Connect with us

business

The Confusion Over Legal Drugs VS Legal Products

Published

1 year ago

on


This fight is ongoing. Are all cannabinoids that have to do with hemp, legal? Are hemp-derived cannabinoids that are completely or partially synthetic, legal? Are the cannabinoids that show up in nature, but are only used for production as synthetics, legal? And what about the products that are made from these compounds? Are they legal? There’s a mass amount of confusion on this, and on one end, a pretty discreet answer. So here we ago, when it comes to the DEA and FDA, what’s the difference between legal drugs, and legal products?

DEA, FDA, and USDA: what do these government agencies do?

For the most part, we have a generally good idea about this, but just to be clear, let’s quickly go over on a broad scale, the purpose (and power) of these government agencies. We’ll start with the DEA.

According to the agency, “The mission of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is to enforce the controlled substances laws and regulations of the United States and bring to the criminal and civil justice system of the United States, or any other competent jurisdiction, those organizations and principal members of organizations, involved in the growing, manufacture, or distribution of controlled substances appearing in or destined for illicit traffic in the United States.”

On another hand, according to the FDA, “The Food and Drug Administration is responsible for protecting the public health by ensuring the safety, efficacy, and security of human and veterinary drugs, biological products, and medical devices; and by ensuring the safety of our nation’s food supply, cosmetics, and products that emit radiation.”

Cool that you stopped by. Check out the Cannadelics Weekly Newsletter to get your direct email updates; and tons of deals on cannabis flowers, vapes and equipment, edibles, smoking devices, cannabinoid compounds, and a host more. Get all your cannabis-related shopping done here!

It goes on, “FDA also has responsibility for regulating the manufacturing, marketing, and distribution of tobacco products to protect the public health and to reduce tobacco use by minors.” And, “is responsible for advancing the public health by helping to speed innovations that make medical products more effective, safer, and more affordable and by helping the public get the accurate, science-based information they need to use medical products and foods to maintain and improve their health.”

As the FDA controls the regulation of all tobacco products, as stated, this includes vapes. Vapes are currently regulated under tobacco law, meaning all usage of vapes (e-cigarettes) falls under FDA regulation as electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS).

As far as the USDA, “We provide leadership on food, agriculture, natural resources, rural development, nutrition, and related issues based on public policy, the best available science, and effective management. We have a vision to provide economic opportunity through innovation, helping rural America to thrive; to promote agriculture production that better nourishes Americans while also helping feed others throughout the world; and to preserve our Nation’s natural resources through conservation, restored forests, improved watersheds, and healthy private working lands.”

These three agencies all play a role with cannabis in some way. The USDA regulates industrial hemp cultivation; the DEA regulates the legality of drug compounds; and the FDA regulates cannabis in products like foods, cosmetics, medicines, and supplements. These designations are important when looking at the controversy over the cannabinoid industry (and the cannabis industry as a whole), and the idea of legal drugs vs legal products.

The part of the USDA

There is a huge argument right now over which cannabis compounds are legal, and which products are legal; and these two questions are fundamentally different, because they’re governed by different agencies. So, to get an idea how it works with cannabis, let’s go over the breakdown between the legality of one vs the other.

To start with, the USDA’s 2018 Farm Bill legalized the cultivation of industrial hemp. And set a definition for ‘hemp’, which is the basis for a huge, and ongoing, argument, over exactly what this refers to; particularly in the case of wholly synthetic, or partially synthetic compounds. The ambiguity is partly related to the US not having a general definition for ‘natural’, meaning, there are no definitions for other thing like ‘naturally-derived’ either. Such a term is often used to greenwash products (make them sound more natural than they are), which has led to multiple lawsuits.

Natural and naturally-derived
Natural and naturally-derived

There is more specific regulation on this front in terms of food, however, with organic laws setting particular standards. And with organizations like the ISO (International Organization for Standardization) which set standards for cosmetics and food. Apart from offering the hemp definition that causes so many problems (on one front), the USDA is less involved in the rest of the argument.

Legal cannabis drugs vs legal cannabis products, which is DEA and which is FDA?

