Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Globe & Mail)   Insurance covers damages to marijuana garden after police raid   ( divider line
    More: Amusing  
•       •       •

5111 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Dec 2001 at 10:59 AM (15 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

43 Comments     (+0 »)
2001-12-03 11:05:37 AM  
Nice. The insurance company outght to sue the Agency that raided his house.

2001-12-03 11:05:41 AM  
2001-12-03 11:07:47 AM  
Thats it, I'm moving to Canada.
(I KNEW Smokey would be the weeners) hehe
2001-12-03 11:08:25 AM  
I DID NOT say weeners Smokey, filter did.
2001-12-03 11:12:03 AM  
It's an accepted treatment for depression now? Cool.
2001-12-03 11:14:05 AM  
I'm depressed!
2001-12-03 11:20:33 AM  
Higher insurance rates for everyone! That is so cool.
2001-12-03 11:35:36 AM homeowners policy states that I'm covered for destruction caused by rabbits, moles, and deer. But it does not specifically state damage caused by "pigs". Wonder if I need a "rider" for this coverage??
2001-12-03 11:36:10 AM  
Obviously Eat Me needs to smoke some nuggets, a wee bit uptight aincha?
2001-12-03 11:38:21 AM  
"argued that the theft of trees, shrubs and other plants are covered by his policy."

This just goes to show you how stupid cops really are when it comes to drugs and enforcement. Why did they pull out all his shrubs and trees? They can't tell the difference between a pot plant and a palm tree?

My mom found me with pot when I was a teenager and she took me to see a police officer, head of the juvenile division who was a distant family member. I got the jail tour and the usual scare tactic and it was working. At the time I was caught I had $140 on me for a half ounce of magic mushrooms. At one point the cop asked me what the money was for and I told him. It was his response that really calmed me down; "Magic Mushrooms? What are those?" Then he turns to my mother and says "notice how they use the word 'magic' to make it sound more appealing.

I wasn't scared anymore. I was pissed. This guy goes on like he has the inside scoop on drugs, scares the hell out of my mother by spewing on about how much brain damage pot does... He hadn't a clue what he was talking about! He used terms like 'marijuana cigarette', which also started me thinking that he was clueless. So, the visit actually did more to encourage my habits. His description made it sound like I'd be in a coma in no time. I would imagine he bragged later about the $1,500.00 bust he made (1 gram of oil. Where do cops get these estimates?)

I would bet the officers in this case, as well as the one above, went home that night to have a few drinks. Hypocrites.
2001-12-03 11:56:40 AM  
California. That figures.
2001-12-03 11:56:41 AM  
The pot plants were the "trees, shrubs and other plants" that were removed.
Good for this guy!
2001-12-03 12:02:48 PM  
Obviosly the terrorist have won and are insurance adjusters.
2001-12-03 12:15:00 PM  
So if I bay a bag and it turns out to be sh!t, I can collect on my insurance?
2001-12-03 12:16:32 PM  
ain't nuttin wrong with smokin a little weed. As long as you ain't sellin it to chitluns.
2001-12-03 12:32:38 PM  
"...they dug and they burned and they burned and they dug and they killed all our cute little weeds..."
2001-12-03 12:37:08 PM  
"Don't like the drugs but the Drugs like me"

....has anyone ever thought how many loop holes there are in american in general. Medical care, justice system, government, police, so many loop can pretty much do anything if you have the right resources.
2001-12-03 01:11:45 PM  
"you can pretty much do anything if you have the right resources."

You should be able to do ANYTHING without loopholes. So long as you're not affecting someone else's civil rights.
2001-12-03 01:19:38 PM  
3M TA3:
"Higher insurance rates for everyone!"

And where do you think your taxes go again?

