Get a Clue - Weed

Details: Published: 11 September 2025; Hits: 512

The spectacular collapse of the cannabis industry serves as a stark vindication for prevention advocates who warned against the normalisation of marijuana use. What proponents once promised would be a responsible, regulated market has devolved into a cautionary tale of corporate greed, public health risks, and broken societal promises.

The Cannabis Market Collapse Unfolds

potjar The cannabis market collapse has been more dramatic than even the most pessimistic prevention experts predicted. Four major cannabis corporations – Curaleaf, Green Thumb Industries, Tilray Brands, and Trulieve Cannabis – have seen their combined valuation plummet from $37 billion in February 2021 to just $4 billion today, representing a devastating 89% decline.

This cannabis industry downturn exposes the hollow promises made by marijuana advocates who claimed legalisation would create a mature, responsible industry. Instead, the sector has become characterised by oversupply, price wars, and mounting concerns about youth accessibility and addiction.

Oversupply Creates Dangerous Market Dynamics

The rapid proliferation of cannabis outlets has created precisely the scenario prevention organisations warned against. New York’s explosion from zero to 300 registered dispensaries since 2021 demonstrates how quickly marijuana availability can spiral beyond reasonable control.

This oversaturation has driven prices down by 32% across the United States, making cannabis increasingly accessible to vulnerable populations, including young people. The cannabis market collapse has ironically made the drug more affordable and widespread than prohibition advocates feared.

Youth Protection Failures Mount

Thailand’s recent decision to reverse cannabis legalisation highlights growing international concern about youth addiction – a primary concern raised by prevention advocates from the beginning. The country’s policy reversal came specifically in response to rising addiction rates amongst younger users, validating longstanding warnings about marijuana’s gateway potential.

This cannabis industry downturn coincides with mounting evidence of cannabis-related harms that industry proponents systematically downplayed during the legalisation push. Prevention experts who warned about normalisation effects are finding their concerns increasingly validated by real-world evidence.

Political Reality Contradicts Industry Promises

The stalling of cannabis expansion across the United States reflects growing political recognition of the policy’s failures. Not a single state has legalised recreational marijuana in 2024 or 2025, suggesting lawmakers are heeding prevention advocates’ warnings about societal costs.

President Trump’s administration appears unlikely to pursue federal cannabis reform, whilst the Drug Enforcement Administration has stalled its review of marijuana’s scheduling. This political hesitation suggests growing awareness that legalisation promises have not materialised as advertised.

International Backtracking Validates Prevention Stance

The global retreat from cannabis liberalisation vindicates prevention organisations’ warnings about premature policy adoption. Right-leaning governments worldwide are blocking new recreational markets, recognising the social costs that industry advocates failed to acknowledge.

Thailand’s cannabis ban reversal represents a broader international trend of policy reconsideration. Countries that initially embraced liberalisation are confronting the reality that cannabis normalisation creates more problems than proponents admitted.

Financial Collapse Exposes Industry Deception

The cannabis market collapse has revealed the industry’s fundamental dishonesty about its business model. Major companies are posting collective losses with forward revenue multiples barely above 1, proving that sustainable cannabis commerce was always questionable.

Corporate debt burdens and failed expansion plans demonstrate that the industry’s growth projections were fantasy rather than sound business analysis. Prevention advocates who questioned these unrealistic promises have been vindicated by market reality.

German Market Highlights Continued Risks

Industry attempts to pin hopes on Germany’s limited decriminalisation reveal the sector’s desperation following its cannabis industry downturn. However, Germany’s cautious approach – allowing only personal use whilst restricting commercial cultivation – suggests even progressive governments recognise the dangers of full liberalisation.

The German market’s tiny $37 million value underscores how limited genuine demand actually is when separated from speculative investment hype. This reality contradicts industry claims about massive unmet consumer demand that justified policy changes.

