All Activity

I've got not long ago started off some sort of blog site, the internet people produce here possesses served everyone enormously. Appreciate it intended for all of your current time period & do the job. 성인 PC방 총판모집

Any movies is normally outstanding. You've gotten a lot of particularly as good writers and singers. Document prefer you will the best quality about financial success. wengtoto daftar Really unquie place, Thank you so much meant for posting The experience. Fantasticly penned report, anxieties most of folks given similar volume of material as you may, the online market place might be a a lot better put. Be sure to keep it up! koitoto

Terrific put up, attended on top not to mention saved your web sites. I just can’t hang around to study further because of most people. funny panties for women bachelorette

For on-the-go adjustments, I find that accessing https://jysop.com from my smartphone offers the exact same smooth experience as a desktop. The rapid deployment of services remains unaffected, processing my requests within minutes regardless of where I am. This flexibility is vital for managing US-based campaigns remotely.

Bless you designed for presenting modern up-dates concerning the anxiety, As i watch for browse alot more. funny panties for women bachelorette

It's which means that amazing together with inspiring. We really enjoy any designs together with whoever should get it all during the post shall be grinning. funny womens bachelorette underwear

There's no hurry when you book with us. Our High Profile Escort in Delhi is relaxed and unhurried. We take care of timing, location, and all the little details so you can simply show up and enjoy yourself. Our companions are understanding, patient, and know how to make your time together feel effortless and special.

We don't believe in pushing clients into quick decisions. Our Escorts Service in Connaught Place gives you time to think, ask questions, and feel comfortable before booking. We're not here to pressure anyone. We simply introduce you to wonderful companions who are genuinely good at making people feel valued. That's what keeps our clients happy and coming back.

It is truly a well-researched content and excellent wording. I got so engaged in this material that I couldn’t wait reading. I am impressed with your work and skill. Thanks. 성인피시

Very nice article, I enjoyed reading your post, very nice share, I want to twit this to my followers. Thanks!. 성인 피시방 매매

This is such a great resource that you are providing and you give it away for free. I love seeing blog that understand the value of providing a quality resource for free. 성인 피시방 단속

Geometry Dash employs a minimalist yet striking graphic style, featuring vibrant neon colors, glowing effects, and smooth motion. Each level boasts a unique visual theme, ensuring a fresh experience as players embark on the next challenge.

