Marijuana is the Antidote

8/8/2019 Marijuana is the Antidote

1/26

This document contains text automatically extracted from a PDF or image file. Formatting may havebeen lost and not all text may have been recognized.

To remove this note, right-click and select "Delete table".


2/26

Qin fssay on oz (olngng Taraefgm olnoffvofuton

lst Trntng


3/26

Preface


4/26

A medical marijuana bill, the Medical Cannabis Act-SB 2440/ HB4868, has been introduced in the Illinois Legislature and awaits action.There is much misunderstanding about this entire issue and it is essentialthe public become more aware of the profound implications of the

medical marijuana movement. Much that is highly relevant to thisunderstanding has not been reported to the American people by themainstream corporate media. But recent scientific discoveries are totallychanging the paradigm for understanding marijuanas effects on the bodyand its proper place in society. This revolutionary shift in understandingpresents an opportunity to demand reform of all laws relating to cannabis.The essay which follows lays out an in-depth explanation of thesediscoveries and their importance. The wonder of the internet is that it

provides easy access to original sources. The motivated citizen can nowbecome highly informed and up-to-date on current developments to adegree never before possible and has a responsibility - in a democracy -to act as a citizen/ reporter to inform the public of important advances inknowledge when severe conflicts of interest within the corporate media /government propaganda nexus are withholding information which coulddramatically change the way an issue is perceived and acted on.


5/26

Marijuana is the Antidote:


6/26

An Essay on a Changing Paradigm and EvolutionAs Thomas S. Kuhn described in his classic 1962 book, "The Structure of ScientificRevolutions", paradigms shift when a new scientific discovery is made which completelyreorders the previous worldview. Old theories suddenly collapse, better ones take theirplace. An old generation, and its worldview, is put to pasture, replaced by a new one with

a completely different understanding of things. The new knowledge is revelatory, hastremendous power to change minds. The process is not voluntary, it is transformational.The change is more then political, it is evolutionary. It represents the power of real truth toinstigate real, and rapid, change.Since the endogenous cannabinoid system was discovered by Allyn Howlett andWilliam Devane in 1988 at the St. Louis University Medical School, a whole new body ofresearch is emerging , much of it from outside the US but also plenty going on within, whichis laying the groundwork for a complete scientific revision of the effects of marijuana on thebody and its proper place in society. In 1995, Jon Gettman wrote in the paper, Marijuana

and the Human Brain (www.pdxnorml.org/ brain1.html):The next century will view the 1988 discovery of the THC-receptor site in the brain as the pivotalevent which led to the legalization of marijuana.

(Receptors are binding sites for chemicals in the brain, chemicals that instruct brain cells to start,stop or otherwise regulate various brain and body functions.)

From the book, The Science of Marijuana (Oxford University Press, 2000) byLeslie L. Iverson:These discoveries have radically changed the way in which scientists view this field of research.It has changed from a pharmacological study of how the psychoactive drug-THC works in the brain to amuch broader field of biological research on a unique natural control system, now often refered to as thecannabinoid system and the naturally ocurring chemicals became known as endocannabinoids. The term

cannabinoid, originally used to describe the 21-carbon substances found in cannabis plant extracts is nowused to define any compound that is specifically recognized by the cannabinoid receptors.

The cannabis plant produces a whole family of about 60 cannabinoid molecules, ofwhich THC is the most biologically active. It is the only plant in nature to do so. Theproperties of the other cannabinoids are largely unknown but it is assumed that with the useof whole marijuana any number of them also effect CB receptors in unknown ways. So fartwo endocannabinoids have been identified, anandamide and 2-arachidonylglycerol (2-AG). The CB receptors are an entirely new class of nerve receptor, which only bind tocannabinoid molecules, i.e. those produced either by the body, the plant or syntheticanalogs and blockers made by chemists. But they are present in mammalian tissue in high

concentrations. This is the discovery of a previously unknown, and highly integrated, controlmechanism of the nervous system.From Gettman, Marijuana and the Brain, Part II: The Tolerance Factor (www.pdxnorml.org/brain2.html) :Drugs of abuse such as heroin, cocaine, amphetamines, alcohol and nicotine affect theproduction of dopamine, an important neurotransmiter which chemically activitates switches in the brainthat produce extremely pleasureable feelings. Drugs that effect dopamine production produce addictionbecause the human brain is genetically conditioned to adjust behavior to maximize dopamine production.


