4,200 A Year Fined In Capital Over Cannabis

More than 4,200 people in London have been given UKP80 on-the-spot fines for possessing cannabis in the first year of a government crackdown on drugs.

Figures released by the Met show that nearly half those hit by the penalty handed over the money quickly, boosting public funds by tens of thousands of pounds.

But the other 55 per cent of offenders failed to pay within the 21-day deadline required by the law, forcing police to pass their debts to magistrates’ courts to enforce.

The additional cost of collecting the money this way means that much, if not all, of the potential revenue from those fines is likely to be wiped out.

Cannabis was upgraded to a class-B drug in January last year, amid increasing concern about its potential impact on mental health.  A three-tier penalty system has been created: a person found with the drug for the first time is given a “cannabis warning”, similar to a caution, and those caught a second time are fined UKP80.  A third offence leads to prosecution.

The aim of what the Home Office described as an “escalated enforcement regime” was to avoid clogging up the courts with occasional users.  Heavier penalties attached to class-B status – which include up to five years in prison for possession – would be reserved for persistent users.

The Met figures were obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.  They show police caught offenders with cannabis 53,138 times in the 12 months to the end of January this year.

Of these cases, 37,562 resulted in a warning.  Another 4,206 were given an UKP80 fine, while 7,567 third-time offenders were prosecuted.

Of those charged with cannabis possession, 1,748 were aged between 10 and 17.

Source: Evening Standard (London, UK)
Copyright: 2010 Associated Newspapers Ltd.
Contact: letters

View the Original article

End War–At Least the Drug War

Categories Cato PublicationsEducation and Child PolicyEnergy and EnvironmentFinance, Banking & Monetary PolicyForeign Policy and National SecurityGeneralGovernment and PoliticsHealth, Welfare & EntitlementsInternational Economics and DevelopmentLaw and Civil LibertiesPolitical PhilosophyRegulatory StudiesTax and Budget PolicyTelecom, Internet & Information PolicyTrade and Immigration Archives Blog Home Next: Good News: No Eminent Domain for Flight 93 Memorial

Previous: War Is the Health of the State, Redux

End War–At Least the Drug War Posted by Doug Bandow

War is an awful thing.  Yet, to show they are serious, politicians constantly use the “war” analogy.  A “war on poverty.”  An “energy war.”  The “drug war.”

Yet militarizing these and other issues is precisely the wrong way to deal with them.  So it is with the drug war, which has come most to resemble a real war.  Indeed, more Mexicans have been dying in their “drug war” than Americans have been dying in Iraq.

It’s time to call a truce.  Writes Sherwood Ross:

Gil Kerlikowske, Obama’s new head of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, has renounced even the use of the phrase

View the Original article

Why Is Marijuana Still Illegal?

Posted by Doug Bandow

According to Rasmussen Reports, a majority of Americans believe that alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana:

Pot or not, that is the question.

Fifty-one percent (51%) of American adults say alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Just 19% disagree and say pot is worse.

But 25% say both are equally dangerous. Just two percent (2%) say neither is dangerous.

Younger adults are more likely than their elders to view alcohol as the more dangerous of the two.

Fifty-three percent (53%) of women say alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana, compared to 48% of men. Men by a two-to-one margin over women say pot is riskier, but women are more inclined to say both are dangerous.

Unmarried adults are more critical of alcohol than those who are married. Those with children at home think alcohol is more dangerous than those without kids living with them.

So why are pot users still being tossed into jail?

There are lots of good reasons why people shouldn’t use drugs.  But making drug use illegal only compounds the social consequences, turning a moral and health problem into a legal and criminal problem.  The result is the worst of both worlds:  all of the problems of drug use plus all of the problems of prohibition.  Unfortunately, those consequences flow overseas, further undermining fragile societies such as Afghanistan, Colombia, and Mexico and ultimately American security objectives as well.

It’s time to call off the Drug War.

Doug Bandow

View the Original article

Parents Give Autistic Son Marijuana

I recently found a news item where parents were giving their nine year old son medical marijuana to help him cope with Autism.  According to the parents the marijuana is helping him cope.The parents give their son the medical marijuana through marijuana tea and marijuana oil based cookies.  According to the story the child comes home from school every day wanting his “tea and cookies” because of gut pain caused by anxiety.  His parents claim they did not tell him what the stuff they were giving him was.

Before trying Medical Marijuana Jay, the nine year old son would eat non food items.  He has been known to eat his own shirt, as well as blankets.  Apparently now he has stopped eating non food items according to his parents.  In school Jay is taking part in ABA.  Before marijuana he would have 30-50 aggressions a day at another student or teacher.  Now he has reached days where there are none.

Read the whole article here.  What are your thoughts on Medical Marijuana and Aspergers or Autism..

--

View the Original article

Good News on Medical Marijuana

Posted by David Rittgers

The Department of Justice is changing its long-standing policy of ignoring state laws that allow marijuana use for medicinal purposes. This federalism question played out several years ago in the Supreme Court in the Raich case; Cato’s amicus brief is available here.

Cato hosted Rob Kampia of the Marijuana Policy Project in March, and you can view the event here. Glenn Greenwald wrote an influential study for Cato on the successful decriminalization of drugs in Portugal. Greenwald notes that he gets more invitations to speak on the subject now than he did when it was published.