Lawyers for marijuana reform opponents that are participating in a Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) hearing on the Trump administration’s cannabis rescheduling proposal put significant focus on the second day of the proceedings on pressing a government witness about recently adopted changes to an analysis used to determine whether drugs have accepted medical value. A separate government witness who began his testimony on Tuesday focused on cannabis’s role in treating pain patients and its relative safety compared to opioids. Under federal law, drugs that have a currently accepted medical use (CAMU) cannot be classified in Schedule I, the most restrictive category. For years, officials had used a five-part test to determine a substance’s medical utility that involved an analysis of whether its chemistry is known and reproducible, safety studies, research proving efficacy, acceptance by qualified experts and widely available scientific evidence. But in 2023 to evaluate marijuana, they switched to a new two-part analysis that looks at whether there is widespread, current experience with medical use of the substance by licensed health care providers operating in accordance with state laws and, if so, whether there is some credible scientific support for at least one of the medical conditions it is being used for. Opponents of reform say the switch was improper, however. Their attorneys pressed Dominic Chiapperino, who serves as director of the controlled substance staff with the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Center for Drug Evaluation and Research and is one of the DEA’s two witnesses, on the issue during cross-examination on Tuesday. An attorney for the states of Idaho, Indiana and Nebraska, for example, focused on how a prior analysis on marijuana, conducted in 2015 under the older test, concluded that it should not be rescheduled because it did not have a currently accepted medical use. Under questioning, FDA’s Chiapperino testified that the new two-part test did not exist when he and agency colleagues began the most recent analysis of marijuana that led to its rescheduling recommendation and that in July 2023—just two months before they finished their work—officials were informed of the new approach in a letter from the assistant secretary of health. Chiapperino also acknowledged that marijuana would not have passed the prior five-part test. The line of questioning that led to that testimony was objected to by DEA lawyers but they were overruled by the judge overseeing the proceedings. Kevin Sabet, president and CEO of the prohibitionist organization Smart Approaches to Marijuana, said in a video posted to social media that the admission is “truly extraordinary.” “Let’s be clear about what this means,” he said. “It means that the government is asking to move marijuana out of Schedule I, but it did so using a brand new standard instead of a standard that it had applied for years, which has applied for every other drug—and now in open court its own witness has acknowledged that marijuana would not have met the traditional test.” BREAKING NEWS: The government’s own witness admitted, under oath, that marijuana would not have passed the FDA’s longstanding five-part test for “currently accepted medical use.” SAM CEO @KevinSabet discusses the latest major development in the DEA rescheduling hearing… pic.twitter.com/OPhoPVk79x — Smart Approaches to Marijuana (@learnaboutsam) June 30, 2026 In 2024, the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) said the prior five-part test was “impermissibly narrow” and said the two-part review “is sufficient to establish that a drug has CAMU even if the drug has not been approved by FDA and would not satisfy DEA’s five-part test.” DEA has since embraced the new approach to evaluating cannabis for CAMU and it has been used to subsequently evaluate other substances. While the rescheduling proceedings are not being livestreamed to the public in line with requests from Marijuana Moment, a congressman and others, Marijuana Moment spoke to several people who were in the room for the hearing to get a sense of how the testimony is going. Quotes from participants come from sources’ notes and have not been verified, as official transcripts have not yet been made available. On Monday, the first day of the hearing, DEA lawyers highlighted testimony on marijuana’s medical benefits and its relative safety compared to other substances such as alcohol and opioids. Also on Tuesday, government’s second witness, Corey Burchman, a medical doctor from New Hampshire, began his testimony, with a focus on how medical marijuana provides relief to pain patients and can serve as an alternative to opioids. Once medical cannabis became available, he and colleagues would “avidly use that ability to limit opioids,” he said—adding that some patients were able to fully transition off of the prescription painkillers. It was “positive” and “benefitted patients,” he said. “It is extremely helpful in chronic pain patients as a means of analgesia,” Burchman testified. He also spoke about the relatively safety and effects of cannabis and opioids. “Withdrawal from opioids is like a dumpster fire,” he said. “Withdrawal from marijuana is more like dying glowing ember of a campfire.” Ahead of the hearing’s start on Monday, marijuana reform activists held a press conference outside DEA headquarters to highlight how they feel the have been “shut out” of the process—criticizing the fact that no supporters of reform were invited to participate and that the proceedings are not being livestreamed despite officials’ vows of “transparency.” DEA Administrator Terrance Cole invited only organizations and people who oppose marijuana reform to join the hearing as designated participants—telling supporters that they do not meet the definition of an “interested person” to participate because they are not “adversely affected or aggrieved by any rule or proposed rule issuable.” Last week, Marijuana Moment sent requests to DEA Chief Administrative Law Judge Derek Julius and to Cole, the DEA administrator, requesting they reverse a decision to prohibit the public from tuning into the cannabis hearing via livestream. A congressman and other journalists later joined in that request. — Marijuana Moment’s journalism is made possible by readers like you who value this work enough to support us with monthly pledges on Patreon. If you rely on our reporting to stay informed about key cannabis developments, please help us keep doing this by becoming a sustaining subscriber today. Backing us at the $25/month level also gets you access to our Bill Tracker so you won’t miss any important marijuana legislation in your state. — Rescheduling opponents that are participating in the hearing filed statements last week previewing the anti-marijuana arguments they intend to make during the proceedings. The hearing is set to conclude no later than July 15. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche in April issued an order that immediately reclassified state-licensed medical cannabis, as well as marijuana products approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) to Schedule III. Under a separate order the acting attorney general signed, the upcoming hearing will consider more comprehensively moving marijuana to Schedule III. A prior hearing process on the marijuana rescheduling process that was initiated by the Biden administration stalled last year amid litigation over alleged improper communications and witness selection. The current marijuana rescheduling process is being challenged with several lawsuits that have been consolidated by a federal appeals court. Those pieces of litigation against the cannabis reform have been filed by state attorneys general, marijuana legalization opponents and a cannabis-focused biopharmaceutical corporation. Meanwhile, the already-enacted rescheduling of state-licensed medical cannabis is already having broad impacts. The Congressional Research Service published a report on the current cannabis rescheduling move explaining that certified patients who possess medical marijuana from state-licensed dispensaries now have certain protections under Schedule III. “The order appears to authorize end users to possess marijuana for medical use without a CSA-compliant prescription,” it says. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has posted a draft update to a gun purchase form to acknowledge the federally legal status of medical marijuana under rescheduling. The revised section in question notably says that only “use or possession of marijuana for recreational purposes” is federally prohibited, leaving out the prior form’s mention of medical cannabis. The U.S. Department of the Treasury and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) said they plan to issue new tax guidance for the marijuana industry following rescheduling. The reform will benefit state-licensed marijuana businesses by allowing them to take federal tax deductions they’re currently barred from under an IRS code known as 280E that doesn’t apply to Schedule III substances. Even DEA, which has long opposed cannabis legalization and was accused of stalling the rescheduling process initiative by the Biden administration, has launched a registration process for state-legal marijuana businesses to take advantage of federal benefits that come with the reform. The Department of Transportation, on the other hand, issued guidance saying that use of state-legal medical cannabis is still no excuse for a positive drug test by truck drivers, pilots and other safety-sensitive workers. A congressional committee recently voted to block federal officials from taking further steps to carry out cannabis rescheduling, though bipartisan lawmakers told Marijuana Moment they don’t believe that provision will be enacted into law. Photo courtesy of Carlos Gracia. The post Marijuana Opponents Attack Government Analysis Behind Rescheduling Recommendation On Second Day Of DEA Hearing appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

