Posted on 10/15/2001 9:04:33 AM PDT by MadameAxe
This week, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration banned all food manufactured with hemp grain, delivering a shocking blow to consumers and producers of hemp foods. According to DEA notices published in the Federal Register on October 9, 2001, any product that contains any amount of THC is, and always has been, a Schedule I controlled substance.
The DEA published this notice as an "interpretive rule", not as a new rule, thereby bypassing the usual requirement for public notice and comment. The DEA is stating that hemp food products have always been illegal and that they are just clarifying that fact with this new interpretive rule. The DEA justifies their decision only by saying that it is to "protect the public health and safety", but the DEA does not provide any evidence that THC in any amount is harmful.
"For the first time in U.S. history, the federal government is outlawing a whole class of food products", says Kathleen Chippi, co-founder of the Boulder Hemp Company, who was forced to suspend business last year when investors became nervous about rumors that the DEA was going to outlaw hemp. "It's the same as if the DEA outlawed wheat or corn."
Hemp grain, while not as commonplace as other grains, is touted by health food experts as being "the most nutritionally complete seed on the planet for human consumption."
THC may appear in trace amounts in some products made with hemp grain, just as opiates may appear in trace amounts in poppy seeds. Hemp food has been produced and safely consumed in the U.S. since the founding of the country and has been used worldwide for over 10,000 years without any adverse health effects ever.
The DEA notice in the Federal Register states that it is illegal to consume "any food or beverage (such as pasta, tortilla chips, candy bars, nutritional bars, salad dressings, sauces, cheese, ice cream, and beer) or dietary supplement". Consumers and hemp food manufacturers have until Feb. 6, 2002 to destroy any hemp food products they currently possess.
EXEMPTIONS: The DEA does exempt hemp products that "do not cause THC to enter the human body", such as paper, cloth, and rope. Sterilized seed remains legal for birds, but not humans. Sterilized seed will be exempt only if it is intended for bird seed and combined with some other seed or material that is "not derived from the cannabis plant". Raw hemp fiber is legal, but (strangely) unprocessed hemp stalks are illegal.
Personal care products, such as lotions, soap, shampoo, and lip balm are legal for now, while the DEA searches for evidence that these products can cause trace amounts of THC to enter the body.
There have been rumors for over a year that the DEA was going to ban hemp products. It's unfortunate for citizens that they chose to do this now, while the entire country is focused on terrorist attacks and the war in Afghanistan. You'd think they'd have more urgent things to do right now, like protecting us from bioterrorism, but such is the absurdity of our federal government and its War on Drugs.
This article from the Colorado Hemp Initiative Project. Edited for publication by Sierra Times.com
This is similar to the "hemp paper is better" push. Any paper engineer can tell you that soft fir pulp is superior for a large number of reasons, and that hemp was replaced with other fibers for good reason (after all, hemp was used for a time).
I don't have anything against hemp, but it is highly over-rated as an industrial plant.
I think that the person who posted this bit of misinformation has confused "THC" with "TSH" (Thyroid Stimulating Hormone, from the pituitary).
Interestingly, confusion seems to be a hallmark of chronic pot users.
For some reason, I couldn't find the page that discusses the cost per gallon of producing hemp fuel, nor that mpg and other relevant information.
This lack of info leads me to believe that the data would not reflect well on hemp fuel. If I am incorrect, than you might want to suggest to them that they produce the data, along with the assumptions used. If the data is there, but I can just not find it, then I apologize.
FWIW, I find it fascinating that the gov. bans stuff like Cyclamates or Dursban, but we don't make it a "civil liberties" issue.
But don't touch our HEMP!!!
Leads one to wonder "why?"
I don't mind the idea of hemp farms, if the farm property is obtained legally and without coercion or fraud.
Kerr's activities seem to fall into that coercion/fraud category.
EXCELLENT! YOU GET IT!
I have no problem with you SAYING you want drugs legalized, that's your right under our system of government--even though I'll fight you every step of the way.
But you are RIGHT ON when you point out that stupid "straw men" like "HEMP--THE SUPER SUBSTANCE THAT WILL SAVE CIVILIZATION" doesn't show the fanatical members of your movement in a very good light.
Potheads, unaware they're shooting themselves in the foot! Sort of par for the course, isn't it?
I like to prod the potheads here- they are so easily worked up into a frothing frenzy- but I also favor at least partial legalization and "harm reduction" for druggies. As does William Buckley, and a lot of other real Conservatives.
What I wonder is "why" hemp is illegal in the first place. Even if I agreed that criminalizing substances people might use to get high is justifiable, hemp doesn't fall into that category.
Oh, no, it's perfectly fine, because they're not really laws, just regulations and interpretations.
"DATA??? WE'RE POTHEADS- WE DON'T NEED NO STINKING DATA!!!"
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.