Cannabis News
Is a Meth Head a Criminal or a Patient?
Published
2 years agoon
By
admin
When it comes to guilty pleasures – Twitter for me is a mix of bittersweet toxicity. While it’s true, there’s a lot of interesting takes and opinions by millions of interesting characters…it’s also a never-ending pit of people shouting at each other.
While this inherently isn’t a bad thing if you’re into getting into digital shout-offs, to me it’s a colossal waste of time.
As a writer, I try to find interesting angles, unique perspectives, and to keep my finger on the pulse of the collective chaos of humanity in order to write, create, ponder on things most people take for granted.
When it comes to cannabis, the War on Drugs, Prohibition, the history of drugs, etc – I’ve spent more than a decade of my life distilling information into articles which I published on multiple platforms. My pseudonym, “Reginal Reefer” has thousands of published articles – some of them serious, others absolute insanity.
However, even when I write about things that seem incredible, I always to keep an “anchor” in reality. My job is not to convince you whether something is or isn’t, but to merely spark the imagination on the “possibilities” associated with a concept.
I was mindlessly – yes, mindlessly – scrolling through Twitter and saw a tweet about global drug decriminalization, of which I responded, “We should rather enshrine the right to bodily autonomy as an inalienable human right”…or something along those lines.
Some people agreed.
Some didn’t.
This is a story about one who “didn’t” and instead of me engaging with the user on the platform, I decided to utilize a technique I use to stay creative.
You can call it a sort of “emotional alchemy” where you take a digital response from a stranger, and turn it into a greater work that provides more value to the world.
For example, some rando responds to my tweet and for some reason triggers an emotional response – instead of putting up my dukes and trying to outwit the twit, I rather take a few giant steps backwards and write about it…as I am doing right now.
This allows me to take the emotion – which is motivating me to take action, and reframe it in a more positive direction. One could also call it a kind of emotional Aikido.
This is what I intend to do.
Before continuing however, I’m not going to mention the name of the person nor his handle as this is not the point of the article.
I need his words, not his identity.
The reason I bring this up is because in one of our exchanges where I excused his opinion based on the anonymity of his account, saying, “If you don’t have the balls to stand by what you say…”
Of which he replied;
You think im gonna ID myself for some leftist that spews a narrative they clearly don’t fully grasp? Im sure you are well versed in the “natural” side of drug use, but clearly dont understand things like modern synthetics and their devastating impacts.
We’re already off to a good start. The nameless person assumed I have a political “side” where I lean towards. Little does he know I’m the one sitting on the side lines watching the two sides battle it out as their corporate masters bet on the winners.
However, instead of prolonging the debate, I wanted to address a specific point that the anonymous writer tweeted about, and I think it actually has some real value.
I’ll try to summarize the sentiment of Mr. Anonymous below;
So by your logic, needing Narcan (danger to themselves) one time is enough to intervene? Also, if they want to stay an addict, fine; but society doesnt have to fund for that lifestyle either.
What was my logic?
Unless the “addict” is breaking a law and posing a danger to themselves or others – the addict should be allowed to be addicted and should be provided means of escaping the addiction if he or she decides to do so.
Coffee Drinkers are addicts but we don’t jail them…
But why did I say this in the first place? It was actually a response to his comment;
Addicts do not make rational decisions. When drug use is so severe, someone else needs to make some decisions to interrupt the behavior.
And this is where we begin our exploration of the concept of giving addicts drugs for free.
However, I understand if you’re confused at this point, so let me summarize the sentiment of “Mr. Anonymous” to help establish the premise of our article;
Claim: Addicts do not make rational decisions and therefore if one is addicted severely then someone else needs to make the decision for you to interrupt your behavior.
Welcome to the Grey…
While the claim seems logical. If someone is suffering from severe addiction, someone else must override their autonomy and set them on the straight path.
Except, at what point does addiction become problematic? As I said earlier, “coffee addicts are severely addicted…” yet one wouldn’t consider that a “problematic addiction”.
If that’s the case, we need to create a distinction in addiction. “Socially accepted non-destructive addiction” and “socially abhorred destructive addiction”.
However, we already have rules for that. Meaning, if you break these laws, your addiction has “stepped out of bounds” of what is socially accepted and permitted. If you mug an old lady to buy drugs – you committed a crime of assault against another person.
However, the act of using drugs should not be considered a “crime” in that scenario. Because by designating “drug use” as a category of criminal behavior, it means that by default all addicts of illicit drugs are criminals.
Under this definition, the state can rightfully revoke their freedom and turn them into property of the state…which is what has been happening under the guise of “drug prohibition” for over fifty years.
So the first thing we have to understand in this debate is that we have a fundamental issue with drug prohibition that stands in direct contrast to human autonomy. Furthermore, the selective nature of drug prohibition also creates fundamental clashes with how prohibition is enforced.
