(Pot-Propaganda is Libelous)

JANUARY 19, 2024 EDITOR

Billboards across the country advertise marijuana with false health claims that would never be allowed for tobacco or alcohol.  Big, bold and high (no pun intended), these signs help to sell the drug — while being seen by thousands of children.

Why can’t state regulators stop these assaults on the public that attempt to portray weed as the road to a long life and better health?

Our answer: the cannabis industry which has legions of lobbyists in state governments — routinely prevails against sensible legislation. Only the states of Vermont and Montana ban billboard advertising. Most states struggle to regulate marijuana because the industry overpowers legislators with incredible promises.

This sampling of billboards from around the country proves that the cannabis industry gets away with “murder” in legalization states.  It also proves that the ganjapreneurs, or so-called cannabis “doctors,” make fraudulent claims.  

The “medical” marijuana industry’s false advertising began when they adopted a green cross, a pharmaceutical sign used in Europe.  The gimmick continued by using the term “dispensary, ” which means a clinic, or a room where medicine is dispensed.  Marijuana is numbness, not medicine.  Chicago in 2021

The pot industry understands addiction marketing.   In Chicago, 2021, Cresco Labs ran billboards repeating the word, EVERYDAY several times.   Of course, a public outcry followed.  

Marketing sex

More recently, drivers into Chicago and O’ Hare Airport were greeted with a large billboard exclaiming that cannabis-infused drinks are better than SEX.  Big bold letters and hot red on a white background were used to capture attention.

A public outcry followed, with complaints written in the Chicago newspapers.  We’re happy to see that the sign was recently replaced,  but it still advertises for cannabis-infused drinks.

In Washington state, signs of pretty young women lure people into a pot shop called “Green Lady Marijuana.”

What about the Freebies?  

In Colorado, one billboard announced Free Dabs.   

Even worse, an activist group in Washington, DC,  gave out free marijuana with COVID shots.  The program was called “Joints for Jabs.”   Washington, DC, bans pot shops but allows gifting.

Most despicable are the advertising campaigns trying to get parents, and particularly women, to use weed.   Based on the number of child abuse deaths caused by pot-using parents and the knowledge that pregnant women must not use cannabis, these promoters must be stopped.

We may hate the cannabis industry, but give them credit for being some of the biggest con artists of our era — better than Big Tobacco and the opioid industry.

Have any complaints ever worked? 

Yes, a Colorado store with a mural of Cookie Monster from Sesame Street was forced to take it down after Sesame Street sued.  

In California, a father complained the pot shops weren’t following the promise of Prop 64 not to advertise on interstate highways. He sued and won.

Editor’s Note:  Many of these signs are no longer visible, but the article is meant to alert the public of cannabis industry tactics. (Reposted with permission from PARENTS OPPOSED TO POT)

Legalise dangerous drugs? Don’t be absurd! by Professor Neil McKeganey

IN A recent comment piece for the Telegraph, Daniel Hannan  indulges in a bit of ‘bashing the West’ when he accuses the Western economies of having caused economic and political chaos in Ecuador and other Latin American countries as a result of the ‘failed war on drugs’.

Hannan’s argument seems to be that in failing to legalise heroin and cocaine the West has handed over production and sale of these drugs to criminal gangs who in turn have destroyed the economic and political systems in these source countries. The logic here is that by not allowing legal supply of heroin in the West we have somehow encouraged others to engage in illegal drug production and supply elsewhere. This is of course rather akin to blaming householders for inconveniencing burglars by installing home security systems. The burglars’ life would be so much easier if more of us could be persuaded to leave our front doors ajar at night. 

It is true that heroin and cocaine use persists in the West in the face of the illegality of these substances but this does not mean that our efforts at drug prevention have failed or that the only viable alternative is legalisation. According to the latest prevalence estimate for Class A drug use in England and Wales around 3.3 per cent of the adult population aged 16 to 59 had used Class A drugs in the last year. That means 96.7 per cent had not. In the light of those percentages it hardly makes sense to characterise our efforts at drug prevention as a miserable failure. 

Those, like Hannan, who advocate for the legalisation of all currently illegal drugs do so on the basis that the harm these substances are associated with arises for the most part from their illegal status. The reality of course could hardly be further from that absurd proposition. These drugs are illegal precisely because they are harmful. If the UK were to pursue a policy of allowing legal access to drugs such as heroin and cocaine, what would we do in relation to the Nitazenes 9a class of synthetic opioids developed by the pharmaceutical industry in the 1950s but never approved as medicines which are increasingly associated with drug deaths in the UK and were recently identified in the Lancet as being between 50 and 500 times more dangerous than heroin? Legalise heroin and cocaine and you end up in a position where these other more harmful drugs would still need to remain illegal. 

The alternative to Hannan’s counsel of despair is not to open the door to legal drug supply but to…

For complete article https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/legalise-dangerous-drugs-dont-be-absurd/

but treatment retains promise of hope.

Oregon’s bold experiment in decriminalizing possession of heroin, meth, cocaine and fentanyl — and investing marijuana tax money into expanded addiction treatment, in hopes of shifting the emphasis for users from punishment to rehabilitation — was widely heralded at the time.

The delivery vehicle, Measure 110, drew support from just under 58.5% of voters in the November 2020 general election, dwarfing the 41.5% opposition. It virtually swept the valley and coast on its way to carrying 17 of the state’s 36 counties, including rural, Republican-leaning Yamhill.

Though there may have been others, we can find record of only four newspapers in opposition, the McMinnville News-Register, Bend Bulletin, Medford Mail Tribune and Pendleton East Oregonian. The Portland media, which reached vastly more readers, were united in support.

Funding was even more lopsided, supporters raising almost $5.5 million in cash, compared to just $165,140 for opponents.

And today? Not so much.

A recent survey by DHM Research found 63% of respondents favoring the same remedial approach we do — reinstatement of criminal sanctions for possession of hard drugs, coupled with retention of the measure’s other main thrust, creation of a new state revenue stream to enhance addition recovery efforts. A separate survey by Emerson Polling pegged it at 64%.

The nub of the issue is this: Without threat of painful criminal sanctions, users have insufficient incentive to seek treatment. Evidence strongly suggests that external motivation is required in the vast majority of cases. For complete story  (newsregister.com)

The Battle for San Francisco

San Francisco, for decades known around the world for its jazz, free love and beat poetry, has in recent years become notorious for a different reason. Tent encampments on its streets and open-air drug markets have become a reference point for the consequences of ultra-progressive policies.

Florence Read and Freddie Sayers took a film crew (and an armed security guard) into the Tenderloin district to find out the truth for themselves. This special report includes remarkable interviews with city supervisor Dean Preston and Michael Shellenberger, author of San Fransicko, as well as drug users, locals and activists across the West.

Their report dives into the ideological and practical battles at the heart of the story, and asks whether San Francisco today could be a harbinger of things to come across the Western world. (for complete story  UnHerd)

Also see

1. The Latest Casualty of Bad Drug Policy – Harm Reduction that Isn’t!
2. “There’s NOTHING Compassionate About Letting Someone ‘Stew’ in Their Addiction!”
3. Second-Hand Drug Use: Beyond Toxic

through the modeling of Commission of Narcotic Drugs

The leaders of the “Regional Network of Youth Organizations and Youth Champions of Change in Central Asia for drug free, healthy, safe and secure societies” also made significant contribution to the event and facilitated the simulation of Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) session on drug use prevention.

During the CND, 25 participants engaged in discussions on the topic of “Drug Use Prevention among Youth in Central Asia” and collaboratively devised youth-driven solutions aimed at fostering a future free from drugs. The main reference documents for these discussions were UNODC/WHO International Standards on Drug Use Prevention and the UNODC’s Handbook on Youth Participation in Drug Prevention Work.

Consequently, a youth-driven Resolution was presented to both UNODC and government organizations, delineating key priority areas Such as the implementation of evidence-based drug use prevention programs and advocacy for International Standards on Drug Use Prevention with policymakers.  The Resolution also emphasized the establishment of “youth-cells” in local communities, educational institutions, and government organizations, as well as empowerment of leaders and members of the “Regional Network of Youth Organizations and Youth Champions of Change in Central Asia for drug free, healthy, safe and secure societies” through enhanced knowledge and skills via cascade training and workshops.

For complete article go to United Nations Office on Drugs & Crime

Harm Reduction or Harm Enabling – Who is Funding this and to what end?

Stirling University’s two-year drug checking project, despite the backing of Scottish Drug policy minister Elena Whitham, reveals a troubling inadequacy in its approach. The project, which aimed to delve into drug use patterns, disappointingly managed to interview only 11 drug users. This number is shockingly low, especially considering the gravity of the drug use issue. If I were Elena, I would be questioning the value received for the funding provided.

Organisation: University of Stirling Amount Awarded: £300,082 Split over 2 years

Details of Project:  Researching and developing key components of a new Scottish drug checking programme. This two-year project (18th Nov 2020-17th Nov 2022) aims to directly address two of the six evidence-based strategies identified by the Drug Deaths Taskforce to help reduce drug related deaths: targeting people most at risk, and optimising public health surveillance.

… it’s startling to see that a study credited to 13 authors managed to engage only 11 drug users. This significant discrepancy raises questions about the study’s methodological rigor and ethical integrity. One would expect a higher degree of accountability and professional responsibility from the authors.

This study exemplifies a broader, problematic trend in the field: a tendency for mutual endorsement among like-minded professionals, creating an ‘echo chamber’ effect. This not only limits the scope of academic inquiry but also hinders the progression of the field. When research priorities shift towards promoting personal networks and careers over genuine knowledge advancement, it does a disservice to the discipline and those affected by addiction

Additionally, the creation of the Minister for Drugs Strategy position in December 2020 has not brought about the necessary changes in drug policy or outcomes. This continued trend of escalating fatalities underlines the inadequacy of the current strategy. It suggests a fundamental rethinking is required in both leadership and approach to effectively address and reverse this grave public health crisis.

For complete article https://www.facesandvoicesofrecoveryuk.org/exposing-the-flaws-in-stirling-universitys-drug-research/

ADDRESSING THE TOP PUBLIC HEALTH PROBLEM FACING OUR NATION’S YOUTH: ALCOHOL AND OTHER DRUGS

A PUBLIC HEALTH IMPERATIVE

Time is of the essence. Substance use disorder is preventable, treatable, and responsive to early intervention. We need to focus our efforts on creating more innovative services that can attract and engage young people sooner, as well as prevent substance use to begin with.

https://youthrecoveryanswers.org/

Just One of the Growing Public Health Harms of Drug Decriminalization

“The signs of drug use are everywhere”, and this is on public transport. Welcome to the growing chaos and harms of liberal drug policies. Tragically, the casualties of this toxic social experiment are not just the hapless drug user, it is people in their immediate orbit of use, very much including children, and most effected, the unable to escape, Bus Drivers.

Bus driver workers’ compensation claims skyrocket as exposure to drugs increase. Subject to this day in and day out! Drivers are traumatized having to resuscitate drug users and succumbing themselves to second-hand drug use. And this is ‘good policy’?

For complete report KING 5 – Seattle

VIRGINIA PASSED THE ATTACHED LAW THAT RESTRICTS HEMP PRODUCTS THAT YOU CAN GET HIGH FROM. IT HAS BEEN UPHELD BY A FEDERAL COURT. OPINION ATTACHED.

SB 903 Industrial hemp; regulated hemp products, etc.

SUMMARY AS ENACTED WITH GOVERNOR’S RECOMMENDATION: (all summaries)

Tetrahydrocannabinol; hemp products; packaging, labeling, and testing; penalties. Limits the amount of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) that can be included in a hemp product or industrial hemp extract to 0.3 percent and two milligrams per package. The bill limits the application of such THC limits to retail sales and allows a hemp product or industrial hemp extract to contain more than two milligrams of THC if the product or extract contains an amount of cannabidiol (CBD) that is at least 25 times greater than the amount of THC; however, the bill prohibits hemp processors from selling industrial hemp or a substance containing an industrial hemp extract to a person if the processor knows or has reason to know that such person will use the industrial hemp or substance containing an industrial hemp extract in a substance that violates the aforementioned THC limits.

