cannabisnews.com: White House Returns To Stoking Fears About Pot





White House Returns To Stoking Fears About Pot
Posted by CN Staff on June 13, 2008 at 05:02:06 PT
By Bruce Mirken, AlterNet 
Source: AlterNet 
USA -- In what is becoming a nearly annual ritual, on June 12 the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy released yet another report filled with dire warnings about rising marijuana potency. And the U.S. media -- led by the Associated Press, by far the nation's most powerful wire service -- once again mistakenly treated the story as if it was actual news.AP's story, picked up by newspapers and TV and radio stations all over the country, began, "Marijuana potency increased last year to the highest level in more than 30 years, posing greater health risks to people who may view the drug as harmless, according to a report released Thursday by the White House."
One had to read six paragraphs into the story to get the first hint of a dissenting view, voiced by Dr. Mitch Earleywine, author of the book, Understanding Marijuana. Earleywine, a substance abuse researcher and psychology professor at the Albany campus of the State University of New York, noted that marijuana smokers simply smoke less when the product is more potent, just as drinkers imbibe smaller quantities of bourbon or vodka than they do of beer. Since the only serious proven harm from marijuana use consists of coughing and other respiratory symptoms caused by inhalation of smoke, higher potency marijuana is arguably healthier, since smoke intake is reduced.But the AP story -- and most other coverage -- was dominated by dark suggestions of the dire consequences of this new "potent pot." ONDCP chief John Walters warned of the "serious implications" of increased potency, saying, "Today's report makes it more important than ever that we get past outdated, anachronistic views of marijuana."And Nora Volkow, head of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, added, "Particularly worrisome is the possibility that the more potent THC might be more effective at triggering the changes in the brain that can lead to addiction."The operative word in Volkow's statement is "might." The claim that higher-potency marijuana means greater risk of addiction is entirely speculative, supported by precisely zero data. That, too, was pointed out by Earleywine, but in a comment buried at the very end of the story.And not acknowledged anywhere, either by AP or most other news outlets, is the very large body of evidence suggesting that the whole "it's not your father's marijuana" scare story is phony. To understand why, a bit of context -- almost never provided by U.S. mass media -- is necessary.First, the average potency level of 9.6 percent THC that has ONDCP so alarmed (and which overstates the potency of most domestic marijuana, which is around 5 percent) is actually low by world standards. As reported in the new edition of The Science of Marijuana, by Oxford University pharmacologist Dr. Leslie Iversen, the average THC content of seized marijuana products in Britain from 1998 to 2005 ranged from 10.5 percent to 14.2 percent. In the Netherlands, where marijuana is available by prescription through conventional pharmacies, the minimum permissible THC content set in government standards for medical cannabis (except for one special variety developed specifically to be high in cannabinoids other than THC) is 13 percent.In other words, the minimum acceptable THC content for medical marijuana in the Netherlands is over one-third higher than the level that has Walters and Volkow in such a tizzy.And more sober analysts around the world continue to be far less certain than U.S. drug warriors that potency is of great consequence. In a report issued earlier this spring, the British government's Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (of which Iversen is a member) expressed some ambivalence about the issue. While acknowledging a concern about young people using high-THC marijuana, the ACMD noted that most users may simply smoke less. It also noted that while potency has clearly increased in the United Kingdom over time, "there has been no concomitant reported increase in enquiries to the National Poisons Information Service nor an increase in hospital admissions due to cannabis intoxication."A new analysis by a group of Australian researchers, published online May 20 by the journal Addiction, is even more skeptical, citing "claims about escalating cannabis potency made as far back as 1975." The Australians argue that "more research is needed to determine whether increased potency and contamination translates to harm for users." For good measure, they add that the evidence "is fragmented and fraught with methodological problems," explaining that the variations in marijuana samples (potency data comes from batches of marijuana seized by law enforcement) are so wide and the sources so varied that it is simply impossible to know if reported potency accurately represents what is available to marijuana consumers.That said, there are some legitimate concerns about marijuana potency. A first-time user who happens upon some very high-octane marijuana could well have a more intense experience than they are prepared for. So could someone accustomed to lower-grade material who unexpectedly happens upon some high-quality sinsemilla.There is an easy way to avert such unpleasant surprises, a method that's long been in use for alcoholic beverages: The bottle of white wine presently sitting in my refrigerator bears a label indicating an alcohol content of 13.7 percent, while the bottle of single-malt scotch I keep on hand for special occasions, contains 43 percent alcohol -- again clearly marked. Needless to say, I'll drink the scotch more slowly and judiciously than the wine.Similar information could easily be given to marijuana consumers. But that, of course, would require replacing prohibition with a regulatory system similar to that now used for alcohol and tobacco. Oddly, neither Walters nor Volkow seem to have brought up that possibility.Bruce Mirken is communications director for the Marijuana Policy Project.Complete Title: The White House Returns to Stoking Fears About Potent PotSource: AlterNet (US)Author: Bruce Mirken, AlterNet Published: June 13, 2008Copyright: 2008 Independent Media InstituteContact: letters alternet.org Website: http://www.alternet.org/URL: http://www.alternet.org/drugreporter/88009/Related Articles & Web Site:Marijuana Policy Projecthttp://www.mpp.org/Potent Pot Worries Officialshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread24004.shtmlStudy: Marijuana Potency Increases in 2007http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread24002.shtml 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #22 posted by afterburner on June 14, 2008 at 03:24:11 PT
BGreen #6
ATTENTION SPAM, n.: "a failure to process basic facts or comprehend common knowledge, due to having a mind full of useless information." (UrbanDictionary.com)
--The week's best invented words.
Jun 08, 2008 04:30 AM. 
John Sakamoto 
http://www.thestar.com/News/Ideas/article/439319Above is a newly minted invented word. It seems to apply equally to those Prohibitionists who create and recycle disinformation about cannabis and to their fearful victims who feed on these never ending scare stories.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #21 posted by John Tyler on June 13, 2008 at 20:07:38 PT
apples and oranges
I will compare apples and oranges here. This something our opponents do all of the time, so maybe they will understand it. Cheap beer is about 6.4% alcohol. Cheap wine is about 14% alcohol. Distilled alcohol is 40% to 75% alcohol. So even the most potent cannabis still has less of a percentage of THC than the average glass of wine has of alcohol. In a word the best cannabis (9.6% to 13%) is still less potent than wine (14%). What is the big deal? Why is cannabis illegal at all?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #20 posted by FoM on June 13, 2008 at 18:25:19 PT
Legal Drugs Kill Far More Than Illegal
Legal Drugs Kill Far More Than Illegal, Florida Says June 14, 2008URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/14/us/14florida.html
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #19 posted by FoM on June 13, 2008 at 17:50:06 PT
 Storm Crow 
And thank you too!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #18 posted by charmed quark on June 13, 2008 at 17:47:34 PT
I take pure THC, OMG
Actually, Marinol dilutes the THC in oil, so maybe it's more like 20%. Still, even more potent than this deadly dope the drug Czar is warning about. My brain must be total mush.But based on all the dire warnings over the years about increases in potency, by now street marijuana must be around 1000% THC.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #17 posted by Storm Crow on June 13, 2008 at 16:58:19 PT
And FoM....
