CPO CFM 2012-10-16 Transcript and Response

Community Partnership of the Ozarks
Community Forum on Marijuana

Presented October 16, 2012 Glendale High School Auditorium Springfield, Missouri Transcription provided by Springfield NORML volunteers. Includes remarks prepared by members of Springfield NORML.
This transcript offers a complete record of the event. The time indications on the left side refer to the minutes and seconds from when recording began. Statements prepared by Springfield NORML volunteers are presented in a blue color and different font.
If you are viewing the Google Docs version, you may add comments to this document:
To make a comment, highlight the area of text you're commenting about, right click on it, and choose "Comment". (Make note of the keyboard shortcut for faster commenting) Comments will appear to the right; if you can't see them, scroll over, enlarge your window, or reduce your browser's font size. Please include links if you are citing research. Get as close to the original source as possible.
Page 1 of 41 http://springfield-norml.org/
"Community Forum on Marijuana", 2012 October 16 Transcription provided by Springfield NORML volunteers Includes remarks prepared by members of Springfield NORML
Opening remarks from Springfield NORML members The October 16, 2012 Community Forum on Marijuana offered an opportunity for Community Partnership to have a civil and open community discussion about cannabis. A "forum", as defined by the New Oxford American Dictionary, is "a place, meeting, or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged." This event was advertised as a forum about how marijuana affects the youth. Springfield NORML agrees that youth substance abuse of any variety is a legitimate community concern. We believe youth should steer clear of all medically unnecessary drugs, and science-based information exists that supports that position. We believe helping parents guide their children in this regard, without resorting to misinformation or scare tactics, is also highly beneficial. In this aspect, we think the Community Partnership has done its community a disservice with the way it conducted the forum. There was a decent amount of factual information presented that kept to the topic at hand. However, several speakers departed from the forum's main subject to spread their anti-legalization beliefs, and the moderator failed to act impartially. We do not know for sure if Community Partnership intended the marijuana prohibition discussion to take place, but it is clear they were not willing to allow statements about more than one perspective. Although behavior remained civil, it was clear within the first several minutes that several members of the panel were stacked in favor of presenting an entirely anti-marijuana message, as foreshadowed by the language used within the first minute of recording. Furthermore, speakers presented a stunning amount of leading statements, factual inaccuracies, statistical distortions, misrepresentations, while avoiding full disclosure about the wealth of recent information that shows cannabis can be medically and industrially useful and responsibly used by a society. Finally, while the audience was invited to submit questions on index cards, and while a range of those questions were presented, many questions were answered inaccurately, without offering opportunity for audience comment, or saying "we don't know the answer" and offering an avenue for further research and discussion. In light of these shortcomings, we are sharing the full transcript of this event with the hope that it will serve as a useful continuation of the discussion. We have also included remarks, written and reviewed by Springfield NORML members, to inform the reader further about certain topics that we feel were misrepresented.
0:00 Moderator ...tonight. I'm vice-chair of the board of directors for Community Partnership. And very happy to be here to moderate this community forum on marijuana. Now the bottom line is, the purpose for this evening, why we're here, why folks went to the trouble to put on this event, is that, in fact, there's an awful lot of misinformation. There's a lot of half truths about marijuana, its effects, its long term effects. 0:30 ...[inaudible] have been promulgated by people that should know better, in my opinion.
This language sets the tone of this forum by showing antagonism toward those who do not agree with the information or sentiments shared by the invited panelists.
But, nonetheless, what this evening's about really, is hopefully to raise awareness, certainly, in the community, about the facts regarding marijuana and its long-term use, and so forth. So, that's kind of where we're headed. And we have a really wonderful and distinguished panel of folks who can speak directly to this issue here tonight. 1:00 And we're going to get to them in a minute. And we're going to have a chance for you to weigh in with questions, and hopefully we'll make this a lively evening of discussion, and learning, and awareness-raising. So I'd like to recognize a couple of key folks in the audience here tonight. Is Chuck Daugherty here? Chuck Daugherty's here. He is the executive director of ACT Missouri, in Jeff City (Jefferson City, MO), a state-wide resource center for prevention in Missouri. 1:30 Thanks for being here, sir. We have Springfield City Councilman Doug Burlison is here somewhere, maybe. There's Doug, thanks for coming. And from the Greene County Prosecutor's Office, Dan Patterson. And lots of other VIPs and important folks, too. And lots that I won't take time to mention all of you, but thank you all for coming. 2:00 Appreciate your attendance, bringing your expertise and perspective to the event tonight. So, here's the thing. The way this thing is going to proceed is that we're going to have, as I said, this panel is going to come and each deliver remarks in the range from six (6) to eight (8) minutes. And, I ain't scared. I will take some people out if they mess with me too much. 2:30 Except the guy who's packing heat. Audience [laughter] Moderator So we're going to have some remarks from each of the panelists, and we have a keynote address to close that. But, we're also going to have an opportunity for you all to, on three by five (3" x 5") note cards provided to you. More cards will be available if the questions get really out of hand. But, we have a chance for you to write down your questions. And following each of the speakers, as I understand it, Chris, they're going to be collected.
3:00 Folks will be coming up and down the rows collecting those. So, keep your questions fresh in your mind. After the keynote, we will take a few minutes break to sort of gather our thoughts, gather through the... sort through the, hopefully the onslaught of questions, prepare them for me, and I will then sort of deliver them in some priority order, the questions that you've asked. 3:30 It may not be possible to respond to all questions, certainly. It's a pretty good sized turnout, for which we're grateful. But, we'll try to get through as many as possible. Alright, so having said that, we're going to have folks in this order coming up. Let me just introduce the entire panel very quickly. Major Kirk Manlove, from Springfield Police Department. Brad Shelton, from Greene County Juvenile Office. Jean Graebeel and Julie Steiger. 4:00 Is Julie going to be joining as well? Unknown Yes. Moderator Yes, tag team, from Springfield Public Schools. And Micheal Tadre (?) from Burrell, John Bertsch, I'm sorry, CSTAR (?) program. And our keynote speaker, Ron Griffin. So, without further ado, we begin with Major Kirk Manlove, who has been with the Springfield Police Department for almost twenty (20) years, is currently a commander of Investigation and Support Services, and has significant narcotics enforcement experience. Major? 4:30 Major Kirk Manlove I want to thank the Community Partnership of the Ozarks for inviting the Police Department to participate in tonight's forum. Chief Williams had another engagement tonight, so I won't come to disappoint those who wanted to speak to him, and I'll do my best to answer your questions or address concerns. Drug usage can be a very broad field of discussion, and a discussion about marijuana can also be very broad, so I want to keep my comments fairly narrow in keeping with the forum. 5:00 I'll try to focus on the impact marijuana can have on our youth and the community overall. I've been with the department for nineteen (19) years. I will not pretend to be a marijuana expert, or have all the answers to every question. I do think I can offer some expertise with regard to our agency's experience with users and traffickers of marijuana. So I can share with you our perspective, as your police department, and some of our observations as to our current situation in Springfield.
5:30 I'd also like to tell you about our approach to drug enforcement in our enforcement philosophy. Of my nineteen (19) years in our agency, I spent six (6) of them in our narcotics enforcement unit, four and a half (4.5) of which were undercover, then the rest as a supervisor. More than I would care to, I've sat in many houses and apartments of drug users and dealers, watching them use drugs, marijuana in particular, where its use was prevalent. And watching them smoke many times in front of their children.
In one 13-year study at Columbia University, researchers found that even during periods of marijuana-induced intoxication, people are able to engage in appropriate social behaviors and even respond to emergencies. Many regional experts actually agree that marijuana is not addictive:
After an investigation, we'd often learn these individuals suffered heavy addictions to marijuana.
The managing director at the University of Kansas Hospital's poison control center said the drug is not addictive, but users can become dependent on the feeling it causes. "Some wonder about impact of Colorado marijuana law on Kansas City metro", KCTV 5 News, Nov 8 2012, http://m.kctv5.com/w/main/story/77793553/ The National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse, commissioned by President Nixon, concluded that marijuana "does not lead to physical dependence": Chapter III, "Social Impact of marihuana use" Addiction Potential Unfortunately, fact and fancy have become irrationally mixed regarding marihuana's physiological and psychological properties. Marihuana clearly is not in the same chemical category as heroin insofar as its physiologic and psychological effects are concerned. In a word, cannabis does not lead to physical dependence. No torturous withdrawal syndrome follows the sudden cessation of chronic, heavy use of marihuana. Although evidence indicates that heavy, long-term cannabis users may develop psychological dependence, even then the level of psychological dependence is no different from the syndrome of anxiety and restlessness seen when an American stops smoking tobacco cigarettes. http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/nc/ncc3_17.htm
6:00 In addition they could [inaudible] from not only a health perspective, but financially as well. They often are unemployed, much in part because of their addiction. And money needed for food, rent, or utilities were used to buy marijuana or other drugs. As I moved from case to case I often wondered what becomes of those children in terms of their future drug usage, and how their lives were impacted. I've had the opportunity of interviewing hundreds (100s) of users and dealers. I've had the opportunity, and I need to point out that they often [inaudible] not always, but often.
6:30 I would occasionally come across a marijuana user or dealer that never used other drugs. But for those using other drugs, methamphetamine or cocaine, the vast majority of the time they had been users of marijuana at a very young age, often introduced to them as they observe their parents smoking and then becoming continuous users of the drug.
