Future Cannabis Project

Bernie Sanders: “Remove the federal prohibition on marijuana.”

Bernie Sanders has become the first presidential candidate to publicly endorse the removal of marijuana from the federal government’s list of most dangerous drugs. 

As it stands, marijuana remains a schedule 1 drug, which places it in a category with heroin and LSD has having, “no known medical use.” 

Speaking at George Mason University on Wed., Sanders cited the lives destroyed by criminal records, the fact that marijuana businesses  cannot use the country’s banking system and a nation of researchers hamstrung by federal regulations as reasons for ending marijuana’s near century-long prohibition. 

“Too many Americans have seen their lives destroyed because they have criminal records as a result of marijuana use,” Sanders told a live audience of more than 1,700 students, which erupted with applause. “That’s wrong. That has got to change.”

No other presidential candidate has called for marijuana to be completely removed from the schedule of controlled substances regulated by the Drug Enforcement Administration.

Sanders’s plan would not automatically make marijuana legal nationwide, but states would be allowed to regulate the drug in the same way that state and local laws now govern sales of alcohol and tobacco. And people who use marijuana in states that legalize it would no longer be at risk of federal prosecution.

His plan would also allow marijuana businesses currently operating in states that have legalized it to use banking services and apply for tax deductions that are currently unavailable to them under federal law.

The din of de-scheduling seems to be getting louder and louder. What started as a murmur in 1996 when California became the first state to allow medical marijuana has grown into a nation wide movement with 24 states allowing medical marijuana and 4 states plus Washington D.C. legalizing it for adult use (FYI: “adult use” is the new PC term for “recreational marijuana.”) 

Croatia’s new medical marijuana program: Providing legitimacy and access

On Thursday, Croatia joined Spain, Germany, The Netherlands and other members of the European Union to legalize marijuana for medical use. This is not necessarily surprising considering the recent change in attitude towards medical cannabis in developed countries across the world. 

But unlike most of their continental contemporaries, Croatia plans to allow the sale of medical marijuana in pre-existing pharmacies. 

According to the International Business Times: 

Medicines that contain tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) can be prescribed in Croatia starting Thursday to patients suffering from chronic health problems such as cancer, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy and AIDS. Regulations limit the quantity to 7.5 grams per month, and patients can receive a prescription of up to only 30 days. It remains illegal to grow marijuana at home.

Croatian Health Minister Sinisa Varga said medical marijuana will become available in the country's pharmacies within the next few weeks but currently is offered through eight pharmaceutical companies.

"According to information that we have from wholesale drugstores, quite a lot of them are interested in importing [cannabis-derived products] to Croatia," he told Yahoo News UK.

As it stands, federal policy prohibits the sale of medical cannabis in pharmacies across the United States but does allow certain cannabis derived medicines like Marinol and Sativex. France and the UK have similar national policies to the U.S., while countries like Spain and The Netherlands have adopted medical marijuana dispensaries nationwide. 

But the Croats, along with the Germans and Israelis have taken medical marijuana a step further by allowing the actual plant to be sold in pharmacies. 

In the U.S., marijuana is still a schedule I narcotic under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) alongside heroin and LSD. This, by definition of a “schedule I narcotic,” means it has no medicinal value whatsoever. And while that may seem absurd when you look at the limited medical marijuana research that indicates otherwise, it is the law, and the Department of Justice is obligated to enforce it. Additionally, all drugs sold in pharmacies must be FDA approved and FDA approval requires federally approved research, which is almost impossible under the current regulations.  

But why is Croatia’s decision to allow the sale of medical marijuana in pharmacies important? Two words: legitimacy and access.  

Until marijuana is added to established system and standards of pharmacopeia, it will never attain true legitimacy in the medical world. 

Until doctors can safely prescribe it, pharmacies can lawfully distribute it and insurance companies can reasonably cover it, access to marijuana will remain woefully limited. 

What doctor is going to put his or her license on the line for under-researched medication regardless of its potential? How many patients will be able afford a medication that insurance won’t cover? Is your average person more likely to be comfortable buying their medication at a marijuana dispensary or at the local pharmacy? 

It will be interesting to see how Croatia implements their plan. It is ambitious, and still lacks insurance coverage for medical marijuana, but shows that they are among those countries taking medical marijuana very seriously. 

On the campaign trail in Montreal, Prime Minister Stephen Harper continues to lose touch with today’s audience and says marijuana is “infinitely worse” than tobacco and should be widely discouraged in Canada.

The Conservative Party Leader clashed with Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau in the election on many matters, including marijuana regulation, decriminalization, and legalization.

