cannabisnews.com: Scientifically Speaking This Drug's on Wrong List










  Scientifically Speaking This Drug's on Wrong List

Posted by CN Staff on June 12, 2005 at 12:32:42 PT
By Daniele Piomelli 
Source: Washington Post 

Washington, D.C. -- When the Supreme Court ruled last week that federal authorities have the power to prosecute individuals for the possession and use of medical marijuana, even in the 11 states that permit it, the news reopened longstanding questions. What kind of scientific data exist to clarify just how useful -- or harmful -- marijuana actually is? And why does the Drug Enforcement Administration assign it to the same class of controlled substances as heroin and LSD?
As director of a laboratory funded by the National Institutes of Health to study how drugs act on the brain, I am committed to answering that first question -- which could, in turn, help with the second. When my colleagues and I look dispassionately at the available data on marijuana, we see a Janus-faced drug that has many adverse or even dangerous properties, even as it presents an exciting and largely untapped therapeutic potential. But science's ability to tap marijuana's potential is inhibited by the DEA's inappropriate classification of it as a Schedule I controlled substance.It is true that marijuana and its active ingredient -- a chemical in the tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) family of compounds -- can produce a variety of undesirable effects in both experimental animals and human subjects. A single marijuana cigarette has been shown to impair the judgment of a professional pilot in a flight simulator, and one injection of THC significantly reduces the ability of a rat to navigate a maze. Long-term use of these drugs may also have adverse consequences.Most importantly, perhaps, and contrary to common misconceptions, a growing number of studies show that prolonged exposure to marijuana or THC can cause addiction. This is best seen in lab experiments with monkeys, who learn to self-administer THC by pressing a lever that allows the drug to be delivered directly into a vein. The animals will work hard to get that fix -- though not as hard as they would for cocaine or other more addictive drugs. What's more, a marijuana withdrawal syndrome has been demonstrated in frequent long-term users of this drug: It is characterized by mild but distinctive symptoms, including loss of appetite, irritability and depression.Despite these negative points, marijuana and THC also appear to have significant medical benefits. As drugs go, THC is a very safe compound: It would take about 70 pure grams of it -- about the weight of a chocolate bar -- to seriously harm a 150-pound adult. Indeed, it has satisfied the strict requirements of the Food and Drug Administration for approval as a human medicine and is currently used in the United States, under the trade name of Marinol (manufactured by Unimed), to reduce nausea and stimulate appetite in patients suffering from HIV/AIDS, or undergoing chemotherapy for cancer. A manmade derivative of THC called Cesamet (manufactured by Eli Lilly) is prescribed in Europe for the same conditions.Recent tests suggest that these drugs may have much broader medical uses. For example, clinical trials have shown that Marinol can reduce the physical and vocal tics caused by Tourette's syndrome -- a neurological disorder that still lacks a satisfactory drug treatment. Another report published in 2004 suggests that oral sprays of a marijuana extract marketed under the name of Sativex might reduce muscle spasms in patients with multiple sclerosis, though additional work is needed to confirm the efficacy and safety of this approach. Various animal experiments have confirmed the therapeutic significance of THC and its derivatives, revealing novel potential applications in such areas as neuropathic pain, cancer, glaucoma and atherosclerosis.Nevertheless, ever since the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) became law in 1970, both marijuana and THC have been listed on Schedule I -- the list of drugs "with a high potential for abuse" and with "no currently accepted medical use."The data obviously contradict that assessment. The error was highlighted by a DEA decision made in 1999 to move Marinol -- but not THC -- to Schedule III, which includes much less dangerous compounds, such as the anti-hyperactivity drug Ritalin. As a result of this puzzling move, the very same chemical, THC, is now assigned to two different CSA schedules. This is patently absurd.Marijuana, the smokable leaf, may well belong in Schedule I -- I am a neuroscientist and a pharmacologist, not a medical doctor or sociologist, and I am not going to address this issue. But THC, the chemical compound, does not belong there.A somewhat larger problem is raised by lumping marijuana and THC together with far more hazardous drugs: If we fail to identify the varying degree of danger posed by different substances, we undermine the credibility of our legislation and hinder its effectiveness at preventing drug abuse. Any young person who has smoked marijuana and seen a friend ravaged by heroin can tell the difference between these drugs. Why can't we?Actually we