Medical Marijuana

The jury has returned its verdict in the case of multiple sclerosis patient John Wilson, who was brought up on serious marijuana charges for growing his medicine:

Somerville- The jury returned a not guilty verdict to John Wilson on the first-degree felony charges against him. But the MS patient could still face time in prison after being found guilty of second-degree charges of ‘Manufacturing’ marijuana and third-degree possession of hallucinogenic mushrooms.  

If he had been convicted of "operating and maintaining a marijuana production facility" John would have faced a minimum of 15 years in state prison. That could have amounted to a death sentence for the 37 year old because of the degenerative nature of the disease. [Examiner]

So it could've been worse, but it's awfully hard to get excited about a result that could still send a seriously ill patient to prison. I guess the mushroom possession didn’t help, but shrooms should be legal anyway and I'm sure he found them helpful or he wouldn't have had them.

Let's hope this less-than-worst-case scenario doesn’t suck any momentum from the effort to get Wilson pardoned and pass medical marijuana legislation in New Jersey to prevent such injustices in the future.

Our friends at MPP just caught the drug czar literally editing out the most important part of the American Medical Association's new position on medical marijuana. According to a new ONDCP "factsheet":

The American Medical Association: "To help facilitate scientific research and the development of cannabionoid-based medicines, the AMA adopted (a) new policy … This should not be viewed as an endorsement of state-based medical cannabis programs, the legalization of marijuana, or that scientific evidence on the therapeutic use of cannabis meets the current standards for a prescription drug product."

Notice how it doesn't say what the "new policy…" actually is? That's because the original quote says, "the AMA adopted new policy urging the federal government to review marijuana’s status as a Schedule I substance." Leaving that part out isn't just confusing and dishonest; it looks ridiculous.

If it's now ok to use ellipses to pervert policy positions, maybe I'll just take AMA's statement and do this with it:

"This should…be viewed as an endorsement of state-based medical cannabis programs, the legalization of marijuana, [and] that scientific evidence on the therapeutic use of cannabis meets the current standards for a prescription drug product."

Yeah, I like the sound of that. But I'm not going to print it on a "factsheet," because it's not true.

As accustomed as I am to seeing the drug czar's office routinely deploying these sorts of sleazy semantic deceptions, I'm genuinely awed by this one. They buried the lead so blatantly that anyone who reads it ought to just end up wondering what the hell AMA's "new policy" on medical marijuana actually is. And once Google answers that question in a half-second, you might as well have just told the truth or scrubbed AMA off the site altogether like I suggested weeks ago.

Prosecutors in the trial of multiple sclerosis patient John Wilson probably aren’t too happy about this:

A judge reversed course today, allowing a man on trial for possession of 17 marijuana plants that he was growing during the summer of 2008 to testify about his medical condition.

Judge Robert Reed had earlier ruled that defendant John Ray Wilson could not present a defense based on this medical condition.

But then, after taking the stand in his own defense today, and after multiple conferences among the lawyers and the judge, Wilson was allowed to say "I told them(the arresting officers) I was not a drug dealer and I was using the marijuana for my MS(Multiple Sclerosis)." [NBC]

Unfortunately, that's all the judge would allow. Since New Jersey currently has no medical marijuana law, discussion of the defendant's medical use is considered prejudicial to the jury. We can only hope they got the message. John Wilson is a patient, not a criminal.

Regardless of the outcome here, this whole shameful episode powerfully illustrates the urgency of New Jersey's pending medical marijuana legislation. This trial should never have happened in the first place, but the least we can do is make sure it never happens again.

I enjoyed this story about Colorado State Senator Chris Romer's visit to the Cannabis Holiday Health Fair. As a proponent of stricter regulations that could close many Colorado dispensaries, Romer isn't exactly regarded as a friend of medical marijuana. Nevertheless, he used the event as an opportunity to build relationships and work to find common ground with the patient community. It sounds like a lot of people were impressed to learn how well he understood the issue.

