AZ Marijuana Cards Likely to Be Accepted at Nevada Dispensaries

http://azmarijuana.com/ By:   |   Posted : Aug.14.14

Nevada Marijuanahttp://azmarijuana.com/arizona-medical-marijuana-news/nevada-dispensaries-accept-arizona-marijuana-cards/

Authorities in Nevada are working on a plan that would allow medical marijuana patients from other states, including Arizona, to purchase medical marijuana at Nevada dispensaries, which will be opening in early 2015.

The bureau chief of the Nevada Division of Public and Behavioral Health said that Nevada’s new medical marijuana program will allow Arizona residents to shop at dispensaries if they are part of the medical marijuana program in Arizona.

Brian Sandoval, the governor of Nevada, has officially said that up to 66 dispensaries will open all over the state, with the first expected to open in Las Vegas at the beginning of 2015.

According to state law, Nevada dispensaries can choose to honor out of state medical marijuana cardholders as long as the state that issued their license has an electronic database of patients that “allows the Division and medical marijuana dispensaries in (Nevada) to access the database.”

This measure would obviously need to first be approved by authorities in Arizona.  Will Humble, director of the Arizona Department of Health Services, is hesitant to believe that this law would ever work out in conjunction with Arizona cardholders because the system in which medical marijuana is sold and regulated is specific to Arizona dispensaries.  However, Nevada authorities are confident that once the organized system is functioning by early 2015, their dispensaries won’t even need to access the database in Arizona, and that onsite dispensary agents will be able to validate the out-of-towners’ licenses.

There are more than a few details that need ironing out, but if all goes according to plan, Arizona medical marijuana cardholders and other states will have a few more reasons to visit Las Vegas next year.

 

Japan to Start Exporting Fukushima Rice to Singapore / “Singapore Was Convinced to Lift Import Restriction”

Rice produced in Fukushima is going to be exported to Singapore.

JA Zen-Noh (The National Federation of Agricultural Cooperative Associations) announced on 8/18/2014.

Since 311, the government of Singapore banned importing Fukushima rice. JA Zen-Noh comments they have convinced the government of Singapore to deregulate the safety level of rice.

Currently the press release is removed from the website of JA Zen-Noh for some reason.

 

http://search.zennoh.or.jp/bizsearch_asp/search?corpId=atc130002&vc=1&layout=1&hits=10&q=%E3%82%B7%E3%83%B3%E3%82%AC%E3%83%9D%E3%83%BC%E3%83%AB%E3%80%80%E8%BC%B8%E5%87%BA&p=1&t%5B%5D=1

 

http://maguro.2ch.sc/test/read.cgi/poverty/1408364601/l50

 

 

You read this now because we’ve been surviving until today.

_____

Français :

Le Japon va commencer à exporter du riz de Fukushima sur Singapour / “Singapour a été convaincu pour lever les restrictions d’importation”

 

Le riz produit à Fukushima va être exporté sur Singapour.

JA Zen-Noh (la Fédération Nationale des Associations de Coopératives Agricoles Japonaises) l’a annoncé ce 18 août 2014.
Le gouvernement de Singapour avait interdit l’importation du riz de Fukushima depuis le 11-3. JA Zen-Noh déclare qu’ils ont convaincu le gouvernement de Singapour de déréguler le niveau de sécurité du riz.

Actuellement, le communiqué de presse a été retiré du site web de la JA Zen-Noh.

http://search.zennoh.or.jp/bizsearch_asp/search?corpId=atc130002&vc=1&layout=1&hits=10&q=%E3%82%B7%E3%83%B3%E3%82%AC%E3%83%9D%E3%83%BC%E3%83%AB%E3%80%80%E8%BC%B8%E5%87%BA&p=1&t%5B%5D=1

http://maguro.2ch.sc/test/read.cgi/poverty/1408364601/l50

Vous pouvez lire ceci parce que nous avons survécu jusqu’à aujourd’hui.

 

***Note from Anna: If that radioactive rice spreads and mixes with Monsanto crops farms worldwide will be contaminated.

Fake Charities, Drug Cartels, Ransom and Extortion: Where Islamist Group Boko Haram Gets Its Cash

Fake Charities, Drug Cartels, Ransom and Extortion: Where Islamist Group Boko Haram Gets Its Cash

http://www.ibtimes.com/fake-charities-drug-cartels-ransom-extortion-where-islamist-group-boko-haram-gets-its-cash-1585743

  • Boko Haram Bomb_Nigeria
    A security barrier marks the scene of a car bomb explosion at St. Theresa Catholic Church (background) at Madalla, Suleja, just outside Nigeria’s capital Abuja on Dec. 25, 2011. Islamist militant group Boko Haram said it planted bombs that exploded on Christmas Day at churches in Nigeria, one of which killed at least 27 people on the outskirts of the capital. Reuters/Afolabi Sotunde
  • Boko Haram attacks
    A woman walks past homes destroyed by the Islamist group Boko Haram in Bama, Borno State on Feb. 20, 2014. Reuters
  • Boko Haram Bomb_Nigeria
    A security barrier marks the scene of a car bomb explosion at St. Theresa Catholic Church (background) at Madalla, Suleja, just outside Nigeria’s capital Abuja on Dec. 25, 2011. Islamist militant group Boko Haram said it planted bombs that exploded on Christmas Day at churches in Nigeria, one of which killed at least 27 people on the outskirts of the capital. Reuters/Afolabi Sotunde
  • Boko Haram attacks
    A woman walks past homes destroyed by the Islamist group Boko Haram in Bama, Borno State on Feb. 20, 2014. Reuters

Just over a year ago, armed men on motorcycles entered a national park in Cameroon, near the Nigerian border, and swiftly abducted a family of vacationing French tourists — a husband and wife and their four children, along with their uncle.