A good first step. Fourteen states permit medical marijuana dispensaries; I suspect more are on the way now that this hurdle has been cleared.

David Rittgers

View the Original article

Cannabis Risks Must Not Be Underplayed

Professor David Nutt Is Wrong.  We Cannot Compare Smoking The Drug With Using Cigarettes Or Alcohol

The ill-tempered argument over cannabis use is an ideological dispute between those who regard it as an entirely safe herb and those who regard it as a devilish drug likely to drive one mad after a few puffs.  Sadly, there is rarely an honest and open discussion on why people enjoy it, what level of consumption is safe, if adolescents are especially at risk and whether certain types of cannabis pose greater dangers.

Professor David Nutt, who was sacked as the Government’s drugs adviser, claims that cannabis is no more dangerous than alcohol or cigarettes.  But is it sensible to equate even these two? There are no health benefits in smoking cigarettes, which is simply a manifestation of nicotine addiction.  Most adults in Britain, however, drink alcohol in moderation, and suffer few adverse consequences.  Yet most know that drinking a bottle of vodka a day is likely to harm their health, and few favour daily drinking from the age of 14.

There is a lot of evidence that smoking several joints a day impairs memory.  Using brain imaging, cannabis can be seen to impair the function of the hippocampus, a structure essential to memory.  If we drink heavily for an evening, we may remember little the next day.  But alcohol is washed out of the system in 24 hours; cannabis can be detected a month later.  No wonder the academic performance of school children who smoke it daily deteriorates; they have a chronic low-grade intoxication.

It remains disputed whether memory returns totally to normal after consumption ceases.  In those who have smoked only for a few months or years, there is every hope of a return to normality in months.  But whether a “stoner” addled by decades of consumption can regain all his faculties remains uncertain.

People with schizophrenia use more cannabis than the general population; that is undisputed.  The critical question is whether cannabis use has helped to cause it.  Evidence has been mounting steadily over the past six years that initially healthy people who use cannabis daily are more likely to develop paranoia and psychosis.  Those with a family history of mental illness, with a suspicious or psychosis-prone personality and those who start cannabis use in early adolescence appear at greater risk.

It is not surprising that the link between cannabis and schizophrenia remains controversial.  It took several decades for society to accept that smoking tobacco increases the risk for lung cancer.  Now it is generally accepted.  In his lecture last week Professor Nutt contrasted a 2.6-fold increase in the risk of psychosis from using cannabis with a twentyfold increase in the risk of lung cancer if one smokes cigarettes.  Unfortunately he was not comparing like with like here.  The twentyfold increased risk does not come just by being a smoker but by being a long-term heavy smoker.  For cannabis, the risk of schizophrenia rises about sixfold if one is a long-term heavy user.

Nevertheless, 90 per cent of daily users will not develop schizophrenia, just as most daily smokers will not die of lung cancer.  But even among those who never come near a psychiatrist, daily cannabis users are more likely to be unsuccessful in their careers, to have broken marriages and to suffer minor psychological problems such as anxiety and depression.  For teenagers and their families the consequences of cannabis smoking may never register in medical statistics, yet be devastating in their impact on family life.

In 2007 the Advisory Council on Misuse of Drugs concluded that street cannabis was getting more potent, a view confirmed by two large surveys.  These showed that the concentration of THC, its main active ingredient, had increased from about 4 per cent in 1970s resin to 14-18 per cent in present day skunk.

Giving THC to normal volunteers in a laboratory setting induces psychotic symptoms to a varying extent, depending on the dose.  Cannabis is a complex substance and THC is not the only constituent.

Another is cannabidiol ( CBD ), which does not induce psychosis in studies; if anything it relieves anxiety, and may even have antipsychotic effects.  Traditional cannabis resin contains equal amounts of THC and CBD, so some pro-psychotic effects of THC may be counterbalanced by the CBD.  In skunk, not only has the concentration of THC greatly increased but the CBD has virtually disappeared, so it may carry a double whammy.  Skunk’s ever-larger share of the street market is worrying.

There is little evidence that altering the legal classification of cannabis affects consumption.  When the law was liberalised in 2004 cannabis consumption was falling in most of Western Europe, and the UK has followed the general trend.

Two Western European countries with markedly different policies have less of a problem than the UK.  The Swedes adopt a prohibitionist line and only about 8 per cent of adolescents have smoked cannabis.  The Dutch have a very liberal policy and 28 per cent of adolescents use cannabis.  Both have lower consumption than the UK where 38 per cent of 16-year-olds have used it.  Teenagers starting to use cannabis do not debate its exact classification; many do not even think it is a drug and few have any knowledge of its hazards.  What does appear to have an effect is knowledge about the risks of heavy consumption.

Rather than arguing whether cannabis should be a Class B or C drug, politicians would be better to support a big educational campaign on the properties and constituents of different types of cannabis and the risks associated with heavy use.

Robin Murray is Professor of Psychiatric Research at the Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College London

Source: Times, The (UK)
Copyright: 2009 Times Newspapers Ltd
Contact: letters

View the Original article

Skunk Cannabis Smokers Seven Times More Likely To Suffer From Psychosis

Ultra-potent skunk cannabis is seven times more likely to trigger psychotic illnesses such as schizophrenia than traditional hash, a study has warned.

