------------------------------------------------------------------- Alert - Medical Marijuana Under Attack (John Sajo of Voter Power responds to list subscribers' alarm over news of an attempt by Rep. Mannix in the Oregon legislature to dismantle the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act, saying Oregonians for Medical Rights are carefully watching the legislature and are working to prevent any changes to OMMA. Sajo also forwards the text of a resolution drafted by Voter Power that has been introduced by Rep. Jo Ann Bowman, calling on the federal government to reschedule marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act. The idea behind the resolution is to have those who won the marijuana votes last fall set the agenda, not the people who lost. "Mannix and our other opponents will help us in the long run. We need them to articulate their ideas, which are no longer aligned with most voters.") From: "johns" (email@example.com) To: "cannabis patriots" (firstname.lastname@example.org) Subject: [cp] Re: ALERT-MEDMJ Under Atta Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 16:44:50 -0900 Paul Freedom wrote: >> ALERT-MEDMJ Under Attack >> OREGON LEGISLATURE AND KEVIN FASCIST MANNIX >> DRAFT LEGISLATION TO STOP THE AFFIRMATIVE >> DEFENSE. >> >> MANNIX IS A FASCIST PIG WHO IS RUINING THE STATE >> OF OREGON! HE GOT MANDATORY MINIMUMS,ETC. >> MORE PRISONS MR. MANNIX FOR YOUR POT VICTIMS! >> TO HELL WITH KEVIN MANNIX! >> >> I WILL TRY TO TRANSCRIBE THE ENTIRE ARTICLE. >> STAY TUNED! >> >> THIS BULLSHIT WOULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED IF PEOPLE >> WOULD SEE THE FALLACY OF MEDICAL CANNABIS LAWS. >> IT'S ALL OR NOTHING! TOTAL LEGALIZATION! >> >> PAUL Chuck wrote: > WHAT? how can you attack a constitutional amendment?? Well I guess > you could try to amend the amendment. Wasn't Oregons a constitutional > amenment? > > > See ya > Chuck John [Sajo, of Voter Power,] wrote: The Oregon Medical Marijuana Act was a statutory change and can be modfied by the Oregon Legislature. OMR is carefully watching the legislative process and is working to stop the changes to OMMA. Voter Power drafted a resolution which has been introduced by Jo Ann Bowman calling for rescheduling marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act. The idea behind this resolution is to have those of us who won the marijuana votes last fall set the agenda on drug policy, not the people who lost. Mannix and his supporters are presenting the notion that OMMA is flawed and needs to be fixed (tightened up). We are presenting the notion that the Oregon voters know that marijuana is medicine and the next step is to make sure patients who need it can get it, and that means changing the federal policy. The reality is that OMMA is about the best you can do with a state law and is extremely conservative. The real problems with medical marijuana come from the federal policy which prohibits any supply of the medicine. Marijuana is scheduled in Schedule I under the Controlled Substances Act which implies that it is 1) extremely dangerous and 2) has no medical value. These two lies are the basis for federal policy. These two lies have caused unmeasurable suffering for hundreds of thousands of patients. It is time for us to shift the public debate to the next level on medical marijuana, which is to expose the federal policy that deprives sick people of their medicine to serve political purposes. Mannix and our other opponents will help us in the long run. We need them to articulate their ideas, which are no longer aligned with most voters. His bill (and the rescheduling resolution) give Oregon activists another chance to organize. We have a chance of stopping these bad laws right in the Republican controlled Oregon Legislature. And if we can't, and if Kitzhaber won't veto another reckless marijuana law, we'll refer it back to voters by petitioning. (The number of signatures required for a referendum has actually dropped to 44,524) More details will follow on how you can help. Here is the resolution: Rescheduling Resolution A resolution from the Oregon Legislature urging the United States Congress to reschedule marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act. (Long Version) Summary: This measure would memorialize the President and the Congress of the United States to enact appropriate legislation to permit marijuana to be prescribed by licensed physicians and to ensure that a safe, affordable, regulated supply of marijuana can be available at pharmacies for medical use. WHEREAS, an increasing body of scientific evidence conludes that marijuana is a safe and effective medicine with low toxicity compared to most prescription drugs and it has been shown to be effective in the treatment of glaucoma, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, muscle spasicity, the nausea, vomiting and appetite loss associated with chemotherapies treating cancer, certain forms of chronic severe pain, and the AIDS wasting syndrome; and WHEREAS; the voters of Oregon have approved the concept of marijuana as a medicine by passing the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act (ballot measure 67) at the Novemeber 3, 1998 general election, and WHEREAS; the only way for a patient to obtain medical marijuana under current Oregon law is to grow it themselves or find a caregiver who will grow it for them, and WHEREAS; this system is unlikely to help many patients who need medical marijuana such as recently diagosed cancer patients suffering from the nausea associated with chemotherapy who do not have time to grow a marijuana plant to maturity or find a caregiver, and WHEREAS; this system is unlikely to help severely ill or handicapped patients who would benefit from medical marijuana but are physically unable to grow marijuana or find a caregiver, and WHEREAS; this system will not help patients who are hospitalized but whose physicans recommend that medical marijuana will mitigate their symptoms; and WHEREAS; patients should have the option of obtaining medical marijuana at a pharmacy in the same way that they obtain other prescription drugs, and WHEREAS; doctors should be able to prescribe marijuana to patients without fear of arrest or other penalty for conditions which the scientific evidence shows will be amieliorated by medical marijuana, and WHEREAS; the reason doctors cannot prescribe marijuana and pharmacies cannot make marijuana available to patients is because it is misclassified as a Schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act, which falsely holds that medical marijuana is extremely dangerous and has no medical utility, findings contradicted by scientific evidence, and WHEREAS; the experience of thousands of patients around the country, as expressed in numerous affidavits and testimony at public hearings, indicates that medical marijuana does indeed mitigate their symptoms, and WHEREAS; in 1988 Francis Young, an administrative law judge for the Drug Enforcement Administration, ruled based on extensive evidence that marijuana should be resheduled, and WHEREAS; the Drug Enforcement Administration ignored this ruling and WHEREAS; Barry McCaffrey, the Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, threatened doctors with losing their ability to prescibe controlled substances if they expressed their validly held medical judgement that marijuana might help relieve patients' symptoms based on the best scientific research available, and WHEREAS; the misscheduling of marijuana as a Schedule I controlled substance inhibits research which will further clarify the extent of marijuana's medical utility and methods of using it most safely, and WHEREAS; the people of Alaska, Washington, California, Nevada, Colorado, and the District of Columbia, in addition to Oregon, every jurisdiction that has considered and voted on this issue, voted for medical marijuana, and WHEREAS; properly scheduling marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act will ensure a regulated supply of pure unadulterated medical grade marijuana of known potency, and WHEREAS; not properly scheduling marijuana forces some patients to support the illegal black market in marijuana, and WHEREAS; rescheduling marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act is the compassionate way to provide medical marijuana to patients who will benefit from it: It is the sense of the Oregon Legislature that marijuana ought to be rescheduled from Schedule I, under the Controlled Substances Act, and therefore the Oregon Legislature recommends to the United States Congress and the President of the United States that marijuana be rescheduled. Therefore the Secretary of the Senate shall transmit copies of this resolution to the President and Vice President of the United States, to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and to each Senator and Representative from Oregon in the Congress of the United States. *** For information contact Voter Power 503-736-0907