“The medical cannabis regulations do not clearly violate the state or federal Constitutions on their face.” By Zach Wendling, Nebraska Examiner Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers (R) on Tuesday signed off on the constitutionality of regulations from the state Medical Cannabis Commission, a key step toward final approval. Hilgers, who has opposed the creation of the regulatory commission and questioned the legality of its existence, said in a Tuesday letter that his review “does not imply my support for or opposition to the regulations as a policy matter.” “As to constitutionality, I conclude that the medical cannabis regulations do not clearly violate the state or federal Constitutions on their face,” Hilgers said. The regulations now go to Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen (R), who will need to act by July 11 to prevent any lapse for current temporary regulations. The emergency set—the same as the more formal guidelines that Pillen will now review—expires July 15. Should Pillen sign, the more formal set of rules would take effect five days after signing. Laura Strimple, a spokesperson for Pillen, told the Nebraska Examiner: “The governor will be reviewing and taking action on these regulations in the coming days.” Regulations specifics Among requirements in the regulations are: Establishing a “Recommending Health Care Practitioner” directory and requiring patients who want to access Nebraska-licensed dispensaries to go through one of the providers. Capping cultivators at no more than 1,250 flowering plants at one time. Restricting purchases of medical cannabis to no more than 5 ounces of medical cannabis in a 30-day period, of which no more than 5 grams can be delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) from the same dispensary. Delta-9 THC is the part of cannabis most associated with a “high.” Allowing no more than 12 medical cannabis dispensaries statewide, arranged by judicial district. That would mean one dispensary each in Douglas County (584,526 residents), Lancaster County (322,608 residents), Sarpy/Cass Counties (217,202 residents) and Buffalo/Hall Counties (112,979 residents), according to 2020 census data. Prohibiting the sale of smoking or vaping products and edibles of any kind. Oral tablets with a “thin layer” of flavoring to make the products swallowable would now be allowed. Cultivators, product manufacturers, transporters and dispensaries can be licensed. To date, the commission has licensed four cultivators—the maximum number allowed under the regulations—and has opened up applications for manufacturers. Advocates have repeatedly expressed concern that the proposed regulations could hurt the program’s ultimate success. They’ve also worried that Hilgers’s opposition, and the Legislature failing to pass protections for health care providers who wish to recommend medical cannabis, could mean the in-state provider directory for recommendations sits empty. In his letter, Hilgers cautioned that the commission rules are aimed at regulating marijuana for medical use only and are currently in line with federal law. “Any medical cannabis regulations that allow access to marijuana untethered to a plausibly medical purpose without adequate patient protections are ‘medical’ in name only and may slip into a preempted recreational marijuana scheme,” Hilgers said. Feds move to reschedule marijuana The federal government, since April, classifies state-licensed medical cannabis as a Schedule III drug, down from a Schedule I drug that the rest of marijuana has been listed as for decades. Hearings began this week on whether to reschedule all of marijuana to be Schedule III. Schedule I drugs, such as heroin, LSD, ecstasy and peyote, are drugs the federal government has classified with a high likelihood of abuse and no currently accepted medical value. Schedule III drugs are defined as those with moderate to low potential for physical and psychological dependence, such as Tylenol with codeine, ketamine and testosterone. Nebraska, under Hilgers’s leadership, is challenging the government’s reclassification effort. Should the regulations change, Hilgers said that could open them up to legal uncertainty. The commission plans to add fees for future application types. Said Hilgers: “Nothing in this analysis should be interpreted as opining on whether the medical cannabis regulations would be constitutional in a future, fact-bound, as-applied challenge.” Fight continues over 2024 vote In 2024, Nebraska voters overwhelmingly legalized the possession of up to 5 ounces of medical cannabis with a written health care practitioner’s recommendation. Voters also approved the creation of a Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission, giving regulators the exclusive regulatory power over “all phases of the possession, manufacture, distribution, delivery and dispensing of cannabis for medical purposes by registered cannabis establishments.” Hilgers cautioned that the legality of the regulatory law is still under question because of a case before the Nebraska Supreme Court involving what Hilgers says is “unprecedented levels of malfeasance” in the petition process. The campaign defended its work against Hilgers’ office, and a longtime marijuana opponent. And in November 2024, shortly after the election, a Lancaster County District Court judge ruled that the petitions had enough valid signatures to have been presented to voters. Opponents appealed the ruling to the Nebraska Supreme Court, which heard oral arguments December 3. Now 209 days later, the high court has not yet issued an opinion. “If the Nebraska Supreme Court (or a district court on remand) concludes that the Nebraska Medical Cannabis Regulation Act did not receive enough signatures to be placed on the ballot, the Act would no longer be good law, and any medical cannabis regulations promulgated under the Act would lack the requisite statutory authority,” Hilgers said. Jocelyn Brasher of Omaha, a former assistant attorney general and the 2026 Democratic nominee for attorney general, said in a statement that Hilgers “is trying to have it both ways” in getting credit for greenlighting the regulations while fighting the voter-approved laws in court. “Nebraskans deserve an attorney general who they can trust to respect the law, honor election results and serve the people,” Brasher said in a statement. Advocates continue to push back Hilgers’s letter also references a current quirk in federal law for Nebraska: Since 2014, Congress has consistently prevented federal dollars from being used to interfere with state medical cannabis programs. Today, 47 states are protected, but not Nebraska. It is because of that federal rider limited to medical cannabis that Hilgers said the state regulations are not, on their face, violative of federal law. Hilgers said he assumes Nebraska will be added but said he believes that hasn’t happened yet because the program is in its “infancy.” Nebraskans for Medical Marijuana, which sponsored the 2024 ballot measures, said Tuesday that Hilgers “has always and continues to obstruct what 71% of Nebraska voters approved.” “His signing of these rules and regulations today is nothing more than an election year ruse to trick Nebraskans into thinking he supports the will of the voters,” the organization said. “Nebraskans won’t fall for it.” This story was first published by Nebraska Examiner. Photo courtesy of Chris Wallis // Side Pocket Images. The post Nebraska Attorney General Signs Off On Medical Marijuana Rules Despite Personal Opposition appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

“Given the evolving policy environment around us, what does this mean for our state’s cannabis policy framework?” By Claire Fiddian-Green, Richard M. Fairbanks Foundation via Indiana Capital Chronicle Indiana’s cannabis policy has recently become a subject of increasing scrutiny. While our state’s cannabis laws are among the most restrictive in the nation, three of our four neighboring states have legalized adult-use cannabis, and the federal government has indicated interest in relaxing federal cannabis laws. This context means that, even with Indiana’s restrictive policies, cannabis is accessible to most Hoosiers. According to two new reports from RAND, commissioned by the Richard M. Fairbanks Foundation, 44 percent of Indiana residents live within 50 miles of a licensed dispensary in another state, and 96 percent live within 100 miles. Additionally, another key reality requires us to carefully consider Indiana’s current policy framework: intoxicating hemp products, which can contain the same psychoactive compound as marijuana, are widely available at gas stations, convenience stores and grocery stores across the state—with limited oversight. The Hoosier state does not exist in a vacuum: our health and economic outcomes are already influenced by the regulatory and enforcement decisions made by the federal government and neighboring states, and that will only continue. Evaluating the options and costs For Indiana, this raises a critical question. Given the evolving policy environment around us, what does this mean for our state’s cannabis policy framework? As Indiana considers this, we can learn from what other U.S. states—and even other countries—have done well and where they’ve run into pitfalls. Whether current policies remain intact or change, Indiana leaders should seize the chance to carefully study data and assess policy options, as the consequences of any decision will likely be significant. Rather than recommending a particular policy design, the RAND reports describe various approaches to cannabis regulation and the potential tradeoffs of different choices. For example, Indiana could consider maintaining the status quo of prohibition, reducing criminal penalties for possession, legalizing medical cannabis or legalizing a recreational adult-use market. RAND further describes 14 policy considerations that are relevant to establishing legal markets—each of which could influence the state’s public health and economic outcomes in various ways. The fact is, cannabis use in Indiana has more than doubled over the past decade, with growth especially pronounced among adults 26 and over. In total, RAND estimates the 1.3 million Hoosiers who used cannabis in 2024 spent approximately $1.8 billion on marijuana products. At the same time, Indiana recorded over 13,000 cannabis-related arrests in 2024, with over 90 percent for possession and more than 75 percent in connection with non-cannabis charges. The state spends an estimated $10 million to $20 million annually on cannabis law enforcement. While changes to cannabis policy, including legalization, could reduce these costs, they would not eliminate them entirely. After significant start-up costs, the state’s cost to regulate and oversee an adult-use market could be in the low tens of millions of dollars annually, potentially exceeding any cost savings from reduced criminal justice expenditures. Legalizing adult-use recreational cannabis is estimated to generate about $180 million in annual state revenue, roughly 1 percent of the state’s general fund. Notably, this estimate is far lower than some have suggested. For a point of comparison, in 2025, cigarette and alcohol taxes brought in a combined $385 million, according to the Indiana Department of Revenue. As the policy landscape evolves, a range of factors must be considered, including industry trends and pressures of the legal market, the persistence of illegal markets, the rise of intoxicating hemp products, and the potential for national legalization, all of which make conversations about Indiana’s cannabis policy more complex and nuanced. As Indiana considers the optimal framework for cannabis regulation, it is critical our state takes a thoughtful, data-informed approach. The decisions leaders make today will carry ripple effects for Hoosiers—and other states across the U.S. Claire Fiddian-Green is president and CEO of the Richard M. Fairbanks Foundation. This piece was first published by Indiana Capital Chronicle. The post As Surrounding States Legalize Marijuana, Indiana Officials Need A Data-Informed Approach To Reforming Laws (Op-Ed) appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

A powerful congressional committee is allowing a psychedelics-focused amendment to a major military bill to proceed to a floor vote in the House of Representatives—but it is also blocking other cannabis- and drug-related proposals from advancing. The House Rules Committee on Monday considered the amendments to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2027, allowing one that would extend a psychedelics research effort at the Department of Defense (DOD) for an additional six years to move forward. Sponsored by Reps. Morgan Luttrell (R-TX), Jack Bergman (R-MI), Derrick Van Orden (R-WI), Mike Ezell (R-MS), Troy Carter (D-LA) and Morgan McGarvey (D-KY), Lou Correa (DCA), Seth Moulton (D-MA), Sarah Elfreth (D MD) and Michael Rulli(R-OH), the amendment seeks to include language in the bill expanding DOD studies on psychedelics that were first authorized under the earlier 2024 NDAA. That program, signed into law by then-President Joe Biden, directed DOD to establish a process by which active duty service members with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or traumatic brain injury could participate in clinical trials involving psilocybin, MDMA, ibogaine, 5-MeO-DMT and “qualified plant-based alternative therapies.” As enacted, it only required the secretary of defense to issue updated reports on progress within one year of the law passing and then annually for three years after that. The new amendment would replace “three years” in the law with “nine years.” It also specifies that DOD would have to “extend the performance of research conducted using funding awarded under this section to September 30, 2033.” The previously enacted legislation, which was also championed by Luttrell, set aside $10 million to fund the military psychedelic studies. Earlier this month, the House Armed Services Committee approved its version of NDAA and an attached report that calls on military officials to pay greater attention to potential “access pathways” to psychedelic therapies for servicemembers. Citing a psychedelics executive order signed