cannabisnews.com: Marijuana Is No Rx










  Marijuana Is No Rx

Posted by CN Staff on December 02, 2004 at 21:23:46 PT
Business - Investor's Business Daily 
Source: Investor's Business Daily 

The Law: The Supreme Court has once again heard arguments in a case involving so-called medical marijuana. And once again, compassion for the sick and dying is being exploited by those with another agenda. Three years ago the court ruled 8-0 that federal laws supersede state laws and that federal law prohibits the distribution or sale of marijuana. In so doing, it refused to protect "clubs" that distributed "medical" marijuana from federal charges.
Now, in a ruling on a case brought by Angel Raich, who suffers from a brain tumor, and Diane Monson, who suffers from degenerative spinal disease, the (surprise!) San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court has found that federal prosecution of medical marijuana users who use homegrown cannabis with their doctor's permission and their state's approval is unconstitutional. Many supporters of medical marijuana claim their purpose is to relieve suffering and not use the issue as a means to legalize drugs. But when asked in a January 2000 interview if medical marijuana was a Trojan horse for drug legalization, the director of an organization dedicated to ending the drug war replied: "I hope so." Fact is, smoked marijuana has no medical value that can't be met by a legal, FDA approved prescription drug called Marinol that contains the active ingredient in marijuana. Marinol is administered in a controlled dose and has been cleared by the medical community. It has been found to relieve the nausea and vomiting associated with chemotherapy for cancer patients and to assist with loss of appetite for AIDS patients. According to Dr. Andrea Barthwell, past president of the American Society of Addiction Medicine, the only property that Marinol lacks is the capacity to create a "high." The first rule of medicine is to do no harm. According to the National Institutes of Health, someone who smokes five joints a week may be taking in as many cancer-causing chemicals as someone who smokes a pack of cigarettes daily. Smoking one marijuana cigarette deposits four times as much tar into the lungs as a filtered tobacco cigarette. A study by a team of researchers led by Dr. Thomas Klein at the University of South Florida and published in the journal DNA and Cell Biology shows that marijuana alters the immune system as well as the brain. In those whose immune systems are already impaired, marijuana may actually aggravate deteriorating health. Raich and Monson may have a legitimate medical need for pain relief and a legitimate hope that smoked marijuana can provide it. But as Justice Stephen Breyer has noted, if the medical marijuana laws are allowed to stand, "Everybody will say mine is medical." It's true some chemicals in the marijuana plant offer some potential for medical use. Yet smoking the raw plant, which is what advocates want approved, is a method of delivery supported by neither law nor scientific evidence -- and as a pain-killer has about as much utility as a good bottle of bourbon. The medical marijuana movement is blowing smoke. Source: Investor's Business Daily (US)Published: December 02, 2004Copyright: 2004 Investor's Business Daily, Inc.Contact: IBDnews investors.comWebsite: http://www.investors.com/Related Articles & Web Site:Angel Raich v. Ashcroft Newshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/raich.htmOur Right To Be Free from Painhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19954.shtmlSupreme Court Looks at Medical Marijuanahttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19952.shtmlMed Marijuana Case Tests Limits of Federalismhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19951.shtml 

Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help





Comment #33 posted by runruff on December 05, 2004 at 18:38:09 PT:
Websurfer 11
You have me standing on my chair. Great job!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #32 posted by potpal on December 05, 2004 at 05:40:31 PT
Websurfer
Great job!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #31 posted by dr slider on December 04, 2004 at 09:56:13 PT:
dangerous comparisons
Vioxx, Aspirin, Marinol, CannabisOne of these doesn't belong, which one?Hint: Its the only one that's never been patented.BECAUSE IT IS AN HERB!!!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #30 posted by breeze on December 04, 2004 at 06:11:41 PT
WebSurfer 2-
That was AWESOME!!!
I especially loved what you said about filters and vaporizers!!!!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #29 posted by Hope on December 03, 2004 at 22:00:45 PT
websurfer2
Excellent! That's a great one!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #28 posted by websurfer2 on December 03, 2004 at 21:46:51 PT:
Cannabis Rex (and Rx)
A copy of my email to Investor's Business Daily follows:Regarding your article entitled "Marijuana Is No Rx" dated December 02, 2004.More people have been killed by Vioxx in the short though tragic time it has been available as an FDA approved drug, than have ever been killed by marijuana in it's history of use of approx. 5,000 years. If the 1st rule of medicine is to do no harm, than intentionally denying cannabis from ill patients who would die otherwise, is definely doing harm. All drugs are by their nature dangerous, they affect something to some degree, they possess "activity". We must examine the consequences of using the drug vs not using the drug. What are its side effects? The medical community in the U.S. used cannabis in a tincture (an alcohol based preparation) until it was made illegal under the 1937 Marijuana Tax Stamp Act. They didn't stop using it because it was ineffective or dangerous. They stopped using it because it was illegal and doctors were jailed for violating the statute.People have learned that cannabis, to use the proper name, works for many ailments and has few medical side effects. People wouldn't use it if it didn't work. It is much safer than the alternatives. Filters, just as on tobacco cigarettes, could be provided on cannabis cigarettes, to reduce the tar if that is indeed a problem. Vaporizers provide a non-burning method of delivering the components without the need for actual combustion.Marinol is expensive, and doesn't work for most people because it only contains a single chemical found in cannabis, delta9 THC. It does make you high, despite what was reported in your article, although most people who have used it describe it as being an "uncomfortable high". Marinol, is just what we don't need. Another drug that doesn't work, costs too much and has a bad side effect, to replace a drug, Cannabis, that works, is relatively cheap when grown by the patient, and the only really bad side effect is that it is a felony to grow, use or own.To quote an expert:"Cannabis is remarkably safe. Although not harmless, it is surely less toxic than most of the conventional medicines it could replace if it were legally available. Despite its use by millions of people over thousands of years, cannabis has never caused an overdose death. The most serious concern is respiratory system damage from smoking, but that can easily be addressed by increasing the potency of cannabis and by developing the technology to separate the particulate matter in marihuana smoke from its active ingredients, the cannabinoids (prohibition, incidentally, has prevented this technology from flourishing). Once cannabis regains the place in the U.S. Pharmacopoeia that it lost in 1941 after the passage of the Marihuana Tax Act (1937), it will be among the least toxic substances in that compendium. Right now the greatest danger in using marihuana medically is the illegality that imposes a great deal of anxiety and expense on people who are already suffering. " Formal Testimony of Dr. Lester Grinspoon, before the Crime Subcommittee, Judiciary Committee, U.S. House of Representatives, October 1st 1997.Vioxx is to aspirin, as Marinol is to cannabis. Should the Supreme Court be deciding medicine? Probably not, the real issue before them is "states rights" and the commerce clause, if you'd care to write an article about those issues and how they apply to this case I'd love to see it.P.S. I hope you do investment research better than journalistic research. This article looks like it was single sourced through NIDA or DEA, you might want to actually talk to some doctors and patients who aren't on the "approved by NIDA" list next time. I would also suggest reading "Marijuana, The Forbidden Medicine" by Lester Grinspoon, M.D., Associate Professor of Psychiatry (Emeritus) at Harvard Medical School and James Bakalar, J.D., Lecturer in Law in the Department of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #27 posted by charmed quark on December 03, 2004 at 18:40:15 PT
Marinol doesn't make you high?
I've been hearing this a lot. Where is this little idiocy coming from? You just have to read the PDR listing on Marinol to know this is false.In fact, the problem with Marinol is it gets you too high for its medical benefits. Regular cannabis has a better medical effects to high ratio. More medical bang for less high.CQ
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #26 posted by Hope on December 03, 2004 at 17:50:38 PT
changed one sentence to
You all must be complimented on having no true understanding or real knowledge of your subject, but forging ahead regardless.(I remind myself of a raging Chihuahua.) :-(
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #25 posted by Hope on December 03, 2004 at 17:44:33 PT
to the editorial board
To the editorial board,Wow! The entire editorial board mocking, mocking, mocking. Mocking ill and diseased people. Mocking those who care about them. Mock on “ladies and gentlemen” of the editorial board. Many people escape karma or Jesus saves them from having to pay for their sins, and some people just don't have to deal with a conscience, so you guys will likely be fine. But oh my...you are good at mocking others and believing the deceived and deceivers. You all must be complimented on having no true understanding or real knowledge of your subject. The depth of the lack of your understanding is astounding.Congratulations. You are a credit to your kind.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #24 posted by Hope on December 03, 2004 at 17:22:10 PT
