So, my wife had an interesting office meeting.

[blackspade]

She is in the medical field and the speaker brought in was talking about two things related to pot.

One was the 44% increase in accidents in Colorado involving THC.
I noted to her that that story was incorrect and that there was currently no way of linking THC levels to impairment.

The second was that Cannabis is laden with toxic chemicals from the indoor grow process.
Again, total bullshit.

My problem is that I haven't identified any good sources for a systematic rebuttal of this guest speaker's drug war bullshit.

Most of what I have found are M$M disinformation.
Any help would be appreciated.

[niyad]

1. the current version of "reefer madness".

hell, even the local fishwrap is carrying articles about how there really aren't the problems that were predicted (and the fishwrap is a total reichwing rag)

[blackspade]

3. I was looking for something that specifically addressed the speaker's points.

[niyad]

4. I know. trying to find the article.

[niyad]

2. this article is probably something along the lines of what that person was saying--but look

at the media source and the anti-legalization advocates:

http://www.newsweek.com/problem-pot-306634

[niyad]

5. this article might help:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/02/21/from-colorado-glimpse-life-after-marijuana-legalization/rcccuzhMDWV74UC4IxXIYJ/story.html

[blackspade]

6. Thanks!

I appreciate the links.

[niyad]

7. you are most welcome

[TeamPooka]

8. If it's in your pot then it's in your food. Same fertilizers. Usually pot growers ferts are better

than big Farm Agribiz.

[blackspade]

9. No question about that.

I'm just trying to give my wife factual info over the drug war bullshit she listened to today.

[womanofthehills]

10. Some Colorado marijuana is laden with toxic pesticides not for human consumption

It has been an ongoing problem -growers need to be educated about pesticides - first link is recent and 2nd link from last year - it was the Denver Fire Dept that made the toxic pesticide use discovery so now the Dept of Environmental Health said they will begin testing. Marijuana grown outdoors is more apt to be pesticide free.

The city of Denver, by comparison, recently recalled 19 pot products for pesticides in 19 weeks.

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/marijuana/pot-products-recalled-in-colorado-for-pesticides-but-not-in-washington/

Pesticide misuse puts pot plants at six Denver grow facilities on hold

The city of Denver has ordered a hold on some marijuana plants from six grow facilities after the discovery that pesticides may have been improperly used.

The Denver Fire Department noticed the violations during routine inspections and passed along concerns to the city's Department of Environmental Health, according to city spokesman Dan Rowland.

"There (is) clear language on the labels to guide their usage, saying it's not for indoor use, or that the product isn't intended to be used on items grown for human consumption — like marijuana," Rowland said.[/div


http://www.denverpost.com/marijuana/ci_27772719/pesticide-misuse-puts-pot-plants-at-six-denver

[SheilaT]

11. I am absolutely no expert on cannibis,

but I do worry about people driving while under the influence. It's a genuine issue that needs to be addressed, but I'm not claiming I have an answer of any kind. I'm under the impression that for some time after one has smoked pot, it still shows up in the bloodstream, (the urine also?) long after a person is impaired in any way, Alcohol is much more straightforward in this respect.

I am NOT claiming an increase in accidents because of legal marijuana. All I'm saying is that we need to be aware of a potential problem here. Responsible people won't drive while impaired. Alas, a lot of people are not responsible.

A virtue, so to speak, of alcohol is that it is easily tested for, and standards for impairment have been set. I will say I'm constantly surprised at the people who still drive while under the influence. I live in a state (NM) that has an enormous problem here. I have never lived in a state where people more or less regularly get on the interstate driving in the wrong direction because they're drunk, and cause a terrible accident. Especially when you consider how low the population is here.

[eridani]

12. There is no test for THC that is in common use, period

What they test for is one of the most common metabolites--THC-COOH. It's presence tells you nothing about actual blood THC levels.

[SheilaT]

13. That was what I thought.

So that means that there is no way of accurately testing degree of impairment, unlike with alcohol.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not one who thinks smoking grass is automatically bad and should be forbidden. I did a reasonable share of it in my own youth. But because impairment can have serious consequences, this is something that ought to be figure out. But not in a purely punitive way.

[eridani]

14. Agree it's bad to mix smoking with driving, but--

--IMO, what is vastly more dangerous is for people like me (highly sensitive to the soporific effects of cannabis) to use any strain with significant amounts of gamma-cannabinoids or cannabinol. You can get CBD extracts online because CBD is not psychoactive, but as you might guess from the name, an extract with cannabidiol is also likely to contain cannabinol, and they don't test for it. That's why I ingest my CBD right before bedtime only.

It isn't at all clear how dangerous THC itself is, given that the 44% figure given might merely reflect byproducts in a driver impaired by alcohol or lack of sleep. Drunk drivers will be in the HOV lane doing 90, and stoned drivers in the slow lance doing 45. The latter isn't safe, but probably not as bad as the formern.

[Warren DeMontague]

15. Exactly. THC is fat soluble, so it can be detected something like 2-3 weeks after ingestion.

What's worth noting about the "accident" story is, the actual number of accidents didn't change AFAIU, what changed was how many people involved in the accidents had detectable THC.

Again, THC which can be detected 3 weeks after smoking. No one is seriously trying to suggest that people are impaired 3 weeks after smoking a joint.

What's different, now, is that marijuana is legal, so perhaps there is a greater percentage of the population using it recreationally, and thus a greater percentage walking around with detectable levels even long after not being impaired. Some percentage of those people, unfortunately, get into fatal car accidents, just as they did before.

It's like saying "the number of people involved in fatal accidents who also have a facebook account, skyrocketed from 2006-2016!" The implication that the facebook accounts caused the car crashes is fallacious.

As far as pesticides in cannabis, the best argument against that is legalization.

Voila: Legalization and regulation in action-

https://www.oregon.gov/ODA/programs/Pesticides/Pages/CannabisPesticides.aspx