Showing posts with label drug policy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label drug policy. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 26, 2014
Drug Policy Facts Podcast for 08-26-14: Research news plus the future of medical cannabis in WA.
This week: research on the impact of medical cannabis laws on opioid overdose deaths, and part two of our special coverage of Seattle Hempfest. It's the drug policy facts podcast for August 26, 2014.
Tuesday, August 19, 2014
New Drug Policy Facts Podcast Available - Hempfest Special Part One
This week: It's the Drug Policy Facts Podcast's Hempfest Special Part One. We hear from Vivian McPeak, Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, the ACLU and New Approach Washington's Alison Holcomb, SSDP's Betty Aldworth, and more. Listen or download from http://www.podcastgarden.com/episode/drug-policy-facts-38_24401
Drug War Facts is the premier source for information on drugs and drug policies in the US and around the world. Direct quotes, full citations, and links to the original materials, Drug War Facts is the dream of every drug policy reformer, student, journalist, or politician - and the nightmare of every prohibitionist. Continuously updated and constantly expanding, Drug War Facts is an indispensable part of every reformer's toolbox. Check it out today.
Wednesday, February 5, 2014
Drug Policy Facts Podcast #13 Is Online!
Let nations rejoice, the new Drug Policy Facts Podcast is online!
This week features audio from a landmark hearing on Capitol Hill on federal marijuana policy, a report on the environmental impact of drug trafficking and transshipment, and a look at the lessons we can learn from the death of Philip Seymour Hoffman.
Download, listen, and subscribe from:
http://www.podcastgarden.com/episode/drug-policy-facts-13_10549
#DrugWar #DrugFacts #DrugPolicy #DrugPolicyReform #mmot #HarmReduction
This week features audio from a landmark hearing on Capitol Hill on federal marijuana policy, a report on the environmental impact of drug trafficking and transshipment, and a look at the lessons we can learn from the death of Philip Seymour Hoffman.
Download, listen, and subscribe from:
http://www.podcastgarden.com/episode/drug-policy-facts-13_10549
#DrugWar #DrugFacts #DrugPolicy #DrugPolicyReform #mmot #HarmReduction
Labels:
Blumenauer,
Botticelli,
Cohen,
Connolly,
drug facts,
drug legalization,
drug policy,
drug war,
environment,
harm reduction,
Heroin,
House Oversight Committee,
marijuana,
Mica,
ONDCP,
overdose,
philip seymour hoffman
Wednesday, January 8, 2014
Drug War Facts Newsletter Vol. 4, No. 1, Jan. 2014
What's New At Drug War Facts - Vol. 4, No. 1, January 2014
Issue In Focus
The new Monitoring the Future Survey results for 2013 were released recently.In discussing the new data in a video released on YouTube, Dr. Nora Volkow, the director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, said this: “If we compare the numbers that were, for example, in 2000 regular users, and now in 2013, we have seen increases in those numbers. But in 2000, at the 2000 level of 9 THC was at least half of the levels that we observe now, at least half. So that means that not just were there less kids taking the drug regularly, but even those that were taking it regularly were taking a much less potent drug.”
It almost sounded like she was asserting that THC levels have doubled but that's not what she said. She did definitely assert that in 2000, cannabis was much less potent.
The short version of this report is, she was wrong. This isn't just some political hack, or an uninformed blogger. She's the director of the government's National Institute on Drug Abuse, she's supposed to be the government's science person on drugs. That's not acceptable.
Let's look at what's known. These data are available through drugwarfacts.org, in the marijuana section, where you can find a table of average THC levels of seized samples of cannabis as reported by the University of Mississippi's Potency Monitoring Project.
These are the only data on this, they're the same data Nora Volkow has. The Project stopped testing domestic samples a few years ago, the last domestic cannabis data are from 2010. Samples of non-domestic cannabis – imports from Mexico, Jamaica, Canada, and so many other countries – continue to be tested, but only preliminary data for 2012 are currently available.
Average THC potencies are given for two grades of cannabis: low-end commercial grade – what they call simply “marijuana” - and high-end sinsemilla-type cannabis. The overall combined average they report includes a few samples of ditchweed, so we'll stick with specific data for “marijuana” and “sinsemilla”, and since 2010 is the last year with domestic data, we'll use it for comparison.
In 2000, non-domestic commercial grade marijuana averaged 5.10% THC. The non-domestic sinsemilla type averaged 12.87%. Domestic commercial grade marijuana averaged 3.96% THC, and domestic sinsemilla type averaged 12.72%.
