Weed

Marijuana firms form investment network for pot-related startups: Shortly thereafter, federal agents launched ...

#marijuana news: Marijuana firms form investment network for pot-related startups - Salt Lake Tribune

QCA Opinions Mixed on Legalizing Medical Marijuana: It's only a signature away. In Illinois, a bill to make ma...

Regular marijuana use is associated with favorable indices related to diabetic control, say investigators. They found that current marijuana users had significantly lower fasting insulin and were less likely to be insulin resistant, even after excluding patients with a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus. Their findings are reported in the current issue of The American Journal of Medicine. Marijuana (Cannabis sativa) has been used for centuries to relieve pain, improve mood, and increase appetite. Outlawed in the United States in 1937, its social use continues to increase and public opinion is swinging in favor of the medicinal use of marijuana. There are an estimated 17.4 million current users of marijuana in the United States. Approximately 4.6 million of these users smoke marijuana daily or almost daily. A synthetic form of its active ingredient, tetrahydrocannabinol, commonly known as THC, has already been approved to treat side-effects of chemotherapy, AIDS-induced anorexia, nausea, and other medical conditions. With the recent legalization of recreational marijuana in two states and the legalization of medical marijuana in 19 states and the District of Columbia, physicians will increasingly encounter marijuana use among their patient populations. A multicenter research team analyzed data obtained during the National Health and Nutrition Survey (NHANES) between 2005 and 2010. They studied data from 4,657 patients who completed a drug use questionnaire. Of these, 579 were current marijuana users, 1,975 had used marijuana in the past but were not current users, and 2,103 had never inhaled or ingested marijuana. Fasting insulin and glucose were measured via blood samples following a nine hour fast, and homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) was calculated to evaluate insulin resistance. Participants who reported using marijuana in the past month had lower levels of fasting insulin and HOMA-IR and higher levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C). These associations were weaker among those who reported using marijuana at least once, but not in the past thirty days, suggesting that the impact of marijuana use on insulin and insulin resistance exists during periods of recent use. Current users had 16% lower fasting insulin levels than participants who reported never having used marijuana in their lifetimes. Large waist circumference is linked to diabetes risk. In the current study there were also significant associations between marijuana use and smaller waist circumferences. "Previous epidemiologic studies have found lower prevalence rates of obesity and diabetes mellitus in marijuana users compared to people who have never used marijuana, suggesting a relationship between cannabinoids and peripheral metabolic processes, but ours is the first study to investigate the relationship between marijuana use and fasting insulin, glucose, and insulin resistance," says lead investigator Murray A. Mittleman, MD, DrPH, of the Cardiovascular Epidemiology Research Unit at the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston. "It is possible that the inverse association in fasting insulin levels and insulin resistance seen among current marijuana users could be in part due to changes in usage patterns among those with a diagnosis of diabetes (i.e., those with diabetes may have been told to cease smoking). However, after we excluded those subjects with a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus, the associations between marijuana use and insulin levels, HOMA-IR, waist circumference, and HDL-C were similar and remained statistically significant," states Elizabeth Penner, MD, MPH, an author of the study. Although people who smoke marijuana have higher average caloric intake levels than non-users, marijuana use has been associated with lower body-mass index (BMI) in two previous surveys. "The mechanisms underlying this paradox have not been determined and the impact of regular marijuana use on insulin resista

The NYPD has seemingly made good on their promise to cut back on meaningless low-level marijuana possession?arrests for weed possession are on track to fall by 20% in 2013, and police say that overall enforcement of marijuana laws are taking a back seat to drugs that can actually kill you. Nevertheless, medical marijuana reform and other such measures keep hitting potholes in Albany. State Senator Liz Krueger is pushing ahead for something even bigger: ?It is my intention as a New York State senator to soon introduce a law that would actually decriminalize, regulate and tax marijuana in New York,? she told a crowd this week on the Upper East Side. According to CapitalNY, Krueger unveiled a draft of her bill, "Marijuana, Regulation, and Taxation Act.? Under it, NY adults would be allowed ot grow up to six pot plants at home; they could buy and sell weed just like alcohol; weed sales would be regulated by the New York State Liquor Authority; drivers wouldn't be allowed to operate vehicles under the influence; and pot would be taxed heavily, around $50 an ounce. Most of the proceeds from the sales (80%) would go to the state?the rest would go toward substance abuse, criminal re-entry and job training programs. Krueger, who noted she hasn't smoked pot since the 1970s, had a very sympathetic audience?but even with Gov. Andrew Cuomo supporting decriminilizing small amounts of marijuana, it'll be an uphill battle to get this bill the support it needs. "In the same way that Harvey Milk felt strongly that if you want rights then you have to stand up and say that you want your rights, and that you?re gay and you want your rights, and I think it?s the same way with pot smokers," said panelist Julie Holland, a psychiatrist who wrote The Pot Book. "I think that people have to stand up and say...'I?m a C.P.A. and I pay my taxes and I vote and I?m a pot smoker." News Hawk- Truth Seeker 420 MAGAZINE ? Source: gothamist.com Author: Ben Yakas Contact: Contact: Gothamist Website: State Senator Pushing Bill To Legalize And Tax Marijuana In NY: Gothamist

Massachusetts recently became one of a number of states to legalize the use of marijuana for medical purposes. Regulations issued by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health are effective on May 24, 2013, enabling individuals to register to use medical marijuana. Massachusetts employers should consider this new law in administering their personnel policies with respect to applicants and employees registered to use medical marijuana. Massachusetts Medical Marijuana Act In November of 2012, Massachusetts voters approved a ballot question which allows qualifying patients with certain medical conditions to obtain and use medical marijuana. The medical marijuana law, titled The Massachusetts Act for the Humanitarian Medical Use of Marijuana (the ?Medical Marijuana Act?) became effective on January 1, 2013. The law eliminates state criminal and civil penalties for the medical use of marijuana by qualifying patients who have been diagnosed with a debilitating medical condition. The Massachusetts Department of Public Health (?DPH?) has issued regulations setting forth procedures with respect to the registration of certifying physicians, as well as the registration of qualifying patients and marijuana dispensaries. Under the regulations, a process is established for individuals to obtain a registration card, which is an identification card issued by the DPH used to verify that the individual has received written certification from a physician, and is exempt from state criminal and civil penalties relating to the use of marijuana. Pre-Employment Drug Testing for Applicants The Massachusetts Medical Marijuana Act should not prevent employers from continuing to enforce preemployment drug screening policies that screen for the use of drugs, including marijuana, although policies should be reviewed to ensure proper notice to applicants. The Massachusetts Act does not directly address pre-employment drug testing, but judicial precedent from other jurisdictions is instructive. For example, in Roe v. Tele Tech Customer Care Management, the Washington Supreme Court analyzed this question under Washington State?s medical marijuana law. In Roe, the company made a job offer to an applicant contingent on a drug test. The plaintiff tested positive for marijuana and was terminated from training and denied further employment. The employee sued claiming wrongful termination, and violation of the public policy allowing medical marijuana use. The Washington State Supreme Court held that while the Washington Medical Marijuana Act provides an affirmative defense to medical marijuana users against criminal or civil prosecution under state law, it does not contain a private cause of action for employees or applicants against their employer. Similarly, the Massachusetts Medical Marijuana Act provides no such private cause of action. Drug Testing for Current Employees Similar to the outcome with respect to pre-employment drug testing, courts that have faced the issue of whether an employer may terminate a current employee who tests positive for marijuana have upheld the employer?s right to do so. A federal law, the Controlled Substances Act (the ?CSA?) makes it unlawful to manufacture, distribute, dispense or possess any controlled substance except in a manner authorized by the CSA. The CSA categorizes marijuana as Schedule I drug, which is defined to include substances that have ?a high potential for abuse.? Relying, in part, on federal preemption, state supreme courts in California, Oregon and Montana have rejected claims from employees seeking protection from adverse employment actions based on the use or possession of marijuana under applicable state medical marijuana laws. Accommodation Obligations The Americans with Disabilities Act (the ?ADA?) and Massachusetts state disability law require that employers provide reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with a disability. Do Massachusetts employers now have an o

In a test of public support for medical marijuana, Los Angeles voters will have three different options Tuesday to regulate pot dispensaries, including proposals that limit their numbers and impose new taxes on their sales. Or they can vote against all three, sending a signal that - depending on whom you ask - either means they don't want any dispensaries at all, or, alternately that they want lots of them without limits or caps. Supporters of medical marijuana see the vote as critical not just to the future of the dispensaries in Los Angeles, but also in the rest of California, now that the state Supreme Court has ruled local jurisdictions can prohibit the facilities. Kris Hermes, spokesman for the pro-marijuana Americans for Safe Access, said voting to regulate dispensaries will help their future in Los Angeles. "Regulations would not only help benefit and bring greater safety to the people of Los Angeles, but deliver much-needed revenue to the city," Hermes said. "Patients have been waiting several years for dispensary regulations in Los Angeles. It is truly an idea whose time has come." While there are three marijuana measures on the ballot - Proposition D, Ordinance E and Ordinance F - there are only two active campaigns now, as the main supporters of E decided to throw their backing behind D. Prop. D would cap the number of dispensaries at 135, the ones that were open and registered with the city before a moratorium was created in 2007. It would impose a 6 percent tax on sales of marijuana. The current rate is 5 percent. D was crafted by the City Council to allow a finite number of dispensaries after its effort to have an outright ban on the clinics was challenged with an initiative. Ordinance F has no cap and is backed by clinics that would be excluded under D. It also requires testing of the marijuana dispensed at the facilities, background checks on employees and auditing of their operations. It also places a tax of 6 percent on marijuana sold. Ordinance E caps the number at 135, but has no tax increase and fewer other restrictions. Voters have a fourth option, Councilman Bernard Parks said. They can reject all three proposals and allow the City Council to decide the issue. But some supporters of medical marijuana think that, rather than allow them to operate unchecked, it would spell bad news for their future. "If all the measures are defeated, it will be viewed, I think, as giving the City Council a free hand to do what they have shown they already want to do - just ban all dispensaries outright," said political consultant Garry South, who is handling the F campaign. South also argued that passage of Proposition D, with its strict requirements and cap, would lead to a "slow death" for medical marijuana clinics. "Individual council members will be able to close down all the dispensaries in their district," South said. But Kerry Townsend Jacob, spokeswoman for D, argued that the measure would best stand up to future attempts to modify rules on dispensaries. "While we don't think the City Council will try to have an outright ban again, if Proposition D passes, the council would need to repeal the measure and that would require another vote of the people," Jacob said. News Hawk- Truth Seeker 420 MAGAZINE ? Source: dailynews.com Author: Rick Orlov Contact: Contact Us - LA Daily News Website: 3 competing medical marijuana measures on Tuesday ballot - LA Daily News

It doesn't seem to matter if you ask a man or a woman. Someone young or old. The issue of legalizing medical marijuana for any purpose seems to push a lot of buttons. The only thing that stands in the way of it becoming legal in Illinois is the signature of Governor Pat Quinn. This after the state House and Senate both approved it. The current version of the bill would allow doctors to prescribe 2.5 oz. of marijuana to a patient every two weeks. The drugs would only be available from state licensed dispensaries - getting their supplies from state licensed growers. But how the sales are controlled isn't the issue for many. It's simply an issue of right versus wrong. "I don't believe it's necessary," says Sue Murrow. "I believe there is enough money out there that goes into medical research that should be able to find the things the marijuana does." But now people in Illinois may be getting access to it. But only if a doctor prescribes it. And that's only for certain conditions- like chronic pain and cancer, among others. There is no timeline for when Governor Quinn will make his final decision. News Hawk- Truth Seeker 420 MAGAZINE ? Source: kwqc.com Author: Taylor Umland Contact: KWQC General Information-Contact Us - KWQC-TV6 News and Weather For The Quad Cities - Website: Medical Marijuana.. A Splitting Issue - KWQC-TV6 News and Weather For The Quad Cities -

Two-year-old Vivian Wilson sleeps with a heart and oxygen monitor attached to her toe. When she wakes up, the toddler must wear an eye patch and be kept from direct sunlight. An overnight bag, oxygen tanks and other medical equipment are stacked behind the sofa. Vivian is diagnosed with a rare and severe form of epilepsy known as Dravet syndrome. These are a few of the ways her parents relentlessly manage everything that comes into contact with their youngest daughter, who suffered her first seizure when she was 2 months old. None of it is enough. Medications help, as does a high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet ? every meal weighed to a 10th of a gram. But only so much. Vivian?s parents, Brian and Meghan Wilson, enrolled her in New Jersey?s medicinal marijuana program in desperation, hoping that a strain of pot that has stopped most seizures in a small but growing number of children in Colorado and California could help her. But before her registration card arrived in February, the couple said they figured out the state?s restrictive law and medical community?s unwillingness to participate in the program is preventing any minor from getting help. Meghan Wilson said she has been writing to and calling lawmakers to explain her daughter?s condition and to ask them to relax some of the medical marijuana program restrictions for the few children who may need it. ?All you need to do is see Vivian have one seizure and you are open to anything,? she said. ?The state says the (medical marijuana) program is active, but it?s really not,? she said, noting only about 130 of 900 registered patients have been called in to buy marijuana from the one operating dispensary because supply is scarce. ?When someone with cancer can?t even get what the state has said they need, then Vivian is probably five years away from getting what she needs.? ?I am not going to stop fighting for her,? she added. I?m fighting so she can have a childhood.? The law requires three physicians ? a pediatrician, a prescribing physician and a psychiatrist ? to recommend a child for the program. The Wilsons are still looking for a psychiatrist. A Rutherford doctor who said he has recommended three children to the program said state health officials have asked him to hold off on making any new recommendations until other willing specialists can be found. ?I am actively looking,? said Anthony Anzalone, who says his practice has helped enroll 90 patients. Health Commissioner Mary O?Dowd?s spokeswoman Donna Leusner declined to comment. If the Wilsons clear that hurdle, they?ll have to overcome other legal restrictions on what growers may produce. They want to find a grower willing to cultivate and produce in edible form a strain of marijuana low in psychoactive properties, or what gives patients that high feeling, and high in cannabinoids, another class of chemical compounds. Dravet patients out West are having success with ?Charlotte?s Web,? a strain named after the first child who tried it. The dilemma is, aside from lozenges, state law prohibits the sale of edible pot products. And with New Jersey growers limited to producing three strains, devoting one that only a small number of patients may want may not be a good business decision, Meghan Wilson said. When the Wilsons tried to enlist the help from some physicians in the past, one reacted with disgust. Another dismissed their request immediately, citing the American Academy of Pediatrics? position against medical marijuana. ?People just don?t like to hear about marijuana and kids,? said Brian Wilson, 39, a technical consultant to a software company. ?It kills me when people say, ?Oh, we don?t know the side effects and it kills brain cells.? Well, she?s already killed brain cells on these (prescription) drugs. The seizures have killed brain cells.? The Wilsons are banking on a long-shot, untested remedy outside the scope of accepted medicine. Vivian?s neurologist, a

Just two days before voters decide the fate of medical marijuana dispensaries in Los Angeles, some San Pedro merchants are becoming frustrated with a recent proliferation of the shops in and around their historic downtown district. The surge is among the ripple effects of Proposition 215, the 1996 state measure that legalized marijuana for medical use. Subsequent efforts to regulate the industry by local governments throughout the state have largely resulted in chaos. And Los Angeles is no exception. For those who have been working to put San Pedro on upscale tourism maps, the rapid growth of clinics in the port town has been particularly frustrating. "What they bring in is a lot of loitering, people smoking pot outside on the steps," said Michael Koth, co-owner of Off the Vine, a boutique wine shop that shares a building with one of the collectives. "And we see this all the time - one person will go into the clinic, purchase the product, then pass it out to people on the street, so there's drug dealing going on." Virtually unregulated, the businesses have posed an ongoing dilemma statewide. It is believed that large numbers of the clients are recreational users, although a medical card is required to make purchases. "We have no regulation right now," said Dennis Gleason, an aide to Los Angeles City Councilman Joe Buscaino. Buscaino believes there should be no storefront pot dispensaries, but that the drug rather should be handled through licensed pharmacies. But for now, that's not possible because federal law still lists marijuana as a dangerous and illegal drug. Today, 18 states have approved marijuana for medical use. Caught in a series of back-and-forth court cases, local jurisdictions have been waiting to see how questions about regulations played out, Gleason said. Less than two weeks ago, the state Supreme Court ruled that cities have the right to ban medical marijuana dispensaries. The growing presence of pot dispensaries in downtown San Pedro - several new ones have opened in recent months - has caused concern among those who have been hoping to boost the town's image. "We don't need this in the historic downtown district," said Eric Eisenberg, president of the business improvement district and an owner of commercial property in the area. "I'm not against the use of marijuana ... but I think (the shops) have a negative effect in a community like ours. "Every day I get calls from prospective (marijuana collective) tenants who are willing to pay two to three times to rent, but I say 'no' to them." Koth also supports the availability of medical marijuana - he voted for Proposition 215 - but said the facilities need more oversight. They also can be magnets for crime as they trade in cash. Three marijuana initiatives on Tuesday's Los Angeles city ballot could produce partial fixes. Two of them - D and E - would roll back the number of collectives to just the 135 that existed in 2007, making city regulations more manageable. Currently, hundreds of collectives operate throughout the city, with many clustered in particular parts of town - 12 are in the general vicinity of San Pedro's shopping district. An estimated half a dozen marijuana shops operate in neighboring Wilmington - "too many," as one business leader put it. Measure F would allow the shops that have opened since 2007 to remain open, which critics say poses a challenge to regulation and oversight. Measures D and F both propose restrictions on how close the facilities can be to schools, churches, parks and other public gathering spots. For now, Gleason said, the shops are proliferating "like weeds" across the city, which has little recourse to control or regulate them. The Los Angeles City Council voted to ban the shops in 2012 but later rescinded that action pending the Supreme Court case. "A lot of it comes down to the fact that the original legislation came through a (state) ballot initiative," Gleas