Tag: legalization

Categories
News

POLI SAVVY: New Year, New Weed but the same old mentality

The new year brought new regulations surrounding cannabis consumption in Quebec.

In order to circulate the information, the government recently released an ad, in which you see two men, a younger and older one, about to smoke a joint. An off-camera voice interrupts them just as they are about to light it up, informing them that the law has changed and that you now have to be 21 to legally consume weed.

Then, Bibbidi-Bobbidi-Boo! The joint disappeared from the youngest’s hand, who then shrugs his shoulders, candidly smiles and casually leaves. The desire to smoke just simply goes away, because “it’s against the law.”

Tell me, do you know anyone under 21, especially in a country where specific drugs are legal, who would simply agree to give up their drugs because now “it’s the law”?

What Premier François Legault seems to have missed with these new regulations targeting the younger generation is that before the legalization, kids were smoking and they will continue to do so, even if the law has been changed.

What they will do now is turn to a product that they don’t know the contents of, how it got produced and what it will help finance. It goes against the very purpose of weed legalization.

Legalization was meant to control and provide a safe product, to reduce addiction, fight off the black market, and protect our kids. Additionally, it allowed families to bring up the subject and include everyone at the table.

The ad perfectly showcases another problem in our society, which shows how we expect parents to silence the subject to simply make it go away.

Once again, Legault shows a deeply toxic boomer mentality where patronization replaces education. Our society considers people as adults at 18 years old — you can drink at 18 — but Lord helps us, one cannot touch marijuana until they are 21.

But don’t worry, the joint will magically disappear and no one will need to talk about the reasoning behind such a decision.

 

Graphic by Victoria Blair

Categories
Sports

A year after legalization, weed still on U Sports banned substance list

It’s been one year since Canada legalized cannabis nationwide in a landmark decision. So why is cannabis still banned for U Sports athletes in-season?

But before we answer that question, let’s take a quick look at the major sports leagues across North America and how they approach cannabis.

The NFL has been notoriously hard-lined when it comes to cannabis use (i.e. Josh Gordon), handing out long-term and season-long suspensions for repeated offences. The NBA is more lenient, with punishments ranging from a US$25,000 fine, to a five game suspension. The MLB still prohibits cannabis, but only tests if they feel like they have reasonable cause. The NHL doesn’t punish players who test positive for cannabis.

According to an ESPN report, 101 of the 123 sports teams in the four major leagues (NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL) play in places where cannabis is legalized. The CFL, while not one of the big four leagues, is the only major pro league based entirely in Canada and doesn’t test for cannabis.

In terms of university sports, the NCAA also has cannabis on its banned substance list. Violations can result in a suspension, according to the organization’s drug policies.

U Sports’ cannabis ban is a little different than those other leagues. Unlike the NHL, NBA or even the NCAA, U Sports doesn’t choose its own doping policies or sanctions.

Who makes the rules?

U Sports is a signatory on the Canadian Anti-Doping Program (CADP), which is administered by the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sports (CCES). The CCES is Canada’s anti-doping agency.

“The CCES and U SPORTS work together to protect the integrity of sport and the health of Canadian student-athletes,” said Paul Melia, CCES President and CEO, in an email to The Concordian. “This partnership delivers anti-doping education and a robust testing plan for U SPORTS student-athletes across Canada through the implementation of the Canadian Anti-Doping Program, which is fully compliant with the World Anti-Doping Code and all its International Standards and Guidelines.”

U Sports abides by the CADP, and all sanctions regarding doping violations are based off of that program. In its “Cannabis in Sports Education Kit” the CCES wrote that “In the face of mounting complexity, it is important to remember that in the world of anti-doping, the debate is not complicated. In sport, cannabis is prohibited.”

The CCES chooses which athletes are tested through a variety of factors including an athlete’s history of doping, the physiological demands of the sport or discipline, performance-enhancing substances and their effects on specific sports, and the potential financial incentives of success, such as a pro contract.

The reason cannabis remains on the list of banned substances for U Sports athletes is because the CCES doesn’t determine which substances are or aren’t on its anti-doping list. The organization is a signatory on the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA)’s Prohibited List. The same list is used for Olympic competition.

