Cannabis News
Cannabis Prohibition in a Tyranny of Science, A Crime Against the Nation Argues New Law Paper
The Tyranny of Science: Prohibition is a crime against the Nation!
For those familiar with my work, you know I’ve long stood in opposition to the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). This piece of legislation, which arbitrarily categorizes drugs and makes sweeping claims about their medical value, has been a thorn in the side of rational drug policy for decades. Nowhere is this more evident than in Schedule I, a category reserved for substances deemed to have “no accepted medical use.”
Yet, a closer look at the drugs placed in this restrictive category reveals a startling contradiction. Cannabis, LSD, psilocybin, and other psychedelics – all Schedule I substances – are increasingly shown to have significant medical benefits. This begs the question: What rigorous scientific process led to their classification as medically useless? Or is the CSA merely a political tool, divorced from scientific reality?
It’s refreshing to discover that I’m not alone in labeling the CSA as tyrannical. Robert Mikos, a seasoned law expert specializing in federalism and drug law, shares this perspective. In his recent paper, “Marijuana and the Tyrannies of Scheduling,” Mikos meticulously dissects the flaws in the current scheduling system, providing a compelling argument for its reform.
In this article, we’ll dive deep into Mikos’s cannabis analysis, examining how the CSA’s scheduling criteria create what he terms the “Tyranny of Science” and the “Tyranny of the Majority.” We’ll explore how these tyrannies have effectively trapped potentially beneficial substances in Schedule I, stifling research and medical progress.
While Mikos offers some solutions to this dilemma, I believe his proposals, though valuable, don’t go far enough. The CSA, founded on falsehoods and deception rather than scientific evidence, requires more than minor adjustments. It’s time to renegotiate the entire agreement, challenging the monopoly it grants to Big Pharma – an industry that has repeatedly proven unworthy of such trust and power.
Let’s embark on this exploration of the CSA’s tyrannical nature and envision a path towards more rational, science-based drug policies.
In his paper “Marijuana and the Tyrannies of Scheduling,” Robert Mikos presents a compelling critique of the current drug scheduling system under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). At the heart of his argument is the concept of “currently accepted medical use” (CAMU), a criterion that has become disproportionately influential in determining a substance’s scheduling.
Mikos identifies two major “tyrannies” in the current scheduling process:
-
The Tyranny of Science: Historically, the DEA insisted that CAMU could only be demonstrated through rigorous scientific research, primarily multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This approach set an almost insurmountable bar for Schedule I substances, as their very classification severely restricts the ability to conduct such research. It created a catch-22 situation: a drug couldn’t be rescheduled without extensive research, but such research was nearly impossible to conduct due to its Schedule I status.
-
The Tyranny of the Majority: In response to marijuana’s pending rescheduling, the DEA introduced a new CAMU test based on widespread clinical use. While this bypasses the need for extensive scientific studies, it introduces a new challenge. To meet this criteria, a drug must gain enough popular support to be legalized for medical use in numerous states, accumulating substantial clinical experience. This sets a high political bar that few substances are likely to clear.
Mikos argues that these tyrannies effectively trap substances in Schedule I, regardless of their potential benefits or actual harm profile. This is particularly problematic for promising psychedelics like psilocybin and MDMA, which show therapeutic potential but lack the widespread public support that marijuana has garnered over decades.
The core of the problem, according to Mikos, is the DEA’s insistence that a lack of CAMU automatically relegates a substance to Schedule I, regardless of its abuse potential or dependence liability. This approach, he contends, is not mandated by the CSA and actually runs contrary to the statute’s text and purpose.
To address these issues, Mikos proposes a more flexible approach to scheduling. He suggests that the DEA should consider all three criteria outlined in the CSA – abuse potential, dependence liability, and CAMU – in a more balanced manner when making scheduling decisions. This would allow for substances to be moved out of Schedule I even if they lack a currently accepted medical use, provided their abuse potential and dependence liability warrant such a move.
Mikos argues that this approach would lead to more rational scheduling decisions that better reflect the actual benefits and risks of controlled substances, as Congress originally intended. It would provide a path for promising substances like psilocybin or MDMA to be rescheduled, facilitating research and potential medical use, without having to overcome the enormous political hurdles currently in place.
While Mikos’s proposal doesn’t completely overhaul the CSA or challenge its fundamental premises, it offers a pragmatic solution within the existing framework. By reducing the outsized influence of CAMU determinations, it could potentially break the logjam that has kept many substances trapped in Schedule I for decades, opening up new possibilities for research and medical applications.
This nuanced approach recognizes the complexities of drug scheduling and seeks to create a more flexible, scientifically-grounded system within the existing legal structure. While it may not go as far as some drug policy reformers might wish, it represents a significant step towards a more rational and less tyrannical approach to drug scheduling.
While Robert Mikos provides a far more nuanced approach to drug scheduling, his proposal, in my view, doesn’t go far enough. The Controlled Substances Act (CSA) is fundamentally flawed, built on a foundation of political ideology and pharmaceutical industry lobbying rather than scientific evidence. To truly address the issues plaguing our drug policies, we need to scrap the CSA entirely and start anew.
The arbitrary nature of drug scheduling under the CSA is glaringly evident when we examine the criteria for Schedule I substances. These drugs are claimed to have “no medical value and high abuse potential.” Yet, where is the evidence supporting this assertion for substances like cannabis or psilocybin? When we dig deeper, we find that comprehensive research on these substances is sorely lacking. More disturbingly, the very classification of these drugs as Schedule I creates a catch-22, making it extremely difficult and expensive to conduct the necessary studies to challenge their status.
This system doesn’t just hinder research; it actively stifles scientific inquiry. Researchers need strict permissions and millions of dollars to conduct tests, and even then, they’re often limited to studying subpar versions of these substances that don’t reflect what’s actually used in the real world. It’s a system designed to maintain the status quo, not to uncover truth.
While Mikos’s suggestions aim to fix the situation, they’re akin to putting a band-aid on a gunshot wound. The CSA is toxic legislation that erodes personal freedoms and maintains an arbitrary system that can be leveraged to secure a drug monopoly for pharmaceutical companies. We don’t need amendments; we need a complete rethinking of our approach to drugs and addiction.
Our society already accepts and manages certain addictions – gaming, pornography, gambling, alcohol, and tobacco, to name a few. Yet we deem other substances, like cannabis, as “dangerous,” despite evidence suggesting it’s far less harmful than many legal substances. This inconsistency highlights the arbitrary and often hypocritical nature of our drug policies.
What we need are new norms for a new age. The archaic ideologies of early prohibitionists have caused enough havoc around the world. It’s time to end this madness entirely and develop a drug policy based on science, public health, and respect for personal freedom.
Instead of trying to salvage the CSA, we should be asking fundamental questions about our relationship with drugs and addiction. How can we create policies that prioritize harm reduction and public health over punishment? How can we foster an environment that allows for responsible use while providing support for those struggling with addiction? How can we ensure that promising substances with potential medical benefits aren’t trapped in a regulatory limbo for decades?
While I applaud Mikos for his efforts to bring rationality to an irrational system, his proposals simply don’t go far enough. We need to move beyond the paradigm of scheduling and prohibition altogether. It’s time for a comprehensive, evidence-based approach to drug policy that respects individual autonomy, promotes public health, and allows for scientific research without unreasonable restrictions.
The CSA, born in an era of fear and misinformation, has outlived its usefulness. It’s time to relegate it to the annals of history and craft drug policies fit for the 21st century. Only by completely rethinking our approach can we hope to address the complex realities of drug use and addiction in our society. The time for half-measures is over – it’s time to end the tyranny of the CSA once and for all.
PROFESSOR MIKOS TALKS TO CANNABIS.NET, WATCH BELOW…
Is kratom addictive? Discover the potential for dependence on Kratom, the risks involved with its use, and how to approach its consumption responsibly.
From 2011 to 2017, over 1,800 calls to poison centers involved kratom in the U.S. This significant number highlights the concern regarding kratom addiction.
However, without Food and Drug Administration (FDA) oversight, and due to various consumption methods like teas and capsules, there are significant health risks. Safe use of kratom is now in question due to these issues.
