Cannabis News

grokit

well-worn member
The FDA just outlawed CBDs and hemp oil extracts by claiming all plant molecules now belong exclusively to Big Pharma

Hemp oil extracts containing CBDs (cannibidiols) are such a threat to the pharmaceutical industry that the FDA is now invoking totally insane justifications for outlawing them.

CBDs are non-psychoactive compounds found naturally in hemp plants. They work so well as powerful natural medicine that people everywhere are realizing CBDs work better than pharmaceuticals for treating epilepsy, seizures, neurological disorders and other serious health conditions (including HIV infections).

So the FDA has just launched a massive regulatory assault against CBDs by invoking the most insane logic you've ever heard. Here's how it goes:

1) CBDs work so well that drug companies are now investigating them to be approved by the FDA as medicines.

2) Because CBDs are being investigated by drug companies, the FDA has granted CBDs status as being "investigated as a new drug." In the FDA's own language from their website, "FDA considers a substance to be 'authorized for investigation as a new drug' if it is the subject of an Investigational New Drug application (IND) that has gone into effect."

3) Because CBDs work so well and have been authorized for drug investigations, the FDA now OUTLAWS them being sold as dietary supplements. Per the FDA's own website: "FDA has concluded that cannabidiol products are excluded from the dietary supplement definition under section 201(ff)(3)(B)(ii) of the FD&C Act. Under that provision, if a substance (such as cannabidiol) has been authorized for investigation as a new drug for which substantial clinical investigations have been instituted and for which the existence of such investigations has been made public, then products containing that substance are outside the definition of a dietary supplement."

4) Now the FDA has begun sending warning letters to CBD makers, claiming they are in violation of FDA regulations because they are selling "adulterated products." Adulterated with what, exactly? CBDs, of course! "The debate over hemp CBD’s legal status continues after FDA sent eight warning letters to manufacturers of CBD dietary supplement and food products earlier this month," reports Nutritional Outlook. "The warning letters cite impermissible health claims used to market the products, as well as CBD’s invalid status as a dietary ingredient due to its presence in two drug applications currently under consideration."

The FDA just criminalized one of the most miraculous healing medicines in the world by handing it over to Big Pharma...

(more)
http://www.naturalnews.com/053369_CBD_hemp_oil_extract_FDA_regulations.html

:rant:
 

cybrguy

Putin is a War Criminal
The FDA just outlawed CBDs and hemp oil extracts by claiming all plant molecules now belong exclusively to Big Pharma
I find it hard to imagine that this could actually be occurring without a much larger response/reaction from the MJ community. Looks a little hyperbolic to me...

I have no doubt the FED is looking in to and researching CBDs, or that the Pharma industry would LOVE to patent some of them. But I don't think that the govt has any interest in "giving" them to Pharma. At least any that would be acceptable.
 

Winegums

I make things from wood
Accessory Maker
I'm interested how Canada will handle taxing. Since the black market is so well established and prices are pretty low as it is.

If they want to tax the life out of it I'll just keep on buying from my local dealer. There's no need to tax something so harshly, if the black market can make a profit, the government can make a profit at the same price or better. In fact it will have to be better than street prices or I can't see them killing the black market.
 

MinnBobber

Well-Known Member
I'm interested how Canada will handle taxing. Since the black market is so well established and prices are pretty low as it is.
........................................................
govt can get very greedy on taxing cannabis and look at it as the "golden goose" :(
Did some of our Washington State FCers report that they are getting reamed for almost 50%??

A smart govt would tax very low to truly undercut black market/put them out of business but "govt" and "smart" seem to be mutually exclusive ;)
 
MinnBobber,
  • Like
Reactions: Derrrpp

Winegums

I make things from wood
Accessory Maker
........................................................
govt can get very greedy on taxing cannabis and look at it as the "golden goose" :(
Did some of our Washington State FCers report that they are getting reamed for almost 50%??

A smart govt would tax very low to truly undercut black market/put them out of business but "govt" and "smart" seem to be mutually exclusive ;)

I've seen quotes from Trudeau that say he's aware that the product cannot be taxed or the black market will thrive.

I too have a hard time believing that the government will keep taxing low. I think they're all far too greedy to reasonably tax something that was prohibited for so long. Which is the exact opposite thing they need to do.

I'll grow my own before paying 50% tax. That's robbing from the people who just want to have legal access to their weed. Disgusting what governments do to their own people.
 

Gunky

Well-Known Member
Spirits-Excise-Tax-Rates-2014%20%282%29.png

According to this chart, WA, the state with highest tax on liquor, has total of 27% tax. Somewhere between 10% and 27% seems reasonable, with tax breaks for medical cards.
 
Last edited:

CarolKing

Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
The legislature here loves to tax its citizens to the hilt because we have no state income tax. The cannabis has a 47% tax, if you are on the medical registry its 37%.

I got to thinking about how there is a limit of an ounce is legal cannabis. Why do they even have a limit? It must be because they think folks will go out and sell it to people in other states. Some people probably would but most wouldn't.