A real world example of what happens when marijuana is readily available can be found in Holland. The Dutch partially legalized marijuana in the 1970s. Since then, hard drug use-heroin and cocaine-have declined substantially. If marijuana really were a gateway drug, one would have expected use of hard drugs to have gone up, not down. This apparent "negative gateway" effect has also been observed in the United States. Studies done in the early 1970s showed a negative correlation between use of marijuana and use of alcohol. A 1993 Rand Corporation study that compared drug use in states that had decriminalized marijuana versus those that had not, found that where marijuana was more available-the states that had decriminalized-hard drug abuse as measured by emergency room episodes decreased. In short, what science and actual experience tell us is that marijuana tends to substitute for the much more dangerous hard drugs like alcohol, cocaine, and heroin.
This observation seems to be supported in studies by the AMA, that those who smoke marijuana would be four (4) times likely to use cocaine and five (5) times more likely to use hallucinogens. 7:00 I definitely interviewed many people who admitted they were strongly addicted to marijuana. These individuals often appeared to be apathetic, not very motivated. Those who managed to stay in school, whether college or high school, were making poor grades or not performing very well. I was disappointed to learn that marijuana usage in modern youth has gone up again in two thousand eleven (2011), especially after having experienced no increase from oh four (2004) to oh seven (2007) and then climbing again in two thousand nine (2009). 7:30 In two thousand eleven (2011), two point six million (2,600,000) persons age twelve (12) or older had used marijuana for the first time within the past four (4) ? months, and fifty seven point seven percent (57.7%) younger than eighteen (18). We also see the impact of marijuana usage in our driving public at the police department. The use of marijuana definitely impacts motor skills, causing physical impairment of drivers. Of our approximately over one thousand (1000) DWI drivers last year about twelve percent (12%) of those were impaired by drugs.
8:00 Of our drug-impaired drivers, sixty five percent (65%) were impaired by marijuana.
1000 DWI drivers 12% impaired by drugs = 120 drivers impaired by non-alcoholic drugs 120 drivers 65% impaired by marijuana = 78 DWI drivers impaired by marijuana 1000 DWI drivers - 120 impaired by non-alcoholic drugs = 880 drivers impaired by alcohol
In over seventy five percent (75%) of our drug-impaired drivers, marijuana is a secondary detected drug in combinations with alcohol, depressants, or stimulants. It affects the body two (2) to three (3) hours after ingestion, however impairment can last up to twenty four (24) hours, without the user being aware of the effects. It slows reaction times, depth perception, it reduces the driver's ability to devote sufficient attention to driving.
Statistical Distortion - Major Manlove give statistics on body effects based on ingestion, when people typically smoke it, where effects begin .
From the NORML report on impairment from smoking: Recently, a pair of scientific reviews of automobile crash culpability studies have indicated that THC levels in blood serum below 5 ng/ml are not associated with an elevated accident risk. (Levels below 5 ng/ml are attained in recreational marijuana users, on average, within 1 to 3 hours after cannabis consumption.) Moreover, some studies suggest that "even a THC serum level of between 5 and 10 ng/ml may not be associated with an above normal accident risk." However, additional studies are necessary before reliable THC/blood threshold for impairment may be derived.
8:30 It's important to point out that with improved cultivation techniques and technology, the THC levels now are not what they were in the sixties (1960s) and seventies (1970s). In nineteen eighty three (1983) the average THC level was under four percent (4%). It's ten point one percent (10.1%) now, with some varieties going fifteen (15%) to twenty (20%). I'd like to take a few minutes to describe our drug enforcement efforts in our department. As with any drug, we focus our attention at the distribution and the trafficking level. We do not target users it does not mean we don't come across users in our investigation, nor does it mean that they are not charged with possession.
9:00 But it is more often a result of a traffic stop, or during the investigation of other crimes, that we come across individuals holding small amount of drugs, and this of course includes marijuana. Our agency seized seventy six pounds (76 lbs) of marijuana in two thousand eleven (2011). The local DEA office, of which we have detectives attached as part of a local drug task force...
The reasoning behind this in direct violation of the Missouri constitution and against the state police forces oaths of office. All interest accruing from investment of the county school fund, the clear proceeds of all penalties, forfeitures and fines collected hereafter for any breach of the penal laws of the state, the net proceeds from the sale of estrays, and all other moneys coming into said funds shall be distributed annually to the schools of the several counties according to law. Missouri constitution, http://www.moga.mo.gov/const/a09007.htm There are many articles both new and old about this problem. See page 45 of http://auditor.mo.gov/press/2006-38.pdf (excerpted below) for the results of police forces diverting funds from the School Building Revolving Fund (as set up in our constitution) to their own departments as well as their pockets.
When local police involve any of these five federal agencies, 80% of all seized assets are diverted back to the police: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; Drug Enforcement Administration; Federal Bureau of Investigation; U.S. Postal Inspection Service; U.S. Attorneys Offices.
Greene County diverted $162,901 dollars to themselves according to data found here: http://www.justice.gov/jmd/afp/02fundreport/2011affr/report2b.htm
...and in conjunction with their agencies such as the highway patrol seized thirty eight hundred pounds (3800 lbs) in two thousand eleven (2011) on I-44, and seventeen hundred pounds (1700 lbs) so far this year.
99% of all cannabis seized in our state is a non-psychoactive plant called wild hemp (ditch weed) which grows wild in ditches along the highway. You can't smoke it, it is simply an inert plant that they cut down along the highways each year at the tune of $500,000 in taxes and fees placed on pharmacies. Source: http://www.albany.edu/sourcebook/pdf/t438.pdf
9:30 The majority of that marijuana is smuggled from Mexico by the drug cartels, and tonight, I'd like to dispel a myth I commonly hear and that is our jails and prisons are full of people convicted with just user amounts of marijuana. It's simply not the case. Our arrest policy, and our agreement with our county jail, directs our officers issue a ticket, and release for misdemeanor marijuana possession unless there are other factors at play.
While this is true that the jails may not be full, it downplays the effects of these charges on non violent offenders, e.g. the offender's employment, which can effect a whole families well-being in Springfield.
10:00 For example, the identification of the person cannot be established, so fingerprints must be taken, at which point they're booked into the jail for photographs and prints, then released. Or they may have an arrest warrant, or the person presents a threat to someone, for example. We recently reviewed twelve (12) months of arrest data for our agency, and we found we had booked no-one on probable cause only, for misdemeanor possession of marijuana. We did make a hundred thirty seven (137) arrests, city warrants issued by a judge, for misdemeanor possession of marijuana. 10:30 These are often issued because someone did not follow through with a plea or a judge's directive. At the state level, the Bureau of Justice Statistics showed that only one point six percent (1.6%) of the inmate population were convicted of a marijuana-only crime, including trafficking, with only point seven percent (0.7%) in prison for a marijuana possession only crime. Many of these may have been initially charged with more serious crimes, but were able to negotiate reduced charges for lighter sentences in plea agreements.
11:00 These also might include those individuals who are career criminals with multiple-felony convictions. In closing, I can tell you that I believe our agency and local justice system has shifted, in what I think, in a positive way, in the past twenty (20) or more years. Law enforcement and the justice system, with regard to drug enforcement, has always been a three-pronged approach, with enforcement, education, and treatment. Often times, some agencies and justice systems will be heavier or lighter on some of those areas. 11:30 I do think we are a bit more balanced than in the past, with more emphasis on treatment ... than before. Greene County's drug court, for example, has had big success since its inception over six (6) or seven (7) years ago. I also think investigators have a better understanding of addiction, how a treatment referral instead might be a better avenue, and offers perhaps a more long-term approach to crime reduction, than a temporary trip to jail, only to have someone get out and continue with their addiction. 12:00 Again, I'm just scratching the surface here. These are just a few of our observations, and what we experience and see as an agency in southwest Missouri. Thank you. Audience [applause] Moderator Thank you Major. So we're going to do a collection now. If you have questions on those three by fives (3" x 5"). Alright. 12:30 And next up, we have the hardest working man in juvenile justice, he has been with the office for twenty-two (22) years, born and raised in Springfield, Deputy Juvenile Officer and Supervisor, my friend Brad Shelton. Brad Shelton Thank you, Paul. I just wanna kind of go through just a few things on what we do at the Juvenile Office when when we get one of these referrals. Early intervention is an important key. When we get a referral, we set up an intake conference with parent and youth. We evaluate the case and evidence and other multiple factors. 13:00 We administer a risk needs assessment, on the youth to determine what level of intervention should be considered. Accountability for actions is definitely part of the consideration for disposition. A CSTAR assessment is also done to look at what kind of drug or alcohol dependency issues we have and how we need to handle that. Once we gather all this information in, kind of make a decision regards to how we're gonna handle the case. There's two ways we can go with the case. We can either go informally, or formally. 13:30 We try to to utilize all informal options if possible before we even look at going to court. We have a great probation services department that workers work with these kids and have a lot of resources in the community that we can direct these kids to. That's what we try to do without going to court, if we can. If it requires a formal petition we will file it and take the juvenile to court, and even at that point of time, we're looking at, we're working in the interest of the kid and the family.
14:00 And we have some great services through our formal probation department which include a new program which is called RADAR, Responding Appropriately do Drug and Alcohol Referrals. This is the name of the current program that supervises formal youth while on probation for any offense that is drug related [inaudible]. I pulled a statistic from our detention facility, which is I think is really interesting, and I want to share with you tonight. 14:30 If we detain any youth in our detention facility for any offense and that could be assault, burglary, drug offense, or any offense whatsoever, we are usually looking at formal court action, but what our detention facility is reporting to us on an average of kids admitted into detention, they are seeing forty to fifty percent (40%-50%) of those kids admitted into detention testing positive for THC. That kind of shows you that the issue in regards to marijuana use and getting into some serious trouble.
