Posts Tagged ‘Marijuana’

Suicide rates fall when states legalize medical marijuana, says new study

Sunday, February 26th, 2012

A University of Colorado economics professor has co-authored a study, just released by the Institute for the Study of Labor in Bonn, Germany that concludes that suicide rates among young males declines markedly after states legalize medical marijuana. Professors at Montana State University and San Diego State University were also involved in the study. The study is titled “High on Life: Medical Marijuana Laws and Suicide.”

CU professor Daniel Rees

CU economics professor Daniel Rees is co-author of a study which concludes that passage of medical marijuana laws leads to a decrease in suicides among young men. (Image: CU Denver)

CU Denver professor Daniel Rees and his coauthors don’t say conclusively why suicide rates fall. They offer evidence that marijuana acts as an antidepressant when used moderately, but also note that using marijuana in larger amounts can actually lead to depression.

They also note that the sale of alcohol to young males declines in states that legalize medical marijuana and note that alcohol is a known depressant the use of which can lead to suicidal thoughts. Rees did not return a phone call seeking comment.

from the study:

Using state-level data for the period 1990 through 2007, we estimate the effect of legalizing medical marijuana on suicide rates. Our results suggest that the passage of a medical marijuana law is associated with an almost 5 percent reduction in the total suicide rate, an 11 percent reduction in the suicide rate of 20- through 29-year-old males, and a 9 percent reduction in the suicide rate of 30- through 39-year-old males.

We conclude that the legalization of medical marijuana leads to an improvement in the psychological wellbeing of young adult males, an improvement that is reflected in fewer suicides.

In an often-cited article, Hamermesh and Soss (1974) argued that negative shocks to happiness may reduce expected lifetime utility to the point where an individual will decide to take his or her own life. The negative relationship between legalization and suicides among young adult males is consistent with the argument that marijuana can be used to cope with such shocks. However, estimates provided by Anderson et al. (2011) provide an alternative explanation. These authors found that the passage of MMLs (medical marijuana laws) led to sharp decreases in alcohol-related traffic fatalities, self-reported alcohol use, and per capita beer sales. The strong association between alcohol consumption and suicide related outcomes found by previous researchers (Markowitz et al. 2003; Carpenter 2004; Sullivan et al. 2004; Rodriguez Andres 2005; Carpenter and Dobkin 2009) raises the possibility that medical marijuana laws reduce the risk of suicide by decreasing alcohol consumption.

Speaking recently at the University of Denver, Amanda Reiman, Ph.D, the director of research at the Berkeley Patients Group and a lecturer at the University of California, Berkeley, said that marijuana has medical value even for people not suffering from one of the ailments that medical marijuana laws typically allow people to use marijuana for.

“We deontologically believe that drug use is inherently wrong, which is why it is hard for us to believe there are responsible users. Do you really have to be sick to get benefit from cannabis?” she asked rhetorically.

She said that when you ask people why they smoke marijuana, the most common answer is that it helps them relax. “The word medical is redundant when talking about cannabis. Relaxation itself is medicinal.”

Reiman’s words were echoed on the DU panel by University of California law professor Marsha Cohen, who said that when asked why they smoke marijuana, people answer “‘It makes me feel better.’ That makes it medicinal use,” she said.

Mason Tvert, executive director of SAFER (Safer Alternative for Recreational Enjoyment) and one of the organizers of a ballot initiative to regulate marijuana like alcohol, which will probably be on the Colorado ballot in November, said he was not surprised by the study’s conclusions.

“We know marijuana has medicinal value, and we know that people living with pain sometimes kill themselves,” Tvert said. He added that the connection with alcohol use was intriguing. “Every credible study ever done proves that marijuana is safer than alcohol,” he said.

The Colorado Independent contacted numerous mental health/suicide prevention organizations but could not find anyone willing to comment for this article. Needless to say, other studies have reached other conclusions regarding the effect of marijuana on mental health. For one such perspective, click here.

The Colorado Independent

Montana judge tosses key provisions of new medical marijuana laws

Wednesday, July 6th, 2011

marijuanaleaf171

Angering prohibitionists, a judge in Montana has upheld some parts of the state’s restrictive new medical marijuana laws and thrown other parts to the wind.

Judge James Reynolds decision tosses out rules that would have prevented caregivers from charging patients for the marijuana they grow. It also removes a ban on advertising and removes limitations on how many patients any individual caregiver can provide marijuana to.

He also struck a provision calling for the review of the work of any doctor recommending marijuana to more than 25 patients in a year.

Opponents of the state’s new more restrictive laws say they are pleased with the decision but that it doesn’t go far enough and they are pushing ahead with gathering signatures to put the issue before voters again, noting that more than 60 percent of voters originally approved the state’s legalization of medical marijuana.

Supporters of the new law, especially Republicans serving in the Legislature, said they are unhappy with the ruling, noting that it is the Legislature’s job to pass laws and should not be up to the judiciary to overturn those laws.

From Reuters:

In a preliminary injunction issued on Thursday, state District Judge James Reynolds in Helena ruled those limits would effectively deny access to pot for many patients entitled to use it under the state’s 7-year-old medical marijuana statute.

Reynolds said in his 15-page ruling that he was refraining from making a judgment about whether marijuana has medical benefits, noting that issue already had been decided by Montana voters and the state Legislature.

Instead, he said provisions of the law passed earlier this year to overhaul the original voter-approved 2004 ballot measure legalizing pot for medicinal purposes went too far.

Reynolds specifically blocked provisions outlawing any profits in the supply of medical marijuana, including a ban on growers charging customers to recoup the cost of cultivation and a ban on advertising and promotion of medicinal pot.

He also barred enforcement of sections of the new law limiting cultivation to no more than three patients per supplier.

“The court is unaware of and has not been shown where any person in any other licensed and lawful industry in Montana — be he a barber, an accountant, a lawyer or a doctor — who, providing a legal product or service, is denied the right to charge for that service or is limited in the number of people he or she can serve,” Reynolds wrote.

He added that such restrictions “will certainly limit the number of willing providers and will thereby deny the access of Montanans otherwise eligible for medical marijuana to this legal product and thereby deny these persons this fundamental right of seeking their health in a lawful manner.”

The judge’s decision can be found here.

While Reynolds struck only four out of more than 30 sections in the state’s new law, they were among the more important sections and the tone of the ruling seemed far more sympathetic toward plaintiffs than toward the state.

The Colorado Independent

Govt. entity that controls access to research-grade marijuana in U.S. not open to possible medical benefits, critics allege

Sunday, July 3rd, 2011

(Image: Wikimedia Commons)

The American Independent has long reported on inconsistencies in federal acknowledgment of marijuana’s medical benefits. These came to a head in March, when an update to the National Cancer Institute’s (NCI) treatment database went into detail about the treatment potential of marijuana as prescribed for cancer patients.

In a series of occasionally frantic NCI emails, the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) emerged as the boogeyman of medical marijuana advocates like database contributor Dr. Donald Abrams. To Abrams’ chagrin, several of NIDA’s requests to remove aspects of the entry were granted, and the current version of the marijuana entry that appears on NCI’s site is missing several key elements from the original that NIDA had taken issue with. How, it must be asked, did one agency come to hold such sway over government conversations on medical marijuana?

The answer to that question stretches back to 1961, when the UN drafted the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, an international treaty meant to control the flow of illicit drugs across borders and within member countries. Speaking for the institute, NIDA’s deputy press officer Sheri Grabus explains that the convention “required each nation to designate a single official source of marijuana for medicinal research.” In the U.S., NIDA ended up with that responsibility, and it’s been the gatekeeper for legal government and private research on marijuana ever since.

Because marijuana is a Schedule I drug, any researcher looking to study marijuana has to get prior approval from the DEA. But it’s NIDA that ultimately decides who gets to do marijuana research and for what purposes.

NIDA is also the sole pipeline for researchers to the nation’s only legal marijuana grow farm. Since 1975, Dr. Mahmoud Elsohly has been a research professor at the University of Mississippi; for more than 30 years, he’s held the contract to supply marijuana for all research in the U.S.

Simplifying research by making one agency responsible for approval and one man responsible for growing the materials isn’t necessarily controversial. What worries both advocates and researchers is a perceived anti-medical marijuana agenda within NIDA.

“It’s an incredibly expensive and bureaucratic process, which deters science on so many levels,” says Allen St. Pierre, executive director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML). St. Pierre contends further that with few exceptions, NIDA only allows access to marijuana if a researcher is looking to show the drug’s adverse effects.