Thank you! for "keeping on!" 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #16 posted by FoM on June 13, 2008 at 15:10:27 PT
Matt
Thank you so much. It's been a long hard road but I'm still keepin on. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #15 posted by Matt Elrod on June 13, 2008 at 14:28:15 PT:
Congratulations
Congrats on reaching another milestone Fom. Your search engine has been updated.Matt
Matt's Homepage
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #14 posted by FoM on June 13, 2008 at 12:07:48 PT
BGreen
Now that's funny. I got an email off to him. I do miss having my Outlook email but I have never picked up any virus from yahoo. It has been very stable for me. I have a couple different ones. I like doing it that way. I like the one I have for mostly political stuff the best. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by BGreen on June 13, 2008 at 11:52:22 PT
Best way to reach Matt
Darn, I guess my road trip to Canada is off. :(LOLThe Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by FoM on June 13, 2008 at 11:46:45 PT
observer
OK thank you. I wasn't sure since when I hawked an article using Yahoo it came back as unaccepted or something like that. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by observer on June 13, 2008 at 11:44:33 PT
contact
 I can't contact Matt since I don't have anything but a Yahoo e-mail account now.Try sending Matt an email. Yahoo or gmail works just fine. (Those are the ones I'd use, anyway...) That's the very fastest and best way for you to contact him. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by FoM on June 13, 2008 at 10:49:28 PT
Thanks BGreen
Hopefully he will see it. I don't think it's hard for Matt to fix.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by BGreen on June 13, 2008 at 10:43:38 PT
Did you see post #1, observer?
FoM was just talking about you.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by observer on June 13, 2008 at 10:28:32 PT
Mockingbird Press
And the U.S. media -- led by the Associated Press, by far the nation's most powerful wire service -- once again...see:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbirdhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mighty_Wurlitzer_(media)
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by FoM on June 13, 2008 at 10:24:52 PT
BGreen
As far as I know you can't use outlook but we can use yahoo or gmail. I read and comment now and then on an Alltel Forum and this question has come up more then once and that is what they said.Thank you for sending the email.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by BGreen on June 13, 2008 at 10:24:35 PT
Aha!
I received an email back after I sent the email to Matt, and I had to reply to that email for my original email to be forwarded to Matt.It said it didn't recognize my email address.Please reply to this message to confirm you really want to write
to webmaster. The content of your response does not matter, any message
to the From: address (shown above) will suffice.You will only need to do this once. When you have replied, your
original email will be forwarded to webmaster, and the mail server
will recognize you next time.This is a challenge-response mail filtering system designed
to block SPAM.I'll bet you never received the email to verify your yahoo address and that's why their server doesn't recognize and accept your emails.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by BGreen on June 13, 2008 at 10:16:01 PT
Are you sure, FoM?
I thought you could use just about any email program or browser, as long as the settings are correct.Am I missing something?The Reverend Bud GreenBTW, Matt has been emailed.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by FoM on June 13, 2008 at 10:09:29 PT
BGreen
I think they block yahoo mail because I tried to send an article in one time and it didn't go thru. If you have a regular email address and want to send an email to him and direct him to this thread that would help. I don't know if not updating the search tool when it rolls over is bad for CNews or just an issue.With wireless you can't use Outlook Express and that is what I always used to contact him.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by BGreen on June 13, 2008 at 09:54:01 PT
FoM, can you reach Matt at DrugSense?
webmaster(at)drugsense.orgThe Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by museman on June 13, 2008 at 09:06:57 PT
amazing how they rob the truth
 "Today's report makes it more important than ever that we get past outdated, anachronistic views of marijuana."Outdated, anachronistic views.Everything coming out of the ONDCP is 'outdated and anachronistic.' The WOD is 'outdated and anachronistic.' The federal government is 'outdated and anachronistic.'
 
The banking/economic system is 'outdated and anachronistic.' Religion is 'outdated and anachronistic.' Polluting technologies are 'outdated and anachronistic.' Thinking and believing that someone other than yourself can decide your future is 'outdated and anachronistic.'Obviously there are some major updates waiting for the 'outdated and anachronistic' BS to get out of the way.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by FoM on June 13, 2008 at 05:38:55 PT
Off Topic But Important
I hope Observer sees this or Matt Elrod sees this. I can't contact Matt since I don't have anything but a Yahoo e-mail account now. Matt needs to do something to make the search tool update because we turned over to 24,000 articles. Before I could e-mail Matt but now that I am using a wireless aircard I can't. He knows what to do but maybe he will see this post.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment