Articles

The Mmma - Operation 26%

Wed, 11 Apr 2012 21:23:00 +0000

Dear Medical Cannabis Community,

RE: Re: HB 4834, HB 4851, HB 4853, HB 4856

The above referenced bills were adopted by the House Judiciary
Committee. Very soon these bills will be on the House floor for further
amendments with the final vote requiring a 75% super majority.

Operation 26%'s objective is designed as a full scale, grass roots,
community response aimed at reaching the Democrats that are split,
undecided or ununiformed on this issue and blocking a super majority yes
vote. The Democrats in both the House and Senate will be asked to
advance these bills; they need to hear the voice of this communities'
opposition in numbers. Please join us in making a difference by
contacting the below listed Representatives, via phone, email, letter
and visiting them in person. Each one of them has the power to stop
these bills from advancing. We have provided a form letter addressing
the bills directly, but please feel free to write your own. We would
encourage those involved to add suggested letters as well as the
response and experience they receive from their interactions

Please let your voice be heard by:

1. Cutting and pasting the letter below (or your own) into an email, and
then sending it to each of the Representatives' email addresses listed
below.

2. Printing the letter and mailing it via US mail.

3. And most importantly call, call, call the Representative (see
telephone numbers listed below) and explain to them why the proposed
amendments fail to address the real concerns of patients and caregivers,
and feel free to use the specific talking points that address the
proposed Bills directly.

Talking points for conversations with the Representatives:

1. The Judiciary Committee said that they were working with different
medical marihuana groups but not a single medical marihuana advocacy
group approves of the bills. Watch the tapes from the hearings.

2. Patients and Caregivers are being denied the right to present a
medical marihuana defense, despite very clear language in the
initiative. During the hearings one of the committee members was quoted
as saying "that seems un-American."

3. Nearly three years after it was passed, the Act still has not been
properly implemented, with registration cards showing up late and no new
conditions having been added despite multiple submissions and petitions.

4. When I signed up for the program, I believed that law enforcement
would not have access to the registry. HB 4834 violates our most basic
rights to privacy, as outlined in the act. It is unfair to change the
rules in such a drastic way after the program has begun.

5. Legislators and law enforcement continue to fail to realize this
is a medical issue, protected by HIPAA and aimed at helping the people
of Michigan experience relief.

6. HB 4856 criminalizes behavior that that is the norm for a
possessing and transferring any other medication including prescription
narcotics.

7. HB 4853- which should require a 75% vote criminalizes patients'
safe access for acquiring medicine and limits the protections set out in
the initiative.

8. HB 4851 is unneeded because Lara has recently published its
guidelines for medical marihuana certification, addressing this issue as
a private health issue and not a public safety issue. The issue of
locked enclosed facility is before the Michigan Supreme Court and
additionally effectively makes the transportation of any cannabis plant
illegal.

9. Additionally and for unknown reasons the amendment to guarantee a
right to present a medical marihuana defense to a jury, was amended,
quoting a Representative "this seems so un-American."

10. HB 4834 is the most horrifying allowing access by the loosely
defined "law enforcement official" access to the registry. Over 130,000
patients and numerous caregivers had been promised and believed that
their registry information would be kept private. To honestly ensure
these protections "law enforcement officials" should instead be required
to get a warrant signed by a neutral and detached magistrate. This is
the procedure for obtaining a warrant for the search of someone's home,
and stands as a more acceptable approach. Additionally Law Enforcement
Officers can already verify the validity of a medical marijuana
patient's registry ID card through the Department of Licensing and
Regulatory Affairs.

11. In early March of 2012, LARA announced it had purchased a new
printer which would be installed by the end of the month. We have yet to
see it put into use, if it even exists. It has been 4 years and more
empty promises.

12. What's more patients and caregivers are no safer than they were
prior to 2008, when 63 percent of the voters in Michigan mandated a
change.

13. Based on the above factors and a lack of effort to keep Michigan
residents, namely patients and caregivers, safe under the current law, I
strongly urge you to vote no on all House bills relating to medical
marijuana.

Msms President Steven E. Newman, Md Weighs In O...

Wed, 11 Apr 2012 11:15:21 +0000

Today Video Recording For Those That Missed It

Fri, 02 Mar 2012 01:19:40 +0000

I am still processing the video and will post it here as soon as it's finished.....hang in there

Finally finished, it took a while to get the audio to sync with the video.

Joe Cain (Blueberry) starts at 1:18:00

Us Ca: What Gives Marijuana Its Signature Scent?

Sun, 12 Feb 2012 01:28:33 +0000

URL: http://www.mapinc.or...2/n115/a04.html
Newshawk: http://www.drugsense.org/donate.htm
Votes: 0
Pubdate: Thu, 09 Feb 2012
Source: Sacramento News & Review (CA)
Copyright: 2012 Chico Community Publishing, Inc.
Contact: sactoletters@newsreview.com
Website: http://newsreview.com/sacto/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/540
Author: David Downs

WHAT GIVES MARIJUANA ITS SIGNATURE SCENT?

From Harborside to Halent Labs, Experts Now Know Way More About What Makes Bud Reek

Sacramento cannabis enthusiasts have yet another thing to be snobs about in 2012: terpenes, the building blocks that make up the unique smell of cannabis, which are beginning to waft into the mainstream.

Drug companies are researching the therapeutic properties of these simple organic molecules, and at least two California medical-cannabis labs have begun testing for their presence in dispensary weed.

According to Donald Land, a UC Davis chemistry professor who cofounded Halent Laboratories, which tests for terpenes and conducts occasional smelling classes, "Terpenes are a set of relatively simple organic molecules that are present in all living organisms." He noted that most of the flavors and aromas of plants comes from terpenes.

"The name terpene is derived from the main ingredient in a certain type of pine pitch called turpentine," Land explained. "That piney smell that comes along with turpentine comes from terpenes. There are lots of others."

Herbalists have recognized the power of terpenes for decades. "Cannabis and other plants share a lot of the same terpenes, so terpenes have been legal for many decades," Land said. "There's been quite a bit of research on them in the U.S. and abroad, including many well-documented medicinal effects."

Rick Pfrommer, manager at Harborside Health Center in Oakland, said that as head buyer for the popular dispensary, he has smelled countless numbers of bags and glass jars full of the sticky ick, and that a lot of the odors he detects aren't actually coming from the weed.

"You can smell everything from bat guano to heavy salt-hydroponic fertilizers," Pfrommer said during an interview inside Harborside's buyer's room. The space is dominated by an examination counter, shelves of pot-strain reference books and expensive computers. Pfrommer has been selling ganja for about 25 years.

Pfrommer insists that if one boasts an acute sense of smell, you can smell chlorophyll in a bud that hasn't been cured well, and even molds. "Once you've smelled multiple thousands of samples of cannabis," he explained, "when something is off, it's apparent that it's off, like, as soon as you crack the bag open."

Like a wine sommelier or a buyer for a boutique coffee roaster, Pfrommer smells each potential new addition to Harborside's menu using a specific ritual. First, he pops open a glass jar of coffee beans and takes a big sniff. Like ginger before sushi, coffee beans reset the palate, he said. Then he takes a big whiff from a sample cannabis bag, fishes out a single nug, cracks it open, and inhales deeply.

"All you really want to smell is the terpenes," he said.

According to a literature review by the medical-cannabis journal O'Shaughnessy's: "Limonene ( also found in lemon ) is an antidepressant and immune-stimulant in humans; alpha-pinene ( also found in pine needles ) is an anti-inflammatory, a bronchodilator, and a wide-spectrum antibiotic; nerolidol ( also found in oranges ) is a sedative; linalool ( also found in lavender ) has an anti-anxiety effect; and myrcene ( also found in hops ) is a sedative, a muscle relaxant, a sleep aid, and an anti-inflammatory."

Trainers teach drug dogs to hunt for beta-caryophyllene, a terpene in cannabis that also is an anti-inflammatory. Terpenes are also the chemical precursors to the euphoric ingredient in pot, tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, making them a proxy for potency.

Researchers like Ethan Russo, senior medical director at GW Pharmaceuticals, believe that terpenes contribute to the "entourage effect" that lies at the core of medical cannabis's efficacy in treating nausea, inflammation, chronic pain and more. GW Pharmaceuticals has started growing terpene-only pot-sans THC-to better investigate the effects of terpenes, O'Shaughnessy's reported.

And, unlike the THC pill Marinol, new prescription throat spray Sativex contains THC, its therapeutic peer CBD, and terpenes.

Terpenes also enable pot snobs to make outlandish yet credible claims that they smell chocolate, mango, diesel or lavender in their bag. The five to 10 main terpenes in cannabis have about 25 more rare peers, but cannabis has been found to contain more than 200 different types of them. The combinations are infinite.

Cannabis lab data from Halent and The Werc Shop near Los Angeles is helping to elevate breeding to a science. It's also giving patients a first-ever ingredients list for that dubious doobie, said Jeffrey Rabe, director of The Werc Shop.

Pfrommer envisions legal OG Kush deodorizers or Agent Orange floor cleaners. "I think, along with CBD, terpenes are one of the two most exciting things going on in cannabis," Pfrommer said. "We're just scratching the surface now."

And sniffing.

http://www.mapinc.or...5/a04.html?1042

Planet Green Trees Episode #80

Thu, 09 Feb 2012 22:59:44 +0000

Paul Campaign: We’Re Winning The Battle For Del...

Thu, 09 Feb 2012 20:38:07 +0000

Paul Campaign: We’re Winning The Battle For Delegates

GOP strategist predicts Paul will be on the Republican ticket

Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
February 9, 2012

The Ron Paul campaign issued a press release yesterday announcing that the Congressman was winning the battle for delegates in the lead up to the Republican National Convention, with Paul himself adding that he believes he has unlocked the secret to winning the GOP nomination.
“We are thrilled with the yesterday’s results.” Ron Paul 2012 National Campaign Manager John Tate stated, “Our campaign to Restore America continues to gain ground, and we are poised to pick up even more delegates from Minnesota and Colorado adding to our delegates in Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada.”

“As people across the country view the results of yesterday’s contests, it is important to consider a few facts that have not been clearly reported. Not one single delegate was awarded yesterday, instead the caucuses in Minnesota and Colorado were the very first step in the delegate selection process. And there are still over 40 states left to go. The Ron Paul campaign plans to continue to vie for delegates nationwide.” Tate added.
Tate pointed out that the caucuses were essentially “non-binding beauty contests”, and that the Paul campaign is poised to pick up many more delegates in Missouri, Colorado and Nevada than the straw poll numbers indicate.
Tate also stated that following a strong second place showing in Minnesota, “the Paul campaign is well-organized to win the bulk of delegates there.”

“We are confident in gaining a much larger share of delegates than even our impressive showing yesterday indicates. As an example of our campaign’s delegate strength, take a look at what has occurred in Colorado” Tate added, pointing to the fact that delegate slots do not directly correlate with the straw poll vote.
As the graphic below illustrates, in several counties in Colorado, Paul won ALL the delegates despite coming in third or even fourth in the straw polls:

“We are also seeing the same trends in Minnesota, Nevada, and Iowa, and in Missouri as well.” the Paul campaign statement read.
The Congressman appeared on Cavuto last night and explained:
“In some of these states I can come in third or fourth, but because we have the organisation we might get the most of the delegates. A lot of people don’t understand that, I shouldn’t let the secret out!” Paul noted.
Paul conceded however that in order to stand a real shot he needs to finish in first in some of the primaries and caucuses.
“I think for PR purposes and credibility you have to win some states.” Paul said.
Watch the full interview below:

Another interesting take on Paul’s momentum was put forth by GOP strategist Jack Burkman, who predicted that come the RNC, Paul would be on the Republican ticket.
Burkman contends that because Romney will likely not be in an outright winning position, and because Paul will have a competitive number of delegates and can attract more independent and even Democrat voters, than Gingrich or Santorum could dream of, Paul could find himself on the Republican ticket.

