Connect with us
[adrotate group="2"]

Uncategorized

Massachusetts House Approves Bill To Amend Cannabis Laws

Published

on


The Massachusetts House of Representatives overwhelmingly voted on Wednesday to approve a bill amending the state’s weed laws, including significant social equity investments and the addition of cannabis consumption cafes to the state’s roster of regulated pot businesses. Lawmakers in the House voted 153-2 to approve the bill, which is nearly identical to a measure passed by the Massachusetts Senate in April.

House Speaker Ron Mariano issued a statement quoted by the Boston Globe, saying the bill aims “to create a fair and successful cannabis industry, fostering equitable opportunities to those disproportionately impacted by the systemic racism of historic drug policy.”

The bill makes several changes to existing cannabis laws in Massachusetts, where voters approved a ballot measure to legalize cannabis for use by adults in 2016. Since then, recreational pot retailers in the state have sold more than $3 billion in weed products, according to a report from the Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission that was released the same day the bill was approved in the House.

Adam Fine, a partner with the cannabis law firm Vicente Sederberg, says that the “legislation marks the House of Representatives’ first significant movement on cannabis since adult-use legalization.”

“Components of the bill address some of the concerns that have been identified over the past five years, particularly around social equity, host community agreements and movement towards allowing social consumption sites,” Fine wrote in an email to High Times. “The proposal creates the Social Equity Trust fund for social equity operators and provides a mechanism for money to be raised to help applicants enter the cannabis space.”

New Investments in Social Equity

Under the bill, 20% of the pot taxes collected in the state will be dedicated to investments in cannabis social equity businesses. The share of revenue is higher than the 15% detailed in an earlier version of the bill and double the 10% included in the Senate bill.

The increased funding would be substantial. From July 2021 through April of this year, Massachusetts has collected $124.5 million in recreational cannabis excise taxes. Under the House version of the bill, that amount of revenue would equate to more than $25 million in funding for social equity cannabis businesses in the state.

Under the state’s current social equity program, only 23 of the state’s 253 licensed cannabis businesses are owned by entrepreneurs qualified for the economic empowerment and social equity programs administered by the Cannabis Control Commission. Shanel Lindsay, the co-founder of the advocacy group Equitable Opportunities Now, praised lawmakers in the House for the change and urged senators to retain the higher percentage in a compromise version of the bill.

“Without this funding, our equity goals are just hollow promises,” Lindsay said.

Both versions of the bill require local governments to consider social equity factors when issuing local permits. The House bill also simplifies the expungement process for past weed convictions and arrests by making more offenses eligible for relief. The legislation also directs judges to approve all eligible petitions for expungement, removing much of their discretion to deny requests without explanation.

“We mean it when we say our residents have the right to keep these records from following them around for life,” said state Representative Michael Day.

Massachusetts Bill Reforms Host Community Agreements

Another provision of the legislation would reform the contracts cannabis businesses sign with local governments to obtain local licensing approval known as host community agreements. Cannabis operators and applicants for licenses have argued that community impact fees included in such agreements by local governments exceed the cannabis industry’s negative effects on the community.

Both the Senate and House versions of the bill limit impact fees by requiring local governments to detail any negative impact and set commensurate fees. State regulators would have the authority to reject plans that require excessive payments.

“Without enforcement, we’ve seen some communities push the bounds further than allowed by law, this legislation will make local permitting straightforward and allow more social equity applicants to move through the local process,” said Fine.

The House version ends impact fees once a weed business has been open five years and gives the Cannabis Control Commission 45 days to review local agreements, while the Senate bill allows up to 120 days.

“The municipality literally has the upper hand in these negotiations, and many have used it to a fault,” said state Representative Daniel Donahue. He added that the legislation would help create a “legal, fair, and honest” cannabis industry in Massachusetts.

The Massachusetts Municipal Association of local governments opposed the change, saying the changes to impact fees were a way for cannabis operators to keep more profit for themselves at the expense of local communities.

