. 2 and 4.

Table 1. Cannabinoid Formulations reproduced from Ref. 1 Of particular note is the incredibly low dosage for marijuana at 4 puffs of 4% THC marijuana.

The Epilepsy Foundation — an organization that provides “conflicting” evidence for the efficacy of cannabis in epilepsy.

Furthermore, many of the studies considered had significantly too few patients, sometimes only testing a dozen. There simply is not enough data to make any statistical inference, so many of the questions posed by the survey remain unanswered. For example, consider epilepsy. A simple google search of epilepsy and cannabis brings us to the epilepsy foundation (Ref. 6). This foundation states that there is “much controversy” surrounding the efficacy of cannabis. Once again, they quote a study which had 48 patients, and it is claimed that this study had insufficient data. However, they go on to say that a study with 213 people found CBD did help epilepsy. If one study claims that they had insufficient data, and another study collects more data and find that it indeed helps, where is the controversy? It seems clear that the study with more participants is superior to the study that was inconclusive.

In this study, the only entry that involved smoked cannabis directly from the plant, it was said that the THC content used was 4%, and the dose taken was 4 puffs (See Table 1.). Many strains available on the market today have THC percentages of greater than 20%, which means that one puff of the strains on the market would already have more THC than the 4 puffs taken in this study. Many of the results of the studies with smoked cannabis were inconclusive, which should not be a surprise. If a patient were to take 1 puff of 20% THC cannabis, it should be expected that noticing a difference from no cannabis would be difficult. Perhaps if the studies tried using higher doses and tested it on more patients, they could have gotten more conclusive results.

Many people remain skeptical about the potential medical uses of cannabis. However, it seems that many of the skeptics simply quote studies that have insufficient data. Remember, if a study does not find conclusive evidence, it does not provide evidence that cannabis is not effective. It simply shows that more rigorous and thorough research needs to be performed.

xamining THC’s effects on neurological disorders is showing a disregard for the interaction of the various cannabinoids and terpenes found in cannabis. This is know as the “entourage effect” — a key component in the efficacy of medical marijuana.

There is no doubt that hard work was put into these study, but anyone who does research on cannabis in 2014 should be aware that THC and CBD are not the only aspects of cannabis. The terpenes are responsible for an entourage effect, which makes the cannabis plant fundamentally different than synthesized THC such as Dronabinol. Most of the study was done with cannabis extracts, and it remains unclear if the terpene profile was kept within the extract. This is a crucial consideration when debating the efficacy of medical marijuana for neurological disorders.

It is also stressed in the conclusion that adverse psychopathologic effects were amongst nearly 1% of the patients. While THC is predominantly known as the euphoriant in cananbis, it seems plausible that providing the proper terpene profile could remove a lot of these negative side effects. Therefore, it seems that the best course of action for medicinal cannabis users is not to use the pharmaceutical companies’ stripped down form of “cannabis”, which only has THC and/or CBD. The cannabis plant contains a far richer terpene profile that lab synthesis can provide.

CannaKids — A fantastic organization doing sound research on the cannabinoids and terpenes in strains of cannabis that are most effective in fighting childhood cancer and an array of other disorders.

One company that clearly gets it is CannaKids.
They offer lines of cannabis oil that keep cannabinoid and terpene profiles similar to the actual flower. Sometimes nature does it right. CannaKids does not simply wait for studies with sufficient data, they provide products that have beencuring kids of cancer and helping them with epilepsy for years. The response of success from CannaKids has been overwhelming, yet note that no research study has been done on these success stories. While many remain skeptical of the medicinal uses of cannabis, CannaKids is proactive in helping sick children and have met great success.

We hope that this post helped provide a greater source of hope for the use of medical marijuana for neurological disorders than what is commonly touted as “sound science” on Wikipedia. At WoahStork, we believe that every individual is unique, therefore their interaction with cannabis will ultimately be a unique experience. As sovereign adults, it is our job to become as educated as possible to make informed decisions about the choices we make. That’s why we allow users to review their experiences with strains and use machine learning algorithms to help users find strains that provide the desired effects and medicinal uses. LetWoahStork help you ultimately determine which cannabinoid and terpene profiles are appropriate for your desires and needs.

http://420intel.com/articles/2016/02/08 ... -disorders

[savuseppo]

Canadian police: Liberals’ vow to legalize pot creating chaos

Canada’s frontline officers and police chiefs are alarmed by the growing chaos in the marijuana industry, saying the Liberal Party’s promise to eventually legalize the drug has sparked confusion across the country.