However, it is somewhat unlikely that Ron Paul would compromise his positions to share a ticket with Mitt Romney, who he has consistently criticized as a Wall Street owned establishment insider.

My link

Bona Fide Issue Resolved By Mi Board Of Medicine

Thu, 02 Feb 2012 20:24:58 +0000

Yesterday the Michigan Board of Medicine may have ended the discussion regarding what a "Bona Fide" dr/pt. relationship is. They issued the following memorandum...

The Board of Medicine and the Board of Osteopathic Medicine and Surgery has
adopted the following statement to clarify the standard of care applicable to the
evaluation of an individual for the purpose of certification to use marihuana for any
medical condition:

Generally accepted components of a full medical evaluation to determine
suitabitity and appropriateness for recommending treatment of any kind, including
certification for medical marihuana, include:

- a hands-on physician patient encounter
- full assessment and recording of patient's medical history
- relevant physical examination
- review of prior records of relevant examinations, treatments and treatment
response including substance abuse history
- receipt and review of relevant diagnostic test results
- discussion of advantages, disadvantages, alternatives, potential adverse
effects and expected response to treatment
- development of plan of care with state goals of therapy
monitoring of the response to treatment and possible adverse effects
- creation and maintenance of patient records documenting the information
above
- communication with patient's primary care physician when applicable

The Boards expect that these medical encounters would be completed at permanent
locations that enable the patient to retum for follow-up, consultation or assistance as
needed.

A physician failing to meet generally accepted standards of practice when certifying a
patient to use marihuana for a medical condition may be found to be practicing below
the acceptable standard of care and therefore may be subject to disciplinary action.

Planet Green Trees Episode # 79

Thu, 02 Feb 2012 16:36:19 +0000

Planet Green Trees Webisode #77

Fri, 20 Jan 2012 01:11:58 +0000

Planet Green Trees Webisode #76

Wed, 18 Jan 2012 06:19:24 +0000

Planet Green Trees Episode 76 - Matt Abel Canna...

Fri, 13 Jan 2012 17:35:14 +0000

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/planetgreentrees/2012/01/13/episode-76-lets-end-prohibition-w-atty-matt-abel

HostedBy: Attorney Michael Komorn

VeryImportant Show Last Night. History is Made

Thelargest medical marihuana patient advocacy group in Michigan, The MichiganMedical Marihuana Association, CEO Joe Cain, President Michael Komorn, pledgetheir support for a constitutional amendment to repeal the prohibition ofmarihuana. As stated by Joe Cain, Bill Schuette has given patients no choice butto support this initiative, our community of sick people are scared. Thegovernment needs to be talking about getting the cards out on time and addingnew conditions to the registry, not limiting the protections of the act.

Also:Shakina Pena calls in to report on her victory after a jury trial allegingvoter fraud ( a politically motivated prosecution)

AlsoNick Agro calls in to talk about the tortured story of the Agro family over thelast 2 years but reports on finally getting some justice, when Judge Dan Obriandismisses all charges in the Clinical Relief case.

http://www.blogtalkr...lanetgreentrees

PLANETGREENTREES Call-in Number: (347) 326-9626

Call-inNumber: (347)326-9626

Webisode #76 - Planet Green Trees

Fri, 13 Jan 2012 16:26:10 +0000

Webisode #76

Doctors Refuse To Authorize Medical Cannabis Use

Fri, 04 Nov 2011 03:23:10 +0000

Canada: Doctors Refuse to OK Marijuana Use
URL: http://www.mapinc.or...1/n643/a06.html
Newshawk: Haden, Mark [VC]
Votes: 0
Pubdate: Tue, 01 Nov 2011
Source: Ottawa Citizen (CN ON)
Copyright: 2011 The Ottawa Citizen
Contact: http://www.canada.co...en/letters.html
Website: http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/326
Author: Sharon Kirkey
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mjcn.htm (Cannabis - Canada)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal)

DOCTORS REFUSE TO OK MARIJUANA USE

Patients Left in Pain; Some Users Risked Being Jailed for Using a Drug That Helps Them Function. and Proposed Health Canada Changes Could Make the Situation Worse, Writes Sharon Kirkey

A decade after Canada legalized the medical use of marijuana, most doctors are still refusing to sign the declarations patients need to get legal access to pot - meaning patients in pain risk being jailed if they use a drug that helps them function.

It's a predicament that threatens to become worse because of proposed changes to how Health Canada regulates access to the drug.

At first glance, it appears the government is easing up on strict rules for obtaining medicinal marijuana. Health Canada has proposed removing itself as the ultimate arbiter in approving or rejecting applications to possess.

Instead, doctors alone would sign off on requests.

But the nation's largest doctors' group said the proposals would have the perverse effect of putting even greater pressure on MDs to control access to a largely untested and unregulated substance they know little to nothing about; a drug that hasn't gone through the normal regulatory review process. Their licensing bodies have told doctors that they are under no obligation to complete a medical declaration under the current regulations and that any one who chooses to do so should "proceed with caution."

Dr. John Haggie, president of the 75,000-member Canadian Medical Association, said the changes being proposed would essentially off load all responsibility for using and monitoring marijuana to the doctors who sign an authorization - "and they'd be kind out of out there, without any infrastructure around them to assess it, to monitor it and to know if they were doing the right thing.

"I don't think that's appropriate or fair," he said.

Observers said doctors fear doing harm, exposing themselves to legal action and becoming the "go-to" source for people seeking pot not to alter their pain but to alter their consciousness.

Haggie said physicians want fundamental research into some basic questions - is it safe? Who does it work for? Who should not use it? Yet the Conservative government abruptly terminated a medicinal marijuana research program in 2006. According to Health Canada, the government believes clinical research is "best undertaken by the private sector, such as pharmaceutical companies."

A world leader in cannabis research said the logic defies him.

