Kannabis: in the Pursuit of Health and Happiness : Melbourne Indymedia

How Kannabis became Hemp:
kannabis ---- hannipiz ---- hampfr ---- hanaf ---- hanap ---- haenep ---- henep ---- hemp

Kannabis - The Fabric Of Our Lives:
cannapaceum ---- cannapum ---- cannabis ---- canvas
=============

EATING low doses of THC, the active ingredient in cannabis, helps prevent arteries clogging up, at least in mice.

THC binds to two receptors in the body. One is found mostly on brain cells and is responsible for the chemical's psychotropic effects. The other receptor is found mostly on immune cells, and THC has been shown to suppress the immune response to infections and cancer.

François Mach at University Hospital in Geneva, Switzerland, wondered if this effect might also help prevent the build-up of fatty deposits in arteries, or atherosclerosis, by reducing the inflammation associated with this process. Sure enough, when his team fed 1 milligram of THC per kilogram of bodyweight - a low dose that should not have any psychotropic effects - to mice susceptible to atherosclerosis, it greatly slowed the progress of the disease (Nature, vol 434, p 782).

The results are striking, says Michael Roth of the University of California, Los Angeles, who wrote a commentary for Nature. He stresses that the findings do not prove that smoking cannabis will prevent atherosclerosis, pointing out that the mouse study suggests the effect is dose-dependent and too little or too much THC has no protective effect.

Rather than feeding people THC, Roth says, researchers should try to develop drugs that bind only to the cannabinoid receptor found on immune cells.

Cannabis may BLOCK GROWTH OF BRAIN CANCER
By James Hamilton
Sunday Herald, 15 August 2004

Cannabis chemicals may provide a new way of treating deadly brain cancer.
Scientists have shown that cannabinoids – the chemicals responsible for the drug’s “high” – deter the growth of blood vessels which feed the tumour.

They appear to prevent genes making a protein called VEGF (vascular endothelial growth factor) that stimulates the sprouting of blood vessels.

Cutting off tumours’ blood supply is one of the latest anti-cancer strategies being explored by scientists. In studies cannabinoids significantly reduced the activity of VEGF in laboratory mice.

They also lowered VEGF levels in tumour tissue samples taken from two patients with glioblastoma multiforme, the most lethal brain tumour type.

About 4400 new cases of brain tumour are diagnosed in the UK each year. A small percentage of these are grade four gliomas, the most aggressive and dangerous brain tumours.

Only about 6% of people diagnosed with these high- grade cancers live for more than three years. The disease is normally treated with surgery, followed by radiotherapy and possibly chemotherapy. But the main tumour often evades complete destruction and grows again to kill the patient.

Cannabinoids had previously been shown to inhibit the growth of blood vessels in mice. But the mechanism involved remained a mystery and it was not known if the same effect occurred in humans.

In the new Spanish-led study, cannabinoids were injected into mice with gliomas. DNA analysis was then carried out on 267 genes associated with the growth of tumour blood vessels. It showed that the cannabis compounds reduced the activity of several genes involved in VEGF production.

Professor Manuel Guzman, from Complutense University in Madrid, said: “In both patients, VEGF levels in tumour extracts were lower after cannabinoid inoculation.”
==========

Cannabis extract makes brain tumors shrink, halts growth of blood vessels
Category: Cancer/Oncology News
Article Date: 15 Aug 2004

Researchers in Spain have discovered that a cannabis extract makes brain tumors shrink by halting the growth of blood vessels that supply the tumors with life. Cannabis has chemicals called cannabinoids, these are the chemicals that could effectively starve tumors to death, say the researchers.

The Spanish team, led by Dr Manuel Guzmán, wanted to see whether they could prevent glioblastoma multiforme cancer from growing by cutting off its blood supply. Glioblastoma multiforme is one of the most difficult cancers to treat – it seldom responds to any medical intervention, such as radiotherapy, chemotherapy and surgery.