Illegal pot dispensaries are opening up from coast to coast at the same time as some users feel they should no longer be subject to the Criminal Code, prompting law-enforcement officials to urge the Trudeau government to remind Canadians that marijuana remains an illegal drug.

The dispensaries are ostensibly set up to distribute medical marijuana, but many are believed to also sell cannabis for recreational use with the flimsiest medical evidence or documentation. The licensed producers of medical marijuana have responded by launching a lobbying campaign to persuade the government to shut down the dispensaries. At the same time, these legal producers of medical marijuana are vying to be the first in line to legally produce marijuana for recreational use.

“The discussion [surrounding legalization] that is occurring is causing a lot of confusion, even from an enforcement perspective,” said Tom Stamatakis, president of the Canadian Police Association, which represents 52,000 frontline police officers across the country.

“On the street, you have citizens who are convinced or have allowed themselves to be convinced that marijuana is now legal and it’s okay to not only use it, but to manufacture and sell it.” In many ways, he said, tobacco and alcohol are now more regulated and face tougher restrictions than cannabis, as some pot stores openly advertise their products and sell to minors.

In the past election, the Liberals promised to legalize marijuana for recreational purposes, but the legal changes are months away as consultations with the provinces and other groups have yet to start.

“Now that the Liberals are in government, and this is an agenda that they have, there does need to be some action and messaging from them as they work toward developing the statutory framework and the ensuing regulations [for legalization],” Mr. Stamatakis said in an interview.

Saskatoon police chief Clive Weighill, who presides over the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, agreed the government needs to deal with the uncertainty created by its promise. He said police forces have cracked down on dispensaries in cities from Halifax to Nanaimo, but that the government also needs to speak out.

“The police have taken the enforcement action that we have up to date. I think it would certainly help if the government would come forth and advise people that the legislation isn’t in place yet and that the laws will be enforced until it is,” he said in an interview.

In a statement, Liberal MP Bill Blair said the government will not be rushed as it moves to “legalize, strictly regulate and restrict access to marijuana in a careful and orderly way.”

“We will take the time that is necessary to get this right,’ said the government’s point man on the file.

In the meantime, however, he said all current laws will apply and need to be enforced.

“Until Parliament has enacted new legislation and new rules are in place to ensure that marijuana is carefully regulated, current laws remain in force and should be obeyed,” said Mr. Blair, parliamentary secretary to the minister of justice.

Mr. Stamatakis has had private discussions on the issue of legalization with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale. He said he is convinced that once the drug is legalized, it will be tightly restricted.

“My first impression is that we will end up with a similar legislation and regulatory framework to what we have for alcohol and tobacco, which, from a law-enforcement perspective, is the direction we should go in,” he said.

In the meantime, however, different jurisdictions are tackling the matter differently. In Vancouver, the city is moving toward a system to license a number of marijuana dispensaries. At the same time, Saskatoon has recently busted a similar establishment.

“We have an obligation to enforce the Criminal Code of Canada, but you have different levels of government, especially at the municipal level, who are taking a different approach,” he said. “It is a tough challenge.”

Both Mr. Stamatakis and Mr. Weighill said a key issue, as Canada moves toward a legalized marijuana market, will be finding ways to enforce laws against impaired driving.

“We would be looking for legislation around impaired driving for marijuana, possibly a recognized instrument to measure the levels of THC, like we can with alcohol,” Mr. Weighill said.

He added he will also seek legislation to ensure that “anyone who is selling it to youth will be prosecuted.”

http://420intel.com/articles/2016/02/08 ... ting-chaos

[savuseppo]

4 Fears About Marijuana Legalization That Have Been Totally Disproven by Reality

Colorado and Washington legalized marijuana in 2012, and Alaska, Oregon and Washington DC, came on board in 2014. Voters in a half-dozen states are likely to vote on legalization this year, and they will be wanting to know what kind of impact it has had so far, both in the legal states and nationwide.

