Willful Ignorance

Paul Armentano catches this incredible performance by the Director of the National Institutes of Health: Health Czar Shows Amazing Ignorance About Marijuana

“We don’t know a lot about the things we wish we did,” with respect to the herb, Collins said, seemingly unaware that a keyword search of the agency’s own sponsored website would yield thousands of scientific papers specific to marijuana and its behavioral and health effects. “I’ve been asked repeatedly, does regular marijuana smoking, because you inhale deeply, increase your risk of lung cancer? We don’t know. Nobody’s done that study.”

Nobody’s done that study?


This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

107 Responses to Willful Ignorance

  1. DonDig says:

    In the words of a very young Drew Barrymore, ‘Gimme a break!’
    Is this guy a new hire or something?
    Seriously though, it just goes to show that genius doesn’t necessarily mean equally enlightened across all subjects one might discuss. (Or maybe he’s among those subject to the DEA truth gag order.)
    It certainly would have been much better for everyone (and probably especially him) if he had said “I” don’t know.
    I’d almost think he was deliberately trying to mislead us.

  2. allan says:

    I was gonna say to grab some shovels but damn if they don’t seem able to just keep digging that hole they’re in deeper w/o our help.

    and it’s only the first week of March!

  3. We have more experts here than the National Institute of Health has. If I was that ignorant of my job at any other place of employment in America my next days work would consist of showing up early at the unemployment office and submitting resume’s.

  4. allan says:

    and is this really ignorance?

    I mean hell, doesn’t the name Tashkin come to most of y’all’s minds when someone asks/talks about smot poking and lung cancer?

    Could it be that they are down to the “truth? what truth? I don’t know no steenking truth” phase?

    And as “Health Czar” (big, scary finger quotes) isn’t it the job of the “Health Czar” to know these things? Or is willful ignorance in the job title?

    If it’s willful ignorance, it’s conspiracy/fraud/deception…

    • claygooding says:

      I posted Tashkin’s study at every article I found on him,,a video link so short you don’t have to tinyize it.


      It has a pdf link there for the hard to convince.

      • allan says:

        nimbin tv… heh… thanks BigBong!

        • Plant Down Babylon says:

          Scored some awesome cannabis in Nimbin. Super easy and inexpensive.

          It was a little sketchy getting it into New Zealand, though.

          Big risks, good times!!

        • allan says:

          yeah, Nimbin’s on my list, got some mates there as yet unmet that I need share a spliff or 20 with. They used to run a webcam at the hempbar that helped to connect real time visuals. Not to mention, the sleeping franchise opportunity that is Big Bong’s Burger Bar®… forgot the Golden Arches, look for the big bong!

        • kaptinemo says:

          BB’s a Netfriend of mine as well. Meself, Observer from DrugSense and BB used to hang out at DrugSenseChat; I helped him fix a computer remotely a few years back. One of these days I’ll fly out there, but don’t know when 🙁

        • Hope says:

          Big Bong! My old friend, too. I hope he and his are well.

    • Matthew Meyer says:

      Tashkin’s name is not in these folks’ vocabulary…

      • Duncan20903 says:


        That’s a heckuva good trick considering that he used to be the starting pivot man at official ONDCP circle jerks.

  5. kaptinemo says:

    (Chuckling) Oh, jeez, just like I said, they’re getting nuttier all the time. I’d write more, but there’s only so many ways you can say, “Unbelieveable”. In a very real sense, the prohibs are truly that.

  6. primus says:

    The more they thrash around seeking relevancy, the more pathetic they look. The more they spout their lies the more evil they look. The more they vilify their opposition the more repulsive they become, so the public listens less and sees them as irrelevant, repulsive liars, which leads to even more thrashing about seeking relevancy. DEAth spiral. Now, even the politicians have noticed how bereft of friends they are, how transparent, how easily contradicted, rebuked and publicly embarassed. The sharks are circling. The more they thrash, the more they attract the sharks. When the pols take them to task, the people who hire them, when they are used as the whipping boy so the politicians have cover to ‘evolve’, they won’t be so glad they took that cushy government job.

    • claygooding says:

      I live for the day when any committee chairman actually reads the Re-authorization Act and reads out loud in public line 12 of the ONDCP directors regulations,,,and acts like he didn’t know that was in there.

  7. DdC says:

    because you inhale deeply

    Nobody’s done that study?

    I have, two minutes ago…

    • allan says:

      you too? omg… me too! it’s not cancerous, it’s contagious

      • DdC says:

        I tried contagioning the neighbor, still an idiot. I think there may be a “high” causal connection between ignition and inhalation. How am I able to type, or read? What if I have to pee? It must have bore a hole through my sinus’. The smoke is leaking out of my nose! Who can I notify? Does High Times make house calls?

        I’m late for the Saturday nite fights. Wait it’s Thursday. Someone get them a calendar!


        In this corner a cannabis celeb-ish skeptic. Wearing red trunks weighing in at 217 pounds, Russel the Radiiiiiiiicccccaaaall.

        In the other corner, wearing green trunks, the hometown favorite. DML David Malmo-Levine, Mr DeMoLittttiiiiooonn . crowd cheers

        Tonight’s battle is over censored reality vs pleasing the idiots.

        Russ Belville, who writes for HighTimes.com, wrote a very superficial article called “5 Pro-Pot Myths That Must Be Busted”:

        The Devil in the Details: by David Malmo-Levine
        Why Russ Belville is Slightly Wrong About His “5 Pot Myths That Must Be Busted”

        Oh my you could hear that one in the upper deck. DML just connected with a left hook and the Rad is down for the count…

        Russ Belville ‏@RadicalRuss
        FINALLY! Somebody debunks me with links and reasoning! I’ll respond soon David, but thanks for the watchdogging.

        My favorite complaint is that I wrote a “superficial article”. Uh, yeah, it was a 400-word assignment. Not much room for in-depth there.

  8. Tim says:

    Recalling a day about twenty years ago when I was working for a Xian radio station and had to take the special “non-abortion” feed of Focus on the Family to play, as Dobson and company knew that hammering the abortion issue in Canada was pretty much a non-starter. We made some BS announcment about FOTF not being available at its “regular time due to technical issues.” (Hey, they just paid me to roll tape.)

    The SAM Canada website reminds me of the special Focus on the Family show that aired that day.


  9. Servetus says:

    The willful ignorance scam is used to accomplish things besides a never-ending drug war. When the various scams are compared, a pattern emerges:

    (1) The public influence isn’t generated by citizens, but by governments and/or special interests, since governments, or large influential entities, are the only ones with the resources having any chance of pulling off their grandiose schemes.

    (2) The scam must however always appear to be a grass roots effort, such as parents protecting their children, and so forth.

    (3) Everyone knows about the willful ignorance scam, but it continues to work anyway. Evidence: famous quotes about willful ignorance are numerous:

    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.― Benjamin Franklin

    Five percent of the people think; ten percent of the people think they think; and the other eighty-five percent would rather die than think.― Thomas Edison

    There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.― Søren Kierkegaard

    Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science.― Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man

    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.― Isaac Asimov

    It’s much easier not to know things sometimes.― Stephen Chbosky, The Perks of Being a Wallflower

    • allan says:

      …one should be gentle with the ignorant, for they are the chosen of God…

    • DdC says:

      “It is difficult to get a man to understand something,
      when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
      ― Upton Sinclair

    • kaptinemo says:

      I couldn’t have been more succinct. Thank you. You nailed it perfectly.

      Because that is just how astroturfing works. And that’s how DuPont snookerered the ‘Concerned (translation: control freak) Parent’s Movement in the late 1970’s-early 1980’s into being his water-carriers.

      And when the bureaucracy had been beefed up by said control freaks pressuring Congress to ‘do something’, DuPont jettisoned them with no more thought than anyone has about used toilet paper. And in the same spirit.

      What tickles me to no end is that some of the control freak wannabe-players-who-got-played are still alive to witness our approaching victory.

      After all the damage they helped cause in the ramping-up the DrugWar to its’ present murderous absurdity, it must be especially bitter to know that their works only made things worse, and the very ‘children’ they thought they were ‘saving’ repudiate them with every petition signature, donation to reform group or vote for re-legalizing cannabis. For, as a famous poet once said, “Your children are not your children.” The prohibs keep forgetting that, and that’s ultimately why they lose.

      • Cannabis says:

        I love reading comments that are well thought through and also writers that know the difference between its’, it’s, and its.

        • Artie says:

          Except for one thing: there’s no such thing as its’. The possessive pronoun is its, with NO apostrophe, and the construction it’s is a contraction for it is (or it has). Sorry to be so pedantic, but this is one of my pet grammar peeves.

          Oh, and I, too, love reading kaptinemo’s comments (regardless of the its’s). Keep up the good work, sir.

        • allan says:

          thanks Artie, I saw that last night and was thinking ummm…

        • darkcycle says:

          Jeez, Artie, you and my wife. She’s an education Professor. Specifically literacy and literature. She has a tattoo of a winged Red Pencil on her thigh, with the words “Spell good or Die” in rockers above and below.

        • Artie says:

          darkcycle, I love it! My background is not in literature, but in computer science – specifically computer languages and compilers (which probably explains my interest in grammar, syntax, and semantics).

          I didn’t mean to start anything, but I just couldn’t pass it by. 🙂

        • allan says:

          She has a tattoo of a winged Red Pencil on her thigh, with the words “Spell good or Die”

          My roomies in college really had a love/hate relationship w/ my red pen. They loved better grades on papers but hated getting a paper back from me after they worked so hard to get it right.

          I send strangers on the wwweb messages about their typos… 99% appreciative feedback. But I remain an amateur editor only (some say that about my writing).

    • NorCalNative says:

      Impressive list of quotations.

  10. thelbert says:

    some people are just not curious, especially if there is a risk of knowing facts you don’t want to know. some people even kill their own brain cells, on purpose, with alcohol

    • John says:

      “Alright brain, I don’t like you and you don’t like me. But let’s just do this and I can get back to killing you with beer.”

      -Homer Simpson

  11. Howard says:

    Interesting discussion about the nature of addiction. A bit of churning and chewing to get there, but the range and co-factors described is revealing.


    Nuance does not play well with the all-or-nothing prohibitionists. They’re stuck in “black or white” mode.

  12. Randy says:

    I wonder if Dr. Collins religious beliefs might be playing a part here.

    Dr. Collins is an evangelical Christian, and evangelicals think it sinful for a person to alter ones mood for recreational purposes. Also keep in mind that evangelicals think that one of their Christian duties is to lead people away from sin. It could be that Dr. Collins would rather feign ignorance about cannabis studies in general, rather than point to any studies that doesn’t show cannabis usage as a major health risk as that might “send the wrong message”.

    My guess is that Dr. Collins is influenced by:

    (1) The NIH’s bureaucratic (political) stance against cannabis
    (2) His Christian beliefs
    (3) As an M.D., he like many in profession see cannabis usage as a negative

    Unrelated to this issue, but to Dr. Collins’ credit, he is a prominent Christian who affirms the validity of evolution and natural selection. That is something to be celebrated given the willful ignorance displayed by many Christians regarding evolutionary science.

    • primus says:

      It’s not that complex; If Collins knows the facts and understands them, he is intelligent. It therefore follows that he is a liar. If he does not know and understand the facts, he is either stupid, incompetent or both. Take your pick: stupid, incompetent or liar. There are no other choices. In any case he has demonstrated that he is not suitable for this job.

  13. Duncan20903 says:


    I’ve got an idea! Let’s play “Ask the Prohibitionist!”

    Q) Mr. Prohibitionist, Mr. Prohibitionist, how many prohibitionists does it take to screw in a light bulb?

    A) None. We don’t have enough scientific studies to know whether or not we should screw in the light bulb, or how we would go about doing it, or even know if it’s possible to screw one in! No, we can’t risk giving the scientists any light bulbs that are more than 25 watts to use for scientific studies. They might get into the wrong hands!

    • thelbert says:

      and yet fatties and vaporizers are as ubiquitous as light bulbs, despite scientific ignorance. if i was a scientist, i would wonder where the bodies were. when the last line of defense is lack of knowlege, i think we may be getting close to victory. now we have to think about how to rehab the unemployed narks.

  14. darkcycle says:

    Hey folks, Help me out here. IIRC, there was an article we discussed here that made the claim that CBD has been found in another plant, besides cannabis. I am looking for the citation….
    O/T, the FDA has confirmed (again) that CBD is a schedule one controlled substance: http://www.beyondthc.com/fda-confirms-cbd-is-a-schedule-1-drug/
    Wow! I found it before the timer ran out! http://skunkpharmresearch.com/2013/02/05/flax-seeds-contain-cbd/

    • claygooding says:

      O/T but need to know,,with WA fast tracking their MMJ program out of existence is there any talk of recreational users boycotting state stores,,I would and tell them to hire more cops and build more prisons on the tax money they ain’t getting.

      • Windy says:

        That is actually a very good idea, clay, civil disobedience, most every rec user already has a guy, or at the very least a guy who knows a guy, and the medical users have their dispensaries and deliverers.

        • darkcycle says:

          That is a good idea…wonder if it could fly…

        • Windy says:

          We pretty much know it will be difficult to get a jury to convict for any pot “crime” in WA, especially after all the bait and switch tactics of the legislature.

    • Howard says:

      CBD is lumped in with Tetrahydocannabinol in the CSA. Which, of course, completely negates any rationale of the CSA itself. That means six-year-old Charlotte Figi, and other children taking CBD oil for seizure control, are criminals. And they are violating international treaties. I suspect the DEA is seeking funds to build a child prison to incarcerate this miscreants as I type this.

    • Windy says:

      Is the fed gov going to add flax seed to the CSA’s schedule 1? If not, then it MUST remove cannabis from the CSA.

      If it adds flax seed to that schedule then the American people are going to KNOW (without any doubt whatsoever) this government is absolutely insane, and just stop obeying all federal “laws”. Similar will happen if it leaves flax seed off the schedule but keeps cannabis on it, then the people will know the government is arbitrary and cruel, and stop supporting it.

      Looks like a Catch 22 situation to me.

      • darkcycle says:

        No, they’ll ignore it until flax derived CBD becomes available, then they’ll use the CSA to shut down the extractors and the sellers. But they won’t ban Flax. If they go there, they know that people would cry bloody murder. They have the internet and active informed people to deal with, unlike 1937, when they could re-name Hemp Marijuana and sneak it through with nobody noticing.

    • It’s a heck of a catch 22. Will CBD extracted from flax be illegal? Why is the DEA restricting a chemical that has no abuse potential and tremendous medical value to schedule 1? How can this be justified? Do other plants that are found to contain cannabinoids get banned as they are discovered? How about their extracts?

    • Been thinking. The endocannabinoid system in the body was unknown to science when the DEA was in its infancy and the CSA was written. All of this, the DEA included are antiquated. We should all expect and demand that the government get out of the game of trying to manipulate science to their own ends. They support the prohibition of life saving natural substances to the body that cannot addict and can save lives. Moreover, lives are now being lost as we speak because of their failures. This is a rather large moral imperative. This has to stop or they have to go. Soon. Lack of legal access means they are now killing people knowingly and publicly with these antiquated policies. This is lunacy.

    • Duncan20903 says:


      What the…?? It isn’t on the “list“.

      All that was confirmed is that it “meets the ‘definition'” of a schedule I substance. That in itself is a frackin’ joke since it doesn’t stimulate CB-1 receptors. Not that the Feds ever cared whether a substance met the criteria before. But their opinion does “meet the definition” of laughing stock.

      Oh wait, I see it now. Humpty Dumpty been berry, berry busy redefining words to suit himself down the street on Capitol Hill.

      Since nomenclature of these substances is not internationally standardized, compounds of these structures, regardless of numerical designation of positions covered.

      Am I reading that cluster fuck of gobbledegook correctly because I think that they’re saying that without international standardization that those words mean just what they choose them to mean? Is that just them trying to baffle us with bullshit? If so they’ve succeeded in baffling me.

      • Duncan20903 says:


        Take a look at what I stumbled across while trying to make sense of nonsense and failing miserably:

        Pursuant to § 1301.33(a), Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), this is notice that on September 6, 2013, National Center for Natural Products Research—NIDA MProject, University of Mississippi, 135 Coy Waller Complex, University, Mississippi 38677, made application by renewal to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the following basic classes of controlled substances:

        Drug Schedule
        Marihuana (7360) ……………………. I
        Tetrahydrocannabinols (7370) ….. I

        The company plans to cultivate marihuana in support of the National Institute on Drug Abuse for research approved by the Department of Health and Human Services. linky

        It appears that the “National Center for Natural Products Research” is Dr. Assholey’s dog & pony show. Why the heck is he applying to do what he’s been doing for decades?

      • darkcycle says:

        The DEA uses an internal number for CBD, according to them, and lumps it in with Hashish in the schedule for charging purposes according to this, the number is 7372:
        Q: If CBD is non-psychoactive, does that mean it is legal?

        A: Technically, CBD is forbidden in any form (pure or from a plant) in the USA, despite its total lack of addictive potential or any rational danger. Cannabidiol and all other plant cannabinoids are Schedule I drugs in the USA. The code number for cannabidiol in Schedule I is 7372. CBD is not psychoactive, but it is illegal in the eyes of the federal government. You may find it listed here: under Schedule I where it says tetrahydrocannabinols. The part saying “and others” includes all phytocannabinoids, even CBD. However there are exceptions. American scientists with a DEA license in some cases are permitted to experiment with pure synthetic CBD. Envelope-pushing medical marijuana entrepreneurs claim that it is legal to import CBD-rich oil extracted from industrial hemp grown in other countries, as long as the THC content of this oil is less than .3 percent (in accordance with federal rules regarding industrial hemp products). But this is a rather grey area of the law. Thus far, U.S. authorities have not moved against a handful of companies that purport to import “CBD hemp oil” with trace levels of THC. The situation is different in many other countries, where CBD is not controlled at all.
        This is from the Project CBD website Q and A. http://www.projectcbd.org/?post_type=faq

  15. allan says:

    Someone should also ask the “Health Czar” about the ’74 Virginia study and cancer (that was NIH, IIRC).

    But we all know… like Judge Young’s study (the Shaeffer Commission, etc) they can’t talk about what the science really says. And the more they DON’T talk about it the more we will. We have the audience’s attention and the prohibs only have growing public scorn.

    This is conspiracy. Didn’t someone have to actually issue a directive to hide the VA study?

    I’m telling ya, crimes against humanity, at minimum.

  16. B. Snow says:

    OT: But, Excellent News [I posted this a couple threads back, but I wanted to be sure everyone sees it]:

    (March 6th) Director Kerlikowske Confirmed by Senate as Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection

    “Today, the Senate voted to confirm Gil Kerlikowske to be the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, a role to which he will be transitioning over the next several days.

    Once the transition is complete, Deputy Director Michael Botticelli will take on the role of Acting Director of National Drug Control Policy.

    While the staff of the Office of National Drug Control Policy is sad to see Director Kerlikowske go, we wish him all the best in his new position, and we look forward to the continued leadership of Deputy Director Botticelli.

    WOW! This is gonna be good… “Director Michael Botticelli”!
    He’s gotten already a pre-appointment verbal beatdown – from Rep. Steve Cohen, Rep. Earl Blumenauer, & Rep. Gerry Connolly!

    These are about to be ‘interesting times’ for the New Director ‘Botticelli Fife’

    You know, as in ‘Barney Fife’ = come on…
    Not even one tiny snicker? It’s like the third time I’ve said that – nobody’s an Andy Griffith Fan here? Personally – I’m not but I thought this was a good one its NOT – “Droopy Dog” good but I thought it was at least ‘in the ballpark’.

    **Wait, I just noticed “Acting Director”… Jeez, maybe they realize he’s already been largely discredited by Cohen & Crew?**

    Between this and Dr. Gupta “Doubling Down”… Heck, Maybe (just maybe) its because he/they know he’s only gonna be “Acting Director” for a little while – as everyone knows his job will soon become severely less relevant?

    He might’ve already told his boss that he simply (desperately) wants to transfer somewhere, anywhere = Where the people just make playful jokes about his last name.
    À la, Robert Downey Jr. in ‘The Pickup Artist’ (1987) -as- ‘Jack Jericho’: “Did anyone ever tell you that you have the face of a Botticelli and the body of a Degas?”

    • DdC says:

      300,000,000 people in the country and they go to Sabetage SAM, rehashed McCzar Berry third rail policy. For a presently sober x junkie as deputy dog czar, now he slides on auto drive into fool fledged drug czar? He runs rehabs, and as most over zealous converts he’s going to saved us from his own past mistakes. Caused by the prohibition, he perpetuates, for profits. Junkie Drug Czar actually would make more sense, and be more effective and efficient than the profiteers. Something tells me he’s backsliding. If a stoner told a cop “I don’t know that I know.”. Instant road side check.

      Obama’s deputy drug czar admits marijuana is less dangerous than alcohol
      February 05, 2014
      “How many people die from marijuana overdoses every year?” Connolly asked of Botticelli.

      “I don’t know that I know. It is very rare,” Botticelli replied, according to Raw Story.

      “Very rare. Now just contrast that with prescription drugs, unintentional deaths from prescription drugs, one American dies every 19 minutes,” Connolly continued. “Nothing comparable to marijuana.”

      “Alcohol — hundreds of thousands of people die every year from alcohol related deaths: automobile [accidents], liver disease, esophageal cancer, blood poisoning. Is that incorrect?” he asked.

      Botticelli acknowledged the lawmaker first during the first round of questioning, Dolan reported, but refused to directly answer once Connolly tried to compare weed to alcohol.

      “I guess I’m sticking with the president — the head of your administration — who is making a different point,” Connolly reportedly fired back. ”He is making a point that is empirically true. That isn’t a normative statement, that marijuana is good or bad, but he was contrasting it with alcohol and empirically he is correct, is he not?”

      “Is it not a scientific fact that there is nothing comparable with marijuana?” he asked further. ”And I’m not saying it is good or bad, but when we look at deaths and illnesses, alcohol, other hard drugs are certainly — even prescription drugs — are a threat to public health in a way that just isolated marijuana is not. Isn’t that a scientific fact? Or do you dispute that fact?”

      At that point, Raw Story reported, Botticelli admitted, “I don’t dispute that fact.”

      Oregon Dem destroys top drug official
      An Oregon Democrat literally threw up his hands in frustration Tuesday after failing to get a direct answer to his question about marijuana’s dangers from the deputy director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy.

      Michael Botticelli google

      ✖ Prior to joining ONDCP, Mr. Botticelli served as Director of the Bureau of Substance Abuse Services at the Massachusetts Department of Public Health.

      Well if he’s directing a substance abuse service its no wonder it took him a long-term recovery from addiction. If he’s still recovering, would you want him driving an airplane?

      ✖ Michael Botticelli has been sworn in as Deputy Director of the Office of National … Botticelli, who is in long-term recovery from addiction….

      And on your resume under “experience” to be considered as Drug Czar you listed “long-term recovery from addiction”. Yet with that impressive record you don’t know if you know if marijuana is more dangerous than meth or heroin? Sounds good.

      ✖ Michael P. Botticelli
      Deputy Director of the Office of National Drug Control
      M.Ed., Director, Bureau of Substance Abuse Services,

      ✖ Drug Control Policy Michael Botticelli can’t answer directly if anyone has overdosed with Marijuana or if it’s more addictive than Meth or Coke.

      I thought he didn’t know if he knew? He was going to check with himself and get back to them on it.

      ✖ For too long, we have treated addiction as an acute illness rather than a chronic condition.

      or reducing stress, or enjoying the experience or making a smarter safer choice?

      ✖ Michael Botticelli has been sworn in as deputy director of the Office of … recovery from addiction himself, with more than 24 years of sobriety,

      ✖ The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), Center for Substance Abuse Treatment … Michael Botticelli, Project Director

      ✖ Top Drug Warrior Unsure if Meth is Worse Than Marijuana

      When all else fails, tell a story about some dead kids. reddit
      Apparently Deputy Director of National Drug Control Policy Michael Botticelli can’t answer directly if anyone has overdosed with Marijuana or if it’s more addictive than Meth or Coke.

      Our Patent System Incentivizes Drug Companies To Pay Doctors Kickbacks

  17. primus says:

    Something has occurred to me; now that Colorado has a legal cannabis market, they will find out just how large that market really is. They actually thought that the small number of outlets they initially allowed would be enough to satisfy the whole market. They are quickly finding out that they were wrong. They vastly underestimated the size of the market. The stores have lines out the door every day they are open, they have raised their prices to capitalize and the people keep coming and buying cannabis. At the same time, the black market is still operating, although of course it is difficult to know whether the illegal market is as large as it was before the legal stores opened. In due time, there will be more outlets opened, until it reaches the point that they are competing for clients, and then the prices will come down. Note that all the state taxes are expressed as a percentage of sale prices, so as prices per unit drop so will tax per unit. The way it will be made up is by taking market share away from the black market, which will happen as prices and supply adjust. Long term, the legal market will be virtually all the market, and then we will know just how large it really is. There are going to be a lot of surprised people on the prohib side. The market is huge.

    • Freeman says:

      It’s true the market is huge — and that’s before legal sales were ever allowed.

      But I don’t think the prohibitches will be all that surprised. They’ve been predicting that consumption will “explode” if/when it’s legalized, and they will be totally convinced it proves they were right when the size of the market is finally exposed. They’ll continue to insist that government-commissioned surveys about illegal activity that they use to establish their pre-legalization baseline were accurate, and the exposed size of the market is so much higher completely due to legalization. Yeah, Dr. Silent K, I’m looking at you.

    • Duncan20903 says:


      Gosh primus, the State of California has collected sales tax on approaching $1.5 billion with a b. That’s reported gross revenue which for all practical intents and purposes is a voluntary gift which was given only because cannabis vendors so crave the patina of legitimacy. I’d be utterly shocked if that reported revenue was even 5% of the total taxable cannabis retail market in California. Yes sunshine, the only transactions which are “tax free” involve the commission of criminal tax evasion. Not that I expect anyone to suddenly decide to send in a check for the back taxes, it’s just that so many people have the delusion that illegal transactions are de jure tax free, not de facto.

      California does have the highest population among the various States in by a factor of nearly 2.

  18. John says:

    The Health Czar saying “we don’t know” if smoking marijuana causes cancer should be considered as slow progress.

    Not too long ago they would have said tobacco is a plant, burning it causes cancer. Marijuana is a plant too so of course burning it must cause cancer. The smoke of both contain a lot of the same chemicals.

    • Duncan20903 says:


      The very reason why there are scientific studies is because an idea makes “sense” to people, it doesn’t mean that it’s true.

      Study Finds No Cancer-Marijuana Connection

      Regardless, smoking simply is not required in order to gain the benefits of cannabis, whether for medicinal need or just plain enjoyment. Any potential health hazards due to smoking are not the hazards of cannabis, but of smoking. I always recommend that people seriously consider not smoking it. I quit in 2006 and have never looked back. There are just too many other delivery methods which don’t require the person enjoying cannabis or utilizing it for medicinal need to inhale carbon monoxide.

      The vaporizer is proven safe, less expensive, and preferred by the study’s subjects by a margin of 7:1 in peer reviewed research published in 2007. No carbon monoxide or other nasty byproducts of combustion are produced when the vaporizer is set at the optimal temperature.

      In addition to the vaporizer there is oromucosal delivery via tincture or gel strip, infused edibles/liquids, topical salves, eye drops or suppositories.
      Vaporization as a “Smokeless” Cannabis Delivery System

    • Duncan20903 says:


      I thought she was going to write a book called, “Santa Clause is a False God”. How the heck can she reconcile that with forcing Santa to smoke up on the roof? He either exists or he doesn’t, no?

      • Duncan20903 says:


        Ooops, my mistake, I was confused. It’s me who intends to someday write a book called “Santa Clause is a False God”, not Miss Goodytwoshoes. I have no clue how I mistook that lady for myself.

    • John says:

      I wonder if Ms. McColl is aware that the whole Santa/elves/flying reindeer mythos creation was heavily influenced by hallucinogenic mushrooms?

  19. Tim says:

    Pam wants media!

    Pamela McColl
    778-354-3551; 604 563-0055

  20. DdC says:

    Willful Ignoramuses

    They yell and cry and kick their flat feet like little babies keeping little babies from seizure medication. Now they cry like spoiled brats for some of the proceeds of selling pot. Are they still tax paid servants or special needs children. Like those they rob funding from as it is?

    Colorado cops demanding more money from legal pot taxes
    Legalizing limited amounts of cannabis for adults over 21 should be saving taxpayers money as police can now focus on actual crimes instead of hassling legal pot users and dispensers. But Colorado’s police chief’s don’t see it that way. Instead, they are insisting on more money to pay for pot cops, which they say are sucking money and officers away from other duties.

    Apparently they didn’t get the message: the bill was intended as a way for cops to spend their existing resources on more important things, like actual crimes.

    Blood Suckers

    ‘Don’t drive high, you’ll get a DUI’
    Ponzi scheme starts in Colorado as new war on marijuana ensues
    Shepard Ambellas | You are almost in 1984, a total Orwellian nightmare built this way by design–and yes, it’s 2014

    It’s the Drug War Gong Show

    News fabricated for ratings. To sell more products. Special guest spots, commentators reading scripts and bad actors hosting. They’ve moved on from McCaffrey paying TV shows to add anti drug lines to real live bad guys headlining bad actors reading scripts.

    Narco-Villain “El Chapo’s” Arrest Packaged for Media Consumption By Bill Conroy
    Former DEA Supervisor Contends Guzman’s Capture Was An “Arranged” Event

    While the real hero’s get banned from TV by Junkie Joe McArthy and his Chickenshit chicken littles. Yesterdays Sabetage SAM. Thank You Pete Seeger

    Inside the Song of History with Pete Seeger By Al Giordano
    The Search for “Another Victory Song” Led Him to Change the World… a Lot.

  21. Hope says:

    “We don’t know…”

    Does he live and work in a dark, desolate hole? No contact with the outside world? Does he know about the internet?

    “We don’t know a lot about the things we wish we did,”. Excuse me?

  22. ezrydn says:

    Acting stupid sure looks more and more like a Capitol Requirement!

  23. primus says:

    How do you describe that attribute in a CV? “Has taken acting classes specializing in acting gormless.” Not sure what gormless means? Rolf Harris describes it thus: Young lad says to his father, “Dad, thinkin’ of getting married to my new girlfriend.” Dad says, “Not wanting to pry, but you haven’t been seeing her long, I just wondered whether you have made love to her yet?” Lad says, “No, dad I haven’t, but all the guys say she’s really good at it.” Gormless.

  24. allan says:

    A young man is eating lunch with his father and says, “Dad, I’m going to ask my girlfriend to marry me.”

    “Well son, that’s great. I don’t mean to pry, but have you made love to her yet?”

    “Not yet dad. But all the guys say she’s really good at it.”

  25. Duncan20903 says:


    This one is from the “Gomer says, ‘surprise!’ ‘surprise!’ ‘surprise!'” category:

    More drivers testing positive for marijuana

    SEATTLE – More drivers tested positive for marijuana in Washington in 2013 – the first full year after the state legalized pot – but officials so far say there’s been no obvious, corresponding jump in car accidents.

    The Washington State Patrol says 1,362 drivers tested positive for having active marijuana in their system – a jump of just under 25 percent from the year before, even though the patrol had fewer troopers on the road and there was no overall rise in intoxicated driving arrests.

    In the “willful ignorance” category, half a dozen prohibitionists say “told you so, told you so, nanny nanny boo boo!” in the comments following the article. Prohibitionists just aren’t very smart people. A couple of the smarter ones (IQ ≥ 80 but ≤ 99) claim that 2013 doesn’t count because there’s no place to buy cannabis in the State of Washington yet. The prohibitionists making that claim are obviously residents of the State of Confusion.

  26. Jean Valjean says:

    Watching “long term in recovery” Director Botticelli draws attention to the tactic of prohibitionists to one-sidedly connect themselves with 12 Step recovery groups, whose members “have to be protected from legalization.” What is always left out is the fact that many, if not most of those same recovering people, if their drug of choice was on the controlled substance list (and if they weren’t a Kennedy), were exactly the same people targeted by prohibitionists like Botticelli. If they were unlucky enough to get a record, they are still paying the price for being the victims of prohibitionists, who really have a lot of gall to turn around and say they are doing it for the good of their victims. This seems to be the latest play in their ground-holding retreat, and Botticelli personifies this.

  27. darkcycle says:

    Hey folks….as a result of an argument I had on FB last night with Russ Belleville and Alison Holcomb regarding the restrictive mmj bill going through legislature, I have been invited to give testimony on the Senate floor during the hearing tomorrow. I will be testifying in writing using the minute reserved for another activist.
    It has to be one minute….read what I have on the clock at 58 seconds, but I’d love critiques from the couch:

    “Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate,
    Thank you for hearing my testimony, I only regret I cannot be here in person to deliver it. My name is Mark Chanen. In better days I was the head examiner in testing at Seattle Central Community College and provided testing services at the King County Jail. Before that, I was a therapist working with mentally ill children. I have been a medical marijuana patient since 2006.
    I urge you to reject SB5887. I feel that the three ounce/three flowering plant limit is grossly insufficient for most patient’s needs. Most doctors will be very reluctant to recommend more than is allowed for in the law. Three ounces is what many medical users go through in a week to ten days. No other medicine is dispensed one week at a time. And the reality of a flowering plant is, it takes 90-120 days to harvest, and indoors, yields two to four ounces. Yet seven ounces is four weeks of medicine for me, leaving me without, or forcing me to buy on the commercial market for the rest of that 120 days.
    Furthermore, SB5887 will make it much more difficult to secure a doctor’s recommendation by requiring your primary care physician to either write the recommendation himself or give you a direct referral for that purpose. Many if not most doctors will not do this. Also, Doctors who treat Medicaid and Medicare patients stand to lose their provider status if they do, and it’s unclear whether doctors who serve “Obamacare” insurance patients will be able to recommend it. In my case, my first letter came from my primary care physician. When the requirement to renew became law, and I went to him for that renewal, he flatly stated he could no longer write those recommendations, he was prevented from doing so by the rules of my HMO. Thus began my dependence on the much maligned “Kush Doctors”. I fear I will be unable to secure the needed recommendation, regardless of my qualifying conditions.
    SB5887 would restrict the qualifying conditions, at a time in history when new research is published daily, and the list of conditions for which cannabis can provide relief grows every week. It flies in the face of science and good sense. If this passes, Washington will be the only State eliminating rather than expanding qualifying conditions and patient protections. And that expanded list of conditions we enjoy here currently, we fought for in this legislature for six years. That is a slap in the face to any patient who worked to expand access.
    Please vote no on 5887. We need a better solution. Thank you.”

    • claygooding says:

      “”I urge you to reject SB5887. I feel that the three ounce/three flowering plant limit is grossly insufficient for most patient’s needs. Most doctors will be very reluctant to recommend more than is allowed for in the law. Three ounces is what many medical users go through in a week to ten days. No other medicine is dispensed one week at a time. And the reality of a flowering plant is, it takes 90-120 days to harvest, and indoors, yields two to four ounces. Yet seven ounces is four weeks of medicine for me, leaving me without, or forcing me to buy on the commercial market for the rest of that 120 days.

      ^^^^possibly cut this down to this:

      I urge you to reject SB5887 because three flowering plants grown indoors cannot produce a sufficient quantity of medical grade cannabis,,many medical users go through 3 ounces in a week to ten days depending on their dosage method and requirements.

      Explaining the different flowering properties won’t mean anything to them.

    • Paul McClancy says:

      Good luck, darkcycle.

    • Duncan20903 says:


      Have you considered informing them of the results of a veto referendum which appeared on the 1998 Oregon ballot? You know, the one where by a margin of 66.5-33.5 the voters of Oregon kicked a re-criminalization law to the curb so the garbage collectors would cart it to the dump.

      Oregon Marijuana Possession as a Class C Misdemeanor, Measure 57 (1998)

      Gosh I really, really love that story.

      • allan says:

        that was quite the year Duncan, defeating re-criminalization got more votes than the OMMA. I loved driving Conde’s truck in them days… that was the year they “raided” Conde’s, took all our computers, seized ALL of Conde’s personal stash (an oz in his freezer)(which was all the pot they found).

        The red warning flags we put on long boards sticking out past customer tailgates had I Got Loaded at Conde’s on ’em.

        • Duncan20903 says:


          It wasn’t limited to just Oregon. In 1998 Arizona voters stripped the legislature of its powers to reject or modify any laws which were the results of a ballot initiative for at least 5 years. They did so because the Legislature overturned the voter approved medicinal cannabis patient protection law.

          The voters also approved the added requirement that any modifications to citizen generated laws required a 75% supermajority to change. It’s why Arizona still offers medicinal cannabis patient protection today. Without that law the 2010 law would have been overturned lickety-split.

          There was also a legislatively generated ballot initiative which was similar but only required a 2/3rds supermajority which was defeated.

          That wasn’t the end of it, the enemies of freedom also put a proposed law on the ballot that would have made it illegal to legalize any drug on the Feds’ naughty list #1 which the voters beat silly and left for dead. Arizona is a very, very weird State. It certainly appears to me that the body politic prefers to elect politicians who disagree with the people.

          1998 was a very good year for cannabis law reform specifically and freedom in general. But it also shows me that there just wasn’t the public interest at least in the media. At the end of 1998 I was still very involved in trading stocks and a very important part of that is keeping tab on the media. I wasn’t aware of any of this. Wall Street sure didn’t have the hard on for “marijuana” like they do today. It’s positively surreal hearing Jim Cramer blather on about the potential profits of the “marijuana market”. The fact that there’s only a single legitimate “marijuana stock” just adds to the intrigue.

          For those not familiar with Mr. Cramer, he’s a totally self involved loud mouth who loves to hype his portfolio positions. He’s basically the stock market equivalent of Nancy Grace. He used to run a fairly successful hedge fund but decided that he preferred to get his ego stroked and retired from stock trading in order to become a full time talking head just like Ms. Grace gave up being a prosecutor. After a not very long period of time he decided that his schtick required him to actually trade. So he set up a charitable trust so he could engage in more believable chest pounding. He also started TheStreet.com. Just for the sake of example here’s an interview with Congressman Earl Blumenauer which happened on March 5 on that website:
          Should Congress Regulate Marijuana to Protect Children?

          Here’s another from 2/28 that’s not from Mr. Cramer or his dog and pony show:
          Todd Harrison: Marijuana Will Be the Single Best Investment Idea of the Next Decade

        • Windy says:

          That is exactly what WA voters need to do, and we need make it a a least 10 years and a super majority before they can even make a tiny change (instead of 5, like AZ), currently in WA it is two years until the legislature can fuck with an initiative and it doesn’t take a super majority for them to do it. They’ve been overturning the initiatives that reduce their ability to tax on a regular basis, we pass the initiative and two years later they gut it, then we pass another and two years later they gut it, time for that to end.

        • Windy says:

          Duncan re:
          “Arizona is a very, very weird State. It certainly appears to me that the body politic prefers to elect politicians who disagree with the people.”

          That is true of all politicians, and I do not think it is the voters who are electing these politicians who constantly rule and make laws that are against the people’s/their constituents’ best interests. Now that there has been admittance from Romney that the GOP and Romney cheated in every way they could find to cheat, and literally stole the nomination from Ron Paul by altering the vote counts in primaries, caucuses, and conventions, and changing the rules in the middle of State conventions, I think this proves it is a nationwide problem that affects EVERY State and every election. The candidates voters want are being sidelined in favor of the candidates someone powerful wants. The elections are fixed. I’ve suspected this for a few elections now, and now my suspicions have been confirmed.

    • thelbert says:

      politeness and reason are our allies, good luck, Darkcycle.

  28. allan says:

    that would be a fast, mistake-free read. With just a bit of stumbling I was at 1:18.

    • darkcycle says:

      Thanks Allen. I was a pretty good public speaker at one point in time, good to know I can still nail a time limit. Takes me under a minute speaking clearly but quickly.
      Substance look okay to you? Properly polite? I still have some time to make changes, and still get the copy to my friend.

  29. DdC says:

    California Democrats Back Marijuana Legalization

    Newsom continued, “This is not a debate about hippies. This is not a debate about stoners. We can’t diminish this issue or the people involved in this debate by belittling them and trivializing them. Let me be clear. You can be pro-regulation without being an advocate for drug use.”

    Watch Newsom’s Speech: youtube

    “The problem with anything, a certain amount is okay,” Jerry Brown said. “But there is a tendency to go to extremes. And all of a sudden, if there’s advertising and legitimacy, how many people can get stoned and still have a great state or a great nation? The world’s pretty dangerous, very competitive. I think we need to stay alert, if not 24 hours a day, more than some of the potheads might be able to put together.”

    Poor Moonbat, decades and generations of brain manipulation through propaganda and demonizing. 3/4th of a century of prohibiting nourishment for the Endocannabinoid system. Reaching a robotic Clinical Endocannabinoid Deficiency. Thus evolving Larger ‘Fear Centers’ in Their Brains. More fear causes more need of safety, and a willingness to give up liberty for it. Serving with a blind belief and obedience in what they are programmed to believe. Then passing it on. With the standard hypocrisy, and stigmatizing those outside of the system. Not letting themselves think or believe”heretics”. Turning their backs on their own people and even fighting against the one thing that could make them whole again. Using Pot To Save Brains! Plant a seed and ward off a prostibitionist! mho

    • DdC says:

      Not Feeling Well? Perhaps You’re ‘Marijuana Deficient’ | Alternet

      Fox News: Are You Cannabis Deficient?
      By contrast, the therapeutically active components in marijuana — the cannabinoids — appear to be remarkably non-toxic to healthy cells and organs. Further, they mimic compounds our bodies naturally produce — so-called endocannabinoids — that are pivotal for maintaining proper health and homeostasis.

      What is clinical endocannabinoid deficiency? sensiseeds

      Endocannabinoid Deficiency Syndrome youtube

      Hemp Treats Clinical Endocannabinoid Deficiency (CECD)

    • jean valjean says:

      as a millionaire in the wine trade and a catholic to boot its refreshing to hear newsom attacking the wod. gov chickenlooper take note.

      • Duncan20903 says:


        What’s got me fascinated is that Messrs. Newsom and Brown are simultaneously arguing pro and con. Somehow I don’t think it’s because they disagree with one another but don’t know which side of the issue would generate the most political capital. I ‘m really, really skeptical of the thought that they’re acting independently of one another.

        • Jean Valjean says:

          Jerry is 75, Newsom in his 40s. I think we are just seeing the demographic divide. I also think Newsom wants to be governor and knows that a prohibitionist will no longer be electable in California in the future. I think, at least I hope, his disgust at the WOD is genuine.

        • DdC says:

          Brown is too damned tied to the prison lobby and unions. He was elected on the soul basis of a lesser evil than fascist Meg. Newsom is sticking to the ganja profits and especially tax, the same as he pushed in SF methinks. All of it is the never ending incremental illness of the profiteers on every side of the issue. It’s just a plant to relieve suffering for the poor. Making it a commodity is one more insult of fake Americans. The prices are worse than the streets. Convenience of packaged products from buds to edibles is fine with me. But not when it curtails homegrown for free, for those without means to the buyers clubs and dispensaries. Or gives cops ability to bust possession they can’t as it stands. Again, Prop 215 already covers anyone for any reason except to sell it and NO state law can over ride the feds. Even medical cards are voluntary, by the dispensaries appeasing cops, not law. They may not sell you it but cops can’t bust you for not having it. May be a case that the dispensaries are breaking the law forcing ID cards. So we keep perpetuating the profits even if it is on peoples misery. The only right and logical thing to do is rely on science and remove it as a scheduled substance federally. As it was in 1900. This country is turning to shit.

          Starting in the 1860s, the Ganja Wallah Hasheesh Candy Company made maple sugar hashish candy

          cannabis drugs, which were the number one medicine in America prior to 1863.

          World Fairs and International Expositions from the 1860s through the early 1900s often featured a popular Turkish Hashish Smoking Exposition

          The Police Gazette estimated there were over 500 hashish smoking parlors in New York City in the 1880s

          Perilous Play, by Louisa May Alcott

          Bill Hicks Marijuana Jokes youtube

          Dr. Sanjay Gupta ‏@drsanjaygupta
          just landed in colorado. this is home base for new doc — cannabis madness. Tuesday mar 11 10 p est

          here’s the trailer for my new documentary. i investigate the politics of pot – politicians vs patients. #WeedCNN – http://youtu.be/6tkLUQuVluU

        • Duncan20903 says:


          Jean, Tommy Chong is also 75, what’s your point? Have I mentioned that I met Jerry Brown face to face during the week leading up to the 1992 New Hampshire primary and he was fully in favor of re-legalization? The one thing that no one can accuse Mr. Brown of is having any strong personal belief in his publicly professed politics. The only reason (IMO) that he’s doing the prohibitionist schtick is because he needs the support of the California lobby. Gov. Brown is a dictionary picture worthy example of a political whore. His only strong personal belief is whatever is going to get him the most votes. Regardless of their ages they’re Governor and Lt. Governor of the same State and that means that they’re joined at the hip.

        • Duncan20903 says:


          Hey DdC, you do realize that I never read any of your bullcrap, right? I have noticed that you occasionally leave a pile under one of my posts and I just thought you would like to know that if you have any delusions that I care what you think, even a little bit that you’re wrong. Feel free to reply, don’t reply but you might get more mileage from your dingleberries if you spread them somewhere else. If you really want to do something to promote re-legalization, go be a prohibitionist.

          I do mean all of that in the nicest possible way!


        • jean valjean says:

          whats my point duncan? its there in the second sentence. we are witnessing a demographic change on legalization which is why browns age is relevant.

        • Duncan20903 says:


          22 years ago he was in favor of blanket re-legalization but he was still from the same generation. Offer him the votes and/or enough of a political contribution and I’ll bet you could get him to think about supporting legalizing kiddie porn. His age has nothing to do with his utter lack of ideology or his offering it’s façade being for rent to the highest bidder.

          As far as age I think some people place way too much importance on it vis a vis the issue of ending prohibition, and that’s enough of that controversy for me.

          Oh, one more little thing, I just noticed another one of those breakdowns of various groups and how they split on the issue. I found it very interesting that it sure looked like level of education is the more significant factor, with the under educated being much more likely to be in favor of continuing the stupidity of prohibition. Go figure that one out.

  30. primus says:

    This always seems backwards to me; the human endocannabinoid system developed hundreds of millennia after the appearance of cannabis sativa. It would therefore be more correct to say that the body developed endocannabinoids to mimic those found in nature, not the other way around. The plant does not mimic us, we mimic it.

  31. DdC says:

    the human endocannabinoid system developed hundreds of millennia after the appearance of cannabis sativa.

    Is there a ref on that? They didn’t supposedly start research until the 60’s. Though I’m sure they had plenty stashed before that. So who is to say which came first? Or if it wasn’t all equal out of the ooze. Marijuana – The First Twelve Thousand Years leaves 200,000 years of existence according to How Long Have Humans Been on Earth? All that time without an endocannabinoid system to regulate the other systems? Doubtful.

Comments are closed.