Rebane's Ruminations
July 2013
S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  

ARCHIVES


OUR LINKS


YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

George Rebane

[This is the transcript of my regular KVMR commentary broadcast on 5 July 2013.]

For years I straddled the fence on the legalization of drug use, especially seemingly benign versions like marijuana.  Then I finally got off the fence in favor of making the whole catalog of drugs legal since the war on drugs was not being won, and the collateral damage from the conflict took a horrendous toll on lives and freedoms (more here).  I cast my lot with those who counseled legalizing drugs, controlling their distribution at prices that made no one rich, and mopping up the human detritus pretty much as we already do with alcohol and illegal drug use.

The idea is to get the criminal element out of the business, and thereby greatly reduce the layers of well-funded law enforcement agencies that benefitted from the other side of that sorry business.  But that’s easier said than done since both the drug cartels and dealers agree with the feds that narcotics should remain on the wrong side of the law.  Today the promoters of marijuana use have made contentious inroads in several states to legalize both recreational and medicinal use of that dear little weed.  The resulting dust-ups have even reached the local levels such as we are witnessing here in Nevada County where one jurisdiction gives their approval for smoking pot under certain conditions, and another jurisdiction is adamant in saying ‘no way Jose’.

So far the main point of pot proponents has been that smoking it gives rise to no significant health risks and does serve to ease certain aches and pains in addition to soothing the savage breast.  But now reports have appeared in prestigious medical journals like Lancet and the Journal of Psychiatry announcing that “medical research shows a clear link between marijuana and mental illness.”  Well, I didn’t know that.


Moreover, the most apparent causal link is between smoking pot and schizophrenia, a widespread and most pernicious and debilitating form of mental illness that affects several times more people than are afflicted with multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease, and even HIV/AIDS.  We learn that “less than one third of the people with schizophrenia can hold a steady job or live independently”, and that about the same fraction of homeless people suffer from the disease.

The really bad part of the evidence is that this effect is greatest after young people imbibe during their teens and early twenties.  Psychiatry says that all of us are predisposed to live near the edge of the “cliff of sanity”, and some come into the world closer to the cliff than others.  The evidence on marijuana consumption is that it pushes people even more toward the edge.  And those who started out closer to that precipice of insanity often get pushed over.

So this news is taking us into a new area in the legalization debate.  Dr Samuel Wilkinson of Yale’s Department of Psychiatry reports (here) on the connection between marijuana and mental illness.  He advises that we owe it to the mentally ill among us “and to society in general to consider all the facts, risks, and potential benefits before we embark on this drastic social experiment” of legalizing marijuana.  “If the end of Prohibition offers any historical precedence, once marijuana is legalized it will be all but impossible to undo.”

In this context we should consider the already tenuous cognitive state of our under-educated and uninformed electorate and workforce.  I believe that this research should be taken seriously and followed to wherever it might lead.  It should not be dismissed by marijuana proponents in a manner similar to how true believers in man-made global warming today have dismissed the new findings that dispute the long promoted yet scientifically contended views of the International Panel on Climate Change.

As I consider these findings, the response of Lord Keynes comes to mind.  When a reporter pointed out that the famous economist had flipped on a long held thesis.  He said, “When new information conflicts with a previous belief, I change my mind.  What do you do?”

My name is Rebane, and I also expand on this and related themes on NCTV and on georgerebane.com where the transcript of this commentary is posted with relevant links, and where such issues are debated extensively.  However my views are not necessarily shared by KVMR.  Thank you for listening.

Posted in , ,

168 responses to “Mindbending Marijuana”

  1. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Another study here Dr. Rebane.
    http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/07/04/study-longtime-marijuana-smokers-lack-motivation-reward-seeking-behavior/
    While the sample is small and not irrefutable, it brings up something I like, i.e., dopamine. Its what makes you happy and feel good. The quickest way for the brain to produce and release dopamine is laughter.
    This study caught my interest because dopamine produced by the brain (or not produced) is usually a topic concerning heroin addicts and alcoholics. Alcohol is certainly a drug by any chemical definition and criteria. Drug users have been known to spend up all the dopamine in their “bank” and having the brain’s production of dopamine depleted, they seek (crave) an increasing quantity of drugs to make them feel good. Thus the vicious cycle of seeking to feel good when the brain’s ability to produce dopamine has been hindered and more and more drugs are needed to bring them out of their funk and feel ok again. Just to feel ok.
    The only reason I mention this is because I have long suspected that some long term marijuana users would not/could not live without their supply of herb as they have somehow become incapable of feeling average without their “non-addictive marijuana”.
    Yes, pot has no known lethal dosage in the chemical criteria of a drug. Many may scoff at my gut feeling. But having low amounts of dopamine in your system is not living “naturally high.” Its just another substance used to chase that feeling of the first time.
    Not every person having a nice glass of fine wine at a French restaurant will go out and become raging maniacs howling at the moon, painting the town and exhibiting violent tendencies. Not every long term pot smoker dreads the day when their stash runs out. Some can take it or leave it. The dopamine study is more akin to “real” drug users, not the “non addictive types” who smoke pot day after day, year after year. The study mentioned the brain’s diminished ability to produce dopamine is more pronounced when a young person smoked pot in their early to mid teens. Food for thought.

    Like

  2. fish Avatar
    fish

    Explain to me why we care about weed (or the consumption of other drugs as well) at all. If someone smokes themself into catatonia how is that my problem?
    I’m far more concerned about the proprietors opening statement regarding the thuggish police state that has developed in an attempt to “solve” the problem.

    Like

  3. Barry Pruett Avatar

    Thank you George. The more information that I read on this topic the better. Like you, I struggle with this issue a little bit.

