Connect with us

Cannabis News

No More Getting High on Hemp in America?

Published

on


crackdown on hemp by the states

The burgeoning market for hemp-derived products, particularly those that contain intoxicating compounds like Delta-8 THC, has been met with increasing scrutiny and regulation across various states in the U.S. This shift comes in response to growing concerns over public health, safety, and the integrity of hemp legislation initially aimed at promoting non-intoxicating uses of the plant. In some cases, over 90% of tested hemp products contain well over the 0.3% THC threshold to be considered hemp and not intoxicating cannabis.

An earlier article by Cannabis.net called, “America is Getting High on Hemp” pointed out the subtle differences between natural marijuana and lab-produced Delta-8 and Delta-9 THC.

As more states implement stringent regulations, the landscape of the hemp industry is poised for significant changes. This article delves into the reasons behind the regulatory crackdown, the implications for the industry, and the potential future of hemp-derived products.

 

The Rise of Intoxicating Hemp Products

Hemp, a variety of the Cannabis sativa plant, was legalized federally in the United States under the 2018 Farm Bill, provided it contains no more than 0.3% Delta-9 THC, the psychoactive compound commonly associated with marijuana. This legislation was primarily aimed at promoting the agricultural and industrial use of hemp, including the production of non-intoxicating cannabinoids such as CBD (cannabidiol).

 

However, the market soon saw the emergence of products containing Delta-8 THC, a cannabinoid that occurs naturally in small amounts in hemp but can be synthesized from CBD through a chemical process. Delta-8 THC produces psychoactive effects similar to, but generally milder than, Delta-9 THC. The popularity of Delta-8 THC products has surged, driven by their legality under the broad language of the 2018 Farm Bill and consumer interest in an alternative to traditional marijuana.

 

 Regulatory Concerns and Crackdowns

Despite their popularity, Delta-8 THC and other intoxicating hemp products have raised significant concerns among lawmakers, health officials, and industry stakeholders. These concerns include:

 

  • Public Health and Safety: There is limited research on the safety and long-term effects of Delta-8 THC. Reports of adverse reactions, including hallucinations, vomiting, and loss of consciousness, have prompted calls for regulation. Additionally, the unregulated production processes raise the risk of contamination with harmful chemicals.

 

  • Youth Access: The marketing and packaging of Delta-8 THC products, often mimicking candy and other snacks, have led to fears about their appeal to children and teenagers. Without strict regulations, these products can easily end up in the hands of minors.

 

  • Legal Ambiguities**: The current federal stance on Delta-8 THC is ambiguous, with the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) stating that all synthetically derived tetrahydrocannabinols remain Schedule I controlled substances. This has created a gray area that states are now moving to address.

 

Consumer Confusion: The similarity in names and effects between Delta-8 THC and Delta-9 THC can confuse consumers, leading to unintentional intoxication and impaired driving, among other issues.

 

State-by-State Regulatory Responses

In light of these concerns, several states have initiated regulatory measures to control the sale and distribution of intoxicating hemp products. Here is an overview of the actions taken by some states:

 

  • New York: New York has banned the sale of Delta-8 THC products, citing health concerns and the potential for abuse. The state’s new cannabis regulations do not allow Delta-8 THC under the definition of hemp-derived products.

 

Colorado: Colorado, a state with a well-established marijuana market, has also prohibited Delta-8 THC, aligning its hemp regulations with the stricter standards applied to marijuana products.

  • Oregon: The Oregon Liquor Control Commission (OLCC) has imposed strict testing and labeling requirements for all hemp products, including those containing Delta-8 THC. These measures are aimed at ensuring consumer safety and preventing youth access.

  • Kentucky: In Kentucky, where hemp farming is significant, the state agriculture department has issued warnings about the legality of Delta-8 THC and is considering further regulatory actions.

  • Texas: Texas has seen legal battles over the status of Delta-8 THC, with temporary bans and subsequent legal challenges reflecting the contentious nature of its regulation. The state is in the process of clarifying its stance through legislative means.

  • Florida – Gov. Desantis vetoed a bill limiting intoxicating hemp in a strategic move to cause problems in the upcoming recreational marijuana amendment vote in November.  A bizzarre tactic for sure and one that may backfire on his anti-pot policy in Florida.

 Implications for the Hemp Industry

 

The regulatory crackdown on intoxicating hemp products has several significant implications for the hemp industry:

  • Market Adjustments: Producers and retailers of Delta-8 THC and similar products face the prospect of losing substantial revenue streams as states impose bans and restrictions. This could lead to a shift in focus towards non-intoxicating cannabinoids like CBD and CBG (cannabigerol).

  • Compliance Costs: Meeting new regulatory requirements, such as enhanced testing and labeling standards, will increase operational costs for businesses. This could disadvantage smaller companies that lack the resources to adapt quickly.

  • Legal Challenges: The evolving regulatory landscape is likely to result in continued legal challenges as businesses and advocacy groups push back against state bans and seek clarity on federal regulations.

  • Consumer Access: Consumers who rely on Delta-8 THC for its perceived benefits, such as pain relief and anxiety reduction, may find it harder to obtain these products. This could drive demand for alternative cannabinoids or result in a resurgence of the illicit market.

  • Innovation and Research: The scrutiny of Delta-8 THC highlights the need for more comprehensive research into the safety and efficacy of all cannabinoids. This could spur innovation in the industry, leading to the development of new, safer products that meet regulatory standards.

The Future of Hemp-Derived Products

As the regulatory landscape continues to evolve, the future of hemp-derived products remains uncertain but filled with potential. Key factors that will shape this future include:

  • Federal Legislation: Clarification from federal agencies, including the DEA and FDA, on the status of Delta-8 THC and other cannabinoids will be crucial. Clear guidelines and consistent enforcement can help stabilize the market and protect consumers.

  • State Regulations: States will continue to play a critical role in regulating hemp products. Collaboration between state and federal authorities, as well as input from industry stakeholders, will be essential in developing balanced regulations that safeguard public health while supporting economic growth.

  • Consumer Education: Educating consumers about the differences between cannabinoids and the importance of purchasing from reputable sources will help reduce confusion and ensure safe consumption practices.

  • Innovation: The challenges posed by regulation can also drive innovation. Companies that invest in research and development to create novel, compliant products will likely thrive in the long term.

  • Advocacy and Collaboration: Ongoing dialogue between industry representatives, lawmakers, and advocacy groups will be vital in shaping fair and effective regulations. Transparent communication and collaboration can help address concerns and promote the benefits of hemp-derived products.

Conclusion

The regulatory crackdown on intoxicating hemp products across multiple states underscores the complex interplay between innovation, consumer demand, and public safety. As states move to impose stricter controls on products like Delta-8 THC, the hemp industry must navigate a challenging landscape marked by legal ambiguities and evolving standards. While these regulations aim to protect public health and prevent misuse, they also present significant challenges and opportunities for industry stakeholders. The future of hemp-derived products will depend on clear regulatory guidance, ongoing research, and the industry’s ability to adapt and innovate in response to changing conditions. By prioritizing safety and compliance, the hemp industry can continue to grow and offer valuable products that meet consumer needs in a regulated and responsible manner.

 

HEMP CAN GET YOU HIGH, READ ON…

HOW TO GET HIGH ON HEMP

HOW CAN AMERICA BE GETTING HIGH ON HEMP, EXACTLY?



Source link

Cannabis News

California Appeals Court Rejects Marijuana Grow Permit, Citing Federal Illegality

Published

on

By


In a landmark decision that highlights the tension between state and federal cannabis laws, a California appellate court ruled on October 29th that property owners can refuse to allow the transportation of cannabis across their land via easements, even when the cannabis operation is approved by local authorities.

The Second District Court of Appeal’s unanimous decision draws attention to private property rights in a context where cannabis remains federally illegal, but state law allows licensed cultivation, distribution and sale. Presiding Justice Albert Gilbert stated, “No matter how much California voters and the Legislature might try, cannabis cultivation and transportation are illegal in California as long as it remains illegal under federal law.” JCCrandall LLC v. County of Santa Barbara, Case No. B333201, 2024 WL 4599304, Oct. 29, 2024.

Unless the California Supreme Court grants review – which I would not rule out – the decision empowers private property owners to refuse to contract with cannabis businesses, and restricts local government from approving cannabis operations that implicate the property rights of neighbors who object.

The case at hand

The dispute centered around a cannabis cultivation operation in Santa Barbara County, where JCCrandall LLC challenged a conditional use permit granted by the County to its neighbor, Santa Rita Holdings Inc. The critical issue was that Santa Rita Holdings could only access its 2.5-acre cannabis farm via an unpaved road crossing JCCrandall’s property through a pre-existing easement. JCCrandall grows oats and barley.

JCCrandall’s primary concern? It raised a number of complaints with the Santa Barbara County Supervisors about truck traffic and night operations, which did not gain traction, but in the Court of Appeal JCCrandall focused on what it claimed was potential liability associated with having federally illegal substances transported across its property, even though County regulators found that the Santa Rita operation was fully compliant with state and local laws.

