Tuesday, November 1, 2016
New Study Suggests Cannabis Improves Night Vision
As we all know, weed can have some strange effects on our minds and bodies. New research now suggests an added benefit we could all use—better night vision.
This theory is not totally new but proof has been lacking.
Twenty-five years ago, a pharmacologist at the University of the West Indies in Jamaica noted that a local fisherman who smoked weed and drank rum made from cannabis leaves and stems seemed to have “an uncanny ability to see in the dark.” And back in 2002, a team of researchers from the U.S. and Spain set out to confirm rumors that Moroccan fishermen and people living in rural mountain areas who smoked hash had an extraordinary ability to visibly see objects in the near dark.
Now, a scientific study is providing hard evidence for these claims.
According to the open access journal eLife, cannabis could eventually be applied to the treatment of patients with degenerative eye diseases,such as retinitis pigmentosa, and could improve night vision.
The study, done on tadpoles, proved that cannabis made the retina more sensitive to light, therefore helping people see better in low visibility. Very simple.
Loïs S Miraucourt, of the Montreal Neurological Institute and one of the co-authors of the report, said they zeroed in on transparent African tadpoles rather than nocturnal fishermen. They applied a synthetic cannabinoid to the eye tissue of tadpoles and found, to their surprise, that it seemed to work. Specifically, they found that CBD made particular retinal cells more sensitive to light, improving the speed at which the eye responded to even dim stimulus, reported the Guardian.
“We didn’t believe what we were seeing,” another author in the study told the Montreal Gazette. “…cannabinoids were increasing the excitability of cells in the eye that connects to the brain.”
The researchers expected to find that the cannabis would inhibit the tadpoles’ retinal ganglion cells (RGCs), which are responsible for transmitting information about light detection from the eye to the brain.
“But the cannabinoids were increasing the excitability of cells in the eye that connects to the brain,” said Edward Ruthazer, the paper’s senior author.
One cannabinoid receptor fired at higher frequencies, allowing the tadpoles swimming in a petri dish to see better and flee predators in low light conditions, explained Ruthazer, a neurologist at McGill University.
The tadpoles that received the CBD performed excellent in the dark, just like the stoned Jamaican and Moroccan fishermen.
from http://ift.tt/2fsDa5f
by Maureen Meehan at High Times
Democratic Senate Control Could Be Great for Marijuana Reform
The marijuana reform movement could experience a tremendous boost in 2017, if the Democrats manage to take control of the Senate following the November election.
Although there have been a number of marijuana-related proposals introduced in Congress over the past few years, including the infamous CARERS Act and Bernie Sanders’ Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act, the Republicans have refused to allow any of these proposals so much as a hearing. But if the Democrats take over next Tuesday, the party could change all of that by putting a committee chairman in charge who will be a bit more enthusiastic about the reform of national marijuana laws.
According to a recent report from Roll Call, Democratic Senator Patrick J. Leahy stands the best chance at stripping the gavel out of the hands of Republican Charles Grassley—a staunch opposing force to the marijuana movement. This could mean great things for the cause, especially considering that Leahy seems at least somewhat onboard with protecting the sanctity of states that have legalized the leaf for whatever purpose.
“I’ve long urged the federal government to stay away from states where they have legalized the use of marijuana, or legalized medical marijuana,” Leahy told the Atlantic in 2013. “We only have so many resources for law enforcement and to waste time on these minor marijuana measures or waste time on marijuana in states where it is legal makes absolutely no sense.”
Reports indicate that the Democratic Party has a fair shot at winning control of the Senate this year, needing a net of only four seats to make this happen if Hillary Clinton is elected as our next president.
A recent Rothenberg & Gonzales Political Report indicates that Democrats will likely achieve this mission. Here is how:
“Democrats still look likely to take over Illinois and Wisconsin, bringing the fight for control of the Senate down to six states: Indiana, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Nevada, North Carolina, and Missouri. Democrats need to win three of those six states for control because winning Nevada would just be holding a seat they already control,” the report reads.
While drug reform advocates say they would be more optimistic about the progress of marijuana legalization if Leahy takes over, this alone does not guarantee that a lucky piece of legislation geared toward cannabis reform will make it to the desk of the next president for a signature.
A recent report from the web-based gambling resource Casino Online found that out of the thousands of bills that get introduced in the halls of Congress, only four percent of them become law. And when it comes to all things pertaining to drug-related issues, the study authors said these issues have 26-to-1 odds of being enacted—making it more likely to strike it rich with a bet on a three-legged horse at next year’s Kentucky Derby than seeing any concrete changes being made in respect to national marijuana policy.
Still, many supporters believe the outcome of the upcoming election will serve as the turning point for the grand scheme of marijuana legalization. That’s because with Arizona, California, Maine, Massachusetts and Nevada expected to end prohibition this year—not to mention four more states set to decide on medical marijuana—there could be a larger percentage of Congress fighting to protect green jurisdictions in 2017.
“What happens with these nine states on the 8th could propel a breakthrough in Congress and it’s going to be a huge signal to the other folks around the country,” Democratic Representative Earl Blumenauer told Roll Call.
from http://ift.tt/2dZMDQf
by Mike Adams at High Times
Grow Q&A: How Much Pot Should I Put Into My Curing Jars?
Dear Dan,
I just harvested a week ago and my buds are ready for the curing process. My question is, how much is too much when loading jars for curing? — 420Animal
Dear 420Animal,
When curing, your glass jars should be full, but not overfilled. There should be plenty of air in the jar so don’t stuff the buds down into the jar. Basically, you don’t want to crush the buds and damage the trichomes so gently fill the jars but don’t press or force more in than comfortably fits.
Remember to “burp” the jars on a daily basis to let out any accumulated moisture. The slow release of liquid into the air and the replacement of moist air with regular air is the curing process in a nutshell. If you smell anything that resembles ammonia coming out of the jars, leave them open until the odor subsides and the buds don’t feel damp anymore.
from http://ift.tt/2eaUpCh
by Danny Danko at High Times
Floridians ‘Not Amused’ by 4 a.m. Robocall from Prohibitionists
Politics The latest in cannabis legalization including laws and policies, legislators’ views, election coverage, and more.
A campaign push by Florida medical marijuana opponents this weekend could’ve easily been mistaken for a massive drunk dial. In the early morning hours, between roughly midnight Saturday and 6:30 a.m. Sunday, hundreds of registered voters in the state received robocalls from Drug Free Florida urging them to oppose Amendment 2.
It’s not clear whether the effort won over hearts and minds, but local reports make it obvious the calls sure pissed people off. Pensacola resident Judy Druegner told Sunshine State News that she and her husband woke up at 4:38 a.m. Sunday morning to the phone ringing. Given the early hour, the couple feared it was a family emergency.
“We were not amused,” she said.
The Drueners weren’t alone. Several residents complained to local news, and the No on 2 Facebook page was swamped with complaints.
“All this particular political committee has done is show they are capable of spreading misinformation at best, downright lies the majority of the time, and horribly poor execution of their plan to push their nonsensical agenda,” wrote Facebook user Maggie Cappadonna. “Needless to say, they have not swayed my vote on Amendment 2.”
In the ad, Drug Free Florida warns what might happen if voters say yes to the constitutional amendment to expand medical marijuana in Florida. The state’s current medical marijuana system is extremely limited, with most patients limited to low-THC cannabis in non-smokeable forms.
“They’re pushing a constitutional amendment that authorizes kid-friendly pot candy that looks just like the junk food your children know and love,” Dr. Jessica Spencer, a substance abuse counselor in Florida, says in the recorded message.
Drug Free Florida issued an apology Sunday evening after the phone snafu, saying the robocalls were supposed have been made in the evening.
“Our sincerest apologies to those voters who inadvertently received a recorded call during the early morning hours on Sunday,” the group said in a statement. “It was not our intention to have those calls made at that hour. These calls were supposed to be made starting in the early PM and were mistakenly sent in the early AM.”
Latest polls in Florida show Amendment 2 leading the polls, 71 percent to 21 percent. Constitutional amendments in Florida require a 60 percent supermajority for approval. A 2014 legalization measure failed by 3 percent.
The post Floridians ‘Not Amused’ by 4 a.m. Robocall from Prohibitionists appeared first on Leafly.
from http://ift.tt/2fevFtB
by Gage Peake at Leafly
Radical Rant: News Flash—Legalization Isn’t Going to Solve Everything
Why are you interested in the legalization of marijuana?
To solve the gross inequality of income in American society?
To cure the evils of racism embedded in American society?
To provide an economic engine to revive the middle class in American society?
Not me. For me legalization of marijuana must solve one problem alone: it must end the ability of police to harass us over the smell of weed.