In an update in the January/February edition of the Journal of Addiction Medicine, researchers Jane C. Maxwell of the University of Texas at Austin and Bruce Mendelson of the Denver Office of Drug Strategy review the data and provide some insights into the initial impact of marijuana law reforms.

"Data are needed to understand the relationship between the patterns and amounts of use in terms of consequences as well as data on the health conditions of those receiving medical marijuana and the impact of higher potency," they explain.

Based on the data so far, here are four things we now know about the impact of marijuana legalization that the fearmongers and prohibitionists frequently promised the opposite.

1. Adult pot smoking is up, but not much and it started before legalization.The review's press release, citing data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), says that "over the past decade, marijuana use has increased significantly among adults aged 18 to 25 and those aged 26 years and older." Actual data from the survey paints a slightly less dramatic picture: Among 18- to 25-year-olds, last month use grew from 20.2% to 22.0%; among those over 25, past month use grew from 5.8% to 8.3%. While adult use has increased modestly, "these trends appear to have begun before 2012, when Colorado and Washington became the first states to legalize marijuana," the reviewers noted.

2. Pot arrests and marijuana treatment admissions are both down in major legal cities.The reviewers report that in Denver, "arrests for marijuana use/possession and admissions to substance use disorder treatment programs have decreased," and that "data from the Seattle area also show reduced rates of treatment admissions and police involvement, along with an increased prevalence of frequent marijuana use." This suggests that marijuana treatment admissions are to some degree driven by criminal justice system referrals

3. Kids aren't smoking more pot.Those NSDUH surveys show that "marijuana use by youth age 12 to 17 has not increased significantly," the review found. In fact, it's been stable for more than a decade, as NSDUH's authors note in its most recent edition: "The percentage of adolescents in 2014 who were current marijuana users was similar to the percentages in most years between 2003 and 2013."

4. Some people are having bad experiences. "In Denver, marijuana-related hospital admissions, emergency department visits, and calls to poison control centers have all increased," the reviewers note. The same phenomenon has occurred in other legal states, too, but the doctors who handle these cases say the most common malady is acute anxiety or panic reactions, typically from young, inexperienced marijuana users and typically treated with a little rest and relaxation. Consuming too much weed may be disorienting and discomfiting, but it's not life-threatening.

http://420intel.com/articles/2016/02/08 ... en-reality

[savuseppo]

Pot and work: 5 small firms pledge not to fire workers for using medical marijuana

With all the concerns confronting Illinois' medical cannabis pilot program — not enough patients, not enough qualifying conditions, not enough time — a handful of Chicago-area employers want their workers to know that they don't have to worry about job security.

Five small companies — a law firm, a real estate services firm, two health care organizations and a nightclub — have announced their intentions to support employees who use medical marijuana. It's a tangled topic across the country, with state laws permitting pot use clashing with federal laws that don't, and employers seeking to balance employee needs and rights against workplace safety.

Feliza Castro, founder of The Healing Clinic, which helps people register for cannabis cards, and Justice for Patients, a nonprofit advocacy group, recruited the companies to go public with their decisions in hopes that they will set an example for others to follow.

"The best way to support the nondiscrimination of these employees and to support reasonable HR policies that are inclusive of these patients is to go ahead and announce it," said Jonathan Spero, CEO of InHouse Physicians, one of the companies on Castro's list.

InHouse Physicians, a health care solutions company based in St. Charles that employs about 250 people, has added language to its human resources handbook to accommodate employees' medical pot use, including while they're at the office, Spero said.

It states that employees will not be subject to any disciplinary actions for using cannabis while on the job as long as they have a current, legitimate medical cannabis card, he said.

Spero, who has been helping Castro's Healing Clinic recruit physicians for over a year, said employees will be subject to the same performance requirements, so if the type of cannabis they use does have psychoactive effects that hurt day-to-day performance, there could be consequences.

But he doesn't want to know what medications his employees are taking, seeing it as a violation of privacy rights.

Attorney Stuart Krauskopf, who employs 12 people at his River North law practice, said his employees' health is a priority, and anything they need to do to be comfortable is fine with him.