Public Health Evidence Accumulates

The cannabis market collapse coincides with growing research documenting marijuana’s health risks, particularly regarding mental health impacts and dependency potential. Studies continue revealing long-term consequences that industry advocates consistently minimised during legalisation campaigns.

Prevention organisations’ warnings about cannabis-related mental health risks are gaining scientific support, whilst industry claims about marijuana’s safety profile face increasing scrutiny. The timing of the market collapse alongside emerging health evidence suggests correlation between policy failures and public health concerns.

Prevention Community Gains Credibility

Drug prevention advocates who opposed cannabis legalisation based on public health concerns now find their positions strengthened by market evidence. The cannabis industry downturn provides tangible proof that marijuana normalisation creates societal costs without delivering promised benefits.

Community-based prevention programmes can point to the industry’s financial failures as evidence that cannabis legalisation was driven more by corporate profit motives than genuine social reform. This market collapse strengthens arguments for evidence-based drug policy focused on prevention rather than commercialisation.

Lessons for Future Policy Debates

The cannabis market collapse offers crucial insights for future substance policy debates. Prevention advocates can demonstrate how industry promises about responsible regulation and economic benefits proved fundamentally false when subjected to market reality.

The spectacular failure of cannabis commercialisation validates prevention-focused approaches that prioritise community health over corporate profits. Policymakers considering other substance liberalisation policies should examine how cannabis industry promises failed to materialise.

Strengthening Prevention Messaging

The cannabis industry downturn provides prevention organisations with powerful evidence about the dangers of drug normalisation. The sector’s collapse demonstrates that substance commercialisation creates market dynamics incompatible with public health priorities.

Prevention educators can use the cannabis market collapse to illustrate how corporate interests in substance markets inevitably conflict with community wellbeing. The industry’s financial failures prove that sustainable drug commerce requires exploitation of vulnerable populations.

The spectacular cannabis market collapse serves as a vindication of prevention advocates’ longstanding warnings about marijuana commercialisation. As the industry’s promises crumble alongside its valuations, the wisdom of prevention-focused drug policy becomes increasingly apparent. (Source: Reuters)

Details: Published: 10 September 2025; Hits: 420

cartoon Australia's medicines regulator has not investigated the safety of most medicinal cannabis products despite receiving hundreds of "adverse event" reports ranging from coughing to psychosis in the past three years.

The ABC can reveal there were 615 reports made to the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) involving unregistered medicinal cannabis products between July 1, 2022 and June 1, 2025.

A TGA spokesperson said it had the power to investigate unapproved cannabis medications when "safety signals" — red flags for possible safety concerns —were identified.

"To date, no such signals for specific unapproved medicinal cannabis products have been identified and no investigations have occurred," the spokesperson said.

There are more than 1,000 different medicinal cannabis products currently available in Australia.

Apart from two products — which are listed on the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods — the TGA has not approved or assessed any for quality, safety or efficacy.

While health professionals are required to report adverse events for unregistered products, the TGA generally keeps these reports on an internal database used for "general safety monitoring".

The TGA said when clinicians prescribed an unapproved medicine, they assumed responsibility for the "efficacy and safety of that good".

Psychiatrists say companies prioritising profit over safety

Chair of the Queensland branch of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (RANZCP) Brett Emmerson believed the 615 adverse events reported between July 2022 and June 2023 were the tip of the iceberg.

Last year, Professor Emmerson told the ABC his colleagues had seen a significant increase in people hospitalised with psychosis after being prescribed medicinal cannabis.

"The industry continues to market medicinal cannabis for a wide variety of conditions for which there is no evidence that it works," he said.

"They market it because people take it and that's their business.

"The medicinal cannabis companies are just like the tobacco companies — they want people to use their product, that's how they make their money and their profit."

Professor Emmerson is calling for greater regulatory oversight of medicinal cannabis.

He said companies should be required to prove specific products were safe and effective treatment for conditions before the medication could be prescribed.

"This is not a drug that can be just regarded as a natural product," he said.