The bill creates a regulated hemp product retail facility registration, which carries an annual fee of $1,000, and requires persons to obtain such registration from the Commissioner of the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services prior to offering for sale or selling regulated hemp products, as defined in the bill, or any substance intended for consumption that is advertised or labeled as containing an industrial hemp-derived cannabinoid. The bill creates certain packaging, labeling, and testing requirements for regulated hemp products and requires that topical hemp products bear a label stating that the product is not intended for human consumption. The bill provides the Commissioner with the authority to access registered regulated hemp product retail facilities and any business that offers for sale or sells at retail a substance intended for human consumption that is advertised or labeled as containing a cannabinoid for the purpose of inspections and securing samples. The bill also creates a civil penalty of up to $10,000 per day for the following violations: (i) offering for sale or selling at retail without a regulated hemp product retail facility registration a regulated hemp product or a substance intended for human consumption, orally or by inhalation, that is advertised or labeled as containing an industrial hemp-derived cannabinoid; (ii) continuing to offer for sale or selling at retail a regulated hemp product after revocation or suspension of such registration; (iii) offering for sale or selling at retail a substance intended for human consumption, orally or by inhalation, that contains THC in excess of the applicable limits; or (iv) offering for sale or selling at retail a regulated hemp product that does not meet the applicable packaging, labeling, and testing requirements. The bill (a) clarifies that persons who manufacture, store, sell, or offer for sale an industrial hemp extract or food containing an industrial hemp extract are subject to the existing food and drink permit requirement and (b) requires such persons to indicate their intent to manufacture, store, sell, or offer for sale an industrial hemp extract or food containing an industrial hemp extract on such permit application. The bill also creates labeling, packaging, and testing requirements for industrial hemp extracts and foods containing an industrial hemp extract.

The bill creates a civil penalty of $10,000 for the following: (1) manufacturing, selling, or offering for sale an industrial hemp extract or food containing an industrial hemp extract without a permit; (2) continuing to manufacture, sell, or offer for sale an industrial hemp extract or food containing an industrial hemp extract after revocation or suspension of such permit; (3) failing to disclose on a form prescribed by the Commissioner that he intends to manufacture, sell, or offer for sale a substance intended to be consumed orally that contains an industrial hemp-derived cannabinoid; (4) manufacturing, selling, or offering for sale a food that contains more than 0.3 percent of THC or more than two milligrams of THC per package; (5) manufacturing, offering for sale, or selling in violation of food and drink laws or regulations a substance intended to be consumed orally that is advertised or labeled as containing an industrial hemp-derived cannabinoid; or (6) otherwise violating any provision of the Commonwealth’s food and drink laws or regulations. The bill also makes it a Class 1 misdemeanor to engage in such actions, except for those set forth in clause (4). The bill makes it unlawful under the Virginia Consumer Protection Act to (A) sell or offer for sale any substance intended for human consumption that contains a synthetic derivative of THC or (B) sell or offer for sale a topical hemp product that does not include a label stating that the product is not intended for human consumption. The bill also increases existing civil penalties for certain hemp-related violations.

The bill provides that certain regulated hemp product provisions related to retail facility registrations, packaging, labeling, and testing and associated civil penalty provisions shall become effective when the Commissioner provides notice to the Virginia Code Commission that the Department has established the registration process. The bill removes tetrahydrocannabinol from the list of Schedule I controlled substances and contains other technical amendments.

As states relax their laws on cannabis, neuroscientist Yasmin Hurd is warning about the drug’s dangers for the developing brain.

In a recent edition of SCIENCE, Yasmin tables the serious and growing concerns about cannabis use, dependency, addiction, as well as short and long-term damage to developing brains. (Source: As cannabis laws relax, neuroscientist warns of its dangers for developing brain | Science)

Whilst Yasmin is not in favour of trying to catch the bolted horse of legalisation, as with most scientists (a little naïve on the shark pool that is addiction for profit industry, and the real time data of the failed and failing legalisation models) believes ‘regulation and taxation’ will end the ‘bad practices’ of high THC weed.

