DEAN BECKER (00:04):
Broadcasting on the drug truth and network. This is cultural baggage, really fundamentally and American [inaudible]. My name is Dean Becker. I don't condone or encourage the use of any drugs, legal or illegal. I report the unvarnished truth about the pharmaceutical banking to prison and judicial nightmare that feeds on eternal drug war.

DEAN BECKER (00:38):
All right. To those who are part of my, uh, Oregon highs efforts. I want to thank you for joining us these past Sundays. I hope you're able to talk to some of your friends and associates. So many of you have lost your children to these contaminated drugs, these synthetic drugs, these, uh, counterfeit drugs that, uh, the cartels are selling. Now, thank you for joining us on this edition of cultural baggage. I think this is a very important show. Please put your ears on, you know, each week I try to, uh, focus on the important parts of, uh, the drug war, the good, the bad, and I guess, especially the ugly, but this week we've got something of great beauty to talk about something of a great importance, uh, that looks good for the future. And here to talk about it is one of the gentlemen who, uh, was the ramrod who, uh, stayed behind this, who stuck with this and, uh, committed many a years of his life to bringing this about, you probably heard about it. The United nations and the world health organization have changed their perspectives on medical marijuana. And the gentleman I'm talking about the one who helped to ramrod this, uh, this change, uh, is one Michael krauts and he's with us now. Hey, Michael, how you doing?

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (02:02):
I'm doing okay, man. Great to be here, Dean.

DEAN BECKER (02:05):
Okay. Now, Michael, the, um, the truth is this, uh, situation at the UN okay. United nations, but it does have worldwide implications. Let's talk about what it means. Uh, give us the cliff notes. What happened, uh, with this new perspective?

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (02:25):
Well, first of all, not that ramrod isn't really accurate because it is, we had to kinda, uh, move this process along at a few times over the, over the last five years that we've been working on it. Uh, but I like to think of myself as the architect, rather than the ramrod, just from my perspective, we've got quite a team. So, uh, yeah, I just want to credit where credit's due, uh, our little team of probably five or six at the very core expanding out to at one point or another, as many as 200 over the last five years. So, and we draw from basically the best of the best throughout the entire cannabis and hemp movement worldwide, and, uh, also bringing in the industry as stakeholders as well. So, uh, we work and coordinate as closely as we can with government. We've gotten a lot of help.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (03:16):
Uh, last few weeks from Switzerland who is on the executive board of the United nations drug control board, uh, drug control commission there and be in Austria. And, uh, we're working very hard for transparency and sort of fighting against a powerful players like Russia, who are doing the opposite and a whole lot of help from Jamaica who I think gave one of the best presentations on the floor of the United nations, uh, in support of the world health organization recommendations before the vote, you know, and, uh, I think that, um, it's really important to understand that this is a change in international law. This is, you know, it's funny the opposition to this, uh, we're just literally going crazy for the last, uh, I don't know, forever right up till the vote, uh, led by Russia, uh, Nigeria, uh, you know, the many countries that were just adamantly opposed to marijuana, they, they weren't nuanced, they didn't have any opposition or any particular recommendation of the, who they were just anti-marijuana and wanted everybody to know that they were and, and, uh, and, and why, uh, and they, before the vote were saying, don't do this, don't pass this recommendation.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (04:35):
It's going to be legalization. It's going to be terrible. It's going to do this. It's going to do that. And then the minute it passed, you got Kevin, Sabet saying, Oh, this is just symbolic. It really doesn't have any it sure. Acknowledges cannabis has medical value at the worldwide level and changes that to enshrine it actually an international law, but it's about, that's just symbolic. He says, it's just, it's funny. It's just absolutely funny. So the nutshell of it, sort of the cliff note version is this, uh, and you probably won't get this from very many other people because it's a long process. It started in 2009, actually. And in 2009, 11 years ago, the country of Japan and Azerbaijan put forth a resolution inside the United nations drug program. That commission on narcotic drugs that I talked about in Vienna, Austria, there delegated the day-to-day authority of overseeing this drug treaty from the 186 countries that actually signed the treaty.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (05:32):
And those 53 countries run the show. It's not like there's some, you know, a little group that runs everything and tells it no 53 countries are delegated that authority. They take it seriously, and they all have to work in unison and consensus to get things done. Except if the world health organization recommends the change of, uh, of a place, uh, in, within the schedules for a drug or to add, or to take out a drug to the world health organization products within the men program, it only requires a simple majority vote, not a consensus vote. So back to 2009 Japan and Azerbaijan put in the seed resolution to try to actually outlaw cannabis seeds, seeds are generally seen as hemp and hemp is exempt under the industrial use, uh, exemption of the treaty, hemp, hemp seeds, all the hemp products CBD, all the hemp products are exempt, uh, as a, uh, exempted industrial application.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (06:28):
And it's important to note that the treaty only applies to medical use and the research of medical use it doesn't apply to nonmedical use it, doesn't apply to our industries that we use, uh, drugs and substances for. So anyway, back to 2009, these guys thought that they were going to basically do something simple, I guess, but it's not simple at all. If you're going to try to change the exemption really adds seeds that have been seen as exempt since the beginning of the treaty. I think it was a much bigger thing they were asking for than they thought. And the way that got interpreted was because it was looking at something that wasn't even under control. It was interpreted as a very broad request to the world health organization to do a super wide wide scope review of cannabis one wide enough where they'd even look at seeds. And oddly enough, that ironically at the end of the day, there was nothing about seeds, essentially in the final, in the final documentation. And we, we, we didn't, we didn't make it harsher. We made it, uh, went the other way. And there was nothing about seeds in the end. So the, it took like six years before that Request, which

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (07:40):
Gained momentum and gained other sponsors and supporters like a countries. And even the international narcotics control board signed onto this request to the world health organization to do this review. And it wasn't finally started until five years ago. And then the world health organization started that review. And we worked there inside of the world health organization, which is separate over in Geneva, Switzerland for three full years, working on these recommendations, making sure that their expert committee at the world health organization had all the science that we were looking at, had heard from the patient's perspective and had heard from our cannabis industry's perspective. We just tried to, you know, we had, I guess, a certain amount of faith that if they were able to look at everything we were looking at that they would come at a reasonable outcome. We didn't feel like we needed to dictate the outcome. We just needed to make sure that they were privy to everything and that they were able to make a fair assessment. Now that's important because do you know the name birth on the draws professor mudras drug? Does that ring a bell to you?

DEAN BECKER (08:42):
Yeah. I don't remember the details, but I don't think I like her.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (08:47):
Well, if you think Kevin Sabet is a really good advocate against marijuana, you know, very effective can really come up with the great talking points and has great credentials and everything being a PhD and former speech writer for the drugs and everything. Well, she blows him away. She's a professor of neuropsychometry at Harvard and she's absolutely against marijuana. As a matter of fact, she's vehemently opposed to any plant medicine. She's made it very clear that, uh, plants will never be medicine. She understands that cannabinoids do all the things that they do. And she knows about the cannabinoid receptor system at the end of the day, she'll say, Oh, but cannabis, isn't a medicine because it's a plant and that's such a horrible negative bias. Um, so anyway, we actually, at the very beginning of that five years ago, that was the first thing we did was we brought it to the attention of the world health organization that this professor from Harvard actually was very biased.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (09:45):
And we used her record against her to show them, uh, her, her position, which was already known without any evidence having been presented. So she was fired. She was taken off the committee. And because of that, I think we were able to have a clean start. There was a moment there where the world health organization really didn't want to do a review. They were going to just do an update and we actually pressured them. That's why that ramrod actually is pretty, pretty accurate because at one point we did raise quite a stir inside of the world. Health organization had a sign on letter with very powerful people and did a protest within the who that was successful and actually got them to do a full-on critical review, critical review of being that process that can actually produce this outcome of recommendations for change in the treaty.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (10:33):
And sure enough, lo and behold, they produce good recommendations. Uh, as we had faith, they would, those recommendations were, I think, somewhat purposefully delayed in their delivery to the UN, which delayed the process and, and allow the UN to easily delay the vote for a year. That one year delay allowed for some fantastic hearings in the, in the UN what I would call cannabis summits, where the world health organization came to the UN and, and basically taught a college class at the PhD level on cannabis, cannabinoids, cannabis medicine, and traditional medicine, everything to the, to the countries, to the member States. It was phenomenal, several hearings like that. And at the end of the day, they weren't ready to vote on it again, they delayed again from last December and finally voted on it this December. So yeah, so, uh, the world health organization recommended six recommendations, but one is of really particular interest to us. And that's the one that won the other ones were mostly what you might call housekeeping. Um, and really of less significance now, just to answer, Kevin said that, okay, there's two significant schedules in the treaty that cannabis was placed in schedule one slash four Schedule. One is quite literally where every drug