Despite Canada’s legalization of cannabis, the CCES abides by international anti-doping standards.

After the legalization of cannabis in Canada, U Sports stated in a press release that, “As a banned substance on the World Anti-Doping Association Prohibited List (which is the same list followed by the Canadian Anti-Doping Program (CADP),) there will be no change to cannabis’ usability for U SPORTS student-athletes.”

For a substance to end up on the WADA’s Prohibited List, regardless of its legality, it has to fulfill two of the three criteria in the eyes of the WADA.

  1. It has the potential to enhance sport performance
  2. It represents a health risk to the athletes
  3. It violates the spirit of sport.

The WADA stated in an email to The Concordian that it does not make public the reasons for which it adds substances to the list.

In the “Cannabis in Sports Education Kit” from the CCES, the organization states that “While the CCES does not view cannabis as particularly performance enhancing, we do have anecdotal accounts of athletes using it therapeutically with the intent to improve performance or recovery by managing pain, stress, or anxiety.” It adds that habitual use of cannabis presents “the potential for harm.”

Sanctions, suspensions, and substances

Before we go any further, It’s important to note that U Sports’ cannabis rules are far more relaxed than most of its athletic counterparts. First of all, cannabis is only banned for U Sports athletes during the season, meaning athletes don’t receive a sanction for a positive cannabis test result during the off-season. Also, any U Sports athlete that faces a suspension can appeal the decision to a third party arbitrator.

However, any in-season test sample that contains more than 150 nanogram per millilitre (ng/mL) of cannabis metabolite Carboxy-THC would be flagged and might land a U Sports athlete a suspension. That threshold, while not a shield for athletes, is extremely high compared to other athletic and legal thresholds. For comparison, the MLB’s cannabis testing threshold is 50ng/mL and the NFL’s is 35ng/mL.

Since raising the cannabis testing threshold to 150ng/mL in 2013, only five U Sports athletes have been suspended  for cannabis violations.

Cannabidiol, commonly known as CBD, is not on the WADA banned substance list, however the WADA warns that “there are no guarantees that the product they are using does not contain trace amounts of THC.”

While athletes have faced suspensions for cannabis testing, the WADA requires that labs not report and that anti-doping organizations not pursue any sanctions against an athlete who was found to have low concentrations of cannabis in their sample.

According to the WADA, “athletes using the substance in-competition will be detected, while the chances of detecting (non-prohibited) out-of-competition use are substantially reduced.”

While the WADA’s cannabis ban, and U Sports testing, is relaxed compared to other athletic leagues, cannabis is still a suspendable violation. All CADP violations are publicly listed on the CCES’ website.

Under the CCES’ anti-doping sanctions, a first violation for presence, use or possession of a banned substance can result in either a two or four year sanction. A non-intentional presence of a banned substance results in a two year sanction.

The CCES releases annual reports that details all anti-doping violations. Between 2003 (the first annual report available online) and 2012, 23 athletes tested positive for cannabis. Out of those 23, the only athletes to receive suspensions were those who tested positive for multiple substances.

What the players think

We asked past, current, male and female U Sports athletes from different sports for their thoughts on the league’s cannabis ban. Athletes spoke anonymously, some saying they were worried that if they spoke about cannabis publicly, they would be singled-out for testing. Here’s what they said.