Why is it that you don’t criminalize alcohol consumption, or to be more technical, “The consumption of ethanol”, which is a mind altering substance that not only claims lives due to excess consumption, is linked to 40% of all violent crimes according to the FBI data?
This drug gets a free pass. It’s not even on the Controlled Substance Act.
But why? Could it be that they tried to prohibit it in the past, realized that drug prohibition was a colossal failure that only reaped death, corruption, and violence? I wonder if that had any parallels to the sheer amount of carnage left in the wake of the War on Drugs?
When Mr. Anonymous said, “Last time I checked, coffee drinkers generally are not robbing and stealing to support their habit, staying up for weeks at a time, and swinging machetes around.”
When pointing out that using the term “addicts” would include coffee drinkers, he pointed out that coffee drinkers don’t engage in violent or detrimental behaviors. Which is true for the most part.
However, alcohol drinkers do. They get behind wheels of cars, they crash and kill people. They get drunk and violent. They rape, steal, and murder.
Therefore, under the logic of Mr. Anonymous – we should prohibit alcohol as it qualifies all of the metrics designated by him.
However, we know that this won’t happen.
Alcohol isn’t even regulated by the DEA. It got lumped with another agency regulating Alcohol, Tobacco and Fire Arms and Explosives. Why they are regulating alcohol, tobacco and fire arms as a singular category still baffles the mind – but this is how bureaucracy works.
Nonetheless, we can see a complete incongruence when it comes to how drug regulation works from a general policy perspective. There’s obvious special interests involved and this is by design.
The “Legal drugs” are controlled by Pharma.
The Illegal Drugs are all “suppressed” by the DEA.
For years, in conjunction with the FDA, NIDA and government sponsored propaganda – The war on Drugs effectively established a drug monopoly for Big Pharma.
Alcohol & Tobacco were given exception due to their influence within the government prior to the drafting of the 1971 Controlled Substance Act signed into law by Richard Nixon. The same Nixon that took the US off the Gold Standard and created the corporate Clusterfuck, which is our current reality.
But I digress.
To summarize my point here is that unless we have equity in drug enforcement or a unilateral application of policy on all drugs – then to prohibit “some people” because their particular drug create undesirable outcomes – that would literally be discrimination.
Now I’d like to point out – getting hooked on Meth – the drug Mr. Anonymous used as his reason for supporting his opinion.
I agree with him, that people hooked on meth and that are creating havoc due to their addiction would probably need some intervention, however, unless they are physically breaking laws other than consuming a drug – then we should technically leave them to their own devices.
This – for better or worse – is the fundamental principle of bodily autonomy. You have a right to your own body – meaning, you can fuck it up all the way to your own death. Will some people fuck it up? Most certainly – but this is a fundamental right to individual liberty that if we give the power to the government – you cease to have that right.
If saying “this drug” gives me a right to remove your personal liberty because of “these reasons”, yet those same reasons apply to other accepted drugs – your argument fails to have substance due to the hypocrisy of enforcement.
Therefore, unless you are absolutely on board with banning alcohol in the same capacity as other “dangerous drugs” – you’re not actually upset about the negative consequences of drug use, but rather the negative outcomes of certain drugs and its impact on society.
Why giving Meth to a Meth head could be the best way to deal with a Meth head…
Here’s a question. When is a meth head most dangerous?
The answer is, “When they don’t have drugs and no means of getting more!”
When their addiction becomes overwhelming, they typically turn to theft and on occasions, assault. Once they buy their drugs, they return to the sweet faux-comfort of their perpetual misery. Their temporary alleviation from their turmoil.
One way to address this situation is to force a junkie into reforming their life. You can arrest them, send them to a drug court, mandate rehab that has to either be funded privately or publically, and hope it sticks.
However, the evidence isn’t really in favor of this working. As this Healthline Article outlines;
A 2016 report by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health found that people who were involuntarily committed were more than twice as likely to die of an opioid-related overdose than those who chose to go into treatment.
Another 2016 study published in the International Journal of Drug Policy found little evidence that mandatory drug treatment helps people stop using drugs or reduces criminal recidivism.
“There appears to be as much evidence that [compulsory treatment] is ineffective, or in fact harmful, as there is evidence that it is effective,” said study author Dan Werb, PhD, who’s also an epidemiologist and policy analyst at the University of California at San Diego (UCSD).
Most of the studies reviewed by Werb and his colleagues looked at involuntary drug treatment centers outside the United States, many of which are rife with human rights violations.
“What we’ve seen across the world — in Mexico and Southeast Asia and China — is that ‘treatment centers’ that are mandated can effectively turn into internment camps,” Werb said.
A 2018 study done in Tijuana, Mexico, by Claudia Rafful, a doctoral student in public health at UCSD, found that involuntary drug treatment is also associated with an increased risk of nonfatal drug overdoses.