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (11:54):
Goes, that's under control. And then it's either one slash two or one slash three or one slash four, one slash two would be a little bit less dangerous than one, one slash three would be drugs that in some cases can be produced like a, let's say a call coding cough syrup, for example, where you can even have over the counter sales and, and, uh, uh, no prescription sales, that's that one slash three. And then one slash four, just to confuse everybody switches way over the other direction. One slash four slash four is essentially the prohibition schedule. And that's what we remove cannabis was removed from that slash four, leaving it in just one. Now the world health organization actually recommended it to go into one slash three that low, low category where it would give a wide variety of options to countries where they could have, you know, very strict control all the way down to almost no control, but they didn't go for that.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (12:49):
The countries didn't opt for that, they only took it out of schedule four, took it out of the prohibition schedule. It recognizes cannabis, medical value, and basically throws it in with just general purpose drugs, uh, that, uh, may produce, uh, abuse potential, which is just everything, you know, and like I said, it's, it's the general purpose category of the treaty. It's where if you look at it this way, and this is another really interesting talking point that the UN is using to say that we haven't changed the level of control of cannabis. And that's a very clever way to put it. It's very accurate. All the control mechanisms are in schedule one. That's where the paperwork is that countries have to fill out the quotas and all this stuff scheduled. Four was quite literally the prohibition schedule is the schedule slash four said that we don't know much about it. It's extremely dangerous. You better treat it as only a research drug. And now that that's gone, it should be treated like any other prescription drug, essentially leaving a wider variety of options, hopefully to our executive branch, as far as where we should be able to schedule it. And this is a change in international law. That's, that's not a hallmark card. That's not, you know, just a symbolic move or sending a message, although it's all those as well.

DEAN BECKER (14:08):
Mike, if I may interject a couple of thoughts here, uh, it sounds to me like, um, the, the, the process being drawn out allowed more fact to be presented, to be absorbed, to be taught in, in certain instances, as you indicated. And the truth is, uh, is beginning to win out, I guess, is the best way to put this, uh, the talk of schedule one versus schedule one dash four and all of this, it doesn't correspond. It's all. It seems almost exactly opposite to the, uh, us, uh, the controlled substance act, one being heroin and cannabis, uh, up to this point. Uh, but, uh, the point is it's now going to give politicians the ability to say the United nations, the world health organizations have investigated this and determined. It's not as dangerous as was once believed to be true, which will enable those politicians to maybe move more progressively now towards legalization and actual control. Right?

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (15:15):
It's more than that because you know, this is a little bit of law that I've dug into that seems to sort of escape the attention of our cannabis movement. Before I say anything about it, I'll, I'll give a plug to Carl Olsen. Have you talked to Carl Olson yet about what he's doing in Iowa? Because I definitely recommend you do that. He is found now when the DEA says that, or the judge that is ruling over a case where we've been fighting the DEA over the schedule of cannabis, and the judge said, you haven't exhausted all your administrative remedies. One of them is what Carlson is doing right now, which is something no activist has ever done. And it's just a state asking for an exemption under the claw and the controlled substances act connected to diversion. It's a different set of code, different place someplace we've never worked.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (16:08):
And he's brought it up to the attention of all the different States that have legalized and used medical cannabis access laws. And I was the very first one ever put in a petition for that. That's just amazing at this late date, that, that, but anyway, I just wanted to give that as a side note to lead into what I've been looking at, which is another section of the controlled substances act, which I'll call the treaty clause, what the treaty clause says in a nutshell, and it's only like a small paragraph. It says pursuant to our treaty obligations, the attorney general shall place drugs in the schedule appropriate based on those treaty obligations, completely superseding the entire scheduling consideration of the previous section. And that previous section is the section of code that we've been fighting in for decades over this rescheduling petition of normal and all that stuff.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (17:01):
That whole section of code is superseded by the treaty clause. In other words, right now, right now in the United States, you know, law and the controlled substances act is embedded this sort of secret weapon or the Anslinger ERs that would prevent us from moving any drug anywhere. If it wasn't agreed to by the treaty. And since we haven't changed our national law, since we haven't changed that law, it's still there. It prevents us. And I want to make that clear. It's not the treaty that's preventing us. It's our own federal law that would be preventing us from, uh, moving away from the treaty. So as long as we haven't changed that law, we haven't passed the Moore act for example, and had it signed into law or anything like that. We're where we are right now is hinged at the hip to that treaty. So what that means is a change in international law will automatically trigger a process within our government of reassessment.

DEAN BECKER (17:59):
Now, Mike, uh, you, you underscore what I've been dabbling in talking about a couple of, um, the passage shows and that is, it was Anslinger and they're following him some compatriots that forced the United nations and indicating we might stop funding them, uh, through our government grants. We do each year to promote democracy around the world. If you don't have a drug war, you ain't getting any money. And, and that, that worked for decades. That's what propelled us forward. That's what gave us this worldwide drug war. Am I right? Yeah.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (18:34):
I would agree with you. But what I'm saying is that that's part of our responsibility as to why we shouldn't just legalize at the federal level, in the United States with a disregard for the treaty. We should have an eye on how we're going to change the treaty as well. How are we going to address the, the change that we're going to have to promote at the international level to reduce and reverse the damage that we've done to the world with the war on drugs? What you just said is so important because we actually, you know, it's not like we're just backing out of a tree being who cares. No, we were the ones promoting that treaty. We were the ones defending that treaty. We were the ones in forcing that treaty, especially in forcing the, the most important one. And when you just back out, can you imagine what the rest of the world would do and say, and think if after forcing this down their throat and, and shoving them into a corner with a struggle war for decades, we just back off, but there's another facet to this and that's the economic facet.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (19:35):
If you just pull out of the treaty, you're also pulling out all the economic agreements associated with it. And that's, you know, for our cannabis industry would be a huge, you know, billion dollar mistake. I'm sure

DEAN BECKER (19:47):
It was us that, that led this whole effort. We are the, the, the, uh, the Ram rods drug war, I guess, right?
MICHAEL KRAWITZ (19:55):
Yeah. Uh, in the architects,