“The key issues for cities and towns include making certain that the final version of legislation doesn’t interfere with existing host community agreements, and making sure that communities can collect adequate community impact fees going forward,” said Geoff Beckwith, the associate director of the group.

Beckwith added that reducing or eliminating the impact fees “could be a disincentive for additional communities to accept cannabis establishments.”

Massachusetts Cannabis Business Association president David O’Brien praised the changes to the state’s cannabis laws included in the legislation.

“By providing start-up capital, empowering the [cannabis commission] with proper oversight of greedy municipalities, and allowing cannabis operators to deduct normal business expenses,” O’Brien said, “entrepreneurs now will be able to pursue their dreams of starting a small business with fewer barriers in their way.”

Before the legislation can become law, a conference committee will have to rectify the differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill. Both bodies would then have to vote in favor of a final bill before sending it to Governor Charlie Baker for approval.



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Uncategorized

New Washington, D.C. Policy Lets Adults ‘Self-Certify’ for Medical Cannabis

Published

on


City lawmakers in Washington, D.C. adopted an emergency ordinance on Tuesday designed to ease access to the medical cannabis program in the nation’s capital by allowing all adults to “self-certify” their eligibility to use medicinal pot. Under the proposal, adults 21 and older would no longer be required to submit a recommendation to use medicinal pot from a health care provider when they apply for a medical cannabis identification card.

Supporters of the measure maintain that the bill will make it simpler for patients to gain access to medical cannabis, particularly for those who have difficulty seeing a doctor. Out of thousands of physicians practicing medicine in Washington, D.C., only 620 are registered to issue medical pot recommendations. In January, the city council passed a similar measure that allowed adults 65 and older to self-certify for medical cannabis card eligibility, but that ordinance expired on May 1.

“This self-certification is urgently needed for consumers and dispensaries alike,” said Councilmember Janeese Lewis George, as quoted by the DCist. “Expanding our patient base is a necessary first step to putting them on an equal playing field.”

Washington, D.C. Dispensaries Face Competition From Illicit Businesses

The emergency ordinance passed on Tuesday was introduced by Councilmembers Kenyan McDuffie and Mary Cheh. Proponents of the bill also hope that it will help regulated medical dispensaries compete with the illicit cannabis economy.

“Due to the lower barriers to access in the gray market, a significant number of medical marijuana patients have shifted from purchasing their medical marijuana from legal medical dispensaries to the illicit gray market, creating a significant risk to the long-term viability of the District’s legal medical marijuana industry,” McDuffie and Cheh said in a statement accompanying the emergency bill. “If this trend continues, it is possible that gray market sales could wipe out the District’s legal marijuana dispensaries.

Cheh and McDuffie went on to state that given the “benefits that regulated and safe legal dispensaries provide to medical marijuana users in the District, it is vital that the industry survive until the District can stand up a regulated recreational market and transition toward full regulation of recreational marijuana products.”

The council members noted that Washington, D.C.’s permitted medical marijuana dispensaries face stiff competition from the city’s gray market for cannabis, which takes advantage of recreational cannabis decriminalization loopholes to operate with virtual impunity. One popular scheme features businesses who sell cheap merchandise at hyper-inflated prices and include what is ostensibly a gift of cannabis with the purchase.

“Savvy business owners have pushed the legal limits on the gifting industry,” McDuffie said ahead of the vote. “I’ve had medical dispensaries that have reached out to me and my staff and say that if we don’t pass this measure, it could put their businesses into jeopardy.”

Although possession of cannabis has been legalized since the passage of a 2014 ballot measure, the federal government has blocked implementation of the law that would allow for the opening of recreational pot retailers. At Tuesday’s meeting, Council Chairman Phil Mendelson said that he would still like to see additional legislation that targets Washington D.C.’s cannabis gifting shops, noting that the business will be vital infrastructure for a potential legalized adult-use cannabis market.

“It’s not an equal playing field and will never be as long as there are illegal cannabis gifting shops,” he said. “As long as there are these businesses, the legal industry won’t be there to step in [when legalization happens].”

The city council passed the ordinance by a unanimous vote at its meeting on Tuesday. The bill is now headed to the office of Mayor Muriel Bowser for her consideration. In a letter sent to the council on Tuesday, Bowser said that she is in favor of the legislation, according to media reports.



Source link

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

The impact of cannabis use on COPD and COVID-19

Published

on


Tobacco use is associated with reduced air flow rate and lung volume; however, this association is not observed with cannabis use. In fact, one 2012 study found no association to exist between occasional and minimal cumulative cannabis usage and poor pulmonary function.

To determine the different effects of cannabis and/or tobacco, it is crucial to know the quantity of how much was smoked. Those who frequently use tobacco will typically smoke between ten and twenty cigarettes each day, whereas the average cannabis user will smoke two to three times per month.

Many people first try cannabis in their late teens or early twenties, with some continuing to use cannabis for several years at modest doses. Since heavy cannabis users were comparatively uncommon in the study population, accurate estimates of the consequences of excessive usage were not available in the aforementioned 2012 study, despite the fact that heavy exposure to cannabis may harm the lungs.

In a recent Chronic Diseases and Translational Medicine study, researchers evaluated the effects of smoking cannabis on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) test positivity, as well as potential risk factors associated with cannabis-induced lung damage and COVID-19.

About the study

Approximately 500,000 men and women participated in the United Kingdom Biobank (UKB), which is a sizable prospective observational study that was conducted between 2006 and 2010. UKB participants were selected from 22 centers throughout England, Wales, and Scotland and are still being longitudinally monitored to record any subsequent health occurrences.

Study participants were asked several questions upon their enrolment in the UKB. For example, participants were asked whether a doctor had ever informed them that they have a certain health condition, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

The subjects were then asked whether they had consumed cannabis. If the response was “yes,” cannabis usage was entered in the UKB data field. The participants were also asked at what age they had last consumed cannabis.

Subsequently, study participants were asked the frequency to which they used cannabis. The available response options included less than once a month, once a month or more, but not every week, once a week or more, but not every day, and once a day.

The researchers also incorporated COVID-19 laboratory-confirmed cases that were reported between March 16, 2020, to April 26, 2020, with the UKB data. A positive test result was regarded as a reliable indicator of severe COVID-19 during this time, as the testing of older groups was primarily restricted to individuals who were hospitalized as a result of their infection.

Study findings

The mean age of the study participants was about 57 years old. Taken together, 54% of the study participants were women, whereas the remaining 46% were men.

Increased cannabis use was associated with an increased incidence of both COPD and COVID-19 positivity. Packs-years smoking was also found to correlate with COVID-19 incidence.

Implications

In general, smoking tobacco increases an individual’s risk of lung infections like COVID-19. Although the data is limited in establishing an association between the smoking of cannabis and its effects on the lungs, previous research has shown that cannabis smoke causes respiratory symptoms such as increased cough, sputum, and hyperinflation, all of which are also observed in tobacco smokers.

In the current study, both smoking packs of cigarettes and cannabis had significant effects on the likelihood of testing positive for COVID-19. This observation insinuates that although cannabis had not been used for at least ten years, its ability to cause damage to the lungs is additive.

Although it is challenging to correctly predict and separate the consequences of cannabis usage from those associated with smoking cigarettes, smoking cannabis can nevertheless cause significant harm to the lungs.

With prolonged cannabis use, significant lung problems can develop, such as chronic bronchitis symptoms. Cannabis use has also been linked to weakened immune systems and pneumonia.

Excessive cannabis use can also worsen COVID-19 outcomes and restrict the airways. However, cannabis use may reduce lung inflammation and inhibit viral replication in COVID-19 patients, which may improve certain prognoses.

