lunedì 29 agosto 2016

Patent No. 6,630,507: Why the U.S. government holds a patent on cannabis plant compounds

It’s about technology transfer, not legalization

PUBLISHED: August 28, 2016 at 12:01 am | UPDATED: August 27, 2016 at 10:03 pm

It may not have quite the same ring to it as a certain seven-digit phone number made famous by a 1980s pop hit, but 6,630,507 has become internet-famous since the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration opted not to reschedule marijuana, leaving it in the category of drugs with no legitimate medical uses.

Since then, proponents of legalization have responded with a storm of social-media posts highlighting U.S. Patent No. 6,630,507, granted in 2003 to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and covering the potential use of non-psychoactive cannabinoids to protect the brain from damage or degeneration caused by certain diseases, such as cirrhosis. They’re telling the DEA to “talk to the hand,” writing “6,630,507” on their palms, hashtagging the number and linking to past articles on the topic.

The intent of the posts is symbolic, said Sam Mendez, an intellectual property and public policy lawyer who serves as the executive director of the University of Washington’s Cannabis Law & Policy Project.

“Naturally, it shows that there is a certain amount of hypocrisy that there is ‘no accepted medical use’ for cannabis according to federal law,” Mendez said. “And yet here you have the very same government owning a patent for, ostensibly, a medical use for marijuana.”

Mendez — like patent lawyers, the research arm of the HHS and the New York biopharmaceutical firm that’s working as an exclusive licensee under the patent — cautions that the existence of Patent No. 6,630,507 doesn’t signal that legalization is on the horizon.

“The government is allowed to file and obtain patents, and that has no bearing on the Controlled Substances Act,” Mendez said.

But it does indicate what could result if cannabis were rescheduled: an explosion of marijuana-related patents, Mendez said.

No. 6,630,507’s inception

The National Institutes of Health employs roughly 6,000 Ph.D.-level scientists, said NIH special adviser for technology transfer Mark Rohrbaugh, who holds doctorates in biochemistry and law. When one of those scientists invents a new technology or makes a new discovery, the NIH evaluates the result and determines whether to file for a patent.

Over the years, the NIH has conducted and funded research involving cannabis — both as a drug of abuse and for its potential therapeutic properties, NIH spokeswoman Renate Myles said.

In the case of No. 6,630,507, the researchers discovered that non-psychoactive compounds in cannabis may have antioxidant properties that could be beneficial in the treatment of certain neurological diseases, she said.

“This patent describes the therapeutic potential for cannabinoid chemical compounds that are structurally similar to THC, but without its psychoactive properties, thereby treating specific conditions without the adverse side effects associated with smoked marijuana,” Myles said in an e-mail.

The patent doesn’t prove the chemical compound is effective in the stated treatment, Rohrbaugh said. The compound would have to be purified, synthesized in a lab setting, subjected to extensive testing in animals and humans, and ultimately require U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval to show that it’s safe and effective for the intended purpose.

The intent behind patenting and licensing NIH discoveries is to keep technology that could potentially benefit the public from sitting idle, he said.

This sometimes requires looping in the private sector, he said. Laws made in the 1980s help entities such as universities and the government to make their discoveries accessible to others who are in a position to further the research and potentially commercialize the developments. The entities behind the discoveries typically receive payments as part of the licensing agreement.

NIH’s Technology Transfer Office advertises patents — including those related to cannabinoids — available for licensing on its website, and officials sometimes conduct outreach as well. The licenses often are packaged with some elements of exclusivity, Rohrbaugh said.

“It’s like a piece of land,” he said. “You wouldn’t build a million-dollar house on a piece of land you wouldn’t have some title to.”

Five years ago, the NIH granted New York-based Kannalife Sciences exclusive license for the part of the technology outlined in the patent to develop cannabinoid- and cannabidiol-based drugs for the treatment of hepatic encephalopathy — brain damage that could result from conditions such as cirrhosis. Kannalife also has a non-exclusive license to develop drugs to treat chronic traumatic encephalopathy, a rare and progressive degenerative brain condition likely caused by repeated head trauma, Myles said.