Part of this may be due to loss of tolerance to the drugs when someone suddenly stops using them. This happens not just with mandatory treatment, but also when people end up in jail.
Across the board, forcing people into rehab isn’t showing much effectiveness.
In fact, it seems that it could be doing the opposite, increasing fatal overdoses and not reforming anyone.
These forced rehab clinics are often funded by taxpayers, meaning that even though they are paying for it – they aren’t getting the returns they are seeking.
So if straight up drug prohibition doesn’t work, and forced rehabilitation doesn’t work – what options do we have?
Give them the drugs for free!
In an ideal world, everyone would be able to engage with anything and hold themselves accountable. Unfortunately, this is the real world and some people will develop habits that aren’t “up to par” with the rest of society.
They will get addicted and some of them will turn to theft or violence when they are faced with the “hunger” of addiction.
But the real question is, “When does the junkie’s drug use become a problem for society?”
The answer is, “when the junkie turns to criminal behavior to sustain their habit”.
If a junkie were to steal or mug people for resources, this would create a chain reaction. First of all, the perceived safety of the given area begins to diminish as the odds of getting robbed or mugged increases.
This in turn increases police activity, which has a social cost as we’re paying wages with our taxes. The policing will inevitably lead to arrest which then activates the whole legal system economy. Court appointed lawyers, paperwork, food, water, etc…all of the extra things will be paid by the taxpayer.
At the end of the day, maintaining the current system “costs” a lot of money to society with very little benefit.
The taxpayer is paying for the treatment, the police activity, etc – and the junkie doesn’t recover.
Conversely, producing heroin cheaply if legalized would be very possible. Not to mention, you’d have control over purity – same for meth. You’d be able to provide the meth head with a similar addiction, but cleaner – for free.
This would remove the incentive of the junkie to resort to criminal behavior. Why rob someone, face potential jail time, have a record – when you can walk to a center, which will give you drugs for free.
Some might think this as a crazy idea, however – it’s one of the only ideas that have real world effectiveness.
In places like Portugal and Switzerland, they have programs where all drugs are decriminalized, and centers of drug consumption. In Switzerland, they have a center where people can consume heroin.
The addict walks into the front door, asks for a dose – after filing some paperwork and signing liability forms, they are escorted to a comfortable room, where they are handed as much drugs as they want without inducing a fatal dose – and then they trip.
When they are ready to walk out of the front door – they can.
Nobody is forcing them to go to rehab, no one is forcing them to stop doing drugs. All they are doing is removing the hazardous elements of severe drug addiction.
They are removing the incentive to rob or turn to violence. They are removing the element of bad hygiene in terms of sharing needles and so forth. They created a controlled space where hardcore addicts can trip, and simultaneously reduced the “harm and violence” associated with severe drug use.
The results?
They saw a drop in crime, disease, violence, across the board. The same happened in Portugal when they stopped treating drugs as a “thing to be stopped” as opposed to “helping people cope”.
The average age of a junkie rose to over 30, meaning that younger people weren’t as motivated to consume drugs under this model. Perhaps, it’s because you remove the incentive for the black market to compete with a “free market”.
Perhaps it’s because socially, drug addiction is seen as a health problem, and thus – the youth distances themselves from use…who knows.
What we do know is that it’s providing more positive results than negative ones. More importantly, it treats addicts as humans, it gives them the option to quite, but also makes it safer for the consumer and society as a whole.
Sure, not every country is the same and potentially you’d need to create specific demographical conditions – but it seems to me that after 50+ years of prohibition and decades of forced rehabilitation – perhaps it’s time we change strategies.
Perhaps it’s time we rethink drugs altogether, remove the monopoly that Pharma has on drug production and distribution. Maybe we take science and rework the framework on how we interpret “problematic drug use”, and create policies that actually benefit society.
Why should we pay the junkie their drugs? Because it reduces the overall burden on society in terms of violence, crime and economy.
Drug use is here to stay…
The truth of the matter is that there will always be a portion of the population that will consume drugs and get severely addicted. They aren’t bad people. They typically come from broken, fatherless homes – they have little perceived support and have little self control.
But it’s important to understand that this is a small portion of drug users. This isn’t the norm. The vast majority of drug users, whether they consume cannabis, psychedelics, or other drugs – do not develop an addiction.
The vast majority of drug users, save highly addictive ones (that I argue we should give for free), they can consume and leave it without a problem.
Yet, we decided to punish everyone for the faults of a few. If this is the case, then we should also ban fast food for the obese, since this is the number one killer in their demographic and they too are addicted. They too cost the taxpayer billions annually…but if we go down that road – can we call ourselves a free society?
