Thank you for your correspondence of February 3, 2005, addressed to the Minister of Health, the Honourable Ujjal Dosanjh, concerning the inclusion of cannabis resin and other cannabis-based products in the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations (MMAR). The same letter was also received by the Office of Cannabis Medical Access at Health Canada. I regret the delay in replying.

In Canada, marihuana under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA). This legislation allows Canada to fulfill its international commitments under three Conventions of the United Nations: the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs; the 1971 Convention on Psychotropic Substances; and the 1988 Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. Under these conventions, Canada is required to criminalize certain activities with respect to particular drugs, including marihuana.

Marihuana is not approved as a therapeutic drug in any country in the world. It cannot be approved in Canada without adequate scientific evidence of benefits and a favourable risk/benefit profile for the therapeutic indication(s) for which it is proposed. At present, while pointing to some potential benefits, current scientific evidence does not establish the safety and efficacy of cannabis to the extent required by the Food and Drug Regulations for marketed drugs in Canada.

That is why our policy on medical marihuana has two components. The first component in the MMAR, which allow people with authorizations to possess and cultivate marihuana for medical purposes, and the second component is research. Conducting research will allow us to better understand whether, and for which medical conditions, marihuana may be effective medicine, and the risks associated with its use in such conditions.

The MMAR were developed following the Canadian regulatory process which affords an opportunity for the public to provide comments regarding the regulations and any proposed changes. The most recent amendments to the MMAR came into force on June 7, 2005, and were published in the Canada Gazette, Part II on June 29, 2005. These amendments to the MMAR and the Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement are available on the Canada Gazette Web site at: http://canadagazetteducanada.gc.ca/partII/2005/20050629/pdf/g2-13913.pdf
http://canadagazetteducanada.gc.ca/partII/2005/20050629/html/index-e.html

The MMAR currently authorize the possession of dried marihuana only, as the evidence in support of its use for medical purposes only comes from the use of the dried plant material. There is very little, if any, anecdotal evidence regarding the use of cannabis resin for medical purposes. Compared to dried marihuana, cannabis resin may also pose greater risks to the patient due to the difficulty in dosing resulting from the increased concentration of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and greater variability in the THC content.

In closing, I understand that these may not be the answers you are looking for. However, the MMAR were designed to regulate the use of marihuana for medical purposes, and we will continue to follow these guidelines, as well as continue our research efforts.

Again, thank you for writing.

Yours truly,

Susan Fletcher

Donations Gratefully Accepted
Annual Subscription to printed version $10

Contact CANNABIS DIGEST at: (250) 381-4220 or hemp101@shaw.ca

Cannabis Digest is a quarterly publication of the International Hempology 101 Society, which provides current legal, medical, and political updates concerning the medicinal use, growth and supply of cannabis. The Cannabis Buyers’ Clubs of Canada helps people with permanent physical disabilities and diseases. The Cannabis Digest is available online and in newsprint.

Thanks to all our contributors: Ted Smith, Gayle Quin, Steve Pittner, Janice Gee, Anthony D’Agati.

6) The difficulty in this case is that the analyst was unable to identify either cannabis resin or cannabis (marijuana) by sight in the sample of the cookie that she analyzed. What she was able to do was to identify a number of other cannabinoids under Schedule II that are mentioned separately there.
7) In creating these different offences for those two substances, resin and marihuana, Parliament has ascribed different weights of those substances that will attract, not only different penalties, but different court process. The analyst, Jenny Luk, who gave evidence in this case, said that they cannot quantify cannabis resin when it is in the form of a baked product, such as a cookie. It therefore becomes impossible to place it in one of these categories that the Parliament has created, because it cannot be seen and it cannot be quantified.
10) This is not a case that is going to throw the law or law enforcement into a tailspin. It is simply a case where it was wrongly charged. Had the charges been worded differently, then it most likely would have led to a more successful prosecution. Perhaps that is why there have been no cases in these 7 or 8 years, and it is simply not problematic except if the wrong charge is laid.

Once again I would like to graciously thank all who have completed and returned their Research Questionnaires! We’ve been telling people to take their time with them to do a good job, but please do not forget about it. If you like you can always get another one and start again to continue to monitor your progress. The best way to reclaim your health is to reclaim your life and be responsible for your Whole Self, even if it means searching for a new doctor. VICS will be starting their trial for cultivating in May or June as well. The preliminary hearing for Ted’s Nov. 15, 2000 cookie giveaway arrest has been set for June 1,2005 at 10am. The room # is always a mystery until the last minute so please come a few minutes early if you can. Ted is expecting a trial by jury this fall. Ted has appealed his cannabis resin conviction and his UVIC trafficking conviction and is presently waiting for court dates to be set. Thanks to everyone who bought a raffle ticket to pay the fine. If you would like to volunteer or help around the club be sure to attend our Working Group Meetings: next meeting July 5 at 6:30 pm at the club. Have a happy, healthy, and safe summer!

The only charge to stand after 4 trials against the club is the trafficking resin conviction from Jan. 7 that I am appealing to the B.C. Court of Appeal. That means a total of 11 various types of trafficking cannabis charges have been thrown out, with one left standing. ;. On the bright side, this resin conviction could be the only opportunity I could get to challenge the laws at the highest levels.

In a related case, Mary Jean Dunsdon, a.k.a Watermelon, in Vancouver has set some excellent precedents with her lawyer, John Conroy. She was arrested several times on Wreck Beach selling pot cookies and charged with trafficking cannabis resin. However, John successfully argued that these charges should be thrown out because the procedures used by Health Canada are unreliable. Unfortunately, the last decision was not available for my court case, though I may be able to use it in my appeal.

This change has several implications. Now the cases are before the highest level of court in the province, with 3 judges sitting on the bench to listen to my arguments. The factums and other supporting documents are much more intensive, and the court dates will not be set until most of the preparations have been made. The BC Court of Appeal is the place where changes could be made to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, the Medical Marijuana Access Regulations and other government policies regarding the use of cannabis. If only one judge agrees with my arguments, then I may go to the Supreme Court of Canada.

The first appeal against the charges of trafficking cannabis resin in cookies and skin products at the CBC has a much greater chance of success than the appeal against the trafficking conviction I received from sharing joints at UVic. The reasons for appeal have been posted on the web-page already, though they will become more refined in time. Since both cases will likely be heard at the same time, the focus will be placed on the resin conviction, as many people depend upon edible cannabis products and should not be forced to use pharmaceutical cannabis drugs instead. I am representing myself in these appeals for several reasons. It costs a lot of money to pay a lawyer to prepare an appeal, let alone the costs of the transcripts. I could not live with myself if 1 did not fight this to the end, and 1 look forward to the opportunity to persuade a few judges that these laws, regulations and prejudices suppressing cannabis are wrong.

There were six guest speakers forming a well-rounded group of activists: Gordon Harper spoke on behalf of the Regional Addictions Advocacy Society, a group dedicated to educating on harmful patterns of substance abuse. Advanced Nutrients, die leading manufacturer of grow products, sent Tech’ Mike to inform us of their new line and discuss responsible growing. Mathew McCally spoke on behalf of LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition), an American founded, but now worldwide, organization composed of ex-law enforcement officers, lawyers, judges and concerned citizens; LEAP is dedicated to fighting against prohibition starting from within the system. Gayle Quin, who represented the Cannabis Buyer’s Club of Canada, told us her story and talked about the medical benefits of cannabis as well as the unique products the club has to offer. Joanna McKee, founder of the Seattle Green Cross and catalyst for the Washington State Medical Marijuana Initiative, spoke about her patient co-op, a group of medical users who help each other grow medical-grade cannabis.

Of course, the convention would not be complete without the host Ted Smith, President of the International Hempology 101 Society and founder of the Cannabis Buyer’s Club of Canada. To cap off the afternoon we had a raffle and a 4:20; prizes included a beautiful glass bong, a Walbran Steve plaque and a full kit of nutrients supplied by Advanced Nutrients, to name a few. The convention was a huge success. To accommodate larger attendance the 7th Annual Cannabis Convention will be moved to the University of Victoria, to be held in Jan. 2006 instead of March, a busier month for students. Ted was arrested Nov.8, 2000 at a 4:20 circle on campus and was banned from UVic. That afternoon, undercover officers faked tokes at the 4:20, put the roaches out and later arrested Ted in the parking lot. However, a recent court decision allowed Ted back at the university for the first time in over four years, where he continues the Wed. 4:20 meetings of the UVic International Hempology 101 Club. Ted’s fine of $575 for sharing joints at UVIC will be paid for in large part by a raffle held on April 20 at 4:20. Keep updated at weekly Wed. meetings, 3:20 at Lansdowne Camosun, 4:20 at UVic and 7 pm at a location downtown. Check out our website: hempology.com.

Speaking of elections, a Provincial one is in full swing at this time and B.C is once again being swooned with assorted promises. At the provincial level there is limited legal responsibility for medical marihuana users as Health Canada is the federal purveyor of die Medical Marijuana Access Regulations (MMAR). However, prescription drug and law enforcement costs are paid for out of the provincial budget.

It’s nice to know that a few local candidates have at one time or another supported, or at least leaned in favour of softer penalties, legalization and or safe access for medical users. Many marihuana advocates moved to the N.D.P during the last federal election due in part to Jack Layton’s openness supporting full legalization and pot cafes across die country.

In Victoria former city councilor Rob Fleming, who spoke at our 2006 Cannabis Convention, is running in die Victoria/Hillside riding for die N.D.P. Not too long ago, Rob encouraged city council to ask the new Federal health minister Ujjal Dosanjh ( a former N.D.P premier in this province) to clarify the M.M.A.R. Also in the Victoria/Beacon Hill area, the Leader of the N.D.P Carole James is the candidate. While the old guard in the NDP is not fully supportive on this issue, it seems the younger generation is prepared to move beyond cannabis prohibition. The alternative is a nasty Liberal government which wants very harsh laws against all growers and compassion clubs shut down in favour of the federal government’s plans. At the provincial level, the N.D.P has in the past viewed public input seriously and has often leaned towards community-based solutions to address social and health care needs. The candidates need to hear your views so it’s up to you the voter to ask. If you would like to know more about the N.D.P their web address is BC.NDP.ca/comitments/platform.