“Other companies may also apply for licenses to use this patented technology to develop drugs to treat other neurological diseases where antioxidant properties of cannabinoid drugs may be beneficial,” she said. “The patent expires on April 21, 2019, after which anyone would be free to develop drugs based on these cannabinoids that, like all drugs, would require FDA approval to demonstrate safety and effectiveness in humans.”

No other companies have licensed portions of the 6,630,507 patent, she said.

Kannalife CEO Dean Petkanas did not disclose the specific terms of the licensing agreement, but he told The Cannabist that the deal includes milestone payments, a percentage of sales as well as royalties in “the six figures” to the government. The patent is valid in several jurisdictions, including the United Kingdom and Australia, he said.

Petkanas said his company “could not have gotten a better ruling” from the DEA.

“We’ve been building our business from the pharmaceutical side from Day One,” said Petkanas, a former executive at the investment firm depicted in the film “The Wolf of Wall Street.” “We want to be on the pharmaceutical side; everything we do has to be by the book.”

Kannalife, recently featured in a football-related Sports Illustrated reportregarding its research into therapies for chronic traumatic encephalopathy, is about to begin raising $15 million in private investments. The money would allow it to start clinical trials related to hepatic encephalopathy as soon as the first quarter of 2018. Petkanas said Kannalife anticipates eventually seeking orphan drug status — a special FDA designation for treating rare conditions. The company also contemplating conducting chronic traumatic encephalopathy-related trials in Europe.

“Does marijuana have medicinal benefit? Well, yeah,” Petkanas said. “But it can’t be targeted and qualified for repetitive use (without the FDA-approved research).”

That one arm of the federal government is poised to make money from cannabis-derived compounds, and another has approved synthetic cannabinoid drugs such as Marinol and Syndros, tells a story different from the one told by the DEA, which lumped together the hundreds of chemical compounds of cannabis as a Schedule I substance, said Gregory F. Wesner, a Seattle-based patent and trademark attorney for Lane Powell PC.

“The interesting thing here is basically the government being two-faced,” Wesner said.

If and when national legalization comes, it’ll trigger a swarm of new patent applications, said the UW Cannabis Law Project’s Mendez.

“That’s massive growth that does not occur every day or every year That’s the kind of growth you’re talking about once in a generation,” he said of the potential sales growth in the industry. “As part of that, you’re going to see many people and many businesses research this far more intensely and file for patents.”

An analysis conducted by Christopher Freerks, a Lane Powell patent administrator, shows that the PTO already has granted at least four dozen cannabis-related utility patents, including No. 6,630,507. The analysis does not include plant patents, which have been tougher to come by for some cultivators.

San Diego patent attorney Dale C. Hunt, an Open Cannabis Project board member who has degrees in botany, genetics and biology, said one would need to develop a completely new strain in order to land a patent.

If marijuana is rescheduled, it’s realistic to believe that the innovation could carry on in the laboratories of NIH scientists, he said. But for now, the federal government’s technology transfer and patenting actions around cannabis do not appear to be widespread.

“(Tech transfer) happens all the time,” Hunt said. “It obviously doesn’t happen all the time in cannabis.”

Patent No. 6,630,507: Why the U.S. government holds a patent on cannabis plant compounds

sabato 27 agosto 2016

Four Cannabis Entrepreneurs Share Their Strangest Moments

Carrie Roberts, Senior Consultant at Medicine Man Technologies(MDCL:OTC US)
We had a potential client approach us wanting to  retrofit an abandoned mine (18,400,000 sq. ft.), capable of producing 3 millions pounds of cannabis annually for domestic and international exportation.  This would be the largest cultivation facility in Western Canada.  They didn’t actually have funding for this “envisioned” project, so they also wanted us to write their business plan and do all of the design work for free.  Half the battle of consulting in the cannabis industry is managing client expectations.

Steve Gormley, Managing Partner/CEO at Seventh Point LLC
I would say that one of the craziest experiences I’ve had in a meeting with some cannabis industry entrepreneurs occurred in LA last winter.  I was in a meeting where the dispensary license holder was speaking to me in Mandarin, the cultivator was speaking to me in Spanish, the landlord in Russian and the real estate agent was speaking to me in French.  They all wanted to keep information from the other and were all talking at once. 