Logical Fallacy: Correlation proves causation
The implication here is that the kids admitted into detention were led to commit other crimes as a direct result of the use of marijuana at some time prior to the crime.
15:00 Finally, in my years of experience with working with youth and families, referred to our office, and I've been there a long time, and this is not rocket science, I mean, it's pretty simple, and I try to put it out through the parent and the youth that I work with. I can state without a doubt, you know, marijuana and drug use, in simple terms is not healthy, it leads to negative consequences, leads to dangerous situations with your friends, leads to family problems, leads to peer problems, education problems, and legal problems, and that's a fact.
This altruistic viewpoint presented as fact should be balanced by looking at the other side.
One testimony you can watch is from Dennis Hill, Biochemist who treated his prostate cancer with cannabis. It's an interesting story by someone who has a lot of credentials in the science field. Video (part 1): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ym0BSdEIjJA Video (part 2): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_7gy7Dyta0&feature=relmfu Again, if dissuading kids here is the goal, the available evidence shows the contrary. Most of the negative consequences are brought onto them through law enforcement and the judicial system.
15:30 I've been there twenty-two (22) years, and I can tell you without a doubt, that marijuana and drug use is just [inaudible] can be horrific for kids. Finally, one thing I do tell kids and the parents when they come into my office, you know, we're there to try to work with them and work in their interests, but the issue that comes to mind is, if they can't get it under control, and get this activity under control, when they turn seventeen (17), if they go out and get arrested they will have an adult criminal record for the rest of their life. 16:00 And it doesn't matter if they are adjudicated on that, it will show up as an arrest. And whenever we do background checks on people that are coming to work at our office, I will see that. There will be an arrest, and a person that's applying for a job, that doesn't have that arrest on their record's going to have a better shot at doing something positive and getting a good job in the future.
16:30 So, in closing, I just want to make sure everybody knows that tackling these issues before adulthood, with early and appropriate intervention, is absolutely, and a key and a must. Moderator Thank you sir. Audience [applause] Moderator He ought to know. Next up we have a team. Jean Graebeel, who's been Coordinator of Health Services for Springfield Public Schools for the past twenty-two (22) years. Twenty-two (22) years seems to be a theme tonight, there's three of you. 17:00 She's a Registered Nurse with a Masters in health education, was recently inducted as a national fellow in school nursing, Jean has two grown children, one a graduate of Kickapoo High School. And helping her out's going to be Dr. Julie Steiger, Springfield Public Schools Director of Operations for Secondary Schools, a former high school math teacher, middle school counselor, middle school and high school assistant principal, and principal. Ladies? Jean Graebeel Thank you. Well good evening. 17:30 Well I'm in a unique position this evening, because I get to share with Julie, and Julie is our Secondary Operations Director, so I'm going to talk a few minutes about prevention and early intervention with our students, and then Julie's going to talk on the side of our policy as it relates to our discipline policy, participation in extracurricular activities, and the potential consequences related to college and career planning. So, you know, the old adage, "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure," and that is still very relevant today. 18:00 So, we begin very early in our health curriculum, and talking with our kindergarteners, for instance, on good substances and bad substances. What is safe, and what is unsafe substances that can be taken into the body. And the middle school, for example, in the sixth (6th) grade, the curriculum covers application of major steps in decision making, to a scenario where the student has to best describe how they would do resistance to drug use. 18:30 Students also have to investigate the impact of drug use and the ability to make sound judgments. In the ninth (9th) grade curriculum, students have to identify and assess the effects of drugs use, misuse, and abuse on major life areas, including short and long term effects of various drug uses, how peer pressure and media pressure influence drug-taking behavior, and who you can turn to for help if you have a problem with an illegal substance use and abuse, for instance, marijuana. 19:00 So, for an example, in Springfield Public Schools, if a student discloses to the school counselor, or to another staff member, that they're using an illegal substance, or they're concerned about a drug or alcohol use, the student can be referred for an initial screening to determine whether or not there's in-patient or out-patient substance abuse counseling, which may be appropriate for them. 19:30 So all those requests, or even for mental health screening, at this point, for middle school and high school students, we have a relationship, or an agreement, with Burrell Behavioral Health Center at this point, between us, and Springfield Public Schools and Burrell Behavioral Health. So they can be referred for screening by an administrator, a counselor, or even you as a parent.
20:00 So if you have concerns about what's going on with your student, don't hesitate to contact the school counselor, have a discussion with them, or if you have a relationship with one of their teachers, or an administrator, don't wait until too late to have a discussion with them. If you are seeing signs and symptoms of things that are not going well within the home, then talk to the school about that. So then the student assistance team, or the teacher support team, can also take in referrals from other teachers if they've noticed changes in the behavior of the student within the classroom. 20:30 They've changed friends, absences, chronic absences from school, and/or they're tardy, they seem to be sleeping in class, or their behavior, again, has changed. So then those screenings are free for any student that is under the age of eighteen (18). If they're over the age of eighteen (18), eighteen (18) and over, then there's another process that has to take place, and that goes through our Coordinator of Counseling, which is Rhonda Mammon. 21:00 So if you have any questions or concerns about that, then certainly she is the person to go to for that. So if there's any request for screening, the principal or the counselor can make recommendations to the parent, and screening takes place only with parental consent. And the parent is supposed to be involved with that screening. So then a contact is made to Rhonda Mammon, and then from there, then it goes on and she makes the appointment for that screening to take place, and parents are involved. 21:30 It can be taken place at the school site, but most typically, it's done off-site as well. So in essence, it's a team approach, for us. It's not only the school district that talks about prevention, it's up to parents, it's up to the community, it's up to students. We try to build essential steps for the students in order to be able to create a healthy lifestyle for them, but it also takes the community support. 22:00 And isn't that wonderful, that as many of you that came out this evening, to become better informed about this urgent concern that we have for our youth. We all want our youth to be successful, and you're part of the solution as well. So that's my ounce of prevention. So next, Julie is going to speak about our discipline policy, and the potential impact for future and consequences for substance abuse and use. 22:30 Dr. Julie Steiger First I'd like to give some good news. Our drug and alcohol suspensions, and we don't differentiate between what the student is being suspended for, it all falls under drug and alcohol, so I cannot speak to how many of these are specifically for marijuana. But, since two thousand seven (2007), our suspensions have gone down each year. We had one year, they peaked up about by ten (10), but in two thousand six two thousand seven (2006-2007), which is when our current system started keeping the data, we were at two hundred ninety-six (296) students in the entire district being suspended for drug or alcohol use or distribution. 23:00 And last year, we were down to one hundred ninety-seven (197). And I think that's really good. And you think, we're a school district of about twenty-five thousand (25,000) students, our numbers are way down, and I think a lot of it has to do with all the different things we've put in place to help students before it becomes a real problem. And with the discipline we are a zero-tolerance school district. Distribution is a Safe Schools violation. We run by Missouri statute with how we make our policies.
23:30 When a student has the first offense for possession, they are assigned a ten (10) day out of school suspension, which may be reduced to seven (7) days, if they and their parent elect to go through the assessment that Jean talked about that is run through CSTAR. Out of our one hundred ninety-seven (197) suspensions last year, fifty-three percent (53%), one hundred nine (109) of those students did choose to do the assessment, to have their suspension reduced to seven (7) days. We want kids in school. They don't learn when they're not in school. 24:00 They're not learning, they're not going to be graduates, and our graduation rate continues to go up every year, which is another good thing to hear about. On sale and distribution, on the first offense, that's a maximum ten (10) day out of school suspension that would not be reduced with the assessment. So, with that, they could still do the assessment, that is still available, but it's a mandatory ten (10) day out of school suspension. When we talk about second offenses for possession or use, that does go up to also to the ten (10) day out of school suspension, and a recommendation for a review meeting. 24:30 We have review officers, who are retired principals, who will come in and sit and listen to the circumstances and decide if they will go beyond the ten (10) days, because by state law, the superintendent cannot suspend somebody for more than ten (10) days without having that review meeting. One of the things that is a real big concern is extracurricular activities. Our students do sign a citizenship agreement. They are representing the school, they are representing the activity they are participating in, so they are held to a little bit higher standard. 25:00 If they have a drug or alcohol violation, they would have a twenty-eight (28) day athletic suspension from that participation. So, in the high schools and in the middle schools, while they are on the out of school suspension, they may not participate in that activity at all. When they are back in school, even though they still have that twenty-eight (28) day window where they're supposed to be excluded from participation, they may not participate in games, or speech and debate, or whatever, they may participate in the practices if the coaches choose to let them do so. 25:30 They also may sit on the bench or attend if the coach decides that they may do that, or the sponsor decides they may do that. The final point that we were asked about was college admissions and scholarships, and I did call one of our high school counselors, and I said, "Okay, just be blunt with me, very honest. "If a student has a drug or alcohol suspension, or if they have something that has been sent over to juvenile, because we do school police reports whenever these happen, what's the likelihood that that college will process that application?" 26:00 And she said pretty much what I thought. Some of the schools that have very strict policies, they won't even look at it. Other schools, they will want to talk to that student, see what the circumstances are. There's not a blanket answer for that, so it does vary, and like Brad said though, when a student's over seventeen (17), the costs are a lot higher in terms of that. And in terms of federal aid, I just went to a very good workshop in Indianapolis on FAFSA, which financial aid for students. This is all sponsored by Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, there's no taxpayers on getting this program going.
26:30 But it's to help students hook up with the money they can access to go to college. Because a lot of students do not know how much money's available out there for them. So this whole program's to help kids go to college. So when you're talking about federal funding for scholarships, some federal grants do have rubrics that they will look at, and with a first offense, in which a student is charged, they could look at not being eligible for the scholarship money for a year. 27:00 Second offense, it could be two years from the time that they had that infraction to where they would be eligible, and on the third infraction, they may not be eligible at all. That is not necessarily for every grant that is out there, but that is kind of the general rule for scholarships. Thank you. Audience [applause] Moderator Thank you Jean and Julie. Okay, I forgot last time, so we're going to make sure we come through and pick up the three by fives (3" x 5"). 27:30 If you have questions, please write on those cards and get them to the folks that are collecting them. That's whats going to make this fun. The last panelist before the keynote is my friend John Bertsch, who's been with Burrell Behavioral Health for seven (7) years. He's director of our adolescent substance abuse treatment program. He's a licensed clinical social worker, who's been in counseling and social services for twenty (20) years, not twenty-two (22), but just twenty (20). So, John? 28:00 John Bertsch I'm going to state a few facts about marijuana use, and then I'm going to describe a little bit about our program, and what we see in our program. As Paul described, I'm director of the adolescent substance abuse program and the CSTAR that Jean referred to. Marijuana use, especially among youth, has many health hazards. 28:30 Studies indicate the continued use as an adolescent can drop a person's IQ by as many as eight (8) points.
A 2002 longitudinal study published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal http://www.cmaj.ca/content/166/7/887.long concluded that "marijuana does not have a long-term negative impact on global intelligence," and that "current marijuana use had a negative effect on global IQ score only in subjects who smoked 5 or more joints per week." The study, which monitored subjects since birth, examined IQ scores before, during and after cessation of regular marijuana use, found current light users and former users showed average IQ gains of 5.8 and 3.5 respectively, compared to an IQ gain of 2.6 for those who had never used cannabis. The study showed an average IQ decrease of 4.1 for heavy users. If the speaker was referring to a recently released longitudinal study of more than 1000 New Zealanders, of important note is that the study only showed a decrease in IQ for adolescents. The effect of persistent cannabis use on intellectual functioning is really confined to adolescents, (which) suggests that adolescents, in particular, are vulnerable to the effect of cannabis," says lead author Madeline H. Meier, a psychologist and postdoctoral researcher at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina. http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/27/health/health-teen-pot/index.html
There are also studies that indicate, for males, it can double the chances for testicular cancer.
The study actually shows that the heaviest users of cannabis have less testicular cancer than moderate users. It also shows that using cocaine decreases the cancer risk. It only utilized a small number of people (163 men) and much of the data doesn't add up. The media didn't report on the cocaine connection in the same study which throws the whole study off. Dr. Mitch Earleywine discusses the statistical problems with this study at the 27:54 mark on this video interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALX4uwWIscY&t=27m54s The study itself: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cncr.27554/abstract
Marijuana use can double the chance of having a car accident.
It is important to note that legal pharmaceutical drugs are as much, or more, of a problem as cannabis. In conducting the study, the researchers compared drug use in nearly 5,200 people involved in major car accidents with that of more than 31,000 similar people with no record of serious accidents. The study, published Sept. 13 in the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, found the people involved in car accidents were more likely to have been taking psychotropic drugs for any length of time. http://consumer.healthday.com/Article.asp?AID=668525, September 13, 2012
Marijuana use... teens who smoke three (3) or more times a week are three (3) times more likely than non-users to have thoughts about committing suicide.
Logical Fallacy: Correlation Proves Causation
It may just be that teens who are already suicidal end up using marijuana. This data does not prove that marijuana causes an increase in thoughts about suicide.
29:00 Marijuana use, marijuana, is addictive, and heavy users develop withdrawal symptoms and tolerance issues just like those with other drug addictions.
Factual Error it has been standard knowledge for many years that marijuana does not lead to withdrawal or tolerance issues the way many other drugs do.
Herkenham's earlier research mapping the locations of the cannabinoid brain-receptor system helped establish scientific evidence that marijuana is nonaddictive. This new tolerance study builds on that foundation by explaining how cannabinoid tolerance supports rather than contradicts that finding. "It is ironic that the magnitude of both tolerance (complete disappearance of the inhibitory motor effects) and receptor down-regulation (78% loss with high-dose CP-55,940) is so large, whereas cannabinoid dependence and withdrawal phenomena are minimal. This supports the claim that tolerance and dependence are independently mediated in the brain." In other words, tolerance to marijuana is not an indication that the drug is addictive. http://www.marijuanalibrary.org/brain2.html ("Marijuana and the Brain, Part II: The Tolerance Factor", High Times, July 1995)
Teens can become addicted in as little as six (6) months. The majority of youth entering drug treatment reported primary drug use of marijuana.
This is true, however the users in this case are given the option of going to jail or treatment before a judge. This choice is presented regardless of whether or not they have a real problem with cannabis. The majority go for the treatment, then government uses this information to lead to the notion that marijuana is a problem for so many people. Many people drink alcohol socially, but if it were prohibited as marijuana is, and social users were treated as above, it would lead to the belief that the social users of alcohol need treatment for being "alcoholics", even if many didn't have problems and simply chose a treatment system in lieu of imprisonment. In light of this, the speaker is making an exaggeration of a true statement. It throws off the rest of the statistics presented by the speaker: you don't know what percentage of his clients have a real problem with cannabis, vs those placed in his care due to enforcement reasons and may only rarely use cannabis.
The national figures of current marijuana use is about eight percent (8%) of those twelve (12) through age seventeen (17).
29:30 In our adolescent substance abuse program, the drug that is abused the most is marijuana.
Since THC in cannabis stays in your system longer than other drugs (up to 30 days), more people get caught and are told to go into rehabilitation institutions in higher numbers than for other substances. See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_drug_testing
Of the two hundred seventy-five (275) clients we saw in treatment this past year, ninety percent (90%) reported marijuana use. Some other facts about our program is that most of our clients are male, which is at sixty-seven percent (67%). 30:00 Of the two hundred seventy-five (275) clients we saw this past year, eighty percent (80%) reported co-occurring diagnoses. That means depression, anxiety, ADHD. We have also, we are also asked very many times about our program, "What is your success rate?" Given that substance abuse is a long-term, relapsing disease, we do expect that some clients will relapse. Last year, at the three (3) month follow-up, fifty-two percent (52%) of the clients reported no use. 30:30 At the six (6) month follow-up, fifty-three percent (53%) reported not using any drugs. And at the one (1) year mark, fifty-eight percent (58%) reported not using. That concludes my report. Thanks. Moderator Thank you John. Audience [applause] Moderator And again, any questions. And I'm sure all these interesting remarks are sparking all kinds of questions in your mind, so make sure you write those down, and the folks will come pick them up. 31:00 Alright. Ron Griffin is our keynote speaker this evening. Anybody want to guess how long he's been in substance abuse treatment, anybody? Twenty-two (22) years, yeah. I don't make this stuff up. This is [inaudible] sixty-six (66) plus twenty (20)... it's like a hundred and eighteen (118) years of experience, it's crazy. Ron comes to us with over twenty-two (22) years of experience in working with individuals, families, and communities in both drug treatment and prevention. 31:30 He's been a national trainer in drug prevention, as well as a drug treatment counselor, and program administrator. Currently Ron is a professor at Longview College in Kansas City, and is active in Missouri's fight against marijuana legalization. Welcome Ron Griffin. Audience [applause] Ron Griffin Thank you. Can you hear me okay? Okay, I know you're out there, I can hear you breathing.
32:00 Could you do me a favor? Could all the young people, all the teenagers and younger, please just stand up for a second. Just humor me for a second. If nothing else, it's good, a chance to stretch your legs, there you go. Thank you very much. Look around. I want to say a special thank you to you for coming out here tonight, giving up part of your evening to come listen to this, and I want everybody in the room to look at these people, because this is why I'm here tonight, and I hope this is why you're here tonight, too. 32:30 Thank you all very much. Give these guys a round of applause. Audience [applause] Ron Griffin [inaudible] have a seat. What we are working for, and what we are paying attention to, and what's important to us is the future that we're going to have, that we're going to hand off to the kids that are in this room that just stood up. And there are things that we can do to make things better, and things that we can do to make things worse. Whenever we look at marijuana, and I've been fighting marijuana for twenty-two (22) years now, as a drug treatment counselor, I still do counseling. 33:00 As a preventionist within the state of Missouri. And one of the things I constantly see are people's perceptions of this drug driving choices which put these young people at further risk. Marijuana is the most misunderstood drug I've ever dealt with, and I've dealt with all of them, from ecstasy to heroin to crack, all the way through. 33:30 Marijuana is the number 1 (#1) most misunderstood there is out there. There are, if you go to the Internet, and where do most young people get their information from? Audience [several utterances of "Google"] Ron Griffin From the Internet. And you type in the word "marijuana" and you're going to get dozens, or even thousands I shouldn't say dozens thousands upon thousands of pages of information, and most of that information is going to be skewed towards the pro side, towards the positive side.