The research, by the highly-respected Institute of Psychiatry in London, will deepen concerns over the safety of cannabis amid political controversy over its criminal status.

Dr Marta Di Forti, who led the research, said: ‘Our study is the first to demonstrate the risk of psychosis is much greater among frequent cannabis users, especially among those using skunk, rather than among occasional users of traditional hash.

‘Psychosis was associated with more frequent and longer use of cannabis.  Our most striking finding is that patients with a first episode of psychosis preferentially used high-potency cannabis preparations of the skunk variety.’

Skunk contains high levels of the psychoactive ingredient delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol, known as THC, which can trigger psychotic symptoms.

In South-East London, where the study was carried out, the THC content of hash is less than 4 per cent but in skunk it is 18 per cent.

In the past two years skunk has come to dominate the cannabis market, with its price dropping to under UKP5 a gram.

Some experts believe skunk is so potent it should be treated differently from other types of cannabis and put on a par with Class A drugs such as cocaine and Ecstasy.

Last month Professor David Nutt was forced to step down as chairman of the Government’s Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs after criticising the decision to push cannabis back into the more serious Class B after a period of downgrading.

Its downgrading from B to C had been increasingly controversial as concern grew over its effects.

The sacking of Professor Nutt, who claimed the drug was less harmful than alcohol and tobacco, caused a revolt among members of the advisory council with several resigning.

The number of under-25s smoking cannabis was almost one in five last year, even though use has been falling since 2001.

This latest study, published in the British Journal of Psychiatry, involved 280 patients aged 18 to 65 attending a South London hospital with a first episode of psychosis, compared with 174 healthy people.

Those with psychosis were twice as likely to have used cannabis for longer than five years, and more than six times likely to take it every day.

Significantly cannabis users who smoked skunk were 6.8 times more at risk of being treated for a psychosis than those who took hash.

Other studies show hash users are at double the risk of suffering psychosis compared with those who never use the drug.

Marjorie Wallace, chief executive of the mental health charity SANE, said: ‘Those of us on the front line, including psychiatrists, police and families, know that skunk cannabis can be particularly dangerous for the significant minority of people vulnerable to mental illness.

‘We need to give out an uncompromising warning about the specific links between skunk and mental illness.’

Drug charity Turning Point welcomed the findings.  Spokesman Harry Walker said: ‘We now have confirmation of what many suspected and it is important that we act on these findings.’

Source: Daily Mail (UK)
Copyright: 2009 Associated Newspapers Ltd
Contact: letters

View the Original article

Closed Minds on Cannabis Reform

Under the leadership of former prime minister Sir Geoffrey Palmer, the Law Commission is both busy and productive, intent on making New Zealanders look closely at many of our laws with a view to modernising, simplifying and improving them.

Its latest report, an issues paper on controlling and regulating drugs, out last week, has a focus on the potential softening of drug possession laws with a complementary shift towards more treatment of chronic users.

These are ideas that merit study and debate.  But Justice Minister Simon Power isn’t prepared to even wait for the submission period to end before declaring his closed mind.

“There’s not a single, solitary chance that as long as I’m the minister of justice we’ll be relaxing drug laws in New Zealand,” he said upon the paper’s release.

Prime Minister John Key echoed him, without sounding quite so dogmatic.

Beating about the bush somewhat, but eventually getting to the point, he said: “No one is probably arguing necessarily that if someone uses a small amount of marijuana that that is necessarily of itself the end of the world.

“But …  what’s the message we want to send youngsters? And the message is, don’t engage with drugs.”

As a message, it’s difficult to dismiss.  But the fact is that young New Zealanders – and the middle-aged, and some of the elderly – do engage with illegal drugs in large numbers.

So much so that the smoking of cannabis, if not its cultivation, has already been decriminalised by default.

As Police Association president Greg O’Connor puts it, “Most police are too busy to be looking for cannabis users.”

Or how about the 2007 scandal at Nelson College, when 11 boarders were caught for using cannabis and growing it on the Grampians?

The school wisely decided to treat the offending as “some very silly decisions” by the boys, and offer counselling, while the police adopted what they called “a more educative than punitive” response.  How sensible.

In recent times politicians of most parties have adopted a harder line on crime, partly because it taps into public anxiety.

“Get tough and get votes” seems to be the formula.

But when it comes to cannabis and some other “soft” drugs, there are other ways to address illegal practices that don’t have to make criminals out of users.

The Law Commission has listed some of them: a formal cautioning scheme, an infringement notice regime, a greater use of diversion into education and treatment.

Flexible approaches like this are likely to be more effective at reducing the harm caused by drugs than simply punishing drug users, it says, while allowing police to concentrate on more harmful drug activities.

Surely these are exactly the kind of ideas that any progressive, responsible government would want to explore.

Drug abuse – like the much bigger New Zealand problem of alcohol abuse – - is a health issue.  Much of the associated crime is the result of addiction.

Mr Power and Mr Key should take the blinkers off for long enough to at least have their thinking challenged.