There's an important lesson here for folks on either side (or stuck in the middle) of any debate over public policy regarding medical marijuana (and hopefully other pending reforms). Romer approached the conflict by trying to open more dialogue, rather than sitting in an office somewhere plotting against people. In the process, he was able to build some sympathy for his position, while also gaining some sympathy for the concerns of his opponents.

Supporters of medical marijuana should also take note of the bad publicity you earn by lashing out against opponents in an unprofessional way. The article quotes Romer saying that, "I did have some people yelling at me and throwing F-bombs." In an otherwise positive article about open communication between patients and politicians, this unnecessary ugliness stood out and reflected badly on the patient community. Bitterness and hostility are in no short supply when it comes to debating drug policy, but it's best to vent such frustrations among friends and never in the company of those we hope to influence. People who don't already agree with you will usually mistake your fury for craziness.

Still, I think there's a positive message here about how communities can work together to make drug policy reforms work in everyone's best interest. As medical marijuana continues to gain ground and broader legalization builds momentum, it's going to become necessary for competing interests to cooperate and find common ground. That's what has to happen and every good example we set goes a long way.

New data on youth drug use was released today and, as we've come to expect, the drug warriors would rather lie about it than learn from it. Instead of focusing on the fact that more high school seniors are smoking marijuana than cigarettes (proving what a perfect failure our marijuana laws truly are), the drug czar and his minions tried to claim that debating drug policies causes more young people to do drugs:

The increase of teens smoking pot is partly because the national debate over medical use of marijuana can make the drug's use seem safer to teenagers, researchers said. In addition to marijuana, fewer teens also view prescription drugs and Ecstasy as dangerous, which often means more could use those drugs in the future, said White House drug czar Gil Kerlikowske.

The "continued erosion in youth attitudes and behavior toward substance abuse should give pause to all parents and policy-makers," Kerlikowske said. [AP]

Wait, what was that about the medical marijuana debate causing an increase in teen pot-smoking? According to The Associated Press, that's what the "researchers said," but the only reference to medical marijuana in the whole study tells a more interesting story:

Marijuana use began to decline in 1997 among 8th graders and then did the same in 1998 among 10th and 12th graders. The rate of decline was rather modest, however, perhaps due in part to effects of the public debates over medical use of marijuana during that period.

So they never said marijuana use "increased" because of the medical marijuana debate. Not even close. All they did was speculate that a decrease -- which took place 12 years ago – would "perhaps" have been steeper if it weren't for the debate over medical marijuana. I'll give you one guess where I'm about to go with this…

Teen marijuana use declined following the emergence of a national debate over medical marijuana. That's what actually happened and the suggestion that such declines would have been greater if it weren't for marijuana activism is about as logical as arguing that Sgt. Pepper would have been an even better record if The Beatles weren't on acid.

Rates of high school marijuana use had been climbing rapidly until 1996, when California voters legalized medical marijuana, after which point they declined for 10 years straight. Now I'm not saying that the debate over medical marijuana caused a reduction in teen marijuana use, but even if I did, it would still make a lot more sense than what we read yesterday from The Associated Press.

Of course, I completely understand that journalists can’t possibly read and digest a 700+ page report. That's understandable, as is some reliance on press releases when piecing a story together. But if you're getting all your information from the drug czar, you should be awfully careful not to get taken advantage of. A really good sign that you've been completely worked over is if you end up reporting that the legalization debate causes kids to do drugs.

An Alternet story about the DEA's continuing failure to update their website in accordance with the AMA's new position on medical marijuana seems to have gotten results. DEA made another update here, noting the new position and replacing bad info.   

Also at Alternet, 10 Signs the Failed Drug War Is Finally Ending by Tony Newman. This has been an incredible year for drug policy reform and Tony's piece was published before this week's incredible news on Capitol Hill.

An outrageous medical marijuana prosecution in New Jersey. It's really time to get this legislation passed.

A new poll finds 53% support for legalizing marijuana. Other interesting stuff in there too.

The worst anti-marijuana editorial I've seen in awhile. The dude even mixes up North and South Korea.

Drug war robots! I've been warning about this for years now. It's just a matter of time before the cartels build robots too (if they haven't already). 

And finally, Prisoner dupes guards, grows pot in cell. Seriously. He told them it was tomatoes. And he only got busted because another inmate ratted him out. Although I suppose it would have caught up with him eventually, because at some point the guards might notice that he doesn’t ever seem to have any tomatoes.

US House and Senate negotiators in conference committee approved the finishing touches on the Fiscal Year 2010 budget Tuesday night, and they included a number of early Christmas presents for different drug reform constituencies. But it isn’t quite a done deal yet--this negotiated version of the FY 2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act must now win final approved in up-or-down, no-amendments-allowed floor votes in the House and the Senate. What the conference committee approved: * Ending the ban on federal funding for needle exchange programs--without previous language that would have banned them from operating within 1,000 feet of schools, parks, and similar facilities. * Ending the ban on the use of federal funds for needle exchanges in the District of Columbia. * Allowing the District of Columbia to implement the medical marijuana initiative passed by voters in 1998 and blocked by congressional diktat ever since. * Cutting funding for the Office of National Drug Control Policy’s National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign from $70 million this year to $45 million next year. In a news release after agreement was reached, this is how the committee described the language on needle exchange:

Modifies a prohibition on the use of funds in the Act for needle exchange programs; the revised provision prohibits the use of funds in this Act for needle exchange programs in any location that local public health or law enforcement agencies determine to be inappropriate

Its description of the DC appropriations language:

Removing Special Restrictions on the District of Columbia:...Also allows the District to implement a referendum on use of marijuana for medical purposes as has been done in other states, allows use of Federal funds for needle exchange programs except in locations considered inappropriate by District authorities.

And its language on the youth media campaign:

National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign: $45 million, $25 million below 2009 and the budget request, for a national ad campaign providing anti-drug messages directed at youth. Reductions were made in this program because of evaluations questioning its effectiveness. Part of the savings was redirected to other ONDCP drug-abuse-reduction programs.

Citing both reforms in the states--from medical marijuana to sentencing reform--as well as the conference committee’s actions, Drug Policy Alliance Executive Director Ethan Nadelmann stopped just short of declaring victory Wednesday. “It’s too soon to say that America’s long national nightmare – the war on drugs – is really over,” said Nadelmann. “But yesterday’s action on Capitol Hill provides unprecedented evidence that Congress is at last coming to its senses when it comes to national drug control policy.” But, as noted above, there are still two votes to go, and DPA is applying the pressure until it is a done deal. “Hundreds of thousands of Americans will get HIV/AIDS or hepatitis C if Congress does not repeal the federal syringe funding ban,” said Bill Piper, DPA national affairs director. “The science is overwhelming that syringe exchange programs reduce the spread of infectious diseases without increasing drug use. We will make sure the American people know which members of Congress stand in the way of repealing the ban and saving lives.” Washington, DC, residents got a two-fer from the committee when it approved ending the ban on the District funding needle exchanges and undoing the Barr Amendment, the work of erstwhile drug warrior turned reformer former Rep. Bob Barr (R-GA), which forbade the District from implementing the 1998 medical marijuana initiative, which won with 69% of the vote. “Congress is close to making good on President Obama’s promise to stop the federal government from undermining local efforts to provide relief to cancer, HIV/AIDS and other patients who need medical marijuana,” said Naomi Long, the DC Metro director of the Drug Policy Alliance. “DC voters overwhelmingly voted to legalize marijuana for medical use and Congress should have never stood in the way of implementing the will of the people.” "The end of the Barr amendment is now in sight,” said Aaron Houston, director of government relations for the Marijuana Policy Project. “This represents a huge victory not just for medical marijuana patients, but for all city residents who have every right to set their own policies in their own District without congressional meddling. DC residents overwhelmingly made the sensible, compassionate decision to pass a medical marijuana law, and now, more than 10 years later, suffering Washingtonians may finally be allowed to focus on treating their pain without fearing arrest." Medical marijuana in the shadow of the Capitol? Federal dollars being spent on proven harm reduction techniques? Congress not micromanaging DC affairs? What is the world, or at least Washington, coming to?