    Like

  4. George Rebane Avatar

    What caught my eye in this finding is the potential for mass mental debilitation that such a ‘benign’ drug can cause if the research holds out. For years I have been on a tear about the internal assaults on America that can end our grand experiment in self-governance. Systemic unemployment due to a number of causes is a biggie – poor education and accelerating technology being prime. Bad socio-political ideology being sufficient to do the job all by itself – cultural breakdown and collectivism are the meta-causes.
    If mass psychoses are to be promulgated by legal means, then I think legalizing marijuana should also be discussed on that basis because it affects us all (as do the other factors just listed). To me it’s a complex problem with no easy answer.

    Like

  5. fish Avatar
    fish

    The rate of marijuana use has been fairly steady with most users indulging when young for the purposes of experimentation and growing out of it without significant ill effect. There will always be exceptions.
    Our experiment in self government seems to be winding down for reasons far more pernicious than pot.
    I’m generally in favor of reducing the states police power wherever the opportunity presents itself.

    Like

  6. Todd Juvinall Avatar

    Some of my direct ancestors were Dutch. They used to be a world power. Then they legalized dope and now you never hear much from or about them. Anyone have a Dutch update?

    Like

  7. fish Avatar
    fish

    Some of my direct ancestors were Dutch. They used to be a world power.
    Not all it’s cracked up to be Todd.

    Like

  8. Gerry Fedor Avatar
    Gerry Fedor

    Our Sheriff has lied on numerous occasion trying to tell everyone about how his office has had sooooo many problems and that the MMJ crowd is the basis for his problems, when in reality it not actually true.
    I would like for people to look at the following (below), to use your brain and look at what I presented here, and then let me know what you think, as did our Sheriff, the President of the California Sheriff’s Association lie, and is this the behavior we should accept / expect from him?
    That’s the question I want the answer to:
    Below is the issue I was speaking about, as well as a picture of the subject property that led to the creation of the Nevada Counties overly restrictive Medical Marijuana ordinance.
    Please look at the following CBS video of the grow on that was on Annie Drive in Alta Sierra and the actual site photo of this property (which is attached) (the approximate address is @16036 Annie Drive, Alta Sierra, CA. This picture is attached and below PG&E high tension lines on the hillside, which are faintly shown in this picture – in case you want to use Google Earth for a historic perspective of the layout of this site):
    http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2011/09/26/pot-grow-near-grass-valley-school-concerns-neighbors/
    http://cbssacramento.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/grow.jpg?w=420
    http://cbssacramento.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/grow2.jpg?w=420
    If you look at the pictures in this news report (as provided by the Nevada County Sheriff’s Department, Sheriff Keith Royal) that were used in this story. You’ll see these pictures they show a large un-cloaked greenhouses on flat land, while this site is directly under the PG&E lines and is on a 45% hillside (every 100′ you go forward you go up 45′ in elevation).
    These pictures are a complete fabrication, as even the reporters could not find this purported “huge grow”. This story was perpetuated by Mr. Donald Bessee, and continues to be the basis for his stories about how the medical marijuana patients were the basis for these so called “issues”. The reporter in this new story could not see this “huge grow”, because it never existed, but Mr. Bessee continues to use this as fodder for his perspective.
    This site on Annie drive was the basis that was used to generate the current Nevada County “ordinance”, but this is one of many, many discrepancies, that look like the law enforcement community fabricated this issue from a very small problem.
    Were there problems?
    Absolutely yes, but these issues could have, and should have easily been handled by the Law Enforcement community while not making the issue of truly sick people from being able to get the material they need.
    This news report, as well as the pictures prove that there was no “massive grow” at the Annie location (the Sheriff provided pictures have 90+ plants), in fact there were @20 grow bags (none of which are shown) and @50% of these small plants (less than 3′ in height) and 10 of these plants were destroyed by a neighbor.
    There are even questions about the supposed pictures as one member on the Alta Sierra Property Owners Board, went up to this grow and spoke with the patient there was there, and this patient said that he saw Mr. Bessee post the signs (while taking pictures) and then he removed them after the pictures were taken.
    Then the Sheriff told the Boars of Supervisors members that his office was receiving 30-50 phone calls per day, and if you consider that there are 214 days in an average “grow” season this would then be 6,500-10,400 calls per year (and if you consider that the Sheriff’s office receives 102,000 calls per year you, and I, can understand why the Board of Supervisors would vote for this de-facto ban.
    The problem is that these records were requested by the Nevada County chapter of the ASA using an Freedom Of Information request and the Sheriff said “we did not write them down….”
    REALLY?
    I worked in law enforcement before (when I was in High School as a explorer) and we were required to write down everything that happened on a daily basis and there are laws that also require this.
    You expect for the public to believe that you didn’t write them down, especially when this law enforcement official is the President of the California Sheriff’s association….
    The year following we heard that the Nevada County Sheriff’s Department received about 300 calls (and when another Freedom Of Information request was filed) the ASA group got 157 redacted copies. These stories seem to have no basis in reality…..
    It’s also a concern that our Sheriff tells the community leader that we had 6,500-10,400 complaints one year, yet the next we had 157 documented cases. Why such a difference? Statistically something is very wrong here……
    Recently the Sheriff stated that the Sheriff’s department got 100 calls (this was at the May 11th meeting at the Board of Supervisors Chambers) yet no one puts a plants into the ground before the 1st week of June as Cannabis will go into flower, and not make any usable product if planted before June 1st.
    The Sheriff has been asked to explain these discrepancies, but so far he just sits there trying to make up more stories about nothing that has any bearing on his previous fabrications…….

