Becky DeKeuster of Berkeley Patients Group

On December 17th, our post dealt with the State of Maine setting up their medical marijuana program. A few days later we received a comment on our post via Live Journal from Becky DeKeuster of Berkeley Patients Group. We shared Becky DeKeuster's comments with you on December 31, 2009, and we promised to respond to Ms. DeKeuster. Please see below our comments.

Dear Ms. DeKeuster,
Thank you for taking the time to respond to my post and for so eloquently sharing important information. I understand that you needed to correct my statement: "The same people who are helping Maine set up a medical marijuana program are also trying to have full on legalization voted on in the next year in California." I will agree with you this statement is rather broad. Without enough research, I implied, based on an assumption from the news articles that the Berkeley Patients Group would be in favor of full legalization. I did not mean to imply that you have or would take an official stand on legal or recreational use of cannabis. After all, as far as legal use, medicinal legal use was passed in California in 1996 and Berkeley Patients Group was founded in 1999. I understand now that recreational legalization is not part of BPG's agenda.

I have now visited your web site and read your mission statement. I have also taken the time to read the PDF "Declare Saturday, October 31 2009, 'Berkeley Patients Group Day' In the City Of Berkeley." This declaration was very informative, providing a historical review of Proposition 215 and Berkeley Patients Group activities over the past 13 years.

I appreciate your clarification and your wish for a "do-over" regarding the wild-west metaphor. I, too, have been following this topic for a number of years and I recognize that each state finds they must individually navigate these waters very carefully and diligently. I am frequently amazed at the obvious differences in how medicinal marijuana dispensaries are managed in northern California towns and cities, as compared to what I see and read about in Southern California.

I don't think we are too far apart regarding the pharmacology issues. I did not mean to imply that I believe that marijuana should only be available in pharmacies distributed in THC pill form. What I wanted to assure is that it be regulated and, therefore, look forward to it not only in a synthesized formula, but also the natural herbal form being distributed by pharmacies. I do understand that patients indicate that the delivery format of the herbal form appears to be more efficient for pain relief, not unlike, I would think, the surgical patient receiving a morphine drip, as opposed to a Vicodin tablet.

The bigger question remains, should marijuana be approved for recreational sale and use, like alcohol? And if it is, how will it be managed, controlled, sold, distributed? We know addiction is a disease. Many people use marijuana, but like alcohol drinkers not all are abusers. Addiction affects minimally 25% of the population. Managing medicinal marijuana use will be perhaps left to our health care providers, who will need to decide if herbal marijuana is the correct course for each individual patient.

Going forward we will continue our work to educate and assist those seeking recovery and sobriety.

"Thank You, and Some Corrections"

On December 17th, our post dealt with the State of Maine setting up their medical marijuana program. A few days later we received a comment on our post via Live Journal from Becky DeKeuster of Berkeley Patients Group. We would like to share her thoughts with you as we close out 2009. Next week we will be back to respond to Becky's comments.

Thank you, and some corrections
Greetings, and thank you for addressing the important work that Maine's medical cannabis task force is undertaking to ensure that qualified patients have safe access to medical cannabis there. In the interest of an open exchange of ideas and facts, I write to address some of the concerns you express in this posting, and to clarify certain inaccuracies therein.

First I must correct your statement that "The same people who are helping Maine set up a medical marijuana program are also trying to have full on legalization voted on in the next year in California." Berkeley Patients Group takes no official stand on legal or recreational use of cannabis, and has not contributed to the ballot initiative that California voters may vote on in 2010. To do so would in no way advance our mission, which is as follows:

"The mission of the Berkeley Patients Group is to provide the purest, most effective, and affordable medical cannabis along with integrated holistic health services. We create and maintain the standards of excellence for medical cannabis in all that we do. We foster a compassionate community that advances understanding and inspires action."

As we enter our second decade of operations, BPG is still guided by the vision of our founder Jim McClelland, who died of AIDS-related complications in 2000. To blur the bright line between legalized medical use and legalized adult use would be to do a disservice to Jim, and to the patients who rely on us for medicine, services, and support. We are expert at successful, legal dispensary operations. Legalization is not on our agenda.

My second point refers to the perception that "the west is a mess." If I had a do-over button I would not have used the "Wild West" metaphor in that media interview. It's an easy shorthand, but it paints an inaccurate picture of what is actually happening in western states with medical cannabis laws. (These include Alaska, Washington, Oregon, California, Hawaii, Montana, Arizona, Nevada, and New Mexico.) Each of these states is dealing with implementation in its own way and each is facing various complexities.

It is important to keep in mind that these states are working separately because our federal government has so far refused to accept the findings of its own DEA Chief Administrative Law Judge Francis Young, who ruled in 1988 that "marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known." He further stated that "the provisions of the Controlled Substances Act permit and require the transfer of marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule II," and that "it would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious for the DEA to continue to stand between those sufferers and the benefits of this substance."

That being said, for the purposes of this comment I will limit my focus to California, which I suspect is the true target of the "wild west" concerns. Of course, the issues that L.A. is facing make for great media and so, unfortunately, those are the reports that the nation hears.

What is less often reported is that there are cities and counties in California where medical cannabis cultivation, dispensing, and use happen with reasonable oversight and without negative impact on local communities or patients. Oakland, San Francisco, Sebastopol, and Berkeley all come to mind as examples. These local governments early on implemented sensible regulations that allowed for, and put reasonable checks on, how patients, dispensaries, and communities can co-exist. And in the case of Berkeley, voters last year authorized a city commission to oversee dispensary operations and safety standards. In short, locales that allow for dispensary operations within clear, fair guidelines simply do not have the proliferation issues that we are seeing in the southern part of CA today. Because their programs are successful, because they work for their communities and don't make waves, they are not sensationalized in the media. The last media BPG received before this past Tuesday was an article in the Oakland Tribune about the City Council of Berkeley unanimously proclaiming our 10th birthday as "Berkeley Patients Group Day" in our city this year. [here is a link to the city's proclaimation "Berkeley Patients Group Day CA 2009" ]

I understand your call for cannabis to be treated as other pharmaceuticals. We have heard it again and again here in California--why can't they just have it in pharmacies? You can get synthesized THC in your local pharmacy, with a prescription. It's called Marinol, or Sativex. Patient responses, though, indicate a strong preference for the natural herbal form of the medicine, which can be self-titrated, and which offers a plethora of strains for the patient to choose from--and yes, scientists here, in Holland, and elsewhere are working hard to match specific strains to relief from specific ailments, and why. We know from our patients' anecdotal experience that various strains work best for different illnesses, but are currently working to link chemical components of each strain to the types of health issues that respond best to each strain. (Again, such research is taking place on a self-regulated basis and under considerable legal restraints, due to the federal government's refusal to address this important concept.) There are even four patients in the U.S. who receive 300 pre-rolled joints a month from the federal government itself, which operates a grow facility at a university in Mississippi.

So. Why can't we dispense it in pharmacies? Well, the folks who make Marinol would like that very much, but the patients say that THC compounded synthetically in a lab doesn't approach the efficacy of using whole plant medicine. Furthermore, cannabis is proven to be less lethal than aspirin. Yes, over the counter aspirin. In terms of patient needs, and taking into account societal impacts, this is not a medicine that requires Schedule I handling (also on Schedule I: heroin and fentanyl. Cocaine and meth are both Schedule II).

Finally, I want to say that I personally appreciate the work you do to help those with addictions to various substances. Your concerns about Maine's implementation of this law are understandable. However, it is especially vital for those in your profession to fully understand the facts about medical cannabis, and to consider Maine's law, and our advisory role, not as a threat but as an opportunity to learn more and to help debunk damaging myths about this substance. I would invite you to research more on the issues I have stated above, and to also consider the emerging role of medical cannabis as a valuable harm reduction tool.

Again, thank you for taking up this issue. I look forward to continued conversation with you as Maine crafts regulations that encourage safe access and sensible medical use standards.