Under a measure passed Tuesday by the Los Angeles City Council, the number of medical marijuana dispensaries in the city will shrink by more than 90%. The council voted to cap the number of dispensaries at 70, while recent estimates put the number of actually operating medical marijuana outlets in the city at between 800 and 1000. The vote is only the latest in the council’s torturous and twisted four-year effort to regulate the city’s booming medical marijuana retail industry. There were four dispensaries in the city when the council first tackled the issue in 2005. By the time the council issued a moratorium on new dispensaries in 2007, there were 186. In the past two years, their numbers have increased four-fold from there. Of the dispensaries that legally registered with the city prior to the moratorium, officials believe 137 are still open. Those establishments will be allowed to stay open, but may have to move to comply with restrictions on where they may locate. "I think we should hold true to those that followed the rules," said Councilman Dennis Zine, explaining why he voted to reward dispensaries that were legally registered. If Los Angeles actually does cap dispensaries at 70, that will mean roughly one dispensary for every 50,000 residents. In Oakland, the only other large city in the state to impose a cap, four dispensaries serve 100,000 residents each. Other, smaller, California cities with caps include Berkeley (one dispensary for each 34,000 residents), Palm Springs (one for each 24,000 residents), West Hollywood (one for every 9,000 residents), and Sebastopol (one for every 3,500 residents). The council will continue working on its medical marijuana dispensary regulation ordinance tomorrow (Wednesday), and could even see a final vote then.

Apparently, there's no climate so inhospitable that the drug testers won't show up to collect everyone's urine:

FAIRBANKS -- The Iditarod plans to test mushers for drugs and alcohol in March, a change many mushers have no problem with -- but one that three-time champion Lance Mackey scoffs at.

"I think it's a little bit ridiculous," Mackey said Wednesday night from his home near Fairbanks after a training run. "It is a dog race, not a human race. It (using a drug) doesn't affect the outcome of the race."

Mackey, a throat cancer survivor who has a medical marijuana card, admits to using marijuana on the trail and thinks his success has made some of his competitors jealous. [ADN]

The funny part is they've already been drug testing the dogs for several years. I just assumed that the mushers were wasted the whole time. I mean, you're racing a dog-sled through arctic conditions for 1,000 miles with no sleep. According to the comments on the article, some guy once won the thing completely jacked on coke.

It'll be embarrassing next year when no one finishes the Iditarod.