Study limitations

There are several notable weaknesses of the current study. For example, cannabis usage was only linked to positive COVID-19 test results. Furthermore, the frequency of cannabis usage and its ability to alter an individual’s susceptibility to COVID-19 was not explored.

The high prevalence of Caucasian participants may have also impacted the current findings. Future studies that incorporate more independent variables in the logistic regression would be beneficial.

Source: News-Medical.net

Image: Pexels



Source link

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Viridis Laboratories Continues to Fight for Safety of Michigan Cannabis Consumers

Published

on


Viridis Chief Operations Officer and Founder Todd W. Welch sent an email on June 17 with a statement addressing the company’s values and recent information that has come to light regarding the CRA.

“These CRA allegations against Viridis are from last August and continue to be baseless, meritless and totally detached from science, facts and data,” said the statement. “We intend to defend our business against these false claims during the court process and show the vindictive and retaliatory nature of the CRA’s actions which are clearly designed to cause maximum disruption and damage.”

“Court-ordered proficiency test results that Viridis is in possession of, which the CRA had been withholding, will directly contradict these findings, and we’re confident the truth will prevail when all facts come to light,” the statement continued. “We hope these legal proceedings will pave the way for more transparency, accountability, and reforms at the CRA. Our hope is that the CRA can one day fulfill its true mission of promoting patient and product safety instead of unfairly targeting Michigan businesses trying to grow, compete and create jobs.”

The email also shared that nearly all of the company’s customers have returned, with an added 63 new customers. The company supports testing for approximately 62% of the state’s flower.

The CRA (formerly called the MRA, or Marijuana Regulatory Agency, as of April 2022) issued a recall for products tested by Viridis Laboratories and Viridis North in November 2021, with claims that Viridis products contained “inaccurate and/or reliable results,” for products analyzed within the range of August 10 and November 16, 2021. This resulted in the recall of an estimated $229 million in product value.

The MRA claimed that Viridis’ methods of testing were “unreliable” and “inaccurate,” which Viridis responded to by filing a Court of Claims lawsuit against the MRA on November 23.

By December 3, the court ruled that the CRA must release half of the accused products, which were tested by Viridis North, LLC. Viridis Attorney Kevin Blair praised the court decision, even if “the entire recall was completely without merit.” “This ill-advised recall has caused irreparable harm not only to Viridis but to growers, retailers and consumers throughout the state. The MRA needs to be held fully accountable for violating state law, ignoring the advice of respected national experts and causing mass disruption to the Michigan cannabis industry,” he said in a press release.

Months later in February 2022, more news came forward regarding the CRA’s conduct. Judge Thomas Cameron released a court opinion that “the issuance of the recall against the Bay City facility was, on the Court’s review of the record, arbitrary and without basis.”

Shortly after this, it was revealed that CRA had instructed its agents not to seize illegal cannabis found at CRA-licensed facilities. New evidence from CRA depositions shared troubling truths about the inner workings of the MRA when it comes to following its own policies.

In March, Senator Aric Nesbitt questioned the CRA and its management. “I think it was poorly communicated to your licensees and it didn’t seem like you had thought through the impact on the wider marketplace before acting on the recall, and I thought it was very poorly done and very clumsy in the implementation of the recall,” Nesbitt said at a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Licensing and Regulatory Affairs/Insurance and Financial Services.

Most recently in May, the CRA filed formal complaints about the accuracy of Viridis’s THC test results. According to Viridis CEO Greg Michaud, described that allegations from the CRA “continue to be baseless, meritless and totally detached from science, facts and data.”

Furthermore, Michaud shared that the CRA’s Inter-Laboratory Proficiency Test, which was obtained via a court order, reveals some shocking finds about other lab testing facilities in Michigan. The test results are not yet public, but Welch’s email suggests that more news will be announced soon.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending