Cannabis: laws, human rights, medicinal uses and malfeasance

 

1) There is strong scientific evidence that almost all pharmaceutically prescribed drugs, over-the-counter medications, alcohol, tobacco and sugar can harm people’s mental and physical health, yet they are all legally available.

2) The very same plant is grown and exported for medicinal use by British Sugar Cooporation and used to produce extracts by GW Pharmaceuticals.

 

3) The very same plant is sold to adults through private clubs and collective grows in Spain, Coffeeshops in The Netherlands, shops and dispensaries in many States of the US, shops such as in Canada and Uruguay and available through doctors in dozens of coutries worldwide. 

 

4) There is no stron evidence to suggest that cannabis is harmful to the physical or mental health of the vast majority of consumers (millions of them in the UK) or harmful to communities.

 

5) Preventing a person from access to a beneficial substance and / or punishing them because of the supposed risk to a minority of other people is contrary to common sense and common law and Justice.

 

6) Interference in the chosen practice of ones belief and invasion of a person's private life without evidence that an activity poses a risk to PUBLIC health, public order or morals, national security or the Rights of others, is contrary to the Human Rights laws.

 

7) Any person in authority that is guilty on an offence under any statute or law, irespective of whether they are "following orders" or not, is guilty of a crime by malfeasance.

 

 

COMMON SENSE AND COMMON JUSTICE

The policy pursued at present by the Government flouts common justice and common sense.

 

Quite simply, the policy is illegal: cannabis is a safe, beneficial and natural commodity and the laws which ban it are clearly in violation of several articles of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. 

 

The preamble to the UN Declaration, signed by Britain in 1948, establishes these Rights for all time: they are unchangeable and universally applicable. The preamble also explains that the Declaration in spirit is a declaration of the brotherhood and equality of man. It demands that we treat each other with respect and tolerance. How does the prohibition of a beneficial plant align with this? It does not.

Clearly, there is flagrant inconsistency between cannabis prohibition and the Principles and Articles. 

 

It is a Human Right to choose and to change, to preach and to practise, one's religion or belief. To use cannabis in the belief that it is medically and spiritually beneficial is in accordance with Article 9 of the European Convention:

1. "Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his or her religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practise, and observance."

2. "Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morale, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others."

 

Cannabis has been in use as a sacrament for thousands of years. Many people believe it is an essential part of their ritual. Others believe it is essential for their health. Either way, what Right has the law to stop them using cannabis? None!

The articles in both the Declaration and the Convention make quite clear the criteria by which the law can be invoked to prevent a person from exercising his or her Rights:

• to protect the Rights of others,
• to protect law and order,
• to protect national security,
• to protect public well being or morality.

Cannabis smoking does not threaten public safety or public order, health or morals, nor threaten the rights of others.

 

Clearly, on none of these grounds can the law be invoked against a cannabis user. Rather it is the prohibiting of cannabis that breaks the law.

 

The law banning cannabis effectively prevents these people from practising their beliefs. It negates a basic Human Right. It is inexcusable.

 

The enforcement of cannabis prohibition directly contravenes the following articles of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights: 1, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 16, 18, 21, 25, 26, 28, 29 and 30. The prohibition of cannabis is illegal.

 

An example of this illegality in practice is the treatment meted out in our country to religious sects. Natural cannabis is one of many plants that have been used for the inducing and stimulating of religious states of mind in the individual or, ceremoniously, the group. Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Moslems, Jains, Rastafarians and many other religions have long made use of cannabis. They use it today; but usually in secrecy, for fear of arrest. Modern day New Age Travellers, the Universal Church of the Holy and Sacred Herb, The Church of the Universe, The Church of the Hemp Goddess - members of all these groups are arrested these days for smoking their sacrament. This is a direct consequence of the blanket prohibition of cannabis.

 

The affront to justice entailed in putting into practice our weird law relating to cannabis proves itself in the event, inevitably, to be at the same time an affront to sense. A blatant example: billions of pounds are spent each year providing ineffective medicines to people who claim, after all, to experience far more benefit from the smoking of cannabis. There are thousands suffering from cancer, AIDS, multiple sclerosis, spinal injury, epilepsy, asthma, insomnia and stress-related illnesses who openly admit that they have needed to resort to cannabis to relieve their pain. And many of these, bizarrely, are taken to the courts!

 

After recommendations for an immediate change of law from the House of Lords, many doctors and many experts, and after a huge outcry from the general public, the Government has responded by allowing medical trials of organic cannabinoid extracts, declaring that if these trials are a success, then maybe in the future…!

 

In the meantime, literally millions of subjects are denied relief from pain, under threat of severe punishment. What sort of justice is that? What sort of sense?

 

We propose that the long known and many therapeutic values of cannabis be accepted immediately by the British Government and that cannabis in its natural form be made available without fear of prosecution to all whose health and well-being would benefit.

 

The legalising of cannabispossession, cultivation and supply would protect consumer's health: in effect it would act as a prophylactic against unknown and possibly noxious substances presently found in illegal cannabis on the streets of Britain.

 

Then again, how in the name of sense or of justice can one defend what our armaments, our industries, and our modes of transport do to the environment? For it is a question of justice, a matter of human rights. 

 

The environment is an essential aspect of ourselves, and we bequeath it to the future. It can be said, without exaggeration, that what we do to the world today may be unchangeable for millions of years. Nuclear waste materials have half-lives beyond the imagination. (A half-life is the time it takes a radioactively poisonous material to decay to half its potency. During the equivalent period following, it decays half again. That means that some of our waste will be dangerous for millions of years. This in the interest of fuel, of energy and of profit!)

 

The widespread cultivation of cannabis (to recapitulate) could halt and reverse much of the polluting activity that our society so stupidly and criminally engages in. Cannabis biomass could be made to provide all our fuel virtually cost-free (given that the THC-rich parts of the plant were used recreationally and medically, the remainder being a by-product). The dangerous synthetic industries could be put out of business. Large tracts of land on which other crops cannot be grown successfully could be reclaimed. The Greenhouse Effect could be hugely reduced, enabling nature to undo some of what has been done to the ozone layer. And so on…

 

We have asked why successive Governments have failed to take these facts into consideration and act upon them. We have received no satisfactory answer.

 

The Government's strategy in relation to cannabis is at once outrageous and ludicrous. Such a fuss about a plant, a remarkably safe plant! Such a pother about responsible people enjoying a 'high'!

They claim that cannabis is a dangerous drug. Claim it still, despite the evidence of their own studies!

 

Each year, for the crime of possessing this 'dangerous' substance, more and more people are arrested and taken through the courts. And the process costs the taxpayer billions of pounds.

 

But this figure - this tally - is of course dwarfed by the amount the multi-national corporations accumulate in producing synthetic alternatives to hemp.

 

Just look at the world: sick, starving, war-torn, polluted, crime-riddled and drug-addicted!

links:

Out of Joint: 20 Years of Campaigning for Cannabis
Time for Cannabis The Prison Years

Cannabis Campaigners Guide
We The Undersigned campaign
Human Rights Act

CBD Cannabis Medicines and the rest of us

On the issues of that wonderful plant that is not considered to have any medicinal values by the UK Government and others, yet contains two substances now classed as medcines, THC and CBD extracts.

Of course the THC and CBD extracts will cost more than on the "street" when extracted, purified, verified pure and delivered in standardised doses, BUT, as with all licensed medications, people will know it is pure and excatly what is being said on the label, if indeed there was one.

Sure, the price may be higher but the knowledge of purity will be there.

Now that the UK Government has decided to reschedule CBD as a medicine, those that have been supplying it on line and off-line, possibly with no real indications of purity or dose, will be less happy that the producers who will satisfy the medicines criteria, probably the bigger pharmaceutical companies such as GW who presently control the supply and profits of THC through its expensive and hard-to-get Sativex.

Yet surely this is exactly what the "endourpain" campaign that has been calling for more cannabis medicine, and exactly what the government minister promised last year at the farce debate ina side-chamber in Parliament which was supposed to be about all cannabis consumers.