"I cannot imagine how a government agency can supervise ( a marijuana access ) program knowing that there is very little data out there - on safety issues in particular - and not try to stimulate research," said Dr. Mark Ware, head of the Canadian Consortium for the Investigation of Cannabinoids, a non-profit network of more than 150 clinicians and researchers investigating the potential role of cannabinoids in diseases from arthritis to glaucoma.

No drug company wants to evaluate smoked marijuana as a medicine, Ware said, because there's no money in it for them. Funding agencies have been less than approachable, he added, because there's little appetite to support studies involving a product that's often smoked. In clinical parlance, "They don't see it as a safe, viable drug delivery system," said Ware, director of clinical research at the Alan Edwards Pain Management Unit at the McGill University Health Centre.

Ware said he wonders how much the government's disinterest in research might be tied to its toughon-crime political agenda - "that somehow facilitating research on medicinal cannabis is a way of accepting that it may have some value as a medicine."

The Montreal doctor, who is helping reform medical school curricula to better educate physicians around pain, received about $2 million under the now-dead medicinal marijuana research program. In a study published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal last year that involved 21 patients with neuropathic pain - a common and dreaded condition that causes electric, stabbing pain - Ware's group found that smoked cannabis at low doses reduces pain, improves mood and helps sleep, without making people high. All had "refractory" pain, meaning pain that had defied all traditional treatments. No serious or unexpected side effects were reported.

Ware avoids prescribing cannabis to patients with a history of psychosis or schizophrenia, because it's psychoactive at high doses - and sometimes even therapeutic doses. It can also be dangerous to people with unstable heart disease.

Still, there has never been a proven overdose death caused by marijuana in humans, according to Ontario's highest court. Ware said that for patients for whom it works, cannabis can achieve about 30 per cent reduction in pain intensity.

But doctors remain wary - their chief concern being: How do I know when a patient is seeking a licence for a legitimate medical purpose and not simply to get legal access to an otherwise illicit drug?

Ware's consortium has been working hard to educate and support doctors around the use of cannabis. He said data from Health Canada suggest that the average medical user is consuming two grams per day - - about four joints when smoked. "It's just taking that information and getting it into the hands of practising physicians. Then at least they know what the ballpark is."

Some patients were getting authorizations for far higher amounts, because doctors didn't know that 30 or 40 grams a day could be outside the "normal" range, he said.

Health Canada said the proposed changes to the program - which would include removing the rights of patients to grow their own supply of marijuana or to appoint designated growers, forcing users to get their pot from a licensed commercial producer instead - would make the program less complicated for seriously ill Canadians.

Paul Lewin begs to differ. Doctors already are boycotting the program en masse, the Toronto lawyer said. Lewin said medical regulators and insurers sent letters to the government, "saying, 'Don't put us in charge, don't make us a gatekeeper, we don't know anything about pot, this is a plant product, it's an unapproved drug.' "

Lewin said the court heard stories of how some doctors encouraged their patients to use pot for their pain. The patients would return, reporting that the marijuana was helping, that they were feeling less pain. But when they asked the doctors to sign their forms, "that's when the mood changes," Lewin said.

"That's when they say, 'Get out. I'm not risking my practice over you.' "

Lewin's client, Matt Mernagh, started growing marijuana when he found it provided some relief from chronic pain and other symptoms of scoliosis, fibromyalgia and epilepsy. But he couldn't get a licence to grow, because he couldn't find a doctor to sign his declaration.

Police found Mernagh's plants in 2008 when they were in his apartment building on an unrelated call. He was charged with production.

Lewin took the case to the Superior Court in Ontario. The court declared the federal medical marijuana program unconstitutional. The case is scheduled to go to the Court of Appeal for Ontario in March.

Lewin said the proposed changes to the marijuana access program are likely to scare off some of the few doctors willing to sign declarations, meaning "more seriously ill, lawabiding Canadians will be wrongfully treated as criminals" and subjected to humiliating arrests, medicine seizures and possibly even jailed, he said.

skirkey@postmedia.com

Twitter.com/sharon_kirkey

AUTHORIZATION TO POSSESS MARIJUANA

In 2001, 727 doctors supported an application for an authorization to possess marijuana. In 2010, 3,187 doctors signed a declaration. Between Jan. 1 and Oct. 25, 3,803 doctors supported an application for an authorization to possess.

As of Sept. 30, 12,216 people in Canada held authorization to possess marijuana for medical purposes.

Who has authority to approve or reject submissions in the new system?

Under the proposed changes, patients would continue to consult with their physician in order to obtain access to marijuana for medical purposes. Once it has been determined that the use of marijuana for medical purposes is appropriate, the physician would provide the individual with a document. Health Canada is consulting the medical community on the form that this document would take.

Individuals would then send the physician's document directly to a licensed commercial producer of their choice. The licensed producer would validate the document from the physician by confirming that the physician is licensed to practice medicine in Canada. The licensed producer would register the individual as a customer and would process the order for a specific amount of dried marijuana. Health Canada would maintain an up-to-date list of licensed producers on its website, and work with the medical community to disseminate this information as widely as possible.

Kalamazoo Voters To Decide Marijuana Enforcemen...

Fri, 04 Nov 2011 03:21:23 +0000

By: Raven Thompson
Kalamazoo, MI
November 3, 2011
WMUK
Download

Listen to this report (5:19)

Kalamazoo City ballot question

Possessing even small amounts of marijuana in Michigan is illegal without a state medical marijuana I-D card. Violators convicted of the misdemeanor charge can face up to a year in jail. But on Tuesday, November 8th, voters in Kalamazoo will decide whether or not to make possession of an ounce or less of marijuana by someone 21 or older the “lowest law enforcement priority” in the City. WMUK’s Raven Thompson reports:

The issue wound up on the ballot after supporters gathered enough petition signatures to put it there. The campaign by the group Kalamazoo Coalition for Pragmatic Cannabis Laws was led by Louis Stocking. He wasn’t available for interviews. But other supporters have spoken out. They include Kalamazoo Attorney Daniel Grow. He says the proposal to de-emphasize pursuit of offenders who have small amounts of marijuana is a vote on police priorities:

[Daniel Grow] “Making the pursuit of crimes like rape, theft, child endangerment those types of things; crimes where someone’s harmed or property is stolen a higher priority then crimes that are merely a crime because they’ve been designated as such for the possession of less than one ounce of marijuana. The police department’s resources and the court’s resources are limited and this ballot initiative allows the voters to tell the court system and police department that they want the more serious crimes to be the top priority and these statutory crimes involving the possession of marijuana to be the lowest priority for law enforcement.”

