Monday, August 22, 2011 -

    Baroness Browning On Cannabis Part 3

    Baroness Angela Browning

    I wrote to Baroness Browning back on 16th May shortly after she was appointed as the new drugs minister.   You can read that first part of this story here: A Welcome Note To The New Drugs Minister.

    I wrote to her again on 27th June.  You can read that here: Baroness Browning On Cannabis Part 2

    I wrote again today:

    Dear Baroness Browning,

    I refer to my previous emails and letters to you concerning the medicinal use of cannabis.

    Despite four emails and two letters since you were appointed drugs minister, I haven’t received anything from you which even attempts to deal with the issues I have raised.  That is bad enough in what is supposed to be a democratic country but now I have absolute proof that the Home Office is providing false and misleading information about medicinal cannabis.  This is a very serious matter which involves dishonesty towards people who suffer from dreadful illnesses and disabilities.  It requires your urgent attention.

    In correspondence from the Home Office, enquirers are now being told that the medicinal use of cannabis will not be permitted, nor even reviewed, because the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) has not “identified any medicinal benefits”.  However, the ACMD has offered no such advice, nor could it.  I have a letter from Professor Les Iversen, chair of the ACMD (copy attached) in which he states unequivocally that it “…is not constituted to consider the medical benefits of any drug”.

    This is not something that has happened just once or twice.  We have the evidence of the many occasions when this explanation has been given in writing.  Clearly, it is Home Office policy and it is dishonest. It must be corrected.  It is nothing more than an excuse because there is no reasonable explanation for the denial of medicinal cannabis.

    The matter of the re-scheduling of Sativex brings this to a head.  Any attempt to re-schedule Sativex as anything but cannabis will be dishonest.  There is no pharmacological difference between cannabis and Sativex.  I give you notice that the government will be subject to legal action if it seeks to re-schedule Sativex dishonestly or in a misleading way.

    For your convenience, I am attaching copies of the emails and letters I have sent previously.  As leader of CLEAR, I see a great deal of correspondence between the Home Office and our members.  The policy you are pursuing is not only dishonest, it is also shockingly cruel, deeply unjust and flies in the face of all the scientific evidence.

    If you want to know what your chief drugs advisor, Professor Iversen, actually thinks about medicinal cannabis than I suggest you watch the video of his British Pharmacological Society lecture last year “Bringing Cannabis Back Into the Medicine Cabinet”: http://vimeo.com/19315276

    CLEAR is now co-ordinating the efforts of approximately 30 individuals who have a doctor’s prescription for medicinal cannabis.  They are just the tip of the iceberg and there is no reasonable argument against permitting them access to the medicine their doctors have recommended.  Unless you can offer me some definite indication of change, we will be pursuing this through the courts.  This will cost a great deal of public money as well as adding to the suffering of those involved.  Will you not now please reconsider this terribly cruel, unfair and irrational policy?

    As I have already explained, this does not require any change in the law, merely for you to authorise the issue of import licences for Bedrocan, medicinal cannabis from the Dutch government’s official producer.  If you will not do this, when it is required in order to fill a doctor’s prescription, please will you explain to me why?

    Please understand that these questions are not going away.  Ignoring them or providing misleading answers will not achieve anything except to prolong pain and suffering.  There are millions of people in Britain who will not stand for any more dishonesty, deception, misinformation or procrastination on this.  It is time for your department to stop playing games and deal with this properly.  Continued failure to do so can only add to growing suspicion about the government’s relationship with GW Pharmaceuticals which has been granted a unique and unparalleled monopoly.

    I repeat, again, my request for a meeting to discuss this.  The government is not dealing with this in a reasonable way.  Please will you arrange an appointment for me to come and see you?

    Yours sincerely,

    Peter Reynolds

    Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

    Related news:

    1. Baroness Browning On Cannabis Part 2
    2. Cameron On Cannabis Part 7
    3. An Appeal To Andrew Lansley Part 2
    4. “MS Patients Denied Licensed Cannabis Drug By NHS”, The Guardian, 30th May 2011
    5. The Sativex Scam part 1
    • John S

      Fantastic stuff! Bring it to a head … J

    • Anonymous

      Good stuff Peter, well done sir. 
      The response ( if any is given ) should make for interesting reading.
       Our political establishment openly lying to the public? Of course. They really are a shameless bunch of crooks and spivs. 

