Cannabis: Survey for Case Studies

If you have had any experience with cannabis please complete this survey which may be used as part of the WTU case against the Government.

It takes just a few minutes but will help the case a great deal. Just scroll down the page at


https://www.wtuhq.org/survey-for-case-studies/

We The Undersigned Have a Human Sovereign Right to Cannabis.

Thank you for choosing to contribute your “CannaJourney” as one of several case studies used to support the WTU legal challenge against the political policies of cannabis prohibition and its inclusion in the Misuse of Drugs Act of 1971 and its subsequent amendments.

WTU seeks to issue a Declaration of Incompatibility between the MoDA and the Human Rights Act, so is gathering as many case studies as possible to demonstrate the wide variety of uses and benefits cannabis provides, including nutritional, medicinal, therapeutic, social, relaxational, recreational, spiritual, creative, industrial and environmental.

There is no right answer here, just a chance for you to tell your truth about your experience with cannabis.

Gathered information will ONLY be used to SUPPORT the WTU legal case and contact details will NOT be shared.

Many thanks for your contribution in our struggle for freedom and equality for all the CannaCommunity in British law and society.
PLEASE NOTE – YOU WILL NEED TO COMPLETE THIS SURVEY IN ONE SITTING – THERE IS NO SAVE FUNCTIONALITY – SO GET YOURSELF A DRINK SIT COMFORTABLY AND SHARE YOUR EXPERIENCES.
THE CLOSING DATE FOR THIS SURVEY IS 1st SEPTEMBER 2019

Medicalisation of cannabis favours pharmaceutical profiteers

So in 1971 the then government banned the use of cannabis as a medicine including tincture, on the grounds that its use could lead to use of hard drugs and an ill-informed / lie in international and UK legislation that classified the plant as having no medicinal value.

Now, some 47 years later, after causing many tens of thousands of people including children to unnecessarily suffer from dreadful ailments and injuries (and basically calling those that claimed that cannabis helped were liars), our government is acknowledging that cannabis does, in fact, have medicinal properties.

So they will allow a very strict and limited prescription system for certain cannabinoids and pharmaceutical substances such as Sativex and Bedrocan (Sativex has been allowed for some time but has been hard to get and expensive) .. whilst continuing to threaten everyone that does not fall within their definitions, with prison sentences.

So far they have failed to recognise the wide range of benefits including as a preventative medicinal substance.

So whilst this small step may appear to some as a huge step, it is a very limited step that will benefit a minority rather than a majority of those in need.

In 1971 they then argued that cannabis "misuse" could be gateway to hard drug addiction, so they closed the door.

Now they want to avoid widespread medicinal availability to prevent that same door from opening.

I say, legalise now and hold the door open. It is a fact that even under prohibition, the very large majority of cannabis consumers do not later become drug "addicts" and those that have, are actually a product of prohibition and the profiteers.

Freedom of Choice: Freedom the Farm: No Victim = No Crime 

Medical cannabis to be available on prescription in UK after being approved for use by government Cannabis-based medicines get green light as UK eases rules 

Medical cannabis in UK: What does the legalisation mean and how will it help patients?  

 Patients like me manage lifelong illness with cannabis. For us, the UK is a hostile environment 

UK Gov:  Cannabis-derived medicinal products to be made available on prescription

In the name of Justice and equal Rights for all - stop the prosecutions for cannabis.

You know, if they legalised cannabis for all adults, there would be no need to campaign for medical access. depend on ailment and the doctor's opinions (now all doctors in The Netherlands will prescribe Bedrocan cannabis and when they do, it costs more than from the coffeeshop and choice is limited). So we would still have to campaign for everyone else.

What about the children?

Well they would not of course be able to buy if they are not old enough assuming an age restriction, but parents can buy for the older teenagers just as they can legally buy and supply alcohol for them. (the child's age after which parents can legally supply alcohol tothem is 5)

As for medicine for the young - just like other medicines that will be possible of prescription from a doctor.

Once outlets for adults and home growing are legalised, pharmacies and health / herb shops will also be able to supply.

It will save on police and court time, raise taxes on profits, enable hygienic production, packaging and supply with indications of strain and strength, enable credible information and advice at point-of-sale, separate supply from hard drugs, enable consumer protection, increase employment and of course vastly improve access for cannabis as a medicine, relaxant, sacrament ... it will realise our Human Rights and introduce a Just regime for cannabis.

If we all joined together and campaign for everyone, I think we would make more progress over the next few years.

Of course some people will pessimistically speculate "the government won't do that" - well they certainly won't for much longer if people do not unite and put on the pressure!!

UK Government caught out lying about the cannabis plant, again.

It is simply miraculous that GW Pharmaceuticals can make an expensive spray form of whole cannabis plant extract simply by dissolving the plant in alcohol and adding some flavour, when the plant itself in the UK is scheduled as having no medicinal uses.

Secondly it is sad that cannabis grown in the UK has no medicinal value yet in Holland the plant grown there has a medicinal value when grown by a pharmaceutical company, Bedrocan is irradiated and standardised cannabis bud.

In the US they have been giving cannabis joints for medicinal use to a small number of people for DECADES so why do they do that if they at teh same time also deny the medicinal properties.

Thirdly, until 1971, cannabis tincture was prescribed; in his herbal book Culpeper listed some medicinal uses and it has been known that it was used in ancient Egypt and China as a medicine, and Queen Victoria herself used the plant as a medicine.

So what had happened to make cannabis in the UK so useless as a medicine since 1971? Is there something wrong with our air or water or sunlight or soils?

The only change is in the law, of course, so the law no favours pharmaceutical companies that hold us to ransom by charging such high prices for their Sativex?

The Government says Sativex is available on prescription but it is actually available only to a few that can persuade their doctors and then many have to pay - so that is a blatant distortion of truth again.

There are countless reports from people that suffer terrifying ailments and find ease or even cures from the cannabis plant itself and it was that anecdotal evidence that led GW Pharmaceuticals to invest in and study the plant and its medicinal uses that the Government denies.

There is only one word to describe the Government response - LIARS! 

 

Government responded
Herbal cannabis is listed in Schedule 1 as a drug with no recognised medicinal uses outside research. A substantial body of scientific evidence shows it is harmful and can damage human health.

The Government will not encourage the use of a Schedule 1 controlled drug based on anecdotal evidence. It is important that a medicine is very thoroughly trialled to ensure it meets rigorous standards before being licensed and placed on the market so that doctors and patients are sure of its efficacy and safety.
Cannabis in its raw form (herbal cannabis) is not recognised as having any medicinal purposes in the UK. There is already a clear regime in place to enable medicines (including those containing controlled drugs) to be developed and subsequently prescribed and supplied to patients via healthcare professionals. This regime is administered by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), which issues Marketing Authorisations for drugs that have been tried and tested for their safety and efficacy as medicines in the UK.
It is up to organisations to apply for Marketing Authorisation for products that they believe have potential medicinal purposes so that these can be subject to the same stringent regime and requirements that all medicines in the UK are subjected to.
Since 2010 UK patients can use the cannabis-based medicine ‘Sativex’ for the treatment of spasticity due to multiple sclerosis. ‘Sativex’ can also be prescribed for other conditions at the prescribing doctor’s risk. ‘Sativex’ was rigorously tested for its safety and efficacy before receiving approval, and is distinguished from cannabis in its raw form. It is a spray which is standardised in composition, formulation and dose and developed to provide medicinal benefits without a psychoactive effect. Due to its low psychoactive profile ‘Sativex’ was rescheduled from Schedule 1 and placed in Schedule 4 Part 1 to enable its availability for use in healthcare in the UK.
The MHRA is open to considering marketing approval applications for other medicinal cannabis products should a product be developed. As happened in the case of ‘Sativex’, the Home Office will also consider issuing a licence to enable trials of new medicines to take place under the appropriate ethical approvals.
In view of the potential harms associated with the use of cannabis in its raw form and the availability of avenues for medicinal development, the Government does not consider it appropriate to make changes to the control status of raw or herbal cannabis.
The Government’s view is that the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and regulations made under the Act continue to facilitate the development of medicines which are made from Schedule 1 controlled drugs. The legislation is aimed at protecting the public from the potential harms of drugs and is not an impediment to research into these drugs or development of medicines.
In 2013 the Home Office undertook a scoping exercise targeted at a cross-section of the scientific community, including the main research bodies, in response to concerns from a limited number of research professionals that Schedule 1 status was generally impeding research into new drugs.
Our analysis of the responses confirmed a high level of interest, both generally and at institution level, in Schedule 1 research. However, the responses did not support the view that Schedule 1 controlled drug status impedes research in this area. While the responses confirmed Home Office licensing costs and requirements form part of a number of issues which influence decisions to undertake research in this area, ethics approval was identified as the key consideration, while the next most important consideration was the availability of funding.
Home Office