USDA aside, the DEA regulates drugs on behalf of the Department of Justice. It holds drug scheduling lists that determine the legality and uses of a drug on a federal level. Schedule I is for 100% illegal drugs with no accepted medical use, a high risk of danger, and a high risk of addiction. These drugs are illegal for any resident to possess, use, cultivate, sell, transport, traffic, or do anything else with. Cannabis is one of these drugs. However, recently, plants with no more than .3% THC were legalized by the most recent farm bill, for industrial use; by moving regulation for cultivation and production (only) to the USDA.

When we want to know if a drug is legal in general, we look to the DEA. And that’s why the agency has fielded inquires, like from the Alabama Board of Pharmacy about delta-8, and more recently, by attorney Rod Kight in terms of two synthetic cannabinoids: Delta-9-THCO and delta-8-THCO. In both cases, it stipulated they’re illegal. These questions are about overall legality, like, can I have it at all as a legal compound, or will simply having it be a federal offense. But that’s where DEA control ends.

The problem with the current debate, is that its essentially over products, rather than standard legality. Whether the DEA says the compounds are legal or not, has 100% no bearing on whether they’re legal to use in products. And that’s because the FDA (NOT the DEA) overseas all uses of cannabis in anything related to medical, supplements, cosmetics, smoking, and food products.

This means anything dealing with cannabis in vapes, is illegal. As is every other kind of cannabis product: oils and tinctures (both supplements, or food), creams, patches, and makeup (cosmetics, or medicine), pills, and treatments of any kind (medicine or supplements). They’re all uniformly illegal; because the FDA never made them legal.

What does the FDA permit? “With the exception of Epidiolex, Marinol, and Syndros, no product containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds (either plant-based or synthetic) has been approved as safe and effective for use in any patient population, whether pediatric or adult.”

FDA allows legal cannabis pharmaceutical products
FDA allows legal cannabis pharmaceutical products

If it needs to be stated more clearly, this ends the question of whether any cannabis product is legal on a federal level. And the answer is no. Once again, this is unrelated to whether the DEA classifies something as illegal or not. In fact, it should be remembered that the DEA has cannabis in Schedule I, yet the FDA approved Epidiolex, Marinol, and Syndros. Which means an illegal drug can still be used in legal products, should the FDA pass them. And a legal drug, is still illegal in products, if the FDA doesn’t make an allowance.

Why do people try to use DEA answers to promote product legality?

Hard for me to say, but I have my theories. One of them is simply confusion. I fully admit I, myself, was quite entangled in the ‘synthetic or not’ aspect of the argument for a long time. And that still matters in terms of legal drugs, but it doesn’t affect legal products. At least not in current circumstances. When an industry has regulation through different government bodies for the same topic, it can get confusing. And for many, it might seem like the DEA holds the answers to issues of product legality.

The other possibility is more a manipulation issue. The ideas generally focused on when speaking of the debate on hemp-derived cannabinoids, are whether they cross the .3% THC level at any point in processing, and whether they’re synthetic to some degree and what that means. That’s because these things can be argued. What is less arguable, is that the agency that allows legal products, never changed its stance. If industry promoters and vendors had the public focus on this, their products would be seen as illegal with no recourse. If response letters from the FDA were published, there wouldn’t be a question.

This is similar to how I believe the government uses methods of subterfuge to keep American attention off certain topics. Whether the cannabinoid industry is dirty or not, it simply doesn’t come with any real death toll that can be attributed to anything but additives. As in, not any of the cannabinoids, synthetic or not, have caused an issue to any real degree. On the other hand, while the government talks of them like they’re a massive threat to humanity, it continues to push opioids through regulation, as they now kill close to 100 thousand people a year.

Same concept. By focusing on the DEA, and whether a drug is legal overall, takes attention away from the fact that the FDA regulates products, and the DEA has nothing to do with this. The cannabinoid products industry isn’t going to focus on the legal aspect that renders it completely illegal. It’s going to focus on the debatable part, and sell it products based on the argument therein.

