California Bill to Require Cannabis Warnings About Mental Disorder Risks Advances

[ad_1]

Should cannabis products in California come with warnings about rare, adverse reactions for people living with schizophrenia and other mental illnesses, or does it fuel false or exaggerated beliefs about cannabis?

Senate Bill 1097, the Cannabis Right to Know Act, was introduced February 16 by Sen. Richard Pan, and is sponsored by the Public Health Institute, a nonprofit. On June 21, it was amended in the Committee on Business and Professions, as support for the bill gained steam.

Some researchers say people must already have a predisposition for a mental disorder like schizophrenia for these types of negative reactions to occur, while others disagree. Others say certain types of products shouldn’t be a big concern.

“Cal NORML agrees that consumers should be educated about the risks of psychotic reactions, especially in connection with high-THC concentrates and dabs,” Dale Gieringer told High Times. “Cyclical vomiting syndrome is another concern. We doubt whether label warnings are a useful way of informing them, though. Consumers are already jaded by the proliferation of inane Prop. 65 warnings.”

Gieringer has been the state coordinator of California’s NORML branch since 1987, before adult-use regulations took effect, ramping up safety efforts. Requiring warnings like this on products like topicals and CBD products isn’t the solution, he says.

He continued, “We don’t think SB 1097 is the right answer. It doesn’t make sense to be posting these warnings on harmless products like topicals or high-CBD varieties. Consumers weren’t consulted by the authors of SB 1097. We think more research is needed to determine the best way of informing consumers about the risks of THC over-consumption.”

On June 30, the Kaiser Health News profiled an instance of a teen who had an adverse reaction to pot, and it was later revealed that he was diagnosed with schizophrenia. Liz Kirkaldie’s grandson didn’t have a good experience with cannabis, but he suffered from schizophrenia. The pot appeared to enhance delusions like hearing voices. “They were going to kill him and there were people coming to eat his brain. Weird, weird stuff,” Kirkaldie said. “I woke up one morning, and no Kory anywhere. Well, it turns out, he’d been running down Villa Lane here totally naked.”

“The drug use activated the psychosis, is what I really think,” she said.

Seek and ye shall find, and there are plenty of peer-reviewed studies that show the negative outcomes from cannabis use. According to a study published in The Lancet Psychiatry on March 19, 2019, the focus is on high-potency pot, and the risk is over four times greater for people who use high-potency pot daily than for those who have never smoked. But often these risks are blown out of proportion.

Fearmongers have banked on studies like these, such as Alex Berenson, author of Tell Your Children: The Truth About Marijuana, Mental Illness, and Violence—who was permanently banned from Twitter for you guessed it, the spread of misinformation. The way arguments are presented makes it seem as though schizophrenia is common.

Other researchers say drugs, nicotine, and other factors that aren’t pot muddy up the results in studies searching for a real correlation between pot and schizophrenia, nor other mental disorders.

A 2014 study, led by Ashley C. Proal and Dr. Lynn E. DeLisi of Harvard Medical School recruited pot smokers with and without a family history of schizophrenia, as well as non-smokers with and without such a history. But this time, the pot users did not use any other drugs, so they could rule out those factors. What they actually found was a heightened schizophrenia risk among people with a family history—regardless of cannabis use.

“My study clearly shows that cannabis does not cause schizophrenia by itself,” Dr. DeLisi told the New York Times in 2019. “Rather, a genetic predisposition is necessary. It is highly likely, based on the results of this study and others, that cannabis use during adolescence through to age 25, when the brain is maturing and at its peak of growth in a genetically vulnerable individual, can initiate the onset of schizophrenia.”

Other experts backed up Dr. DeLisi’s guess that schizophrenia warnings could be a bit inflated. “Usually it is the research types who are doing ‘the sky is falling’ bit, but here it is switched,” said Dr. Jay Geidd, a professor of psychiatry at the University of California, San Diego. “The researchers are wary of overselling the dangers, as was clearly done in the past. However, clinicians overwhelmingly endorse seeing many more adolescents with ‘paranoia’”

SB 1097 now heads to an appropriations committee, sent on June 22, for another reading.