In 2010, non-domestic commercial grade marijuana averaged 6.69% THC. Non-domestic sinsemilla type averaged 12.81% THC. Domestic commercial grade marijuana averaged 2.79% THC, and domestic sinsemilla type averaged 11.84%.
So only one category shows an increase in average potency from 2000 to 2010 is for non-domestic commercial grade cannabis – an increase of 31%, going from 5.1 to 6.69% THC. The others all show decreases, in fact the average THC of domestic commercial grade dropped by 29.5%.
There are fluctuations: In 2011, the average THC in non-domestic commercial marijuana was down to 5.6%, the average for non-domestic sinsemilla type was 13.47%. They stopped testing domestic samples in 2010, remember, and for what it's worth those numbers were much lower in 2009, when domestic commercial averaged 2.43% THC and domestic sinsemilla type averaged only 7.37%.
So, Nora Volkow's statement? Maybe not a flatout lie, but inaccurate and misleading at best. The point is, don't just trust authority. Always question, always check, and the fact-checker's best friend is Drug War Facts. Eventually, hopefully, we'll get complete potency data for 2012, and when that's available, you'll find it at drugwarfacts.org.
Help Spread the Word!
Check out the new Drug Policy Facts podcast! You can download and subscribe fromhttp://www.podcastgarden.com/podcast/drugwarfacts.
Follow us on Twitter! Drug War Facts is @DrugPolicyFacts – follow us for information and breaking news about drugs and drug control policies.
Give us a “Like” on Facebook! The Drug War Facts page is at https://www.facebook.com/DrugWarFacts
Put a Drug War Facts banner on your blog or website! DWF banners and graphics are available at
http://drugwarfacts.org/cms/?q=banners
More graphics will be available soon, including data tables from the pages of DWF!
Notable New Facts
(Drug Offenders in US Prisons 2012)Federal: On Dec. 31, 2012, there were 196,574 sentenced prisoners under federal jurisdiction. Of these, 99,426 were serving time for drug offenses, 11,688 for violent offenses, 11,568 for property offenses, and 72,519 for "public order" offenses (of which 23,700 were sentenced for immigration offenses, 30,046 for weapons offenses, and 17,633 for "other").
State: On Dec. 31, 2011, there were 1,341,797 sentenced prisoners under state jurisdiction. Of these, 222,738 were serving time for drug offenses, of whom 55,013 were merely convicted for possession. There were also 717,861 serving time for violent offenses, 249,574 for property offenses, 142,230 for "public order" offenses (which include weapons, drunk driving, court offenses, commercialized vice, morals and decency offenses, liquor law violations, and other public-order offenses), and 9,392 for "other/unspecified".
Source: E. Ann Carson and Daniela Golinelli, "Prisoners in 2012: Trends in Admissions and Releases, 1991-2012" (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics, Dec. 2013), NCJ243920, Table 5, p. 3, and Appendix Table 10, p. 43.
(US Population Under Community Supervision Declining) "During 2012, the number of adults under community supervision declined for the fourth consecutive year. At yearend 2012, an estimated 4,781,300 adults were under community supervision, down 40,500 offenders from the beginning of the year (figure 1). About 1 in 50 adults in the United States was under community supervision at yearend 2012. The community supervision population includes adults on probation, parole, or any other post-prison supervision. (See BJS definition of probation and parole.)
"The decline in the total number of adults under community supervision is attributed to the drop in the probation population as probationers accounted for the majority (82%) of adults under community supervision. The decline of 38,300 offenders in the probation population (from an estimated 3,981,000 to 3,942,800) accounted for about 95% of the decline in the overall community supervision population. The parole population declined by about 500 offenders during 2012, falling from an estimated 851,700 to 851,200."
Source: Laura M. Maruschak and Thomas P. Bonczar, "Probation and Parole in the United States, 2012" (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics, December 2012), NCJ243826, p. 1.
"Any Illicit Drug. The index of any illicit drug use tends to be driven by marijuana, which is by far the most prevalent of the many illicitly used drugs. In 2013, the proportions of students indicating any use of an illicit drug in the prior 12 months are 15 percent, 32 percent, and 40 percent in grades 8, 10 and 12, respectively—higher than a year ago by 1.5, 1.6 and 0.6 percentage points for the same grades (only the change at 8th grade is statistically significant). For the three grades combined, the rate is up by 1.3 percentage points, also a statistically significant increase. The percentages indicating any use in their lifetime are 20 percent, 39 percent and 50 percent. In other words, half of America's high school seniors have tried an illicit drug by the time they graduate and four in 10 have used it in just the past year.