Key legal findings

The appellate court’s decision hinged on several crucial points:

  1. Property Rights: The court emphasized that “the right to exclude others is the essence of the right of property ownership” and classified it as a fundamental vested right.
  2. Federal Supremacy: The panel determined that allowing cannabis transportation across private property “defies the Supremacy Clause” of the U.S. Constitution.
  3. State vs. Federal Law: While cannabis might be legal under California law, the court ruled that federal law’s prohibition takes precedence in this context.

California cannabis industry implications

Legal experts suggest this ruling could have far-reaching consequences for California’s cannabis industry. Section 1550.5(b) of the California Civil Code makes contracts within California involving cannabis lawful and enforceable, and Santa Rita Holdings bet the ranch on that argument. But the Court of Appeal held that the statute could not compel a landowner to allow cannabis to travel across its property on a pre-existing easement. Licensed operators may find it harder to do business because neighbors who have property rights affected by a cannabis business can object, and, under the JCCrandall ruling, local government must yield to those objections.

An example might be a cannabis dispensary that depends on access to its parking lot via an easement or is located in a shopping center where other lessees have rights to object to tenants notwithstanding the approval of the landlord. In cultivation, many cannabis farms depend on vehicular access through easements because they are remote and do not always have direct access to public thoroughfares, or they depend on water sourced from other properties pursuant to agreements made by prior owners who grew traditional crops. These neighbors might not need to show any negative impact on their property, but can argue that they could be found complicit in federally illegal activities.

I think the most problematic language in the JCCrandall ruling is the following, which might draw the attention of the California Supreme Court and cause it to grant review: “For as long as an easement is enjoyed, its mode and manner of use shall remain substantially the same as it was at the time the easement was created. The County argues the easement was used for agricultural purposes. But there is a vast difference between legal and illegal agricultural purposes.” (Emphasis added.) If California has determined that cannabis cultivation is legal – as it has – and state courts routinely enforce contracts involving cannabis, it is a pretty bold step to declare the use of a lawful pre-existing easement illegal simply because the agricultural crop is cannabis and take away easement access from Santa Rita.

Looking ahead

This decision creates new challenges for cannabis businesses in California, and will result in more disputes among neighbors. While the Biden administration has shown signs of easing federal marijuana restrictions, this ruling demonstrates that the federal-state law conflict continues to create significant legal hurdles for the cannabis industry.

California court decisions also can be persuasive authority in other states, so we might see similar litigation (and decisions) elsewhere in the country where cannabis has been legalized.

The case serves as a reminder that despite California’s progressive stance on cannabis, federal prohibition continues to cast a long shadow over the industry’s operations and development. As the cannabis landscape continues to evolve, this ruling may prompt businesses to reassess their property arrangements and local governments will certainly have to reconsider their permitting processes to give more careful consideration to objections by neighbors who claim that their property rights are implicated by cannabis operations.

Note: This post was first published earlier this month on the Alger ADR Blog.



Source link

Continue Reading

Cannabis News

Autoimmune Conditions Are Rising Fast in American Medicine, Can Cannabis Help?

Published

on

By


cannabis autoimmune problems

Why Are Autoimmune Conditions On The Rise? And How Cannabis Can Help

 

Autoimmune diseases refer to a group of medical conditions that occur as a result of the immune system attacking your own tissues.

 

In a normal human body, the immune system is responsible for protecting the body by producing antibodies that prevent toxins, cancer cells, and viruses from harming the body. However, when one is struck by an autoimmune disorder, the immune system is no longer able to distinguish the difference between dangerous cells and healthy cells. As a result, the healthy cells are attacked, too.

Today, we know of around 100 different kinds of autoimmune conditions. Some of the most common examples of autoimmune conditions include rheumatoid arthritis (RA), lupus, inflammatory bowel disease, celiac disease, Type 1 diabetes, multiple sclerosis (MS), and the Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) to name a few. Others include Graves’ disease, Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, psoriasis, and vasculitis.

 

According to the National Health Council, around 50 million Americans are affected by autoimmune diseases today. This is a conservative estimate, considering that several autoimmune conditions are tricky to treat and so many people go undiagnosed for long periods of time. It’s worrisome to note that there are more people developing autoimmune diseases these days, many of which have reached levels comparable to epidemics.

 

But cannabis can help!

 

How Cannabis Can Help Curb And Manage Autoimmune Diseases

 

Not one single cause is responsible for the alarming growth of autoimmune diseases, though there are several factors at play. While there isn’t just one cause we can point at, it’s certain the reasons lie in our environment. After all, human genetics haven’t changed significantly yet the chemicals, toxins, and pollutants in our food and everyday items have risen dramatically.

