[Vision2020] Discussing Marijuana via Social Media

[Art Deco]

The logical thing is to spend a lot more effort on alcohol abuse.


On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Darrell Keim <keim153 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Absolutely, Art!  So the logical thing to do is to legalize more drugs,
> thereby increasing that toll.
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Art Deco <art.deco.studios at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Its difficult for me to understand those bitching so much about marijuana
>> given huge toll that alcohol consumption has on our society.  Just Google
>> the costs of alcohol consumption on society to get a little hint.
>>
>> w.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Darrell Keim <keim153 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I had heard about it, but not realized it was available online.
>>> Watching momentarily.  Personally, I don't have much issue with medical
>>> marijuana.  People in real pain should have access to relief.  What I don't
>>> like is the poor way it has been implemented in the various states that are
>>> trying.  If it is medical, it should be treated as such.  The drug should
>>> be dispensed from REAL pharmacies.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Saundra Lund <v2020 at ssl1.fastmail.fm>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Did you happen to catch Dr. Sanjay Gupta’s recent “Weed” documentary?
>>>> It really was quite interesting . . . and discussed how the “anti” crowd
>>>> really has been who manipulates the science  J****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> In case you missed it:****
>>>>
>>>> http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/08/health/gupta-changed-mind-marijuana****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> *Why I changed my mind on weed*
>>>>
>>>> By *Dr. Sanjay Gupta*, CNN Chief Medical Correspondent****
>>>>
>>>> updated 8:44 PM EDT, Thu August 8, 2013****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> *(CNN)* -- Over the last year, I have been working on a new
>>>> documentary called "Weed." The title "Weed" may sound cavalier, but the
>>>> content is not.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> I traveled around the world to interview medical leaders, experts,
>>>> growers and patients. I spoke candidly to them, asking tough questions.
>>>> What I found was stunning.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Long before I began this project, I had steadily reviewed the
>>>> scientific literature on medical marijuana from the United States and
>>>> thought it was fairly unimpressive. Reading these papers five years ago, it
>>>> was hard to make a case for medicinal marijuana. I even wrote about this in
>>>> a TIME magazine article, back in 2009, titled "Why I would Vote No on
>>>> Pot <http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1552034,00.html>
>>>> ."****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Well, I am here to apologize.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> I apologize because I didn't look hard enough, until now. I didn't look
>>>> far enough. I didn't review papers from smaller labs in other countries
>>>> doing some remarkable research, and I was too dismissive of the loud chorus
>>>> of legitimate patients whose symptoms improved on cannabis.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Instead, I lumped them with the high-visibility malingerers, just
>>>> looking to get high. I mistakenly believed the Drug Enforcement Agency
>>>> listed marijuana as a schedule 1 substance<http://www.justice.gov/dea/druginfo/ds.shtml>because of sound scientific proof. Surely, they must have quality reasoning
>>>> as to why marijuana is in the category of the most dangerous drugs that
>>>> have "no accepted medicinal use and a high potential for abuse."****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> They didn't have the science to support that claim, and I now know that
>>>> when it comes to marijuana neither of those things are true. It doesn't
>>>> have a high potential for abuse, and there are very legitimate medical
>>>> applications. In fact, sometimes marijuana is the only thing that works.
>>>> Take the case of Charlotte Figi<http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/07/health/charlotte-child-medical-marijuana/index.html>,
>>>> who I met in Colorado. She started having seizures soon after birth. By age
>>>> 3, she was having 300 a week, despite being on seven different medications.
>>>> Medical marijuana has calmed her brain, limiting her seizures to 2 or 3 per
>>>> month.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> I have seen more patients like Charlotte first hand, spent time with
>>>> them and come to the realization that it is irresponsible not to provide
>>>> the best care we can as a medical community, care that could involve
>>>> marijuana.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> We have been terribly and systematically misled for nearly 70 years in
>>>> the United States, and I apologize for my own role in that.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> I hope this article and upcoming documentary will help set the record
>>>> straight.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> On August 14, 1970, the Assistant Secretary of Health, Dr. Roger O.
>>>> Egeberg wrote a letter recommending the plant, marijuana, be classified as
>>>> a schedule 1 substance, and it has remained that way for nearly 45 years.
>>>> My research started with a careful reading of that decades old letter. What
>>>> I found was unsettling. Egeberg had carefully chosen his words:****
>>>>
>>>> "Since there is still a considerable void in our knowledge of the plant
>>>> and effects of the active drug contained in it, our recommendation is that
>>>> marijuana be retained within schedule 1 at least until the completion of
>>>> certain studies now underway to resolve the issue."****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Not because of sound science, but because of its absence, marijuana was
>>>> classified as a schedule 1 substance. Again, the year was 1970. Egeberg
>>>> mentions studies that are underway, but many were never completed. As my
>>>> investigation continued, however, I realized Egeberg did in fact have
>>>> important research already available to him, some of it from more than 25
>>>> years earlier.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> *High risk of abuse*****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> In 1944, New York Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia commissioned research<http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/lag/lagmenu.htm>to be performed by the New York Academy of Science. Among their
>>>> conclusions: they found marijuana did not lead to significant addiction in
>>>> the medical sense of the word. They also did not find any evidence
>>>> marijuana led to morphine, heroin or cocaine addiction.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> We now know that while estimates vary, marijuana leads to dependence in
>>>> around 9 to 10% of its adult users. By comparison, cocaine, a schedule
>>>> 2 substance <http://www.justice.gov/dea/druginfo/ds.shtml> "with less
>>>> abuse potential than schedule 1 drugs" hooks 20% of those who use it.
>>>> Around 25% of heroin users become addicted.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> The worst is tobacco, where the number is closer to 30% of smokers,
>>>> many of whom go on to die because of their addiction.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> There is clear evidence that in some people marijuana use can lead to
>>>> withdrawal symptoms, including insomnia, anxiety and nausea. Even
>>>> considering this, it is hard to make a case that it has a high potential
>>>> for abuse. The physical symptoms of marijuana addiction are nothing like
>>>> those of the other drugs I've mentioned. I have seen the withdrawal from
>>>> alcohol, and it can be life threatening.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> I do want to mention a concern that I think about as a father. Young,
>>>> developing brains are likely more susceptible to harm from marijuana than
>>>> adult brains. Some recent studies suggest that regular use in teenage years
>>>> leads to a permanent decrease in IQ. Other research hints at a possible
>>>> heightened risk of developing psychosis.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Much in the same way I wouldn't let my own children drink alcohol, I
>>>> wouldn't permit marijuana until they are adults. If they are adamant about
>>>> trying marijuana, I will urge them to wait until they're in their mid-20s
>>>> when their brains are fully developed.****
>>>>
>>>> * *
>>>>
>>>> *Medical benefit*****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> While investigating, I realized something else quite important. Medical
>>>> marijuana is not new, and the medical community has been writing about it
>>>> for a long time. There were in fact hundreds of journal articles, mostly
>>>> documenting the benefits. Most of those papers, however, were written
>>>> between the years 1840 and 1930. The papers described the use of medical
>>>> marijuana to treat "neuralgia, convulsive disorders, emaciation," among
>>>> other things.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> A search through the U.S. National Library of Medicine this past year
>>>> pulled up nearly 20,000 more recent papers<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=medical+marijuana>.
>>>> But the majority were research into the harm of marijuana, such as "Bad
>>>> trip due to anticholinergic effect of cannabis<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23906840>,"
>>>> or "Cannabis induced pancreatitits<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23892868>"
>>>> and "Marijuana use and risk of lung cancer<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23846283>."
>>>> ****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> In my quick running of the numbers, I calculated about 6% of the
>>>> current U.S. marijuana studies investigate the benefits of medical
>>>> marijuana. The rest are designed to investigate harm. That imbalance paints
>>>> a highly distorted picture.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> *The challenges of marijuana research*****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> To do studies on marijuana in the United States today, you need two
>>>> important things.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> First of all, you need marijuana. And marijuana is illegal. You see the
>>>> problem. Scientists can get research marijuana from a special farm in
>>>> Mississippi, which is astonishingly located in the middle of the Ole Miss
>>>> campus, but it is challenging. When I visited this year, there was no
>>>> marijuana being grown.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> The second thing you need is approval, and the scientists I interviewed
>>>> kept reminding me how tedious that can be. While a cancer study may first
>>>> be evaluated by the National Cancer Institute, or a pain study may go
>>>> through the National Institute for Neurological Disorders, there is one
>>>> more approval required for marijuana: NIDA, the National Institute on Drug
>>>> Abuse. It is an organization that has a core mission of studying drug
>>>> abuse, as opposed to benefit.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Stuck in the middle are the legitimate patients who depend on marijuana
>>>> as a medicine, oftentimes as their only good option.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Keep in mind that up until 1943, marijuana was part of the United
>>>> States drug pharmacopeia. One of the conditions for which it was prescribed
>>>> was neuropathic pain<http://www.webmd.com/pain-management/guide/neuropathic-pain>.
>>>> It is a miserable pain that's tough to treat. My own patients have
>>>> described it as "lancinating, burning and a barrage of pins and needles."
>>>> While marijuana has long been documented to be effective for this
>>>> awful pain<http://www.jwatch.org/ac200704300000001/2007/04/30/marijuana-painful-peripheral-neuropathy#sthash.e8PMYHlU.dpuf>,
>>>> the most common medications prescribed today come from the poppy plant,
>>>> including morphine, oxycodone and dilaudid.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Here is the problem. Most of these medications don't work very well for
>>>> this kind of pain, and tolerance is a real problem.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Most frightening to me is that someone dies in the United States every
>>>> 19 minutes from a prescription drug overdose<http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/14/health/gupta-accidental-overdose>,
>>>> mostly accidental. Every 19 minutes. It is a horrifying statistic. As much
>>>> as I searched, I could not find a documented case of death from marijuana
>>>> overdose.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> It is perhaps no surprise then that 76% of physicians recently surveyed<http://www.drugfree.org/join-together/drugs/poll-76-percent-of-doctors-approve-of-medical-marijuana-for-advanced-cancer-pain>said they would approve the use of marijuana to help ease a woman's pain
>>>> from breast cancer.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> When marijuana became a schedule 1 substance, there was a request to
>>>> fill a "void in our knowledge." In the United States, that has been
>>>> challenging because of the infrastructure surrounding the study of an
>>>> illegal substance, with a drug abuse organization at the heart of the
>>>> approval process. And yet, despite the hurdles, we have made considerable
>>>> progress that continues today.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Looking forward, I am especially intrigued by studies like those in
>>>> Spain and Israel looking at the anti-cancer effects of marijuana<http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090401181217.htm>and its components. I'm intrigued by the neuro-protective study by Lev
>>>> Meschoulam in Israel, and research in Israel and the United States on
>>>> whether the drug might help alleviate symptoms of PTSD<http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/01/the-case-for-treating-ptsd-in-veterans-with-medical-marijuana/251466/>.
>>>> I promise to do my part to help, genuinely and honestly, fill the remaining
>>>> void in our knowledge.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Citizens in 20 states and the District of Columbia have now voted to
>>>> approve marijuana for medical applications, and more states will be making
>>>> that choice soon. As for Dr. Roger Egeberg, who wrote that letter in 1970,
>>>> he passed away 16 years ago.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> I wonder what he would think if he were alive today.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> *From:* vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:
>>>> vision2020-bounces at moscow.com] *On Behalf Of *Darrell Keim
>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 03, 2013 1:32 PM
>>>> *To:* vision2020 at moscow.com
>>>> *Subject:* [Vision2020] Discussing Marijuana via Social Media****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> I enjoyed this article about why talking drug use prevention is so
>>>> difficult on the internet.  Certainly matches my own findings.  My father
>>>> was also roundly attacked when he lobbied against M legalization in his
>>>> state.****
>>>>
>>>>  ****
>>>>
>>>> *This article from Sue Rusche of What About The Children campaign was
>>>> published to show just how inane are comments from the drug user community
>>>> on the internet. The sad part is that many young people use Facebook and
>>>> Twitter and can be easily influenced by the comments they read on these and
>>>> similar sites.  Parents need to educate their youngsters so that they know
>>>> how biased and full of untruths such comment from drug users can be. NDPA
>>>> *****
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Don’t Expect to Learn Anything True about Marijuana From Internet
>>>> Commenters* <http://www.butwhataboutthechildren.org/?p=1079>****
>>>>
>>>> Six days after *The Huffington Post* published my latest article,
>>>> browsers had logged in 156 comments. The post was titled Marijuana
>>>> Legalization Proponents Deny Health Harms Just Like the Tobacco Industry Did<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sue-rusche/marijuana-legalization-pr_b_2884765.html>;
>>>> 153 of the 156 comments proved the point. ****
>>>>
>>>> Just 30 people made 80 percent (125) of the comments. Contributing the
>>>> most were truthaboutmmj<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/truthaboutmmj?action=comments>(19); kevin
>>>> hunt2012<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/kevin_hunt2012?action=comments>(12); Andrew
>>>> swanteni<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Andrew_swanteni?action=comments>(9); Blows
>>>> Against the Empire<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Blows_Against_the_Empire?action=comments>and
>>>> ConnieInCleveland<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/ConnieInCleveland?action=comments>(6 each);
>>>> RMForbes<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/RMForbes?action=comments>,
>>>> SchumannFu<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/SchumannFu?action=comments>,
>>>> and Volteric<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Volteric?action=comments>(5 each);
>>>> JohnThomas<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/JohnThomas?action=comments>,
>>>> Tomaniac<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Tomaniac?action=comments>,
>>>> and WowFolksAreDumb<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/WowFolksAreDumb?action=comments>(4 each); average
>>>> dude<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/average_dude?action=comments>,
>>>> FlyingTooLow<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/FlyingTooLow?action=comments>,
>>>> JD Salinger<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/JD_Salinger?action=comments>,
>>>> Matthew Fairbrother<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Matthew_Fairbrother?action=comments>,
>>>> McMike55<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/McMike55?action=comments>,
>>>> moldy <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/moldy?action=comments>, Paul
>>>> Paul <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Paul_Paul?action=comments>,
>>>> and susierr<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/susierr?action=comments>(3 each). Eleven people contributed 2 comments each; 28 contributed 1 each.
>>>> Only one person, Jan Beauregard, PhD<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Jan_Beauregard?action=comments>,
>>>> a Virginia psychotherapist<http://ipivirginia.com/2012/10/jan-beauregard/>whose specialties include addictive disorders, agreed that marijuana has
>>>> health harms. She contributed three comments. ****
>>>>
>>>> Clicking a link in a commenter’s name will take you to *Huff Post’s*<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/your-huffpost-experience_b_260666.html>Social News and a collection of all the comments that person has made about
>>>> *Huff Post* stories. Commenters apply<http://www.butwhataboutthechildren.org/?paged=1>for a spot on Social News by linking it to their Facebook accounts, which
>>>> magnifies *Huff Post’s* reach. Call it *Huff Post* squared.* Huff Post*cubed occurs if commenters also link Social News to their Twitter accounts.
>>>> *Huff Post *<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/introducing-huffpost-badg_b_557168.html>awards
>>>> badges to commenters based on the number of comments they make on *Huff
>>>> Post’s* stories and the number of Facebook Friends and Twitter
>>>> Followers they have. The more comments, friends, and followers, the higher
>>>> level badges they earn. WowFolksAreDumb<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/WowFolksAreDumb?action=comments>,
>>>> for example, who must hold some kind of record, has written more than
>>>> 10,000 comments since joining Social News in May 2012 and has earned four
>>>> badges–Level 2 Networker, Level 2 Superuser, Level 1 Crime Solver, and
>>>> Moderator. ****
>>>>
>>>> *Huff Post* has brilliantly tapped into social media to expand its
>>>> audience exponentially. But this brave new world comes at a cost. Few
>>>> editors live in this world. Opinions triumph over facts. Quantity trumps
>>>> quality. Truth loses. ****
>>>>
>>>> Juxtapose this with two major problems of current science: 1) the
>>>> public cannot access most published studies and 2) scientific disciplines
>>>> are so specialized that public access<http://www.butwhataboutthechildren.org/?paged=1>would hardly matter. A PhD is needed to understand the complexity of new
>>>> knowledge scientists are developing today, and a PhD in one discipline does
>>>> not guarantee understanding of knowledge developed in another. Scientists
>>>> can’t speak each other’s languages anymore, so specialized have various
>>>> disciplines become. An astronomer couldn’t explain the genome to you any
>>>> better than a geneticist could explain the cosmos. ****
>>>>
>>>> Without access to comprehensible science, science illiteracy rules,
>>>> particularly in the area of the science that underlies addictive drugs.
>>>> Perhaps the most puzzling argument that runs through many of the comments
>>>> about my post is one that rejects later work which contradicts earlier
>>>> studies. WowFolksAreDumb<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/WowFolksAreDumb?action=comments>,
>>>> for example, writes, “According to Dreher 1994, there are no prenatal or
>>>> neonatal differences between babies from mothers who did use cannabis
>>>> during pregnancy and babies from mothers who did not.” In addition to the
>>>> 2012 study I wrote about, more than 50 other studies about the harmful
>>>> effects of marijuana on the developing fetus have been published since
>>>> 1994, but WowFolksAreDumb<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/WowFolksAreDumb?action=comments>claims the 1994 study negates them all. Maxpost,
>>>> Midnight Toker<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/maxpost?action=comments>,
>>>> goes a step further. He interprets Dreher’s study to mean: “Pregnant women
>>>> SHOULD smoke DOPE!!!” ****
>>>>
>>>> Commenters attacked all the studies I wrote about, particularly the
>>>> study indicating a link between marijuana use and testicular cancer. Steve
>>>> Hager<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Steven_Hager?action=comments>dismissed it this way: “I believe the testicular cancer study involved 6
>>>> people, maybe it was only 3. Worthless, really.” That study actually
>>>> involved 163 young men diagnosed with testicular cancer and a control group
>>>> of 292 healthy men of the same age and ethnicity and asked them about their
>>>> drug use. The investigators found that compared to those who had never used
>>>> marijuana, men who had used the drug were twice as likely to have
>>>> testicular cancer. It’s difficult to understand why Mr. Hager couldn’t
>>>> trouble himself to check how many people were involved in the study since I
>>>> provided links to both the account of it published by *Science Daily*and the abstract of the study itself. Both clearly state the number of
>>>> research subjects.****
>>>>
>>>> The collision of social media with current, complex science produces a
>>>> chasm where scientific truth can be manipulated easily – and aggressively.
>>>> I emailed Dr. Beauregard to thank her for supporting the marijuana science
>>>> I had written about. She emailed back, “I have found many of the same
>>>> facts, but the comments are more than I can stand and the backlash is
>>>> horrific. I only posted a few things and have had literally over 50 people
>>>> email me with hostile, emotional comments based on personal experience as a
>>>> user.” ****
>>>>
>>>> And that, in a nutshell, is the heart of the problem. When it comes to
>>>> marijuana, users dominate not just *Huff Post*, but the Internet as
>>>> well. They relentlessly assault anyone who reports that a marijuana study
>>>> might show a detrimental effect. Few have time to put up with this, not
>>>> therapists like Dr. Beauregard who treats marijuana addiction, not
>>>> scientists who conduct the studies, not writers who report the science.
>>>> With marijuana, what takes place on the Internet is a shouting match; those
>>>> who shout loudest win.****
>>>>
>>>> After this experience, I’ve learned something else about the drug:
>>>> marijuana not only makes you lie, it makes you rude.****
>>>>
>>>> Source: www.nationalfamilies.org  National Families in Action<http://www.butwhataboutthechildren.org/?author=2>March 29, 2013
>>>> ****
>>>>
>>>>  ****
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> =======================================================
>>>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>>                http://www.fsr.net
>>>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>> =======================================================
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)
>> art.deco.studios at gmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>> =======================================================
>>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>                http://www.fsr.net
>>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> =======================================================
>>
>
>


-- 
Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)
art.deco.studios at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20130903/95a9415d/attachment-0001.html>