can -- at least at a scientific level. During the past decade the properties of marijuana have been studied in great detail and its actions are now well understood. When marijuana smoke enters the lungs, its THC component dissolves into the blood and spreads rapidly throughout the body. It then combines with protein molecules present on the surface of many cells in the brain. These molecules selectively recognize THC, much as a lock fits a key. They are called cannabinoid receptors (after the Latin name for the marijuana plant, Cannabis).Heroin binds to a different class of protein molecules, called opiate receptors -- just as lock-and-key specific as the cannabinoids, but with different effects. The two receptors are not interchangeable.Take, for example, the question of addiction. Research indicates that when THC stimulates cannabinoid receptors in the brain, it engages a complex circuit of neural cells and transmitters that are normally involved in the response to rewarding stimuli, such as tasty foods. A brief burst of activity in this circuit produces only a pleasant sensation, but if the stimulus persists for a long time (as it does with frequent and heavy marijuana use) it can eventually cause changes in the neural circuit that result in tolerance -- the need to take larger amounts of drug to produce the same effect -- and dependence -- the feelings of unease and craving experienced when prolonged drug use is suddenly stopped.Heroin's interaction with its opiate receptors triggers a much more intense sensation of pleasure than does marijuana -- so intense, indeed, that heroin addicts are at a loss to put it into words. But heroin's withdrawal is far more severe emotionally than marijuana's, and unlike the latter, it causes a myriad of physical symptoms including shivering and pain. It's not a higher degree of the same response -- it's a different response to a different chemical reaction.All potential benefits of marijuana, such as its ability to increase appetite and ease nausea, are also caused by the binding of THC to its brain receptors. This is one of the main sources of trouble with developing medicinal uses for marijuana: If a single receptor is responsible for all actions of the drug, how can we tease apart the good from the bad? One way to do this may be to forgo smoked marijuana and find better methods to deliver THC -- for example, metered aerosols such as those used in asthma -- which would allow patients to take just enough drug to control their symptoms, minimizing unwanted side effects. This strategy would also avoid inhaling the dangerous mixture of toxic and cancer-promoting chemicals present in marijuana smoke.Another way to offset marijuana's risks may be to take advantage of the fact that cannabinoid receptors did not evolve in the human brain to give us the opportunity to experience a high. Rather, their original role is to combine with a set of THC-like chemicals produced by brain cells, whose functions include the control of pain and anxiety. If we could design chemicals that tweak the levels of these transmitter substances in the brain, we might be able to boost their normal effects. Our lab and others throughout the world are now working in this direction with the goal of creating new classes of painkiller, anti-anxiety and antidepressant drugs.Because of THC's Schedule I status, that research sometimes faces extra bureaucratic hurdles. But preventing a few months of paperwork to a scientific project is not the main reason the drug and its derivatives should be reclassified to a schedule that is in accord with their medical utility. Far more important is the goal of having realistic drug laws in this country that penalize drug abuse but also encourage medical progress.Ever since the enactment of the CSA, advocates have been pressing for THC to be reclassified. These pleas have gone unheeded so far. Perhaps the Supreme Court decision will inspire citizens and medical organizations to take a fresh look at the scientific evidence without being blinded by prejudice. This evidence suggests that, while marijuana is an addictive drug that requires careful monitoring, its active constituents can be useful in medicine when appropriately employed. But it's hard to get this message across: All too often, the voice of science and reason is lost in a polarized shouting match.Daniele Piomelli is professor of pharmacology and director of the Center for Drug Discovery at the University of California, Irvine.Complete Title: Scientifically Speaking, This Drug's on the Wrong ListNewshawk: Nicholas Thimmesch IISource: Washington Post (DC)Author: Daniele PiomelliPublished: Sunday, June 12, 2005; B03Copyright: 2005 Washington Post Contact: letterstoed washpost.comWebsite: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ Related Articles & Web Site:Medical Marijuana Information Linkshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/medical.htmWhen Judicial Fantasies Take a Toll http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20847.shtmlClarity on Marijuanahttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20845.shtmlCongressional Leaders Should Act To Protecthttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20843.shtml 

Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help





Comment #46 posted by GreenJoy on June 14, 2005 at 07:46:25 PT
Schmeff
 70 grams. I think you'd mutate...into Reeferman! Ganjagirl? And of course they would be your villainous archrivals. GJ
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #45 posted by schmeff on June 14, 2005 at 00:33:39 PT
A: 3 Dead Parasites
In the interests of science, I would volunteer to eat 70 grams of pure THC, if Johnny "Pee" Walters, Rep. Mark Souder and Karen Tandy would volunteer to eat 70 grams of pure nicotine, aspirin and caffeine, respectively.Q: What do you think would happen? 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #44 posted by FoM on June 13, 2005 at 13:47:16 PT
EJ Lyrics I Liked This Song
We watched the movie of Neil Young and Crazyhorse called The Year of The Horse and the last song was an acoustic performance by Neil. When I heard it I said to my husband that it reminds me of a song that could be about an experience with more then likely Coke. What do you think?MUSIC ARCADEHave you ever been lostHave you ever been found outHave you ever felt all aloneAt the end of the dayYeah I'm talkin' bout gettin' downTake it easy - there's no one aroundJust a mirror and you and meAnd the TV skyI was walkin down main streetNot the sidewalk but main streetDodgin' traffic with flyin' feetThat's how good I feltTook a spin in the laundromatPlayed a game in the music arcadeKept winnin' while the band playedThat's how good I felt(chorus)Have you ever been singled outBy a hungry manYou're listening to the radioHe's washin' your windowWhen you look in those vacant eyesHow does it harmonizeWith the things that you do?That's how good I felt(chorus)There's a comet in the sky tonightMakes me feel like I'm alrightI'm movin' pretty fastFor my sizeI really didn' mean to stayAs long as I haveSo I'll be movin' on
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #43 posted by GreenJoy on June 13, 2005 at 13:41:57 PT
PWNI
 Thanks bud. I think I have it fairly well sussed. I'm pretty certain anonymous tips stay that way anyway, otherwise some who aren't so kind and forgiving would take vengeance. Vengeance is not mine. I'm recently a free man, and am thinking forward. Wiser, I live to fight again another day. Somewhere Else!
              GJ
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #42 posted by FoM on June 13, 2005 at 13:00:05 PT
EJ That Makes Sense
Smoking pot will bring a person down from a Meth high fairly quickly. It helps when a person is freaking out but if they are just gliding along somewhere up there they don't want to come back down to earth for a while.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #41 posted by PainWithNoInsurance on June 13, 2005 at 12:58:21 PT
Greenjoy 
I am no legal buff, but I would think if you called your lawyer and asked for a copy of the affividavit on the case you would see what happened to make them seek a search warrant. It wouldn't hurt a thing to satisfy your curiosity. Just tell them you are curious about what happened leading up to the event.AllAmericanCitizensDeserveHealthcare
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #40 posted by PainWithNoInsurance on June 13, 2005 at 12:47:39 PT
Greenjoy
I would say the utility worker did smell the forest. It's a very stong and unmistakeable smell even in veg stage. Spraying things to hide the smell probably wouldn't have worked either. War is everywhere.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #39 posted by E_Johnson on June 13, 2005 at 12:40:32 PT
FoM I agree, look at punk music
The edgiest meanest punk rockers were cocaine and meth users who heaped abuse and contempt on the potheads who ruled classic rock in the seventies.What you say is reflected in the musical culture.The cokeheads ansd tweakers who valued their "edge" the most expressed the most disdain for marijuana.Even now -- Coirtney Love did a really punk album America's Sweetheart, while she was abusing cocaine.There's a song there that is really nasty towards marijuana users. The Zeplin Song.A song where she complains that her stoner Zeppelin-playing boyfriend doesn't have the kind of edginess she is seeking.That song, and the monkey experiment -- they fit together, totally.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #38 posted by E_Johnson on June 13, 2005 at 12:34:24 PT
I wrote a letter
About the monkey research. I related what Dr. Piomelli omitted.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #37 posted by FoM on June 13, 2005 at 12:34:20 PT
Cannabis The Stabilizer
EJ You said: From what I have seen of cocaine and meth users is -- they like pot to help take the edge off of coming down from their insane high.I agree that cannabis is used to take the edge off and if a person doesn't want the edge taken off they avoid smoking Cannabis.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #36 posted by E_Johnson on June 13, 2005 at 12:30:40 PT
The monkey experiment
They got the monkeys hooked on cocaine IV (a dastardly bit of animal abuse to begin with) and then withdrew their coke and substituted THC.So the monkeys self-administered THC, something monkeys won't do on their own.Maybe what this means is the monkeys were self-medicating from cocaine withdrawal symptoms????Hello, anyone with a BRAIN out there doing this kind of research??????????????From what I have seen of cocaine and meth users is -- they like pot to help take the edge off of coming down from their insane high.I think that's what the monkey research really showed.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #35 posted by GreenJoy on June 13, 2005 at 12:09:15 PT
Leap at the chance...
 ...to spare others this ordeal. I've had plenty of time to go over it in my mind. The timing of events leads me to believe a city utility worker that was in my home to change the water meter to an interior one that they can read as they drive by was the tipper. I had everything put away, in the dark, closed off. But he may have been able to smell it anyway. I've heard since then that there are devices that can draw a sample of the air and determine the presence of controlled substances. He was alone for about 30 seconds as I went into another room to confirm the tap was functioning. There were several homes in the area in the days that followed that were suddenly all boarded up. And I could swear I saw a bust in progress with the same posse and that very same utility worker was with them pointing the way. Anyway, I have to point the finger at me. Perhaps it was all the pain and the pills. I missed a beat. Don't get even slightly sloppy people. Its serious, serious matter.
             
