Epidemiologic studies examining one association of Cannabis use with head and neck squamous cell carcinomas have also been inconsistent in their findings. A pooled analysis of nine case-control studies from the U.S./Latin American International Head and Neck Cancer Epidemiology (INHANCE) Consortium included information from 1,921 oropharyngeal cases, 356 tongue cases, and 7,639 controls. Compared with those who never smoked Cannabis, Cannabis smokers had an elevated risk of oropharyngeal cancers and a reduced risk of tongue cancer. These study results both reflect the inconsistent effects of cannabinoids on cancer incidence noted in previous studies and suggest that more work needs to be done to understand the potential role of human papillomavirus infection. A systematic review and meta-analysis of nine case-control studies involving 13,931 participants also concluded that there was insufficient evidence to support or refute a positive or negative association between Cannabis smoking and the incidence of head and neck cancers.
An alternative to the gateway hypothesis is the common liability to addiction (CLA) theory. It states that some individuals are, for various reasons, willing to try multiple recreational substances. The "gateway" drugs are merely those that are (usually) available at an earlier age than the harder drugs. Researchers have noted in an extensive review that it is dangerous to present the sequence of events described in gateway "theory" in causative terms as this hinders both research and intervention.
The Drug Enforcement Agency and the Office of National Drug Control Policy of the US raised concerns over tests conducted from 1995 to 1997 that showed that consumption of hempseed products available during that period led to interference with drug-testing programs for marijuana use. Federal US programs utilize a THC metabolite level of 50 parts per billion in urine. Leson (2000) found that this level was not exceeded by consuming hemp products, provided that THC levels are maintained below 5 ppm in hemp oil, and below 2 ppm in hulled seeds. Nevertheless the presence of even minute trace amounts of THC in foods remains a tool that can be used by those wishing to prevent the hemp oilseed industry from developing.
Jump up ^ Klein C, Karanges E, Spiro A, Wong A, Spencer J, Huynh T, Gunasekaran N, Karl T, Long LE, Huang XF, Liu K, Arnold JC, McGregor IS (November 2011). "Cannabidiol potentiates Δ⁹-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) behavioural effects and alters THC pharmacokinetics during acute and chronic treatment in adolescent rats". Psychopharmacology. 218 (2): 443–457. doi:10.1007/s00213-011-2342-0. PMID 21667074.
Jump up ^ Parliament of the Czech Republic (1998), Explanatory Report to Act No. 112/1998 Coll., which amends the Act No. 140/1961 Coll., the Criminal Code, and the Act No. 200/1990 Coll., on misdemeanors (in Czech), Prague "Podle čl. 36 Jednotné úmluvy o omamných látkách ze dne 31. března 1961 (č. 47/1965 Sb.) se signatáři zavazují k trestnímu postihu tam uvedených forem nakládání s drogami včetně jejich držby. Návrh upouští od dosavadní beztrestnosti držby omamných a psychotropních látek a jedů pro svoji potřebu. Dosavadní beztrestnost totiž eliminuje v řadě případů možnost postihu dealerů a distributorů drog."
For many, the medical and therapeutic potential of cannabis is what makes legalizing the marijuana plant such an important political and social task. Federal prohibition has established barriers to comprehensive cannabis research in the United States. However, researchers in other countries continue to make significant contributions to our knowledge of the cannabis plant and how it affects the human body.
Soil characteristics, latitude and climatic stresses have been found to have significant effects on THC concentrations, and there are seasonal and even diurnal variations (Small 1979; Pate 1998b). However, the range of THC concentrations developed by low-THC cultivars (those typically with £0.3% THC) under different circumstances on the whole is limited, for the most part generally not varying more than 0.2 percentage points when grown in a range of circumstances, and usually less (note information in Scheifle et al. 1999; Scheifle 2000, Scheifle and Dragla 2000). Practically, this has meant in Canadian experience that a few cultivars have been eliminated from further commercial cultivation because they sometimes exceed the 0.3% level (‘Fedora 19’ and ‘Futura,’ authorized in 2000, have now been removed because some test results in several years exceeded 0.3%; ‘Finola’ and ‘Uniko B’ are under probation because of elevated levels), but on the whole most of the permitted cultivars have maintained highly consistent development of quite low levels of THC.
As of November 2016, 28 states and the District of Columbia legally allow cannabis for personal medical use. Rules surrounding the use of medical cannabis (medical marijuana) vary by state. The first state in the union to legalize the medical use of marijuana was California in 1996. States that allow medical marijuana include: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia. It is important to recognize that these state marijuana laws do not change the fact that using marijuana continues to be an offense under Federal law.
Wild North American hemp is derived mostly from escaped European cultivated hemp imported in past centuries, perhaps especially from a revival of cultivation during World War II. Wild Canadian hemp is concentrated along the St. Lawrence and lower Great Lakes, where considerable cultivation occurred in the 1800s. In the US, wild hemp is best established in the American Midwest and Northeast, where hemp was grown historically in large amounts. Decades of eradication have exterminated many of the naturalized populations in North America. In the US, wild plants are rather contemptuously called “ditch weed” by law enforcement personnel. However, the attempts to destroy the wild populations are short-sighted, because they are a natural genetic reservoir, mostly low in THC. Wild North American plants have undergone many generations of natural adaptation to local conditions of climate, soil and pests, and accordingly it is safe to conclude that they harbor genes that are invaluable for the improvement of hemp cultivars. We have encountered exceptionally vigorous wild Canadian plants (Fig. 52), and grown wild plants from Europe (Fig. 53) which could prove valuable. Indeed, studies are in progress in Ontario to evaluate the agronomic usefulness of wild North American hemp. Nevertheless, present policies in North America require the eradication of wild hemp wherever encountered. In Europe and Asia, there is little concern about wild hemp, which remains a valuable resource.
“With more than 2,000 wine and liquor stores from Buffalo to Montauk, we offer existing retail space with quick and cheap access to the market in every corner of the state,” reads the website for the group, which is called The Last Store on Main Street. “That means more tax revenue, and sooner, for the State to fulfill basic responsibilities and invest in the future of our neighborhoods.”
Market considerations also heavily determine the wisdom of investing in hemp. Growing hemp unfortunately has a magnetic attraction to many, so there is danger of overproduction. A marketing board could be useful to prevent unrestrained competition and price fluctuations, but is difficult to establish when the industry is still very small. As noted above, unwise investment in Canada produced a glut of seeds that resulted in price dumping and unprofitable levels for the majority. Cultural and production costs of hemp have been said to be comparable to those for corn, and while the truth of this remains to be confirmed, the legislative burden that accompanies hemp puts the crop at a unique disadvantage. Among the problems that Canadian farmers have faced are the challenge of government licensing (some delays, and a large learning curve), very expensive and sometime poor seed (farmers are not allowed to generate their own seed), teenagers raiding fields in the mistaken belief that marijuana is being grown, and great difficulties in exportation because of the necessity of convincing authorities that hemp is not a narcotic. Unless the producer participates in sharing of value-added income, large profits are unlikely. The industry widely recognizes that value added to the crop is the chief potential source of profit, as indeed for most other crops.
In Europe and Asia, hemp farming has been conducted for millennia. Although most countries ceased growing hemp after the second word war, some didn’t, including France, China, Russia, and Hungary, so that essential knowledge of how to grow and process hemp was maintained. When commercial hemp cultivation resumed in Canada in 1997, many farmers undertook to grow the crop without appreciating its suitability for their situation, or for the hazards of an undeveloped market. Hemp was often grown on farms with marginal incomes in the hopes that it was a savior from a downward financial spiral. The myth that hemp is a wonder crop that can be grown on any soil led some to cultivate on soils with a history of producing poor crops; of course, a poor crop was the result.
On October 17, 2018, Canada legalized cannabis for recreational adult use making it the second country in the world to do so after Uruguay and the first G7 nation. The Canadian Licensed Producer system may become the Gold Standard in the world for safe and secure cannabis production, including provisions for a robust craft cannabis industry where many expect opportunities for experimenting with different strains. Laws around use vary from province to province including age limits, retail structure, and growing at home.