7/26

This chemical process occurs in the middle-brain, in an area called the striatum, which also controls various


8/26

aspects of motor control and coordination.Dr. Miles Herkenham of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) and his associates have


9/26

proven that marijuana has no direct effect on dopamine production, and that most of the drugs effectsoccur in the relatively new (in evolutionary terms) region of the brain- the frontal cerebral cortex.

In other words, it is now proven that marijuana is not physically addictive.Many articles published in the last year in peer-reviewed scientific journals - andcompletely ignored by the corporate media - begin to hint at how prophetic Gettman was:

Last year, five scientific journals published prominent articles trumpeting cannabinoids(compounds in marijuana) as potential anti-cancer agents.These include:* Clinical trial data published in January 2003 issue of the Journal of the American Society of ClinicalInvestigation that found cannabinoids significantly inhibit skin tumor growth in mice. Investigators of thestudy concluded, "The present data indicate that local cannabinoids administration may constitute analternative therapeutic approach for the treatment of non-melanoma skin cancer."* Clinical trial data published in the March 2003 issue of The FASEB Journal that found that the "localadministration of a non-psychoactive cannabinoid inhibits angiogenesis (tissue growth) of malignantgliomas (brain tumors)."* A clinical review in the October 2003 issue of the prestigious journal Nature Reviews Cancer thatconcluded that cannabinoids "favorable drug safety profile" and proven ability to inhibit tumor growthmake them desirable agents in the treatment of cancer. According to the reviews author, tumors inhibitedby cannabinoids include: lung carcinoma, glioma, thyroid epithelioma, lymphoma/leukemia, skincarcinoma, uterus carcinoma, breast carcinoma, prostate carcinoma, and neuroblastoma (a malignanttumor originating in the autonomic nervous system or the adrenal medulla and occurring chiefly in infantsand young children).* Clinical trial data published in the November 2003 issue of the Journal of Pharmacology andExperimental Therapeutics that found the administration of the cannabinoid cannabidiol (CBD) inhibits thegrowth of human glioma cells both in vitro (e.g., a petri dish) and in animals in a dose-dependent manner.Investigators concluded, "Non-psychoactive CBD produce[s] a significant antitumor activity both in vitroand in vivo, thus suggesting a possible application of CBD as an antineoplastic agent (something whichprevents the growth of malignant cells.)"

* And finally, a clinical review in the December 2003 issue of the journal Expert Opinion on TherapeuticTargets that summarized "the demonstrated antitumor actions of cannabinoids," and elaborated on"possible avenues for the future development of cannabinoids as antitumor agents."www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread19348.shtml.

Well examine: "Cannabinoids: Potential Anticancer Agents" by Dr. ManuelGuzman, published in the Oct. 2003 edition of Nature Reviews-Cancer, a publication of thejournal Nature, one of the world's most respected, peer-reviewed scientific journals. Theresearch is from the Dept. of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, ComplutenseUniversity- Madrid, Spain. Its very good science by anyone's estimation. Excellentbibliography. Yet there hasnt been a peep mentioned about any of this in the American

corporate media. ( Find PDF link at marijuananews.com/news.php3?sid=717)2.


10/26

Its been known since 1974 that THC (Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol), the active


11/26

ingredient in marijuana, slowed the growth of tumors but for political reasons research intopositive effects of marijuana has been verboten in Amerika ever since because ofinsufferable drug war bureaucratic roadblocks which required that research approved bythe National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) on marijuana be conducted only to emphasizenegative results. But the discovery of the cannabinoid receptor system in 1988 spured an

incredible flurry of new research worldwide and the dike is about to burst. Two kinds ofcannabinoid-specific receptors have been identified, CB1 and CB2 receptors. CB1receptors are abundant in the brain while CB2 receptors are concentrated in the immunesystem. But as more research is done, cannabinoid receptors are turning up in an amazingarray of places:Since the 1999 IOM (Institute of Medicine) report was published, hundreds of studies oncannabinoids, the active compounds in marijuana, and their newly developed cognates, have uncoveredastonishing results."Every one of our body's organized systems makes and responds to marijuana-like compounds:cardiovascular, digestive, endocrine, excretory, immunological, nervous, reproductive and respiratory,"

says Dr. Robert Melamede, head of the biology department at the University of Colorado (ColoradoSprings). Endogenous (natural in the body) cannabinoids and their receptors are popping upeverywhere, and showing beneficial effects in animal and clinical (human) studies.Beyond the traditional symptomatic relief for nausea in cancer and AIDS patients, or pain andspasticity in Multiple Sclerosis sufferers, cannabinoids may actually retard the progression of diseases likeMS, Alzheimer's, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). In addition, compounds in marijuana are showinganti-tumor effects and protective properties in the brain and heart tissue of stroke and heart attack victims,and those exposed to nerve gas. "When they say marijuana destroys your brain, they have it exactlywrong," says Melamede. "Marijuana protects your brain, from the lack of oxygen and neurotoxins." TheU.S. army is investigating the matter, and one research team in Spain is shrinking human brain tumors byinjecting them with cannabinoids. http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread19302.shtml

Cannabinoid receptors dont turn up, it turns out, in the brain stem which controls involuntaryand cardiovascular functions and this probably explains why no fatal overdose for THCexists.What has been discovered about the endogenous cannabinoid system, and therole of the bodys own cannabinoids, anandamide and 2-arachidonylglycerol (2-AG), isthat this system is very basic to the way - apparently - all animal life forms biochemicallyoperate. From Understanding Marijuana, A New Look at the Scientific Evidence by MitchEarleywine, Oxford University Press, 2002 :Human cannabinoid receptors are extremely similar to those found in rodents, suggesting thatevidence from animal studies may apply to people. Leeches, mollusks,chickens, turtles, trout and fruitflies have cannabinoid receptors. Even a primitive protozoan, the Hydra, has a cannabinoid receptor that

appears to alter its feeding. The presence of the receptor in such a wide variety of species suggests thatit must have an important and universal function.

Consider this study- http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/6/thread6304.shtml-Chemicals related to the active ingredient of cannabis might be vital for our survival. Naturallyoccurring cannabinoids in newborn mice trigger feeding, and without them the animals may die withindays, says a biologist in Israel. She believes the chemicals could play a similar role in people.Cannabinoids produced in the body are known to be natural painkillers. They also coordinatethe dopamine system, helping to control movement. But smoking cannabis increases appetite, a property


12/26

3.


13/26

that is sometimes exploited to help cancer and AIDS patients. Cannabinoids have also been detected inhuman and cow's milk, and levels here are at their highest the day after giving birth. Ester Fride of the


14/26

Hebrew University of Jerusalem thought these observations might be a clue that naturally occurringcannabinoids are important in the early development of newborns.To test this, she injected newborn mice with a chemical that blocks cannabinoids by competingfor receptors in the brain. None of the treated pups fed from their mothers. Some died within a week, andthose that survived developed more slowly, Fride told the meeting.When Fride and her colleagues treated the pups with the active component of cannabis, delta-

9-tetrahydrocannabinol, in a dose sufficient to swamp the effect of the blocker, the pups fed and grewnormally, confirming that the blocker chemical was not itself toxic. "It seems that the pups are completelyunable to ingest food without endogenous cannabinoids," she says.