------------------------------------------------------------------- Hyping The Drug War (A staff editorial in the Orange County Register pans the Clinton administration's latest drug-war battle plan, saying the real issue is whether America should continue to step up its drug war, or seek out less politically expedient, but more promising approaches. What's missing is the realization that most low-level drug use poses no harm to society. Most disturbing about the administration's plan: It uses the specter of a teen drug epidemic to maintain popular support. But the nation's drug problem is most severe among aging baby boomers. Focusing on the teen drug problem is dishonest.) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 15:00:46 -0800 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: US CA: Editorial: Hyping The Drug War Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: John W. Black Pubdate: Tues, 16 Feb 1999 Source: Orange County Register (CA) Copyright: 1999 The Orange County Register Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.ocregister.com/ HYPING THE DRUG WAR Judging by the Clinton administration's latest drug-war battle plan and Republican rebuttals to it, the American people are given this odd choice: Give the feds more money and authority to target illegal narcotics here and overseas or give the feds even more money and authority to do those very same things. Earlier this month, Vice President Al Gore outlined the White House's latest anti-drug strategy, which he called an "all-out effort to banish crime, drugs and disorder and hopelessness from our streets," complete with ambitious targets, such as cutting drug availability and use in half by 2007. The plan calls for educating children, helping addicts get treatment, adopting a "zero tolerance" program for testing and punishing drug-using prisoners and parolees, stepping up border patrols and finding ways to reduce the supply of drugs from domestic and international sources. Congressional Republicans didn't dispute the specifics, but mainly question whether the administration is devoting enough resources to accomplish its goals. Banishing, or at least slashing in half, drug use and attacking related crime, disorder and hopelessness is no short order. It's unlikely that any proposal would earmark enough federal funds to make real headway into such deeply rooted and ill-defined social problems. The real issue is whether America should continue to step up its drug war, as the administration's proposal would do, or seek out less politically expedient, but more promising approaches. Two administration proposals have merit - focusing on drug treatment and targeting parolees - even though they are not federal matters. But the bulk of the Clinton-Gore plan concentrates on law enforcement and interdiction, approaches that have been largely unsuccessful in the past. What's missing is the realization that most low-level drug use poses no harm to society, and that attacking supply without reducing demand only drives up drug prices and induces addicts to commit crimes to pay for their habits. Most disturbing about the administration's plan: It uses the specter of a teen drug epidemic to maintain popular support for these policies. Mike Males, the Irvine-based author of "Framing Youth: Ten Myths About the Next Generation," told us that the nation's drug problem is most severe among aging baby boomers and that focusing on the teen drug problem is dishonest. In 1997, there were 12 teen-age deaths in Orange and Los Angeles counties attributed to drug overdoses, Mr. Males said. That compares to 768 adult deaths in both counties for all overdoses. "If I were (drug czar) Barry McCaffrey, I would stop saying teens have a drug problem." Rather than doing an honest assessment of the "structure of the drug abuse problem," and finding ways to direct effective treatment toward hard-core addicts, Mr. Males said the administration is busy arresting casual drug abusers and "scar(ing) suburban parents." Mr. Males' comments confirm what we have long argued: The drug war has become a self-perpetuating government crusade that exploits legitimate fears to maintain its funding and to justify its oftentimes unjust policies. The latest U.S. proposal is nothing more than a repackaging of the same old tried-and-failed policies. Given political realities, we don't expect U.S. officials to be willing to abandon their misguided drug policies. But we do expect them to tone down the battle rhetoric and calmly analyze the nature of the problem. An honest self-appraisal might be the first step on the road to recovery for the government's drug-war addiction.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Just Say So: D.A.R.E. Doesn't Work (An op-ed in the San Francisco Examiner by Kendra E. Wright of Family Watch says drug education and prevention will never succeed as long as DARE - the Drug Abuse Resistance Education program - is ensconced in 70 percent of our children's schools. Over the last five years, studies have been conducted for the federal General Accounting Office and Justice Department and for the California Department of Education. They describe how DARE and other anti-drug programs fail to reach the teenagers most at risk of drug abuse. Joel Brown of Berkeley-based Educational Research Consultants was hired by the California Department of Education to conduct one of the most extensive qualitative studies of drug education programs to date. He found that DARE and other programs may actually be hurting our kids.) Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 19:07:52 EST Originator: firstname.lastname@example.org Sender: email@example.com From: Richard Lake (firstname.lastname@example.org) To: Multiple recipients of list (email@example.com) Subject: US: SFX: PUB OPED: Just Say So: D.A.R.E. Doesn't Work X-ListProcessor-Instructions: Send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org with the subject blank and the BODY containing nothing but the word HELP for instructions. X-Comment: A list to discuss D.A.R.E. Newshawk: Kevin Zeese (email@example.com) Pubdate: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 Source: San Francisco Examiner (CA) Copyright: 1999 San Francisco Examiner Page: A15 Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.examiner.com/ Forum: http://examiner.com/cgi-bin/WebX Author: Kendra E. Wright Note: The SFX wrote: Examiner contributor Kendra Wright is director of Family Watch, a national network concerned about the impact of drug policy on families, women and children. We add: The Family Watch website is at: http://www.familywatch.org/ Since 1997, Kendra has served as the Chairperson of DrugSense. Kendra's bio is at: http://www.drugsense.org/kw/ JUST SAY SO: D.A.R.E. DOESN'T WORK DRUG CZAR Barry McCaffrey announced last week a plan to cut drug use in half by 2007. His goal - getting mentors and role models more active in the lives of kids - is laudable. But drug education and prevention will never succeed as long as D.A.R.E. - the Drug Abuse