We'll have to wait and see, but we know that the criteria for legal supply which has to be approved by the MHRA will come alongside an increase in price (sand supposedly, safety).
I have said all along, that a campaign based upon the demand for more "cannabis medicine" will be successful and result in more pharmaceutical cannabis roducts and extracts, NOT any change in law regarding cultivation or supply of the cannais plant or even possession.

The existence of such legally prescribable or approved extracts will also counteract any mitigation in court.

The way the campaign has been going, demanding regulations and medicine rather than fundamental Rights and Freedoms, is responsible for the changes we can see happening right now - those that have been thinking only of themselves, those that have been seeking profits, will be well-pleased.

It does nothing - it may even be a step backwards - from seeing the law changed for any of us.

Man used cannabis to combat anger - will he be punished for not using NHS drugs?

Why is it that we keep reading articles about people that grew and used cannabis in their own homes to their own medicinal benefit being taken to court and punished for it?

"Mr Tomlinson said: "He felt it would be better to take cannabis than Prozac."

For sure I am convinced that is true.

As for the estimate of value - had it been sold - well that just goes to show that nobody knows the yield until it was ready - and IF he had sold it (which seems down to what the police "believe"), would his customers have been victims or other people that felt the plant was better than expensive pharmaceutical drugs.

It's almost as if the courts are telling us "buy our drugs - if you grow cannabis we will make you pay!"

And the taxpayers will be made to pay either way, either for the NHS drugs or the court cases. 

 

Man grew cannabis to help him calm his anger problem
Derby Telegraph, May 19 2012

A SELF-EMPLOYED engineer grew cannabis plants to self-medicate his anger problem, a court was told.
Police found 20 plants at Lee Priest's home in Derby Road, Heanor.
They were growing under three timer-controlled lamps in a basement, magistrates in Chesterfield were told.
Becky Mahon, prosecuting, said the plants had a potential street value of between £3,600 and £11,250, depending on their yield.
Priest told police he was going to let them grow for another fortnight and then check on the internet what to do next.
Ms Mahon said: "He said he had anger management issues and smoked up to half an ounce of cannabis a week, and he used it to relax himself.
"Police believe he would keep some for his own use and sell the rest to subsidise the outlay for future crops."
Kevin Tomlinson, in mitigation, said Priest had been prescribed Prozac for depression but it had an adverse effect on him.
Mr Tomlinson said: "He felt it would be better to take cannabis than Prozac."
Priest, 33, admitted producing 20 cannabis plants between January 1 and March 12.
He will be sentenced on July 13. He was granted bail.

 

Prohibition Policies Reveal Government Corruption and Ignorance

According to The Report of the FCDA, Europe, on Cannabis, it could be grown in huge quantities on waste land; the tops and heads available for medicinal and recreational use, the seed used as food and animal food, the seed oils used too, the hurd and textiles used for clothing, paper, canvas, even building bricks and chitboard, and plastics too - what is left used to make biofuels, safely, easily, locally and environmentally friendly. Anything left, thrown back into the land. The revenue from sales of bud would mean virtually free fuel!

The people would gain more independence from giant petrochemical and pharmaceutical companies, from drug dealers, suffer less pollution and save money.

Any Government that refuses to acknowldge that are liars.

Any Government that still claims that the harm caused by cannabis outweighs the benefits, are either fools or have a vested interest in prohibition, just like the alcohol-gangster-supporting prohibitionists in the USA that supporteed alcohol prohibition last century.

Concerns over online drugs poll - comment

"legalising cannabis" is about law and Justice - we must ask first whether the possession or small scale cultivation of cannabis poses any threat or does any harm to others - in itself - not speculate. For instance, when it comes to unsafely driving whilst under the influence then that would come under driving laws just as over-the-limit drinking does: alcohol is not banned despite accidents, fights, destruction of property etc - and anyone proved guilty of that can be dealt with by the authorities irrespective of whether they are sober, drunk or high on pot. It would not be seen as just by many people to punish everyone that drinks alcohol because of what a minority of others do.

Likewise with illness: cannabis is actually far less risk to health than aspirin, tobacco, alcohol and it is surely not Just to punish users because they or others get ill?

Cannabis, like alcohol, is widely used in the UK - by millions - and those unable or unwilling to grow their own are exposed to drug dealers and crime - lack of information, availability of other drugs, contaminated cannabis that poses health risks of its own.

Imagine if the only source of alcohol was illegal dealers or manufacturers, that criminals control the supply! Oh yes, they tried that in the US and had to legalise alcohol again.

And the cost to the taxpayer of chasing over 3 million regular users, thousands of growers and dealers, only to find that however many or fined or locked up, there is more and more cannabis on the streets.

Then there is the ridiculous situation where people like Winston Matthews in Surrey are imprisoned for growing cannabis to ease the terrible pains of illness or injury - nobody else involved.

Consider the cost to the NHS of providing pharmaceutical drugs, often with their own risks and side-effects, to people that claim cannabis is more effective. Now Pharmacists are producing whole-cannabis extract containing about ten pounds worth which they sell at over £120 a can of spray to people in desperate need whilst they risk prison if they grow their own.

Of course there is the cost of potentially criminalising millions of our youth - for a crime without victims.

Not forgetting of course, that if it is legal to grow cannabis then it is legal to grow hemp - a valuable source of fibre, foodstuff, oils and environmentally-friendly fuels - local hemp could avoid the problem of transporting fossil fuels around the world and ease up on pollution.

And what of the negative impact: less profit for giant petrochemical and pharmaceutical companies, less work for the police and courts .. less money for drug dealers.

I voted in favour of legalising cannabis also realising that it is not cannabis that needs legalising because it is not itself illegal - it is the possession, cultivation and supply that is illegal and need legalising - the law is aimed at people, not drugs - the "war on drugs" is a war on drug-users, not substances.

I have studied the pro's and cons: I hear the cries that cannabis causes problems in a minority of users, and poses risks to others if people drive whilst high - but all those risks are made worse by the failed prohibition.

I would advise anyone seriously concerned about those risks to use the WWW and search for evidence, because there are several reports out there claiming cannabis has little detrimental effect on driving skills and poses only a small risk to a small percentage of people predisposed to certain mental health condition eg http://tinyurl.com/79zcjmj”

Leicester Mercury, March 23 21012
Concerns over online drugs poll

Regarding the online poll about the legalisation of cannabis, I was rather perturbed to see that so many seem to be in favour of a change in the law.
Admittedly the respondents are a self-selected group and not necessarily representative of the general population but their influence may be important.
In addition to the concerns about mental health, progression to other drugs, etc, I do wonder how many of those wanting to decriminalize cannabis have considered its detrimental impact on daily functioning.
Very recently, a research paper in the British Medical Journal found that cannabis use doubles the odds of having a motor vehicle crash.
So I would suggest if the rules concerning so-called "recreational" drugs are to change then it will also be necessary to consider implementing drug-driving legislation in order to keep the remainder of the community safe from the increased threat of road accidents.
Personal use of drugs has wide-reaching effects beyond those on the individual and this must not be forgotten.
Eleanor Mather, Earl Shilton.

Winston Matthews sent to prison for trying to ease his terrible backpain with home-grown plants

Please send a postcard or letter

Winston Matthews A8167CK
HMP High Down Prison
High Down Lane
Sutton
Surrey SM2 5PJ

(see below for more details about sending mail)

Winston Matthews has been sent to prison for 16 months in the UK for repeatedly growing his own medicinal cannabis plants in his home, to use as an effective alternative to dangerous and expensive pharmaceutical drugs.

British Justice has been thrown out.

This group is set up to help fight for Winston's early release and to support him as best we can.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Winston-Matthews/121612817891093?v=wall

Winston uses cannabis to ease the dreadful pains he suffers as a result of a back injury years ago, he is not a dealer, he is a patient

You can write to Winston Matthews Prison Number : A8167CK
AT HIGHDOWN PRISON, Highdown lane, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5PJ

You can send funds to Winston by sending a cheque or postal order made to "HM Prison Service to THE GOVERNOR AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS, you must include your name and address and Winston's name and prison number it will be deposited into his prison account and passed to him on release.

You can write to your MP via www.writetothem.com asking them to highlight this case to the MP for Horley, surrey. This will mean Winston's MP will get requests/correspondence from MP's all over the UK.

If you go on Holiday send Winston a postcard, if your a lady send him a valentines, if you have sympathy for his illness send him a get well soon card, these things all help.

Thanks for your support.

Follow the link to add badge to your profile pic

http://www.picbadges.com/free-winston-matthews/2486686/
FREE WINSTON MATTHEWS
www.picbadges.com

Letters
When you write to a prisoner you must include your full name and address. In most prisons the letters are searched and can be read before being given to the prisoner.

You can write about anything but letters must not be obscene, name ‘victims’, or be a threat to discipline or security. Do not enclose any items with letters. Make sure you put sufficient postage to cover the costs (anything bigger than A5 counts as ‘large’). Prisoners can normally receive a ‘reasonable’ number of letters per week.

If you send greetings cards these should be of reasonable size and not padded or pouched. Do not send musical cards. If you are sending more than one card put them all inside one outer envelope, this saves postage. Remember to include your full details (you could put your details on a ‘Post-It’ note stuck to the card or include a letter which has your details).

Always put the prisoner’s full name and prison number. If the person has been moved their mail will be forwarded.

On conviction or transfer a prisoner should be given a ‘Reception’ letter to write to tell you where they are.

Prisoners are given a free letter each week to post out, they can send more, but at their own expense. Some prisons allow you to send in stamps.

Photographs
You can usually send in photographs but in some prisons these must not include any image of the prisoner. Child protection measures may mean that some prisoners may not receive pictures of children, unless they are their own and were not ‘victims’. If you send pictures of children include an explanatory note identifying who the children are and their relationship to the prisoner.

Money
It is not a good idea to send cash, this can get ‘lost’ in the prison. Prisons prefer postal orders, but you could send a cheque. Make these payable to ‘H M Prison Service’, write your name on the back and also the prisoner’s full name and prison number. Any money sent which is deemed to be ‘anonymous’ can be stopped.
Money you send is paid into the prisoner’s ‘Private Cash’ account and they get access to a certain amount (depending upon IEP) each week [currently £15.50 for Standard prisoners].

Man grew cannabis for medical reasons - and was unjustly fined

Totally outrageous - what is this country doing - where is the justice in punishing a man for growing a couple of plants in his own home for his own beneficial use.

Now what's he going to do - take expensive and more dangerous pharmaceutical pills often with unpleasant side-effects?

Seems to me that the Government favours those big companies over individuals, their rights, and plant remedies.

Human Rights include the Right to a Private Life: we can do whatever we want in our Private lives and the only justice that the authorities have - even the police - for interfering with that right is clearly written in the Act: that is if there is a risk to public health, public order, national security or the Rights of others - that it is against the law is itself not a justifiable reason.

Therefore the invasion of this man's private life is itself illegal, under Human Rights law - and it's about time that the judges took that into account.

Man grew cannabis for medical reasons
Lancashire Telegraph, January 18, 2012


A MAN who claimed he had been growing cannabis for medical reasons has been fined £100.
Jason Paul Alston, 40, had been cultivating two plants at his house in Piccadilly Road, Burnley magistrates heard.
Alston, said to use cannabis for back pain, admitted producing the drug.
He is currently on a community order and was also told to pay £85 costs, with a £15 victim surcharge.

New Zealand Courts miss the target on Justice on Cannabis Carer?

Although pleased to read that Peter Davy has not been sent to prison (although he will imprisoned in his own home under detention) I would hate to be in his position - as would most people.

Now he has to decide whether to risk the criminal world and try to buy some, or to risk prison by growing it again.

What a terrible choice New Zealand Law without Justice has put upon this man and what an unenviable position he is now in.

