We pass it to them and they won't stop talking.
"Marijuana critics call ballot question flawed" by Eric Moskowitz | Globe Staff, October 23, 2012
"Marijuana critics call ballot question flawed" by Eric Moskowitz | Globe Staff, October 23, 2012
Lawmakers, doctors, and others opposing a ballot question to legalize marijuana for medical use contended Monday that the question’s wording is flawed and would enable widespread recreational use of the drug.
On that second one, there already is, but is that a good enough reason to deny it to sick people when it could help alleviate their suffering?
Related: Massachusetts Justice Rejects Medical Marijuana
A Globe poll last month found that 69 percent of respondents support the legalization measure. Gathered on the State House steps, the opponents argued that the ballot question does not stand up to scrutiny, contending it plays on compassion for those suffering from debilitating illnesses in hope of ultimately decriminalizing marijuana for all.
Even if it does, so what? States have already done it, and are looking at a haul of tax loot.
“This is not about being compassionate to those true, legitimate treatment needs,” said state Senator John F. Keenan, the Quincy Democrat who chairs the Joint Committee on Mental Health and Substance Abuse. “The residents of Massachusetts are being sold a law that goes way beyond the idea of being compassionate. Don’t be fooled. Please read the law.”
This is the compassionate, caring, liberal Democratic state of Massachusetts, right? First on gay marriage and out front on bullying and all?
Supporters of the question disputed those assertions, prompting a spirited debate on the Beacon Street sidewalk between lawmakers and advocates on both sides.
Opponents who organized the event pointed to what they called the question’s “vague, ambiguous” language. They cited clauses that allow the drug to be prescribed not just to alleviate pain for cancer or glaucoma but for any “conditions as determined in writing by a qualifying patient’s physician,” and that permit patients to obtain a 60-day supply at once, which in states where medical marijuana is legal can mean half a pound.
Opponents of the measure known as Question 3 warned that storefront dispensaries could appear anywhere, that medical marijuana registration cards would be easy to obtain and never expire, that cardholders could acquire large stashes by visiting multiple dispensaries, and that the cards would make it harder for police to enforce laws for illegal possession or use if a cardholder is present in a group.
“This will mean more marijuana in the hands of our children,” said Representative Carolyn Dykema, a Holliston Democrat and mother of teenagers.
It is sad to see the reactionary liberals parroting propaganda and advancing their agenda using children. How about calling out a war lie and maybe saving a life instead.
The 2,300-word proposal does not restrict dispensary locations, except to allow for up to five per county and 35 statewide. It says nothing about card expiration dates or visits to multiple dispensaries but prohibits possession of more than a 60-day supply. It also says fraudulent card use could be punished with up to six months in jail and that resale or distribution of marijuana for nonmedical use could be punished with up to five years in prison.
Supporters of the measure disputed the criticisms and said if voters approve the ballot question, strong regulations would be written by the state Department of Health.
Well, I don't know if you can trust the DoH. Not after the meningitis outbreak and state drug lab scandal. Mostly forgotten now, though, and everything back to "normal."
The vote-no group filled the steps with teenagers and recovering drug addicts in treatment, while legislators, doctors, law enforcement leaders, and others poked at the language of the question and called marijuana a gateway drug.
Mayor Tom Koch of Quincy said the dispensaries could appear next to schools or addiction- treatment centers. Jay Broadhurst, the Worcester physician leading the coalition, called the list of diagnoses that would allow someone to qualify for the drug “outrageously broad” and “clinically useless.”
Norfolk District Attorney Michael W. Morrissey and Norwood Police Chief William G. Brooks III, representing the state’s chiefs, said similar laws elsewhere brought unintended problems, with crime increasing near dispensaries and with the drugs ending up in the hands of those without cards.
As opponents spoke, supporters quietly distributed literature of their own. Representative Martin J. Walsh of Dorchester, who said he opposes the legalization effort as a cancer survivor and as someone who has lost family members to addiction, called them out.
I'm tired of the one-$ided debate and insults hidden in the journalistic style, folks. Think I'll just go smoke a joint.
When the crowd broke up, Walsh debated with two legalization supporters, Representative Frank Smizik of Brookline and Karen Munkacy, a nonpracticing physician from Newton.
“The Department of Public Health is going to issue regulations on this if it passes,” Munkacy said.
“Oh, I feel comfortable with that,” Walsh said.
“They’ll do a very good job,” Munkacy said.
Well, I don't know about that.
“I’m concerned about the kids that were behind me up on the stairs,” Walsh said, saying the measure would make marijuana easier for all to obtain.
Is it that difficult now? Or is it because terrorists are selling it?
Munkacy, a breast cancer survivor, said she was motivated by the “horrible suffering” she experienced in treatment because she chose not to smoke marijuana, deciding not to break the law. She said the lessons of other states would yield regulations to make this “the most heavily regulated program in the country.”
Oh, the person in pain with suffering gets a whole paragraph?
--more--"
On that second one, there already is, but is that a good enough reason to deny it to sick people when it could help alleviate their suffering?
Related: Massachusetts Justice Rejects Medical Marijuana
A Globe poll last month found that 69 percent of respondents support the legalization measure. Gathered on the State House steps, the opponents argued that the ballot question does not stand up to scrutiny, contending it plays on compassion for those suffering from debilitating illnesses in hope of ultimately decriminalizing marijuana for all.
Even if it does, so what? States have already done it, and are looking at a haul of tax loot.
“This is not about being compassionate to those true, legitimate treatment needs,” said state Senator John F. Keenan, the Quincy Democrat who chairs the Joint Committee on Mental Health and Substance Abuse. “The residents of Massachusetts are being sold a law that goes way beyond the idea of being compassionate. Don’t be fooled. Please read the law.”
This is the compassionate, caring, liberal Democratic state of Massachusetts, right? First on gay marriage and out front on bullying and all?
Supporters of the question disputed those assertions, prompting a spirited debate on the Beacon Street sidewalk between lawmakers and advocates on both sides.
Opponents who organized the event pointed to what they called the question’s “vague, ambiguous” language. They cited clauses that allow the drug to be prescribed not just to alleviate pain for cancer or glaucoma but for any “conditions as determined in writing by a qualifying patient’s physician,” and that permit patients to obtain a 60-day supply at once, which in states where medical marijuana is legal can mean half a pound.
Opponents of the measure known as Question 3 warned that storefront dispensaries could appear anywhere, that medical marijuana registration cards would be easy to obtain and never expire, that cardholders could acquire large stashes by visiting multiple dispensaries, and that the cards would make it harder for police to enforce laws for illegal possession or use if a cardholder is present in a group.
“This will mean more marijuana in the hands of our children,” said Representative Carolyn Dykema, a Holliston Democrat and mother of teenagers.
It is sad to see the reactionary liberals parroting propaganda and advancing their agenda using children. How about calling out a war lie and maybe saving a life instead.
The 2,300-word proposal does not restrict dispensary locations, except to allow for up to five per county and 35 statewide. It says nothing about card expiration dates or visits to multiple dispensaries but prohibits possession of more than a 60-day supply. It also says fraudulent card use could be punished with up to six months in jail and that resale or distribution of marijuana for nonmedical use could be punished with up to five years in prison.
Supporters of the measure disputed the criticisms and said if voters approve the ballot question, strong regulations would be written by the state Department of Health.
Well, I don't know if you can trust the DoH. Not after the meningitis outbreak and state drug lab scandal. Mostly forgotten now, though, and everything back to "normal."
The vote-no group filled the steps with teenagers and recovering drug addicts in treatment, while legislators, doctors, law enforcement leaders, and others poked at the language of the question and called marijuana a gateway drug.
Mayor Tom Koch of Quincy said the dispensaries could appear next to schools or addiction- treatment centers. Jay Broadhurst, the Worcester physician leading the coalition, called the list of diagnoses that would allow someone to qualify for the drug “outrageously broad” and “clinically useless.”
Norfolk District Attorney Michael W. Morrissey and Norwood Police Chief William G. Brooks III, representing the state’s chiefs, said similar laws elsewhere brought unintended problems, with crime increasing near dispensaries and with the drugs ending up in the hands of those without cards.
As opponents spoke, supporters quietly distributed literature of their own. Representative Martin J. Walsh of Dorchester, who said he opposes the legalization effort as a cancer survivor and as someone who has lost family members to addiction, called them out.
I'm tired of the one-$ided debate and insults hidden in the journalistic style, folks. Think I'll just go smoke a joint.
When the crowd broke up, Walsh debated with two legalization supporters, Representative Frank Smizik of Brookline and Karen Munkacy, a nonpracticing physician from Newton.
“The Department of Public Health is going to issue regulations on this if it passes,” Munkacy said.
“Oh, I feel comfortable with that,” Walsh said.
“They’ll do a very good job,” Munkacy said.
Well, I don't know about that.
“I’m concerned about the kids that were behind me up on the stairs,” Walsh said, saying the measure would make marijuana easier for all to obtain.
Is it that difficult now? Or is it because terrorists are selling it?
Munkacy, a breast cancer survivor, said she was motivated by the “horrible suffering” she experienced in treatment because she chose not to smoke marijuana, deciding not to break the law. She said the lessons of other states would yield regulations to make this “the most heavily regulated program in the country.”
Oh, the person in pain with suffering gets a whole paragraph?
--more--"
Yeah, it's all about the kids. Maybe they will stop filling them up with prescription pharmaceuticals someday, and we won;t have a bunch of brain-numbed killers wandering around.
"Teen marijuana use linked to later declines in IQ" Associated Press, August 28, 2012
"Teen marijuana use linked to later declines in IQ" Associated Press, August 28, 2012
NEW YORK — Teens who routinely smoke marijuana risk a long-term drop in their IQ, a new study suggests.
I'm not suggesting kids should smoke pot; however:
Pot makes you smart!; Recent study into the effects of pot on IQ reveals that the media are dopes
Hey, what one more weiss in the $ervice of a greater good?
Also see: The Greatest Story Never Told
California Scientists Say Marijuana Compound Cures Cancer
Wha... cough... t?
I'm not suggesting kids should smoke pot; however:
Pot makes you smart!; Recent study into the effects of pot on IQ reveals that the media are dopes
Hey, what one more weiss in the $ervice of a greater good?
Also see: The Greatest Story Never Told
California Scientists Say Marijuana Compound Cures Cancer
Wha... cough... t?
You don't think I'm going to take an agenda-pushing survey from my mouthpiece media seriously, do you? If so, what have you been smoking?
The researchers didn’t find the same IQ dip for people who became frequent users of marijuana after 18. Although experts said the new findings are not definitive, they do fit in with earlier signs that the drug is especially harmful to the developing brain.
It's the least toxic out there, and that includes nicotine and booze, but when you are $hoveling an agenda.... and to think I used to read and believe this shit. What was I smoking?
‘‘Parents should understand that their adolescents are particularly vulnerable,’’ said lead researcher Madeline Meier of Duke University. Meier and colleagues reported their work online Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Study participants from New Zealand were tested for IQ at age 13, presumably before any significant marijuana use, and again at age 38.
The mental decline between those two ages was seen only in those who started regularly smoking marijuana before age 18.
Richie Poulton, a study co-author and professor at the University of Otago in New Zealand, said the message of the research is to stay away from marijuana until adulthood if possible. ‘‘For some it’s a legal issue,’’ he said, ‘‘but for me it’s a health issue.’’
Got a light?
Marijuana is the most popular illegal drug in the world, with somewhere between 119 million and 224 million users between the ages of 15 and 64 as of 2010, the United Nations reported. Within the United States, 23 percent of high school students said they had recently smoked marijuana, making it more popular than cigarettes, the federal government reported in June.
Young people ‘‘don’t think it’s risky,’’ said Staci Gruber, a researcher at the Harvard-affiliated MacLean Hospital in Belmont, Mass. Gruber, who did not participate in the new work, said the idea that marijuana harms the adolescent brain is ‘‘something we believe is very likely,’’ and the new finding of IQ declines warrants further investigation.
Scientists said the new research is an advance because its methods avoid criticisms of some earlier work, which generally did not measure mental performance before marijuana use began.
‘‘I think this is the cleanest study I’ve ever read’’ that looks for long-term harm from marijuana use, said Dr. Nora Volkow, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, which helped fund the research.
The study drew on survey data from more than 1,000 people in New Zealand, everybody born in the town of Dunedin during a year-long span ending in 1973.
In addition to IQ tests, they were interviewed five times between ages 18 and 38, including questions related to their marijuana use.
--more--"
You wanna pass that or are you going to make love to it?
"Medical marijuana law will challenge overseers" by Chelsea Conaboy | Globe Staff, November 09, 2012
Voters’ approval of medical use of marijuana on Tuesday is already prompting questions about the readiness of beleaguered state health regulators, local communities, and police to oversee the retail outlets where the drug will be sold.
Un-flipping-real.
Un-flipping-real.
The law, which won majorities in all but two Massachusetts communities, takes effect Jan. 1. But some groups, including the Massachusetts Municipal Association, are calling on the Legislature to delay it. Town officials must draft zoning rules stipulating where the distribution centers may be located — or whether to allow them at all — and police departments are grappling with how to deal with a law that is in direct conflict with federal drug policy and their own training.
All of a sudden now it's a big problem. Every time we vote for something they didn't want it's always some feet-dragging bulls*** or lame-ass excuse.
All of a sudden now it's a big problem. Every time we vote for something they didn't want it's always some feet-dragging bulls*** or lame-ass excuse.
“There’s no attempt to stop the ballot question in any way,” said Geoff Beckwith, executive director of the municipal group, who would like to see a “transition period” until about mid-2013. “It’s just a real-world challenge of suddenly having something that’s been illegal now being legal, and communities need to have time to update their ordinances.”