    Like

  9. Gerry Fedor Avatar
    Gerry Fedor

    The other issue I have is that our Sheriff’s department, and county has spent well over $1.5 million dollars (our both your and my money on this issue) and what have we gotten for our money?
    A major lawsuit, and now a expensive ballot measure because this new ordinance is a outright ban, based upon nothing more than lies.
    The Sheriff said that our county would become a grower paradise, when he knows that this too is another lie in the long list on this subject.
    I urge everyone to sign the ballot measure so we can fix this lie, as if you want to speak about marijuana and it’s health concerns look at the YouTube film “what if cannabis cured cancer” and then make a informed and educated comment:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jWWVtS2gEg

    Like

  10. Paul Emery Avatar

    George
    Dr Wilkinson writes “and to society in general to consider all the facts, risks, and potential benefits before we embark on this drastic social experiment” of legalizing marijuana. “If the end of Prohibition offers any historical precedence, once marijuana is legalized it will be all but impossible to undo.”
    To that end do you have any problem with that “experiment” occurring on a State level or do you consider it to be a function of the Federal government? Where do you stand on States Rights in California which has voted to legalize Masrijuana for medical purposes.
    I agree that marijuana use should not be legal for children and teenagers much like alcohol.

    Like

  11. George Rebane Avatar

    PaulE 129pm – I always favor the lowest level that makes operational sense. Here the state level should be sufficient. And if one state does a good job in conducting its “drastic social experiment” in a transparent manner, taking good data, and giving a reasoned basis for any subsequent public policy, then other states may stand on its shoulders and/or modify their experiments accordingly. I think the Founders had such processes in mind in the grand scheme of things when they gave us our Republic.

    Like

  12. Paul Emery Avatar

    So George you honor then the process by which 16 states and DC have passed legislation legalizing medical and in Colorado recreational Marijuana. Of course this is contrary to Federal law. In your view what should the role of the Federal Government be in this matter?

    Like

  13. George Rebane Avatar

    PaulE 339pm – I don’t know, maybe nothing outside of its current function of interdicting marijuana and other drug smuggling across US borders. I presume we’re talking about a future wherein the feds retract all federal laws affecting the use of marijuana inside US borders, leaving that determination and necessary enforcements to the several states. This would entail revision of DEA, FBI, BATF, … functions and necessary adjustments of budgets.
    How would you approach this kind of realignment?

    Like

  14. fish Avatar
    fish

    This would entail revision of DEA, FBI, BATF, … functions and necessary adjustments of budgets.
    What a wonderful opportunity to eliminate (although since it seems all but impossible to kill a federal program “vastly reduce” might be the best we could hope for) an “alphabet” agency.

    Like

  15. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Fish: Don’t hold your breath. Think it was Reagen who said the closest thing to eternal life on Earth is a government bureaucracy in Washington DC. Heck, we still have a Bureau of Dams in Washington DC that hasn’t built a dam in 50 years. Seemed like a good idea during the New Deal.
    Concerning the long term effects of smoking Mary Jane, it is rather hard to determine even to the trained eye whether it is psychosis or dependency. What came first, the chicken or the egg? Perhaps the answer will never be fully explained, so we should happy to settle for that nice neat word “schizophrenia”. I can live with that.

    Like

  16. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    George,
    I hate to be a broken record here but you are putting forward the false issue of it being social. It is not, it is political. Politics makes for strange bedfellows when we have two completely corrupted political parties running the government for 150 to 200 years.
    The biggest opponents of legalization is the pharmaceutical, alcohol, and private prison industries. Also legalization would take a huge selective enforcement tool out of the CIA and FBI hands in controlling the poor regions of the US. How do you keep poor people down, create prohibition making people criminals at the same time creating a huge illegal underground market where large sums of capital can be made.
    CIA and Drug Running
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rFWDHQcIG8

    Like

  17. Paul Emery Avatar

    George
    Obama pledged that he would not bring in the feds as long as State laws were being complied with. He said to Barbara Walters ”
    “It would not make sense for us to see a top priority as going after recreational users in states that have determined that it’s legal,” he said, because “we’ve got bigger fish to fry”
    What BS. According to reason.com Obama is far worse than Bush in pursuing Medical Marijuana violators.
    AS long as the Attorney General is chief spokesperson for the hookum and bookum incarnation industry there will be little relief from federal intrusion. Our good sheriff loves to lap up the federal bucks when they dangle grants and cash from the Feds. So much for being a “constitutional sheriff.” Also property seizers are a cash cow for local and federal jurisdictions under Rico Laws.
    Marijuana is a major cash crop for law enforcement so they have no interest in reforming the law.
    Three years ago 200 hundred regional cops swooped down on a cultivator in North San Juan and ended up with just three convictions.
    I’m with Tom McClintock on this one. He co-sponsered H.R. 5326 that would would, “prohibit any funds made available to the Department of Justice from being used to prevent the states of Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Michigan Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington, or the District of Columbia, from implementing programs authorized by those laws.”
    http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2012/may/09/house_representatives_votes_down
    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/09/bipartisan-amendment-seeks-to-halt-obamas-medical-marijuana-raids/

    Like

  18. Michael Anderson Avatar
    Michael Anderson

    Paul and fish, great comments. Pot deregulation in the states, and their consequent promulgation of states rights, is clearly making the Obama administration uncomfortable and I am not exactly sure why.
    Regarding the new study cited by George, it’s clear that we are finally looking into this drug with more scrutiny but I don’t this particular study proves that MJ is an outlier in creating mental illness; it has been long established that drug abuse of all kinds causes mental health issues for certain subsets of users.
    Singling out pot, while new according this study, is yesterday’s lettuce to anyone who really understands the War on Drugs vs. drug abuse being a medical problem that can’t be solved by criminal justice agencies.