[ad_2]

Source link

The CBD Sox? Charlotte’s Web Gems? – Major League Baseball Now Allows CBD Company Sponsorships

The CBD Sox? Charlotte’s Web Gems? – Major League Baseball Now Allows CBD Company Sponsorships

[ad_1]

In a huge move, Major League Baseball just announced that their teams can now freely sell CBD sponsorships. A report by Terry Lefton of Sports Business Journal discussed that during a recent conference call, CBD has now been made into an “approved category” provided that they have been vetted by a testing organization and do not contain psychoactive amounts of THC. However, other leagues around the country are still not open to CBD sponsorships due to the stigma surrounding THC, though MLB was wise to see the potential of getting a share in the massively-growing CBD market.

[ad_2]

Source link

New Washington, D.C. Policy Lets Adults ‘Self-Certify’ for Medical Cannabis

[ad_1]

City lawmakers in Washington, D.C. adopted an emergency ordinance on Tuesday designed to ease access to the medical cannabis program in the nation’s capital by allowing all adults to “self-certify” their eligibility to use medicinal pot. Under the proposal, adults 21 and older would no longer be required to submit a recommendation to use medicinal pot from a health care provider when they apply for a medical cannabis identification card.

Supporters of the measure maintain that the bill will make it simpler for patients to gain access to medical cannabis, particularly for those who have difficulty seeing a doctor. Out of thousands of physicians practicing medicine in Washington, D.C., only 620 are registered to issue medical pot recommendations. In January, the city council passed a similar measure that allowed adults 65 and older to self-certify for medical cannabis card eligibility, but that ordinance expired on May 1.

“This self-certification is urgently needed for consumers and dispensaries alike,” said Councilmember Janeese Lewis George, as quoted by the DCist. “Expanding our patient base is a necessary first step to putting them on an equal playing field.”

Washington, D.C. Dispensaries Face Competition From Illicit Businesses

The emergency ordinance passed on Tuesday was introduced by Councilmembers Kenyan McDuffie and Mary Cheh. Proponents of the bill also hope that it will help regulated medical dispensaries compete with the illicit cannabis economy.

“Due to the lower barriers to access in the gray market, a significant number of medical marijuana patients have shifted from purchasing their medical marijuana from legal medical dispensaries to the illicit gray market, creating a significant risk to the long-term viability of the District’s legal medical marijuana industry,” McDuffie and Cheh said in a statement accompanying the emergency bill. “If this trend continues, it is possible that gray market sales could wipe out the District’s legal marijuana dispensaries.

Cheh and McDuffie went on to state that given the “benefits that regulated and safe legal dispensaries provide to medical marijuana users in the District, it is vital that the industry survive until the District can stand up a regulated recreational market and transition toward full regulation of recreational marijuana products.”

The council members noted that Washington, D.C.’s permitted medical marijuana dispensaries face stiff competition from the city’s gray market for cannabis, which takes advantage of recreational cannabis decriminalization loopholes to operate with virtual impunity. One popular scheme features businesses who sell cheap merchandise at hyper-inflated prices and include what is ostensibly a gift of cannabis with the purchase.

“Savvy business owners have pushed the legal limits on the gifting industry,” McDuffie said ahead of the vote. “I’ve had medical dispensaries that have reached out to me and my staff and say that if we don’t pass this measure, it could put their businesses into jeopardy.”

Although possession of cannabis has been legalized since the passage of a 2014 ballot measure, the federal government has blocked implementation of the law that would allow for the opening of recreational pot retailers. At Tuesday’s meeting, Council Chairman Phil Mendelson said that he would still like to see additional legislation that targets Washington D.C.’s cannabis gifting shops, noting that the business will be vital infrastructure for a potential legalized adult-use cannabis market.