Research debates how dependence develops, outlining signs like loss of control and withdrawal symptoms. These signs are seen in regular kratom users. Ironically, some people switch from drugs like heroin to kratom, looking for a legal alternative.
Understanding Kratom: Origins and Prevalence
Kratom comes from the Mitragyna speciosa tree in Southeast Asia. It can act like a stimulant or like opioids, based on how much you take. People use it in different ways, for a small energy boost or stronger effects at higher doses.
The legal status of kratom in the U.S. is complicated and changing. It’s a hot topic because some worry about its misuse. It’s still legal in several states. This shows how different places handle drug rules. The National Institute on Drug Abuse is looking into its medical benefits. But, the FDA hasn’t approved it for medical use yet. The DEA calls it a “drug of concern,” which means policies might change.
-
From 2011 to 2017, poison control centers in the U.S. got over 1,800 reports about kratom. This shows it’s widely used and might pose health risks.
-
Kratom’s main ingredients bind to opioid receptors very strongly, stronger than morphine even. This fact is key to understanding its effects.
-
As more people use kratom, more are reporting serious health problems. These include liver and heart issues, and tough withdrawal symptoms, particularly in those already sick.
The statistics show mounting worries about kratom in the U.S. As its use grows, it’s becoming more important to health policies and laws. What happens next will depend on further research and legal decisions.
Is Kratom Addictive: Investigating the Substance’s Nature
The question of kratom’s addictiveness focuses on how it affects brain receptors and its long-term health implications. The ongoing debate highlights concerns about dependence and the risk of addiction. Scientists are closely looking at these issues.
How Kratom Works in the Brain
Kratom’s main alkaloids, mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine, bind to the brain’s opioid receptors, similar to painkillers and narcotics. This connection suggests a potential risk of dependence. These alkaloids are key to kratom’s pain relief but also point to possible addiction concerns, especially with frequent, high-dose usage.
Patterns and Consequences of Long-term Use
-
Using kratom often, especially in large doses, can increase the risk of dependence and intense withdrawal symptoms, similar to opioid withdrawal.
-
Although some use it for pain or to improve mood, long-term kratom users might see serious health problems, like liver damage and mental health issues.
-
Withdrawal symptoms, including irritability, nausea, and sleep problems, show kratom’s impact on one’s physical and mental health.
Assessment of Addiction Risks
Studies indicate a significant risk of addiction to kratom, especially with high doses or frequent use. Dependence develops as the body gets used to kratom, leading to tolerance and a need for more to feel its effects. Withdrawal symptoms emphasize this risk, as highlighted by health experts.
Physiological Effects: Kratom’s Impact on the Body
There is a lot of debate about the safety and use of kratom. This herbal extract comes from the Mitragyna speciosa plant. It has drawn attention for its possible harmful effects on the body. The FDA has issued many warnings about kratom, raising safety concerns.
-
Kratom Adverse Effects: Kratom users have reported side effects like nausea, vomiting, and confusion. More serious issues include high blood pressure and liver damage. These problems highlight the risks of using kratom.
-
Herbal Extract Safety: Some kratom products contain heavy metals and pathogens. These can cause severe health issues, including death. This shows the importance of safety in herbal products.
-
FDA Warnings and Regulations: The FDA has linked kratom to over 35 deaths and warns against using it. They point out the lack of medical uses and the risk of addiction.
-
Physiological Impact: Kratom’s effects depend on the dose and the user’s body. Yet, it can lead to dangerous outcomes like liver damage and seizures.
-
Safety Concerns from Authorities: Federal agencies like the DEA are worried about kratom’s safety. Although not a controlled substance, monitoring suggests users should be careful.
Kratom might offer temporary relief for some ailments, but it comes with significant risks. The FDA’s warnings should make people think twice. If considering kratom, it’s crucial to talk to a doctor first. Experts stress the need for safety and caution with herbal extracts.
Conclusion
Kratom’s role in health and regulation is complex, with views and research findings widely varied. Some people use kratom for its claimed health benefits, but it’s a hot topic. Experts advise caution and suggest consulting a doctor before using kratom due to the unclear effects.