The scientists knew that cannabinoids will block the growth of blood vessels (to tumors) in mice – they wanted to find out whether the same thing would happen with humans.

The mice were given a cancer similar to the human brain cancer (glioblastoma multiforme). The mice were then given cannabinoids and the genes examined.

The genes associated with blood vessel growth in tumors through the production of a chemical called vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) had their activity reduced.

Cannabinoids halt VEGF production by producing Ceramide. Ceramide controls cell death.

Dr Guzmán said: "As far as we know, this is the first report showing that ceramide depresses VEGF pathway by interfering with VEGF production."

They selected two patients who had glioblastoma multiforme and had not responded to chemotherapy, radiotherapy or surgery. The scientists took samples from them before and after treating them with a cannabinoids solution – this was administered directly into the tumor.

Amazingly, both patients experienced reduced VEGF levels in the tumor as a result of treatment with cannabinoids.

The researchers said that the results were encouraging. In order to be sure about their findings they need to carry out a larger study, they said.

Dr Guzmán said "The present findings provide a novel pharmacological target for cannabinoid-based therapies."

Pot Shrinks Tumors; Government Knew in '74
By Raymond Cushing, AlterNet.
Posted May 31, 2000.

In 1974 researchers learned that THC, the active chemical in marijuana, shrank or destroyed brain tumors in test mice. But the DEA quickly shut down the study and destroyed its results, which were never replicated -- until now.

The term medical marijuana took on dramatic new meaning in February, 2000 when researchers in Madrid announced they had destroyed incurable brain tumors in rats by injecting them with THC, the active ingredient in cannabis.

The Madrid study marks only the second time that THC has been administered to tumor-bearing animals; the first was a Virginia investigation 26 years ago. In both studies, the THC shrank or destroyed tumors in a majority of the test subjects.

Most Americans don't know anything about the Madrid discovery. Virtually no major U.S. newspapers carried the story, which ran only once on the AP and UPI news wires, on Feb. 29, 2000.

The ominous part is that this isn't the first time scientists have discovered that THC shrinks tumors. In 1974 researchers at the Medical College of Virginia, who had been funded by the National Institute of Health to find evidence that marijuana damages the immune system, found instead that THC slowed the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice -- lung and breast cancer, and a virus-induced leukemia.

The DEA quickly shut down the Virginia study and all further cannabis/tumor research, according to Jack Herer, who reports on the events in his book, "The Emperor Wears No Clothes." In 1976 President Gerald Ford put an end to all public cannabis research and granted exclusive research rights to major pharmaceutical companies, who set out -- unsuccessfully -- to develop synthetic forms of THC that would deliver all the medical benefits without the "high."

The Madrid researchers reported in the March issue of "Nature Medicine" that they injected the brains of 45 rats with cancer cells, producing tumors whose presence they confirmed through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). On the 12th day they injected 15 of the rats with THC and 15 with Win-55,212-2 a synthetic compound similar to THC. "All the rats left untreated uniformly died 12-18 days after glioma (brain cancer) cell inoculation ... Cannabinoid (THC)-treated rats survived significantly longer than control rats. THC administration was ineffective in three rats, which died by days 16-18. Nine of the THC-treated rats surpassed the time of death of untreated rats, and survived up to 19-35 days. Moreover, the tumor was completely eradicated in three of the treated rats." The rats treated with Win-55,212-2 showed similar results.

The Spanish researchers, led by Dr. Manuel Guzman of Complutense University, also irrigated healthy rats' brains with large doses of THC for seven days, to test for harmful biochemical or neurological effects. They found none.

"Careful MRI analysis of all those tumor-free rats showed no sign of damage related to necrosis, edema, infection or trauma ... We also examined other potential side effects of cannabinoid administration. In both tumor-free and tumor-bearing rats, cannabinoid administration induced no substantial change in behavioral parameters such as motor coordination or physical activity. Food and water intake as well as body weight gain were unaffected during and after cannabinoid delivery. Likewise, the general hematological profiles of cannabinoid-treated rats were normal. Thus, neither biochemical parameters nor markers of tissue damage changed substantially during the 7-day delivery period or for at least 2 months after cannabinoid treatment ended."

Guzman's investigation is the only time since the 1974 Virginia study that THC has been administered to live tumor-bearing animals. (The Spanish researchers cite a 1998 study in which cannabinoids inhibited breast cancer cell proliferation, but that was a "petri dish" experiment that didn't involve live subjects.)

In an email interview for this story, the Madrid researcher said he had heard of the Virginia study, but had never been able to locate literature on it. Hence, the Nature Medicine article characterizes the new study as the first on tumor-laden animals and doesn't cite the 1974 Virginia investigation.

"I am aware of the existence of that research. In fact I have attempted many times to obtain the journal article on the original investigation by these people, but it has proven impossible." Guzman said.

In 1983 the Reagan/Bush Administration tried to persuade American universities and researchers to destroy all 1966-76 cannabis research work, including compendiums in libraries, reports Jack Herer, who states, "We know that large amounts of information have since disappeared."

Guzman provided the title of the work -- "Antineoplastic activity of cannabinoids," an article in a 1975 Journal of the National Cancer Institute -- and this writer obtained a copy at the University of California medical school library in Davis and faxed it to Madrid.

The summary of the Virginia study begins, "Lewis lung adenocarcinoma growth was retarded by the oral administration of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabinol (CBN)" -- two types of cannabinoids, a family of active components in marijuana. "Mice treated for 20 consecutive days with THC and CBN had reduced primary tumor size."

The 1975 journal article doesn't mention breast cancer tumors, which featured in the only newspaper story ever to appear about the 1974 study -- in the Local section of the Washington Post on August 18, 1974. Under the headline, "Cancer Curb Is Studied," it read in part:

"The active chemical agent in marijuana curbs the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice and may also suppress the immunity reaction that causes rejection of organ transplants, a Medical College of Virginia team has discovered." The researchers "found that THC slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers and a virus-induced leukemia in laboratory mice, and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent."

Guzman, writing from Madrid, was eloquent in his response after this writer faxed him the clipping from the Washington Post of a quarter century ago. In translation, he wrote:

"It is extremely interesting to me, the hope that the project seemed to awaken at that moment, and the sad evolution of events during the years following the discovery, until now we once again draw back the veil over the anti-tumoral power of THC, twenty-five years later. Unfortunately, the world bumps along between such moments of hope and long periods of intellectual castration."

News coverage of the Madrid discovery has been virtually nonexistent in this country. The news broke quietly on Feb. 29, 2000 with a story that ran once on the UPI wire about the Nature Medicine article. This writer stumbled on it through a link that appeared briefly on the Drudge Report web page. The New York Times, Washington Post and Los Angeles Times all ignored the story, even though its newsworthiness is indisputable: a benign substance occurring in nature destroys deadly brain tumors.

Raymond Cushing is a journalist, musician and filmmaker. This article was named by Project Censored as a "Top Censored Story of 2000."
==========

When spliff gets in your eyes...
Giles Tremlett in Madrid
Wednesday July 7, 2004
The Guardian

We knew it gave people the munchies and made them giggle. Now researchers claim to have found a new property in cannabis - it HELPS US SEE IN THE DARK.

Scientists made their discovery after becoming intrigued by Moroccan fishermen who not only failed to lose their sense of direction after smoking generous amounts of local kif, a mixture of cannabis and tobacco, but seemed to navigate better on dark nights.

"They attribute their ability to see to the consumption of kif that they spend entire hours smoking before getting into their barques," one of the research team, drawn from the US, Spain and Morocco, reported.

Jamaican fishermen have reportedly shown a similar reaction, suggesting that there may be something medically useful in cannabis apart from the pain-deadening properties already spotted by doctors treating cancer patients.

Equipped with a machine for measuring night vision, the researchers headed for the Rif valley, the centre of Morocco's flourishing cannabis trade. "High-grade sifted cannabis was mixed with tobacco in a 2:1 ratio and smoked as kif by subjects employing a traditional sebsi pipe," the team write in the latest Journal of Ethnopharmacology.

Three "kif-experienced" Moroccan volunteers were then invited to make "numerous inhalations".

The volunteers demonstrated "consistent improvements" in tests, leading the researchers to suggest that further studies should be conducted.

The researchers admit that the results have turned the ancient wisdom of Persian and Arab scientists, who suggested that cannabis made vision fuzzier, on its head.

But their results backed up claims by the Observer columnist Sue Arnold, who suffers from retinitis pigmentosa and is officially registered blind. She noticed several years ago that drawing on strong Jamaican skunk suddenly and temporarily enabled her to see things clearly. [!]

But Ms Arnold has since warned of side-effects that could impede night-time navigation.

TAKING the high road may not be so dangerous after all. Ministers are set to be embarrassed by government-funded research which shows that driving under the influence of drugs makes motorists more cautious and has a limited impact on their risk of crashing.

In the study, conducted by the Transport Research Laboratory, "grade A" cannabis specially imported from America was given to 15 regular users. The doped- up drivers were then put through four weeks of tests on driving simulators to gauge reaction times and awareness.

Regular smokers were used because previous tests in America using first-timers resulted in the volunteers falling over and feeling ill. The laboratory found its guinea pigs through what it described as a "snowballing technique" - one known user was asked to find another after being promised anonymity and exemption from prosecution agreed with the Home Office.

Instead of proving that drug-taking while driving increased the risk of accidents, researchers found that the mellowing effects of cannabis made drivers MORE CAUTIOUS and so LESS LIKELY TO DRIVE DANGEROUSLY.

Although the cannabis affected reaction time in regular users, its effects appear to be substantially less dangerous than fatigue or drinking. Research by the Australian Drugs Foundation found that CANNABIS WAS THE ONLY DRUG TESTED THAT DECREASED THE RELATIVE RISK OF HAVING AN ACCIDENT.

The findings will embarrass ministers at the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR) who commissioned the study after pressure from motoring organisations and anti-drug campaigners. Lord Whitty, the transport minister, will receive the report later this month.

Last week police revealed details of new drug-driving tests to be administered by the roadside, which were received with some amusement. They require suspected drug-drivers to stand on one leg, lean back and touch their nose with their eyes closed, and to count to 30 silently with their eyes shut. This is apparently difficult for those on a drug trip.

However, if the findings are less than frightening on the effects of marijuana, they may convince ministers to put more money into raising driver awareness of fatigue. Tiredness is now blamed for causing 10% of all fatal accidents, compared with 6% for alcohol and 3% for drugs.

A low-key radio campaign will be launched tomorrow warning drivers to take breaks.

The report's surprising conclusions will not sway organisations such as the RAC, which believes there is incontrovertible evidence that drug-driving is a growing menace. DETR statistics published in January showed a six-fold increase in the number of people found to be driving with drugs in their system after fatal road accidents. The figure jumped from 3% in 1989 to 18%.

Dr Rob Tunbridge, the report's author, refused to reveal his findings before they were published but said: "If you were to ask me to rank them in order of priority, fatigue is the worst killer, followed by alcohol, and drugs follow way behind in third."

Tunbridge admitted that the effect of drugs differed with the individual, the amount taken, the environment they were taken in and the point at which you tested reactions.

http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v00.n1206.a04.html
=====================================

CANNABIS MAKES YOU A BETTER DRIVER - MORE EVIDENCE
The AGE 21 October 1998 pA5;
CANBERRA TIMES 21 October 1998 p4