But Jeff Hadley, Kalamazoo’s Chief of Public Safety, says he doesn’t think much would change if voters approve the proposal:

[Jeff Hadley] “We don’t dedicate specific resources to the enforcement of marijuana; it just comes by way of many other things. And it is illegal to poses marijuana and we are sworn to uphold the law and enforce it in a fair and just manner, so I’m not sure what impact it will have on how we operate.”

Hadley says Kalamazoo Public Safety officers usually make small marijuana busts as the result of traffic stops or other kinds of unrelated offenses. He says his officers already don’t switch on their lights and sirens in pursuit of people who have a few joints, although Hadley says those trafficking in large amounts of pot are a different matter.

Kalamazoo’s City Attorney Clyde Robinson also says he doesn’t think the proposed ordinance would change much when all is said at done:

[Clyde Robinson] “It will be a part of the City Charter, but the question as to its affect on public safety operations is up in the air given the fact that there is no local ordinance addressing the use or possession of marijuana except for permitting marijuana as a home occupation.”

That last is allowed under Michigan’s voter-approved medical marijuana law.

Charles Ream is the statewide coordinator of the Safer Michigan Coalition. It supports “Lowest Law Enforcement Priority”, or LLEP initiatives, like the one in Kalamazoo. Ream says the proposal is about allocation:

[Charles Ream] “I produced a six-page document which lays out this scientific data by academic criminologists which proves, it’s not just an opinion, it proves that when you apply resources to chasing after marijuana or drugs that you reduce the resources that you have that are available for fighting real crime. And you actually diminish the amount of real crime that is solved.”

But City Attorney Clyde Robinson says Kalamazoo officers are only enforcing state marijuana laws. He points to a case in Ypsilanti in the 1970’s. It had an ordinance that made possession of small amounts of marijuana a civil, rather than a criminal infraction. It also required police officers to refer cases to city officials rather than the county prosecutor:

[Clyde Robinson] “Ypsilanti officers proceeded through state statute and that was challenged and the courts have said a police officer has the ability to enforce state law and they can’t be precluded from doing so.”

Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette makes the same point. He says the proposed Kalamazoo ordinance conflicts with state law and can’t be enforced if it is approved. But Schuette couldn’t prevent it from going to voters because the state constitution doesn’t give the attorney general authority to block ballot questions based on petitions.

Kalamazoo attorney Daniel Grow says that’s as it should be. He hopes Kalamazoo voters will approve the marijuana enforcement ordinance, and that officials at all levels will listen:

[Daniel Grow] “Our elected officials simply have to heed the voices of our voters. If the Michigan voters, the people on the street, think the police and the court system have gone too far in one area and have neglected another area of the law, then I think it’s imperative that they respect that voice. There’s always an argument that can be made, you know, a technical argument in terms of whether legally this is the best way to go about it or the only way to go about it, but I don’t think that’s important. I think it’s important that our elected officials hear the voice of the people who they are supposed to be serving.”

Kalamazoo voters almost had two marijuana propositions to consider this fall. Another group circulated petitions to get a question before voters that would allow three medical marijuana “dispensaries” in the City. Supporters gathered enough signatures but the question didn’t make it on the ballot because of counting mistakes by the City Clerk’s office.

Kalamazoo voters will decide the proposed marijuana enforcement ordinance November 8th.

© Copyright 2011, WMUK

My link

Protest At The Courthouse

Fri, 04 Nov 2011 03:20:35 +0000

The Attorney General Bill Schuette has added himself as a plaintiff in the civil case of Chesterfield Twp. and their Chief of Police vs. Big Daddy's. PROTEST AT THE COURTHOUSE at 12 noon, the Hearing begins inside at 1:00 November 3rd, 2011, Macomb County Circuit Courthouse, 40 N Main Street, Mt. Clemens, MI located in downtown Mt. Clemens. Pre-protest gathering and sign-making workshop arrive as early as 10am at 52011 Gratiot in Chesterield Township, MI located north of 23 Mile Road.We will make signs and have coffee & donuts. We will provide transportation from there to the courthouse. After court we willl meet back at Big Daddy's for hopefully a victory celebration and have lunch. Pass the word on!

You are cordially invited to attend the 2nd ann...

Sat, 17 Sep 2011 02:12:38 +0000

You are cordially invited to attend:

2nd annual MMMA film fest

The Michigan Medical Marijuana Associations 2nd Annual film festival
Sat. Oct 22nd 2-5pm
2150 Bagley, Detroit MI 48216

We will be showcasing ten short videos submitted by MMMA members
The videos will be judged, and awards given to the top three films.
We encourage participating film makers to consider no more than a 5-10 minute limit of the films submitted.

We are asking for a donation to the MMMA of $10-$20 for admission.
NO ONE WILL BE TURNED AWAY

The film festival will also feature:

a panel discussion on the new laws and proposed amendments, and updates on the current state of the law.
Recent documentaries regarding cannabis as medicine
a patient medication lounge
raffle prizes
live music

SUBMIT YOUR VIDEO:
Mail a DVD to the MMMA
3000 Town Center Ste 1800
Southfield, MI 48075

All entries must be submitted by Oct. 16th
all topics will be considered, but themes relevant to the medical marijuana community will be favored.

Please join the MMMA as we continue to make a safe environment Michigan patients and caregivers.

We look forward to seeing you...

Sincerely:

Joe Cain (CEO)
Michael Komorn (President)

Seeds or Clones?? Where to Start??

Tue, 23 Nov 2010 13:40:09 +0000

Where to start? How to start? What to start with????

