Canadense

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/07/03/government-sponsored-study-destroys-deas-classification-of-marijuana/ Government-sponsored study destroys DEA’s classification of marijuana A government-sponsored study published recently in The Open Neurology Journal concludes that marijuana provides much-needed relief to some chronic pain sufferers and that more clinical trials are desperately needed, utterly destroying the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency’s (DEA) classification of the drug as having no medical uses. While numerous prior studies have shown marijuana’s usefulness for a host of medical conditions, none have ever gone directly at the DEA’s placement of marijuana atop the schedule of controlled substances. This study, sponsored by the State of California and conducted at the University of California Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research, does precisely that, driving a stake into the heart of America’s continued war on marijuana users by calling the Schedule I placement simply “not accurate” and “not tenable.” Reacting to the study, Paul Armentano, director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), told Raw Story that the study clearly proves U.S. drug policy “is neither based upon nor guided by science.” “In fact, it is hostile to science,” he said. “And despite the Obama Administration’s well publicized 2009 memo stating, ‘Science and the scientific process must inform and guide decisions of my Administration,’ there is little to no evidence indicating that the federal government’s ‘See no evil; hear no evil’ approach to cannabis policy is not changing any time soon.” Schedule I is supposedly reserved for the most inebriating substances that the DEA believes have no medical value, including LSD, ecstasy, peyote and heroin.* As the DEA describes it: “Drugs listed in schedule I have no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States and, therefore, may not be prescribed, administered, or dispensed for medical use. In contrast, drugs listed in schedules II-V have some accepted medical use and may be prescribed, administered, or dispensed for medical use.” And that’s the problem, the study’s authors portend. “The classification of marijuana as a Schedule I drug as well as the continuing controversy as to whether or not cannabis is of medical value are obstacles to medical progress in this area,” they wrote. “Based on evidence currently available the Schedule I classification is not tenable; it is not accurate that cannabis has no medical value, or that information on safety is lacking. It is true cannabis has some abuse potential, but its profile more closely resembles drugs in Schedule III (where codeine and dronabinol are listed). The continuing conflict between scientific evidence and political ideology will hopefully be reconciled in a judicious manner.” They add that their evidence showed marijuana reliably reduced chronic neuropathic pain and muscle spasticity due to multiple sclerosis versus trials where a placebo was used. They also specifically tested marijuana’s effects when smoked, calling the delivery method “rapid and efficient” but noting that vaporization is a better choice because it produces less carbon monoxide. The study adds that, like all medicines, there are negative side effects associated with marijuana, such as dizziness, fatigue, lightheadedness, muscle weakness and pain and heart palpitations — all of which can pose a risk in some chronic pain patients with co-occurring conditions like cardiovascular disease or substance abuse disorders. However, they call these side effects “dose-related” and “of mild to moderate severity,” adding that they “appear to decline over time, and are reported less frequently in experienced than in naïve users.” Researchers also noted that “fatal overdose with cannabis alone has not been reported.” Authors additionally found that marijuana does cause withdrawal symptoms within 12 hours of use, noting the symptoms are mild in experienced users and typically abate within 72 hours. They added that ingesting marijuana “can acutely impair skills required to drive motor vehicles,” but noted that the data on marijuana and traffic accidents is “inconclusive.” Ultimately, they concluded that more clinical trials are needed to determine which individual components of the marijuana plant are causing the medicinal effects, and whether the plant can be used to treat a host of other ailments. “Medical marijuana is mostly used for chronic pain, and has enabled countless patients to either reduce or eliminate their pharmaceutical drug regimen,” Kris Hermes, a spokesman for Americans for Safe Access (ASA), one of the nation’s leading medical marijuana advocacy groups, told Raw Story. “However, it can also be used for: arthritis, nausea or as an appetite stimulant for people living with HIV/AIDS or cancer, gastrointestinal disorders, and movement disorders (not just for people with multiple sclerosis). That is only a sampling of health conditions for which cannabis has been found helpful in alleviating symptoms. Other health conditions include: [post-traumatic stress disorder], [attention deficit disorder], [attention deficit hyperactivity disorder] and other mental health conditions, glaucoma, and migraines.” In hopes of forcing recognition of marijuana’s medical value, ASA sued the federal government last year after a long-running appeal for the reclassification of marijuana was shot down nearly a decade after it was filed. That case should go before the U.S. Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit later this year. “The federal government’s strategy has been delay, delay, delay,” ASA chief counsel Joe Elford said in an advisory. “It is far past time for the government to answer our rescheduling petition, but unfortunately we’ve been forced to go to court in order to get resolution.” “Reform advocates can and should use this study to show their congressional representatives that our country’s leading medical marijuana researchers agree that it should be reclassified,” Hermes added. “…This certainly should also have a bearing on the D.C. Circuit’s deliberations in the appeal of the rescheduling petition denial.” Medical marijuana is currently legal in just 17 states and Washington, D.C. —— *Clarification: Scientific studies have shown LSD, ecstasy, peyote and heroin also have some limited medical value, which the DEA has refused to recognize.

porra ai q eu num volto msm...

numv ´´só no br nao... le the lucifer effect

só falta eu depender do governo pra alguma coisa... principalmente quando o assunto é diversão... no urugay num mencionaram nada sobre medicinal... alias, duvido que isso veio a ser publico... lá é combate ao trafico... e com suas limitações de 40 beck/mes será um tiro no pé. tem que ser vendido, como alface, pra ter lucro e etc... qualé o problema em ganhar dinheiro com isso???

tudo a mema merda... policia num presta, policiais menos ainda...

po malandro, 2 dose de vodka, umas 500 ml de clamattoo, molho ingles, tabasco, raize forte, sal de acelga, pimena e sal.. tudo a gosto.

bicho... sou uma metamorfose ambulante hedonista ao extremo... E PNCP!!!! pode deixar, proxima vez que eu colar vou fazer aquele tour cannabico pelos colegas de GR nesse barzyl varonil...

quero ver legalizar essa e não a outra..

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/06/25/study-medical-marijuana-does-not-increase-teens-smoking-pot/ WASHINGTON (CBSDC) - Os adolescentes ainda estão recebendo alta em maconha, mas um grupo de economistas dizem que a maconha medicinal não é culpado pelo pequeno aumento de sete anos no uso de maconha entre os adolescentes. Uma nova pesquisa durante um período de 17 anos indica que não há evidências sugerindo que a maconha medicinal pode ser ligado aos picos de uso de drogas dura ou macia entre estudantes do ensino médio, de acordo com um estudo recente de três professores da faculdade de economia. O Instituto para o Estudo do Trabalho de "leis de maconha medicinal e Uso de maconha entre adolescentes" analisou dados da Pesquisa de Comportamento de Risco da Juventude entre 1993 e 2009 - um período de tempo em que 13 estados permitidos para o uso da maconha medicinal. Os dados indicaram que a evidência estatística da relação entre adolescentes e uso de maconha medicinal faltavam, assim como o uso da maconha, como um todo, para os adolescentes tem aumentado desde 2005. "Há indícios de que a maconha medicinal está encontrando seu caminho nas mãos de adolescentes, mas não há evidência estatística de que a legalização aumenta a probabilidade de uso", disse Daniel I. Rees, da Universidade de Colorado Denver economista e autor do estudo, em comunicado . Estudo do mês passado de Rees, juntamente com a Universidade de Oregon professor de economia Benjamin Hansen e do Estado de Montana professor de economia da Universidade D. Mark Anderson, vem como dispensários de maconha medicinal dentro de 1.000 metros de escolas, parques e playgrounds estão sendo alvejados por funcionários federais. "Este resultado é importante, dado que o governo federal recentemente intensificou os seus esforços para fechar dispensários de maconha medicinal", disse Hansen em comunicado. "Na verdade, muitas vezes os dados mostraram uma relação negativa entre legalização e uso de maconha." A pesquisa também vem num momento em que as legislaturas estaduais em todo o país mais estão pesando a possibilidade de apresentar projetos de lei para permitir a prática e consumo de maconha medicinal. O governo federal, no entanto, continua a afirmar que a panela de prescrição é um catalisador para incentivar os adolescentes a se drogar. Atualmente, 17 estados e no Distrito de Columbia já legalizaram a maconha medicinal. "Estamos confiantes de que o uso da maconha por adolescentes não aumenta quando um estado legaliza maconha medicinal", Anderson disse em um comunicado.

http://www.gq.com/news-politics/blogs/death-race/2012/07/exclusive-in-his-second-term-obama-will-pivot-to-the-drug-war.html According to ongoing discussions with Obama aides and associates, if the president wins a second term, he plans to tackle another American war that has so far been successful only in perpetuating more misery: the four decades of The Drug War. Don't expect miracles. There is very little the president can do by himself. And pot-smokers shouldn't expect the president to come out in favor of legalizing marijuana. But from his days as a state senator in Illinois, Obama has considered the Drug War to be a failure, a conflict that has exacerbated the problem of drug abuse, devastated entire communities, changed policing practices for the worse, and has led to a generation of young children, disproportionately black and minority, to grow up in dislocated homes, or in none at all. It is hard to write about the Drug War without getting preachy, in part because it remains so polarizing. This ought not be so. As a new documentary, The House I Live In, from filmmaker Eugene Jarecki, makes clear, a consensus is emerging among academics, police officers, lawyers, and even some politicians about what not to do. The film debuted in Los Angeles the last night of the festival, right next to the theatre were the male striptease tentpole Magic Mike was premiering, and so it won't get the attention from the press that it deserves. It did, however, win the Grand Jury citation at Sundance. The House I Live In doesn't break new ground. But it puts together 40 years of history, politics and sociology in a concise and compelling way. If you're prepared to believe that the cycle of drug abuse that plagued the black community in the 1980s and is currently sweeping across poor white America now is the fault of the low-level dealers and the users themselves, then you won't like Jarecki's point of view. For him, the decision to sell drugs is a starting point. He wants to know why it has become so common, so uncontroversial, so startlingly consequence-free. His answer is that everyone profits from it. The Drug War is ongoing because it has been successful for everyone but those most affected by it. Politicians have a useful and cyclic scapegoat to prove their crime bona fides. ("If you are a causal drug user, you are an accomplice to murder," Ronald Reagan once said.) The corrections industry has become a billion dollar business. Through asset forfeiture laws, police departments large and small can buy expensive new toys and keep cops on the street. And Americans have a vehicle to control their exposure to those elements of society that seem to threaten their economic interests the most. The historian Richard Miller, who usually writes about Abraham Lincoln, describes for viewers how drug laws in American history were created almost nakedly to marginalize disfavored groups. When Chinese immigrants began to crowd out jobs for white people in California, opium consumption suddenly became a crime. Hemp was legal and consumed in a variety of forms until it became a way to reduce economic competition from Mexicans. Cocaine, notoriously, was consumed in polite society throughout the century, but was not the subject of police attention until blacks migrated North to escape the Jim Crowified South. The 100-to-1 disparity in sentencing between crack cocaine was the most obvious manifestation of how different blacks and whites were treated. When President Obama recently signed a law reducing the disparity to 18 to 1, it was considered a reform, even though the two forms of cocaine are still pretty much the same goddamned thing. Jarecki wanted to know why black people have had the roughest go of it, and how drugs and the drug war seem to feed off each other in a sort of deadly symbiosis. David Simon, the creator of The Wire, is happy to provide his answer. There's nothing else there. The prejudicial paternalism of the New Deal ensured that blacks migrating North moved into ghettos that were subsequently redlined, making home ownership a near impossibility. Businesses moved out; the American industrial base collapsed. From door to door, from the stoop of his home to the threshold of his school, a young black man sees only the dealer, who offers him a job. Some kids can escape this reality, and a majority don't become drug dealers, but virtually everyone who lives in an urban black neighborhood is affected by it. Simon, who speaks in paragraphs in the film, notes that the sentencing guidelines passed by Congress and the pressure on local police departments to get rid of the scourge of drugs created an incentive for officers to make as many arrests as possible. The officers who get promoted quickly are those who make arrests. And it's easy to make a drug arrest—just go to a drug infested neighborhood and "jack someone up," as he puts it. The result was a plethora of amped up police officers in constant confrontation with the black community—and "makes a police department where nobody can solve a fucking crime." Homicide detectives don't get the stats that narcotics cops do. Pull a father from his daughter and put him in jail for life, and you all but guarantee that she won't make it out the ghetto. Break apart a family over a few ounces of cocaine, and the victims multiply. And everyone admits (from the beat cop to the prosecutor) that nothing really is getting better. Ground zero for violence in the drug war is now Mexico. Gangs there fight with each other and with the Mexican and American governments with such fervor precisely because the demand from Middle America for drugs is so high. (This is something that Hillary Clinton admitted recently, to her credit. The U.S. is a functional cause of Mexico's drug violence.) Race, however is not the primary soldering force of the Drug War. Class is. Poor whites are now (if you can believe the rhetoric) being devastated by the meth epidemic, breaking up previously intact families throughout Appalachia and the Midwest. The same language was used to describe the dangers of the marijuana culture during the 40s and the cocaine culture during the '80s is now used to cast meth users as social deviants, and slowly, the incarnation rate of white people is inching up. So what to do: Jarecki has no answers, other than to stop doing what we're doing now. But here are some points of departure. Watch out for returning veterans. They are uniquely vulnerable to drug abuse of all types, and narcotics traffickers have set up camp around military bases, particularly those housing infantry and special operations forces, for a reason. That generation cannot be lost to drugs. Second, recognize what Mike Carpenter, a jowly Oklahoman who runs a prison there, is comfortable telling Jarecki: Non-violent drug offenders really don't belong in prisons. Where they go is a political question, because drug abuse is something that does require a governmental response. But prison just basically ends their lives. They can't vote when they're released; thanks to President Clinton, most can't move back into public housing; they're stigmatized, in many ways, like child molesters. Reintegrating drug users back into society is as important (if not more important) than punishing them in the first place. And the next time a celebrity makes it seem like legalizing marijuana is the be all and end all of drug law reform, slap him in the face. (Metaphorically, unless you want to get your time on TMZ). Legalizing pot is the least of it. Getting politicians to understand how their actions contributed to the problem is a lot harder and requires more effort, but will ultimately pay off. If mandatory minimum sentences are reduced, for example, judges will be in a much better position to consider family structure when pronouncing a sentence. This local discretion could mean the difference between an intact family and a broken one. Beyond that, since the United States isn't about to legalize or regulate the illegal narcotics markets, the best thing a president can do may be what Obama winds up doing if he gets re-elected: using the bully pulpit to draw attention to the issue. But he won't do so before November.

dorgas...

procura aqui... me parece que semente chega... tinha um broter daqui plantando lá... tudo é possivel... abrax.

porra... 100 dola por 5 g??? po, tenho uns bro que tão pagando caro... me falaram 100 conto a g... mas tinha um moderador daqui do GR que planta ai no jp....

porra, ha roupas e ha roupas....

pra mim tem que impor os impostos pro povo não começar a fumar.... IMO qualquer coisa q custe menos de 20.00 R$ o maço seria o dieal.... unico foda, é q a fumaça num fica só no pulmão de quem fuma... agora o tabacco mascavel... faça que tu quieres... e tinha que botar em cada maço agora aqui é assim...

trombadinha??? tinha até me esquecido dessas parada... era só que me faltava, eu num poder usar roupa q eu gosto por medinho...

né não... e eu nunca vou parar de comprar minhas lacoste polo... PQP ja falei aqui, sempre quis ser playboy... E TB NUNCA VOU PARAR DE TOMAR MINHAS BLOODY CAESARS!!!! clamatto (suco de moluscos com tomate) + vodka e raiz forte, molho ingles, sal de acelga e tabasco... com 3 azeitona com alho. ui... ta 35 grau aqui... acho que vou la tomar um...

falacias...

po.. pra quem quer largar essa vacina é tudo.. cigarro é pior que heroina o vivio... assim como tem vacina contra a msm...

e a maconha?? CADE?

num curto mais cogu... das ultima 5 vezes eu fiquei puto... essa era a brisa... eu ficava puto... ai parei

Psychedelic drugs can unlock mysteries of brain – former government adviser David Nutt says research into mental illness is hampered by the prohibition of drugs such as psilocybin and LSD David Nutt claims that psychedelic drugs such as magic mushrooms may provide insights into depression and schizophrenia. Photograph: Andy Paradise/Rex Features Scientists should have access to illegal psychedelic drugs such as LSD and psilocybin to aid them in brain research, according to the government's former drug adviser Professor David Nutt. He said that research into the deepest mysteries of the brain, including consciousness and mental illness, had been curtailed by the prohibition of the drugs. Prof Nutt said that scientists might find treatments for conditions such as schizophrenia by using modern techniques to study the effects of psychedelic drugs on the brain. "Neuroscience should be trying to understand how the brain works," said Nutt, who is professor of neuropsychopharmacology at Imperial College London. "Psychedelics change the brain in, perhaps, the most profound way of any drug, at least in terms of understanding consciousness and connectivity. Therefore we should be doing a lot more of this research. "It's extraordinary that 40 years of advances in brain imaging technology and there's never been a study about this before. I think it's a scandal, I think it's outrageous the fact these studies have not been done. And they've not been done simply because the drugs were illegal." Speaking to the Guardian ahead of a lecture he will give at a University College London neuroscience symposium on Friday, Nutt said that a volunteer for a recent experiment pulled out of the study because he was worried that "being in a study with a so-called illegal drug could mean he couldn't travel to some countries, such as America. To inhibit research to that extent is an outrage." Nutt's views will challenge governments around the world which, largely, classify psychedelic drugs as harmful and illegal. The professor is used to being a thorn in the side of the authorities. In 2009, the UK's then health secretary, Alan Johnson, sacked him from his post as chair of the government's Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs for publicly stating that alcohol and tobacco were more harmful than LSD, ecstasy and cannabis. Hundreds of clinical trials of psychedelic drugs such as LSD were carried out in the 1950s and 1960s, and successful treatments, including one for alcohol addiction, came out of the work. Since LSD was banned around the world, however, the number of scientific studies has dropped to virtually zero, and there have been no studies using modern imaging techniques such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to look at what parts of the brain are affected by it. Nutt recently published research, with colleagues at Cardiff University, on the effects of psilocybin – the active ingredient in magic mushrooms – on the brain. His team had assumed the drug might increase activity in certain parts of the brain, to explain the experience that users get when they eat magic mushrooms. Instead, MRI scans of 30 healthy volunteers showed that psilocybin seemed to decrease activity in the regions of the brain which link up different areas. The study was published in January in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. "This is a hugely important way of perturbing the brain to understand the nature of consciousness," said Nutt. At his lecture on Friday, he will examine whether psilocybin's effects on the brain can be used as a model for psychosis. Some of the brain alterations seen as a result of taking psilocybin, he said, are similar to those seen in the brains of people with prodromal schizophrenia. Psilocybin seems to suppress the actions of a brain system called the "default mode network" which is active whenever a person is, for example, reflecting about the world rather than engaged in a specific activity. The "task-positive network" is engaged when a person focuses on a specific job and it operates out of phase with the default mode network. But in schizophrenia, the networks are much more in phase and, under psilocybin, they are completely in phase. "So, we're thinking [psilocybin] might be an interesting model for early stages for schizophrenia, it might allow us to test new drugs," said Nutt. "When people start to become psychotic, their ego boundaries break down, the relationship between them and the world gets disrupted and the relationship between their different inner experiences gets mixed up. Eventually they start hearing their own thoughts as someone else's voice. "That breakdown of connectivity in the brain is very classic in schizophrenia. If we can produce this in a laboratory in a normal volunteer, we can then look for new treatments and it is much more efficient to do that in normal volunteers than try to find young people who are starting to develop their illness and it's ethically more acceptable too." Nutt and his colleagues are also studying potential uses for ecstasy, also known as MDMA. "The therapeutic value of MDMA for psychotherapy has been widely known until it was banned and has hardly been studied since. There have only been a couple of MDMA imaging studies, but none of them using cutting-edge technologies, so we're doing that at present." In collaboration with Robin Carhart-Harris at Imperial College London, Nutt also wants to further his research into more psychedelic drugs such as LSD and ibogaine, a derivative of African root bark, which is used to treat addiction in Thailand and Cambodia. Carrying out such work is usually difficult for researchers, however, because they have to make such lengthy applications for licences to use illegal drugs. And even if the research went ahead and showed benefits from the drugs, it is unlikely doctors would be allowed to prescribe them. Nutt recently called for the UK's classification system of drugs to be rewritten to reflect more accurately their relative harms, and called for a regulated approach to making drugs such as MDMA and cannabis available for medical and research purposes. "Regulations, which are arbitrary, actually make it virtually impossible to research these drugs," said Nutt last month. "The effect these laws have had on research is greater than the effects that [George] Bush stopping stem cell research has had, because it's been going on since the 1960s."

na boa jaba... eu era bem mais saudavel usando heroina do que a galera do bar... po, uma vez até fiz academia dormindo... ... matei quase meia grama no dragon ball e fui fazer escadas... é mole???