Tag: the war on (some) drugs

New York City’s Push to Ban Mail at Rikers Was Based on Drug Test Kits With an 85 Percent Error Rate

In 2022, former New York City Department of Corrections Commissioner Louis Molina testified before the city council about the flood of fentanyl coming into Rikers Island, the city’s infamous jail complex.

“How does fentanyl get into our jails?” he asked. “The short answer is that most of it enters in letters and packages laced with fentanyl, literally soaked in the drug, and mailed to people in custody.”

To illustrate the problem, Molina had a powerful prop: A child’s drawing of a reindeer that had been mailed to a Rikers Island inmate and tested positive for fentanyl. It was because of letters like this, Molina explained, that his department was proposing ending delivery of physical letters to jail inmates and instead sending them scanned and digitized copies.

There was only one problem: The field test used on that reindeer drawing wasn’t reliable, and a drug lab would later invalidate the results. Rudolph was clean.

In fact, a report released Wednesday by the New York City Department of Investigation (DOI) found that, when it sent 71 pieces of mail that tested presumptive positive for fentanyl to a drug lab for verification, 85 percent of the items came back negative, including the reindeer drawing.

The DOI concluded that “field tests are not reliable, particularly with respect to the identification of fentanyl in items such as books, clothing, greeting cards and other materials sent through the mail.”

The basis for the DOC’s proposed policy ending physical mail delivery to inmates was a falsehood, and not a particularly good one. The problems with these drug field tests are well known: They’ve resulted in hundreds of documented cases of wrongful arrests around the country, and several state prison systems, including New York’s, have suspended their use.

The test kits use instant color reactions to indicate the presence of certain compounds found in illegal drugs, but those same compounds are also found in dozens of known licit substances. Over the years, police officers have arrested and jailed innocent people after drug field kits returned presumptive positive results on bird poop, donut glaze, cotton candy, and sand from inside a stress ball. 

A study published earlier this year by the Quattrone Center for the Fair Administration of Justice at the University of Pennsylvania estimated that these tests may result in up to 30,000 wrongful arrests a year.

The DOI says reliance on these field tests led officials to incorrectly focus on mail instead of other, more obvious, vectors for contraband.

Keep reading

FDA Approves Long-Awaited Clinical Trial Of Smoked Marijuana To Treat PTSD In Veterans

After years of delays, researchers are set to move forward on a landmark clinical trial meant to evaluate the efficacy of smoked medical marijuana to treat post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in military veterans. The study is being funded with tax revenue from legal cannabis sales in Michigan.

The Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies, or MAPS, announced this week that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted approval for Phase 2 of the research, what MAPS described in a press release as “a randomized, placebo-controlled study of 320 Veterans suffering from moderate to severe PTSD who have previously used cannabis.”

The group said the study “is designed to investigate the inhalation of high THC dried cannabis flower, versus placebo cannabis, with the daily dose being self-titrated by participants.” It’s meant to reflect consumption patterns already happening across the country and study “the ‘real-world’ use of inhaled cannabis to understand its potential benefits and risks in treating PTSD.”

The project is years in the making, MAPS said, noting that it encountered numerous issues in clearing the research with FDA that only recently were resolved.

“After 3 years of negotiations with the FDA, this decision opens the door to future research into cannabis as a medical treatment, offering hope to millions,” the organization said.

“These data are critical to inform patients, medical providers, and adult-use consumers when considering cannabis in treatment plans for the management of PTSD, pain, and other serious health conditions,” the group’s press release said, “yet regulatory obstacles have historically made it difficult or impossible to conduct meaningful research on the safety and effectiveness of cannabis products typically consumed in regulated markets.”

MAPS said that over the years, it responded to five partial clinical hold letters from FDA that halted the study’s progress.

“On August 23, 2024, MAPS responded to the FDA’s fifth clinical hold letter by submitting a Formal Dispute Resolution Request (FDRR) to resolve the continued scientific and regulatory disagreement with the Division on four key issues,” according to the organization: “1) the proposed THC dose of the cannabis flower product, 2) smoking as a delivery method, 3) vaping as a delivery method, and 4) the enrollment of cannabis naïve participants.”

Keep reading

Beer Lobby Wants Restrictions and Higher Taxes on Intoxicating Hemp Products

A trade group representing the American brewing industry released proposals on how Congress should regulate its competitors. Unsurprisingly, they recommend a heavy hand.

The Beer Institute is a trade organization that “represents the beer industry before Congress, state legislatures and public forums across the country…as the recognized and authoritative source of information on aspects of the industry.” Last week, it released a list of “guiding principles” calling for restrictions on intoxicating CBD products.

“The Beer Institute supports efforts underway by lawmakers to close an unintended federal loophole that is enabling the proliferation of unregulated intoxicating hemp products across the country, including those containing synthetically derived THC,” the statement said. “Intoxicating hemp and cannabis products are fundamentally different than beer and the taxation of them by government entities should reflect these stark differences just as governments at all levels in the United States have consistently reaffirmed the different tax treatment between beer, wine and hard liquor.”

While marijuana remains illegal at the federal level, Congress inserted a provision into the 2018 farm bill legalizing hemp by defining it as part of the cannabis plant containing “not more than 0.3 percent” delta-9 THC, the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana. Soon thereafter, chemists began to manufacture intoxicating products with CBD derived from hemp that contained delta-8, a milder form of THC not mentioned in the farm bill.

The industry for intoxicating hemp-derived products exploded, and state laws have struggled to catch up. “State regulations governing hemp products vary widely and are unevenly enforced, creating a patchwork of rules that can change dramatically from one state to the next,” according to a policy brief by Geoffrey Lawrence and Michelle Minton of the Reason Foundation, the nonprofit that publishes this magazine. There are currently no federal laws that specifically address these products, including their legality—they are simply assumed to be legal based on the phrasing of the farm bill, and Congress has struggled to pass an updated version for more than a year.

In its guidelines, the Beer Institute takes no position on marijuana’s legality, merely allowing that “the legalization of consumable cannabis products is for American voters, state legislatures and Congress to decide.” But if and when Congress does get around to addressing intoxicating hemp products, the group recommends it pull no punches.

“If legalized, the Beer Institute supports the establishment of a federal excise tax rate on intoxicating hemp and cannabis, with the tax rate set higher than the highest rate for any beverage alcohol product,” the guidelines stipulate. “Regulators at the federal, state, and local levels should prohibit co-location of the sale of alcohol beverages in the same retail venues as intoxicating hemp and cannabis products, if legalized, and further, to avoid consumer confusion, intoxicating hemp and cannabis products, if legalized, should only be sold in dispensaries.”

Keep reading

DMSO has been proven to protect and heal the heart, lungs, liver, kidneys and prostate, and treat infertility

The therapeutic actions of DMSO, or dimethyl sulphoxide, make it well-suited to treat challenging conditions throughout the body, including many internal organs, such as the heart, liver, lungs, pancreas, kidneys and others.

DMSO has been proven to treat various diseases and conditions, including heart attacks, liver cirrhosis, gallstones, ARDS, lung damage from inhaling smoke, pulmonary fibrosis, pancreatitis, diabetes, nephritis, kidney stones, polycystic kidney disease, cystitis, epididymitis, genital pain, prostatitis, urethral syndrome, enlarged prostates, tubal infertility, endometrial inflammation and fibrosis.

In the article ‘How DMSO Protects and Heals the Internal Organs‘, A Midwestern Doctor (“AMD”) reviewed DMSO treatment protocols for conditions of our internal organs and provided general DMSO information for those looking to use it for their own health. 

The following is a summary of AMD’s article on protecting and healing our internal organs.  We encourage our readers to want to know more to refer to AMD’s article as in the summarising of it, details will get lost in translation. 

In a summary of another article in AMD’s DSMO series we previously published on strokes and neurological damage, we attached a PDF copy of AMD’s article because it is easier to search for specific terms in a PDF file.  We have done the same with this article, see the PDF below.