Trudeau promises to legalize marijuana if he and his party are elected, but Harper is trying his best to convince Canadians that legalization is in their worst interest.

Harper fears that the regulation of marijuana will make it impossible to keep it out the hands of minors in Canada... which is hypothetical at best.

Reporters have asked Harper why he thinks marijuana is so harmful despite it being used medicinally for many Canadian citizens. Harper replied that there is overwhelming evidence of the long-term effects of marijuana on people. He offered no source of these effects.

Harper likened what the government is trying to do with marijuana to its tobacco control strategy.

“We’ve spent a couple of generations trying to reduce the use of tobacco in Canada with a lot of success,” he said.

“Tobacco is a product that does a lot of damage — marijuana is infinitely worse and is something we do not want to encourage.”

A government survey of tobacco use found that the overall smoking rate among Canadians over the age of 15 declined from 25 per cent in 1999 to 16 per cent in 2012.

Statistics Canada has reported, however, that marijuana use among Canadians over the age of 15 has remained relatively stable, with 12 per cent reporting they used the drug in the last year both in 2002 and 2012.

Both Trudeau and NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair believe that Harper is just trying to instil fear in the voters. They also believe that he is using this issue of marijuana to distract voters over his recent decision concerning the niqab.

Either way, voters are getting a clear look at which party leader is showcasing what they can do for Canada, and which leaders are showing how their opponents could hurt Canada.

Voting day is on the horizon and parties are making a large effort to reach as many voters as they can. Hopefully Canadians take away the right pieces of information and choose the right leader for the country.

For the original story, click the link!

How will legal marijuana impact Ohio employers? Experts weigh in.

In a little under a month, Ohio voters will be asked to make their choice on two ballot measures, issue 2 and issue 3, which would legalize medical and recreational marijuana, and ban monopolies, respectively. 

While there is little opposition to issue 3 aside from the businesses it targets, more have spoken out against issue 2, which would see marijuana legalized and regulated like alcohol. The opposition’s latest argument cites the difficulty employers - with no-tolerance drug policies - will have finding suitable employees as a result of increased marijuana use.

Tracey Reed reports for The News Herald:

“One big area of concern is that it’s becoming a challenge to find new workers and fulfill your workforce needs. Employers are having difficulty with drug testing today. Legalizing another substance is not going to make it easier to find qualified candidates.

“The complicating factor of legalized marijuana from a workplace perspective is at the federal level, the drug would continue to be viewed as illegal. If Ohio passes Issue 3, an employer would need to be attentive to both state and federal laws, and what we do know is that lawsuits are an expense.”

Stephen Norton, a spokesman for Mentor-based Steris, said the global manufacturer opposes Issue 3.

“It’s bad for business; it’s bad for Ohio,” said Norton. “Steris is one of the safest companies in America by any generally accepted metric. We believe the ballot issue passage would compromise workplace safety. We are working to get the message out to vote no on Issue 3 and vote yes on Issue 2. Ohio should not be among the first states to pass something with so many unknowns.”

Per company policy, applicants to Steris, which employs about 8,000 people, must consent to a drug test. While employed, Steris can require an employee to take a drug test at any time.

“We do maintain a drug-free workplace in compliance with existing regulations and we expect to continue to do so even if Issue 3 passes,” added Norton. “If Issue 3 passes as proposed, employees would still be subject to the same restrictions as other medications — even with medical marijuana.”

Faith Oltman, a spokesperson for ResponsibleOhio, said employers would continue to maintain their rights to establish drug-free policies even for legal drugs, such as some companies do with banning nicotine.

“There is this big misconception that employers can’t drug test (for legal drugs), but they can,” she said. “As far as workplace safety goes, studies show that in states that have legalized marijuana, employees who get into accidents on the job are no more likely to test positive for marijuana than a random group of employees.”

Christine Link, executive director of the ACLU of Ohio, said the civil liberties group has never liked mandatory drug testing.

“It triggers cheating and some aren’t reliable,” said Link. “Poppy seeds can show up as THC, and there are other substances that give false positives, particularly with marijuana. Issue 3 would not change an employer’s ability to hire and fire. What we do see is an opportunity for businesses to develop better tests. You may not have smoked marijuana in the last two weeks, but it will still show up in your bloodstream. What do you do when 50 percent of your applicants have positive tests? A lot of people now smoke marijuana, and it’s illegal. Just think what it will be like when it’s legal.”

Mary Jane Trapp, an attorney with Thrasher Dinsmore & Dolan in Cleveland and Chardon, said legal marijuana would not necessarily hurt the workplace.