Two months later, the kidnappers released the hostages along with 16 others in exchange for a cool $3.15 million. The transaction was made by French and Cameroonian negotiators, but it was not divulged who made the payments, according to Reuters.

So landed another cash infusion into the coffers of Boko Haram, the West African jihadist militia that has now gained worldwide infamy through the mass kidnapping of school girls in northern Nigeria. Long before its latest wave of attacks, the Islamist group has efficiently financed violent acts in the service of its mission to impose Shariah law through a combination of lucrative criminal enterprises, say experts who track the group. In addition to kidnappings, Boko Haram has secured financing through extortion, cooperation with international drug cartels and operating fake charities, these experts say.

“What is certain about Boko Haram is that the organization is very well funded; without an ever-increasing cash flow, the movement would have died out long ago,” reads a report from the Terrorism Research and Analysis Consortium, a research initiative of the reference publisher Beacham Group.

About a decade ago, shortly after Boko Haram was founded, it drew the majority of its funds from people in surrounding communities who supported its goal of imposing Islamic law while ridding Nigeria of Western influences, according to a report from the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) based at the University of Maryland. But that means of fundraising was inherently limited in a country in which 54 percent of people are classified as “extremely poor” by the World Bank.

In more recent times, Boko Haram has broadened its funding by drawing on foreign donors, and other ventures such as fake charity organizations, extortion, and deals with global drug cartels, according to the START report. Its most recent foray — the kidnapping of 276 schoolgirls to sell on the black market as “wives” — is merely the outgrowth of a coherent strategy to find funds for expansion through whatever means necessary.

The term Boko Haram translates to “Western education is forbidden,” in the local Hausa language of the predominantly Muslim region in northern Nigeria where the group is based.

Since its formation in the early 2000s, the militia has been carrying out violent attacks around the country. Since 2009, when the group’s founding leader was killed and replaced by his second-in-command, the attacks have grown significantly more violent and intense, according to the START report. Last year, the U.S. State Department officially designated the group as a “foreign terrorist organization.”

“What Boko Haram achieved in less than a year is quite remarkable,” wrote David Doukhan of the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism, in a 2013 report, citing their reign over many parts of northeastern Nigeria, the institution of Sharia law, tax collection and an Islamic education system to recruit youth to their cause.

This expansion has required increasingly large sources of funding, which has apparently led Boko Haram to ratchet up its methods of raising money.

Boko Haram Targets Despite religious and political overtones, the majority of Boko Haram’s targets have been private citizens.  National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) / IBTimes

 

“Perhaps less sophisticated than other tactics, kidnapping has become one of the group’s primary funding sources,” wrote Jacob Zenn, African and Eurasian affairs analyst at The Jamestown Foundation, in a recent report.

But the group receives steady support from abroad, including from Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, according to the U.S. State Department, while using links to that terrorist group to secure further donations from sympathizers in the United Kingdom and Saudi Arabia, along with weapons and training.

An unnamed United States intelligence official last week told The Daily Beast that the Islamist group had received “strategic direction” from Osama bin Laden.

Boko Haram cloaks its sources of finance through the crafty use of a highly decentralized distribution network, say experts. The group employs an Islamic model of money transfer called “hawala,” based on an honor system and a global network of agents that leaves no trace.

“The very features which make hawala attractive to legitimate customers — efficiency, anonymity and lack of a paper trail — also make the system attractive for the transfer of illicit funds,” reads a report from the U.S. Treasury Department.

Other direct fundraising includes fake charities and nonprofits. Some have reported that the group receives regular payment from local leaders in northern Nigeria to protect their land.

An untraceable flow of money plus loosely guarded borders has created an ideal environment for black market trade. The porosity of Nigeria’s borders offers the group a steady flow of weapons, training, radicalization and funding.

A 2012 report from the Inter-University Center for Terrorism Studies alleges that Nigerian terrorist groups are financed by drug cartels in Latin America.

Lauretta Napoleoni, an Italian journalist and expert on terrorist finance, said this began to happen when the 2001 Patriot Act made it difficult to transfer drugs through the U.S. to Europe.

“Nobody wants to admit that cocaine reaches Europe via West Africa,” said Napoleoni. “This kind of business is a type of business where Islamic terrorist organizations are very much involved.”

Beyond drugs, Boko Haram has joined other criminal groups in Africa in the billion-dollar rhino and elephant poaching industry, according to a recent report from Born Free USA, a wildlife conservation organization.

“While impoverished locals are enlisted to pull the triggers, it is highly organized transnational crime syndicates and militias that run the poaching and reap the lion’s share of the profits, funding terrorism and increasingly war,” wrote New Scientist’s Richard Shiffman.

Using these extensive networks, Boko Haram members can smuggle anything from sugar and flour to weapons or even people across international borders. This, plus kidnapping ransoms and donations from abroad, is one of the most important factors keeping them in business.

Earlier this week, the U.S. State Department announced plans to further its efforts to counter Boko Haram, given the importance of Nigeria as an economic and political leader in Africa.

“The U.S. has a vital interest in helping to strengthen Nigeria’s democratic institutions, boost Nigeria’s prosperity and security, and ensure opportunity for all of its citizens,” according to a public statement.

A major part of their plan includes a counterterrorism finance program, that “aims to restrict Boko Haram’s ability to raise, move and store money.”

Editorial: CalPERS Proposal Would Authorize Pension Spiking by Another Name

http://www.sacbee.com/2014/08/19/6637585/editorial-calpers-proposal-would.html

Published: Tuesday, Aug. 19, 2014 – 12:00 am

The California Public Employees’ Retirement System board needs to stop.

The board is preparing to approve rules today affecting employees who have been hired by local governments since 2013, after Gov. Jerry Brown pushed what he said was a pension reform intended to rein in the cost of pensions and end spiking for new employees.

The CalPERS staff cannot say whether the new regulations will increase costs or lower them. A staff report issued in April offered a vague analysis that there could be savings. We heard such comments in 1999 when the CalPERS staff declared the state could increase pensions at no cost to taxpayers. That didn’t work out well.

Our guess is that costs won’t be dropping. Most public employee unions are urging support or asking the board to go further. That’s their job. They’re supposed to work hard to get the most for their members. Elk Grove, Beverly Hills and many other cities are asking the board to reject the regulations.

The League of California Cities pointed out in a letter that CalPERS is preparing to impose “major pension rate increases” on local governments, and warned the proposal “could increase these already burdening costs unless supported by strict actuarial analysis and standards.”

The issue involves whether “pensionable compensation” is a job’s base pay for new employees, or normal monthly pay, which can include pay for one of nearly 100 bonuses that civil servants might receive.

Some seem reasonable. Most seem like they’re a basic part of the job. A newly hired cop might receive more monthly pay for being a detective or a canine officer. The question is whether the extra compensation should count toward pensions for employees hired after the new law took effect.

Being a detective might be worthy of more base pay and a larger pension. But the number of add-ons is surprisingly long. Officers could get more if they are physically fit or a good shot. Shouldn’t all cops be fit and shoot straight?

Officers could get higher pensions if they are assigned to Drug Abuse Resistance Education programs in schools, regularly enforce laws against drunken driving and drugs, find fugitives, fight gangs, direct traffic or work at the front desks at jails.

Newly hired firefighters would qualify for bigger pensions for inspecting buildings for fire-code compliance, investigating causes of fires or if they are “assigned to administrative work during normal hours of employment.

There could be a premium for being pilots, which sounds reasonable. There also are premiums for librarians whose job includes telling patrons where to find resources. We love librarians. But isn’t assisting patrons fundamental to what librarians do?

There could be premiums for employees “assigned to mix, transport and/or apply a tar-like substance for sidewalks, roads, roofs and/or parking lots”; who are “consistently assigned to finish cement work”; who operate audio-visual equipment; or who can take shorthand and dictation, and type quickly.

Brown sent a letter urging the board to reject a part of the proposal that would allow higher pay from temporary promotions to be counted toward pensions. That’s important, but a only a half-step.

With great fanfare, Brown and the Legislature approved a pension overhaul in 2012 that was supposed to reduce the cost of pensions for new employees.

By counting so many premiums, however, CalPERS would be stepping back from that commitment, and sanctioning spiking by another name.

Gov. Jay Inslee Announces $150,000 to Support Tourism in Methow Valley and Okanogan County

http://www.governor.wa.gov/news/releases/article.aspx?id=324August 15, 2014

Media Contact:

Jaime Smith
Governor Inslee’s Communications Office
360.902.4136

Penny Thomas
Department of Commerce
360.725.2805

Gov. Jay Inslee today approved $150,000 in economic recovery aid to help promote the Methow Valley and Okanogan County as a tourism and visitor location following the Carlton Complex Fire. The funds will supplement current tourism and marketing spending by businesses, cities, the county and Washington Tourism Alliance to let travelers and visitors know their businesses are open and tourists are welcome.

“From the Methow Valley and Okanogan National Forest to the Grand Coulee Dam, this region boasts beautiful landscape, diverse wilderness recreation activities, and historic towns,” Gov Inslee said. “This aid package will help get Okanogan’s robust economy back on its feet, as its residents begin the challenging task of rebuilding and recovering.”

The state Department of Commerce requested the funding in direct response to the economic losses and infrastructure damage sustained by the region as a result of the Carlton Complex wildfire.

“Visiting the Methow Valley and Okanogan County with my family last weekend, I saw firsthand that the area is very much open for business. We join with local leaders in encouraging folks to come and take advantage of the beautiful late summer weather in this spectacular corner of our state – it’s a great way for anyone to help with their recovery effort,” said Commerce Director Brian Bonlender.

The aid will fund marketing campaigns to promote travel to the region, recreational and camping opportunities, and upcoming local events such as the Pateros Hydro Races and Okanogan Family Faire.

CDPHE Meeting on Retail Marijuana Surveillance – Thursday 8/14/2014-Patients and Press *Not* Invited

For immediate release: Aug. 13, 2014

Cannabis Press Association
http://www.cannabispressassociation.com/

Patient and Caregiver Rights Litigation Project
http://www.cannabislawsuits.com/
888-EAT-HEMP

{Denver} — The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
(CDPHE) will be holding an all-day meeting on Thursday, Aug. 14, concerning
their expanding roles in “retail marijuana surveillance” and other areas.

*PHYSICAL LOCATION OF MEETING*
Courtyard Marriott Cherry Creek
Skyline Ballroom
1475 South Colorado Blvd.
Denver, CO 80222
Workshop begins at 8:30 am

The CDPHE had previously only regulated medical marijuana. Their new roles in retail marijuana involve at least 6 different departments within the CDPHE. (See page 10 of “Marijuana and CDPHE” presentation below.)

The meeting will be held at the Courtyard Marriott in Denver, but there
will also be a live webinar available (See below for details.)

According to the CDPHE, “no media” will be allowed to attend the meeting,
and the agenda shows that “no patients” have been invited to share their
views in any manner, even though the subject matter directly concerns them.

The Cannabis Press Association (CPA), working with the Patient and
Caregivers Rights Litigation Project (PCRLP), discovered the meeting, after
several patients received an email invitation asking them to register for
the meeting, which was apparently sent accidentally by the CDPHE to the
wrong email distribution list.

In the email, Elyse Contreras, Programs Coordinator for the Retail
Marijuana Program & Medical Marijuana Research Grant Program at the CDPHE,
stated that the purpose of the Aug. 14 meeting is “to update our local
partners on latest information regarding marijuana surveillance, prevention
efforts, medical research, lab regulations, infused product safety and
more!”

Contreras’ invitation stated that “no media” would be allowed to attend.

When the CDPHE discovered they had sent the email invitation to patients in
error, they immediately removed the online registration form from their
website.

The Cannabis Press Association filed a Colorado Open Records Act (CORA)
request last week, asking for the location and webinar login information
for the meeting, as well as a request for the list of invitees to the
meeting.

The CDPHE ignored the CORA requests. However, CPA was able to obtain the
information from reliable sources. (See below.)

*SURVEILLANCE OF PREGNANT WOMEN*
Many topics will be covered at the all-day meeting. A primary focus will be
how the CDPHE will be performing “surveillance” on pregnant women to
determine whether cannabis used during pregnancy is harmful to children.

According to a “Marijuana and Pregnancy” presentation on the CDPHE website,
one of the new CDPHE programs includes “Birth Registry Surveillance”, which
is defined as “surveillance to determine if marijuana could be a factor in
the development of adverse birth outcomes” and includes a “thorough review
of maternal medical records” (See page 9 of “Marijuana and Pregnancy”
presentation below.)

Kathleen Chippi of the Patient and Caregiver Rights Litigation Project sees
this as another attack on patients. “This secret meeting is just another
attack on medical marijuana patients. They want to screen all birth mothers
for cannabis? The CDPHE doesn’t test new moms for GMOs, pesticides,
fracking fluids, caffeine, sugar, or pharmaceutical chemicals, so why focus
on THC, which has been used safely by humans for over 10,000 years?
Cannabis was actually prescribed commonly to ease pregnancy and the
birthing process before it was made illegal in 1937. Natural cannabinoids
(endocannabinoids) are actually abundant in all breast milk and research
has shown that they are essential to a newborn’s development.”

See: Cannabinoids, like those found in marijuana, occur naturally in human
breast milk
http://www.naturalnews.com/036526_cannabinoids_breast_milk_THC.html#ixzz3AKr2v8PH

===================================================================

*MEETING AGENDA*
Click here for agenda for the Aug. 14, 2014 CDPHE/DOR meeting:
http://cannabispressassociation.com/docs/CDPHE.Agenda.for.State.Local.Workshop-8.14.14.pdf

NOTE: The CDPHE claims that this is not a public meeting, but have refused
to provide a list of the official invitees. If you want to attend in
person, it is recommended to arrive early to try to cajole a seat out of
your public officials.

===================================================================
*WEBINAR LOGIN INFORMATION*
From: “Contreras – CDPHE, Elyse” <elyse.contreras@state.co.us>
Date: August 13, 2014 10:51:24 AM MDT
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
Subject: 8/14 Marijuana Webinar Details
Marijuana Workshop for State and Local Public Health

Follow the directions below to join the webinar beginning at 8:30 am
Thursday, August 14th. This is an all day work shop, the agenda is
attached.

This meeting is intended to allow local public health agency
representatives the opportunity to learn more abut marijuana regulation in Colorado.  No public comment or questions will be taken as the meeting is not considered an open meeting as defined in the Colorado Open Meetings Law, Section 24-6-401 et seq. 

Questions on the topics discussed can be
sent to medical.marijuana@state.co.us.

To join the meeting:
https://cdphe.adobeconnect.com/r6e3dlu1pg2/
—————-
If you have never attended an Adobe Connect meeting before:

Test your connection:
https://cdphe.adobeconnect.com/common/help/en/support/meeting_test.htm

Get a quick overview: http://www.adobe.com/products/adobeconnect.html

Elyse Contreras
Programs Coordinator
Retail Marijuana Program & Medical Marijuana Research Grant Program
P 303.692.6455  |  F 303.782.0904
4300 Cherry Creek Drive South, Denver, CO 80246
elyse.contreras@state.co.us
===================================================================

*RELATED CDPHE PRESENTATIONS*
“Marijuana and CDPHE” presentation
http://cannabispressassociation.com/docs/CDPHE.Marijuana.and.CDPHE.Presentation.CORA4.pdf

“Marijuana and Pregnancy” presentation
http://cannabispressassociation.com/docs/CDPHE.Marijuana.Pregnancy.Presentation.pdf

===================================================================
NOTE: This information was obtained as a public service by volunteers
working with the Cannabis Press Association (CPA), working with the Patient
and Caregivers Rights Litigation Project (PCRLP). Please be generous and
make a donation today.

===================================================================

For immediate release: Aug. 13, 2014

Cannabis Press Association
http://www.cannabispressassociation.com/

Patient and Caregiver Rights Litigation Project
http://www.cannabislawsuits.com/
888-EAT-HEMP


Provided as a Public Service by the:
Cannabis Press Association
“Fighting over 77 years of lies and mis-information
with over 10,000 years of history and fact.”
Web: http://www.cannabispressassociation.com/
Email: info@cannabispressassociation.com

***Note from Anna: I wish the DEA officers went after legal (and illegal) methamphetamine,steroid, and Prozac abusers with the same intensity used for illegally profiling legal medical marijuana patients.

Colorado has sold out to big pharmaceutical companies and their petty political lobbyists. It’s disturbing to watch how easy it is for judges and cops to abuse the weakest among them while running like their asses are on fire away from violent offenders on legally-distributed methamphetamines.

Stats on Meth in Colorado:

http://www.justice.gov/archive/ndic/pubs4/4300/meth.htm

National Drug Intelligence Center
Colorado Drug Threat Assessment
May 2003

“…Methamphetamine abuse is increasingly prevalent in Colorado. The number of methamphetamine-related treatment admissions to publicly funded facilities in the state increased from 1,748 in 1997 to 2,037 in 2001, according to data from ADAD. (See Table 1 in Overview section.) Since 1999 treatment admissions for methamphetamine abuse have increased each year, while admissions for cocaine, heroin, and marijuana have declined. According to ADAD, more than 83 percent of patients treated for methamphetamine abuse in 2001 were Caucasian, 54 percent were male, and nearly 33 percent were 35 or older. Nearly 43 percent of methamphetamine abusers treated during 2001 smoked the drug, 32 percent injected it, 19 percent snorted it, and 6 percent used some other method or multiple methods of administration.”

http://www.narconon.org/drug-information/colorado-drug-addiction.html

From Narconon International:

“…Colorado is crossed by eight Interstates: I-15, I-25, I-70, I-76, I-80, I-84, I-90 and I-94. The central location and high ethnic population of Denver and its suburbs makes it a perfect distribution center for drugs coming into the U.S. across the Canadian border, or for drugs being trafficked north from the Southwest border. Fifteen Ports of Entry (POE) from Canada exist in Montana, and Interstates 15 and 90 link these POEs with Denver and Salt Lake City, both major drug distribution points.

…The most dangerous aspect of the drug scene in Colorado and its cities is that drug trafficking and use is on the increase. The biggest threat is the highly addictive and physically damaging ice methamphetamine. Recent supplies of meth have been more pure and lower cost than earlier supplies.”

From Johnny Green at the Weed Blog April 3, 2013:

http://www.theweedblog.com/marijuana-patents-us-patents-on-medical-procedures-involving-cannabinoids/

Spain Study Confirms Hemp Oil Cures Cancer
http://www.endalldisease.com/spain-st…

Federal Government Reports that Marijuana Kills Cancer Cells
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/51148243/ns…

US Patent 4837228
Cannabichromene (CBC)
http://www.google.com/patents/US4837228

US Patent 4189491
Glaucoma Treatment
http://www.google.com/patents/US4189491

US Patent 5631297
Anandamide Compounds
http://www.google.com/patents/US5631297

US Patent 6132762
Pain, inflammation and arthritis
http://www.google.com/patents/US6132762

US Patent 6410588
Cannabidiol and inflammatory diseases
http://www.google.com/patents/US6410588

US Patent 6974568
Treatment for coughs
http://www.google.com/patents/US6974568

US Patent 6630507
Inflammatory and autoimmune diseases
Strokes, Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s
http://www.google.com/patents/US6630507

US Patent 7741365
Novel polycyclic cannabinoid analogs
http://www.google.com/patents/US7741365

US Patent 7597910
Prostate cancer and prostatitis
http://www.google.com/patents/US7597910

US Patent 7977107
Detecting traces of cannabinoids
http://www.google.com/patents/US7977107

US Patent 8071641
Diabetes and insulitis
http://www.google.com/patents/US8071641

US Patent 8242178
Cannabidiol and autoimmune hepatitis
http://www.google.com/patents/US8242178

US Patent 8034843
Nausea, vomiting and motion sickness
http://www.google.com/patents/US8034843

US Patent Application 20100292345
Cannabigerol (CBG)
http://www.google.com/patents/US20100…

US Patent Application 20080181942
Multiple sclerosis and MS relapse
http://www.google.com/patents/US20080…

US Patent Application 20090197941
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
http://www.google.com/patents/US20090…

US Patent Application 20100204312
Treating cell proliferation and cancers
http://www.google.com/patents/US20100…

US Patent Application 20080262099
Inhibition of tumour cell migration
http://www.google.com/patents/US20080…

US Patent Application 20100222437
Gastrointestinal inflammatory and cancers
http://www.google.com/patents/US20100…

Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research Studies…

Scientific Proof Cannabinoids Kill Cancer Cells :

http://youtu.be/mFBBTnv5Xbs

http://redd.it/18qiwn
http://phoenixtears.ca
http://www.phoenixtearsfoundation.com…

Copy and paste links into address bar (one at a time) :

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19638490
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22776349
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16682966
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12648025
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19914218
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15026328
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16893424
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15361550
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19889794
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19015962
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19608284
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17237277
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11586361
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14692532
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16571653
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18286801
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16250836
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17934890
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12052046
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19189054
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18354058
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19047095
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10913156
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9653194
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18088200
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16909207
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17342320
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19059457
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12723496
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19442536
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16728591
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19539619
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16500647
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19189659
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14617682
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18938775
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11106791
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19394652
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20336665
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19442435
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15451022
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18197164
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16835997
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11903061
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17675107
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17202146
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19425170
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18454173
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17065222
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10700234
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16787257
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15958274
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16139274
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16624285
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16616335
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11269508
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19690545
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12511587
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20307616
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16818634
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17952650
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16818650
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16596790
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15638794
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15275820
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12133838
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18339876
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9771884
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10570948
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12182964
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19229996

 

Oil Companies Fracking Into Drinking Water Sources, New Research Shows

Energy companies are fracking for oil and gas at far shallower depths than widely believed, sometimes through underground sources of drinking water, according to research released Tuesday by Stanford University scientists.

Though researchers cautioned their study of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, employed at two Wyoming geological formations showed no direct evidence of water-supply contamination, their work is certain to roil the public health debate over the risks of the controversial oil and gas production process.

Fracking involves high-pressure injection of millions of gallons of water mixed with sand and chemicals to crack geological formations and tap previously unreachable oil and gas reserves. Fracking fluids contain a host of chemicals, including known carcinogens and neurotoxins.

Fears about possible water contamination and air pollution have fed resistance in communities around the country, threatening to slow the oil and gas boom made possible by fracking.

Fracking into underground drinking water sources is not prohibited by the 2005 Energy Policy Act, which exempted the practice from key provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act. But the industry has long held that it does not hydraulically fracture into underground sources of drinking water because oil and gas deposits sit far deeper than aquifers.

The study, however, found that energy companies used acid stimulation, a production method, and hydraulic fracturing in the Wind River and Fort Union geological formations that make up the Pavillion gas field and that contain both natural gas and sources of drinking water.

“Thousands of gallons of diesel fuel and millions of gallons of fluids containing numerous inorganic and organic additives were injected directly into these two formations during hundreds of stimulation events,” concluded Dominic DiGiulio and Robert Jackson of Stanford’s School of Earth Sciences in a presentation Tuesday at the American Chemical Society conference in San Francisco.

The scientists cautioned that their research, which is ongoing and has yet to be peer-reviewed, “does not say that drinking water has been contaminated by hydraulic fracturing.”

Rather, they point out that there is no way of knowing the effects of fracking into groundwater resources because regulators have not assessed the scope and impact of the activity.

“The extent and consequences of these activities are poorly documented, hindering assessments of potential resource damage and human exposure,” DiGiulio wrote.

Underground sources of drinking water, or USDWs, are a category of aquifers under the Safe Drinking Water Act that could provide water for human consumption.

“If the water isn’t being used now, it doesn’t mean it can’t be used in the future,” said DiGiulio, a Stanford research associate who recently retired from the Environmental Protection Agency. “That was the intent of identifying underground sources of drinking water: to safeguard them.”

The EPA documented in 2004 that fracking into drinking water sources had occurred when companies extracted natural gas from coal seams. But industry officials have long denied that the current oil and gas boom has resulted in fracking into drinking water sources because the hydrocarbon deposits are located in deeper geological formations.

“Thankfully, the formations where hydraulic fracturing actually is occurring…are isolated from USDWs by multiple layers and often billions of tons of impenetrable rock,” said Steve Everley, a spokesman for Energy in Depth, an industry group.

Industry officials had not seen the Stanford research.

DiGiulio and Jackson plotted the depths of fracked wells, as well as domestic drinking water wells in the Pavillion area. They found that companies used acid stimulation and hydraulic fracturing at depths of the deepest water wells near the Pavillion gas field, at 700 to 750 feet, far shallower than fracking was previously thought to occur in the area.

“It’s true that fracking often occurs miles below the surface,” said Jackson, professor of environment and energy at Stanford. “People don’t realize, though, that it’s sometimes happening less than a thousand feet underground in sources of drinking water.”

Companies say that fracking has never contaminated drinking water. The EPA launched three investigations over the last six years into possible drinking water contamination by oil and gas activity in Dimock, Pa.; Parker County, Texas; and Pavillion, Wyo. After initially finding evidence of contamination at the three sites, the EPA shelved the investigations amid allegations by environmentalists and local residents that the regulator succumbed to political pressure.

Jackson said the Stanford study’s findings underscore the need for better monitoring of fracking at shallower depths. “You can’t test the consequences of an activity if you don’t know how common it is,” he said. “We think that any fracking within a thousand feet of the surface should be more clearly documented and face greater scrutiny.”

The Stanford study focuses on Pavillion, in part because of DiGiulio’s familiarity with the area when he served as an EPA researcher in the latter stages of the Pavillion water study. Industry and the state of Wyoming questioned the EPA’s methodology after its 2011 draft report found the presence of chemicals associated with gas production in residents’ well water. In June 2013, the EPA turned over the study to Wyoming regulators, whose work is being funded by EnCana, the company accused of polluting the water in Pavillion.

The EPA study looked at whether chemicals migrated upward from fracked geological zones into people’s well water. The Stanford research does not explore the possibility of migration, focusing instead on the injection of fracking chemicals directly into geological formations that contain groundwater.

The EPA does not keep track of whether underground sources of drinking water have been hydraulically fractured as part of oil and gas development, said Alisha Johnson, a spokeswoman. “EPA does not maintain a database of all the wells being hydraulically fractured across the country,” she said in an email.

In their presentation, DiGiulio and Jackson noted that the EPA considers the Wind River formation and the Fort Union stratum below it to be underground sources of drinking water. The conventional image of tight geological formations where fracking occurs is that they are monolithic stretches of rock. But the scientists say the geology of the two formations is mostly sandstone of varying permeability and water.

“People think these formations are impermeable, and so they wonder, ‘Why are you worrying about water?’” DiGiulio said. “But it is an extremely heterogeneous environment, with areas of low and high permeability mixed together and with many lenses conducting water.”

Follow @neelaeast for energy and environmental news.

Copyright © 2014, Los Angeles Times

***Note from Anna; Big pharma wastes combined with nuke storage wastes combined with Monsanto wastes equals a full-on disaster to the environment, keeps the citizens trapped in a toxic economy, and will create a public health hazard nightmare by Winter 2015.The U.S. budget is not stable. Obamacare is not stable. Fracking causes immune system disorders.