Keep reading

DEA Should Be Removed From Marijuana Rescheduling Hearing After Illegally Conspiring With Prohibitionists, Legal Filing Says

A Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) judge is being asked to remove the agency from its role in an upcoming hearing on the Biden administration’s marijuana rescheduling proposal, with a new legal filing citing alleged statutory violations that include “unlawful” communication with a prohibitionist group.

When the Department of Justice formally proposed moving cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA)—consistent with a recommendation from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)—one aspect stood out: The DEA administrator didn’t sign the notice of proposed rulemaking, breaking with historical precedent on federal scheduling proceedings. Instead, it was signed by Attorney General Merrick Garland.

That was one of several factors that led to a motion being filed with DEA Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) John Mulrooney on Monday, seeking corrective action. It was submitted on behalf of Hemp for Victory and Village Farms International, which were both invited to participate in the rescheduling hearing that’s set to begin next month.

The issue isn’t just that DEA Administrator Anne Milgram declined to sign the proposed rule. Throughout that notice, the agency said it needed additional data on a variety of issues—namely cannabis-related health issues and law enforcement concerns—in order to make a complete assessment. The motion argues that the backwards approach to the rulemaking violates federal statute.

“By waiting until the publication of the [proposed rule]—and thus after DOJ had initiated proceedings under [the CSA]—to flag categories of supposedly ‘necessary data,’ DEA ensured that HHS would not get to respond to that data in its recommendation and evaluation,” the motion says. “Even worse, DEA effectively turned the [proposed rule] into a blueprint for the Prohibitionists it apparently was communicating with behind the scenes.”

Another issue that’s arisen concerns DEA’s selection of witnesses to participate in the December hearing, which was scheduled following a public comment period that saw tens of thousands of submissions—a majority of which favored rescheduling or otherwise pushed for bolder reform such as removing marijuana from the CSA altogether.

Keep reading

State’s Audit Reveals Rampant Abuse of Psychotropic Drugs on Children in State Care

A recent audit conducted by the Massachusetts Office of the State Auditor reveals that the Department of Children and Families (DCF) apparently is really bad at doing its job and the fact that the well-being of children is at stake makes the incompetence incomprehensible.

The DCF is tasked with providing services to children who are at risk and victims of abuse or neglect. The services the state is responsible for providing include adoption, guardianship, foster care, housing stabilization, and family support.

Specifically, AbleChild is interested in the section of the audit that reviews the oversight of the drugging of children with serious psychiatric mind-altering drugs. The audit reviewed the period from July of 2019 to December of 2023.

During the audit period, 3,899 (22%) of the 17,891 children in DCF’s protective custody were prescribed at least one psychotropic medication. During the audit period, the number of prescriptions filled for each drug category included 1,065 prescriptions for anti-anxiety meds, 21,585 Antidepressants, 10,564 Antipsychotics, 10,776 Mood Stabilizers, and 48,453 Stimulants. Clearly, chemical behavior modification is a common practice, and the state’s DCF social workers are required to participate in, follow, and document the medication history of each child under their care.

To help caseworkers provide the required services, a child is provided a physical Medical Passport that records its healthcare services while in state custody. Social Workers are required to review these physical passports every six months to keep the children’s related medical records in iFN (electronic information system) updated with their most recent healthcare information.

In Massachusetts, it is required that the Courts approve antipsychotic medication use in children in the state’s protective custody. The audit revealed that “the Department of Children and Families did not always obtain or renew court approval before children in its protective custody were administered antipsychotic medications.” This is a problem because the court needs to know that the drug regimen is safe and effective. Furthermore, the courts have oversight of children who are too young to consent to the drug treatment and act as a neutral party.

The audit also found that “the Department of Children and Families did not properly maintain healthcare records in iFamilyNet (iFN) for children in its protective custody who received psychotropic medications.” Keeping up-to-date records is essential to ensure that the child is not being overprescribed with toxic mind-altering drugs. There is no oversight, leaving the children in custody at risk.