Resistance Education program - is ensconced in 70 percent of our children's schools. Over the last five years, studies have been conducted for the federal General Accounting Office and Justice Department and for the California Department of Education. They describe how D.A.R.E. and other anti-drug programs fail to reach the teenagers most at risk of drug abuse. Joel Brown of Berkeley-based Educational Research Consultants was hired by the state Department of Education to conduct one of the most extensive qualitative studies of drug education programs to date. He found that D.A.R.E. and other programs may actually be hurting our kids. Brown's conclusions - eloquently articulated for him by the teens he interviewed - were so disturbing that in 1995 the state education agency buried the report. (The findings became public in 1997 when published in the prestigious Education Evaluation and Policy Review Journal.) If kids are taught that marijuana is as bad as heroin, and then try pot and experience few consequences, they are often more likely to experiment with the dangerously addictive hard drug. There are other problems. Most teens oppose authoritarian measures used to punish peers caught with alcohol or drugs. The teenagers Brown interviewed questioned whether suspension from school is really the best way to deal with kids caught experimenting with drugs. You might wonder why the Republicans haven't attacked D.A.R.E. - which the federal government subsidizes to the tune of more than $650 million a year. Or why the Democrats, who consider education policy their domain, haven't created a national commission to find something better. The reason for the silence is that D.A.R.E., which relies on uniformed police officers and scare tactics to drum the "just say no" message into our kids, is an effective marketing machine. By combining grassroots PR - including T-shirts, bumper stickers and rallies - with aggressive political lobbying of local, state, and federal governments, D.A.R.E. has become its own special interest group. The core of the problem is that D.A.R.E. boosters refuse to recognize that teenagers experiment with drugs. Government surveys show, however, that half of high school students try an illegal drug before graduation. How do we reach these youngsters? We can turn around drug education by abandoning the "just say no" cookie cutter approach. We can find funds for pilot programs that seek to reduce the harms associated with drugs, including addiction. We should focus on the capabilities, not inabilities, of our children. Most importantly we should understand that drug experimentation is different from drug abuse, and seek ways to help the most at-risk kids. As in 12-step programs, the first step toward recovery is the recognition that we have a problem.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Lawmakers Consider Bills To Permit Use Of Marijuana For Medical Reasons (The Honolulu Star-Bulletin says three committees in the Hawaii legislature considered two different bills today that would allow the medical use of marijuana. While commending Gov. Ben Cayetano for introducing HB 1157, advocates for medical marijuana patients generally preferred the less restrictive HB 1341, submitted by House Health Chairman Alex Santiago.) Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 05:24:48 -0800 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: US HI: Lawmakers Consider Bills To Permit Use Of Marijuana For Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Dave Fratello (email@example.com) Pubdate: Tues, 16 Feb 1999 Source: Honolulu Star-Bulletin (HI) Copyright: 1999 Honolulu Star-Bulletin Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.starbulletin.com/ Author: Helen Altonn, Star-Bulletin LAWMAKERS CONSIDER BILLS TO PERMIT USE OF MARIJUANA FOR MEDICAL REASONS Many Life Foundation clients use it to treat AIDS symptoms Crime or compassion? Those were the issues debated today as three legislative committees considered bills to remove criminal penalties blocking medical use of marijuana. "I guess I'm here this morning to report a crime," said Paul S. Groesbeck, executive director of the Life Foundation, Hawaii's largest AIDS program. About one-third of the foundation's 500 active clients use marijuana to treat AIDS symptoms, he told the House and Senate Health Committees and House Public Safety Committee. Groesbeck joined other groups and individuals in supporting legislation to allow Hawaii doctors to prescribe marijuana for medical purposes. Among opponents are the Hawaii Medical Association, American Cancer Society, Hawaii Catholic Conference, Hawaii Ophthalmological Society and Hawaii County Police Department. The HMA, American Medical Association and National Institutes of Health advocate increased research into use of medical marijuana. "Physicians cannot in good faith recommend a drug therapy without the clinical evidence to back them up," HMA officials said. Supporters of medical marijuana generally favor HB 1341, submitted by House Health Chairman Alex Santiago, rather than HB 1157, proposed by the state administration. While commending Gov. Ben Cayetano for introducing legislation that would allow the medical use of marijuana, supporters criticized his measure as too restrictive. It would require two physicians to approve marijuana for medical reasons; it would limit use to someone with a severe or terminal illness, and it would require the Department of Public Safety to create a confidential registry of qualifying patients. If passed, it "would only lead to constant wrangling and costly litigation," said Donald Topping, president of the Drug Policy Forum of Hawaii. Pam Lichty, board member of the American Civil Liberties Union, who is on the National ACLU board, also expressed concerns about the administrative bill -- especially the elaborate registry procedures and involvement of public safety officials. Lichty and Topping agreed with former Rep. David Tarnas who emphasized, "This is a health issue -- not a public safety issue. Registries don't work. Allow physicians to do their job." State Health Director Bruce Anderson, noting other states are taking action to allow medical marijuana, said "Hawaii should be equally compassionate." Among conditions for which it has been approved in other states, he said, are cancer, glaucoma, HIV/AIDS, seizure and spasticity disorders, severe pain and nausea. Hawaii County Police Chief Wayne Carvalho said both bills, as currently written, "would not only allow, but encourage widespread abuse of legalized medical use of marijuana." Medical Oncologist Reginald C.S. Ho said he opposes legalizing marijuana for medical use for the same reason he would appose any other new drug -- until it's proven safe and beneficial through controlled research clinical trials.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Drugs Won't Pay (An editorial in the Cavalier Daily at the University of Virginia, in Charlottesville, argues against the Drug Reform Coordination Network's campaign to organize college students to overturn the ban in the Higher Education Act on student loans to anyone convicted of possessing marijuana or other supposedly controlled substances.) Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 13:18:08 -0800 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: US: Editorial: Drugs Won't Pay Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: email@example.com Source: The Cavalier Daily (University of Virginia) Copyright: 1999 The Cavalier Daily, Inc. Pubdate: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 Section: Lead Editorial Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org FAX: (804) 924-7290 Mail: Basement, Newcomb Hall; Charlottesville, VA 22904 Website: http://www.cavalierdaily.com/ Note: Information on DRCNet's HEA reform campaign is at http://www.u-net.org/ DRUGS WON'T PAY It used to be that only those who could afford a college education received one. Now, more Americans than ever have college degrees, indeed, a college diploma is almost a prerequisite for success in life. Opportunities to receive financial aid have expanded; most people on these Grounds know someone who has a loan or a grant. Financial aid, however, does not grow on trees. Until approved FAFSAs start to bloom on McCormick Road gingkos, or more money is invested in grants and loans, a government-subsidized education will remain a privilege, not a right. The Drug Reform Coordination Network hopes you disagree. The non-profit group is coordinating what they bill as a "national student-led campaign to raise awareness and opposition" to a provision in the Higher Education Act of 1998. The provision (Section 483, subsection 'F') denies federal financial aid to any student "who has been convicted of any offense under any Federal or State law involving the possession or sale of a controlled substance." The ineligibility period for a convicted possession starts at one year for the first offense. A conviction for the sale of a controlled substance carries a two-year ineligibility for the first offense. Under the provision, federal financial aid applications ask applicants whether they have ever been convicted of a drug offense. Before the Act's passage in October, the only questions dealing with a criminal record involved incarceration. In opposition to the provision, DRCNet raises the question: Should drug use be a consideration in financial aid applications where convictions for crimes such as rape are not considered? But this disparity argues for the punishment of convictions such as rape through financial aid applications, rather than for the overturning of the HEA provision. The overturning of this provision would be a disservice to higher education. If the government subsidizes or fully funds a drug user's education, and that student uses personal funds to support his drug use, the government is, in effect, subsidizing the drug use. Also, because financial aid is limited, every person who receives a loan or grant does so at the expense of someone who was denied aid. With so many people looking for the means to attend college, it is only fair that those who have stayed clean are awarded aid over those who have not. It is true that such a policy might result in the denial of aid to a few people who are truly trying to turn their lives around, but that does not justify withholding aid from those who have committed no crimes. And the ineligibility periods are not set in stone. The provision includes a clause on rehabilitation. Under this provision, a student may regain eligibility before the end of the period provided that he completes a drug rehabilitation program. Keeping these in mind, we find that we cannot condone financial aid for active drug users. With that said, the wording of the provision could prove troublesome. The first clause states that eligibility suspension will affect any "student who has been convicted ... ." This leads the reader to believe that any student who has, in the past, been convicted of a drug offense could lose financial aid. Punitive measures should not extend to offenses committed years before the offender applies to college. Other than that, the provision is justifiable and necessary.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Hemp Beer Served Aboard Air Force One (The online Drudge Report says stewards passed out Hemp Golden Beer Monday evening to the president, members of Congress, the press and other personnel returning from Mexico aboard Air Force One. The tasting came just weeks after the Air Force banned the use of all products containing hemp oil - including Hemp drinks. "The president tasted, but did not swallow," laughed one reporter aboard the plane.) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 18:50:04 -0800 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: US: Hemp Beer Served Aboard Air Force One Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Patrick Henry Pubdate: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 Source: The Drudge Report Website: http://www.drudgereport.com/ DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX 02/16/99 22:05 UTC HEMP BEER SERVED ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE **Exclusive** The Hemp Revolution has hit the White House! Late Monday evening aboard Air Force One, stewards passed out HEMP GOLDEN BEER to the president, members of Congress, the press and other personnel! The move came just weeks after the Air Force banned the use of all products containing hemp oil -- including Hemp drinks. For any active-duty, Reserve and Air National Guard members, conviction for digesting Hemp products can bring two years in prison and a dishonorable discharge! HEMP GOLDEN BEER -- "smooth, mild, mellow herbal flavor" and "brewed with hemp seeds," according to the label -- was an instant hit with Washington insiders who have been stressed out over the year-long Lewinsky scandal. President Clinton was returning from Mexico when the hemp based drink was served. "The president tasted, but did not swallow," laughed one reporter aboard the plane. http://marijuananews.com reports that FREDERICK BREWING CO. [NASDAQ: BLUE] has just introduced HEMP GOLD, a cream ale brewed with hemp seeds. "The beer is smooth and mild - very, very drinkable," comments Steve Nordahl, FBC's VP of Brewing Operations. Passengers were mellowed out. "Clinton lingered with members of Congress in the guest cabin. While the president signed pages of Air Force One stationery for one guest, others showed off to Clinton the T-shirts and other Mexican souvenirs they'd picked up," reported the ASSOCIATED PRESS in PM cycles. The White House Travel Office refused to comment if any passengers reported a bad case of the munchies after the trip. The Air Force One/HEMP GOLDEN BEER development comes just weeks after the United States Air Force banned the use of all products containing hemp oil. A sergeant beat a marijuana charge by claiming traces of the drug came from a cholesterol-lowering supplement. "We don't want people testing positive and jeopardizing their careers because they swallowed something they may have thought was healthy and good for them," said Lt. Col. Peter Durand of the Air Force Surgeon General's Office. Lt. Gen. Charles Roadman, Air Force surgeon general, issued the Hemp prohibition on January 22, 1999. It makes hemp oil use a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice's article 92, which prohibits personnel from disobeying direct orders or regulations. Conviction can bring two years in prison and a dishonorable discharge. "In the interest of military readiness and good order and discipline, active-duty, Reserve and Air National Guard members are now prohibited from consuming any products containing hemp seed oil," declared Lt. Col. Greg Girard of the Air Force judge advocate general's office in the Pentagon. "Service members need not be concerned that they are unwittingly ingesting hemp products in foods and drinks because," Durand said, "most of these products are still expressly marketed and sold in health food stores." Or unless your traveling aboard Air Force One.