"It is based on complete mutual respect, and the idea is that I don't have to interfere in their well-being," said Krauskopf, who has Crohn's disease and understands what it is like to be in pain, though he has elected not to join the medical marijuana program.

His firm does not have a formal drug policy and will address issues as they arise on a case-by-case basis, Krauskopf said, though he expects he won't permit people to use marijuana while at the office, in case clients drop by. As for concerns about potential legal consequences if mistakes are made and blamed on an employee's impairment, he said he isn't worried, because nothing gets sent to clients without his seeing it first.

The other companies on Castro's list are Chicago-based chiropractic company Universal Wellness Source, River North nightclub Lite Chicago, and Highland Park-based Frontline Real Estate Partners.

Castro, who sought out local companies across several industries, said it was difficult to find companies to publicly announce what she calls "compassionate policies," even if they have them in place.

She hopes the initial five encourage others to follow suit. The most common question she receives at The Healing Clinic is whether a medical marijuana card will protect a patient from getting in trouble at work.

The short answer is that it does not. Illinois' statute gives employers the flexibility to determine whether and how to accommodate employees who use medical marijuana. While companies cannot discriminate against anyone for having a patient card, they can still impose drug tests and fire people who fail them, regardless of their card-carrying status.

Lawsuits filed in other states protesting terminations for legal medical marijuana use have tended to go in favor of employers.

Dina Rollman, founding partner of Rollman and Dahlin, a recently launched cannabis-focused law firm in Chicago's Fulton Market district, said employers should think about what their employees' needs and responsibilities are and formulate policies accordingly. Companies where workers operate heavy machinery daily, for instance, will likely have a different approach from those with office jobs.

Time will tell if this becomes an issue in Illinois, as dispensaries opened only three months ago and the state has announced just over 4,000 qualifying patients so far. But Rollman said she has not sensed that employers want to address the issue quickly.

"Unfortunately, I have the feeling it's going to take the first employee to fail a drug test due to their legal marijuana use for them to look at their policies," she said.

http://420intel.com/articles/2016/02/08 ... -marijuana

[savuseppo]

Top 6 industries fighting marijuana legalization

The fight against legal marijuana is motivated by money, not public health or safety.

If online users browse the websites of just about any anti-marijuana or anti-drug group, they’ll likely notice a very clear health and safety angle to the arguments being made against marijuana legalization.

While these arguments are largely exaggerated or outright false, they do serve a vital function for marijuana prohibitionists: distraction. If people are distracted withoutrageous claims about the dangers of marijuana, they’re not likely to question the financial motivations for opposing legalization so strongly.

Of course, financial motivations underpin almost every single anti-marijuana marketing campaign out there. Who else would pay for these commercials that tell viewers that smoking pot will ruin their lives?

A number of industries stand to lose profits if marijuana is legalized, so they’re heavily funding efforts aimed at preventing that from happening.

With that in mind, let’s investigate six of the top industries fighting to block marijuana legalization.

http://420intel.com/articles/2016/02/08 ... galization

[savuseppo]

Pesticide Position Paper: Prepared by Comprehensive Cannabis Consulting

Applying pesticides off label is a federal offense and successful pest management should not require some of the pesticides used regularly in the industry and cited in recent Colorado recalls.

Those that follow the legal cannabis industry are undoubtedly aware of the struggles of Colorado to regulate pesticide use on cannabis. At the time of this writing, there have been 19 recalls of products contaminated by pesticides in as many weeks. Authorities could not in all cases identify exactly how many units of products may have been tainted, but based on the numbers available, roughly 200,000 individual cannabis products, if not more, have been pulled from dispensary shelves. Along with these recalls have come a large amount of coverage and commentary from various news outlets, industry stakeholders, and even those companies who have had products pulled from shelves.

As this is a controversial and contentious subject, it can be difficult to parse and evaluate the various points of view being offered. In what follows, we will outline the issues at hand objectively: first providing a brief overview of federal and state pesticide regulations and how they pertain to cannabis; addressing claims of whether pesticide usage is “safe” or not; and, finally, offering our opinion of how the cannabis industry should address the pesticide conundrum considering the current regulatory environment and the state of our knowledge.

