|
|
 |
" I heard it
through the
AgLine"
|
|
November 6, 2009
·
Food supply
emerging as a global security issue
·
Farmers bend the
rules on GM crops, report says
·
Fraud case
reveals rotten side of tomato industry
·
How plants
communicate to thwart disease – study
·
Inside look
at California’s pot growing industry
Food supply emerging as a global
security issue
(The Christian
Science Monitor) By Howard LaFranchi – Washington - Which is more likely to grab
and hold attention: third-world hunger or global food security?
Kanayo Nwanze bets the answer is the latter. The Kenyan who
recently became president of the United Nations' International Fund for
Agricultural Development (IFAD) says globalization has made the hunger and
rural poverty that always pulled on the heartstrings an international security
issue.
"People now have a clear sense of the linkages between
food security and national security," says Dr. Nwanze. That understanding
is helping bring questions of hunger and rural development to a broader
audience, he says, "as well as to some very high places."
Hunger now can mean increased cross-border and international
migration. And the riots that accompanied recent food shortages and price hikes
in several parts of the world show how hunger can destabilize governments in
regions of critical importance to the international battle against extremism.
That's why issues of rural hunger and food security are
increasingly cropping up in venues ranging from the US Congress to the G-8
group of industrialized countries, Nwanze says. It is the emergence of food as
an international security issue, Nwanze adds, that raises the odds that the
international community will help developing countries come up with sustainable
answers to food production challenges.
"Sustainability is determined inside a country, the
answers to food production and development have to come from within," says
the agronomist who studied in Kansas State University
and who is recognized for developing a high-yield, drought-resistant rice for Africa. "But we also need the participation of the
broader international community to answer these challenges that today have an
impact on everyone."
In Washington recently in
advance of this month's World Summit on Food Security in Rome,
Nwanze noted that the security dimension of hunger and food production is
translating into greater interest in places like the US capital. IFAD, which Nwanze
describes as a cooperative among 160 countries that provides grants for rural
development projects, benefited from a US-led initiative this year to increase
the organization's funding by two-thirds to about $100 million.
At the same time, the US Congress is considering the Global
Food Security Act, a five-year authorization that seeks to improve US
response to food crises, provide new funding for university research in
agriculture and for rural development projects.
In introducing the legislation earlier this year, Sen. Bob
Casey (D) of Pennsylvania pointed to Pakistan, where he said nearly half the
population is considered "food insecure" and likely to become more so
as the military pursues offensives against the Taliban.
"Hunger and competition for food can lead to further
instability and potentially undermine government leadership at a very critical
time," he said.
Short-term food shortages must be addressed, IFAD's Nwanze
says, but his focus appears to be on longer-term finding production and
development solutions.
"We need to think beyond production to the means of
getting what is produced to the market, and to creating livelihoods,"
Nwanze says. Thirty years ago, Angola
was touted as a food production miracle, only to plunge back to Earth when the
increased production failed to spark rural development and farm-to-market
infrastructure. The same thing could happen to today's bright spots, he says.
"Today we speak of Malawi
and Ghana
[other African stand-outs] but where will these same countries be 30 years from
now?" Nwanze asks.
Return to Top
Farmers bend rules on GM crops, report
says
(The New York
Times) – As many as 25 percent of the American farmers growing genetically
engineered corn are no longer complying with federal rules intended to maintain
the resistance of the crops to damage from insects, according to an advocacy
group’s report released Thursday.
The increase in farmers skirting the rules, from fewer than
10 percent a few years ago, raises the risk that insects will develop
resistance to the toxins in the corn that are meant to kill them, the report
says. And it raises questions about whether the Environmental Protection Agency
and the agricultural biotechnology industry are adequately enforcing the rules.
The data “should be a wake-up call to E.P.A. that the
regulatory system is not working,” Gregory Jaffe, the report’s author, wrote in
a letter Thursday to Lisa P. Jackson, the administrator of the federal agency.
Mr. Jaffe is the biotechnology project director at the Center for Science in
the Public Interest, a Washington
advocacy group that does not oppose genetically engineered crops but favors
stricter regulation.
The crops in question, called BT corn, have bacterial genes
spliced into their DNA that cause the plants to make toxins that kill certain
insects when they feed on the crop. In 2008, about 49 million acres of BT corn
were grown, accounting for 57 percent of domestic corn acreage.
