Barriers to marijuana research acknowledged

Tom Angell is unstoppable in his dogged determination to ask pointed questions of the powerful. Over at, he discusses the Facebook chat conducted by NIDA’s Nora Volkow, where he got her to admit that there are barriers to research on marijuana.


This is why most people supporting the prohibition regime don’t like to get into public discussions. It’s very hard to maintain the lies under determined knowledgeable questioning.

Go to Tom’s article for more.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Barriers to marijuana research acknowledged

  1. DdC says:

    Tom Angell @tomangell
    So Gavin Newsom supports legalizing all drugs? It’s true: Prohibition only makes dangerous drugs even more dangerous

    Only 13% of the medical schools surveyed
    mention the endoCannabinoid Science to our future doctors.

    “Doctors” who then prostitute themselves as “excerpts” to legislators embezzling more money from tax payers.

    The political repression of the scientific study of cannabis.

    Not such a big secret, just not mentioned very much by the memo readers at 5, 6 & 11 News Hour… So most follow the lead protecting their jobs and do nothing.

    Your Brain on Marijuana is Just Fine
    Forbes Travis Bradberry Permanently Lowers IQ

    Prohibition causes stress and even PTSD treated by Cannabis. So if you want to reduce cannabis use… end prohibition.

  2. jean valjean says:

    Nora’s refusal to answer the handcuff question is the real give away for me.

  3. divadab says:

    This is why (in my experience) wingers get all huffy and hurt when someone challenges their positions – their personal identity is emotionally tied to positions that are irrational, cruel, even, and not supportable in any form of reasoned debate. They live in a cozy constructed mental world and are just plain unprepared to reason with people who disagree with them. SO they demonize people who disagree with them – because that’s all they got!

    • Windy says:

      I’m going to share your comment on FB with the following modification (reason for alteration follows the changed section):
      This is why (in my experience) prohibitches get all huffy and hurt …
      Reason — I too have had experience with prohibitches, and they come almost equally, in my experience, from BOTH wings of that bird of prey we call the political parties.

      The rest of the comment is spot on which is why I am going to share it.

  4. claygooding says:

    Every time I hear Nora’s foreign accent it tells me how hard it is to find someone with the necessary qualifications to accept a job where lying is required.

  5. kaptinemo says:

    They still won’t get it. Not can’t Won’t. Classic Upton Sinclair: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

    Tough. The days of snow-jobbing are over. Non-answers will be called out as such, publicly. And with all the contempt they deserve.

    They still think they’re BSing Grandma and Grampaw. They still don’t get it that there really, truly is such a thing as an Internet, where fact-checking their bilge is a mouse-click away. Nora’s non-answers are an example of policy inertia not keeping up with the times, and as Bob Dylan said so long ago, the times are, indeed, a-changin’.

  6. darkcycle says:

    Typical, the answers she avoided giving were the most telling. Good on Tom and the DPA for putting that rat firmly in her corner as regards arrest. Best one was when she was asked what other health problems she felt handcuffs would help.

  7. primus says:

    Tom did an excellent job of cornering her, then preventing her from wiggling out of that corner. When the prohibitutes get their heads handed to them in such a way, they are less likely to stick their heads up again. Good. The fewer times they say their lies, the more the tide shifts in favour of the truth–our truth. Also, the more they get whacked in this long game of whack-a-mole, the fewer of them there will be to carry the torch for prohibition. Good. Everyone should attack prohibitutes whenever and wherever they appear.

  8. jean valjean says:

    Love the pic of Nora on Tom’s article……she really looks like the crazy lady hidden in the attic.

    • kaptinemo says:

      Then, you’ll like this one, too.

      You really must wonder at what goes through the minds of such people at such moments. Like, maybe she was contemplating theoretical lobotomies on captured cannabis consumers, perhaps? “I cut them here and here, and they’re cured!

      Yeah, sure. In the end, their ‘science’ is no better than this. What’s the difference between crackpot ‘science’ then (that goof with the funnel on his head is supposed to be a doctor) and what is being purveyed today as officially sanctioned – but unproven – theories about addiction being a disease?

      Addiction medicine in the US has been hampered in the same way that Soviet science was, by ideology (see Lysenkoism). And people like Volkow play a large role in perpetuating that.

  9. Mr_Alex says:

    Anyone here aware that Nora is related to Trotsky?

Comments are closed.