This is a commonly talked about topic, and it should be. “A new grower should grow out bag seed”. Ever hear that one?? It’s true. Common sense says that a new grower needs all the experience they can get. Growing from regular seed will give a grower the chance to see both male and female parts, and allow them to sex plants. It will allow the new grower to see a plants life from beginning to end. It will make a new grower learn how to germinate seeds. It teaches a new grower about the fragile first week of a seedlings life. Common sense says that a new grower is prone to make mistakes and should not start with expensive seeds for this reason. But what about this clone thing??

Michigan is hurting for good caregivers. This is no secret. And for this reason I try to steer newer growers to Compassion Clubs and friends for clones. Starting via clone will give you meds for you and your patients quicker, and still allow you to learn 90% of the grow process as well. After you get meds out to your patients, and get your grow room and skills tuned in, it can be time to play around with seeds and seedlings.

One major concern growing from seed is the possibility of male plants pollinating your crops. Even if the seeds are feminized, there is still a chance of a hermaphrodite plant. In many circumstances, the hermaphrodite plant is much more difficult to spot that the true male. In either case, the new grower may not 100% know what to look for, or may look too late. Pollination will ruin a crop, and if not cleaned up well, it can pollinate crops for cycles to come as well. Patients expect seedless meds. Sure, there are understanding patients who will work with you, and work around the seeds for a cycle or two, but it gets old real quick. If you start with clones, you will not have this problem.

Too many new growers/caregivers promise the world and then have disaster. Could be pests, pollen, or just grow failure in general…… Leaving the grower look bad, and also leaving patients without medication. Starting with clones will take a ton of “ifs” and potential problems out of your grow. Simplicity is key for the newer grower.

Good, bug free clones are available all over the state from caregivers and Compassion Clubs alike. Many are free, some ask for a small donation/compensation. Anything more than $15-$20 per clone is probably too much. If you are looking for 8-10-12 clones…… do the math. It may be worth it to put that money in your gas tank and drive a distance for free clones from a reputable person, or a person who maintains a grow journal on the internet. This gives you a chance to see the characteristics of the plant before you pick up a clone and go growing blind. The more homework and research you do before planting, the better off you are in the long run.

Another thing to worry about is plant count. Obviously we are held to 12 plants per patient in Michigan. Well, if you plant 12 regular seeds, you might have 10 or 11 make it to seedling phase. Out of those 10 or 11, half will be males. So we are left with 4 or 5 female plants. This is nowhere close to our limit. It would be much better to start with 12 clones.

The same can be said for 12 feminized seeds. Maybe 10 or 11 will make it to the seedling stage. Now we have 10 or 11 females right? Hopefully, but that’s not going to always be 100% true. If a hermaphrodite plant pops up in those 10 or 11 plants and goes unnoticed for more than a few days, the entire crop will be pollinated and you are back to square one. Once again…………. It would just be so much better to start with 12 clones.

Confidentiality .. It's In The Law. So What...

Mon, 22 Nov 2010 16:57:26 +0000

Confidentiality within the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act.

The confidentiality section of the MMMA is located in section 6 (h).

A common mistake evolves when someone tries to apply HIPPA law to issues of confidentiality within the MMMA. These are two very different laws. HIPPA does not protect the identity of a medical marijuana caregiver. The MMMA does not protect dental records. There is an overlap of the two laws. Those overlaps are minimal. The differences are major.

There is very little medical information that is maintained in the MDCH data file. Nearly every item is identification in nature. Our law was not intended to provide anyone with a list of local medical marijuana patients and or caregivers to ANY employee or official of government.

There are several items, located in 6 (h) (1) and (2) that are placed within the protections of this section.

The nature of all of the items that the MMMA places the protection of confidentiality upon are informational. It is the information within the registry file at the MDCH in Lansing. This information is protected on it’s way toward that file, while in the file and proceeding from the file.

Any copy of the information that has made it’s way to, or is on it’s way to, the MDCH file is protected. For example, a patient retains a copy of the application in the event that the MDCH takes longer than twenty days. After the twenty days the retained copy of paperwork with it’s supporting information, serves the function of being a “temporary ID card” until the plastic arrives in the mail.

This retained copy is a mirror image of the collective information that will be or is within the master file at the MDCH.

It is the information that is protected and not just the literal piece of paper that is submitted:

(1) Applications and supporting information submitted by qualifying patients, including information regarding their primary caregivers and physicians, are confidential.

When considering the specific action that is forbidden of the MDCH to do with such records, it should be noted that it is the information that is forbidden from release via FOIA request. Clearly this is talking about the release of information and not the literal paper application.

Information is quickly passed from one person to the next in our information age.

The next paragraph places emphasis on every iota of information contained within the file that the MDCH keeps:

(2) The department shall maintain a confidential list of the persons to whom the department has issued registry identification cards. Individual names and other identifying information on the list is confidential and is exempt from disclosure under the freedom of information act, 1976 PA 442, MCL 15.231 to 15.246.

Even the names are given the protections of this section. Identifying information would include names, addresses, phone numbers, drivers license numbers, social security numbers etc.

Two different views that exist about this paragraph.

· This paragraph only forbids disclosure in response to a FOIA request.

· This paragraph forbids disclosure in any way INCLUDING a response to a FOIA request.

The second view seems to have been adapted by the MDCH in it’s rules.

Rule 333.121:

Rule 21. (1) Except as provided in subrules (2) and (3) of this rule, Michigan medical marijuana program information shall be confidential and not subject to disclosure in any form or manner. Program information includes, but is not limited to, all of the following:

a] Applications and supporting information submitted by qualifying patients.

b] Information related to a qualifying patient’s primary caregiver.

c] Names and other identifying information of registry identification cardholders.

d] Names and other identifying information of pending applicants and their primary caregivers.

(2) Names and other identifying information made confidential under subrule (1) of this rule may only be accessed or released to authorized employees of the department as necessary to perform official duties of the department pursuant to the act, including the production of any reports of non-identifying aggregate data or statistics.

(3)The department shall verify upon a request by law enforcement personnel whether a registry identification card is valid, without disclosing more information than is reasonably necessary to verify the authenticity of the registry identification card.

