Potent Pot Puts Spin on Decriminalization Debate

[boulder]

Marijuana is not what it used to be. The Woodstock-era weed smoked by legions of baby boomers has morphed in recent years into a drug whose potency has more than tripled.

 

And that has ignited a debate about whether America's most commonly used illict drug, a substance tried by an increasingly younger audience, has grown more dangerous.

 

Public safety and health experts worry that many of the Bay Staters who voted two weeks ago in a nonbinding referendum to decriminalize pot were unaware of the drug's dramatic change and its potential to harm unsuspecting new users, particularly teens.

 

``I am sure voters are reaching back to the 1970s and saying, `Weed, it wasn't that bad.' But things are different,'' said state police Sgt. Alan Zani, a narcotics officer in the Essex County District Attorney's Office.

 

Zani said he has been seizing marijuana that informants who are longtime pot smokers say is knocking them for a loop.

 

But referendum supporters, who are pushing for pot possession to be treated more like a traffic ticket than a criminal offense, say the potency issue is a scare tactic.

 

They point to a recent study by the National Institute on Drug Abuse which shows the percentage of high schoolers who reported getting ``very high'' from pot declined during the 1980s, while pot potency started to rise. They say this proves that kids figured out how to adjust their doses of the stronger stuff.

 

However, the same study notes that the proportion of high schoolers reporting ``very high'' highs started to climb again in the 1990s and has held steady through 2001.

 

``While (marijuana) is not the right thing for everybody, the level of harm it generates is so far below the harms we tolerate from alcohol and tobacco,'' said Michael Cutler, an attorney and co-founder of the Drug Policy Forum of Massachusetts, a privately funded marijuana-decriminalization group.

 

``If you fear the new marijuana because it is so much more powerful,'' Cutler said, ``all the more reason to regulate it, control it and tax it.''

 

What has changed in marijuana is the percentage of the mind-altering chemical, known as THC. Technological advances, particularly in indoor-growing operations, have allowed growers to create plants with significantly higher THC levels.

 

Federal data show THC levels have risen from an average of between 1 and 2 percent in the 1970s to an average of 5.3 percent last year, with much of the increase coming in the 1990s.

 

Since the 1970s, law enforcement officers around the country have sent thousands of seized samples to the federally funded Potency Monitoring Project at the University of Mississippi.

 

The project's latest data show that, in the past year, THC levels in some pot samples have spiked as high as 33 percent.

 

There is no shortage of pot in the Bay State and demand for the more powerful stuff is on the rise, says the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration.

 

``We are seeing an increase of Canadian marijuana coming over the border and, unfortunately, it's the more potent marijuana,'' said Mark Trouville, special agent in charge of the DEA's New England Field Division.

 

``Children aren't going to know how potent that marijuana cigarette is,'' Trouville said. ``You can get some (Canadian) `BC Bud' as high as 30 percent (THC).''

 

The influx of potent pot comes as groups that favor decriminalization plan to meet with state lawmakers and seek their support of bills, to be filed in January, that would eliminate jail sentences for first- and second-offense pot posession offenders and instead provide addiction treatment.

 

Similar bills have stalled in the past.

 

This time, supporters say, legislators can't ignore the fact that about 60 percent of the voters in the 19 districts where the ballot question ran supported decriminalization.

 

The nonbinding question asked whether the state representative should vote in favor of legislation that would make possession of less than one ounce of pot a civil violation, punishable by a maximum fine of $100. Currently, such offenders face criminal penalties with jail time and fines up to $1,000.

 

``The current prohibition on marijuana is ultimately designed to protect public health and it does so,'' said Dr. Michael Gastfriend, director of the addiction research program at Massachusetts General Hospital.

 

Health experts note that of the reasons for the thousands of drug-related visits to U.S. hospital emergency rooms last year, adverse reactions from pot use ranked fourth. They say this indicates the higher potency is likely catching many off-guard.

 

``The sizable unknowns about marijuana make it an unreasonable risk to make it widely available,'' Gastfriend said. ``We wouldn't do that today if we had a second chance with tobacco.''

 

But those who favor decriminalization say it could save the cash-strapped Bay State millions each year in law enforcement resources.

 

A new report by the Drug Policy Forum concludes that decriminalization could save Massachusetts $24.3 million annually. The report was written by Boston University economics professor Jeffrey Miron.

 

While not endorsing decriminalization, the head of the Boston Police Department's Drug Control Division said his 100 officers are spread so thinly over the city's 48 square miles, they concentrate on the illicit drugs - crack, cocaine and heroin - that produce the most violence and crime.

 

``If you live in the South End and kids are smoking pot on the corner, I could have that handled by the walking man who will go broom those kids, saying see you later, scram,'' said Detective Lt. Frank Armstrong.

 

With the revitalized decriminalization issue headed to the state Legislature, the lawmaker who heads the criminal justice committee says he has some strong reservations - particularly because of pot's increased potency.

 

``I do not know how you send the message that it's OK for adults to smoke pot and not have the message trickle down to kids,'' said Rep. Stephen Tobin (D-Quincy).