“It’s not an equal playing field and will never be as long as there are illegal cannabis gifting shops,” he said. “As long as there are these businesses, the legal industry won’t be there to step in [when legalization happens].”

The city council passed the ordinance by a unanimous vote at its meeting on Tuesday. The bill is now headed to the office of Mayor Muriel Bowser for her consideration. In a letter sent to the council on Tuesday, Bowser said that she is in favor of the legislation, according to media reports.

[ad_2]

Source link

Camping with weed? 4 things you need to know

Camping with weed? 4 things you need to know

[ad_1]

Is it legal to consume cannabis while camping in Canada?

  • Parks Canada permits cannabis on private sites but not in common areas.
  • Ontario, British Columbia, and Alberta campsites are mostly weed-friendly.
  • Keep quantities under 30 grams (unless you have a medical exemption).
  • Smoking in the wrong areas can come with hefty fines.

For Canadians, dusting off the boxes of gear labelled “camping” and packing them into the car for a weekend in the woods is a rite of passage. Especially come summertime;  nature is calling us to take full advantage of the sunshine and warm-ish lakes in these fleeting, warm-weather months.

Driving out of the city and immersing yourself in natural beauty provides instant stress relief, but sometimes you want a little extra support from that old friend. Though weed is legal nationwide, there are still some places (and people) that frown upon taking a hit and even getting a whiff of pot in public.

Baby steps, right?

“Each province has its own set of guidelines to follow when it comes to cannabis consumption in Canadian Parks,” explains Owen Allerton, co-owner of Highland Cannabis, a Kitchener, Ontario-based retailer.

“Generally speaking, cannabis use is acceptable in most front-country individual campsites and trails across Canada, but regulations vary from province to province.”

explains Allerton

Here are four things you should know about camping with cannabis in Canada this summer:

You can smoke cannabis on most Parks Canada campsites, but not in communal areas

Smoking or using weed on a campsite that you’ve booked through Parks Canada is completely legal. Blaze it! This is because Parks Canada considers these registered sites private spaces; you can think of the designated area as your own backyard as you roll up or pack a bowl. 

However, shared spaces on Parks Canada land, like washrooms, kitchen shelters, parking areas and roadways, national historic sites, and playgrounds, are cannabis no-go zones. 

Additionally, a certain number of Parks Canada campgrounds abide by their own sets of rules and can choose whether or not to permit 4/20-friendly activities, even on registered sites.

It’s sort of the same way that some grounds will ban alcohol at various times of the year “in an effort to ensure that all visitors enjoy their stay,” a Parks member told CBC.

Ontario, BC, and Alberta have the most weed-friendly campgrounds

Legally camping with cannabis in Canada is one of the perks of legalization. (roxxyphotos/Adobe Stock)

It shouldn’t come as a surprise that Ontario, British Columbia, and Alberta are top of the list of the most weed-friendly camping locations in the nation. All three provinces have an abundance of retail stores and stunning campgrounds.

In fact, two-thirds of campgrounds in Alberta, British Columbia and Ontario have embraced pot, according to Highland Cannabis’ research, and these three provinces have relatively relaxed rules when it comes to where you can get high and use weed when camping and hiking.

Related

Gratuitous or Genius? Penis cannabis gummies hit dispensaries in Canada

In Ontario, you can consume cannabis in Parks Canada public areas like day-use swimming holes and backcountry trails, in addition to registered campsites. But consumption in public parks across Ontario isn’t allowed in common areas (washrooms, for example) or within 20 metres of a playground.

British Columbia and Alberta follow similar parameters. Day-use areas, registered campsites, trails and backcountry all get the green light to light up, but keep an eye out for fire ratings before you go in these parts. BC has experienced its fair share of devastating wildfires and you don’t want to be that jerk who causes a fire by carelessly tossing a butt into the woods.

Quebec and the Prairies have the least weed-friendly camping options

Quebec’s view on weed, much like the Prairies, “is a little strained,” says Allerton. “Although cannabis is legal across the country, it’s only legal in Quebec if you buy it through the Société Québécoise du Cannabis (SQDC).”

