Other references are:
Birth Defects in Colorado Linked to Medical, Recreational Marijuana (thedoanlawfirm.com)
Effects of THC on Youth • Johnny's Ambassadors (johnnysambassadors.org)
Cannabis – the science tells us it is ‘not fit for human consumption’
In a Letter to Health Ministers in Australia and New Zealand, we have joined together with other drug prevention organisations to share key science on cannabis: NOTE: WE HAVE ALWAYS WELCOMED ANY EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY, BUT TO DATE, NONE HAS BEEN FORTHCOMING.
Here is an extract from the Letter’s summary of the latest science and evidence on cannabis which clearly demonstrates that it is not fit for human consumption, whether that be medicinally, recreationally or even as a hemp-based edible.
Cannabis likely causal in 33 cancers, more than double the 14 caused by tobacco, with CANNABIDIOL (CBD) causal in at least 12
Cannabis, Cannabidiol, Cannabinoids, and Multigenerational Policy - ScienceDirect
Cannabis likely causal in 89 of the 95 birth defects tracked by the European Medicines Agency
Cannabis causes 30% of new psychosis/schizophrenia diagnoses in London and 50% in Amsterdam
The contribution of cannabis use to variation in the incidence of psychotic disorder across Europe (EU-GEI): a multicentre case-control study - PubMed (nih.gov)
As a medicinal substance, cannabis does not alleviate chronic pain and is only useful as an adjunct to opiates
Effect of cannabis use in people with chronic non-cancer pain prescribed opioids: findings from a 4-year prospective cohort study - PubMed (nih.gov)
Sadly, a lot of the so-called health research regarding Cannabis is open to fraud and manipulation via vested interests, in much the same way as that of the Tobacco Companies.
We believe Parliamentarians are generally sincere in their endeavours to honestly represent their constituents. Therefore, we request that all newly elected Parliamentarians and those in the Greens Party double check the evidence that they are now using, to make sure that this evidence:
* is ethical, See Attached
* has no conflict of interest, and
* has been proven not to be fraudulent.
As a guide we recommend and request that the following considerations be applied:
1. Who is paying for the research and is there any conflict of interest?
2. How large is the sample size (the larger the number the stronger the evidence)
3. Note that the so-called 'evidence-based' research can be an approach to minimize unnecessary and irrelevant clinical health research that is unscientific, wasteful, and unethical.
4. Are there human subjects in clinical trials:
5. Ethical considerations and concerns Has there been sufficient time to establish whether the health research is fraudulent until proven otherwise?
PLEASE POLITICIANS, TAKE NOTE.FOR A COPY OF THE FULL LETTER, EMAIL: [email protected]