Final thoughts

I really don’t care if the products market continues. I mean, it’s a bit gross, with trademark violations, fake labs, mislabeled products, and no way to know what’s added in. But legal markets tend to have these issues too. And realistically, they ain’t killing anyone. My argument is simply about understanding the legal landscape, and not falling victim to subterfuge marketing moves when it comes to this understanding. But am I parading around for the end of cannabinoids? No. And realistically, illegal or not, there seem to be few, if any, repercussions involved; likely because the US can’t fight another losing drug war.

Issues with mislabeled cannabis products
Issues with mislabeled cannabis products

I’d sure love if everyone had access to the real plant (which seems to lower use of synthetics anyway), but I also know people like to get high and will try what’s available. And if its not going to cause damage, or at least, not in remotely the same ballpark as other drugs like medically approved opioids and benzodiazepines, and illegal ones like meth; it kind of seems like the FDA should suck it up, and allow it to happen. Although, in the world of reality, the market continues regardless.

Hey guys, welcome! Thanks for making it to Cannadelics.com; where we work to bring you independent coverage of the cannabis and psychedelics industries, everyday. Head our way whenever possible to keep updated on everything important; and subscribe for our Cannadelics Weekly Newsletter, so you’re always on top of what’s going on.



Source link

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

business

Astronauts to Test Cannabis Growth in Outer Space

Published

3 weeks ago

on

April 1, 2024

By


NASA‘s recent collaboration with the International Space Research Consortium to launch a mission testing the cultivation of cannabis in the microgravity of space has stirred a whirlwind of interest and controversy across the globe. This initiative aims to unravel the mysteries of how low-gravity environments affect plant growth, with cannabis serving as the pioneering subject. According to Dr. Alfred Terra, the esteemed lead scientist spearheading the project, the conditions in space present an “unparalleled opportunity” to push the boundaries of our understanding of botany and its applications in medicine and agriculture beyond Earth’s confines.

This ambitious endeavor aims to shed light on the potential for utilizing space-based agriculture to support long-duration space missions and future colonization efforts on other planets. The choice of cannabis as a research subject is particularly intriguing due to its complex biochemical makeup and its increasing use in medicinal therapies on Earth. Insights gained from how cannabis adapts to space’s harsh environment could lead to breakthroughs in growing food and medicinal plants in extraterrestrial colonies.

Despite the scientific excitement surrounding the mission, the announcement has been met with its share of skepticism and criticism. Some members of the scientific community and the general public question the allocation of resources toward cannabis research in space, arguing that more pressing scientific and exploratory questions merit attention aboard the International Space Station (ISS). These critics call for a focus on projects that directly contribute to our understanding of space travel’s impacts on human physiology or further our knowledge of the cosmos.

However, the space agencies involved have been quick to highlight the broader implications of this research. They argue that studying cannabis growth in microgravity could offer invaluable insights into plant biology, stress responses, and the possibility of cultivating a variety of crops in space, which are crucial for the long-term sustainability of space exploration and eventual human settlement on other planetary bodies.

Amidst the debates over the mission’s merits and the speculation spurred by its announcement date—April 1st—lies a deeper curiosity about the future of space exploration and the role of innovative agricultural research in that journey. The timing has led some to question the announcement’s authenticity, pondering whether it could be an elaborate April Fool’s Day jest aimed at sparking discussion or simply a coincidence that has amplified the public’s fascination with the project.

Whether viewed as a bold step into the future of space agriculture or a controversial choice of research focus, the mission symbolizes a growing intersection between space exploration and the quest to understand and utilize biological processes in unprecedented environments. As the launch date approaches and preparations continue, the world watches, eager to see what insights this venture might unfold about cannabis, plant science, and the potential for life beyond Earth.

*** This article is an April Fool’s Day joke ***



Source link

Continue Reading

business

A Hiring Wave on the Horizon

Published

2 months ago

on

March 1, 2024

By


The U.S. cannabis industry is on the brink of a significant hiring wave in 2024, spurred by a 12% increase in legal sales in 2023, reaching $29 billion. This growth, alongside potential federal reclassification of cannabis, is expected to create up to 100,000 new jobs, particularly in the retail sector, where 93% of companies plan to expand their workforce. The Vangst 2024 Cannabis Salary Guide highlights an industry ready to bounce back from previous economic stagnation, with a strong emphasis on experience, adaptability, and cultural fit in prospective employees.