This argument is often used to show how information on the Internet must all be misinformation. Our entire government, medical institutions, doctors, chemists, engineers and more are also on the Internet. Statistics show that 63 percent of people has mistrust in the media, mainly because the truth often times comes out on the internet by independent researchers, commentators and reporters who blog and create videos. See also: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/14/business/media/14survey.html?_r=0
So again, I'm glad to have the young people here tonight. 34:00 Whenever we look at the information, that positive marijuana information, most of it stems from a group called NORML, the National Organization to Reform Marijuana Laws. They are the impetus, they key driving force behind this, nationally, and even here within the state. And so we hear about things like medicalization of marijuana. We hear about the agricultural reasons and why we shouldn't prosecute marijuana at all, because we could save tax dollars.
34:30 Let's take a second to look at NORML's mission statement. NORML's mission is to move public opinion sufficiently to achieve the repeal of marijuana prohibition so that the responsible use of cannabis by adults is no longer subject to penalty. What did you hear in there? Did you hear medicinal care, palliative care for sick people? 35:00 Did you hear "growing marijuana so we can use it for rope or fuel" or anything like that?
NORML has a branch called the NORML Hemp Alliance. Hemp is the product used to create rope and fuel. See also: http://norml.org/component/zoo/category/norml-hemp-alliance
No, what did you hear? This is about smokin' dope, and not gettin' busted. People that do drugs. Help me out with this. People that do drugs do not want to get busted. Am I right? So far I'm? Okay, I haven't said anything crazy yet.
35:30 When we look at all the different ploys that the marijuana industry will use, number one (1), the thing that they're getting the most mileage of out of it right now, is medicinal marijuana. Convincing people that marijuana is good, it's healthy.
There is a vast amount of testimony about the benefits of cannabis for medical reasons. There are also mainstream products available that make use of THC-free edible hemp products, which have been praised for being nutritious and health-promoting.
Here are just two of the many videos you'll need to ignore in order to believe the speaker's statement. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJ_UBW_IITw http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b84_1351611295
And I have to say, these guys are doing a great job. When it comes to their mission statement, they are dedicated, and they are working together and doing a great job swaying public opinion, convincing young people that it's no big deal.
"Principles of Responsible Cannabis Use": I. Adults Only Cannabis consumption is for adults only. It is irresponsible to provide cannabis to children. Many things and activities are suitable for young people, but others absolutely are not. Children do not drive cars, enter into contracts, or marry, and they must not use drugs. As it is unrealistic to demand lifetime abstinence from cars, contracts and marriage, however, it is unrealistic to expect lifetime abstinence from all intoxicants, including alcohol. Rather, our expectation and hope for young people is that they grow up to be responsible adults. Our obligation to them is to demonstrate what that means. http://norml.org/about/intro/item/principles-of-responsible-cannabis-use-3 "Children, Teens, and Pot": NORML is absolutely against the use of cannabis by minors. While we obviously don't condone this practice, we understand the reality that adolescents will be experimenting with mind-altering substances. http://norml.org/about/item/children-teens-and-pot
36:00 One of their lines, and the group's name is NORML, one of their lines is that it's "NORML to smoke pot".
This is not a tag line representing NORML and its broad member base. "It's NORML to Smoke Pot" was used as a promotional slogan in 2002 after New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg admitted to smoking cannabis. See also http://norml.org/about/it-s-norml-to-smoke-pot-campaign.
No it's not. How many people in here do you remember, raise your hands with me, how many people remember when we voted on acetaminophen being a medication? None of us do. Because we don't vote on what's medication. That's the job at the institue of medicine.
As mentioned elsewhere in this response, the DEA and other institutes actually hinder research done into cannabis due to the stigma attached to it. This makes it less likely for the institute of medicine to approve of its use, regardless of its true effectiveness.
It's not done by popular vote. 36:30 But all of the sudden, now we're starting to vote on what we will accept as medication. Does anybody know what classification, and I'm not talking Schedule, what classification marijuana is? Say it. Audience [one member] Schedule one (1). Ron Griffin No, not schedule, what classifica... is it a depressant, is it a narcotic, is it a stimulant, is it a hallucinogen? Audience [several members] It could be all of them. Ron Griffin [laughs] It's a hallucinogen.
It is important to note that just because something can act as a hallucinogen, does not mean it will at all doses, or that its potential hallucinogenic effects are not tolerated or regulated by individuals and society. For example, Dextromethorphan (DXM), is an unscheduled, over-the-counter drug that is a common ingredient in cough syrup products, including children's preparations. At labeled doses, it has no hallucinogenic side-effects. At several times the labeled dose, the side-effects include strong hallucinations. Several prescription drugs may also act as hallucinogens. See http://www.livestrong.com/article/28843-list-hallucinogenic-antidepressant-medications/.
37:00 And these are things that people don't pay attention to and don't understand. Whenever we look at the other arguments, the agricultural argument, it is not about being able to grow marijuana for hemp, to be able to make rope products. There's no market for it.
Current industry estimates report that U.S. retail sales of all hemp-based products may exceed $300 million per year. Because there is no commercial industrial hemp production in the United States, the U.S. market is largely dependent on imports, both as finished hemp-containing products and as ingredients for use in further processing. [ ] In the early 1990s a sustained resurgence of interest in allowing commercial cultivation of industrial hemp began in the United States... To date, nine states have legalized the cultivation and research of industrial hemp, including Hawaii, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Montana, North Dakota, Oregon, Vermont, and West Virginia. However, because federal law still prohibits cultivation, a grower still must get permission from the DEA in order to grow hemp, or face the possibility of federal charges or property confiscation, despite having a state-issued permit. "Hemp as an Agricultural Commodity", Congressional Research Service, January 2012, http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32725.pdf "The lighter the car, the less fuel you need to propel it," explains Alan Crosky of the School of Material Science and Engineering in the University of New South Whales in Australia. German car companies including Mercedes (Daimler/Chrysler), BMW and Audi Volkswagen have been leading the way in incorporating plant fibers in their models... The next trend could be in building the shells of cars from plants. Crosky says he and his team are now looking at building exterior car panels from hemp. http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=98529&page=1#.UIWu1ml24Sp
But there's a huge market for the drug. We hear all the time from the pro-marijuana group that, oh my gosh, if we quit prosecuting marijuana, do you know how much money we would save?
37:30 Millions and millions of dollars. My answer to that is just because the system isn't working perfectly doesn't mean we just throw it away.
The war on drugs has had no effect on drug addiction as shown in this chart:
Source: "[Updated With Correction]: Forty Years of Drug War Failure Represented in a Single Chart", http://reason.com/blog/2012/10/11/forty-years-of-drug-war-failure-in-a-sin
If we were to say, you know, if we just took away all the speeding limits, then we wouldn't have so many people getting speeding tickets, and that would make life better for all of us.
When using this as an analogy to marijuana prohibition, it would follow that those who are caught exceeding speed limits are often punished with imprisonment or permanent legal records. This is not the case, though, so does not make a useful comparison.
It just doesn't work that way. Especially when we look, and here's the important part, the long-term ramifications to the community. 38:00 The long-term ramifications to the people who stood up here just a little bit ago, who we need to help provide clear and healthy beliefs and standards to help them ensure a better life. Whenever we look at the pro-marijuana arguments, one of the things that we'll hear is taxes. I've heard this so often: "You know if we just make it legal, and we tax it, then, we're going to have money flowing all over the place, we're going to have cash everywhere." 38:30 Whenever we look at the tax on alcohol and tobacco, do you know where Missouri stands in the fifty (50) states on the tax on alcohol and tobacco? We're number fifty (50). We're at the very bottom. When we look at the, I don't remember the exact numbers, I wasn't planning on talking about this, so don't hold me tight to this, so the rough numbers were like, we're bringing, I can't remember, twenty-nine million dollars ($29,000,000), but it costs us like two point five billion ($2,500,000,000).
39:00 We don't tax it enough. We don't bring in enough money. If we were to legalize marijuana, we would spend a lot more on the ramifications, the problems created by it, than we would by what we get out of it, just like we do with alcohol and tobacco.
Jeffrey A. Miron, Department of Economics, Harvard University and the Cato Institute, contributed to a report that says otherwise:
This report estimates the reduction in government expenditure and the increase in tax revenue and that would result from legalizing marijuana in Missouri. Legalization would reduce government expenditure by about $90 million annually. Legalization would also generate tax revenue of roughly $59 million annually if marijuana were taxed at rates comparable to those on alcohol and tobacco. These estimates assume that all other states and the federal government also legalize marijuana. "The Budgetary Implications of Legalizing Marijuana in Missouri" http://nationalcannabiscoalition.com/budgetary-implications-marijuana-missouri/
Some people will say, "forbidden fruit", have you heard this argument? If you make something illegal, then people are just, they're gonna want to do it. 39:30 If you make it illegal, then "forbidden fruit", and they're gonna be driven to go out there and forced to do it.
After decriminalizing cannabis in Portugal, less people used it.
See: http://bjc.oxfordjournals.org/content/50/6/999.full, http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html

Well, most people, most people, even young people, will live within the parameters of what is legal and acceptable by society's standards. There are going to be that fringe element, that if you say, "Hey, don't go stick your tongue on that spark plug," they're just gonna have to go over and stick their tongue on it. 40:00 They're out there. But most people, by and large, are going to live within what is acceptable by the state, or by the community standards. When you've got a real loud voice saying, we should change these community standards to be able to include alcohol, or, I'm sorry, be able to include marijuana use, people are gonna start paying attention to that, and they're gonna start to follow along with that as well. 40:30 One of the things I always hear, over and over, is, "Well, I did it, and I turned okay." "I smoked marijuana and I turned okay." "No problems with me." Well, okay, I'll. I'm forty-seven (47) years old. I know, for some of you that doesn't so bad, for some others that's ancient. When I was growing up, there were, we didn't have seat belts in our cars.
41:00 And when we did, how many people can recognize this? When you did have 'em, you never used 'em. And we can all look around and say, "You know what, I've never used a seatbelt, and I'm okay." When I was young there was even, there was no such thing as a bicycle helmet. They didn't exist. I rode bicycles for years without a helmet. I'm okay. 41:30 So does it make sense that we should say, "Just because I turned out okay, just because I didn't get some sort of horrible problem from a risky behavior, then it should then be okay for the masses." No. Because it's going to be the individual that bears the brunt, that bears the weight, of the problems that's gonna be created in their lives, when, coming back to what the lady said, "an ounce of prevention is pound of cure." Am I standing outside of your camera range? I'm sorry about that. 42:00 I'm glad to see so many parents here tonight. Parents play a major role in prevention. It's not just a parent's responsibility. It's not all put on the parents, but parents play a major role. If you set your standards high for kids, kids will try to live up for 'em, live up to 'em. If you set your standards low, kids will definitely live down to 'em. Part of what parents need to do is continuously have the conversation with your young people about your values. 42:30 About why it's important to stay clean and sober. About the risks and dangers of not just marijuana, but everything out there, that I think marijuana, in particular. It has to be the adult that brings it up, because kids won't. It has to be the adult that makes it a priority, and just to share your values and your hopes and dreams for what your kids are, and where they're going to go, and what their life is going to be like. 43:00 I think a lot about coaches and parents. Coaches and parents. Parents, I think, should be more like coaches. A coach, when they're out there running practice, and they're doing drills and stuff, they don't just look out at a player messing something up, and say, "Well, you know, it's probably just a phase." Audience [laughter] Ron Griffin "If I just leave him alone, he's gonna be fine, he's gonna work his way through it, and it's just a normal thing, all wide receivers drop balls like that, so, you know, I'm just gonna let it go." 43:30 No. Coaches pay attention. They watch everything that's going on. They monitor behavior. They pay attention to the steps that the people are taking, the kids are taking, and when something's wrong they come in and they say "Hey, you know what, here's a better way, try it this way, do this, this is going to get you better results." So I encourage parents, be more like a coach.
44:00 Pay attention, be willing to step in there and say "Hey, something needs to change, something needs to be different." Don't be like the fan. What do fans do? They show up once a week. They sit in the audience, and they scream. Be a coach. Invest your time and your efforts with your kids, and really focus on perception of harm. And marijuana is harmful. That's part of the perception that we've lost in this country. 44:30 What John Lennon called the "harmless little giggle" back in the nineteen sixties (1960s) is not a harmless little giggle. We heard earlier about the levels of THC going up nine percent (9%), eleven percent (11%) in some areas, for the special stuff thirty-three (33%) THC in marijuana. It's causing more and more problems. I'm still a chemical dependency counsellor to this day. I am missing group tonight to be here. 45:00 And let me tell you, I have a lot of clients in group that are having problems with marijuana. But it's funny, that perception still sticks with 'em, "it's not a big deal." And part of getting healthy, I think for the individual, and the community, is to realize it is a big deal. The community's job? Get to know factual information. Get out there and actually research, or better yet, get in touch with Chris Davis, because he's already done all the research, and find out the factual information about marijuana. 45:30 That it's not a harmless little giggle. This is a dangerous drug. It alters people's perceptions, putting them in danger for addiction, and for getting into all kinds of trouble. It's also the community's norm to help set the standards of what the community is going to stand for. We can't be a passive, quiet majority.
Three polls within the last year show that marijuana prohibitionists are in the minority.
46:00 People need to speak up, take a stand, step beyond their own passivity, step beyond their own values, and look at what's important for the community, and what's important for who, the kids that stood up in this room just a little while ago. When we look at marijuana, just a couple of little facts about marijuana. Marijuana is different from every other drug we know. All the other drugs that we know are water-soluable. 46:30 They break down in your body and they'll pass out through your body in a period of a day or two. Marijuana is different. It's what we call lipophilic. Doesn't break down in water. It actually sticks to fat cells. It will stick to fat cells, a one time use, depending on how much, what quality, how much the person weights, ek-setera ek-setera ek-setera [sic] (etc. etc. etc.). A one time use can be detected positive up to a week later.
47:00 Heavy users were seeing testing positive over thirty (30) days after their last use, with the urine drug screen. But that's not even getting into hair samples and all that other stuff. Marijuana sticks to fat cells. Your brain is about one third (1/3) fat. I'm not gonna do the fat head joke tonight. Marijuana will actually change the way you think, feel and behave even when you're not physically high. It changes our perceptions even when we're not physically high. 47:30 Over a period of time, it's called subclinical intoxication. Even though the person isn't physically high at the time, they're still impacted by the marijuana that they've smoked already. We can also look at marijuana, a term called "amotivational syndrome," where people just, I think the word says it itself, "amotivational," they just give up.
The condition he refers to is not widely accepted:
A study done by researchers Barnwell, Earleywine and Wilcox[1] on a sample of undergraduates also suggests that cannabis use does not cause an amotivational syndrome. The e-mail survey showed no significant difference in motivation (as measured on the Apathy Evaluation Scale[2]) between cannabis users and cannabis abstainers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amotivational_syndrome
I had a friend in college, he was there for a while, smoked a lot of weed. 48:00 In fact we called him "Weedy."
If the point here is to dissuade people from using marijuana because you will not make it in life if you do, it will not add up. President Obama has (in the below video) revealed that he smoked cannabis during his college years. The President is especially influential and popular with the college crowd. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFRWbOkYvao
That was his name. And he was in college for about a year and a half, until he just absolutely flunked out. His favorite activity was to get high and look at a glass of soda, seven up (7-UP), and watch the bubbles. That was entertainment for him. He didn't make it. When we look at marijuana, it interferes with learning. It interferes with short-term memory retention and problem solving skills. 48:30 What is it that our kids are relying on right now, while they're in school? Memory retention, and learning skills. In closing, isn't that always the best two words, whenever you hear a speaker? Audience [laughter] Ron Griffin In closing, the hardest thing that we can do is try to change somebody's attitudes. People get involved with a certain behavior and they start to normalize that within their life.
49:00 If normal, for me, was to go home and drink a giant bottle of bourbon every night, then I would start thinking normal for everybody would be to do the same thing. And if I don't want to get DUIs, then I might go out and start trying to lobby to stop DUI checkpoints.
NORML's position on this states that it is a valid concern. NORML's own "Principles of Responsible Cannabis Use" invokes a "no driving" clause: Although cannabis is said by most experts to be safer than alcohol and many prescription drugs with motorists, responsible cannabis consumers never operate motor vehicles in an impaired condition. http://norml.org/component/zoo/category/driving-and-marijuana
We have to look beyond what we are doing to what is best for others, what is best for the community, what is best for the kids, and drug use isn't it. 49:30 I want to say a special thank you to Chris Davis and his crew for having all of us up here. I want to say thank you to the board, and to our moderator. Give him a round of applause, would you please? Audience [applause] Ron Griffin And thank you to all of you for coming out here tonight. Moderator Thank you. Let's hear it for Ron Griffin. Audience [applause] Moderator Nicely done, sir. Okay, we're just, we're gonna take just a short break. 50:00 And that means you can talk amongst yourselves, if you'd like, and we're gonna gather up these questions, and we're gonna begin the question answer, which is where the real fun will begin, I'm sure. Audience [milling about] 50:30 Audience [milling about] 51:00 Audience [milling about] 51:30 Audience [milling about] 52:00 Audience [milling about] 52:30 Audience [milling about]
53:00 Audience [milling about] 53:30 Audience [milling about] Moderator Let's get started. Okay, several of the questions were very similar, so we tried to group them and pick only one from the topic. Also if anyone's questions don't get answered tonight, the panelists will be available to ask them one on one questions after this. 54:00 Some of them will be anyway, I'm sure. Alright, so, we'll figure out who's the best person to respond to this, or you can, we'll just, have a free for all. "What can a parent do if one of their child's friends are using drugs and alcohol?" Student's fourteen (14) years old, parents of the child refuse to believe the student is involved with drugs and alcohol. 54:30 Might be a, you know... go ahead. Ron Griffin [tests microphone] Can you hear me now? Hello? Can you hear me now? Audience [several say "Yes"] Ron Griffin Okay. I always think better on my feet. I'm a teacher. There we go. If your, if a friend of your child is using drugs, there's really not a whole lot you can do as far as, help me out here if I'm wrong anybody. 55:00 There's really not a whole lot you can do, because you don't have the control over that child. What you can do is set parameters to say, "I don't want you, I don't want you hanging out with this boy when he's using." You can talk to that boy, assuming you have a relationship with him. I did hear "boy", correct? Boy or girl? Moderator It just says "child." Ron Griffin Child. You can talk to that child, and let them know that options are out there. Give them support, to let 'em know that you care for them, that you would like a better life for 'em. 55:30 Options are out there and you can help them find it, to get treatment or whatever might help them along. But as actually as far as being able to force anything to change with that child, you just don't have that authority. Does that go along pretty much with what we understand up here? I'm not just alone? Okay. Thank you.