To the people breaking down doors to others homes... :)
2001-12-03 01:28:38 PM  
This should have a "Way To Go Dude" tag.
2001-12-03 01:54:56 PM  
Um, hello? Pot is actually a depressant, no matter how much it makes you giggle and smile and be able to endure hours upon hours of coding without hardly noticing that any time went by or what you actually just coded.
2001-12-03 02:00:46 PM  
Smokey, I agree, but many people argue that dangerous behavour like smoking has costs to society. Basicly that when drug users get hurt and go to the hospital they have no money and the government picks up the bill (medicade, etc), which costs everybody. Same applies to long term effects of smoking, motorcycling without safety gear, etc.

This seems a little hipocritical to me. If society makes laws that make medical care available regardless of if the recpiant can pay for it, then society ought to pay whatever costs that incurs. Giving something away doesn't give you the right to tell someone else how to behave.
2001-12-03 02:40:27 PM  
All hail our civil right to blow pot smoke in others' faces!

And when I have a beer, all hail my civil right to piss it all over others!
2001-12-03 02:40:41 PM  
Madcharlie, your full of it. THC--the chemical that makes in you high in pot is classified as a psychoactive. Not a depressant. Psychoatives do not depress you.
2001-12-03 02:52:05 PM  
Is that covered under item 4:20 of a homeowners policy
2001-12-03 03:46:20 PM  
"Smokin them tweeds and wearin ya clothes halfway off ya ass!"
2001-12-03 03:51:41 PM  
Maybe the old US of A really is the land of the free.

No irony this time.
2001-12-03 04:10:51 PM  
Madcharlie, Tre_bumpin is right, Except that I think that its technically a psychotropic, not a psychoactive. But this is taking me back a few years... Not quite sure.

Did you guys catch the article on mimes that was there too? The mime troupe was too scary for the airport? Right on!
2001-12-03 04:13:30 PM  
"And like a good neighbor,..State Farm is there.."
2001-12-03 05:01:52 PM  
CHRONIC-ly depressed? I'm depressed whenever I run out of weed, too. Vicious circle, dude.
2001-12-03 05:22:08 PM  
There you go howie, thats depression for ya.

You are partially correct mcfuzz, although i don't want to confuse you farkers too much

To put it simply, a psychotropic has psychoactive effects. So you can word it however you want to the shiat gets you high.
2001-12-03 05:43:23 PM  
Hey, don't bogart that.
2001-12-03 07:42:56 PM  
shouldnt this be under hero?
2001-12-03 08:09:23 PM  
Right-on Howie....I'm never depressed when the bowl is full.

Tax weed, get rid if cigarettes!!!
2001-12-03 09:25:33 PM  
Marijuana Abuse May Up Risk of Depression
By Suzanne Rostler

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Adults who abuse marijuana may be putting themselves at risk for depression, results of a new study indicate.

According to the report, adults who were not depressed when the study began but who abused marijuana were about four times more likely to report symptoms of depression 15 years later, compared with their non-smoking peers.

These adults were especially likely to have had suicidal thoughts and report a lack of interest in things that once held their interest, Dr. Gregory B. Bovasso reports in the December issue of the American Journal of Psychiatry. Pot smokers were four times more likely than their non-smoking peers to have suicidal thoughts, and white women were found to be at particular risk.

In the study, marijuana abuse was defined by various signs of problem pot use, such as impaired work performance or using the drug on the job.

Individuals who used other drugs such as amphetamines and opioids were about 8 to 10 times more likely to be abusing pot 15 years later. However, those who were depressed when the study began were no more likely to abuse marijuana later on, according to the report, which followed nearly 850 adults who were not depressed and more than 1,800 who did not report marijuana abuse at the study's start.

In an interview with Reuters Health, Bovasso suggested that future studies investigate how excessive pot-smoking leads to a higher risk of depression, examine why adults abuse marijuana and establish how much pot is enough to put people at risk of becoming depressed.

In the meantime, the findings ``underscore the importance of cannabis abuse prevention rather than treatment,'' because they highlight new cases of depression arising among marijuana abusers, the report concludes.

``Treatments or other interventions that prevent the abuse of cannabis from occurring in the first place are important,'' Bovasso said. ``On a general policy level, marijuana...may not be as harmless as many believe.''