Well, we are headed there and I have only one question: HOW MANY SICK PEOPLE NEEDLESSLY SUFFERED for MONTHS in liberal, caring, compassionate, Democrat Massachushitts??!! You guys didn't give a shit about the conditions at the compounding places, and yet this is all gonna have to be inspected with regulations, blah, blah, blah.
Well, we are headed there and I have only one question: HOW MANY SICK PEOPLE NEEDLESSLY SUFFERED for MONTHS in liberal, caring, compassionate, Democrat Massachushitts??!! You guys didn't give a shit about the conditions at the compounding places, and yet this is all gonna have to be inspected with regulations, blah, blah, blah.
The ballot measure charged the Department of Public Health with writing the rules for the program, including those determining just how much drug each patient can possess at a given time and the required operating procedures for distribution centers. The department’s budget has been cut in recent years, and the past two months have brought two major public crises.
A chemist at the Jamaica Plain drug lab formerly run by the department was arrested in September, accused of tampering with drug samples and throwing into question thousands of convictions. Commissioner John Auerbach, a respected public health leader, resigned under pressure soon after the case came to light.
Then news broke in late September that an injectable steroid produced at a Framingham pharmacy had been linked to a growing number of fungal meningitis cases, including at least 31 deaths.
It's up to 53 now, and still counting. No big concern, certainly not the kind of ma$$ media attention the Marathon bombing got.
Questions have been raised about the adequacy of the state board of pharmacy’s oversight of New England Compounding Center — concerns heightened Wednesday when the department’s interim commissioner, Dr. Lauren Smith, announced she had fired the board’s director for allegedly mishandling a complaint against the compounder.
“Right now, we know that DPH has had unprecedented pressure,” and creating a medical marijuana program will cost “valuable state resources,” Representative Jeffrey Sánchez, a Boston Democrat, said last week when asked about the ballot question.
Sánchez is House chairman of the Joint Committee on Public Health and has joined other lawmakers in calling hearings starting Nov. 14 on the department’s ability to protect public health, given the recent crises.
Sánchez said Wednesday that lawmakers are just beginning what will probably be a long process of investigating the stability of the Department of Public Health, but regulators will begin grappling with medical marijuana now. “The dialogue and debate have just begun on this issue,” he said.
We already had that and voted. WTF are you talking about?
Both recent scandals were disturbing but not entirely surprising to Dr. Barry Zuckerman, an outgoing member of the state Public Health Council, an appointed panel of doctors, professors, and consumer advocates that oversees the public health agency. He said the department’s budget has been dramatically cut in recent years, and it was “only a matter of time and in what area” that those cuts would have real public health repercussions.
Blog editor can't believe what he just read.
In fiscal 2009, the budget was about $589 million. In the latest state budget, it is $519 million.
Community-based programs have seen the most cuts, said Maddie Ribble, policy director for the Massachusetts Public Health Association. And those came even as the department was given new responsibilities, including school nutrition programs, concussion monitoring in youth sports, and duties related to the medical cost containment bill passed this summer.
In July 2011, members of the Public Health Council sent a letter to lawmakers expressing concern about the department’s finances and asking them to be as generous as possible in the final budget negotiations for the year.
Ribble said he hopes the Legislature will add to the department’s budget to fund proper oversight of the medical marijuana program and sustain other important programs, such as regulating food safety.
A chemist at the Jamaica Plain drug lab formerly run by the department was arrested in September, accused of tampering with drug samples and throwing into question thousands of convictions. Commissioner John Auerbach, a respected public health leader, resigned under pressure soon after the case came to light.
Then news broke in late September that an injectable steroid produced at a Framingham pharmacy had been linked to a growing number of fungal meningitis cases, including at least 31 deaths.
It's up to 53 now, and still counting. No big concern, certainly not the kind of ma$$ media attention the Marathon bombing got.
Questions have been raised about the adequacy of the state board of pharmacy’s oversight of New England Compounding Center — concerns heightened Wednesday when the department’s interim commissioner, Dr. Lauren Smith, announced she had fired the board’s director for allegedly mishandling a complaint against the compounder.
“Right now, we know that DPH has had unprecedented pressure,” and creating a medical marijuana program will cost “valuable state resources,” Representative Jeffrey Sánchez, a Boston Democrat, said last week when asked about the ballot question.
Sánchez is House chairman of the Joint Committee on Public Health and has joined other lawmakers in calling hearings starting Nov. 14 on the department’s ability to protect public health, given the recent crises.
Sánchez said Wednesday that lawmakers are just beginning what will probably be a long process of investigating the stability of the Department of Public Health, but regulators will begin grappling with medical marijuana now. “The dialogue and debate have just begun on this issue,” he said.
We already had that and voted. WTF are you talking about?
Both recent scandals were disturbing but not entirely surprising to Dr. Barry Zuckerman, an outgoing member of the state Public Health Council, an appointed panel of doctors, professors, and consumer advocates that oversees the public health agency. He said the department’s budget has been dramatically cut in recent years, and it was “only a matter of time and in what area” that those cuts would have real public health repercussions.
Blog editor can't believe what he just read.
In fiscal 2009, the budget was about $589 million. In the latest state budget, it is $519 million.
Community-based programs have seen the most cuts, said Maddie Ribble, policy director for the Massachusetts Public Health Association. And those came even as the department was given new responsibilities, including school nutrition programs, concussion monitoring in youth sports, and duties related to the medical cost containment bill passed this summer.
In July 2011, members of the Public Health Council sent a letter to lawmakers expressing concern about the department’s finances and asking them to be as generous as possible in the final budget negotiations for the year.
Ribble said he hopes the Legislature will add to the department’s budget to fund proper oversight of the medical marijuana program and sustain other important programs, such as regulating food safety.
The Department of Public Health has about four months to write rules for the program, based on the ballot measure’s basic framework....
I'm sure they will get an extension.
--more--"
I'm sure they will get an extension.
--more--"
"Towns seek limits on medical marijuana" by Peter Schworm | Globe Staff, December 02, 2012
A measure to legalize medical marijuana in Massachusetts may have won decisive support at the ballot box this election, but communities across the Boston area are rushing to craft zoning regulations to limit where the drug dispensaries can be located, or in some cases ban them altogether, before the new law takes effect in January....
The quick and widespread response reflects concern with the potential impact of the shops, from increased crime to an influx of recreational users....
Pffft!
Why don't you go down to the BANK, first?!!!!
Given the uncertainty, the Massachusetts Municipal Association, a coalition of cities and towns, is calling for a six-month delay in implementing the law....
While some town officials are seeking to prohibit the dispensaries, most are focused on where they should operate, and generally agree that office parks, industrial zones, and medical areas would be best. They are acting like they are locating a porn shop.
Supporters of the dispensaries, while frustrated by local resistance, agree that centers would be well-suited near hospitals.
“That strikes me as extremely logical,” said Bill Downing, an official with The Massachusetts Cannabis Reform Coalition, which supports the legalization of the drug. Downing dismissed efforts to ban or impede centers as “a lot of posturing,” and cited studies that rebut claims that dispensaries are magnets for crime.
Experts at UCLA studied crime rates in 95 different parts of Sacramento, Calif., in 2009 and found no correlation between crime and concentration of medical marijuana outlets.
Who cares about facts?
Law enforcement officials are skeptical, and say the law will be exploited by drug dealers and lead to more addiction.
But supporters say Massachusetts can use the experience of other states to craft strong regulations.
“It’s not as if Massachusetts will be reinventing the wheel here,” said Paul Armentano, deputy director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. “There are practical models that are up and running and have been for some time.”
Regulations vary from state to state, he said, but are generally considered rigorous. A dozen states, including California, Colorado, and Maine, allow dispensaries.
Massachusetts town officials say that while banning centers may not pass legal muster, zoning restrictions should be valid.
“The precedent exists for adult entertainment facilities,” said Adam Baacke, who directs Lowell’s planning and development department. “Chances are, this is a use that will be viewed in a similar light.”
But some backers of the medical marijuana law say the debate may be moot. By the time the centers are licensed and set to open, marijuana may be legalized, some speculate.
--more--"
The quick and widespread response reflects concern with the potential impact of the shops, from increased crime to an influx of recreational users....
Pffft!
Why don't you go down to the BANK, first?!!!!
Given the uncertainty, the Massachusetts Municipal Association, a coalition of cities and towns, is calling for a six-month delay in implementing the law....
While some town officials are seeking to prohibit the dispensaries, most are focused on where they should operate, and generally agree that office parks, industrial zones, and medical areas would be best. They are acting like they are locating a porn shop.
Supporters of the dispensaries, while frustrated by local resistance, agree that centers would be well-suited near hospitals.
“That strikes me as extremely logical,” said Bill Downing, an official with The Massachusetts Cannabis Reform Coalition, which supports the legalization of the drug. Downing dismissed efforts to ban or impede centers as “a lot of posturing,” and cited studies that rebut claims that dispensaries are magnets for crime.
Experts at UCLA studied crime rates in 95 different parts of Sacramento, Calif., in 2009 and found no correlation between crime and concentration of medical marijuana outlets.
Who cares about facts?
Law enforcement officials are skeptical, and say the law will be exploited by drug dealers and lead to more addiction.
But supporters say Massachusetts can use the experience of other states to craft strong regulations.
“It’s not as if Massachusetts will be reinventing the wheel here,” said Paul Armentano, deputy director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. “There are practical models that are up and running and have been for some time.”
Regulations vary from state to state, he said, but are generally considered rigorous. A dozen states, including California, Colorado, and Maine, allow dispensaries.
Massachusetts town officials say that while banning centers may not pass legal muster, zoning restrictions should be valid.
“The precedent exists for adult entertainment facilities,” said Adam Baacke, who directs Lowell’s planning and development department. “Chances are, this is a use that will be viewed in a similar light.”
But some backers of the medical marijuana law say the debate may be moot. By the time the centers are licensed and set to open, marijuana may be legalized, some speculate.
--more--"
Like it's a natural disaster?
"Physicians won’t seek marijuana delay" by Liz Kowalczyk | Globe Staff, December 02, 2012
"Physicians won’t seek marijuana delay" by Liz Kowalczyk | Globe Staff, December 02, 2012
WALTHAM — The state’s largest physicians organization decided Saturday that it will not push to delay a new law allowing the medical use of marijuana. Instead, the group will lobby for tighter protections for doctors whose patients want to use the drug.
Yeah, thanks, doc.
The Massachusetts Medical Society also will advocate to include medical marijuana patients in an online state database that helps doctors and pharmacists monitor over-prescribing of addictive drugs.
I'll skip the prescription then. They hand out the pharmaceuticals like candy, but they are worried about a drug you can't overdose on.
Some groups, including the Massachusetts Municipal Association, are calling for the Legislature to postpone the medical marijuana law, which takes effect Jan. 1. During a two-day meeting of the medical society attended by several hundred doctors, some physicians urged the organization to do the same, but ultimately, they decided the voters had spoken.
“The voters want it and our patients want it,’’ said Dr. Eric Ruby, a pediatrician in Taunton. “You cannot put the Massachusetts Medical Society above the law.’’
You can only put wealthy elite and bankers there.
Ruby and several other physicians said some of their patients who suffer from severe pain, anxiety, and other debilitating medical conditions already have asked for permission to use marijuana. Under the law, patients who qualify will have to get a certificate from their doctors to buy the drug from state-sanctioned distribution centers.
Patrick Lowe, 23, a medical student at the University of Massachusetts in Worcester, said he did not want the medical society “to appear to be hindering the process,’’ especially when a delay is likely anyway as the Department of Public Health develops detailed regulations....
Dr. James Broadhurst, who headed the medical society’s opposition to the ballot initiative, proposed a broad policy to the organization that included supporting a delay. The society voted on two dozen resolutions during its two-day meeting, which are used to guide its policy and lobbying agenda. The rest of Broadhurst’s proposal on medical marijuana was largely approved and signal how doctors will seek to shape implementation of the law....
Broadhurst said protecting patients from overuse or dangerous combinations of drugs also is important.
“You are asking [physicians] to make a judgment about the risks and benefits of marijuana” for a patient, Broadhurst said. “If I’m prescribing a benzodiazepine, which has sedative effects, I need to know if the person is taking medical marijuana.’’
Ultimately, he said, doctors want to make sure that only patients who are very sick and have exhausted all other remedies have access to marijuana....
You know who and what he mean$, right?
Doctors have argued all along that medications should be used only after rigorous study and approval by the US Food and Drug Administration. But now that Massachusetts has become the 18th state to legalize marijuana for medical use, physicians will have to make a personal decision whether to make the drug available to their patients.
Then what is with all the phony pharmaceutical tests and FDA recalls?
Ruby said he has kept a list of a half-dozen patients at least 18 years old who have requested the drug or who might qualify. He said he will make the drug available to certain patients.
“I have kids who can’t go outside their house because they are so anxious with social anxiety,” he said. “They are on Ativan, which is so much more addicting or on Prozac, which is very difficult for them to get off.’’
Broadhurst said that for him “it’s a very tough call. I’ll have to learn a great deal more,’’ he said.
Not from where I'm sitting.
--more--"
Yeah, thanks, doc.
The Massachusetts Medical Society also will advocate to include medical marijuana patients in an online state database that helps doctors and pharmacists monitor over-prescribing of addictive drugs.
I'll skip the prescription then. They hand out the pharmaceuticals like candy, but they are worried about a drug you can't overdose on.
Some groups, including the Massachusetts Municipal Association, are calling for the Legislature to postpone the medical marijuana law, which takes effect Jan. 1. During a two-day meeting of the medical society attended by several hundred doctors, some physicians urged the organization to do the same, but ultimately, they decided the voters had spoken.
“The voters want it and our patients want it,’’ said Dr. Eric Ruby, a pediatrician in Taunton. “You cannot put the Massachusetts Medical Society above the law.’’
You can only put wealthy elite and bankers there.
Ruby and several other physicians said some of their patients who suffer from severe pain, anxiety, and other debilitating medical conditions already have asked for permission to use marijuana. Under the law, patients who qualify will have to get a certificate from their doctors to buy the drug from state-sanctioned distribution centers.
Patrick Lowe, 23, a medical student at the University of Massachusetts in Worcester, said he did not want the medical society “to appear to be hindering the process,’’ especially when a delay is likely anyway as the Department of Public Health develops detailed regulations....
Dr. James Broadhurst, who headed the medical society’s opposition to the ballot initiative, proposed a broad policy to the organization that included supporting a delay. The society voted on two dozen resolutions during its two-day meeting, which are used to guide its policy and lobbying agenda. The rest of Broadhurst’s proposal on medical marijuana was largely approved and signal how doctors will seek to shape implementation of the law....
Broadhurst said protecting patients from overuse or dangerous combinations of drugs also is important.
“You are asking [physicians] to make a judgment about the risks and benefits of marijuana” for a patient, Broadhurst said. “If I’m prescribing a benzodiazepine, which has sedative effects, I need to know if the person is taking medical marijuana.’’
Ultimately, he said, doctors want to make sure that only patients who are very sick and have exhausted all other remedies have access to marijuana....
You know who and what he mean$, right?
Doctors have argued all along that medications should be used only after rigorous study and approval by the US Food and Drug Administration. But now that Massachusetts has become the 18th state to legalize marijuana for medical use, physicians will have to make a personal decision whether to make the drug available to their patients.
Then what is with all the phony pharmaceutical tests and FDA recalls?
Ruby said he has kept a list of a half-dozen patients at least 18 years old who have requested the drug or who might qualify. He said he will make the drug available to certain patients.
“I have kids who can’t go outside their house because they are so anxious with social anxiety,” he said. “They are on Ativan, which is so much more addicting or on Prozac, which is very difficult for them to get off.’’
Broadhurst said that for him “it’s a very tough call. I’ll have to learn a great deal more,’’ he said.
Not from where I'm sitting.
--more--"
Also see:
Supporters celebrate shift on gay marriage
Washington state passes gay marriage question
In Maine, a gay-marriage conversation
Gay marriage becomes legal in Maryland
Same-sex couples wed in Maryland
Agenda-pushing media all happy 'bout those.
Studying medical pot law at work
Mass. seeks input on medical marijuana
States should distribute marijuana via warehouses, not storefronts
Related:
Coakley rejects bans on dispensing marijuana
Medical marijuana trade group set to debut in Mass.
And what's this?
"State may miss deadline to issue medical marijuana rules" by Kay Lazar | Globe Staff, February 03, 2013
The November ballot referendum that legalized marijuana for medical use in Massachusetts required that regulations be issued by May 1 to implement the law, but state health officials say the complexity of the issue has proven so daunting that they are unlikely to complete final rules by that deadline.
Un-flipping-real.
The referendum left dozens of crucial details to be decided by regulators, including the ailments for which patients could use marijuana, whether permits should have an expiration date, and whether dispensaries that sell marijuana brownies should be inspected like restaurants.
“We have to be conscious of balancing the needs of patients with the very real potential for unintended consequences that can come with this kind of program,” Dr. Lauren Smith, interim public health commissioner, said in an interview.
Smith said she wants regulations crafted to minimize the risk of marijuana becoming widely available for recreational use, especially by teenagers.
Some studies have shown that rates of marijuana use among young people have increased in states that have allowed use of marijuana for medicinal use.
She said her department is talking to health leaders in many of the other 17 states that have legalized medical marijuana to learn what has worked and what has not.
The department is also gathering comments from the public, doctors, local governments, and other interest groups.
Public health officials believe that the law gives them some leeway on the timing of regulations, because they are broadly interpreting the word “issue” to mean that rules must be proposed by May, but not necessarily adopted.
“We are going to have the final regulations done as close to May as possible,” Smith said. She declined to say when she thought final rules would be in place.
Supporters of medical marijuana said any delay is unjustified and would cause patients to suffer needlessly.
“The existing timeline allows the state sufficient time to implement the law so patients get the medicine they need, communities are safe and secure, and the will of over 63 percent of the voters is followed,” Matt Allen, executive director of the Massachusetts Patient Advocacy Alliance, said in an e-mail.
The law went into effect Jan. 1, so patients can already get a certification from their doctor that would allow them to use and grow a limited amount of marijuana for their own medical needs, but no marijuana dispensaries can open yet.
Meanwhile, state lawmakers, who say they have been inundated by voters worried about public safety and health concerns, have filed a flurry of proposals to change the law, which was passed easily by voters. One bill would delay the law’s effective date to Sept. 1, giving health officials until the end of the year to finalize regulations. And a growing number of municipalities have passed zoning rules seeking to ban medical marijuana dispensaries in their communities.
It is not clear that the law would allow communities to entirely ban the dispensaries, but some of the legislative proposals would give communities the right to prohibit the facilities near schools, churches, and municipal buildings.
With mounting community opposition to marijuana dispensaries, Senator John F. Keenan of Quincy has proposed an unusual compromise. Instead of the 35 storefront operations statewide envisioned in the referendum, Keenan’s bill suggests there be no more than 10 secure warehouse-type centers to fill patient orders via courier.
He said the proposal would address community concerns about higher crime rates reported around retail marijuana dispensaries in other states.
Bullshit.
It would also eliminate the need to allow disabled patients to grow their own marijuana, he said, because transportation would not be an issue in a courier-run system.
Busted!
“It will make marijuana available to those with debilitating conditions,” Keenan said.
Smith, the interim health commissioner, said the warehouse idea is intriguing, but added that her department is still studying Keenan’s bill, which includes several other proposals.
It would, for instance, require that identification cards needed to purchase marijuana expire one year after they are issued by the state.
That provision addresses one of the many concerns of the Massachusetts Medical Society, the state’s largest physician trade group, which recently met with state health officials to outline physician suggestions for the pending regulations.
Bill Ryder, the society’s legislative and regulatory counsel, said prescriptions for other types of medications typically run 30 or 60 days and no longer than one year, so cards allowing patients to buy medicinal marijuana should similarly have to be renewed after one year if the patient still needs marijuana.
“Even if it’s something like cancer — presumably some of these patients go into remission — but does their certification last in perpetuity?” Ryder said.
Leaders of the Massachusetts Municipal Association have also discussed concerns with state health officials and are preparing written suggestions, said association executive director Geoffrey Beckwith.
One of the association’s recommendations would require marijuana dispensaries to get approval from local health departments for any food products, such as medical marijuana brownies and lozenges, which are envisioned for patients who are unable to smoke.
“We want to makes sure all the appropriate local procedures and processes that are in place are honored by the department,” Beckwith said.
States that have legalized dispensaries have run into problems with edible marijuana products, said a 2011 report by the US Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, which met with leaders from 15 states to record their experiences with medical marijuana.