Source: Nelson Mail, The (New Zealand)
Copyright: 2010 Fairfax New Zealand Limited
Contact: editor

View the Original article

The Secret Cannabis Kings Next Door

Hannah isn’t just the girl next door.  She’s a teacher who cultivates cannabis on the side.  Meet the middle-class growers with a taste for easy money and uneasy morals

Meet Alex.  He is 26, handsome, privately educated, and, for most of his week, a freelance director of documentaries.  His wardrobe is immaculately shabby: designer jeans, cast-off T-shirts and vintage trainers.  The kitchen of his boutique Victorian terraced house is decked with a vast, chrome Smeg refrigerator, a dining table for 12, and two sinks so deep you could bathe in them.  He’s just had Velux windows put in, so the room catches the morning light.  He also has big plans for the garden.

This life looks enviable, does it not? Now ask Alex how he achieved all this so young.  Easy, he says: the money grew on trees.

Alex is, in his spare time, a cultivator of high-grade cannabis.  For three or four hours a week he tends to the 40 or so marijuana plants that grow in his spare room under the glare of fierce lamps.  Once every two months he crops those plants, bags them, makes a phone call, and waits for a man with a suitcase to arrive.  Each harvest delivers around five kilograms of a strain of skunk known in the market as “Cheese” on account of its powerful aroma.  A kilogram of Cheese is worth around UKP5,000, wholesale.

Alex is hoping for five, or possibly six harvests this year.  His plants are occasionally prone to disease, and he has overheads to pay.  Still, he hopes to clear an annual UKP100,000 profit.  Naturally, it will be tax-free.

None of Alex’s neighbours on his quiet street in an affluent city in the southwest knows about his sideline.  How would they? He appears to them as he does to me — a polite, successful young man with a burgeoning career.  There is never any noise from the house, nor any smell.  Alex does not smoke cannabis himself.  His sideline is, in his words, “all about the profit”.

He is not alone.  Meet Hannah, a well-spoken, 31-year-old primary-school teacher who works in the same city as Alex, with the kind of cute looks that — according to one of her friends — “make dads turn up to parent-teacher evenings”.  When Hannah left university, she worked as a PR in London for several years before quitting to have a baby.  After splitting up with the father of her child, she retrained as a primary-school teacher and moved out of the capital.  Like many recent graduates, she has “significant” student debts.  So, two years ago, she turned, as many of her friends had done before her, to a lucrative hobby.  She began growing weed.

Hannah generates much less money through cannabis than Alex, but still makes enough to pay her rent and bills.  If she were caught she would lose everything: her profession, her reputation, and, for the period of a likely two-year custodial sentence, her child.  Why take the risk?

“I know, I know,” she says, giggling nervously.  “It is a risk, and you’re always weighing it up in your mind.  Is it worth it? But I earn UKP20,000 a year as a primary-school teacher.  I’ve got a child to look after.  I don’t get any help from my son’s father.  I’ve got debts.  The cost of living is so high.  If I wasn’t making any extra money I’d be back living with my mum, as a lot of my friends are.

“It comes down to this: I want to do something with my life and this is a way of helping me reach my goals.  Maybe, when I’m further along in my career, and I get paid better, I’ll stop.  For now, it’s helping me achieve something, and that’s great.”

You will have noticed that this is not, at heart, a drugs story.  It’s a money story.  More and more young professional Britons are turning to cannabis cultivation as a profit-making venture.  They are teachers, lawyers, designers, property developers and plumbers.  They should be thriving in the legitimate success of their careers but, somehow, they are not.  For some reason, they think they need a little extra on the side.

Where does the money go? One 27-year-old energy consultant I spoke to said growing cannabis was the only way he could afford a holiday.  A plumber, who was laid off by his company six months ago, said he was using his bi-monthly output of skunk as a top-up to his jobseekers’ allowance and would quit the moment he found work again.  One couple, who work as graphic designers ( and whose lives will surely be examined when some future Andrew Marr comes to anecdotalise the early 21st century ) have sold cannabis to pay for three courses of IVF treatment.

Over three months, I spoke to many of these part-time cultivators, on condition that I would not reveal their names or locations.  None of them thought their extracurricular activities made them criminals.  But every single one recognised the grave criminal consequences of being discovered: a prison sentence.  They took the risk simply because it was — financially — worth it.

These middle-class amateur growers are not kingpins in Britain’s UKP5 billion drugs market.  They are, however, a swelling sector of the cannabis trade.  A recent study by the Independent Drug Monitoring Unit found that some 60% of cannabis consumed in Britain is home-grown, compared to 10% in 1984.

The charity DrugScope believes organised gangs, often from Vietnam, produce about 75% of the home-grown cannabis on our streets.  The rest is produced by the cottage industry: people like Hannah and Alex.

The deliciously named Dr Gary Potter — an expert in this field — has noticed a sharp rise in the number of domestic growers.  “There is a huge demand for it.  Ten, 15 years ago, most of the cannabis in the UK was imported — normally in resin form,” he says.  “Now, that’s changed.”

Most of the cannabis consumed in Britain now is skunk — the leafy, powerful form of the drug — because most of it is now home-grown.  Two factors are behind this “buy local” explosion.  There are internet sites that lay out how to grow and dozens of shops that sell the equipment, including the complex hydroponic growing systems and high-wattage lamps, to get started.  These shops are not illegal, because the products they sell could as easily be used to grow tomatoes as cannabis.  “But when the guy in the shop asks someone how his tomatoes are getting on,” says Potter, “it’s with a nudge and a wink.  Everyone knows what they’re talking about.”