FoM
Thanks for the pat on the back. I'll accept that gesture of affection by including myself in "all of you".And thanks for the first Christmas wish of the season. It sounds like you might have your tree up and have a bit of that Christmas glow going on. That's good. I hope you have a wonderful Christmas, too. Joy...it's a good thing.I'm sure I speak for many when I say, "We feel a great deal of affection for you, too."It can't be said too often...Thank you for all you do.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #23 posted by Hope on December 03, 2004 at 17:14:39 PT
"...It's so scary...."
Comment 4Well said, lilgrasshoppah77. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #22 posted by Hope on December 03, 2004 at 16:30:12 PT
Breeze, Comment 12
That's an excellent idea!Thanks.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #21 posted by Hope on December 03, 2004 at 15:53:49 PT
Shishaldin
Sick Andscared.I've seen a lot of monikers on the web but that is the saddest one I ever saw. It broke my heart.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #20 posted by Hope on December 03, 2004 at 15:50:39 PT
Kaptinemo, Comment 13
You are so right. It frightens me to realize how little people can think of other people.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #19 posted by global_warming on December 03, 2004 at 15:00:51 PT
You can always smell the stink of the Money Trail
Even the "gangsters" that "this" prohibition has spawned have learned to invest their ill-gotten "money".
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #18 posted by potpal on December 03, 2004 at 13:31:27 PT
eddress
If anyone so desires to write to IBD...something along the lines of 'if you research your ed topics as well as you do your stocks...'. Here's the eddress of their ed dept...
ibdnews investors.com lilgrasshopper...
I agree and share your frustration. Doesn't seem any media org can talk intelligently about cannabis...they can't even call it cannabis for crying out loud.Have a good weekend all...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #17 posted by FoM on December 03, 2004 at 11:59:52 PT
Just a Pat On The Back
I am so proud of all of you. What a pleasant day reading so many great comments on the different threads. You are all so very special to me.Merry Christmas Early!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #16 posted by Shishaldin on December 03, 2004 at 11:29:37 PT
can't get the facts straight 
"According to Dr. Andrea Barthwell, past president of the American Society of Addiction Medicine, the only property that Marinol lacks is the capacity to create a "high.""However, AMA studies (even the clinical prescription notes) say directly otherwise:http://www.rxlist.com/cgi/generic2/drona_wcp.htmFurthermore, the National Academy of Sciences, Institute of Medicine states directly why (CB1 affinity, rather than CB2) Marinol is not as clinically effective, and produces a GREATER level of intoxication on a dose-per basis. In other words, Marinol gets you HIGHER, with less clinical benefit:http://books.nap.edu/html/marimed/ch2.html(those links courtesy of Sick Andscared on the Overgrow.com site. Thanks!)Can't see the facts when $$$ are clouding up your eyesight.Peace and Strength,Shishaldin
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #15 posted by FoM on December 03, 2004 at 11:07:15 PT
kapt
I'll never forget the horse! Never!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #14 posted by Sam Adams on December 03, 2004 at 11:02:01 PT
Oh my gosh!
Dr. Andrea Barthwell says medical marijuana is bad!  Heavens to Betsy! I'm flushing all mine down the toilet right now.All I can think of is how lucky I must be that the Lord sent Dr. Barthwell to help! 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by kaptinemo on December 03, 2004 at 10:42:35 PT:
Afraid the worker drones might revolt, eh?
 Recall the Horse from Orwell's ANIMAL FARM: he worked and worked and worked...until he died. And his body was unceremoniously packed off to the glue factory. This is *precisely* the aim of those who write such editorials as the one above.The REAL fear of American business? That American workers, so cowed by having their unions (the only effective means of fighting back against a tyrannical corporation that thinks it owns them) destroyed in the Reagan Regime, so worried about having to compete against foreign workers and illegal immigrants here, might decide they've had enough. Gotta keep the wage slaves down, gotta keep their heads bowed, their brows furrowed with worry lines, their backs breaking and knees bent from the work load, their hopes and dreams having no further length and breadth than a few months down the road. And always, *always* ALWAYS the crushing debt, the taxes, the continual treadmill, kept running, running, running like a hamster in a barrel cage.And what surcease do they have? Drugs like nicotine and alcohol, both destructive and addictive, ruining lives and supporting markets at the same time. An ideal situation, really...if you're a heartless monster who sees people as fungible as beans.But cannabis? Cannabis makes people 'lazy' (meaning they refuse to run on that damned treadmill as fast as the boss wants them to). It slows things down and allows you the 'luxury' of thought (which might lead to challenging the whole idea behind being worked to death). And, 'worst' of all, its' non-toxic...so the wage slaves live longer, and they get to draw from the pension the boss had hoped to raid after the next merger.Make no mistake: you are nothing but numbers to those who seek to dominate all aspects of your life under the rubric of 'commerce'. That such are aligned with government, seeking to use its' power to control you for commercial ends and cloaking its' predations with 'public health' as a (lame) excuse is but a modern version of a very old and ugly form of governance: Fascism.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by breeze on December 03, 2004 at 10:28:51 PT