Anthony Franciosi, Founder of Honest Marijuana
When doing the initial planning for the growery, we needed to conduct some research to determine which strains to include. Strain selection is critical to the success of our business, so we took a trip to Jamaica to inspect a number of potential specimens in person. When returning to the United States, I got a little too close to a drug dog which must have smelt some smoke on me from before I left Jamaica. After spending an entire night explaining to the police that I had no reason to traffic drugs into the country as I had my own growery in Colorado, they finally let me go with no charges pressed.

Rob Hunt, President at Teewinot Life Sciences
The moments that stick out are the captive audiences I have had the unique opportunity to educate. These include the Joint Committee on Taxation at the U.S. Senate, the Conference of Western Attorney Generals or even the Government of Colombia. Ten years ago I would never have imagined that parties such as these would actively be seeking information around how cannabinoid based compounds may lead to monumental medical breakthroughs.

Four Cannabis Entrepreneurs Share Their Strangest Moments

giovedì 18 agosto 2016

The Marijuana Show Could Become The Shark Tank for Ganjapreneurs

FRIDAY, AUGUST 12, 2016 AT 7:41 A.M.

Spirits were high at the Southern California Cannabis Conference & Expo, held in San Diego on Aug. 7. It wasn’t the crowd you might expect at a cannabis convention. While Sublime songs did make the occasional appearance, most gathered were there to talk the big business of marijuana.

The Amazon reality show seeks the next marijuana millionaire.

The expo brought out dozens of cannabis-based businesses, some so huge they trade on the New York Stock Exchange, such as Medical Marijuana Inc., whose assets total more than $216 million, according to its 2015 annual report and whose main distributor, HempMeds, had a huge booth at the conference. Others are so small they consist of a mom and daughter cooking edibles in their kitchen and packaging them to sell at dispensaries. 
Seven of those budding cannabis entrepreneurs made their way to the main conference stage to pitch their business idea to Karen Paull, co-creator and co-producer of the Amazon reality competition The Marijuana Show, dubbed “Shark Tank for Ganjapreneurs.”
The audition was the first held in California, which still prohibits the use of recreational marijuana but has legalized the use of medical marijuana, albeit with various restrictions. In Denver, which is considered the epicenter of the marijuana industry due to its legal status, 200 contestants auditioned.
In the first two seasons, investors featured on The Marijuana Show bankrolled contestants with more than $18 million. This season, up to $20 million is up for grabs.
Paull and her partner, Wendy Robbins, created the show after hearing at a dispensary event viable business ideas that they thought they could help get off the ground with some consulting.
Karen Paull and her partner, Wendy Robbins, hope their marijuana business reality show will become “Shark Tank for ganjapreneurs.”

“We have successful business backgrounds, and we thought maybe we can help consult entrepreneurs out of the kindness of our hearts; give them some guidance,” says Paull, who served as the CEO of Sales Guru and VP of sales at Snapfish. Robbins is the co-inventor of the Tingler head massager as well as a two-time Emmy winner. She appeared on the show Homemade Millionaire with Kelly Ripa and has been a producer on Broadway.
“We typically offer free advice anyway,” Paull adds. “But what that morphed into was the concept of a reality show. We’ve been called the Godmothers of Pot before, or the Godmothers of Weed, and frankly, we’re a couple. We don’t have kids, so a lot of times the people that come through our show feel like our children that we get to coach and mentor and get to that stage where they’re ready to pitch investors.”
Hopefuls sat among a sparse audience and watched a sizzle reel showing past contestants walking away with the green they’ve been dreaming of. In one scene, a man triumphantly held up his dog inside a limousine and proclaimed, “Charlie! We’re rich, buddy!”
Deborah Smith, left, and Autumn Leilani, a mother-daughter team who auditioned for The Marijuana Show