 

Sixty percent of voters in Tobin's district approved decriminalization. Tobin said he does not believe most voters were aware of the higher potency issue. He also said he was unaware of the report that indicates the state could save $24 million annually through decriminalization.

 

``I look forward to learning more,'' Tobin said. ``But is it OK to promote marijuana to a whole new generation if it saves $24 million?''

 

Complete Title: Potent Pot Puts New Spin on Decriminalization Debate

 

Source: Boston Herald (MA)

[pipeman]

I'd be interested to hear the opinions of some of the long term smokers in here about this so called increase in pot potency over the past 20 years.

[Pete]

i thought more potent weed was better coz ya smoke less to get high and therefore do less damage to yer body.

 

btw. does anyone know where i can get some seeds from that ~30% strain?!?

 

Pete

[Brainstorm]

There's some speculation that the potency of good MJ hasn't changed at all, I've read some claims on forums and other sites that the gear the US department of whatever tested for potency in the 70's and early 80's was bag weed coming in from Mexico and was never that good.

 

I'm not sure if it's true or there would be any evidence to back up the speculation but it sounds reasonable I guess !

[boe~pimp]

i think this is a fucking disgrace and the media and goverment is scraping the bottom of the barrell for propaganda to use against the legislation of cannabis use the world over.

 

<gets out his list>

 

``I am sure voters are reaching back to the 1970s and saying, `Weed, it wasn't that bad.' But things are different,'' said state police Sgt. Alan Zani, a narcotics officer in the Essex County District Attorney's Office.'

 

was he smoking weed then and also now ? because he must've been to prove that aligation.

 

 

'Zani said he has been seizing marijuana that informants who are longtime pot smokers say is knocking them for a loop.'

 

are informants not criminals to start with ? typical street scum that would sell they're mothers to stay out of trouble with the BOYS in blue ?

 

 

'They point to a recent study by the National Institute on Drug Abuse which shows the percentage of high schoolers who reported getting ``very high'' from pot declined during the 1980s, while pot potency started to rise. They say this proves that kids figured out how to adjust their doses of the stronger stuff.

However, the same study notes that the proportion of high schoolers reporting ``very high'' highs started to climb again in the 1990s and has held steady through 2001.'

 

one thing i would like to point out here is: "They say this proves that kids figured out how to adjust their doses of the stronger stuff." wouldn't that express a form of education relating to cannabis use ?

 

<throws the rest of that in the bin due to the excessive stupidity involved>

 

 

``While (marijuana) is not the right thing for everybody, the level of harm it generates is so far below the harms we tolerate from alcohol and tobacco,'' said Michael Cutler, an attorney and co-founder of the Drug Policy Forum of Massachusetts, a privately funded marijuana-decriminalization group.'

``If you fear the new marijuana because it is so much more powerful,'' Cutler said, ``all the more reason to regulate it, control it and tax it.'' '

 

yet they continue to tax tobacco and alchohol ? ? ? mote attorneys like Michael Cutler are needed in this world and less tosspot ones. Not for the sake of "Potheads" all over the world but for responsible smokers.

 

 

'Federal data show THC levels have risen from an average of between 1 and 2 percent in the 1970s to an average of 5.3 percent last year, with much of the increase coming in the 1990s.'

 

i've spoken to many people that say they've smoked marijuana in the 60's 70's that they wish they could find now due to it's supremecy, a damn hell of alot of technological advancements have been made in the cultivation of cannabis, although the 'potency' of marijuana has not increased significantly considering the climb of potency, availability and birth of other illicit pharmacuetical and 'home made' chemical drugs around these days.

 

 

'There is no shortage of pot in the Bay State and demand for the more powerful stuff is on the rise, says the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration.'

 

As someone else mentioned, "doesn't the higher potency tend to make people smoke less?" Yes, yes it does, for a little while, untill the body becomes imune to it, i find i can't smoke mull from the same dealer for extended periods of time because i just have to smoke too much to get the same effects, if i switch dealers frequently it keeps my body from building up an imunity from it. This maybe just me as part of a minority, as i'm sure there are other people are in this situation, although it may only be a small amount of people. This could be the only arguement over caabnis in general that i can find.

 

 

``Children aren't going to know how potent that marijuana cigarette is,'' Trouville said. ``You can get some (Canadian) `BC Bud' as high as 30 percent (THC).'' '

 

I'm deadset fucking sure that the average teen cannot go and buy 30% THC cannabis for the regular price of regular weed. I know many people on these boards would love to have the opportunity, therefore reinforcing the fact that it would be in great demand, and a price rising would be too much of a revenue generator to refuse for dealers, they raise they're prices just for irregular availability let alone pot that potent.

 

If it was regulated wouldn't it radically reduce the amount of irresponsible smokers ? Illiminating the readilly accessible "black market" for cannabis to growing your own and restricted purchase of cannabis ?

I know of many people that smoke buds but if left with the ultimatum "Grow it yourself or don't smoke it" would not be smoking it anymore, it's like anything, you have to take responsibility in what you do.

 

I'm going to put an end to it here as i could go on for quite a while about just this subject as could alot of you.

 

~Boe~