While Abrams declined to comment to The American Independent, his emails put him firmly on the side against NIDA. “I am not happy that NIDA has been able to impose their agenda on us,” he wrote in March. “I am considering resigning from the Board if we allow politics to trump science!” Abrams’ testy history with NIDA goes back to 1996, when the agency only allowed him access to Elsohly’s marijuana after he agreed to change the focus of a marijuana study [PDF] from examining the drug’s benefits to AIDS patients to looking instead at its adverse effects.

For its part, NIDA admits that most research on the adverse effects of marijuana gets the agency’s support but claims it’s not by design. “In fact, for the past several years very few proposals have been submitted to the NIH for testing the medicinal effects of smoked marijuana,” NIDA tells TAI. “Rather, the more promising approach for research has been on cannabinoids.”

This diplomatic answer happens to confirm the notion that the government may give the pharmaceutical industry a legal pass to develop marijuana-based drugs, quashing state-legal dispensaries that sell whole-plant cannabis. But it’s also in line with the contention among abuse specialists that their biggest problem with medical marijuana presently is that people smoke it. As more entities in the federal government make it clear that they recognize the medicinal benefits of the drug, the last big hurdle to fall before medical marijuana has a chance at federal recognition is its delivery system. The question that remains is whether Big Pharma’s going to get there first. And with the first non-synthetic cannabinoid derived from whole-plant marijuana winding down testing, all signs point to that being a matter of when, not if.

The Colorado Independent

Judge Gray Files New Initiative to Regulate Marijuana Like Wine With Attorney General

Friday, May 20th, 2011

JUDGE GRAY FILES NEW INITIATIVE TO REGULATE MARIJUANA LIKE WINE WITH ATTORNEY GENERAL
Retired Superior Court judge wants marijuana strictly regulated and kept away from minors. Filed voter initiative Wednesday with Attorney General to regulate marijuana like wine.

Sacramento, Calif., May 18, 2011 — He was once a determined drug warrior, but now former Assistant US Attorney and Superior Court Judge James P. Gray believes the time has come to take marijuana out of the black market and regulate it instead. After years of witnessing the harm caused by outlawing marijuana, Judge Gray filed a voter initiative on Wednesday, May 18, with the California Attorney General’s office that will regulate marijuana like wine.

From a press conference held in front of the Attorney General’s office at 1300 I Street, Judge Gray stated, “Instead of my categorizing the initiative, I think it would be better for any people interested to review it themselves. It can be downloaded at www.RegulateMarijuanaLikeWine.com. When people review it, they will see that it allows anyone who is 21 years of age or older to raise up to 25 plants per year or possess up to 12 pounds of dried marijuana without being licensed, regulated or taxed, except for income or sales taxes, where applicable (which is basically the same as the home brewing provisions for wine and beer); it prohibits any government entities from taxing marijuana to a greater extent than they do wine; and it expressly does not change the provisions of Prop. 215 and its progeny, which would include, of course, the provisions for those under 21 years of age to be able to use their medicine as long as they are in compliance with those laws. It also expressly prohibits the public advertising of the sales or use of marijuana, except for medical marijuana under Prop. 215 and products made from hemp. And finally, it would not only prohibit the arrest or seizure of property, etc., of anyone 21 years of age or older who is in compliance with the initiative, it would also prohibit anyone employed by or under contract with the State of California from cooperating with federal agents in enforcing federal law.

In short, I think this is a good initiative that will repeal the failed policy of Marijuana Prohibition in California for adults, and basically be of benefit to California and everyone in it, except the Prison Guards’ Union. That is our intent, and I actually think we have been pretty successful in accomplishing it.”

“Our policy of marijuana prohibition has failed from every standpoint imaginable: unnecessary prison growth, increased taxes, increased crime and corruption here and abroad, loss of civil liberties, decreased health, and diversion of resources that are needed to address other problems in society,” Gray said.

Gray added that he is especially concerned about the disastrous effects of outlawing marijuana on families and kids, effects he has witnessed for himself as a judge and federal prosecutor. “Far from protecting our children, our present policy is actually recruiting them to a lifestyle of drug usage and drug selling,” charged Gray.

When challenged over the wisdom of allowing for sales to adults 21 and older, Gray has no doubts that it is time to regulate marijuana and take it out of the black market. “Many things in our society are dangerous, but making them illegal is not the answer. Does anyone really believe that making tobacco illegal would reduce the harm it causes? What about glue, gasoline, chain saws and high cholesterol foods? Further, if you think about it, we have at least some controls with regard to the sales and use of alcohol and tobacco, because they are regulated by the government. We have no controls at all with marijuana, because it is currently controlled by the mob,” Gray emphasized.

