Thoughts from the void: June 2020

Wednesday 24 June 2020

Unlock the Natural Doors in the Wall

'In the Western world visionaries and mystics are a good deal less common than they used to be. There are two principal reasons for this state of affairs - a philosophical reason and a chemical reason. In the currently fashionable picture of the universe there is no place for valid transcendental experience. Consequently those who have had what they regard as valid transcendental experiences are looked upon with suspicion, as being either lunatics or swindlers. To be a mystic or a visionary is no longer credible.

But it is not only our mental climate that is unfavourable to the visionary and the mystic, it is also our chemical environment - an environment profoundly different from that in which our forefathers passed their lives.'- Heaven and Hell, Aldous Huxley, 1956

The prohibition, for more than a century, of cannabis, psilocybin, peyote, ayahuasca and other such natural healers has been a massive hurdle to the further understanding of human consciousness, the mind and the world we live in. These plants, revered in their cultures, and looked upon as spiritual, medicinal and healing plants and fungi, are what Aldous Huxley referred to in his 1950s classic, The Doors of Perception, as 'Doors in the Wall', that open out the human mind, living in a compartmentalized fashion with its total focus on survival, to the 'Mind at Large' or the universal mind. While synthetic doors have been created in the meantime, and other doors such as fasting, meditation and exercise still remain open, the question remains as to the impact that prohibiting the usage of these wonderful, natural mechanisms have had on the world.

Every one of these plants and fungi takes our minds out of the daily tasks of survival and enables us to see the brilliance and beauty of the universe we live in. As Huxley and William Blake said, they cleanse the doors of our perception, making things appear as they really are, infinite. At these moments our minds are at one with the universal mind and many of the filters that enable us to function on a day to day level in the tasks in pursuit of survival, are removed temporarily. They bring a reverence and better understanding of nature and our minds and provide a glimpse into what the universal mind or supreme consciousness is. All this is achieved through minimal damage to mind and body. Unlike some of the other doors in the wall that take your mind out of its compartmentalized existence and then present it with vast horrors, providing it often with no way to return back within its secure walls, or that destroy the body in the process, these doors provide a means to safely venture out into the mind at large and return back to our compartmentalized minds, bringing back from the journey the priceless treasure of a vast improvement in our understanding of the without and within. None of these wonderful natural mechanisms are anywhere as addictive or deadly as the widely prevalent and freely available alcohol, tobacco and opium but are vastly more potent in their abilities to open up our minds to mental exploration and reality. They rarely lock us out, leaving us without an anchor, drifting insanely in the vast and sometimes terrifying unknowns of super-consciousness, but actually aid us in a better understanding of our day to day lives and actions for survival post the experience. You could call it a space walk in the realms of the mind with the tethers on.

All these natural mechanisms have been used for thousands of years in their respective cultures and society has not suffered as much for it in all the years put together as it currently suffers for the few years that the alternatives have been made available, alternatives such as alcohol, tobacco and pharmaceutical drugs emerging from the chemists lab. Writers and thinkers such as Huxley have spoken in depth about the potential of natural ways of gaining tremendously greater insights into the working of the mind and of reality itself. Science too has increasingly shown the benefits of these plants as medicine, especially for mental illnesses.

It is worth noting that most of these mechanisms were inherent in traditional cultures and it is the so-called modern human, economic and social upper classes, and predominantly western societies that have put locks on these natural doors in the wall. This has been done gradually as a part of the systematic erosion and suppression of traditional cultures, viewed as inferior to western ideas and ways of life. In this context, it is interesting to note that even some of the leading western explorers of these natural mechanisms for mind exploration chose to use a synthetic compound consisting of the active principle of these natural plants and fungi, such as mescalin instead of peyote, as in the case of Huxley and lysergic acid synthesized from ergot instead of psilocybin, as in the case of Timothy Leary. Perhaps the fact that a chemist synthesized these compounds in a lab produced a feeling of safety and control for these users in line with their familiar systems of medicine rather than consuming these plants or fungi in their natural form as advocated by the natural systems that were a result of their evolution and traditional direct use for mental study and exploration. The fact that the natural plant or fungi was not used, only one of its compounds, would have surely taken away something from the real experience resulting, in my opinion, in an incomplete experience as compared to the one provided by the balanced natural plant and fungi. But then the trend of placing more faith in chemically synthesized substances emerging from the chemists lab was well underway by this time. It had already existed for many years by this time and had produced heroin, cocaine, nitrous oxide and barbiturates. This misplaced confidence in the power of the chemist, and faith that what the chemist produced was safer than what nature created, has been one of the fundamental reasons why these natural doors in the wall were locked up and the doors that opened through synthetic substances embraced. This eventually led to the global ban of psilocybin, peyote and cannabis through the 1961 Single Convention treaty and led to the subsequent worldwide avalanche of pharmaceutical drugs and synthetic ways to open up the mind as well as its legal and illegal abuse.

Thus, mental exploration continued to happen but mostly along synthetic paths, often with fatal results, while the vast store of experience that the natural ways provided was shunned and forgotten. An irony of this approach was that the more the synthetic ways damaged body, mind and society, the more the blame for this was placed on the natural plants and fungi. The situation has reached such a stage today that the mere mention of the word 'drugs' invokes negative images of these banned wonderful natural healers while the products of the chemists lab form a part of nearly every household and every person's daily diet without a second thought being given to the impact it is having on man and society.

At one time, the 20th century was touted as the century with the potential for the greatest spiritual development and human understanding, but we may have vastly underachieved as evidenced by the fact that with increased communication, technology, and awareness of the planet, we have also taken it to the brink of extinction through our recent man-made inventions of petrochemicals, pharmaceuticals, mass weaponry, alcohol and tobacco alongside indiscriminate actions such as environmental degradation and the quelling of traditional medical systems, native peoples and their ways of life. Possibly the imbalance in our development could have been countered with the availability, usage, increased study and awareness of how these natural plants and fungi affect the world and how they contribute to living in connection with nature, the universal spirit and ultimate reality. These plants could have served as tremendous aids in helping us choose the right path of progress, thought and action, one that is humane, inclusive, just and sustainable for the whole planet.

Even today in 2020, all these plants remain part of the banned list of narcotic and psychotropic substances that form the 1961 Single Convention treaty that all nations religiously adhere to. This is in spite of the ever growing awareness of the benefits and safety of these plants and fungi, of the selfish motives that resulted in their prohibition and of the harms that the alternatives now available have inflicted on life and planet. We must correct this wrong at the earliest and take these revered, medicinal and vastly useful healers of the world out of these global lists of banned and controlled substances. The lists need to consist of man-made synthetic chemical substances and not these magical and powerful creations of nature. With this change, there is the possibility that the planet can re-balance itself into sustainability primarily through humans, its current main threat, regaining their balance through an improved understanding and consciousness of reality and the universe and the vast and beneficial powers that these magical doors in the wall hold. Yes, I am still optimistic that we can do this and it is still not too late...but we must unlock these natural doors in the wall without further delay before all life is lost to the void in the blink of a cosmic eye...

Following are some of Huxley's writings on the above subject. Words in italics are my thoughts at the time of reading.

'It was in 1886 that the German pharmacologist, Ludwig Lewin, published the first systematic study of the cactus, to which his own name was subsequently given. Anhalonium Lewinii was new to science. To primitive religion and the Indians of Mexico and the American Southwest it was a friend of immemorially long standing. Indeed, it was much more than a friend. In the words of one of the early Spanish visitors to the New World, 'they eat a root which they call Peyotl, and which they venerate as though it were a deity.' - The Doors of Perception, Aldous Huxley, 1954.

'Why they should have venerated it as a deity became apparent when such eminent psychologists as Jaensch, Havelock Ellis and Weir Mitchell began their experiments with mescalin, the active principle of peyotl. True, they stopped short at a point well this side of idolatry; but all concurred in assigning to mescalin a position among drugs of unique distinction. Administered in suitable doses, it changes the quality of consciousness more profoundly and yet is less toxic than any other substance in the pharmacologist's repertory.' - The Doors of Perception, Aldous Huxley, 1954.

'According to such a theory, each one of us is potentially Mind at Large. But in so far as we are animals, our business is at all costs to survive. To make biological survival possible, Mind at Large has to be funneled through the reducing valve of the brain and nervous system. What comes out at the other end is a measly trickle of the kind of consciousness which will help us to stay alive on the surface of this particular planet. To formulate and express the contents of this reduced awareness, man has invented and endlessly elaborated those symbol-systems and implicit philosophies which we call languages.' - The Doors of Perception, Aldous Huxley, 1954.

'Most people, most of the time, know only what comes through the reducing valve and is consecrated as genuinely real by the local language. Certain persons, however, seem to be born with a kind of by-pass that circumvents the reducing valve. In others temporary by-passes may be acquired either spontaneously, or as the result of deliberate 'spiritual exercises,' or through hypnosis, or by means of drugs. Through these permanent or temporary by-passes there flows, not indeed the perception of 'everything that is happening everywhere in the universe' (for the by-pass does not abolish the reducing valve, which still excludes the total content of Mind at Large), but something more than, and above all something different from, the carefully selected utilitarian material which our narrowed, individual minds regard as a complete, or at least sufficient, picture of reality.' - The Doors of Perception, Aldous Huxley, 1954.

'That humanity at large will ever be able to dispense with Artificial Paradises seems very unlikely. Most men and women lead lives at the worst so painful, at the best so monotonous, poor and limited that the urge to escape, the longing to transcend themselves if only for a few minutes, is and has always been one of the principal appetites of the soul. Art and religion, carnivals and saturnalia, dancing and listening to oratory - all these haves served, in H.G. Wells' phrase, as Doors in the Wall. And for private, for everyday use there have always been chemical intoxicants. All the vegetable sedatives and narcotics, all the euphorics that grow on trees, the hallucinogens that ripen in berries or can be squeezed from roots - all, without exception have been known and systematically used by human beings from time immemorial. And to these natural modifiers of consciousness modern science has added its quota of synthetics - chloral, for example, and benzedrine, the bromides and the barbiturates.' - The Doors of Perception, Aldous Huxley, 1954.

'Most of these modifiers of consciousness cannot now be taken except under doctor's orders, or else illegally and at considerable risk. For unrestricted use the West has permitted only alcohol and tobacco. All the other chemical Doors in the Wall are labelled Dope, and their unauthorized takers are Fiends.' - The Doors of Perception, Aldous Huxley, 1954.

Cannabis meets all these criteria plus it it naturally growing worldwide and has been used for tens of thousands of years...no need for a new drug, we just need to bring it back..reefer madness had clouded even Huxley's mind at the time that this was written...

'What is needed is a new drug which will relieve and console our suffering species without doing more harm in the long run than it does good in the short. Such a drug must be potent in minute doses and synthesizable. If it does not possess these qualities, its production, like that of wine, beer, spirits and tobacco will interfere with the raising of indispensible food and fibres. It must be less toxic than opium or cocaine, less likely to produce undesirable social consequences than alcohol or the barbiturates, less inimical to the heart and lungs than the tars and nicotine of cigarettes. And, on the positive side, it should produce changes in consciousness more interesting, more intrinsically valuable than mere sedation or dreaminess, delusions of impotence or release from inhibition.' - The Doors of Perception, Aldous Huxley, 1954.

Huxley misses a point or two here..no drug will be universally perfect for all. There will always be a minority (better that than a majority) for whom any drug will be incompatible given different mental and physical constitutions. Also his obsession and faith in the Western system of synthesizing something that can be had in measured doses like pills or alcohol is unnecessary for natural intoxicants where margins are much larger and safer..cannabis is the ideal...peyote and psilocybin too where it is available but not to the extent of cannabis...nature has done the work already, no need for pharmacologists and neurologists to re-invent the wheel...