Given these strict laws, it makes sense that the rules around using cannabis while camping in Quebec are also tough.

Related

Meet the six best pre-ground cannabis products in Canada

The only place you can smoke cannabis in Quebec is at certain Parks Canada campgrounds while on your registered campsite; you cannot smoke in any outdoor public space (campground or otherwise).

Fines for cannabis smoking infractions are steep, ranging from $750 to $2,250 if caught breaking the rules.

You can legally carry 30 grams of dried weed (or the equivalent) on you at one time

When stocking up on booze for a camping weekend, you can grab as much beer or wine as you want. With cannabis, limits work differently. In Canada, adults can have up to “30 grams of legal cannabis, dried or equivalent in non-dried form in public,” according to the Cannabis Act.

The “equivalent” is varied and based on the consumption method. For example, one gram of dried cannabis is equal to 15 grams of edibles, which means you can legally carry 450 grams of your favourite gummies. Concentrates, on the other hand, are equal to 0.25 grams of dried product, so you can have 7.5 grams of solid or liquid concentrated on you at one time.

Still, it’s important to note that private campgrounds and different municipalities have varying rules on how much you can carry and where it can be used. Do your research into the specific community and facilities before you go in order to avoid any confrontations.

Lisa Felepchuk's Bio Image

Lisa Felepchuk

Lisa Felepchuk is a seasoned lifestyle editor, writer and digital nomad based in beautiful Vancouver, British Columbia.

View Lisa Felepchuk’s articles

[ad_2]

Source link

It’s Local, It’s Legal, and It’s Extortion

It’s Local, It’s Legal, and It’s Extortion

[ad_1]

massachusetts impact fees

Massachusetts cannabis companies have paid $50M-plus in community fees since 2018

 

Cannabis businesses based in Massachusetts towns and cities have paid more than $53 million in “impact” fees since recreational cannabis sales kicked off in the state. This is the conclusion reached by a survey carried out by Northeastern University researchers on 88 communities.

 

The survey was published by the Massachusetts Cannabis Business Association as lawmakers debate on a final bill that would compel these towns and cities to justify their actions. An action many critics call a government shakedown.

 

One of the sponsors of the legislation, state Senator Sonia Chang-Díaz affirmed that the report further proves how unequal and arbitrary the local process of approval had become. She added that she’s looking forward to a time when the cannabis marketplace meets our expectations, aspirations, and values.

 

Presently, Massachusetts state law enables communities to charge a 3% tax on cannabis sales. Communities also get to charge impact fees to a max of 3% of a firm’s yearly revenue given the fee is ‘reasonably related’ facility imposed cost. However, given the absence of state supervision, a lot of these communities charge cannabis business to the maximum percentage without quoting specific impacts.

 

Meanwhile, local officials have argued that the fees were arranged in good faith. They said the fees have gone a long way in curbing the cost of setting up cannabis regulations, managing heightened traffic, and reviewing license applications.

 

Nonetheless, the Northeastern report has brought forward new questions relating to the practice, which entrepreneurs and advocates have long criticized as a form of bribery. They believe the funds are being channeled to unrelated state projects while locking our small cannabis businesses that can’t afford to pay the fees.

 

Out of the 88 communities that claimed to have changed the impact fees as inclusive of the agreements made with the cannabis business, only 47 communities provided a public record of fees collected. This means that the $53.3 million is way less than the actual amount collected by these towns and cities.

 

The Exception: Brookline

Fall River, a city whose ex-mayor is currently serving a 6-year jail time in federal prison for receiving bribes from applicants for cannabis licenses earned $5.33 million in impact fees, more than any other city that took the survey. Although Fall River did not disclose how the money was spent.

 

Brookline, the home of NETA, one of the most successful dispensaries in the country, is the second city on the list has and received $4.9 million in fees. The total fee amounts to hundreds of thousands of dollars cannabis businesses have remitted to enforcement officials working compulsory town security details at cannabis dispensaries.