Be well,

Becky DeKeuster
Berkeley Patients Group

Maine has Turned to California for Help Setting up a Medical Marijuana Program

Maine has turned to California for help setting up a medical marijuana program; the hope is that they will be able to implement what has worked well in the past. With over 10 years of experience in California they have had plenty of time to make mistakes and to have hopefully learned from them; considering that we are on the edge of what appears to be full on legalization in the next five years. Maine proceeds cautiously into this new territory, hopes to figure out a system that addresses both public safety and the needs of those recommended patients for marijuana. Maine is trying to avoid the craziness that exists out west, dispensaries opening and closing daily and it doesn't seem like any one really understands what is happening - in short the west has become a mess. A task force has been set up, "figuring out how many medical marijuana patients there are in Maine and how many distribution clinics or dispensaries are needed to serve them. At least one member of the panel said he's not sure if the state needs one, 10 or 50", according to ABC News. The task force is composed of 14 members, they will determine rules effective within 120 days; the task force hopes to be able to take every factor into account in order to give the voters exactly what they voted for. Becky DeKeuster, of the Berkeley Patients Group said, "This should not have a negative connotation. This is a medicine. This is essentially a pharmacy with a community center component in our model".

If marijuana is going to be considered a medicine then it needs to be held to the same standards as every other pharmaceutical, the same laws and restrictions should apply to weed as they do to Vicodin. There is no other way to make this a legitimate program, therein lies a huge problem with the legality of marijuana; some are trying to have a medicine and others are trying to have a recreational drug, like alcohol. The same people who are helping Maine set up a medical marijuana program are also trying to have full on legalization voted on in the next year in California. It is noteworthy that Maine is taking the time to create a successful program, but it seems like all of this is a slippery slope and no matter what, all the factors present cannot be addressed. "This task force is not going to be able to accomplish the dotting of every 'I' and the crossing of every 'T', but addressing the issues ahead of time is crucial so that you don't end up with a wild-west situation", DeKeuster said.

Measure To Legalize Pot May Be On California's November Ballot

California residents may find that they are casting their vote in November regarding the legalization of marijuana. The original consensus was that marijuana advocates would wait until 2012 to put it on the ballot, but, 680,000 people signed a petition in favor of legalization causing the timeline to speed up. Marijuana buzz is sweeping the country, as more and more states tarry with the idea of medical marijuana programs; it seems like with every passing month the snowball increases it size and moves faster towards all out legalization. These are big times in the United States, nothing like this has happened since Roosevelt's New Deal; when a country hits hard financial times then it is time to legalize something in order to bring in revenue. Or at least that has been the American way in the past, to make money on the addiction and suffering of others. On the surface it seems like California and America are heading in the right direction: smaller prison populations, less crime, generates tax revenue, pharmaceuticals, hemp, oil, paper, etc... The pros listed are certainly worth agreeing with, it is clear that marijuana does have benefits and could be utilized in number of ways. However, California may be heading down a slippery slope and could possibly bring the whole country with it.

Richard Lee, the measure's main proponent, said to the LA Times, "It was so easy to get them, People were so eager to sign". Richard Lee has already invested over a million into the campaign, he owns a dispensary and a marijuana college called Oaksterdam in Oakland, California. "The initiative would allow cities and counties to adopt laws to allow marijuana to be grown and sold, and to impose taxes on marijuana production and sales. It would make it legal for anyone who is at least 21 to possess an ounce of marijuana and grow plants in an area of no more than 25 square feet for personal use", according to the LA Times. Medical marijuana has completely shifted how we look at marijuana in the United States, opening the door to all out legalization talks such as this; it appears at this point that the pro-marijuana campaign is having more success than those against it.

We are still a year out from the polls and naturally a lot will take place between now and then. It is still anyone's guess! What we can be certain of is that money will end having the final say in this debate. As with most political battles, those who spend the most have the best chance of passing something - even if it is the worst possible thing. In many people's eyes marijuana is already legal because it is so easy to get a recommendation to use cannabis. If this trend keeps up, marijuana and alcohol will be in the same class. My only hope is that addiction is considered in the debates and the public is made aware of the implications of legalizing an illicit drug.

Is Marijuana an Illegal Drug or a Medicine?

Iowans have been turning to marijuana for their medical ailments despite their Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley's opinion. Grassley, who recently is working to prohibit all discussion regarding medical marijuana in a bill to amend drug policy. However, the citizens of Iowa have a different opinion and many are pulling to have medical marijuana legalized. According to the Iowa AP, "opponents claim marijuana is already the state's most abused drug and the problem will only worsen if it's allowed for medical use". A lot of people still hold on to and are not willing to let go of the idea that marijuana is the gateway drug that leads to the abuse of all other drugs. However, that idea has come under serious debate in the last few years and doctors are professing the medical benefits of marijuana; alcohol is generally considered more damaging then marijuana these days.

"The Iowa Board of Pharmacy has held four hearings in recent months to seek scientific evidence and testimony on the topic. That review could lead to a recommendation to state lawmakers whether to change Iowa laws", stated the Iowa AP. More people in Iowa are speaking out for legalization than there are against it; very few people have expressed their opposition which is kind of surprising to many people. Thirteen states are now allowing the use of medical marijuana, very few states have set up dispensaries as of this point but more are expected to pop up in the near future.

The fact still remains that marijuana is addictive and affects the brain and lungs in a negative way. Will legalizing medical marijuana send out the wrong message to young people? Medical marijuana use could very possibly spike addiction rates in the coming months and that data will give people a better idea of the societal effects of medical marijuana. Before any kind of decision in Iowa is made, Dr. Ron Herman the director of the University of Iowa's Drug Information Network said, more research is needed.

2008 Zogby Poll - Three Out of Four Americans said the War on Drugs is Failing

Is it time to reform our criminal justice system and how we fight the war on drugs? Let's face it, our criminal justice system has a fatal flaw and as a result people are imprisoned needlessly all in the name of America's "War on Drugs". It is unacceptable that the United States has 5 percent of the world's population, but houses 25 percent of the world's prisoners. The majority of those prisoners are low level offenders generally incarcerated because of drugs; half of federal prisoners and 21 percent of state prisoners are locked up because of something drug related. Perhaps it is time for rational debate on drug policy, that's what the Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) seek. In a 2008 Zogby poll, three out of four Americans said the war on drugs is failing.


Overall, Congress is afraid to address the drug war subject because it can be political suicide; the lack of involvement has allowed this problem to fester and now we have a criminal justice nightmare. "Sen. Jim Webb, a Virginia Democrat, and 35 other senators are sponsoring the National Criminal Justice Commission Act (NCJCA) to establish a blue ribbon commission to review our criminal justice system", reports the Desmoines Register. Sen. Chuck Grassley wants, regarding the bill, to prohibit any discussion or examination of the possibility that drugs, including medical marijuana, should be decriminalized or legalized despite there being evidence that removing prohibition could help out the criminal justice system and help fight the cartels.


More and more people are arguing that if any real change is going to happen with the criminal justice system in America it will start with changing how we fight the war on drugs. We have to ask ourselves what the cost of this war is, and why people who belong in drug treatment are ending up in prison. Prison is no place for a low level drug offender, and those are the people the war on drugs is targeting. If we spent as much time on going after the cartel as we did individual drug addicts perhaps we would see some positive developments. It does not seem like we can afford to ignore any suggestions, even if they involve some form of legalization, as long as it can help.

Senator Webb Introduces Bill to Overhaul America's Criminal Justice System Video. While this video is almost 10 minutes long, Senator Webb eloquently addresses the issues discussed above.

The War on Drugs Conference is Leaning Towards Legalization

If the United States were to legalize marijuana it would cripple the Mexican drug cartels severely. At least that is the hope and belief of the panelists at the War on Drugs conference last Tuesday. This idea is not a new one, and there are a lot of people who concur that the legalization of marijuana would financially devastate the cartels. The conference lasted two days and was held in El Paso, Texas. El Paso has now become the front line in this war due to its close proximity to Juarez. They evaluated America's War on Drugs over the last four decades; the major topic of discussion was regarding the pros and cons of legalization. William Martin, a sociology professor at Rice University who studies drug abuse and government policy believes that if marijuana were sold legally, as a controlled product, it might keep smokers away from other harder drugs. "If you are not going to a dealer to buy marijuana, you are less likely to go after harder drugs," states Martin. The War on Drugs conference is leaning towards legalization.

There was a reoccurring theme throughout the entire conference, panelist after panelist stated that America was as much to blame for the violence in Juarez as the Mexican government. The war being fought is over keeping Mexican drugs out of the United States, but, the majority of blood being spilled is Mexico's. According to the El Paso Times, "now that Mexico is trying to rid itself of the drug cartels that have killed thousands of people in the past 20 months, the United States should have an honest debate about drug policies that have done nothing to lessen demand, panelists said". We cannot continue to pretend that the U.S. is in anyway stemming the tide. Many politicians do not even want to broach the subject of legalization for the fear of their voters who are against it.

Nevertheless, drastic action needs to be taken if the killings are going to stop. Maybe, legalization would help? Maybe not? The United States and Mexico have a common enemy. It will take a joint effort to defeat this monster; cartels have become too powerful for the Mexican government to tackle this problem - they have tried and failed at the cost of many lives. In the past eight years the United States has devoted itself to foreign affairs, perhaps it is time to do some work at home. Marijuana is an addictive drug with negative side effects, but, we have to ask ourselves if prohibition is doing more harm than good. The Mexican border is becoming like Chicago in the 1930's and that is unacceptable on so many levels. When the War on Drugs conference is saying "Legalize", perhaps they have figured out something that might work - nothing else has.

The Battle Continues over the "Marijuana Question" in California

The battle continues over the "Marijuana Question" in California, which will decide whether legalization will do more harm than good. Next year's election in California will be centered on whether a 14 billion dollar a year black market drug will be legalized. Ballot measures are already being put forward by different groups as well as a bill by Assembly Member Tom Ammiano, a San Francisco Democrat, that would legalize and tax the drug. In the coming months there will be a heated battle between the "right" and "left"; there is a good chance that the Mexican cartels will not stay out of the fight for the fact that they have a lot to lose if marijuana is legalized.

Federal drug czar Gil Kerlikowske, who is against legalization, said a few weeks ago, "We will wait for evidence on whether smoked marijuana has any medicinal benefits - those aren't in." Just last week in Fresno Kerlikowske made the statement that, "Marijuana is dangerous and has no medicinal benefit." It would seem that the drug czar has more of a complaint regarding the method in which marijuana is used, rather than whether it is used at all. This brings up an important point, how marijuana in used makes a big difference with regard to heath risks; anything foreign that human beings inhale will have negative side effects. I do not think it is possible for the state to regulate the manner it which weed is used!

Medical marijuana started about ten years ago in California for people with disorders and sicknesses, now, pot-activists want it to be legal for everyone in the state. All of this is starting to look like a recipe for disaster; if marijuana is legalized for adults over the age of twenty one what will be in place to stop children from getting the drug? It will be easy to get for children and teenagers, which without a doubt will ultimately lead to a rise in drug addiction state-wide. It does not seem like this problem can be helped, if 14 billion is being made under the government's nose already, it's pretty clear that once they legalize it they won't be able to control it. Sure some extra money might be made in taxes which obviously wouldn't hurt, but, it seems that everything is moving too quickly for this plan to be put into practice effectively. The country is in need of revenue and this has led to a number of poorly thought out plans to make that happen. I am looking forward to seeing which way this battle goes and I am curious about your thoughts regarding the subject.

If Marijuana Is Legal, Will Addiction Rise?

Marijuana legalization has been a hot button topic for many years and is one that has serious implications. America's prohibition on "Weed" has many people wondering if legalization would do more good than the current laws have done. If Marijuana is legal, will addiction rise? I have found many great arguments on both sides of the table, this topic is one that should be discussed in depth for the fact that the question at hand is an American problem; more Marijuana is consumed in the US per capita than any other country. I can see positives and negatives for the legalization of Marijuana, I am attempting to get the conversation started on this delicate subject.

I do believe the question at hand is one that most adults have asked themselves at one point or another, whether or not legalization would do more good than criminalization has? The argument that "Pot" is just like every other illegal drug does not hold as much water as it used to. That is the danger with putting all illegal drugs in the same category for the fact that it is simply illegal raises social stigmas with the uninformed; which, in turn, has impacted how the government treats people who have dealings with Marijuana. The writing is on the wall and whether or not we choose to read it greatly affects us as a nation. In many cases trying Marijuana in America has been a right of passage since the 60's, the amount of people who continue to smoke marijuana is very low. A very small percentage of all that have tried "weed" continue smoking it on a regular basis; most people become social smokers, meaning they can take it or leave it. The small group of people that smoke daily are more than likely people with addictive personalities and perhaps the disease of addiction. Norm Stamper, who was Seattle's police chief from 1994 to 2000 said in a New York Times Article, "Any law disobeyed by more than 100 million Americans, the number who've tried marijuana at least once, is bad public policy. As a 34-year police veteran, I've seen how marijuana prohibition breeds disrespect for the law, and contempt for those who enforce it... Let's make policy that helps, not handcuffs, those who suffer ill effects of marijuana or other drugs, a policy that crushes the illegal market - the cause of so much violence and harm to users and non-users alike."

With the economy spiraling out of control and doctors stating that Marijuana is no more harmful or addictive than alcohol, many people argue that legalization could be one of the answers to boosting the economy. People have been growing, selling, and smoking Marijuana despite strict laws right here in the United States; legalizing it and putting government control over the substance would allow it to be taxed, thus decreasing the black market activity exponentially. Is it a coincidence that the many of the banks in America with liquid money are in Northern California? A professor at the University of Washington, Roger Roffman, believes this could be done one of two ways. "Surveys indicate increasingly positive attitudes in the U.S. for liberalizing marijuana policies. Two ways of doing this are: (1) legalization, which would involve lawful cultivation and sale of marijuana, and (2) decriminalization, which would retain criminal penalties for cultivation and sale while removing them for possession of small amounts."

Many who have experimented with Marijuana have suffered greatly, but not necessarily regarding their health. Legal policies have, in some cases, done more damage to a person's life than the side-effects of the drug. "I support finding alternatives to criminal penalties for marijuana possession. Those penalties have costs (being jailed, having a criminal record, barriers to employment, loss of scholarships, to name a few) and may accomplish little in deterring use."(Roger Roffman) Justification for this level of punishment has yet to be seen, nor has any good argument been clearly stated for why Marijuana is illegal and not Alcohol or Cigarettes. Why?

In this post I have tried to present a non-biased view of a subject that is at the forefront of social politics. I am not sure what the right answer to this problem is, if any at all; what I do know is that change needs to be considered regarding Marijuana policy in America. If legalization does come to fruition, policy makers need to be careful in the way it is done; there would need to be stringent rules in the way it is marketed and the way it is distributed. I do believe Americans can find a way to meet in the middle on this subject but it will take people on both sides being honest and realistic in the way we proceed. The idea is to lower drug related crimes and keep our children educated and informed of the possibility of addiction with Marijuana and all drugs for that matter. What we don't want is people getting rich off "pushing" the disease of addiction, that is promoting a product that can be addictive, as the cigarette marketers did for so many years. "Telling marketers they can get rich by creating disease is dangerous." - Mark A.R. Kleiman, Professor of Public Policy at U.C.L.A.

Our Whiteside Manor Blog seeks to be topical in the areas of addiction and recovery. As California considers new law, let us know your thoughts on this important subject...

In the meantime, I invite you to watch Dr. Nancy Snyderman of NBC News, as she discusses with a panel "Should Marijuana be Legal?"

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy