While experts agree that stoned driving cannot be regulated in the same way as drunk driving, the question remains: Can legislators and law enforcement meet the unique challenges presented by cannabis consumption behind the wheel?

Every few weeks, Chris Halsor has volunteers in Colorado take part in a scenario that at first blush seems too good to be true. He transports them, free of charge, to a respectable hotel where, in a comfy, goody-filled RV in the parking lot, he has them get really high.

There’s only one rub: After they’re nice and stoned, they’re escorted to a hotel conference room filled with prosecutors and cops.

Driving High

For the next several hours, the volunteers are probed, prodded and analyzed by the very people cannabis users usually try to avoid at all costs. The goal is improved public safety. Halsor, a Colorado attorney and former public prosecutor, is the founder of Green Lab, a first-of-its-kind endeavor that allows law-enforcement personnel and others to learn about cannabis impairment by witnessing it, up close and personal. Modeled on “wet labs,” the longtime training scenarios in which cops observe drunk people to better understand alcohol inebriation, Halsor designed the program to help police officers correctly identify people who are too high to be on the road, especially in states where cannabis laws are shifting (Halsor recently expanded his services to California).

“It’s a big paradigm shift of law enforcement and prosecutors to adjust to some of these changes,” Halsor says. “The idea behind it was to help law-enforcement officers improve their ability to detect and investigate marijuana-impaired driving cases.”

After several years of running the program, Halsor knows more about cannabis impairment and driving than nearly anybody. And what he’s learned has caused him to reevaluate his stance on laws that base cannabis impairment (and driving-under-the-influence charges) on specific THC levels in a person’s body, similar to how alcohol inebriation is based on blood-alcohol levels. He used to support such rules, which are being implemented in a growing number of states around the country. Now he’s changed his tune.

“We are used to a [blood-alcohol] number,” Halsor says. “A number like that for cannabis would make it all gel together. But I wouldn’t advocate for new states coming on board to adopt such an approach. I don’t know if it really serves what we thought it was going to serve.”

One of the few things law enforcement and cannabis advocates tend to agree on is that people who are too high to drive should be kept off the road. But as lawmakers pass new rules about driving while high and tech companies rush to perfect cannabis breathalyzers, such efforts are coming into direct conflict with a growing body of evidence that suggests when it comes to cannabis and driving, there’s a lot we still don’t know. So, if the old tests and approaches won’t work, how are we ever going to know which cannabis users should be behind the wheel and which definitely shouldn’t?

Driving High

When marijuana was still illegal from coast to coast, cases involving marijuana and driving were relatively straightforward: If you were caught with any amount of marijuana in your system while on the road, you were likely going to be in trouble. “For a long time, cannabis was an afterthought in the world of driving-under-the-influence lawmaking,” says Alex Kreit, a marijuana-law expert and director of the Center for Law and Social Justice at the Thomas Jefferson School of Law. “For a long time, there was a push to standardize blood-alcohol laws, and there wasn’t much attention on substances other than alcohol.”

But as states started legalizing medical and recreational cannabis use, lawmakers had to determine how much marijuana use is too much when you’re behind the wheel. Borrowing from the idea that cannabis should be regulated like alcohol, many of these officials looked to the laws and tests that have long been used to identify drunk drivers. In other words, they began basing cannabis inebriation on the amount of cannabis found in the body.

Four states—Colorado, Illinois, Montana and Washington—have passed laws decreeing that anyone caught on the road with five nanograms or more of THC per milliliter of blood is considered to be driving under the influence of cannabis. Two other states—Nevada and Ohio—set the limit at two nanograms per milliliter of blood. All of these states save one have so-called “per se” rules, meaning if you’re caught on the road while over the blood-level limit, you’re considered guilty of drugged driving. Colorado, however, passed a “permissible inference” version of the law, meaning if you’re caught driving while over the five-nanogram limit you’re presumed to be guilty, but you’re allowed to argue in court that you weren’t actually impaired.

Experts believe that as cannabis prohibitions continue to wane, other states will likely follow a similar tack. “As more and more voters are showing their tolerance for state-legal marijuana, legislators aren’t necessarily going to be up to speed on the issue and are going to copy what states like Colorado and Washington have done,” says Skyler McKinley, director of public relations and government affairs at AAA Colorado. “They are going to get these laws on the books as part of these big packages of legislation.”

That means a growing number of states will likely end up with nice, tidy rules on which to base cannabis-and-driving cases. There’s only one problem: Scientifically, everyone agrees these rules don’t make much sense.

For starters, unlike these new cannabis traffic-safety laws, blood-alcohol limits for driving weren’t hashed out over legislative bargaining tables. They were carefully determined through extensive and meticulous car-crash studies in the late 1960s overseen by the country’s first traffic czar, William Haddon Jr., a trained epidemiologist. The result was a pioneering set of laws based on science, not politics.

Driving High

Alcohol was uniquely suitable to regulations and tests based on biological indicators, such as blood-alcohol concentrations and alcohol levels on a subject’s breath. That’s because unlike the vast majority of drugs, the relationship between alcohol levels in the body and alcohol intoxication remain markedly constant from one person to the next.

“Alcohol is conveniently emitted through your breath in amounts that correctly predict intoxication and impairment. That is not the case with most drugs,” says Ryan Vandrey, an associate professor at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine who studies the behavioral pharmacology of cannabis. “People often say, ‘We have a breathalyzer for alcohol, why don’t we have one for cannabis?’ Well, we don’t have a breathalyzer for any of the hundreds of other things that can impair your driving.”

Cannabis impairment, on the other hand, doesn’t seem to track consistently with THC levels in a subject’s system at all. Intoxicating effects can vary widely depending on the method of consumption, and longtime marijuana users tend to build up a tolerance to its performance-impairing effects. In other words, it’s possible that a first-time cannabis user could be in no shape to drive with less than five nanograms of THC per milliliter of his blood, while a regular cannabis consumer could have far more than that level long after all the intoxicating effects of her last smoke session have worn off.

To get to the bottom of the matter, in 2015 the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety commissioned a study to determine whether there was any correlation between blood concentrations of THC and driver impairment and crash risk. The study results were decisive, says lead author Barry Logan, chief of forensic toxicology at Pennsylvania-based NMS Labs and a leading figure in drug-impaired-driving research. “Our conclusion was you are not going to find a blood concentration level for cannabis that is a useful tool for deciding whether someone is under the influence or not,” says Logan. “You can’t really say anything based on the number.”

Thanks to findings like that, both the American Automobile Association and the National Safety Council now recommend against states basing cannabis and driving laws on cannabis-blood-concentration levels. Even the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration has conceded in past reports that “It is difficult to establish a relationship between a person’s THC blood or plasma concentration and performance impairing effects.”

It’s possible, however, that researchers will eventually find a reliable way to draw a parallel between impairment and evidence of cannabis in the body. Vandrey, for example, is working on a new study that will scrutinize a variety of biological markers to see if any correlate consistently with impairment. But even if scientists do hit upon a way to gauge cannabis intoxication through something like a blood test, there’s another problem. “THC drops precipitously after somebody stops using cannabis,” says Logan. “THC levels fall by about half in 20 minutes, and in about an hour it’s about 20 percent of what it was originally. So in the real world, by the time someone is pulled over, given a roadside sobriety test, then brought to a hospital and had blood drawn, that number won’t tell you anything about the number they had when they were driving.”

It’s why the race is on to develop a cannabis breathalyzer that officers can use as soon as they pull somebody over. And there are indications that such devices could soon hit the streets. One of the big challenges for marijuana breathalyzers is tied to the vapor pressure of cannabis, which is an indication of its evaporation rate. Ethyl alcohol has a high vapor pressure, meaning its molecules are constantly escaping into the air—which is why the smell of alcohol is so pungent and it’s fairly easy to measure the substance on someone’s breath. On the other hand, THC’s large and complex molecules have such a low evaporation rate its vapor pressure had never been accurately measured, until scientists at the National Institute of Standards and Technology laboratory in Boulder, CO, used a pioneering technique to do so earlier this year. The discovery could be used to develop and calibrate future breathalyzers. “One application of the vapor pressure of THC would be to help calculate the level of THC you collect on someone’s breath and correlate it back to the THC concentration in his or her blood,” says Tara Lovestead, a NIST chemical engineer and the lead author of the study.

The fact that we’re still learning about THC’s fundamental physical properties is only one of the reasons why companies working to develop breathalyzers have been laboring for years without anything promising yet hitting the market. “THC exists in your breath in parts per trillion. You compare that with alcohol, which is in the parts per thousand. You have to be a billion times more exacting,” says Mike Lynn, CEO of Hound Labs, one of the main firms working on the challenge. “It’s like looking for a few specific drops of water in a hundred swimming pools put together. We had to figure out some pretty clever ways to identify the THC in such vanishingly low concentrations.”

Lynn insists his company has figured out a way to do so, however. He says the resulting Hound breathalyzer is in the final stages of testing and will launch in 2018 with a retail price between $500 and $1,000, similar to alcohol breathalyzers. But he’s quick to note that while his device will detect THC on someone’s breath, indicating he or she recently consumed the drug, its measurements say nothing about cannabis-blood concentrations—one more indication that driving laws based on cannabis-blood levels don’t make any sense. “All you can say is if you can measure THC in your breath, it is absolutely in your bloodstream,” says Lynn. “But you can’t see how much is in your blood. It’s one of the reasons it’s been so unfair to have these blood standards. They don’t correlate to any sense of impairment.”

The good news is that even if driving laws based on cannabis-blood levels aren’t effective, marijuana legalization hasn’t led to a spike in cannabis-fueled car accidents. In both Washington and Colorado, for example, government officials note traffic safety hasn’t been negatively impacted by the states’ new recreational-cannabis markets. Reports like this lead Paul Armentano, deputy director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, to call these new cannabis-driving laws “a solution in search of a problem.” After all, Armentano points out, “The bottom line is driving under the influence of marijuana or any intoxicating substance is already a traffic-safety violation in all 50 states.”

It’s why many policy experts recommend that instead of passing unnecessary and scientifically dubious new laws about cannabis and driving, lawmakers should instead be making sure police officers are correctly trained to recognize the physical signs of impairment when they pull someone over, no matter what substance caused the impairment or what might be found in a blood test. “If I am a policymaker, I would avoid these THC blood limits at all cost,” says McKinley at AAA Colorado. “The wise choice in public policy is to have dedicated funding that creates training programs for drug-recognition experts, which are the peak law-enforcement officers trained to recognize drug impairment.”

Halsor thinks his Green Lab program is a practical alternative to unwieldy and unrealistic new cannabis-driving laws. Not only are his sessions helping law-enforcement personnel understand when they should bust someone for cannabis impairment and when they shouldn’t, but the events are also breaking down social barriers. “When we first started, we hoped that by putting police officers and cannabis users in the same room, they might learn from each other,” Halsor says. “We didn’t know that was going to happen, but fortunately it did. In the absolute majority of cases, both Green Lab volunteers and police officers have walked away thinking they have a little better understanding of each other.”

This feature was published in the April 2018 issue of High Times magazine. Subscribe right here.

The post Driving High appeared first on High Times.

CBD Oils | Growing Cannabis | CBD For Anxiety | CBD Oil Benefits | CBD Oils Cancer Fighting | Effects of CBD Oil | CBD Oil For Pain | CBD Oil For Pain | Vape Pens | Vape Pen Starter Kit | Vaporite Pen | Vapir Pen | Vapen | Sutra Pen | Pulsar Pen | Pax Pen | Kandy Pens | Greco Science Pens | Exxus Pens | Dr Dabber Pens | Dipstick Pens | Davinci Pens | Atmos Pens | Arizer Pens | Zephyr Pens | White Rhino Pens | Volcano Pens | Viva La Vape Pens |  

As Referenced From Bluebird Botanicals. Click Here To Read From The Source.

 

1. What is CBD? What is CBD Oil?

Cannabidiol (CBD) is a naturally occurring constituent of industrial hemp/cannabis. Its formula is C21H30O2 and it has a molecular mass of 314.4636. It is the most abundant non-psychoactive cannabinoid found in cannabis, and is being scientifically investigated for various reasons.

CBD oil is a cannabis oil (whether derived from marijuana or industrial hemp, as the word cannabis is the latin genus name for both) that has significant amounts of cannabidiol (CBD) contained within it. Our CBD products and extracts are derived from industrial hemp, so they could be considered CBD-rich hemp oil, hemp derived CBD oil, CBD-rich cannabis oil, or plainly “hemp extracts” since they typically contain much more than just CBD. Again, cannabis doesn’t mean marijuana, but is the genus name, and general umbrella term which all forms of marijuana and hemp fall under. The form of cannabis we use for our CBD and hemp extracts is industrial hemp; we do not sell marijuana.

2. If a hemp extract is 40% cannabinoids, what’s the other 60%? What’s in your hemp extracts besides the naturally occurring cannabinoids?

Our Kentucky hemp extracts contain over 80 different phyto-cannabinoids such as cannabidiol (CBD), CBC, CBG, CBN, etc.. In addition to the cannabinoids naturally present in our agricultural hemp extracts, there are also many other types of natural molecules and phyto-chemical compounds such as amino acids, carbohydrates, vitamins (including B1, B2, B6, D), fatty acids (including omega 3 & 6), trace minerals (including iron, zinc, calcium, magnesium, potassium), beta-carotene, chlorophyll, flavanoids, ketones, nitrogenous compounds, alkanes, glycosides, pigments, water, and terpenes. The most common terpenes in our hemp extracts are Myrcene, Beta-caryophyllene, Terpinolene, Linalool, alpha-Pinene, beta-Pinene, Nerolidol og Phytol, trans-alpha-Bergamotene, Limonene/ beta-Phellandrene (Co-elution), and alpha-Humulene.

3. What’s the difference between Hemp and Marijuana?

Scientifically, industrial Hemp and Marijuana are the same plant, with a genus and species name of Cannabis Sativa. They have a drastically different genetic profile though. Industrial Hemp is always a strain of Cannabis sativa, while marijuana can be Cannabis sativa, Cannabis indica, or Cannabis ruderalis. The major difference is how industrial hemp has been bred compared to a marijuana form of Cannabis sativa. organic hemp seedsTypically speaking, industrial hemp is very fibrous, with long strong stalks, and barely has any flowering buds, while a marijuana strain of Cannabis sativa will be smaller, bushier, and full of flowering buds. However, newer industrial hemp varieties in the USA are being bred to have more flowers and higher yields of cannabinoids and terpenes, such as our Kentucky hemp we’re now using!

99% of the time marijuana has a high amount of THC and only a very low amount of CBD. Hemp, on the other hand, naturally has a very high amount of CBD in most instances, and only a trace amount of THC. Fortunately, the cannabinoid profile of hemp is ideal for people looking for benefits from cannabis without the ‘high.’ Hemp is used for making herbal supplements, food, fiber, rope, paper, bricks, oil, natural plastic, and so much more, whereas marijuana is usually used just recreationally, spiritually, and medicinally. The term cannabis oil can refer to either a marijuana or hemp derived oil, since marijuana and hemp are two different forms of cannabis.

In the USA the legal definition of “industrial hemp,” per Section 7606 of the Agricultural Appropriations Act of 2014, is “INDUSTRIAL HEMP — The term ‘‘industrial hemp’’ means the plant Cannabis sativa L. and any part of such plant, whether growing or not, with a delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol concentration of not more than 0.3 percent on a dry weight basis.”

4. Are hemp derived cannabinoids such as CBD as good as CBD from marijuana?

The short answer is yes. CBD is CBD, whether from marijuana or hemp. Most marijuana has a very low non-psychoactive cannabinoid profile (like CBD, CBC, CBG), so most of the time hemp would be much more preferable for anything besides THC. Marijuana is usually very high in THC (gives people the high) but usually very low in other non-psychoactive cannabinoids.

Nowadays in the USA, many farmers are growing industrial hemp flowers that are just as beautiful, odor-producing, and terpene rich as the best marijuana strains, such as our partnered farmers in Kentucky.

5. Why don’t you source your Hemp and CBD from within Colorado?

colorado growing operationWe feel that the hemp program in Kentucky is more well suited for our company in regards to growing hemp, and that because it’s 100% compliant with Section 7606 of the 2014 Farm Bill (and the 2016 Agricultural Appropriations Act), procuring it from there is perfectly legal at the federal level. Kentucky’s ecology is perfect for hemp just as it is for tobacco. The growing season is longer than in Colorado, and the soil is richer, so the quality of the hemp and the yields are better.

6. What’s the percentage of cannabinoids and CBD in your product?

Our raw extracts have varying percentages of cannabinoid and cannabidiol (CBD) content, the range being 10%-99%. Each product has a unique formulation and uses varying ratios of our extract types. Our CBD Isolate is over 99% pure CBD.

7. What is the best method of use?

For our dietary supplements we can only recommend them for internal consumption. Our CBD isolate is for research purposes only. If you don’t like the flavor of the oil supplements, you can mix with something sweet like apple sauce or honey to cut through the flavor.

8. What’s the ideal serving size for me, and how often should I take it?

There is no easy answer to this. Our starting recommended serving size is 15 drops but we generally recommend experimenting to see what feels best to you. Some prefer 5 drops, some prefer over 50 drops per day.

9. What is the safety of your hemp extracts? Are there negative side effects?

Hemp is considered by many to be generally safe. We’ve never seen or heard of any significant or negative CBD Oil Extractside effects in our years in the industry. That said, we can’t rule them out. Please consult with your physician before using any dietary supplement including Hemp extract supplements.

10. Which of your CBD and hemp products should I get?

As a company who sells various dietary and food supplements, we can’t suggest any of our products for the prevention, treatment or cure of any disease or ailment.

When considering our different dietary hemp products, know that they all come in two strengths. Our Original Hemp blends (Classic Hemp Blend, Hemp Complete, Brainpower oil, & Signature Blend) all have 250+mg of cannabinoids per fluid ounce, and our concentrated blends have 1,500+mg per fluid ounce, six times the potency of our traditional oils. We’ve found that sometimes less is more, but nevertheless, some people like to take very large serving sizes of our hemp extracts.

The main difference between the four Original Blends is the additional herbal ingredients besides hemp. We suggest you research the separate components of each blend to determine which product may be most appealing to add to your dietary regimen. If you know it’s solely the hemp extract that you are looking for, with no additional ingredients, then Classic Hemp Blend or Classic Hemp 6x is what you’re looking for.

For dabbing and vaporizing or for research you can try our CBD Isolate.

THOSE WHO SUSPECT THEY MAY HAVE A DISEASE OR ARE SEEKING HELP FOR A DISEASE SHOULD CONSULT A QUALIFIED MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL.

11. Why do people use Hemp Extracts and CBD? What are the benefits and uses of CBD?

In accordance with federal regulations we cannot make health claims regarding our dietary supplement products. We can only recommend our products for general wellness.

12. Is a standard hemp seed oil the same as a high-CBD hemp extract?

Hemp Oil For Dogs

Hemp Oil For Dogs

Absolutely not. Standard hemp oil, which can be found very cheaply at a grocery store, is a much different product than our CO2 hemp extracts (not from seed). Standard hemp oil is produced by cold pressing the seeds, whereas our hemp extract is a supercritical CO2 extraction of the hemp plant itself, not the seeds. Hemp seed oil is considered to be a great nutritive food, but it doesn’t have the naturally occurring terpenes, cannabinoids and other components that our extracts do have.

13. Do I need to move to Colorado to get your Hemp Extracts and CBD? Where do you ship?

No. We actually source our hemp from Kentucky, as it’s legal to ship across state lines. Many people are under the impression that the only way to acquire hemp extracts and CBD for themselves or a loved one is to move to Colorado or another cannabis-friendly state. Many major news outlets are misinformed and are unfortunately spreading the idea that you can only get CBD oil in the states where medical marijuana has been legalized. This is simply not the case though. Because our extracts comes from hemp instead of marijuana, we can and do ship to all fifty states, and no medical marijuana card is needed. There are some exceptions, like with Indiana, Missouri and South Dakota we can’t sell our concentrated products due to state legislation.

We also ship to Japan, Australia, the EU, Switzerland, and Brazil. For all EU orders contact our exclusive distributor thereCannawell.

14. Is your Hemp Extract Oil similar to Rick Simpson Hemp Oil?

Not quite. Ours are from hemp and RSHO is usually using marijuana, a different form of cannabis than industrial hemp. Our industrial hemp extracts are more standardized and will usually have a much higher content of non-psychoactive cannabinoids like CBD than one produced through the Rick Simpson method. And oils produced through his method will usually have a much higher THC content, as it’s typically marijuana that is used for RSHO.†

Generally speaking, most marijuana producers and sellers (especially on the black market) don’t test for contaminants (metals, pesticides, bacteria, etc.). Rick Simpson Hemp Oil is actually more a method of extraction than it is a specific product. People use the Rick Simpson method with hundreds of different strains of marijuana, so the THC, CBD and other cannabinoid content of the final oil is always varying greatly, depending on the cannabis the consumers are acquiring. Usually what’s used for Rick Simpson oil is a strain with an inferior CBD content (and high THC), because that’s what the vast amount of marijuana is nowadays.

15. Where do you source your hemp and CBD from?

We have partners in Kentucky who grew a dedicated plot for us this year (2016) which is being used in our products now. mjna message boardWe also currently source from Europe but we’ll be changing that soon.

16. What kind of testing/analysis is performed on your products?

We have an industry leading quality control system, and we have third party laboratories analyze all of our hemp extracts and our final products for cannabinoid potency, heavy metals, bacterial and microbial life, mycotoxins (fungus), and pesticides.

17. What is CO2 extraction? What’s the difference between subcritical and supercritical CO2 extractions?

CO2 extraction is an extraction process that uses pressurized carbon dioxide to extract phyto-chemicals (such as CBD, CBG, or terpenes, flavonoids, etc.) from a plant. CO2 at certain temperatures and pressures acts like a solvent, without the dangers of actually being one. It is the most expensive extraction method, and is widely considered the most effective and safest plant extraction method in the world.

Many hemp and CBD companies boast about their supercritical CO2 extractions, but that’s actually only one (and perhaps an inferior) method of using a CO2 extraction machine. There are also subcritical CO2 extractions, and ‘mid-critical’, a general range between subcritical and supercritical. Subcritical (low temp, low pressure) CO2 extractions take more time and produce smaller yields than super-critical, but they retain the essential oils, terpenes, and other sensitive chemicals within the plant. Supercritical, on the other hand, is a high pressure and high temperature process that damages most terpenes and heat sensitive chemicals, but can extract much larger molecules such as lipids (omega 3 and 6), chlorophyll, and waxes. A truly full-spectrum CO2 extract includes first performing a subcritical extraction, separating the extracted oil, and then extracting the same plant material using supercritical pressure, and then homogenizing both oil extracts into one. In the essential oil industry, an extract made using this specific process is referred to as a CO2 Total.

18. What is the endocannabinoid system (ECS)?

“The endocannabinoid system (ECS) is a group of endogenous cannabinoid receptors located in the mammalian brain and throughout the central and peripheral nervous systems, consisting of neuromodulatory lipids and their receptors.” Wikipedia

There are two main types of receptors in the ECS, CB1 and CB2. CB1 receptors are primarily located in the central nervous system and brains of mammals, and CB2 are generally found in the peripheral nervous system. There are two main cannabinoids mammals produce- 2AG and Anandamide (named after the Sanskrit term “ananda” which translates to “peace”).

For hundreds of millions of years every vertebrate on Earth has been equipped with this ECS, a crucial system in the body, and it has been known about in the scientific and medical communities since the 1980’s. However, it’s still not taught about in most medical schools.

Comments

comments