 

The city’s director of administrative services, Devon Fields, admitted that the inception of cannabis stores has led to considerable administrative costs and headaches in the neighborhood. Fields claimed the neighborhood has been impacted by various disorderly conducts including neighborhood trashing, parking, traffic, and various endowment issues. She believes the impact fees are justified and it would be a shame if the cash inflow is halted.

 

Different from other cities, Brookline diverted the funds into a separate account overseen by a community board that publishes a comprehensive account of all expenditures when due. Fields believe the town has judiciously managed the funds which have been used to kick start initiatives for racial justice and employ counselors for substance abuse cases. He also noted that the funds have helped Brooklyn push local cannabis retailers to also prioritize diversity in hiring.

 

Brookline has maintained a transparent process that everyone can see. Fields added that more oversight would be appreciated but the city does not want to be in a situation similar to Fall River. Brookline was quick to accept that legalization of legal cannabis was bound to happen, which gave the city the edge, time, and resources to make everything work.

 

Current Stance of The Massachusetts Municipal Association

As a representative of the local government, the Massachusetts Municipal Association is lobbying against the planned ban on impact fees. The association argued that the impact fees are fair and are a practical incentive for towns and cities to host cannabis facilities.

 

The executive director of the Massachusetts Municipal Association, Geoff Beckwith, affirmed in a statement that the cannabis industry is publishing another report that cares for the financial interest of its members. He believes this is an attempt to discredit agreements between host communities that had been fairly negotiated in the interest of the public.

 

Geoff believes that towns and cities should retain the power to make decisions on behalf of taxpayers and residents as regards agreements with the marijuana industry.

 

In the course of the survey only 42 cities made available their spending records to the researchers as proof of revenue disbursement. Among these cities, half claimed that the money is diverted to their general funds which are then spent on various budget items and local initiatives. This is regardless of if they were connected to the effects of growing facilities and cannabis stores. 

 

For instance, Wareham used a larger percentage of its $1.7 million impact fees to fund the latest police headquarters, while Maynard used a percentage of its $137,000 impacts fee for the construction of four park benches. Other communities claim the fees were used to fund various things like police cruisers, fire equipment, rides are programs, storm drains, and so on. 

 

However, according to Jeffrey Moyer, a professor of public policy at Northeastern University, while few of these claims are true, most of these cities are not transparent about their spending habits. The resident of the cannabis business association, David O’Brien, affirmed that many of these cities are using these impact fees mud funds with little transparency and zero accountability.

 

Just a few towns like Lee and Northampton have stopped receiving impact fees claiming cannabis businesses have been good to their neighborhood and exact several measurable costs. Meanwhile, other cities have doubled down. For instance, Haverhill is challenging a lawsuit issued by a local cannabis store disputing the impact fees.

 

 

Conclusion

As it stands, cannabis businesses are willing to cover the real impact costs they may inflict on communities. However, what’s objectionable is the compulsion to pay a flat rate fee that isn’t compelled on non-cannabis businesses with identical impacts. While there’s certainly the need for local control in towns and cities, the impact fee seems too ambiguous for comfort. It is basically legalized bribery.

 

READ MORE ON SHADY LICENSING IN CANNABIS…

CANNABIS BRIBES IN MASSACHUSETTS

THE BOSTON GLOBE LOOKS AT CANNABIS BRIBERY IN MASSACHUETTS!

[ad_2]

Source link

Wee-Delivery Chatbox
!

Wee-Delivery Assistant

How can I help you?

Hi there! 👋 Welcome to Wee-Delivery. How can I assist you today?
Call us: 888-422-9658
Hours: Mon-Fri 9am-1pm, closed 2pm-6pm, then open until 11pm. Saturday 9am-11pm, Sunday by appointment.
Delivery minimum
Are you open now?
Service areas
Verification process
Payment methods
After hours
How to order
Call 888-422-9658