Legalising "medical" cannabis = high prices, restricted supply, profit for the pharmaceutical giants

Legalising medical cannabis MEANS making a pharmaceutical grade product such as Bedrocan or SATIVEX AVAILABLE ON DOCTOR'S PRESCRIPTION - WHICH IN THE CASE OF SATIVEX IN THE UK, IT ALREADY IS - if you can get a doctor to prescribe it and an NHS region to supply it (as in Wales) or else you pay a massively high price.

In The Netherlands, same, you have to find a doctor willing to supply BEDROCAN and then buy from chemist shop costing more than in Coffeeshops - and many doctors there refuse to prescribe it.

Legalising medical cannabis would mean that one would have to have a "qualifying" medical condition that the doctor may think cannabis may help.

 

Legalsing medical cannabis would not mean that anyone could legaly grow their own, possess or buy cannabis - much like opiates at this time.

No reason to punish people for using things to their benefit unless they harm others.

Almost everything is life can pose a risk to some people but that is no reason to punish other people for using things to their benefit unless they harm others. Punishing a person simply for growing or possession of a plant for their own use is a total misuse of law, injustice and breach of Human Rights that allow people a Private Life.

To punish a person such as Mr French, who claims to be using cannabis to alleviate dreadful pain an symptoms of MS would be an outrage, as it is that so many other victimless cannabis users have been and are being fined and even sent to prison.

There is now irrefutable medical evidence that cannabis has medicinal vale for a large number of ailments and evidence that risk is very small, far smaller than many pills prescribed by doctors - pills that often have side-effects that require other pills to counteract.

The side-effect of consuming cannabis is at best a feeling of relaxation and at worse the munchies.

In fact, The UK and other Governments, even though they deny that cannabis has any medicinal uses, now allow the production and sale of the whole-plant extract in the form of alcohol solution in a spray, called Sativex.

I have yet to see any explanation of how a medicine can be produced by simply dissolving and filtering a plant with no medicinal use, in alcohol!

And in Netherlands and other countries, cannabis bud is available on a doctors' prescription and bought at pharmacies.

Unfortunately the law gives monopoly to the pharmaceutical companies and unfortunately there products are far more expensive than the cost of growing the cannabis at home or even buying in Dutch Coffeeshops.

But what it boils down to for me - irrespective of benefit or risk of harm through use - why should the law punish people that engage in activities that do no harm or pose no risk to others or their rights?


Call for cannabis legalisation at Portsmouth event
http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/health/local-health/call-for-cannabis-legalisation-at-portsmouth-event-1-6529353 
The News Portsmouth, 19 January 2015

WE must fight to legalise cannabis for the sake of improving our lives.

That was the message yesterday from people with a range of health problems who revealed that taking the drug means they are not left in constant pain.

Patients were given the opportunity to share their experiences during an open discussion on the topic of cannabis legalisation at Fratton Community Centre, in Portsmouth.

Clark French, 29, of Brighton, who was diagnosed with MS five years ago, said taking cannabis has eased the chronic pain that comes with the disease.
He told the audience: ‘MS is an awful disease, it’s horrible, I can’t even bring about the words to explain it.

‘I am in pain all the time.
‘When I use cannabis however, I am in less pain.
‘It doesn’t take the pain away completely, but cannabis gives me a life again and gives me the ability to stand up and share my story.’
Mr French, of United Patients Alliance, which set up the event, added: ‘It’s not right that it is not legal – we need to get together and fight.
‘It’s not cannabis we are fighting for, but our lives.’
Angela Came, 44, of Petersfield, said the drug helps her cope with depression, psychosis and post-traumatic stress disorder.
‘I didn’t start taking it until after I was diagnosed and I didn’t start taking it regularly until two years ago,’ she said.
Mel Clarke, 53, of Southsea, who has MS, said smoking cannabis has changed her life whereas painkillers ended up doing more harm.
Mrs Clarke said she first smoked cannabis on a trip to Amsterdam.
Alex Fraser, 24, who was diagnosed with Crohn’s disease at 19, said while critics may feel he should just take legal painkillers, they make his condition worse.
‘There are a lot of things I can’t eat, I can’t drink, there’s a whole list. And I know that what I do eat, it’s still going to be hard,’ he said.
‘If I smoke a joint or smoke a joint after a meal, I feel so much better.’

Prohibitionsists seeking medicalisation of plants v No Victim No Crime

Prohibitionists are campaigning to try to keep a residual prohibition law by working towards "medicalisation" - allowing a limited number of patients selected by doctors to obtain cannabis extracts or irradiated and standardised product to obtain cannabis on prescription at grossly inflated prices and profits for the pharmaceutical giants thus removing the possibility of anyone caught growing in ppossession to use medical need in mitigation or defence.

Anyone without a prescription could still be busted if caught growing or in possession - just like many other prescription medications.

Strangely enough there are no health warnings on Sativex or Bedrocan

Prohibitionists stooping low claiming cannabis is as addictive and dangerous as heroin, that it does not increase creativity, causes paranoia, schizophrenia, psychosis, impotence, baldness, loss of memory, loss of motivation, is a gateway to hard drugs and so on

We are argue with them 'til blue cheese in the face.

Point I make is that EVEN IF any of that is true for even one user - all the more reason for consumer protection but no reason to punish that person (those people) that suffer bad effects and certainly NO REASON to punish the rest of us.

In the name of Justice = no victim no crime

Wake up folks!

https://www.facebook.com/pages/NO-Victim-NO-CRIME/257914584389417

CENSORED: 1947 Cannabis Study on Epilepsy

It seems to be the pattern for governments that clearly favour synthetics and pharmaceuticals over plants. From the times of the ancient Chinese and ancient Egyptians through Romans and Culpeper's Herbal until 1971 cannabis was used as a medicine. But in 1961 and then in 1971 in the UK, cannabis was suddenly deemed to have no medical uses and possession, cultivation etc was banned. Nowadays Bedrocan is grown and sold through pharmacies in Netherlands and prescribed in other countries, Sativex a whole-plant extract marketted almost worldwide (both produced by pharmaceutical companies, pharmers, not farmers), as a medicine is now available in many US States and in fact USA has been supplying it to a very few patients for decades whilst all the time burning crops, arresting growers and claiming it has no medical use in international treaties and many country's national legislation. That reveals the hypocrisy and corruption of the governments we have elected.

please see  http://weedfinder.com/dash/news/censored-1947-cannabis-study-on-epilepsy/

CANNABIS: POSSIBLE LEGAL SUPPLY ROUTES

In discussing and advocating the repeal of cannabis laws we must go beyond the issues of possession or cultivation for own use: there is clearly no justification for any authority to interfere with Private Life activities that pose no threat to public order, health or the Rights of others.However, when it comes to supply, I think it essential that any future control of cannabis should be based upon consumer protection and taxation (only on profits, to my mind).

Whether the cannabis is gifted or sold, the receiver deserves the protection of law just as everybody does with other goods.So what are the alternative systems of supply that would best suit the customers without putting unnecessary burdens on commercial cultivation or supply.

Presumably there would be a system of license or registrations allowing conditions to be put on businesses to ensure hygiene, freedom from, accuracy of weights, maybe even labelling requirements. There would need to be avenues of recompense for breaches.

“Grow-your-own!” has become a mantra for many within the cannabis law repeal fraternity and “Cannabis Social Clubs” (CSC's)

 (https://www.facebook.com/pages/Cannabis-Social-Clubs-Proposal/145368762174099) have been proposed as an extension of that.

A CSC is a non-profit making collective of people that grow communally for their own needs; they are transparent to authority with accounts and details of membership and production and distribution.

Many CSC's now operate in Spain and more are starting up in Belgium, France and Italy. Many are already growing cannabis and distributing to members.