Before diving in, we are also aware that there is controversy around cannabis testing methodologies, and that the reliability of cannabis testing labs in general has been called into question by a number of the companies that have faced recalls. While we cannot comment on the operations of particular labs, we do support the application of consistent standards, proficiency evaluations, and stringent regulatory oversight to testing labs themselves, so that their results can be assured of being beyond reproach.

Still, 3C’s stance is that quality cannot be tested into a product. To have growers continue to produce contaminated cannabis only to see it recalled repeatedly is unsustainable for the industry; indeed, it threatens its very existence, as we discuss below. That is why we focus in this paper on the cultivation of the plant, as correcting problems on the production side is the only way to ultimately resolve the dilemma in which the industry finds itself.

Pesticide Regulation in the US Relative to Cannabis Cultivation

Cannabis’ pesticide problems stem in large part from the fact the pesticide regulation takes place at the federal level, under the auspices of the EPA. All pesticides undergo years of research and development before they can be sold to farmers and employed on crops. That research addresses questions such as where and how a pesticide can be employed, on what crops, in what concentrations, with what frequency, and how long before harvest can a pesticide be applied. Questions of worker safety are also addressed, such as those concerning what Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) might be required and how long workers must avoid treated areas (Re­Entry Intervals), among other concerns.

The fruits of such studies are then distilled to the contents of a pesticide’s label, which must be registered with and approved by the EPA before a pesticide can be distributed for sale. Federal and state laws require that pesticides be applied according to label directions, making the label a legal document of sorts. “The label is the law,” is a phrase common among agricultural professionals with which the legal cannabis industry is becoming acquainted.

The sticking point in regard to cannabis is that, due to its federal illegality, no research has been performed on the use of pesticides on cannabis. Due to the lack of research, no pesticides registered currently with the EPA are labeled for use on cannabis. Since all pesticides must be applied according to label specifications, this essentially prohibits pesticide use in cannabis production. However, some labels are written in such a broad manner that the use of those pesticides could not be construed as a breach of the legally­binding use directions. Additionally, certain pesticides are of such low­toxicity that the EPA has deemed that their registration is not required; these are known as minimum­risk products under section 25(b) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). At this time, the Colorado Department of Agriculture (CDA), in an attempt to offer guidance to cannabis growers, is maintaining a list of such products that, either due to broad label language or 25(b) status, may be used on cannabis without that use being a violation of the label.

Are Pesticides Safe for Use on Cannabis?

Since the first plants to be quarantined after discoveries of improper, off­-label pesticide use to the most recent recalls, some of the Colorado cannabis companies caught up in those enforcement actions have made public statements claiming that their products are safe. These statements are dangerously misleading, as they do not take into account the issues laid out above, nor the facts that follow.

Frequently, attempts to justify such claims point out that pesticides are employed on our food and therefore must be okay to apply to cannabis as well. This is a classic case of comparing apples to oranges; or, in this case, comparing apples and oranges to cannabis. Such data cannot be bridged for the simple reason that apples and oranges (and most other agricultural food crops) are not smoked. Smoking remains the primary method of cannabis ingestion, but cannabis products are also vaporized (concentrates), consumed (edibles), applied to the skin (topical creams and patches), and taken sublingually (tinctures, sublingual strips).

As noted, the studies that pesticides must undergo prior to being approved by the EPA involve measuring acceptable residues based on the method of consumption of the final product. Since most food is consumed and digested, few pesticides on the market have undergone pyrolysis studies, which examine how the chemical structures of pesticides degrade when burned. This means that while the fungicide myclobutanil, the active ingredient in Eagle 20EW, may be approved for use on grapes, that approval is meaningless in regard to cannabis, as grapes are not smoked and the relative safety of myclobutanil residues was not tested in regard to such a consumption method.

While studies may eventually reveal that certain pesticides may be used on cannabis without ill effects to the end users, such research has not been performed and no one can say with certainty what the effects of consuming cannabis containing pesticide residues might be. Even the CDA qualifies the list of products that may be used without violating labeling guidelines with the following statement, “These products have not been tested to determine their health effects if used on marijuana that will be consumed and thus the health risks to consumers is unknown.”

Again, no one can currently say what pesticides, if any, can be safely employed on cannabis; anyone claiming definitively that their products are safe despite off­label pesticide use is making a statement that at this time lacks any scientific basis whatsoever.