"It's a drug of dependence with serious side effects and it's having a tragic impact on a large number of people in this country."

(For complete story ABC News 10th September 2025^thABC News 10th September 2025)

Details: Published: 10 September 2025; Hits: 482

Groundbreaking research from the Sorbonne has uncovered disturbing evidence linking youth marijuana suicide rates to regular cannabis consumption amongst teenagers. Furthermore, the study reveals that adolescent cannabis suicidal behaviours increase dramatically with marijuana use, even after accounting for existing mental health conditions.

Shocking Statistics Emerge: The French researchers discovered that young people who use marijuana face 46% higher odds of experiencing suicidal thoughts. Moreover, the cannabis-suicide connection becomes even more alarming when examining suicide attempts, with users showing 85% higher odds compared to non-users.

Significantly, the research methodology controlled for pre-existing depression, demonstrating that cannabis independently damages adolescent mental health. Consequently, these findings add to mounting evidence that adolescent cannabis suicidal ideation stems directly from marijuana consumption rather than underlying psychological conditions.

Prevention Becomes Critical: The Sorbonne study reinforces concerns about prevention strategies for at-risk teenagers. Additionally, previous research has established connections between cannabis use and severe mental health disorders, including schizophrenia. Therefore, experts emphasise that early intervention programmes targeting teenage substance use could prove vital in reducing tragic outcomes.

These alarming statistics suggest that addressing adolescent cannabis suicidal behaviours requires immediate action from parents, educators, and policymakers. Indeed, when youth marijuana suicide risks reach such concerning levels, prevention becomes a matter of life and death for vulnerable young people across communities nationwide. (Source: WRD News)

Details: Published: 10 September 2025; Hits: 543

holdpotleaf Growing evidence suggests that cannabis immunotherapy risks may significantly compromise cancer treatment outcomes, according to a comprehensive new review by Australian medical cannabis advocate Dr Ben Jansen. Furthermore, his research poses a critical question that could reshape patient care protocols: “Are cannabinoids with cancer immunotherapy contributing to early death?”

Subsequently, Dr Jansen’s newly published study examines three key clinical trials that reveal troubling patterns in treatment effectiveness. Meanwhile, the findings challenge the widespread assumption that medical cannabis provides only benefits for cancer patients.

Personal Tragedy Drives Scientific Investigation

However, Dr Jansen’s investigation into medical marijuana treatment dangers stems from deeply personal circumstances surrounding his mother’s death from dementia. Moreover, he explained to Newsweek that discovering medicinal cannabis might have offered her relief motivated his advocacy work in the field.

“Over time, we’ve come to recognise the immunomodulatory properties of cannabinoids, which raised caution in my mind about their interaction with immune-based treatments,” Dr Jansen stated. Consequently, his concerns intensified when both the public and clinicians appeared unaware of potential cannabis immunotherapy risks.

Additionally, the issue “crystallised” during a public lecture when a patient questioned why her immunotherapy wasn’t working, only to reveal she had been taking high doses of medicinal cannabis.

Alarming Treatment Response Rates

Nevertheless, the first study Dr Jansen analysed compared patients receiving nivolumab immunotherapy alone with those combining the treatment with cannabis. In particular, the research examined 89 patients on nivolumab alone versus 51 patients using both treatments for advanced cancers including lung cancer, renal cell carcinoma, and melanoma.

The results revealed stark differences in treatment effectiveness, with cannabis users showing significantly lower response rates (15.9% versus 37.5%). Thus, patients using cannabis were approximately three times more likely to experience poor responses to immunotherapy, highlighting serious medical marijuana treatment dangers.

Importantly, whilst cannabis use didn’t significantly impact overall survival rates, the reduced treatment efficacy raises substantial concerns about therapeutic outcomes.

Shortened Survival Times Documented

Similarly, the second study examined 34 patients prescribed both immunotherapy and cannabis compared with 68 patients receiving cancer treatment alone. Furthermore, the findings revealed that tumours progressed much faster in cannabis users, typically within three-and-a-half months compared to over a year for patients on immunotherapy alone.