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thomas-Speed/100000465301077 Thomas Speed

      This seriously warrants a reply.

    • Psmith67

      I doubt she is able to critically think

      She is a Government drone – programmed to lie and manipulate the truth.

      Our Government is incapable of telling the people the truth – just look at Libya – nothing but a 21st century resource grab dressed up as liberation from dictatorship

      If we were not almost empty on north sea oil – we’d be no where near Libya.

      It’s going to be fun watching our government try to maintain control and manage expectations as we rapidly slide down the downside of the oil slope

      Opps sorry thought we were on a peak oil forum – LOL
       

    • Jordan Docker

      brilliant stuff. keep up the good work, CLEAR.

    • Anonymous

      Ill bet she didnt even read the last letters but just put them in the shredder . I dont think it will matter what is said to her regarding cannabis as she just looks like another brain dead zombie waiting on her orders from above . I think the battle will start when the rules are changed for sativex or its just gave ” special conditions ” from the HO . When legal action is took by sick people who want to grow their own / same medicine for free with out paying for it , we might even see the media picking it up .  

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yumita-Yumara/100001692770490 Yumita Yumara

      I hope you keep at it,  even if it turns into a Shawshank situation. A fine letter if there ever was one. :)

    • Shawn Buchanan

      Brilliant Peter, amazing letter… give her hell brother, on all of our behalves…

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Derek-Williams/1072934911 Derek Williams

      If there is anything special about Sativex it’s that it is a specific blend of two strains of cannabis designed to give a 1:1 ratio of THC to CBD. The spray device is designed to give a consistent dose, but patients are allowed to self-administer  and are free to take the entire days dose in one go, which apparently many chose to do.

      The “raw” cannabis could, of course, be supplied as a blend identical to that used to make Sativex.

    • Zobbster

      This should be on the front page of every newspaper, opposed to the ridiculous insignificant life choices of some ‘celebrity’.

      The world is currently in a very bad place socially and the lying Governments and crooked money making organisations claw to keep their power is only going to instil distrust upon the man on the street. I’m sick to death of it!!

    • Anonymous

      I look at it a different way , i will use cannabis no matter what the law says along with over 6 million other people and if our Government prefer us to give our money to  terrorists / gang members / criminals instead of them then thats the Governments problem not ours . They will change their minds some day its just a pity they couldnt do it before they blow another couple of billion pounds .

    • http://www.peter-reynolds.co.uk Peter Reynolds

      I too will continue to use cannabis no matter what the law says.  However, it’s useless to say “thats the Governments problem not ours” because the government is ours.  If we abandon government to its own devices then we will deserve everything we get.  It is OUR government and we must bring it under our control.

      What you advocate is hopeless.  However difficult it is, we must never stop fighting for it to be “government of the people by the people”.

    • http://www.facebook.com/cannajan Janice Wells

      We need all the extra cannabinoids that natural herb contains as this research shows 330% increase with them!
      This from a research paper recommended by GW Pharmaceuticals -THE PROPAGATION, CHARACTERISATION AND OPTIMISATION OF CANNABIS SATIVA L AS A PHYTOPHARMACEUTICAL 2009

      The ingredients having the greatest effects on the cannabis taste would most probably be the fragrant terpenes within the essential oils. Some of these have their own pharmacology and have been cited as likely synergists in mixtures with cannabinoids (McPartland and Russo, 2001). The potential benefit of these ingredients was demonstrated in a test measuring pain relief in mice, in which unknown powerful synergists produced a 330% increase in activity compared to THC alone (Fairbairn and Pickens, 1981). Synergistically improved efficacy of cannabis extracts over THC-alone was also demonstrated in a mouse model which assessed their antispacticity effects (Williamson, 2001).
      In subsequent research cannabis extracts also showed a significantly increased antihyperalgesic effects compared to CBD-alone when tested in a rat model of neuropathic pain (Comelli et al., 2008). The potential benefits for mankind were supported by the observation that patients taking synthetic derivative nabilone for neurogenic pain actually preferred cannabis herb and reported that it relieved not only pain but the associated depression and anxiety (Williamson and Evans, 2000). Reasons suggested included the more rapid absorption through the lung than the gut; the presence of other ingredients in plant-derived cannabis which might give additive or synergistic effects; and the ability of smokers to self-titrate their dose (Grinspoon and Bakalar, 1995).