Additionally, the DCF did not list and/or update the psychotropic medications prescribed to children in their medical passports, which clearly can lead to overprescribing of dangerous mind-altering drugs and serious, if not deadly, adverse events. And with the lack of documentation, the DCF also did not document follow-up doctor appointments and recommended psychosocial services. How can these deficits possibly help children in the state’s care?

Keep reading

Trump Taps Pro-Marijuana Legalization Congressman Matt Gaetz For U.S. Attorney General

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) is President-elect Donald Trump’s choice to serve as the next U.S. attorney general—a selection that would put one of the only GOP members of Congress who actively supports and voted for marijuana legalization into the nation’s top law enforcement position.

As Trump works to put together his cabinet, the choice of Gaetz stands out as one of the most positive signals that the state-level cannabis marketplace will not be impeded under his administration. And it also bodes well for the ongoing Biden administration-led marijuana rescheduling effort that Trump has endorsed.

Gaetz was one of three Republican members of the House to approve a Democratic-led bill to federally legalize marijuana, titled the Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement (MORE) Act in 2022. He also supported a prior version of the legislation despite his concerns with equity-focused provisions.

Keep reading

Every GOP Senate Majority Leader Candidate Opposes Marijuana Legalization

With Republicans winning control of the U.S. Senate in last week’s elections, a key question for marijuana reform advocates and stakeholders is what the selection of a new GOP majority leader will mean for cannabis reform.

There are three names currently at the top of the list of potential majority leaders who will set the legislative agenda: Sens. John Cornyn (R-TX), Rick Scott (R-FL) and John Thune (R-SD). None have embraced ending prohibition, and each has a track record of expressing concerns about cannabis use or even moderate policy reforms such as those endorsed by President-elect Donald Trump on the campaign trail.

With Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) having already announced he will not be seeking to return to the leadership position, this will the first time since 2007 that the GOP caucus will be selecting a new majority leader. Republican senators are set to meet on Wednesday to make that determination.

Trump hasn’t endorsed a specific candidate to assume the top Senate role, but while Thune is generally considered a front-runner, certain of the president-elect’s allies such as Elon Musk have been pushing for Scott to become the chamber’s leader.

However it shakes out, the current contenders are united in their opposition to legalizing marijuana.

There are some in the industry who remain hopeful that Trump’s embrace of an unsuccessful Florida legalization measure, cannabis banking reform and rescheduling could move the party to fall in line. But the extent to which the incoming president cares enough about the issue to forcefully push for, or even occasionally mention, it from the White House remains to be seen.

After announcing his support for the policy change, Trump became relatively quiet on the issue ahead of the election—which may partly explain why his supporters evidently did not adopt his position, according to a recent poll.

And based on the records of the top contenders for Senate majority leader, it seems highly unlikely they would proactively try to enact reform legislation without a major push from the president.

Keep reading

Marijuana Legalization Faces A ‘Red Wall’ In Remaining Conservative States That Still Criminalize Consumers

November 5, 2024, was a tough day for cannabis legalization supporters.

Recreational legalization ballot questions in Florida, North Dakota and South Dakota all failed.

Two medical measures passed in Nebraska but face legal challenges over the validity of the signatures required to get the measures on the ballot. Why two measures? One legalizes the medical use of cannabis, and the second regulates it.

A medical use measure also appeared on the ballot in Arkansas, but the state Supreme Court ruled before the election that the votes can’t be counted because the title and name were “misleading.”

These failures raise questions about where the movement to legalize cannabis goes from here.

The red wall holds

I’ve been researching cannabis legalization in the U.S. since 2014. I’ve previously written about how the cannabis legalization movement’s primary obstacle is the “red wall,” a term I use to refer to the 20 states where Republicans have total control of state government and recreational cannabis remains illegal.

Another four states without recreational legalization—Kansas, Wisconsin, Kentucky and North Carolina—could be described as “red wall adjacent.” These states have Democratic governors, but Republicans control the state legislatures.

Keep reading