This combination of factors has led to a revolution.  “For criminal gangs, it becomes simple,” says Potter.  “Why import, when you can set up an operation in Britain? Either you do big, risky imports…  or you set up an operation that makes UKP1m a year from one house.”

For those with ambitions to grow on a smaller scale, the current climate is also fecund.  “When you’re talking about middle-class growers, it becomes fascinating,” he says.  “Five years ago, say, a lot of people got into it because they wanted to get away from the black market.  They really were cultivating for personal use, and distributing among their friends.  But recently people have realised that growing is not only really easy, but you can make a fortune doing it.  The temptation to increase the scale of the operation is too great to resist.”

Ethically, this is a difficult area.  Finding a consensus on the relative harm of cannabis is like trying to cross a motorway on a unicycle — one rarely reaches a conclusion intact.  One grower viewed the argument in terms of the relative impact on society.  “You ask the police who they’d rather deal with in a city centre on a Saturday night,” he said.  “A hundred stoners or a hundred pissheads? The answer’s simple.”

Does he feels guilty about people who develop psychiatric illness as a result of cannabis misuse? “No, it’s the same as alcoholics,” he says.  “Should we ban alcohol because some people get ill by using it? I don’t think cannabis is any more dangerous than wine.  Whether other people abuse it or not isn’t really my business.”

Variations on this argument are being played out at the highest levels — most visibly during the recent furore surrounding the sacking of Professor David Nutt, the government’s chief drug adviser.  To recap, Nutt publicly disagreed with Jacqui Smith when the former home secretary moved cannabis from a class-C drug to a class-B.  And he was sacked by the current home secretary, Alan Johnson, after he claimed alcohol and tobacco were more harmful than LSD, ecstasy and cannabis.

The one incontrovertible fact about cannabis is it remains, for the moment, illegal.  For long-time devotees like Frank and Andrew, this is an absurd situation.  “Don’t you think it’s a little unnatural to make nature against the law?” says Andrew.

Andrew is 33.  He has dreadlocks and works as a park warden in a small northern city.  His friend Frank is 42, wears an anorak, and runs his own IT business.  They both grow cannabis and have the glazed, cheery look of men who have spent too much time indulging their particular poison.  They are what Potter would call “social growers”.  Frank, in particular, is a guru in the home-grown community.  He calls himself a “self-appointed tester of new strains,” and has about 40 types of cannabis in his possession.  Much of his spare time is spent contacting similar enthusiasts in other parts of the world and arranging to swap seeds.  He shows me his Mexican, Egyptian, West Virginian and Lebanese strains.  Impressive, I say — although all the seeds look roughly similar.

“Yes, but they smoke incredibly differently,” says Frank.  “I’ve got a Mexican a lot of people don’t like, because it’s quite speedy and not remotely narcotic.  I’ve got a Colombian which is quite cerebral.  There’s Pakistani weed that is incredibly narcotic — you smoke it and you pass out.  So there’s a whole range — it’s a delicate business.” He lights a joint.

Frank and Andrew have noticed a marked increase in the number of police raids on cannabis factories in the suburbs.  The arrests have focused on commercial Vietnamese and Chinese gangs operating out of rented, gutted terraced houses.  Now, most of the domestic growers that Andrew and Frank know have decided to lie low — cultivating a few plants at a time and making sure they only deal to friends.

For small-time growers like Andrew and Frank, however, profit is not the main concern.  They simply wish to grow, and smoke, among friends.  When the police’s tails are up, their biggest problem is concealing the energy consumption needed to keep high-watt lightbulbs glowing for 12 hours a day.  “That said, I’ve got a neighbour who pays UKP600 a month for his electricity and nobody ever bothers him,” says Frank.

For committed growers, there are, naturally, ways and means to bypass the electricity problem.  Either they keep their operation small enough that nobody would notice the spike in energy use, or they steal it.  Many of the criminal gangs jack their electricity from neighbours using rudimentary and dangerous techniques.  It can turn their houses into fire traps — and has led to a number of deaths.  For the upmarket grower, like Alex, the solution is safer, but more expensive: he paid a dodgy electrician UKP200 to wire his house into the national grid.

The real money is made by those who set up new growers.  In exchange for half the profits from a domestic operation, an “instructor” will lend you equipment, teach you the basics of cultivation and check on your crop.  Some instructors have 20 “students” working for them — and they make a fortune.

Middle-class growers often make a big show about how their activities bypass the criminal underworld.  The out-of-work plumber I spoke to said: “I don’t have a criminal record and have no intention of changing that.”

This desire to bypass the black market is why the current trend for home-growing flourished: cannabis smokers wanted to ensure that what they put between the rolling papers was not muck off a boat from Holland but was grown with love and attention by someone not unlike them.  Despite this, the professional criminals intrude.  Hannah tells me her biggest fear is not from the police, but from gangs who wait around outside grow shops and follow cultivators back to their house: “If you have the plants and the set-up in the house, you know there are criminal gangs who come and try to do you over, and steal your stuff.  So I’ve had to be a little bit savvy.”

