Cannabis News

[Tranquility]

I don't see that in any of the poll data on MJ attitudes. Can you explain the basis for this view to me?

MJ attitudes, while turning around are superficial. Few vote merely because of a politician's position on cannabis either towards or against. The argument I made had to go with interest groups that support Trump. For instance:[https://www.voterstudygroup.org/publications/2016-elections/the-five-types-trump-voters]:

• This analysis finds five unique clusters of Trump voters: American Preservationists (20%), Staunch Conservatives (31%), Anti-Elites (19%), Free Marketeers (25%), and the Disengaged (5%)

Law and order will take more in in some categories while losing some in others.

https://www.voterstudygroup.org/publications/2016-elections/political-divisions-in-2016-and-beyond

No, just Breitbart. Like I said, it's cancer. Peruse their comment section for 30 seconds if you disagree. They aren't a legitimate news source as they shill for the President. Meanwhile the source @macbill posted is perfectly legitimate with a Right of Center bias https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/arutz-sheva-israel-national-news.

Totalitarians always find a reason to good-think/bad-think people. You should read 1984 and Farenheit 451. (Brave New World is more of a people are so amused they don't need to read kind of path.) Don't just look at the Cliff's notes, read them. It's hard to get the ideas down on a feeling level unless you identify with the characters.

Nonsense. Based on every poll on legalization, it's fair to assume a certain percentage of Trump supporters are cannabis fans. Trump can't afford to lose any of his hardcore base right now.

First, I agree some percentage who have voted for him are cannabis fans. I am one. But, how many will leave if he cracks down? A few. But, he will gain from those who are very conservative and have sworn to never vote for him. He's not going to lose any of his "base" if he focused on enforcing the law he was sworn to enforce. All voters are multi-variate on what makes them vote for a person and most polls show cannabis not being a very high motivator. In other words, voters tend to agree with relaxing cannabis laws, they just don't care that much about it. Abortion is more important an issue than cannabis. (As is jobs, deficits, immigration, taxation and any of a number of things.)

Second, such thinking is how a candidate gets to crow about getting more popular votes from in front of a Burger King rather than be President.

Additionally, a crackdown would further energize the Dem base. The Midterms already look bad for the President's party.

The Dem base is near peak crazy. The only #Resist left in the tank is open warfare. (On re-read, we go to impeachment first.) No one is going to the barricades over a president who enforces the law.

Midterms always look bad for the incumbent party. We'll see.

Maybe you're right and Trump is stupider than he seems though.

It amazes me how each Republican president is the stupidest man that has ever lived and how each Democratic president is wise and kind. If true, it appears the intelligence of the president has no relationship to the success of his presidency.

 

[Baron23]

Again, using Breitbart quotes to defend Trump is hardly being "objective".

Yeah, you are right....we should all be quoting HuffPost, Maddow, Vanity Fair, NY Times, and Politico among others?? (yes, this is indeed sarcasm).

I find nothing debatable with you about my reply to @OldNewbie that I appreciate his approach of looking at all sources of 'news' these days and drawing his own individual conclusions.

And I'm pretty sure my comment was to @OldNewbie and that I did not engage you on any of this.

Have a great day, mate. Let's make America great again by minding our own business and returning to those days when keeping your political views to yourself was considered polite.

 

[cybrguy]

Medical is now legal in 29 states, many ruby red. The number of Recreational, or should we call them Fully Legal states are also growing quickly, currently including Alaska and Nevada which nobody would consider liberal bastions. And 2 more of the 4 or 5 states considering full legality are also red states.
I don't think it is reasonable any longer to assume that a state who votes against Democrats will also vote against Marijuana. If Trump is relying on (even his) republicans to agree on Sessions's ridiculous positions on cannabis, he does so at his own peril.

And it would be really nice if you all remembered this is a discussion of Cannabis news, not a forum for your political arguments.

 

[Tranquility]

Let's make America great again by minding our own business and returning to those days when keeping your political views to yourself was considered polite.

 

[Stu]

Let's please keep this discussion on the topic of Cannabis news. Purely political posts that to not further the discussion of news about Cannabis is not appropriate in this thread, so let's not go there.

Thank you.

 

[macbill]

Danger posed by drivers who smoke pot on 4/20 is similar to drunk drivers on Super Bowl Sunday

Data from the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration show that the risk of a fatal vehicle crash on American roads is 12% higher after 4:20 p.m. on an April 20 than on similar days that have no particular connection to pot, Staples and Redelmeier found.

 

[Tranquility]

Danger posed by drivers who smoke pot on 4/20 is similar to drunk drivers on Super Bowl Sunday

Data from the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration show that the risk of a fatal vehicle crash on American roads is 12% higher after 4:20 p.m. on an April 20 than on similar days that have no particular connection to pot, Staples and Redelmeier found.

That is an unfortunate data point. I have my suspicions about its value, the main one is all the assumptions that underlie the connection. Another problem gets to the choice of data itself. 4:20pm on 4/20? Why not the whole day? Why not after 4:20 every day? I suspect there is some choice bias in the data.

Still, it does suggest a connection on a superficial level. I believe, and hope, it is not showing any connection when looked at more closely.

That being said, "Don't dab and drive."

 

[florduh]

Danger posed by drivers who smoke pot on 4/20 is similar to drunk drivers on Super Bowl Sunday

Data from the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration show that the risk of a fatal vehicle crash on American roads is 12% higher after 4:20 p.m. on an April 20 than on similar days that have no particular connection to pot, Staples and Redelmeier found.

Just like St. Patrick's day with booze, 4/20 brings out the amateurs.

 

[Tranquility]

I'm, I'm, I'm, finally a MEME!

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/marijuana/sd-me-senior-pot-20180131-story.html

While legal marijuana is new to California, cannabis is an old companion to Lee.

“I’ve been using since I was a junior in college in, what, 1966?” said the 70-year-old real estate broker, browsing in Torrey Holistics, a Sorrento Valley cannabis dispensary. “I never thought I’d live to see the day it was legal.”

Even before Jan. 1, when California legalized recreational weed, pot was enjoying a gray renaissance. Between 2006 and 2013, the National Survey of Drug Use and Health reported a 250 percent rise in marijuana use by Americans 65 and older. This is still a small number, climbing from 0.4 percent to 1.4 percent of that population, but local dispensaries see plenty of silver-haired shoppers.

“This is probably the most interested — and wariest — group,” said Lincoln Fish, CEO of Outco, noting that the average customer at his Outliers Collective in El Cajon is over 58 years old.

Older consumers add a new wrinkle to the legal cannabis trade. Retirees tend to be less interested in getting high and more interested in getting relief from pain, anxiety and insomnia. Many are skittish about being identified as a user. (Lee and most other seniors interviewed for this story declined to be photographed or give their full names.)
​

 

[cybrguy]

I'm, I'm, I'm, finally a MEME!

You were already a meme. Now you are one you are OK with...

More on Illinois. And the answer is a resounding YES!

Should Illinois legalize recreational marijuana?

When it comes to easing restrictions on cannabis, Illinois has not been a pioneer. Medical marijuana was legal in 19 other states and the District of Columbia before state law allowed it here in 2013. Nine states and D.C. have gone beyond, legalizing the sale and use of recreational pot. Lawmakers in Illinois have hung back, letting other states lead the way. And that’s exactly the right approach.

The case for legalization is not one we dismiss. But there are good reasons not to rush into such a momentous decision.

Right now, Illinois is getting the benefit of a multitude of experiments in marijuana policy from the states that have jumped out in front. The information collected, mistakes made and lessons learned in these places should be of great value in determining the best policy. Playing it safe means taking our time.

The national movement toward treating marijuana more or less like alcohol is going strong. In 2005, a Gallup Poll found, only 35 percent of Americans favored full legalization; today, 60 percent do. In Illinois, a Simon Poll last year found, the figure is even higher: 66 percent.

Politicians are beginning to take heed. Last year, Gov. Bruce Rauner signed a measure decriminalizing possession of small amounts of weed. Before, someone caught with a couple of joints faced a possible six months in jail and a fine of up to $1,500. Now, the penalty is a fine of $100 or $200.

The Democrats running for his job, meanwhile, would not stop there. When they appeared before the Tribune Editorial Board recently, they were asked if they favored allowing recreational cannabis. Five candidates said they did, with the sixth, Chris Kennedy, saying, “I don’t oppose legalization of marijuana.” (All acknowledge using it in their younger days.) Also in favor: Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle and her challenger, former Ald. Bob Fioretti.

In the General Assembly, Sen. Heather Steans and Rep. Kelly Cassidy, both Chicago Democrats, have held hearings on their legislation to allow what they call “adult-use marijuana.”

Aside from recognizing the policy merits and political advantages, all these supporters can see another big attraction: revenue. Steans and Cassidy propose to regulate marijuana and levy an excise tax on growers, as well as a sales tax for buyers. The Marijuana Policy Project says the state could reap $350 million to $700 million per year. The change also would reduce costs for law enforcement.

But serious thought also has to be given to the possible downside. In Colorado, it’s reassuring to see, teen use of pot has actually declined. Adult use has been stable.

A Denver Post investigation, however, found that “the number of drivers involved in fatal crashes in Colorado who tested positive for marijuana has risen sharply since 2013,” the last year before legalization. A study in the American Journal of Public Health found no difference in crash fatality rates in Colorado and Washington compared with states that didn’t legalize. But that risk, and ways to counter it, are matters that justify caution in Illinois.

There is still a lot to be learned about the benefits and costs of legalization. Illinois may ultimately decide it’s a better option. But the important thing is not acting quickly. It’s acting wisely.
---------------
"A Denver Post investigation, however, found that “the number of drivers involved in fatal crashes in Colorado who tested positive for marijuana has risen sharply since 2013,” the last year before legalization."
I would wager that the number of people using a Boulder grocery store who tested positive for MJ would ALSO have gone up. There is no good reason to necessarily suggest that the MJ contributed to the increase of fatal crashes.

 

[macbill]

News Flash! Water is Wet and...
Alcohol 'more damaging to brain health than marijuana'

Scientists at the University of Colorado Boulder conducted a review of existing imaging data that looked at the effects of alcohol and marijuana, or cannabis, on the brain.
Their findings linked alcohol consumption with long-term changes to the structure of white matter and gray matter in the brain.
The use of marijuana, however, seemed to have no significant long-term effects on brain structure.

 

[cybrguy]

"A Denver Post investigation, however, found that “the number of drivers involved in fatal crashes in Colorado who tested positive for marijuana has risen sharply since 2013,” the last year before legalization."
I would wager that the number of people using a Boulder grocery store who tested positive for MJ would ALSO have gone up. There is no good reason to necessarily suggest that the MJ contributed to the increase of fatal crashes.

Pardon me for quoting my own post again, but rather than wonder if more fatal crash drivers test positively for cannabis, I think a better question might be, "with more people consuming cannabis, are there more fatal car crashes?"

 

[Tranquility]

Pardon me for quoting my own post again, but rather than wonder if more fatal crash drivers test positively for cannabis, I think a better question might be, "with more people consuming cannabis, are there more fatal car crashes?"

I don't know if either query's data set would answer the question as the underlying definitions are precise and a little different than you might think. What "related" means in traffic data is very broad for alcohol and other drugs, like marijuana.

 

[cybrguy]

It's always way easier in almost any formulation to determine correlation than causality. Correlation is just math and pretty transparent. Causality requires a great deal more effort, and may even be indeterminable. Yet that is usually what we are really after.

 

[MinnBobber]

It's always way easier in almost any formulation to determine correlation than causality. Correlation is just math and pretty transparent. Causality requires a great deal more effort, and may even be indeterminable. Yet that is usually what we are really after.

............................................................
My big problem with these cannabis : traffic fatality numbers and statistics is the issue of "testing positive vs being impaired" by cannabis. Someone can test positive for cannabis days or weeks later as the by-product they test for (THC- COOH)
is not water soluable / does not flush out / binds with fat cells and then is slow released back into the blood over time, and THC-COOH is non-psychoactive so gives no info about being under the influence/being intoxicated.

Is there a current, accurate test for active THC in your body??

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2587336/

 

[Tranquility]

............................................................
My big problem with these cannabis : traffic fatality numbers and statistics is the issue of "testing positive vs being impaired" by cannabis. Someone can test positive for cannabis days or weeks later as the by-product they test for (THC- COOH)
is not water soluable / does not flush out / binds with fat cells and then is slow released back into the blood over time, and THC-COOH is non-psychoactive so gives no info about being under the influence/being intoxicated.

Is there a current, accurate test for active THC in your body??

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2587336/

The statistics are worse than that. It can be alcohol/marijuana "related" if a passenger has it in his system--even if both drivers did not.

 

[psychonaut]

New Mexico Leaders Want to Give Opioid Patients MMJ Access

https://www.leafly.com/news/politics/new-mexico-leaders-want-to-give-opioid-patients-mmj-access

 

[Tranquility]

It only works if it's easy to get.

https://www.rand.org/news/press/2018/02/06.html

The report—the most-detailed examination of medical marijuana and opioid deaths conducted to date—found that legalizing medical marijuana was associated with lower levels of opioid deaths only in states that had provisions for dispensaries that made medical marijuana easily available to patients. Opioid death rates were not lower in states that just provided legal protections to patients and caregivers, allowing them to grow their own marijuana.

In addition, the association between medical marijuana dispensaries and fewer opioid deaths appears to have declined sharply after 2010, when states began to tighten requirements on sales by dispensaries.​

 

[Baron23]

“the number of drivers involved in fatal crashes in Colorado who tested positive for marijuana has risen sharply since 2013,”

My problem with this is that it conflates correlation with causation.

With that said, I'm not a fan of driving impaired....be it alcohol, cannabis, or pharma.

 

[Tranquility]

My problem with this is that it conflates correlation with causation.

With that said, I'm not a fan of driving impaired....be it alcohol, cannabis, or pharma.

http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

 

[cybrguy]

With that said, I'm not a fan of driving impaired....be it alcohol, cannabis, or pharma.

While I agree, and I avoid driving while impaired, if someone were sharing the road with me and depending on what "pharma" to which we refer, I would rather have that person high on MJ than any of the alternatives. Driving "impaired" is just that, the drivers ability is diminished, but the degree of impairment, the kind of impairment (what senses are effected), and the drivers awareness of his impairment may be totally different, and is almost guaranteed to be "more impaired" meaning "less able to drive well" with alcohol than most other impairments. And alcohol is the only completely uncontrolled (other than age) substance under discussion with no other limits or controls on consumption, availability or even education.
An observer might wonder if we have a death wish or if we choose idiots to run our government. That observer need not be on the outside to make such an observation...

 

[Silver420Surfer]

http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

Thanks for making me have to clean spitted-soda from my keyboard


Seriously though, great post!

 

[Tranquility]

Spurious correlation or chicken/egg:
https://nypost.com/2018/02/13/americans-are-more-depressed-and-miserable-than-ever/

Furthermore, “the 21 US states that saw their wellbeing drop in 2017 shattered the previous record set in 2009 amidst the Great Recession when 15 states had lower well-being than the year before,” note Gallup and Sharecare, which began looking into well-being in 2008. This is “particularly notable given that Americans’ confidence in the economy and perceptions of the job market are substantially better in 2017 than they were in 2009.”

One thing that is driving down our well-being is our declining mental and emotional health, says Dan Witters, research director of the Gallup-Sharecare Well-Being Index.

“It’s an unprecedented worsening … This is nothing like we have ever seen before,” he says.​

http://www.governing.com/gov-data/state-marijuana-laws-map-medical-recreational.html

The maps don't reproduce here. But, compare the map of legalization with the map of decreasing wellbeing.

Either we have a path to other states that might be willing to legalize or we have a problem with legalization as related to wellbeing or we have our own pool drowning/Nic cage movie correlation.

 

[asdf420]

Spurious correlation or chicken/egg

doesn't seem solid enough to draw any conclusions

 

[Tranquility]

https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Berkeley-City-Council-votes-to-become-sanctuary-12612148.php

Sanctuary!

The Berkeley City Council voted unanimously to become a sanctuary city for legal adult-use marijuana, prohibiting city agencies and employees from turning over information on legal cannabis activities and assisting in enforcing federal marijuana laws.​