 

In addition, people are getting less sleep than ever; stress rates are through the roof, and people are constantly worried. There is a clear link between psychological stress and physical health as well as immunity, which is why it isn’t unusual – it’s even common – to see many autoimmune disease cases flare up after people experience severe stress caused by grief, an accident, job loss, or the death of a loved one. These highly stressful and traumatic conditions wreak havoc on the body’s immune response, causing inflammation all over the body.

 

Conventional treatments prescribed to treat autoimmune conditions are focused on taming inflammation; these usually include steroids but also some non-steroidal drugs. These drugs often come with unwanted side effects, but research has shown that cannabis can work with the endocannabinoid system through THC and CBD, as well as other cannabinoids, to simulate similar results. In one study for example, we can see the clear association of the endocannabinoid system for neurodegenerative and inflammatory processes seen in Multiple Sclerosis and Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis.


There has also been an increasing number of studies proving the efficacy of cannabis for treating several autoimmune conditions.

 

Cannabis For Multiple Sclerosis

 

Multiple sclerosis is one of the autoimmune conditions where a growing number of studies have come out supporting the therapeutic benefits of cannabis for. In a 2024 study, patients with multiple sclerosis reported several improvements in quality of life after using cannabis-based medical products (CBMPs). For the study, British investigators analyzed the impact of cannabis based medicinal products made from either oil or extracts in 141 patients who were enrolled in the UK Medical Cannabis Registry.

 

The researchers then analyzed the changes in patient outcomes after a month, then three and 6 months after. According to the patients themselves, they were able to sustain improvements in their mental and physical health after marijuana therapy.

 

“This case series demonstrates a potential association between the initiation of CBMPs and improved patient reported outcomes in sleep, anxiety, and general HRQoL [health-related quality of life] measures, over six months,” said the study authors. “Additional measures for HRQoL, including various physical and mental health subdomains, also exhibit improvements up to six months when compared to baseline,” the authors concluded.

 

In another study from 2023, patients with multiple sclerosis reported significant improvements in symptoms after cannabis use. For the study, researchers from the Dent Neurologic Institute in Buffalo, New York, analyzed the medical records of 141 patients with multiple sclerosis, who were also legally authorized to consume medical marijuana products. They then analyzed data from the patients after one up to 4 follow-up sessions after the initial session of cannabis therapy. Sixty-five percent of patients consumed 1:1 THC:CBD tinctures.

 

According to the authors: “The results of this study indicate that use of MC [medical cannabis] to alleviate symptoms of MS is largely efficacious, with improvement in pain (72 percent of patients), muscle spasticity (48 percent of patients), and sleep disturbance (40 percent of patients) frequently reported.”

 

“More than half of opioid users at baseline were able to either discontinue or decrease their opioid use after starting MC. The mean daily MME [morphine milligram equivalents] was significantly reduced from the initial visit (51 mg) to the last follow-up visit (40 mg). This is consistent with previous literature showing that MC legalization is associated with decreased opioid use and that MC use is associated with decreased opioid use in patients with chronic pain. These findings indicate that MC may represent an alternative analgesic to opioids for some patients,” they wrote. 

 

Anecdotal Evidence

 

While more studies are needed to determine cannabis’ effect on other autoimmune conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis, we can rely on anecdotal evidence. In 2020, data from the medical journal, Rheumatology, revealed that patients who have this condition, along with those who have lupus and fibromyalgia, consume cannabis.

 

In fact, it was reported that marijuana was extremely common especially for patients with fibromyalgia. “In this meta-analysis, we found that one in six patients suffering from rheumatologic disease actively consumes cannabis, reducing pain reduction… A favorable effect of cannabis on pain in our meta-analysis reinforces the idea that cannabis could be used for analgesic purposes,” the authors concluded.

 

Conclusion

Cannabis is a safe and natural way to help prevent and treat the symptoms of autoimmune disease. It targets inflammation at its root, and is a proven natural way to help cope with stress, pain, insomnia, and inflammation all while protecting the brain. However, it’s important to ensure you medicate with clean, organic sources of marijuana.

 

AUTOIMMUNE AND CANNABIS, READ ON…

AUTOIMMUNE DISEASES THAT CANNABIS CAN HELP

CANNABIS FOR 9 DIFFERENT AUTOIMMUNE DISEASES!



Source link

Continue Reading

Cannabis News

Hemp and the New Senate Farm Bill

Published

on

By


The U.S. Senate’s version of the Farm Bill finally landed this week. They’re calling it the Rural Prosperity and Food Security Act of 2024 (the “Senate bill”). The Senate bill follows on the House’s proposal, called the Farm, Food and National Security Act of 2024 (the “House bill”), offered in May. Neither the Senate bill nor the House bill would preempt state or Indian law regarding hemp or the regulation of hemp products. This means states and tribes will retain a lot of latitude in regulating hemp and hemp-derived products– which gets people fired up.

Aside from giving states some runway, the Senate bill and the House bill differ in key respects regarding hemp. Therefore, these august bodies must confer and reconcile their sundry proposals. That could happen in 2024, but seems more likely in 2025 when the new Congress convenes. As of this week, though, we finally have a framework.

The Senate Bill re-defines “hemp” and defines “industrial hemp”

Section 10016 of the Senate bill (“Hemp Production”) amends the definition of “hemp.” Hemp was defined in the 2018 Farm Bill and removed from the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA), taking us on a truly wild ride. See: What Happened to Hemp? (“What Happened”). The Senate bill also gives us a definition for “industrial hemp.” Here are those definitions, with points of emphasis in bold:

(1) Hemp. The term “hemp” means (A) the plant Cannabis sativa L. and any part of that plant, including the seeds thereof and all derivatives, extracts, cannabinoids, isomers, acids, salts, and salts of isomers, whether growing or not, with a delta-9 total tetrahydrocannabinol concentration (including tetrahydrocannabinolic acid) of not more than 0.3 percent on a dry weight basis; and (B) industrial hemp.

(3) Industrial Hemp. The term “industrial hemp” means the plant Cannabis sativa L. if the harvested material (A) is only (i) the stalks of that plant, fiber produced from those stalks, or any other manufactured product, derivative, mixture, or preparation of those stalks (except cannabinoid resin extracted from those stalks); (ii) whole grain, oil, cake, nut, hull, or any other compound, manufactured product, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the seeds of that plant (except cannabinoid resin extracted from the seeds of that plant); or (iii) viable seeds of that plant produced solely for production or manufacture of any material described in clause (i) or (ii); and (B) will not be used in the manufacturing or synthesis of natural or synthetic cannabinoid products.

The new regime

Again, the definitional stuff in bold is what I want to emphasize.

First, the Senate bill keeps the THC threshold at 0.3 percent, which is an arbitrary number we’ve been advocating against for years. The Senate bill mirrors the House bill in this respect, though, so we are stuck with this, unless Ron Paul gets his way.

Second, the Senate bill keeps the 2018 Farm Bill’s total THC standard, including THCA. The House bill does this too. This was fairly predictable: in What Happened, I wrote that we could “expect the total THC standard to remain, which means that actual Delta-9 THC won’t be the only metric for calculating THC content.”

We’ve also explained on this blog that the 2018 Farm Bill and USDA rules mandate total THC testing on pre-harvest hemp batches, but do not mandate such testing on post-harvest hemp or hemp products. The Senate bill doesn’t change this paradigm, which means the “loophole” for gas station weed remains open. This proposal is a big win for opponents of the House bill’s “Miller Amendment,” which would narrow the definition of “hemp” to exclude intoxicating hemp-derived substances.

Third, the Senate bill introduces a new definition and framework for industrial hemp. The House bill does this too, albeit slightly differently. The idea here is to invite farmers to grow hemp for fiber and grain purposes, while freeing them from regulatory burdens with the Department of Agriculture and criminal exposure with the Department of Justice. More specifically, for “industrial hemp” growers, the Senate bill:

  • removes background check requirements;
  • instates “relaxed regulatory requirements” for sampling and inspection methodologies (which will need to be adopted by rule); and
  • develops a certified seed program. 

The Senate bill also makes any hemp producer ineligible to grow hemp for five years if that producer, “with a culpable mental state greater than negligence, produces a crop of hemp that is inconsistent with that license.”(Hint: use the seed program.) The proof standard here seems like it could be an issue, and even if anyone has been adjudicated as growing marijuana under the guise of hemp, Farm Bill ineligibility seems like a far-off concern.

Bottom line

The big takeaway for me is that the Senate bill leaves the door open for intoxicating hemp products, whereas the Miller Amendment to the House bill does not. Something’s gotta give. And it needs to happen soon, because we’re already long overdue. As I explained in a webinar last week, the Farm Bill deals with the nation’s entire food supply, not just hemp. Therefore, this is not like with the SAFE Banking Act, where we have a proposed law specific to cannabis that may or may not ever pass. The Farm Bill must pass, and soon.

Stay tuned and we’ll keep you updated on any major happenings. For more on this topic, check out our massive hemp and CBD archive, or these specific, recent posts:



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2021 The Art of MaryJane Media