For sure as Mr Davy said, a discharge would have been better - it would also have been FAR more just

Cannabis grower's partner pleased to see him home
Source 3News.co.nz
Date: July 6 2011
By Anna Burns-Francis

A cannabis grower who threatened to go on hunger strike if he was jailed will spend the next six months on home detention - and his partner's delighted he's coming home.
Peter Davy was growing 45 rare cannabis plants in his backyard, but says he was only growing the plants for medicinal purposes - to help his chronically ill partner, Tracey Perrin.
Before court he reiterated that he was prepared to go on a hunger strike if sent to jail - in protest that he wouldn't be able to care for Ms Perrin, who has multiple sclerosis.
Ms Perrin is “truly thrilled” at the home detention, and is relieved her partner’s home tonight.
“For him to come home, it's the absolute best, it truly is,” she says.
One of Davy’s supporters, Jasmine Hewlett, says the outcome is “just fantastic”.
“Convicted and discharged would have been better but in all reality home detention ...he can look after Tracey, get on with their lives,” she says.
The judge has warned Davy that jail's a real possibility if he's back in court again.

http://www.3news.co.nz/Cannabis-growers-partner-pleased-to-see-him-home/tabid/423/articleID/217812/Default.aspx

Sativex, The Cannabis Plant and Human Rights - the hypocrisy of the UK Government

SENT TO MY MP Chloe Smith, Conservative:

Dear Ms Smith

I wonder if you could ask the Home Office to explain this to us.

Sativex is a cannabis medicine produced by GW Pharmaceuticals and recognised by the UK Government - it is prepared by extracting cannabinoids into alcohol, with added peppermint for flavouring.

Sativex contains the same active ingredients and chemicals as does the cannabis plant itself.

Yet, in letters from the Home Office, they consistently deny that cannabis has any recognised medicinal uses in the UK - despite the fact that pure cannabis "bud" (the tops and heads of the plant) is prescribed in The Netherlands, Belgium, Italy, Germany - at least.

In fact, under the Schengen agreements, residents of those countries that have cannabis bud prescribed to them are entitled to bring their medication with them to the UK without fear of prosecution (they can presumably legally smoke it too), whereas residents of the UK that are prescribed cannabis in one of those countries, can not.  I am talking about herbal cannabis and Sativex can be prescribed here in the UK and therefore covered by the Schengen Agreement, I believe.

So my questions are;

why are residents of the UK treated differently at the UK borders in this respect?

is it not unlawful under Human rights law to treat people differently based upon their property (in this case residence)?

if the Government recognises that Sativex has medicinal value but insist that natural cannabis does not, which are the added ingredients in Sativex that give it those medical uses?

I would appreciate a rapid response (not a standard letter from the HO) as this matter concerns literally tens if not hundreds of thousands of people that could benefit from growing a couple of medicinal cannabis plants at home (at little cost) but risk prosecution because the Government refuses to acknowledge those benefits - and for those people it is a matter of urgency.

I would also point out that Sativex is presently so costly that the NHS refuse to supply it to all but a few patients.

Is This Why They Bust Cannabis Growers

Every day we read in our papers that another cannabis growing operation has been closed down - not just the large professional and profiteering growers but also those run by people in dire medical need of the relief from much of their pain and suffering.

Cannabis the plant is now well known and widely accepted as having medicinal and pain-easing properties, used effectively and safely by many tens of thousands of sufferers of a wide-range of ailments from Multiple Sclerosis to Epilepsy, pain to loss of appetite or sleeplessness, depression and even cancers.

In fact it has been used for hundreds of years and was listed by Culpeper in his"Complete Herbal and English Physician" in 1826 where he wrote 

"It is so common a plant, and so well known by almost every inhabitant of this kingdom, that a description of it would be altogether superfluous."

That was until 1971, when the UK, as lacky to the UN Single Drugs Convention of 1961, banned the sale of the medicine (then available as a tincture", claiming that cannabis had no medicinal value and was being misuses as a "recreational drug".