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Clinton Talks Of Self Renewal (An Associated Press account of the U.S. president's visit to Mexico concludes by confirming "Stewards passed out Hemp Golden beer" on the trip back home aboard Air Force One.) Newshawk: GDaurer Source: Associated Press Copyright: 1999 Associated Press Pubdate: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 Author: Sandra Sobieraj CLINTON TALKS OF SELF RENEWAL WASHINGTON (AP) -- For President Clinton, this appears a time of self-renewal and forward focus as he claims the world stage -- and New Hampshire's familiar political terrain -- with talk of a ``new season'' and ``this tide of spring.'' The president's words as he sat opposite Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo on Monday were not new. The aftermath of his impeachment and acquittal should, for the nation, be a ``time for reconciliation and renewal,'' Clinton reiterated during his quick trip to Merida, Mexico. But his brimming confidence this time suggested he feels he's won not only a second chance but a stronger hand. Clinton took off work today and, after a long abstinence, took to the golf course with brother-in-law Hugh Rodham and top Democratic fund-raiser Terence McAuliffe. From commanding the world stage on his 23-hour mission to Mexico, Clinton takes the policy helm of his Democratic Party on Wednesday, with a Social Security forum at the White House -- the centerpiece of a day when Democrats fan out to Social Security town meetings nationwide. Friday, he welcomes French President Jacques Chirac at the White House and is planning his first news conference since last summer. In between, Clinton will spend all of Thursday making stops around New Hampshire, where in the 1992 campaign he coined his own nickname as ``The Comeback Kid.'' ``I never saw him act like a man in trouble in the first place,'' Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., said Monday evening as he boarded Air Force One behind Clinton en route home from Mexico. ``But he sure had a great day today.'' Thousands and thousands of Mexicans, many setting up mariachi-style bands on the sidewalk, lined the streets of Merida to cheer Clinton's motorcade with flags and banners wishing him and ``su esposa (your wife) Hillary'' happy returns. ``This joy, this warmth, this affection is reserved only for our dearest friends,'' Zedillo said. Clinton basked in that affection. He thanked the congressional delegation with him -- including Republican Reps. Mark Sanford of South Carolina, Rob Portman of Ohio and Kevin Brady of Texas, each of whom voted in favor of Clinton's impeachment -- for their show of ``America's commitment for the common future we will make together.'' To officials from both Mexico and the United States, Clinton proclaimed: ``This tide of spring has brought a new season of friendship.'' He was talking about U.S.-Mexican relations, but the sentiment appeared to apply more broadly. On the return flight to Washington late Monday, Clinton lingered with members of Congress in the guest cabin. While the president signed pages of Air Force One stationery for one guest, others showed off to Clinton the T-shirts and other Mexican souvenirs they'd picked up. Stewards passed out Hemp Golden beer, whose label boasted the ``smooth, mild, mellow herbal flavor'' of having been brewed with hemp seeds.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Panel Finds Too Many Crime Laws (The Associated Press says a 56-page report prepared over two years by a blue-ribbon task force sponsored by the American Bar Association and chaired by former Attorney General Edwin Meese III has concluded that the avalanche of new laws Congress has passed since 1970 to make America's streets safe has failed. "There is no persuasive evidence that federalization of local crime makes the streets safer for American citizens," says the report. More than 40 percent of all federal criminal laws enacted since the Civil War were passed since 1970.) Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 01:08:39 EST Errors-To: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Originator: email@example.com Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org From: RandallBart (Barticus@att.net) To: Multiple recipients of list (email@example.com) Subject: Re: Meese Panel Decries Crime Laws (AP) This is a later cut on the same story. I still don't have a URL or EMail address or official document number on this. The official name of the report appears to be "Federalization of Criminal Law" and it was sponsored by the American Bar Association. Their website at http://www.abanet.org is one of the more useless sites on the web. http://www.infobeat.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=2558474975-fb8 10:42 AM ET 02/16/99 Panel Finds Too Many Crime Laws By RICHARD CARELLI Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - The avalanche of new laws Congress has passed since 1970 to make America's streets safe has failed, a report concludes. ``There is no persuasive evidence that federalization of local crime makes the streets safer for American citizens,'' says a report prepared by a blue-ribbon task force sponsored by the American Bar Association and chaired by former Attorney General Edwin Meese III. ``Crime legislation is popular. Most of the time it's just feel-good legislation'' because existing state and local laws are sufficient to address the targeted problems, Meese told reporters today as the report was made public. Such duplication ``undermines the critical role of the states and local law enforcement,'' said Meese, the nation's top law-enforcement officer during the Reagan administration. The 16-member task force says a Congress worried about being called ``soft on crime'' actually may be hurting the fight against street violence by passing federal laws that duplicate state and local efforts nationwide. The 56-page report, backed up by hundreds of pages of statistical findings, calls on Congress to resist its political impulses. ``There is an understandable pressure on Congress not to vote against crime legislation even if it is misguided, unnecessary and harmful,'' the report's executive summary says. ``But there must be a recognition that a refusal to endorse a new federal crime is not a sign that a legislator is soft on crime.'' The product of a two-year study, the report notes with alarm that more than 40 percent of all federal criminal laws enacted since the Civil War were passed since 1970. ``Highly publicized criminal incidents are frequently accompanied by proposals for congressional responses for no reason other than that the conduct is serious, even if the activity is already handled by state law,'' the summary says. The ``Federalization of Criminal Law'' report mirrors criticism raised by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist in his year-end report on the federal judiciary in December. He blamed the trend on pressure in Congress ``to appear responsive to every highly publicized societal ill or sensational crime.'' The report states: ``Increased federalization is rarely, if ever, likely to have any appreciable effect on the categories of violent crime that most concern Americans, because in practice federal law enforcement can reach only a small percent of such activity.'' State law enforcement accounts for about 95 percent of all prosecutions nationwide. ``Inappropriate federalization'' can contribute to ``long-range damage to real crime control'' by diverting federal money better spent on state law-enforcement systems, the report says, and can deplete funding of federal law-enforcement efforts not duplicated by the states. ``The expanding coverage of federal criminal law, much of it enacted in the absence of a demonstrated and distinctive federal justification, is moving the nation rapidly toward two broadly overlapping, parallel and essentially redundant sets of criminal prohibitions. ... Such a system has little to commend it and much to condemn it,'' the report says. ``Sampling of the latest available statistics demonstrates that several recently enacted federal statutes, championed by many because they would have a claimed impact on crime, have hardly been used at all,'' the task force found. Some of the laws cited dealt with drive-by shootings, interstate domestic violence, failure to report child abuse and murder by escaped prisoners.