“They are often dispensed without FDA or health department oversight or without quality control systems in place to identify who made the items, when they were made, or how they were made,” the report said.
It noted that some states have encountered instances in which edible products were found to be contaminated by mold or “other potentially harmful ingredients.”
Compounding!
Even in states that have had laws on the books for years, new issues are arising. In California, where medical marijuana has been legal since 1996, two cities faced lawsuits from several disabled residents who said that more recent local bans on marijuana dispensaries hampered their ability to use the service, violating the Americans with Disabilities Act. But a federal appeals court has ruled that the act does not protect the rights of disabled patients to use medical marijuana, even when prescribed by a doctor.
Fearing similar challenges in Massachusetts, Representative Cleon Turner, a Dennis Democrat, has filed four bills that, he says, will protect the rights of cities, towns, and property owners who prohibit medical marijuana smoking in public and private places, such as apartments and parks, that already ban tobacco smoke.
“It is unfair to cities and towns and private property owners to leave these obvious issues unclear and have them face the costs of litigation,” said Turner, a lawyer and former Dennis police officer and selectman.
The experience of some other states also suggests that, it may be some time before the first dispensary opens its doors.
In New Jersey, where the Legislature approved a law in January 2010, the first dispensary did not open until nearly three years later, in December 2012.
And to hell with the suffering sick people, 'eh?
--more--"
"Wide range of concerns voiced at Mass. hearing on medical marijuana" by Kay Lazar | Globe Staff, February 14, 2013
An Army veteran from Newton worries that medical marijuana will not be legally available in Massachusetts for those seeking treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder.
The chairman of a Weymouth substance abuse treatment program is concerned that regulators will be too lenient when crafting rules, allowing easy access for teenagers seeking marijuana for recreational use.
And family physicians fear losing their federally issued licenses to prescribe pain medications if they recommend marijuana for patients, a practice not sanctioned by federal laws.
They were among about 50 people who voiced their concerns and suggestions Thursday at Roxbury Community College in a three-hour “listening session” held by state regulators to help them craft regulations guiding the medical use of marijuana.
Under a November ballot referendum that legalized medical marijuana, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health is required to issue regulations by May 1, although officials recently said the complexity of the issue may take them a bit longer to complete the task.
Dave Morgan, a retired pharmacist who heads Weymouth’s Substance Abuse Prevention Team, urged regulators to consider not allowing edible marijuana, such as cookies or candies, which are permitted in some of the other 17 states that have legalized the medical use of marijuana.
“As a pharmacist, we don’t put Lipitor in cheeseburgers,” Morgan said. “Medicine is not smoked and is not compounded into food and candies. If you want it to be called medicine, treat it as medicine.”
Many of those who spoke among the audience of about 200 offered opinions about how regulators should decide the medical conditions that would qualify a patient as so debilitated that he or she needs medical marijuana.
The referendum listed nine specific conditions, but also states that “other conditions” could be determined in writing by a patient’s physician, a stipulation that worries substance-abuse prevention and other health specialists who say such vague language will result in marijuana being widely diverted for recreational use.
Scott Murphy, the 30-year-old Newton veteran who served in Iraq, said a friend of his, another vet, committed suicide last year after suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. Murphy said he worries that veterans, who receive care from Veterans Affairs health centers, may not be able to persuade those physicians to certify patients for medical marijuana use, since the federal government prohibits such use.
Murphy said he struggles with chronic pain and degenerative arthritis in many of his joints, the aftermath of a motorcycle accident exacerbated by four years of Army service. Smoking marijuana, he said, helps relieve his joint pain, when other medications have not worked.
“I have to buy it off the street now,” he said after testifying....
A landlords’ association spokeswoman testified that property owners are worried about mold, water, and smoke damage in their buildings from patients now allowed to grow their own marijuana under “hardship cultivation” permits, if they lack transportation or finances to buy from dispensaries.
Dawna Carrette of the Small Property Owners Association, pointed out that landlords in Oregon are legally allowed to refuse to rent to patients approved for medical marijuana use, and she said members of her association want the same protections for Massachusetts landlords.
“We need either to have a choice or, alternatively, I suggest [state regulators] should ban marijuana growing and using in rental apartments,” Carrette said.
Dr. Lauren Smith, interim state health commissioner, said regulators want to carefully write the rules to ensure that there are no unintended consequences.
She said the lengthy testimony was helpful. And she said the department is determined to strike the right balance between public safety and patient needs.
“Everyone’s story is appropriately poignant,’’ she said. “What we have to do as a department is to listen to the stories but continue to understand that we are responsible for the health and well-being of the 6½ million people of the Commonwealth . . . and that’s what we are going to do.”
--more--"
"Marijuana rules would let doctors determine patient use" by Kay Lazar | Globe Staff, March 29, 2013
Proposed rules for medical use of marijuana in Massachusetts, issued Friday by the state Department of Public Health, largely sidestep the thorny matter of who will qualify for treatment with the drug and instead leave it up to doctors to decide.
The regulations say patients must have a debilitating condition — defined as causing weakness, wasting syndrome, intractable pain or nausea, or impairing strength or ability and limiting major life activities — to receive written certification from their doctor to buy the drug.
The rules also list qualifying conditions, including cancer, glaucoma, HIV/AIDS, hepatitis C, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or ALS, but ultimately allow doctors and their patients to decide what other conditions would qualify for treatment.
Dr. Lauren Smith, interim public health commissioner, said her agency heeded the many requests from patients who testified during public hearings in February that the decision is best left to doctors and their patients.
“We shifted the focus away from the disease and more appropriately to how that disease affects the patient,” Smith said during a teleconference with reporters.
Voters in November approved a ballot referendum that legalized marijuana for medical use, but the measure left it to the health department to issue regulations that would implement the law.
The referendum allowed patients to possess up to a 60-day supply of marijuana for personal use, but did not define the specific amount. The draft regulations define that supply as up to 10 ounces in a 60-day period. The department said it took into account the “best practices” from 17 other states that have legalized marijuana for medical use in crafting Massachusetts’ proposed regulations.
But some advocates said 10 ounces may not be enough to address the pain and other symptoms of some patients.
Whitney Taylor, field director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, noted that Washington state, which adopted a medical marijuana law more than a decade ago, allows patients to possess up to 24 ounces of marijuana in a 60-day period.
“Washington state has had all these years of experience, and they have a policy statement on why they chose 24 ounces, so why do something else?” she said.
Another patient advocacy group, Americans for Safe Access, said it found the rules “generally acceptable,” but is concerned about several of the new provisions, including one that would require physicians to undergo mandatory training before being authorized to recommend marijuana to their patients.
The group said in a statement that this might “chill physician participation in the program and make it more difficult for patients to obtain a recommendation.”
The 45 pages of rules also would require applicants wishing to open a medical marijuana treatment center, known as a dispensary, to be organized as a nonprofit and to operate both a cultivation and dispensing facility. No wholesale distribution of marijuana products would be allowed.