Comment #9 - don
You stated that you thought about writing a letter/email- but did not think its worth the time.Okay- here is where we brainstorm, and come up with a solution. Its simple, actually.Spend a few minutes writing a re-buttal against any one who is a prohib. Usually, their message is always the same- the drug is not medically valuable, People who are for medical marijuana have an ulterior motive- to decriminalize ALL drugs, there are other medicines to control pain, etc. etc. etc.-So what I propose to you, and others who don't feel its worth it to send an email- just write up a short report stating how you feel- and keep it handy whenever you don't feel like taking the time to write one personally addressed to a prohib. And just copy and paste- spend the three seconds to address the person, and there- you have effectively written an email and confronted the person in less time for you to read what I just wrote.It takes consistent, unrelenting movement against each diatribe that contributes to a negative view of marijuana.I personally think that more people would get involved if they just did what I propose. Spend 5 minutes typing in a rebuttal, and send it to each individual that states that their view of prohibition against marijuana is legitimate- and save that rebuttal for future days. Just write it for the "in case" you wish to add something to it on a more personal note. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by JoeCitizen on December 03, 2004 at 10:13:46 PT
You can always tell a Piece of S**t editorial....
when it's anonymous, or credited to the publication or the editorial staff. In other words, no one was willing to put their own name on this turd.Sometimes, when an article legitimately gets some facts wrong, I'll write a rebuttal. But when they throw in just about every lie, exaggeration, and obfuscation in the book, as they did with this one, you know it wasn't written in good faith. It's solely propaganda, and IBD needs to be added to the list of House Organs of the State.JC
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by goneposthole on December 03, 2004 at 09:12:17 PT
it is a well known quote
Better to keep quiet and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.It is attributed to Abraham Lincoln. His version: "Sometimes it is better to keep quiet and have others suspect that you are a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."http://www.economics.utoronto.ca/melino/4060/SeminarTips.htmlI have to give credit where credit is due. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by dongenero on December 03, 2004 at 08:21:34 PT
idiocy
I was about to start working on a letter regrding this jackass article from Investor's Business Daily. I don't really think it is worth the time though.Maybe these idiots should stick to investment reporting! Let's see, they could write about how the Federal Government and the DEA supresses research on Cannabis. They could report on GW's work in the UK on a whole plant, sublingual drug that will do what Marinol doesn't...and how it will not be an American company developing these drugs. Maybe they could write about the hit that the US pharmaceutical companies are afraid of taking if an easily grown plant that is not patentable takes over their profitable synthetic drugs.Maybe...at the VERY least...they could do some actual in depth research into a subject that is clearly out of their expertise, before they publish something like this.Here is some great advice for Investor's Business Daily, that goneposthole recently contributed:"Better to keep quiet and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt."
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by goneposthole on December 03, 2004 at 05:53:43 PT
Back in years from 1981 through 1985 or so
When skunk #1 was the number one sought after cannabis strain, you could smoke one hit (all you ever needed), the ash was 'white' and I had very little problem with the 'tars'.It was clean as a whistle. Now, the 'growers' use anything and everything under the sun to get a maximum harvest. It needs to be legalized and regulated. It is good that the IBD can buy a good bottle of bourbon. Obviously, they're drinking plenty of it. During prohibition, they might have drunk some methanol in hopes it would be good bourbon. They're obviously blind to facts; they just think they drank some good bourbon. Regardless, they're drunker than skunks over there.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by freedom23 on December 03, 2004 at 03:30:29 PT
Nice trolling
Wow, great article. The only thing missing was "won't somebody please think of the children" and "written by John Waters"."Three years ago the court ruled 8-0 that federal laws supersede state laws and that federal law prohibits the distribution or sale of marijuana. In so doing, it refused to protect 'clubs' that distributed 'medical' marijuana from federal charges."US v. OCBC only dealt with the legality of the _sale_ of marijuana. The SCOTUS ruled against OCBC based on Wickard v. Filburn since commerce was involved. They specifically said they were not passing judgment on the noncommercial use of marijuana. In many ways this was not a ruling against medical marijuana but the distribution method used.From the SCOTUS ruling in US v. OCBC:
"[O]r are we passing today on a constitutional question, such as whether the Controlled Substances Act exceeds Congress' power under the Commerce Clause." - Clarence ThomasA lot of important people are coming out in favor of Raich because if she loses the Feds could control _any_ activity on the states' level that _could_ possibly commercial at any time (a dangerous thing). It would also require the Court to reverse themselves on Lopez and Morrison, something that IMO is not going to happen. This case is really about the States' rights to govern themselves in noncommercial activities. People that hate marijuana are supporting Raich.This article is nothing more than first class trolling. The author is no doubt back hiding in the warmth of the underside of his bridge.
"Bullsh*t: Penn & Teller" vs the War on Drugs