A copy of Judge Gray’s voter initiative and one minute video can be viewed at the Regulate Marijuana Like Wine website: http://www.regulatemarijuanalikewine.com

Sponsored by the Committee to Regulate Marijuana Like Wine 2012, campaign ID #1336887.

GrayAGMay18
FilingAGmay18

Photos: William McPike, Judge James P. Gray and Bishop Ron Allen look on as Steve Kubby signs off on an official request to the California Attorney General for a Title and Summary. The initiative, called the Regulate Marijuana Like Wine Act, would allow cannabis to be grown, sold, taxed and consumed like wine. Adults who grow 12 pounds or less would be exempt from any regulations or taxes. Photo by Jennina Chiavetta, May 18, 2012.

Blogger Post Digg Delicious Email Facebook Fark FriendFeed Google Buzz Google Bookmarks Google Gmail LinkedIn Reddit Shoutwire StumbleUpon Slashdot Share

Independent Political Report

Video for the New Marijuana Initiative in California: Regulate Marijuana Like Wine

Sunday, May 15th, 2011

Judge Jim Gray and Steve Kubby have been hard at work for a new initiative for 2012.

Blogger Post Digg Delicious Email Facebook Fark FriendFeed Google Buzz Google Bookmarks Google Gmail LinkedIn Reddit Shoutwire StumbleUpon Slashdot Share

Independent Political Report

SF Weekly: Steve Kubby, Prop 215 Author, Drafts New initiative to Decriminalize Marijuana

Wednesday, March 2nd, 2011

Chris Roberts at SF weekly:

Steve Kubby has earned his stripes: Before he was a Libertarian Party candidate for governor of California and President of the United States (and South Lake Tahoe City Council), Kubby was a model activist and poster child for the medical cannabis movement. The latter because he has lived with a rare form of adrenal cancer for over 40 years, thanks to medical marijuana, and the former for co-authoring Proposition 215.

Now, Kubby, 64, is circulating a proposed ballot initiative for 2012 that, he told SF Weekly on Monday, can not only succeed where Proposition 19 failed last November, but could lead toward a changed federal policy on marijuana.

[..]

Exactly how this will play with the Prop. 19 folks and the money-makers who bankrolled them is unclear. A message for Steve Gutwillig, chair of the state Drug Policy Alliance (which funneled millions to the Prop. 19 effort, from the likes of George Soros and others), was not immediately returned. A spokeswoman for the Prop. 19 campaign did not immediately return an e-mail, either.

But Kubby says he’s willing to play ball. “I’m not married to our initiative,” he said. “If [other efforts] cover the same ground we cover, and poll at 60 percent or above, I will get on board.”

Kubby says he’s currently fundraising to pay for polls, with plans to have a finalized initiative in the hands of paid signature gatherers by the fall. The initiative would require 504,760 validated signatures by February 2012 to qualify for the November 2012 ballot.

IPR note: See our previous story, Steve Kubby: Liberty, Leadership and Libertarianism and facebook for more about this effort.

Blogger Post Digg Delicious Email Facebook Fark FriendFeed Google Buzz Google Bookmarks Google Gmail LinkedIn Reddit Shoutwire StumbleUpon Slashdot Share

Independent Political Report

Montana House committee passes bill to overrule Missoula’s efforts to make marijuana enforcement a low priority

Monday, February 21st, 2011

In Montana, where voters overwhelmingly approved a measure legalizing medical marijuana back in 2004, the winds of change are blowing.

A few days ago the Montana House took a trip into local politics, voting by a 3-1 margin to pass a bill out of committee that would repeal a Missoula initiative instructing local law enforcement to make marijuana laws its lowest priority.

The Montana House has already voted by a wide margin to overturn the state’s medical marijuana laws.

The Senate will take the matter up soon, but in the Senate there are competing bills, with some legislators favoring additional regulation instead of outright appeal.

Some Democrats in the Legislature say it wouldn’t be right to outlaw the medicine outright legislatively,
considering it was passed by voters. Republicans, though, tend to take the stance that the voters were duped and that people are using medical marijuana recreationally.

In Missoula, recent debate has centered on the economic impact of repeal, which could be large, putting people out of work and causing commercial real estate to take a nose dive.

From a University of Montana newspaper:

Dave Stephens, owner of Better Life Montana, said that if the repeal is passed, he predicts the loss of thousands of jobs, lost city revenue from business taxes and many more people relying on food stamps.

