Prohibition based on a lie

LETTER

Cannabis prohibition is based on a lie — that “it is a drug of no medicinal value”.

In the 1940s, Dr William Woodward, president of the American Medical Association, attended a hearing where he said cannabis was the gold standard for treatment of migraines and had been used safely as a traditional medicine for many illnesses.

At the time of cannabis prohibition, health benefits were known. President Nixon commissioned the Shaeffer Report hoping it would produce evidence supporting his prohibitionist stance, but it recommended the temporary ban on cannabis be lifted because of its health benefits because they knew from the example of alcohol that prohibition does not work — it creates far-reaching problems.

We have been told that cannabis is a drug of no medicinal value, but that does not make it so. The effects of prohibition have included an increase in ischemic, age-related inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. We have been denied the acknowledged benefits from neuroprotectants for neurological damage following stroke and trauma, and neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s, HIV and dementia. Many of these diseases have reached epidemic proportions.

Other consequences of cannabis prohibition include the introduction of corporate prisons, a larger police force to enforce cannabis prohibition and the need for lawyers to represent the many thousands of people with cannabis-related convictions (6500 in 2015).

We have been told that there needs to be more research. That is another lie. See this patent listing many diseases for which its use is effective: www.patent6630507.info/

The Government must rescind legislation that is based on a lie. We look forward to the re-legalisation of cannabis.

Beverley Aldridge

President, Otamatea Grey Power

Cannabis prohibition is based on a lie — that “it is a drug of no medicinal value”.

In the 1940s, Dr William Woodward, president of the American Medical Association, attended a hearing where he said cannabis was the gold standard for treatment of migraines and had been used safely as a traditional medicine for many illnesses.

At the time of cannabis prohibition, health benefits were known. President Nixon commissioned the Shaeffer Report hoping it would produce evidence supporting his prohibitionist stance, but it recommended the temporary ban on cannabis be lifted because of its health benefits because they knew from the example of alcohol that prohibition does not work — it creates far-reaching problems.

We have been told that cannabis is a drug of no medicinal value, but that does not make it so. The effects of prohibition have included an increase in ischemic, age-related inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. We have been denied the acknowledged benefits from neuroprotectants for neurological damage following stroke and trauma, and neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s, HIV and dementia. Many of these diseases have reached epidemic proportions.

Other consequences of cannabis prohibition include the introduction of corporate prisons, a larger police force to enforce cannabis prohibition and the need for lawyers to represent the many thousands of people with cannabis-related convictions (6500 in 2015).

We have been told that there needs to be more research. That is another lie. See this patent listing many diseases for which its use is effective: www.patent6630507.info/

The Government must rescind legislation that is based on a lie. We look forward to the re-legalisation of cannabis.

Beverley Aldridge

President, Otamatea Grey Power

Your email address will not be published. Comments will display after being approved by a staff member. Comments may be edited for clarity.

Clive Bibby - 19 days ago
I doubt that the current law was draughted on the basis of cannabis's medicinal qualities or lack of them. The reasons why this drug has been kept on the banned list for such a long time is that a majority of Parliamentarians have always appreciated the damage done to the lives of our youngest and most vulnerable when they have uncontrolled access to it.
Although I agree with you that the law isn't working to deter those who want to take advantage of the "open all hours" opportunity to make millions out of those unfortunates who can least afford it, that isn't a good enough reason to decriminalise cannabis. If your concerns about the availability of mecidinal cannabis were justifiable, then we should be looking at changing the law to accommodate that. But having spent time on the local health board, I'm pretty confident that this drug is indeed available to health professionals as a back-up to the existing pain relief medicines in every public hospital in the country.
The existing law allows for that, but is for restricted use only.
The part of the law that needs to be changed is the bit that would ensure the police have adequate resources to fight the criminals on a level playing field instead of trying to keep a lid on this scourge with both hands tied behind their backs.
There is one thing that people like you and I can do Beverly. We can encourage the general population to stop listening to those liberal members of Parliament, including our new Prime Minister, and some senior members of the judiciary who have given up on the fight to stop the carnage, particularly in our low-decile communities. I can only hope that they may themselves be convinced a retention of the current law is necessary as it applies to the dope growers and suppliers when they see some of our major industries start to struggle - simply because they can't fill the vacancies for skilled, highly-paid operators when the applicants for these jobs can't pass the basic drugs test.
Sadly, I am not at all confident that they'd even be moved by that argument either but we should not give in to these freeloaders.

David Hemsley, Katikati - 14 days ago
I sure hope we are smoke-free by 2025 - our lungs do not need this sort of drug. Smoking is causing 5000 deaths a year in NZ and costing all of us thousands of dollars to look after people with cancer. I am one of these people.

Poll

  • Voting please wait...
    Your vote has been cast. Reloading page...
    Do you think the benefits of forestry to the region outweigh its negative impacts?
    See also: