Backlash Against Hemp Lollipops is Misguided 

  Backlash Against Hemp Lollipops is Misguided 

Posted by CN Staff on July 10, 2005 at 21:42:43 PT
Source: Kinston Free Press  

North Carolina -- The next target of the anti-drug hysteria that stems from our nation's drug war could well be something many Americans have never heard of: marijuana-flavored lollipops. Marketed by several makers under names such as "Pot Suckers," the candies contain no THC, the active ingredient in marijuana. But that doesn't stop rabid drug warriors and well-meaning activists who worry that pot-flavored treats will send the wrong message to kids.We believe such hand-wringing is probably misplaced; many of us grew up "puffing" on candy cigarettes and bubble-gum cigars, yet aren't addicted to tobacco. Most people, even children, know there is a difference between candy that tastes like pot and the real McCoy. Not everyone is so sure.
Michigan state Rep. Dudley Spade is proposing a state ban on candy that contains hemp or tastes like hemp. He's one who worries about sending the wrong message to children. He's obviously one who also believes that parents are unable to communicate the right message to their kids, so the state must do it for them.Anti-drug organizations such as the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America take a more family-based approach, urging parents to get stores to stop stocking the candies. We always prefer market-based solutions rather than those imposed by government. They allow more freedom and choice in the marketplace.That's not to say we encourage anyone, especially children, to rush out and pick up a few of these lollipops so they could pretend to be on drugs, because we don't. We do, however, encourage parents to talk to their children about drug use and other behavior that involves choices that could change their lives forever. Choice is a wonderful thing, but it must come with the freedom to make bad choices, so long as we're willing to accept the consequences.Source: Kinston Free Press (NC)Published: July 11, 2005Copyright: 2005 by Freedom ENC CommunicationsWebsite: pholmes freedomenc.comCannabisNews Hemp Archives

Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help

Comment #9 posted by jose melendez on July 14, 2005 at 15:53:24 PT
I'm not hiding, drug war is crime and I do seek and will require the sharpening of said issues at trial and invite or otherwise engage the reasoning, intellectual honesty, genuine and good behavior of any Uncompromised Judge or Judges in any Court without prejudice or conflict of interest, deference to anyone Corrupted by Sellers or Distributors of or the Use of far more harmful foods, supplements, medications or intoxicants and with equitable jurisdiction over such matters and Rights long and Historically deemed most Basic and Inviolable by our Constitutional and common Laws.Jose MelendezInternational Hydrocarbon Corporation1630 Lake DriveDeLand, FL 32724888 247-8183
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #8 posted by afterburner on July 14, 2005 at 10:56:15 PT
jose melendez, RE big pharma 
I have hard copy newspapers of the following investigative report. If you would like to receive this series from Canada, please contact me by email to FoM with a mailing address:
 {Blind Faith: What happens when drugs, science and money mix? 
{Special Investigative Report 
{The Hamilton Spectator THESPEC.COM [Hamilton, ON, Canada] 
"An extensive, three month Spectator investigation has uncovered financial relationships between pharmaceutical companies and dozens of McMaster University researchers. The probe also found that drugs are being pulled off the market in Canada more often than ever before. And we discovered that Health Canada, the government watchdog, is toothless when it comes to controlling the 95 million prescriptions written each year for unapproved uses." 
{A Five-Part Series 
{Part 1: Series overview, Saturday, June 25, 2005 
{Part 2: Dangerous drugs, Monday, June 27, 2005 
{Part 3: Researchers' links, Tuesday, June 28, 2005 
{Part 4: Unapproved uses, Wednesday, June 29, 2005 
{Part 5: Safe solutions, Thursday, June 30, 2005}Many of the pharmaceutical companies cited are international. Some of the questionable research may be similar to US research. Health Canada, like the FDA, has been accused of inadequate oversight of new pharmaceuticals.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #7 posted by jose melendez on July 14, 2005 at 07:14:30 PT
big sugar, big tobacco, big pharma what's the diff
The sugar would be far more dangerous than almost any palatable amount of THC, of course. - - -New Drug: Tumors shrink in unexpected percentage of patients . . . perhaps they smoke weed?
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #6 posted by elfman_420 on July 14, 2005 at 06:48:35 PT
Wait till this guy sees what we've been making..
We've got cannabis that tastes like blueberries, orange, lemon, grapefruit, bubblegum, berries, peppermint(trainwreck baby).. it's too early for me.. what else am I forgetting? My other question is, even if there were active cannabis ingredients in the sucker, which would be worse for our bodies, the sugar or the THC? 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #5 posted by FoM on July 12, 2005 at 14:52:29 PT
Related Article from Reuters
Conn. Wants To Weed OMarijuana-Flavor CandyJuly 12, 2005  
 NEW YORK (Reuters) - Connecticut on Tuesday joined a growing effort to weed out marijuana-flavored candy from store shelves when its attorney general said he would sponsor a statewide ban on "Pot Suckers" lollipops.The green candy flavored with hemp oil has been showing up in novelty stores in large malls throughout the state, marketed with slogans such as "Every lick is like taking a hit."The lollipops do not contain THC, the hallucinogenic compound in marijuana, but Attorney General Richard Blumenthal called the candy "a gateway product" that "glamorizes drugs for children."The candy has been banned by the Chicago City Council and in Suffolk County, New York. The New York City Council and the states of Michigan, New Jersey and Georgia are considering legislation to ban them.No comment was available from the Trenton, New Jersey, company ICUP that markets the candy. It has previously defended the product as intended for an adult audience and said it planned a hemp-flavored chocolate candy called Buzz Bar.Other marijuana-flavored candy products have found their way to the market place in recent months including "Kronic Kandy," made in the Netherlands and sold in the Atlanta area, and items from the Mary Jane Candy Company including "Ganja Pops" and "Icky Sticky Nuggets." Copyright: Reuters 2005
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #4 posted by runderwo on July 11, 2005 at 10:04:54 PT
" He's obviously one who also believes that parents are unable to communicate the right message to their kids, so the state must do it for them."Even worse, these are being banned for ADULTS too. Talk about a nanny state! I wonder why nobody mentions this... is there a good reason why if these are so offensive they couldn't be sold only to people over the age of 18?Oh, some other examples of how this is just cannabis paranoia: Coca-cola, jelly beans flavored as alcoholic drinks, grape juice sold in wine bottles, ...
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #3 posted by jose melendez on July 11, 2005 at 06:37:18 PT
Got Commerce?
Worldwide, approximately 50 agents are in active clinical trials for the treatment of neuropathic pain. Promising new neuropathic pain treatments currently in late-phase clinical development for neuropathic pain include calcium channel antagonists pregabalin (Pfizer) and ziconotide (Elan Pharmaceuticals); sodium channel antagonists topiramate (J&J / Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical), mexiletine (Boehringer Ingelheim), and oxcarbazepine (Novartis / Kissei); glutamate / NMDA antagonists memantine (Neurobiological Technologies / Merz) and lamotrigine (GlaxoSmithKline / Bristol-Myers Squibb); cyclo-oxygenase inhibitors meloxicam (Boehringer Ingelheim / Bristol-Myers Squibb / Abbott Laboratories) and lornoxicam (Roche / Nycomed Pharma); cannabinoid receptor agonist THC:CBD (GW Pharmaceuticals / Bayer AG); neuromuscular blocking agent botulinum toxin A (Allergan); and alpha adrenoceptor agonist clonidine gel (Curatek Pharmaceuticals).More: 
Forget Wal-Mart: Demand the Plant
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #2 posted by ekim on July 11, 2005 at 05:56:22 PT
NASDA and The National Grange "supports Hemp
H.R. 3037, the Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2005 
U.S. companies that manufacture or sell products made with hemp include Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps, the number-one-selling natural soap, Interface, the world’s largest manufacturer of commercial carpet and carpet tiles, FlexForm Technologies, an Indiana company whose natural fiber materials are found in 1.5 million cars, Alterna, a professional hair care company whose hemp products are beloved by Julia Roberts, California based Nutiva Hemp Foods and adidas USA which has been selling hemp sneakers since 1995. Although hemp grows wild across the US, a vestige of centuries of hemp farming, the hemp for these products must be imported. There is widespread support among national organizations for a change in the federal government’s position on hemp. The National Association of State Departments of Agriculture "supports revisions to the federal rules and regulations authorizing commercial production of industrial hemp." The National Grange "supports research, production, processing and marketing of industrial hemp as a viable agricultural activity."
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by kaptinemo on July 11, 2005 at 04:37:41 PT:
"Suckers", indeed
Don't the antis think that this might, besides being a marketing gimmick, also have been a goad?Think about it; 'sucker bait' for 'suckers' about suckers. The reactions of the antis have been, as usual, hysterical as well as histrionic. They fly off the handle, despite the fact, as the author points out, of there existing bubble gum cigars and candy 'cigarettes'. No one is demanding that those items be removed from stores, when, using the antis 'logic', they prime kids for a future of being nicotine addicts.All the antis have done, as usual, is increase the allure of the product; don't these goofs understand marketing techniques? Kids who didn't have the slightest interest before will now vie to be the first ones to get them and show their friends. Expect the price to increase, soon. As well as the sales.Will they EVER learn? They haven't had any success with 'the real deal'; what makes them think they can do any better against a candy?Yes...'suckers' is right...not the article itself, but those seeking to prohibit it.
[ Post Comment ]

  Post Comment