DEAN BECKER (20:00):
Uh, and, uh, folks, uh, once again, we're speaking with Mr. Michael crowds, he's a longtime friend, and I'm thinking the first time I met you was in Houston. You came as part of that original journey for justice. With Kevin, [inaudible] recently deceased a mentor and a we've known each other now for over 20 years, um, through the, through this work. And, and Mike has been a guest, uh, I was looking dozens of times on my shows over the decades, and I want to thank you for that, but I want to back up just a little bit to, um, w we, we have so much concern for our veterans these days, we're losing so many to suicides now. Uh, so many of them just get boxed in, or, you know, the PTSD gets to them somehow, whatever the, the horrors of war catch up to them, we, we have found that the use of cannabis helps them to diminish their use of opioids and other prescription pills. It helps them to maybe gain a little more control of their life and helps diminish that number of suicides. And it was you and your efforts that helped bring about a new perspective for our veterans administration as well. Tell us a little bit about that, please, Michael.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (21:12):
Well, sure. That was actually going way back, uh, going into the early nineties for me, I started working inside the VA, uh, on something. It was, I guess, the mid nineties, it was after the, uh, proposition two 15 in 1996 that we, we learned that cannabis was really effectively helping to lower the amount of pain pills people were using. And that was one of the things we learned right off the bat. Uh, I learned that myself as a patient, but the data and information that we were getting from California showed that that was actually a, a big population. It wasn't just a little population of patients that, that affected and, uh, um, you know, based on that, and based on what I was learning at that time, working inside the drug policy reform movement at that, at that time, it was more like a, uh, classic, uh, apprenticeship.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (22:05):
And you learned all these different disciplines. It wasn't just Canada's, you, you want to learn in harm reduction and you know, all these different things. And, and from that more global perspective, I realized that this, this, you could look at it almost like two Frank trains. One was afraid train, um, more and more patients that were going to be using cannabis. And when cannabis was applied as an adjunct therapy, there would be getting better results with less pain pills, but there was also another freight train of the drug war heading their way and the drug war, what that meant was more and more pressure on the, on the, on the doctors themselves to police their, their patients, to weed out, no pun intended and weed out the marijuana users out of their, out of their clinic. And, you know, they use drug testing for that principally, but that drug testing was connected to this quasi agreement called a pain contract that many doctors were using.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (22:59):
And the emergence of that quasi contract, that pain contract, which was nothing more than a coercive document, they would make you sign otherwise they would take away your treatment. It was unbelievable. I mean, the whole thing is, is mind mind-bending and looking at those two freight trains, that's where I put my, my, my marker on. I tried to figure out how to prevent them from hitting. And I thought it would be too difficult out in the outside world to go after doctors because they have freedom in the outside world. I thought inside the VA, well, there's a place where they have to follow constitutional rules, right? That was my thinking, well, I was wrong. It wasn't, it wasn't how it worked at all. But what I did learn inside the VA system as I was working my way through the system on that issue was that ethics worked ethics.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (23:45):
It's unethical, unethical to take away someone's treatment, any medical treatment as a punishment, flat out, always unethical to take away someone's treatment. As a punishment, you go to prison, you still get your medicine. Even if you go to prison as a drug viewer, you still get your medicine it's unethical, and therefore outside the standards of medical care. Cause remember to get your medical license, you have to take an oath to say that you're going to act ethically. So it's outside of the standards of medical care to take away someone's med medicine and treatment. So my work inside the VA connected with another veteran outside the VA in Kalamazoo, Michigan, around 2010 and our work combined to create the first ever VA marijuana medical marijuana policy to allow veterans to be able to use the marijuana under state programs and not face some sort of repercussion, no punishment in the VA system.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (24:37):
That is the first and only place we've gotten that kind of protection anywhere in the United States, inside or outside the VA, really all the medical boards and the board of medical, you know, doctors and everything. And each state should be actually adopting that protection for patients that you should never be punished. I mean, that should be a standard protection, but yet we only were able to really do it in the VA. But the reason why I'm saying this this way is because I want you to understand that that wasn't a veterans only thing that was a place that we staked out to work to try to prove a point and to create a new sort of way of going the other way to counter that wave. That was really coming. That was really preventing patients from being able to use it as an adjunct. And I think if you think about it since 2010, when that VA policy came out, we've kind of reversed that time. And there is less and less, you know, re resistance from patients using cannabis as an adjunct. And of course, we've had a lot of data that supported our position since then. And you know, that, you know, showing that we use less pain bill showing less overdose rates and stuff. Yeah. But anyway, that VA policy was passed in 2010. It was updated in 2011 and again, in 2017. And it's very much active today.

DEAN BECKER (25:51):
Well, Mike, the, the, the, uh, the ripples, the ramifications, the, the changes that I think are forthcoming. We just, this week had a vote in the United States house to, uh, the Moore act, which, uh, what it was a good step, a good indication of progress is, is coming. I'm not so sure what the Senate will ever do, but the point, I guess, I'm wanting to get to is that you out there, dear listeners, we're speaking here with Mr. Michael crowds. And as these changes come about, as these ripples go across the pond of society, however you want to say it, this man has helped to make those changes. This man deserves a lot of credit. And for that, I applaud you, Mr. Michael Krauss, there a website folks could learn more about the work you're doing.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (26:46):
Absolutely. These days. We are really leaning on Facebook, a lot for communications, uh, veterans for medical cannabis access on Facebook. Also the veterans action council on Facebook, but you could also Google us veterans for medical marijuana, access veterans for medical cannabis access, and, uh, feel free to contact us if you have any problems with the VA, uh, accessing your treatment and coordinating that with use of cannabis,

DEAN BECKER (27:12):
Michael crouch. Thank you, sir.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ (27:14):
Thank you. Thanks for having me, Dean, anytime.

DEAN BECKER (27:16):
It's time to play name that drug by its side effects, Reyes syndrome and disruptive effects on the heart and blood flow in newborn infants, severe constipation, diabetes, dysentery. He will feel your kidney disease, gout, upset, stomach and ulcers. Time's up. The answer from the manufacturer

DEAN BECKER (27:44):
Embrace prohibition is to embrace insanity. It is to embrace barbarity. It is to embrace hysteria. It is to embrace a lie. Prohibition is a fabrication, a Mirage, or as they say in the DEA, it's like mowing the lawn or taking out the garbage prohibition. What is the benefit for you or me? Our families, our neighborhood, our city, our state, our nation. What is the benefit for the world in closing? I want to thank Michael crowds. I want to thank you for tuning in to this edition of cultural baggage. And I want to remind you that because of prohibition, you don't know what's in that bag. Please be careful

DEAN BECKER (28:33):
To the drug truth network listeners around the world. This is Dean Becker for cultural baggage and the unvarnished truth, cultural baggage production Drug Truth radio network archives are permanently stored at the James A. Baker, the third Institute for public policy. And we are all still tap dancing on the edge of an abyss.

TRANSCRIPT

CENTURY OF LIES

DECEMBER 5, 2018

DEAN BECKER: The failure of drug war is glaringly obvious to judges, cops, wardens, prosecutors, and millions more now calling for decriminalization, legalization, the end of prohibition. Let us investigate the Century Of Lies.

DOUG MCVAY: Hello, and welcome to Century of Lies. I'm your host Doug McVay, editor of DrugWarFacts.org.

Well, the other day I was thinking about what to have on this week's show, when I got a phone call from my friend Michael Krawitz, from Veterans for Medical Cannabis Access. He's over in Vienna, Austria, preparing for a conference, well, a few conferences actually.

The Commission on Narcotic Drugs has its reconvened Sixty-First Session, that runs December Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh, then there's also the International Cannabis Policy Conference, which goes on December Seventh, Eighth, and Ninth.

Michael is over there in Vienna, he's one of the organizers [sic: of the ICPC], and he called and so I set up to do an immediate interview. He also had a colleague who's one of the other organizers. Here's that phone call.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ: Okeh, so, this is Michael Krawitz speaking, executive director of Veterans for Medical Cannabis Access and a senior consultant for FAAAT, the Foundation for Alternatives to Addiction Treatment Therapy Think & Do Tank [sic: For Alternative Approaches to Addiction, Think & do tank]. And with great pleasure, I can introduce my colleague, Farid, who willl introduce himself.