Among the auditioners was mother/daughter team Autumn Leilani and Deborah Smith. Leilani, a DJ living in West Hollywood, and her San Diego–based mom, run Pop’s Potions. It's a company they started after the death of Jim, Leilani's father and Smith's husband. They concocted different edibles and cannabis oils in their kitchen to ease Jim’s pain resulting from cancer caused by exposure to Agent Orange during the Vietnam War.
After his death, the women decided to create their company so they could help others in pain through cannabis-infused candy and food, including truffles, beef jerky, lollipops and gummy bears. They’ve expanded their model to provide branded homemade edibles and packaging for other cannabis-based businesses.
The duo came to the conference to see if they could take their homegrown business to the next level. They say they believe that auditioning for The Marijuana Show can make that happen.
“It was one of those things where we said, ‘We should do this!' Why wouldn’t we?” Leilani says. “This is our heart and soul. This is our passion. I would love to just see us be one of the biggest edible companies out there as well as a main manufacturer for good, legit brands. There are edibles out there that are just garbage. We put pride in every single piece of candy that we produce.”
As auditions began, Paull picked up the microphone, angling her face to the cameras capturing the auditions, and greeted everyone. “We’re looking for the next marijuana millionaire, and they can be right here in this audience!”
While your neighborhood weed dealer may still be raking in enough cash for a sweet pre-owned Audi, those auditioning for The Marijuana Show know there are millions to be made in the legalized marijuana industry.
Marijuana industry investment and research firm ArcView Market Research reported that legal pot sales are expected to hit $6.7 billion in 2016 alone — a 25 percent jump from 2015. By 2020, that number is expected to be $21.8 billion. In California, sales at dispensaries were $2.7 billion in 2015, with an estimated growth to $6.6 billion in 2020. Los Angeles has more dispensaries than Colorado and Washington combined.
Still, because of the iffy legal status of marijuana use across the country, it’s a market fraught with potential legal issues. But Paull and Robbins want to get people there.
“We have people pitch us that aren’t going to necessarily be on the show,” Paull says. “But they will become friends or advocates, collaborate or sell sponsorships with us and everyone in this community, because cannabis is trying to become legalized. Everybody needs to help each other. It’s like a paradigm. The old culture is us against them. The cannabis culture is that we’re all in this together.”
A large investment would be life-changing for people like Leilani, who is attempting to grow her business from seed to bank.
“I would probably pee myself [if we got a major investor], and then there would be a big party followed by that, and then it would make all of my dreams come true,” Leilani says. “It would put me where I know I need to be. It would be buckle-down time. We’d get this in gear and get it to the next level.”

The Marijuana Show Could Become The Shark Tank for Ganjapreneurs

lunedì 15 agosto 2016

New York Times: cannabis, non trattiamola più come droga pericolosa

Articolo di Redazione
13 agosto 2016 12:03
 I sostenitori di una politica più ragionevole sulla cannabis hanno ottenuto una piccola vittoria questa settimana quando l'Amministrazione Obama ha dichiarato che avrebbe autorizzato un maggior numero di istituti a coltivare marijuana per scopi di ricerca medica. Ma il Governo non ha colto l'opportunità di un cambiamento più significativo.

Giovedi' scorso il Dipartimento antidroga (Drug Enforcement Administration o DEA) ha rigettato due petizioni - una dei Governatori degli Stati del Rhode Island e di Washington, e l'altra di un cittadino del New Mexico - che chiedevano l'eliminazione della cannabis dalla Tabella 1 della legge sugli stupefacenti. Le droghe in quella tabella, che includono eroina e Lsd, sono considerate prive di efficacia terapeutica; la legge federale ne vieta il possesso, e i ricercatori devono fare i salti mortali per ottenere l'autorizzazione a studiarle e ottenerne piccoli campioni. La presenza della cannabis in quell'elenco è profondamente sbagliata, visto che molti scienziati e lo stesso Presidente Obama hanno detto che non è più pericolosa dell'alcol.

Negli anni, il Congresso e i ministri della Giustizia hanno delegato ogni decisione alla DEA, che fa parte di quel ministero di Giustizia cui spetta il compito di reprimere in base alla normativa federale antidroga. La DEA ha così acquisito un esteso controllo sulle politiche antidroga. Ad esempio, decide chi può e non può coltivare marijuana per scopi scientifici e quali studiosi possono o meno studiarla. Si è opposta vigorosamente ad ogni sforzo da parte di scienziati, rappresentanti degli Stati e legislatori federali di riclassificare la cannabis, rigettando o rifiutandosi di riconoscere le evidenze scientifiche secondo cui la marijuana è meno pericolosa di quanto previsto dalla legge.