From By | Jan 31, 2014 at Medical Daily:

…According to a recent study published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, babies born near fracking sites are 30 percent more likely to have birth defects.”

http://www.medicaldaily.com/birth-defects-result-fracking-natural-gas-wells-put-fetus-risk-congenital-heart-neural-tube-problems

http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/wp-content/uploads/122/1/ehp.1306722.pdf

Fracking is absolutely unnecessary. There is an entirely new generation of scientists emerging that can better handle the challenges associated with sustainable energy creation. They are much better suited to effectively managing multicultural global infrastructure issues than their predecessors.

 

 

New Study Says U.S. Underestimated Keystone XL Emissions

By ,  August 13, 2014

By Nick Cunningham for Oilprice.com

A new report says the U.S. government dramatically underestimated the level of greenhouse gas emissions that would result if the controversial proposed Keystone XL pipeline becomes a reality.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SCI_KEYSTONE_PIPELINE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

The study, by the Stockholm Environmental Institute,http://www.sei-us.org/, found that building the pipeline, which would connect Canada’s oil-rich tar sands to refineries in the Gulf of Mexico, would produce greenhouse gas emissions at least four times higher than the U.S. State Department’s official estimate.

The study’s authors said that the U.S. officials did not take into account the fact that, by providing an outlet for Canada’s tar sands to reach international buyers, global oil supplies would increase, resulting in a moderate price decline of about $3 per barrel, according to the study. Basic economic theory dictates that lower prices would lead to greater consumption.

More specifically, the study estimates that global oil consumption increases by 0.6 barrels for every barrel http://www.climatecentral.org/news/keystone-xl-will-spike-oil-demand-and-co2-17884

of oil added to global supply. The study finds that global greenhouse gas emissions would increase by 121 million tons of carbon dioxide a year. The study was published in the journal Nature Climate Change.http://phys.org/news/2014-08-keystone-carbon-pollution-figured.html

There are a couple of interesting things about the findings. First, 121 million tons of carbon dioxide is barely a rounding error, considering that the world emits 36 billion tons of carbon dioxide per year. And the impact pales in comparison to what’s produced by the hundreds of coal plants in the U.S. and world.

Nevertheless, the emissions are not trivial. The 121 million added tons of annual CO2 emissions is like building an additional 31 average-sized coal-fired power plants. (That figure assumes EPA’s estimate of 3.8 million metric tons of CO2 emissions per power plant, per year.)

http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-resources/refs.html

Keystone XL pipeline supporters like to play down the environmental impact of the project, but since the U.S. is implementing new regulations to reduce the climate impact from its existing inventory of coal-fired power plants, choosing to add the equivalent emissions of 31 new coal plants seems a little odd.

U.S. President Barack Obama has said he would approve Keystone only if it “does not significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution.” Given the figures from the latest study, the pressure on him to reject the pipeline is certain to increase.

And it is important to note that it is not at all clear the extent to which the Canadian tar sands will be developed if Keystone XL isn’t built. Some oil will certainly be transported by rail — as the American Petroleum Institute noted in its response to this study — but there is no way that rail will be able to move the equivalent amount of oil that the pipeline would handle, or at least, not without a monumental effort to expand rail capacity.

The Keystone XL would have a capacity to carry 830,000 barrels per day, which is roughly how much oil the entire rail system carried on average in 2013.

The capacity to carry oil by rail would thus need to approximately double from 2013 levels in order to handle the same amount of oil that Keystone XL will carry. While possible, shipping oil by rail adds about $5 to $10 to the cost of moving each barrel of crude oil. That would likely force tar sands producers to cut back on production because the marginal barrel would no longer be profitable. Thus, fewer emissions.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/13/us/rail-transport-of-crude-oil-increases-as-pipeline-falls-short.html?_r=1

Moreover, the industry wouldn’t be fighting so hard for the pipeline if the tar sands were going to be produced and exported anyway. Other pipeline routes could get the tar sands out, but those have also run into trouble. A proposed route to the east coast just recently hit a wall in Maine,

http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Another-Export-Route-for-Oil-Sands-Blocked.html

and a pipeline to Canada’s west coast is also facing some serious hurdles. http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Canadian-Supreme-Court-Ruling-Throws-Major-Pipeline-into-Doubt.html

(For a great depiction of all the major oil pipelines in North America, the organization Frac Tracker has put together an excellent map, which you can see here).

http://maps.fractracker.org/latest/?appid=606e1b991ddf45369a30a8216848f038

There are other reasons to approve the pipeline – it could add to North American energy security, for example, or it could simply be an important source of additional global supply – but with this latest study, it will be much harder for the White House to argue that Keystone XL would have a minimal impact on greenhouse gas emissions.

This article was originally published on Oilprice.com.

http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/New-Study-Says-U.S.-Underestimated-Keystone-XL-Emissions.html

 http://www.nasdaq.com/article/new-study-says-us-underestimated-keystone-xl-emissions-cm379592The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of The NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc.

Overcoming the Hurdles of Big Data in Education

Place your vote/comment here: http://panelpicker.sxsw.com/vote/36416
 
With the rise of digital technology has come the opportunity for educators to enhance students’ learning experiences by personalizing content based on insights revealed from analysis of learning data. While this paradigm offers tremendous benefits, parents are raising serious concerns about the issue of data privacy. In this session, we’ll explore an approach that tries to strike a balance between using data analytics to improve learning outcomes and mitigating the concerns around data privacy. – See more at: http://panelpicker.sxsw.com/vote/36416#sthash.A5QHhydH.dpuf
 

Questions Answered

  1. Discuss the legitimate concerns that parents have about data privacy in education
  2. Illustrate specific ways in which student data, if expanded, might be used to help improve outcomes for those particular students and others
  3. Describe a possible approach to addressing privacy concerns and making some of these learning benefits possible

Speakers

Organizer

Rhean Westerlund Kidaptive

University of Arizona Drops Researcher Studying Medical Marijuana for Veterans

Brittny Mejia, The Republic | azcentral.com 11:49 a.m. MST July 2, 2014

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/arizona/2014/07/02/ua-drops-researcher-studying-medical-marijuana-vets/11956323/

The University of Arizona has abruptly ended its support of a researcher who was leading a controversial and first-of-its kind study on medical marijuana use for veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder.

Dr. Sue Sisley, the principal investigator, had approval from the Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Public Health Service, as well as conditional approval from the UA Institutional Review Board for the study of marijuana’s effect on PTSD. Her goal was to start the study this summer.

Late last week, university officials told her they wouldn’t renew her contract, essentially stopping the study before it started.

She said she believes that action occurred because the study became too controversial, at one point creating backlash in the Legislature.

“What they’ve done is harm the veterans by delaying this very crucial research by possibly a year or more when (veterans) really needed this research to be done,” Sisley said. “We were right on the cusp of being able to implement this research and the UofA just cut it off at the knees and hurt the veteran community in Arizona more than they’ll ever realize.”

The study, which was to include 70 veterans suffering from PTSD, would have been the first and only randomized controlled trial in the country looking at marijuana in treating post-traumatic stress disorder, Sisley said.

Sisley, who works at the UA’s Phoenix medical school, said university officials e-mailed her on Friday saying they would not renew her appointment as assistant director in the Arizona Telemedicine Program and as coordinator of special projects in research administration at the Phoenix medical school, effective Sept. 26.

On Monday afternoon, she said she also received a letter saying that her academic appointment as clinical assistant professor in the Psychiatry Department would end, meaning she can no longer perform her research at the UA.

“It’d be different if it was just one of the three positions,” she said. “But this is an across-the-board termination, so it suggests that this is a direct attack on the fact that I was at the forefront of very controversial research.”

George Humphrey, assistant vice president for public affairs for the Arizona Health Sciences Center, said in an e-mail that the university would not comment on personnel matters.

But he said that the university has policies and procedures that would allow for faculty who are departing the university to continue to pursue their research projects elsewhere.

In May, the UA signed a contract with Sisley and the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies, a non-profit research and educational organization, to enable Sisley to conduct the randomized controlled trial at the university. The non-profit sponsored the study, and committed to providing the funding, which would total nearly $1 million.

Sisley, who has spent five years trying to bring the medical-marijuana study to fruition, said she believes the decision not to renew her contracts resulted from her education and advocacy on the barriers to marijuana research, which include finding a home and funding for the research.

She said she plans to appeal and has reached out to the American Civil Liberties Union and other organizations.

While Sisley said her primary focus is on scientific and academic pursuits, she added that she has become politically active because of the barriers on federally regulated marijuana research.

Earlier this year, when state Sen. Kimberly Yee blocked a hearing of a bill that could have helped fund Sisley’s study, some residents launched a recall effort and the UA logo became affiliated with the effort to recall her, Sisley said.

In April, Sisley said she received a phone call from Joe Garcia, senior vice president for Health Sciences, regarding her political activism.

He instructed her to provide a letter for the UA administration team, wherein she explained she did not participate in the recall effort or link the university to it. She also stated in the e-mail that she never used university resources to participate in activism. Garcia was unavailable for comment.

Sisley said she never received a response to her e-mail.

“They can call it a non-renewal, they can say I wasn’t fired, but when you strip a faculty member of 100 percent of their salary support, it’s pretty clear what they’re doing,” she said. “I think that this is retaliation for trying to provide the public with knowledge about the barriers to marijuana research.”

The university has not received any political pressure to terminate any employees, said Chris Sigurdson, senior associate vice president of university relations. Sigurdson said the university has been supportive of medical-marijuana research and had gone to the Legislature in the past to voice that support.

Some reasons for non-renewal include funding changes and changes within a unit, according to Helena Rodrigues, director of human resources, strategy and planning at the UA.

“Any individual employee should not have an expectation of continued employment past the end of an employment-contract period,” Rodrigues said.

While the FDA approved Sisley’s study three years ago, she was awaiting a permit from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, which she couldn’t receive until the UA gave her a location to house the study. The study would have measured how specific doses could treat PTSD symptoms.

Sisley said if she were forced to take her research to another university, she would have to go through a new review process, which could take another year.

State Rep. Ethan Orr, R-Tucson,who earlier this year introduced the bill in the Legislature that would help fund Sisley’s study, said the research would have been useful in understanding medical marijuana.

“I think if she does not do the study at the UofA, I hope that another university would pick her up and pick this research up because it’s very valuable to us,” Orr said. “I hope that the UofA will continue to look at this type of research as well.”

Ricardo Pereyda, a former UA student and combat veteran with PTSD, said cannabis works better for treating his symptoms than prescription medication.

But Pereyda, 32, said he believes it’s essential to conduct a study like Sisley’s to provide concrete answers to whether marijuana works in treating PTSD.

“Thousands of veterans have committed suicide in the time that this study has been delayed,” Pereyda said. “How many more are going to continue to commit suicide? This could potentially be something that could see a reduction in those numbers.”

 

****Note from Anna: How many more mentally ill people have to die to please big pharmaceutical companies? When are the citizens, whose tax dollars are used to employ and maintain the lifestyles of *all* city,state, end federal politicians, going to have their needs put first? Obama should immediately fully legalize hemp and medical marijuana for nationwide(as well as global) medical and retail purposes. 

It would give millions of citizens the freedom to grow their medicines, improve their health conditions, and become financially stable through farming. It would rebuild America’s economy.