From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Cannabidiol Relieves Psychosis in Schizophrenia, Why Illegal?
by Medical Cannabis for Mental Health
Monday Nov 26th, 2012 3:17 PM
A molecule in cannabis (CBD) has shown to relieve anxiety and symptoms of psychosis in people diagnosed with schizophrenia, though many patients are denied or discouraged from this medicine with fewer side effects than pharmaceutical products because the DEA has deemed the cannabis plant to be "illegal". The U.S. government needs to answer "why?" this medicine warrents time in prison when nobody is being harmed.
Several studies show benefits for mental health treatment with cannabis, with CBD as the active ingredient;

Study: Administration Of Non-Psychotropic Cannabinoid Mitigates Psychotic Symptoms In Schizophrenics

The administration of the non-psychotropic plant constituent cannabidiol (CBD) is associated with a significant reduction in psychotic symptoms in patients with schizophrenia, according to clinical trial data published in the journal Translational Psychiatry.

An international team of researchers from Germany and the United States performed a four week, double-blind, randomized clinical trial assessing the clinical relevance of cannabidiol versus amisulpride, a potent antipsychotic agent, in patients with acute schizophrenia.

Researchers reported that the administration of either substance was associated with significant clinical improvement, but they acknowledged, “[C]annabidiol displayed a markedly superior side-effect profile.”

Amisulpride is categorized as “one of the most effective drugs currently in use for the treatment of schizophrenia.”

Investigators concluded, “Our results provide evidence that the non-cannabimimetic constituent of marijuana, cannabidiol, exerts clinically relevant antipsychotic effects that are associated with marked tolerability and safety, when compared with current medications. … The results … potentially represent a completely new mechanism in the treatment of schizophrenia.”

A review of CBD’s safety profile in humans, published online in 2011 in the scientific journal Current Drug Safety, concluded that the cannabinoid is non-toxic, safe, and well tolerated in humans, even in high doses.

Separate investigations of CBD have documented the cannabinoid to possess a variety of therapeutic properties, including anti-inflammatory, anti-diabetic, anti-epileptic, anti-cancer, and bone-stimulating properties.

For more information, please contact Paul Armentano, NORML Deputy Director, at: paul [at] Full text of the study, “Cannabidiol enhances anandamide signaling and alleviates psychotic symptoms of schizophrenia,” is available online here:

Article From NORML and republished with permission

Is There Anything CBD Can’t Do? Then Why Is It Illegal?
•by Paul Armentano, NORML Deputy DirectorOctober 9, 2008

While the prohibition of cannabis is absurd, the ban on the plant’s non-psychoactive components is even more mind-boggling — particularly when it’s apparent that these compounds possess amazing therapeutic properties. Case in point: cannabidiol (CBD).

A just published scientific review by Sao Paulo University (Brazil) researcher Antonio Zuardi reports that there’s been an “explosive increase” of interest in CBD over the past five years. It’s apparent why.

“Studies have suggested a wide range of possible therapeutic effects of cannabidiol on several conditions, including Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease, cerebral ischemia, diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, other inflammatory diseases, nausea and cancer,” Zuardi writes. Let’s look at a few of these in detail, shall we?

1. Antiepileptic action
“In 1973, a Brazilian group reported that CBD was active in … blocking convulsions produced in experimental animals.”

2. Sedative action
“In humans with insomnia, high doses of CBD increased sleep duration compared to placebo.”

3. Anxiolytic action
“CBD induce[s] a clear anxiolytic effect and a pattern of cerebral activity compatible with an anxiolytic activity.”

4. Antipsychcotic action
“[C]linical studies suggest that CBD is an effective, safe and well-tolerated alternative treatment for schizophrenic patients.”

5. Antidystonic action
“CBD … had antidystonic effects in humans when administered along with standard medication to five patients with dystonia, in an open study.”

6. Antioxidative action
“[I]t was demonstrated that CBD can reduce hydroperoxide-induced oxidative damage as well as or better than other antioxidants. CBD was more protective against glutamate neurotoxicity than either ascorbate or a-tocopherol, indicating that this drug is a potent antioxidant.”

7. Neuroprotective action
“A marked reduction in the cell survival was observed following exposure of cultured rat pheochromocytoma PC12 cells to beta-A peptide. Treatment of the cells with CBD prior to beta-A exposure significantly elevated the cell survival.”

8. Antiinflammatory action
“CBD, administered i.p. or orally, has blocked the progression of arthritis.”

9. Cardioprotective action
“CBD induces a substantial cardioprotective effect.”

10. Action on diabetes
“CBD treatment of NOD (non-obese diabetic) mice before the development of the disease reduced its incidence from 86% in the non-treated control mice to 30% in CBD-treated mice. … It was also observed that administration of CBD to 11-14 week old female NOD mice, which were either in a latent diabetes stage or had initial symptoms of diabetes, ameliorated the manifestations of the disease.”

11. Antiemetic action
“The expression of this conditioned retching reaction was completely suppressed by CBD and delta9-THC, but not by ondansetron, [an] antagonist that interferes with acute vomiting.”

12. Anticancer action
“A study of the effect of different cannabinoids on eight tumor cell lines, in vitro, has clearly indicated that, of the five natural compounds tested, CBD was the most potent inhibitor of cancer cell growth.”

In sum, the past 45 years of scientific study on CBD has revealed the compound to be non-toxic, non-psychoactive, and to possess a multitude of therapeutic properties. Yet, to this day it remains illegal to possess or use (and nearly impossible to study in US clinical trials) simply because it is associated with marijuana.

What possible advancements in medical treatment may have been achieved over the past decades had US government officials chosen to advance — rather than inhibit — clinical research into CBD (which, under federal law, remains a Schedule I drug defined as having “no currently accepted medical use”)? Perhaps it’s time someone asks John Walters or the DEA?

additional info on CBD;

BTW - Not all people with schizophrenia who use cannabis will be symptom free, though many are considerably less violent than if they had no medicine, or like zombies (see "Thorazine shuffle") on the pharmacuetical products.

Paranoia from the THC molecule in cannabis is no doubt aggravated by the U.S. government policy of cannabis prohibition. Schizophrenics using medical cannabis and cops or feds looking for a quick bust in the non-medical states are not a good combination!!

How's that class action lawsuit against the DEA going??

Comments  (Hide Comments)

by ending cannabis prohibition in court
Monday Nov 26th, 2012 3:41 PM
Class action suit against the DEA, DOJ, etc...

by , September 22, 2007, 04:40pm

I'm ready to launch one. The claim originates from this Federal Code; TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 21 > SUBCHAPTER I > § 1983 Civil action for deprivation of rights The creation of the drug laws was illegal - unconstitutional. The supreme court had ruled that congress could NOT use the commerce clause to regulate PRODUCTION or MANUFACTURE of... ANYTHING. This was mentioned again in U.S. v Lopez; U.S. Supreme Court U.S. V Lopez The Constitution creates a Federal Government of enumerated powers. See U.S. Const., Art. I, 8. As James Madison wrote, "[t]he powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite." The Federalist No. 45, pp. 292-293 (C. Rossiter ed. 1961). This constitutionally mandated division of authority "was adopted by the Framers to ensure protection of our fundamental liberties." “...The commerce power "is the power to regulate; that is, to prescribe the rule by which commerce is to be governed. This power, like all others vested in Congress, is complete in itself, may be exercised to its utmost extent, and acknowledges no limitations, other than are prescribed in the constitution.” “...When cases involving these laws first reached this Court, we imported from our negative Commerce Clause cases the approach that Congress could not regulate activities such as "production," "manufacturing," and "mining." See, e.g., United States v. E. C. Knight Co., 156 U.S. 1, 12 (1895) “ The drug laws violated these (there were more than one) supreme court rulings. Strike one against congress, strike one against the drug laws. The charges in drug crimes are for possessing private property. Property RIGHTS are GOD GIVEN rights that are SUPERIOR to any government interaction. All powers of government (in the USA) are derived from the rights of the people. Can I legally prevent someone from selling their personal computer to you - if you want to buy it, they want to/are willing to sell it, and you agree upon a price? Can I get a group of people - a few hundred of us - and PREVENT that transaction from taking place? And assuming you make the deal, buy the computer - I can then take the computer FROM you, and hold both you and the seller because I WANT to? Can I EVER LEGALLY deprive you of your rights - to own property and contract with it freely - which are granted to you BY GOD - by getting a larger group together and deciding to strip you of those rights? The government has authority derived from our rights. I cannot do this without the government - so I cannot GIFT this authority - AS A PRIVILEGE - to the government. Strike two against congress... Strike two against the drug laws... If that isn't enough... U.S. Code Title 18 Chapter 13 Section 242 - Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law... This FEDERAL LAW prohibits the government or ANYONE acting under ANY law to deprive a citizen (or anyone) of their RIGHTS, privileges, etc... protected under the constitution. This is great CRIMINALLY - but as citizens we cannot press criminal charges - only file formal complaints and wait for the authorities (who in this case ARE the criminals...) to arrest and punish themselves. This is ridiculous. Luckily there is another remedy; TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 21 > SUBCHAPTER I > § 1983 § 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia. Here is where I want to base my civil class action suit - with any currently or past incarcerated non-violent drug war VICTIM - political prisoners - silenced through incarceration - able to sign on to the suit. I think the nation's ready for it. We need to reclaim our GOD GIVEN rights - shake off the UNGODLY government that has taken those rights from us... And reclaim our nation for the PEOPLE - the rulers of this nation. Anyone have a legal resource to tap to begin this suit? I'm ready to push it. Hard. I'm ready to testify. And I'm ready to put my name on the thing to get it started. Hook me up with someone willing to write it, and lets get going. It's time to stop letting the aggressors run over the citizens they are sworn to protect. It's time, in this war, to begin taking up arms of knowledge and piercing the armor of lies that the enemies of the United States have taken upon themselves. It's time to stop WHINING about the war and FIGHT it. I'm ready. I'm able. Someone please give me a clue where to start a class action suit.