FARID GHEHIOUECHE: Hello, my name is Farid Ghehioueche. Nice to talk to you, Doug, and, so, about this conference.

DOUG MCVAY: Oh, Farid!

FARID GHEHIOUECHE: Yes.

DOUG MCVAY: Oh, hey, man, how's it going? It's good to hear your voice. Very long time, man, very long time, been a while.

FARID GHEHIOUECHE: Yes, so, actually, I'm part of FAAAT, for sure, and I'm coordinator of this big conference in Vienna, the International Cannabis Policy Conference. But, I'm also part of the movement in France, I was former an organizer at the center of the Million Marijuana March, and also met you during ENCOD activities.

And so I have different caps, but now actually I'm in Vienna, just mostly to follow up what is going on at the UN level, I mean, regarding the decision that the Commission on Narcotic Drugs will have to take next year, and mostly to follow up the process ongoing at the WHO regarding the cannabis plant.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ: Where do you want to go from here, Doug?

DOUG MCVAY: Well, let's go, let's just, quick background. The World Health Organization has been undertaking a critical review of cannabis and also some cannabinoids, and also some synthetic cannabinoids, for that matter.

They met -- the Forty-First Meeting of the Expert Committee on Drugs and Drug Dependence just finished up recently. That was where they were to be discussing these. They have a draft report that's out. No recommendations yet out, but those will be forwarded to the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, and sometime they're supposed to be -- they might, at least, the CND might be taking a vote on whether to change the scheduling of cannabis.

Do I have that right? And could you -- yeah, do I have any of that right?

MICHAEL KRAWITZ: Absolutely. So what we'll do, I'll go ahead and kind of fill you in on the World Health Organization situation, and then Farid can follow up and talk about this conference that we're going to have, and how it ties in with sustainability and the Sustainable Development Goals at the UN, and talk a little bit more about the process at the Commission on Narcotic Drugs.

DOUG MCVAY: Perfect.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ: But indeed, you have it absolutely right. I would add that this is the first time that cannabis has ever been evaluated to see if its placement is correct since it was put in the treaty in 1961.

And in 1961, if you can imagine, the information that that was based on was already antique, in the system, from the 1930s, and even the 1920s, and at the very latest the 1950s, and that was input from police essentially.

So, the treaty is not based on evidence, and it's supposed to be, actually. And the World Health Organization is tasked with that evidence collection, but very specifically it's written in the treaty that the World Health Organization makes recommendations, up or down, for substances that may be subject or of interest for subject to control under the international drug control treaties.

So, cannabis being scheduled the same as heroin, essentially, in the treaty, there's nowhere to go but down, that any real recommendation from the World Health Organization, and they've given us very good indication that there will be a real recommendation from the World Health Organization on this.

I mean, a real recommendation would be substantial, even just the most modest change would be substantial. So, this is, you know, really kind of a once in a lifetime thing, and I just wanted to point out that it's a process that's initiated by the United Nations that the World Health Organization does but it does fit in into the international law and then feeds back into the process.

The other thing I would mention is why we work on this so diligently, because in the United Nations process, everything has to be done by absolute unanimous consensus, and that's why it's so difficult and almost impossible to really amend the treaties in a substantial way.

But this process, where the World Health Organization comes in and makes recommendations, that just requires a majority vote. So we feel like this is actually doable, we can actually get through the Commission and succeed with that.

So, that's, you know, essentially where we're at. We should get the results back on the whole critical review from the World Health Organization within a week or so, they promised in the beginning of December, and I think what they're looking for is to be able to send over that letter that they do, from the Director General of the World Health Organization to the Secretary General of the UN, telling them that they've completed the process. You know, it's kind of pomp and circumstance.

There'll be a little bit of a hint, I'm sure, as to what they're going to be doing in Vienna in March, in that letter, but still there's a lot of unknowns. They said that CBD is not a subject of concern, and in its pure form, shouldn't be scheduled at all in the treaty. But we don't know how they're going to actually say that to the Commission.

And, of course, like I said, there's such a wide variety of different options that they could take with regard to cannabis. I don't envy them their process, it must be pretty arduous.

And one last thing I guess I'll mention is, we've worked through this process, from beginning to end. We've given a great deal of info, and when I say we, the entire cannabis movement and industry around cannabis, and many, many interested groups, from patients to indigenous people and others have given info, and that info was well considered, and the experts are just that, real experts.

And we've gotten every indication that they're taking this very seriously. It's a big job, and like I said, it's ambitious. We'll see what they come up with. But yes, a little bit of faith that they're working on this hard, and just wanted to make sure people weren't completely depressed with the system, not ever getting anything done positive. It's possible, maybe in this case we'll find an exception to that rule.

DOUG MCVAY: Well, and just so -- yeah, just real quick, though. We don't base our scheduling of marijuana on the international scale exactly, but it does have impact, and the US Food and Drug Administration officially gathered comments from citizens, from people, they announced they were doing that a few months ago, to forward to the CND, I mean, this is -- it will have an impact in the US, whether or not, I mean, even if they say reschedule or deschedule, we may not do it, but, you know, it's part of our process here too.

I'm sorry, so Farid --

MICHAEL KRAWITZ: Hey.

DOUG MCVAY: Yes.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ: Well, while you're bringing that up, I'll just point out that this recent stuff that happened with CBD, with the scheduling, based on GW Pharma's new product hitting the market, they initiated a National Institutes of Health review, they did an eight point review, they determined CBD shouldn't be scheduled at all, and gave that input to the FDA, who then went to the DEA, who said, no, we absolutely have to schedule CBD because of our treaty requirements.

And the FDA said, okeh, we'll go ahead and schedule CBD the lowest possible schedule that we can [sic: CBD is still Schedule One], but they formally stated that they would leave themselves open to change that should there be guidance from the UN, and then here, just months later, literally, there's going to be guidance from the UN on CBD, so this is going to be fascinating, how it unfolds in the US.

FARID GHEHIOUECHE: Doug, if I may just add a few words to what Michael just described, for sure, that's a long process. And, we are entering into a type of new history, and for decades, we were waiting for this scientific assessment to be made -- to be made on cannabis, that -- on what is the endocannabinoid system, how it works, about how those compounds work and everything, now is on the table.

Until 2015, it was not the case. Nobody knew about this at the UN level, or even within the WHO. And so, this long process now is entering to a phase, a new step, that is historic because for sure, in March, regarding the recommendation made by the WHO, there will be a vote.

So, this is actually already a success, for sure. We didn't have the scientific assessment five years ago, now we will have it. In a few months, we will see how the states at the UN level are doing with this issue, and mostly because next year, they have to make sure the issue to discuss, and to decide is about the next UN objective for the next decade, until 2029.

And here there is lots of fights and lots of challenges that are related to human rights and the death penalty, and so-called -- also issues that are not breaking the consensus. And also challenges that are related to the coherence that the UN system has to find with relation to the Sustainable Goals 2030. That's quite important to think about.

So, next March, we will enter a new world, and for sure, about the CBD, about what we are now I would say, is also another challenge for the UN system regarding scheduling issues. It's not only about the cannabinoids and what we call the phytocannabinoids. It's more about the petro-cannabinoids, and all the different mimetic drugs that are so-called new psychotropic drugs -- substances, NPS.

Like fentanyl, that are mimetic to the morphinic products, but are one hundred times more potent. And all those issues related to the new psychoactive substances are quite big, because we see for one century we quite prohibited cannabis, because we don't have real scientific assessment on it, but nowadays, there's many, many different compounds that are existing in this world that are not controlled, and within the UN process they are not able to handle this issue.