L'Università del Mississippi è l'unica istituzione che, dal 1968, è autorizzata a coltivare piante di cannabis a fini di ricerca. Questo ha limitato fortemente la sua reperibilità. Solo ora, la DEA ha dichiarato che autorizzerà un maggior numero di università a coltivare piante di cannabis per metterla a disposizione di quei ricercatori che hanno ottenuto l'autorizzazione a studiarla. Questo dovrebbe facilitare il reperimento di una varietà di cannabis con concentrazioni variabili di componenti diverse. 

Oltre alla scarsità della cannabis destinata alla ricerca, la presenza della sostanza nella Tabella 1 significa che gli scienziati devono ottenere molteplici autorizzazioni da parte di diverse agenzie federali come la DEA e la Food and Drug Administration (agenzia che vigila sulla sicurezza alimentare e dei farmaci). In confronto, il Governo rende molto più facile studiare gli oppiacei ed altre sostanze pericolose che sono invece elencate nelle Tabelle da 2 a 5. 

La DEA e la FDA continuano a sostenere che non ci sono sufficienti prove scientifiche per rimuovere la cannabis dalla Tabella 1. Ma sono in malafede; è lo stesso Governo che ha reso impossibile fare quegli studi e sperimentazioni che potrebbero fornire le prove a sostegno della riclassificazione della sostanza.

Mentre la DEA esita a ripensare le politiche sulla cannabis, gli elettori da ogni parte del Paese stanno espandendo l'accesso a questa sostanza attraverso iniziative legislative e referendarie. L'Alaska, il Colorado, l'Oregon, lo Stato di Washington e il Distretto di Columbia (dove ha sede la capitale Washington) hanno legalizzato l'uso ricreativo, e 25 Stati e il Distretto di Columbia e Puerto Rico hanno legalizzato la cannabis terapeutica. I residenti di almeno cinque Stati - Arizona, California, Maine, Massachusetts e Nevada - saranno chiamati a voltare sulla legalizzazione dell'uso ricreativo della marijuana a novembre. E i residenti dell'Arkansas e della Florida voteranno sull'uso terapeutico della cannabis.

L'Amministrazione Obama ha fatto la cosa giusta nel consentire agli Stati di legiferare in tal senso. Ma il prossimo Presidente potrebbe facilmente revocare questa decisione. Hillary Clinton ha detto di essere a favore della facoltà degli Stati di legalizzare la sostanza e anche a rimuoverla dalla Tabella 1. Donald Trump ha detto che personalmente è contrario alla legalizzazione per uso ricreativo, ma favorevole alla cannabis terapeutica e al diritto degli Stati a scegliersi la loro legislazione.

Sarebbe opportuno rimuovere la cannabis dalla Tabella 1. Ridurre le limitazioni alla ricerca e le pene per chi le usa sarebbe un passo nella giusta direzione.

Editoriale del Editorial Board del New York Times pubblicato il 13 agosto 2016 sull'edizione online del quotidiano

New York Times: cannabis, non trattiamola più come droga pericolosa

sabato 6 agosto 2016

Forbes Features Medical Marijuana, Inc. Portfolio Company Kannalife in Article on NFL and Concussion-Related Disease CTE

Article Explains How Cannabis Could Be the "Holy Grail" of Neurological Medicine

SAN DIEGO, CA --(Marketwired - July 25, 2016) - Medical Marijuana, Inc. (OTCMJNA) announced today that its portfolio company Kannalife Sciences, Inc. ("Kannalife") was the focus of a Forbes article that discussed Kannalife's role in developing a pharmaceutical treatment for the degenerative brain disorder Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE), a concussion-related disease that is pervasive among NFL players.
The July 22 Forbes article titled, "NFL To Name New Medical Chief, Bringing Hope for Cannabis Concussion Treatment," describes how bio-pharmaceutical and phyto-medical company Kannalife is conducting U.S. government-licensed research to determine the effects of cannabinoids on CTE and how such research could lead to major changes in how the NFL treats and prevents players' brain injuries. The article also includes success stories from former NFL players who have used medical marijuana instead of addictive opioid painkillers to address their brain injury-related symptoms.

