A new study argues that indoor cannabis is worse for the environment than outdoor, but many companies are already changing the indoor landscape.
The post How detrimental is indoor cannabis cultivation to the environment? appeared first on Leafly.
Black athletes deserve a place in the cannabis industry as much as anyone else. See which ones are putting their hard earned dollars towards cannabis brands and investments.
The post 9 Black athletes trailblazing the cannabis industry appeared first on Leafly.
This company doesn’t just sell seeds—they teach you everything you need to know about growing them, too.
The post Homegrown Cannabis Co. makes sure no one grows alone appeared first on Leafly.
Over the years, we’ve pointed out when federal agencies opt to ignore the federal illegality of cannabis. It happens more often than you might think depending on the topic (see, for example, the NLRB). One agency, though, that has surprisingly never lifted a finger against state-legal cannabis–though it is taking a closer look at CBD–is the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
It is bad public policy when no federal watchdog is looking out for cannabis consumers (many millions of people) or scrutinizing the quality of cannabis products overall, and/or going after bad actors to deter bad behavior. To date, it’s truly been “buyer beware” outside of states putting together their own protocols on things like recalls, packaging and labeling safety standards, quality assurance reviews, and testing. None of this is approved or sanctioned by the feds, like it oftentimes is for other industries. As such, the states are literally making up cannabis consumer safety as they go along; and products liability suits (and at least one wrongful death suit) have manifested over the years. See here for our various posts on these topics.
Cannabis testing, itself, has also been problematic in a variety of states where no gold standard exists for testing. It’s entirely up to state agencies regarding what, exactly, should be tested and in what amounts, in order to be considered a “passing” product. For example, if you remember, vitamin E acetate was one of the presumable culprits when consumers were experiencing significant health issues from ingesting illegal market cannabis oils through vapes. At the same time, California’s cannabis regulators didn’t mandate testing for additives/thickeners (like vitamin E acetate) for products manufactured and sold by state-licensed businesses. In addition, there have always been issues with certain standards of lab integrity/general competence: one lab will issue a passing result for a batch of cannabis while a second lab issues a failing result– both using the same testing methods under state laws and regulations.
CBD testing, packaging, and labeling is no consumer safety picnic either. It’s no secret that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) doesn’t sanction the consumption of CBD for humans and pets in food and beverages, and it continues to pursue the shutdown of CBD companies that make unsubstantiated medical claims about their CBD products in violation of the Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act. So, the FDA has been zero help regarding consumer safety around CBD (though they know that hundreds of thousands of consumers are using CBD on a routine basis in the U.S.). And if states opt to regulate CBD, they’re no shining model either on packaging, labeling, and safety content either (pretty similar to cannabis at large). Like cannabis, CBD is also a “buyer beware” situation.
All of that said, there may be some light at the end of the quality assurance tunnel. Finally, the feds are looking more seriously into product safety and quality for cannabis and CBD products– but it’s not the FTC taking the reins.
Back in July, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) launched the Cannabis Quality Assurance Program (CannaQAP). The title of the program is a little misleading right now: NIST isn’t really helping state-licensed cannabis labs test cannabis products (see more on that here). Instead, the program is dedicated to assisting labs testing hemp products (mainly hemp oils, for now) to ensure that the THC concentration doesn’t exceed .3% THC in line with the 2018 Farm Bill. NIST states that it is:
planning to conduct future exercises with ground hemp and possibly marijuana. Those exercises will involve measuring a larger number of compounds, including terpenes — the chemicals that give different strains of marijuana their distinct aromas — and compounds that people don’t want in their cannabis such as fungal toxins, pesticides and heavy metals. Future exercises may also include extracts, concentrates, distillates and edibles.
Chances are probably good that NIST will eventually help out state-licensed cannabis labs with their quality assurance testing protocol and measurements.
More recently, as initially reported by Marijuana Moment, the FDA is issuing an Request for Quote (RFQ) for a contractor to assess a multitude of CBD products for safety and quality over a year’s time, which will hopefully lead to some clarity and uniformity around future federal regulation of CBD. The reason for this move is that the FDA already sent a report to Congress last month (at its request per federal legislation) detailing the adulteration and mislabeling of CBD products that exist in the marketplace today for humans and pets (e.g. oils, tinctures, capsules, tablets, gummies, vape liquids, conventional foods, topicals, and pet treats and capsules).