So they have to, I would say, manage a new way to establish their control, and, if they relax, if I just may use one word, if they relax about cannabis issues, like Michael explained, changing part of the cannabis scheduling, making it more coherent, it will be quite a big step forward.

DOUG MCVAY: This is a portion of an interview with Michael Krawitz, from Veterans for Medical Cannabis Access, and Farid Ghehioueche, a French activist and organizer who is one of the organizers behind the International Cannabis Policy Conference.

You are listening to Century of Lies. I'm your host, Doug McVay. editor of DrugWarFacts.org. Now, let's get back to Farid and Michael.

It's a thing I talk about on this show quite a lot, this, the CND process is opaque, and it's intentional. There's -- it's not technology, it's not rules, there is no reason for it except trying to maintain that opacity. They do not want the process to be transparent, they do not want people to understand or to follow this stuff.

And, that's really why, you know, I mean, it's -- hey, I wish I had the travel budget so I could be there myself, and I'm glad that we have the ability to talk, because I think this is important stuff, and I'm grateful to heavens that -- to both of you, Farid and to Michael, I'm very grateful to you for participating and for talking about what's going on there.

Because, I mean, it's, you know, light is a great disinfectant. And this UN process needs some disinfecting. It's -- there's no question. So, now I do want to find out more about the conference, the ICPC, the International Cannabis Policy Conference. I'm getting that part right, right?

MICHAEL KRAWITZ: Right. Right, the ICPC, yes, in Vienna at the Austria Centre. It's this massive, beautiful, brand new complex. It's almost connected to the UN Centre, it's just separated by a wall, basically, between the United Nations Vienna International Centre and the Austria Events Centre, where we're going to be.

Really beautiful place. What we're going to actually do, we're bringing our main activists inside the UN on Friday, and we're going to have our own little private lunch meeting there, inside the UN, and talk about strategy, talk about some of these issues surrounding cannabis and sustainability, and working with the CND and all.

And then, that night, we're going to have a reception, where we're hoping to engage as many of the diplomats as we can from the Commission process, for the next day, which would be the Eighth and Ninth of December, where we're going to have our conference. And I'll let Farid handle it from there.

FARID GHEHIOUECHE: Yeah, on Saturday morning, we start with the opening panel, with my friend Michael, who will open the ceremony, and then we will enter quite in a big, big issue, because we talk about sustainable development, about the climate change, about the new needed to challenge those issues.

We are sure that lots of the speakers that are actually the program, that are coming also, some on Friday, but on even on Sunday, we will have quite good panels, and I request you to go on the website and to have an image of our, I would say, the quality of the speakers, and I would say, also, en francais we say la creme de la creme.

So, that's the image. Again, the highest profile, the people that are very known engagement, like we are. And, what is important is that we try to merge not only a conference but also an exhibition, and a kind of fair.

And so we will also open the floor to entrepreneurs, to those -- yeah, those stakeholders that are now part of the reality of what we call the market. And, it is a big word to say that it's part of the reality, and there is a lot of people that are now engaged, with a lot of money, into these kinds of industries. That's not even to talk about the big money in the medical marijuana.

We also have the sponsorship of those who are trying to develop the textile, or even the food supplement relative to the health industry. So, all those stakeholders, from the entrepreneur to the researcher, from those who are physicians and are dealing with the patient, but also the patient that will also be there, represented, with Franjo Grotenhermen, who is the president of the International Association for Cannabis -- Medical Cannabis [sic: the International Association for Cannabinoid Medicines], IACM.

And so, we will have all those high profiles at this conference, and also, at this date, the program at this date, because of the UN CND reconvened session, but also because we are just next to the Human Rights Declaration Day, and this year it will be the seventieth anniversary of this declaration.

And I guess that we're also given -- given also the unique and historic, as well as we are now entering to a kind of unique and historic process regarding cannabis scheduling at the international level.

DOUG MCVAY: So, now, how do folks find out about the conference, just in case, the Think & Do Tank website is FAAAT.net? Or am I misremembering?

MICHAEL KRAWITZ: That's correct.

FARID GHEHIOUECHE: FAAAT.net.

DOUG MCVAY: Excellent.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ: The conference is right there, just click conference, you'll see the link right there.

DOUG MCVAY: Right on. Hopefully you'll be posting some of the content. That's -- yeah, like I say, I don't have the travel budget anymore, but gosh I wish I could be there.

UNKNOWN: Join our event on Facebook.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ: Yeah, join our event on Facebook, and --

UNKNOWN: And follow our conference page, instagram, and twitter.

MICHAEL KRAWITZ: Instagram, twitter, all the social media.

FARID GHEHIOUECHE: Yeah, and we will livestream those panel sessions for those who are no means, and they can't afford to come to Vienna. It's quite, really, difficult, we can imagine, to come to the UN building and the city of Vienna. But, this venue is quite very well -- yeah, there is good material, so we will have a nice broadcast on facebook, so, and all the social media, and I guess that lots of people will also share this opportunity to follow all those very nice speakers.

DOUG MCVAY: Right on. Farid, if you've got another minute, since I've got you on the phone, could you -- what's, talk to me about drug policy in France, about drug policy reform and drug policy in France. What kind of stuff are you working on, and what are some of the things you think people should -- what should people know?

FARID GHEHIOUECHE: About France, it's quite complicated, because my country is now supposed to be governed by a very nice, young, modern president, but it's not really the case when we talk about drug policy at all.

We are a kind of big strong guy, and that's quite not coherent to the image of being progressive and being very, actually, being smart, and so, for over a year, since last year in fact, the government should have issued the national new strategy, and it has been postponed three times this year, and it should be released before the end of the year.

And when I was living in Paris, it was still not possible to get the date about when the new strategy will be released.

So, that's quite ambiguous, because yesterday I discovered that there was a big title in the French papers about a new commission that has been implemented in September that was supposed to evaluate the scientific benefits of cannabis, but also the harms of cannabis.

It was quite a kind of obscure new committee, but it's quite important because it's directly linked to the French authorities, a kind of FDA, a French FDA, ANSM [L'Agence nationale de sécurité du médicament et des produits de santé or ANSM].

And so, this committee yesterday said oh, we should consider the -- consider that cannabis has medical -- as a medicine can have some value for the patient, and then after they put some little comments, cannot be too positive, but, they recognized there the rights of patients to have access to cannabis for any kind of support related to their health.

And so, that's quite a big issue because in 2013, there was a French health minister decree that said that all kinds of cannabis products that can be issued from the natural forms of cannabis can be found into pharmacy as medicine as long as they have their authorization of being sold on the market, which is quite a big process also.

But, yeah. At that time, this decree from the health minister was described as the Sativex, which is seen, talked about Epidiolex, which is mostly about CBD, but Sativex is a mixture, eighty percent of THC with CBD. And like Epidiolex, it's not so really well done, because there is also part of alcohol and some kind of --

MICHAEL KRAWITZ: Sublingual spray.

FARID GHEHIOUECHE: Yeah. So, the Sativex decree has not really been effective because Sativex is not available in pharmacies because the [inaudible] GW and Bayer, they didn't sign an agreement with the French government, and still now they are -- nobody can afford to get access to this medicine.

But, yesterday they opened the door to a kind of new policy for patients, I would say for sure in two weeks, maybe, we will see a opening up some cannabis medical club, which will be mostly a cannabis compassionate club, and I'm sure that we will see rising those kind of initiatives related to the support and we'll not talk about waiting for a kind of state or government agreement related to the use of this medicine

DOUG MCVAY: That was an interview with Michael Krawitz and Farid Ghehioueche, they are organizing the International Cannabis Policy Conference in Vienna, Austria, December 7, 8, and 9. I wish them all the luck, wish I could be there.