SOURCE: American Journal of Psychiatry 2001;158:2033-2037.
2001-12-03 09:25:46 PM  
Cannabis, if I'm not mistaken, is part depressant and part psychoactive.

Depressant simply means that it slows down your central nervous system: doesn't necessarily mean you will get depressed. It's the opposite of stimulant.
2001-12-03 09:26:41 PM  
The above article just happened to be on Yahoo News today.
2001-12-03 09:35:52 PM  
May do this and may do that, i've got ten articles that would confuse the hell out of you....did you know that the THC receptors in your brain are part of a completely seperate system in your let me find the article.

Three years ago, Israeli archaeologists stumbled upon a 1600-year-old tragedy: the remains of a narrow-hipped teenage girl with the skeleton of a full-term fetus still cradled in her abdomen. With her were grey ashes that contained traces of tetra-hydrocannabinol, the active ingredient of marijuana. Could it be that the midwife had administered the plant in a last-ditch effort to bring on labour or to ease her pain?

Today, in nearby Jerusalem, another chemical is in the news -- this one extracted not from ancient ashes but from fresh, pulverised pig brain. It is anadamide, a newly christened chemical that might do naturally in our heads what marijuana does when we choose to smoke it. Anandamide's discovery, along with that of the molecule it binds to in the brain, has marijuana researchers buzzing with the best high they have had in years. The findings provide new hope for therapies that draw on the weed's long list of anecdotal medical uses: as a painkiller, appetite stimulant or nausea suppressant, to name a few. They also throw open windows onto the mysterious workings of our brains.

[History of marijuana research and use]

More recently came other exciting finds: in 1988, Allyn Howlett of St Louis University Medical School discovered a specific protein receptor for THC in mouse nerve cells -- a protein that only THC and its relatives dock onto. Two years later, Tom Bonner's group at the National Institute of Mental Health pinpointed the DNA that encodes the same receptor in rats. It is now known that humans have the receptor, too.

Finding a cannabinoid receptor implies that THC -- unlike alcohol -- has a quite precise modus operandi that taps into a specific brain function. Presumably the drug binds to nerves that have the receptor, and the nerves respond in turn by altering their behaviour. The classic effects of marijuana smoking are the consequences: changes in mood, memory, appetite, movement and perception, including pain. Researchers think THC affects so many mental processes because receptors are found in many brain regions, especially in those that perform tasks known to be disturbed during THC intoxication: in the banana-shaped hippocampus, crucial for proper memory; in the crumpled cerebral cortex, home of higher thinking; and in the primitive basal ganglion, controller of movement.

Once a specially tailored receptor was found, the next step was simple - in theory, anyway. "The receptor had to be there for a purpose - presumably it didn't evolve so that people could smoke cannabis and get high," says Roger Pertwee, a pharmacologist at Aberdeen University. Instead, there had to be a natural chemical inside of us that fitted onto the receptor and sent some biochemical signal cascading through the nerve cell to do who knows what. But plucking that one chemical out of a brain stuffed with millions of others was never going to be easy.

Several laboratories set to work on the problem and, fittingly, Mechoulam's was the first to come up with an answer, in the form of a greasy, hairpin-shaped chemical. The researchers dubbed it anandamide, from "ananda", the Sanskrit word for bliss. "The guy discovers the active ingredient of marijuana back in the 1960s, and now, almost 30 years later to the day, he discovers anandamide," says Paul Consroe, a neuropharmacologist at the University of Arizona. "Isn't that great?"

Mechoulam's strategy was to chase after chemicals that, like THC, are soluble in fat. By teasing these substances away from those that are water soluble, his group extracted a substance from pig brain that did indeed bind to the cannabinoid receptor. But did it act like THC? To find out they sent their specimen to Pertwee who had devised a sensitive test for cannabinoids that involved monitoring a substance's ability to stop muscle-twitching in mouse tissue, when dropped on certain nerves. "When it arrived, there was so little of it in the phial I couldn't even see it," Pertwee recalls. "We didn't know what it was - just that it was a greasy substance." But the tests went well: anandamide depressed the twitch just like THC, and last December the researchers published their results in "Science".