'Although obviously superior to cocaine, opium, alcohol and tobacco, mescalin is not yet the ideal drug. Along with the happily transfigured majority of mescalin takers there is a minority that finds in the drug only hell or purgatory. Moreover, for a drug that is to be used, like alcohol, for general consumption, its effects last for an inconveniently long time. But chemistry and physiology are capable nowadays of practically anything. If the psychologists and sociologists will define the ideal, the neurologists and pharmacologists can be relied upon to discover the means whereby that ideal can be realized or at least (for this kind of ideal can never, in the very nature of things, be fully realized) more nearly approached than in the wine-bibbing past, the whisky-drinking, marijuana- smoking and barbiturate-swallowing present.' - The Doors of Perception, Aldous Huxley, 1954.

Ganja in the Indian sub-continent...

'The urge to transcend self-conscious selfhood is, as I have said, a principal appetite of the soul. When, for whatever reason, men and women fail to transcend themselves by means of worship, good works and spiritual exercises, they are apt to resort to religion's chemical surrogates - alcohol and 'goof-pills' in the modern West, alcohol and opium in the East, hashish in the Mohammedan world, alcohol and marijuana in Central America, alcohol and coca in the Andes, alcohol and the barbiturates in the more up-to-date regions of South America.' - The Doors of Perception, Aldous Huxley, 1954.

As with cannabis...

'For these Native Americans, religious experience is something more direct and illuminating, more spontaneous, less the home-made product of the superficial, self-conscious mind. Sometimes (according to the reports collected by Dr. Slotkin) they see visions which may be of Christ Himself. Sometimes they hear the voice of the Great Spirit. Sometimes they become aware of the presence of God and of those personal shortcomings which must be corrected if they are to do His will. The practical consequences of these chemical openings of doors into the Other World seem to be wholly good. Dr. Slotkin reports that habitual Peyotists are on the whole more industrious, more temperate (many of them abstain altogether from alcohol), more peaceable than non-Peyotists. A tree with such satisfactory fruits cannot be condemned out of hand as evil.' - The Doors of Perception, Aldous Huxley, 1954.

'"Lo, the poor Indian, whose untutored mind
Clothes him in front, but leaves him bare behind"

But actually it is we, the rich and highly educated whites, who have left ourselves bare behind. We cover our anterior nakedness with some philosophy - Christian, Marxian, Freudo-Physicalist - but abaft we remain uncovered, at the mercy of all the winds of circumstance. The poor Indian, on the other hand, has had the wit to protect his rear by supplementing the fig-leaf of a theology with the breech-clout of transcendental experience.' - The Doors of Perception, Aldous Huxley, 1954.

'But the man who comes back through the Door in the Wall will never be quite the same as the man who went out. He will be wiser but less cocksure, happier but less self-satisfied, humbler in acknowledging his ignorance yet better equipped to understand the relationship of words to things, of systematic reasoning to the unfathomable Mystery which it tries, forever vainly, to comprehend.' - The Doors of Perception, Aldous Huxley, 1954.

Cannabis and Cocaine
https://ravingkoshy.blogspot.com/2020/11/cannabis-and-cocaine.html

Cannabis and Benzodiazepines
https://ravingkoshy.blogspot.com/2020/11/cannabis-and-benzodiazepines.html

Friday 12 June 2020

Without a Scientific Basis, Global Drug Laws are Invalid

'The history of how 0.3% became the THC limit for hemp goes back to Canada and various countries across Europe, who first adopted that standard for hemp farmers in the 1990s. When farmers in the US began to lobby for the right to farm hemp, they followed suit.

“We thought ‘well, we’ve got to go with what the standard is in Canada and Europe because it was going to be harder to make an argument that you needed a different standard,’” said Eric Steenstra, President and Co-Founder of US hemp advocacy group Vote Hemp. “It just sort of became a de facto standard, even though it wasn’t really based on any kind of science.” '

- Leafly

"We must come to terms with the Drug Culture in this country...country...country!..." These echoes drifted back to the rear in confused waves. "The reefer butt is called a 'roach' because it resembles a cockroach...cockroach...cockroach..."

"What the fuck are these people talking about?" my attorney whispered. "You'd have to be crazy on acid to think a joint looked like a goddamn cockroach!"

I shrugged. It was clear that we'd stumbled into a prehistoric gathering. The voice of a "drug expert" named Bloomquist crackled out of the nearby speakers"...about these flashbacks, the patient never knows, he thinks it's all over and he gets himself straightened out for six months...and then, darn it, the whole trip comes back to him."'

- Fear & Loathing in Las Vegas: A Savage Journey to the Heart of the American Dream, Part II...by Raoul Duke, November 25, 1971, Fear and Loathing at the Rolling Stone, The Essential Writing of Hunter S. Thompson

'Richard Pound, who served as the first president of WADA, spoke to Marijuana Moment about the origins of the cannabis ban and said that the U.S. was “really quite adamant that [cannabis] was on the list” of prohibited substances.

“The U.S. was a leader in saying—and this was the ONDCP saying this—’in our view, marijuana is the entry-level drug. If you can keep people from using marijuana, they don’t graduate to cocaine and heroin and some of the other the other chemical variations of these things.'”'

- Marijuana Moment

'The international policy process does not fare any better, with existing conventions built on a view of illegal drugs that is “increasingly at odds with current knowledge” (p. 218), and to a large extent reflecting a US desire to globalise their own policies. The international war on drugs has “often served as a flexible instrument for forwarding general American policy interests” (p.214); cannabis was included in the 1961 convention under “heavy international pressure” so as to “globalize the [American] Marijuana Tax Act” (p.205); the 1971 convention was established “as a reaction to the rise of youth counterculture of the late 1960s” (p.214); and poor nations are regularly threatened with “serious fiscal and reputational consequences” (p.215) if they fail to comply with US policy requests.'

- Sage Publications

- IndyStar

'Article 28 CONTROL OF CANNABIS

2. This Convention shall not apply to the cultivation of the cannabis plant exclusively for industrial purposes (fibre and seed) or horticultural purposes.'

- UN 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs

There is no scientific basis for the global narcotic and psychotropic substances laws. These laws do not stand on solid, verifiable scientific facts, and hence their validity is highly questionable.

To begin with, here are some questions:

What is the scientific and universally agreed definition of a narcotic or psychotropic substance that forms the basis of all the global drug laws and conventions?
How is a substance classified as a narcotic or psychotropic? What are the criteria? What is the scientific validation for classifying a substance as a narcotic or psychotropic?
On what basis is any substance included in the lists of narcotic and psychotropic substances that form the international conventions and drug laws?
On what basis is any substance excluded from the lists of international narcotic and psychotropic substances?
How can one measure the narcotic or psychotropic qualities of a substance?
What are the units of measure that help to measure the extent of narcotic or psychotropic quality in a substance?
Is narcotic quality the same as psychotropic quality? If they are the same, then why the usage of different terms? If they are different, how are they different? If they are different, how can you distinguish between the two? Can each be measured differently? Do they have different units of measure? Do they have different devices for measure?
What are the universally defined ranges of narcotic and psychotropic quality, based on which it can be uniformly and universally stated that a particular substance's narcotic and psychotropic qualities are within safe limits, and another substances' narcotic and psychotropic qualities are beyond safe limits?
If such standards exist, who has agreed on these standards, limits, ranges and measures of narcotic and psychotropic quality? Who has validated them? What is the scientific evidence and backing for these definitions and validations?
Are narcotic and psychotropic qualities the same across different substances? If not, how can we scientifically measure and differentiate this?
Do we have the specific narcotic and psychotropic qualities for each of the substances listed in the controlled substances lists?
Can we measure the narcotic and psychotropic quality of all substances, irrespective of whether the substance is man-made or natural? For example can we measure the narcotic property of water or tea?
Can we measure the narcotic and psychotropic properties of different states of matter i.e. solid, liquid, gas?
Are there other naturally occurring plants, fungi and substances, not listed in the global lists, that are narcotic and psychotropic? If so, how many are there? Should they be brought into the controlled lists? If not, why not? What about synthetic substances?
Are animals, insects, birds, natural elements, minerals, and microbes narcotic or psychotropic? Do we have ways in which we can measure and clearly say that they are or are not narcotic or psychotropic?
Do narcotic and psychotropic properties change with external conditions such as temperature?
Are narcotic and psychotropic properties inherent in a substance or an effect produced in the animal consuming it?
Are there ranges or limits within which each narcotic and psychotropic property in the controlled substances may be present in all other substances? If so, what are they?
Do combinations of the listed controlled narcotic and psychotropic substances, even though within individual limits in any compound, constitute levels of narcotic or psychotropic quality that exceed acceptable levels when combined? What are these combinations? What are these acceptable levels for the various combinations?
Are all substances, that man comes in contact with, tested for the amount of the listed controlled narcotic and psychotropic substances contained within them?
Does the narcotic and psychotropic effect of a substance vary from individual to individual, animal to animal, across different age groups, genders, races, geographies, etc? Do we have measures and values defined for this?
Does the narcotic or psychotropic effect of a substance vary according to the time of day, age of individual, repeated doses, prolonged use, first time use, in combination with other substances?
Does the narcotic and psychotropic nature of a substance vary with time i.e. aging?
Does the narcotic and psychotropic nature of a substance vary across its parts or is it concentrated in certain areas?
What is the difference between naturally occurring and chemically synthesized narcotic and psychotropic substances?
What are the defined safe doses and toxic doses of narcotic and psychotropic substances?
Does toxicity build up over time with the prolonged use of all narcotic and psychotropic substances? If not, do we know in which cases it occurs?
How do you identify an addict? What are the parameters and criteria? Where is it laid down in quantifiable form? How is an addict universally defined in a scientifically verifiable fashion? Are there different criteria for different substances? What is the scientific basis and evidence of such definition? What is the criteria with reference to cannabis?
Which of the following three - toxicity, narcotic property or psychotropic property, should be the most important consideration for controlling a particular substance?
What measures are in place in nature and in man-made synthesis to manage the toxicity of narcotic and psychotropic substances? Are these measures universal, scientifically verifiable and in force globally?
What resources and efforts are in place to ensure that toxicity in natural and synthetic substances are within safe tolerable limits?
On what basis are the available resources and efforts apportioned amongst man-made and natural narcotic and psychotropic substances?
How does growing certain natural narcotic or psychotropic plants constitute an offense when it is widely acknowledged that it is only on maturity that these plants obtain their narcotic or psychotropic nature, and when we are largely unaware of the narcotic and psychotropic properties of most plants and entities present in nature?
Can laws relating to cultivation, possession, transport, manufacture, production, etc., come into effect before the stage of flower maturation or resin processing, if the rest of the plant and its various stages of growth are outside the definition of psychotropic narcotic substances? If yes, then on what basis can these laws be applied, if the intention of the grower is to use them at these legal early stages?
How many people have been tried and convicted for flouting laws related to the mature plant, when they were actually in possession of the plants in their early legal growing stages?
What provisions exist in the narcotic and psychotropic laws to protect an individual from unlawful legal action during the growing stages of a plant?
If it is widely acknowledged that only the mature plant contains narcotic and psychotropic qualities, should not legal action be initiated only after tests have been done on the mature plant to ascertain its level of narcotic and psychotropic qualities?
How can one differentiate that a person is growing a narcotic plant for scientific, religious, medical and recreational purposes, as against commercial purposes?
Is not the prohibition of growing a natural plant by an individual an infringement of an individual's right to freedom of practicing religion, right to equality in pursuing a livelihood if he or she is studying it, right to life in choosing medicine that the individual feels is appropriate for herself, right to choosing the means of recreation which the individual feels is safe and appropriate for herself?
Suppose I am cultivating the plant for the seed how do I reach there without going through the flowering stage? How can the plant's flowering and resin production stage, which is a natural process, be considered illegal while its seed production which is a subsequent stage be considered legal in some countries? Similarly how can the leaf stage be considered legal and the flowering stage illegal for the same plant?
In many countries the possession of narcotic and psychotropic substances beyond a certain quantity is punishable with life sentences or death. What is the basis of formulating these laws, and arriving at these limits given that these are victimless crimes? In the case of cannabis, where it is well known that you cannot overdose on the substance realistically, what is the scientific basis for arriving at these limits?
Can a person be convicted for stocking cane or corn sugar beyond certain limits because an individual is likely to die of overdosing on it beyond even a few hundred grams in a short period of time?
Why do these drug laws regarding possession not apply to other extremely dangerous and toxic substances like poisonous plants, pharmaceutical drugs, and alcohol, which are known to kill beyond just a few doses above the safe dose?
How can a sentence of death, or life imprisonment, be passed on possession of a relatively safe natural substance, such as cannabis, and no curbs exist on highly toxic man-made synthetic substances?
On what scientific basis has the limit of 0.3% THC been arrived at, below which a plant is industrial, and above which it is narcotic and psychotropic? What scientific studies and evidence are there to support this differentiation of the same plant as industrial or narcotic?
Natural narcotic and psychotropic plants and fungi have been created by nature. By banning these are we saying that nature is a criminal? Should nature be tried for the manufacture and production of natural narcotic and psychotropic substances?
Man appears to be the most toxic of all of nature's creations, threatening to lay waste to all of nature. A man can also relieve pain through soothing words and action, induce sleep through boring talk, produce a stupor through brainwashing or violence, be addictive through compelling words and actions. He appears to be narcotic. Should we add him to the global lists of controlled substances?

I will not go through the exercise of answering all the above questions. It is sufficient for me to try and answer the first question regarding the definition of narcotic and psychotropic substances to prove that all global laws and lists, regarding narcotic and psychotropic substances, are invalid.

To look up the definition of 'narcotic', I did a Google search, the go-to method these days. Here is what I found:

narcotic - "an addictive drug affecting mood or behaviour, especially an illegal one." - Oxford Languages definition
narcotic - "a) a drug (such as opium or morphine) that in moderate doses dulls the senses, relieves pain, and induces profound sleep but in excessive doses causes stupor, coma, or convulsions b) a drug (such as marijuana or LSD) subject to restriction similar to that of addictive narcotics whether physiologically (see physiological) addictive and narcotic or not; something that soothes, relieves, or lulls" - https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/narcotic
"Narcotic, drug that produces analgesia (pain relief), narcosis (state of stupor or sleep), and addiction (physical dependence on the drug). In some people narcotics also produce euphoria (a feeling of great elation)." - https://www.britannica.com/science/narcotic
narcotic - "a drug that makes you want to sleep and prevents you feeling pain" - https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/narcotic
The best example is the definition of narcotics in the United Nations Conventions - "Narcotics are substances and preparations that induce drowsiness, sleep, stupor, insensibility, etc., and that these effects (and their rate) are complicated to prove, e.g. during litigation. Thus, the legal definition of a narcotic is whether or not it is listed on the Schedules of the Convention. If it is on some of the Schedules, it is narcotic" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcotic#Studies_on_the_definition_of_counterfeit_medicines_in_WHO_member_states

I will not even attempt to explore the definition of 'psychotropics'. From the above definitions, it is quite evident that the term 'narcotic' itself has no firm ground. In some cases, substances which produce sleep, stupor, and relief from pain are called narcotic. In other cases, actual substances are listed to try and explain what a narcotic is, making it a circular reference. The United Nations Conventions, of course, take the cake by stating that if a substance is on one of the lists then it is a narcotic!

So there are no fixed parameters and measures of these parameters, on the basis of which any person can say whether a substance is narcotic or not. It is left hanging in the air, for anyone in a position of power and influence to arbitrarily decide if a substance is narcotic or not. Please note that a cup of tea induces sleep, through relaxation and reduces pain. Sleeping in excess produces a stupor. Alcohol produces stupor and reduces pain. Exercise produces good sleep and reduces pain. Smartphones and the internet relieve pain, produce a stupor, puts one to sleep, and are extremely addictive. For such far reaching laws and conventions as those that define the lists of controlled substances, narcotics and psychotropics, the minimum that one would expect is that the definition of what is narcotic should be scientific, measurable, verifiable and universally agreed. It should also be universally agreed that narcotic property(s) in a substance is something harmful, before we go about arresting and killing people for possessing and using narcotic substances. From the definitions above, it seems that the narcotic property is a very desirable property, rather than the evil it is made out to be. The fact that the bulk of the world's pharmaceutical medicines strive to deliver this narcotic effect, and pharma companies charge huge amounts of money for it which people are willing to pay, shows that it is much desired in society. The fact that alcohol is so widely consumed is another indicator that the narcotic effect is widely desired in society, as is the consumption of all kinds of illegal drugs and intoxicants.

Coming back to the definition of what is a narcotic, only after we have agreed on a concrete, scientifically verifiable, repeatable and robust definition of what a narcotic is, should we move to the next steps, such as identifying which substance produces what narcotic effect(s), how much of a substance produces how much narcotic effect, what the safe limits are, what methods and devices can be used to measure all this, etc. These measures and methods should also be universal, scientifically validated and agreed upon to be used to determine if a substance is a narcotic or not, and to what extent narcotic properties can exist in a substance to be within safe limits. This should be backed again by scientific evidence.

From the definitions above, it appears that what we are trying to call a narcotic is based on its effects on the consumer ,and that the determination of what is a narcotic is subjective and not entirely a property of the narcotic substance. Anybody or anything can be a narcotic to a suitable subject. It can vary from person to person, according to age, physical and mental constitution, genetic make up, time of day, state of current physical and mental health, environment and innumerable other factors. If we examine the list of substances that form the controlled substances list, it will be evident that the compounds are very large and diverse in number. It is also evident, from experience, that for as many substances that are listed, there are many millions, possibly billions of other substances that exist outside these lists which fit the even current vague and ambiguous definition of what a narcotic is. To add to these already existing compounds, chemists are churning out hundreds of new ones from their labs all the time.

From the above, it will be obvious that the entire system of classifying certain substances as narcotic and psychotropic, and banning, controlling and creating laws on the basis of this classification is seriously biased, flawed and unscientific.

It is a known fact that natural plants and fungi, as well as naturally fermented spirits and country liquor, have been consumed by humans for thousands of years. Nature has ensured that the compounds contained in them, that intoxicate or produce 'narcotic' and 'psychotropic' effects, are counter balanced by other compounds through hundreds of thousands of years of evolution. This coupled with man's experimentation with them, over hundreds of thousands of years, have resulted in man selecting those plants, fungi and natural preparations that work for him and are relatively safe. If control must be had in the name of protecting human health, then the criteria on the basis of which control must be established is not narcotic property, but toxicity. It is the man-made synthetic substances that need to be controlled, because evolution and biological experience have created the unstated lists of controlled substances that exist in all societies. These man-made substances that need control include all the compounds that emerge from a chemist's lab, as a result of chemical synthesis. These need to be controlled because they have not stood the test of time and quality that thousands of years of trial and error and biological experience provide the naturally existing 'narcotics' and psychotropic substances. The property that needs to be controlled in these man-made substances is toxicity, and not its narcotic or psychotropic property.

If you look closely, even distilled alcohol will fall into the category of man-made, synthetic narcotics and psychotropics that need control, along with pharmaceutical preparations, because of its harmful nature and, specifically, its toxicity. We all know that the harms of distilled alcohol far exceed the harms of any natural narcotic or psychotropic substance, yet it does not find any mention in the conventions and laws that control these substances. You can find distilled alcohol, with alcohol content ranging from 1% to possibly 80% and above, available freely and widely used without any curbs and restrictions. This is in spite of all the evidence regarding its direct co-relation with violent crime, insanity, addiction and death.According to the WHO, "Alcohol consumption contributes to 3 million deaths each year globally as well as to the disabilities and poor health of millions of people. Overall, harmful use of alcohol is responsible for 5.1% of the global burden of disease. "

All natural plants and fungi that man has consumed for long periods of his existence, and all fermented spirits that he has consumed from these natural sources must be removed from the lists of psychotropic and narcotic substances that society seems to be so eager to create and base global laws on. New lists need to be created, specifically focusing on man-made synthetic substances, and the focus must be on toxicity, rather than ambiguous properties like narcotic or psychotropic properties. What is currently happening is that the safe natural substances are out of reach for society, while the harmful, toxic, synthetic substances emerging from the chemists lab are being made available, widely sold and even recommended by the lawmakers of society, and the physicians and pharmacists who have the responsibility of protecting society's health as a part of their profession. One look at the controlled substances lists that form international drug lists and conventions, specifically the 1961 and 1971 Conventions, the WHO list of Essential Medicines, etc., and country specific drug lists, will show that these are haphazard, ad hoc lists containing mostly chemical compounds that constitute leading, and supposedly, essential pharmaceutical drugs. Even these lists are ever changing with chemists, developing newer compounds every day to replace and workaround the ones on the controlled substances lists, so that they can sell them without restrictions.

In between all these controlled substances sit natural compounds - such as THC, DMT, psilocybin - that are a part of natural plants and fungi. These compounds should not be considered as controlled substances if they are present in natural form in plants and fungi. In nature they are well within safe limits through evolutionary mechanisms. It is only when man tries to synthesize them to create new breeds of plants and fungi, with higher than natural concentrations of these compounds, or man extracts these compounds from their natural hosts to create highly concentrated and potent preparations, that control is required. So, here again, it is a control over man-made products and not on natural products, that is required. We must remove naturally occurring or cultivated cannabis, opium, psilocybin, ayahuasca, mescaline, coca, etc., from all these psychotropic and narcotic substances lists worldwide, and the conventions and laws which currently ban and restrict them. This also implies that country spirits and alcohols, derived from natural processes and substances, should not be curbed and restricted when highly toxic distilled alcohol is not prohibited.

We must bring back sanity, as soon as possible, to our drug laws regarding intoxicants, narcotics and psychotropics, or else we are pushing society more and more towards the most toxic and dangerous synthetic legal and illegal pharmaceutical drugs, and alcohol, by depriving human society of its natural intoxicants, narcotics and psychotropics that are every human's basic right to safe recreation and medicine. Through these biased and unscientific drug laws, we are subjecting hundreds of millions to coercion by drug and law enforcement agencies, and sending millions to jails, and even death sentences. The persons who make a business out of toxic synthetic substances, in the name of medicine and recreation, are killing millions, getting rich in the process, and have the support of the system that creates the drug lists and laws and prohibits the natural means by which society can escape the poisoning.

To summarize, the current global drug laws and conventions regarding narcotic and psychotropic substances are not based on scientific definitions, criteria and evidence, but are arbitrary and ad hoc. These laws and conventions therefore are invalid and should be reformulated in the light of current knowledge and scientific understanding.

'The vote by the Commission for Narcotic Drugs, which is based in Vienna and includes 53 member states, considered a series of recommendations from the World Health Organization on reclassifying cannabis and its derivatives. But attention centered on a key recommendation to remove cannabis from Schedule IV of the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs — where it was listed alongside dangerous and highly addictive opioids like heroin.

Experts say that the vote will have no immediate impact on loosening international controls because governments will still have jurisdiction over how to classify cannabis. But many countries look to global conventions for guidance, and United Nations recognition is a symbolic win for advocates of drug policy change who say that international law is out of date.'

- New York Times

'WHO recommendation to delete cannabis and cannabis resin from Schedule IV of the 1961 Convention: The Commission decided by 27 votes to 25 and with one abstention to follow this recommendation. Cannabis and cannabis resin will accordingly be deleted from Schedule IV of the 1961 Convention. They remain in Schedule I of the 1961 Convention and thus remain subject to all levels of control of the 1961 Convention.'

https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/commissions/CND/Mandate_Functions/current-scheduling-recommendations.html

'Among WHO’s recommendations, it was suggested that cannabidiol (CBD) with 2 percent or less Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC, the addictive substance) should not be subject to international controls. Member States rejected that recommendation for a variety of reasons, including some Member States arguing that CBD is not currently under international control and there was, thus, no need for action. CBD has taken on a prominent role in wellness therapies in recent years, and sparked a billion-dollar industry.'

https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/12/1079132

The following are links to articles, and content, appearing in various media related to the above subject. Words in italics are the thoughts and comments of the author of this article.

'To date, not a single state that has implemented legalization has reversed course. That’s because these policies are working largely as politicians and voters intended — and because they are preferable to marijuana prohibition.

Ultimately, common sense regulation allowing for the legal, licensed commercial production and sale of cannabis best addresses adult consumers’ demand while keeping marijuana products largely out of the hands of young people.

By contrast, the continued criminalization of cannabis only compounds the public safety risks posed to young people and others by the unregulated marketplace.'

https://norml.org/blog/2023/03/24/norml-op-ed-in-the-era-of-legal-marijuana-the-kids-are-alright/

'Hemp is merely a type of plant in the Cannabaceae family. The difference between hemp and cannabis is purely legal in the US—hemp is defined as having less than 0.3% THC. '

https://www.leafly.com/learn/cannabis-glossary/hemp

'In 1965, Timothy Leary (who would go on to be an advocate for psychedelics) was arrested for possession of cannabis while crossing the border from Mexico into Texas. Leary argued that the Marihuana Tax Act required him to self-incriminate—registering for the act showed intent to possess marijuana, which would violate the fifth amendment. The US Supreme Court agreed with him in 1969 and struck down the Marihuana Tax Act.

However, with the loss of the Tax Act, President Richard Nixon passed the Controlled Substances Act in 1970, setting up a framework for the federal regulation and criminalization of drugs. The Controlled Substances Act created five categories of drugs and classified cannabis under Schedule I—drugs considered dangerous with no medical use and a high potential for abuse, such as heroin and cocaine.

Nixon appointed former Pennsylvania Republican governor Raymond Shafer as the head of the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse—later called “The Shafer Commission”—to review all research and literature on cannabis to correctly classify it in the Controlled Substances Act.

Shafer’s 1972 report debunked damaging myths about marijuana, found that the plant did not threaten society, and recommended decriminalizing the plant. Nixon ignored the report, and the plant stayed on Schedule I, where it remains today. '

https://www.leafly.com/learn/legalization/marijuana-illegal-history

'" I know," said Flug. "Next time you want to think about appealing a case to the U.S. Supreme Court, just remember who'll be up there.'

"You mean down there." I said. "Along with all the rest of us." I laughed. "Well, there's always smack..."

Flug didn't laugh. He and a lot of others have worked too hard, for the past three years, to derail the kind of nightmare that the Nixon-Mitchell team is ready to ram down our throats. There is not much satisfaction in beating Haynsworth & Carswell, then having to swallow a third-rate yoyo like Powell and a vengeful geek like Rehnquist. What Nixon and Mitchell have done in three years - despite the best efforts of the sharpest and meanest young turks the Democratic opposition could call on - is reduce the U.S. Supreme Court to the level of a piss-poor bowling team in Memphis - and this disastrous, Nazi-bent shift of the federal government's Final Decision-making powers won't even begin to take effect until the spring of '72.

The effects of this takeover are potentially so disastrous - in terms of personal freedom and police power - that there is no point even speculating on the fate of some poor, misguided geek who might want to take his "Illegal Search and Seizure" case all the way up to the top. A helpful hint, however, might be found in the case of the Tallahassee newspaper reporter who went to Canada in 1967 to avoid the draft - and returned to find that he was no longer a citizen of the United States and he now had ninety days to leave the country. He appealed his case to the Supreme Court, but they refused to even hear it.

So now he has to go, but of course he has no passport - an international travel is not real easy without a passport. The federal immigration officials understand this, but - backed up by the Supreme Court - they have given him an ultimatum to vacate, anyway. They don't care where he goes, just get out - and meanwhile Chief Justice Burger has taken to answering his doorbell at night with a big six-shooter in his hand. You never know, he says, who might come crashing in.'

- The Campaign Trail: Is This Trip Necessary?, January 6, 1972, Fear and Loathing at the Rolling Stone, The Essential Writing of Hunter S. Thompson

'Results
The most robust predictors of support for the CLCB were use of and policy support for medicinal cannabis use, voting for a left-wing political party, having a positive moral view of cannabis use, living in a small town and having read the CLCB. Predictors of opposing the CLCB were voting for right-wing parties, considering “frequent” cannabis use to be a high health risk, and lifetime use of other drugs. Age, ethnicity, education, employment status, religiosity and lifetime cannabis use were not significant predictors after controlling for other variables.'

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0955395921003479

'Question Is the legalization of recreational cannabis in the US associated with changes in cannabis use outcomes and cannabis use disorder across racial and ethnic groups?

Findings In this cross-sectional study analyzing repeated yearly surveys of US adults conducted from 2008 to 2017, living in a state after enactment of recreational cannabis laws was associated with increases in the odds of cannabis use within the past year and past month among Hispanic and non-Hispanic White individuals (as well as individuals identifying as Native American, Pacific Islander, Asian, or more than 1 race) compared with the period before the passage of recreational use laws; there were no increases among non-Hispanic Black individuals.

Meaning Cannabis legalization is generally associated with increased use of cannabis and not associated with frequent use or use disorder among cannabis users, including among members of demographic subgroups most affected by criminalization.'

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2784528

'When we look at other disruptive industries in the U.S. throughout history, almost all legislative change came after private enterprise exerted pressure on the federal government to acknowledge and accommodate their interests.

From oil and gas to electric vehicles to cryptocurrencies to gambling, the interest of big business catalyzes change. We are seeing a similar pattern emerge in cannabis.

Federal legalization is important to the future of the industry and something many Americans are eager for.

But the independent political movements in Washington DC should be less of a signal of what is to come than the movements of big business.

Know where to focus your attention. Legalization is coming.'

https://mjbizdaily.com/wheels-of-capitalism-not-congress-are-driving-marijuana-legislation/

'Industrial hemp is cannabis intended for making a variety of products such as cloth, biofuel, and animal feed. It can also be used for some medical preparations.

The original version of the bill will now be submitted to President Miloš Zeman for his signature. If he approves the amendment, it will take effect on Jan. 1, 2022.

The approved amendment would more than triple the amount of THC in industrial hemp to 1 percent.

According to some senators, increasing the THC content would contravene the international drug convention and would also affect criminal law concerning possession of a classified substance.

For this reason, the Senate wanted to maintain the THC content limit for technical hemp to 0.3 percent. However, deputies in the lower house disagreed with the Senate.'

https://www.expats.cz/czech-news/article/czech-parliament-approves-tripling-the-amount-of-thc-is-industrial-hemp

'But the best technicians available to the National DAs convention in Vegas apparently couldn't handle it. Their sound system looked like something Ulysses S Grant might have rigged up to address his troops during the siege of Vicksburg. The voices from up front crackled with a fuzzy, high-pitched urgency, and the delay was just enough to keep the words disconcertingly out of phase with the speaker's gestures.

"We must come to terms with the Drug Culture in this country...country...country!..." These echoes drifted back to the rear in confused waves. "The reefer butt is called a 'roach' because it resembles a cockroach...cockroach...cockroach..."

"What the fuck are these people talking about?" my attorney whispered. "You'd have to be crazy on acid to think a joint looked like a goddamn cockroach!"

I shrugged. It was clear that we'd stumbled into a prehistoric gathering. The voice of a "drug expert" named Bloomquist crackled out of the nearby speakers"...about these flashbacks, the patient never knows, he thinks it's all over and he gets himself straightened out for six months...and then, darn it, the whole trip comes back to him."'

- Fear & Loathing in Las Vegas: A Savage Journey to the Heart of the American Dream, Part II...by Raoul Duke, November 25, 1971, Fear and Loathing at the Rolling Stone, The Essential Writing of Hunter S. Thompson

'“The existing FDA approval system is designed for the assessment of privately produced compounds that go through conventional P1, P2, and P3 trials – so the Pfizer vaccine comports with the existing regulatory model. Cannabis does not. It is an illicit botanic product,” Armentano said.

Armentano went on to explain the FDA approval process is not designed to evaluate such products.

“In fact, under the existing regulatory and legal environment, there is no process for which the FDA could review or approve herbal cannabis – as acknowledged by the DEA and others who are familiar with the process,” Armentano said. “The DEA acknowledged this publicly in 2016 and has done so repeatedly since.”'

https://www.laweekly.com/the-difference-between-the-fda-approving-vaccines-and-weed/

'Viscous, stratified, and hot to the touch, a five-gallon water tank bubbled with unknown chemicals at an illegal marijuana grow site in California’s San Bernardino National Forest. Marijuana growers most likely planned to use this brew as a high-powered pesticide to keep any and all animals away from their marijuana plants.

On U.S. Forest Service land in California alone, more than 400 illegal grow sites have been identified. This is in part because international drug organizations have traditionally set up illegal grow sites on national forests in California.

However, organized sites are now popping up as far east as North Carolina, and smaller, unorganized grow sites occur in most states. These sites pose problems for Forest Service law enforcement, the public, and the environment – with pesticides poisoning wildlife, soil, and water.'

https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2017/08/21/cleaning-illegal-marijuana-grow-sites

'Justice Department lawyer Daniel Aguilar, who represented the federal government at the oral argument in June, insisted that the court should dismiss the case and allow the group to file their own DEA rescheduling petition.

Judges Paul Watford concurred with the latest ruling, but he did notably say in a concurring opinion that, “in an appropriate case, the Drug Enforcement Administration may well be obliged to initiate a reclassification proceeding for marijuana, given the strength of petitioners’ arguments that the agency has misinterpreted the controlling statute by concluding that marijuana ‘has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.'”'

https://www.marijuanamoment.net/court-dismisses-dea-marijuana-rescheduling-case-but-judge-says-cannabis-reclassification-may-be-coming-anyway/

And we believers in the future will never cease to concern ourselves with the old commandment: 'Thou shalt not kill.' Even if some day all the legal codes in the world forbid killing (inclusive of killing in war and killing by executioners), that imperative will never lose its cogency. It is the foundation of all progress, all human development. We kill so much! Not only in our stupid battles, the stupid street fighting of our revolution, our stupid executions - no, we kill at every step. We kill when circumstances force us to drive gifted young people into occupations for which they are not suited. We kill when we close our eyes to poverty, affliction, or infamy. We kill when, because it is easier, we countenance or even pretend to approve of atrophied social, political, educational, and religious institutions, instead of resolutely combating them. Just as a consistent socialist looks on property as theft, so those who hold consistently to our kind of faith regard all contempt of human life, all cruelty and indifference, as tantamount to killing. And not only things present can be killed, but the things of the future as well. A great deal of future in a young man can be killed by a mordant sceptism. Everywhere life is waiting, everywhere the future holds promise, and we see so little, we trample so much. We kill at every step.

In respect to mankind we all of us have but one task. To help mankind as a whole make some small advance, to better a particular institution, to do away with one particular mode of killing - all these are commendable, but they are not my task or yours. Our task as men is this: in our own unique personal lives, to take a short step on the road from animal to man.

- Thou Shalt Not Kill, 1919, If The War Goes On, Herman Hesse

'They conclude: “In the lead up to legalization, professional associations … suggested that legalization posed a threat to public health, advocated for the legal age for cannabis use to be set at a minimum age of 21 or 25, or that Canada should not legalize at all because it would place youth at greater risk of harm. With such categorical fears now shown to be largely unfounded, this should provide the basis to move forward on more nuanced grounds. … [O]n the balance, cannabis legalization – especially when considering the severe adverse social impacts of criminalization, and especially for youth – continues to offer the potential to better protect and achieve consequential net benefits to public health and welfare of cannabis users and society at large.”'

https://norml.org/blog/2021/08/17/analysis-marijuana-legalization-opponents-fears-have-not-come-to-fruition-in-canada/

'Raphael Mechoulam, one of the most esteemed cannabis researchers in history, calls cannabis a “neglected pharmacological treasure trove” in a 2005 paper. Neglected by researchers? Absolutely. But to some extent, by consumers like us, too.

For decades, cannabis has been regarded primarily as a vessel for the almighty high-bringer that is THC. Even in legal markets with a wide variety of options, many people still reach for the strain with the highest THC content.'

https://www.leafly.com/news/cannabis-101/cannabis-entourage-effect-why-thc-and-cbd-only-medicines-arent-g

'Senators took issue with the 2018 Farm Bill’s 0.3 percent THC cap for lawful hemp products and directed USDA to work with the other federal agencies on a study of whether that threshold is scientifically supported:

“Hemp.—The Committee is concerned that the level of allowable THC content in hemp may be arbitrary and pose a burden on hemp producers that is not supported by scientific evidence. The Committee directs USDA to work with the Department of Health and Human Services and the Drug Enforcement Administration to study and report to Congress on whether there is scientific basis for the current limit of 3 percent THC in hemp and suggest alternative levels if necessary.”'

https://www.marijuanamoment.net/senate-committee-urges-rethink-of-hemp-thc-limit-and-pushes-cbd-regulations/

'In 2019, more than 4,000 acres among roughly 243,00 planted in the U.S. were destroyed for going hot. In 2020, despite total U.S. hemp acreage decreasing, hot hemp acres increased to 6,234. Based on those figures, with current projections calling for roughly 108,000 acres of hemp production in 2021, approximately 11,675 acres will expectedly test hot. However, the use of USDA’s finalized sampling and testing methodology by state agricultural officials may greatly mitigate that projection.'

https://newfrontierdata.com/cannabis-insights/how-many-acres-have-farmers-lost-to-hot-hemp/

There are only two accursed beings on earth who are excluded from following this eternal call and from being, growing, living, and dying as an inborn and deeply ingrained self-will commands. Only man and the domesticated animals he has tamed are condemned to obey, not the law of life and growth, but other laws that are made by men and from time to time broken and changed by men. And the strangest part of it is that those few who have disregarded these arbitrary laws to follow their own natural law have come to be revered as heroes and liberators - though most of them were persecuted in their lifetime. The same mankind which praises obedience to its arbitrary laws as the supreme virtue of the living reserves its eternal pantheon for those who have defied those laws and preferred to die rather than betray their 'self-will'.

- Self-will, 1919, If The War Goes On, Herman Hesse

'With hemp already federally legal, a primary policy issue is how marijuana and hemp—two varieties of the cannabis plant—would be distinguished under a federal regulatory regime. In this article, we lay out the CAOA’s key provisions governing hemp, related cannabis product regulation, and areas where legislators specifically seek industry feedback to inform the best policy approach.'

https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/cannabis-administration-and-opportunity-4867282/

'“What we found over the weeks that we were sampling, the amounts of CBD and THC went up proportionately in all of these different cultivars for all of these different stresses,” Toth said.

By week four, at harvest time, they found that nearly every plant (except those treated with herbicide, which were nearly dead) produced the expected ratio of CBD to THC, with high levels of CBD corresponding to levels of THC above the 0.3% THC threshold.'

https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2021/07/hemp-goes-hot-due-genetics-not-environmental-stress

'Although Nixon declared the war on drugs on June 17, 1971, the U.S. already had lots of practice imposing drug prohibitions that had racially skewed impacts. The arrival of Chinese migrants in the 1800s saw the rise of criminalizing opium that migrants brought with them. Cannabis went from being called “reefer” to “marijuana,” as a way to associate the plant with Mexican migrants arriving in the U.S. in the 1930s.

By the time Nixon sought reelection amid the anti-Vietnam War and Black power movements, criminalizing heroin was a way to target activists and hippies. One of Nixon’s domestic policy aides, John Ehrlichman, admitted as much about the war on drugs in a 22-year-old interview published by Harper’s Magazine in 2016.

Experts say Nixon’s successors, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton, leveraged drug war policies in the following decades to their own political advantage, cementing the drug war’s legacy. The explosion of the U.S. incarceration rate, the expansion of public and private prison systems and the militarization of local police forces are all outgrowths of the drug war.'

https://apnews.com/article/war-on-drugs-75e61c224de3a394235df80de7d70b70

A good way to get a country to legalize ganja would be for its immediate neighbour to legalize. There is usually such competition between neighbouring countries that the idea that one's immediate neighbour may stand to gain immensely from legalization could be a very good motivation for one's own country to legalize. Keeping up with the Joneses i mean the Mary Janes..Canada/USA, Australia/New Zealand, England/Germany, Israel/Iran, China/Japan, North Korea/South Korea...hey Pakistan, I think you guys should legalize because that would surely wake up India too...it's the perfect healthy competition and a win-win for all...gun competition is so uncool...not to mention fatal for the majority...

Updated Oct 30, 2022 2:32:29pm

'I wish to speak a word for Nature, for absolute freedom and wildness, as contrasted with a freedom and culture merely civil - to regard man as an inhabitant, or a part and parcel of Nature, rather than a member of society. I wish to make an extreme statement, if so I may make an emphatic one, for there are enough champions of civilization: the minister and the school committee and every one of you will take care of that.'

- Walking, Selected Writings on Nature and Liberty, Henry D Thoreau.

'An in-depth look at water usage in the regulated cannabis cultivation market reveals how it compares to the illicit market and traditional agricultural sectors. On a per-pound basis, cannabis might be better compared to more valuable, scarce cash crops. Mid-range cannabis in the United States, costing approximately $1,500/lb., is comparable to the price a pound of saffron fetched in Delhi, India, last year ($1,496), or the same amount of Italian white truffles ($1,581). Notably, the substantial expense associated with saffron and truffles are in part derived from the labor-intensive collection process for the former, and the relative rarity and difficulty in procuring the latter.

Consequently, cannabis is not only one of the world’s most valuable cash crops, but the industry’s market value has potential to increase dramatically, with only incremental increases in production. Across the globe, nations which have legalized cannabis for either medical or adult use have found the plant to be an enticing source of additional revenue. At the same time, agricultural research and innovation should normalize cultivation practices and lead to greater resource efficiency.'

https://newfrontierdata.com/cannabis-insights/bureaucratic-restraints-constrain-cannabis-as-a-commodity/

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1515/nsad-2015-0034

'“It is absolutely thousands, no question,” Genine Coleman, the executive director of the Origins Council, said of those rural growers kept out of the legal market.

“If we’re going to summarize it into one key issue, it is that cannabis cultivation is treated like development,” added Coleman, whose Mendocino County-based group advocates small marijuana farmers across the state.

“It’s regulated as though you’re building a shopping mall, straight up. So that, for folks that are homestead producers on a small scale, it’s out of reach. It’s too expensive. It’s too onerous. It’s too time-consuming.”'

Along with the legalization of marijuana, its normalization also needs to happen in society. The plant has been suppressed for so long that its presence sometimes creates anxiety for the user who worries about social and legal discrimination. Its presence creates panic, fear, distrust and anger in the non-user due to the negativity that has been built around it. The consumption of the plant should become once again a natural part of social life. That would be normalization. With continuous exposure, increasing information and awareness normalization should happen eventually.

Updated Oct 11, 2022 1:10:08pm

'The Misuse of Drugs Act (1971) is not fit for purpose. For 50 years, it has failed to reduce drug consumption. Instead it has increased harm, damaged public health and exacerbated social inequalities.

Change cannot be delayed any longer. We need reform and new legislation to ensure that future drug policy protects human rights, promotes public health and ensures social justice.'

https://transformdrugs.org/mda-at-50/parliamentary-support

'The director said researchers have “had all kinds of limitations” and there’s “limited opportunity for access.” He noted that the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) has recently moved to expand the number of marijuana manufacturers, but he said what the government “really needs” to do is “moderate the Schedule I limitation.”

He said he’s spoken with NIDA Director Nora Volkow about the issue and feels there should be a modified Schedule I category called Schedule I-R, “which would be basically a different pathway if you’re going to use this material for research.”'

https://www.marijuanamoment.net/top-federal-health-official-touts-psychedelics-therapeutic-benefits-and-slams-marijuana-scheduling/

'I noticed a few other things. In addition to my perma-grin, the pain in my hips from the previous day’s workout was gone. The tension in my neck and shoulders from sitting at a computer for most of the day was nowhere to be found. While 10 mg might have just taken the edge off, 100 had me feeling as light as a feather.

When the time to sleep finally came, I clocked 10 hours of shuteye, something I haven’t done in years. No cold sweats, no meltdowns, no emergency room visits—just relaxation, a quiet mind, and a seriously deep rest.'

https://www.leafly.com/news/health/i-ate-10-times-more-thc-than-i-planned-heres-what-happened

'The 0.3% THC limit is based on a 1970s research paper, Bolt said, but it's largely been used out of context and was never meant to guide regulation. Recent research has shown psychoactive effects of THC tend to kick in around 1%, but most recreational cannabis contains closer to 30%.'

https://www.indystar.com/story/news/environment/2021/05/17/indiana-hemp-regularly-destroyed-because-has-too-much-thc/4990932001/

'European health and beauty product manufacturers can now safely use hemp-derived cannabigerol or CBG in their cosmetics and skin care lines with approval from a key market regulator for trade in the European Union.

The European Commission added CBG last month as a safe ingredient for skin conditioning to Cosing, its cosmetics ingredient database.