"But it should also be noted that fully half of today's seniors have not tried an illicit drug by the end of high school," said Lloyd Johnston, the principal investigator of the study.
Source: Johnston, L. D., O'Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (December 18, 2013). "American teens more cautious about using synthetic drugs." University of Michigan News Service: Ann Arbor, MI, p. 2.
"Originally approved for use in the treatment of opioid dependence by the United States Food and Drug administration (FDA) in 1984, naltrexone is a competitive μ-opioid receptor antagonist with negligible agonist effects, blocking euphoric and physiological effects of opioid agonists.11,12 Naltrexone does not cause the development of dependence or tolerance over time, and dosing cessation does not result in withdrawal.13
"Orally dosed naltrexone is subject to first pass metabolism, where it is converted to active (6-β naltrexol) and inactive metabolites.14 First-pass metabolism of orally dosed naltrexone is high, evidenced by the peak dose of naltrexone and its metabolites 1 hour after oral dosing.15 Serum half-life for chronic oral administration is approximately 10 hours.15 The half-life, when compared to naloxone, another μ-opioid antagonist, is longer, and naltrexone is able to block the agonist effects of other opioids for 48 hours.16 Oral dosing is accomplished by either 50 mg daily dosing or three times weekly dosing with two 100 mg doses and one 150 mg dose."
Source: Kjome, Kimberly L. and Moeller, F. Gerard, "Long-Acting Injectable Naltrexone for the Management of Patients with Opioid Dependence," Substance Abuse: Research and Treatment 2011:5 1–9, doi: 10.4137/SART.S5452.
Notable New Sources
E. Ann Carson and Daniela Golinelli, "Prisoners in 2012: Trends in Admissions and Releases, 1991-2012" (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics, Dec. 2013), NCJ243920, Table 5, p. 3, and Appendix Table 10, p. 43.Laura M. Maruschak and Thomas P. Bonczar, "Probation and Parole in the United States, 2012" (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics, December 2012), NCJ243826, p. 1.
Johnston, L. D., O'Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (December 18, 2013). "American teens more cautious about using synthetic drugs." University of Michigan News Service: Ann Arbor, MI, p. 2.
Kjome, Kimberly L. and Moeller, F. Gerard, "Long-Acting Injectable Naltrexone for the Management of Patients with Opioid Dependence," Substance Abuse: Research and Treatment 2011:5 1–9, doi: 10.4137/SART.S5452.
Walmsley, Roy, "World Prison Population List (Tenth Edition)" (Kings College, London, England: International Centre for Prison Studies, 2013), p. 1.
Media
Check out the new Drug Policy Facts podcast! You can download and subscribe fromhttp://www.podcastgarden.com/podcast/drugwarfacts.
Drug Truth Network Radio segments:
Full half-hour news programs:
Century Of Lies, 12/15/13, White House drug policy conference http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/4647
3-minute news segments:
420 News, 12/1/13, Interviews with Ethan Nadelmann and Neill Franklin: http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/4627
420 News, 12/7/13, MDMA, Emergency Room Visits, and Young People: http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/4640
420 News, 12/27/13, New Monitoring the Future survey http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/4662
420 News, 12/30/13, Correcting NIDA Director Nora Volkow http://www.drugtruth.net/cms/node/4667
Doug McVay is also a regular blogger at CelebStoner dot com.
- See more at: http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/node/3520#sthash.BPHQSUNH.dpuf
Drug Policy Facts Podcast #9 Is Online!
The
new Drug War/Drug Policy Facts podcast is dedicated to the 55,014
people now in state prison serving time for drug possession. This week: a
new prisoner report; survey shows majority support for marijuana
legalization; Playing Safe(ly) with Eddie Einbinder; harm reduction
& drug user organizing with Ruth Kanatser; and talking weed with
Mickey Martin. Download and subscribe from http://www.podcastgarden.com/episode/drug-policy-facts-9_8866
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Testing Fever Hits the Potomac Again
Two stories caught my eye this week.
The first has to do with Congress jumping back onto the drug war bandwagon by adopting a law to force states to require that many people seeking unemployment compensation first pass a urine drug test. The Fiscal Times reported on Feb. 19, 2012:
Such programs have been shown to be a waste of time and taxpayer money. In spite of this, three states have enacted or are trying to enact such a testing program, as noted by AP on Feb. 15:
From AP: Bill on Testing Welfare Recipients Slowed, Feb. 15, 2012.
If the FGA's mouthpiece quoted above was correct, that's a very scary number because the testing program itself, as the Tampa Tribune reported on Aug. 24, 2011:
And oops, looks like the mouthpiece from the FGA was wrong after all - surprise surprise:
From Welfare drug-testing yields 2% positive results By CATHERINE WHITTENBURG, The Tampa Tribune, Aug. 24, 2011.
Another testing story probably passed below the radar for most folks, which is too bad because this one will affect a lot more people and could have some very serious repercussions. AP's Garance Burke reported on Feb. 19, 2012:
Yet how serious a problem is contaminated food in this, our 21st century America?
But surely there are other agencies at the federal level, or in the states? WRONG.
From Obama's Budget Cuts Bacteria Testing in Produce, by GARANCE BURKE, AP, Feb. 19, 2012.
The first has to do with Congress jumping back onto the drug war bandwagon by adopting a law to force states to require that many people seeking unemployment compensation first pass a urine drug test. The Fiscal Times reported on Feb. 19, 2012:
Drug testing for some unemployed: The legislation encourages states to enact legislation to require applicants for unemployment insurance to pass a drug test under the following conditions: 1) the individual was fired from his or her most recent job because of the unlawful use of controlled substances, or 2) the individual’s only suitable work involves employment in an occupation that regularly conducts drug testing.from 8 Things You Didn't Know About Payroll Tax Cut Deal, by ERIC PIANIN, The Fiscal Times, Feb. 19, 2012.
Such programs have been shown to be a waste of time and taxpayer money. In spite of this, three states have enacted or are trying to enact such a testing program, as noted by AP on Feb. 15:
Those who failed drug tests would face a series of progressively strict penalties. A welfare applicant would be ineligible for financial assistance for one month after failing a first drug test. A second failed test would cut off funding for three months, while a third failed test would eliminate an applicant's welfare funding for three years.
Similar legislation was filed in 36 states last year, but passed only in Arizona, Florida and Missouri. A federal judge blocked Florida's program pending a lawsuit there. Tarren Bragdon, chief executive officer of the Foundation for Government Accountability, backed Spencer's bill, saying that Florida saw a nearly 50 percent drop in approvals during the brief period when the tests were allowed.
From AP: Bill on Testing Welfare Recipients Slowed, Feb. 15, 2012.
If the FGA's mouthpiece quoted above was correct, that's a very scary number because the testing program itself, as the Tampa Tribune reported on Aug. 24, 2011:
Since the state began testing welfare applicants for drugs in July, about 2 percent have tested positive, preliminary data shows.
Ninety-six percent proved to be drug free -- leaving the state on the hook to reimburse the cost of their tests.
The initiative may save the state a few dollars anyway, bearing out one of Gov. Rick Scott's arguments for implementing it. But the low test fail-rate undercuts another of his arguments: that people on welfare are more likely to use drugs.
And oops, looks like the mouthpiece from the FGA was wrong after all - surprise surprise:
Having begun the drug testing in mid-July, the state Department of Children and Families is still tabulating the results. But at least 1,000 welfare applicants took the drug tests through mid-August, according to the department, which expects at least 1,500 applicants to take the tests monthly.
So far, they say, about 2 percent of applicants are failing the test; another 2 percent are not completing the application process, for reasons unspecified.
Cost of the tests averages about $30. Assuming that 1,000 to 1,500 applicants take the test every month, the state will owe about $28,800-$43,200 monthly in reimbursements to those who test drug-free.
That compares with roughly $32,200-$48,200 the state may save on one month's worth of rejected applicants.
The savings assume that 20 to 30 people -- 2 percent of 1,000 to 1,500 tested -- fail the drug test every month. On average, a welfare recipient costs the state $134 in monthly benefits, which the rejected applicants won't get, saving the state $2,680-$3,350 per month.
But since one failed test disqualifies an applicant for a full year's worth of benefits, the state could save $32,200-$48,200 annually on the applicants rejected in a single month.
Net savings to the state -- $3,400 to $8,200 annually on one month's worth of rejected applicants. Over 12 months, the money saved on all rejected applicants would add up to $40,800-$98,400 for the cash assistance program that state analysts have predicted will cost $178 million this fiscal year.
From Welfare drug-testing yields 2% positive results By CATHERINE WHITTENBURG, The Tampa Tribune, Aug. 24, 2011.