For now, that's it. I want to thank you for joining us. You have been listening to Century of Lies. We're a production of the Drug Truth Network for the Pacifica Foundation Radio Network, on the web at DrugTruth.net. I’m your host Doug McVay, editor of DrugWarFacts.org.

The executive producer of the Drug Truth Network is Dean Becker. Drug Truth Network programs are available by podcast, the URLs to subscribe are on the network home page at DrugTruth.net.

The Drug Truth Network has a Facebook page, please give it a like. Drug War Facts is on Facebook too, give its page a like and share it with friends. Remember: Knowledge is power.

You can follow me on Twitter, I'm @DougMcVay and of course also @DrugPolicyFacts.

We'll be back in a week with thirty more minutes of news and information about drug policy reform and the failed war on drugs. For now, for the Drug Truth Network, this is Doug McVay saying so long. So long!

For the Drug Truth Network, this is Doug McVay asking you to examine our policy of drug prohibition: the century of lies. Drug Truth Network programs archived at the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy.

CULTURAL BAGGAGE

JUNE 14, 2018

TRANSCRIPT

DEAN BECKER: I am Dean Becker, your host. Our goal for this program is to expose the fraud, misdirection, and the liars whose support for drug war empowers our terrorist enemies, enriches barbarous cartels, and gives reason for existence to tens of thousands of violent US gangs who profit by selling contaminated drugs to our children. This is Cultural Baggage.

This is the Reverend Dean Becker, I want to thank you for being with us on today's edition of Cultural Baggage. A bit later, we'll hear from Mister Michael Krawitz, who just returned from Geneva, working with the UN, but first up, well, over the years, I've probably spoken to well over a hundred, perhaps over 200 members, speakers, of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, now Law Enforcement Action Partnership.

Today, we're going to speak with the chairman of the board of LEAP, retired Lieutenant Diane Goldstein. Hello, Diane.

DIANE GOLDSTEIN: Thank you very much, Dean, like always it's such a pleasure being on with you.

DEAN BECKER: Well, Diane, you know, I'm proud of the fact that I am a LEAP speaker and that we are recognized and, you know, certified, if you will, by a lot of politicians around the country who use our words, our thoughts, our writings, informing their opinions in making adjustments to our drug laws, that's, it's a real benefit, it feels good, does it not?

DIANE GOLDSTEIN: It does, and you know, we continue to make some really interesting progress, even in this administration. I think so much of the work of grassroots activists, members of LEAP, Students for Sensible Drug Policy, Drug Policy Alliance and the other organizations that have really made the critical difference that we're able to meet where we all agree, to push smart on crime policy forward.

DEAN BECKER: I had Mister Jason Reed, heads up the LEAP UK, on a couple of weeks back. He was talking about their being recognized by the British Medical Journal, for the thoughts and the presentations they have given to them. If only we could get the US Senate, or the House, to invite us to come speak. Right? It would be something.

DIANE GOLDSTEIN: You know, and I don't know if you're aware, but I'm also on the board of directors for LEAP United Kingdom, and because it, with all our international chapters as well, we have a representative from kind of the main board, so to speak. And the progress that LEAP United Kingdom is doing is absolutely amazing.

So two years ago, in 2016, we launched in the House of Commons in Parliament, and we're going to relaunch LEAP UK as Law Enforcement Action Partnership United Kingdom sometime this fall, and myself and Neill and maybe a couple of other people will be over in England to do so.

DEAN BECKER: Well, Diane, the thought that things are changing, are being respected internationally, certainly, is a move in our favor.

DIANE GOLDSTEIN: Well, you know what, you're right, but you know, I think what's very interesting is how quickly we're seeing movement internationally, and I haven't read the World Health Organization report that I think just recently came out on cannabis, and it talked about how much safer cannabis was than other illicit drugs.

You know, I only caught one little brief news release, so when you have health organizations like WHO, or like the British Journal of Medicine [sic], and then you have countries that are willing to take the risk like Uruguay and Canada, Mexico's talking, you know, it's, I think we're going to see that the UN treaties evaporate eventually, because the countries are going to just continue to ignore it, and I think that the United States, our legalization of cannabis, starting with Colorado and Washington, had so much to do to push that envelope.

DEAN BECKER: The drug war is really reefer madness at its heart. It is this old fashioned, primitive belief system that drugs are so bad, in order to keep you from destroying your future we're going to destroy your future by throwing you in a cage, and that's just -- that's just got to go, it's got to be uncovered or exposed and, you know, I spend my life trying to find anybody, you know, in a position of authority who's willing to come on this show and defend the drug war, to tell us the benefit that offsets the horror we inflict on ourselves by continuing to believe it to be valid. Your thought there, Diane Goldstein.

DIANE GOLDSTEIN: Well, you know what, it's so true, and I think what you're going to continue to see is you're going to have a small group of hardcore prohibitionists, you know, the Walters, the Sabets, the Duponts, and some really, really conservative politicians that are in many aspects, you know, breathing the last gasp of prohibition. They're like the dinosaurs stuck in the La Brea Tar Pits, and they just didn't know that their ideology's dying.

You know, the dinosaurs didn't recognize that death was close, and I really truly believe that about drug prohibition. And, you know, the issue of the opioid epidemic is one of those that's been very interesting. You're starting to see movement from criminal justice organizations, understanding that this is a public health issue, yet many law enforcement organizations are clinging to, okeh, we're not going to punish the user, but if you're a seller we're going to do whatever we can to imprison you for the rest of your life, so that's the battle that we have to continue to push.

This isn't just about people who are suffering from chronic substance use, it's about getting the bad actors out of the illicit drug market, but it's also recognizing that even low level drug dealers are only doing it for sustenance level, and if we impose a heroin assisted treatment program, or other public health strategies, then maybe that wouldn't occur.

DEAN BECKER: And it really boils down to we have cities like New York, San Francisco, Seattle even, a little bit my city of Houston, looking into safe injection facilities, place where people can go, have a doctor on hand, they can do their drugs under a medical supervision, if they happen to OD they can be brought back to life, that they can have access to clean needles, clean water instead of alley water, they can, you know, have another day, have another chance at treatment or understanding the nature of their addiction.

It just really boils down to every aspect of prohibition really complicates it, really makes it that much worse, that the drugs that are being sold? Well, nobody knows if they're counterfeit, if they're -- got rat poison in them for that matter. It leads itself to failure and futility, does it not?

DIANE GOLDSTEIN: Of course. I mean, we've been in this battle for over a hundred years. If you simply look back to the Harrison Tax Act in 1914, or we can go back into the -- in California, the late 1800s, with the issue of opium. And, you know, what we have to continue to do is educate the criminal justice profession very specifically that, you know, if you thought outside the box, you know, and created a new paradigm, we would lessen the impact on public safety resources if we funded communities instead of public safety.

So, you know, public safety is only one small component of community health, safety, and wellbeing. And so we have to start putting money into vocational job training, infrastructure, drug treatment on demand, safe consumption sites, needle exchange programs, you know, harm reduction testing. Education that's based on evidence and not on just say no, I mean, there's so many things that we could be investing in that would lessen the impact on public safety.

Heroin assisted treatment programs. You know, medication assisted treatment, although it's so interesting, you know, you start talking about language, is, one of my favorite journalists, Maia [Szalavitz], she just talked about, you know, we don't refer diabetics as needing insulin assisted treatment, you know, so we need to also start messaging the language relative to, it's not just medication assisted treatment.

Because, it's medication, and we should be providing people on demand suboxone or methadone, or other medications that prevents death, disease, and addiction.