              GJ
                  
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #34 posted by FoM on June 13, 2005 at 10:39:00 PT
News Article from UPI
Health Wrap: Up in SmokeBy Dan Olmsted, UPIWashington, DC, Jun. 13 (UPI) -- You know it is a strange week on the consumer-health beat when U.S. Supreme Court Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, Clarence Thomas and William Rehnquist side with the pot smokers -- though they and the pot smokers lost. At issue, of course, was not the right to toke away with impunity, but whether the federal government could stop people with serious illnesses from smoking "medical marijuana" to alleviate pain.The aforementioned justices usually back the power of states to legislate such matters without federal involvement, and in this case the other six court members voted that federal power trumps the states' rights to legalize marijuana for use in such situations. Experts said, however, it was unlikely the feds would start hauling off terminal-cancer patients in flexi-cuffs.The real impact is likely to be in the 40 states that have not legalized medicinal use: The clear implication of the ruling by the court's majority is only federal legislation will suffice, and that is unlikely. Dr. Herbert Kleber, professor of psychiatry at Columbia University, suggested a solution of taking the active ingredients of the drug, such as THC, and creating a form of medication that is safer and approved by the federal government.Complete Article: http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20050613-094927-3747r.htm
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #33 posted by FoM on June 13, 2005 at 08:38:23 PT
Related News Article
Defining Medical Marijuana: Is THC on the Wrong Drug List?June 13, 2005Are you confused about the medical marijuana issue, thanks to last week’s Supreme Court decision on this subject? Do you have more questions about the scientific basis behind advocating the use of medical marijuana? If so, then I encourage you to read the article from Daniele Piomelli titled “Scientifically Speaking, This Drug’s on the Wrong List.” Dr. Piomelli is a Professor of Pharmacology and Director of the Center for Drug Discovery at UC Irvine. She summarizes much of the established and some recent science surrounding marijuana and its active ingredient, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). Complete Article: http://tmhbaconbits.net/
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #32 posted by mayan on June 13, 2005 at 04:02:00 PT
Insane
Marijuana, the smokable leaf, may well belong in Schedule I -- I am a neuroscientist and a pharmacologist, not a medical doctor or sociologist, and I am not going to address this issue. But THC, the chemical compound, does not belong there.Sure, let's ban a plant which anyone can grow...indoors or outdoors. Sounds like a sane policy. Prohibition won't criminalize a large portion of society or fuel a black market. Prohibition just might work. It's amazing that some on earth think like that.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #31 posted by runderwo on June 12, 2005 at 20:34:28 PT
PWNI
I'm really sorry to hear about that. It's hard to believe that such irrational paranoia defines the status quo unless you've experienced it firsthand, but on the other hand, firsthand experience in this area is the last thing any one of us wants.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #30 posted by BGreen on June 12, 2005 at 20:24:37 PT
PainWithNoInsurance
Unfortunately, most of these internet stores have physical locations. Gardeners of all types of plants shop at these stores and on the internet.Operation Green Merchant was a horrible attack back in the late '80s because it considered anybody doing business with these stores as suspected cannabis growers and a lot of innocent people were hurt by the overzealous cops involved.I'm trying to find out if there is an Operation Green Merchant II sting going on because it endangers everybody even visiting these physical stores. I thought those gestapo tactics had ceased.Did you try googling the name of the store and see if they had a physical location or were internet only? Googling would also tell you if anybody else might have had a similar experience with this store and tell you more about the sleazy dirtbags that set you up.Wait a few days and then google, if you're worried about your privacy, then report back anything that might educate us without compromising your safety.Thanks again.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #29 posted by PainWithNoInsurance on June 12, 2005 at 20:00:43 PT
runderwo 
I guess I was one of those statistics seeking help from cannabis when I was ordered by the judge to go to drug counseling. The problem was, I hadn't smoked pot for 8 years before I had gotten caught growing. They didn't even find parpheneilia in my house. I'm not kidding.I decided I had had it with prescription drugs for my back problem and decided to grow pot it. I got some seed grew up two seedlings 3 inches tall and woke up one day to answer the door ( they where pounding so hard they could have knock it in) and saw all the cops pointing guns at my face.NoHealthInsurance
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #28 posted by PainWithNoInsurance on June 12, 2005 at 19:44:45 PT
Greenjoy
They found a seedling stem I had thrown away in my garbage just as they did you(Very small). They also found a box from the PH meter I bought from the internet. I should have taken a clue when I noticed my garbage wasn't being picked up on time. I could have been an excellent gardener. The smell of a growing plant is just beautiful.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #27 posted by PainWithNoInsurance on June 12, 2005 at 19:31:14 PT
Bgreen 
I am affraid to mention the store that was mentioned in the affivadit my lawyer read to me because of the possibility of maybe being sued or something. I think it really doesn't matter what company was mentioned because that doesn't prove they are a DEA hydroponics store or not; it would only prove that the DEA was watching my transaction going through thousands of miles of telephone lines and they saw I bought from that store. I purchased from many online stores and only one of those stores was in the affidavit. My advice for anyone growing weed is to purchase their equiptment at a brick and morter store because even the delivery man can read addresses.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #26 posted by GreenJoy on June 12, 2005 at 19:12:53 PT
Religious
 I guess for me...cannabis was way more than a toddy.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #25 posted by runderwo on June 12, 2005 at 19:07:33 PT
boiling it down
I think the best way to boil it down would be: an activity is an addiction if it has become a habit, and if there is some other consequence to quitting besides that one would miss the activity in question. If the only reason not to quit is because you find it fun and want to keep doing it, then it is not an addiction, it is just a pleasurable habit, and we all have those.I suspect that many cannabis "addicts" (that is, ones that have voluntarily checked themselves into treatment) are either under pressure from others to quit and don't really want to quit, or under pressure from others such as loser friends to keep using cannabis against their will. Why else would you need help? How bad could it possibly be to just throw out your weed and put away the pipe, given that the worst symptom you might experience is insomnia? (Heck, you might have been an insomniac in the first place. Not that the statistics would bother to capture that information.)
[ Post Comment ]

 


Comment #24 posted by GreenJoy on June 12, 2005 at 19:01:22 PT

Pain With No Insurance
 Yes you may. I was never given the info on the exact tip. I never purchased thru the internet. The report said "suspicious activity." They checked out my electricity which was higher than the neighbors for many reasons beyond my lamp...and then they "found" a trace of marijuana in my garbage. That is suspect because I was impeccable about that. 
              GJ
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #23 posted by runderwo on June 12, 2005 at 18:59:01 PT

Painwithnoinsurance
Addiction is a condition characterized by three separate things. The first is habituation, where an activity produces pleasurable (reinforcing) effects, and thus the activity becomes a normal part of the daily flow. Anything pleasurable can cause habituation. You simply seek out and do things that make you happy and/or satisfied because as an organism, that is what you are designed to do. Methampthetamine, cocaine, and alcohol are highly reinforcing because they act directly on the brain's pleasure mechanisms.The other half is the combination of tolerance and withdrawal. Tolerance is the gradual necessity of more of that activity (or substance) to achieve the same pleasurable effect. Specifically with drugs, the body builds up chemical tolerances to some, and simply becomes flooded with others. With nicotine and heroin for example, each replaces a natural neurotransmitter that the body produces (acetylcholine and endorphins respectively), and the body adjusts to their presence by producing less of the natural components. With cannabis, the tolerance comes from the body being flooded with broken-down THC and CBD/CBN which produce little to no psychoactive effect, so there are no cannabinoid receptors left for freshly consumed THC to attach to.Withdrawal is when mental or physical symptoms arise from ceasing an activity. With drugs such as heroin, barbiturates, and alcohol, the body can be anywhere from feeling sick to in a life-threatening state of shock, because it has adjusted to the presence of the intoxicant and must now readjust to the absence of it. With cannabis, one feels a longing but that is about it, because the body has not made such adjustments. The withdrawal is purely mental.It requires a cycle of tolerance and withdrawal to become a drug addict - i.e., one who requires intervention to get clean.Since cannabis produces little to no withdrawal, and is not as reinforcing as some other drugs are, it is difficult to believe that it is the drug addiction threat it is made out to be. One must only look at alcohol, a drug which satisfies all three criteria as well as having a life-threatening withdrawal, albeit one which is legal, to see why cannabis poses relatively little threat to society through addiction.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #22 posted by BGreen on June 12, 2005 at 18:57:19 PT