So far there appears to be little sign that insects have
evolved resistance to the toxins in the corn. If they do, however, it not only
would render the crops ineffective but also would hurt organic farmers who use
sprays of bacterial BT toxins as natural pesticides.
To stave off such resistance, the E.P.A. requires farmers in
the Corn Belt to plant 20 percent of their
fields with non-BT corn to serve as a refuge for insects. The idea is that if
an insect becomes impervious to the BT toxin, it is likely to mate with a
nonresistant insect from the refuge, so the offspring might not be resistant.
While each biotech seed company is responsible for assuring
that its farmer customers adhere to this rule, five big biotech companies —
Monsanto, Pioneer Hi-Bred, Syngenta, Dow AgroSciences and Bayer CropScience —
jointly survey growers and report results annually to the E.P.A.
Mr. Jaffe obtained these reports from the E.P.A. through a
request under the Freedom of Information Act. He found that based on industry
surveys of farmers, from 2003 to 2006, about 90 percent of farmers growing corn
resistant to one insect, the corn borer, established refuges of the required
size. But the rate fell to 80 percent in 2007 and 78 percent in 2008.
Only 74 percent of farmers were setting up a big enough
refuge for corn resistant to the rootworm in 2008, down from 89 percent in
2006. And only 63 percent of farmers had their rootworm refuges close enough to
their BT fields.
Nicholas Storer, chairman of the Agricultural Biotechnology
Stewardship Technical Committee, the industry group that does the surveys, said
the seed companies recognized the problems and for the last two years had been
undertaking a “Respect the Refuge” campaign, sending postcards to farmers and
putting billboards alongside highways in the Corn Belt.
“We’re not happy to see negative trends,” said Dr. Storer,
an entomologist who is also global science policy leader for biotechnology at
Dow AgroSciences.
One factor behind the decline, Dr. Storer said, could have
been skyrocketing corn prices in 2007, which might have tempted growers to
plant more BT corn. Also, he said, farmers might have been confused because new
varieties of corn appeared with genes to protect against both the corn borer
and the rootworm, each of which had somewhat different refuge requirements.
A spokesman for the E.P.A., Dale Kemery, said the agency
would evaluate the report and would take action if it deemed that additional
measures were needed to prevent insect resistance.
While the industry has an interest in ensuring that BT
technology retains its effectiveness against pests, it is also looking for ways
to reduce the refuge size so that farmers can plant more of the expensive
genetically modified crops.
One way to do this is put more than one insect-protection
gene in a crop, making it harder for insects to become resistant.
Monsanto and Dow have received permission from the E.P.A.
for a refuge of only 5 percent in the Corn Belt
for their jointly developed crop called SmartStax, which contains six genes for
insect resistance.
Pioneer has applied to introduce a “refuge in a bag” with
its new Optimum AcreMax seed. About 2 percent of the seeds in each bag would
not be BT. Farmers would no longer have to set aside separate acreage as a
refuge because the non-BT crops would be dispersed through the whole field.
But scientific advisers to the E.P.A. had reservations about
Pioneer’s proposal, and the agency so far has not given its approval.
Return to Top
Fraud case reveals rotten side of tomato
industry
(sacbee.com) –
Another former SK Foods executive has been charged in Sacramento federal court, the latest
expansion of a sprawling case of fraud, bribery and price fixing in the
tomato-processing industry.
In court papers filed today, Alan Huey, a former senior vice
president at the company, admitted to falsifying documents in order to sell
bulk tomato paste that was older, moldier or more diluted than SK Foods
claimed, violating federal quality and labeling standards.
Huey has agreed to plead guilty to a felony conspiracy charge
and to cooperate in the government's investigation, according to a spokeswoman
for the U.S. Attorney's office in Sacramento.
The government first accused SK Foods of bribery in an
August 2008 lawsuit. Since then, the case has expanded to include employees of
Kraft, Frito-Lay and other food companies.
Huey is the eighth person charged in connection with the
case. Jeffrey Beasley, a former SK Foods vice president, pleaded guilty Aug. 25
to bribing buyers at firms that purchased the company's products. Earlier in
August, a former senior purchasing manager for Kraft Foods Inc. was sentenced
to two years and three months in prison and ordered to pay restitution to Kraft
of $1.858 million for accepting SK Foods' bribes.
SK Foods LP, with two Central Valley
plants, was a grower, processor and distributor of tomato and other food
products for sale to manufacturers, distributors, marketers and retail outlets.