Our job is not to control other people’s behavior, but empower them to make better choices. We do this by accepting their condition, by providing safer alternatives, and saying, “If you want out of the addiction cycle – you can walk this way and we can help you…but it’s your choice!
I believe this is the only way to deal with dangerous drug addiction, while reducing the influence of the black market on drugs in general.
More importantly, removing the Drug War mechanisms that have only served as a cancer on society is of paramount importance if we ever want to achieve a state of actual liberty. We need to recognize that people will use drugs, and that is their choice…and that’s okay as long as they aren’t hurting others.
And that’s what I believe after 15 years of writing on these topics…
DECRIMINALIZE ALL DRUGS, READ ON…
You may like
-
Colorado cannabis operator’s testing experiment yields damning pesticide, microbial and potency results
-
Detroit (USA): International Drug Policy Reform Conference 2025
-
How Do You Tell Your Kids You Smoked Weed at Their Age, But They Should Not?
-
Amsterdam’s cannabis tourism is evolving: Here’s how
-
What if the World’s Biggest Tobacco Company Entered the Cannabis Industry?
-
cheeba cannabis & hemp academy Presents The Rise of the African Cannabis Industry Free WEBINAR tuesday, 4th February, 7 – 8:30pm SAST
Cannabis News
How Do You Tell Your Kids You Smoked Weed at Their Age, But They Should Not?
Published
1 day agoon
February 2, 2025By
admin
Modern Parenting: Talking to your kids about weed…our use not theirs!
Remember that uncomfortable moment when your parents caught you smoking weed? That dreaded “Talk” that followed – where you sat squirming in your chair while they cycled through concern, disappointment, and those well-worn warnings about the dangers of marijuana. Even though you knew they meant well, it felt like an eternity of awkward silence punctuated by cautionary tales and stern looks.
For those of us who came of age in the 80s, 90s, and early 2000s, this was practically a rite of passage. Getting busted, enduring The Talk, making promises to “never do it again” (fingers firmly crossed behind our backs), and eventually being grounded or punished in some creative way. While our parents were right about waiting until our brains fully developed before experimenting with cannabis, the whole experience was about as pleasant as a bad case of cottonmouth.
But times, they are a-changin’. These days, many of those same kids who got The Talk are now parents themselves – and quite a few of them enjoy cannabis responsibly as adults. This creates an interesting role reversal. Instead of lecturing kids about their weed use, modern parents face the challenge of explaining their own cannabis consumption to their children.
How do you have that conversation? When is the right time? What do you say to a curious 5-year-old who spots your vape pen? How do you address a teenager’s pointed questions about your “hypocritical” stance on underage use?
Today, we’re going to tackle these thorny questions head-on, providing modern parents with age-appropriate strategies for discussing their cannabis use with their kids. Because in 2025, The Talk isn’t just about warning kids away from weed – it’s about modeling responsible adult consumption in an era of increasing acceptance and legalization.
Let’s dive into how to navigate these conversations at different stages of your child’s development.
When it comes to discussing cannabis use with your kids, we can essentially break it down into two major developmental stages. Sure, we could slice and dice age groups into smaller segments, but we’d just end up rehashing variations of the same conversation. For simplicity’s sake, let’s focus on “Pre-Teen” (ages 3-12) and “Teen” (13-19), though you’ll need to adjust these guidelines based on your child’s individual development.
During those early years, less is definitely more. Your five-year-old doesn’t need a detailed explanation of the endocannabinoid system or terpene profiles. A simple “It’s Mommy’s medicine” or “It helps Daddy’s back pain” usually suffices. Kids this age are generally satisfied with straightforward, matter-of-fact explanations that fit within their understanding of the world.
However – and this is crucial – don’t fool yourself into thinking they’re not paying attention. Kids are like tiny surveillance cameras with unlimited storage capacity. They notice everything, even when you think they’re absorbed in their LEGOs or favorite cartoon.
I’ll never forget a scene I witnessed in San Pancho, a laid-back surf town in Mexico. At some local’s gathering, I watched in amazement as toddlers perfectly mimicked their cannabis-consuming parents – right down to the characteristic head bob, half-lidded eyes, and that unmistakable “stoned” expression. They weren’t judging; they were just doing what kids do best: observing and imitating.
This brings me to the most critical point about handling cannabis use during your children’s early years: it’s less about what you say and more about how you behave. Your actions will shape their perceptions far more than any explanation you provide.
If you can consume cannabis while maintaining your role as a responsible, present, and reliable parent – if you’re still helping with homework, making dinner, playing games, and being their rock of stability – then you’re sending the right message. Kids don’t need you to be perfect, but they do need you to be consistent and dependable.
The goal isn’t to hide your cannabis use but to demonstrate that it doesn’t fundamentally change who you are or your ability to be their parent. If you can maintain your composure, fulfill your responsibilities, and avoid turning into a stereotype (looking at you, couch-locked snack attackers), your kids are likely to view cannabis as just another aspect of adult life – no more dramatic or concerning than having a glass of wine with dinner.