56:00 Tough situation, though, because obviously, there are relationship dynamics involved. And this particular age, you know, when you start even exerting your legitimate control and authority over your own child, to, you know, it's the old psychological reaction that says, "Oh yeah? I can't see them, huh? They can't be my friend? Watch me." So it's a tough one, it's a very tough question. Does anybody else have any another thoughts about that? 56:30 But certainly, I mean one of the things we say in treatment is, when you're trying to get clean, you change your playmates, playground, and playthings. And so relationships are terribly important, and so this person's very wise to be concerned about the dynamics of the friend. Next question. "Since marijuana grows naturally, isn't it okay to smoke? Aren't cigarettes more harmful than marijuana?" Oh Ron's about to come out [inaudible]. Audience [laughter] Moderator [inaudible] apoplectic, [inaudible] pop a vein. Ron Griffin I love this question. 57:00 Audience [laughter] Ron Griffin There's lots of stuff that grows naturally that is not healthy for you. Smoking poison ivy, nightshade, hemlock, not good for you. Just because something is natural doesn't mean that it's good for you. If we look at the precursor, we look at all the drugs that we have. Ephedra comes from a root. Cocaine comes from coca plants. Heroin comes from poppies.
Cocaine and heroine are monumentally different than their natural counterparts. They are heavily processed and thus should not qualify as "natural."
57:30 I mean, we can trace all of that back to plants and nature, so the answer to that is a resounding "no," that doesn't make it okay, it doesn't make it healthy. Just because mother nature put it out there, doesn't mean it's good for ya'. And I'll be quiet. Moderator No, that's great. Anybody else want to talk about that? Miss masters in health, nursing woman? She agrees. Yeah, if you're gonna get poisoned, get poisoned naturally, right? 58:00 Alright, next question. "Do you think the prohibition of natural cannabis has led to the creation of legal synthetic alternatives, which are often incredibly dangerous?" Very thoughtful question. The hydraulic system. Anybody? Let me repeat the question for you. "Do you think the prohibition of natural cannabis has led to the creation of legal", in quotes, "synthetic alternatives, which are often incredibly dangerous?"
58:30 Going once, going twice, going to Ron. Ron Griffin I don't want to just run this show, so I mean, feel free to jump in on any of these. When we look at the synthetics, the K two (K2) and the K three (K3) and Spice and all the ones that come along with that, they have a pretty specific niche market. They, when they first came out, couldn't be detected in drug screens. So for people that had to drop, like if you were on probation and parole, and you had to drop urine for a screen, you're really prohibited from using a lot of drugs. 59:00 And one of the big ones is marijuana, because it stays in your system so much longer than other chemicals. And so, I don't think it was so much, and this is Ron's opinion here. I don't think it was so much the prohibition of marijuana that created that, but more people that wanted to get high on a marijuana type substance that couldn't do it because of legal issues, and it's causing them to resort to something else. 59:30 Moderator Alternatives, indeed. Major Kirk Manlove [inaudible] make a comment on that, too, if I could. Moderator Sure. Major Kirk Manlove On the flip side, this is really a good example of a legal product that is very dangerous. You know, the legislation can't keep up with the chemical changes that the manufacturers continue to do to stay ahead of most state laws, but the bath salts that you see, and the synthetic marijuana, very dangerous, and it's a legal product. 60:00 The, there's not a week that goes by that our officers don't encounter an individual under the influence of bath salts, and they can be very volatile and very dangerous. Moderator Excellent example. Alright, next question. "Has anybody overdosed," related to the other question, "has anybody overdosed on marijuana? If not, why can't someone say 'I used it, and I'm fine'?"
60:30 Major Kirk Manlove No. To my knowledge, we have not across our agency anybody who's overdosed on marijuana. Combination of the drugs, perhaps, but not solely attributed to marijuana. Moderator I think that's a, sort of a matter of definitions as well. What is the definition of overdose?
According to the New Oxford American Dictionary, an overdose is "an excessive and dangerous dose of a drug." Toxicity is one component of all substances we consider drugs, but is not related to the question of effective doses vs "excessive and dangerous" doses. To answer that, you need to compare the ratio of lethal dose to effective dose. The higher that ratio, the more difficult it is to overdose on the drug. That ratio is very high for cannabis (>1000:1), and considerably lower for alcohol and dextromethorphan (10:1).
If any dose is toxic, then any dose would be an overdose, technically, I suppose.
Ranking psychoactive substances by their ratios of lethal dose to effective dose gives a general picture of how likely each is to precipitate an acute fatal reaction. By this measure, many illicit drugs are considerably safer than alcohol. http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/id.3484,y.0,no.,content.true,page.4,css.p rint/issue.aspx
But certainly, we know it's lipophilic, it binds with fat receptors, it binds with fat tissues, and it certainly can create very toxic levels of chemicals in the body.
61:00 Ron, did you want to say something else? Ron Griffin Is it that easy? Moderator It's just that easy. Ron Griffin It's just, you can just look at me and tell that I want to say something? Moderator Yes. Eat the mic, just sort of right there. Ron Griffin Eat the mic? Can you hear me now? Hello? Just because you don't overdose on it, just because you're not going to have a stroke on it, or die from heart attack on it, doesn't mean that that is safe. 61:30 There is still a lot of people who get into trouble because they have perception changes, don't realize what they're doing, what they're getting into, the addiction to it. Just because you're not going to overdose and die, like you would from an overdose of cocaine or opiates, doesn't mean that it's healthy. 62:00 Moderator Indeed, and overdose, of course, when we think of overdose, we think of an acute overdose, that lands somebody in the ER, or, you know, and ICU, but, you know, you look at the studies long term, for example, neuro-cognitive effects of marijuana, and [laughter] you know, it's just a slow motion overdose, is a way you can think of it. Next question. "How can we eliminate marijuana use among high school students? That being said, is there any educational, are there any educational programs in high school to inform students about drug use consequences?" 62:30 I bet somebody knows the answer to that. Jean Graebeel Well, yes, it is part of our curriculum. It is part of our curriculum, and so we do have instruction, and it's required as part of our ninth (9th) grade health curriculum. 63:00 But in other classes, they have instruction on, where they have resources from the community who'll come in and provide additional instruction on issues. And the counselors also have a curriculum that they provide too, where they're going in and helping students with refusal techniques, self esteem, those kinds of things. And then some of the counselors also have groups for students, so they lead groups with them. 63:30 And they don't label 'em as this is our drug group, or this is our drug prevention group. But kids who are having issues, and they'll bring them in, and they'll talk and share about what's going on within their lives, so that they can have, build some relationships and get them engaged. And I think it's, the other important thing for parents, is to make sure that they're assisting their child to be engaged, and engaged in activities that the parent's involved in as well, so they have better knowledge of who their friends are, and what's going on with their student.
64:00 The better engaged and attached the child is to the school district, the better engaged the parent is, the better outcome for the student. Moderator Thank you. Doctor Julie, Doctor Justin, you guys want to say anything about this question at all? Unknown [inaudible] Moderator Jean handled it pretty well. Alright. Next question. Very important question for many young folks in the audience, for sure. "How does marijuana affect athletic performance?" 64:30 I bet you have a lecture on this in your class, don't you, Ron? Ron Griffin I really don't have a lecture on this in my class, but I think we can start by talking about how it affects athletic performance. We don't have to look too far back into our history to Mizzou students, student athletes, football players. It affected their performance when they got caught smoking marijuana, and were barred from playing.
This does not answer the question about direct effects of cannabis use on athletic performance.
It is unlikely that cannabis use directly and negatively affected the athletic performance of Dorial Green-Beckham, the University of Missouri student likely being referred to by the speaker. The effects were indirect: laws and rules surrounding cannabis use are what affected his game.
65:00 When we look at the impact of the marijuana smoke on the lungs, it's more harsh even than cigarette smoke, tobacco smoke. Has two and a half (2.5) times more tar, like I said earlier, so it will decrease the person's ability to be able to, pardon me, to be able to have the lung capacity to play at their fullest ability.
Cannabis can act as a bronchodilator. In other words, it expands the lungs when inhaled and increases lung capacity. It has been successfully used to treat asthmatic patients.
Source: "Bronchodilator effect of delta1-tetrahydrocannabinol", British Pharmacological Society, 1978 June, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1429361/
65:30 It's also going to affect their ability to concentrate and focus on the game, to maintain that level of performance through practices and games, so yes, it will affect an athlete.
This argument will fall flat on the ears of most kids who follow the Olympics.
Michael Phelps, who is the most decorated Olympic athlete in history, has smoked cannabis. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l35nC0jVNuk.
Moderator You bet. Absolutely. I mean, you'd think, based on what you hear from some people, that marijuana is like multi-vitamins and breath mints, salutary effects on your health.
A study, published in the Cancer Prevention Research journal, showed that long-term cannabis users were, roughly, 62 percent less likely to develop head and neck cancers than people who did not use cannabis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_effects_of_cannabis#Positive_effects
Does anybody really believe that? 66:00 I mean, does anybody seriously question whether breathing any kind of smoke into your lungs repeatedly is good for you, really? Okay. "How would you respond to effective use of medicinal marijuana, where the side effects are much less than prescription medications used to treat the same medical issue?" Anyone? Unknown [inaudible] doctor. Moderator Is there a doctor in the house? [laughter] 66:30 Major Kirk Manlove You know, I think it's the delivery system, or the delivery method is probably what's most questionable in terms of the medicinal perspectives that you hear. You know, the FDA has, I believe, the only, has approved a synthetic THC, "Marinol." I don't know often it's used or how effective it is, but it's FDA approved.
67:00 So I think the fact that we have varying degrees of THC level in varieties of marijuana, and then to attempt to try to use it as medicine is probably the biggest challenge, and probably one of the biggest problems the FDA has in trying to regulate it. I do know the DEA has, I think, a hundred and eleven (111) researchers actually dedicated to researching the cannabins [sic], and the THC and the marijuana derivatives for medicinal purposes.
