- Emily Drayton, Staff Writer
THC Limits Are Bad for Americans
As we move past the first 4th of July since COVID took over the planet, it's a good time to review a note about "the land of the free..." in this case, "free to safely treat their own pain with cannabis medicine."
Americans can decide how much pain relief they need, especially those with extreme or chronic pain. These folks are pain-management-professionals by necessity.
Thousands, unfortunately, have fallen under the spell of Pharma and opioids and have lost their lives ("A death toll equal to 9/11 every three weeks."), devastating families and communities in much the same way alcohol and tobacco have done for centuries. Even ibuprofen has proven deadly to the elderly
But Americans continue to experience chronic pain - estimates are approximately 30% of American adults, or about 100 million individuals. Certainly a large enough number to justify a response.
And what a bizarre response! It seems cannabis regulators are attempting to take what they've learned about three known-to-be-deadly substances (and let's not forget sugar, and call it #4) and mis-apply these lessons to a substance that is known not to be deadly?
Looks like they're trying... by ordering limits to the THC available in regulated cannabis products.
This is an egregious mistake, for multiple obvious reasons:
It assumes people cannot regulate the amount of cannabis they consume (but they are allowed to self-regulate other deadly substances every day)
It's unfair and based on voodoo and not facts to limit THC and NOT limit other, far more harmful substances that are currently legal
Also, if regulators set THC limits, a good majority of the industry (and all that tax revenue and all those American jobs) would disappear.
Where would all the high-THC weed go? To the illicit market, of course. Because that genie is NOT going back in the bottle and didn't The Guv learn anything from losing the War on Drugs? Would they rekindle it so soon, on such a weak strategy?
Besides, if too-much-pain-relief were the problem, regulators would have cancelled Oxy and Fentanyl a long time ago!
And by the way, a study** shows that higher THC does not make the user more "high" - - so what's the big fear?
(** From Forbes:
"Researchers at the University of Colorado at Boulder’s Institute of Cognitive Science documented the experiences of 121 cannabis users. Half the study participants were users of cannabis concentrates—very-high THC cannabis extracts—and the other half preferred cannabis flower.
"Both groups received cannabis at varying “strengths”: flower users tried cannabis flower at either 16 percent or 24 percent THC, and extract users received oil at either 70 percent or 90 percent THC. Researchers checked study participants’ blood and monitored their mood, cognitive function, and intoxication level before, immediately after, and one hour after use.
As the researchers expected, the concentrate users had very high levels of THC in their bodies after use. But they weren’t “more high.” In fact, every participants’ self-reported “highness” was about the same—“as were their measures of balance and cognitive impairment,” as CU noted in a news release.
Medium THC flower, high-THC flower—all the same high! This was not what the researchers were expecting.)
(Editor's Note: The endocannabinoid system is smarter than researchers understand.)
Now, regulators are not idiots, of course. They are trying to solve a problem. But exactly what problem are they trying to solve by limiting THC?
It is rather obvious that this silly strategy is a legacy of the war on drugs - the strategy to capture and incarcerate people for using THC.
And since we know The War on Drugs is a War on People which largely targets and punishes black and brown people, we know everything about this strategy.
We see you, regulators.