|
| NORML's Weekly News Bulletin - June 28, 2007 |
|
Posted by CN Staff on June 28, 2007 at 10:30:09 PT Weekly Press Release Source: NORML 
Cannabis Has "Clear Medical Benefits" For HIV Patients, Study Says -- Smoked marijuana produces “substantial and comparable increases in food intake … with little evidence of discomfort and no impairment of cognitive performance”June 28, 2007 - New York, NY, USA New York, NY: Inhaling cannabis significantly increases daily caloric intake and body weight in HIV-positive patients, is well tolerated, and does not impair subjects’ cognitive performance, according to clinical trial data to be published in the Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes (JAIDS). Investigators at Columbia University in New York assessed the efficacy of inhaled cannabis and oral THC (Marinol) in a group of ten HIV-positive patients in a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. All of the subjects participating in the study had prior experience using marijuana therapeutically and were taking at least two antiretroviral medications. Researchers reported that smoking cannabis (2.0 or 3.9 percent THC) four times daily "produced substantial … increases in food intake … with little evidence of discomfort and no impairment of cognitive performance." On average, patients who smoked higher-grade cannabis (3.9 percent) increased their body weight by 1.1 kg over a four-day period. Researchers reported that inhaling cannabis increased the number of times subjects ate during the study, but did not alter the average number of calories consumed during each meal. Investigators said that the administration of oral THC produced similar weight gains in patients, but only at doses that were "eight times current recommendations." The US Food and Drug Administration approved the prescription use of Marinol (a gelatin capsule containing synthetic THC in sesame oil) to treat HIV/AIDS-related cachexia in 1992. Subjects in the study reported feeling intoxicated after using either cannabis or oral THC, but remarked that these effects were "positive" and "well tolerated." Although not a primary outcome measure of the trial, authors reported that patients made far fewer requests for over-the-counter medications while taking either cannabis or oral THC than they did when administered placebo. Most of these requests were to treat patients’ gastrointestinal complaints (nausea, diarrhea, and upset stomach), investigators said. Patients in the study also reported that smoking higher-strength marijuana subjectively improved their sleep better than oral THC. "The data demonstrate that over four days of administration, smoked marijuana and oral [THC] produced a similar range of positive effects: increasing food intake and body weight and producing a ‘good [drug] effect’ without producing uncomfortable levels of intoxication or impairing cognitive function," authors wrote. They added, "Smoked marijuana … has a clear medical benefit in HIV-positive [subjects] by increasing food intake and improving mood and objective and subjective sleep measures." A previous preliminary trial by Columbia investigators published in the journal Psychopharmacology in 2005 also reported that inhaling cannabis "produce[s] substantial … increases in food intake [in HIV+ positive patients] without producing adverse effects." Survey data indicates that an estimated one out of three HIV/AIDS patients in North America use cannabis therapeutically to combat symptoms of the disease or the side-effects of antiretroviral medications. Clinical trial data published in the Annals of Internal Medicine in 2003 reported that cannabis use by HIV patients is associated with increased CD4/T-cell counts compared to non-users. A separate study published in JAIDS in 2005 found that HIV/AIDS patients who report using medical marijuana are 3.3 times more likely to adhere to their antiretroviral therapy regimens than non-cannabis users. Most recently, investigators at San Francisco General Hospital and the University of California's Pain Clinical Research Center reported this year in the journal Neurology that inhaling cannabis significantly reduced HIV-associated neuropathy (nerve pain) compared to placebo. The Columbia University study is one of the first US-led clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy of smoked cannabis to take place in nearly two decades, and it is the first to compare the tolerability and efficacy of smoked marijuana and oral THC in HIV patients. For more information, please contact Paul Armentano, NORML Senior Policy Analyst, at: paul@norml.org Full text of the study, "Dronabinol and marijuana in HIV-positive marijuana smokers: caloric intake, mood, and sleep," will appear in the Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes. Further discussion of this trial is available on the Thursday, June 28 edition of the NORML Daily Audio Stash: http://www.normlaudiostash.com DL: http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7289 Rhode Island: Legislature Makes One-Year-Old Medical Cannabis Law Permanent June 28, 2007 - Providence, RI, USA Providence, RI: More than 80 percent of House and Senate lawmakers voted last week to make the state’s one-year-old medical cannabis law permanent. The votes override an earlier veto from the state’s Republican governor, who sought to close the statewide program. Under the state’s law, known as the Edward O. Hawkins and Thomas C. Slater Medical Marijuana Act, an estimated 300 state-authorized patients and their caregivers are provided state legal protections to possess medical cannabis. The law was set to expire at the end of June unless it was reauthorized by the legislature. In 2006, Rhode Island became the eleventh state since 1996 to legalize the medical use of cannabis for qualified patients. This past April, New Mexico became the twelfth state to enact such a law, and only the fourth to do so legislatively. Earlier this month, Republican Governor M. Jodi Rell vetoed a similar proposal in Connecticut. However, state news outlets have reported that lawmakers may attempt to override her veto in a special legislative session later this year. A New York state proposal to authorize the possession and use of medical cannabis passed the Assembly earlier this year before stalling in the Senate. Proponents are hopeful that the proposal may also be revisited in a special legislative session this summer. For more information, please contact Erin Dame, NORML Outreach Coordinator, at (202) 483-5500 or visit: http://www.ripatients.org DL: http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7291 ‘Pro-Pot’ Speech By Students Not Constitutionally Protected, Supreme Court Rules June 28, 2007 - Washington, DC, USA Washington, DC: The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 this week that students’ speech that may be "reasonably viewed" as "promoting illegal drug use" is not protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and may be prohibited by school administrators. The ruling marks the first time the Court has determined that schools can prohibit student expression that is neither obscene nor published under the school’s auspices. The decision reverses a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals determination that found that school officials infringed upon a student’s free speech rights when they suspended him for unfurling a banner stating "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" at an off-campus student function in 2002. "Drug abuse by the nation’s youth is a serious problem [and] …. the governmental interest in stopping student drug abuse allow[s] schools to restrict student expression that they reasonably regard as promoting such abuse," Chief Justice John Roberts opined for the Court. Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia, and Clarence Thomas sided with the majority. Justice Stephen Breyer filed an opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part. Writing for the dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens opined that the majority’s ruling could potentially "silence opponents of the war on drugs." He wrote: "Even in high school, a rule that permits only one point of view to be expressed is less likely to produce correct answers than the open discussion of countervailing views. ... In the national debate about a serious issue, it is the expression of the minority’s viewpoint that most demands the protection of the First Amendment. Whatever the better policy may be, a full and frank discussion of the costs and benefits of the attempt to prohibit the use of marijuana is far wiser than suppression of speech because it is unpopular." Justices Ruth Bader Ginsberg and David Souter joined in Justice Stephen’s dissent. The case is Morse v. Frederick, No. 06-278. For more information, please contact Keith Stroup, NORML Legal Counsel, at (202) 483-5500. Full text of the Supreme Court’s ruling is available online at: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/06pdf/06-278.pdf Further discussion of this case is available on the Monday, June 25 edition, of the NORML Daily Audio Stash: http://www.normlaudiostash.com DL: http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7290 Source: NORML Foundation (DC) CannabisNews NORML Archives Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help |
 |
| Comment #26 posted by FoM on June 30, 2007 at 06:05:00 PT |
| Thank you. I can't believe someone used a link from cannabis news. That made me happy. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #25 posted by Mike on June 29, 2007 at 16:03:47 PT |
| http://digg.com/health/BREAKING_Double_blind_Study_Proves_Cannabis_Has_Clear_Medical_Benefits A lot of people are Digging this one. Unfortuntately the ones that bark the loudest "anti-drug" propaganda are the ones who are benefitting financially by keeping these obscene policies in place (e.g. drug companies, alcohol companies, the prisons, the police departments, Johnny Pee Walters & minions, etc.) Their corruption is so rampant and the lies so vile. Everyone else that supports these laws are simply their tools. The mindless just gobble the lies right up - with a little beer and wine. The one good thing is that most people in the future will look down on these "prohibition days" the same way most people today look down on slavery. The only question is, how far into the future will it take? [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #24 posted by whig on June 28, 2007 at 21:58:48 PT |
| I think this is what The GCW is talking about. http://www.safeaccessnow.org/article.php?id=4401 ASA is trying to force the government to stop lying. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #23 posted by FoM on June 28, 2007 at 18:40:00 PT |
| Once I saw the date I was able to go into the archives and find a couple related article. Medical Marijuana Advocacy Group Sues The FDA http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread22716.shtml *** U.S. Is Sued Over Position on Marijuana http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread22675.shtml *** Group Sues Feds Over Medical Marijuana Claims http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread22671.shtml [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #22 posted by The GCW on June 28, 2007 at 18:34:13 PT |
| http://www.talkleft.com/story/2007/2/21/22056/4960 Lawsuit Challenges Gov't to 'Stop Making False Statements' About Pot By TChris, Section Crime Policy Posted on Wed Feb 21, 2007 at 09:00:56 PM EST Tags: (all tags) The war against drugs has often been a war against the truth. A lawsuit filed today challenges the federal government's unyielding claim that marijuana has no efficacious medical use. The lawsuit, filed today in federal court in Oakland, comes a week after the release of a controlled, clinical University of California, San Francisco study showing HIV patients who smoked marijuana found relief from chronic foot pain. "We are asking the courts to weigh in on the science ... and force the government to stop making false statements about medical cannabis," said Steph Sherer, executive director of Americans for Safe Access. The ASA argues that the administration is ignoring science, a charge that has become depressingly familiar. While the Bush years have been particularly hostile to science, no administration has been willing to authorize serious research into the medical benefits of marijuana. ASA in October 2004 had petitioned the Department of Health and Human Services and its subordinate Food and Drug Administration under the Data Quality Act, a 2000 law requiring information circulated by federal agencies to be fair, objective and meet certain quality guidelines. That law lets citizens challenge government information believed to be inaccurate or based on bad data; ASA's petition claimed the government has ignored scientific studies and medical consensus on marijuana's efficacy as medicine. HHS denied the petition in 2005 and denied an appeal in July 2006. Those decisions are arbitrary and capricious, Elford said, and so Americans for Safe Access has been biding its time ever since to sue. Given the deference that courts give to decisions made by executive agencies, challenging HHS will be difficult. Still, evidence is abundant that marijuana is medically useful, and the government's irrational decision to pretend otherwise might convince a court that HHS has failed to give responsible attention to the science that should underlie its judgments. (This news should be watched to see what happens. It seems more significant that most law suits... The GCW) [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #21 posted by FoM on June 28, 2007 at 18:23:16 PT |
| When it comes to lawsuits I usually forget because there have been so many it seems. I'm not much of a legal eagle. It always appears that no one wins in lawsuits. Maybe some lawyers make good money though. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #20 posted by The GCW on June 28, 2007 at 18:14:42 PT |
| If I remember right, California has a law suit to force the government to stop claiming cannabis has no medical value. I think that when I saw that news I posted it and its link here at C-news or else I saw it here at C-News... It was by way of a not often used law that states government isn't allowed to keep making false claims... or something to that effect. Do You remember it??? What is going on with that??? [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #19 posted by mayan on June 28, 2007 at 16:53:27 PT |
| Prohibition is on it's death bed for sure. Now, if we can just make it through this bottle-neck withyout the neo-cons staging another false-flag terror attack we will be home free! [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #18 posted by FoM on June 28, 2007 at 15:27:49 PT |
| Really good links. I really like NORML's open letter to Sen. Norm Coleman.