Scott Hawkins, who heads a Boston consulting firm that has advised industry and elected officials on medical marijuana issues in several states, said Massachusetts’ draft rules are unlike those in many other states because they allow dispensary owners to cultivate their crop at an alternate in-state site.
“It allows for Western Massachusetts to participate by having a greenhouse operation,” Hawkins said. “This allows for greater economics in production, making it less expensive to produce, which would allow patients, in theory, to receive less expensive medicine.”
Jobs!
The regulations require dispensary applicants to document that they have at least $500,000 in an escrow account, a high hurdle particularly for nonprofit organizations that typically rely on federal funding, said Wayne Dennison, an attorney at the Boston firm Brown Rudnick.
Despite the existence of marijuana dispensaries in 17 other states, federal authorities do not recognize the them as legal operations, making them potentially subject to criminal prosecution.
“Any nonprofit that is pretty heavily federally regulated would likely run away from trying this because of their funding source,” Dennison said.
Massachusetts regulators said they intend to “minimize home cultivation” through a variety of approaches, including requiring the industry to provide and finance discounted rates for low-income residents at all dispensaries, allowing “secure home delivery where necessary,” and encouraging patients’ personal caregivers to pick up products in lieu of growing marijuana at home.
“In this proposal, we have sought to achieve a balanced approach that will provide appropriate access for patients, while maintaining a secure system that keeps our communities safe,” said Smith, the interim commissioner.
Addressing concerns raised by many substance abuse prevention advocates, the rules severely restrict marijuana access to patients under age 18, requiring guardian approval and certification by two physicians, one of them a pediatrician or pediatric specialist. These younger patients would only be certified to receive marijuana if they had a “life-limiting illness, likely to result in death within six months,” according to the rules.
Smith’s department also recommends strict rules for dispensary advertising, allowing no illuminated signs or signs larger than 16 by 18 inches outside the buildings. The rules prohibit the dispensaries from advertising their prices outside their facilities, and will not allow the sale of any “promotional gifts, such as T-shirts or novelty items,” bearing any symbols or references to marijuana or marijuana products.
The department said it will accept written comments immediately from patients, interested parties, and the public at large. On April 10, the department will present the draft regulations to the Public Health Council, an appointed body of physicians, academics, and policy makers that is responsible for reviewing the department’s recommendations and approving final regulations.
On April 19, public hearings will be held in Northampton, Boston, and Plymouth, and on April 20 the public comment period will close, the department said.
State Representative Jeffrey Sánchez of Boston, House chairman of the Joint Committee on Public Health, said in a statement that the public should realize the rules issued Friday are only a “midpoint” of a long regulatory process.
“There is still time for citizens to weigh in on this proposal, and I encourage them to do so through the department’s public hearings or through written comment,” Sanchez said.
The Public Health Council is scheduled to vote on final rules May 8, and if approved, those rules would go into effect May 24, the department said.
--more--"
Related: Doctors call for study of marijuana
What's the delay, doc?
"SJC issues rulings to clarify marijuana law" by John R. Ellement | Globe Staff, April 05, 2013
The state’s highest court Friday stepped into the gray legal area created in 2008 when voters decriminalized the possession of one ounce of marijuana, releasing four rulings aimed at clarifying where police and the public can draw the line between a crime and a civil offense.
In three of the rulings, the Supreme Judicial Court concluded that prosecutions linked to the public consumption of small amounts of marijuana cannot stand because the defendants came to the attention of police due to civil infractions — which are punishable by fines — and not by crimes punished by imprisonment.
In the fourth ruling, the SJC decided that a Western Massachusetts man who had outfitted his closet to grow marijuana could face criminal charges because cultivating cannabis is still illegal, even though Adams police found less than an ounce of marijuana when they raided his home.
Cape and Islands District Attorney Michael O’Keefe, noting that the SJC threw out two illegal gun possession cases today, said he disagreed with the court. But, he said, the responsibility lies not with the judges, but with the electorate who approved the measure. O’Keefe is president of the Massachusetts District Attorneys Association.
“The public seems to have spoken on this. They seem to be saying that it’s OK to have this encouragement to dope smoking,’’ said O’Keefe, who opposed the 2008 proposal, as did other prosecutors. “They can live with the consequences.’’
But Matthew R. Segal, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, said the SJC only recognized a social reality and, at the same time, protected the rights of citizens to be free of intrusive searches by police.
“This just basically ensures that the conduct that is already happening all over Massachusetts, and most other states — sharing marijuana — won’t land you in jail and won’t give police the license’’ to search possessions, he said. The organization urged the SJC to reach the conclusions that it did.
At the heart of one of the rulings was the Hempfest held annually at Boston Common, where many attendees publicly smoke marijuana and often — as was the case in 2010 with defendant Kityan Jackson — share a joint with friends and acquaintances. Jackson was spotted by police sharing a joint, which led police to search his backpack without a warrant, where they found 10 small bags of marijuana weighing 23.5 grams, or less than an ounce. Jackson was prosecuted for possession of marijuana with intent to distribute. But the SJC said that charge must be thrown out because Jackson was targeted by police after they spotted him committing a civil infraction, sharing a joint, not a crime.
“We now decide that the social sharing of marijuana is akin to simple possession, and does not constitute the facilitation of a drug transfer from seller to buyer that remains the hallmark of drug distribution,’’ Justice Fernande R.V. Duffly wrote for the unanimous court.
The SJC also threw out illegal gun possession charges lodged against Daniel Clinton and Alyson Tayetto after Boston police stopped the car Tayetto was driving in Dorchester with one headlight out in 2009 and discovered that both smelled like they had been smoking marijuana and that Tayetto possessed a small amount of marijuana. Duffly also authored this unanimous ruling, which concluded that the gun found in the glove box of the car was discovered only after police made an unauthorized search of the vehicle based on Tayetto’s admission that she possessed a small amount of marijuana.
“Absent articulable facts supporting a belief that either occupant of the vehicle possessed a criminal amount of marijuana, the search was not justified by the need to search for contraband,’’ Duffly wrote.
The SJC also rebuffed Suffolk District Attorney Daniel F. Conley’s office on another key issue raised during the appeal. Prosecutors wanted the SJC to make it clear that police can search a car to make sure its operator doesn’t drive under the influence of marijuana, which remains a criminal offense akin to drunken driving.
The SJC said it would not use its power to grant police that “community caretaker’’ authority, in part because none of the evidence against Tayetto suggested she was incapable of driving and also because prosecutors had not raised the issue in the lower courts.
The SJC also threw out a gun case against Antonio L. Pacheco, who was in a car smoking marijuana with friends when a state trooper stopped them for violating the evening curfew at Heritage State Park in Lynn. The trooper found a small bag of marijuana inside the cab of the car, and then opened the trunk, where he found a gun in a backpack.
Pacheco allegedly admitted the weapon was his, but the SJC said those statements must be thrown out, too, because they came after he was stopped for using marijuana.