Growers can be as savvy as they like, but someone has to sell their product for them.  And that someone is unlikely to have a respectable day job.  On one surreal November afternoon,

I sat in an Audi estate car with a middle-aged Indian drug dealer called Sly, who had gold teeth and an affable manner.  He told me that the “white boys” who came to him with their crop to sell were only one section of the market, and a vulnerable one.  “In this city, there’s many gangs — black gangs, Asian gangs, Chinese gangs — and everyone’s growing now,” he says.  “They’ve realised they can make money from the home-grown, high-grade.  All the kids…  the only thing they want to smoke is high grade, things like Cheese and Kush

View the Original article

Using Cannabis To Treat Health Problems

There was a time when I despised the smell of marijuana; inconveniently, it coincided with my college years.

So it would probably surprise those who knew me then as a violin-playing, straight-A student to discover that today, at 33, I cruise the streets of Los Angeles with a pot prescription.  Then again, maybe it wouldn’t.  But it surprises me.

As the child of pianists who took trips to Carnegie Hall while others tripped out to The Doors, I always thought of marijuana as a “gateway drug”, a bad weed that could only lead to suicide or, worse, failure in the arts.  When I gave it more of a chance in my late twenties, it wasn’t to boost “creativity”.  In fact, I don’t even know if I like cannabis yet, given all of its strains and forms.

Late last year, I simply began to experiment with it in search of relief for some vexing medical symptoms.

I was living in the right city at the right time, to be sure, but I lacked the positive and extensive marijuana history that so many of my peers enjoyed.

In 1999, I took my first hit as a college junior from a pipe that belonged to my younger brother.

At the time, I was feeling even more invincible than other young men: I had recently survived Hodgkin’s disease and a stem-cell bone marrow transplant, following sub-lethal chemotherapy and a failed romance with an engineer.  If I could endure such objective toxicity, I reasoned, something natural couldn’t cause too much harm.  I was right, but all I remember is coughing like an emphysema patient and obsessing about ( imagined ) cockroaches on my walls.

A few years later, I tried pot again, while working in Manhattan as a music writer.

But after a similarly bad experience at a Radiohead concert, with my undead pal the Maharishi, I ended the relationship.

Then my life changed dramatically: in 2005, after I moved to Los – -Angeles, I began to experience the onset of mysterious after-effects from my “cured” cancer, including peripheral nerve damage and a potentially malignant lesion in the base of my skull, something that few doctors could make sense of, much less treat.

Fortunately, California life proved to be therapeutic in itself: I found solace in the sylvan hills, the surf, the Pacific dolphins.

My new crowd included more creative, fewer type-A people.

And of course drugs were every-where.  The first day in my new apartment, I “lunched” at a neighbouring rocker’s pad.  In a scene like something out of Annie Hall, he offered me a dent out of a miniature Matterhorn of cocaine.

Later that winter, I attended a Christmas party at the home of a wannabe-dancer-turned-television production assistant.  Instead of the usual ornaments, her Christmas tree dangled bags of weed, joints and hash.  “How’d she get all that stuff?” I asked a studio musician.  “She goes to one of those, like, medical places.  She’s ’sick’ with ‘insomnia’.”

“Opposite world” is how my New York-based brother described my new dimension.  He was on to something.

Not only did everyone seem to survive in this city without a job, but the green crosses on storefronts with signs reading “Compassionate Care Collective” weren’t advertising chemists.

It was a new century, and these were a new breed of “legal” medical – -marijuana dispensaries stores that sold medically approved weed in California even though the drug was proscribed under US federal law.

As pot shops spread, there was a growing pride in the laidback medical–marijuana subculture, with everyone from celebrities to staid professionals indulging as rampantly as the TV show Weeds – -featuring a pot-dealing soccer mom would have you believe.  Gourmet chefs offered “secret” upgrades on the pot brownie; weekend classes sprang up to teach medical-marijuana business skills; you could buy $100,000 cultivation trailers at dedicated trade shows.  Hand in hand with all this came a growing public acceptance that cannabis could help people with chronic conditions, from cancer and multiple sclerosis to Aids and attention-deficit disorder and a tacit acknowledgment by LA authorities that the legal ban would henceforth go largely unenforced.

The medical marijuana system was easy to work.  All you needed was a doctor to recommend cannabis to treat diagnoses as vague as pain, anxiety or insomnia.

Then, you could join a local “collective” and take your pick from different varieties of medical-grade weed, which in some places you could buy with a credit card.  To find a doctor, you could visit a dispensary for a referral if you didn’t want to cold-call a number from an alternative newspaper or road sign.  Professional weed doctors charged $100-$250 for a recommendation letter that was valid for a year.  Some even provided a credit-card-sized version.

Armed with that, you could buy nearly as much marijuana as you liked ( up to 8oz ) in various forms, including starter plants.

It was revolutionary: stronger strains, more choice and no drug dealers.

Of course, it could have been all that vitamin D shining down on me as I worked poolside, but if LA culture and chronic illness had taught me anything, it was that people should live as they like; I wasn’t about to crusade against abuse of the medical marijuana laws, particularly when long, expensive visits to the country’s best hospitals had failed to relieve my legitimate neuromuscular symptoms.  But I was also victim of a cognitive disconnect: after seeing how successfully chemistry and -physics cured cancer, I didn’t think much about alternative medicine.