In June the Monterey-based company, which was part of agribusiness tycoon Scott
Salyer's SK Foods Group, was sold out of bankruptcy for $39 million to Olam
International of Singapore.
California
produces more than 95 percent of the nation's processing tomatoes and about 30
percent of the world supply. Several Sacramento
Valley and Delta counties
are major growing and processing areas.
Return to Top
How plants communicate to thwart
disease – study
(UC Davis) – When it comes to plants' innate immunity, like
many of the dances of life, it takes two to tango. A receptor molecule in the
plant pairs up with a specific molecule on the invading bacteria and, presto,
the immune system swings into action to defend against the invasion of the
disease-causing microbe.
Unwrapping some of the mystery from how plants and bacteria
communicate in this dance of immunity, scientists at the University of
California, Davis, have identified the bacterial signaling molecule that
matches up with a specific receptor in rice plants to ward off a devastating
disease known as bacterial blight of rice.
The researchers, led by UC Davis plant pathologist Pamela
Ronald, will publish their findings in the Nov. 6 issue of the journal Science.
"The new discovery of this bacterial signaling molecule
helps us better understand how the innate immune system operates," Ronald
said.
"Because similar pairs of receptors and bacterial
signaling molecules are known to exist not only in rice but also in other
plants, as well as animals and humans, we are hopeful that this work will lead
to new strategies for controlling diseases in plants and people," she
said.
Disease resistance background
In 1995, Ronald's laboratory identified the XA21 gene, which
produces a receptor protein that recognizes Xanthomonas oryzae pv. Oryzae, also
known as Xoo, which causes bacterial blight disease. Xoo and other species of
Xanthomonas infect virtually every crop species in the world.
Subsequent discoveries revealed that receptors with striking
structural similarities to the XA21 receptor protein exist in other plants,
flies, mice and even humans. These receptors were later named pattern
recognition receptors or PRRs because they have the ability to recognize
molecules that occur across species in a large class of disease-causing
microbes. These receptors then can launch a protective immune defense on behalf
of the plant or animal.
Together, the receptors (PRRs) and the microbial molecules
they recognize comprise a previously unknown system of immunity called innate
immunity. As the name suggests, this form of immunity is built into the genetic
makeup of the plant, rather than developing over time with repeated exposure to
disease-causing microbes. Unlike animals, plants do not produce antibodies.
The new findings
In their newly published study, Ronald and her colleagues
identified a peptide -- a compound that they call ax21 -- as the molecule that
binds with the XA21 receptor protein. The binding triggers a defense response
against the bacterial disease.
The researchers note that ax21 is also found in many other
species of Xanthomonas as well as in Xylella fastidiosa, a microbe that causes
the devastating Pierce's disease in grapes. Furthermore, ax21 is even found in
Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, a bacterium that causes respiratory tract
infections in humans.
"These studies have led to a convergence in our
understanding of the molecular mechanisms that govern how disease-causing
microbes interact with the plants and animals they infect," Ronald said.
"We are hopeful that these discoveries will benefit
agriculture and medicine in the United
States and around the world by leading to
development of treatments that will disrupt bacterial infection," she
said.
###
Working with Ronald on this study were Sang-Won Lee,
Sang-Wook Han, Malinee Sririyanum, Chang-Jin
Park and Young-Su Seo,
all researchers in the UC Davis Department of Plant Pathology.
Funding for the study was provided by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture and by the National Institutes of Health.
Return to Top
Inside look at California’s pot growing industry
By Butch Warner
VCReporter.com
The benevolent outlaw
“Nobody produces any better weed than we do here,” says Raul
G. Raul, a pot grower whose farm is somewhere between Santa Paula and Ojai. Raul likes to think of
himself as a benevolent outlaw, supplying “medical” marijuana to clinics and
“slanging (dealing) a little on the side to make people happy.”
His plants are gorgeous, even (or maybe even more so) to a
man in recovery who hasn’t touched bud in 11 years. Some are easily 15 feet
tall, with the sexiest flowers this side of Holland.
“Weed is as natural and wholesome as spinach,” says Raul,
then adds, “and a lot more profitable.”
Although medical pot’s reputation has been tarnished lately
— the district attorney in Los Angeles
is shutting down dispensaries, and investigators with the Santa Barbara County
Sheriff’s narcotics unit have blamed at least one of the recent wildfires on a
marijuana farm.