The mouse result gave Mechoulam and his group the encouragement they needed to extract more anandamide from pig brains and then analyse and synthesis the chemical in the lab. They also wanted more evidence that anadamide docked specifically onto the cannabinoid receptor and acted like THC, which has a very different molecular structure. And so, with Zvi Vogel and colleagues at the Weizmann Institute near Tel Aviv, they came up with a plan. They would add the DNA encoding the cannabinoid receptor to hamster or monkey cells growing in dishes. The cells equipped with this DNA would then produce masses of receptor, which would sit in the cell membrane ready and available for any chemical "key" that should happen along. Vogel's researchers would add anandamide to the cells and watch what happened.

The results, published in July's issue of the "Journal of Neurochemistry", were clear: anandamide acted as a key, and a precise one at that, sticking only to the cells containing the receptor, and not to others. What's more, when anandamide stuck to the cells, it triggered biochemical changes similar to those associated with THC and related chemicals. Not only did anandamide fit the same lock as THC, but it appeared to open similar doors in the brain.

More tests followed in a number of laboratories, and those researchers found that in every way that has been tested so far, anandamide acts very much like THC. But why would we want such a mind-altering substance in our brains?

Studies on another class of drugs provide a useful parallel. Opiates such as morphine and heroin act upon the body's nervous system to cause euphoria and block pain. In 1973, natural opioids, which behave in the same way as opiates, but have a different structure, were pulled out of the body. It appears that when the body is under serious assault, nerve cells spit out these opioids, which promptly bind to other nerve cells to stop pain signals dead in their tracks. At the same time, they fasten onto sites in the brain to induce a feeling of wellbeing.

Anandamide, like the natural opioids, will probably have its own specific set of jobs to perform in the brain and body. The effects of THC give a rough guide to what these might be: involvement in mood, memory and pain are obvious examples.

But what would the brain be like without anandamide? Researchers intend to find out. Bonner is gearing up to produce a genetically engineered mouse that has no cannabinoid receptors: no receptors, no anandamide function. Others want to tinker with anandamide to make a version that binds to the receptor but doesn't trigger any change in the nerve's behaviour. Added to a mouse, it would stop the body's real, internal anandamide from doing its job. Researchers are also excited by anandamide's possible role in mental and neurological disease. There are also other questions to be asked. If anandamide, like THC, hampers memory, could a drug with the opposite effects - a "memory pill" - be made? "It's all speculation for now," says Steven Childers, a pharmacologist at Bowman Gray School of Medicine, North Carolina, "but we like to think about these things."

It will take more time before anandamide is firmly established as the bona fide partner to the cannabinoid receptor. Meanwhile, Mechoulam's lab has two other anandamide-like chemicals waiting in the wings. And in the US, Howlett and Childers both have chemicals of an entirely different kind that bind to the receptor: they are water soluble, not fat soluble. The importance of each remains to be seen.

Whatever anandamide turns out to be, it provides pharmacologists with a fresh plan of attack in their hunt for drugs that act like the cannabinoids. Such drugs could be valuable to help keep at bay the nausea of cancer chemotherapy; to stimulate appetite in AIDS patients; to dampen tremors in neurological disorders; to reduce eye pressure in patients with glaucoma; and to dull pain in those for whom other painkillers do not work.

Cannabinoids can do at least some of these things, with one small drawback: they also make the recipient high. The holy grail of cannabinoid therapeutics has been to separate what causes the high from the source of the desired effects, by chemical tinkering with THC or its relations - shortening a side group on one part of the molecule, lengthening a carbon chain in another - in the hope that the "undesirable" effects will be lost in the reshuffle. Despite the drug's dubious reputation, several US pharmaceuticals spent several years trying to make this work, but without success. Nor did they reach another equally sought after goal: an antagonist that will block the effects of THC and similar substances when taken.

Until marijuana researchers succeed in doing something along these lines, it is unlikely that drugs companies will pay much attention. "There is a real stigma with working with drugs of abuse," says Billy Martin, a pharmacologist at the Medical College of Virginia. "If drugs companies had three choices of classes of drugs to work on and one was a drug of abuse, they're just not going to work on the drug of abuse." This view is shared by Larry Melvin, who worked on the Pfizer pharmaceuticals company's now defunct cannabinoid therapeutics programme. "What will ultimately legitimise the field in a big way is if researchers can come up with a really good therapeutic ability. Then you'll see the companies turn around."

But Gabriel Nahas, an anaesthetist from Columbia University in New York, who has spoken out against marijuana use for many years, maintains that THC's effects on the brain are too general and too toxic for this route ever to work. The discovery of anandamide and its receptor have not changed his mind. "The brain is a computer," he says. "To put THC in the brain is akin to putting a bug in the computer. I'm sticking to my guns about its harmful effects - not only to man but to society."

Only time will reveal the value of anandamide and its receptor to drug therapy. But the importance of these discoveries to brain research is not in doubt. "We're no longer just dealing with the pharmacology of a recreational drug," says Pertwee. "We're dealing with the physiology of a newly discovered system in the brain. And that's an enormously bigger field."

Created 11/6/2000 19:15:32
Modified 11/6/2000 19:15:32 Leda version 1.4.3
2001-12-03 10:46:27 PM  
One thing I will say...
(Quit saying "marijuana" you all sound like ignorant Mr. G-men from the 1930's. Couldn't say "cannabis" since that was hemp what was important to the war effort for rope and clothing...)

Smokable Cannabis = Lowered Motivation = Lack of Motion = Not enough exercise = Chemical imbalance = Depression
2001-12-03 10:48:06 PM  
Pot shrinks tumors; government knew in '74
By RAYMOND CUSHING. reprinted from

(Wednesday, March 28, The United States Supreme Court heard arguments on whether marijuana for medicinal purposes can be distributed by a buyer's cooperative. The following article was listed as one of the top 25 censored stories of the year 2000. We reprint it here and pose the question, why would the government want to keep us from knowing this?)

The term medical marijuana took on dramatic new meaning in February 2000, when researchers in Madrid announced they had destroyed incurable brain tumors in rats by injecting them with THC, the active ingredient in cannabis.

The Madrid study marks only the second time that THC has been administered to tumor-bearing animals. In 1974, researchers at the Medical College of Virginia, who had been funded by the National Institutes of Health to find evidence that marijuana damages the immune system, found instead that THC slowed the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice -- lung and breast cancer, and a virus-induced leukemia.

The DEA quickly shut down the Virginia study and all further cannabis/tumor research, according to Jack Herer, who reports on the events in his book, The Emperor Wears No Clothes. In 1976, President Gerald Ford put an end to all public cannabis research and granted exclusive research rights to major pharmaceutical companies, who set out -- unsuccessfully -- to develop synthetic forms of THC that would deliver all the medical benefits without the "high."

The Madrid researchers reported in the March issue of Nature Medicine that they injected the brains of 45 rats with cancer cells, producing tumors whose presence they confirmed through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). On the 12th day they injected 15 of the rats with THC and 15 with Win-55,212-2, a synthetic compound similar to THC.

"All the rats left untreated uniformly died 12-18 days after glioma (brain cancer) cell inoculation ... Cannabinoid (THC)-treated rats survived significantly longer than control rats. THC administration was ineffective in three rats, which died by days 16-18. Nine of the THC-treated rats surpassed the time of death of untreated rats, and survived up to 19-35 days. Moreover, the tumor was completely eradicated in three of the treated rats." The rats treated with Win-55,212-2 showed similar results.

The Spanish researchers, led by Dr. Manuel Guzman of Complutense University, also irrigated healthy rats' brains with large doses of THC for seven days, to test for harmful biochemical or neurological effects. They found none.

