Posts Tagged ‘Cannabis Industry Council’
Rapists and Rappers Are Not Suitable Brands for Prescription Cannabis
Last year, as chair of the Adult-Use sub group of the Cannabis Industry Council, I was literally screamed at to “shut up” when trying to raise the issue in the executive committee. I fully understood that importers of prescription cannabis felt their monopoly of legal cannabis supply was threatened but today I see those same people using the Tyson and ‘Big Narstie’ brands to promote their medical products.
It’s clear that avarice and greed are now driving the provision of prescription cannabis services in the UK. Apart from the crass misuse of inappropriate brands, I see more and more people who claim to be prescribed 60 or 90 grams per month and invited to ‘pick and choose’ from a range of different flower products. The number of patients in the UK who have a legitimate need for such quantity is very small. But don’t take my word for it. Take note of the ‘Good Practice Guide‘ issued by the Medical Cannabis Clinicians Society in July 2024. Predictably, perhaps, the response to this from importers of cannabis products and others was angry and vituperative.
I don’t need to explain the widespread concern at using the name of a convicted rapist for a medical product. As for ‘Big Narstie’, due respect to him as a patient in his own right but I hardly think that ‘grime comedy’ is appropriate for promoting medicine. When we finally get adult-use legalisation in the UK, I’d encourage him to get involved and he’ll probably do well.
I have some sympathy for anything that circumvents the ridiculous law that prohibits cannabis for adults. While some borderline prescribing was acceptable in my judgement, within reasonable limits, it now threatens the legitimacy of the entire prescription cannabis industry. If these greedy, short-sighted fools don’t get themselves in order, the regulators are going to intervene.
The lessons here are for the importers who dominate supply of prescription cannabis. Understandably, they take a much shorter term view than the few who are now introducing UK-based cultivation. I am certain that the domestic supply chain will be much more responsible as they have the future in mind. Clinics which are involved in excessive and ‘recreational-style’ prescribing also need to think about the long term.
I spent 40 years of my life campaigning for legal access to cannabis as medicine and, by accident rather than design, the 2018 regulations provide the most progressive and flexible system for prescribing cannabis anywhere in the world. It would be a terrible thing to lose this through abuse of the system for short term greed.
Medical use of cannabis is entirely legitimate, life-changing for many, life-saving for some. Adult-use of cannabis is also legitimate in principle, if not yet legal in law.
With common sense it’s easy enough to access cannabis for adult-use without putting oneself in great legal peril. The argument for legalisation is about liberty but most importantly about fighting the massive harms of the gangster-dominated criminal market.
Of course, between medical use and adult-use, there is some blurring at the margins but it’s prudent to separate the two and be disciplined about it.
The Houses of Parliament, the London Drugs Commission and Cannabis
Last week I was invited to give evidence to the London Drugs Commission on the effectiveness of the UK’s drugs laws, focusing on cannabis.
Later that same day I attended the Cannabis Industry Council’s event at the Houses of Parliament where we launched our ‘Protect our Patients’ campaign to enable cannabis prescribing by GPs.
All in all, a good day in London, a city I appreciate much more from afar than when I used to live there!
Dear Lord Falconer,
It was a pleasure to meet you and your colleagues on the London Drugs Commission last week. Thank you for the opportunity to give evidence.
I am writing to summarise the key points that I made.
- There have been a number of studies and papers published on the costs/benefits of cannabis legalisation and regulation, including the paper by Chris Snowdon of the IEA who was also in our meeting. The IEA, the Taxpayers’ Alliance, Health Poverty Action, the Adam Smith Institute, the Beckley Foundation with the University of Essex and the LSE have all published well-researched analyses. I endorse them all but none is as comprehensive or uses the variety of sources (many no longer available) as the study that CLEAR Cannabis Law Reform commissioned in 2011 from the Independent Drug Monitoring Unit. Although now 12 years old, it remains as relevant as ever. The price of cannabis has, if anything, reduced while all other costs have increased.
‘Taxing the UK Cannabis Market’, 2011, Atha et al, projects a net annual gain to the UK economy of between £3.4 billion to £9.5 billion based on a £1 per gram cannabis sales tax in addition to VAT. See the attached table which neatly summarises this. I have also attached a full copy of the study.
- Cannabis is not harmless and you won’t find anyone serious who makes this claim. However its health harms are systematically and consistently exaggerated. Peanuts and shellfish cause more health harms. Finished admission episodes to hospital for ‘mental and behavioural problems’ related to cannabinoids are at one-fifth the rate of such admissions for alcohol. What appears to be a massive increase in community-based treatment for young people is confounded because 89% of such treatment is coercive. That is, such ‘treatment’ is imposed by authorities such as educational institutions or the courts as an alternative to suspension/expulsion or harsher sentences. (Sources NHS, DHSC)
The University of York estimates the risk of a diagnosis of psychosis associated with cannabis use for regular users is 1 in 20,000. Comparatively, the National Geographic Society estimates the lifetime risk of being struck by lightning at 1 in 3,000.
However, the more harmful you think cannabis is, the more irrational and irresponsible it is to leave the market unregulated and controlled by criminals.
- Cannabis prohibition creates deep and far reaching fractures in our society which affect everyone. With the value of the market at least three times that of Class A drugs such as heroin and cocaine, it is the principal provider of regular cashflow to organised crime. It drives gangsterism, street dealing, underage use, violence, knife crime, intimidation, exploitation, county lines, human trafficking, contaminated products, societal breakdown and authoritarian policing of people’s private lives.
When government finally takes responsibility for the cannabis market and regulates it, the benefits will transform society, making our streets safer and reducing crime of all sorts. Prohibition of this largely benign and very popular substance has turned the forces of law enforcement against the communities they are supposed to protect. This policy was always destined to fail and persisting with it has caused immense, incalculable harm.
If I can be of further assistance please let me know.
Kind regards,
Peter Reynolds
Peter Reynolds 