Nowhere has legalisation lessened harm, or criminality or even discrimination. That’s another Smoke Screen that alarms are already sounding over.

• ‘Then There Were Three – Marijuana Markets, That Is!’
• The Disastrous Californian Cannabis Legalization Experiment – More than promises ‘Up in Smoke’!
• Legalize cannabis and a veritable cornucopia will emerge.
• Cannabis as ‘Medicine?’: Pot Propaganda, Emotive Anecdote, Marketing Manipulation, and the Side Stepping of Science

Alarm bells on the published neurobiological harms of cannabis were sounding as far back as 2008 research, let alone volumes of anecdata that tacitly warned the same.

• Deconstructing the neurobiology of cannabis use disorder – PubMed (nih.gov)
• Adolescent brain maturation, the endogenous cannabinoid system and the neurobiology of cannabis-induced schizophrenia – PubMed (nih.gov)
• New vistas on cannabis use disorder – PubMed (nih.gov)
• Cannabis and psychiatric disorders: it is not only addiction – PubMed (nih.gov)

Canada: Quebec City Embracing the ‘Alberta model’ of tackling addiction

By Geoff Russ|Posted on September 10, 2023

• With 93 percent of delegates voting in favour of the resolution, the Conservatives adopted elements of the Alberta provincial government’s strategy for combating drug addiction.
• The Alberta model de-emphasizes “safe supply” policies, which involve the government providing substances to addicted persons to replace often fatally-toxic drugs purchased off the street. 
• Conservative MP Stephen Ellis says the Liberal government’s support for “safe supply” has been ineffective, and that the Conservatives want drug and addiction policies to move in a new direction. 

QUEBEC CITY — The Conservative Party may have a reputation for bickering and in-fighting but its members were able to find one area of overwhelming consensus at the party’s policy convention in Quebec City this weekend.

With 93 percent of delegates voting in favour of the resolution, the Conservatives almost unanimously decided to adopt elements of the Alberta provincial government’s strategy for combating drug addiction.

It was one of the largest margins at the convention and a big endorsement of a policy that has been polarizing in Alberta, but has attracted the support of Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre as he campaigns against disorder in Canadian cities.

Officially titled the “Alberta Model: A Recovery-Oriented System of Care,” the strategy emphasizes recovery through the use of long-term recovery facilities across the province to help addicts overcome their addiction.

The Alberta model de-emphasizes “safe supply” policies, which involve the government providing substances to addicted persons to replace often fatally-toxic drugs purchased off the street. 

“The truth is that what we’re doing in Canada, and the way that we’ve been thinking as a society, about addiction for the last 20 years, has been a failure,” says Dan Williams, Alberta’s minister of mental health and addiction, in an interview with The Hub. “And we see that both in the data, the literature, but we can also see it with our own eyes.” 

Williams attended the convention in support of the resolutions inspired by the Alberta model.

He says Canadians will have a choice between the Alberta model, or the “safe supply” model endorsed by the federal government, which he says has helped to perpetuate the rampant addiction and homelessness crisis in Vancouver. 

“We know that addiction running its course has one of two ends,” says Williams. “It either ends in pain, misery, and with enough time, death, or the alternative is treatment, recovery and a second lease on life.”

The Alberta model is often presented in sharp contrast to the B.C. government’s approach, which has embraced “safe supply” policies to help combat the province’s long-standing and deteriorating rate of addiction. While “safe supply” has been praised by the B.C. government and federal Liberals as a viable strategy, the rate of addiction and drug-related deaths in the province has only increased since “safe supply” policies were enacted. 

For complete article go to Conservatives overwhelmingly embrace the ‘Alberta model’ of tackling addiction – The Hub

Also see

•  Vic-NSW Injecting Rooms – A Review
• Overdoses – What’s Really Happening?
• Saving Lives – What Does the Evidence Say?