Another testing story probably passed below the radar for most folks, which is too bad because this one will affect a lot more people and could have some very serious repercussions. AP's Garance Burke reported on Feb. 19, 2012:
The budget plan the president sent to Congress Monday would ax the Agriculture Department’s tiny Microbiological Data Program, which extensively screens high-risk fresh produce throughout the year for bacteria including salmonella, E. coli and listeria.
If samples are positive, they can trigger nationwide recalls, and keep tainted produce from reaching consumers or grocery store shelves.
Food safety advocates and a top-ranking U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention official said the information also can help pinpoint foods tied to illness outbreaks, and would not easily be replaced by companies’ internal tests or more modest federal sampling programs.
Yet how serious a problem is contaminated food in this, our 21st century America?
Last year, for instance, California firms recalled pre-packaged fresh cilantro and bagged spinach from the marketplace after MDP tests of random samples detected salmonella.
According to the CDC, nearly one-third of the major, multistate foodborne illness outbreaks in 2011 were caused by contaminated fruits and vegetables.
The 120,000 food samples the program has collected in the last decade have offered public health officials important clues when they are probing the source of food poisoning outbreaks, Dr. Robert Tauxe, the CDC’s top food-germ investigator, said in an interview in October when the agency began offering the program’s employees early retirement packages.
Last year, the program found lettuce and spinach contaminated with E. coli O157:H7, the strain most commonly responsible for food poisoning, and also started aggressively testing for listeria in cantaloupes in response to the nation’s most deadly foodborne illness outbreak, in which 30 people died after eating listeria-tainted melons. In one instance in the last several years, a contaminated produce sample the program identified was later tied to an illness cluster, Tauxe said.
FDA Produce Safety Staff Director Samir Assar said in an October interview that while his agency also conducts targeted tests of certain high-risk fresh fruits and vegetables each year, cutting MDP would leave the regular testing of sprouts, tomatoes, cantaloupe and cilantro to industry and more modest state and federal efforts.
But surely there are other agencies at the federal level, or in the states? WRONG.
FDA spokeswoman Siobhan DeLancey, however, said she could not speculate on whether FDA would set up a parallel program, or had the money to do so.
“We don’t test produce,” said Lola Russell, a CDC spokeswoman. “That’s just not part of our mission.”
State health departments are already facing tough choices as they try to come up with enough dollars to keep food safe after tens thousands of employees have been laid off in recent years. And the FDA has always been crunched for food safety dollars, receiving so little money for food inspections that some facilities are only inspected every five to 10 years. A new food safety law President Obama signed last year aims to increase the number of inspections in the United States and abroad, but emphasizes prevention rather than increased testing of foods.
From Obama's Budget Cuts Bacteria Testing in Produce, by GARANCE BURKE, AP, Feb. 19, 2012.
Labels:
CDC,
drug policy,
Drug Testing,
FDA,
unemployment,
USDA,
Welfare
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Major investigative report from The Bangkok Post: Myanmar's Rising Drug Trade
From the story:
More here: http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/investigation/279434/myanmar-reforms-mask-meteoric-rise-in-drug-trade
"Critics say that the ceasefire agreements signed with ethnic armies are driven by a desire to capitalise on the country's booming narcotics business not a desire for change and that the army and politicians are padding their coffers with the proceeds."
More here: http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/investigation/279434/myanmar-reforms-mask-meteoric-rise-in-drug-trade
Saturday, January 14, 2012
Gov. Gary Johnson Interviewed by Joe Schrank of The Fix
This November 2011 article and video interview with presidential candidate and former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson is from The Fix, "a daily website about alcoholism, addiction, recovery and the drug war." It is well worth checking out. Here are the closing paragraphs:
http://www.thefix.com/content/video-gop-candidate-gary-johnson-visits-fix9245
Johnson's willingness to break step with the vast majority of US politicians on prohibition is brave, although a trailblazer is often doomed to forge a path that others later follow with more success. His views on marijuana aren't at odds with US voters. But the powerful TV networks and party establishment are proving slower to follow public opinion, which leaves him starved of publicity.
And that's a shame. Without the full participation of a dissenting voice like Johnson's, drug and addiction issues are set to receive little airtime in the 2012 presidential campaign. The Fix has asked several other candidates for an interview or statement on their drug policy and received no response—except from a spokeswoman from the Michele Bachmann campaign, who simply replied, "What drug policy?" Whatever your views on prohibition, this lack of political scrutiny of a vital policy area—directly affecting many millions of Americans and others around the world, and perceived by many to be failing—is anything but healthy.
http://www.thefix.com/content/video-gop-candidate-gary-johnson-visits-fix9245
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)