Another claim made numerous times by companies defending their off­label pesticide use is that no one has yet fallen ill from pesticide use on cannabis. While this is true, we must remember that we are in uncharted territory, and no large­scale public health studies have been done to determine what, if any, effects result from consuming cannabis to which pesticides were applied. We hope that no ill effects will surface, but the fact of the matter is that chronic health issues may take years to show themselves and a public health crisis may yet emerge.

Recommendations for the Cannabis Industry

We are advocates for cannabis legalization and want to see this industry grow and develop into one that is beneficial for all involved. We believe that cannabis can continue to be a force for positive change in numerous areas of society, from medicine to criminal justice to agriculture, and beyond. But, in order for it to do so, we must navigate issues such as those around pesticide use in an intelligent and responsible manner.

Our primary recommendation should be preceded by the statement that the use of chemical pesticides of the type triggering Colorado’s recalls is not needed in cannabis production. We make this statement based on years of experiencing working in, managing, and advising cultivation operations of all types, methodologies, and scales on how to grow successfully without illegal pesticides. Cannabis has survived and flourished throughout human history without pesticides, and will continue to do so if we cultivate it correctly.

As such, we recommend that growers n​ot​employ any pesticides in a manner that violates label directions, and only use 25(b) products that have undergone pyrolysis testing to ensure that they are not releasing harmful compounds when burned. Furthermore, applications should only be made during the vegetative stage, prior to the emergence of flowers. Overall, if there is any doubt as to whether a product or material is safe, it should not be used until legitimate, peer­reviewed research has been performed by a reputable institution.

Successful pest control can be achieved via intelligent facility design, robust environmental controls, workflow protocols, and strict cleanliness standards, in addition to preventative applications of appropriate minimum­risk pesticides. There is no magic bullet that will solve all pest problems, which is why experienced agricultural professionals rely on Integrated Pest Management (IPM), defined as “an ecosystem­based strategy that focuses on long­term prevention of pests or their damage through a combination of techniques such as biological control, habitat manipulation, modification of cultural practices, and use of resistant varieties.” Overall, the adoption of Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) is much needed in the industry, and cannabis growers should look to agricultural operations that promote the four pillars of GAP standards (economic viability, environmental sustainability, social acceptability, and safety and quality of the final product) for guidance in formulating best practices in this new field.

This recommendation is not simply a matter of principle, but one that will preserve your business. In addition to costly and brand­damaging recalls, we have already seen the first product liability lawsuits filed last year against LivWell by cannabis consumers over off­label pesticide use. Another issue is that of worker safety. Most cannabis cultivation takes place indoors, where pesticide residues can linger in garden areas and on equipment, creating toxic work environments. Unfortunately, based on the widespread nature of pesticide use in the legal cannabis industry, we feel confident in stating that thousands of workers employed in legal cannabis cultivation operations have applied chemical pesticides without proper PPE or safety training. Businesses employing pesticides off­label will likely find themselves subject to liability claims from workers, as well as consumers, in the relatively near future.

Conclusion

In closing, the bottom line is that applying pesticides off­-label is a violation of state and federal law and could result in criminal and civil sanctions, should regulators and affected parties choose to pursue them.

It must also be noted that off­-label pesticide use threatens the industry as a whole. Point six of the Cole Memorandum states that the federal government will not make the enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act a priority as long as the “exacerbation of (…) public health consequences associated with marijuana use” is prevented. The emergence of a public health problem would be a violation of the Cole Memo ­ it could be argued that the current situation unfolding in Denver is already a violation ­ and could trigger federal intervention against states that have legalized cannabis. In this light, the Denver Department of Environmental Health, which is driving the recalls, has not “launched a campaign against legal cannabis,” as a company recently subject to a recall claimed, but is actually acting as a bulwark against a potentially serious Cole Memo violation that could shutter the entire industry.

Based on the current situation, the cannabis industry must come together to denounce and eliminate off­label pesticide use. In order to ensure the health of patients, consumers, workers, and the industry itself, we must seize this opportunity to grow without chemicals that are currently illegal, potentially very harmful, and ultimately not even necessary.

http://420intel.com/articles/2016/02/08 ... consulting