Clinical studies using scores like SOWS and COWS haven’t confirmed withdrawal symptoms from kratom. This adds to the debate, especially when some users report withdrawal. This makes kratom a controversial subject among different findings and user experiences.
When it comes to treating opioid addiction, kratom can be both helpful and harmful. Some have used it successfully to fight addiction. Yet, some states have banned it. This highlights the need for regulations and consistent product quality. It also raises questions about kratom’s legal status due to mixed actions by authorities.
The situation shows how complex kratom is in the realm of substance use and law. Without clear evidence supporting either its benefits or risks, it poses a challenge. More research is needed to guide regulations and health advice. For now, anyone thinking of using kratom should be careful, seek medical advice, and keep up with laws and health guidelines.
WHAT IS KRATOM ANYWAY? READ ON…
Cannabis News
New Rule, December 5: Oregon Cannabis Retailers, Processors and Labor Peace Agreements
As the popularity of CBD (cannabidiol) continues to rise, many pet owners are exploring its potential benefits for their furry companions. CBD is derived from the hemp plant and is known for its therapeutic properties, which may help alleviate anxiety, pain, inflammation, and other health issues in dogs. However, when considering CBD treats for your dog, it’s crucial to understand the ingredients that go into these products. This article will delve into the essential ingredients to look for in CBD treats, their benefits, potential risks, and how to choose the right product for your canine friend.
Understanding CBD and Its Benefits for Dogs
Before we dive into the ingredients, it’s important to understand what CBD is and how it can benefit dogs. CBD is a non-psychoactive compound found in cannabis plants. Unlike THC (tetrahydrocannabinol), which can produce a “high,” CBD does not have intoxicating effects. Instead, it interacts with the endocannabinoid system (ECS) in both humans and animals, which plays a crucial role in regulating various physiological processes.
Potential Benefits of CBD for Dogs
-
Anxiety Relief: Many dogs experience anxiety due to various factors such as loud noises, separation from their owners, or changes in their environment. CBD may help reduce anxiety levels by promoting a sense of calm.
Choosing the Right CBD Treats
When selecting CBD treats for your dog, it’s essential to look beyond just the CBD content. The overall quality of the treat is equally important. Here are some key ingredients you should be aware of:
1. High-Quality CBD Oil
The foundation of any good CBD treat is the quality of the CBD oil used. Look for treats that contain:
-
Full-Spectrum or Broad-Spectrum CBD: Full-spectrum products contain all cannabinoids found in the hemp plant, including trace amounts of THC (below 0.3% as per legal standards). Broad-spectrum products contain multiple cannabinoids but no THC. Both types can provide an “entourage effect,” enhancing the therapeutic benefits.
2. Natural Ingredients
Just like human food, the ingredients in your dog’s treats matter significantly. Look for treats made with natural ingredients rather than artificial additives or preservatives. Here are some beneficial components:
Whole grains like oat flour or brown rice flour provide essential nutrients and fiber that support digestive health. They are also a good source of energy for active dogs.
Healthy fats are vital for maintaining your dog’s coat and skin health. Ingredients like coconut oil or peanut butter not only enhance flavor but also provide beneficial fatty acids that support overall well-being.
Incorporating fruits and vegetables into your dog’s treats can boost their nutritional value:
To make treats more appealing without resorting to artificial flavors, look for natural flavorings like chicken broth or carob (a chocolate substitute safe for dogs). These ingredients can enhance taste while keeping the treat healthy.
3. Functional Ingredients
Some treats may include additional functional ingredients designed to address specific health concerns:
These compounds are often included in joint support treats to help maintain joint health and mobility, especially in older dogs or those with arthritis.
Probiotics can promote gut health by supporting a healthy balance of bacteria in your dog’s digestive system.
Certain herbs like chamomile or ginger may offer calming effects or aid digestion. Always ensure these herbs are safe for canine consumption before choosing treats containing them.
Ingredients to Avoid
While there are many beneficial ingredients to seek out, it’s equally important to know which ones to avoid:
1. Artificial Additives
Many commercial pet treats contain artificial colors, flavors, and preservatives that can be harmful to your dog’s health. These additives may lead to allergic reactions or other health issues over time.