In the UK, many CSC's are newly formed groups of users and campaigners in various counties, cities or towns across the country and it is possible that eventually they may lead to organised growing similar to the Spanish model. Of course that would be no problem after legalisation.

Previous to prohibition though, there were no CSC's. People either grew there own or picked it wild.

Countries such as India had Government shops that sold hashish, and New York once had hashish bars.

Since prohibition and until recently, there has been no country in the world that allows the legal sale of cannabis – even in the Netherlands with all their policy of tolerance for “Coffeeshops”, they have no legal supply routes into the premises. It's a sort of half-way-house (grey area) where adults can go to buy and sometimes smoke small amounts of cannabis but the only control on quality is through reputation. Most are great places to visit and I would love to see them in every city, enabling people to buy and smoke cannabis when away from home, or even in their own towns. It is estimated that 30 to 40% of Dutch smokers buy from Coffeeshops, the rest grow their own or buy from house dealers – there is also some punting of cannabis to tourists on the streets – something likely to increases if the Dutch Government implement their backward-planning for restrictions against tourists and the citing of venues.

Cannabis, grown and irradiated by the Dutch pharmaceutical company under the name Bedrocan, has been available on prescription in The Netherlands and Italy and sold through pharmacies. It is granulated bud. Unfortunately, it is more expensive than the Coffeeshops, and although residents of countries that prescribe Bedrocan can travel freely with it throughout the UK, it remains an offence for residents of the UK to go and buy it and bring it back – the UK Government are still in the stone age when it comes to recognising the true medicinal values of cannabis.

So in the UK the supply of all natural cannabis remains in the hands of “criminals”, whether simply profiteers or people trying to help the sick and injured.

Now, in 2014, changes are afoot in some countries.

In Uruguay the Government has attempted to take control of cannabis and stop the illegal dealing by allowing people to grow a few plants of their own, and otherwise the Government will grow and supply the plant themselves. That said, they still have to work out which strains to grow, packaging and pricing, and how to stop resale.In California and other States in the US, cannabis has been supplied through “clinics” requiring a doctor's prescription for a number of years: unlike

The Netherlands however, prescriptions are much easier to get and the cannabis is not radiated – hash, cookies, foodstuffs and other cannabis products are often sold through the same clinics.. Under federal law, however, it all remains illegal and it remains to be seen what Obama will ultimately do about it – get heavy-handed or turn a blind eye?

After a powerful vote last year, Colorado and has gone one step further in defiance of federal law has allowed cannabis shops to open up and sell the plant in its many forms without the Californian pretence of medicinal prescription for almost anyone – the supply is legal, consumers are protected as are all consumers, profits taxed.  Adults over 21 can buy for “recreational use” and thousands of people in medical need are also heading that way – the revenue raised is already impressive, within days.

Cannabis is subject to the same regulations as all products to which the public is exposed. http://youtu.be/lS-ijtvVaCAI guess the Colorado legalisation could be called a free-for-all within the law, without the criteria of non-profit making of the Spanish CFC model, beyond the policy of the front room tolerance but back door crime of the Dutch Coffeeshops, side-stepping the question of purpose of use, protecting the consumer, taxing the profits --- it seems just the sort of system many campaigners said we could never have.

We may have to wait a while now to see how it develops in California, Colorado, Uruguay and the Netherlands, and then we need to convince our own Government that such systems are better for everyone except the criminals – just wait and see how they react when we learn just how much revenue is raise through tax on profits and how much is saved on policing! Many people think that in these times of supposed fiscal crisis, money will be the key to change, rather than Rights or health issues – after all, Government raises huge sums from selling cigarettes and alcoholic drinks, why not weed?

Ask which system of distribution I prefer from the above: simple: any and all of them.I would like to see private cultivation, group cultivation,medicinal supply, Coffeeshops for supply and toking and clinics or shops for supply = such systems are not mutually exclusive.

LINKS

http://www.encod.org/info/-English-en-.html

http://ukcsc.co.uk/

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Cannabis-Social-Clubs-Proposal/145368762174099

http://www.ccguide.org/index.phphttps://www.facebook.com/CCGUIDE

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Alliance-of-Cannabis-Hemp-Activists-ACHA/119868538117932

http://www.coffeeshop.freeuk.com/

http://norml-uk.org/