Archive for the ‘The Media’ Category
“Ignorant, Misleading And Downright Evil Tabloid Headlines”
Baroness Joan Walmsley, LibDem peer, during the House of Lords debate on a Royal Commission on drugs policy, 9th March 2011
My Government, who were elected with 60 per cent of the vote, should have the confidence to defy the tabloid newspapers. They should get the facts and act on them. We should not be afraid of ignorant, misleading and downright evil tabloid headlines. It is the right thing to do. Please let us do it!
Watch the debate here from 19:48 onwards. See the full transcript here.
Medicinal Cannabis And Its Impact On Human Health
This is an excellent US documentary featuring three of the most eminent advocates of medicinal cannabis: Dr David Bearman, Dr Donald Tashkin and Dr Donald Abrams. You can watch the film here.
Home Office Drug Strategy Blog – Brokenshire The Buffoon
James Brokenshire introduces the new Home Office drug strategy blog here.
It is difficult to contain the contempt in which I hold this odious and dishonest little man. His brazen cheek in believing that he has anything of honour or relevance to publish on the internet is astounding. Is he really so isolated in his ivory tower that he doen’t realise how much he and his polices are despised and reviled? Does he not know that he is subject to intense ridicule and disrespect at his absurd ideas and propaganda? Doesn’t he know that he is universally regarded as a complete prat – by all his colleagues, doctors, scientists, members of the ACMD, everyone who comes into contact with him?
This is my comment. I did my best to restrain myself and stay polite. I wonder whether it will be published?
There are many, many things wrong with Britain’s drug strategy. We now have one of the most regressive, authoritarian and oppressive drug policies anywhere in the world. Only in places where they execute people for drug possession such as Malaysia or China are there more backwards, unjust and outdated ideas being implemented.
No omission or error is more heinous though than the failure even to mention the medicinal use of cannabis. With the new understanding of the endocannabinoid system and its vital importance to all aspects of human physiology, the power of cannabis as medicine is self-evident. Throughout Europe, doctors are able to prescribe medicinal cannabis to patients. Extraordinary results are achieved in multiple sclerosis, neuropathic pain, Crohn’s, cancer, ADHD and many other conditions. Meanwhile the British government continues with what can only be described as its inane response that “there are no medicinal benefits in cannabis”. It is not just a stupid policy. It is cruel. Hundreds of thousands of British citizens are denied access to the medicine that could relieve their pain and suffering. Meanwhile, in virtually every other country in Europe except France, in Israel and in 15 US states, cannabis is being used as medicine and achieving wonderful results.
Those denied their medicine in Britain are humiliated that European patients can bring medicinal cannabis into Britain and use it under the protection of the Schengen Agreement. This is a cruel and unusual punishment for the crime of being resident in Britain.
The British drug strategy is a joke throughout the world except amongst those agencies and drug workers that depend upon it for their living. It is a shame on our great nation and an extreme indictment of our political system which allows such discredited, cruel and self-defeating policies to persist.
The prohibition of medicinal cannabis is perhaps the best example of how utterly useless, out of date and hopeless is current government drugs policy.
Putting Cannabis “Research” Into Perspective
Just Say No!
The furore around yesterday’s BMJ article on cannabis and psychosis is reverberating around the world. It shouldn’t be any surprise really that a psychoactive substance has psychoactive effects but it provides opportunity for good sensationalist copy.
In the course of dealing with today’s events, two incisive and illuminating facts emerged:
First, the study which is published in the BMJ includes a statement that says:
“Furthermore, we used a rather broad outcome measure, defined as a minimum of one positive rating on a G section item, representing psychotic experiences rather than clinically relevant psychotic disorder.”
The study asked people to say if they used cannabis and if they had experienced one of a series of “subclinical” symptoms of psychosis, like an hallucination. If they had just one yes in 10 years they counted towards the study’s findings.
Secondly, I was reviewing the number of cannabis related hospital admissions – approximately 1000 per annum. As a comparison, I checked on the number of emergency peanut allergy cases – approximately 3000 per annum.
Just say no to peanuts?
ISMOKE Magazine Issue 2
The second edition of ISMOKE magazine is now available here. It promises to be even better than the first.
The contents are:
- Lead Editorial – Nuff Said
- Cannabis Is A Wonderful Thing – Peter Reynolds
- Cannabis In The News
- Meet The Sprayer – Nuff Said
- An Interview With Jason Reed – Nuff Said
- Bud Porn – THCDUDEUK
- Strain Reviews – The Cannablog
- When There’s A Wall, There’s A Way – Clark French
- Twisted Logic, You Know It Makes Sense – Jason Reed
- Marijuana Myths: The Dangers Of Smoking Cannabis – Cure Ukay
- The New Legalise Cannabis Alliance – Peter Reynolds
- Recreational Or Medical: A Distinction Without A Difference – Alun Buffry
- UKCIA – Derek Williams
- Your Pictures
- My Sacrament – Jakub Carter (FRANKDONTKNOWJACK)
- Around The World – Cannabis College Amsterdam
- Stateside: Nuff Said Reaches Out To Farmer Tom
- Blogs You Should Read – Nuff Said
- Cannabis Strains – Rags (THCTALK)
- ISMOKE Reviews – Nuff Said
- How To Do Your Bit For The Cannabis Campaign – Nuff Said
- ISMOKE Competition
- My Story – Luke Bunce
- Visitor Map On ISMOKEHerb
Mr Cameron, It’s You Who Needs Education About Cannabis!
See the interview here. The relevant part starts at 10:45.
Al Jazeera: This was incidentally, the second most popular question because viewers would submit questions and then members of the public would vote.
Why is marijuana illegal when alcohol and tobacco are more addictive and dangerous to our health, but we manage to control them? Wouldn’t education about drugs from a younger age be better?
Cameron: Well there’s one bit of that question I agree with which I think education about drugs is vital and we should make sure that education programmes are there in our schools and we should make sure that they work. But I don’t really accept the rest of the question. I think if you actually look at the sort of marijuana that is on sale today, it is actually incredibly damaging, very, very toxic and leads to, in many cases, huge mental health problems. But I think the more fundamental reason for not making these drugs legal is that to make them legal would make them even more prevalent and would increase use levels even more than they are now. So I don’t think it is the right answer. I think a combination of education, also treatment programmes for drug addicts, I think those are the two most important planks of a proper anti-drug policy.
Al Jazeera: What about the argument that it could be used as medicinal properties? That was another question we actually had, a person saying it’s got proven medicinal properties. If used properly and regulated properly it could actually be quite helpful.
Cameron: That is a matter for the science and medical authorities to determine and they are free to make independent determinations about that. But the question here about whether illegal drugs should be made legal, my answer is no.
Dear Mr Cameron,
I am writing about your answer to the question about marijuana during the recent Al Jazeera World View YouTube interview.
I am the recently elected leader of the LCA. I represent the interests of at least two million regular users of cannabis and perhaps as many as 10 million occasional users in Britain. This is a huge proportion of the population and on their behalf I am requesting a meeting with you.
We were dismayed, shocked even, at your answer to the question. With respect, clearly it is you who are in great need of education about cannabis. The information you gave was inaccurate and false. While we must all respect different opinions, your answer was factually wrong and you must correct it.
Cannabis is not “incredibly damaging”, nor “very, very toxic”. It is a myth that there is anything significantly different about the cannabis on sale today and the idea that it causes “in many cases, huge mental health problems” has been comprehensively disproved many times over by scientists all over the world.
I can provide you with scientific information which proves that these ideas are false. Recently we have been pursuing various newspapers through the Press Complaints Commission for publishing the same inaccuracies. I am seriously alarmed when I see the prime minster of my country distributing such untruths.
Two key facts:
The Therapeutic Ratio of cannabis (ED50:LD50) is 1:40000 (Alcohol = 1:10, Paracetamol = 1:30). Even potatoes are more toxic than cannabis.
Professor Glyn Lewis of the University of Bristol reviewed all published research on cannabis and psychosis in 2009 and concluded that 96% of people have no risk whatsoever and in the remaining 4% the risk is “statistically tiny”.
Your suggestion that legalising drugs increases use is also not supported by the evidence. In both Holland and Portugal where cannabis use is not prosecuted, consumption is much lower than in Britain.
Finally, on medicinal use it is simply not true that the scientific and medical authorities are free to make independent determinations. The Home Office stamps on any medicinal cannabis use even when prescribed by a doctor. People from other European countries can bring medicinal cannabis to Britain and use it legally under the Schengen agreement but you can’t if you’re British. Here, sick and disabled people are being prosecuted every day for use of a medicine which is scientifically and medically proven. Surely you cannot be unaware of this? It is a cruel and evil policy which shames our nation.
So please, Mr Cameron, will you meet with me in order that I may show you the evidence and the facts about cannabis? Remember, this was the second most popular question you were asked on Friday and I represent the interests of millions of British citizens. Please make time for me in your diary.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours sincerely,
Peter Reynolds
STOP THIEF! £2 Million Banker Robber.
Highwayman Hester
RBS, 83% owned by you and me, lost £1.13 billion last year. Stephen Hester is getting a £2 million bonus – all in shares – with his salary frozen at a paltry £1.2 million.
It’s an inside job. Cameron, Dr Cable and the poodle all have their hand in this. A stitch up.
I wonder what BBC DG Mark Thompson’s bonus will be this year and how easily Uncle Rupert will subvert his way into total British media domination?
This is the oligarchy, cooking its books, flexing its muscles at your and my expense.
“New LCA” – Call For Nominations
“New LCA” is in the process of drafting its constitution and revising its aims and principles in accordance with the results of the leadership election. The immediate plans following the election are set out here.
The management committee is considering a new name which will better reflect the aims of the party. Nominations are invited from everyone.
This is not a competition and there are no prizes, guarantees or rewards. We are looking for suggestions and ideas. The committee will decide the name that it will recommend to the membership as part of the new constitution.
The main consideration is how to advance our cause, ending the prohibition of cannabis, and who we have to communicate with and persuade in order to achieve that. That means looking outwards at people who do not use cannabis and particularly at MPs, opinion formers and the media. These are the people we must influence.
We need a name and identity around which we can rally supporters but we are not the main concern. For instance, “legalise” is a word that frightens people. Our target audience thinks that it means a free for all, whereas our intention is a system of regulation based on facts and evidence which protects children and the vulnerable and maintains quality and safety standards.
“Cannabis” is a word that people are concerned about having linked to their online and Facebook profiles but it is the essence of our cause. It is difficult to see how any name could be successful without including the word. Our new campaign theme is “Reform Regulate Realise” but it needs a payoff to say clearly what it is about.
Please think about how the name will sound when you write to your MP . Will it be an immediate turn off or will it invite interest? When Jeremy Paxman talks about us on Newsnight will it be with a sneer or with some respect, that here is a serious party with a serious proposition?
Please post your ideas here as comments. I promise that every suggestion will be considered. Here are some ideas to start off with.
Cannabis Party
Cannabis Tax & Regulate Party
Cannabis Tax Party
Cannabis Law Reform Party
End Cannabis Prohibition Party
Reform Regulate Realise Party
Safer Access Party
British Cannabis Reform Party
This Vile Punk Needs To Be Stripped Of His Arrogance, His Dignity And His Title!
“Tory Peer: Bus Drivers And Waitresses ‘Unimportant'”, The Daily Telegraph, 9th February 2011
Oaf
A senior Government adviser employed to monitor former ministers working in business has claimed bus drivers, waitresses and people in other “unimportant” jobs would be unfit to join his panel.
Lord Lang, the Conservative peer, said people in ordinary jobs were not sufficiently qualified to pass judgement on the employment of former ministers in the private sector.
The Chairman of the Advisory Committee on Business appointments has come under pressure to dilute the “Establishment” make-up of his panel, which comprises four peers, two knights and a dame.
But he defended the composition of his committee, despite accusations the arrangement was too “cosy”.
Lord Lang told MPs he would be prepared to accept a “lay member”, but added that is should be someone “who had experience and proven success in a relatively important profession or trade – somebody who had achieved distinction – rather than a waitress or bus driver.”
The Commons Public Administration Committee, which is looking into the employment of former ministers in big business, did not receive his comments well.
Paul Flynn, a Labour MP who formerly worked as a bus driver, said: “Speaking as a bus driver of long standing who married a waitress, could you explain why neither I nor my wife have any contribution to make to your committee?”
Lord Lang, who was himself a trade secretary and now has sizeable business interests, said a committee made up of people who “knew nothing at all about the issues involved” would make the wrong decisions.
See the full story by Nick Collins here.
Peter Reynolds 