Connect with us

Cannabis News

The Government Wants to Kill the US Weed Industry

Published

on


government shuts down weed industry

Why Does the U.S. Government Hate Freedom?

This is the question I find myself asking as I witness representatives in Congress raging about “closing the loophole” when it comes to legal hemp-derived psychoactive cannabinoids like Delta-8 THC, THCa, and others. It seems that our elected officials are more interested in restricting personal liberties than embracing the potential benefits of a thriving industry.

For the past six years, the United States has experienced a form of national cannabis legalization, though most people were unaware of it.

Thanks to the 2018 Farm Bill, hemp-derived psychoactive cannabinoids have allowed virtually every state to have some sort of legal cannabis products available in stores. This has been a game-changer for consumers and entrepreneurs alike.

However, now Congress aims to kill this $28 billion per year industry, rather than acknowledging that cannabis legalization, despite limited regulation, did not bring about the end of the world. In fact, it has created jobs, generated tax revenue, and provided countless individuals with access to alternative wellness options.

In this article, we will explore why the U.S. government seems to hate freedom and innovation, and why it’s crucial that you begin to vote out these dinosaurs who are holding us back.

The majority of Americans want legal access to cannabis, but the government remains woefully out of touch with the will of the people.

When most people think of the “unregulated cannabis market,” they often picture the illicit, black market trade. However, they would be mistaken. In reality, the hemp-derived cannabis marketplace has been the one operating largely unregulated for the past six years, much to the chagrin of the FDA and the U.S. government.

This unregulated market has flourished, growing into a staggering $28 billion per year industry. Hemp-derived psychoactive cannabinoids, such as Delta-8 THC and THCa, have become widely available, with products frequently found in head shops across the United States and even in neighboring countries like Mexico.

Essentially, this unregulated cannabis market has thrived without significant government intervention. Entrepreneurs have seized the opportunity created by the 2018 Farm Bill to innovate and meet consumer demand, all while operating in a legal gray area.

However, this booming industry is now seen as a threat by both legal cannabis companies operating within state-regulated systems and the government itself. Legal cannabis businesses argue that the unregulated hemp-derived market is cutting into their profit margins, as consumers opt for more readily available and often cheaper alternatives.

Meanwhile, government officials, likely influenced by lobbyists from the regulated cannabis industry, are seeking to put an end to this unregulated market. They claim concerns over safety and the lack of oversight, but it’s hard to ignore the financial motivations at play.

This brings us to the current situation, where a bill is floating through Congress that could severely restrict these hemp-derived cannabinoids and essentially wipe out an entire industry overnight. If passed, this legislation would redefine the legal status of these compounds, making them illegal under federal law.

The potential ramifications of this bill are immense. It would not only destroy a multibillion-dollar industry and eliminate countless jobs but also deprive consumers of access to products they have come to rely on. It’s a stark reminder of how quickly the government can intervene and disrupt entire markets, especially when powerful interests are at stake.

As we continue to examine this issue, it’s essential to consider the broader implications of the government’s actions. Is this really about public safety, or is it a blatant attempt to protect the profits of a select few at the expense of consumer choice and free-market innovation? The answer to that question may determine the future of the hemp-derived cannabinoid industry and the wider fight for cannabis legalization in the United States.

 

How to make hemp derived psychoactive THC

How to Make Psychoactive Hemp THC

To understand the current controversy surrounding hemp-derived psychoactive cannabinoids, it’s essential to grasp the differences between typical cannabis and hemp-derived THC products.

Traditional cannabis, often referred to as marijuana, contains a high concentration of delta-9-THC, the primary psychoactive compound responsible for the “high” associated with cannabis use. Hemp, on the other hand, is legally defined as cannabis plants containing less than 0.3% delta-9-THC by dry weight.

However, hemp plants still contain other cannabinoids, such as CBD, delta-8-THC, and THCa, which can be extracted and processed to create psychoactive products. The process of obtaining these compounds isn’t always naturally derived; it often requires additional steps and specific chemical processes.

For example, delta-8-THC is typically synthesized from CBD through a chemical reaction involving solvents and acids. This process alters the molecular structure of CBD, converting it into delta-8-THC, an isomer of delta-9-THC with similar psychoactive properties.

Despite the differences in production methods, the chemical structures of hemp-derived THC compounds are nearly identical to those found in traditional cannabis.

This means that the effects experienced by users are quite similar, although some cannabis enthusiasts argue that delta-8-THC produces a milder, more clear-headed high compared to delta-9-THC.

Nonetheless, the emergence of hemp-derived psychoactive products has provided a glimpse into what true cannabis legalization could look like. These products have been widely available, offering consumers a legal alternative to marijuana in states where recreational use remains prohibited.

The success of the hemp-derived THC market demonstrates that people are ready for a more open and accessible approach to cannabis. It has shown that legalization doesn’t necessarily lead to the doomsday scenarios often portrayed by opponents, such as increased crime rates or widespread addiction.

Instead, the unregulated hemp-derived THC industry has highlighted the potential benefits of a free and open cannabis market, including job creation, economic growth, and the availability of alternative wellness options for consumers.

As the government seeks to clamp down on this industry, it’s crucial to recognize that the genie is already out of the bottle. Consumers have experienced the benefits of legal access to psychoactive cannabinoids, and they are unlikely to accept a return to the days of strict prohibition.

Rather than attempting to suppress this market, policymakers should focus on creating sensible regulations that prioritize consumer safety, product quality, and responsible use. This approach would not only protect public health but also foster innovation and economic opportunity within the cannabis sector.

The rise of hemp-derived psychoactive cannabinoids has provided a tantalizing preview of what true cannabis legalization could achieve.

As the debate over the future of this industry continues, it’s essential to keep sight of the bigger picture: the need for a rational, evidence-based approach to cannabis policy that respects individual freedom and promotes the well-being of society as a whole.

The rise of the hemp-derived psychoactive cannabinoid industry has provided us with a unique opportunity to witness the effects of cannabis legalization in action. Over the past six years, this unregulated market has thrived, offering consumers access to legal, psychoactive cannabis products and demonstrating the potential benefits of a more open approach to cannabis policy.

Despite the lack of strict regulations, the sky hasn’t fallen. Society hasn’t crumbled under the weight of widespread cannabis use. Instead, we’ve seen the emergence of a vibrant, multibillion-dollar industry that has created jobs, generated tax revenue, and provided people with alternative options for relaxation and wellness.

This experience should serve as a wake-up call to policymakers and the public alike. It’s time to acknowledge that the current system of cannabis prohibition is broken and that a new approach is needed. The solution is clear: we must completely deschedule cannabis at the federal level and allow states to establish their own regulatory frameworks.

By removing cannabis from the list of controlled substances, we can finally begin to treat it like any other commodity. This will open the door to a new era of innovation, entrepreneurship, and economic growth, as businesses and investors flock to the cannabis sector.

Moreover, descheduling cannabis will enable us to embrace new market norms and adapt to the changing preferences of consumers. As the hemp-derived THC market has shown, Americans are ready and willing to incorporate cannabis into their daily lives, just as they do with alcohol or tobacco.

In fact, recent studies have indicated that Americans now consume cannabis on a daily basis more frequently than they drink alcohol. This shift in behavior reflects a growing acceptance of cannabis as a normal part of adult life, and it’s time for our laws and policies to catch up with this reality.

The bottom line is that cannabis is here to stay, and it’s up to us to decide how we want to approach it as a society.

We can either continue down the path of prohibition, wasting resources on enforcement and criminalization, or we can embrace the opportunities presented by legalization.

By choosing the latter, we can create a safer, more equitable, and more prosperous future for all. We can establish a well-regulated cannabis market that prioritizes public health, social justice, and economic growth, while also respecting the individual rights and freedoms of consumers.

The hemp-derived psychoactive cannabinoid industry has given us a glimpse of what this future could look like. Now, it’s up to us to make it a reality. It’s time to deschedule cannabis, embrace new market norms, and welcome the cannabis revolution with open arms.

 

THE END OF HEMP IN AMERICA, READ ON…

END OF HEMP IN AMERICA

THE END OF HEMP IN AMERICA IS NEAR, READ WHY HERE!



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