    Like

  19. Ken Jones Avatar
    Ken Jones

    The legalization of marijuana is starting to take place in the US. WA and CO have adopted this policy; many states allow patients to use for medicinal purposes. But marijuana has issues like similar substances such as nicotine, alcohol, prescription medication, street drugs. These substances and food can and will be abused by some of the users/consumers. There are adverse medical side affects with all these substances.
    The bottom line is simple “The dose makes the poison”.
    For Todd: “Some of my direct ancestors were Dutch. They used to be a world power. Then they legalized dope and now you never hear much from or about them. Anyone have a Dutch update?”
    Yes the Netherlands never legalized drugs. Todd you are mistaken again. Some drugs are tolerated but not legal. Big difference.
    http://www.holland.com/us/tourism/article/dutch-drug-policy.htm
    Currently there is a move in the Netherlands to be more restrictive and less condoning in regards to the policy concerning drug use.
    “The Netherlands has begun rolling-out restrictions on the sale of cannabis to foreigners, as part of attempts to deter drug tourism.
    Dutch News reports that from today, anyone wanting to buy hashish and marijuana from the country’s licensed coffee shops will have to register for a special membership card called a ‘weed pass’ or ‘wietpas’. The card will only be available to residents of the Netherlands.”
    http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/europe/benelux/120501/dutch-cannabis-coffee-shops-begin-closing-doors-tourists

    Like

  20. Ken Jones Avatar
    Ken Jones

    Tried to post this once with no luck. Once more.
    The legalization of marijuana is starting to take place in the US. WA and CO have adopted this policy; many states allow patients to use for medicinal purposes. But marijuana has issues like similar substances such as nicotine, alcohol, prescription medication, street drugs. These substances and food can and will be abused by some of the users/consumers. There are adverse medical side affects with all these substances.
    The bottom line is simple “The dose makes the poison”.
    For Todd: “Some of my direct ancestors were Dutch. They used to be a world power. Then they legalized dope and now you never hear much from or about them. Anyone have a Dutch update?”
    Yes the Netherlands never legalized drugs. Todd you are mistaken again. Some drugs are tolerated but not legal. Big difference.
    holland.com/us/tourism/article/dutch-drug-policy.htm
    Currently there is a move in the Netherlands to be more restrictive and less condoning in regards to the policy concerning drug use.
    “The Netherlands has begun rolling-out restrictions on the sale of cannabis to foreigners, as part of attempts to deter drug tourism.
    Dutch News reports that from today, anyone wanting to buy hashish and marijuana from the country’s licensed coffee shops will have to register for a special membership card called a ‘weed pass’ or ‘wietpas’. The card will only be available to residents of the Netherlands.”
    globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/europe/benelux/120501/dutch-cannabis-coffee-shops-begin-closing-doors-tourists

    Like

  21. Ken Jones Avatar
    Ken Jones

    Third time trying to post:
    The legalization of marijuana is starting to take place in the US. WA and CO have adopted this policy; many states allow patients to use for medicinal purposes. But marijuana has issues like similar substances such as nicotine, alcohol, prescription medication, street drugs. These substances and food can and will be abused by some of the users/consumers. There are adverse medical side affects with all these substances.
    The bottom line is simple “The dose makes the poison”.
    For Todd: “Some of my direct ancestors were Dutch. They used to be a world power. Then they legalized dope and now you never hear much from or about them. Anyone have a Dutch update?”
    Yes the Netherlands never legalized drugs. Todd you are mistaken again. Some drugs are tolerated but not legal. Big difference.
    holland (dot) com /us/tourism/article/dutch-drug-policy
    Currently there is a move in the Netherlands to be more restrictive and less condoning in regards to the policy concerning drug use.
    “The Netherlands has begun rolling-out restrictions on the sale of cannabis to foreigners, as part of attempts to deter drug tourism.
    Dutch News reports that from today, anyone wanting to buy hashish and marijuana from the country’s licensed coffee shops will have to register for a special membership card called a ‘weed pass’ or ‘wietpas’. The card will only be available to residents of the Netherlands.”
    globalpost (dot)com dispatch/news/regions/europe/benelux/120501/dutch-cannabis-coffee-shops-begin-closing-doors-tourists

    Like

  22. Ken Jones Avatar
    Ken Jones

    The legalization of marijuana is starting to take place in the US. WA and CO have adopted this policy; many states allow patients to use for medicinal purposes. But marijuana has issues like similar substances such as nicotine, alcohol, prescription medication, street drugs. These substances and food can and will be abused by some of the users/consumers. There are adverse medical side affects with all these substances.
    The bottom line is simple “The dose makes the poison”.
    For Todd: “Some of my direct ancestors were Dutch. They used to be a world power. Then they legalized dope and now you never hear much from or about them. Anyone have a Dutch update?”
    Yes the Netherlands never legalized drugs. Todd you are mistaken again. Some drugs are tolerated but not legal. Big difference.
    http://holland.com/us/tourism/article/dutch-drug-policy.htm
    Currently there is a move in the Netherlands to be more restrictive and less condoning in regards to the policy concerning drug use.
    “The Netherlands has begun rolling-out restrictions on the sale of cannabis to foreigners, as part of attempts to deter drug tourism.
    Dutch News reports that from today, anyone wanting to buy hashish and marijuana from the country’s licensed coffee shops will have to register for a special membership card called a ‘weed pass’ or ‘wietpas’. The card will only be available to residents of the Netherlands.”
    http://globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/europe/benelux/120501/dutch-cannabis-coffee-shops-begin-closing-doors-tourists

    Like

  23. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    Thanks Ken, you absolutely made my point forme. Your links show the danger of drugs is now being reigned in by the poster child country for dopers.

    Like

  24. Paul Emery Avatar

    Todd
    What is your view of States Rights in this matter?

    Like

  25. Ken Jones Avatar
    Ken Jones

    No Todd your point was the Netherlands legalized “dope”. They never did. You can never admit when you are wrong. Further there is no evidence that the tolerance policy made drug use worse in the Netherlands. There was evidence that it did create a “drug tourism” for people outside the Netherlands to visit to partake. Do you feel the same way about alcohol and tobacco Todd? Or do those drugs get a pass?

    Like

  26. Paul Emery Avatar

    George
    Back to your original topic about the effects of MJ consumptions on the mentally ill. Based on your link to Dr Samuel Wilkinson’s study it is really inconclusive but certainly worth inquiry. It is known that schizophrenia manifests itself in teens around the age of 17 because it is a degenerative disease that takes years to develop. I am firmly opposed to marijuana use by teenagers because of the way affects brain development. Interestingly noted is that states with legal medical marijuana availability show declining use by teenagers in general.. There is a 10% decline in use by those states between 2000-2006. California ranked 32nd in the State in 2006 for example behind such states as Wyoming and Minnesota that have vigorous anti pot enforcement policies.
    Some states do show a hike in teen use after legalization however especially Maine and Montana.
    http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=001557

    Like

  27. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    The perfect example is Portugal of drug decriminalization. Legalization makes it marketable, which opens up a who new can of worms.
    Portugal Decriminalized All Drugs Eleven Years Ago And The Results Are Staggering
    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/portugal-drug-policy-decriminalization-works-2012-7#ixzz2YUlWs5y0

    Like

  28. Paul Emery Avatar

    Ben
    thanks Ben for finding this.
    This is a staggering detail from the article “more than half of America’s federal inmates are in prison on drug convictions”
    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/portugal-drug-policy-decriminalization-works-2012-7#ixzz2YUqE5guU

    Like

  29. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    The biggest drug dealers just got a get out of jail free card from our corporate Supreme Court. The Obama administration argued on behalf of the pharmaceutical industry against consumers in the case
    Karen Bartlett vs. Mutual Pharmaceutical Company
    Once our eyes are open to this fascist/ corporatist state we are living under it becomes apparent it is pervasive in every decision coming out of our capitals at the state and federal levels.
    Supreme Court rules Drug Companies exempt from Lawsuits
    http://www.whiteoutpress.com/articles/q32013/supreme-court-rules-drug-companies-exempt-from-lawsuits/

    Like

  30. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    Addition to 08 July 2013 at 07:56 PM
    Could this be part of Obama’s back room deal during the health care reform?
    Or
    Could Obama or Biden or anybody or everybody have dirt on them via the NSA, FBI, Verizon, AT&T, ect… spying programs and they are being held hostage if they want to stay in office?

    Like

  31. Gregory Avatar

    Ben, once again you got it wrong. Here’s the plain language summary from the scotusblog:
    “PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Companies that make generic drugs have to sell the same product and use the same label as the original “branded” drug approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration. The issue in this case is whether someone who is injured by the side effects of a generic drug can sue the manufacturer on the ground that that the generic drug, taking account of its label, is unreasonably dangerous. In this case, the label in question did not mention the side effect that caused the injury (which took the form of third-degree burns on much of the plaintiff’s body). The answer is that the plaintiff cannot sue the manufacturer. Because the FDA has approved the product and the label, the state court cannot impose damages for harm from using the product.”
    In short, the generic manufacturer didn’t design the drug or specify the instructions. You can’t sue them for a making a good copy of the approved drug and if that changed, goodbye affordable generics.

    Like

  32. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    Greg,
    My take on it is from a lawyer who has argued and won against big pharma in the past, sorry to burst your feel good moment of proving I am wrong. But again you have watched Law & Order for years so that must mean your interpretations of the decision are better than a lawyer who deals in this specific legal area. Rarely are my positions on Supreme Court decisions, Climate Change, Economics, and so on my own. They are shaped by reading and listening to professionals from their respected fields. You are a master of all trades and a laborer of none, in your own mind.

    Like

  33. Gregory Avatar

    Ben, you apparently were following a personal injury attorney. I quoted a Columbia Law school professor writing at the SCOTUSblog and that was far different than your proclamation that the “Supreme Court rules Drug Companies exempt from Lawsuits”.

    Like

  34. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    Greg,
    My guess in all of your infinite wisdom you have a problem seeing the big picture because you are so full of intricate details of every complex issue that faces our nation, state, and local communities. Over all we are seeing a big shift in the pharmaceutical industry and the Supreme Court along with both political parties are making sure the new emerging generic giants will be unaccountable by the people.
    Medicare Part D has forced the biggest consumer of pharmaceuticals to pay retail prices without negotiation. Made it illegal for Medicare to purchase pharmaceuticals outside the US. 2003 http://oversight-archive.waxman.house.gov/story.asp?ID=2115
    The US is one of only two developed nation where pharmaceutical industry can use direct to consumer advertising. 1997 http://academia.edu/278465/Chronology_of_Direct-to-Consumer_Advertising_Regulation_in_the_United_States
    The Obama administration cut a deal with the pharmaceutical industry pre health care reform debate. 2009 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/06/health/policy/06insure.html?_r=0
    Earlier this year Big Pharma got their pay to delay capabilities challenged.
    http://www.uspirg.org/news/usp/big-pharmas-pay-delay-deals-take-hit
    Big pharmaceuticals are selling less drugs to Americans with patents but are intertwined with the generic industry as well in many cases.
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2013/05/09/drug-giants-are-selling-many-fewer-pills/
    Last and not least the FDA among other government positions are filled with lobbyists from Big Pharma and vice versa. http://www.anh-usa.org/fda-huge-conflicts-of-interest-with-big-pharma/
    Lobbyists in 2012 who have previously held government jobs*
    Pharmaceuticals – Trade Associations
    95 out of 146 PhRMA lobbyists
    58 out of 86 Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO) lobbyists
    4 out of 10 Generic Pharmaceutical Association lobbyists
    Pharmaceuticals – Companies
    59 out of 79 Roche Holdings lobbyists
    54 out of 74 Pfizer Inc lobbyists
    45 out of 58 Eli Lilly & Co lobbyists
    33 out of 56 Abbott Laboratories lobbyists
    33 out of 42 Merck & Co lobbyists
    32 out of 55 Novartis AG lobbyists
    27 out of 49 Johnson & Johnson lobbyists
    24 out of 35 GlaxoSmithKline lobbyists
    19 out of 27 Sanofi lobbyists
    14 out of 18 Bristol-Myers Squibb lobbyists
    10 out of 16 Gilead Sciences lobbyists
    10 out of 18 Teva Pharmaceutical Industries lobbyists

    Like

  35. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    Greg,
    I had a long cited comment but once again it didn’t post after it appeared to do so. You have a lack of ability to see the big picture on many issues. It appears you didn’t follow the link I gave in hast to prove me wrong. If you have gone to the link you would have seen “Supreme Court rules Drug Companies exempt from Lawsuits” is the title of the piece.
    The biggest problem is the revolving doors between public and private industry that leads to capture of our government reps and agencies.
    Lobbyists in 2012 who have previously held government jobs*
    Pharmaceuticals – Trade Associations
    95 out of 146 PhRMA lobbyists
    58 out of 86 Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO) lobbyists
    4 out of 10 Generic Pharmaceutical Association lobbyists
    Pharmaceuticals – Companies
    59 out of 79 Roche Holdings lobbyists
    54 out of 74 Pfizer Inc lobbyists
    45 out of 58 Eli Lilly & Co lobbyists
    33 out of 56 Abbott Laboratories lobbyists
    33 out of 42 Merck & Co lobbyists
    32 out of 55 Novartis AG lobbyists
    27 out of 49 Johnson & Johnson lobbyists
    24 out of 35 GlaxoSmithKline lobbyists
    19 out of 27 Sanofi lobbyists
    14 out of 18 Bristol-Myers Squibb lobbyists
    10 out of 16 Gilead Sciences lobbyists
    10 out of 18 Teva Pharmaceutical Industries lobbyists
    -US is one of only two nations that are allowed direct to consumer pharmaceutical advertising 1997
    -Medicare Part D forces Medicare to purchase drugs at non negotiated retailed prices and the bill was passed with very controversial procedures. It also makes purchasing pharmaceuticals outside US. 2003
    -Obama administration made back room deals with pharmaceutical industries before the health care debate began in 2009
    -Obama care forces 30 million more people onto the roles of private health insurance industries that send patients to doctors that attended pharmaceutical financed AMA medical schools.
    -Big Pharma is selling less patented drugs while generics are becoming the majority of drugs sold in the US
    -Big Pharma had their ability to pay to delay generics challenged earlier this year
    -Now the Karen Bartlett vs. Mutual Pharmaceutical Company decision give generic manufacturers immunity to lawsuit, which by the way are becoming more and more subsidiaries of big pharma.
    Can you see how the new corporate friendly system is being set up?

    Like

  36. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Paul brings up some good points and questions. Seems to me that we are Libertarians on different issues. States rights are ok for pot and the Supreme Court ruled recently upholding states rights for same sex marriage. So, some of us are all for states rights on one issue and want the Feds to step in on other issues. Don’t tread on me when it hits close to home.
    Some quote the Commerce Clause and if anything good will come out of ObamaCare, it is the Supreme Court finally put some limits on the Commence Clause (the far reaching tentacles of Our Great White Father in Washington).
    Guess we all pick and choose whether we want states rights or the US Government to have the final say when the rubber meets the road. I prefer the States’ Rights to trump an overreaching Federal Government each and every time as per the Law of the Land.
    Heck, there are some states today where I wonder why people don’t revolt against a overburdening state government with laws and regs coming down the pike every day. Usually its the same old story: they be turning over every rock looking for money, the money in people’s pockets.
    Take Washington State, a place where I lived for a few years. The people voted down a massive increase in DMV fees. Like it was going to go up 10 fold. So, what to they do? If you buy a used car for a grand, it does not matter. The DMV will charge you their assessed value of the car, which is higher than Kelly Blue Book. Yet, when you hit 62 years old, your property tax decreases. If you live longer, your property taxes decrease more. Each state does what it does, which is fine by me. But Washington is going radical green, which means all references to “penmanship” and the word “freshmen” are being stricken from text books because those words are sexist. Yes, they legalized pot for recreational purposes, but the devil is in the details. Like is it a no-no transporting pot and having more than a little bit. States rights is is what makes up our Republic.

    Like

  37. Michael Anderson Avatar
    Michael Anderson

    I support states rights regarding abortion, same-sex marriage, health care implementation, and drug law.
    I guess where we differ, Mr. Tozer, is that you would have a single state’s ass-backwardness trump another state’s legislation that was pro-choice, pro same-sex marriage, building PPACA exchanges, and enacting drug decriminalization laws.
    If Kansas were to pass a law stating that all scarecrows had to be in black face, I would support their right to be racist pigfuckers to my dying day. But I would also insist that under federal law, black face scarecrows would only be mandated in Kansas, and that other states who liked their scare crows to be less racist, the feds would honor that predilection as well.
    In other words, gay marriage that is recognized in California is afforded the same federal benefits of all marriage. There is no harm to Kansas since they will not be recognizing gay marriage within their borders.
    The beauty of the 10th Amendment is that it allows states to experiment with progressive or repressive laws, and the people can then vote with their feet. But federal law must honor each state’s iterations, as long it conforms with certain constitutional basics.