Thank you! [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #17 posted by FoM on June 28, 2007 at 15:07:09 PT |
| We should never make enemies with anyone. Sometimes are enemies can become our friends or so I have noticed in my life. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #16 posted by whig on June 28, 2007 at 14:45:03 PT |
| I meant to say, "I shouldn't have said they were being deceptive." [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #15 posted by whig on June 28, 2007 at 14:42:38 PT |
| I should have said they were being deceptive, they are being diplomatic and saying nice things about Clinton and Obama because it isn't good to make enemies in politics and they are going to be sitting senators no matter what happens in the presidential primaries, so why antagonize more than necessary? But as far as I am concerned a candidate who won't publicly support us in some way, to stop the federal government from raiding medical patients and providers at least, I cannot support that candidate or advocate for that candidate at all. I do not want someone to be a Democratic president who is a cannabis prohibitionist and war monger. It would just make the same problem we have with George Bush over again in the opposite image. If you won't respect our liberty, or even our medicine, why the heck should we respect you? [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #14 posted by kaptinemo on June 28, 2007 at 13:48:26 PT:
|
| Pete's DrugWarRant blog. Lotsa good stuff there today, as usual; go see. http://blogs.salon.com/0002762/ [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #13 posted by kaptinemo on June 28, 2007 at 13:46:05 PT:
|
| the DrugWar: Nation’s Mayors Call for a New Bottom Line in U.S. Drug Policy http://tinyurl.com/3bdgdz The resolution in its' entirety: http://tinyurl.com/2w89qt Sounds almost like we wrote it, huh? And the Mayors voted on accepting it. It's formal. It's official. And undeniable. The cat's out of the bag for sure, now... [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #12 posted by FoM on June 28, 2007 at 13:18:42 PT |
| I only posted about the Democrats and Republicans but here is the whole article. Most Presidential Candidates Back Medical Marijuana Patient Protection June 28, 2007 Source: mpp.org MANCHESTER, NEW HAMPSHIRE — With the medical marijuana issue already drawing attention on the presidential campaign trail, the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) has returned to New Hampshire to join with local residents in an effort to press the candidates to take a stand on behalf of the seriously ill and their caregivers. As a result, most major party presidential candidates have already expressed support for ending federal attacks on medical marijuana patients and caregivers, including Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and former Sen. John Edwards (D-NC), who defended the federal medical marijuana raids in 2004. Headquartered in Manchester, MPP-supported Granite Staters for Medical Marijuana (GSMM) has already begun organizing New Hampshire medical marijuana patients and supporters, and pressuring candidates. "Volunteers and ill residents are confronting candidates at public events as they campaign throughout New Hampshire," said GSMM campaign manager Stuart Cooper. "Residents are forcing presidential contenders to take a clear stance on this issue because voters ought to know which candidates want to protect seriously ill Americans, and which candidates want to have them arrested and jailed." The Bush administration has conducted an all-out war on medical marijuana patients, arresting seriously ill people using marijuana legally under the laws of 12 states to treat the symptoms of cancer, AIDS, multiple sclerosis, and other serious illnesses, along with those patients' caregivers. The raids have sparked national outrage and sharply critical editorials in newspapers across the country, including The New York Times, Chicago Tribune, and Los Angeles Times. Four years ago, GSMM succeeded in getting positive statements on medical marijuana from six of the nine Democratic presidential hopefuls, including eventual nominee Sen. John Kerry (D-MA). Earlier this year, the New Hampshire Legislature considered legislation to protect seriously ill residents who use medical marijuana with their doctor's approval (HB 774), narrowly defeating the bill by a vote of 186-177. Most of the 2008 contenders have already taken a clear position on the issue. Two weeks ago, John Edwards, who in 2004 was a strong opponent to ending the federal raids, told voters at a Derry town hall meeting, "we will not be going in and raiding the use of marijuana for medical purposes in states that have legalized it. I think where democracy has worked, where voters have decided this should be legalized, I will not as president go in and run contrary to the will of the people in those states where it has been legalized." **** All eight Democratic candidates have taken positive positions on medical marijuana. Six candidates have publicly promised to end the federal raids, including Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE), Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT), Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), John Edwards (D-NC), Mike Gravel (D-AK), and Gov. Bill Richardson (D-NM), who in April signed legislation making New Mexico the 12th state to protect residents who use medical marijuana. Senators Barack Obama (D-IL) and Hillary Clinton (D-NY) have yet to clearly state their support for ending the raids, but along with Sen. Dodd, they voted in opposition to federal legislation in committee that would have increased the penalties for growing and distributing medical marijuana in states that have approved its use. Many of the Republican candidates have also taken compassionate positions on medical marijuana, including former secretary of Heath and Human Services Tommy Thompson, who recently stated on two separate occasions that he would end the raids on patients. Last year, Reps. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) and Ron Paul (R-TX) voted with Kucinich in support of the Hinchey-Rohrabacher amendment, which would have cut off funding for federal raids on states with medical marijuana programs. McCain and former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore have both taken positions protecting states' rights, with McCain saying he would, "let states decide" the medical marijuana issue. Not all candidates have shown compassion for the seriously ill. Neither former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts nor former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani have taken a clear position one way or another. Former Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-AR), Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS), and Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) have all stated that they would continue having cancer and AIDS patients arrested for their use of medical marijuana. GSMM's Web site, GraniteStaters.com, includes a variety of resources for voters concerned about medical marijuana, including a voter guide with details about the candidates' actions and statements to date, as well as information about how to participate in the campaign. Based in Manchester, New Hampshire, Granite Staters for Medical Marijuana is a grassroots coalition of patients and activists. GSMM is organizing during the New Hampshire presidential primary campaign to raise awareness of the need for federal action to protect medical marijuana patients. For further information, please see: http://www.GraniteStaters.com http://www.hightimes.com/ht/news/content.php?bid=1254&aid=24 [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #11 posted by ekim on June 28, 2007 at 12:50:10 PT |
| i seem to remember that Duba said he was all for letting the state regulate medical cannabis and ol Bill said while leaving to Rolling Stone -- arresting cannabis users was to cruel-- will someone ask Hillary if she suports the arrests and jailing of over 750,000 for cannbis use. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #10 posted by FoM on June 28, 2007 at 12:20:56 PT |
| I didn't take this to mean that they all supported medical marijuana. All eight Democratic candidates have taken positive positions on medical marijuana. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #9 posted by FoM on June 28, 2007 at 12:16:59 PT |
| The Granite Staters probably haven't been able to get the questions to Clinton and Obama because they are drawing big crowds and have the Secret Service with them. We just need to give the Granite Staters a little time. They'll zero in on them I'm sure. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #8 posted by whig on June 28, 2007 at 12:01:36 PT |
That press release is really deceptive by the way because it says ALL EIGHT Democrats have supported us. But here is what they say about Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton:Senators Barack Obama (D-IL) and Hillary Clinton (D-NY) have yet to clearly state their support for ending the raids, but along with Sen. Dodd, they voted in opposition to federal legislation in committee that would have increased the penalties for growing and distributing medical marijuana in states that have approved its use. So they voted in committee not to increase penalties, and we're supposed to call that support? That just means they aren't as actively hurtful as some. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #7 posted by FoM on June 28, 2007 at 12:00:53 PT |
| They must. Once the Granite Staters can get to Clinton and Obama we'll know how they stand. Patience is so darn hard but I am sure they will chase them down for an answer. They're good at that. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #6 posted by FoM on June 28, 2007 at 11:57:39 PT |
| Thank you. Why I was wondering the weight of the 300 joints they get is because that could be a good guide for New Mexico. It's government issued so who could argue with that amount? That's what I was thinking. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #5 posted by whig on June 28, 2007 at 11:56:37 PT |
| Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are the only two Democrats who I don't think are either with us or willing to stand up to the prohibitionists. I wouldn't be able to support either of them if they didn't come out very clearly and support us. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #4 posted by ekim on June 28, 2007 at 11:52:53 PT |
|
http://www.medicalcannabis.com/ Also Frequent Marijuana Users are invited for a research study. Researchers are studying the effects of chronic marijuana use on brain structure, function, and mental abilities FoM the IND patients get 300 joints a month from U.Of Mis i do not know how much in weight that comes to If you go to myspace.com and see Elvy Musikka there is a picture of the canster in which it is shipped in. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #3 posted by FoM on June 28, 2007 at 11:08:05 PT |
| June 28, 2007 All eight Democratic candidates have taken positive positions on medical marijuana. Six candidates have publicly promised to end the federal raids, including Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE), Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT), Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), John Edwards (D-NC), Mike Gravel (D-AK), and Gov. Bill Richardson (D-NM), who in April signed legislation making New Mexico the 12th state to protect residents who use medical marijuana. Senators Barack Obama (D-IL) and Hillary Clinton (D-NY) have yet to clearly state their support for ending the raids, but along with Sen. Dodd, they voted in opposition to federal legislation in committee that would have increased the penalties for growing and distributing medical marijuana in states that have approved its use. Many of the Republican candidates have also taken compassionate positions on medical marijuana, including former secretary of Heath and Human Services Tommy Thompson, who recently stated on two separate occasions that he would end the raids on patients. Last year, Reps. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) and Ron Paul (R-TX) voted with Kucinich in support of the Hinchey-Rohrabacher amendment, which would have cut off funding for federal raids on states with medical marijuana programs. McCain and former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore have both taken positions protecting states' rights, with McCain saying he would, "let states decide" the medical marijuana issue. Not all candidates have shown compassion for the seriously ill. Neither former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts nor former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani have taken a clear position one way or another. Former Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-AR), Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS), and Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) have all stated that they would continue having cancer and AIDS patients arrested for their use of medical marijuana. GSMM's Web site, GraniteStaters.com, includes a variety of resources for voters concerned about medical marijuana, including a voter guide with details about the candidates' actions and statements to date, as well as information about how to participate in the campaign. Based in Manchester, New Hampshire, Granite Staters for Medical Marijuana is a grassroots coalition of patients and activists. GSMM is organizing during the New Hampshire presidential primary campaign to raise awareness of the need for federal action to protect medical marijuana patients. For further information, please see: http://www.GraniteStaters.com [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #2 posted by ekim on June 28, 2007 at 10:39:39 PT |
| International Cannabinoid Research Society 2007 ICRS Symposium
Jun 26, 2007 - Jul 1, 2007
Location: Manoir Saint-Sauveur, 246 Ch. du Lac-Millette, St-Sauveur (Quebec), Canada
More Info: http://www.cannabinoidsociety.org
The mission of the ICRS is to: foster cannabinoid research, to promote exchange of information and ideas about cannabis and the cannabinoids through the organization of scientific meetings; to encourage financial support from funding agencies and industries; to facilitate liasons between funding agencies, industry and the academic community, and to serve as a source of reliable information on the chemistry, pharmacology, toxicology and the behavioral, psychological and social effects of cannabis and the cannabinoids (ICRS By-Laws, adopted June 1992). The ICRS was formally incorporated as a scientific research society in 1991. Prior to that, symposia were organized by various researchers in the field since 1970. Membership in the Society risen from about 50 members in the first year to over 400 in 2006.
www.drugpolicy.org [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #1 posted by FoM on June 28, 2007 at 10:33:43 PT |
| We know that so when will the politicians in Washington understand it? How much longer? [ Post Comment ] |
| Post Comment |  |
 |  |