PainWithNoInsurance
What company did you order from, where did you find out about this company and are they still in business?You've never divulged this important info but I think it might save a few lives.Divulge only as much as you feel comfortable sharing.Thanks.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #21 posted by runderwo on June 12, 2005 at 18:44:37 PT

that experiment
I think a good control for that experiment would have been some other thing that produces a reinforcing biological response as opposed to saline solution. For example, to give the monkeys a sugar rush, sexual gratification, or even something as banal as a change of scenery in their surroundings. Something with no biological effect whatsoever is not a good control as far as I can tell, because we are trying to fit drugs into the overall framework of attractive activities for a creature to engage in, and in theory, show that the drug seeking compulsion takes precedence over the desire to perform any other activities.So what have we shown? That a monkey would rather seek drugs than *nothing*, given that they are the only two possibilities? I'm not surprised at all. I think this is the fundamental methodology flaw here.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #20 posted by PainWithNoInsurance on June 12, 2005 at 18:44:35 PT

Greenjoy
May I ask how the American gestapo found out you where addicted to gardening? Mine was the fact I was buying gardening equiptment through the internet. Just curiousI will say it again. I don't think word addiction is even understood entirely. Like I say I am addicted to high fat foods and go through the same withdrawls when I don't eat them. I was addicted to my girl friend and went through withdrawls when she left me. 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #19 posted by runderwo on June 12, 2005 at 18:38:46 PT

thanks everyone
I *knew* something was wrong with that study!
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #18 posted by GreenJoy on June 12, 2005 at 17:36:43 PT

Addicted?
 When I had my own garden going, two fine varieties, it seemed like every morning was Christmas morning. Everything I did I did with zest. When my neck was injured in an accident I became doubly thankful for my garden. Once Vioxx had permanently rearranged my heartbeat, and Celebrex, Bextra, and Prednisone had failed and left me with a bad case of gastritus, I had pretty much settled on the usual narcotics when absolutely neccessary and my own best medicine...Cannabis. A loose seam somewhere, they came crashing in and took it all away. Was I addicted? No. I was in absolute rapturous love. Did I go through withdrawal? Maybe. More like I was utterly heartbroken. Depressed? That's a word. Doesn't even scratch the surface. I couldn't move. Its hard to compartmentalize. I had a lot to be concerned and unhappy about its true. I just know that I haven't had a whisp since they threw me down on my face. It has been almost a year and a half. Am I better off? Am I happier? Do I feel like I've been set free?
Can I accept this rearrangement by them? NO. I would like the powers that "set me straight" to get out of my life entirely and forever. If neccessary I'll move if I have to. My US citizenship means less to me than my cannabis. Addicted? So be it. Show me a crackhead or a heroin addict that has shook loose for a year and a half and feels this way about it. People are not monkeys. GreenJoy for a reason.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #17 posted by FoM on June 12, 2005 at 17:09:21 PT

EJ That Sounds Good
I don't know how it can be done though. If you can figure it out that would be great.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #16 posted by E_Johnson on June 12, 2005 at 16:42:01 PT

Maybe we should compose a group letter
Inform the WashPost of the real study she is citing, and then sign the letter from the members of CannabisNews.com.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #15 posted by lombar on June 12, 2005 at 16:25:33 PT

Simply writing into this article
any reference to that study guarantees the purpose is not to inform but program.NIDA Researchers Find Animals Will Adminster Marijuana: http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread7353.shtml I scanned it, they got the monkees addicted to cocaine first to introduce and reinforce the drug taking behavior and then switched to thc. The monkees probably hit the buttons like mad because it was not giving what they actually wanted. Not enough of a kick...total junk science and wrong conclusions. No controls, just a DEMONstration of pavlovian conditiong and unethical treatment of monkees....we already know crack is harshly addictive, we don't have to torture any more beings to prove that. Whats worse is to use such total deception to torture YET more beings, cannabis users, by the thousands with laws that are a FRAUD on the people of this world. 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #14 posted by E_Johnson on June 12, 2005 at 16:24:03 PT

Sam Adams
"Does modern society mean that we're all slaves to the opinion of distant "expert scientists", thousands of miles away in Washington, or are we still free men and women, able to take care of ourselves?"Modern freedom, that's a tricky concept, as I have discovered in this battle of ours.Now I understand why people study postmodernism.There is a lot of class and race and gender bias in science, in the assumptions and presumptions that this special population makes about everyone who is not as special.They assume they are smarter and better, because they made it through graduate school.So that gives them the right to rule.It's not the divine right of kings any more, it's the divine right of advanced education.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #13 posted by PainWithNoInsurance on June 12, 2005 at 15:46:05 PT