Since then the Government has fought tooth and nail to stop people from gaining medical benefits and pain relief from the plant they can easily and cheaply grow at home - despite literally thousands of testimonials and acceptance in countries such as the USA,  Canada, The Netherlands, Italy, Germany,and Israel.

Then, a few years ago, along comes a Pharmaceutical giant to produce extracts and test them - now they produce "Sativex", an alcohol and peppermint spray containing exactly the same beneficial chemicals (THC and CBD) found in the plant itself - and of course charging extortionate fees and making huge profits for their shareholders - at public expense.

It seems to me that the UK taxpayer loses out all round for they must pay both the NHS bill for the prescription medicine and the cost of seeking out and prosecuting the growers.

So one is forced to ask - is the potential profits for the same people that sell us highly priced and dangerous fuels to heat our homes and run our cars, the toxic chemicals dumped as side-products of the environmentally-damaging plastics and other synthetics the reason for the prohibition of the possession or cultivation of the plant  - described by one of the world's foremost experts on cannabis, Professor Lester Grinspoon of Harvard University, as "remarkably safe".

It may not be coincidental that the cannabis plant, also know as hemp, can also enable production of safe and cheap alternative fuels, plastics and even foodstuff.

see How cannabis was criminalised.

UK Government waste millions on Sativex then Health Authority refuse to allow it for MS!

The Midlands Therapeutics Review & Advisory Committee has issued the first blanket ban in the UK for prescribing Sativex, claiming that there is inadequate evidence for the drug’s efficacy and safety. This flies in the face of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency's decision that the drug is both safe and effective.

Sativex is a licensed treatment for people with MS who experience symptoms of spasticity and it should be prescribed to people for whom other treatments have failed.

Jayne Spink, Director of Policy and Research at the MS Society said: "Sativex has undergone extensive clinical testing over many years. This decision beggars belief. It is not the remit of local committees to overwrite the judgements about the safety and effectiveness of drugs made by the official regulators. Banning access to Sativex will condemn those people with MS who rely upon it to a life unnecessarily limited by spasticity; a potentially devastating and distressing symptom of the condition."

In my opinion, Jayne is correct:.  For the Midlands Therapeutics Review & Advisory Committee to deny access to so many suffering people is simply atrocious and ignorant, when the hard evidence from studies and trials have shown beyond doubt that Sativex, the cannabis-extract solution, is both effiicacious and safe.  Those were amongst the strict criteria all medicines have to satisfy - which Sativex has - in order to gain a license (which Sativex has).

So we, the taxpayers, contribute willingly to cover the salaries of these ignorant and cloth-eared bureaucrats! 

When prison for cannabis can mean a death sentence - how can it be Just?

I am concerned to read about 51- year-old Peter Davy who is suffering from cancer for ten years and whose partner suffers from Multiple Sclerosis and needs his care 24 hours a day.

So I have written to the Prime Minister, Deputy PM and Minister of Justice in New Zealand asking for a pardon for Peter Davy.   I hope that you too will write .

Peter admits to having cultivated cannabis for his own use and says he has studied extensively the breeding of rare strains of cannabis for specific medical conditions.

On February 5th, Peter pleaded guilty to cultivation of cannabis at Timaru court; this was his fifth conviction and the judge has told him he will be sent to prison.  Peter has also threatened to go on strike and not take his cancer medicines if he is sent to prison.

Of course, a prison sentence for a man that grows a plant, albeit contrary to law, for his own medicinal use and to ease the terrible suffering of his partner is unjust - surely there can be no doubt in that?

If Mr Davy has done no harm - in fact, if all he has done is break a law that enables him to do GOOD,  how can he justly be sent to prison.

In addition, not only will his own health suffer, but it could cost his partner's life"

It is surely the equivalent of a death sentence?

May I humbly request that Peter Davy be given a pardon.

----

Web site http://www.freepeterdavy.com/node/1

 Facebook page

Write to John Key Prime Minister  john.key@national.org.nz

Write to Bill English, Deputy Prime Minister  b.english@ministers.govt.nz

Write to Simon Power, Minister of Justice  s.power@ministers.govt.nz

Write to The Press letters@press.co.nz