“We tell our clients to hope for the best and plan for the worst,” said Trapp. “Marijuana is still illegal under federal law. Until that changes, which I don’t see on the horizon, employers are protected under federal law. If a business had a zero tolerance policy before Issue 3, they’ll have a zero tolerance policy after Issue 3. If it passes, employers and human resource professionals will need to sit down and review their employee handbooks so that the drug use policies they have in existence now will also cover marijuana and medical marijuana.

“I don’t see a huge change for employers. If they fail to update their policy and procedure manuals or if they don’t have a drug use policy, then they might have some problems. People get concerned that there’s going to be a flood of litigation. I don’t see a flood of litigation. I see a few test cases coming, but I don’t think the sky’s gonna fall.”

I am having some trouble finding a real problem here. I should clarify that, in this case, a real problem is defined as one that cannot be mitigated with a sit-down at HR and a policy change or, as Mary Jane Trapp (Yes, that is her name and within the context of this article, that is awesome) indicates above, doing absolutely nothing. 

With respect to recreational marijuana, this should not be a concern. Regardless of its federal status, companies are permitted to drug-test as they see fit and according to their own policies, regardless of how arcane they may be. 

The truth about how marijuana affects male sexual performance

For as long as I have been a fan of marijuana I have heard about its supposed affects on male sexual performance. The science has been largely limited up to this point, but with national attitudes towards marijuana changing, the time is ripe for new research into the confounding question. 

Justin Lehmiller reports for Playboy:

In the hope of providing a more definitive answer, biomedical researchers have begun to conduct more controlled research looking at the effect marijuana has on erectile functioning. Their scientific efforts reveal that, rather than helping erections, weed could potentially hurt them.

Animal studies have found that cannabis has an inhibitory effect on certain receptors inside the erectile tissue of the penis. We don’t have parallel research showing the same thing in humans (at least not yet) because of ethical and legal difficulties in conducting the research, but the animal findings suggest that marijuana is more of a sexual inhibitor than it is a sexual enhancer.

However, there are a few caveats.

For one thing, researchers have long argued that dosage is a very important consideration when looking at the effects of this drug, just like it is with alcohol. If you consume marijuana or alcohol in small quantities, the inhibitory effects on sexual performance tend to be pretty minimal. In fact, you may actually experience an overall performance boost with low doses due to these drugs lowering inhibitions and stimulating desire.

Today is the day Oregonians can start buying legal, recreational marijuana. 

“Stoners of Oregon, ASSEMBLE,” is what you might have heard if you happened to be in Oregon at 12 am Thursday morning as recreational marijuana dispensaries in Oregon opened their doors for the first time. At least, that is what I would have said if I was there and wearing an Optimus Prime costume. 

Less than a year after Oregonians voted to pass a bill allowing their state to join the recreational revolution going on in two other states, Colorado and Washington, Oregon has become the third state to allow sales of recreational marijuana. 

Adults 21 years of age or older are permitted to buy up to one-quarter ounce of marijuana per day without a note from a physician. 

According to Fortune: 

Recreational sales in Oregon will be untaxed through the rest of this year, with a sales tax of 25% set to be added in January after regulators determine the framework for taxing recreational pot. When that framework is finalized, the state is likely to receive a boost in tax revenues. In Colorado, where recreational sales have been legal since the start of 2014, the state collected more money in marijuana taxes in its last fiscal year than it did from taxes on alcohol sales, with a chunk of the cash coming from an excise tax ear marked for public school construction projects.

Green tinted, ‘marijuana goggles’ designed to simulate the experience of being high.

In what will surely be considered a great day for stoner snowboarders everywhere, a Wisconsin company has developed green tinted goggles that are supposed to make the wearer feel stoned. 

But snowboarders - who are clearly too far down the marijuana rabbit hole to bother trying to save - are not the target demographic for the new hippie shades. Instead the company responsible, Fatal Vision, is marketing to schools and law enforcement programs as a way of educating kids on the dangers of marijuana use. 

The goggles are packaged with other products and activities. These are intended to show the wearers ability to do a range of tasks like reacting to a thrown ball or a red light, and navigating a grid on the floor, supposedly while “stoned.” 

“These engaging activities provide an experience of cognitive impairments associated with recreational marijuana use. Program participants will experience the simulated effects of distorted processing of visual information and alteration of visual perception, slower decision making, and loss of short-term memory,” says the company’s website. 

But how do a pair of goggles simulate the complex and highly subjective experience of being high on marijuana, and what exactly do experts think of the not-so-novel idea? 