Incorrect: the federal government does not sponsor study of the positive effects of cannabis. Responsibilities. The Director [...] (12) shall ensure that no Federal funds appropriated to the Office of National Drug Control Policy shall be expended for any study or contract relating to the legalization (for a medical use or any other use) of a substance listed in schedule I of section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812) and take such actions as necessary to oppose any attempt to legalize the use of a substance (in any form) that is listed in schedule I of section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812); and has not been approved for use for medical purposes by the Food and Drug Administration; Title VII Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 1998: H11225
But at this point, I don't think they'd been able to find a combination that would be FDA approved that would be suitable for medicinal use.
The DEA is one of the main organizations deterring research in the field of Schedule I drugs.
In DMT: The Spirit Molecule by Rick Strassman, Rick explains how the DEA was one of the main stumbling blocks to his research into DMT for therapeutic reasons. He explains how you essentially need to appeal to the DEA as wanting to find a negative consequence to these substances than positive outcomes before they allow any science to be done. See also: http://www.amazon.com/DMT-Molecule/dp/0892819278
67:30 Moderator Thank you. Here's an interesting question, that maybe many of us may have thought about. "Do you really think scaring kids about marijuana early in their life will make them not use it? That just makes them more curious about it." Right, Ron? Right, John? Unknown [inaudible]
68:00 I think the idea is not so much to scare the kids, and we actually, over time, research has proven that some of the "scared straight" stuff and scaring kids is not effective. What we need to do is be honest and approach our kids with factual information. And let them know what our attitudes are about drug use. If you're a parent and you have a permissive attitude about marijuana use, your kid is going to be a lot more likely to use. 68:30 So education is the important part, and scaring kids is not effective for anything. Moderator You know, there's actually some very interesting social psychological research on this very question, not related to marijuana specifically, but related to health interventions in general. And that indicates that actually, fear-based messages can be very effective in motivating behavior. In this case it was a study regarding going and getting a vaccination, but, yeah, but there's an interesting correlation there, and that is with self esteem. 69:00 It takes a little while with people with high self esteem, after they receive a fear based message, to process that, but when they do, it actually has a significant effect on their likelihood of showing up to get that vaccination or whatever. So there actually is some evidence that, you know, I'm not a big fan of just scaring kids for no apparent reason, but sometimes when you share the facts, it's scary. And, you know, that's the bottom line. So, next question. "Has," and this probably will need to go to Doctor Harrell (?) or Doctor Julie. 69:30 "Has Springfield Public Schools considered drug testing", number one (#1), and "Why is assessment not required by Springfield Public Schools?" Dr. Harrell (sp?) I'm assuming we're talking about random drug testing? Moderator Doesn't say, but it sounds like it. Dr. Harrell (sp?) Yes, there have been ongoing conversations about random drug testing. 70:00 The question we deal with in a district our size, looking for exactly what are you testing for. Do you test all students? Do you test athletes? That always comes up into the conversations. And has that proven to inhibit use over the fear of possible test. And most of the research, honestly right now does not indicate that that's a huge decline unless you are randomly testing the entire population, and everyone in that population may in fact get tested at some point. 70:30 There's not been a whole lot of research saying this is really stopping it. But, on the flip side of it, if it helped with anyone, is it important? Absolutely. So have there been conversations, or ongoing conversations? There's a philosophy on both sides of it. We've not moved in one direction [inaudible], or one way or the other as far as a school at this point. I hope that answered the question. Moderator Thank you very much. We have about five (5) minutes left of questions.
71:00 And this one, this one could take all night, but let's weigh into it. "If we were in a different location, such as California, would we still be having this conversation?" "Being in the bible belt is our biggest issue, perhaps," it says. This is a can of worms I just [inaudible]. Is it a cultural thing related to being in the clasp of the buckle of the bible belt, where we live? 71:30 Or is this conversation that is going on across the country? Unknown Have at it man, it's you. Ron Griffin I don't want to jump in and not give anybody else a chance here. But apparently I have an opinion on everything. Audience [laughter] Ron Griffin California is a very liberal and very outgoing liberal state. 72:00 If we were living in California right now, there would be different conversations that we would be having. But the fact of the matter is, we're living here in Missouri, and this is where our conversation is right now. Every state is dealing with this issue right now. And every state is dealing with it in their own way. Some are looking at medicalization. Some are actually starting to talk about legalization. 72:30 So every state is having this conversation. It just so happens this state is having this conversation right now. Moderator Indeed. And I would just say that I think the premise of the question is a bit flawed, because it presumes that you have to be, in some way, that maybe it's only Christians who believe that marijuana ought to be against the law and is harmful, and whatever. Certainly, that's not true. 73:00 There's a lot of people of all kinds of different faiths, and no faith at all, who believe that marijuana is very harmful, because they've read the literature.
Other literature, including oriented toward people of faith, is not so one-sided.
For example, a 2011 article in Christianity Today concludes with the author, after conducting a well-rounded analysis of biblical scripture as it relates to the use of herbal cannabis for medicinal use, asking readers to "be wise and do not violate your conscience" regarding medical cannabis. See http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2011/june/vg-medicalmarijuana.html?start=3
They've been convinced by the facts, in my sometimes humble opinion. Alright, so the last question really is for each of you. And that is, "If there's one thing you want people to take home or remember from tonight, what would that be?" We'll start with Major Kirk Manlove.
73:30 Well, I'd say that, focus what decisions you've made and how that impacts your children. And I am glad the doctor recognized our youth here tonight, and if nothing more I think what we have said tonight, hopefully, they'll leave here with some good information. And so I think that's what I would like to take away from tonight's forum, is that our youth tonight learned a thing or two. I know I did. And I'm glad you all came as well. Thank you. Moderator Thank you, major. Brad Shelton, what one thing would you like the folks to take home tonight? 74:00 Brad Shelton One thing I would say is just encouragement. Talk with your kids. When somebody comes down to the office, a lot of times they, you know, they don't see that encouragement right out of the gate. But when we get into something, we want to see people succeed. We want to see kids be healthy. So, I think just encouraging your kids, and if you see an issue, address it, just don't let it go. Moderator Very good. Jean Graebeel, what do you want them to take home tonight? Jean Graebeel I would say start the conversation now with your kids. 74:30 You be the ones to talk to your children. Get that conversation going, and don't stop. Don't just think because they're in high school that you don't need to talk to them anymore. Continue to talk with them. Moderator Very good, indeed. John Bertsch. John Bertsch I guess I just have to reiterate what everybody else has been saying. I think is, as a society, as parents, we need to be involved with our kids' lives as much as possible. 75:00 Even one of the other questions that was raised earlier, about how do you prevent your kid from, if you have a friend, if your kid has a friend that's using, you know, you invite that kid over. I mean, you have, when they have get-togethers, it's at your house. You make yourself known to that kid. They're not probably gonna want to be around you if you're asking them questions and you're finding out more about their lives. Be involved with your kids' lives.
75:30 Know what they're doing. Know what they're looking at on the Internet, and know who those friends are. That's the very most important thing, I think, that we can pass on to anybody. Moderator Thank you John. And finally, Ron Griffin. Ron Griffin And this is the last thing I'll say, and then I'll be quiet. The message I bring tonight is not just an anti-marijuana message, it's a pro-health message. There are things that will advance people and get them closer to getting their needs met, getting their goals and their dreams met, and there are things that will get them further away.
This speaker said in his introduction that he had been "fighting marijuana" for 22 years, and does not seem well-informed or open-minded to the latest research, and countless personal stories of responsible use of cannabis in all its forms. There is no debate that the non-psychoactive seeds of hemp are extremely nutritious and an ideal food for the human body. There is also a clear amount of evidence that when properly used, some forms of cannabis can be very beneficial to a large number of individuals. A more complete "pro-health" message when discussing cannabis would include such information. To continue to use words like "facts" to create a mental link between cannabis use and ill health is a disservice to the community. It belittles citizens and assumes that they can't make responsible decisions based on the latest verified information about important aspects of human society.
76:00 This is about focusing on what gets people healthy, and keeps them healthy, so that they can have pleasant, productive lives. Moderator Thank you kindly. And thanks, let's hear it for this panel. Audience [applause] Moderator [inaudible] wonderful remarks this evening. Please, if you would, complete that post survey that you were handed when you came into the building, and place it in the box on the resource table in the hallway. 76:30 I want to say thank you again to all of our panelists and volunteers, everyone made tonight possible, members of the Ozark Fighting Back advisory board, and CPO board of directors for volunteering tonight. Springfield Public Schools, certainly, for use of the facility, equipment, participating on the panel, student and staff support for this wonderful use of this auditorium. Springfield Police Department for participating on the panel. Greene County Juvenile Office also. 77:00 Burrell Behavioral Health. Mr. Ron Griffin, for coming all the way down from Kansas City to be our keynote. And everyone who showed up tonight. You all in the audience, whether you agree with the opinions expressed or not, thank you very much for being here, and go home safely.
# # #
Page 41 of 41 http://springfield-norml.org/ "Community Forum on Marijuana", 2012 October 16 Transcription provided by Springfield NORML volunteers Includes remarks prepared by members of Springfield NORML

CPO CFM 2012-10-16 Transcript and Response

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CPO CFM 2012-10-16 Transcript and Response

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Community Partnership of the Ozarks

Community Forum on Marijuana

Logical Fallacy: Correlation proves causation

Marijuana use can double the chance of having a car accident.

Logical Fallacy: Correlation Proves Causation

After decriminalizing cannabis in Portugal, less people used it.

See: http://bjc.oxfordjournals.org/content/50/6/999.full, http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html

The condition he refers to is not widely accepted:

Other literature, including oriented toward people of faith, is not so one-sided.

You might also like