  • U Sports football player: “I believe [cannabis should be unbanned]. Since cannabis isn’t [an illegal] substance anymore and doesn’t enhance performance, I believe that many athletes could benefit from its calming effects. I believe they would benefit athletes stress-wise as well as pain-wise and would limit painkillers. If it’s legal in society and does not enhance performance, there is no reason why it should be banned for athletes, as long as they are not using during games.”
  • U Sports field hockey player: “Athletes could definitely benefit from having cannabis unbanned because there are many beneficial uses beyond recreational. Many people in my life use cannabis to relieve pain, anxiety and in order to sleep better. In general, athletes are busy people and are prone to stress, so cannabis could help be a big help. Cannabis is safe to use and is now very regulated just like alcohol which is legal in U Sports.”
  • Former U Sports football player: “Do I think there should be a ban? Absolutely not. But at the same time I can understand why the U Sports won’t lift the ban. They would be the first western civilization sports organization to do so, and I don’t think they’re a big enough entity to handle the down sides of lifting the ban. They won’t pull the trigger unless the NCAA is successful with it.”
  • U Sports soccer player: “It’s interesting, I find it very similar to alcohol and you’re allowed to drink during the season. From an athlete’s perspective, the act of smoking while you’re competing is kind of dumb. Unless you’re in an individual sport, you’re screwing over your team. If you’re taking it through other forms, edibles aren’t legal yet. I know a lot of athletes that drink and go out with their teams, but I know that smoking during the season is very stigmatized. And for good measure, if you get tested, you’re out.”
  • U Sports football player: “I definitely believe cannabis should be banned during the season, but if an athlete wants to consume some in [their] off season I believe that it shouldn’t be a problem and players should be allowed to do so. The only way I could see a player benefiting from cannabis being unbanned is during an injury period and the cannabis manages to eliminate some of the pain felt by the player. I think some players would love to see the ban lifted and have the opportunity to consume cannabis like other consumers in Canada without fearing the consequences of the suspensions athletes receive if they get caught.”
  • U Sports rugby player: “I don’t know why it’s banned for U Sports athletes. They have us do an online substance use training [before the season], even after that I’m still not sure why athletes can’t consume weed in particular. It has benefits, it helps with anxiety and sleep. I find it unfair to take away that potential benefit to athletes.”

Graphic by @sundaeghost

Categories
News

Simply Scientific: The medical future of CBD oil

Stress and sleep are two main topics in well-being discussed in university. Some students find wellness in working out, others by binge-watching a Netflix series. Unfortunately for a few, stress and sleep disorders have become chronic.

While I am not promoting in any way the consumption of the substance, I will discuss some of the benefits found in the use of cannabidiol (CBD); THC’s humble little brother.

CBD is the non-psychoactive molecule found in marijuana. It was popularized in the last couple of decades after helping cure symptoms of Dravet syndrome, according to a study published in 2018. The substance can be administered in many forms, but the most common way is by oil. Unlike THC, CBD does not provoke the secondary effects of smoking pot, like light-headedness.

CBD has recently grown in popularity with respect to treating a wide range of medical conditions, namely anxiety and sleep disorders.

In 2015, for example, a co-led research project conducted by five Israeli pediatric epilepsy clinics administered CBD oil to a group of epileptic children. The frequency of seizures in these children, ranging from ages one to 18, was reduced in 89 per cent of the cases. It was also noted that seven per cent of cases saw an increase in the frequency of seizures which resulted in CBD withdrawal.

This medical advancement shows promising potential in children’s epilepsy treatments, according to the research.

There has also been an increase in recent years of people self-medicating with CBD oil to treat their sleep and stress disorders. While such practices may be effective in some cases, CBD is still to this day under the scrutiny of health organizations, such as the FDA.

 

Graphic by @sundaeghost

Categories
Opinions

The misconceptions of marijuana

Graphic by @spooky_soda

Analyzing the misplaced stigma surrounding cannabis consumption

After years of debate, marijuana is finally legal in Canada. On Oct. 17, the first dispensaries opened across the country. This is a massive step toward not only making pot safer and more accessible, but also ensuring a degree of product quality that couldn’t be guaranteed in an unregulated market. That being said, I believe significant progress is still needed in regard to the elimination of the stigma associated with marijuana use.

Certainly, cannabis is by no means a product without fault. Just like everything else, overuse of marijuana can have serious side-effects. The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry noted that acute cannabis consumption at a young age has been linked with the inhibition of psychomotor skills, short-term memory, and minor cognitive functions.

There have also been studies aimed at examining and contrasting the overuse of marijuana at a young age with the development of certain mental disorders. While there is a certain correlation, it is crucial to remember that researchers have yet to find any meaningful causality. According to CBC News, Matthew Hill, an associate professor at the University of Calgary Hotchkiss Brain Institute emphasizes that we shouldn’t fall into the stereotypes about pot; instead, we should have faith in the studies being conducted which disprove them.

With all its potential side effects, the stigma around cannabis consumption still massively outweighs the real risks. We live in a world where the majority of the population is comfortable with people drinking alcohol or smoking cigarettes (more or less). While people aren’t necessarily okay with others being addicted to opioids or pharmaceuticals, it’s definitely still a very common and accepted pain relief method. Yet some of the same people are still adamantly against the very thought of marijuana.

That being said, alcohol, cigarettes, and pharmaceuticals/opioids are distinctly worse for your health in every aspect and deadlier than marijuana could ever be. Unlike booze, pills or cigarettes, marijuana does not create a chemical dependency in the brain. While attitudes like psychosocial dependency can be developed, the detox period for this is significantly less painful and shorter than the detox period for chemical addiction, according to CBC News.

Another factor to keep in mind is that not a single person has ever died solely due to marijuana consumption, according to Greencamp, a website that researches cannabis use. Not a single one. Ever. According to the Canadian Cancer Society, smoking has killed 37,000 people in Canada this year alone, and opioids have taken 8,000 Canadian lives since 2016 according to CBC News. Marijuana is increasingly being seen as a viable alternative to prescription drugs with research being performed at facilities such as CanniMed and the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse on the medical benefits of cannabis. This shows how invaluable it could be for the creation of effective and addiction-free treatments.

According to the Canadian Institute of Health Information, alcohol consumption also led to the hospitalization of nearly 77,000 Canadians in 2016. Yet pharmaceuticals, cigarettes, and alcohol are accepted aspects of society with no legislation aiming to ban them. Unfortunately, marijuana is consistently demonized, and will remain so for several years to come.

In his book Weed: A User’s Guide, columnist for the cannabis website Leafy and host of the Roll-Up podcast David Schmader explained that a person would need to smoke roughly 1,500 pounds of cannabis in an hour to fatally overdose. According to calculations by the peer-reviewed journal Drug and Alcohol Dependence, that would come to about 1,943,965 joints. In one hour. Good luck with that.

At its core, legalization of marijuana takes the first step toward the de-stigmatization of its consumption. Regardless of the potential health benefits or the toxic and deadly products we deem more socially acceptable, marijuana use still has a negative connotation to it. However, with the progressive steps governments are taking to not only decriminalize cannabis, but make it more accessible, one can hope this stigma won’t remain a mainstream concept for much longer.

Graphic by @spooky_soda

Categories
Opinions

Editorial: The complexities behind the legalization of marijuana

graphic by @spooky_soda

Marijuana legalization is on the horizon. The people have spoken, and as of Oct. 17 they’ll be tokin’. Yet, the legalization process is more complex than simply lifting the ban on getting high; the way it is executed can mean the difference between freedom for citizens and more centralized state power.

Policing marijuana and other substances has been a method of controlling populations—particularly by criminalizing certain groups—for a long time. Enforcing substance laws is often used as a tool by powerful groups to further their goals. This often invokes keeping poor people, racial and gender minorities, and other disenfranchised groups at the lowest of our class structure.

The way the war on drugs campaign started proves this. As admitted by Richard Nixon’s former assistant to the president for domestic affairs John Ehrlichman: “We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin. And then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities.” This is pretty clear evidence that the prohibition of marijuana is not about any moral issues with consumption of the drug. So legalizing marijuana is clearly a good thing, because it’s a step toward ending arbitrary means of state control.

This is the stance that was taken by the Bloc Pot political party in the recent Quebec election. Their main platform highlighted the prohibition of marijuana as a tool for the state to control and disempower its citizens. While they are in support of legalizing marijuana, they point out the problems with governments controlling that legalization process. The party also advocates for marijuana to be left out of the Criminal Code and the Canadian government’s control completely.

Quebec premier François Legault of the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) will soon have to confront the task of implementing marijuana legalization in Quebec. One of the stipulations in his legalization plan is bumping the legal age from 18 (as was previously intended) up to 21. How he implements and regulates the rest of the law will affect more than just the minute details around buying weed; it could be the difference between maintaining oppressive social structures or granting people autonomy.

Legault, who ran on the promise of reducing immigration in Quebec by one fifth and imposing a “Quebec values” test on immigrants, doesn’t have the greatest track record with minorities. The CAQ’s immigration policies are outside the realm of marijuana legalization, but the reality is that generating and maintaining laws about personal issues like consuming marijuana only lends more power to the state to intervene in people’s lives. As essayist Jackie Wang argued in her book, Carceral Capitalism, right-wingers and neoliberals only want reduced state control until it involves policing the lives of minorities—a contradiction no doubt. It is likely that even as marijuana is legalized, it will still be heavily policed/regulated, which will disproportionately affect minority communities. Therefore, we will need to pay attention to the details surrounding legalization and make our voices heard if they are unjust.

The legalization of marijuana will not dissolve problematic structures in society any more than it will cure cancer, but leaving the police out of as many parts of our lives as possible is something that is in the best interest of the vulnerable members of our society, and thus something we should all strive for.

Graphic by @spooky_soda

 

Categories
Opinions

The pot-ential of legalization in Canada

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin.

Industry regulations, police resources among factors to consider before July 2018 legislation

The legalization of marijuana in Canada is a major step in the country’s history. This is an issue that impacts society on a fundamental level. In my opinion, how each province handles and adapts to the changes resulting from this legislation will be an important part of the transition.

In July 2018, the Quebec government will officially recognize Bill 172. This bill introduces the legalization of marijuana, along with several key points. Firstly, the legal age to purchase and consume marijuana will be 18 in Quebec, according to CBC News. Secondly, the bill prohibits the growing of marijuana for personal use or growing it for commercial use if it is conducted outside the laws established by the provincial government.

Additionally, under the bill, marijuana can be smoked in areas permitting tobacco smoking, but it will be strictly forbidden to smoke on the property of an educational institution, according to the same source. And, of course, driving under the influence will still be against the law. Anyone caught driving while under the influence, or suspected of being under the influence, could have their license suspended for 90 days or even face jail time, according to CBC News.

Concerned citizens and several Quebec officials are still hesitant about the idea of legalizing marijuana. Some believe that by legalizing it, younger citizens could be influenced to pick up the habit, according to the Montreal Gazette. I believe these concerns are justified.

Even though marijuana will be legalized, the long-time criminal element associated with it remains, and law enforcement officials are striving to postpone its legalization date. They are insistent that the bill must allow for stricter regulations when it comes to managing this new industry. This includes making sure companies and the health ministry have stricter security clearances for employees to avoid introducing organized crime into the legalized marijuana industry, according to the National Post. Many law enforcement officials also believe police require additional training and resources—besides the saliva test, which has yet to be federally regulated—in order to identify and handle impaired drivers, according to CBC News.

While valid points, I believe it’s also important to see the good that this legalization can bring. One major example is that, according to a study published in the journal JAMA Internal Medicine, medical marijuana could help combat the opioid crisis. Since 2015, the opioid crisis has become a dangerous problem for Canadians. In 2016, there were over 2,800 reported fatalities in connection to opioid overdoses in Canada, according to The Globe and Mail.

Portugal is one example of successful marijuana legalization. Since 2001, the country has legalized all drugs up to a certain amount, including marijuana, and each legal limit varies per drug. According to Sensi Seeds, a cannabis seed marketing company, carrying up to 2.5 grams of marijuana is legal in Portugal. However, trafficking and cultivating marijuana is still illegal and could result in jail time, according to the same source. Portugal has seen several advantages, including a decline in drug overdoses. Within the European Union, Portugal has the second lowest rate of fatal overdoses, according to the Washington Post.

Make no mistake—I am not saying we should be legalizing all drugs. I am saying that legalizing marijuana may have the potential to do some good within certain communities. By following and adapting our policies to the examples set by the legislations in other countries, Quebec can create policies that provide strict safety and security regulations for marijuana. There is also a potential benefit to people’s health, especially when considering the opioid crisis.

However, such a sensitive issue requires patience. While I wouldn’t say no to the idea, I am saying that we need more time to finalize all the details and appeal to all the groups involved. In my opinion, if we rush this process, the consequences could result in severe social backlash.

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin

Exit mobile version