2. High Sugar Content
Just like humans, dogs do not need excessive sugar in their diets. Treats high in sugar can lead to obesity and dental problems.
3. Low-Quality Fillers
Avoid treats with low-quality fillers such as corn syrup or by-products that do not provide any nutritional value.
Always ensure that any CBD product you choose contains less than 0.3% THC to avoid any psychoactive effects on your dog.
How to Introduce CBD Treats Safely
When introducing any new treat into your dog’s diet—especially one containing CBD—it’s essential to do so gradually:
-
Start Small: Begin with a small amount of the treat to see how your dog reacts.
-
Monitor Your Dog: Observe your dog for any adverse reactions such as changes in behavior or gastrointestinal upset.
-
Adjust Dosage as Needed: Depending on your dog’s size and needs, you may need to adjust the dosage over time.
-
Consult Your Veterinarian: Before starting any new supplement regimen, including CBD treats, consult with your veterinarian—especially if your dog has existing health conditions or is taking other medications.
Conclusion
CBD treats can be a beneficial addition to your dog’s diet when chosen carefully with attention to ingredient quality and safety. By understanding what goes into these treats—such as high-quality CBD oil, natural ingredients, functional additives—and knowing what to avoid, you can make informed decisions that support your dog’s health and well-being.
Always prioritize transparency from manufacturers regarding ingredient sourcing and product testing; this will ensure you’re providing your furry friend with safe and effective options tailored to their needs. With proper research and guidance from a veterinarian, you can confidently explore the potential benefits of CBD treats for your beloved pet while ensuring they enjoy a tasty snack that’s good for them too!
CBD OIL FOR DOGS, READ ON…
Get some rest on Modified Grapes—November’s Leafly HighLight
Is Kratom Addictive? Understanding Dependence, Risks, and Safe Usage
New Rule, December 5: Oregon Cannabis Retailers, Processors and Labor Peace Agreements
The CBD Dog Treat Guide
Trippin’ Golf Balls – Can Magic Mushrooms Help Your Golf Game?
Australian Broadcasting Corp Alleges Military Veterans Have Been Targeted By Medicinal Cannabis Companies Via Social Media & Offered Free “Product”
Medical Marijuana Passed in 106 out of 106 Counties and Cities in What State? A. Florida B. Kentucky C. Ohio D. North Dakota
Green Dragon founders fired up to “get back to where we were” with new joint
Trump 2.0 Cannabis Reform? – What to Expect When Republicans Control Washington
Two men convicted in robbery-murder of marijuana dispensary employee in Santa Ana
Distressed Cannabis Business Takeaways – Canna Law Blog™
United States: Alex Malyshev And Melinda Fellner Discuss The Intersection Of Tax And Cannabis In New Video Series – Part VI: Licensing (Video)
What you Need to Know
Drug Testing for Marijuana – The Joint Blog
NCIA Write About Their Equity Scholarship Program
It has been a wild news week – here’s how CBD and weed can help you relax
Cannabis, alcohol firm SNDL loses CA$372.4 million in 2022
A new April 20 cannabis contest includes a $40,000 purse
Your Go-To Source for Cannabis Logos and Designs
City Of Oakland Issues RFP For Employee Training Programs
-
Cannabis News2 years agoDistressed Cannabis Business Takeaways – Canna Law Blog™
-
One-Hit Wonders2 years agoUnited States: Alex Malyshev And Melinda Fellner Discuss The Intersection Of Tax And Cannabis In New Video Series – Part VI: Licensing (Video)
-
Cannabis 1012 years agoWhat you Need to Know
-
drug testing11 months agoDrug Testing for Marijuana – The Joint Blog
-
Education2 years agoNCIA Write About Their Equity Scholarship Program
-
Cannabis2 years agoIt has been a wild news week – here’s how CBD and weed can help you relax
-
Marijuana Business Daily2 years agoCannabis, alcohol firm SNDL loses CA$372.4 million in 2022
-
California2 years agoA new April 20 cannabis contest includes a $40,000 purse