THC Associated with Increase of Survival Time in Palliative Cancer

THC Associated with Increase of Survival Time in Palliative Cancer

Summary from the official government website (Link Below)

The Use of Tetrahydrocannabinol Is Associated with an Increase in Survival Time in Palliative Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Multicenter Cohort Study

The study, conducted by researchers in Germany, analyzed data from the palliative treatment documentation of over 9,000 patients from five ambulatory palliative care teams. The researchers divided the patients into three groups: those who did not receive THC, those who received a low dose of THC (less than or equal to 4.7mg per day), and those who received a higher dose of THC (greater than or equal to 4.7mg per day). They then compared survival rates between the groups.

The analysis revealed that THC use was associated with a statistically significant increase in survival time, but only for patients who received a daily dose exceeding the median amount of 4.7mg. In this group, patients lived an average of 15 days longer compared to those who did not receive THC.

APPEALS in STATE or FEDERAL COURT
When you need to appeal a decision you feel is wrong.
Call Komorn Law
 (248) 357-2550

Key takeaway: This study suggests that THC may offer a survival benefit for ambulatory palliative care patients, but only at higher doses. More research is needed to confirm these findings and to explore the underlying mechanisms.

Additional considerations:

  • The study was observational and cannot definitively prove that THC caused the observed increase in survival time. Other factors may have played a role.
  • The optimal dosage of THC for palliative care patients is still being investigated.
  • THC use can have side effects, and it is important to weigh the potential risks and benefits when considering it as a treatment option.

Further readings:

Source: NIH

In the FEDERAL COURT SYSTEM
When you need to go on the offense – to put the prosecution on defense
Komorn Law (248) 357-2550.

Michigan wants to study marijuana’s health benefits

Michigan wants to study marijuana’s health benefits

MICHIGAN WANTS TO STUDY MARIJUANA’S HEALTH BENEFITS

When Michigan voters approved recreational marijuana six years ago, they also allocated cannabis tax revenue for research into the health benefits of the drug specifically for military veterans. In a remarkable commitment, state officials dedicated a substantial $40 million to this cause.

Not a single veteran has received marijuana in a trial.

Critics argue that federal restrictions are to blame for the delays in marijuana research. A Michigan study on post-traumatic stress disorder faced obstacles from the Food and Drug Administration, which opposed participants inhaling marijuana, despite it being the primary method of consumption for many veterans.

Additionally, researchers faced significant challenges in acquiring a federally approved marijuana supply for their proposed studies, enduring a time-consuming process spanning nearly two years. Due to legal constraints, they are unable to utilize readily available cannabis from dispensaries.

Consequently, these studies are still several months away from commencing.

In Michigan, veterans like Anton Harb said they believe marijuana holds promise for PTSD treatment and staves off suicidal impulses. He’s a former Army artilleryman who served in Iraq and says marijuana helped ease nightmares, anxiety and depression caused by PTSD.

“Cannabis set me on a path of healing,” said Harb, 41. “I want other veterans to be able to at least make an informed decision.”

Attorney Michael Komorn

Attorney Michael Komorn

State / Federal Legal Defense

With extensive experience in criminal legal defense since 1993 from pre-arrest, District, Circuit, Appeals, Supreme and the Federal court systems.

KOMORN LAW (248) 357-2550

Harb has voiced concerns about the slow progress of research. The 2018 legalization of recreational marijuana in Michigan enforced a requirement that generated tax revenue from sales be designated for FDA-approved research.

Since 2021, the Cannabis Regulatory Agency of Michigan has bestowed $40 million in grants upon the University of Michigan, Wayne State University, and the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS), a reputable nonprofit organization.

Researchers say the larger trial in Michigan, paid for with a $12.9 million state grant, will study 320 veterans.

The FDA held up the second trial over concerns about inhalation and danger to the lungs in smoking pre-rolled marijuana cigarettes and vaping, as well as THC dosing. In a Dec. 28 letter, an FDA official said the hold would be lifted if the “drug delivery method” changes. MAPS plans to appeal the ruling. The FDA declined to comment, saying the agency’s “ability to discuss pending [applications] is strictly limited by federal law.”

Some experts, including a prominent pulmonologist who has studied the effects of marijuana smoking, say there is no evidence marijuana smokers are at significant risk of developing lung cancer or pulmonary disease like tobacco smokers. But a study published Wednesday found that frequent cannabis smoking may significantly increase a person’s risk for heart attack and stroke.

There is much more to the story —> Read More here at the Midland Daily News

DUI for Alcohol or Marijuana or Prescription Drugs - Fight it

Related Articles

Government Drones in Your Life – Yes, They Made up a Reason

Government Drones in Your Life – Yes, They Made up a Reason

Long Lake Township v. Maxon The Costs Outweigh Benefits in Exclusionary Rule Application and the Slippery Slope of Fourth Amendment ProtectionsThe recent decision by the Michigan Supreme Court in Long Lake Township v. Maxon represents a significant shift in the...

More Posts

Seattle settles case involving – the rights of nature

Seattle settles case involving – the rights of nature

The Rights of NatureSeattle settled a lawsuit brought by the Sauk-Suiattle Tribe on behalf of salmon harmed by dams on the Skagit River. This is one of the first "rights of nature" cases in the US, and the tribe argued that the lack of fish passage measures violated...

read more
NY judge fines unlicensed cannabis shops $15 million

NY judge fines unlicensed cannabis shops $15 million

It's their corner now“This punishment should serve as a clear warning for all unlicensed cannabis stores in the state: we will enforce the law and shut down your operations,” state Attorney General Letitia James saidThe owner of seven unlicensed cannabis shops in New...

read more
Vehicle Forfeiture in Canada – The Process of Taking

Vehicle Forfeiture in Canada – The Process of Taking

Thank You... and have a nice day eh!Disclaimer: We are not Attorneys in Canada.  This is an article of information obtained from various sources and presented here. We can only assume they are accurate.  If you ever find a reason to go to Canada and need a lawyer...we...

read more
Alcohol, Drugs, Kayaking – It could be a problem

Alcohol, Drugs, Kayaking – It could be a problem

Can I drink alcohol and smoke cannabis if I'm canoeing or kayaking or tubing or paddleboarding or just floating around?While Michigan law doesn't explicitly forbid consuming alcohol on non-motorized vessels like canoes or kayaks, it's strongly discouraged for safety...

read more
Feds Clarify Doctor Prescribed Medical Cannabis Is No Excuse

Feds Clarify Doctor Prescribed Medical Cannabis Is No Excuse

The revised federal workplace drug testing guidelines, issued by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), are intended to provide clarity. These guidelines emphasize that individuals who use medical marijuana under a doctor’s recommendation in a legal state cannot use it as a valid justification for a positive THC test.

In notices published in the Federal Register, SAMHSA announced that it had amended guidance of saliva and urine testing to include the cannabis policy clarification, despite receiving comments opposing the proposal after they were first announced last year.

In the new notices, SAMHSA acknowledges receiving numerous comments advocating for reconsideration of the marijuana testing policy, with many individuals seizing the opportunity to advocate for federal cannabis legalization. Nevertheless, SAMHSA maintains that the current law justifies the revised guidance.

Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs

A Rule by the Health and Human Services Department on 10/12/2023

AGENCY:

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

ACTION:

Issuance of mandatory guidelines.

SUMMARY:

The Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS” or “Department”) has revised the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs using Oral Fluid (OFMG) which published in the Federal Register of October 25, 2019.

DATES:

The mandatory guidelines are effective October 10, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Eugene D. Hayes, Ph.D., MBA, SAMHSA, CSAP, DWP; 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 16N02, Rockville, MD 20857, by telephone (240) 276–1459 or by email at .

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Summary

These revised Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs using Oral Fluid (OFMG) establish a process whereby the Department annually publishes the authorized drug testing panel ( i.e., drugs, analytes, or cutoffs) to be used for Federal workplace drug testing programs; revise the definition of a substituted specimen to include specimens with a biomarker concentration inconsistent with that established for a human specimen, establish a process whereby the Department publishes an authorized biomarker testing panel ( i.e., biomarker analytes and cutoffs) for Federal workplace drug testing programs; update and clarify the oral fluid collection procedures; revise the Medical Review Officer (MRO) verification process for positive codeine and morphine specimens; and require MROs to submit semiannual reports to the Secretary or designated HHS representative on Federal agency specimens that were reported as positive for a drug or drug metabolite by a laboratory and verified as negative by the MRO. In addition, some wording changes have been made for clarity and for consistency with the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs using Urine (UrMG) or to apply to any authorized specimen type.

The Department is publishing a separate Federal Register Notification (FRN) elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register with the revised UrMG, which include the same or similar revisions as the OFMG, where appropriate.

Background

Pursuant to its authority under section 503 of Public Law 100–71, 5 U.S.C. 7301, and Executive Order 12564, HHS establishes the scientific and technical guidelines for Federal workplace drug testing programs and establishes standards for certification of laboratories engaged in drug testing for Federal agencies.

Using data obtained from the Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs and HHS-certified laboratories, the Department estimates that 275,000 urine specimens are tested annually by Federal agencies. No Federal agencies are testing hair or oral fluid specimens at this time.

HHS originally published the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs (hereinafter referred to as Guidelines or Mandatory Guidelines) in the Federal Register (FR) on April 11, 1988 (53 FR 11979). The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) subsequently revised the Guidelines on June 9, 1994 (59 FR 29908), September 30, 1997 (62 FR 51118), November 13, 1998 (63 FR 63483), April 13, 2004 (69 FR 19644), and November 25, 2008 (73 FR 71858). SAMHSA published the current Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs using Urine (UrMG) on January 23, 2017 (82 FR 7920) and published the current Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs using Oral Fluid (OFMG) on October 25, 2019 (84 FR 57554). SAMHSA published proposed Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs using Hair (HMG) on September 10, 2020 (85 FR 56108) and proposed revisions to the UrMG (87 FR 20560) and OFMG (87 FR 20522) on April 7, 2022.

There was a 60-day public comment period following publication of the proposed OFMG, during which 53 commenters submitted 204 comments on the OFMG. These commenters were comprised of individuals, organizations, and private sector companies. The comments are available for public view at https://www.regulations.gov/​. All comments were reviewed and taken into consideration in the preparation of the Guidelines. The issues and concerns raised in the public comments for the OFMG are set forth below. Similar comments are considered together in the discussion.

Summary of Public Comments and HHS’s Response

The following comments were directed to the information and questions in the preamble.

Some submitted comments were specific to transportation industry drug testing which is regulated by the Department of Transportation (DOT). The Department has noted these comments below, but responded only to comments that are relevant to these Guidelines. DOT issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on February 28, 2022 (87 FR 11156). Subsequently, DOT extended the comment period to April 29, 2022 (87 FR 16160), and published the final rule on May 2, 2023 (88 FR 27596).

Authorized Drug Testing Panel

The Department requested comments on its proposal to publish the drug testing panel separately from the OFMG in a Federal Register\[[[[p Notification (FRN) each year. Fifteen commenters submitted a total of 40 comments on this topic for the OFMG.

Nine commenters disagreed with publishing a revised drug testing panel without a public comment period, expressing concerns that stakeholders including individuals subject to federally regulated drug testing would not be given the opportunity to provide comment and that the Department would miss valuable input including information on costs and burden. Some of these commenters suggested alternate ways to permit public comment while enabling a quicker response to testing panel changes ( e.g., setting a shorter comment period, publishing the Guidelines as an interim final rule or issuing an advance notice of proposed rulemaking). The Department has reviewed these comments and suggestions and determined that no changes to the proposed Guidelines are needed. The Department has developed procedures which will allow review and comment before testing panel changes are published, as described below.

Consistent with current procedures, prior to making a change to the drug or biomarker testing panel, the Department will conduct a thorough review of the scientific and medical literature, and will solicit review and input from subject matter experts such as Responsible Persons (RPs) of HHS-certified laboratories, Medical Review Officers (MROs), research scientists, manufacturers of collection devices and/or immunoassay kits, as well as Federal partners such as DOT, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). Further, the Department plans to provide notice and opportunity for public comment regarding any proposed changes to the drug and biomarker testing panels as part of Drug Testing Advisory Board (DTAB) meetings and procedures.

Information regarding any proposed changes to the drug and biomarker testing panels and a request for public comment will be included in an advance notice of the DTAB meeting published in the Federal Register , along with the timeframe and method(s) for comment submission. During the meeting, the Department will present the basis for adding or removing analytes ( i.e., including technical and scientific support for the proposed changes), as well as a discussion of related costs and benefits. This information will be provided in advance to DTAB members. The Department will review all submitted public comments and will share information during a DTAB session prior to DTAB’s review of SAMHSA’s recommendation to the Secretary regarding each proposed change.

The Department will make the final decision on any panel changes and include the effective date(s) in the annual Notice, to allow time for drug testing service providers ( e.g., immunoassay kit manufacturers, oral fluid collection device manufacturers) to develop or revise their products, and for HHS-certified laboratories to develop or revise assays, complete validation studies, and revise procedures.

Three commenters specifically agreed with the need to streamline and improve processes for making changes to the testing panels, but expressed concern over the process for testing panel review and who would be involved. These commenters suggested involving other stakeholders ( e.g., HHS-certified laboratories, DTAB, FDA). As noted above, the Department will use multiple methods and involve subject matter experts from various stakeholder groups to determine testing panel changes, and will provide opportunity for public review and comment before changes are made. FDA, DOT, and other Federal partners will have opportunities to review and provide input.

More Posts

What is the Exclusionary Rule?

What is the Exclusionary Rule?

What is the Exclusionary Rule?The Exclusionary Rule is a legal principle in the United States that prevents the government from using most evidence gathered in violation of the United States Constitution. Specifically, it applies to evidence obtained through an...

read more
Michigan K-12 students could take medical marijuana to school

Michigan K-12 students could take medical marijuana to school

Students attending K-12 schools in Michigan would have the opportunity to utilize medical marijuana and CBD-infused products thanks to recently introduced legislation (2023-HIB-5063).

The bill, introduced by Democratic representatives in the Michigan House last week, aims to legalize the consumption of marijuana-infused edibles, beverages, and other products with minimal THC content by students on school premises or while riding a school bus.

A designated staff member will have the authority to administer the product, while only those with written permission specifying the appropriate timing and recipients will be permitted to ingest it. Examples of such instances include rescue medication for the relief or prevention of symptoms.

The goal is to improve access to medical marijuana for students who meet the required qualifications, thereby enhancing their accessibility.

It’s a clear demonstration of the state’s commitment to align its policies with the wide range of drugs that vary in legal status within Michigan.

FAQs 

Q: What is the purpose of Michigan legislation 2023-HIB-5063?

A: The purpose of Michigan legislation 2023-HIB-5063 is to require school districts to provide medical marijuana to students who have a medical marijuana card and whose parents or guardians have consented to their use of medical marijuana.

Q: Who is eligible to receive medical marijuana under the legislation?

A: Students who have a medical marijuana card and whose parents or guardians have consented to their use of medical marijuana are eligible to receive medical marijuana under the legislation.

Q: How would medical marijuana be administered to students under the legislation?

A: The legislation would require school districts to designate a school nurse or other qualified school employee to be responsible for administering medical marijuana to students. The legislation also requires school districts to develop a policy for the administration of medical marijuana to students.

Q: Are there any restrictions on the use of medical marijuana by students under the legislation?

A: Yes, there are some restrictions on the use of medical marijuana by students under the legislation. For example, students would not be allowed to use medical marijuana during school hours or during school-sponsored activities.

Q: When would the legislation take effect?

A: If the legislation is passed and signed into law, it would take effect on September 30, 2024.

Additional information:

  • The legislation was introduced by Representative Dylan Wegela on September 28, 2023.
  • The legislation has been referred to the House Committee on Regulatory Reform.
  • The legislation has not yet been voted on by the Michigan House of Representatives as of October 3, 2023.

Please note that this is just a summary of the legislation and does not constitute legal advice. If you have any questions about the legislation, you should consult with an attorney.

Random FAQs

Q: What is a subpoena?

A: A subpoena is a court order that requires a person to appear in court or to produce documents.

Q: What is a deposition?

A: A deposition is a sworn statement that a witness gives outside of court. Depositions are often used to gather evidence before a trial.

Q: What is a plea bargain?

A: A plea bargain is an agreement between a defendant and a prosecutor in which the defendant agrees to plead guilty to a lesser charge in exchange for a lighter sentence.

Q: What is a trial by jury?

A: A trial by jury is a trial in which a group of citizens, called jurors, decide the guilt or innocence of a defendant in a criminal case.

Q: What is an appeal?

An appeal is a process by which a party in a lawsuit asks a higher court to review a decision made by a lower court.

Q: What is a writ of habeas corpus?

A writ of habeas corpus is a court order that requires a person who is being held in custody to be brought before a judge so that the legality of their detention can be determined.

Q: What is a Miranda warning?

A Miranda warning is a warning that police officers must give to suspects before they interrogate them. The Miranda warning informs suspects of their rights, such as the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney.

Q: What is a statute of limitations?

A statute of limitations is a law that sets a time limit within which a lawsuit must be filed.

Q: What is a tort?

A tort is a civil wrong that causes harm to another person. Common torts include negligence, assault, and battery.

Q: What is a contract?

A contract is an agreement between two or more parties that is enforceable by law.

Q: What is a crime?

A crime is an act that is prohibited by law and punishable by the government.

What does Quash mean?

to say officially that something or an earlier decision, is no longer to be accepted: His conviction was quashed after his attorney argued that police evidence was all lies.

What is conviction vacated mean?

When a sentence is vacated: It legally annuls the conviction. Vacating a criminal sentence means removing that conviction from a person’s record. The record will then appear as if the person was never charged and convicted of a crime.

Why would a sentence be vacated?

Someone who has their conviction vacated are released from custody under certain conditions, such as a plea bargain being breached, proof of ineffective counsel, court bias, or another similar factor that might have impacted the outcome of the original trial.

Is vacating the same as dismissing?

‘Vacating’ or ‘setting aside’ is used when referring to nullifying a specific judgment from the judge (in this case, a guilty or ‘no contest’ judgment).

‘Dismissing’ applies to the entire case. It means that the case is thrown out for reasons other than its factual merits.

Does vacated mean innocent?

Winning the motion to vacate doesn’t mean that this is the end of the matter. The conviction or sentence is canceled as if it never existed, but the court doesn’t close your case. Instead, the prosecutor then decides whether to drop or pursue the original charges.

More Posts

What is the Exclusionary Rule?

What is the Exclusionary Rule?

What is the Exclusionary Rule?The Exclusionary Rule is a legal principle in the United States that prevents the government from using most evidence gathered in violation of the United States Constitution. Specifically, it applies to evidence obtained through an...

read more

Canadian Study-Cannabis use disorder linked to 60% higher risk

Canadian Study-Cannabis use disorder linked to 60% higher risk

A recent study published in Addiction evaluated the associations of cannabis use disorder (CUD) with cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes.

Cannabis usage is prevalent among more than 200 million individuals worldwide, and its associated adverse effects carry significant implications. The occurrence of Cannabis Use Disorder (CUD) affects approximately 27%-34% of cannabis users, highlighting the urgent need for public health attention. The gravity of the situation is further emphasized by the limited availability of treatments and behavioral interventions for those affected.

Although research suggests adverse health outcomes due to cannabis usage, the relationship between cannabis and CVD is less explored. However, current evidence indicates a higher occurrence of cardiovascular events among young cannabis users. In addition, cannabis has been associated with severe events such as stroke, myocardial infarction, arrhythmias, atherosclerosis, and cardiomyopathies.

Read The Article Here

FAQs about Cannabis Use Disorder

What is cannabis use disorder?

Cannabis use disorder (CUD) is a medical condition in which a person uses cannabis excessively and compulsively, even though it is causing problems in their life. CUD can lead to a number of negative consequences, including impaired memory and learning, problems with relationships and work, and financial problems.

How common is CUD?

CUD is the most common substance use disorder among people in the United States. About 10% of people who use cannabis will develop CUD, and the rate is higher among adolescents and young adults.

What are the symptoms of CUD?

The symptoms of CUD can vary from person to person. Some common symptoms include:

Using more cannabis than intended
Trying but failing to quit using cannabis
Spending a lot of time using cannabis
Craving cannabis
Using cannabis even when it causes problems at home, school, or work
Continuing to use cannabis despite social or relationship problems
Giving up important activities with friends and family in favor of using cannabis
Using cannabis in high-risk situations, such as driving a car
Continuing to use cannabis despite physical or psychological problems
Needing to use more cannabis to get the same high
What are the risk factors for CUD?

A number of factors can increase a person’s risk of developing CUD, including:

Age: Adolescents and young adults are more likely to develop CUD than older adults.
Family history: People with a family history of addiction are more likely to develop CUD.
Mental health problems: People with mental health problems, such as depression or anxiety, are more likely to develop CUD.
Peer pressure: People who have friends who use cannabis are more likely to use cannabis themselves.
Early exposure to cannabis: People who start using cannabis at a young age are more likely to develop CUD.

How is CUD treated?

There is no one-size-fits-all treatment for CUD. Treatment plans are typically tailored to the individual’s needs and may include a combination of medication, therapy, and support groups.

Common treatments for CUD include:

Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT): CBT is a type of therapy that helps people to identify and change their thoughts and behaviors.
Contingency management: Contingency management is a type of therapy that rewards people for positive behaviors, such as staying sober.
Medication: There are a number of medications that can be used to treat CUD, such as bupropion (Zyban) and naltrexone (Vivitrol).

Support groups: Support groups can provide people with CUD with a safe and supportive environment where they can share their experiences and learn from others who are going through the same thing.

FAQ

What does Quash mean?

to say officially that something or an earlier decision, is no longer to be accepted: His conviction was quashed after his attorney argued that police evidence was all lies.

What is conviction vacated mean?

When a sentence is vacated: It legally annuls the conviction. Vacating a criminal sentence means removing that conviction from a person’s record. The record will then appear as if the person was never charged and convicted of a crime.

Why would a sentence be vacated?

Someone who has their conviction vacated are released from custody under certain conditions, such as a plea bargain being breached, proof of ineffective counsel, court bias, or another similar factor that might have impacted the outcome of the original trial.

Is vacating the same as dismissing?

‘Vacating’ or ‘setting aside’ is used when referring to nullifying a specific judgment from the judge (in this case, a guilty or ‘no contest’ judgment).

‘Dismissing’ applies to the entire case. It means that the case is thrown out for reasons other than its factual merits.

Does vacated mean innocent?

Winning the motion to vacate doesn’t mean that this is the end of the matter. The conviction or sentence is canceled as if it never existed, but the court doesn’t close your case. Instead, the prosecutor then decides whether to drop or pursue the original charges.

More Posts

What is the Exclusionary Rule?

What is the Exclusionary Rule?

What is the Exclusionary Rule?The Exclusionary Rule is a legal principle in the United States that prevents the government from using most evidence gathered in violation of the United States Constitution. Specifically, it applies to evidence obtained through an...

read more