A new article in the European Journal of Cancer Care answers medical marijuana opponents who claim that cancer patients don't need marijuana to relieve the nausea and vomiting from chemotherapy. Opponents claim that while studies in the past showed THC to be roughly comparable to other anti-nausea drugs, it wasn't substantially better. Since those studies, they argue, better anti-nausea drugs have come into use, making medical marijuana irrelevant. In any case, they add, THC is available in pill form as Marinol.

Researchers at the University of Sao Paulo conducted a systematic review of studies of cannabinoid drugs for relief of chemo-induced nausea. Alas, the studies all involved oral THC or other cannabinoids, not whole marijuana, so the pill-vs.-plant issue isn't addressed, but many of the other distortions put out by opponents are firmly debunked.

First, the analysis found clear advantages for cannabinoids over the other tested. In some cases there were statistically significant differences in efficacy, and with amazing consistency, patients preferred the cannabinoids.

Most important, the Sao Paulo researchers demolish the claim that we don't need marijuana because we  now have better anti-nausea drugs. They note that these newer drugs still fail some patients, and "this cannot be corrected by an increase in dosage or frequency of administration," adding that when the nausea hits a day or more after chemo treatment, the "gold standard" drug combination "rarely obtains 50% of the desired effect."

And the coup de grace: "Cannabinoids seem to act through different mechanisms [than standard drugs] and can be effective for people who respond in an unsatisfactory way to the antiemetic drugs used today."

That's what some of us have been saying for years.

In the second part of this video documenting the real world impact of marijuana prohibition, we hear from medical marijuana patient Bernie Ellis about the potential loss of his home. Then, we speak with Ronnie and Anisha Naulls, California medical marijuana patients and dispensary owners whose family has been dramatically affected by the government’s war on marijuana.

In this first part of "The Human Cost of Marijuana Prohibition," we hear from Marisa Garcia, a student whose experience with a drug misdemeanor has left her without financial aid, and from MPP's own Rob Kampia, who tells us not only about his own experiences in jail, but also about those of several others who were not so fortunate. Click here for part 2.

According to the New York Times, Cindy McCain, wife of presumptive GOP presidential nominee Sen. John McCain, drives a car with vanity license plates reading, "MS BUD." "Bud," of course, is common slang for marijuana, so where are the howls of outrage from the Drug Free America Foundation and ONDCP? How dare the wife of a presidential candidate promote drug use?!?!?

Oh wait. Mrs. McCain owns a beer distributorship. The "Bud" involved is Budweiser, and that's a "good" drug, so all we get are amused chuckles, if anyone notices at all. That alcohol is more addictive, massively more toxic, and orders of magnitude more likely to cause violence or aggression than marijuana is doesn't matter.

The marijuana "eradication" season is now well underway, as highlighted by this breathless Drug Enforcement Administration press release touting a raid in the San Diego area. "Thus far this year," the DEA says, "marijuana has been eradicated in more than 60 sites." 

This is, of course, utter nonsense. The word "eradication" implies permanence, but there is no evidence of any long-term impairment in marijuana availability or use. The complete failure of the DEA to accomplish its supposed job in 35 years of existence is discussed perceptively in a column by Bill Steigerwald in the generally conservative Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.

In California, the Marysville Appeal-Democrat raises an interesting question in an editorial marking the DEA's 35^th birthday: Could it be that "the entire point of the drug war is to give people jobs"?

The paper was thinking of DEA agents and drug war bureaucrats, but let's not forget who else benefits from our war on marijuana: Just as Al Capone made a mint off of booze during Prohibition, marijuana prohibition is enriching criminal gangs and all manner of unsavory characters, who effectively get a monopoly on a popular product without such inconveniences as taxes, environmental or labor laws, etc. In that respect, our marijuana laws are a roaring success.

California Congressman Jerry McNerney says he will now support an amendment to bar the U.S. Department of Justice from attacking state medical marijuana laws, according to a report in the Oakland Tribune. Last year, McNerney opposed the measure, known as the Hinchey-Rohrabacher amendment, but hearing the real-world stories of medical marijuana patients in his district changed his mind.

McNerney's Republican opponent, Dean Andal, promptly went on the attack, calling medical marijuana "a red herring," and saying federal anti-drug efforts shouldn't be curtailed when "we are facing a drug crisis with meth and other drug use on the rise."

Memo to Andal: Meth is already a legal medicine under federal law, classified in Schedule II of the Controlled Substances Act. No one seriously believes that medical use of methamphetamine by a limited number of patients has anything at all to do with meth abuse.

And let's not even ask what happened to the notion that Republicans were the party favoring local control and limited federal intervention.

We sat down with author and national radio commentator, Jim Hightower, to discuss some of his thoughts on marijuana. Check it out and look for more Profiles in Marijuana Reform coming soon!

I mentioned Drug Free America Foundation's Calvina Fay earlier this week, but here's another whopper from her group, Save Our Society, regarding a North Carolina resolution to study medical marijuana:

"Those that seek the legalization of marijuana often site [sic] the American College of Physicians paper as being in favor of 'medical' marijuana, however that is not accurate. The ACP supported research into cannabinoids such as THC, but they specifically stated 'The ACP encourages the use of non-smoked forms of THC that have proven therapeutic value.'"

There's actually plenty that's objectionable here: That SOS is so scared of North Carolina lawmakers even discussing medical marijuana shows what kind of small-minded fear addicts we're dealing with.

But if you actually read the ACP's statement – and you should if you really want to piss SOS off – its position is clear:

"ACP strongly urges protection from criminal or civil penalties for patients who use medical marijuana as permitted under state laws."

Really, though – read it. Don't take my word for it, and definitely don't take the word of the likes of Calvina Fay.

California's annual exercise in futility known as the Campaign Against Marijuana Planting -- a marijuana "eradication" program that regularly announces record plant seizures without having any discernible effect on the state's marijuana supply -- has begun for another year. According to news reports today, at least one man is already dead in a CAMP raid.

The circumstances of the shooting remain unclear, so it's possible the dead man fired first. Clearly, there are some unsavory characters involved in marijuana production. But California is a major producer of another psychoactive drug that's much more likely to induce violence and aggression -- a drug known as "wine" -- and yet this industry seems to have no such problems. If California regulated its marijuana industry as it regulated its wine industry, the problems associated with marijuana cultivation would vanish.

Last year, MPP sent a letter to California Attorney General Jerry Brown, who oversees CAMP, asking him to provide evidence that CAMP has reduced the state's marijuana supply, cut teenagers' access to marijuana, reduced the involvement of criminal gangs in marijuana production, or curbed environmental damage caused by marijuana production. Brown did not reply.

Ever find yourself at a party filled with smart, interesting folks, except the loudest, most boorish person there keeps dominating conversation? When it comes to shaping international drug policy, the U.S. is that guy.

Check out this account of the United Nation's Forum on International Drug Control Policy – a gathering of drug policy experts from nongovernmental organizations around the world – by the ACLU's Graham Boyd:

In all but one region of the world, the NGOs found an appalling over-reliance on arrest and incarceration — appalling both because it proves ineffective in addressing drug addiction and because it destroys so many lives at such great cost. In all but one region, the NGOs called for applying human rights norms to their nations’ drug policies. In all but one region, the NGOs described their work in reducing the harms of drugs by providing sterile syringes to drug users to stop the spread of AIDS.

All, that is, but the U.S. delegation, which is stacked with mean-spirited fear mongers like Drug Free America Foundation's Calvina Fay, who defended imprisoning drug users – including medical marijuana patients – as a great way to get abusers into treatment.

The reality, according to the latest drug treatment admission statistics from Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, is that our treatment facilities are increasingly clogged with low-level marijuana users whose only real problem is getting arrested. According to the stats, 58% of those seeking treatment for marijuana in 2006 were court ordered, far more than for any other drug, and more than half of those had used marijuana three times or fewer the month before entering treatment.

With great ideas like that, why would the crew representing the country with the most abysmal marijuana and cocaine use rates in the world want to listen to anybody else talk about drug policy? Only a cynic would suggest that Fay's organization parrots the U.S. government line because of its nearly $1.5 million in government grants.