25 October 2015

How Australians Feel About Legalising Cannabis

UPDATE 26 October, 2015


Only 7% of Australians surveyed for their views on medical cannabis said they were opposed to the 'drug' being made legal for medicinal purposes, a new survey shows. In a poll released by Roy Morgan Research, 644 Australians aged 14 and above were asked: “In your opinion should the use of marijuana* for medicinal purposes be made legal or remain illegal?” Most – 91% – said it should be made legal, while 2% were unsure. The strongest support for legalisation came from the 50-plus age group, with 94% of respondents in favour. The age group least likely to support it were 14-to-24 year-olds, but even so, 85% of that group said it should be legalised for medicinal use. Michele Levine, the CEO of Roy Morgan Research, said it was not surprising that Australians aged 50-plus were the strongest supporters.

“This group is most susceptible to several of the conditions that medicinal marijuana* can provide relief from: Parkinson’s disease, cancer, glaucoma and more”, she said. “It should also be noted that the special telephone survey found that only one third of the population believes that the smoking of marijuana* should be made legal. This demonstrates that Australians understand that smoking and consuming marijuana* for medicinal purposes are two very separate issues”. Sussan Ley, the Federal Health Minister, announced earlier this month she would seek parliamentary support to change the Narcotics Drugs Act of 1967 to create a regulatory body to oversee the cultivation and importation of medical cannabis for state trials. This would make it easier for researchers in Victoria, Queensland and New South Wales – where clinical trials for the use of medicinal cannabis have been announced – to obtain the plant locally.

ORIGINAL 25 October 2015

In January 2015, Roy Morgan Research asked Australians 14+ the question, "In your opinion should the smoking of Cannabis* be made legal - or remain illegal?". Judging by more recent media reports, the use of Cannabis for medical purposes could become legal in Australia in the foreseeable future. Politicians such as New South Wales Premier Mike Baird and Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews expressed their support for the idea, and clinical trials are to start in 2016. But how do Australians feel about the legalisation of Cannabis?


Over the last decade, the proportion of the population who believe it should be made legal has grown from 26.8% (2004) to 31.8% (2014). In this time, the 65+ age bracket has seen the largest proportional increase in favour of legalisation, rising from 16.9% to 25.5% (a 50% growth rate). However, this is still well behind young Australians aged 18-24 (35.7%), the age group with the most support for making smoking Cannabis legal.




How Australians of Different Ages Feel About Legalising Cannabis


Source: Roy Morgan Single Source (Australia), January 2014–December 2014 (n=51,969). Base: Australians 14+


The belief that smoking Cannabis should be made legal has become more widespread across all ages except 25-34 year olds (among whom it has declined fractionally). Even 14-17 year olds, traditionally the least likely to support legalisation, seem to have become more open to the idea in the last 10 years, having gone from 15.5% in favour to 20.7%. University-educated Australians are more likely than those who didn’t complete high school to agree that smoking Cannabis should be made legal: 35.8% of people currently at university and 32.3% of tertiary graduates are in favour, compared with 30.9% of people who finished at year 10 and 28.4% of people with ‘some secondary’ education.


Of course, Aussies’ growing conviction that Cannabis smoking should be made legal means the proportion who want it to remain illegal is declining. In 2004, 64.1% of the population thought smoking Cannabis should remain illegal; by 2014, it sat at 56.8%. Still a majority, it has to be said, but not such a large one. Meanwhile, the proportion of Australians who are undecided on this issue has risen from 9.2% to 11.4%.

Michele Levine, CEO, Roy Morgan Research, said:

“Whether someone feels that smoking Cannabis should be made legal or not often indicates how progressive or traditional their social attitudes are in general. In fact, the gradual increase in the proportion of Australians who support legalisation corresponds with an increase in the proportion who describe their ‘viewpoint with regard to social issues and social trends in Australia’ as somewhat or very progressive.

However, the current debate is centred on medical use rather than personal recreational use, so this casts a different light on the issue, and may provide a clue as to why there has been significant growth in support for legalisation among Australians aged 50 and over. Medical Cannabis has been found to provide relief from, or slow the progress of, several conditions that are not uncommon among older people: glaucoma, cancer, Alzheimer’s, arthritis, Parkinson’s disease and more (of course, it’s also worth noting that many Aussies aged 50+ would have been part of the hippy movement in the 1960's and 1970's, which had very liberal views on Cannabis use).

Having measured Australians’ attitudes to societal, political, environmental and health issues for many years, Roy Morgan Research has accumulated data that can assist government departments wishing to gauge how the population is feeling about particular issues at any given time”.