THE LARGEST STUDY EVER DONE linking road accidents with drugs and alcohol has found drivers with cannabis in their blood were no more at risk than those who were drug-free. In fact, the findings by a pharmacology team from the University of Adelaide and Transport SA showed drivers who had smoked marijuana were marginally LESS LIKELY TO HAVE AN ACCIDENT than those who were drug-free. A study spokesman, Dr Jason White, said the difference was not great enough to be statistically significant but could be explained by anecdotal evidence that marijuana smokers were more cautious and drove more slowly because of altered time perception. The study of 2,500 accidents, which matched the blood alcohol levels of injured drivers with details from police reports, found drug-free drivers caused the accidents in 53.5 per cent of cases. Injured drivers with a blood-alcohol concentration of more than 0.05 per cent were culpable in nearly 90 per cent of accidents they were involved in. Drivers with cannabis in their blood were less likely to cause an accident, with a culpability rate of 50.6 per cent. The study has policy implications for those who argue drug detection should be a new focus for road safety. Dr White said the study showed the importance of concentrating efforts on alcohol rather than other drugs.

This information was posted by the library of The Alcohol and other Drugs Council of Australia (ADCA). Requests for copies of newsclips can be directed to the library by phone 02 62811002, fax 02 6282 7364
or e-mail library@adca.org.au.
=====================================

From ":MARIJUANA AND ACTUAL DRIVING PERFORMANCE"
U.S. Department of Transportation,
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(DOT HS 808 078), Final Report, November 1993:

"This program of research has shown that marijuana, when taken alone, produces a moderate degree of driving impairment which is related to the consumed THC dose. The impairment manifests itself mainly in the ability to maintain a steady lateral position on the road, but its magnitude is not exceptional in comparison with changes produced by many medicinal drugs and alcohol. Drivers under the influence of marijuana retain insight in their performance and will compensate, where they can, for example, by slowing down or increasing effort. As a consequence, THC's adverse effects on driving performance appear relatively small."
=====================================

"Compared to alcohol, which makes people take more risks on the road, marijuana made drivers slow down and drive more carefully....
Cannabis is good for driving skills, as people tend to overcompensate for a perceived impairment."
-Professor Olaf Drummer, a forensic scientist at the Royal College of Surgeons in Melbourne, 1996

commentary and additional research to follow - please do not delete, rename, or re-categorize.

The government spends millions of dollars searching for pot plantations, raiding pubs and generally harassing and imprisoning people that aren't doing anything to hurt anyone.

The real criminals are those in the parliaments. They have no right to legislate what I can and can't put in my own body, what drug I use, how I enjoy myself.

The Secret History of the Credit Card

Introduction

It's one of the most wonderful times of the year for the banking industry's
most lucrative business: credit cards. In the coming weeks, millions of
Americans will reach into their wallets and use plastic to buy an estimated
$100 billion in holiday gifts. But at what cost?

In "Secret History of the Credit Card," FRONTLINE® and The New York Times
join forces to investigate an industry few Americans fully understand. In
this one-hour report, correspondent Lowell Bergman uncovers the techniques
used by the industry to earn record profits and get consumers to take on
more debt.

"The almost magical convenience of plastic money is critical to our
famously compulsive consumer economy," Bergman says. "With more than 641
million credit cards in circulation and accounting for an estimated $1.5
trillion of consumer spending, the U.S. economy has clearly gone plastic."

Millions of American families use their personal, general-purpose credit
cards such as Visa, Mastercard, American Express and Discover to make ends
meet; credit cards have been a discreet lifeline for families in financial
straits.

But other consumers, like actor and author Ben Stein, use plastic purely
for convenience. While it would appear that Stein -- who says he charges a
small fortune every month on his credit cards -- is the ideal customer, in
reality, he is what some in the industry call a "deadbeat." That's because
he pays his balance in full every month.

The industry's most profitable customers, the ones being sought by creative
marketing tactics, are the "revolvers:" the estimated 115 million Americans
who carry monthly credit card debt.

Ed Yingling, incoming president of the American Bankers Association, tells
FRONTLINE that revolvers are "the sweet spot" of the banking industry. This
"sweet spot" continues to grow as the average credit card debt among
American households has more than doubled over the past decade. Today, the
average family owes roughly $8,000 on their credit cards. This debt has
helped generate record profits for the credit card industry -- last year,
more than $30 billion before taxes.