Maybe it is because I grew up in the Just Say No ’80s in a conservative county in Idaho, a redundancy from which springs such bigotry against cannabis that its governor is the only one nationwide to have vetoed a CBD-only law that would spare lives of epileptic children. (You know you’ve stepped to the fringes of social conservatism when you’re rejecting something Utah pioneered and the South embraced.)
Because of that experience of fearing a cage in the Gem State and having been caged over the smell of weed in the Beehive State, I tend to see this movement in very clear terms as what our opponents have always called it—a war, not on drugs per se, but on those of us who choose the unapproved ones. A war where the soldiers are the cops and our statehouses are the battlefields.
If you’re lining up with the enemy to support continuation of this war, in my eyes, you’re a traitor in that war. If you’re actively working for the enemy in continuation of this war, in my eyes, you’re an enemy combatant.
But if you’re a millennial and a California native, you don’t have that experience and outlook. For you, marijuana has always been something available at the pot shop. It’s always been a rite of passage to visit Permission Slips-‘Я’-Us and give the autographologist your annual protection money for Arrest Anxiety Syndrome. Even if you didn’t, back when you were in school Governor Terminator made marijuana just a ticket and a fine, so you think prohibition of marijuana is no big deal.
If you’ve got that perspective, I can see why legalization of marijuana freaks you out. But it doesn’t excuse your willful ignorance and cannabis privilege. When the bullet hits me, it doesn’t matter if the enemy soldier is an unwitting conscript or a volunteer patriot, I’m just as shot.
In decriminalized medical California, 8,800-plus marijuana felonies are issued annually, even after the passage of Prop 47 reduced many felony drug crimes to misdemeanors. People still get marijuana misdemeanors, too. And if you’re living in poverty, even a $100 ticket can be a serious obstacle to overcome.
Telling people that “anybody can get their Prop 215 [i.e., medical marijuana] card” also smacks of someone privileged enough to throw the kind of money around that poor people cannot.
I read too many cannabis consumers online in comments sections, Facebook walls, and blog posts complaining about legalization for numerous hypothetical reasons.
They complain that legalization “turns cannabis over to the corporations / elite / the one percent / Monsanto.” Yes, in America and most of the world, legal commodities are manufactured, bought, and sold by fictitious legal entities.
How is cannabis legalization supposed to create a market for marijuana unlike the market for any other product? Require all businesses to be non-profits? Artificially control supply and demand through regulation that will keep prices high and guarantee criminal diversion? Socialize the cannabis market and let the government run it?
They complain that legalization “doesn’t do a thing to address racism, since marijuana crimes remain and minorities still get busted disproportionately.” Yes, America has a racist criminal-justice system; blacks and Latinos are arrested, tried, and convicted disproportionately and more harshly than whites for just about every crime.
How is cannabis legalization supposed to rectify 407 years of racist oppression brought by white invaders of this continent? I can’t imagine that maintaining the prohibition status quo does much in that regard.
They complain that legalization “doesn’t look out for the little guy.” Yes, the tendency of American capitalism is to favor bigger business entities with the means to out-compete smaller entities.
How is cannabis legalization supposed to reverse the trend towards big-box retailers who outperform their smaller competitors on selection and price? By artificially restricting companies so price remains high and criminal diversion is profitable?
They complain that legalization “ends medical marijuana.” Yes, eventually when there are no longer marijuana crimes, we won’t need to protect sick people from arrest.
But as the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan once observed, “you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts.” The legalization being proposed in all five states, including California, does not alter those states’ medical marijuana protections one iota. Unless that complaint is “ends medical marijuana’s monopoly on the cannabis market,” it’s a shameful lie propagated by people whose economic interests are threatened by competition.
Economic arguments against marijuana legalization are morally indefensible. The price of marijuana under prohibition is subsidized by the misery of those busted for it. While prohibition exists, that risk tariff is a defensible cost of doing business.
Obstructing the dismantling of prohibition, however, places you in the position of promoting the misery of others for your personal gain. It makes you no better than the cops, prison guards, drug testers, rehabs, drug companies, and other prohibitionists whose profits depend on marijuana’s criminal status.
—–
Russ’s previous Radical Rant: We Will Remember the Traitors!
And check out: The The Top 10 Myths About California’s Prop 64 (With Footnotes!)
For all of High Times’ legalization coverage, click here.
And click right here for all of our dispatches on the Prop 64 race in California.
from http://ift.tt/2fa3Vr5
by Russ Belville at High Times