But neither the negative publicity, nor, in fact, anything
short of a bust, is going to put Raul out of business. Just one of his plants,
he says, yields about two pounds of herb, which would be worth about $5,000;
Raul boasts that his plants are worth “a cool green million.”
The economics of weed are simple and seductive. It costs
about $1,000 to grow a kilo (2.2 pounds) of pot, which sells for up to $7,500
to a wholesaler. At a conservative $15 a gram, the $1,000 investment can
ultimately be worth $15,000. If “medical marijuana” clinics are getting any
part of the deal, you can imagine how sweet that is.
Another grower told the Reporter, “You should go up to Humboldt County. It’s pretty wild. There’s
18-year-old kids who grow enough pot to own large houses with acres of land.
Young kids in high school are growing quality pot.”
Pot = profit, and in broke California, authorities can’t keep up with
increasing numbers of growers. They’re also handcuffed by conflicting state,
federal and county laws governing marijuana.
With low start-up and overhead costs, marijuana is the most
profitable drug of all, according to local law enforcement officials. With that
kind of profit margin, marijuana is increasingly filling the gap left by other
failing industries, like lumber and fishing.
How marijuana became legal in California
In 1996, California
passed the Compassionate Use Act, Proposition 215, which decriminalized medical
marijuana. Proposition 215 was conceived by San Francisco marijuana activist
Dennis Peron in memory of his partner, Adam West, who had used marijuana for
AIDS.
Since then, 12 states have enacted similar laws. A federal
appellate court has ruled that the federal government cannot punish — or even
investigate — physicians for discussing or recommending the medical use of
marijuana with patients.
State law allows anyone to grow a limited amount of
marijuana for medicinal purposes as long as they have a prescription for it. In
Ventura County, that amount is “six mature
plants or 12 immature plants,” and the amount can vary by county or even city.
Moreover, some individuals have been granted an exemption from this amount, and
in places like L.A. and Sonoma County
“caregivers” are allowed “up to 99 plants in a 100-square-foot growing area
plus three pounds of marijuana.”
So in most places in California
— but not Ventura
County — marijuana is
effectively legal today. There are an estimated 300,000 to 400,000 medical
marijuana patients in the state now, and the figure is rapidly growing.
More astonishingly, there are about 700 medical marijuana
dispensaries now operating in California
and openly distributing the drug. But there are none in Ventura County,
although apparently you can have your weed delivered to your door by someone
who sells pot.
These “compassionate-care clinics” are outpatient facilities
that sell marijuana and its concentrated resin forms, hashish and kif,
sometimes alongside a range of enticing, non-inhaled alternatives, including
marijuana-imbued brownies, cookies, gelati, honeys, butters, cooking oils (“Not
So Virgin” olive oil), bottled cold drinks (“enhanced” lemonade is the most
popular), capsules, lozenges, spray-under-the-tongue tinctures and even
topically applied salves.
In Venice
Beach, a shop called The
Farmacy, one of three stores in a chain, uses a “pastry chef” to direct its
baked goods operation. Most dispensaries offer plants and seeds.
To the Feds, though, it’s all drug dealing.
The Federal Government vs. marijuana
The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), NIDA
(National Institute of Drug Abuse), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
all maintain that marijuana has “no currently accepted medical use.”
The feds continue to classify marijuana, like heroin, as a
“Schedule I controlled substance,” forbidden from being prescribed by doctors.
Viciously addictive drugs like Oxycontin, ironically, are more leniently
classified as Schedule II drugs, allowing prescription use.
Thirteen states now allow residents to use marijuana
medicinally, typically as an anti-nausea and anti-vomiting agent, for example,
for those in chemotherapy, to assuage chronic pain, for movement disorders and
muscle spasticity, e.g., multiple sclerosis, and as an appetite stimulant for
AIDS and cancer patients.
Another 15 states are weighing legislation or ballot
initiatives that could turn them into medical marijuana states by next year.
Under Presidents Bush, Bush Jr. and Clinton, the U.S.
Justice Department treated state medical marijuana laws as nullities. Such laws
were contradicted and therefore preempted by federal drug laws, the Justice
Department reasoned, and the U.S. Supreme Court upheld that position in 2005.
So the feds raided and prosecuted defendants who said they
were complying with state medical marijuana laws. In court, defendants were not
allowed to tell juries about the existence of those laws.
In late February, President Obama signaled a new approach.
His attorney general, Eric Holder, confirmed at a press conference that he
would no longer subject individuals who were complying with state medical marijuana
laws to federal drug raids and prosecutions.