“It’s a bad idea all the way around,” Stephens said.

Stephens owns and runs Better Life on his own and said he had hoped to hire employees in the next year. However, if House Bill 161 is passed, Stephens said, “We’d be out of business.”

He is hopeful that the bill will not be approved by the state Legislature and isn’t actively anticipating having to close down his business.

“I feel like the governor will veto it if it comes down to it,” he said.

The governor, Brian Schweitzer, is a Democrat.

In Colorado, where the right to medical marijuana is guaranteed by the constitution, the Legislature cannot ban the medicine outright, but can only craft laws by which to regulate that right.

That hardly seems to make the matter less contentious, however, as evidenced by a recent fracas in the Capitol that pitted medical marijuana advocates against a legislator who was trying to take their side in the debate.

Colorado Independent

Marijuana petition denied by Board of Health

Friday, January 21st, 2011

The Colorado Board of Health Wednesday denied the Cannabis Therapy Institute’s Petition for Emergency Rules to Protect Patient Privacy on the grounds that the issue did not constitute an emergency as defined in the state Administrative Procedure Act.

The Board of Health did agree to hold an informational meeting on the topic at the next Board of Health meeting on Feb. 16.

CTI’s proposed emergency rules would have prohibited the CDPHE from sharing the CDPHE Confidential Registry with any outside agencies. The rules also contain procedures to ensure confidentiality and generate “incident reports” if the Registry is breached. CTI’s petition came as a result of plans by the CDPHE to allow the Colorado Department of Revenue to replace the current CDPHE Confidential Registry with a database and surveillance system that some medical marijuana advocates believe would make confidentiality easier to breach.

Colorado Independent

Medical marijuana records found near dumpster

Friday, December 31st, 2010

A Denver resident got a surprise yesterday when he took his recycling out: He found a binder full of information about people who have applied for or have received medical marijuana licenses.

From a story at the 9news website:

“I picked the book up and I opened it and right away. I noticed the top of each page; medical marijuana registry forms. The next thing I noticed is there is all these people’s personal information on each one of those sheets,” Morton said.

The forms were inside plastic sleeves and contained social security numbers and dates of birth, along with patient names, addresses and telephone numbers. The binder contained the personal and medical information of dozens of patients.

The forms were on letterhead identified as Apothecary of Colorado, a dispensary in Denver.

Adam Stapen, an attorney for Apothecary of Colorado, says their patient records are “kept under lock and key to protect privacy of patients.”

He says the current owners purchased the dispensary on July 1 and it is possible the patient records are from before that.

Medical marijuana advocates today decried what they say is a medical marijuana registry lacking the safeguards needed to keep records confidential.

Colorado Independent

Marijuana is lifting spirits — and budgets — in mountain towns

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2009

That smoke wafting down from the mountains west of Boulder may not all be from forest fires. According to a New York Times article today, mountain communities long known for their tolerance of the illegal weed are now becoming known as havens for legal smokers as well.

The Times reports that statewide about 1 in 60 residents has a medical marijuana license, but that in some mountain communities the ratio is closer to 1 in 20.

In Nederland, a town of 1,400, for instance, there are seven legal medical marijuana dispensaries. Town coffers are flush as a result.

In June alone, while many communities around the nation were still sputtering through economic doldrums, sales taxes collected in Nederland came in a robust 54 percent above those of June 2009. Without the tax collected on marijuana, the increase would have been 22 percent.

“It’s been here, probably in an illegal capacity, for a long time, but now there’s an opportunity for industry,” said Nederland’s mayor, Sumaya Abu-Haidar. “There’s an opportunity for free enterprise, an opportunity for people to make a living in a way that wasn’t available before.”

Philip Dyer, 45, a local musician, put it another way. The government, he said, “has finally gotten smart enough to regulate it and get their piece.”

Supporters of medical marijuana say the pattern — medical use most predominant in places of historically high recreational use — is simply a reflection of better knowledge about the drug and its properties. People in communities where marijuana has been accepted, they say, know more about its medical benefits than those in other parts of the state where medical marijuana patients are rare.

Eagle County and the town of Minturn, near the ski resort of Vail, both passed medical marijuana ballot questions allowing dispensaries and grow operations, and the Colorado Independent reported Friday that pro-legalization groups are already beginning to plan for 2012, when they think the state may finally be ready to pass a measure that would make pot legal in Colorado with or without a medical pretext.

Colorado Independent