By the way we have a big gas tax too.
 

Gunky

Well-Known Member
The legislature here loves to tax its citizens to the hilt because we have no state income tax. The cannabis has a 47% tax, if you are on the medical registry its 37%.

I got to thinking about how there is a limit of an ounce is legal cannabis. Why do they even have a limit? It must be because they think folks will go out and sell it to people in other states. Some people probably would but most wouldn't.

By the way we have a big gas tax too.
Washington needs a bill or initiative to allow home grow. Prohibit home grow they can get away with 47% tax even though they lose revenue to black market sales. Home grow helps to fix this whole situation, make it more competitive and better quality.
 

CarolKing

Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
They allow medical patients up to 15 plants if the doctor will sign for it. Otherwise it's 6. I think everyone should be able to grow whether it's med or rec. Its legal. The state wants to make money the easy way - on cannabis.

Meanwhile they will be closing my fav organic dispensary in a couple months. They weren't given a lisence. The state basically screwed many of the dispensaries over in favor of the new recreational stores. I know I keep harping on this but it's a big deal for the medical patients.

Years ago the state started allowing a state lottery, that was to fund schools. I think it ended up in the general fund. Property taxes help to run our schools. We pay around $1800 in our property tax just to schools each year. Over 20 years time that's $36,000.

We also have a B&O tax for businesses but huge tax breaks for Boeing. It's a bribe so Boeing doesn't move out of state. Boeing basically holds the state hostage.
 
Last edited:

Gunky

Well-Known Member
The one ounce limit and similar limits suck. There really is no reason for them at all, they are just a relic of prohibition. If you are gonna allow it then quit fucking around with nickel and dime amounts and let people buy and sell what they want/need just like alcohol.

47% tax is extortionate. WTF? It's like double the tax on liquor! WA legislators need to get hip: we are better off encouraging people to blow dope rather than down liquor. It's much easier on their livers and they drive better...
 
Last edited:

howie105

Well-Known Member
Gunky is so right, buying good pot is relatively cheap, buying government approved and taxed MJ will not be in the end. Sadly the focus is now mostly on getting it legalized and not on what the market will look like in the further. So FTG and grow your own, same as it always was.
 

cybrguy

Putin is a War Criminal
Nixon Aide Reportedly Admitted Drug War Was Meant To Target Black People

“Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”
56f16ce1150000ad000b2d3f.jpeg


John D. Ehrlichman, appointed counsel to the White House, is seen in 1968. (AP Photo)
An eye-opening remark from a former aide to President Richard Nixon pulls back the curtain on the true motivation of the United States’ war on drugs.

John Ehrlichman, who served 18 months in prison for his central role in the Watergate scandal, was Nixon’s chief domestic advisor when the president announced the “war on drugs” in 1971. The administration cited a high death toll and the negative social impacts of drugs to justify expanding federal drug control agencies. Doing so set the scene for decades of socially and economically disastrous policies.

Journalist Dan Baum wrote in the April cover story of Harper’s about how he interviewed Ehrlichman in 1994 while working on a book about drug prohibition. Ehrlichman provided some shockingly honest insight into the motives behind the drug war. From Harper’s:

“You want to know what this was really all about?” he asked with the bluntness of a man who, after public disgrace and a stretch in federal prison, had little left to protect. “The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”
In other words, the intense racial targeting that’s become synonymous with the drug war wasn’t an unintended side effect — it was the whole point.

The quote kicks off Baum’s “Legalize It All,” the cover story for Harper’s April 2016 issue.

Read the whole article, which is a comprehensive argument for drug legalization, here.

Baum explained to The Huffington Post why he didn’t include the quote in his 1996 book, Smoke and Mirrors: The War on Drugs and the Politics of Failure.

“There are no authorial interviews in [Smoke and Mirrors] at all; it’s written to put the reader in the room as events transpire,” Baum said in an email. “Therefore, the quote didn’t fit. It did change all the reporting I did for the book, though, and changed the way I worked thereafter.”

The quote does, however, appear in the 2012 book The Moment, a collection of “life-changing stories” from writers and artists.

Baum also talked to HuffPost about why Ehrlichman would confess such a thing in such blunt terms.

“It taught me that people are often eager to unburden themselves, once they no longer have a dog in the fight,” Baum said. “The interviewer needs to be patient sometimes, and needs to ask the right way. But people will often be incredibly honest if given the chance.”
 

KennyPowers

Well-Known Member
The cia made billions off importing crack into minority communities to fund their wars.
Can't do any of that if drugs are illegal. Check out the film "kill the messenger" with jeremy renner.
 

macbill

Oh No! Mr macbill!!
Staff member
Marijuana Legalization Movement Just Won Multiple Courtroom Battles, But Will That Be Enough to Quash Future Legal Threats?