(4) The department may release information to other persons only upon receipt of a properly executed release of information signed by all individuals with legal authority to waive confidentiality regarding that information, whether a registered qualifying patient, a qualifying patient's parent or legal guardian, or a qualifying patient’s registered primary caregiver. The release of information shall specify what information the department is authorized to release and to whom.

(5) Violation of these confidentiality rules may subject an individual to the penalties provided for under section 6(h)(4) of the act.

There is a serious omission of doctors protections. They are mentioned in the law yet ignored in the rules. The identities of the doctors are an item protected under the law itself.

To whom the duty of confidentiality is owed.

Many have asserted that the patient may wave confidentiality of these records.

The MDCH rules in paragraph 4 indicate that several people are owed the confidentiality provided within the records that involve a patient: Each of those other people are required to sign waivers before one iota of information is to be released about the mmj patient. Not just simply a waiver from the patient, but every other person named in the patients record.

Persons targeted by paragraph section 6 (h) (4) of the law.

This paragraph contains a list of authorities.

"including an employee or official of the department or another state agency or local unit of government,"

The inclusion of “local units of government” supports the idea that this section of law applies to much more than what the MDCH, or it’s employees.

One popular interpretation is that this criminal disclosure can only take place by persons employed by the MDCH in response to a FOIA request. That would leave out employees of local units of government. Yet those employees of local units of government are on the list of possible offenders.

Again, the MDCH interpretation of the confidentiality section assumes the more conservative stance. That is that ANY disclosure of ANY information that identifies ANYONE may be a violation of criminal law.

So far, we’ve looked at:

(1) What information is confidential and is protected from disclosure

(2) Who is owed confidentiality and what is required to waive the protections

(3) Who may be arrested for violations under section 6 (h) (4) of the law.

More on “who may violate?”

Paragraph (4) starts out “A person, including an employee or official of the department or another state agency or local unit of government,”

This paragraph targets government officials and employees. Both state and local.

Any person that is an official or employee of government could attempt to claim immunity of some sort in a defense to this criminal charge.

While not discussed in the law itself, immunity from this section must be considered.

A judge might be protected from this criminal law by immunity for actions taken in a court of law. The immunity protections for the prosecuting attorney would be less that provided to the judge. The court clerk would have less protection than the pa and so on down the list.

The further that employee or official is removed from the judge, the less likely that the person would be successful in claiming immunities.

It is difficult to claim immunity from a law which targets that person.

The officer on the street would most likely not succeed in claiming immunity.

The clerk behind the desk at city hall would be even less protected.

Local governments are currently attempting to force patients and caregivers to register with those local units of government. The MDCH would never release the same information to such units of government.

Such local laws are an attempt to make an “end run” around the confidentiality section of our law. The local governments can not get the information directly from the MDCH. They are now attempting to gain the exact same information from the persons that are supposed to be protected.

Disclosure

What is forbidden disclosure?

Who may not disclose?

What may not be disclosed?

The criminal section (4) states that:

A person, including an employee or official of the department or another state agency or local unit of government, who discloses confidential information in violation of this act is guilty of a misdemeanor,

“in violation of this act” ..

There are two ways that this may be viewed.

(1) Disclosure in ways that are forbidden by the act.

(2) Disclosure in any way that is not allowed within the act.

Again, the MDCH has chosen to adapt the second, more conservative view.

It is not required that the disclosure be a public disclosure to trigger this section of law.

One single person can disclose something to another single person. It is not required for something to be published to have been disclosed.

Many would claim that disclosure could not take place within a department as long as the information remained within that department.

There is no provision in our mmj law to allow any intra office transmission of confidential information with the single exception of within the MDCH in the normal performance of their duties.

Each person working with this information inside of a local unit of government could possibly commit a crime when they perform their normal duties. Such as data entry into a local computer file that can be accessed by other persons.

Any local laws that are written to require registration of patients and caregivers have some sort of enforcement procedure. This would require that a local employee disclose confidential information to some sort of enforcement person. Which, in the end, would involve law enforcement.

The Michigan State Police have requested access to the information contained within the MDCH file. Every time such a request has been made, the MDCH has refused to allow access.

No single person has a greater ability to disclose this information than the MDCH has. The MDCH can not and will not disclose the information to law enforcement or local governments.

Forcing persons to violate confidentiality, by registering, might raise the issue to Federal levels.

42:USC 1985 Civil rights violation by someone acting under color of law.

No local law can force a person to either commit a state level crime or waive state given rights of protection.

Furthermore, since the MDCH views each person listed within a patients records as having their own, separate, protections, the patient or caregiver would be forced to divulge information, about other persons, which they do not have the ability to waive confidentiality.

Medical Pot Users Fight Charges-Bob And Torrey...

Mon, 15 Nov 2010 12:52:44 +0000

Jennifer Chambers / The Detroit News
Lansing — An Oakland County couple certified to use medical marijuana under state law is asking the Michigan Supreme Court to dismiss felony drug charges against them.
Robert Redden and Torey Clark, who became certified under the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act, were charged with drug possession after police found 21 marijuana plants in a raid at their home in 2009.
Advertisement

Please note the very well stated quote by Robert Mullen " "All at the expense of otherwise well-intentioned and unwitting medical marijuana patients that are proceeding like proverbial lambs to the prosecutorial slaughter," Mullen wrote."