DEAN BECKER: Friends, once again we're speaking with Diane Goldstein, she's the chairman [sic] of the board for Law Enforcement Action Partnership. She's a former policewoman with the Redondo Police Department, she rose through the ranks, became a sergeant, served as a division commander, and retired as a lieutenant.

Diane, I, you know, you were talking earlier about the 1914 Harrison Act, but right before that was the act that I want us to go back to, the 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act, which required sellers to have, if they're selling drugs, that it should have a label on it labeling exactly the contents of that bag because that's the problem we're having now.

I think of two millionaires that I respect, Prince and Tom Petty, both thought they were buying real Oxy pills out on the black market, turns out even the pills were counterfeit, and both of those men died, and, you know, to me, that's one of the horrors of this, that we have no more respect for our fellow citizens than to force them into a situation where even millionaires can make mistakes and kill themselves. Your response, Diane.

DIANE GOLDSTEIN: You know what, and, I think that, for me, is the most frustrating part about drug prohibition, is this clinging to an ideology without recognizing the harms of prohibition on everybody. You know, and I know we've talked about this before, and I think that's the thing that LEAP speakers bring to the table, is we can link every bad thing in our society to drug prohibition.

When I was doing my master's degree, I talked about a paper that linked college attainment with the drug war. You know, in California, we are funding more prisons than we are colleges, and because of that, we see the diversity level in California colleges go down, because we're also, you know, in a disparate fashion, going after communities of color.

And so, there's so many different links, you know. You have health links. You have job links. You have federal aid to student loans, you have families being torn apart, you have -- I mean, everything starts with drug prohibition at the root, really, of kind of all evil.

DEAN BECKER: You know, we've often talked about it, it denies you credit, housing, on down the line, so many ramifications that many states have to cripple a young person's opportunities to prevent their advancement in life. It's --

DIANE GOLDSTEIN: Yep.

DEAN BECKER: It's horrible. I guess what I want to bring to the fore is why we do what we do. You know, you've devoted well over a decade of your life, I've devoted near twenty of mine, to trying to expose the fraud and misdirection of this drug war. But we can't do it by ourselves. You know, I don't have the leverage to get those top dog politicians in here to -- to interview them.

And I guess what I'm trying to say is we need our listeners. We need the people who read our writings, who view our webpage, to understand that change is possible. God damn it, it's necessary, if we're going to have a true and just society. Your closing thoughts there, Diane.

DIANE GOLDSTEIN: You know, absolutely, and I think what I would also suggest, especially in light of the recent pardon of Alice Johnson by the president. We, as, you know, political opponents, maybe on opposite sides of many issues, but we need to meet people where we agree, and when that happens, you get progress and you get movement.

You know, it's -- I know you know Amy Pofahl, from CANDO Clemency, is, she did tons and tons of back work on the back side, relative to the issue of Kim Kardashian, and when Kim Kardashian walked into the White House, it wasn't just about Alice Johnson. There was a list of 50 people that was presented to the president at the same time.

And so, you know, I think as our listeners, we may disagree with the Kardashians, or with the president, or with, you know, other legislators relative to this issue, but where we can agree, we need to meet them at that place and work together to end injustice.

DEAN BECKER: All right, folks, there you have it, from the chairman [sic] of the board of LEAP. They're on the web at LEAP.cc. Please check it out.

Program note: one of the guests scheduled for next week's Cultural Baggage will be Amy Pofahl of CANDOClemency.org. I spoke with Amy briefly this week, here's a bit of what she had to say.

AMY POFAHL: Everybody thinks, you know, they know best, and that Trump would never be interested, so when the press criticizes Kim Kardashian, well thank god she's not in criminal justice reform, thank god she wasn't an expert, because all the experts were telling me, oh no, there's no way. So, there you go.

DEAN BECKER: Darth Drug Czar, you're a coward,
A liar, demon, and thief.
Seems you can't face the truth
For just one hour.
Too busy looking at [unintelligible].
Dean Becker, DrugTruth.net.

It's time to play Name That Drug By Its Side Effects! Frequent prolonged or bothersome erections, birth defects, enlarge genitals, premature pubic hair, increased libido, aggressive behavior, male pattern baldness, increased acne, prostate cancer, and time's up! The answer, from Cerner Multum Incorporated [sic: Eli Lilly]: Axiron, for muscle gain and boners.

MIKE KRAWITZ: I'm Mike Krawitz, I'm executive director of Veterans for Medical Cannabis Access, and over at the World Health Organization I'm working with an organization called FAAAT, Foundation for Alternative Approaches to Addiction.

DEAN BECKER: Well, Michael, you just returned recently from, was it Vienna, some UN proceedings, correct?

MIKE KRAWITZ: Geneva. World Health Organization.

DEAN BECKER: Okeh, I'm sorry. And, tell us about that gathering.

MIKE KRAWITZ: So, it was -- well this is a UN thing, the United Nations has requested the World Health Organization to do a review of cannabis. This is kind of a routine thing that's never happened, so it would be routine if they ever did it, but they never did it, so, since the beginning of the treaty, 1962, there's never been a review, official review, of cannabis, so it was just sort of arbitrarily placed without science, without evidence, you know the history of cannabis prohibition.

And, it's even thicker, it's even deeper, you know, the Anslinger kind of rift at the international level, and it's never been corrected, there's never been any correction. So, we're working with the World Health Organization. They have the job of collecting evidence and making a recommendation back to the UN, this year we'll be back at the United Nations, and we're hoping to undo some of Anslinger's legacy, frankly, to correct the treaty, update it based on evidence, hopefully maybe have cannabis at the end of this process a little bit more accurately described and a little bit more appropriately scheduled in the treaty.

This still isn't going to, you know, affect your biggest problems of prohibition, because that's a bigger treaty issue, but at least we can update the science and evidence on cannabis and maybe place it a little bit better in the schedules. And you know how in the United States a change in schedule could have a dramatic change on policy.

DEAN BECKER: Well, right, and what you brought forward there, the thought that, you know, Anslinger put forward this quote information set, this dataset, and proclaimed it to be moral and righteous and the appropriate thing to do, and very few people even challenged him, the American Medical Association did try, but they were kind of thwarted by the US Congress, and I guess what I'm saying is, is that the morals of this policy have never been really examined, brought to light, and that's what you guys are trying to do. Correct?

MIKE KRAWITZ: Absolutely. And, it's really, again, just a straightforward collection of evidence, when you're talking about a 1960 treaty, with a substance that the active, you know, quote -- quote unquote active ingredient was discovered in the late 1960s, or middle of the 1960s, and the treaty was started in the early 1960s, so, no matter how you look at it, they didn't know anything about cannabis. They didn't know what the active ingredient was, they really didn't know anything scientific about it.

All they knew was what Harry Anslinger and, like you said, you know, the Hearst paper chain, and there was another person, according to our friends at Transnational Institute and their history that they dug up, they found an Anslinger protege, a guy named Doctor Wolfe, who was working at the World Health Organization back there, it was like 1935, when they put this stuff in the record.

And there was some opposition at the international level, it wasn't the AMA, it was more like India. But it was not enough to prevent cannabis from being put into the treaty, and I was actually there in 1998 at the UN, India came forward and talked to us, they came to our table, a representative of the delegation of India, and told us that they had signed onto the treaty in 1962 with a 25 year delay, it was a reservation to delay the implementation for 25 years, and they were just implementing it then, in 1998, and guess what, Dean? They found already, in that time, just in the year or so of implementation, a decrease in cannabis use to be sure, and a matching increase rate in the rate of black tar heroin use.

DEAN BECKER: It is such a preposterous situation, these laws against cannabis. So few people that the first medical adviser to our first quote drug czar, Harry Anslinger, was Mister James C. Munch, who was a veterinarian [sic: Professor Munch's doctorate was in pharmacology]. And he said that he concocted a marijuana extract and gave it to some dogs, and it basically knocked them out, but then they came to a few hours later and seemed to be just fine.

It's just such a lie, isn't it, Michael?

MIKE KRAWITZ: Well, to be accurate, the extracts of cannabis, they didn't know what the active ingredient was, but they actually were working with the cannabis products back, you know, in 1890, 1910, 1920, they actually had their act together. They had a lot of great products on the shelf, in the pharmacy, and believe it or not, that was the standard way of testing to see if it had an active ingredient. You'd give it to a dog, and you could see the dog's reaction physically, you know that there's active ingredient.

Again, they didn't know what the active ingredient was, they had no science, so they had to use a physical test, that was a physical test for activity of the active ingredient. And this thing about black tar heroin is not a nuance, it's not a side note. We found now in the United States, in hard research, what -- it supports what we've been finding in the field, and that is that cannabis, when you use it as a medicine, you use less of the pain pills. You use less of the opiates. You die less, you have less overdoses.

And I'm talking a pretty significant reduction of overdose, and an increasing rate over the years. So, we've lost so many people since 1930 to overdose and death and mayhem of these hard drugs, and cannabis has been kind of our, you know, Dorothy's shoes, all we had to do was click it together three times and we could help ourselves get out of this mess.

DEAN BECKER: Well, friends, I have my info a little bit wrong about the marijuana extract and the dogs, but I do know that this same James C. Munch once purported in a court room that he took some marijuana, flew around the room like a bat, and then a couple of hours later he was just fine. All kinds of propaganda, right?

MIKE KRAWITZ: I -- it sounds like some stuff I'd love to get my hands on for medicine, actually, but, yeah, I'll tell you, these guys, it's amazing when you look back at the history of this. There was actually a government expert in the United States against marijuana, you're talking right at the time of, you know, she should have said no and reefer madness, and it was a government expert, they would bring him to court, and he would testify that yes indeed this marijuana is a killer, and da da da.

And you know what happened? He actually found a profession out of this. He found a little niche, and he started defending killers, and he got them off the hook for marijuana insanity defense. He tried to do it with one person that, just the marijuana in their proximity caused them to go insane and kill a bunch of people, and the judge drew the line and they threw the guy out of court, and as I understand it they stopped allowing his expert testimony. But he made a cottage industry out of this cannabis insanity defense.

DEAN BECKER: Well, Michael, I know that you work with the -- veteran groups, you're trying to work with the government to make it more feasible, more allowable, for their doctors to prescribe medical cannabis, and the reason behind, one of the main reasons behind that is, every day here in America there are 22 veterans that kill themselves, and, you know, we have the two recent celebrity suicides that garnered way more attention than these veteran deaths ever have. Your thought there, please.

MIKE KRAWITZ: Well, I certainly appreciate your sentiment, and I certainly agree with you that it's a travesty that we don't get more attention to the many deaths we have every day, of veterans that are taking their own lives. I think we ought to have a ticker on the TV, you know, so-and-so Army veteran in Ohio, you know, Iowa, and, you know, Kansas, whatever, takes their lives today. That should be on a ticker on the bottom of the screen, then maybe we'd get some attention to these issues.

But, you know, there's two things going on here with cannabis. One is, you know, the drug action, the pharmacological action, and there's good reason to believe that as a medicine cannabis can help reduce suicides. As a medicine, cannabis can treat pain, cannabis can help do these things. But, as a replacement drug, in other words, use cannabis, use less of these pills, when it comes to suicide, we're giving veterans a pill in the VA that actually has a suicide warning label. That's the medicine that we're giving them for post-traumatic stress.

If we can reduce the amount of that medication that's being used, doesn't it make sense maybe we'll reduce the suicide rate?

DEAN BECKER: Michael, I don't know, the drug laws do not make any sense, anywhere, as far as I'm concerned. Even insofar as, you know, heroin is now not really heroin, it's fentanyl, and it's killing people by the dozens, and, we just have no concept of the repercussions of believing in this system, do we?

MIKE KRAWITZ: You know, and I think that's they key to this whole discussion, is that we actually put the blame where it belongs, and I think the, you know, the United States right now is going through a real serious issue with overdose deaths, and it's very convenient to, you know, blame the doctors, or blame the patients, well how about the policy?

How about the drug policy that was supposed to prevent children from getting hold of heroin, that kept, you know, as we're watching the legalizing countries, their use of, first use of heroin age going up and up, our first use of heroin age going down and down, as we're watching the rest of the world implement these policies like Portugal, that's taking the criminal element, you know, at least a chunk of it, and gutting it, taking away its income, that it's allowing, you know, patients to have better access, and allowing people with a drug addiction to be treated like human beings, and medical patients that they are.

And actually, finally, starting to get at the underlying problems of addiction. No, no, we have to go the other way, we have to listen to people like Kevin Sabet, we have to go and jail people and double the prison rate, because that's what -- we've got to be tough on drugs, and then no one says, hey, maybe getting tough on drugs was a mistake. Maybe listening to Kevin Sabet and Robert Dupont was a mistake.

No, no, let's go further down this rabbit hole, kill a bunch more people, and then blame me, a pain patient.

DEAN BECKER: Well, friends, we've been speaking with Mister Michael Krawitz, very much involved with veterans and medical marijuana, very much involved with the UN and their concepts and precepts about the drug laws. Michael, is there a closing thought, a website you might want to share?

MIKE KRAWITZ: Sure, absolutely. This international stuff is going to be going on for a good year now, from here, we're actually deep in the middle of it, and we can use help. So, come and take a look, take a look at the documentation, it's at FAAAT, three As, FAAAT.net, and you can put a slash cannabis if you want to go right to information about the World Health Organization, all that.

We've got enough information there and it's broken down enough that you could actually just start at the beginning, and an hour or two get a really good understanding of what's going on at the WHO, if you really want that -- that level of understanding.

And I'll tell you, this is going to have an impact on every single country that we work with, 186 countries that are signed onto these treaties. So if we can have some, you know, good results of this process, and we can use your help, definitely, in this process, I think it's going to help patients, it's going to help, you know, this reform. We still need to reform the treaties, we're going to have to get rid of this prohibition. You know that, I know that, we all know that.

But the world leaders haven't caught on yet. So go to FAAAT.net and check us out, and I really appreciate your help.

YOUNG MALE VOICE: Okay, let’s say drug prohibition does support terrorism.

DEAN BECKER: And murder.

YOUNG MALE VOICE: And murder.

DEAN BECKER: Torture.

YOUNG MALE VOICE: And torture.

DEAN BECKER: Corruption and bribery.

YOUNG MALE VOICE: And whatever.

DEAN BECKER: What’s your point?

YOUNG MALE VOICE: Change the law.

DEAN BECKER: I got you. Make it cheap, more available everywhere, like soda or cheesy puffs.

YOUNG MALE VOICE: Exactly.

DEAN BECKER: Cocaine at the playground, crack stands at the laundromat; heroin at the mini mart. Like that?

YOUNG MALE VOICE: Face it old man, that’s what we’ve got now.

DEAN BECKER: Please, visit the website of Law Enforcement Action Partnership on the web at LEAP.cc.

Folks, the drug war is ending slow, ugly, and bloody, and we could really use your help to bring it to a quicker end. Again, I must remind you that because of prohibition, you don't know what's in that bag, please, be careful.

To the Drug Truth Network listeners around the world, this is Dean Becker for Cultural Baggage and the unvarnished truth. Cultural Baggage is a production of the Pacifica Radio Network. Archives are permanently stored at the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy. And we are all still tap dancing on the edge of an abyss.