By many accounts, Monday was a banner day for the marijuana movement in the courts. In the nation’s capital, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to take up a lawsuit filed by Nebraska and Oklahoma to overturn Colorado’s legalized marijuana program, meaning that if the two states’ attorneys general want to continue to pursue the matter, they will have to do so in federal district court. That same day in Colorado, a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by southern Colorado horse ranchers against Rocky Mountain Organics, a marijuana company building a cultivation facility nearby, accusing it and affiliated businesses of violating both the U.S. Constitution and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), a federal law designed to target organized crime.
 

macbill

Oh No! Mr macbill!!
Staff member
Hemp, Cannabis, Marijuana: What's the Difference?

There is a lot of confusion about the difference between hemp, cannabis and marijuana. Hemp, cannabis or marijuana all are scientifically denoted by the Latin term, Cannabis Sativa; hemp, cannabis or marijuana are all the same plant species, Cannabis Sativa. Varieties known as Cannabis Indica are just different varieties of the same species that were originally bred in India. Cannabis is not a genus, it is a species. Today, almost all varieties of cannabis used for medicine and social use are cross-breeds of both indica and sativa varieties.
 

grokit

well-worn member
Hemp, Cannabis, Marijuana: What's the Difference?

There is a lot of confusion about the difference between hemp, cannabis and marijuana. Hemp, cannabis or marijuana all are scientifically denoted by the Latin term, Cannabis Sativa; hemp, cannabis or marijuana are all the same plant species, Cannabis Sativa. Varieties known as Cannabis Indica are just different varieties of the same species that were originally bred in India. Cannabis is not a genus, it is a species. Today, almost all varieties of cannabis used for medicine and social use are cross-breeds of both indica and sativa varieties.
So what you're saying is that cannabis indica is actually,
technically... cannabis sativa :freak:
 

howie105

Well-Known Member
An interesting article and nice to see how another country is approaching the subject. MJ is a wonderful tool for the medical profession and well funded research is just going to make things happen quicker. However this quote I found disturbing.
Jeffrey Friedland, CEO of private U.S. investment firm Friedland Global Capital, has invested in two agro-tech companies and a pharmaceutical firm in Israel.“If you’re in California or Colorado, you’re getting medical marijuana in a lot of cases from someone who did not graduate high-school - there’s no science.” This disparaging remark about the current open supply model makes me consider the possibility that it could be an approach business could use to secure the production of MJ for itself. Fuck business dummies who want to turn something from the people for the people into their cash cow at the expense of the users.
 

MinnBobber

Well-Known Member
DEA Plans To Decide Whether To Reschedule Marijuana By Mid-Year

The Drug Enforcement Administration plans to decide whether marijuana should reclassified under federal law in “the first half of 2016,” the agency said in a letter to senators.
.........................................................................................................
IMO, re-scheduling cannabis OFF of SCHEDULE 1 DRUGS would be a huge step in the right direction.

Schedule 1 status impacts the green movement in so many ways, it's a giant legal "wet blanket" over so many facets.
1. Research of cannabis is almost totally snuffed out by this . Researchers have to go thru a zillion hoops to get permission for their project. And this requires big bucks and the patience of Job.

Contrast our current US research with world leader Israel where med MJ studies are everywhere.
Here, AZ researcher pushing for crucial study of cannabis and vets with PTSD and she is terminated
and study squashed before even starting.

2. Many people rely on the government / trust the govt health experts so consequently they believe that cannabis has absolutely no/zero/ none/nada medical use, like the Fed experts say.

3. In state's battles to legalize Med MJ / Rec MJ, many people and states point to Schedule 1 status as
a reason to vote NO.

4. Schedule 1 status leaves legal states in limbo----will next Prez or DEA Admin suddenly shift to the raid and destroy mode, to enforce Sched 1 status

5. Legal shops often cannot use banks, as they are fearful of fed retaliation

6. MJ shops cannot deduct any normal business expenses as they deal in an illegal drug/ tech illegal to the feds, business. Rent, wages, their cost for product cannot be deducted. IMO, this impacts pricing immensely. They have to jack up prices significantly to cover having no expenses allowed

7. Some media are banning MJ ads as it's fed illegal. I thought USPS recently prohibited MJ ads/materials??

8. Sched 1 mandates the few studies allowed must use the Feds cannabis supply. Their chart shows the average THC is about 4% and no vastly intriguing strains like "Charlette's Web". Studies need to get some of the top shelf stuff and the broad array of specialty strains

9. Feds and Vet Affairs hide behind Schedule 1 to not allow considering it for vets. Huge deal for vets with injuries and PTSD. Vets needs MJ ASAP

10. AS a schedule 1, no insurance will cover it, even where legal
 
Last edited:

howie105

Well-Known Member
I am waiting to see what schedule if any they decide to move MJ to. If it remains a scheduled drug it is still an illegal drug that can put your butt into the system and once there you are at the mercy (or lack of) of those who are prosecuting you in their own court on your way to their jails. On the other hand if they are serious about a problem they have created they will hit the reset button on the criminality of MJ and walk away. It would be a cheap, quick and easy way of putting the future of MJ into the hands of the users.
 
Top Bottom