Moreover, the median overall survival time for cannabis users was dramatically shorter at 6.4 months compared to 28.5 months for non-users. Therefore, these statistics underscore the potential severity of cannabis immunotherapy risks for patient outcomes.

Comprehensive Analysis Confirms Concerns

Meanwhile, the third study investigated 105 patients with solid organ tumours receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors, with cannabis use primarily through prescribed dronabinol. Additionally, this research confirmed previous findings about medical marijuana treatment dangers.

Cannabis use was associated with significantly worse outcomes across multiple measures: shorter median overall survival (6.7 versus 17.3 months), reduced progression-free survival (4.8 versus 9.7 months), and markedly lower disease control rates (10.7% versus 37.7%).

Notably, these negative outcomes were most evident in white patients, suggesting potential ethnic variations in cannabinoid metabolism or immune response.

Complex Therapeutic Interactions

However, Dr Jansen acknowledges the inherent complexity of cannabis as a therapeutic agent when considering cannabis immunotherapy risks. Indeed, previous research has demonstrated that cannabis can suppress immune system function through active compounds including CBD, THC, and other cannabinoids.

Conversely, laboratory and living organism studies have suggested that cannabinoids can kill cancer cells and prevent spreading. Therefore, this paradox creates significant challenges for healthcare providers weighing treatment options whilst considering medical marijuana treatment dangers.

Clinical Recommendations and Future Research

Consequently, Dr Jansen emphasises the critical importance of informed patient consent regarding potential interactions. In addition, he advocates for more thorough research controlling variables such as cancer type, cannabis dosage, socio-economic status, and lifestyle factors.

When asked whether he would prescribe medical cannabis during immunotherapy, Dr Jansen responded definitively: “Absolutely” not, citing current evidence suggesting possible negative interactions.

Finally, until large, well-controlled trials provide clarity about cannabis immunotherapy risks, medical practitioners must carefully balance symptom management benefits against potential treatment compromise, ensuring patient safety remains the primary consideration.

Source: Newsweek

Details: Published: 05 September 2025; Hits: 440

A damning counter-policy response has exposed Australian cannabis legalisation proposals as a dangerous deception that would unleash devastating public health consequences. The comprehensive analysis of the Penington Cannabis Control Plan reveals how “health-first” rhetoric masks commercialisation that prioritises addiction-for-profit economics over genuine community wellbeing.

cancontrol1025 The document warns that cannabis control Australia advocates ignore overwhelming evidence from jurisdictions where legalisation has failed spectacularly. “Once a substance is trivialised, normalised, decriminalised, legalised then commercialised – harms will increase and the human cost in short and long-term harms, not least to the emerging generation will be incalculable,” the analysis states.

Devastating Health Evidence Ignored by Legalisation Advocates

Between 2019 and 2024, dozens of peer-reviewed medical journal population studies completed on massive populations, including 330 million US citizens from 50 states and significant populations from 14 European countries, confirm what has been known for decades: cannabis is mutagenic, carcinogenic and teratogenic.

The public health impacts revealed by these studies are substantial. Cannabis is shown to be causal in:

33 cancers compared to 16 for tobacco, where Cannabidiol (CBD) is the most carcinogenic cannabinoid at 12 cancers
Cancers which make up 70% of paediatric cancer cases
90 birth defects out of 95 tracked in the European Union including hole in the heart, cleft lip/palate and limb deformities
Autism, where CBD is once again heavily implicated
Premature ageing of users by 30% at 30 years

“The studies show that cannabis provides a greater burden, in terms of cancers caused in a population, than either tobacco or alcohol,” the document states. Yet Australian cannabis legalisation proponents remain “culpably silent on the very real demonstrable costs that far outweigh its touted benefits.”

