Posted on 07/25/2004 1:12:55 AM PDT by MadIvan
New super-strength marijuana readily available on US streets is prompting the White House to change direction in its war against drugs.
Research from the government-sponsored Marijuana Potency Project claims today's cannabis is more than twice as strong as in the mid-Eighties, leading to greater health risks for those smoking it at increasingly younger ages.
Now President George Bush, who had already promised a more aggressive campaign against substance abuse, has ordered that resources be allocated to fighting so-called 'soft' drugs instead of concentrating on harder forms, such as heroin and cocaine.
'We are working hard on education, but unfortunately a lot of today's parents are under the impression marijuana is harmless and that their kids trying it is some kind of rite of passage,' said Jennifer de Vallance, of the Office of National Drug Control Policy.
'They might have had experience in their own teenage years with no problems, but this is not the same marijuana as in the Sixties, Seventies and Eighties. Today's forms are much stronger and potentially more harmful, especially to young people whose brains are not fully developed and are therefore more susceptible to adverse reactions.'
The Marijuana Potency Project, at the University of Mississippi, analysed more than 30,000 samples seized over the past 18 years by the authorities. It found that the average level of the active ingredient in marijuana, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), jumped from 3.5 per cent in 1985 to more than 7 per cent in 2003.
Of more concern to the analysts is that the upward trend appears to be continuing. The average potency of 20 marijuana samples seized and tested so far this year exceeds 9 per cent, with a peak of 27 per cent in one batch from a state in the North West.
'Today's marijuana is a much more serious problem than the vast majority of Americans understands,' said John Walters, the government's director of drug control policy who has promised a clampdown on producers.
Those who support the legalisation of cannabis are not convinced. 'Whenever government officials speak about drugs issues, a more detailed examination of the facts is a good idea,' said David Borden, executive director of the Washington-based Drug Reform Coordination Network.
'These projects are always government-funded and, without criticising the researchers, officials take what they want from it and send out their press releases. There has always been a wide range of potencies. It doesn't mean people are getting more intoxicated, because the higher the potency, the less they smoke.'
Figures suggest overall drug use in America's high schools has fallen by 11 per cent in two years but the National Centre on Addiction and Substance Abuse reports the number of children and teenagers receiving treatment for marijuana abuse jumped 142 per cent over the last decade, and that emergency hospital admissions of 12 to 17-year-olds in which marijuana was implicated rose 48 per cent in four years.
Borden acknowledges children must be steered away from drugs, but says: 'Their anti-drugs efforts have had a paradoxical effect in promoting the underground cultivation of marijuana. The number of users makes it an appealing target and there is no limit to the number of arrests that can be made, and the government uses those numbers to scare the public into thinking there is some big problem.
'All the government has been able to do is encourage people to experiment with stronger drugs than they would have before.'
"20 samples from the current year seem like an awfully puny number "
Statistically, it maybe significant enough to prove that there is a trend of increased strenght. I guy by the name of Shewhart in th 1920's I think made some rules for sampling and trending. So if these samples are infact representative then it would be valid.
This is not opinion gathering but sampling pot that if the samples don't vary much the sample would be valid to prove a trend. The point is that there is a trend not anything else. I think that there is a danger to those who may use pot and not know they have higher strenght weed.
Song:
What if God smoked Cannabis?
http://www.bobrivers.com/player/ttplayer.asp?ID=1025&Speed=4
"Perhaps that Christian believes that hemp is intended by God for the production of clothes and ropes not smoking. It is a perversion to use pot to get high. This article is about the increase strenght of the active ingredient in pot and therefore not really "natural" like God intended."
Most plants you consume have been modified through selective breeding to enhance their desirable characteristics, and therefore are not natural. So?
From the November 22, 1999 issue of Insight on the News, in the "Mark My Words... I Mean What I Say" column:
"I believe each state can choose that decision as they so choose." - [then] Texas Gov. George W. Bush on legalization of marijuana. His campaign later explained that he does not favor legalizing the drug but does favor states' rights in the matter.