A Pennsylvania House committee in Harrisburg held the first hearing ever on medical marijuana in the Keystone State today. The hearing, which featured a raft of supportive witnesses, sparked interest and questioning from legislators and left medical marijuana advocates optimistic. The hearing before the House Health and Human Services Committee was on HB 1393, introduced by Rep. Mark Cohen (D-Philadelphia). The bill would provide immunity from arrest for patients suffering from HIV/AIDS, cancer, and other illnesses who have a doctor's recommendation to use marijuana and a registration ID card. Patients could possess an ounce of marijuana and up to six plants. The bill also provides for state-licensed compassion centers which could sell marijuana to patients. Such sales would be subject to state and local sales taxes. Witnesses included patients, medical marijuana advocates, physicians, attorneys, and a rabbi. It wasn't completely one-sided—there to testify against the bill were the Pennsylvania Elks and a woman who lost a daughter to a drug overdose. Some witness testimony tugged heart strings. In one such moment, Charles Rocha, who had travelled from Pittsburgh, told legislators how, at age 24, he obtained medical marijuana for cancer-ridden mother and how it helped her get through end of life hospice care. But Sharon Smith gave an equally emotion-laden presentation. Smith, who started a drug-treatment advocacy group after her daughter's death from a heroin overdose in 1998, worried that allowing medicinal use of marijuana would lead to drug abuse and addiction, citing supposed "abuses" that have occurred in other medical marijuana states. Smith also said legislators shouldn't be the ones deciding whether any given substance is a medicine. "Let the medical experts decide, not the legislators," she told the committee. Smith's concern about abuse potential was addressed head-on by Edward Pane, CEO of Serento Gardens Alcoholism and Drug Services, Inc. in Hazleton. He told the committee that the gateway theory had been discredited and that patients given small amounts of marijuana were unlikely to develop a physical dependency. "Concerns that the medical use of marijuana will spur individuals into the world of chemical addiction are baseless," said Pane, a part-time instructor on addictions studies at the University of Scranton. HIV sufferer Brad Walter of Larksville told the committee he smoked marijuana four or five times a day to alleviate gastrointestinal distress from the 14 pills he takes each day for his diseases. Walter said he obtained marijuana on the black market because nothing else, including Marinol, worked as well. While the committee Democrats were generally supportive, that wasn't the case with Republican committee co-chair Rep. Matt Baker (R-Wellsboro), who said that federal health officials had found little evidence of marijuana's medical benefits and that marijuana remains illegal under federal law. "I can't support the legalizing of medical marijuana," he said. Similarly, Republican Attorney General Tom Corbett, who is running for his party's gubernatorial nomination, objected. In a letter to the committee, Corbett said the measure would weaken existing drug laws and make a dangerous substance more available. With Republicans in control of the state Senate, the bill's immediate prospects are cloudy. Spokesmen for Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi (R-Lawrence) have said Senate Republicans have no intention of moving on the bill even if were to pass the Democratically-controlled House. But even a House vote is a ways off. Committee Chairman Frank Oliver (D-Philadelphia) said he plans to hold hearings across the state before taking a committee vote. Still, after the session, supporters were stoked. "It was a great hearing," said Rep. Cohen, the bill's sponsor. "We moved the bill forward dramatically. There was a lot of thoughtful testimony." "I feel very positive," said Chris Goldstein of Pennsylvanians for Medical Marijuana, which has led the campaign in the Keystone Stone. "This was the first medical marijuana hearing ever in Pennsylvania, and the legislators asked a lot of good questions. This was a non-voting hearing, and we still had 18 of 26 committee members show up, and they extended the hearing an hour past when it was supposed to end." That the bill managed to get a hearing at all was a good sign, Goldstein said. "The legislature has been wrapped up dealing with the budget crisis, and there is a lot of stuff that isn’t even going to get heard. That there were hearings at all says a lot. And, frankly, we look forward to having hearings all across the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania." "Getting a hearing is always important, particularly in a state without a lot of progress before," said Bruce Mirken, communications director for the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), whose Bob Ceppecchio testified at the hearing. "It has generated a lot of press interest, and even if a bill isn't going to pass immediately, the educational process takes a huge leap when you start airing the issue in this kind of official forum." "This will inevitably succeed," said addiction specialist Pane. "On one side, we have overwhelming support and the scientific evidence, and on the other side, hyperbole." Pane said he thought he had gotten through the hostility of Republican co-chair *** when he reminded legislators about how they struggled to get drug treatment resources. "People are not endangered by marijuana being in the hands of doctors, but they don't give you the resources to "I think this has a realistic chance of passing in 2010," said Goldstein. "Progress has been lightning-fast so far. We just started talking about a bill in March, it got introduced in April, it was supposed to have a hearing in September, but the budget crisis happened. A lot of important issues are getting dealt with, but medical marijuana got a hearing today."