Some experts say the profitability of credit cards really began twenty-five
years ago, when the banking industry successfully eliminated a critical
restriction: the limit on the interest rate a lender can charge a borrower.
Deregulation, coupled with a revolution in technology that enables the
almost real-time tracking of personal financial information and the
emergence of nationwide banking, has facilitated the widening availability
of credit cards across the economic spectrum. But for some, the cost of
credit is often far greater than it appears.

According to Harvard Law Professor Elizabeth Warren, the credit card
companies are misleading consumers and making up their own rules. "These
guys have figured out the best way to compete is to put a smiley face in
your commercials, a low introductory rate, and hire a team of MBAs to lay
traps in the fine print," Warren tells FRONTLINE.

Warren and other critics say that a growing share of the industry's
revenues come from what they call deceptive tactics, such as "default"
terms spelled out in the fine print of cardholder agreements -- the terms
and conditions of which can be changed at any time for any reason with 15
days' notice.

Penalty fees and rates are sometimes triggered by just a single lapse -- a
payment that arrives a couple of days or even hours late, a charge that
exceeds the credit line by a few dollars, or a loan from another creditor
which renders the cardholder "overextended" as defined by the nation's
three all-powerful credit bureaus. This flurry of unexpected fees and rate
hikes come just when consumers can least afford them.

"[Banks are] raising interest rates, adding new fees, making the due date
for your payment a holiday or a Sunday on the hopes that maybe you'll trip
up and get a payment in late," says Robert McKinley, founder and chairman
of Cardweb.com and Ram Research, a payment card research firm. "It's become
a very anti-consumer marketplace."

Banking Association spokesman Yingling defends industry practices. Because
the credit card business is basically unsecured lending, he says, the risks
associated with the business must be offset.

But that's of little consolation to consumers who may be in trouble.
According to the Better Business Bureau, credit card and banking companies
are the subject of a record numbers of complaints. "It's not an accident
that the banking and credit card business generates more complaints
nationally, across the country, than any other industry...Out of one
thousand industries that we track, they are number one," says Pat Wallace,
head of the San Francisco Bay Area Better Business Bureau. "There are
irritated, unhappy, dissatisfied customers in this industry."

As Professor Warren sees it, the industry is operating without fear of
penalty. "There's no regulator, and there's no customer who can bring this
industry to heel," Warren says.

Poll: What's Your Balance?

The average American household is carrying a credit card balance of $7,500
- $8,000. What's yours?

Note: As the producers of this report found out, it's hard to get people to
talk about their credit card debt. But this poll is completely anonymous ,
so we invite you to answer honestly.

Which Are You?

Here's the credit card industry's jargon for its customer categories:

"Revolvers" - they roll credit card balances over month to month, never
paying in full.

"Deadbeats" - they pay their balances off in full every month.

"Rate Surfers" or "Gamers" - they shift usage between credit cards based
upon interest rates.

"The Australian government does not own my body. I therefore refuse to recognize any legislation designed to A) control my intake of psychoactive molecules, B) thwart my pursuit of happiness, and/or C) protect black markets from competition."

For once, we're in complete agreement. Nicely worded!
If I wasn't on the road relying on brief net cafe sessions I'd prepare a proposed feature on this one. May still do so when I get back to Melbourne - it's not a deadline dependant article.

"The following is a compendium of good reasons to sue the Australian government for harm caused by irrational legislation that does not in any way reflect the wishes or the interests of the people."