This is pretty basic! Returning to the Guzman study. In the Summary it says:Cannabinoids inhibit tumour growth in laboratory animals. They do so by modulating key cell-signalling pathways, thereby inducing direct growth arrest and death of tumour cells, as well as byinhibiting tumour angiogenesis and metastasisCannabinoids are selective antitumour compounds, as they kill tumour cells without affectingtheir non-transformed counterparts. It is probable that cannabinoid receptors regulate cell-survival andcell-death pathways differently in tumour and non-tumour cells

This is an astounding discovery! What is the mechanism at work which allows

cannabinoid molecules to perform in this way?Cannabinoids might exert their antitumour effects by several different mechanisms,including direct induction of transformed-cell death, direct inhibition of transformed-cell growth andinhibition of tumour angiogenesis (the development of blood vessels) and metastasis.Antitumour compounds should selectively affect tumour cells. It seems that cannabinoids can dothis, as they kill tumour cells but do not affect their non-transformed counterparts and might even protectthem from cell death. The best characterized example is that of glial cells. Cannabinoids induce apoptosisof glioma cells in culture and induce regression of gliomas in mice and rats. By contrast, cannabinoidsprotect normal glial cells of astroglial and oligodendroglail lineages from apoptosis.The molecular basis for this ying-yang behavior is not completely understood, but could resultfrom the differential capacity of tumour and non-tumour cells to synthesize ceramide in response to

cannabinoids.It is therefore conceivable that cannabinoid receptors regulate cell survival and cell deathdifferently in transformed and non-transformed cells.

In light of all this, what does this study have to say about the use of whole marijuana?In a 2-year administration of high oral doses of THC to rats and mice, no marked histopathologicalalterations in the brain and other organs were found. Moreover, THC treatment tended to increase survivaland lower the incidence of primary tumours. Similarly, long-term epidemiological surveys, although scarceand difficult to design and interpret, usually show that neither patients under prolonged medicalcannabinoid treatment nor regular cannabis smokers have marked alterations in a wide array ofphysiological, neurological and blood tests.

The discovery of an antagonism between cannabinoid molecules, especially THC,

and cancer genesis, operating at the molecular level, is deeply profound. This is atransforming insight. Consider this also: not only are there no cases of anyone ever dyingfrom an overdose of THC, there are also no proven cases of anyone ever developinglung cancer solely from smoking marijuana. The usual explanation postulates a difference in4.


15/26

the smoking habits of pot-smokers vs. tobacco smokers and finds marijuana smokers inhale


16/26

far less tar over time. But one study from the UCLA School of Medicine(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11245634&dopt=Abstract) has found evidence the THC in inhaled marijuana smoke mayactually inhibit a pre-cancerous enzyme change from taking place in the lungs. So this maybe another case where THC actually acts directly to suppress cancer. Certainly the

circumstantial evidence of millions of people using cannabis for years with no lung canceranywhere in evidence epidemiologically suggests a direct action.The Guzman research team has published another study in the Aug. 15, 2004edition of Cancer Research on the effects of cannabinoids on angiogenesis. From thearticle: http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread19337.shtmlCannabinoids, the active ingredients in marijuana, restrict the sprouting of blood vessels to braintumors by inhibiting the expression of genes needed for the production of vascular endothelial growthfactor (VEGF).According to a new study published in the August 15, 2004 issue of the journal Cancer Research,administration of cannabinoids significantly lowered VEGF activity in laboratory mice and two patients with

late-stage glioblastoma."Blockade of the VEGF pathway constitutes one of the most promising antitumoral approachescurrently available," said Manuel Guzmn, professor of biochemistry and molecular biology, with theComplutense University in Madrid, Spain, and the study's principal investigator.Glioblastoma multiforme, the most aggressive form of glioma, strikes more than 7,000 Americanseach year and is considered one of the most malignant and deadliest forms of cancer, generally resultingin death within one to two years following diagnosis.The disease is usually treated with surgery, followed by conventional radiation alone or incombination with chemotherapy. However, the main tumor often evades total destruction, surviving andgrowing again, eventually killing the patient. For this reason, researchers are actively seeking othertherapeutic strategies, some of which might be considered novel.In this study, the investigators chose to work with cannabinoids which, in previous studies, have

been shown to inhibit the growth of blood vessels, or angiogenesis, in laboratory mice. However, little wasknown about the specific mechanisms by which cannabinoids impair angiogenesis, or whether thechemical might do the same in human tumors.To answer the first part of the question, the scientists induced gliomas in mice, which weresubsequently inoculated with cannabinoids. Using DNA array analysis, the team examined 267 genesassociated with the growth of blood vessels in tumors and found that cannabinoids lowered theexpression of several genes related to the VEGF pathway, critical for angiogenesis.The researchers also discovered that cannabinoids apparently worked by increasing the activity ofceramide, a lipid mediator of apoptosis, resulting in the functional inhibition of cells needed for VEGFproduction. The ability of cannabinoids to alter VEGF production was significantly stifled following theintroduction of a ceramide inhibitor.