dedicated to the DEA;

"thieves, thieves and liars, murderers
hypocrites and bastards

hey thanks for nothing!
morals in the dust
two-faced bastards and syncophants
no trust

thieves! liar!"
by problems with pharma psychiatric drugs
Monday Nov 26th, 2012 4:03 PM
The legal alternative to medical cannabis comes with severe side effects and additional risks. Though to be placed in prison with rapists and murderers because i choose a medicine that has less side effects? That's enough reasons for seccession and an all out war on the DEA!!!

Thorazine, Haldol, and other medication prescribed by psychiatrists can destroy the lives of people who take them.

VIRTUALLY ALL persons who go to psychiatrists are put on one or more drugs. However, psychiatric drugs, which are unpredictable and extremely deadly, do not cure anything, and instead destroy the life of the person who takes them.

The most dangerous of these are major tranquilizers, also known as neuroleptic (nerve-seizing) drugs or anti-psychotics. Of the more than two dozen in this class, introduced in the mid 1950s, the most commonly used are Haldol (haloperidol), Compazine (prochlorperazine), Thorazine (chlorpromazine), Navane (thiothixene), Prolixin (fluphenazine), Mellaril (thioridazine), and Trilafon (perphenazine).

Their purpose is to create "maximum behavioral disruption"--a goal clearly reflected in 1950 tests conducted with rats on Thorazine. Through chemicals, psychiatrists sought to sabotage thought processes and thereby deny the person control of his own body.

At the time the major tranquilizers were introduced, the lobotomy was touted highly and widely used by psychiatrists. With the procedure, the shredded brain was damaged forever, generating objections from family and friends of the patient.

The major tranquilizers were able to create a zombie state, identical to that seen after a lobotomy, in a person whose brain remained intact. For this reason, Thorazine became known as a "chemical lobotomy."

"[On Thorazine] my thoughts spun and never got too far. My hands were rubber and I could hardly hold a fork," said one patient who had been put on the drug by a psychiatrist. "After six weeks . . . I felt like my mind had been put through a meat grinder. No longer could I think clearly; no longer could I speak articulately; no longer could I act confidently."

Another stated that, after a week on Haldol, "I was unable to speak. No matter how hard I tried, I couldn't say anything out loud and spoke only with the greatest difficulty.... It was as if my whole body was succumbing to a lethal poison."

The horrifying mental upheaval and devastation this lobotomizing effect causes was precisely what appealed to psychiatrists. These chemicals would enable people to be warehoused with the least "inconvenience" to psychiatrists and staffs of psychiatric institutions.

Today, these drugs are being used against the elderly in enormous quantities to straitjacket them chemically. By 1985, the National Disease and Therapeutic Index reported that, while adults 60 years and older made up 11 % of the population, they used more than one- third of all antipsychotic drugs. A study of 2,000 pharmacies in 1986 showed that 60.5% of prescriptions for nursing home residents over 65 years of age were for major tranquilizers and 17.1 % for minor versions.

A Harvard Medical School study of 55 Boston-area rest homes published in the Jan. 26, 1989, issue of The New England Journal of Medicine reported that 55% of the 1,201 nursing home residents it surveyed took at least one psychiatric drug with 39% being given anti-psychotics.

These are not prescribed to "treat" any condition. They are administered solely to turn the patient into a zombie incapable of complaining or presenting problems to staff Concerning their use on the elderly, Jerome Avorn, director of the program for the Analysis of Clinical Strategies at Harvard, pointed out, "Drugs do work. They do quiet them down. So does a lead pipe to the head."

Larry Hodge, administrator at the Life Care Center in Tennessee, described the impact on the elderly of these drugs: "Too often they were so zonked out during their meals that their heads were in the mashed potatoes."

Wilda Henry told The Arizona Republic that her 83-year-old mother became "a vegetable" five weeks after taking Haldol. This powerful mind-altering chemical, which the Soviet Union used for years to control dissidents, left her mother babbling, drooling, shaking, and unable to control her bowel functions.

Anise Debose of Washington, D.C., said her 76-year-old father entered a nursing home active, laughing, and talking. Four days later, after taking Mellaril and four other drugs, "He was restrained to a chair as rigid as a board when I saw him. His head was thrown back and his mouth was limply hanging down. Both eyes were closed. The impression all of us had was that he was dead."

In 1989, the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Aging reported that, while those over 60 years of age make up 17% of the population, they accounted for more than half the fatalities resulting from drug reactions. Acording to the American Hospital Association, of the 10,800,000 elderly admitted to hospitals each year, 1,900,000 are due to drug reactions. Four percent of those cases, an estimated 76,000 elderly a year, die. This annual death rate far exceeds the 58,021 Americans who lost their lives during the Vietnam War. An average of more than 200 elderly Americans die each day from drug reactions.

"People don't just die of old age," Theodore Leiff, professor of gerontology, Eastern Virginia University School of Medicine, points out. "Their deaths are caused by something." As case after case demonstrates, they are being killed behind the locked doors of nursing homes by lazy, incompetent, or criminal psychiatric staffs who use deadly drugs to quash complaints before they ever are voiced.

Creating insanity

These chemicals, capable of throwing the minds of users into chaos, have a long and well-documented history of creating insanity in persons who take them. In 1956, two years after the introduction of Thorazine, researchers reported that the drug caused psychosis, hallucinations, and increased anxiety. They speculated that this drug-induced insanity arose from the chemically straitjacketing effect of the drug.

In 1961, researchers reported the case of a 27-year-old man who was given Thorazine, after which he "complained of 'feeling like an empty shell, floating around in the air,'" and said that he heard voices coming "from two small men standing on his chest." The researchers concluded that Thorazine was the cause of the man's "toxic psychosis."

Yet another paper, published in The American Journal of Psychiatry in 1964, found that major tranquilizers can "produce an acute psychotic reaction in an individual not previously psychotic." A 1975 paper described a negative effect called akathisia, a drug-induced inability to sit still comfortably.

Researcher Theodore Van Putten reported that nearly half of the 110 persons in the study had experienced akathisia. "[One woman] started to bang her head against the wall three days after an injection of [a major tranquilizer]. Her only utterance was: 'I just want to get rid of this whole body."' A woman who had been given these drugs for five days experienced "an upsurge in hallucinations, screaming, even more bizarre thinking, aggressive and also self-destructive outbursts, and agitated pacing or dancing." A third woman stated that, while on the tranquilizer, she felt hostile and hated everybody, and heard voices taunting her. Others complained of an "abject fear or terror" that was difficult for them to explain.

Such drug-induced symptoms are far worse than any underlying problems a person might have. Even more damning is the evidence that the damage caused by these drugs can be permanent.

Many types of psychiatric drugs, including the major tranquilizers, can cause lasting, grotesquely disfiguring nerve damage known as tardive dyskinesia or tardive dystonia. The muscles of the face and body contort and spasm involuntarily, drawing the face into hideous scowls and grimaces and twisting the body into bizarre contortions. These horrifying effects occur in more than 20% of persons "treated" with major tranquilizers and currently affect 400,000-1,000,000 Americans.

Psychiatrists theorize that these drugs damage the muscle-control portion of the brain in a way that makes it permanently "supersensitive" to messages passing down nerve pathways into the brain. The result is that this portion of the brain becomes permanently deranged. While the precise location of this brain damage is not known with certainty, there is no question that it exists. It is clearly visible in the faces of its tragic victims.