    Like

  38. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Mr. Anderson, I don’t think we disagree. Even in progressive Colorado, I can stroll down the street carrying a gun. To each his own. I totally agree with your last paragraph above. Totally agree.
    Just because I oppose 99% of abortions on moral grounds, I ain’t clamoring for the feds to step in. Besides, the Supreme Court has already sided with the right to kill crowd. We must value life so I also agree that wholesale discrimination against blacks in housing and employment had to be addressed at the Federal level on Constitutional grounds. Putting down folk based on skin color does not value life. The problem did not simply go away in the Old South. Ironically, the high school in Little Rock set the national record for the 440 relay a few years later.
    Possessing a joint once got you 2 years in Nevada and some did 20 years in Texas for a little bit of pot. In Oregon you were told to put it out. Each state has their laws reflecting the will or the locals. And in some states (like Washington), each county has its own property tax laws. An each city has its open container laws. The great experiment. BTW, Kansas does not seem to make the news much anymore.

    Like

  39. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    Greg,
    “Ben, you apparently were following a personal injury attorney.” I am guessing that is supposed to be an insult that I am following a sleazy ambulance chaser.
    Here is his bio
    Mike Papantonio is the President of The National Trial Lawyer Association, and a senior partner of Levin, Papantonio, Thomas, Mitchell, Rafferty & Proctor, P.A., one of the largest plaintiffs’ law firms in America, having handled thousands of cases throughout the nation including Pharmaceutical Drug Litigation, Asbestos, Breast Implants, Factory Farming, Securities Fraud, the Florida Tobacco Litigation, and other mass tort cases. “Pap” has received numerous multi-million dollar verdicts on behalf of victims of corporate malfeasance.
    Papantonio is a Board Certified Civil Trial Lawyer by the Florida Bar and the National Board of Trial Advocacy. He is a fellow in the International Academy of Trial Lawyers and the International Society of Barristers. Papantonio is a member of the American Board of Trial Advocates; the American Association for Justice (formerly the ATLA); the Southern Trial Lawyers Association; and the Florida Justice Association (formerly the Academy of Florida Trial Lawyers), where he served on the Board of Directors for five years.
    Papantonio is listed in the publications, Best Lawyers in America and Leading American Attorney.
    In 1998, Papantonio teamed with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the Hudson Riverkeepers, and Water Keeper Alliance, to establish a Riverkeepers program in Northwest Florida, known as the Emerald Coastkeepers, Inc., a full-time organization that serves the community as a public advocate for the waterways of Northwest Florida. Coastkeepers and Riverkeepers are reputable for their willingness to take polluters to court. In 2001, Papantonio filed two lawsuits against polluters, which lead to a $70 million settlement. In 2007, as lead trial counsel in the environmental class action case of Perrine v. Dupont, Papantonio received a jury verdict award for a West Virginia community with an estimated value in excess of $380 million.
    In 2008, Papantonio was selected by the Public Justice Foundation as a finalist for its Trial Lawyer of the Year Award.
    In 2011, Papantonio was awarded the Perry Nichols Award, the highest honor given by the Florida Justice Association. The award recognizes individuals who fight valiantly and with distinction for justice throughout their lives.
    In 2012, Papantonio became President of the National Trial Lawyers Association.
    Papantonio has authored and co-authored instructional articles on handling complex litigation for trial lawyers. He is the founder of the cutting edge continuing legal education seminar organization, Mass Torts Made Perfect, which has and continues to train thousands of lawyers in how to better their legal practice. The organization has hosted speakers such as former President Bill Clinton, James Carville, Johnnie Cochran, Bob Woodward, Elliot Spitzer, Jack Kemp, Al Sharpton, Arianna Huffington, Dick Morris, Paul Begala, and Dan Rather.

    Like

  40. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    I guess it is not going to stick so I will break this up into two comments
    Greg,
    I had a long cited comment but once again it didn’t post after it appeared to do so. You have a lack of ability to see the big picture on many issues. It appears you didn’t follow the link I gave in haste to prove me wrong. If you have gone to the link you would have seen “Supreme Court rules Drug Companies exempt from Lawsuits” is the title of the piece.
    The biggest problem is the revolving doors between public and private industry that leads to capture of our government reps and agencies.
    Lobbyists in 2012 who have previously held government jobs
    Pharmaceuticals – Trade Associations
    95 out of 146 PhRMA lobbyists
    58 out of 86 Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO) lobbyists
    4 out of 10 Generic Pharmaceutical Association lobbyists
    Pharmaceuticals – Companies
    59 out of 79 Roche Holdings lobbyists
    54 out of 74 Pfizer Inc lobbyists
    45 out of 58 Eli Lilly & Co lobbyists
    33 out of 56 Abbott Laboratories lobbyists
    33 out of 42 Merck & Co lobbyists
    32 out of 55 Novartis AG lobbyists
    27 out of 49 Johnson & Johnson lobbyists
    24 out of 35 GlaxoSmithKline lobbyists
    19 out of 27 Sanofi lobbyists
    14 out of 18 Bristol-Myers Squibb lobbyists
    10 out of 16 Gilead Sciences lobbyists
    10 out of 18 Teva Pharmaceutical Industries lobbyists

    Like

  41. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    Greg,
    -US is one of only two nations that are allowed direct to consumer pharmaceutical advertising 1997
    -Medicare Part D forces Medicare to purchase drugs at non negotiated retailed prices and the bill was passed with very controversial procedures. It also makes purchasing pharmaceuticals outside US. 2003
    -Obama administration made back room deals with pharmaceutical industries before the health care debate began in 2009
    -Obama care forces 30 million more people onto the roles of private health insurance industries that send patients to doctors that attended pharmaceutical financed AMA medical schools.
    -Big Pharma is selling less patented drugs while generics are becoming the majority of drugs sold in the US
    -Big Pharma had their ability to pay to delay generics challenged earlier this year
    -Now the Karen Bartlett vs. Mutual Pharmaceutical Company decision give generic manufacturers immunity to lawsuit, which by the way are becoming more and more subsidiaries of big pharma.
    Can you see how the new corporate friendly system is being set up?