One of the main problems found by FDA is that the claimed labeling content (for instance, regarding CBD versus THC ratios and other heavy metals and toxins) is consistently inaccurate when compared to test results. This obviously poses major problems for consumers. There are also issues where certain CBD products contain little or no labeling at all, which further leaves consumers in the dark.
The FDA report also detailed how the agency would eventually engage in more serious CBD product sample testing in two phases (near-term and long-term sampling). Hence, the current search for the contractor, which is the long-term sampling portion of this plan.
Specifically, the FDA stated in its report that the long-term sampling plan would entail:
[All CBD products being] analyzed for 11 cannabinoids, including a quantitative determination of total CBD, total THC, and the elements As, Cd, Hg, and Pb. The testing methods will be equivalent to those used in the near-term study. Additional analyses, including pesticides, residual solvents, and microbial testing will be performed on a
subset of products. The specific number and type of testing will be determined based on product type and the results from the near-term study. Product sampling and testing will be conducted by a third party and FDA expects this long-term study to be initiated in 2020.
It’s anyone’s guess at this point regarding who will win the RFQ with the FDA.
The NIST and the FDA may not be the heroes we wanted on the beginnings of meaningful federal participation around cannabis/hemp consumer safety, but they’re the heroes consumers may need in order to stay safe and informed (and to help states better refine their testing and packaging and labeling standards).
The data yielded by these two agencies over their studies and analyses will hopefully better guide states in this very sensitive area while the FTC remains on ice for consumer safety enforcement. So, stay tuned.
The post NIST and FDA May Be the Cannabis Quality Assurance Heroes We Need appeared first on Harris Bricken.
They may be cute, but deer will eat your growing weed plants. Here's how to prevent them and other critters from destroying your weed.
The post Do deer eat weed? And other pests to watch out for when growing cannabis appeared first on Leafly.
A worker making pre-rolls in Michigan decided to lick them closed. State regulators shut the whole operation down.
The post Hey, who pre-licked my pre-roll? A cautionary tale in the time of COVID-19 appeared first on Leafly.
Personally, Donald Trump does not care about cannabis. Don’t take my word for it, go to the source, Trump’s Twitter account. Use Twitter’s “Advanced Search” options to search for whether Trump has used certain words and phrases on Twitter. As of August 14, 2020, I could only find one tweet from @realDonaldTrump that actually references the cannabis plant:
.@BillMaher needs to cut back on the pot, and maybe he will stop making offers he can’t afford.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 17, 2013
I searched his account for uses of the following terms:
There were no mentions of marijuana, hemp, or cannabis. There were a few tweets where trump used the word “pot” and “weed” but in the context used, they had nothing to do with cannabis (e.g., “weed out”, “stir the pot”). The above dig at Bill Maher, from 2013, is the only reference in a Trump tweet and it was made 2 years before he declared he would run for President in the 2016 election.
Trump has retweeted twice regarding cannabis:
Since April, the @USCG and the @USNavy have stopped more than 94,000 pounds of cocaine and 9,200 pounds of marijuana from being smuggled into the U.S.https://t.co/nz3phwzZOk
— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) June 10, 2020
How do you explain a House Democratic Party so crazy that their new $3 trillion proposal has 68 references to Cannabis and only 52 references to jobs? Maybe Speaker Pelosi of San Francisco believes “California Dreamin” could become the new national anthem.
— Newt Gingrich (@newtgingrich) May 14, 2020
Since declaring his candidacy in 2015 Trump has tweeted a lot, according to Trump Archives, a site that tracks the Commander in Chief’s Twitter activity:
| Candidacy (June 16, 2015 – November 8, 2016) | 7,794 | 15.2 |
| Transition (November 9, 2016 – January 19, 2017) | 364 | 5.1 |
| Presidency, Year 1, first half (January 20, 2017 – July 19, 2017) | 1,027 | 5.7 |
| Presidency, Year 1, second half (July 20, 2017 – January 19, 2018) | 1,576 | 8.6 |
| Presidency, Year 2, first half (January 20, 2018 – July 19, 2018) | 1,472 | 8.1 |
| Presidency, Year 2, second half (July 20, 2018 – January 19, 2019) | 2,146 | 11.7 |
| Presidency, Year 3, first half (January 20, 2019 – July 19, 2019) | 2,814 | 15.6 |
| Presidency, Year 3, second half (July 20, 2019 – January 19, 2020) | 5,151 | 28.1 |
| Presidency, Year 4, first half (January 20, 2020 – July 19, 2020) | 6,014 | 33.2 |
Between the start of his term on January 20, 2017, and July 19, 2020 Trump has tweeted 20,200 times. He has shaped foreign and domestic policy through Twitter, as indicated in this report by the New York Times, or as Trump likes to tweet, the Failing New York Times. None of those tweets touch on cannabis and his only retweets that mention cannabis are negative, highlighting marijuana confiscated at the border and criticizing Democratic leaders for including marijuana provisions in legislation.