***
What a difference between then and now, and what a waste of resources. Bush could have targeted methamphetamine users, for instance, and made a much bigger statement, and a more useful impact on public health. Such a waste.
Real smart, George. At this point, I'm going to need an industrial strength clothespin for my nose when I vote for him.
Hey Vag, did you know that Ronald Reagan called libertarianism the heart and soul of conservatism?
When he makes bonehead moves like this, he deserves disrespect.
"It is not the responsibility of the government or the legal system to protect a citizen from himself." – Justice Casey Percell
"If the government can't keep drugs away from inmates who are locked in steel cages, surrounded by barbed wire, watched by armed guards, drug-tested, strip-searched, X-rayed, and videotaped – how can it possibly stop the flow of drugs to an entire nation?" – Ron Crickenberger
"The War on Drugs is a price support system for terrorists and drug pushers. It turns ordinary, cheap plants like marijuana and poppies into fantastically lucrative black market products. Without the War on Drugs, the financial engine that fuels terrorist organizations would sputter to a halt." – Ron Crickenberger, Libertarian Party Political Director 2/4/02
A philosophy of consolation is always a comfort to us mortals. ;^)
Until we have a single [1] ruling made by the Supreme Court that any of the current actions being taken by our Government are unconstitutional then, by definition the above statement is fact.
At this point, we appear to have three such rulings (2 1/2 if you prefer):
In my reading, by your own admission this refutes the "fact"uality of the preceding statements upon the absence of which the remainder of your argument largely collapses. I'm just curious to know why you might think these rulings don't suggest a need for a revision of your Rebuttal?
"You have to wonder about a Christian who feels they are smarter than GOD who made the plant and pronounced it good."
The "GOD created it so it must be good!" argument is false.
God created Satan, does that make the devil "good"? God created fruit, does that mean fruit from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil wasn't tainted? God created sex and demanded it occur in marriage, does that mean sex outside of marriage is okay just because God created sex?
Your argument ignores the invasion of sin into creation, and God's response. The Bible doesn't have to scientifically cover and note every intoxicant known to man in order to prohibit. It covers all intoxicants (including Cannabis Sativa) by demanding sobriety.
Christians understand this, so don't worry about them.
Your loserdopian remarks are asinine. Don't you realize that an attack on any freedom is an attack on you?
There is a guy in California right now who claims that we can lower the teen suicide rate by outlawing Christianity. According to him, teen suicides are predominately Christian.
I heard him preaching his nonsense at a park in Chico, California last weekend. I had a good laugh, but I noticed that the majority of the crowd were taking him seriously.
How long before we add Christians to the War On list?
Read this thread down a few dozen posts. Thank God, even FReepers don't believe this crap from Big Stupid Government.
Have you ever even met anybody who gives a damn what Big Stupid Government "thinks" about pot before deciding whether to light up?
The WOD is just another empire-building scam by highly-paid government parasites to keep their cush jobs. Like Prohibition, it'll eventually die - but not before ruining a lot of lives and squandering a trillion dollars or so.
Is the graphic turning? Or is the graphic stationary at the center of the universe while everything rotates around it? Am I seeing orange stripes? Or are the stripes every color except orange?
"We should legalize everything lest they outlaw puppies, and daisies, and the saying of the Rosary!"
And as to the "prompting the White House to change direction in its war against drugs."...well, I've not seen any direction change since the WOsD was implemented. I've only seen it get escalated and from the sounds of this article the direction is about to get ratcheted up a bit more.
A pox on 'em all!
God bless the President. Protecting us as he can against terrorists and now also furthering the protection of our culture and youth.
What a guy! I'm sure this will make Libertarians especially want to go out and campaign for him.
After all, who would want illegal drugs more available in America? That would be sick to feel that way IMO!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.