And so I watched the medical marijuana scene from afar, my nerves and muscles continuing to scorch and twitch under T-shirts and denim.

Then, in 2006, a men’s magazine sent me to Virginia to report on a religious teenager with Hodgkin’s disease who had been taken into temporary custody for disavowing chemotherapy in favour of herbs and natural food.  I soon found myself ensconced in the case and wanted to take my health into my hands using “natural” means.

That led me to Donald Abrams, head of University of California San Francisco’s Osher Center for Integrative Medicine, a conventionally trained oncologist who had also studied under wellness guru Andrew Weil.  Abrams put me on a successful anti-inflammatory diet and recommended acupuncture.  But unbeknownst to me at the time, he was also a prominent cannabis researcher whose studies confirmed the plant’s success with easing neuropathic pain.

And so, last winter, when I decided to give my mystifying skull-base lesion more attention by scheduling an innovative procedure with a leading neurosurgeon, I contacted Abrams, too.  By this time, my attitude towards pot had matured: if I could authorise a doctor to drill into my head and suck a tumour out through my nose, how bad could weed be? Still, I wanted to go about this properly, by first asking a trusted expert whether this “treatment” could actually help.  I sent Abrams an e-mail, and within minutes received a resounding affirmative along with a digitally signed letter on UCSF letterhead recommending medical marijuana for pain.  For once, it was enviable to be me.

Walk into West Hollywood’s premier dispensary, The Farmacy whose owner was a pharmacist before becoming a cannabis entrepreneur and you could be in a Malibu cafe.  There’s a well-lit waiting room; the couches are chic and comfortable; and the light-wood grain of the furniture blends calmingly with surfboards and black-and-white Ansel Adams-style photos on the walls.

On my first visit, last December, a smiley woman who looked like Alanis Morissette was sitting at reception.

In front of her stood a jar of quarters for people who needed coins for the parking meters.  After some pleasantries, Alanis took my recommendation letter, phoned UCSF, and had me sign in.  Then she gave me a “passport”, a customer loyalty card of sorts: stamp it after each purchase so you can earn a free score.

I also received an introductory discount coupon, and soon was escorted behind a wall into the actual store: a pot-smoker’s dreamspace replete with a quasi-coffee house counter, gourmet chocolates in a glass case, a refrigerator filled with marijuana soda, and a freezer storing marijuana gelato.

The clerk, or “budtender”, asked about my “preferences”.  A deadringer for the actor James Franco, he looked unfailingly chill.  “Nothing too strong,” I said.  I explained my symptoms and that I’d heard about two opposing types of marijuana indica and sativa the former more of a downer, the latter more like an upper.

“I want indica,” I said.  I wanted to slow overactive nerves.

Franco nodded and let me smell three different strains.

One smelled like lavender, another like peat.  I took the most basic.

Franco seemed confident that it would work and also sold me marijuana chocolate bars with almonds.

I bought the “edibles” because I don’t like smoking anything, really, and because I lacked an expensive vapouriser such as The Volcano, a $700 product that today’s upscale weed-lovers use to inhale the active ingredients in marijuana without the ash.  In minutes, I was in my car, and within the hour I was home, eating a confection with my wife in front of a documentary film.  My crampy muscles soon relaxed, yet I remained completely lucid.

No giggling, no forgetting.  No paranoia.

Three days later, early on Saturday evening and I’m ready to go to the next level.  so far the Farmacy chocolate bars have worked well: Divided into single “doses”, they gradually ease my peripheral nerves, which often feel like fraying electric wires shorting out, sizzling, popping.

I don’t experience a “head high” ( no imaginings or unprovoked laughing fits ) and I’m now confident enough to try the Farmacy weed.  It’s called Sensi Star, which Google tells me took first prize at the 1999 High Times Cannabis Cup.  But what do the experts say about how it actually works?

Well, according to the Marijuana Strain Library at the site Kindgreenbuds com ( the world’s leading cancer experts have yet launch a weed site ), the strain’s THC levels hover around 20 per cent ( THC is marijuana’s most active ingredient ), rendering it a “one-hitter quitter” while its CBD content measures 0.9 per cent ( CBD, another but less prominent active ingredient, has been shown in studies to alleviate pain and inflammation, and appears in Sativex, a mouth spray available in Canada for multiple sclerosis patients ).  Of course, I don’t know what any of this means, really, but this is already more than I learnt at the dispensary simply that Sensi Star is “really nice”.

I smoke while my wife works on her dissertation.  I forget the “one–hitter quitter” rule and soon I’ve taken enough to fill up half my glass pipe’s bowl a small proportion of the eighth of an ounce that I had purchased.

I take rapid inhalations I’m not just bad at smoking, I’m annoyed that I’m bad at smoking; California hasn’t killed all the type-A in me.  So, gallantly, I smoke more, and 20 minutes pass.

Suddenly, I’m calling out for my wife.  “I don’t know what’s happening,” I stutter.  “Everything’s changing; I’m for-forgetting; everything I say; wait, what did I…? Maybe we should put those knives away; they look sharp!” I point to the cutlery on the kitchen counter, terrified, watching my hold on my consciousness slip away.  I’m walking forward and backward, and obsessively shifting from one leg to another.  “I’m dying; I’m not me, please save my life!”