runderwo 
runderwo, You hit the nail right on the head about the addiction. I would say yes everything that is pleasurable is addicting. You could even add a high fat diet as being addicting to the list. Just try to quit that weekly pizza; you will go through withdrawl thinking frequently about inhaling a fat greasy slice.To Quote runderwo:Kinda like going without one's morning cup of joe. Or breaking up with a significant other. Or hell, how about the death of a relative who was put in jail for self-medicating with cannabis? I think I'd lose my appetite, become irritable and be depressed over that.I have went through the withdrawl of cannabis and it is just like a withdrawl of breaking up with a loved one or dieting. I think it is the same thing.I have just asked my state senator to introduce a medical marijuana bill (via email), it won't do any damn good, but it might. I encourage everyone else to do the same. Right now is the time to move because the news is out there everywhere, In my particular case, I don't smoke pot but have in the past, so I don't have any problems giving a state senator my address after asking him to introduce a bill on medical marijuana. I know it will never happen in this Mark Souder state anyway, but I was so motivated I had to or go through the withdrawl symptoms of constantly having it on my mind. 

[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #12 posted by Sam Adams on June 12, 2005 at 15:29:13 PT

Smokeable leaf
EJ, I caught that also.  How can she be writing an article purporting to be an expert scientist's opinion of cannabis, and she doesn't even know that we smoke and vape the dried flowers of the plant? Does modern society mean that we're all slaves to the opinion of distant "expert scientists", thousands of miles away in Washington, or are we still free men and women, able to take care of ourselves? 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #11 posted by FoM on June 12, 2005 at 15:10:57 PT

A Couple Related Articles
Marijuana Monkey Off Your Back: http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread7383.shtmlCannabis as Addictive as Cocaine:
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread7360.shtmlNIDA Researchers Find Animals Will Adminster Marijuana:
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread7353.shtml 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #10 posted by E_Johnson on June 12, 2005 at 15:03:19 PT

Hey I remember the experiment
They were trying to produce this result deliberatly. They couldn't do it just by giving the monkeys cannabis alone.They got the monkeys hooked on cocaine first. Then they switched the cocaine for cannabis.I remember Richard Cowan talking about it on Pot TV News.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #9 posted by lombar on June 12, 2005 at 14:55:49 PT

runderwo
This is best seen in lab experiments with monkeys, who learn to self-administer THC by pressing a lever that allows the drug to be delivered directly into a vein.Just reading that is enough to realize the experiment is not realistic. Who bangs pure thc intravenously? How does that relate to even problematic use of cannabis which usually involves smoking? Also no dosages were specified. I have no idea what that would do. Is it THC alone? Is it an extract with all the cannabinioids? Maybee the stuff is so strong the monkey dreams of the trees all day...What got me was:both marijuana and THC have been listed on Schedule I -- the list of drugs "with a high potential for abuse" and with "no currently accepted medical use."andMarijuana, the smokable leaf, may well belong in Schedule I -- I am a neuroscientist and a pharmacologist, not a medical doctor or sociologist, and I am not going to address this issue. But THC, the chemical compound, does not belong there....the smokable leaf has proven to have medical efficacy before sativex, so by *definition* is not Schedule I. "I study brains, I don't use my own."

[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #8 posted by E_Johnson on June 12, 2005 at 14:52:31 PT

And I will say this too
"All too often, the voice of science and reason is lost in a polarized shouting match."I know this guy is on our side, but this kind of statement makes me mad.I know why the bvoic e of science and reason has been silent for so long -- I witnessed myself the way scientists have deliberately avoided stepping into this battle because of their own desire to milk the government for money.I know a scientist of repute who has a brother with HIV who was dependent on cannabis for nausea relief, and this man had a chance to talk to Clinton once and I begged him to bring up medical cannabis and assure Clinton there was real science behind the idea.But he said no, I have to talk to Clinton about money for the DOE and NSF for my own lab and that takes priority.In other words, the voice of science and reason only speaks up when there's no money in danger.Het it's nice that Piomelli wrote this article, I hope it helps us.But I remember how the last ten years have been and the science establishment in this country has a lot to be ashamed about.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #7 posted by E_Johnson on June 12, 2005 at 14:36:34 PT

On no this just drives me nuts
"Marijuana, the smokable leaf, may well belong in Schedule I -- I am a neuroscientist and a pharmacologist, not a medical doctor or sociologist, and I am not going to address this issue."I think what he meant to write is:"I am a pampered academic coward, not a brave champion of logic and truth, and I lack the courage of conviction that it takes step onto this battlefield."
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #6 posted by runderwo on June 12, 2005 at 14:26:26 PT

kaptinemo
Do you have a citation for that experiment? I've been trying to find one for a while now because something smells wrong about its methodology, but it is cited in almost any "scientific" article that attempts to demonstrate the addictive potential of cannabis.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #5 posted by runderwo on June 12, 2005 at 14:22:39 PT