"Careful MRI analysis of all those tumor-free rats showed no sign of damage related to necrosis, edema, infection or trauma ... We also examined other potential side effects of cannabinoid administration. In both tumor-free and tumor-bearing rats, cannabinoid administration induced no substantial change in behavioral parameters such as motor coordination or physical activity. Food and water intake, as well as body weight gain, were unaffected during and after cannabinoid delivery. Likewise, the general hematological profiles of cannabinoid-treated rats were normal. Thus, neither biochemical parameters nor markers of tissue damage changed substantially during the seven-day delivery period or for at least two months after cannabinoid treatment ended."

Guzman's investigation is the only time since the 1974 Virginia study that THC has been administered to live, tumor-bearing animals. (The Spanish researchers cite a 1998 study in which cannabinoids inhibited breast cancer cell proliferation, but that was a "petri dish" experiment that didn't involve live subjects.)

In an e-mail interview for this story, the Madrid researcher said he had heard of the Virginia study, but had never been able to locate literature on it. Hence, the Nature Medicine article characterizes the new study as the first on tumor-laden animals and doesn't cite the 1974 Virginia investigation.

"I am aware of the existence of that research. In fact I have attempted many times to obtain the journal article on the original investigation by these people, but it has proven impossible," Guzman said.

In 1983, the Reagan/Bush Administration tried to persuade American universities and researchers to destroy all 1966-76 cannabis research work, including compendiums in libraries, reports Jack Herer, who states, "We know that large amounts of information have since disappeared."

Guzman provided the title of the work -- "Antineoplastic activity of cannabinoids," an article in a 1975 Journal of the National Cancer Institute -- and this writer obtained a copy at the University of California medical school library in Davis and faxed it to Madrid. The summary of the Virginia study begins, "Lewis lung adenocarcinoma growth was retarded by the oral administration of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabinol (CBN)" -- two types of cannabinoids, a family of active components in marijuana. "Mice treated for 20 consecutive days with THC and CBN had reduced primary tumor size."

The 1975 journal article doesn't mention breast cancer tumors, which are featured in the only newspaper story ever to appear about the 1974 study -- in the "Local" section of The Washington Post on Aug. 18, 1974. Under the headline, "Cancer Curb Is Studied," it read in part:

"The active chemical agent in marijuana curbs the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice and may also suppress the immunity reaction that causes rejection of organ transplants, a Medical College of Virginia team has discovered." The researchers "found that THC slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers, and a virus-induced leukemia in laboratory mice, and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent."

Guzman, writing from Madrid, was eloquent in his response after this writer faxed him the clipping from The Washington Post of a quarter century ago. In translation, he wrote:

"It is extremely interesting to me, the hope that the project seemed to awaken at that moment, and the sad evolution of events during the years following the discovery, until now we once again draw back the veil, over the anti-tumoral power of THC, 25 years later. Unfortunately, the world bumps along between such moments of hope and long periods of intellectual castration."

News coverage of the Madrid discovery has been virtually nonexistent in this country. The news broke quietly on Feb. 29, 2000 with a story that ran once on the UPI wire about the Nature Medicine article. This writer stumbled on it through a link that appeared briefly on the Drudge Report Web page. The New York Times, The Washington Post, and Los Angeles Times all ignored the story, even though its newsworthiness is indisputable: a benign substance occurring in nature destroys deadly brain tumors.

Reprinted from:

Medical Marijuana is " of the safest therapeutically- active substances known to man."

The Honorable Francis Young

Administrative Law Judge

Drug Enforcement Agency - 1989
2001-12-03 10:50:29 PM  
Oh yeah... It is also considered an Anti-oxidant if you can believe that...Absorbtion of free radicals and all that...
2001-12-04 12:43:17 AM  
Thank you for the article. My aunt lived for almost 10 years longer than she should have with an inoperable thyroid tumor through heavy pot use. Then she was arrested for posession and died of the cancer in prison 3 months later.
2001-12-04 04:43:48 PM  
Willy Pete:Please accept our condolences..That kind of stuff shouldn't be happening in this day and age...And MadLeaf,thanks for the article..Rich and Jan
Displayed 43 of 43 comments

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.