Hemp extractors and manufacturers tout the benefits of using hemp-derived CBG in skin care and cosmetics products, including anti-inflammatory, antibacterial and antioxidant properties.'

https://hempindustrydaily.com/european-commission-adds-cbg-as-legal-ingredient-for-cosmetics-skin-care/

Even if all the nations of the world legalized cannabis for all purposes - medicinal, intoxicant, food and industrial purposes - TODAY, a feat not impossible as all it takes is for the UN to change global drug laws and every nation to follow suit by changing their individual national drug laws with the same alacrity that all showed in embracing the fake pandemic Covid, it would still take at least a decade for cannabis to become truly pervasive significantly reducing the footprint of the following industries: the synthetic pharmaceutical drug industry for medicine; the global synthetic recreational drug industry, alcohol and tobacco for intoxicant; unsustainable rice, wheat and cotton as agricultural crops on current scales; the chemical fertilizer industry through organic farming of climate resistant cannabis; the petrochemical based non-biodegradable plastics and synthetics industries as industrial sources of raw materials. Even then much of the damage may be irrepairable, such as the omnipresent microplastics, and the contamination of land, water and air by synthetic pharmaceuticals, chemical fertilizers, fossil fuels and petrochemicals. But there is a chance that we could at least slow this down or even stall it. However, these industries - petrochemicals, synthetic pharmaceuticals, chemical fertilizers, alcohol and tobacco are the biggest industries in the world today. The world's rich to whom these industries belong, and the governments that they own and fund, will do all they can to prevent this, including the use of the arms industry who fear a peaceful world of cannabis as a threat to their existence as much as the rich and the governments. This means that what could take a decade if all are fully committed will most likely take much more time. The two years lost to the fake pandemic Covid were accelerated steps in the opposite direction to that which we should have been taking. Do we have that much time to change course? Will nature and human insanity give us the time? Today, all global leaders are floundering helplessly and aimlessly, with what is being proposed as solutions to the catastrophic problem being nothing more than cosmetic makeovers, while they work to consolidate their own positions and the rich strive to get richer. At a time when all possible options must be considered, no, pursued with great urgency, even then it may not be enough, we find humanity moving with determination like zombies towards the sixth extinction...What is overwhelmingly evident is the human delusion that man is the master of nature and an insane stubbornness to pursue natural ways...

Oct 08, 2022 12:07:53pm

'They concluded: “In sum, the findings from the current study … provide further support of previous research questioning the causal claims of the MGH [marijuana gateway hypothesis]. While there is strong support for correlation and sequencing in marijuana and hard drug use, correlation and sequencing alone cannot provide sufficient evidence for causality. Factors other than marijuana use such as genetic predisposition, peer associations, or access to the illicit drug market could be the primary causes of hard drug use instead of marijuana use itself. As such, any public policy that prohibits the use of marijuana in an attempt to curb hard drug use is unlikely to succeed.”'

https://norml.org/news/2021/05/06/analysis-marijuana-use-data-fails-to-support-gateway-hypothesis

'Because delta-8 THC is manufactured from hemp-derived CBD, not extracted directly from the hemp plant, it is a controlled substance under law, according to the DEA.

“From a chemist’s perspective, it is clear that the isomerization of CBD to delta-8 THC with a catalyst is a chemical process,” said Erik Paulson, lab manager at Infinite Chemical Analysis Labs, a cannabis testing laboratory with locations in California and Michigan. “Any product of a chemical reaction like this one is, by definition, a synthetic chemical.”'

https://hempindustrydaily.com/more-states-banning-delta-8-thc-as-regulators-clarify-its-legality-under-federal-law/

'In any other industry, the harm of a product like this would be limited to an offense against good taste. But cannabis isn’t any other industry. The harm here goes far deeper. Tens of millions of Americans have had their freedom revoked and their lives ruined by nonsense criminalization and the War on Drugs. Those harms are reinforced by the stigma surrounding cannabis, and the stereotypes that still cling to healthy, happy, everyday consumers.

Canna Bumps isn’t just a marketing pitch gone awry. It’s actively facilitating the risk and harm that millions of Americans face every day.

So way to go, THC Living. Neat idea. Clever. Very not fucking funny.'

https://www.leafly.com/news/industry/neat-idea-canna-bumps-thanks-for-keeping-marijuana-illegal

'Steves said his devotion to the legalization cause was largely inspired by his travels abroad, and by witnessing the safe and compassionate approach that many European nations have taken to marijuana.

“In Europe, they’re not into legislating morality and incarceration, they’re into something called pragmatic harm reduction,” he said. “And in this country right now, it’s [confronting] a law based on lies, started by President Nixon in 1971 when he was mad at the hippies.” '

https://www.wgbh.org/news/national-news/2021/04/20/step-aside-bellingham-hippies-rick-steves-has-a-marijuana-message-for-the-squares

Gandhi brought into focus the untouchability that existed in society with regard to humans, calling the social outcasts Harijan or people of god...150 years ago society did the unthinkable and made a plant an untouchable...it was cast out of society and still remains so...the plant is called Shivapatre, Shivji ka buti and Siddi among other names...When will society remove this discrimination against the plant, a creation of nature that came into existence 28 million years ago when man was a primate living in the trees?

Oct 02, 2021 8:51:46pm

'If states generally do not see the need to cap the potency of distilled spirits, it is hard to figure why cannabis, a far less hazardous product, requires such a safeguard. But the legal treatment of marijuana has long been anomalous, and evidently some of that irrationality lingers in the minds of politicians even when they are happy to legalize the industry and reap the resulting tax revenue.'

https://reason.com/2021/04/20/arbitrary-thc-limits-could-wipe-out-much-of-the-cannabis-industry/

'The reporter pushed back, noting that moving cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule II under the Controlled Substances Act, as Biden is proposing, wouldn’t facilitate mass clemency given that being convicted for crimes related to drugs in that slightly lower category—which currently includes cocaine—also carries significant penalties.

“It addresses things moving forward, though, which is important and important to many advocates,” Psaki argued.

But advocates don’t really see it that way. For one, they support descheduling marijuana entirely. But when it comes to the relationship between scheduling and sentencing, moving cannabis to Schedule II would in no way fulfill Biden’s 2019 campaign pledge, when he said, “I think everyone—anyone who has a record—should be let out of jail, their records expunged, be completely zeroed out” for marijuana convictions.'

https://www.marijuanamoment.net/biden-press-secretary-misstates-marijuana-reschedulings-impact-for-federal-prisoners-who-want-clemency/

https://twitter.com/usdaRMA/status/1384177751876243465

'A whopping 91 percent of Americans believe that marijuana prohibition should end and cannabis should be legal for either medical or recreational purposes, according to a new Pew Research Center poll released on Friday.

The survey comes shortly after three additional states—New York, Virginia and New Mexico—enacted adult-use legalization. It asked adults to pick between three options: marijuana should be legal for medical use only, it should be legal both recreationally and medically or it should continue to be illegal.

Sixty percent of respondents said that cannabis should be legal for both medical and adult use. Thirty-one percent said it should be legalized for therapeutic purposes only. And just eight percent of Americans said it should continue to be criminalized across the board.'

https://www.marijuanamoment.net/nine-in-ten-americans-support-legalizing-marijuana-for-recreational-or-medical-use-new-pew-poll-finds/

The UN Single Convention Treaty of 1961, based on which all nations have gone ahead and banned the entire plant, says that all parts of the cannabis plant are legal, whereas the flowering tops and resin are illegal...now have you heard of anything stranger than this? What did the flowering tops do to deserve this kind of discrimination? The absurdness of this definition, which is the entire foundation of worldwide cannabis prohibition, essentially means that the plant becomes illegal once it becomes mature, like as if nature, by running its course, turns something legal into illegal just by letting it go through its life cycle...it is the equivalent of saying that a human is legal as a child, but becomes illegal once pubic hair sprouts, after which it must be terminated...what insane laws...

Sep 02, 2021 5:36:17pm

'There is something servile in the habit of seeking after a law which we may obey. We may study the laws of matter at and for our convenience, but a successful life knows no law. It is an unfortunate discovery certainly, that of a law which binds us where we did not know before that we were bound. Live free, child of the mist - and with respect to knowledge we are all children of the mist. The man who takes the liberty to live is superior to all the laws, by virtue of his relation to the lawmaker. "That is active duty," says the Vishnu Purana, "which is not for our bondage; that is knowledge which is for our liberation; all other duty is good only unto weariness; all other knowledge is only the cleverness of an artist."

- Walking, Henry D Thoreau, Selected Writings on Nature and Liberty.

'Hemp industry members are cheering Idaho for becoming the last state in the U.S. to legalize industrial hemp, making the crop now legal to produce in every state in the union, more than two years after the 2018 Farm Bill legalized hemp as a commodity crop.

Idaho Gov. Brad Little signed legislation Friday to legalize the production, transportation and sale of industrial hemp in the state, allowing hemp production to begin in 2022.'

https://hempindustrydaily.com/hemp-now-legal-in-all-50-states-with-former-hold-out-idaho-becoming-last-state-to-approve/

'But at this point, their refusal comes off more like a last gasp than a movement that can hold back the tide of change. At a certain point, lawmakers will have to follow public opinion or risk losing an election. And the public has spoken very clearly, time and again.

What’s less clear is how it will happen. Maybe it’ll be a slow, state-by-state battle before the federal government ends its own prohibition on cannabis, or maybe federal action will lead to a flurry of states legalizing. What has become clear is that legalization will eventually win, and the vast majority of states, if not all, will soon join the ranks of the legalizers.'

https://www.vox.com/2021/4/12/22371929/marijuana-legalization-new-mexico-virginia-new-york-biden

'Consuming too much THC at one time can be temporarily unpleasant. But studies have as of yet failed to identify any independent relationship between cannabis use and mental, physical, or psychiatric illnesses.

Furthermore, THC — regardless of potency or quantity — cannot cause death by lethal overdose. Alcohol, by contrast, is routinely sold in lethal dose quantities. Drinking a handle of vodka could easily kill a person, yet vodka is available in liquor stores throughout the country.

Just as alcohol is available in a variety of potencies, from light beer to hard liquor, so is cannabis. So most users regulate their intake accordingly.'

https://www.counterpunch.org/2021/03/12/is-pot-really-more-potent-these-days-does-it-matter/

'Unjust laws exist; shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once? Men generally, under such government as this, think that they ought to wait until they have persuaded the majority to alter them. They think that, if they should resist, the remedy would be worse than the evil. But it is the fault of the government itself that the remedy is worse than the evil. It makes it worse. Why is it not more apt to anticipate and provide for reform? Why does it not cherish its wise minority? Why does it cry and resist before it is hurt? Why does it not encourage its citizens to be on the alert to point out its faults and do better than it would have them? Why does it always crucify Christ and excommunicate Copernicus and Luther and pronounce Washington and Franklin rebels?'

- Civil Disobedience, Henry D Thoreau, Selected Writings on Nature and Liberty.

One of the root causes underlying the vast number of human made problems we see around us today, is the fact that the human mind has, in most people, completely lost its connection with nature. It has become unhinged, over smart, over confident, incapable of reasoning, inattentive, preferring deception over truth and material wealth above all else. Even rural areas, where one once found a large number of people with simple and wise ways, have increasingly become afflicted, mainly through the seeking of short cuts to the imaginary better life built on money. Maybe the isolated indigenous tribes in a few places retain their sanity, anchored in the only thing that can save it, nature. For the rest of us, no amount of vaccines or synthetic drugs will heal our mental illnesses. The medicine of the mind, nature's cannabis, offers one way to re-establish the connection between our minds and nature. For some, the dosage required may be very, very large and even that may not work...

May 10, 2021 5:36:51pm

'Delta-8 (D8) THC is an intoxicating cannabinoid which can be rather easily derived from its nonintoxicating counterpart, CBD. It is often confused with the better-known Delta-9 THC, the main intoxicating component of marijuana. Though both Delta-8 and Delta-9 THC can get users high, the latter is federally prohibited, while due to a legal loophole the former can be legally obtained in all 50 states.

Delta-8’s legal status is ambivalent at best: The nature of the loophole which allows for its production and sale rests on the definition of what “synthetic” means. The 2018 Farm Bill states that all cannabinoids derived from hemp with a Delta-9 THC concentration of less than 0.3% are lawful, but adds that synthetically derived THC remains illegal. Delta-8 THC is present organically in some hemp cultivars, but can also be readily derived from CBD molecules collected from hemp, and the delineation for Delta-8 is becoming blurrier by the moment.'

https://newfrontierdata.com/cannabis-insights/what-is-the-deal-about-delta-8-a-cannabinoids-legal-loophole-and-disruptive-outlook/

'While the expanding cannabis legalization movement shows that most of the world believes cannabis to be a relatively safe substance, the stigma around cannabis use, particularly the intoxicating high caused by THC, persists. But Ben Pollara, among others, argues that THC is one of the most beneficial aspects of the plant.

“THC is one of many chemicals in marijuana but is by far and away the most active one,” Pollara writes. “It is also the one which produces the most and strongest medicinal effects for patients.”'

https://www.leafly.com/news/politics/prohibitionists-want-thc-limit-laws-heres-why-patients-and-consumers-are-fighting-back

'After all, the practical reason why, when the power is once in the hands of the people, a majority [governments] are permitted, and for a long period continue, is not because they are most likely to be in the right nor because this seems fairest to the minority, but because they are physically the strongest. But a government in which the majority rule in all cases cannot be based on justice, even as far as men understand it. Can there not be a government in which majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience? - in which majorities decide only those questions to which the rule of expediency is applicable? Must a citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience, then? I think that we should be men first and subjects afterward. It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law so much as for the right. The only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think right. It is truly enough said that a corporation has no conscience; but a corporation of conscientious men is a corporation with a conscience. Law never made men a whit more just; and, by means of their respect for it, even the well-disposed are daily made the agents of injustice. A common and natural result of an undue respect for the law is that you may see a file of soldiers: colonel, captain, corporal, privates, powder monkeys, and all, marching in admirable order over hill and dale to the wars, against their will, aye, against their common sense and consciences, which makes it very steep marching indeed, and produces a palpitation of the heart. They have no doubt that it is a damnable business in which they are concerned; they are all peaceably inclined. Now, what are they? Men at all? or small movable forts and magazines at the service of some unscrupulous man in power?'

- Civil Disobedience, Henry D Thoreau, Selected Writings on Nature and Liberty.

The permanent members of the UNSC, US, UK, Russia, China and France are the world's biggest arms traders. India, the eternal aspirant to the elite warmongers council in an organization meant to promote global equity, liberty, peace and harmony, along with Israel and Saudi Arabia are the world's leading arms purchasers. Now, that is not all. Recognize the names and their links to global wars and instability. They are the world's leading legal synthetic drug (known by the much revered name pharma drugs) traders. They are the leading traders of petrochemicals and fossil fuel based energy. They are the world's leading emitters of carbon dioxide and other global warming gases. They are the world's leading traders of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. All of them are ruled by authoritarian governments. They are the countries staging the Covid drama, originating the story, linking their pharma deaths to Covid and then claiming to produce vaccines that will stop the virus. They lead on all Covid statistics. They are the countries instrumental in bringing about the global prohibition of cannabis. They continue to be the leading opposition to global cannabis legalization. They are the leading violators of human rights and liberties through their use of law, incarceration and execution of cannabis users and traders. They are the leading destroyers of cannabis plants and varieties beyond number....

Apr 23, 2021 9:54:01am

'Doctor-prescribed cannabis is becoming increasingly common, and at the same time, the line between medical marijuana and CBD is becoming increasingly blurred. Consumers interested in the medical benefits of cannabis without its psychoactive effects have long embraced CBD, but with increased social acceptance of cannabis, consumers are straying ever more into the high-THC realm. Among current cannabis consumers, 25% prefer products with some measure (between 2:1 and 5:1 ratios) more CBD than THC, and a small minority of them (6%) prefer much more (between 10:1 and 40:1 ratios) of CBD than THC.'

https://newfrontierdata.com/cannabis-insights/the-link-between-cbd-and-medical-cannabis/

'EU regulators have updated their position on cannabinoids in cosmetics to allow for the use of plant-derived CBD in certain products. While national regulations can still cause complications for CBD companies, the decision comes on the heels of the European Commission’s landmark decision not to treat CBD as a narcotic, and is being interpreted as part of a broader loosening of anti-cannabis regulations within the continent.

Loosened regulations will allow for cosmetics companies interested in CBD to invest in product development, clearing the way for a new wave of hemp products. Nine of the 10 countries with the highest per-capita spending for cosmetics are found in Europe, and increased consumer acceptance of CBD is setting the substance up for long-term growth as a functional, commonplace ingredient.'

https://newfrontierdata.com/cannabis-insights/eu-cosmetics-rules-set-up-cbd-for-long-term-growth/

'The change comes after the European Industrial Hemp Association pointed out that the European Court of Justice recently ruled that CBD should not be classified as a drug and can be freely traded.

The classification change was made by the EU’s Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs (small- and medium-sized enterprises). Previously, only synthetic CBD was listed in the agency’s database.

Regulators list plant-derived CBD as a skin protectant and conditioner and note its function as an anti-oxidant.

“These are the types of news that make my day,” EIHA’s managing director, Lorenza Romanese, said in a statement.'

https://hempindustrydaily.com/eu-market-regulator-updates-cosmetics-guidelines-to-add-cbd-as-legal-ingredient/

'Ann Fordham, executive director of the International Drug Policy Consortium, welcomed the “long overdue recognition that cannabis is a medicine” from the international body.

“However, this reform alone is far from adequate given that cannabis remains incorrectly scheduled at the international level,” she said. “The original decision to prohibit cannabis lacked scientific basis and was rooted in colonial prejudice and racism. It disregarded the rights and traditions of communities that have been growing and using cannabis for medicinal, therapeutic, religious and cultural purposes for centuries and has led to millions being criminalized and incarcerated across the globe. The review process has been a missed opportunity to correct that historical error.”'

https://www.marijuanamoment.net/united-nations-removes-marijuana-from-most-strict-global-drug-category-with-u-s-support/

No human, I repeat, NO HUMAN, has the authority to ban the cannabis plant created by the supreme power of the universe.. Happy 4/20 to the lovers, friends and enemies of the divine herb...
This doesn't change, ever....

Updated Apr 21, 2021 12:03:59pm

'The Commission cited last month’s Court of Justice ruling, which said CBD derived from the entire hemp plant is not a narcotic under an international drug treaty and is therefore subject to EU law on the free movement of goods among member states.

The Commission’s full statement to Novel Food authorization applicants reads as follows:

“In light of the comments received from applicants and of the recent Court’s judgment in case C-663/184, the Commission has reviewed its preliminary assessment and concludes that cannabidiol should not be considered as drug within the meaning of the United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961 in so far as it does not have psychotropic effect. As a consequence, cannabidiol can be qualified as food, provided that also the other conditions of Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No178/2002 are met.”'

https://hempindustrydaily.com/breaking-european-commission-reverses-course-says-cbd-should-not-be-regulated-as-a-narcotic/

'Four themes emerged during analyses: “sort of legal,” “mitigating harm through legalization,” “Increasing acceptance,” and “seeking safety when purchasing cannabis.” Despite their limited knowledge of cannabis regulation, the majority of the participants supported recreational cannabis legalization from a harm reduction perspective. Most participants did not believe that cannabis legalization had affected their use behavior. However, participants, especially cannabis users, perceived that recreational cannabis legalization created a context where cannabis use was legally, socially, and behaviorally “safer” than in an illegal context, even for those below the legal age of sale.'

https://harmreductionjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12954-020-00442-8

The problem is not with the natural opium plant or natural coca plant, plants used in traditional cultures for thousands of years, opium in Asia for recreation and as an analgesic, and coca in South America for recreation and as a stimulant. The problem is that governments have taken control of these natural plants away from traditional communities, and regulated their cultivation for supply to pharma manufacturers, legal and illegal. Pharma manufacturers have synthesized key compounds, concentrated them, vastly increased their potency, thus making them lethal, expensive and inaccessible, so as to reap vast profits. It is cocaine from the coca plant, and morphine, codeine, thebaine, oxycodone, heroin, fentanyl, etc from the opium plant. This weaponizing of a natural plant to get rich has wrecked havoc with global human health. Cannabis must be legalized, first and foremost. It is the most widely consumed, medicinal and safest of all natural recreational plants. The natural opium and coca plant must also be legalized. So too with the rare psilocybin and peyotl, found in very few places on earth. Natural palm toddy and natural tobacco are controlled by governments to benefit themselves, and the alcohol industry and tobacco industry. All viable natural recreational and medicinal options, currently illegal, must be made legal, to reach the most people, especially the poorest traditional communities world wide, to truly address human health...

Apr 14, 2021 12:32:47pm

'Congress, presidents, and governmental agencies have had more than enough excuses over the years for not wanting to legalize marijuana in the United States. One of the most prominent being that the United Nations drug treaties strictly prohibits it, and going against the grain of worldly laws would be a serious no-no. However, now that the U.N. has backed off its staunch opposition to the cannabis plant, one has to wonder how lawmakers will justify maintaining pot prohibition in the future.

Marijuana is in this bizarre purgatorial state right now that rests on either time (a lot more) or the outcome of the upcoming special election. Democrats could gain control of the Senate (if they win the two seats in Georgia), giving the party the power to further marijuana reform over the next few years.'

https://www.laweekly.com/now-that-un-accepts-marijuana-what-excuse-does-congress-have-to-uphold-prohibition/

'The European Union’s top court ruled that CBD derived from the entire industrial hemp plant is not a narcotic, paving the way for new business opportunities for low-THC marijuana producers to sell outside the highly regulated pharmaceutical channels in Europe.

The ruling, handed down Thursday by five judges at the EU Court of Justice in Luxembourg, included a landmark interpretation of the 1961 U.N. Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs that cited “the purpose and general spirit” of the treaty in excluding CBD from its jurisdiction.

The milestone ruling, which focuses on cannabidiol extracted from the entire plant, comes as the EU cannabis industry awaits the European Commission’s final decision on whether flower-derived CBD should be regulated as a narcotic.'

https://mjbizdaily.com/cbd-not-a-narcotic-eu-court-says/

Implementation of the 1961 Single Convention Treaty must focus on one entity - the synthetic pharmaceutical drug industry, legal and illegal, including small, medium and large players...All natural plants and their products in natural form must essentially be taken out of the scope of the 1961 Single Convention. This naturally means that drug laws of all nations must be modified accordingly as well...

Mar 08, 2021 4:20:44pm

'Richard DeLisi was sentenced to 98 years in prison for marijuana trafficking in 1989 at the age of 40, for smuggling cannabis into Florida. He was convicted as part of a law enforcement reverse-sting/entrapment operation and was formerly expected to be released in 2022.

During his time in prison, both of his parents, his wife, and son Stephen passed away. He now has five grandchildren that he has never seen.

As of 2018, more than 70 people were serving life sentences for marijuana convictions that did not include violence. Those imprisoned include elderly inmates like Richard, who suffer from medical conditions that require medical attention.'

https://www.leafly.com/news/politics/richard-delisi-free-in-december-2020

'Since the Reagan-era escalation of the war on drugs, severe criminal penalties for drug possession have fueled a huge growth in the prison population, with particularly devastating consequences for many Black communities, where both penalties and policing have been harsher than for Whites. Using the criminal justice system as the primary tool to curb the sale and use of illicit substances has had astronomical costs without the desired effects.'

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/its-beyond-time-to-end-the-war-on-drugs-voters-agree/2020/11/12/84588e06-245a-11eb-a688-5298ad5d580a_story.html

As I have stated repeatedly, all the national drug laws, and the Single Convention Treaty 1961 on which they are based, say that cannabis cannot be cultivated except for medical and scientific purposes. This means that every single human can grow cannabis at home for their personal use without any restrictions on the number of plants because growing cannabis without commercial or trade related activities in mind is growing cannabis for scientific and medical purposes. Watching the plant grow, and different varieties of it, is a part of horticultural scientific activity, increasing its diversity is scientific activity. Using the plant for one's personal needs is using cannabis for medical purposes. No drug law can punish a person for home growing as many cannabis plants as she likes as long as one does not enter into activities of a commercial nature with it. All the persons who have been arrested, imprisoned, punished and had legal action taken against them for this are victims of gross miscarriage of justice everywhere in the world. Article 28 CONTROL OF CANNABIS of the Single Convention Treaty 1961 specifically states that - "2. This Convention shall not apply to the cultivation of the cannabis plant exclusively for industrial purposes (fibre and seed) or horticultural purposes."

Mar 08, 2021 11:18:09am

'A team of researchers affiliated with Harvard Medical School assessed the toxicological screens of 14 subjects who consumed hemp-derived CBD products daily over a four-week period. The CBD products were lab-tested and contained THC levels below federal standards (no more than 0.3 percent THC on a dry weight basis.)

At the end of the trial period, 50 percent of the subjects tested positive for the presence of the carboxy-THC metabolite on a urinary drug screen.

Authors concluded: “[T]hese findings have important public health implications. It is often assumed individuals using hemp-derived products will test negative for THC. Current results indicate this may not be true, especially if assays are more sensitive than advertised, underscoring the potential for adverse consequences, including loss of employment and legal or treatment ramifications, despite the legality of hemp-derived products.”'

https://norml.org/news/2020/11/12/clinical-trial-hemp-derived-products-containing-thc-levels-below-federal-standards-trigger-positive-drug-test-results

'The crackdowns follow on the heels of the European Commission (EC)’s July preliminary decision to classify CBD as a narcotic. Doing so means that CBD will be treated more as a pharmaceutical compound than as a supplement. For companies such as GW Pharmaceuticals, that is welcome news: The company’s patented drug Epidiolex is the first CBD-based drug cleared to treat patients suffering from Dravet syndrome or Lennox-Gestaut syndrome, two debilitating forms of childhood epilepsy. At the cost of $32,500 USD annually, the EU represents more than $400 million USD in potential revenue to the company.

Whether the legal crackdowns on CBD products will continue and spread will be greatly influenced by an upcoming United Nations vote about cannabis scheduling recommendations. Included in said vote are two CBD-specific recommendations which would respectively remove extracts and tinctures from being classified as Schedule I drugs under the 1961 U.N. Single Convention on Narcotics, and free medical CBD containing less than 0.2% THC from international control. The U.S. has opposed the measures — despite the latter’s support by the World Health Organization (WHO) — by citing “legal ambiguities and contradictions that would undermine effective drug control.” While the EU has been silent on the issue, the EC’s preliminary decision is an ominous sign for industry operators. A positive ruling could lead to a more welcoming regulatory environment for CBD, but a negative ruling could signal further and even more restrictive regulatory measures worldwide, slowing demand for CBD products in emerging markets like Latin America.'

https://newfrontierdata.com/cannabis-insights/storm-clouds-on-the-horizon-for-european-cbd-market/

The definition of cannabis in the Single Convention Treaty 1961 reads as "b) 'Cannabis' means the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant (excluding the seeds and leaves when not accompanied by the tops) from which the resin has not been extracted, by whatever name they may be designated."

This means that till the plant flowers, the plant is legit, after that the flowers become illegal. How about that for discrimination against the flowers of a plant? How many people have been arrested, imprisoned and punished for growing the non-flowering part of the plant? Who thinks of and comes up with these stupid laws?

Mar 08, 2021 11:15:00am

'The European Parliament doesn’t have final say on the farm policy overhaul, but hemp activists in Europe applauded the overwhelming votes to bring Europe’s hemp THC limits in line with those used in the Americas.

“The increase of THC level would allow new varieties to enter the market and to be bred, resulting in a better adaptation of the crops to the climatic conditions of the different EU territories,” the European Industrial Hemp Association said in a statement on Monday.'

https://hempindustrydaily.com/european-parliament-votes-to-add-0-3-thc-limit-for-hemp-to-eu-farm-policy-overhaul/

'The World Health Organization’s cannabis scheduling recommendations appeared to have limited support at a United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) “intersessional” meeting on Thursday in Vienna.

That means the proposals still face an uphill battle ahead of December’s expected vote.

As a result, cannabis businesses counting on the adoption of all the WHO recommendations shouldn’t get their hopes up.'

https://mjbizdaily.com/who-cannabis-recommendations-still-face-uphill-battle-for-adoption/

The UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs 1961 is the biggest farce when it comes to cannabis. Having said that cannabis is re-scheduled from Schedule IV which contains dangerous drugs like heroin, but still retained in Schedule I, supposedly the least restricted schedule, makes it appear that the parties have recognized the mistakes made regarding cannabis. However if you examine the list of drugs in Schedule I, what do you have - heroin, morphine, cocaine, fentanyl...ha ha ha...

And what defines the Schedules? Article 1 Definitions u) says - “Schedule I, Schedule II, Schedule III and Schedule IV mean the correspondingly numbered list of drugs or preparations annexed to this Convention, as amended from time to time in accordance with article 3." No definition for what a particular Schedule is and what criteria constitutes the Schedule other than an arbitrary list of items. Basically, a circular reference stating that the definition of something is arrived at by being in a list of things that the definition is supposed to define. The Convention is a smoke and mirrors game around pharmaceutical synthetic drugs with the natural cannabis, opium and coca plant thrown in by some highly muddled or selfish interests who do not recognize the difference between a natural plant that only nature can control and a synthetic man-made drug that needs to be controlled by man...

Mar 08, 2021 11:12:39am

Article 28 CONTROL OF CANNABIS

2. This Convention shall not apply to the cultivation of the cannabis plant exclusively for industrial purposes (fibre and seed) or horticultural purposes.

https://www.unodc.org/pdf/convention_1961_en.pdf

'Since hemp and marijuana are indistinguishable without a chemical analysis, these cases represent a dramatic departure from traditional seized drug cases. Being able to determine whether the amount of THC in a sample is higher than 0.3% — the legal amount for hemp — brings with it a razor-thin margin of error. So the question becomes, how can we perform quantitative THC testing in the most efficient manner?

From day one of legalized industrial hemp production, we’ve relied on an outside vendor to do the testing. While this is time-consuming and expensive, the needs of the judicial system have exceeded our capabilities.

We now are close to implementing a test in our lab to determine if the THC concentration in a sample is above or below 1%. It is not the 0.3% legal threshold, but we feel that testing to this level is a reasonable first step toward distinguishing hemp and marijuana, as there is little to no market for illicit marijuana with less than 1% THC.'

https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/efficient-casework-policy-address-emerging-challenges-seized-drugs#about-author--0

Just as the presence of a tiger is an indicator of a healthy, vibrant forest, the presence of legal recreational ganja is an indicator of a healthy, vibrant society.
Legalize it...

Updated Mar 07, 2021 3:10:53pm

10 actually...

1. Because cannabis is a medicine
2. We should stop wasting scarce resources
3. We should preserve freedom and increase justice
4. Prohibition has become a pretext for arresting decent, law-abiding people
5. Legalization creates jobs and raises tax revenue
6. Legalization increases product safety
7. Marijuana is less harmful than alcohol
8. Legalization has not led to increased road deaths
9. The gateway theory has been debunked. So has ‘amotivational syndrome’
10. Legalization has not increased teen use

https://www.leafly.com/news/politics/9-marijuana-legalization-arguments

'Public opinion aside, there is also much to be said for standing on the shoulders of those who have gone before you.

In the late ’90s, when opinion was still strongly against legalization, western states paved the path for medical marijuana – and, more recently, recreational sales – but it was a slog in states such as California.

Previously, vague language in ballot initiatives and laws led to lengthy court battles. That, in turn, helped shape policy for more recent attempts.'

https://mjbizdaily.com/new-recreational-marijuana-markets-experiencing-quicker-starts-to-sales/

The rescheduling of cannabis by the UN last week from the most restrictive category to the least restrictive one requires an urgent rewrite of India's NDPS Act. The NDPS Act is based on the UN conventions and related international treaties. It must therefore reflect the same removal of cannabis from the most restrictive category to the least restrictive one. All offences, punishments and legal procedures related to cannabis must be redrawn accordingly. As a matter of fact, since cannabis is in the UN's least restricted category, it makes no sense to include it in the NDPS Act which should focus on the more restrictive ones for efficiency. This also presents an opportunity to redraw the NDPS and correct the deep rooted flaws in its structure. For one, actually mentioning the names of substances that are part of controlled substances lists in national drug laws is what one would call 'hard coding', a bad programming practice in software parlance. The NDPS must essentially list what the offences, legal procedures and punishments are for different categories of substances and not list the actual substances which are constantly moving in and out of UN controlled substances lists based on new findings. The NDPS must also ensure that its categorization is in line with the UN's of schedule IV being the most restrictive and schedule I being the least unlike the US's which is the reverse leading to confusion. Absurd laws such as death sentences for possession of THC or charas must immediately be corrected. Law and drug enforcement agencies as well as all sections of the judiciary must be immediately informed of these changes lest harms continue to be perpetrated against the innocent plant and its users.

Dec 08, 2020 9:19:18pm

The rescheduling of cannabis by the UN last week from the most restrictive category to the least restrictive one requires an urgent major shift in the national drug laws of every single nation that cites the international drug laws and treaties as the basis for its cannabis laws and policies. All persons convicted of possession of small quantities of cannabis, its consumption and cultivation, must be immediately freed. Those under trial for these offences must be acquitted. The law and drug enforcement agencies of all these nations must cease to enforce legal action against the persons who are involved in these activities and wasting precious planetary resources on it. The judiciary must stop entertaining cases related to these activities. Past criminal records of all persons convicted for the above offences must be expunged. Equally importantly, national drug laws of every single nation that uses the UN conventions as the framework for defining its drug laws must rewrite the same so that cannabis is not treated as a drug in the most restrictive category that it currently is in at the national level. Not a moment is to be wasted, for the longer the delay in doing this, the more the costs are going to pile up in terms of future corrective actions required, and the more the continuing harms to the plant and its users.

Dec 08, 2020 9:13:01pm

Last week was extraordinary even in the stimulating world of cannabis. Three historic things happened, which few would have expected at the beginning of 2020, while the world lived out its pandemic fantasy.

- The UN removed cannabis from the most restrictive Schedule IV with no recognized medical value. It however still remains in its least restrictive Schedule I which means it is still controlled but it can be more easily researched and used as medicine.
- The US House of Representatives voted through the MORE act to remove cannabis from the list of controlled substances clearing the way for federal legalization. This however needs to pass the Senate and the President. The MORE act essentially means that the US federal government recognizes a state's cannabis legalization laws and will not interfere with it. All cannabis related past records will be expunged and prisoners released. If passed, the US can no longer put international pressure on the UN to keep cannabis scheduled when it recognizes legalization within its own states
- The EU Commission ruled that cannabidiol (CBD) is not narcotic within the meaning of the United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961 in so far as it does not have psychotropic effect.

The world is taking important steps to release the plant and its users from unjust laws. More however needs to be done urgently to fully legalize it world wide and stop the terrible harms of cannabis prohibition.

Dec 08, 2020 9:08:34pm

Cannabis and Cocaine
https://ravingkoshy.blogspot.com/2020/11/cannabis-and-cocaine.html

Cannabis and Benzodiazepines
https://ravingkoshy.blogspot.com/2020/11/cannabis-and-benzodiazepines.html

Thoughts from the void

Pages

Top Three Popular Posts

Wednesday 24 June 2020

Unlock the Natural Doors in the Wall

Friday 12 June 2020

Without a Scientific Basis, Global Drug Laws are Invalid

Followers

Total Pageviews

Report Abuse