"As far as we know, this is the first report showing that ceramide depresses VEGF pathway byinterfering with VEGF production," according to Guzmn.To answer the second part of the question relating to clinical tests, the scientists obtained tumorbiopsies from two patients with glioblastomas who had failed standard therapy, including surgery,radiotherapy and chemotherapy. The biopsied tissue was analyzed before and after local injection of acannabinoid."In both patients, VEGF levels in tumor extracts were lower after cannabinoid inoculation," saidGuzmn. The results, he added, suggest a potential new approach toward the treatment of theseotherwise intractable brain tumors.


17/26

So, more evidence accumulates. Heres a really interesting question: would an5.


18/26

honest epidemiological survey among the generations whove now used cannabis for 30-


19/26

40 years show an increased resistance to all forms of cancer as well as a markedly lowerincidence of a whole host of other diseases? Nobody ever suspected plant- derivedaspirin when it was first let loose on human society would turn out to greatly improve apersons chances of surviving a heart attack, when taken regularly. Likewise, for themoderate use of alcohols positive effect on the cardiovascular system. Its epidemiological

science that uncovers these things but, as the above notes, existing surveys are scarceand hard to design. Especially when the target activity is illegal and the target group would,in fact, be a cross section of some of the most well adjusted, successful, otherwise normalpeople - of the 1960s and later age groups-in every town in America, since that is the realprofile of the typical long time cannabis user.In May 1999, Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Healthpublished a study entitled, Cannabis Use and Cognitive Decline in Persons under 65Years of Age. This was a study surveying 1,318 participants over a 12 year period insearch of any indication of cannabis related cognitive decline in persons under 65. The

conclusion of this study was as follows:There were no significant differences in cognitive decline between heavy users, light users andnonusers of cannabis. There were no male-female differences in cognitive decline in relation to cannabisuse. The authors conclude that over long time periods, in persons under 65 years, cognition declines inall age groups. This decline is closely associated with aging and educational level but does not appear tobe associated with cannabis use.

However, one place in the study did find that:both light and heavy users of cannabis evidenced less cognitive decline than nonusers,although this finding was not statistically significant.

In light of the new cannabinoid receptor research one wonders if it wasnt significant after all?However, this statement is almost certainly why this study never saw the light of day in

corporate-media/ zero tolerance/ Drug War obsessed America.The study was totally ignored! The only periodical in the country with even a oneparagraph mention of it was Science News. The most prestigeous medical researchuniversity in the country publishes the results of a 12 year study which blows a big hole inmarijuana prohibitionist propaganda and its completely whitewashed out of the brought-to-you-by-the -pharmaceutical industry-sponsored-corporate media news. It nevers entersthe public discussion. Is never given the opportunity to influence the debate on marijuanasillegality or medicinal potential. Do we believe in science or dont we? That is the basicquestion here. Do we believe in, and have respect for, the validity of scientific input on themajor questions of the day? The science is now saying something very profound about the

way marijuana effects the body. These discoveries represent a devastating blow to theofficial government line that marijuana has no medical use. They also call into immediatequestion every other assumption ever made about marijuana to justify its illegality or thearresting of over 700,000 citizens every year in the mindlessly quixotic quest to stamp itout.The cost of the War On Drugs is staggering. The following article by Doug McVay,published by the Orlando Centinal, Sept. 29, 2002, lays it out well:


20/26

'We have created an American gulag," declared former drug czar Barry McCaffrey in 1996,describing the widespread and accelerating incarceration of drug offenders. Unfortunately, the American

6.


21/26

drug gulag has grown even larger since then. And it is a phenomenon that has a human and financial cost.In 1990, the entire federal prison system held a total of 56,989 inmates for all offenses combined. By the


22/26

time McCaffrey made his observation in '96, there were 55,000 drug offenders in federal prisons. In 2000,federal prisons held almost 130,000 inmates, of which 75,000 were drug offenders.Who are we sending to the drug gulag and why? The answer may be surprising.Many federal prisoners are first-time offenders. According to the federal Bureau of JusticeStatistics, 46 percent of drug offenders convicted in federal courts in 1999 were first-time offenders. Ofthese, 91 percent were sentenced to 49.2 months on average.

There is also a strong and growing federal focus on marijuana, even though more-dangerousdrugs are becoming cheaper to attain. In 1997, nearly 19 percent of federal drug offenders were servingtime for marijuana. In 1999, 30 percent of the drug offenders convicted in federal courts were marijuanaoffenders. In 1999, more than 90 percent of such offenders were sentenced to an average of 33.8months in federal prison.For their part, the individual states hold more than a quarter of a million drug offenders in prisons,21 percent of the total 1,206,400 state prison inmates. Frequently these are low-level, minor offenders:possession offenders account for more than 27 percent of all drug offenders in state prisons; more than10 percent of all drug offenders in state prisons were convicted of marijuana offenses.The state of Florida, with the third-largest state prison system in the United States according toBJS, had an inmate population of 72,406 at the end of 2001. Nearly 18 percent of them are drug

offenders.The road to the American drug gulag begins with an arrest. In 2000, the FBI reports there were1,579,566 arrests for drug offenses nationally -- the third year in a row of 1.5 million-plus drug arrests, upfrom just over 1 million in 1990. Marijuana arrests numbered 734,497 in 2000, of which 646,042 weresimple possession. These statistics don't include the quickie civil citations that some states allow. Theseare real arrests, each of which takes up at least a few hours of a police officer's, or a DEA agent's, time.\To compare: Nationally, in 2000, there were 625,132 arrests for all violent crimes, and 1,620,928arrests for all property crimes. The FBI notes that annually, less than half of all violent crimes are "cleared" --that is, an offender is arrested and charged with the crime, though not necessarily convicted -- and only16.7 percent of property crimes.Meanwhile, heroin and cocaine are available nationwide at lower prices and higher purity than everbefore. Abuse indicators such as overdose deaths and emergency-room episodes are also at record

highs.The farther along the road to the drug gulag we go, the more racist the system appears. TheHousehold Survey reports that 77 percent of drug users are white, 12 percent are black, and 10 percentare Hispanic. Further, research from the National Institute of Justice indicates that most drug users usuallybuy their drugs from people of their own ethnicity/race.And there are almost equal numbers of white and African-American felony drug defendants instate courts. Yet, on conviction, African-American drug defendants are much more likely than whites to besentenced to incarceration.As a result, within the drug gulag the racial divide is stark: African-Americans comprise 57.8percent of drug offenders in state prisons and 40 percent of federal drug prisoners; whites, 23 percent ofstate drug prisoners and 24 percent of federal drug prisoners; and Hispanics, 17.2 percent of state drug

prisoners and 33 percent of federal drug prisoners.In Florida's prison system, 24 percent of drug offenders are white, 73.4 percent are black.Unfortunately, Florida doesn't provide an estimate of the number of Hispanic offenders -- something thefeds and most states started doing only relatively recently.How did the drug gulag grow so quickly? Much of the growth is the result of mandatory minimumsentencing laws. These laws give judges no leeway in sentencing, and are simply based on the type andquantity of drugs involved in the offense.Recoiling from the fact that their hands are tied, some senior judges on the federal bench nowrefuse to accept drug cases to protest these rules. There is growing resistance to these laws among the


23/26

public as well, but until they change, the gulag continues to grow.Beyond the human cost, this American drug gulag is expensive to operate. The federal Bureau of

7.


24/26

Prisons is currently spending $3 billion a year just to incarcerate drug offenders. Even so, prisonconstruction lags terribly behind demand: BJS reports that the federal prison system is 31 percent over its


25/26


26/26

8.

Documents

Marijuana is the Antidote