by President Donald Trump in April, the panel urged DOD leaders to “remain informed of lawful research and access pathways relevant to post-traumatic stress disorder and other serious mental health conditions affecting servicemembers during post-deployment and transition periods, and members of the Reserve Components and National Guard who also serve as first responders.” That includes studies on “psilocybin-containing investigational products, including naturally derived whole-mushroom formulations administered in structured therapeutic settings,” the report that the panel approved to be attached to NDAA says. The panel is directing the secretary of defense to issue a report by February 1, 2027 that assesses data on such trials, along with an assessment of “legal and regulatory requirements for expanded access,” including under Trump’s psychedelics executive order as well as a Right to Try law the president signed during his first term in office. The secretary’s report would also need to include a “proposed timeline for potential pilot activities or expanded clinical research beginning in fiscal year 2027, and for any broader implementation thereafter.” Lawmakers also used last year’s NDAA to push DOD for a “progress report” on the ongoing psychedelic therapy clinical trials. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — Another proposed amendment to the current NDAA from Reps. Dave Joyce (R-OH) and Dina Titus (D-NV), would have expanded waivers for military recruits who’ve tested positive for marijuana—but the Rules Committee is not allowing it to advance. The amendment acknowledges that the Army and Navy have already “taken positive steps in their work to design and implement a waiver system that permits potential enlistees into the Armed Forces to reapply for enlistment following a positive toxicology test for tetrahydrocannabinol.” It calls on the Air Force, Space Force and Marine Corps to follow through, especially “given the ongoing recruitment and retention challenges undermining the Armed Forces readiness goals.” A similar measure filed by Joyce and Titus, who are co-chairs of the Congressional Cannabis Caucus, was passed by the House of Representatives last year but was not enacted into law. The current measure would have required those military branches to “develop and implement their own permanent waiver system commensurate with the process employed by the Army and Navy.” It says that the secretary of defense “shall develop a program through which to provide waivers for potential enlistees into the Armed Forces who were not permitted to enlist following a positive toxicology test for tetrahydrocannabinol so that such potential enlistees are permitted to reapply for enlistment.” Further, the Department of Defense would have been required to “assess the feasibility of contacting” prospective enlistees who were previously rejected over cannabis and, “to the extent feasible, develop a plan to contact such potential enlistees.” Within 180 days of enactment, the defense secretary would have needed to submit a report to the congressional committees of jurisdiction with a “plan to create, disseminate, and use a clear definition that highlights that all waivered recruits are qualified and eligible to enlist in the Armed Forces, even if they do not meet every enlistment standard, and that existing standards of enlistment allow for waivers.” In April, the Army enacted a new policy making it so recruits will no longer need to obtain a waiver to enlist if they have a single conviction for possessing marijuana or drug paraphernalia on their records. Another drug policy amendment to NDAA that was blocked, from Reps. Madeleine Dean (D-PA) and Nancy Mace (R-SC), would have allowed doctors to administer Schedule I drugs such as certain psychedelics to patients with life-threatening conditions by expanding on the country’s “right to try” law. The policy creates an exception within the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) that gives qualified patients access to potential therapies that haven’t yet been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The Dean-Mace proposal is similar to a standalone bill the bipartisan duo filed in Congress late last year. The lawmakers noted when filing the earlier bill that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has designated two psychedelics, MDMA and psilocybin, as breakthrough therapies for the treatment of serious mental health conditions. Yet the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) currently has no pathway to authorize physicians to administer the drugs despite the broader right to try policy, they said. To address that, the new legislation would amend current statute to allow DEA to register and authorize doctors to administer the novel therapeutics. In 2024, the House passed a version of NDAA that would have prevented drug testing for marijuana as a condition of enlistment in the military or for commission as an officer. But it was not included in the final version that was signed into law following bicameral negotiations with the Senate. Lawmakers have also previously considered amendments to address restrictive military policies prohibiting service members from using hemp products. Last month, for example, the Army published a post reminding soldiers of its “zero-tolerance” policy for all forms of cannabis and its derivatives—including hair care products and lotions made from hemp. Last year, a memo to Air Force personnel in Massachusetts warned that not only marijuana but also hemp-derived cannabinoids, including CBD and delta-8 THC, are prohibited on military bases and related properties. In 2022, the Air Force expressed concern that even using CBD-infused hand sanitizer or hemp granola could inadvertently compromise “military readiness.” After its initial 2019 announcement, DOD more broadly reaffirmed that CBD is off limits to service members in notices published in 2020. The Navy, for its part, issued an initial notice in 2018 informing ranks that they’re barred from using CBD and hemp products no matter their legality. Then in 2020 it released an update explaining why it enacted the rule change. The Coast Guard said that sailors can’t use marijuana or visit state-legal dispensaries. Separately, a general in 2022 said that the Air Force and Space Force were reviewing marijuana policies and considering a “common sense” change that could give potential recruits a pass if they test positive for cannabis. Image element courtesy of Kristie Gianopulos. The post Congressional Committee Allows Military Psychedelics Amendment To Advance But Blocks Marijuana Testing Proposal For Recruits appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