Trump has occasionally commented on marijuana but not in any definitive way. We summarized his views in September 2019, noting the lack of social media statements as well, in grading him, on pot policy. Here is our conclusion:
Grade: D+
Stance on marijuana: Donald Trump’s stance on marijuana is unclear. He has expressed support for medical marijuana as well as for allowing states to decide whether to legalize or not. As president, however, his rhetoric and actions have flip-flopped.
I would classify Trump’s stance on cannabis as indifference leaning to dislike, but do not let that fool you into thinking the status quo is safe. Trump has shown that his administration is no friend to marijuana. To understand this, let’s frame the issue of how federal law on marijuana would change as it relates to the presidency.
The executive branch has the power to execute the laws of the United States. In contrast, the judicial branch interprets those laws and the legislative branch creates them. Congress created the Controlled Substances Act in 1970. The Act gives authority to the U.S. Attorney General and the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) to add or remove a substance from a given schedule. The Attorney General and Secretary of DHHS are both cabinet positions, which means that they are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. The President then has the power to remove these cabinet members.
For the purpose of the Controlled Substances Act, the Attorney General delegates its power to the DEA and the DHHS delegates its power to the FDA. The President can also appoint the heads of the DEA and FDA.
These agencies, the Office of the Attorney General, DHHS, DEA and FDA are all integral parts of the legalization process. Trump has been president for nearly four years and although he hasn’t said much or tweeted anything about marijuana he has appointed some staunch opponents to these key positions.
Attorney General – Jeff Sessions absolutely hated marijuana and made numerous public statements to that effect. He hated marijuana so much that he once joked that he liked the KKK until learning they smoked marijuana. Sessions was incompetent and was unable to do much damage to the marijuana industry, but he did rescind the Cole Memo during his short time in office before being replaced by Bill Barr.
Barr is the opposite of Jeff Sessions when it comes to marijuana. He made few public statements and during his confirmation hearing, seemed to be reasonable regarding marijuana policy, though he did not endorse marijuana. He has done more damage than Sessions though, investigating marijuana businesses for what appear to be bogus allegations of antitrust violations.
HHS Secretary – Tom Price was appointed as the head of HHS before he was canned for using tax dollars to fund his vacations. Prior to that, he was an ardent opponent to cannabis legalization, voting against the Rohrabacher-Farr Amendments and voting against allowing VA doctors to recommend cannabis to veterans. Current Secretary Alex Azar has warned about the dangers of marijuana even stating that “there really is no such thing as medical marijuana.”
DEA Administrator – Rather than talk about one particular leader of the DEA (although Chuck Rosenberg would be a fun place to start), I’d rather focus on the fact that the current acting head of the DEA Timothy Shea asked for an expansion of the agency’s jurisdiction in response to the killing of George Floyd. Pretty much every head of the DEA has been bad on marijuana reform, but under the Trump administration, the DEA has become more dangerous for all Americans, regardless of marijuana use.
If you just look at Trump comments on marijuana is not that different than Joe Biden, who we gave a D on policy. We also graded Kamala Harris, giving her a B overall but she’s got a complicated record on cannabis as well. Honestly, complicated is putting it lightly and Biden is the architect of the tough no crime legislation of the 1990s but these two are clearly the better candidates on criminal justice reform. Plus, the Democratic hopefuls for Biden’s cabinet are likely to be much better on cannabis reform than anyone selected by Trump. I mean, imagine AG Elizabeth Warren at the helm of the Department of Justice. I know that the Democratic Party’s official platform for 2020 does not include cannabis legalization, which is a disappointment. But do not let this fool you, Joe Biden is a much better choice for President if you are only looking at cannabis as a benchmark. It’s not close. Trump is dangerous for America.
The post Where There’s Smoke There’s Fire: Donald Trump Is a Threat to Cannabis Legalization appeared first on Harris Bricken.
