Officials of the Michigan Department of Community Health held a meeting on Monday, Jan 5th, 2009 to propose rules for administering the new state medical marijuana registry. Critics, among them Greg Francisco who is executive director of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association, call the proposed rules “inappropriate” and accuse the MDCH of attempting to take on the role of investigatory or law enforcement duty.

The principal drafter of the law Karen O’Keefe submitted 22 changes to the rules saying “Voters enacted Proposal 1 as written …. the department’s role is to implement the law, not rewrite it.” O’Keefe is the dicector of state policies for the Marijuana Policy Project, a nonprofit organization.

The full story by Todd A. Heywood can be read at the Michigan Messenger.

A New York Times article has Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN’s medical reporter as the leading contender to become the next surgeon general.

Meanwhile the Daily Green lists the “The 6 Most Idiotic Positions of Dr. Sanjay Gupta”. One of his statements is “”But I’m here to tell you, as a doctor, that despite all the talk about the medical benefits of marijuana, smoking the stuff is not going to do your health any good.”

Does the USA really need another of these types in a position of power? In a 2006 Time Magazine article entitled “Why I Would Vote No On Pot” he says

But I suspect that most of the people eager to vote yes on the new ballot measures aren’t suffering from glaucoma, Alzheimer’s or chemo-induced nausea. Many of them just want to get stoned legally. That’s why I, like many other doctors, am unimpressed with the proposed legislation, which would legalize marijuana irrespective of any medical condition.

.

Which is supposedly good reason for voting no. Immediately previous to that though he states

Several recent studies, including a new one from the Scripps Research Institute, show that THC, the chemical in marijuana responsible for the high, can help slow the progress of Alzheimer’s disease. (In fact, it seems to block the formation of disease-causing plaques better than several mainstream drugs.) Other studies have shown THC to be a very effective antinausea treatment for people–cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, for example–for whom conventional medications aren’t working. And medical cannabis has shown promise relieving pain in patients with multiple sclerosis and reducing intraocular pressure in glaucoma patients.

So it seems that if some people want to use marijuana for recreational purposes it justifies making criminals of the people who use it for multiple sclerosis, glaucoma, antinausea. The reasoning hardly seems logical. This from the person who believed that the Raelian-connected Clonaid group had “the capacity to clone”. Check out the Daily Green story for some really off the wall talk from the next surgeon general.

The proof is at their website in the article - here are a few of the more stupid quotes.

Imagine going to the emergency room with a very sick child and having the person sitting next to you in the waiting area light up a joint.

How ridiculous. Imagine that you are a bicyclist hit by a car and while lying on the ground someone opens a bottle of whiskey and has a drink. Does that mean anything? Does it make sense? No it doesn’t and neither does the Niles Stars’ statement. Or how about this one -

Imagine going with your kids to downtown Dowagiac, Cassopolis, Marcellus, Edwardsburg or Vandalia and finding out that a new store has opened up and it is distributing marijuana.

Well, imagine going to whatever downtown and finding out there is a new lingerie shop opened up. Big deal. The editors of the “Star” must be sort of brain dead and if their readership actually is swayed by their less than well reasoned arguments then the readers must be morons too.

Today, October 27, 2008 the Federal Court of Appeals dismissed an appeal from the federal government lawyers who argued that the government monopoly on medicinal cannabis was needed to ensure a reliable and safe supply to users.

The Star has a bit more information but the news is just breaking as this is posted. More details will surely be forthcoming but the decision is a victory for patients everywhere who need a better quality of medicine as well as the freedom to choose where to buy it. The decision means that (legal) growers who could not supply more than one patient at a time will be able to help many sufferers.

The Willits News in the Wilderness section summarizes the issues to be discussed at a symposium on illegal water diversions. The symposium will be held at the Willets, California community center.

Marijuana growing is being blamed for what USFS Special Agent Ron Pugh calls “a crisis at every level”. A fishery biologist from Arcata will speak about how the diversions of waterways are affecting salmon and steelhead populations.

The article states that the meeting is not to be a debate over marijuana cultivation but over illegal water diversion. Assuming that the problem is indeed as described (and there is no reason to doubt the reports) this site would like to point out that this is yet another situation that should be blamed on poor lawmaking. By making it illegal for the actual consumer to grow their own supply the government has caused the cash value of marijuana to be high enough that it encourages the type of activities that are destroying the environment. Make cannabis legal and end the stupidity, we have a life to live and this type of ignorant lawmaking cannot be tolerated.

The Danvers Herald has published an editorial from its sister paper the “MetroWest Daily News” which urges voters to vote in favor of Question 2 on the November 4th ballot. The Herald editors states that they agree with the Daily News.

Calling opponents’ arguments “a refrain as old as drug prohibition” and “not backed up with facts” the editorial says that Massachusetts can “take a step toward a rational approach to substance abuse” and concludes that it is time to make the punishment fit the crime.

Eleven states have already classified possession of small amounts of cannabis as civil offenses rather than criminal offenses which leave the offender with a criminal record not to mention the possibility of going to jail.

An article in the Science Daily questions whether decisions that refuse liver transplants to marijuana patients are justifiable since there is no non-empirical evidence that shows a relationship between the likelihood of rejection and marijuana use.

The Science Daily Press Release indicates that Canadian transplant centers are more willing than those in the United States. The author Karen Kroeker from the University of Alberta says that to deny patients who are in pain and whose only option of relieving the pain is to smoke cannabis is “unacceptable”, particularly given the lack of evidence to justify a refusal.

The Boston Globe reports the results of a recent poll in which voters were asked whether they were in favor of Question 2 on the November 4th ballot. Fifty one percent support the proposal with 32 percent against it.

The article goes on to report a “mobilization” by law enforcement officials and are purportedly making some progress in their effort to defeat the proposal.

Dutch police estimate that annual exports of cannabis have a value of over two billion euros. Max Daniel, the Police Commissioner that leads the “national battle against cannabis growing” says that the estimate is conservative. Cultivation is “forbidden” in the Netherlands although adults can buy, possess and use cannabis products legally.

The article at NIS News Bulletin goes on to describe criminal and legal behaviors that are increasingly being seen in the illegal industry - increased violence on the criminal side and willingness to provide mortgages by banks. Agricultural universities and private companies/laboratories are also blamed by Commissioner Daniel for helping growers become more productive and efficient.

The Retriever Weekly has a decent article on cannabis laws today, October 21, 2008. They state that marijuana prohibition costs the US taxpayer about 8 billion dollars a year.

The article is not an in-depth study but touches on the most salient points and reaches the conclusion that the next US President will have to examine the failed policies and waste of money.

« Previous PageNext Page »