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by JR Bob Dobbs on December 03, 2004 at 01:46:10 PT
Money money money
Usually IBD is a pretty rational, sober paper. I guess in this case they don't want to see their precious drug stocks take a hit (no pun intended) when they have to compete with cannabis. I wonder if IBD could do a fair and balanced study on the economic changes that legally regulated marijuana could bring about, both for good or ill... now that would be interesting. This article is just more fearmongering from people whose economic interests rest with the status quo, and who will cling to that status quo no matter how many people it harms because it's beneficial to their pocketbooks.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by breeze on December 03, 2004 at 00:48:15 PT
Buisness Investors daily posted this article?
Man- no wonder money is so hard to get..."The first rule of medicine is to do no harm. According to the National Institutes of Health, someone who smokes five joints a week may be taking in as many cancer-causing chemicals as someone who smokes a pack of cigarettes daily. Smoking one marijuana cigarette deposits four times as much tar into the lungs as a filtered tobacco cigarette." - Well smoking "RAW" marijuana is only smoked that way because not EVERYONE has a cigarette filter machine to pre-roll their joints!!! I have never seen one, but if a company made filters for people to roll their own, I would not only buy one, I would invest in stock!Vaporizing is another way to use raw marijuana, without the tar- but the darn things are expensive. Possibly because the companies that makes them have little way of mass production of the product. Another company I would invest in if the method of vaporizing were to become an exclusive way to ingest the wonder herb.But many people believe that using a water bong filters out harmful elements of smoke- though it might remove a few harmful chems, it also removes part of that which one is using it for in the first place.On top of this, marijuana can be cooked.Future view of this...just a dream I have...
What would happen if marijuana were legal, and a few companies became wide known for their brand of marijuana cigarettes (pre-rolled with filters) and it went on the market as some of the kindest bud one ever consumed? Just as - with regretful comparrison, cigarettes/alcohol? There would be different brands, flavors, amounts of thc. Eventually, these companies would be able to sell stock on the market- and investors like the nitwit [what I truly want to call this person rhymes with nitwit] who wrote the above article, could trade shares. See? Even these jack sses could benefit.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by lilgrasshoppah77 on December 03, 2004 at 00:10:49 PT
Forget the facts, ma'am!
Apparently, puns are the basis for pot prohibition.If I hear/read/etc "smokescreen" or any of it's derivatives again... I'll be reminded it's time to toke up.This should tell you how much prohibitionists truly fear cannabis: all the god-damn puns! Do you see august news media cracking wise about murders, rapes and burglaries... if somebody rips off a grow house they do... it's laugh a minute then... but otherwise, people correctly assume that crime is serious business. Put it another way, if we heard there was a meteor heading for earth, that would obliterate all life except cockroaches (including John Ashcroft)... how would the headlines read? "Time to Rock and Roll"...? "Between A Rock and a Hard Place"...? "Get Out Your Handbasket and Pack for a Short Trip"...? It's a great meanace... we're all in great danger... billions of people will die... oh and it's darn funny too!Weed is supposed to be the Devil weed! It's supposed to cause psychosis. Supposed to cause cancer. Supposed to be a menace to our way of life, our children and our society. It's sooooo scary that we have to lock people up in prison with rapists and murderers and assorted fiends for longer sentences than armed robbery, attempted murder, or even manslaughter. It's so scary that we had to judicially murder people like Jonathan Magbie and Peter McWilliams... and actually murder people like Donald Scott... to "protect the children". It's soooo scary... and yet kind of funny too! Or maybe it's not scary at all...? Maybe it's just straight up funny...? And that makes it sad.I'd tell these bastards I offer "tokin' resistance", but they wouldn't get the joke!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by afterburner on December 02, 2004 at 22:43:21 PT
Whoever Heard of a Medicine without a Supplier? 
{Many supporters of medical marijuana claim their purpose is to relieve suffering and not use the issue as a means to legalize drugs. But when asked in a January 2000 interview if medical marijuana was a Trojan horse for drug legalization, the director of an organization dedicated to ending the drug war replied: "I hope so."}This is a reference to one man, Richard Cowan, then Director of NORML. RC recognized correctly, as did the Canadian Senate Report on Marijuana, that a patient needs a provider. If medical cannabis patients are allowed to possess and medicate, then a legal supply must be made available. The Canadian courts also had the wisdom to see and rule on this basic truth in Regina (Queen) v. Parker, granting Terry Parker the right to possess medical cannabis and ruling that the Canadian Controlled Drugs and Substances Act's prohibition of cannabis was unconstitutional because it did not provide a legal source of supply of medical cannabis to Mr. Parker. California passed SB 420 in 2004 in order to facilitate the creation of a legal supply of medical cannabis after the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 legalized the medicine in California. Even the US federal government provides a legal supply of medical cannabis from NIDA and its supplier (part of the University of Mississippi) to the 7 remaining medical cannabis patients of the "compassionate IND" program.What other medicine is legal to use, but not to supply to the patients? Only legalization and regulation provides a medical supply; decriminalization is a half-measure (enshrining the black market which governments *claim* they want to eliminate).
[ Post Comment ]