In the article, Kannalife co-founder Thoma Kikis cites the plethora of athletes, including girl soccer players, who could benefit from Kannalife's research. "We want to be able to have a pharmaceutical product that's available the moment an injury happens," Kikis told Forbes. "It would be great if the parents know what they're giving their children. That it's provided by a doctor and not from a dispensary."
Scientific research studies have found that cannabidiol (CBD) reduces brain swelling and neurological impairment following a traumatic brain injury, which in turn improves recovery.Kannalife currently holds two licenses with the U.S. National Institutes of Health for U.S. Patent 6,630,507 "Cannabinoids as Antioxidants and Neuroprotectants." These licenses are currently in use by Kannalife to develop novel therapeutic drugs to treat CTE and hepatic encephalopathy (HE). While CBD from marijuana is tightly restricted, CBD found naturally in hemp is legal throughout all 50 states in the U.S.
"CTE can affect everybody from children who fall off their bikes, to combat veterans, to the professional NFL football players that were highlighted in this Forbes article," said Medical Marijuana, Inc. CEO Dr. Stuart Titus.
"Each time a story is written on the positive effects of cannabinoid therapeutics, hemp and marijuana - as well as cannabis derivatives such as CBD - we are one step closer to `access for all' to this powerful botantical and its chemistry," added Dr. Titus. "We are grateful for news organizations that continue spreading the word about the medical benefits of cannabis, which has the potential to effectively treat or prevent CTE, and for our Kannalife researchers who are on the front lines developing cannabinoid-based therapeutics and solutions."
About Kannalife Sciences, Inc.Kannalife Sciences, Inc. is a phyto-medical company involved in the research and development of novel therapeutic agents designed to be neuroprotectants and immuno-modulators. Kannalife is currently conducting research and development at the Pennsylvania Biotechnology Center in Doylestown, PA, for target drug candidates to treat Hepatic Encephalopathy ("HE") and Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy ("CTE"). HE and CTE are oxidative stress related diseases that affect cognitive and behavioral functions. For more information, visit:
About Medical Marijuana, Inc.Our mission is to be the premier cannabis and hemp industry innovators, leveraging our team of professionals to source, evaluate and purchase value-added companies and products, while allowing them to keep their integrity and entrepreneurial spirit. We strive to create awareness within our industry, develop environmentally-friendly, economically sustainable businesses, while increasing shareholder value. For details on Medical Marijuana, Inc.'s portfolio and investment companies, visit
To see Medical Marijuana, Inc.'s video statement, click here. Shareholders are also encouraged to visit the Medical Marijuana, Inc. Shop for discounted products.
This press release may contain certain forward-looking statements and information, as defined within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and is subject to the Safe Harbor created by those sections. This material contains statements about expected future events and/or financial results that are forward-looking in nature and subject to risks and uncertainties. Such forward-looking statements by definition involve risks, uncertainties and other factors, which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of Medical Marijuana, Inc. to be materially different from the statements made herein.
These statements have not been evaluated by the FDA and are not intended to diagnose, treat or cure any disease.
Medical Marijuana Inc. does not sell or distribute any products that are in violation of the United States Controlled Substances Act (US.CSA). These companies do grow, sell, and distribute hemp-based products and are involved with the federally legal distribution of medical marijuana-based products within certain international markets. Cannabidiol is a natural constituent of hemp oil.

Forbes Features Medical Marijuana, Inc. Portfolio Company Kannalife in Article on NFL and Concussion-Related Disease CTE

lunedì 1 agosto 2016

Legalizzazione cannabis. Istruzioni per l'uso

Comunicato di Vincenzo Donvito
21 luglio 2016 12:03
 Impazza il “confronto” sulla legalizzazione della cannabis dopo che il disegno di legge e' partito col suo iter parlamentare. Abbiamo letto di chi, favorevole alla legalizzazione, vorrebbe “dannare i giovani” (1), e nello stesso anche -in modo piu' civile- che la “battaglia contro la legalizzazione della cannabis è una battaglia di civiltà e, soprattutto, una battaglia culturale. Non possiamo vendere fumo ai nostri giovani” (2). Solo per citare i piu' recenti. Ma se qualcuno pensava che avremmo sviluppato un confronto tra i pro e i contro in base ad argomentazioni, riferimenti scientifici, esempi di altre esperienze istituzionali, e' bene che si ricreda. I 1.300 emendamenti presentati da chi non e' d'accordo sulla legalizzazione ci dicono che, per l'ennesima volta, nel nostro Paese ci sara' il muro contro muro basato sugli sgambetti, i sotterfugi, le fregature, i colpi bassi, etc... cioe' tutto quel bagaglio che fa parte della non-cultura umana, economica, sanitaria ed istituzionale che e' il perfetto contrario di quello che ci vorrebbe per far capire -a chi e' favorevole e a chi non lo e'- e farsi un'opinione.
E' l'Italia, bellezza! Quella che, sempre per restare in ambito istituzionale, quando si teme che una legge possa non passare perche' non si e' tanto sicuri della propria maggioranza, ecco che fioccano i voti di fiducia, la mortificazione della funzione del Parlamento. E' evidente, quindi, che per cercare di far approvare o meno una legge, tutti si attrezzino alla bisogna, sia essa attuale maggioranza (voti di fiducia) che attuale opposizione (ostruzionismo). Tutto legittimo, per carita' e, in un certo senso, anche segnale di vivacita'... ma forse per i cittadini c'e' un contraltare di informazione (quella di Stato della Rai, per esempio) che possa dare strumenti perch'e ognuno si faccia un'opinione? Niente di tutto questo.
La legalizzazione della cannabis, e delle droghe oggi illegali piu' in generale, e' un argomento trasversale tipico. Non e' questione di essere di destra o di sinistra o di centro, ma solo di far funzionare il cervello e vedere se due+due fa quattro, cioe' se i vantaggi per Stato e cittadini siano maggiori nel mantenimento dell'attuale regime proibizionista o meno. Non c'e' di mezzo neanche il -frequentemente conclamato- diritto alla vita dello zigote che, per motivi religiosi, contrappone i favorevoli e contrari all'aborto. E neanche il diritto di disporre della propria vita e della propria morte con il diritto all'eutanasia dove, i contrari, sostengono che la vita ce l'ha data il loro dio e nessun'altro ce la puo' togliere. O tante altre questioni che richiamano in gioco la religione (fecondazione eterologa, adozione per genitori omosessuali, staminali embrionali, etc). Tutte questioni di un certo rilievo che, in genere, insieme alla legalizzazione delle droghe, dividono creando due fronti piu' o meno compatti di pro e contro. No, nel caso della legalizzazione della cannabis tutto questo e' piu' attenuato perche', farsi uno spinello e' come bersi un bicchiere di vino a stomaco vuoto (chi dice che non e' cosi' fa parte di quella caciara di cui scrivevamo prima) e, almeno per ora, anche i piu' tenaci contrari alla legalizzazione non sembra abbiano intenzione di metter mano alla legalita' del vino e degli alcolici in generale. Per la cannabis -e anche per tutte le altre droghe- si tratta solo di comportamenti individuali che, se in eccesso come con qualunque altro tipo di prodotto, di base fanno male solo a chi lo ha assunto. In gioco, quindi, c'e' la liberta' individuale, il diritto e il dovere individuale di far parte di una comunita' in cui le proprie liberta' sono tali, anche in modo estremo, solo se non ledono quelle altrui. Ed e' qui il nodo del problema: perche' grossomodo tutti dicono che l'individuo deve essere libero, ma siccome alcuni lo dicono solo per finta (anche verso se stessi), ecco che manifestano la propria contrarieta' con una caciara intrisa di menzogne. Il gioco dello sparigliamento dei punti fermi che in uno Stato dovrebbero essere uguali per tutti, e' tipico di chi e' consapevole della carenza delle proprie argomentazioni, e di voler mantenere lo status quo solo per una questione di potere, sugli individui e sulla comunita'.
Chi come noi -che siamo favorevoli alla legalizzazione- ha assunto questa consapevolezza del gioco sporco che si sta cominciando a manifestare, e' bene che sia rigido sui principi del metodo: mai ingannare e mai partire dal presupposto della malafede del proprio avversario, anche se molto manifesta. E' proprio da questo che nasce la forza per meglio comunicare con tutti.

Qui il nostro canale web di informazione quotidiana sulle politiche in materia di droghe in tutto il mondo

(1) on. Maurizio Lupi
(2) Valentina Castaldini, portavoce nazionale del Nuovo Centrodestra 

Archivio blog