Adapted from; How Australians Feel About Marijuana* and Legalised Medical Marijuana
*Roy Morgan Reseach actually used the North American colloquialism 'marijuana' in their questioning, which is botanically incorrect and just shows their lack of knowledge regarding the herb, Cannabis sativa L.

Viewing Psychoactivity as Medicine

Marijuana BackgroundNow-a-days we easily accept the 30,000 per reviewed scientific/medical papers on medicinal properties of Cannabis, very few people are discreditable enough to refute the medically confirmed facts. That's good. When it comes to the psychoactive property of Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), it's another story, we tend to only think of 'Recreational Use'. The truth is that the very word 'psychoactivity' directly points to brain and especially upper brain function ... a very important branch of pharmaceutical and herbal medicine.

chemobrain22414
One simple case in point. Recently I had a patient in extremely bad shape mentally and emotionally and I very badly needed the patient to sleep. Large dose administration of THC is very successful in inducing sleep. More importantly, it doesn't compound with the negative side effects of other 'drugs' playing in that 'space'. I didn't have to worry about it suppressing the patients breathing, or slowing/stopping the heart. This would have been the case with the vast majority of sedatives, tranquilisers, beta-blockers, etc ... but not terpenoids. For the same sort of reasons, I didn't have to worry about the patient attempting to overdose on the treatment (it takes about 200 grams of pure THC to reach LD-50). Back on the general medicine ward, our only option was 100mg of Benadryl (large dose inducing drowsiness) ... if the patient tolerated it. 

By the way, I eased the patient into a semi-relaxed state first, with a cup of Chamomile tea, laced with 3 additional drops of German Chamomile essential oil, lightly sweetened with Blueberry honey (I chose it because blueberry pollen is neuro-protective). This initial relaxation gave the THC 'an easier path'. German Chamomile is composed of yet more, highly compatible, terpenoids, the bisabolol terpenoids and chamazulene. 

Properly used, the psychoactive property of Cannabis carries with it many other important treatment options. A good friend of mine lives with ADHD and by focussing on sativa strains containing significant amounts of a-Pinene, Limonene and Terpinolene, in strains like Super Silver Haze, their mind becomes energetic, clear-headed and project-oriented, turning the unfocussed, chaotic ADHD mind into a mildly focussed OCD.

Rev. Dr Kymron deCesare
Chief Research Officer
Steep Hill Lab Inc.

18 October 2015

100 Scientific Studies That Prove Cannabis Cures Cancer


In Australia, Cannabis is a Schedule 9 'prohibited substance' listed in the Poisons Standard (the most restrictive classification) and in the United States, Cannabis is a Schedule I 'drug'. In Australia, a Schedule 9 'prohibited substance' is deemed, by the government, as a substance that can be "abused or misused and the manufacture, possession, sale or use of ... should be prohibited by law except when required for medical or scientific research, or for analytical, teaching or training purposes with approval of Commonwealth and/or State or Territory Health Authorities". Currently, the Australian Federal Government is following trials in some States with even more trials, about two years worth, at least. On 17 October, 2015, the Australian Federal Government announced that, "The Commonwealth intends to develop amendments to the Narcotic Drugs Act 1967 that will establish the authority, within the Department of Health, to regulate the cultivation of cannabis for medical and scientific use required under the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs 1961 ... Cannabis material cultivated in Australia may then be used to conduct clinical trials and develop therapeutic products to be used in accordance with the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989". The US government has designated the Cannabis plant as having no accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse; even though Medicinal Cannabis is approved for use in some way or another in nearly half (23) of the States in the US.

No accepted medical use? There are scores of studies that say differently (see below).


Rick Simpson, medical Cannabis activist, who has been on a personal crusade of healing considers Cannabis to be the most medicinally active plant that humans can use on this planet. Cannabis has been shown in some cases to effectively treat numerous types of cancer, improve immunity and fight anxiety and pain. Dr David Bearman (California, US) introduces us to the history of Cannabis in the following video: Medical Cannabis and its Impact on Human Health, "It's truly amazing the number of conditions that respond favourably to Cannabis ... It would appear that Cannabis and hemp are one of the first plants that have been grown in agriculture" ... 


 



Here’s the full list of studies:

Cannabis kills tumor cells

Uterine, testicular, and pancreatic cancers

Brain cancer

Mouth and throat cancer

Breast cancer

Lung cancer

Prostate cancer

Blood cancer

Skin cancer

Liver cancer

Cannabis cancer cures (general)

Cancers of the head and neck

Cholangiocarcinoma cancer

Leukaemia

Cannabis partially/fully induced cancer cell death

Translocation-positive rhabdomyosarcoma

Lymphoma

Cannabis kills cancer cells

Melanoma

Thyroid carcinoma

Colon cancer

Intestinal inflammation and cancer

Cannabinoids in health and disease

Cannabis inhibits cancer cell invasion

Adapted from Cannabis Cures Cancer

15 October 2015

Cannabis - Alcohol Substitute and Cure for Alcoholism

Dr Tod Mikuriya (1935-2007), a former Berkeley, California, United States (US) Psychiatrist, may be unknown by many new to the movement to re-legalise cannabis (worldwide) and Tod himself would not have been surprised about his leadership role being obscured. “It’s not just marijuana* that got prohibited, it’s the truth about history”, he used to say.

In 1959 during his second year of medical school he read a book on pharmacology which chronicled early American uses of cannabis oils and tinctures. By the end of the summer he had also read everything on cannabis available in the school’s medical library and had travelled to Mexico to sample the plant. Upon graduating he found work with Humphrey Osmond in research at the New Jersey Psychiatric Institution at Princeton; Mikuriya was hired as Director of its Drug Abuse Treatment Centre. Osmond, credited with coining the term ‘psychedelic’, introduced Mikuriya to Timothy Leary, America’s leading light on all things LSD and to members of the San Francisco Diggers, informal anarchists with a passion for guerilla theatre. During his months off he travelled to Morocco and Nepal where he befriended locals and observed the cultivation and use of cannabis.



In 1967 Dr Mikuriya was recruited as Director of non-classified marijuana research for the US National Institute for Mental Health. The ‘non-classified’ designation is important, as from 1945-1975 there was much classified research on 'marihuana' carried out both by the CIA in its MK-Ultra program and by the US Army. It did not take Mikuriya long to discover NIMH’s anti-cannabis bias. When the Institute sent him out to spy on San Francisco communes he arrived, checked out the culture, found it congenial and stayed on.

Dr Mikuriya was not only an MD he was also an historian, publishing an anthology of the pre-prohibition literature entitled, Volume One Marijuana: Medical Papers, 1839-1972, which unearthed the western history of medical cannabis (
there are two other volumes: Volume Two: Clinical Studies and Volume Three: Collected Works of Tod Mikuriya, MD, you can find all these online). The Medical Papers introduced North Americans of the day to the 19th Century published works of Dr William O’Shaughnessy, as well as to the works of other doctors influenced by him. O’Shaughnessy served as surgeon and physician for the British East India Company in Calcutta from 1833-1842. He was a quick study in languages and whilst there travelled widely, immersing himself in studies with local Ayurvedic doctors, who routinely employed what he called 'Indian Hemp'. He learned to develop his own tinctures and conducted experiments on animals and humans. He returned to England with plant specimens for the Royal Horticultural Society and quantities of prepared Indian Hemp (cannabis) medicine to share with European and North American doctors. Thanks to O’Shaughnessy’s many lectures and publications, news of medical cannabis spread throughout Canada and the US. Thanks to his careful documentation, local doctors and chemists were able produce their own potent tinctures and to use them as they and their patients saw fit. 

Pharmaceutical companies followed suit, pouring medicines into those now collectible bottles whose images we love to post. Cannabis tincture or oil became standard over the counter remedies until the early 1940's, when they were forcibly removed from the formularies - though not before over a 100 clinical studies on these remedies had been published in the medical journals of the day. These were the studies that Mikuriya had discovered and had made available to a 1970's public that had lost all memory of them. 


Dr Mikuriya helped draft Proposition 215, the 1996 initiative that legalised cannabis for medical use in California, US. He insisted the law should cover not just the gravely ill, but patients coping with “any other condition for which marijuana* provides relief”. For several years after Prop., 215 passed, Tod was the only doctor in California known to issue approvals readily for conditions other than AIDS and cancer. He called the new law “a unique research opportunity”, and kept adding to the list of conditions known to be treatable by cannabis. 


In 2000 Dr Mikuriya founded a group called the California Cannabis Research Medical Group (now the Society of Cannabis Clinicians) so that doctors issuing approvals could share their experiences, clinical and legal. He foresaw that Cannabis Therapeutics would emerge as a specialty in its own right, and that a journal was needed so that doctors in the field would have an outlet to publish their findings and observations. Publishing Cannabis as a Substitute for Alcohol: A Harm Reduction Approach, was a big part of the motivation in launching O’Shaughnessy’s in 2003.

'Harm reduction' is a treatment approach that seeks to minimise the occurrence of drug/alcohol addiction and its impacts on the addict/alcoholic and society at large. A harm-reduction approach to alcoholism adopted by 92 of Dr Mikuriya's patients in northern California involved the substitution of cannabis - with its relatively benign side-effect profile - as their intoxicant of choice. No clinical trials of the efficacy of cannabis as a substitute for alcohol were reported in the then literature and there were no papers directly on point prior to Dr Mikuriya's own account (1970) of a patient who used cannabis consciously and successfully to reduce her problematic drinking. 

In the late 19th century in the US, cannabis was listed as a treatment for delirium tremens in standard medical texts (Edes 1887, Potter 1895) and manuals (Lilly 1898, Merck 1899, Parke Davis 1909). Since delirium tremens signifies advanced alcoholism, we can adduce that patients who were prescribed cannabis and used it on a long-term basis were making a successful substitution. By 1941, due to prohibition, cannabis was no longer a treatment option, but attempts to identify and synthesise its active ingredients continued. 

A synthetic Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) called pyrahexyl was made available to clinical researchers and one paper from the postwar period reports its successful use in easing the withdrawal symptoms of 59 out of 70 alcoholics (Thompson and Proctor 1953). In 1970 Dr Mikuriya reported on Mrs A., a 49-year-old female patient whose drinking had become problematic. The patient had observed when she smoked cannabis socially on weekends, she decreased her alcoholic intake. She was instructed to substitute cannabis any time she felt the urge to drink. This regimen helped her to reduce her alcohol intake to zero. The paper concluded, “It would appear that for selected alcoholics the substitution of smoked cannabis for alcohol may be of marked rehabilitative value. Certainly cannabis is not a panacea, but it warrants further clinical trial in selected cases of alcoholism”. The warranted research could not be carried out under conditions of prohibition, but in private practice and communications with colleagues Dr Mikuriya encountered more patients like Mrs A. and generalised that somewhere in the experience of certain alcoholics, cannabis use is discovered to overcome pain and depression - target conditions for which alcohol is originally used - but without the disinhibited emotions or the physiologic damage.


By substituting cannabis for alcohol, they can reduce the harm their intoxication causes themselves and others. Although the increasing use of cannabis starting in the late 1960's had renewed interest in its medical properties - including possible use as an alternative to alcohol, meaningful research was blocked until the 1990's, when the establishment of “buyers clubs” in California created a potential database of patients who were using cannabis to treat a wide range of conditions. The medical cannabis initiative passed by voters in 1996 mandated prospective patients get a doctor’s approval in order to treat a given condition with cannabis - resulting in an estimated 30,000 physician approvals as of May 2002. 

A 2009 study published in the Harm Reduction Journal, Cannabis as a Substitute for Alcohol, came to the conclusion that the substitution of one psychoactive substance for another with the goal of reducing negative outcomes can be included within the framework of 'harm reduction' and that medical cannabis patients have been engaging in substitution by using cannabis as an alternative to alcohol, prescription and illicit drugs. "Substitution can be operationalised as the conscious choice to use one 'drug' (legal or illicit) instead of, or in conjunction with, another due to issues such as: perceived safety; level of addiction potential; effectiveness in relieving symptoms; access and level of acceptance. This practice of substitution has been observed among individuals using cannabis for medical purposes. This study examined drug and alcohol use and the occurrence of substitution among medical cannabis patients. 



Successful use of cannabis as a less harmful substitute for alcohol and other toxic substances continues with statistics out of Canada, from the University of Victoria, showing reasons cited for using cannabis by Canadian patients instead of other substances, including better symptom management and less adverse side effects.

13 October 2015

Molecular Biologist - THC Kills Cancer

From Compultense University in Madrid, Spain, Dr Christina Sanchez has been studying the anti-tumour effects of cannabinoids and in particular, Tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, the main psychoactive component of Cannabis for over a decade. In 2014, she delivered sound information that explained exactly how THC kills cancer cells entirely – without adverse effects to healthy cells.

Her research is an addition to other’s work, such as British scientist, Wai Liu, an Oncologist at the University of London’s St George’s medical school. Liu’s research also reveals how THC has ‘potent anti-cancer activity’ and can significantly ‘target and switch off’ pathways that allow cancers to grow. Liu points out that pharmaceutical companies spend billions on drugs that do the very same thing, while the cannabis plant does it naturally. In the following video, The Endocannabinoid System and How THC Cures Cancer, Dr Sanchez explains exactly how THC does the dirty work of eliminating cancer cells by activating the body’s own cannabinoid receptors, creating endocannabinoids.