In the same way that major tranquilizers can throw the muscle-control portion of the brain into chaos, they also can make the thought-control area of the brain supersensitive, driving the person permanently insane. A 1980 study published in The American Journal of Psychiatry described 10 patients who suffered from this condition, which has been labeled "supersensitivity psychosis."

In the first stage, the individual becomes psychotic for a few days immediately after he or she stops taking the drugs. In the second, the insanity that emerges upon withdrawal from the psychiatric drug is persistent and may be irreversible. In the third stage, the psychosis is evident even while the patient is taking the psychiatric drugs. The study notes that, when this stage is reached, "in most cases" the person is doomed to be insane for life. This condition has created thousands of tortured victims, permanently destroyed, cast out of mental institutions to forage in garbage cans while wrestling with inner terrors implanted in their minds by psychiatric drugs.

There also is evidence that these psychiatric drugs can cause people to become violent. A Canadian research team that studied the effects of psychiatric drugs on prisoners found that "violent, aggressive incidents occurred significantly more frequently in inmates who were on psychotropic [psychiatric or mind-altering] medication than when these inmates were not...." Inmates on major tranquilizers were shown to be more than twice as violent as they were when not taking psychiatric drugs. The researchers attributed the marked increase in violence to akathisia.

The Journal of the American Medical Association reported that, four days after a patient started taking Haldol, "he became uncontrollably agitated, could not sit still, and paced for several hours." After complaining of "a jumpy feeling inside, and violent urges to assault anyone near him," the man attacked and tried to kill his dog. The researcher noted the irony that the chemical could cause violence, "a behavior the drug was meant to alleviate."

Killers on psychiatric drugs

Another article published in the American Journal of Forensic Psychiatry described five cases of extreme acts of physical violence caused by Haldol. In the first, a 23-year-old male with a history of developing severe symptoms of akathisia after being given Haldol was injected with the drug in the admissions room of a psychiatric unit.

After the injection, the man escaped, ran to a park, disrobed, and tried to rape a woman. "When pulled off by the husband, he proceeded down the street, broke down the front door of a house where an 81-yearold lady was sleeping. He severely beat her with his fists, 'to a pulp,' by his own description, following which he found knives and stabbed her repeatedly, resulting in her death." He then ran into another woman who was with her child and "repeatedly stabbed the woman in front of the child, where upon he moved on to he next person he encountered, a woman whom he severely assaulted and stabbed to the extent that an eye was lost and an opening into the anus was created resulting in major surgery."

The report describes four other cases of violence attributed to akathisia caused by Haldol. One was a suicide. Another was a suicide attempt in which a man stabbed himself repeatedly and later remarked that "he could never even feel the knife when stabbing himself." The third was a man who beat his mother to death with a hammer.

In the fourth case, a man "had been receiving Haldol as an outpatient for approximately four months and described how progressively his head was rushing, that he felt speeded up, that he was in great pain in his head and had an impulse to stab someone to try to get rid of the pain. He went to the nearby grocery store he frequented on a regular basis and impulsively and repeatedly stabbed the grocer whom he had known for some time."

Many similar acts of violence have been linked with these psychiatric drugs. One example is the 1989 case of David Peterson, who walked out of a mental institution in Middletown, Conn., bought a hunting knife, and then stabbed a nine-year-old girl 34 times, killing her. Peterson said he killed the girl to get back at his psychiatrist for not changing the drug he was being given, a major tranquilizer, that was causing him "pain."

How can Willie Nelson be wrong?
by c
Tuesday Nov 27th, 2012 7:43 AM
people with a predisposition to schizophrenia are the #1 group which should not try marijuana. Sometimes identical twins both are predisposed to the condition, but only one will develop it. Studies have shown that use of a list of drugs including meth, marijuana, cocaine can trigger initial episodes of schizophrenia. Schizophrenia has a biochemical basis - sufferers will respond differently to vitamin B3 at the cellular level and often benefit from very high levels of omega 3 fatty acids.
by Rance
Tuesday Nov 27th, 2012 12:32 PM
I think CBD might be legal if taken from legally imported industrial hemp. I don't see CBD in the federal drug schedule. There is a company ( selling CBD-only products nation-wide, and they're claiming it to be legal as a hemp food product.

We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!


donate now

$ 257.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.


Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network