According to the Washington Post’s Christopher Ingraham:

They work by filtering out red light, which makes it difficult to, say, recognize the flash of a red brake light or draw a line through the red outlines of a maze. The idea is to demonstrate for teens what it's like to be high, and how that can impair your ability to do common tasks.

Some substance abuse educators have praised the the goggles and the interactive experiences that accompany them. “Anytime you can do an activity — something that’s interactive — with them, or something that provides education, that’s great," said Tim Retherford, executive director of Neighborhoods Against Substance Abuse in Indiana, in an interview with WISH TV. "These actually simulate the loss of some of your cognitive functions," he added.

But experts I talked to say it's unclear how tinted goggles can simulate complicated mental phenomena like short-term memory loss and concentration deficiencies. "So the goggles take away the ability to see red, and then the teens are asked to engage in activities that are highly dependent on the color red," said Joseph Palamar, an NYU professor who researches drug use among teens. "And this is supposed to translate into impairment from using marijuana? Misinformation about drug effects has been used as a scare tactic for decades, and this doesn’t seem to be that different."

Have you ever worn a pair of drunk goggles? They, like the pot goggles, are designed to simulate the experience of inebriation. Now, I have not had the pleasure of testing the green- dream goggles, but if they are like the drunk goggles, then they don’t work. 

Strictly visual- based simulations of the mind altering and highly subjective experience of any drug are severely incomplete. For anyone who has smoked marijuana or drank to the point of no return, you are aware that any visual impairment is a small fraction of the overall experience. 

If you don’t normally drive like a bat out of hell in your sober state, but you turn into Dale Earnhardt after a couple of drinks or a joint, the biggest problem there has nothing to do with motor control and everything to do with impaired decision making. 

How can goggles accurately simulate the distorted decision making processes associated with alcohol or marijuana? Is there a “munchies” setting on these goggles to simulate strong Funion cravings? Are there “daydreaming” or “extreme apathy” settings to simulate the act of doing absolutely nothing and loving it?

To me this seems like an over- complicated, 21st century version of reefer madness with some shrewd capitalism and bogus R&D thrown in for flavor. In this case, “educate the kids,” seems synonymous with, “scare the kids.” But this is nothing new, and that is part of the problem. 

In 1994 Chris Boucher led a hemp research project at the USDA research facility in Imperial Valley California.

Watch the video from 1994.

At the time, Chris thought industrial (or agricultural) hemp would be legal to grow in the US in a few years. We’re now 20 years later and hemp is still not legal to grow in the US, despite being legal to grow in Canada, China, England, France, and Russia, among others.

The Canadians control most of the food market, Europeans control the CBD market, and the Chinese control the textile market.

The US is one of the few industrial countries that doesn’t grow hemp. It is, however, legal to import industrial hemp and sell products based on it.

Industrial hemp, by US legal definition, contains less than 0.3 percent THC.

According to a recent article in Politico:

Imported hemp products — because there’s no other way to get them in the United States — represented a $580 million market in 2013 with double-digit annual growth, according to Eric Steenstra, executive director of the Hemp Industry Association. All kinds of jobs, from positions in agriculture to manufacturing would be created in the United States if it were legalized here, he said.

Hemp is already legal to produce in at least 30 countries, including Canada. If it becomes legal to cultivate in the U.S., production could reach 100,000 acres or more nationwide in the next decade, Steenstra predicted.

Kentucky is leading the charge towards legalization in the US, thanks to the strong will of Kentucky politicians such as Rand Paul, Mitch McConnell, and Thomas Massie, who are willing to fight the DEA and the federal government for their states right to grow and sell hemp.

Kentucky is currently researching hemp production as a way to revitalize its farming communities. Farmers participating in the project determined that they made three times more than they made growing tobacco, and ten times what they made growing corn.

Imagine if Nike, Apple, or Coca-Cola, brands that are globally recognized, could only sell products and develop their respective brand reputations in their home states of Oregon, California and Georgia.

That is the challenge faced by brands in the medical and recreational cannabis space. When you’re only allowed to produce and sell within state lines, how do you scale nationally and, at some point, globally.

Licensing is a tool used by many leading brands looking to expand beyond their home turf. 

Dixie Elixers, a well known edibles and drink brand in Colorado, recently struck a deal with Altai brands to be the exclusive licensee of the Dixie Elixers brand in California.

I sat down with Robert Weakley, co-founder and CEO of Altai Brands, to talk about entrepreneurship, licensing and the edibles market.

A marijuana dispensary in Vancouver is hosting a contest to encourage people to vote in this year’s federal election, with top prizes of free pot and Snoop Dogg tickets. 

To enter, contestants must prove they cast a ballot on Oct. 19.