    Like

  42. George Rebane Avatar

    BenE 839am++ – From the spam bucket I fished out and published all what appeared as the non-redundant comments. Thanks for the heads up.

    Like

  43. Paul Emery Avatar

    Bill
    As a fledgling Libertarian I am looking at States Rights much more seriously than a few years ago. I have yet to come up with the rules of the road on that matter. Much of it will be market place driven. For example a company looking for a home base will likely locate in a state with marriage rights for gays because of the talented work force that will likely be available that would otherwise go elsewhere if they are looking for a job.
    Ben
    A very good friend of mine is raising two boys with Cystic Fibrosis. There has been dramatic developments with new drugs that offer remarkable improvements in lifespan and quality of life but, guess what, it costs $60,000 per year for treatment. Obviously the tab is picked up by the government since no one can afford that on their own and the insurance companies obviously won’t insure anyone with that condition. Yet another example of the need for single payer national health care. If indeed we are our brothers keeper we should all share in the health costs of those unfortunate ones so afflicted.
    I have a difficult time leaving this up to individual states. If California had universal health care for example and Nevada didn’t guess what would happen? All those with serious health problems would move to California thus creating an unfair burden in that State. This to me is a good reason to have some kind of universal health care.
    Bill
    My best friend was arrested in Georgia in 1969 for living in a house that was busted for pot. All they found was one joint yet they convicted all residents. He did 6 months of hard time in State prison and had to quit college and was never able to return because he had a felony on his record and couldn’t get a student loan or a decent job or family support. Obviously things are better today but the untold thousands who suffered such a fate are a testament of the times that many in law enforcement would like us to return to.

    Like

  44. Gregory Avatar

    Ben, you are forgetting one of the primary laws of government… “When legislation controls what gets bought and gets sold, the first things to get bought and sold are legislators”, as good a quote from PJ O’Rourke as I can muster from memory. The basic movement of regulators being populated from the ranks of the regulated dates back to the 19th century and is nothing new. You might try reading Friedman’s “Free to Choose”, I recall him covering that well.
    What you and Paul are both missing is that all those expensive drugs are able to be developed in the regulatory climate we have only because of profits able to be earned. It’s more likely that, under that single payer system, such drugs will be rationed only to those for whom the maximum benefits can be expected. Or forbidden entirely as bot being cost effective.
    Back to your last hallucinatory drug story, you can’t have it both ways. Generic drugs are comparatively inexpensive because when the patents expire, any company able to do a credible job of manufacturing and distributing them is able to do so. It is a boon to society as a whole for this to happen, and requiring them to make exact copies, including labeling, is part of the deal. Letting the to be sued into oblivion for doing just that is a formula to return to the old days of no price competition on older medications.

    Like

  45. Paul Emery Avatar

    Gregory
    The “profits able to be earned” come from taxpayers pure and simple. What other options do you see in this matter? No insurance company will touch those people and it’s impossible to pay out of pocket for such things. I’m open to ideas but I see none from this forum.

    Like

  46. Gregory Avatar

    Paul, the problem of risk pools is yet another unanticipated side effect of ‘fringe benefits’ being untaxed back when WWII wage and price controls were untaxable and remaining so, thus beginning the long march towards employer based health insurance forced by Federal tax law. Reform risk pools and make all health care benefits taxable, and the individual healthcare insurance market will again exist and the prepaid healthcare pretending to be insurance, like the approved Obamacare plans, will wane.
    If you don’t want drug companies to make the profits needed to develop new and wondrous drugs, they won’t develop them and we can spend the money saved on nicer gravesites or vacations. If you can’t afford them, the alternatives that would be faced without the drug existing will remain. Generally, the companies that make the things do make them available at reduced prices for many, but if they make it too easy the folks who can afford full freight will want a deal, too… There is no free lunch, someone pays, one way or the other.
    The answer isn’t federally socialized medical care, cradle to grave. It won’t be that great insurance that legislators and public employees get. At the moment, overpayments by individuals with insurance subsidize folks relying on medicare and medicaid that make underpayments. Kill the profits goose and the golden eggs cease.

    Like

  47. Paul Emery Avatar

    Gregory
    Nice outline but you offer no solution except to continue the current system of overpayment by existing insured to subsidize those that cannot afford it. Perhaps there is no solution and people will just die who cannot afford it. Social Darwinism for sure. The question is where will the drug companies make the profits needed to develop new drugs? Who do you suggest can afford the “full freight” you describe?

    Like

  48. George Rebane Avatar

    PaulE 347pm – appending Gregory’s excellent discourse, what social policies do you see rescinding the eternal law of them that’s got will also get? The richer will always have advantages. And thinking that pure and simple profits always come from the taxpayer is a fairly deep reach into communist doctrine. (Don’t circle the government subsidizes businesses barn again; I’m also against government subsidies to big corporations.)
    You have to come back to the cold fact that enforced equality, in whatever dimension of society, means loss of liberty and lower benefits. Contrary to socialist dogma, you cannot levitate yourself by yanking on your bootstraps, even if you pass a law to do so.

    Like

  49. Paul Emery Avatar

    So George it’s Social Darwinism then. Survival of he fittest,in this example the richest. In the case of my friends then without government assistance their options available would be limited and their life shortened. I’m not making his up, these are real people.
    It’s not enforced equality George it’s basic human decency that we take care of the sick and weak. In the case of modern medical miracle treatments if they are only available to the wealthy where does that puts us as a culture to let sick people die when there are options to improve their health that can’t be used.
    Here’s a definition of Social Darwinism
    “A theory arising in the late nineteenth century that the laws of evolution, which Charles Darwin had observed in nature, also apply to society. Social Darwinists argued that social progress resulted from conflicts in which the fittest or best adapted individuals, or entire societies, would prevail. It gave rise to the slogan “survival of the fittest.”
    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/social+darwinism

    Like

Leave a comment