A new poll of marijuana consumers shows they are overwhelmingly more likely to want to dine at restaurants that offer cannabis-derived THC drinks as an alternative to alcohol. The new survey, conducted by cannabis telehealth platform NuggMD, found that 54 percent of people who use marijuana and live in state-legal markets would be much more likely to visit a local restaurant that offered THC beverages. Another 23 percent said they are somewhat more likely to dine there, while 21 percent said it would have no effect on their decision and 3 percent said they would be less likely to become a patron. “While most cannabis consumers prefer to use regular flower in the comfort of their own home, our polling does reflect a clear openness to social consumption,” Andrew Graham, head of communications for NuggMD, told Marijuana Moment. “For example, a separate poll from last year found most cannabis consumers say they have either high or moderate interest in dispensaries that double as cafes, social clubs, or wellness hubs.” The poll comes shortly after the Texas steakhouse chain Logan’s Roadhouse announced it would begin testing three THC-infused cocktails at 14 of its locations. “Beverage strikes me as the most appropriate ingestion format for social consumption, and that’s probably why both independent restaurants and chains like Logan’s Roadhouse are trying it out,” Graham said. “It’s clearly popular with consumers and the margins are probably on par with liquor.” “The problem is the looming re-criminalization of hemp THC that’s currently set to go into effect in November, which would pull these products off of shelves and menus,” he said, referring to a new law to change the federal definition of legal hemp products. “Allowing that ban to go into effect would be a mistake that harms both businesses and consumers.” Q: “A restaurant chain recently announced it will begin selling non-alcoholic, hemp THC beverages to adults at select locations. If a restaurant near you offered THC beverages, how would it affect your likelihood of visiting?” n: % Much more likely to visit 470 53.8% Somewhat more likely to visit 199 22.8% No effect 182 20.8% Less likely to visit 22 2.5% The NuggMD poll involved interviews with 873 cannabis consumers who live in state-legal markets from June 18-21 and has a margin of error of 3.32 percentage points. The National Restaurant Association, which represents the industry, recently sent a letter urging congressional leaders to delay the federal recriminalization of hemp THC beverages that is scheduled to take effect later this year and replace it with a regulatory framework that “ensures consumer safety while meeting growing market demand” for the products as an alternative to alcohol. Hemp derivatives with less than 0.3 percent delta-9 THC on a dry-weight basis were federally legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill that President Donald Trump signed during his first term in office. But late last year, he signed new legislation containing provisions that will redefine hemp to make it so only products with 0.4 milligrams of total THC per container will remain legal after November 12. As Marijuana Moment reported this month, a Republican congresswoman is circulating draft legislation that would keep hemp THC beverages legal under federal law, creating a carve-out from the broad recriminalization of products derived from the crop that is set to take effect later this year. The Hemp-Derived Beverage Regulatory Clarity Act from Rep. Beth Van Duyne (R-TX), in its current form, would allow adults over 21 to purchase and consume hemp THC drinks with up to 5 milligrams of delta-9 THC per serving. It would also impose a federal tax of 10 cents per milligram of any hemp-derived cannabinoid contained within such beverages. The circulation of the new draft legislation and the restaurant group’s push comes as the White House is making it clear that Trump wants Congress to take action to amend the law that threatens to federally recriminalize hemp-derived products. In a letter to House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) this month, White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russell Vought said the administration wants lawmakers to “ensure the fair treatment of hemp products”—specifically citing legislation that would keep many hemp products legal that are currently set to be recriminalized this year, add labeling requirements and institute new taxes on sales, among other regulatory reforms. The administration “welcomes the opportunity to work with the Congress to, at a minimum, update the statutory definition of final hemp-derived cannabinoid products to allow Americans to benefit from access to appropriate full-spectrum CBD products,” OMB separately said this month, “while preserving the Congress’s intent to restrict the sale of products that pose serious health risks.” The call to avert a broad prohibition on hemp CBD products was included in a statement of administration policy about an annual agriculture spending bill that passed the House of Representatives. Several lawmakers had filed amendments to that legislation to keep hemp products legal, but each was either blocked by the House Rules Committee from advancing to a floor vote or withdrawn by its sponsor. “The Administration supports advancement of this legislation, but looks forward to addressing its concerns prior to enactment,” OMB said in its statement of administration policy. “The Administration looks forward to working with the Congress to provide more input as the bill’s legislative process unfolds.” In April, the president himself urged congressional lawmakers to again redefine hemp to avoid recriminalization of full-spectrum CBD products. “I am calling on Congress to update the Law to ensure that Americans can continue to access the full-spectrum CBD products they have come to rely on, and that help them, while preserving Congress’s intent to restrict the sale of products that pose Health risks,” Trump said in a Truth Social post on the same day his administration announced it is moving forward with rescheduling marijuana. “We must get this done RIGHT and FAST, especially for those who saw that CBD helps them,” he said. “Plus, I am told it will also help our GREAT FARMERS, who we love, and will always be there for.” Industry advocates say that the law as enacted last year not only threatens to prohibit intoxicating and synthetic cannabinoid products but also stands to remove popular full-spectrum CBD products that many Americans use therapeutically from the market. “ONE in FIVE adults used it in the past year, and many say it improved their chronic pain enormously,” the president said in his social media post, adding that hemp-derived CBD “has made a HUGE difference for so many people.” He also referenced a new initiative the administration launched in April to cover up to $500 worth of hemp-derived products each year for eligible Medicare patients. The program being implemented by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) focuses largely on CBD but also allows products to have up to 3 milligrams of total THC per serving. “In December, I signed a very important Executive Order calling for Research and Innovation for Hemp-derived CBD,” Trump said. “Our wonderful Dr. Mehmet Oz moved fast to follow the directive in the Executive Order, and launched a model for some Seniors earlier this month. But more must be done!” “Please get it done, and SOON,” the president said in reference to a congressional fix for the broad recriminalization set to take effect in November. “Thank you for your attention to this matter!” It’s not clear how far Trump wants to scale back the scope of the scheduled federal restrictions on hemp products and what kinds of revised THC rules and limitations he would prefer to sign into law. Separately, White House officials recently provided a congressman’s office with feedback on hemp regulatory legislation. In April, Vince Haley, director of the White House Domestic Policy Council and James Braid, assistant to the president for legislative affairs, sent hemp policy suggestions to Rep. Andy Barr (R-KY). “We appreciate your work to advance the policy of” an executive order Trump signed in December that included provisions seeking to protect Americans’ access to CBD products, the staffers wrote in a letter to the congressman. “We are transmitting for your consideration draft legislative text and comments to address the statutory definition of final hemp-derived cannabinoid products in order to allow Americans to benefit from access to appropriate full-spectrum CBD products while preserving the Congress’s intent to restrict the sale of products that pose serious health risks,” the White House officials said, according to a social media post containing a screenshot of the letter. “We are available for discussion and further technical assistance.” A U.S. Department of Agriculture report published in April shows that farmers in the U.S. grew three-quarters of a billion dollars worth of hemp crops in 2025—a 64 percent increase from the prior year. A previous NuggMD poll found that cannabis consumers are more likely to shop at Target following the major retailer’s decision to start selling hemp-derived THC drinks, In partnership with Marijuana Moment, meanwhile NuggMD has also been conducting quarterly presidential approval tracking polls that record cannabis consumer sentiment about the Trump administration’s actions on the issue. The latest iteration published last month found that Trump has seen a massive swing in support for his administration’s marijuana policy actions from consumers since moving to federally reschedule medical cannabis—with nearly three out of four now having a favorable view The post Cannabis Consumers Are Way More Likely To Dine At Restaurants That Offer THC Drinks As An Alcohol Alternative, Poll Shows appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

May possibly fairly recently up and running an important web log, the data one offer you on this web site contains given a hand to all of us substantially. Bless you designed for your current precious time & get the job done. 성인 PC방 처벌

Excellent article. Very interesting to read. I really love to read such a nice article. Thanks! keep rocking. toto macau If more people that write articles involved themselves with writing great content like you, more readers would be interested in their writings. I have learned too many things from your article. judi bola

Every Pennsylvania Democratic senator is joining together in support of a procedural move that aims to increase pressure on Republicans to allow a vote on legalizing marijuana in the state. Led by Sen. Sharif Street (D), the lawmakers filed what is known as a discharge resolution that seeks to bring a bipartisan cannabis legalization bill out of committee, where it is stuck, and onto the floor for a vote. The bill in question is sponsored by Street along with Sen. Dan Laughlin (R), who chairs the Senate Law & Justice Committee but hasn’t called the legislation up for consideration in the panel. The GOP chairman has instead focused on moving a separate bill to create a new Cannabis Control Board to regulate medical marijuana and hemp. That measure failed on the Senate floor earlier this month amid partisan fighting about the best way forward for cannabis in the state. “The people of Pennsylvania deserve a vote on adult-use cannabis,” Street said when introducing the discharge resolution on Monday. “Not next year, not after another study, not after another election. They deserve a vote now.” All 23 members of the Senate Democratic caucus are signed onto the resolution, he noted, though he pointed out that cannabis legalization itself “is no longer a Democratic issue or Republican issue, it is a Pennsylvania issue.” “Cannabis reform has bipartisan support and deserves a bipartisan vote,” he said. “Every one of our neighboring states has moved ahead. Pennsylvanians are crossing state lines every day to purchase legal cannabis in those states, and unfortunately, having to transport it illegally, supporting businesses and generating tax revenue in other places. Our residents spend the money, our neighboring states collect the revenue… Legalization would generate recurring revenue that could help us invest in our public schools, strengthen mass transit, support public community development, improve public safety and reduce structural deficits that challenge the commonwealth year after year. This is not a one-time windfall. It is an ongoing source of revenue that can help us meet our ongoing obligations.” “We believe this issue has been debated long enough,” Street said. “It is time for the Senate to do its job and allow the people’s elected representatives to vote.” Watch Street’s comments, starting around 39:08 into the video below: Discharge resolutions are placed on the Senate calendar but are not automatically brought up for consideration; that is within the discretion of majority leadership. If a resolution is brought up and supported by a majority vote, however, the legislation in question would then be brought out of committee. Republicans currently hold a 27-23 majority in the chamber. “I understand that this discharge resolution does not compel the committee to report the bill,” Street said on Monday. “I understand that it may not force a vote, but it does force a conversation.” “It asks a simple question: if a bipartisan bill has the support of every member of the Senate Democratic caucus, was introduced with a Republican prime sponsor, has the support of the governor, has the support of a majority of Pennsylvanians, and now has demonstrated bipartisan momentum in this chamber, why shouldn’t it at least receive an up or down vote?” “The Senate should not fear debate, we should not fear democracy and we should certainly not fear allowing our colleagues to vote on an issue that has been before this body for a decade,” he said. “The time has come.” The marijuana legalization bill that Street wants to advance, SB 120, would allow adults aged 21 and older to possess up to 30 grams of cannabis flower, 1,000 milligrams of THC in edible products and 5 grams of concentrate. It would also create a process to expunge prior marijuana-related criminal records. If enacted, there would be an 8 percent excise tax on cannabis sales, alongside the state’s regular sales tax of 6 percent. The legislative maneuvering around the bill comes as new poll shows that Pennsylvania voters overwhelmingly support marijuana legalization—and that the largest share put the blame on Republican lawmakers for the fact that the state has not yet enacted the reform. The survey, conducted by Public Policy Polling this month, found that three out of four voters favor legalizing recreational cannabis. When asked whether “adults over 21 should have places to purchase non-medical cannabis products that are legal, and strictly regulated,” 55 percent said they strongly agree and 20 percent somewhat agree. Only 16 percent strongly disagree and 7 percent somewhat disagree, with another 3 percent saying they are unsure. The poll also found that 40 respondents blamed GOP lawmakers for the lack of progress on cannabis, 12 percent blamed Democrats and 9 percent said the governor was to blame. Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) has repeatedly called on lawmakers to send him a marijuana legalization bill and for the last several years has included the reform in his budget requests to the legislature. Republican gubernatorial nominee Stacy Garrity, who is running against Shapiro, recently pledged to veto a marijuana legalization bill if lawmakers ever sent one to her desk—though she added that she doesn’t think the reform stands a chance of making it that far in the state. “I don’t support legalizing recreational marijuana,” she said. “Recreational marijuana will not end up in the budget. They’re never going to pass it…not as long as Senate Republicans are in control of the Senate.” Her running mate for lieutenant governor, Jason Richey, claimed that legalizing marijuana would be “catastrophic” for the state, arguing it would increase the size of the illegal market, undermine job creation and harm public health. In April, the Democrstic-controlled Pennsylvania House of Representatives passed budget legislation proposed by Shapiro that relies on revenue that would be generated from recreational marijuana sales, which has yet to be legalized in the state. The governor earlier this year, as he has in past years, included cannabis legalization and the resulting expected revenue in his budget request. The House last year passed a bill to legalize marijuana and put sales in state-owned dispensaries, but the Republican Senate majority has criticized that plan while also not advancing a cannabis legalization model of its own. The state’s Independent Fiscal Office (IFO) reported in February that legalizing cannabis in Pennsylvania would generate nearly half a billion dollars in annual revenue by 2028, an estimate that is a significantly larger cash windfall compared to projections from Shapiro’s own office. A spokesperson in the governor’s office said the Trump administration’s federal marijuana rescheduling move is an “important step” that “adds support” to his push to legalize cannabis. A GOP senator also said that federal reform will make it easier to legalize marijuana in the state. — Marijuana Moment is tracking hundreds of cannabis, psychedelics and drug policy bills in state legislatures and Congress this year. Patreon supporters pledging at least $25/month get access to our interactive maps, charts and hearing calendar so they don’t miss any developments. Learn more about our marijuana bill tracker and become a supporter on Patreon to get access. — Meanwhile, Laughlin is blaming the governor for the defeat this month of his bill to create a new Cannabis Control Board (CCB) to oversee the state’s medical marijuana program and intoxicating hemp products and that could also one day oversee recreational cannabis if it is legalized. Most GOP senators in the Republican-controlled chamber voted for the legislation from Laughlin, and all but two Democrats opposed it—with even some lawmakers who signed onto the measure as cosponsors ultimately voting against it. The governor “obviously weighed in on the Democratic side of the aisle and asked for a ‘no’ vote over there, successfully,” Laughlin said after the vote. “I knew it was a risk putting it up for a vote, because there were some discussions going back and forth… I had a little bit of a heads-up, but we chose to roll forward.” The governor’s office confirmed in a statement that he opposes the bill as drafted. “The Shapiro Administration remains supportive of comprehensive cannabis regulation, which would enable a competitive, revenue-generating adult-use market, protect patient access to the current Medical Marijuana Program and rein in hemp-based intoxicant products that are currently unregulated,” Rosie Lapowsky, a spokesperson for the governor, said. “Senate Bill 49 does not substantively advance those goals.” The now-defeated measure would transfer regulatory authority for the state’s existing medical cannabis program from the Department of Health to a new seven-member CCB. The body would oversee cannabis permits, enforcement, seed-to-sale tracking, advertising, labeling, testing and other aspects of the legal industry. Moments after the bill’s defeat on the Senate floor, the chamber adopted a motion to reconsider—but it’s not yet clear when or if the legislation will get another vote. Laughlin’s legislation would also significantly restrict most hemp THC products, aligning the state with a new federal policy that is set to take effect later this year recriminalizing preparations with total THC content of more than 0.3 percent on a dry-weight basis or more than 0.4 milligrams of THC per container. The action on the cannabis regulatory bill, SB 49, came shortly after the House of Representatives passed a bill to allow terminally ill patients to use medical cannabis in hospitals and other healthcare facilities. Photo courtesy of Mike Latimer. The post Pennsylvania Democratic Senators Put Pressure On GOP To Allow A Vote On Legalizing Marijuana appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

I actually came out on your site when concentrating on just simply marginally submits. Awesome technique for upcoming, I'll be book-marking right away stop a person's entire rises. 성인 PC방 허가

People with chronic lower back pain who don’t respond to traditional therapies such as opioids experience “large, sustained, and statistically robust improvements” when they switch to inhaled cannabis, according to a new study. Researchers at Rabin Medical Center in Israel looked at longitudinal data from 241 patients with treatment-resistant lower back pain from 2020 to 2025. Not only did cannabis “markedly and durably” improve pain symptoms, but that was accompanied by “near-total displacement of opioids, NSAIDs, antidepressants and gabapentinoids,” the study, published in the journal Biomedicines, said. The authors said they chose to research the efficacy of inhaled or vaporized marijuana “because of its rapid onset, on-demand titratability, and patient preference.” The THC content in the cannabis used in the study ranged from 4-22 percent, while CBD concentration ranged from 2-22 percent. “Inhaled cannabis was associated with large, sustained, and statistically robust improvements in pain, disability, and pain interference, accompanied by near-total displacement of opioids, NSAIDs, antidepressants, and gabapentinoids.” “The within-patient benefit-risk profile…supports consideration of cannabis as a potentially clinically meaningful, opioid-sparing option in patients who have failed multimodal conventional therapy, pending confirmation in randomized comparative trials,” the study concluded. Researchers stressed that, while promising, the study should be followed up with “randomized comparative trials of inhaled cannabis versus continued multimodal therapy” to ensure that “causal claims can be made.” “In their absence, and pending such confirmation, these data support consideration of inhaled cannabis as a potentially clinically meaningful, opioid-sparing option for patients who have failed conventional multimodal therapy,” they said. “Concomitant opioid use fell from 100% at baseline to 4.6% at Year 5 (within-patient absolute risk reduction 95.4%).” This is far from the only study supporting the efficacy of marijuana in the treatment of pain—nor is it the first to suggest cannabis can serve as a substitute for conventional therapies such as opioids. In April, for example, a study found that using medical marijuana appears to help people reduce the use of other medications, including opioids, sleeping aids and antidepressants. They also experience far fewer negative side effects after switching to cannabis from prescription drugs, the study involving more than 3,500 patients determined. About one in three Americans who use CBD say they take it as an alternative or supplement to at least one medication—particularly painkillers—according to a federally funded study published in February. Similarly, another recent federally funded study, published by the American Medical Association (AMA), added more evidence that marijuana can serve as an effective substitute for opioids in chronic pain treatment. Other AMA-published research has found that legalizing marijuana for medical or recreational purposes is “significantly associated with reduced opioid use among patients diagnosed with cancer.” A separate paper published last year similarly found that medical marijuana legalization is “associated with significant reductions in opioid prescribing.” In August, meanwhile, Australian researchers published a study showing that marijuana can serve as an effective substitute for opioids in pain management treatment. Another study published last year in the journal Drug and Alcohol Review found that, among drug users who experience chronic pain, daily cannabis use was linked to a higher likelihood of quitting the use of opioids—especially among men. Other research also found that legalizing medical cannabis appeared to significantly reduce monetary payments from opioid manufacturers to doctors who specialize in pain, with authors finding “evidence that this decrease is due to medical marijuana becoming available as a substitute” for prescription painkillers. Further research also showed a decline in fatal opioid overdoses in jurisdictions where marijuana was legalized for adults. That study found a “consistent negative relationship” between legalization and fatal overdoses, with more significant effects in states that legalized cannabis earlier in the opioid crisis. Authors estimated that recreational marijuana legalization “is associated with a decrease of approximately 3.5 deaths per 100,000 individuals.” “Our findings suggest that broadening recreational marijuana access could help address the opioid epidemic,” that report said. “Previous research largely indicates that marijuana (primarily for medical use) can reduce opioid prescriptions, and we find it may also successfully reduce overdose deaths.” Another recently published report into prescription opioid use in Utah following the state’s legalization of medical marijuana found that the availability of legal cannabis both reduced opioid use by patients with chronic pain and helped drive down prescription overdose deaths statewide. Overall, results of the study indicated that “cannabis has a substantial role to play in pain management and the reduction of opioid use,” it said. The post Marijuana Leads To ‘Robust Improvements’ In Lower Back Pain And ‘Near-Total’ Cessation Of Opioids, Study Finds appeared first on Marijuana Moment. View the live link on MarijuanaMoment.net

i never know the use of adobe shadow until i saw this post. thank you for this! this is very helpful. toto macau I’ve been surfing online more than 5 hours today, yet I never found any interesting article like yours without a doubt. It’s pretty worth enough for me. Thanks... toto slot

An individual's song is certainly impressive. You will have certain rather qualified musicians and artists. That i like everyone one of the best for results. 성피연합

Basically When i understand the item this morning although I did many thought processes concerning this and today I need to to learn to read the item all over again mainly because it is quite well written. 성인 PC방 벌금