What’s more, Cannabis can do this without any psychoactive effects. “There’s quite a lot of cancers that should respond quite nicely to these Cannabis agents”, Liu said. “If you talk about a drug company that spent billions of pounds trying to develop these new drugs that target these pathways, Cannabis does exactly the same thing – or certain elements of cannabis compounds do exactly the same thing – so you have something that is naturally produced which impacts the same pathways that these 'fantastic drugs' that cost billions also work on”.

This comes at an important time when American states are legalising medical Cannabis and the United States (US) Federal Government is receiving pressure to de-list Cannabis as an illegal 'drug' – an archaic and erroneous definition of a plant which the US Fed's say "has no medicinal value", even though they hold Patent No. 6,630,507, Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants. Could this be why they are dragging their feet on declassifying this valuable plant? The patent was awarded to the US Fed's Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in October 2003. It was filed four years earlier, in 1999, by a group of scientists from the US National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), part of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH). 

The patent claims exclusive rights on the use of cannabinoids for treating neurological diseases, such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, stroke and diseases caused by oxidative stress, such as heart attack, Crohn’s disease, diabetes and arthritis. It is easy to think of the patent as a patent on Cannabis itself. However, this would be inaccurate, since the patent actually covers non-psychoactive cannabinoids (both synthetic and natural), meaning those that don’t cause a 'high'. The patent also covers only a specific application of these cannabinoids and not the production or use of Cannabis and cannabinoids overall.

Three scientists from the US Department of Health and Human Services said in the abstract - or summary - of their findings submitted with the patent application: 
“The cannabinoids are found to have particular application as neuroproectants, for example in limiting neurological damage following ischemic insults, such as stroke or trauma, or the treatment of neurological diseases, such as Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease and HIV dementia”.

The patent claims to: “provide a new class of antioxidant drugs, that have particular application as neuroprotectants”. According to the description, the inventors recognised “a previously unanticipated antioxidant property of the cannabinoids in general (and cannabidiol in particular)”. Importantly, the patent does not cover cannabinoids that act through cannabinoid pathways, also known as receptors: “This new found property makes cannabinoids useful in the treatment and prophylaxis of wide variety of oxidation associated diseases, such as ischemic, age-related, inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. The cannabinoids are found to have particular application as neuroprotectants, for example in limiting neurological damage following ischemic insults, such as stroke and trauma, or in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease and HIV dementia.”



The US Fed's patent does not cover THC. On the other hand, Cannabidiol (CBD) is specifically mentioned as an example of a cannabinoid that is covered. The patent describes CBD and other non-psychoactive cannabinoids as superior when taken in higher doses. “Non-psychoactive cannabinoids, such as CBD, are particularly advantageous to use because they avoid toxicity that is encountered with psychoactive cannabinoids at high doses”. According to the description, CBD can be ingested in very large amounts without side effects. “No signs of toxicity or serious side effects have been observed following chronic administration of cannabidiol to healthy volunteers, even in large acute doses of 700mg/day”. The patent explains that CBD previously had not been considered useful as a neuroprotectant. However, it cites various studies on CBD as an anti-epileptic and as a potential treatment for glaucoma.

Surely they knew it could treat cancer too. In Hindu texts Cannabis was known as ‘sacred grass.’ It has also been used in traditional Chinese medicine for centuries. Cannabis can replace toxic medications and drastically reduce pain. The abstract from a study in 2008, Standardized natural product cannabis in pain management and observations at a Canadian compassion society: a case report, states:

"An adult Caucasian male with excruciating pains following multiple traumas was monitored, daily, over one year while managing chronic pain by self-administering quantifiable amounts of natural cannabis. Tetrahydrocannabinol, Cannabidiol, and Cannabinol were all measured in tinctures, capsules, smoke-able product plus some baked goods, prior to their administration. By allowing standardization, the subject was able to develop a daily regimen of pain management that was resistant to a battery of most patent analgesics".


Dr Sanchez and other researchers studies are just adding to the age-old wisdom surrounding the medicinal use of this phenomenal plant. In some parts of the world medicine has come a long way with regard to accepting this plant rather than demonising it falsley as a harmful substance. A plant that can benefit the planet in more ways than one, Cannabis should be offered instead of chemotherapy for cancer. It is important to continue to spread information like this as nobody should deny the tremendous healing power of this plant.