I don’t know who I am, and as Lina starts to rub my arms, asking me if I feel her hands on my skin ( I don’t ), I wonder who she is, too.  This isn’t paranoia.

I’m crying one moment, laughing hysterically the next, my “self” plunging deeper into the abyss.  “Please take me to the hospital,” I scream.  “I am losing myself, who am I? Ha! Oh shit, this is getting worse.

It’s faster.

It’s faster!”

I’m lucky that Lina, a psychotherapist knowledgeable about substance abuse and psycho-pharmacology, doesn’t tell me that she’s never witnessed such a severe reaction; what she would later describe as “part-temporary psychosis, part-temporary dementia”.  I look at her in a newly 3-D rendering, no James Cameron necessary, and for one pleasant moment, think, this is one attractive girl; it might be nice to kiss her.

Lina calls The Farmacy.  “Awww man, that SUCKS,” the budtender says.  “Do you have any bananas?” The potassium in them, he explains, could help.  The weed I smoked was “too stimulating”; my high could last all night.  Oh, and put on some soothing music.  “Just no Alice Cooper,” he warns.  “Once, someone did that for me, and it freaked my shit out.” Lina remains dubious, but has me eat bananas and drink water.  Meanwhile, I’m seeing colours I don’t recognise and I lack a sense of time or spatial depth.

One minute feels like four years.

And it’s getting worse, rapidly.  “No it’s not,” Lina says.  “Just relax, it’s slowing down.” Later, Lina will tell me that she was lying; my erratic personality changes were getting more frequent and were scaring her.

Six hours pass, and Lina calms me with trivia questions from a Seinfeld game.  I get all the answers right.

By midnight, I’m drowsy, but only after I pop 0.5mg of clonazepam, an anti-anxiety pill that my neurologist prescribes for muscle twitches.

The next day, I awake feeling normally stoned.

I am “burnt” all day, as stoners say: sensitive to light, giggly, tired.

But I don’t experience pain or twitching or cramps, and my muscles feel like whipped cream cheese.

I tell Lina that I am “off pot for ever”, but I am already basking in what it feels like not to have to worry about my symptoms.

Maybe I will try weed again.

It’s 24 hours since my first puff of Sensi Star, after the scariest night of my life, about which I feel terribly guilty, but I’m already breaking my promise.  “Maybe I didn’t buy the right kind,” I say.  “Maybe I smoked way too much?”

“You are not trying that stuff again,” Lina says.

How can a drug work this way? How come we don’t know more about it? How can I learn about types and dosage?

Do I have to survive nights like this just to build up my tolerance so it eases my symptoms but doesn’t drive me batty?

Come February, I’m back from successful brain surgery the only experience that I might call scarier than My Highest Night.  I’m currently on a break from experimenting with anything; normalising.  The one thing I don’t forget, however, is how, for all of their psychoactive properties, the hospital’s extremely addictive and dangerous narcotics didn’t help my headaches or nerve pain.  At home, painkillers and gabapentin, a popular neuropathy drug, are only mildly effective.

Recently, Californian activists won a chance to vote on legalising marijuana completely come November.  This, after the city council had just approved a new law to limit LA’s dispensaries to 70, requiring hundreds to close, and creating “buffer zones” around schools.

The city hardly has the cash to raid each dispensary operating illegally.  But it will probably threaten injunctions.  The mayor, reticent on this issue for years, has signed on, too.

It’s a curious predicament: a massive amount of research and education remains necessary to persuade some people to think of pot in a constructive light.

But the economic benefits of taxing marijuana may actually drive voters to legalise the drug this autumn.

In the meantime, I’ve met a number of other LA residents using marijuana for legitimate medical reasons, operating happily and productively here in Opposite World.  A 23-year-old multiple sclerosis patient studying to be a therapist offered me a compelling argument for marijuana reform: “This in-between state does not work,” she said.  “Pot helps, but even though my neurologist wants me to use it, she wouldn’t officially recommend it.  I try new kinds often, and take as little as possible, especially at work.” A 30-something composer for Hollywood movies who uses low dosages to stay pain-free agreed.  “I’d hate to have to use a drug dealer,” he said.  “And I don’t want chemicals in my body.”

Despite my oh-so-exciting adventures, I’m still interested in learning more about marijuana, especially if I can find a strain that helps and doesn’t induce ( any additional ) insanity.

Abrams recommends more CBD and less THC.  “The THC is what’s psychoactive,” he says.  “Cannabis has functioned as medicine for 2,700 years.  It’s just the last 70 years that it has been considered something else.”

I just hope the new crackdown and potential legalisation keeps prices low and availability high.  I already pay way too much for FDA-approved drugs one a branded version of an element from the periodic table that currently costs $200 a month.

Who knows?

Blending cutting-edge interventions surgery and neurologists with something old and legitimate might work.  I’ll just have to make sure that in the future I ask more questions and stay well away from Alice Cooper.

Source: Financial Times (UK)
Copyright: The Financial Times Limited 2010
Contact: letters.editor

View the Original article