Prosecutors allege the couple possessed more than the allowable amount of plants and they did not keep the plants in an enclosed locked facility as required.
Their case received attention last month after a state appeals judge wrote a 30-page opinion urging state lawmakers to take action on the "inartfully drafted" law that he said clashes with other Michigan laws.
Judge Peter O'Connell, who agreed with the majority's opinion to reinstate drug possession charges against the couple, wrote in this opinion that until the state Supreme Court provides a final comprehensive interpretation of the act, it would be "prudent" for citizens to avoid all use of marijuana if they do not wish to risk violating state law.
"I again issue a stern warning to all: Please do not attempt to interpret this act on your own," O'Connell wrote in his appeal.
The couple's attorneys filed a formal appeal with the Supreme Court last week. In his plea to reverse the appeals court and dismiss the charges, attorney Robert Mullen said the Michigan judiciary must resolve interpretive issues that, according to Court of Appeals and district court judges, are "beleaguering" government officials in general and law enforcement officials "in particular."
"All at the expense of otherwise well-intentioned and unwitting medical marijuana patients that are proceeding like proverbial lambs to the prosecutorial slaughter," Mullen wrote.
Voters approved the use of marijuana for medical purposes in a citizen-initiated petition placed on the 2008 ballot.
Lawyers for Clark and Redden provided documents showing the couple each obtained a recommendation from a state-licensed physician, which stated each was qualified to use marijuana for medical purposes under the act. They did not receive state-issued ID cards until after the raid. Madison Heights Police used a battering ram to knock down their front door.
In August, Oakland County authorities seized medical records and marijuana at dispensaries in Ferndale and Waterford Township. Criminal cases against more than a dozen defendants are moving through the courts.
Oakland County Sheriff Michael Bouchard and Oakland County Prosecutor Jessica Cooper have said that dispensaries are illegal under Michigan law.

Michael A. Komorn
Attorney and Counselor
Law Office of Michael A. Komorn
3000 Town Center, Suite, 1800
Southfield, MI 48075
800-656-3557 (Toll Free)
248-351-2200 (Office)
248-357-2550 (Phone)
248-351-2211 (Fax)

Email: michael@komornlaw.com
Website: www.komornlaw.com

Check out our Radio show:
http://www.blogtalkr...lanetgreentrees
NEW CALL IN NUMBER: (347) 326-9626
Live Every Wednesday 8-9:30 p.m.
PLANET GREENTREES
w/ Attorney Michael Komorn

The most relevant radio talk show for the Michigan Medical Marijuana Community. PERIOD.

If you have a medical marihuana question or comment, please email them to me, or leave them on the forum for the MMMA, and I will try to answer them live on the air.

http://www.blogtalkr...lanetgreentrees
PLANET GREENTREES Call-in Number: (347) 326-9626
Call-in Number: (347) 326-9626

Nutrients And All Those Bottles On The Wall

Fri, 12 Nov 2010 15:21:01 +0000

Nutrients, and all those crazy colored bottles with funny names at the grow store. I read an article in a recent High Times issue and I would like to touch on it a little further.

If you are confused by nutes you are not alone. The explosion of Medical Cannabis over the past years has trickled down to an explosion of indoor growing as well. This has brought no-name companies out of the woodwork to sell their products to you….. boasting all kinds of crazy gimmicks. Nutrients are no different than anything else in the world. They have evolved with the changes and needs of today’s gardens and their tenders. Take for instance the 3-part Flora Series from General Hydroponics. This system has been around longer than I have been alive. OK im exaggerating, but...... Its formula has changed probably 20 times in the past 30 years (i do not know these numbers to be fact....just saying it HAS changed). It is because the label stays the same that nobody knows this. The same can be said for other old-school favorites like Fox Farms. These “old-school” companies are still around for a couple reasons. They work, and they are constantly spending millions of dollars yearly on research to improve. The same cannot normally be said for the new thing on the market. Believe me, if I were peddling nutrients, I would be thrilled if my gross sales were a million a year….. Fox Farms spends that on research alone. Some of the things you see advertised in these new companies has already been around for years. There is no need to go spend top dollar because it is new and colorful and has a cool name.

My concern is the 12 part programs out there with 3 additional additives that the manufacturer “highly recommends”. (you get the idea) I will not promote or degrade any company, but the thought that “more is better” should stick with sex …………… it does not apply to cannabis cultivation and the food required for your plants. There is no need to pick up 15 bottles and spend $700 on food to grow a cannabis plant. Especially if you are a newer grower. Keep it simple.

Common sense/science tells us that some raw nutrients cannot be mixed together without a diluting agent like water, and this is why we can’t just run to the store and buy one bottle that contains everything we need to grow. Certain strains need different foods. Another reason to sell nutrients separately is so that certain things can be added/deleted at certain times. All this makes perfect sense. But what doesn’t make sense is the money hungry nute companies that sell 10 different bottles when it could all be done with 3. I actually know of a company that bottles the exact same product in 2 different packages. And then tells you that you need to add both of them….. thus directing you to purchase 2 products instead of just one. Twice the money for the exact same thing. That's a lot of money when you are dishing out 20 bucks a quart for multiple products and the gallon price is so much cheaper in the long run.

Regardless of the nutrient regiment you choose, please know that it’s not rocket science. The company that you purchased your products from has already done that for you. If you are a skilled grower with a finicky strain, I would expect to see a good number of bottles on your grow room shelves. If you are a newer grower and have more than just a few bottles up there, you are headed for trouble. Keep it simple. Do your homework. And believe that they are out to get your money anyway possible. They are a business and require profit.

Everything that I post on this site is geared towards the newer grower and this is no different. YES there are companies that sell 750 different nutrients. And yes there are master growers who spend the thousands of dollars to use these. The simple fact is that these growers did not become masters because of a nute plan. These growers have spent the time/energy/money/YEARS to master the plant itself. As a newer grower, this should be your goal as well. Use a simple and affordable nutrient plan and find a quick/hardy/easy strain. Keep it simple. Learn the plant first. You will have enough problems with your plants and grow room as it is, the last thing you need to worry about is a nute burn or a deficiency. There will be plenty of time to play around later. Keep it simple. So many times i have new growers coming to me for assistance in choosing a bloom/taste/flavor additive?? serious?? You don't even know what your meds taste like naturally?? And you want to alter the flavor already?? I'm not a food critic, but i am a lightweight chef and food lover. I would NEVER add salt/pepper to my dish without tasting it first. Cannabis is no different. Learn your plant, learn your strain in its simple/natural setting. Then play around/spend money/add spice if you feel the need to.

10 years from now you will be staring at that long colorful shelf in the store…………. SMILING…………….. and thinking the exact same thing.