Medical Marijuana by Drone Delivery?
by Christina Sarich
Natural Society
Apr 20, 2014
It’s raining marijuana – medical marijuana that is, if everything bodes well for new start up companies that plan to deliver your cancer-reversing drugs via drone. QuiQui in San Francisco has reportedly unveiled plans to start drone deliveries in the Mission District, and could lead to a new way to get medical marijuana in other states, soon.
Many people dread going to the pharmacy. Now, waiting in lines, exposing yourself to others who are sick, or just getting out and about when you aren’t feeling well to begin with may soon be a thing of the past. According to QuiQui’s website, you’ll get an eco-friendly delivery that costs less than $1.00 from a ‘modern drone that gives off zero emissions and uses quiet clean electric power.”
QuiQui says it won’t deliver medical marijuana for now, although the International Business Times stated they would, but there is speculation that Joshua Ziering, the company’s founder, might change his mind with the growing demand for medical marijuana.
“We are not delivering medical marijuana,” confirmed QuiQui founder Joshua Ziering, who hopes his fleet of drones will one day be able to drop off prescription drugs. “I think [the International Business Times] just made it up.”
After all, shipping pot straight from a dispensary to someone’s front door would be no different than the delivery of other packages. If anything, the product is light weight and in high demand – the perfect product for modern drone delivery.
Furthermore, companies like QuiQui could possibly be within their legal rights according to a recent ruling that the FAA did not have authority over small market, commercial drones, and ended six years of prohibition of drone deliveries.
The FAA appealed the judge’s decision, however, concerned that it “could impact the safe operation of the national airspace system and the safety of people and property on the ground.”
“Commercial operations are only authorized on a case-by-case basis,” the FAA’s Elizabeth Cory said in an email last month. “A commercial flight requires a certified aircraft, a licensed pilot, and operating approval. To date, only one operation has met these criteria.” That’s an operation that uses drones to conduct environmental surveys in the Arctic prior to drilling.
The FAA appeal will be heard before the original ruling will be put back into practice.
Should the FAA ban be permanently lifted? It could open the floodgates for an extensive rollout of various drone-based ventures. Amazon might be delivering your books and movies, but other start up companies could soon be delivering your cannabis oil, and medical marijuana.
More than half of L.A.’s medical pot shops have closed
Toke of the Town
Apr 7, 2014
 |
| Susan Sanchez/LA Weekly. |
Earlier this month we got the 2013 numbers for how many marijuana dispensaries in the city of L.A. have filed to pay a special city collective tax. It reflects how many weed retailers are in L.A. And it was higher than any other number we had seen in nearly five years: 1,140. This despite repeated city crackdowns and a new law, passed last year, that limits the number of shops in town to the 135 or fewer that were legit during a 2007 city “moratorium.”
Well, it looks that the law, Proposition D., and the efforts of L.A. City Attorney Mike Feuer, who has made legal moves against dozens of stores, are having an amazing effect: Numbers unveiled by the city Department of Finance this week show that so far only 462 business tax renewals have been filed for “L050” businesses in 2014 – aka collectives – a finance official told us.
Legal Canadian medical marijuana producer has shipment seized by mounties
Toke of the Town
Apr 7, 2014
Despite having approval from Health Canada, Tweed Marijuana says a shipment of herb grown by private B.C. growers previously licensed to grow cannabis was seized by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police over the weekend.
All of this after Tweed invited the mounties to examine the shipment. Only in Canada are people nice enough to invite the police over to check out their quasi-legal operations.
“We felt everything was done absolutely correctly,” Tweed chairman Bruce Linton told the National Post. “When you call police to say, ‘Come look at this,’ you believe you have everything in order.”
Tweed made headlines late last week as the first publically traded pot company in Canada. The group is one of the dozen that are legally allowed to produce and distribute cannabis under new government laws. The cannabis they were purchasing was produced under the old laws, which allowed for a caregiver-patient system similar to many U.S. states.
For their part, the RMCP isn’t saying anything. It’s their policy to not comment on ongoing investigations. Though, really, there’s not much to investigate. Again, this is Canada and everyone is being really nice and up-front about everything.
Growers licensed under the old system were able to sell off “starting materials” like clones, seeds and immature plants to the new, big, government-licensed grows.
Apparently, Tweed saw such a demand for products, however, that they asked the Health Department for a waiver to purchase actual bud. They got it, and thought everything was okay. Until last Monday, that is.
Linton says they had the police check out the shipment in part to be transparent, but also in part to protect the goods.
Part of the confusion comes from the ever-changing rules. Lawsuits have been filed in part to keep home cultivation in place, and there have been several changed deadlines for transferring materials.
VIDEO — Doug Stanhope Loves Eugenics: 9/11, Drugs, Monsanto, Jews, and More
Bob Tuskin
Apr 16, 2014
Bob Tuskin chats with Doug Stanhope on a numbers of controversial yet important topics.
http://www.bobtuskin.com/
VIDEO — Conspiracy Guy – Fukushima
Joy Camp
Apr 16, 2014
Click here to tweet this video http://ctt.ec/WwJUv
The Conspiracy Guy goes on a tinder date. Tonight’s special: Fukushima fish.
SUBSCRIBE: http://www.youtube.com/user/thejoycam…
DONATE: http://www.thejoycamp.com/donate/
Check out this stuff
Like us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thejoycamp
Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheJoyCamp
Follow us on Instagram: https://instagram.com/TheJoyCamp
Conspiracy Guy – Fukushima | JoyCamp
http://www.youtube.com/user/TheJoyCamp
Nano-Particles in Consumer Products Damage DNA Leading to Cancer
Before It’s News
Apr 10, 2014
Terence Newton, Staff Writer
Waking Times
One of the latest trends in manufacturing for today’s consumer products is the use of engineered nano-particles (ENP’s), yet, most people have no idea that they are consuming and absorbing ENP’s. Research is discovering that certain ENP’s may be toxic and extremely harmful to human health, causing cell and DNA damage, potentially leading to the development of cancers.
Nano-particles are microscopically sized particles with at least one dimension less than 100 nano-meters (nm). To put this in perspective, a sheet of paper is about 100,000 nm thick, and a strand of human DNA is about 2.5 nm thick. A current trend in research and development, ENP’s are generating widespread interest for their potential to enhance consumer materials and food products, and for their potential applications in the electronic, optical and biomedical fields. “Nanoparticles are of great scientific interest as they are effectively a bridge between bulk materials and atomic or molecular structures.” [1]
In the market place, nano-particles can be found in sunscreens, toys, clothing, food, drugs, candy, cosmetics, ceramics, paints, and many other common products, and are already a ubiquitous part of our toxic consumer environment. Some food activists have already called attention to the dangers of the commonly used nano-particle titanium dioxide, noting that the “form of the common ‘whitening’ agent known as titanium dioxide is capable of inducing “tumor-like” changes in exposed human cells.” [2]
“Nanotitanium is found in products produced by Jello, Nestlé, M&M’s, Mother’s, Mentos, Albertson’s, Hostess and Kool Aid.” [1]
Previous concerns have largely been focused on cell damage in the human body, however, a new study from MIT and the Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) indicates that certain ENP’s may in fact directly damage human DNA, a concern that should have manufacturers and regulators immediately halting the use of nano-particles in consumer products.
“The researchers found that zinc oxide nanoparticles, often used in sunscreen to block ultraviolet rays, significantly damage DNA. Nanoscale silver, which has been added to toys, toothpaste, clothing, and other products for its antimicrobial properties, also produces substantial DNA damage, they found.” [3]
As worldwide cancer rates continue to rise, these results are extremely alarming, especially in light of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) recent prediction that human cancer rates will rise a staggering 57% in just the next 20 years. [4]
The MIT And HSPH study zeroed in on just five commonly used nano-particles, shedding some light on how these particles cause disruption and mutations to human DNA:
“The researchers focused on five types of engineered nanoparticles—silver, zinc oxide, iron oxide, cerium oxide, and silicon dioxide (also known as amorphous silica)—that are used industrially. Some of these nanomaterials can produce free radicals called reactive oxygen species, which can alter DNA. Once these particles get into the body, they may accumulate in tissues, causing more damage.” [3]
The study noted that the zinc oxide, used most often in sunscreens, and nano-silver produced the greatest DNA damage:
“…the MIT and HSPH researchers tested the nanoparticles’ effects on two types of cells that are commonly used for toxicity studies: a type of human blood cells called lymphoblastoids, and an immortalized line of Chinese hamster ovary cells.
Zinc oxide and silver produced the greatest DNA damage in both cell lines. At a concentration of 10 micrograms per milliliter—a dose not high enough to kill all of the cells—these generated a large number of single-stranded DNA breaks.
Silicon dioxide, which is commonly added during food and drug production, generated very low levels of DNA damage. Iron oxide and cerium oxide also showed low genotoxicity.” [3]
This study is adds a new dimension to the growing concerns over the use of nano-particles because most prior research has been focused on cell damage, not on the effects that these particles have on DNA.
