Cannabis News
US Attorneys Urge Biden to Keep Cannabis as a Schedule 1 Drug Because Drug Cartels Secretly Run State-Legal Home Grows?
Former U.S. Attorneys Fight Cannabis Rescheduling for the Craziest Sounding Reasons!
In a letter dispatched to the heads of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 29 former U.S. attorneys are fervently urging the Biden administration to retain cannabis in Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). They argue that marijuana has evolved to be more dangerous, potent, and addictive since the last government review in 2016. This development occurs amidst the ongoing DEA examination of marijuana’s scheduling, prompted by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recommendation in August to shift the substance, reportedly to Schedule III.
Cartel Involvement and Home-Grow Laws
The former U.S. attorneys assert a compelling argument against cannabis rescheduling, contending that the legalization of marijuana has inadvertently favored drug cartels. According to their claim, the implementation of home-grow marijuana laws in various states has provided a fertile ground for cartels to exploit loopholes. Allegedly, these criminal organizations have seized the opportunity to cultivate marijuana within the United States, aiming to reduce the costs associated with cross-border trafficking. However, it is essential to note that this claim lacks a specific source, raising questions about the credibility of the assertion. Moreover, the attorneys’ argument might oversimplify a complex issue, as many states with legalized cannabis have stringent regulations in place, limiting the number of plants for legal home cultivation and explicitly outlawing unlicensed commercial sales.
Despite the lack of citation for their claim, the former federal prosecutors emphasize the role of home-grow laws in what they perceive as a detrimental consequence of marijuana legalization. The argument suggests a connection between state-level cannabis policies and criminal activities, urging policymakers to reconsider the potential unintended consequences of relaxing cannabis regulations. However, critics may argue that this perspective overlooks the broader societal benefits associated with regulated cannabis markets, such as tax revenue generation, job creation, and the displacement of illicit markets. As the debate on cannabis rescheduling unfolds, the nuanced relationship between state-level regulations and criminal activities remains a focal point of contention.
In presenting their case against rescheduling, the former U.S. attorneys highlight the significance of understanding the impact of cannabis policies on law enforcement efforts and criminal behavior. While the connection between legalized cannabis and cartel activities is a serious concern, the complex interplay of factors requires a thorough examination. Policymakers and stakeholders in the ongoing cannabis debate must carefully consider the potential unintended consequences of regulatory decisions, weighing the purported risks against the benefits of a regulated and controlled cannabis industry.
Medical Use and Addiction Concerns
Another key argument put forth by the former U.S. attorneys revolves around the perceived lack of accepted medical use and safety under medical supervision for marijuana. The attorneys challenge the prevailing narrative that marijuana should be considered for rescheduling based on its potential medicinal benefits. Despite the adoption of medical cannabis laws in a significant majority of U.S. states, the former prosecutors point to data from a June 2023 review suggesting that cannabis-based medicines increased adverse events related to the central nervous system. This assertion underscores their position that marijuana lacks a recognized medical application and raises safety concerns.
In the context of the broader debate on cannabis rescheduling, the former U.S. attorneys are urging decision-makers to consider scientific research indicating the high addictive potential of marijuana. By emphasizing the addictive nature of the substance, the attorneys seek to counter arguments advocating for its reclassification. The reference to an addiction rate of 30% among marijuana users and the claim that the addiction rate in Washington state after legalization was 21 percent adds a sense of urgency to their plea. This assertion aligns with their overarching message that marijuana poses significant risks, both in terms of public health and potential societal consequences.
As the attorneys address the issue of medical use, they contribute to a longstanding discourse on the therapeutic benefits and potential drawbacks of cannabis. While acknowledging the existence of medical cannabis laws across various states, the former prosecutors challenge the notion that these laws are grounded in sound scientific evidence. Their argument, rooted in concerns about adverse events and addiction, seeks to maintain the status quo by reinforcing the narrative that marijuana lacks the necessary medical merit for rescheduling. In the complex landscape of cannabis policy, the debate surrounding its medicinal properties continues to shape the trajectory of regulatory decisions.
Financial Implications and Industry Regulation
The former U.S. attorneys delve into the financial implications and regulatory landscape associated with the potential rescheduling of cannabis to Schedule III. Their argument centers on the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) rule 280E, which currently prevents businesses dealing with Schedule I substances from claiming standard business deductions. The attorneys assert that rescheduling cannabis would free marijuana companies from this restriction, enabling them to deduct expenses for various activities, including advertisements targeting youth and the sale of what they describe as child-friendly marijuana products.
This financial perspective introduces a layer of complexity to the debate, as it raises concerns about the commercialization of marijuana and its potential impact on vulnerable populations, specifically youth. The former prosecutors express apprehension that removing the IRS rule 280E barrier could lead to increased marketing efforts appealing to younger demographics. However, critics may argue that existing state regulations already address advertising to minors, and the attorneys’ claim might overlook the measures in place to mitigate such risks.
The contention also highlights the broader issue of industry regulation, emphasizing the potential consequences of altering the financial landscape for cannabis businesses. By linking financial incentives to the perceived risks of youth exposure, the former U.S. attorneys aim to underscore the importance of maintaining stringent regulations. As the cannabis industry continues to evolve, finding a balance between economic considerations and public safety remains a central challenge for policymakers and regulators. The attorneys’ focus on financial implications sheds light on the intricate relationship between taxation policies, industry practices, and the overall societal impact of cannabis rescheduling.
Bottom Line
The letter from 29 former U.S. attorneys provides a staunch defence against the rescheduling of cannabis, emphasizing concerns about increased dangers, cartel involvement, and potential adverse consequences. While their arguments touch on perceived risks associated with legalization, particularly about criminal activities and financial implications, it is essential to critically assess the validity of their claims. The absence of specific sources for certain assertions raises questions about the credibility of the presented arguments. As the cannabis rescheduling debate unfolds, policymakers must carefully weigh the concerns voiced by these former prosecutors against the broader societal and economic considerations associated with regulated cannabis markets. Ultimately, finding a balanced approach that addresses public health concerns, fosters responsible industry practices, and acknowledges the evolving landscape of cannabis legalization is crucial in shaping effective and equitable cannabis policies.
SCHEDULE 3 OR SCHEDULE 1, WHO WINS? READ ON…
“How Long Does One Puff of Weed Stay in Your System?”… This topic can be difficult to answer since it is dependent on elements such as the size of the hit and what constitutes a “one hit.” If you take a large bong pull then cough, it might linger in your system for 5-7 days. A moderate dose from a joint can last 3-5 days, whereas a few hits from a vaporizer may last 1-3 days.
The length of time that marijuana stays in the body varies based on a number of factors, including metabolism, THC levels, frequency of use, and hydration.
Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, is the primary psychoactive component of cannabis. THC and its metabolites, which remain in your body long after the effects have subsided, are detected by drug tests.
Since these metabolites are fat-soluble, they cling to bodily fat molecules. They could thus take a while to fully pass through your system, particularly if your body fat percentage is higher.
THC is absorbed by tissues and organs (including the brain, heart, and fat) and converted by the liver into chemicals such as 11-hydroxy-THC and carboxy-THC. Cannabis is eliminated in feces at a rate of around 65%, while urine accounts for 20%. The leftover amount might be kept within the body.
THC deposited in bodily tissues ultimately re-enters the circulation and is processed by the liver. For frequent users, THC accumulates in fatty tissues quicker than it can be removed, thus it may be detectable in drug tests for days or weeks following consumption.
The detection time varies according to the amount and frequency of cannabis usage. Higher dosages and regular usage result in longer detection times.
The type of drug test also affects detection windows. Blood and saliva tests typically detect cannabis metabolites for shorter periods, while urine and hair samples can reveal use for weeks or even months. In some cases, hair tests have detected cannabis use over 90 days after consumption.
Detection Windows for Various Cannabis Drug Tests
Urine Tests
Among all drug tests, urine testing is the most commonly used method for screening for drug use in an individual.
Detection times vary, but a 2017 review suggests the following windows for cannabis in urine after last use:
– Single-use (e.g., one joint): up to 3 days
– Moderate use (around 4 times a week): 5–7 days
– Chronic use (daily): 10–15 days
– Chronic heavy use (multiple times daily): over 30 days
Blood Tests
Blood tests generally detect recent cannabis use, typically within 2–12 hours after consumption. However, in cases of heavy use, cannabis has been detected up to 30 days later. Chronic heavy use can extend the detection period in the bloodstream.
Saliva Tests
THC can enter saliva through secondhand cannabis smoke, but THC metabolites are only present if you’ve personally smoked or ingested cannabis.
Saliva testing has a short detection window and can sometimes identify cannabis use on the same day. A 2020 review found that THC was detectable in the saliva of frequent users for up to 72 hours after use, and it may remain in saliva longer than in blood following recent use.
In areas where cannabis is illegal, saliva testing is often used for roadside screenings.
Hair Tests
Hair follicle tests can detect cannabis use for up to 90 days. After use, cannabinoids reach the hair follicles through small blood vessels and from sebum and sweat surrounding the hair.
Hair grows at approximately 0.5 inches per month, so a 1.5-inch segment of hair close to the scalp can reveal cannabis use over the past three months.
Factors Affecting THC and Metabolite Retention
The length of time THC and its metabolites stay in your system depends on various factors. Some, like body mass index (BMI) and metabolic rate, relate to individual body processing, not the drug itself.
Other factors are specific to cannabis use, including:
– Dosage: How much you consume
– Frequency: How often you use cannabis
– Method of consumption: Smoking, dabbing, edibles, or sublingual
– THC potency: Higher potency can extend detection time
Higher doses and more frequent use generally extend THC retention. Cannabis consumed orally may remain in the system slightly longer than smoked cannabis, and stronger cannabis strains, higher in THC, may also stay detectable for a longer period.
How Quickly Do the Effects of Cannabis Set In?
When smoking cannabis, effects appear almost immediately, while ingested cannabis may take 1–3 hours to peak.
The psychoactive component THC produces a “high” with common effects such as:
– Altered senses, including perception of time
– Mood changes
– Difficulty with thinking and problem-solving
– Impaired memory
Other short-term effects can include:
– Anxiety and confusion
– Decreased coordination
– Dry mouth and eyes
– Nausea or lightheadedness
– Trouble focusing
– Increased appetite
– Rapid heart rate
– Restlessness and sleepiness
In rare cases, high doses may lead to hallucinations, delusions, or acute psychosis.
Regular cannabis use may have additional mental and physical effects. While research is ongoing, cannabis use may increase the risk of:
– Cognitive issues like memory loss
– Cardiovascular problems including heart disease and stroke
– Respiratory illnesses such as bronchitis or lung infections
– Mood disorders like depression and anxiety
Cannabis use during pregnancy can negatively impact fetal growth and development.
Duration of Effects
Short-term effects generally taper off within 1–3 hours, but for chronic users, some long-term effects may last days, weeks, or even months. Certain effects may even be permanent.
Bottom Line
The amount of time that cannabis remains in your system following a single use varies greatly depending on individual characteristics such as body fat, metabolism, frequency of use, and mode of intake. Frequent users may maintain traces of THC for weeks, whereas infrequent users may test positive for as little as a few days. Hair tests can disclose usage for up to 90 days, while blood and saliva tests identify more recent use. Urine tests are the most popular and have varying detection durations. The duration that THC and its metabolites are detectable will ultimately depend on a number of factors, including dose, strength, and individual body chemistry.
PEE IN A CUP COMING UP, READ ON..
Is kratom addictive? Discover the potential for dependence on Kratom, the risks involved with its use, and how to approach its consumption responsibly.
From 2011 to 2017, over 1,800 calls to poison centers involved kratom in the U.S. This significant number highlights the concern regarding kratom addiction.
However, without Food and Drug Administration (FDA) oversight, and due to various consumption methods like teas and capsules, there are significant health risks. Safe use of kratom is now in question due to these issues.
Research debates how dependence develops, outlining signs like loss of control and withdrawal symptoms. These signs are seen in regular kratom users. Ironically, some people switch from drugs like heroin to kratom, looking for a legal alternative.
Understanding Kratom: Origins and Prevalence
Kratom comes from the Mitragyna speciosa tree in Southeast Asia. It can act like a stimulant or like opioids, based on how much you take. People use it in different ways, for a small energy boost or stronger effects at higher doses.
The legal status of kratom in the U.S. is complicated and changing. It’s a hot topic because some worry about its misuse. It’s still legal in several states. This shows how different places handle drug rules. The National Institute on Drug Abuse is looking into its medical benefits. But, the FDA hasn’t approved it for medical use yet. The DEA calls it a “drug of concern,” which means policies might change.
-
From 2011 to 2017, poison control centers in the U.S. got over 1,800 reports about kratom. This shows it’s widely used and might pose health risks.
-
Kratom’s main ingredients bind to opioid receptors very strongly, stronger than morphine even. This fact is key to understanding its effects.
-
As more people use kratom, more are reporting serious health problems. These include liver and heart issues, and tough withdrawal symptoms, particularly in those already sick.
The statistics show mounting worries about kratom in the U.S. As its use grows, it’s becoming more important to health policies and laws. What happens next will depend on further research and legal decisions.
Is Kratom Addictive: Investigating the Substance’s Nature
The question of kratom’s addictiveness focuses on how it affects brain receptors and its long-term health implications. The ongoing debate highlights concerns about dependence and the risk of addiction. Scientists are closely looking at these issues.
How Kratom Works in the Brain
Kratom’s main alkaloids, mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine, bind to the brain’s opioid receptors, similar to painkillers and narcotics. This connection suggests a potential risk of dependence. These alkaloids are key to kratom’s pain relief but also point to possible addiction concerns, especially with frequent, high-dose usage.
Patterns and Consequences of Long-term Use
-
Using kratom often, especially in large doses, can increase the risk of dependence and intense withdrawal symptoms, similar to opioid withdrawal.
-
Although some use it for pain or to improve mood, long-term kratom users might see serious health problems, like liver damage and mental health issues.
-
Withdrawal symptoms, including irritability, nausea, and sleep problems, show kratom’s impact on one’s physical and mental health.
Assessment of Addiction Risks
Studies indicate a significant risk of addiction to kratom, especially with high doses or frequent use. Dependence develops as the body gets used to kratom, leading to tolerance and a need for more to feel its effects. Withdrawal symptoms emphasize this risk, as highlighted by health experts.
Physiological Effects: Kratom’s Impact on the Body
There is a lot of debate about the safety and use of kratom. This herbal extract comes from the Mitragyna speciosa plant. It has drawn attention for its possible harmful effects on the body. The FDA has issued many warnings about kratom, raising safety concerns.
-
Kratom Adverse Effects: Kratom users have reported side effects like nausea, vomiting, and confusion. More serious issues include high blood pressure and liver damage. These problems highlight the risks of using kratom.
-
Herbal Extract Safety: Some kratom products contain heavy metals and pathogens. These can cause severe health issues, including death. This shows the importance of safety in herbal products.
-
FDA Warnings and Regulations: The FDA has linked kratom to over 35 deaths and warns against using it. They point out the lack of medical uses and the risk of addiction.
-
Physiological Impact: Kratom’s effects depend on the dose and the user’s body. Yet, it can lead to dangerous outcomes like liver damage and seizures.
-
Safety Concerns from Authorities: Federal agencies like the DEA are worried about kratom’s safety. Although not a controlled substance, monitoring suggests users should be careful.
Kratom might offer temporary relief for some ailments, but it comes with significant risks. The FDA’s warnings should make people think twice. If considering kratom, it’s crucial to talk to a doctor first. Experts stress the need for safety and caution with herbal extracts.
Conclusion
Kratom’s role in health and regulation is complex, with views and research findings widely varied. Some people use kratom for its claimed health benefits, but it’s a hot topic. Experts advise caution and suggest consulting a doctor before using kratom due to the unclear effects.
Clinical studies using scores like SOWS and COWS haven’t confirmed withdrawal symptoms from kratom. This adds to the debate, especially when some users report withdrawal. This makes kratom a controversial subject among different findings and user experiences.
When it comes to treating opioid addiction, kratom can be both helpful and harmful. Some have used it successfully to fight addiction. Yet, some states have banned it. This highlights the need for regulations and consistent product quality. It also raises questions about kratom’s legal status due to mixed actions by authorities.
The situation shows how complex kratom is in the realm of substance use and law. Without clear evidence supporting either its benefits or risks, it poses a challenge. More research is needed to guide regulations and health advice. For now, anyone thinking of using kratom should be careful, seek medical advice, and keep up with laws and health guidelines.
WHAT IS KRATOM ANYWAY? READ ON…
Webinar Replay: Post-Election Cannabis Wrap – Smoke ’em if You’ve Got ’em
I Had Just One Puff
Marijuana firms Eaze, Green Dragon find new life after $10 million capital infusion
Get some rest on Modified Grapes—November’s Leafly HighLight
Is Kratom Addictive? Understanding Dependence, Risks, and Safe Usage
New Rule, December 5: Oregon Cannabis Retailers, Processors and Labor Peace Agreements
The CBD Dog Treat Guide
Trippin’ Golf Balls – Can Magic Mushrooms Help Your Golf Game?
Australian Broadcasting Corp Alleges Military Veterans Have Been Targeted By Medicinal Cannabis Companies Via Social Media & Offered Free “Product”
Medical Marijuana Passed in 106 out of 106 Counties and Cities in What State? A. Florida B. Kentucky C. Ohio D. North Dakota
Distressed Cannabis Business Takeaways – Canna Law Blog™
United States: Alex Malyshev And Melinda Fellner Discuss The Intersection Of Tax And Cannabis In New Video Series – Part VI: Licensing (Video)
What you Need to Know
Drug Testing for Marijuana – The Joint Blog
NCIA Write About Their Equity Scholarship Program
It has been a wild news week – here’s how CBD and weed can help you relax
Cannabis, alcohol firm SNDL loses CA$372.4 million in 2022
A new April 20 cannabis contest includes a $40,000 purse
Your Go-To Source for Cannabis Logos and Designs
City Of Oakland Issues RFP For Employee Training Programs
-
Cannabis News2 years agoDistressed Cannabis Business Takeaways – Canna Law Blog™
-
One-Hit Wonders2 years agoUnited States: Alex Malyshev And Melinda Fellner Discuss The Intersection Of Tax And Cannabis In New Video Series – Part VI: Licensing (Video)
-
Cannabis 1012 years agoWhat you Need to Know
-
drug testing11 months agoDrug Testing for Marijuana – The Joint Blog
-
Education2 years agoNCIA Write About Their Equity Scholarship Program
-
Cannabis2 years agoIt has been a wild news week – here’s how CBD and weed can help you relax
-
Marijuana Business Daily2 years agoCannabis, alcohol firm SNDL loses CA$372.4 million in 2022
-
California2 years agoA new April 20 cannabis contest includes a $40,000 purse