This approach, combined with age-appropriate explanations, should carry you through the pre-teen years fairly smoothly. But fair warning: once those teenage years hit and complex reasoning kicks in, you’re in for a whole new ballgame. But we’ll get to that particular joy in a moment.
“You don’t pay her!” (Sorry, couldn’t resist the dad joke.) But all humor aside, welcome to the psychological warzone known as “The Teen Years.” If you thought explaining cannabis to your pre-teen was tricky, buckle up – you’re in for a wild ride.
What makes teenagers so different? In a word: everything. By thirteen, your sweet, accepting child has morphed into a walking paradox of complex reasoning and questionable decision-making. They’re developing their own opinions, challenging social norms, and thanks to the hormone monster residing in their developing brains, experiencing emotions with the intensity of a Michael Bay explosion.
Let’s be real – teenagers aren’t exactly operating at peak cognitive efficiency. And I say this with love, having been a spectacularly dumb teenager myself. Between raging hormones, peer pressure, and the desperate need to seem “cool,” their decision-making abilities often resemble a game of darts played blindfolded.
Here’s the kicker – at some point, your teen will encounter cannabis in the wild. Maybe at a party, behind the school gym, or through that one friend whose older brother “totally knows what he’s talking about.” They’ll be exposed to various narratives about weed, many of them wildly inaccurate. This is precisely why you need to step up your game and establish clear guidelines about responsible drug use.
Your message should be straightforward: Cannabis, like alcohol, is primarily for adults. Yes, it has medical applications for some young people, but recreational use should wait until their brains are fully developed. I recommend taking it a step further – tell them you’d love to be their first smoking buddy… when they’re old enough. This might sound counterintuitive, but it accomplishes two things: it acknowledges their future autonomy while establishing a clear boundary about present use.
This is also the time to have broader conversations about drugs in general. Don’t just stop at cannabis – discuss the good, the bad, and the ugly. Talk about different substances, the people who use them, and the various situations they might encounter. Not to frighten them, but to prepare them for the real world they’re about to enter.
The goal isn’t to lecture but to equip them with knowledge and critical thinking skills. They’re going to face these situations without you present, and you want them prepared to make informed decisions.
However – and this is crucial – read the room. If your kid innocently asks why you use cannabis, maybe hold off on sharing that wild story about the time you ate an entire pizza while convinced your cat was plotting against you. Keep it age-appropriate and relevant to their level of curiosity.
Remember, you’re not just teaching them about cannabis – you’re modeling how to have mature, honest conversations about complex topics. And in the hormone-addled battlefield of adolescence, that’s worth its weight in gold.
Here’s a plot twist that might surprise you – today’s kids are actually more straight-edge than we were. They’re drinking less, experimenting with fewer drugs, and even putting off sex longer than previous generations. Who would’ve thought that unlimited access to TikTok and social media would make getting high seem less appealing?
The irony isn’t lost on me. Just as us former “rebellious stoners” have become responsible cannabis-consuming parents, our kids are more likely to be found coding an app than hotboxing behind the gym. And let’s be honest – that’s probably a good thing.
But this shift in youth behavior coincides with a massive transformation in how society views cannabis. The plant that once sparked nationwide panic is now as commonplace as craft beer in many states. The “devil’s lettuce” has gone mainstream, and with it, our need to have more nuanced, honest conversations with our kids about its use.
Being upfront about your cannabis consumption isn’t about promoting drug use – it’s about fostering trust and open dialogue with your children. By discussing your own use responsibly and age-appropriately, you’re not just explaining a plant; you’re teaching critical thinking, personal responsibility, and the importance of making informed decisions.
It’s time to ditch the old taboos and stop pretending our teenagers are living in a bubble of innocence. The world they’re growing up in is complex, often chaotic, and full of choices we never had to face. The best gift we can give them isn’t protection from these realities, but the knowledge and confidence to navigate them wisely.
Because ultimately, that’s what good parenting is about – not shielding our kids from the world, but preparing them to face it head-on, armed with understanding, wisdom, and the ability to make smart choices. Even if that means having some uncomfortable conversations about your own relationship with cannabis along the way.
Inspiration:
https://www.reddit.com/r/entwives/comments/1i4gtx7/
how_are_we_talking_to_our_kids_about_cannabis_use/
PARENTING IN THE LEGALIZATION ERA, READ ON…
PARENTING IN THE TIME OF LEGALIZATION – FORBID IT OR ALLOW IT?
Cannabis News
What if the World’s Biggest Tobacco Company Entered the Cannabis Industry?
Published
2 days agoon
February 1, 2025By
admin
The World’s Biggest Tobacco Company Is Quietly Entering The Weed Industry
What Does This Mean For The Future Of Weed?
From the 1950’s to the 1990’s, cigarettes were considered to be a ‘cool’ habit and somewhat of a fashion accessory globally.
There was even a time when Hollywood celebrities were photographed smoking, which made them seem like the epitome of sophistication. Big names including Humphrey Bogart and James Dean were pictured smoking, but it was also so common and accepted around the world. That did not last long, as eventually evidence that cigarettes killed people from cancer and other fatal health conditions became impossible to ignore.
While there were many names in Big Tobacco that helped popularize the consumption of cigarettes, and made it easy for people to get access to it, Philip Morris International (PMI) were one of the biggest players – and they still are, to this day. They own some of the most common cigarette brands that are consumed around the world, including Marlboro, Chesterfield, and L&M. Surely, one can blame PMI’s products for tempting people to make poor health choices that may have taken them to the grave…
According to the World Health Organization, tobacco smoking is responsible for the deaths of around 8 million people globally.
Yet, with the rise of cannabis, PMI wanted a piece of the pie.
The History Of Philip Morris’ Interests In Cannabis
If you’re only hearing about Big Tobacco’s interest in cannabis right now, you might be shocked to learn that their interest in weed goes as far back as 1969. There are some internal documents that prove PMI was interested in learning about the potential of cannabis. However, they were considering weed a competitor as well as a potential product.
In fact, a 1970 memo even shows that PMI acknowledges the possibility of marijuana legalization.
Fast forward to 2016, when PMI made a significant investment worth $20 million to an Israeli biotech firm specializing in medical cannabis, called Syqe Medical. At the time, Syqe was working on developing a medical marijuana inhaler which would provide metered dosing of weed for medical patients. According to the deal, Syqe Medical will also work on developing certain technologies that would enable Philip Morris to minimize the health effects caused by smoking.
By 2023, Philip Morris made a deal to acquire Syqe Medical for a cool $650 million, as long as there were certain conditions met. In a report by Calcalist, the deal features a number of milestones, though the bottom line is that if the inhaler developed by Syqe passes the clinical trials, PMI will then go ahead to buy all shares of the company for the aforementioned amount.
Another Silent Move Into The Weed Space
More recently, in January 2025, a press release was published detailing Vectura Fertin Pharma’s (VFP), a subsidiary of Philip Morris International, joint venture with a Canadian biotech firm focusing on cannabinoid-based drugs – Avicanna.
According to the press release, the joint venture seeks to promote cannabis accessibility and research. Avicanna already has a stronghold in the wellness sector. However, the press release hardly makes any other mention about the involvement of Philip Morris International, but it’s clear that Big Tobacco has long had their eye in the cannabis industry. Back in 2016, when they first got involved with Syqe Medical, it highlighted the firm’s interest in wellness, but the partnership with Avicanna cements that.
Changes In Consumer Perception And Habits
It only makes sense for Big Tobacco to pivot to cannabis – or wellness, in general. After all, if you can’t beat em, join em!
And it’s clear: for several years now, there has been a decrease in cigarette smoking; young adults are now shifting from tobacco, as well as alcohol, and increasing their cannabis consumption instead.
And Philip Morris isn’t the only player in Big Tobacco who’s expressed an interest in a slice of the (weed) pie. Back in 2017, American holding company Altria Group began moving away from cigarettes, with their $1.8 billion investment into the Cronos Group, a large Canadian cannabis company. Altria owns several big American companies including Philip Morris; so much so, that even their website now declares the tagline: “Moving Beyond Smoking”.
However, Altria faced issues due to regulatory concerns.
British American Tobacco (BAT) has also been interested in cannabis. For some time now, they’ve been researching weed products, particularly infusing CBD and THC into their electronic cigarettes which are sold under the Vuse and Vype brand names. In 2021, BAT began a trial launch of CBD products in the United Kingdom.
RJ Reynolds, which is also now under British American Tobacco, has also considered joining the weed industry. According to internal documents, RJ Reynolds has considered cannabis both an opportunity and a competitor as far back as the 1970s.
Conclusion
At the end of the day, cannabis isn’t a real threat to the tobacco industry. The tobacco industry simply shot itself on the foot – all it needed was time, to prove that it does indeed cause cancer and kill people. On the other hand, cannabis was a friend more than a foe: legalization and a growing consumption of weed proved its ability to save lives.
That said, the relationship between tobacco and weed continues to evolve. Through cannabis legalization, Big Tobacco can learn from the challenges and opportunities that cannabis had to go through. It can be said that one thing is clear, though: the drop in tobacco consumption is a major opportunity for cannabis, with more people looking to substitute tobacco with a healthier alternative.
As a response, we may continue to see tobacco companies investing in Big Cannabis – just as we’ve seen in the examples mentioned above. This partnership is fantastic news for both industries, and we can only hope to see more!
