Send comments, tips,
and suggestions to:
DrugWarRant
Join us on Pete's couch.
couch

DrugWarRant.com, the longest running single-issue blog devoted to drug policy, is published by the Prohibition Isn't Free Foundation
facebooktwitterrss
May 2014
M T W T F S S
« Apr   Jun »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  

Archives

Authors

Quotable

Paul Armentano in Medicine Hasn’t Found Anything Wrong With Pot by Larry Gabriel who notes that “one of the biggest arguments anti-marijuana warriors use is the ‘we don’t know enough about this stuff’ ploy.”

“To date, there are over 20,000 published studies or reviews in the scientific literature referencing the cannabis plant and its cannabinoids, nearly half of which were published within the last five years according to a keyword search on PubMed Central, the U.S. government repository for peer-reviewed scientific research. Over 1,450 peer-reviewed papers were published in 2013 alone,” wrote Armentano. […]

“The answers are in the scientific literature if anybody would read it,” Armentano says. “What prohibitionists are really saying is, ‘We’ve done research on marijuana and we need more research because we’re still searching for the problem.’”

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to Reddit Post to StumbleUpon

12 comments to Quotable

  • DdC

    Possibly the most-studied substance on the planet

    FDA-Approved Medical Marijuana Research Blocked Dec 15 01
    On December 6, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) prevented a privately funded, FDA approved medical marijuana study from taking place by refusing to allow the researcher to purchase marijuana from a legal source.

    Federal agency blocks FDA-approved marijuana research for veterans 04 October 2011

    Drug Worriers preferred methods of treatment…

    Cannabis Shrinks Tumors: Government Knew in 74
    The DEA quickly shut down the Virginia study and all further cannabis/tumor research. In 1976 President Gerald Ford put an end to all public cannabis research and granted exclusive research rights to major pharmaceutical companies, who set out — unsuccessfully — to develop synthetic forms of THC that would deliver all the medical benefits without the “high.”

  • DdC

    Dr. Andrew Weil
    The Harvard Psychedelic Club
    Dr. Andrew T. Weil ‘63-’64, Pioneer of Integrative Medicine

  • Common Science

    Those poor misunderstood anti-marijuana warriors.

    They don’t mean practical scientific literature, what they urgently want provided is just $CIENTIFIC LITERATURE.

    http://tinyurl.com/q7m6bes

    (Tried to make ‘$CIENTIFIC LITERATURE’ the link, but don’t know how you clever dudes do it)

  • If people could grow a viable remedy to many ailments, why would they need to go into hock on useless pharmaceuticals?

    It’s all about PROFITS OVER PEOPLE.

  • allan

    I may give NORML shit but Paul continues to keep lobbing some hefty boulders upon the ha-ha-hapless Prohibs.

  • Tony Aroma

    If you look at the DEA’s response to the most recent petition to reschedule, they specifically say that only “peer-reviewed” studies are available, and not studies that follow FDA protocol, hence their rejection of the petition:

    Petitioners construe “adequate and well-controlled studies” to mean peer-reviewed, published studies suggesting marijuana’s medical efficacy. The DEA, in contrast, interprets that factor to require something more scientifically rigorous.

    The DEA was claiming that peer-reviewed studies are somehow shoddy and not up to their rigorous standards. They don’t seem to be aware of what a peer-reviewed study actually is, or that peer review is one of the cornerstones of the scientific method. A peer-reviewed study is the most “scientifically rigorous” kind of study there is. So how is it that neither the judge, the DEA, the petitioners, nor anyone else caught this faux pas on the DEA’s part? The DEA has actually admitted that the necessary research has been done, and nobody realized it.

    • Duncan20903

      .
      .

      But none of that nonsense dictates the right result! How can research that doesn’t come to the preferred conclusion be good research?

      /snip/
      Others, such as Bill Piper, director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance, disagree. “The general sense is that there’s a lot of momentum around this medical-marijuana bill, in part because of all the states—especially including conservative ones—that are now in play.” Piper said many members of Congress are frustrated with the DEA’s obstruction of the administration’s drug reform—an issue he attributes to DEA Director Michele Leonhart. “She’s living in a different world; she’s stuck in the 1980s,” he said. “I think she’s the last true believer in the war on drugs.”
      /snip/
      Will Congress Back Medical Marijuana?

  • claygooding

    The move to reduce funding for DEA raids on dispensaries and patients did not pass,,I am sure the voting report will be out tomorrow so we will have the list of targets for special attention the next 5 months as legislators scurry home for their re-election bids.
    There is just more money paying for prohibition than paying for freedom…but the greed is growing and when enough rich people want in on the marijuana money they will start paying for the reform.

  • Jean Valjean

    OT
    …Sorry to reference the Daily Mail, but I hadn’t seen this story elsewhere:
    Yet more SWAT team violence… “Police said a multijurisdictional drug unit issued a warrant and organized the SWAT operation…..It’s not clear if any drugs were found in the home during the raid…”

    http://tinyurl.com/l7uh5fj

    Most of the comments are what you might expect from the DM’s readership…