International Experience Proves Control Impossible

The analysis systematically demolishes claims that cannabis control Australia schemes can prevent harm. Evidence from legalised jurisdictions tells a different story entirely:

Cannabis Use Disorder is rising, with over 40% of schizophrenia cases in Canadian youth now linked to cannabis use. Emergency department visits among young people have surged post-legalisation in both Canada and parts of the US.

Criminal markets persist: In California, the black market remains larger than the legal one. In Oregon, cannabis-related organised crime and illegal grows have increased since Measure 110. In Colorado, youth access through diverted legal supply remains a top concern of police departments.

Regulation systematically fails: Age restrictions are routinely bypassed through social sourcing, straw purchasers, and online sales. In Colorado, over 40% of youth report accessing cannabis through someone else’s legal purchase. Potency limits are either unenforced or raised over time, under pressure from commercial operators seeking higher profits.

The document warns: “The idea that cannabis can be safely controlled through retail licensing ignores the reality of regulatory capture. As with tobacco and alcohol, once an addictive industry is legalised, it does not stay in its lane.”

Economic Claims Exposed as Fraudulent

Australian cannabis legalisation advocates suggest the policy will generate tax revenue, create jobs, and reduce enforcement costs. The document exposes these claims as “economically optimistic, but empirically empty.”

The data shows:

In California, legal operators are going bankrupt due to price collapse and black market competition
In Canada, tax revenues from cannabis make up less than 0.4% of total federal revenue, while mental health and healthcare costs continue to rise
A 2024 cost-benefit analysis found that for every dollar earned in cannabis tax revenue, up to $4.50 is spent on downstream public costs, including healthcare, road trauma, regulation, and lost productivity

The analysis notes that 43% or $59 billion of Australia’s total $137 billion smoking-related costs in 2015/16 came from cancers alone. With cannabis causing more cancers than tobacco, these costs would escalate dramatically under Australian cannabis legalisation.

“Legalisation does create jobs — mostly in marketing, lobbying, and packaging — but these come at the cost of public health and workforce reliability,” the document states. “Youth daily use increases, absenteeism rises, and workplace accidents become more frequent in states and provinces that legalise.”

Australia’s Failed Medical Cannabis Framework Signals Disaster

The document highlights how Australia’s existing ‘Vote for Medicine’ framework demonstrates regulatory failure, describing it as “a very thin facade of medical legitimacy tasked to facilitate recreational use to growing numbers of uninformed customers.” This system serves as “a clear harbinger of only further harms that will be precipitated by the expansion and repetition of these current failed regulation protocols.”

Prevention Framework Offers Real Solutions

Rather than pursuing cannabis control Australia policies that have failed elsewhere, the analysis advocates for proven prevention and recovery models:

Wandoo Rehabilitation Prison’s sub-1% recidivism rate
Kenton County’s two-phase Strong Start program, which slashed reoffending by over 60%
Portsmouth, Ohio models showing whole-of-community recovery through integrated housing, employment pathways, trauma-informed counselling, and wraparound services

The document emphasises that “the only model that manages to achieve control outcomes has been the QUIT campaign on Tobacco. The gold standard of ‘denormalisation’ is the key. All media, education, government and health policies and practices have only One Focus, One Message and One Voice – QUIT.”

A Philosophy of Managed Despair

The analysis delivers a devastating verdict on Australian cannabis legalisation: “It has become a philosophy of surrender, where managed despair is mistaken for compassion and policy ambitions have shrunk to keeping people alive in misery rather than enabling them to live with dignity and hope.”

The document concludes: “What Australia needs is not a Cannabis Control Plan, but a Cannabis Prevention and Recovery Framework” that centres on evidence-based prevention, structured diversion programs, and genuine recovery support rather than commercial normalisation of an addictive psychotropic substance.

Australia faces a clear choice: repeat the devastating mistakes of other jurisdictions that prioritised industry profits over public health, or choose evidence-based prevention that protects future generations from avoidable harm.

Source: Dalgarno Institute