 


Comment #2 posted by FoM on December 02, 2004 at 21:54:05 PT

A Few More Articles To Check Out
Cheech and Chong Reunite: http://www.summitdaily.com/article/20041202/AE/112020001***LAW prof argues before Supreme Court: http://www.bu.edu/bridge/archive/2004/12-03/law.html***Chicago Mayor Proposes Decriminalization of Marijuana Possession:http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=16095***Smizik re-files bill to legalize pot for medicinal use:http://www2.townonline.com/brookline/localRegional/view.bg?articleid=137866***Smokin' issue:http://www.lasvegascitylife.com/articles/2004/12/02/local_news/news02.txt
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #1 posted by observer on December 02, 2004 at 21:30:15 PT

Propaganda Rx
[6]
San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court has found that federal prosecution of medical marijuana users who use homegrown cannabis with their doctor's permission and their state's approval is unconstitutional.

(Sentence 6) re: "marijuana users" - Prohibition propaganda claims that all use of any "drug" is abuse. (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) 
 
 
[8]
But when asked in a January 2000 interview if medical marijuana was a Trojan horse for drug legalization, the director of an organization dedicated to ending the drug war replied: "I hope so."

(Sentence 8) re: "drug war" - Drug users are evil fiends which, save for the noble drug "war", would multiply as the "epidemic" of drug use engulfs an innocent people. (Demonize, War (propaganda theme 6) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme6.htm#6 ) re: "legalization" - Onward prohibitionist drug warriors, fighting the epidemic and scourge in the battles of the war against drugs! (Drugs declared evil by politicians, that is.) (Total Prohibition or Access (propaganda theme 7) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme7.htm#7 ) 
 
 
[9]
Fact is, smoked marijuana has no medical value that can't be met by a legal, FDA approved prescription drug called Marinol that contains the active ingredient in marijuana.

(Sentence 9) re: "no medical value" - Drug policy options are presented as either total prohibition, or as total "legalization." No middle ground is contemplated in the "zero-tolerance" world of prohibition. Absolute prohibition executed with religious fervor and purpose! (Total Prohibition or Access (propaganda theme 7) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme7.htm#7 ) 
 
 
[13]
Andrea Barthwell, past president of the American Society of Addiction Medicine, the only property that Marinol lacks is the capacity to create a "high."

(Sentence 13) re: "Addiction" - Drugs, claim the prohibitionist, cause insanity, violence, and terrible sickness. (Madness,Crime,Violence,Illness (propaganda theme 2) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme2.htm#2 ) re: "Society", "American" - The survival of society is assured, -- says the propaganda of prohibition -- as long as drug users are punished (jailed). (Survival of Society (propaganda theme 3) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme3.htm#3 ) 
 
 
[15]
According to the National Institutes of Health, someone who smokes five joints a week may be taking in as many cancer-causing chemicals as someone who smokes a pack of cigarettes daily.

(Sentence 15) re: "cancer-causing" - Prohibition propaganda rarely misses an opportunity to link crime, violence, insanity and malady with "drugs". The propagandist insinuates that prohibited drugs cause evil, and if it weren't for "drugs" bad things would not exist. (Madness,Crime,Violence,Illness (propaganda theme 2) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme2.htm#2 ) 
 
 

[ Post Comment ]





  Post Comment