The cannabis sector is poised for a massive expansion in employment opportunities in 2024, following a year of economic challenges and layoffs. This optimistic forecast comes from Vangst’s latest industry salary guide, which anticipates a hiring boom driven by increased legal cannabis sales and the potential for federal rescheduling. The anticipated move to reclassify cannabis to Schedule III could significantly reduce tax burdens, increase company valuations, and attract more investors, according to Viridian Capital Advisors.

Retail cannabis companies are at the forefront of this hiring surge, with nearly all surveyed indicating plans to bolster their teams in response to growing demand and market expansion. The focus is not just on filling positions but on finding candidates who can navigate the evolving legal and market landscape, prioritize cultural fit, and possess strong communication skills over traditional qualifications.

Salaries in the cannabis industry have also seen an uptick, with top-end wages growing by 4.7%, outpacing the national non-cannabis average. However, the sector still trails behind others in offering comprehensive benefits packages, a gap that affects employee satisfaction and retention. The demand for health insurance and better work-life balance is clear among job seekers in the cannabis space.

Diversity and inclusion are gaining traction within cannabis company hiring practices, with a significant portion of companies implementing strategies to create a more inclusive workforce. The industry’s employment of veterans and individuals with disabilities highlights its diverse nature, but there remains room for improvement.

Why It Matters: This hiring wave marks a pivotal moment for the cannabis industry, signaling a shift towards recovery and growth after a period of stagnation. It underscores the industry’s resilience and its potential to contribute significantly to the economy through job creation and increased sales.

Potential Implications: The anticipated hiring boom in the cannabis industry could lead to wider acceptance and normalization of cannabis use, further influencing policy changes and societal attitudes. Additionally, the focus on diversity and inclusion could set a precedent for other sectors, promoting a more inclusive workforce across industries.

Source: Green Market Report



Source link

Continue Reading

business

86% of Californians Support Legal Cannabis Markets

Published

2 months ago

on

February 29, 2024

By


A recent survey conducted by the California Department of Cannabis Control (DCC) and FM3 Research reveals that a significant majority of Californians, 86%, believe it’s important to purchase cannabis from legal markets. The survey also indicates growing support for Proposition 64 and highlights the need for consumer education on legal cannabis procurement.

California, a pioneer in legalizing medical cannabis in 1996 and later adult-use cannabis in 2016, has developed into the world’s largest cannabis market. The DCC’s Real California Cannabis Campaign, aimed at guiding consumers to licensed dispensaries, commissioned FM3 Research to survey over 1,000 California adults to gauge their attitudes towards the state’s cannabis market. Key findings include:

  • 62% view Proposition 64 positively, suggesting increased support for cannabis reform.
  • 86% of respondents stress the importance of buying cannabis from legal sources.
  • 72% feel consumers should ensure they’re purchasing from licensed retailers.
  • Despite the legal market’s size, illegal sales remain prevalent, with two-thirds of cannabis sales in 2022 coming from the illicit market.
  • The California Unified Cannabis Enforcement Taskforce (UCETF) reported significant seizures in 2023, including over $312 million in illegal cannabis and 119 firearms, showcasing efforts to combat illegal operations.
  • The survey uncovered education gaps, with 85% of respondents in areas where retail cannabis is banned either misinformed or unaware of local cannabis laws.
  • Opinions on identifying licensed retailers were divided, with 44% finding it easy and 42% finding it challenging.

Why It Matters: This survey underscores the growing acceptance of legal cannabis markets among Californians and the critical role of consumer education in supporting legal operations. It highlights the ongoing battle against illicit sales and the importance of regulatory efforts to ensure a safe, legal cannabis market.

Potential Implications: The findings could influence future cannabis policies in California, emphasizing the need for public education campaigns and stricter enforcement against illegal operations. It also suggests a potential shift in consumer behavior towards supporting legal cannabis sources, which could further legitimize and stabilize the legal market.

Source: High Times



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2021 The Art of MaryJane Media