By the way, the past three presidents have all admitted
trying pot, but apparently no one ever got high off of it until Obama, who,
when asked if he inhaled, quipped, “I thought that was the point.”
How it works
To obtain a prescription for marijuana in California,
you must go to a clinic like Northridge Caregivers or the Pacific Coast Highway
Collective in Malibu.
Just call to make an appointment for an exam. The exam, which includes a “free”
ID card and “free verification,” will cost around $150.
The doctor will ask you about this condition of yours that
requires marijuana. The law allows physicians to recommend marijuana for
disorders like cancer, anorexia (loss of appetite and inability to eat), AIDS,
chronic pain, glaucoma, arthritis, and a migraine. (Asthma is, apparently, one
of the legitimate conditions for medical pot as well, according to one clinic.)
The exam will take less than half an hour.
Then you will be handed a “prescription” for marijuana —
Good for one year, with no refill limits. The next step is to find a dispensary
where you can actually get the prescription filled.
Although there are no marijuana dispensaries in Ventura County,
a quick Web check in San Fernando Valley
(using PotLocator.com) turned up several. Studio City
Caregivers, 3625 Cahuenga Blvd.,
offered eighth-ounce specials: Indica strains, including Outdoor Pot of Gold
($35), OG Banana ($45) or OG Herouna ($45). Cannabis sativa strains include
Sweet Tooth ($40), Sour Diesel ($45) and Orange Crush ($45).
The domestic grower
“Robby D.” is a round-face, shaved-head Iranian kid who
lives in Beverly Hills
and grows pot for a living.
Robby spent a day in jail in 2006 because he grew too many
female marijuana plants. How many is too many? In L.A. County,
you’re allowed to grow only “six mature plants or 12 immature plants and 8
ounces of bud.”
Robby was arrested when a SWAT team of Sheriff’s Department
deputies, equipped with weapons and an armful of warrants, burst into his house
and swept him and his plants, and many of his possessions, including his
computer, away. He spent a day in jail before his wealthy family bailed him
out.
Thus began an arduous legal battle, headed by a famous
attorney/marijuana advocate who eventually got Robby off with rehab and
probation.
You’d think that Robby would have learned his lesson from
that experience, but he still grows marijuana today, in another Beverly Hills home that is
a little farther away from his original bust. Why does Robby persist? “The
lifestyle is addictive.
Lots of girls around the house, lots of great weed and other
drugs, and easy money.”
Robby sells some of his weed to a marijuana dispensary in Studio City.
This dispensary is the hub of a “collective,” a group of people associated with
the dispensary who have legal marijuana cards obtained from California marijuana “clinics.”
But he makes most of his money selling weed illegally on the
street.
California’s
pot guidelines
Although there are exceptions for both locale and situation,
California has what are called its SB 420 Statewide Default Patient Guidelines:
“To be as safe as possible from arrest and prosecution, patients and caregivers
should stay below the medical marijuana immunity law passed by the California
legislature, HS 11362.77, which sets a minimum statewide guideline of six
mature plants or 12 immature plants and up to eight ounces of processed
cannabis flowers. Cities and counties empowered to set guidelines that are
greater than those amounts, but not less.”
However, a “physician’s note exempts larger amounts.”
To make the matter even more confusing, the California
Attorney General has issued his own set of guidelines. These are not binding
law, but give an idea of how prosecutors will consider the circumstances of a
medical marijuana patient or garden. These guidelines are exactly the same as
those above, with the proviso that “if a qualified patient or primary caregiver
has a doctor’s recommendation that this quantity does not meet the qualified
patient’s medical needs, the qualified patient or primary caregiver may possess
an amount of marijuana consistent with the patient’s needs.”
The grower’s garden of grass
Marijuana is dioecious, meaning that it has separate male
and female plants. In nature, the male plants fertilize the female plants with
pollen that infiltrates the flowers. Growers cull out the male plants and
cultivate only females. The unpollinated, sterile plants then produce
prodigious flowers in an attempt to entice nonexistent males, and create Buddha
plants that are rich in resin and THC content. This sterile technique produces
marijuana without seeds.
There is a whole lingo around pot growing that has cropped
(no pun intended) up: “Mids” are plants that have been grown in the presence of
males, and “crip” is weed that was grown only with other females. Crip has a
higher THC and resin content and hence potency. Other common terms for seeded,
or otherwise low-quality, cannabis are schwag, regs, booty, greta or mersh.