Yes, you read that right. Prizes are free pot and a meet and greet with the King of rap and marijuana, S-N-OO-P  D-O-GG

“This is a non-partisan initiative,” said Danny Kresnyak, who is leading the Eden Medicinal Society’s contest. “We aren’t telling people who to vote for, we’re simply telling them to vote…. Our registered clientele is well into the five figures, and we think that’s an important demographic.”

When asked about the contest, Elections Canada spokesperson Dugald Maudsley said that the organizers should consult the Elections Act.

“Looking at the Canada Elections Act, any time something tangible is offered, or the opportunity to win something tangible in exchange for a vote, there is a danger that there could be a violation under section 481,” Maudsley said.

“What we recognize is that due to the Fair Elections Act, Elections Canada can no longer advocate the vote amongst the Canadian population,” said Kresnyak.“We believe that it is the essence of democracy to advocate the vote, so we’ve taken up that cause.”

It is not clear if participants must be using marijuana for medicinal or recreational purposes, but it will definitely be drawing in a crowd.

Click the link for the full article.

Reblog, like, tweet, and share!

In the city of Vancouver, smoking is forbidden at parks (and their parking lots), public beaches, golf courses, along the seawall, on patios, within six metres of any entryways including windows, outside of building air intakes, and inside cars if someone 16 or younger is present. Other municipalities in the province have taken similar measures... 

Toronto enacted a bylaw this past summer making it illegal to smoke on patios. You can still smoke like a foot away from where your friends are sitting, but if there's an enclosure of some sort, you gotta be on the outside of it.

Residential buildings in BC are also following suit, designating themselves as "smoke free."

Paul Aradi thought he was safe. The 70-year-old veteran has been sucking back nicotine and tar for half a century. He bought his Langley unit 10 years ago, but in 2009, his condo board passed a rule banning smoking inside common areas and suites. Aradi's response to that rule has pretty much been: GFY. 

He's continued to smoke in his suite—at the rate of a pack and a half every two days—and as such, has been the subject of multiple complaints to his board. He's also racked up more than $11,000 in fines, which he hasn't paid, nor has he ceased smoking. I repeat: this man gives zero fucks...

For the full story on Aradi, the man who “gives no fucks”, click the link to be directed to the original article on VICE.

Reblog, retweet, share, and like!

Jeff Raber, CEO, The Werc Shop, a cannabis analysis laboratory that works with dispensaries and growers to test cannabis for everything from THC and CBD levels to pesticides and mold, talks about his role educating policy makers who draft cannabis laws across the country and state regulators who implement those laws.

Laws cannot be changed easily, and should be written by legislators to provide a broad based framework rather than attempt to get into the details. Details should be left to regulations, which can be changed more easily if regulators get them wrong the first time. Regulations are more fluid and dynamic and are used to tighten up laws.

When legislators attempt to fit everything into the law and then lawmakers and people affected by the law generally agree that one (or many) of the details of the law should be changed based on experience, it takes a long time to be corrected. In California, AB 266 took how long to get through the legislative body?!

Colorado living the green dream as marijuana tax revenues nearly double last year's figures

In one of the least surprising news stories of the year, marijuana sales - and their subsequent tax revenues - have soared during their second year as more people come to accept recreational marijuana as a societal norm. 

Scott Keyes reports for The Guardian:

Legal marijuana tax revenues have been breaking records in Colorado this summer, nearly doubling monthly numbers from last year and on pace to exceed projections of legal sales that bring revenue back to the state.

Through the first seven months of this year, Colorado has brought in nearly $73.5m, putting the state on pace to collect over $125m for the year.

In 2014, experts predicted legal cannabis would bring in upwards of $70m to the state’s tax coffers. In reality, the state collected just $44m in marijuana taxes.

Sales totals fell short of projections in 2014, the first year of legalized recreational sales in the state (and the nation) But this year, tax revenue from marijuana sales is exceeding initial projections of $70m.

Many in the marijuana industry attribute the sales boom to a tipping point in social acceptance.

“I attribute it to ... more and more people ... comfortable with the legalization of marijuana,” said Tyler Henson, president of the Colorado Cannabis Chamber of Commerce. “They don’t see it as something that’s bad for them.”

Accessibility must also account for the sales boom. Colorado’s landscape has changed to include hundreds of marijuana dispensaries across the state, whereas in 2014, there were only a few dozen. 

The article also mentions that dispensaries are seeing more sophisticated customers walking through their doors. The stereotypical teenage stoner has largely been replaced by young professionals and middle-aged businessmen. 

Hopefully this money will go where it is supposed to go and Colorado schools can expect an expanded budget in the near future.