But the court also found decriminalization has its limits. Justices ruled that Kenneth J. Palmer Jr. could still be prosecuted for cultivating the marijuana Adams police found growing in a closet in his home in 2010 — even though the seized marijuana weighed less than an ounce.
While only an ounce was recovered by police, officers also found he had outfitted the closet with lights, a thermometer, and empty plastic bags.
Justice Margot Botsford wrote that “the word ‘cultivate’ refers to the process of growing a plant or crop, not the purpose for which the plant or crop is grown. Accordingly, we hold that the cultivation of one ounce or less of marijuana, regardless of its intended use, is a criminal offense.’’
--more--"
I'm sorry, what did you say?
"Marijuana dispensaries may have to quality test in Mass." by Kay Lazar | Globe Staff, April 10, 2013
Proposed state rules for the medical use of marijuana, which regulators will debate Wednesday, would make Massachusetts one of the few states that require marijuana dispensaries to test their products for contaminants such as heavy metals and pesticides, but specialists say it is easier to mandate testing than to do it reliably.
But if you were a compounder we didn't care and people died.
Few credible labs will test marijuana products for potency or contaminants for fear of losing federal government contracts, because medical marijuana is not sanctioned by federal law, say researchers who study the medical marijuana industry. That means testing will probably be left up to the dispensaries, they said.
“If you are going to talk about marijuana as medicine, you need to think about how you produce it and ensure its safety for patients,” said Rosalie Liccardo Pacula, a senior economist and codirector of the Drug Policy Research Center at RAND Corporation, a California-based nonpartisan research institution.
Pacula, who received a National Institutes of Health grant two years ago to study state marijuana laws, said her research has found few states that mandate testing. “California is an example of how not to do it,” she said....
Americans for Safe Access, a nonprofit that advocates for research and medical use of marijuana, will be submitting written comments suggesting a system of state-licensed, independent labs that would test marijuana but that would not be at risk of federal sanctions because they would not test narcotics and other federally regulated drugs.
“We would absolutely like to see third-party testing,” said Jill Lamoureux, the organization’s program director. “It’s more reliable.”
Massachusetts became the 18th state to adopt a medical marijuana law after voters approved a ballot referendum last November, and that measure required the Department of Public Health to issue regulations to implement the law.
Last month, the department issued 45 pages of draft regulations, which say dispensaries are responsible for testing marijuana products for contaminants including mold, mildew, metals, and pesticides, but do not specify how often.
They also include a section on inspections of dispensaries, known as Medical Marijuana Treatment Centers. The rules state that inspections may be conducted “at any time without prior notice” and stipulate that all areas of the centers and all records are “subject to such inspection.” But inspections would not be mandatory under the proposed rules.
The section is similar in wording to Massachusetts rules regarding oversight of pharmacies, an issue that has sparked heightened state scrutiny after a deadly fungal meningitis outbreak last year was tracked to drugs produced at a Massachusetts specialty pharmacy.
While regulators have long had the authority to inspect pharmacies “at any time without prior notice,” under state rules, they seldom did, instead opting to review pharmacies only when they opened, expanded, or drew complaints. It was only after contamination at New England Compounding Center in Framingham was linked to dozens of meningitis deaths and hundreds of illnesses last fall that Governor Deval Patrick ordered annual surprise inspections of similar pharmacies. That ruling has not since been codified in state law or regulations for pharmacies.
But they will be all over the weed.
Asked about inspections of dispensaries, Dr. Lauren Smith, interim state health commissioner, declined through a spokesman to be interviewed.
She's leaving anyway.
After the Globe asked about the lack of mandatory inspections, spokesman David Kibbe said Tuesday: “The regulations are not final, so I cannot predict what the final regulations will look like, but I can tell you that DPH will conduct unannounced inspections of these facilities, just as the department does with pharmacies.”
*********
On the other end of the spectrum is Maine....
Officials at the Wellness Connection had assured Maine inspectors they were not using pesticides during its most recent annual inspection, but after state officials received calls from concerned employees, the state sent inspectors back to the company’s Auburn cultivation site last month, said Joan Smyrski, an assistant director at Maine’s Division of Licensing and Regulatory Services. “When we went back, we opened every closet and every locked room, and field officers found the pesticides,” she said.
Yeah, but they don't care if it's all over the food.
She said Maine prohibits pesticide use because research is lacking about health effects.
“This is not like putting pesticides on your home-grown tomatoes, because you can’t wash marijuana,” Smyrski said. “We still can’t say that when you ignite it, heat it, and inhale it that it’s not causing duress to someone in end-stage illness.”
Then outlaw cigarettes, cigars, and tobacco.
State records show inspectors found nine pesticides and more than 20 other violations, including bags of marijuana in varying stages of processing that included labels indicating “mold,” or “bugs.”
They quarantined it so it wouldn't affect the rest of the crop, morons.
“When employees were asked about the intentions for the contents of these . . . they reported that they would be required to package [for sale] what they could and that the remainder would be disposed,” the records state.
Wellness Connection, which owns dispensaries in four communities and two cultivation sites, recently agreed to correct the problems, Smyrski said. Regulators have stepped up unannounced inspections of the state’s eight dispensaries....
And I thought Maine was cool.
--more--"
"Cannabis sales are months away" by Kay Lazar | Globe Staff, April 11, 2013
And HOW MANY MORE MONTHS must SICK PEOPLE in Massachusetts NEEDLESSLY SUFFER?
Regulations for the medical use of marijuana in Massachusetts are scheduled to be adopted next month, but even then, many key details will remain unresolved, making it likely that dispensaries will not open for many months, a top state health official said Wednesday.
Years even!
Dr. Lauren Smith, the interim public health commissioner, said in an interview after a meeting of the state Public Health Council, that her agency has “a lot of operational challenges. We are having to develop from scratch regulatory oversight at the same time an industry is developing from scratch. We need a thorough, thoughtful review process. To do it right, it’s going to take time.”
It's like blowing smoke in your face.
Among concerns....
Lack of staff....
Another issue is....
--more--"
"Report says states not adequately tracking drugs; Says oversight of pharmacies lax" by Chelsea Conaboy | Globe Staff, April 15, 2013
Compounding pharmacies in at least 49 states are not required to report the quantity of drugs they produce or where the drugs are shipped, according to survey results set to be released by Representative Edward J. Markey’s office Monday.
The report, being issued in advance of a US House hearing Tuesday on oversight of the specialty pharmacies....
Contaminated injectable steroids made at a Framingham compounding pharmacy have sickened more than 700 people since last year, at least 53 of whom have died. The outbreak of fungal meningitis and other serious infections prompted Markey and other lawmakers to call for federal oversight of pharmacies found to be operating more like drug manufacturers, as the New England Compounding Center was....
--more--"
Related: Slow Saturday Special: FDA Finds More Problems at Compounding Pharmacies
Also see: Hearings set on medical marijuana in Mass.
I'm sorry, what you say? I'm stoned.
UPDATE: State approves medical marijuana regulations
But they will have to have their products tested by labs, and we are still getting the kids waved at us.