There are strains galore, and more are being invented every day, with poetic
names like Jack Herer,
Bubba Kush and HOG.
A grower in the San Fernando Valley
said, “There are four basic price categories for weed. Indoor Kush
fetches the most, especially ‘OG Kush,’ which can get you $4,800 -$5,500 a
pound. Other indoor strains range from $3,500 to $4,600.
Greenhouse strains can go from $2,800 to $3,200, and
finally, outdoor strains can range from $1,000 to $2,500 a pound. All of these
usually do not have many seeds at all, if any. People whose herb has seeds
usually don’t even try to sell to the clubs.”
“We used to call the first price category ‘kush,’ and the
second ‘chronic’ or ‘purps,’ if it was purple weed. The third is called
‘greenhouse’ and the last is called ‘outdoor,’ ” he continued.
“Nobody really uses seeds anymore. Nearly all medical
growers use clones, which are rooted cuttings of a mother plant, and which are
genetically identical to the mother. This means they are 100 percent guaranteed
to be female, with no chance of seeds in the buds. Clones are available at many
collectives and are priced $5-$15 dollars per clone. There are even some
clone-only collectives, which do not even sell the finished product.”
There are Web sites, forum, and blogs, too numerous to
mention here, devoted to growing herb. Small-time stoners and entrepreneurs
alike exchange pictures of their prized projects, information on their “grows”
(crops or plants), techniques on fertilization, harvesting, drying and curing,
and just about anything that has anything to do with weed. Growing pot is not
only big business, it’s a culture.
Governmant stash
There is a perception that most medical marijuana is grown
by the U.S.
government and universities, with arcane scientific names like X-239. There is
an urban myth that a potent strain called G-13 was created by the CIA, who had
nothing better to do in the 1970s than develop powerful different strains of
cannabis. This strain was purportedly a bona fide superweed, with a
concentration of 28 percent.
There are rumors that the University of Washington, under government contract, were
also involved in the development of this strain. One story states that a single
cutting of this potent strain was leaked by students, and local growers managed
to cross-breed the G-13 with blueberry strains, creating PG-13 in the late
’90s, nicknamed such because it is a purple-colored G-13. The truth is that,
although the University
of Mississippi assembled
a world-class cannabis collection during the late 1960s and early 1970s, there
is no evidence that those researchers were ever involved in breeding high
quality cannabis.
By contrast, back in the day of flower power and free love,
good commercial-grade marijuana available to most smokers had a THC content of
about 2 percent to 5 percent, and premium sinsemilla had a THC content that was
somewhat higher. Today, the good commercial grade marijuana available to most
users has a THC content of about 5 percent to 10 percent, and premium
sinsemilla is about 10 percent to 20 percent THC.
There is only one legal marijuana farm and production
facility in the United States,
and it is indeed located on the campus of the University of Mississippi.
This is the government’s “cannabis drug repository.”
Since 1968, the National Institute on Drug Abuse has
contracted with the university lab to grow, harvest and process marijuana and
to ship it to licensed facilities across the country for research purposes. The
lab also collects samples of marijuana seized by police to determine its
potency and to document national drug trends.
There is a small group of patients — like a guy named Irv
Rosenfeld, who can be found on low-quality videos all over the Internet — who
actually gets medical marijuana legally from the federal government. Rosenfeld
is part of the Compassionate IND (Investigational New Drug) program, and he
legally receives about 300 marijuana cigarettes in a metal tin per month.
Contrary to stoner lore, the government’s weed, like its
cheese, isn’t very good. According to reports, it has very low potency and it’s
full of seeds and stems.
Pot gone wild
There is really no purely “legal” medical marijuana in California. If you buy
from a dispensary, somewhere along the line some of that weed was illegally
grown or traded.
When states like California
craft legal loopholes allowing medical use of marijuana, they must grapple with
the tricky question of what precisely constitutes medical use. And let’s face
it, doctors regularly prescribe powerful drugs like Oxycontin and Xanax to
patients who are hardly at death’s door.
“Medical marijuana is God’s little joke on the [marijuana]
prohibitionists,” says Richard Cowan, 69, a longtime legalization activist.
And marijuana, both medical and recreational, will continue
to grow and be grown in California
for a long, long time.
George (Butch) Warner, MA, MFTI, CADC is an addiction
therapist in Studio City and Pasadena.
Return to Top
End Transmission