more stuff
"THC can cause addiction. This is best seen in lab experiments with monkeys, who learn to self-administer THC by pressing a lever that allows the drug to be delivered directly into a vein."If I were a bored monkey in a cage, what would I do?"What's more, a marijuana withdrawal syndrome has been demonstrated in frequent long-term users of this drug: It is characterized by mild but distinctive symptoms, including loss of appetite, irritability and depression."Kinda like going without one's morning cup of joe. Or breaking up with a significant other. Or hell, how about the death of a relative who was put in jail for self-medicating with cannabis? I think I'd lose my appetite, become irritable and be depressed over that."Marijuana, the smokable leaf, may well belong in Schedule I"The leaves are smokable? Maybe if you want a headache."to produce the same effect -- and dependence -- the feelings of unease and craving experienced when prolonged drug use is suddenly stopped."People feel unease and craving whenever they stop doing anything that they have found to be pleasurable. Do we feel unease and craving when going without chocolate, or music, or sex, or sun and fresh air? To suggest that somehow cannabis, a substance which many recreational users say has significant beneficial effects on their lives, would not or should not produce such a reaction when removed is just ridiculous."This strategy would also avoid inhaling the dangerous mixture of toxic and cancer-promoting chemicals present in marijuana smoke."You would think a scientist would examine the evidence rather than propagating the unproven "danger" here. There is no argument that toxic and/or cancer-promoting chemicals are present. The point is that no physical danger has been shown in even the longest of long-term heavy users. She neatly avoids the issue of vaporization too, which would validate home-growing as opposed to a corporate pharmaceutical product such as Marinol or Sativex."Another way to offset marijuana's risks may be to take advantage of the fact that cannabinoid receptors did not evolve in the human brain to give us the opportunity to experience a high."A smug, yet completely unsubstantiated statement. One could speculate in the other direction that humans and the cannabis plant have enjoyed a coevolutionary relationship over the millenia that it has been used."Because of THC's Schedule I status, that research sometimes
faces extra bureaucratic hurdles."That's an understatement. But I doubt someone with ties to a government agency would be feeling these hurdles as much as an independent academic researcher such as Lyle Craker."Far more important is the goal of having realistic drug laws in this country that penalize drug abuse but also encourage medical progress."I'm with you there, as long as your definition of "abuse" does not include responsible recreational use, and as long as the penalties for "abuse" do not exceed the harm done by the abuse of the drug itself."All too often, the voice of science and reason is lost in a polarized shouting match."I couldn't agree more. But the voice of science and reason could be more careful about propagating myths and half-truths than is demonstrated. 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #4 posted by afterburner on June 12, 2005 at 13:51:23 PT

For the Children? 
"A somewhat larger problem is raised by lumping marijuana and THC together with far more hazardous drugs: If we fail to identify the varying degree of danger posed by different substances, we undermine the credibility of our legislation and hinder its effectiveness at preventing drug abuse. Any young person who has smoked marijuana and seen a friend ravaged by heroin can tell the difference between these drugs. Why can't we?"
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #3 posted by global_warming on June 12, 2005 at 13:23:40 PT

Maybe it is time
To eliminate the Controlled Substance Act, denounce it as unconstitutional and rid our society of a legal piece of garbage that has brought our society to near ruin.http://www.narcoterror.org/twowars.htmFederal Drug Budgets and Resources for Selected Agencies, FY2001Agencies 	     Total Budget 	Drug Percentage of Budget 	Drug Portion of Budget in $ 	              Drug Resources PersonnelDEA 	 ,             $1,443,900,000 	100% 	                        $1,443,900,000 	                      8,068 full time employees (FTEs)FBI 	              $3,429,500,000 	23.6% 	                        $810,264,000 	                              5,235 FTEsBorder Patrol/INS   $3,199,600,000 	16.6% 	                        $529,837,000 	                              3,531 FTEsCustoms Service     $2,276,300,000 	31.7% 	                         $721,595,000 	                              6,675 FTEsCoast Guard 	      $4,635,900,000 	13.7% 	                         $636,295,000 	                              7,401 FTEsThe above data comes from the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy's websit
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #2 posted by kaptinemo on June 12, 2005 at 13:05:20 PT:

Oh no, not again
Ok, Lady, here's the scoop: on the monkey experiment, they were first addicted to COCAINE and then forced to go through withdrawl...and the only relief they had was sef-adminstering intravenous cannabis. Jeez, she presents herself as a scientist?
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #1 posted by FoM on June 12, 2005 at 12:47:57 PT

What Would Happen If They Re-scheduled?
How would it make the current laws on the books change if they finally removed Cannabis from being a Schedule I Drug?
[ Post Comment ]





  Post Comment