Perhaps a Common Law Mandate is the way to go. This was used successfully to prevent a toxic waste dump being built in our food belt forcing Bracks to try and dump it on Mildura - Mildurans are now being informed about this powerful legal tool. A CLM is also being prepared to stop the Port Philip Bay dredging - http://www.savethebay.com.au/

See also http://www.treehugger.com/files/2005/11/hemp_food_in_au.php

A company run by some people I met in Brisbane a few years ago has moved from supplying spring water to......Hemp products! - http://www.happyplanet.com.au/

Anecdotally, I have heard that upon hearing of the possibility of manufacturing aircraft from hemp "fibreglass" (as per Henry Ford's famous sledge hammer demonstration), Richard Branson of Virgin Airlines said, "show me the costs!" (Well....he *is* a capitalist..... :)

The point is, this *thing* which pretends - and has managed to convince many - that it has the right to persecute people for the "crime" of harming no one, and prevent a plethora of solutions to social/environmental/health issues is on it's last legs.
And it knows it.
2006 will be an interesting year methinks.....

ps: When I get time, I'll prepare some info showing people how they can refuse to consent to those stupid random "drug driver" tests.

I can't be fucked googleing a link for you, but I have recently seen several reports that scientists have isolated the gene that causes some people to develop psychosis from pot... Apparently this is abot 1 in 20 people and they generally have to smoke a very large amount every day for a long period. This should mean that with simple testing the very few people (especially compared with alcohol) that are affected badly by marijuana could be screened and the one harmfull effect of the drug elliminated. BTW.. I am one of those people who becomes extremely paranoid from smokeing... but this problem was easily fixed by quiting smokeing once it started affecting me badly.

Well, 1 in 20 - you may be lazy - as lazy as the faith-based beaureacrats who insist that cannabis CAUSES schizophrenia (considered an extrememly rare disease until psychiatrists in the eighties decided to develop another market) or that it precipitates it in those who are vulnerable, but are unwilling to provide any research data whatsoever.

But at least you are honest.

I heard that water causes schizophrenia in those who are succeptable, because all schizophrenics drink it.

P.S. anyone interested in selling me some decent cannabis can give me a buzz on 0437 363 477

NOTE: Victorian Police recently refused to charge me with possession - they stole my pot though...

"About a quarter of the population have this genetic make-up, and up to 15 per cent of the group are likely to develop psychotic conditions if exposed to the drug early in life."

"Neither the drug nor the gene raises the risk of psychosis by itself."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3561-1565337,00.html

Moderation of the effect of adolescent-onset cannabis use on adult psychosis by a functional polymorphism in the catechol-O-methyltransferase gene: longitudinal evidence of a gene X environment interaction.

Caspi A, Moffitt TE, Cannon M, McClay J, Murray R, Harrington H, Taylor A, Arseneault L, Williams B, Braithwaite A, Poulton R, Craig IW.

Social, Genetic, and Developmental Psychiatry Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Recent evidence documents that cannabis use by young people is a modest statistical risk factor for psychotic symptoms in adulthood, such as hallucinations and delusions, as well as clinically significant schizophrenia. The vast majority of cannabis users do not develop psychosis, however, prompting us to hypothesize that some people are genetically vulnerable to the deleterious effects of cannabis. METHODS: In a longitudinal study of a representative birth cohort followed to adulthood, we tested why cannabis use is associated with the emergence of psychosis in a minority of users, but not in others. RESULTS: A functional polymorphism in the catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) gene moderated the influence of adolescent cannabis use on developing adult psychosis. Carriers of the COMT valine158 allele were most likely to exhibit psychotic symptoms and to develop schizophreniform disorder if they used cannabis. Cannabis use had no such adverse influence on individuals with two copies of the methionine allele. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide evidence of a gene x environment interaction and suggest that a role of some susceptibility genes is to influence vulnerability to environmental pathogens. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=15866551&dopt=Citation

BTW, I think your article is very good and FULLY AGREE that marijuana and all other drugs should be de-criminalised.

All of the facts are present but what can we do to inhibit the government from stoping the use of pot? As long as they cannot make money from it, it will always be illegal.

At the beginning of time, we gave the government power in exchange for protection. In such a deal, it was made clear that the people could take back their power anytime that the government abused it. How do we get it back?