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Many Anti-Crime Laws Not Needed, Study Says (The Orange County Register version) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 15:00:48 -0800 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) To: email@example.com Subject: MN: US CA: Many Anti-Crime Laws Not Needed, Study Says Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: John W. Black Pubdate: Tues, 16 Feb 1999 Source: Orange County Register (CA) Copyright: 1999 The Orange County Register Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.ocregister.com/ Section: News,page 12 MANY ANTI-CRIME LAWS NOT NEEDED,STUDY SAYS A task force led by former Attorney General Edwin Meese 11 says Congress is sometimes pushed to pass "misguided, unnecessary and harmful" anti-crime laws out of fear of being considered soft on crime if it fails to act. The panel calls on Congress to resist its political impulse. It notes with alarm that more than 40 percent of all federal criminal laws enacted since the Civil War were passed since 1970. The task force was sponsored by the American Bar Association. After a two-year study, its 56-page report will be made public today.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Meese Panel Urges Curbs on Federal Offenses (The New York Times version) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 12:12:34 -0800 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: Meese Panel Urges Curbs on Federal Offenses Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: email@example.com Pubdate: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 Source: New York Times (NY) Copyright: 1999 The New York Times Company Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.nytimes.com/ Forum: http://forums.nytimes.com/comment/ Author: Steven A. Holmes MEESE PANEL URGES CURBS ON FEDERAL OFFENSES WASHINGTON -- An American Bar Association panel led by former Attorney General Edwin Meese III warned lawmakers Monday against the "misguided, unnecessary and harmful" tendency of showing they are tough on criminals by turning more offenses into federal crimes. In a report, the panel said that the penchant for federalizing crimes that had been the purview of the states -- like murder, drug possession and trafficking, rape and robbery -- ran counter to the nation's historic reluctance to concentrate broad powers in a national police force. "Enactment of each new federal crime bestows new federal investigative power on federal agencies, broadening their power to intrude into individual lives," the report said. "Expansion of federal jurisdiction also creates the opportunity for greater collection and maintenance of data at the federal level in an era when various databases are computerized and linked." The task force's reports said the federalization of crime was quickening as lawmakers, seeking to be perceived as being tough on crime, were approving an increasing number of federal criminal statutes. The report said 40 percent of all federal criminal laws that had been enacted since the Civil War were passed since 1970. In the previous congressional term, more than 1,000 bills dealing with federal criminal statutes were introduced through July. Indeed, the task force said, so many federal criminal statutes are now on the books that "there is no conveniently accessible, complete list of federal crimes." The report, titled "The Federalization of Criminal Law," is similar in tone to comments made in December by Chief Justice William Rehnquist. In his year-end report to the judiciary, Rehnquist criticized Congress, saying that it was buckling under pressure to "appear responsive to every highly publicized societal ill or sensational crime." Monday's report is also noteworthy since the task force was headed by Meese, who, during his tenure as President Ronald Reagan's attorney general, had the reputation as being a prosecutor tough on crime. The report warned in dire language of the potential threats of the explosive growth in federal criminal statutes. It noted that federal criminal justice system expenditures grew by 317 percent from 1982 to 1993, compared with a 163 percent increase in state criminal justice financing in the same period. And the report said the number of federal prosecutors in U.S. attorneys offices increased to 8,000 from 3,000 in the last 30 years. Several new laws that were passed amid heightened publicity, like legislation in 1994 making "drive-by shootings" federal offenses, did not result in the filing of even a single charge in 1997. The report said that of the 59,242 federal charges that were made against individuals in 1997, 16,629, or 28 percent, were for only one type of offense -- drug trafficking. "Increased federalization is rarely, if ever, likely to have any appreciable effect on the categories of violent crime that most concern Americans, because in practice federal law enforcement can only reach a small percent of such activity," the report said. It noted that despite the huge increase in financing for federal anti-crime efforts, 95 percent of all prosecutions are still handled by state and local authorities. The report said the increase number of federal crimes placed new strains on federal courts. Scarce resources for the federal courts were increasingly being soaked up by criminal trials, sentencing hearings, post-sentencing matters and appeals. "Civil litigants therefore suffer because of the priority that must be given to any increase in federal prosecutions," the report said. The report's authors also worried that increased federal responsibility in the criminal arena might confuse and discourage local law enforcement efforts. "In light of federal assumption of jurisdiction, some state entities may hesitate in pursuing the conduct in question," the report said. "Such hesitation or withdrawal by local law enforcement would undermine the primary role played by state law enforcement." The panel suggested several means to help Congress refrain from enacting more federal criminal statutes. It recommended, for example, that Congress consider the costs to the federal and state systems of any new federal criminal law before any new criminal statutes are enacted. The panel suggested that the Congressional Budget Office or the Congressional Research Service could conduct such an analysis. The panel also recommended that new federal criminal laws contain a "sunset provision" of no more than five years that would force lawmakers to take another look at the need for the law after passions had cooled. Failure to halt the trend, the report said, could have dire constitutional consequences. "The current federalization trend presents a troubling picture with far-reaching consequences," the report concluded. "It reflects a phenomenon capable of altering and undermining the careful decentralization of criminal law authority that has worked well for all of our constitutional history."
------------------------------------------------------------------- Tougher Laws Fail To Stem Use Of Drugs (The Dayton Daily News, in Ohio, briefly notes the American Bar Association has released a new report showing illegal drug use has increased despite record expenditures on punishment.)Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 05:25:45 -0800 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: US: Tougher Laws Fail To Stem Use Of Drugs Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: General Pulaski Pubdate: 16 Feb 1999 Source: Dayton Daily News (OH) Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.activedayton.com/partners/ddn/ Forum: http://www.activedayton.com/entertainment/forums_chat/ Section: Health Briefs TOUGHER LAWS FAIL TO STEM USE OF DRUGS Increased enforcement of drug laws and stiffer penalties do not deter the use of marijuana and other drugs, research by the American Bar Association has found. The ABA found an 18 percent increase from 1992 to '97 in people who used drugs within the last month even though federal funding, arrests and incarceration rates were at all-time highs. The report, The State of Criminal Justice, also showed nearly 80 percent of the increase in drug arrests for those five years were for possession rather than dealing.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Medicinal Marijuana Battle to Heat Up with Release of Long-Awaited Institute of Medicine Report Next Month (A press release from the Marijuana Policy Project, in Washington, D.C., says MPP is preparing to challenge the likely interpretation of the Institute of Medicine's long-awaited medicinal marijuana report, to be released in mid-March. Government officials are sure to misrepresent the report's findings in order to justify the existing laws prohibiting the use of medicinal marijuana.) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 12:46:26 -0500 From: Marijuana Policy Project (MPP@MPP.ORG) Organization: Marijuana Policy Project Reply-To: MPP@MPP.ORG Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: IOM report release coming soon To: MPPupdates@igc.org FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE FEBRUARY 16, 1999 Medicinal Marijuana Battle to Heat Up with Release of Long-Awaited Institute of Medicine Report Next Month WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) is preparing to challenge the likely interpretation of the Institute of Medicine's (IOM's) long-awaited medicinal marijuana report, to be released in mid-March. Government officials are sure to misrepresent the report's findings in order to justify the existing laws prohibiting the use of medicinal marijuana. MPP plans to make it clear that the report's findings will not contradict MPP's position that the laws should be changed so that patients will no longer be arrested for using medicinal marijuana. The report was commissioned by the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) in January 1997. IOM -- part of the non-profit National Academy of Sciences -- accepted $1 million to conduct a "comprehensive review" of "the health effects and potential medical use of marijuana." Three public hearings were held during the winter of 1997-98. MPP made sure that dozens of patients attended the hearings to testify about their fear of being arrested. (For details, please see http://www.mpp.org/mpp-iom.html.) Indeed, many of them had been arrested and incarcerated for using medicinal marijuana. Unfortunately, ONDCP explicitly forbade IOM from addressing policy and legal issues in the report. IOM must focus exclusively on scientific and clinical issues, even though the biggest concern to the thousands of patients nationwide who already use medicinal marijuana is the threat of being arrested and sent to prison. Based on MPP's experience at the IOM hearings, MPP predicts the following: 1. The report will note that there are existing scientific and clinical data, as well as numerous case histories, indicating that marijuana does work as a therapeutic agent for some patients with certain ailments. 2. The report will note that more research is needed before the FDA can approve marijuana as a prescription medicine. 3. The report will not discuss the appropriateness of the existing federal and state laws which establish harsh criminal penalties for the thousands of patients who are already growing and using their own medicinal marijuana. "ONDCP director Barry McCaffrey is very clever," said Chuck Thomas, director of communications for the Marijuana Policy Project. "He forbade IOM from discussing the existing criminal laws against medicinal marijuana users, knowing that anyone with any compassion would surely conclude that patients should not be arrested. McCaffrey will misrepresent the report's finding that `more research is needed' in his arguments against ballot initiatives and legislation -- which are merely efforts to remove criminal penalties for patients." "Because IOM was not allowed to discuss criminal penalties, nothing in the report should be construed as opposing MPP's efforts to change the laws," said Thomas. "To the contrary, the report will clearly show that marijuana works as a relatively safe and effective medicine for many patients. MPP asserts that these patients are not stupid or crazy, and they should not be arrested." MPP will be available for comment and hold a news conference on the day the report is released. - END - *** HOW TO SUPPORT THE MARIJUANA POLICY PROJECT: To support MPP's work and receive the quarterly newsletter, "Marijuana Policy Report," please send $25.00 annual membership dues to: Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) P.O. Box 77492 Capitol Hill Washington, D.C. 20013 http://www.mpp.org/membrshp.html 202-232-0442 FAX
------------------------------------------------------------------- Australian report on cannabis and testosterone (According to the Australian Associated Press, a new study by Professor Jayashri Kulkarni, director of psychiatry for the Dandenong Area Mental Health Service, showed that in a small group of 40 males, those with the highest levels of testosterone also showed the highest levels of cannabis use - as well as symptoms of psychosis. The study suggests there may be a biological reason why males use cannabis more prevalently than females, which until now has been put down to social factors. Plus more research on cannabis, THC and reproductive biology.) From: "Association for Cannabis as Medicine" (email@example.com) To: Phil Smith (firstname.lastname@example.org) Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 19:42:34 +0100 Subject: Re: Need news article Copyright 1999 The Australian Associated Press. Redistribution unauthorised. By Rada Rouse, National Medical Correspondent BRISBANE, Feb 16 AAP - Testosterone levels may influence the effect of cannabis on the brain, a study suggests. It may be one reason why more young men develop psychosis concurrent with cannabis use, compared to young women, according to Monash University researcher Jayashri Kulkarni (Jayashri Kulkarni). Professor Kulkarni, director of psychiatry for the Dandenong Area Mental Health Service, said her study shows there may be a biological basis for males more commonly abusing the drug, which has until now been put down to social factors. "We've found that patients who had high testosterone levels also had high rates of cannabis use and high levels of psychotic symptoms including hallucinations, delusions and formal thought disorder," she said. Among the 40 patients studied, daily heavy users of cannabis had the highest testosterone levels. The study, which Prof Kulkarni stressed was small-scale, is believed to be only the second to investigate cannabis and gender, with the first having only eight subjects. The research follows recent discoveries of the biological effects of cannabis on the brain, and growing evidence that its active ingredient can either trigger, or exacerbate, schizophrenia. "Neurobiological findings on the effects of cannabis are very new," Prof Kulkarni said. "It is clearly suggested now that cannabis exacerbates dopamine production in the brain which is implicated in the formation of psychotic symptoms." Prof Kulkarni's research, to be presented to the international cannabis and psychosis conference in Melbourne tomorrow, was born out of concern for her patients. "It is heartbreaking as a clinician to treat young men having a first episode of psychosis, only to see them go off and smoke a lot of dope and when they come back you're back at square one," she said. Prof Kulkarni said investigation of the biological components of cannabis dependence may lead to improved clinical treatment, including drugs that target cannabis receptors in the brain. AAP rr/was/de *** From: "Association for Cannabis as Medicine" (email@example.com) To: Phil Smith (firstname.lastname@example.org) Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 00:54:30 +0100 Subject: Re: Need news article You might be interested in an excerpt (see below) from: THC-Limits for Food A Scientific Study nova Institute Hürth, Germany July 1998 Authors: Dr. med. Franjo Grotenhermen Dipl.-Phys. Michael Karus Dipl.-Ing. Agr. Daike Lohmeyer A printed English version is available from Hemptech, Sepastobol, USA Franjo > Hi Franjo, > > Thanks very much for sending this. > > In my country, they're still telling boys that pot will make them grow > breasts. I wonder how they'll deal with this.... > > Phil > 5.3 Hormonal system and reproduction Marijuana acts on the hypothalamo-hypophyseal axis. This is a functional unit in the brain which plays a superior part in the interaction of different hormones. The hypophysis secretes the sex hormones LH (luteinizing hormone) FSA (follicle stimulating hormone), and prolactin, the thyroid hormone TSH (thyrotropin), ACTH (adrenocorticotropin) and somatotropin (STH). These hormones respond to releasing hormones (RH) of the hypothalamus. LH regulates the testosterone production in the testes. Testosterone and FSH are vital for the sperm production (sperm count, sperm motility and sperm function). 5.3.1 Sex hormones 18.104.22.168 Men In animal studies it was shown that THC may impair the function of male sex hormones and induce a decrease in the weights of sex organs (Dewey 1986, Mendelson and Mello 1984). However, contrary to this, various animal studies described a gain or a constancy in the weights of male sex organs (Abel 1981). THC decreased the anterior and mediobasal hypothalamic LH-RH- concentration in rats when administered at 2 mg, 15 mg and 30 mg/kg body weight in a dose-related manner (Kumar and Chen 1983). Furthermore simultaneous decreases in serum testosterone were observed. In another study it was found that THC lowered testosterone and LH-levels in rats (Harclerode 1984). In the sequel a tolerance to this effect developed and with chronic THC- exposure the hormone-concentration completely returned to normal values. In another study of rats that were chronically administered 1 mg, 5 mg or 25 mg/kg THC the testosterone level was unaltered 24 hours after the last administration in the low- dose group, whereas it was found to have doubled in the 5 mg group (Morrill et al. 1983). In a study of mice THC in relation to dose caused a statistically higher incidence of abnormal sperms (Zimmermann et al. 1979). Without THC the number of abnormal sperms amounted to 1.5%. After a treatment for five consecutive days with 5 mg/kg TCH this percentage had risen to 3.8% and with 10 mg/kg THC it rose to 5.3%. Testosterone: First suspicions that cannabis might affect sexual hormones arose from case reports of gynecomastia in male young heavy cannabis users (Harmon and Aliapoulis 1972). This suspicion was substantiated by Kolodny et al. (1974) who observed reduced serum testosterone levels coupled with a decrease in sperm count and sperm motility in chronic marijuana users. This frequently quoted study, however, holds a number of methodical faults that have been repeatedly criticized (Abel 1981). In fact the results of this study could not be confirmed by a greater well-controlled study with chronic marijuana users (Mendelson et al. 1974). No difference in serum testosterone level were found either at the beginning of the study or after three weeks of heavy marijuana consumption. Hollister (1986) assumed that a change, if any, in testosterone level and sperm production would only occur after long-lasting exposition. In two separate studies one research group found a low sperm count with normal motility and morphology in chronic marijuana users that, under observation, had smoked 8-10 marijuana cigarettes over a period of 4 weeks (Hembree et al. 1978, 1976). In a study of 66 chronic cannabis users a comparison with 44 controls did not suggest any cannabis-induced long-term effects on the plasma testosterone level (Friedrich et al. 1990). Correspondingly, also other authors found normal testosterone levels in chronic marijuana users (Schaefer et al. 1975, Coggins et al. 1976, Cushman 1975, Block et al. 1991). Dax et al. (1989) investigated the effects of three times 10 mg THC oral per day or three times 18 mg THC in a marijuana cigarette for three days on male chronic marijuana users after at least two weeks of abstinence. They did not find any alterations in the plasma testosterone concentration. Cone et al. (1986) did not find any decrease in testosterone after the smoking of two marijuana cigarettes (2.8% THC). Mendelson et al. (1978) could not detect any influence on the testosterone level in 27 marijuana users that had consumed a mean of 54 marijuana cigarettes (moderate users) or 120 marijuana cigarettes (heavy users) over a period of 21 days. FSH: Acute THC-exposure (two marijuana cigarettes of 2.8% THC) does not result in an alteration of the FSH-level (Cone et al. 1986). Also chronic administrations did not have any significant influence (Cushman 1975, Hembree et al.1976, Block et al. 1991, Vescovi et al. 1992). LH: In a study by Cone et al. (1986) a decrease in the LH-level after acute THC-exposure (approx. 50 mg inhalative) was noted. In a study of 10 chronic marijuana users their basal and GnRH (gonadotropin releasing hormone) stimulated levels of LH were found reduced (Vescovi et al. 1992). However, in other studies using a different experimental design the LH-concentration was not affected by THC-exposure or cannabis consumption (Cushman 1975, Hembree et al. 1976, Kolodny et al. 1974, Mendelson et al. 1978, Block 1991). Prolactin: After three days of abstinence a slight elevation of prolactin-concentration was stated in six chronic cannabis users (Markianos and Stefanis 1982). Dax et al. (1989) investigated the effect of three times 10 mg/kg oral per day or 18 mg/ marijuana cigarette three times per day for days on male chronic marijuana users after two weeks of abstinence. Though no difference was found in plasma concentrations of LH and testosterone, they found the plasma prolactin level to be altered. The authors attributed this last finding to the heavy marijuana use. Mendelson et al. (1984), however, did not observe any acute effects on the prolactin level. Neither did Cone et al. (1986) find any decrease in prolactin after the smoking of two marijuana cigarettes (2.8% THC). Chronic cannabis users do not show any significant alteration in their prolactin levels (Kolodny et al. 1974, Cohen 1976, Vescovi et al. 1992). Puberty: Copeland et al. (1980) observed a pubertal arrest in a boy aged 16 years, who had consumed at least 5 marijuana cigarettes per day since he was 11 years old. Three months after cessation of consumption a normal entry into puberty was observed. This is the only observation of this kind so far. Conclusion: It is not conclusive to assume that there was a causal connection between the observed gynecomastia of strong marijuana smokers and their use of marijuana, all the more so, as no associations between marijuana consumption with prolactin levels or other relevant parameters were found in later studies. Considering the wide-spread use of marijuana, literature would have to be expected to hold more published observations of this kind. Also in respect of possible influences on puberty only one single case has been described to date. In animal studies high doses produced a slightly higher incidence of abnormal sperm and following a daily smoking of 8-10 marijuana cigarettes (100-300 mg THC) over a period of several weeks a slight reduction in sperm count occurred though no increase in abnormal sperms or any impairment of function was observed. Neither acute nor strongly chronic cannabis usage caused any consistent effects on the serum level of FSH, LH, prolactin or testosterone in male subjects. -------------------------------------------------------------------
The articles posted here are generally copyrighted by the source publications. They are reproduced here for educational purposes under the Fair Use Doctrine (17 U.S.C., section 107). NORML is a 501 (c)(3) non-profit educational organization. The views of the authors and/or source publications are not necessarily those of NORML. The articles and information included here are not for sale or resale.
Comments, questions and suggestions.Reporters and researchers are welcome at the world's largest online library of drug-policy information, sponsored by the Drug Reform Coordination Network at: http://www.druglibrary.org/
Next day's news
Previous day's news
to the 1999 Daily News index for Feb. 12-18
to the Portland NORML news archive directory
to the 1999 Daily News index (long)
This URL: http://www.pdxnorml.org/ii/990216.html