PHILIP MORRIS’ MOVES IN CANNABIS, READ ON…
WHY DID PHILIP MORRIS JUST BUY A MEDICAL MARIJUANA INHALER COMPANY?
Cannabis News
Who are the Next 5 States to Legalize Recreational or Medical Cannabis Starting in 2025?
Published
3 days agoon
January 31, 2025By
admin
As the landscape of marijuana legalization continues to evolve across the United States, 2025 is shaping up to be a pivotal year for states considering reforms. Advocacy groups are closely monitoring legislative developments and public sentiment, identifying specific states that are likely to make significant strides toward legalization. This article explores the states most likely to legalize marijuana in 2025, examining the political climate, public opinion, and advocacy efforts that may influence these changes.
The Current State of Marijuana Legalization in the U.S.
As of 2023, a growing number of states have legalized marijuana for both medical and recreational use. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), 21 states and Washington D.C. have legalized recreational marijuana, while 37 states allow medical marijuana use. This rapid expansion reflects changing public attitudes toward cannabis, which have shifted dramatically over the past two decades.
Public Opinion Trends
Public support for marijuana legalization has reached unprecedented levels. A Gallup poll conducted in late 2022 found that 68% of Americans support legalizing marijuana, a significant increase from just 25% in 1995. This shift in public opinion is crucial for lawmakers as they consider new legislation. Advocacy groups are leveraging this support to push for reforms in states where legalization has yet to occur.
The Role of Advocacy Groups
Organizations such as the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) and the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) play a vital role in advocating for legalization. They provide research, mobilize grassroots campaigns, and lobby lawmakers to promote cannabis reform. Their insights into which states are most likely to legalize in 2025 are based on legislative trends, political dynamics, and public sentiment.
Key States Likely to Legalize Marijuana in 2025
Pennsylvania has emerged as a strong contender for marijuana legalization in 2025. The state has a robust medical marijuana program established in 2016 that has seen significant success, with over 600,000 registered patients. However, advocates argue that the time has come to expand access to adult-use cannabis.
Political Support
The recent election of Governor Josh Shapiro has energized legalization efforts. Shapiro has expressed support for legalizing recreational marijuana and has indicated a willingness to work with lawmakers across party lines. In early 2025, a bipartisan bill is expected to be introduced that aims to create a regulated market for adult-use cannabis.
Advocacy Efforts
Advocacy groups are actively mobilizing support among residents and lawmakers alike. Campaigns highlighting the potential economic benefits—such as job creation and tax revenue—are gaining traction. Additionally, public polls indicate strong support among Pennsylvanians for legalization, further bolstering advocacy efforts.
Hawaii has long been known for its progressive stance on cannabis; it was one of the first states to legalize medical marijuana in 2000. However, efforts to legalize recreational use have stalled in previous legislative sessions.
Current Developments
In 2025, advocates are optimistic about renewed efforts to pass comprehensive cannabis legislation. The Senate previously approved a bill aimed at legalizing recreational use, but it failed in the House due to opposition from conservative lawmakers.
Political Dynamics
The political landscape appears more favorable this year with new leadership in the House that may be more open to discussing cannabis reform. Governor Josh Green has also expressed support for legalization, emphasizing its potential economic benefits for Hawaii’s tourism-driven economy.
Advocacy Strategies
Advocacy groups are focusing on grassroots campaigns and community engagement to build momentum for legalization. Public forums and educational events aim to inform residents about the benefits of legalization while addressing concerns regarding regulation and safety.
South Carolina has made strides toward medical marijuana legalization but remains one of the few states without comprehensive access to cannabis products. In recent years, lawmakers have introduced several bills aimed at establishing a medical program; however, these efforts have faced significant hurdles.
Legislative Prospects for 2025
In 2025, advocates are hopeful that a revived medical marijuana proposal will gain traction. The proposed legislation would allow patients with qualifying conditions access through licensed pharmacies under strict regulations.
Political Climate
The political climate remains challenging, with resistance from conservative factions within the legislature. However, increasing public support—evidenced by recent polls showing over 70% approval for medical cannabis—may sway some lawmakers toward supporting reform.
Advocacy Efforts
Advocacy organizations like SC Compassionate Care are working tirelessly to educate the public and legislators about the benefits of medical marijuana. They emphasize patient stories and health outcomes as part of their strategy to garner support.
Kansas is one of the few remaining states without any form of legalized marijuana use. Despite this restrictive environment, there is a growing movement advocating for medical cannabis legislation.
Legislative Opportunities
In 2025, advocates believe there is a significant opportunity for progress on medical marijuana legislation. Several bills have been introduced in previous sessions that gained some bipartisan support but ultimately failed due to opposition from key lawmakers.
Public Sentiment
Public opinion in Kansas is shifting; recent surveys indicate that nearly 60% of residents support legalizing medical marijuana. This growing acceptance may influence legislators who have previously opposed reform.
Advocacy Strategies
Groups like Kansas Cannabis Coalition are actively campaigning for change by organizing rallies and educational events throughout the state. They aim to raise awareness about the therapeutic benefits of cannabis while pushing for legislative action.
North Carolina has been making headlines regarding potential cannabis reform. While it currently allows limited use of CBD oil for certain medical conditions, comprehensive medical or recreational legalization remains elusive.
Political Dynamics
In recent years, there have been increased discussions among lawmakers about introducing medical marijuana legislation. The current governor supports reform efforts; however, opposition from conservative members poses challenges.
Advocacy Efforts
Advocacy groups such as NC NORML are working diligently to build grassroots support for legalization initiatives. They focus on educating citizens about cannabis benefits while lobbying legislators directly.
Wisconsin’s approach toward cannabis remains conservative compared to neighboring states like Illinois and Michigan. While some local municipalities have decriminalized possession or implemented medicinal programs at their discretion, comprehensive statewide reform is still lacking.
Legislative Prospects
Advocates believe that changing political dynamics could lead Wisconsin toward more progressive policies regarding both medical and adult-use legalization by 2025. Recent elections have resulted in a more favorable balance within state government regarding cannabis issues.
Public Support
Public opinion polls indicate strong support among Wisconsinites—over 60% favoring legalization efforts—creating an opportunity for advocates seeking legislative change.
Advocacy Strategies
Organizations like Wisconsin NORML are mobilizing citizens through educational campaigns aimed at dispelling myths surrounding cannabis while promoting its economic benefits through taxation and job creation associated with regulated markets.
New Hampshire has long been considered an outlier among New England states regarding cannabis laws; it legalized medical marijuana back in 2013 but has yet to pass adult-use legislation despite numerous attempts over recent years.
Current Developments
In early 2025, advocates anticipate renewed efforts aimed at legalizing recreational use through proposed bills introduced during legislative sessions scheduled throughout spring months ahead.
Political Climate
While there is bipartisan interest among some legislators regarding potential reforms related specifically towards taxation structures associated with regulated markets—opposition remains strong from conservative factions within government bodies overall limiting chances significantly unless public pressure mounts significantly enough leading into future elections cycles ahead!
Virginia made headlines when it legalized recreational cannabis possession starting July 1st ,2021—but sales remain unregulated until further action occurs within state government bodies responsible overseeing these matters moving forward!
Legislative Prospects
Advocates believe that enhancing existing laws by adding regulated sales will be crucial steps towards creating an effective market structure benefiting consumers while generating tax revenue needed fund essential services statewide!
Conclusion
As we look ahead into 2025—the landscape surrounding marijuana legalization continues evolving rapidly across various states nationwide! With growing public support coupled alongside advocacy group efforts pushing forward reforms—it’s clear many opportunities exist within multiple jurisdictions ripe opportunities await those willing engage actively participate shaping future policies governing this vital industry.
WHAT STATES MAY NEVER LEGALIZE WEED, READ ON…
Colorado cannabis operator’s testing experiment yields damning pesticide, microbial and potency results
Detroit (USA): International Drug Policy Reform Conference 2025
How Do You Tell Your Kids You Smoked Weed at Their Age, But They Should Not?
Amsterdam’s cannabis tourism is evolving: Here’s how
What if the World’s Biggest Tobacco Company Entered the Cannabis Industry?
cheeba cannabis & hemp academy Presents The Rise of the African Cannabis Industry Free WEBINAR tuesday, 4th February, 7 – 8:30pm SAST
5 Ways To Manage Return To Office
The Best Cannabis Infused Pasta Sauce For The Weekend
Ohio GOP lawmaker’s bill would upend voter-approved adult-use marijuana
Does Will Ferrell Consume Marijuana
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
UArizona launches online cannabis compliance online course
Trending
-
Cannabis News2 years ago
Distressed Cannabis Business Takeaways – Canna Law Blog™
-
One-Hit Wonders2 years ago
United States: Alex Malyshev And Melinda Fellner Discuss The Intersection Of Tax And Cannabis In New Video Series – Part VI: Licensing (Video)
-
Cannabis 1012 years ago
What you Need to Know
-
drug testing1 year ago
Drug Testing for Marijuana – The Joint Blog
-
Education2 years ago
NCIA Write About Their Equity Scholarship Program
-
Cannabis2 years ago
It has been a wild news week – here’s how CBD and weed can help you relax
-
Marijuana Business Daily2 years ago
Cannabis, alcohol firm SNDL loses CA$372.4 million in 2022
-
California2 years ago
A new April 20 cannabis contest includes a $40,000 purse