“Until now, most studies of nanoparticle toxicity have focused on cell survival after exposure. Very few have examined genotoxicity, or the ability to damage DNA—a phenomenon that may not necessarily kill a cell, but one that can lead to cancerous mutations if the damage is not repaired.” [3]
Conclusion
Some researchers, including the author of the MIT/HSPH study paper, are exhibiting concern over the potential of toxic, unregulated nano-particles:
“It’s essential to monitor and evaluate the toxicity or the hazards that these materials may possess. There are so many variations of these materials, in different sizes and shapes, and they’re being incorporated into so many products,” says Christa Watson, a postdoc at HSPH and the paper’s lead author.” [3]
Since nano-particles are already being deployed in many common foods, drugs and products, and we now know that they cause damage to DNA, is simply monitoring and evaluating their toxicity a responsible way to approach this?
Just as with genetically engineered foods, which are already being consumed worldwide, researchers have determined that they can be damaging to human health, yet the status quo for bringing products to market and for removing products from market permits their widespread consumption even in the face of credible research that indicates their dangers.
“According to Tom Philpot, writing for Grist in 2010, ‘As with GMOs, the strategy seems to be: release into the food supply en masse first; assess risks later (if ever).’” [2]
About the Author
Terence Newton is a staff writer for WakingTimes.com, interested primarily with issues related to science, the human mind, and human consciousness.
Sources:
[1] http://www.sciencedaily.com/articles/n/nanoparticle.htm
[2] http://www.wakingtimes.com/2013/09/25/food-industry-poisoning-us-trillions-nanoparticles/
[3] http://phys.org/news/2014-04-nanoparticles-commonly-added-consumer-products.html
[4] http://edition.cnn.com/2014/02/04/health/who-world-cancer-report/
[5] http://www.nano.gov/nanotech-101/what/nano-size
This article is offered under Creative Commons license. It’s okay to republish it anywhere as long as attribution bio is included and all links remain intact.
~~ Help Waking Times to raise the vibration by sharing this article with the buttons below…
The post Nano-Particles in Consumer Products Damage DNA Leading to Cancer appeared first on Waking Times.
Thirdhand Smoke Causes DNA Damage, ‘May Cause Cancer’
by Elizabeth Renter
Natural Society
Apr 14, 2014
Smoking causes health problems—we know this; it’s common knowledge. The dangers of secondhand smoke are similarly understood, but when we start to talk about thirdhand smoke, there is much that we need to learn. A recent talk at the 247th National Meeting and Exposition of the American Chemical Society indicated that thirdhand smoke isn’t only dangerous, but could lead to DNA changes and even cancer.
The talk was presented by Bo Hang, a scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, who published a study on the topic, “Thirdhand smoke causes DNA damage in human cells”, in a 2013 issue of the journal Mutagenesis.
According to Hang, thirdhand smoke—or the residue from smoking found on surfaces and in dust in a room or area where someone previously smoked—can produce toxicants that undergo chemical changes when they encounter compounds in the air. One of these compounds created by thirdhand smoke is 4-(Methylnitrosamino)-4-(3-pyridyl)-butanal, or “NNA”.
NNA, says Hang and his colleagues, can attach itself to DNA and create a cancer-causing chemical, according to MedicalNewsToday.
NNA and another compound known as NNK break down DNA, damaging it in such a way that leads to uncontrolled cell growth and the possible formation of tumors.
While Hang’s research is still in its early stages, he says we have only begun to understand the full damage that thirdhand smoke can cause. Babies and toddlers may be most at risk of these dangers because they are still developing and because they are most likely to swallow, touch, and inhale these compounds as they crawl around, touching everything in their path and frequently putting their hands in their mouths.
Read: 7 Terrible Effects of Smoking
This isn’t the first such troubling research on the topic. A previous study said that secondhand smoke isn’t the only culprit in sickening children with parents who smoke. Thirdhand smoke, researchers from the University of California-Riverside said, could be as dangerous as firsthand smoke.
“In detail, the thirdhand smoke increased lipid levels and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, which is a forerunner to cirrhosis, cancer and cardiovascular disease. It also increased collagen production and inflammatory cytokine levels in the lungs, which has implications for fibrosis, pulmonary disease and asthma.” – MedicalNewsToday
Just as it took decades for us to understand the risks of smoking, and decades more to discover how dangerous secondhand smoke was, it will take time for the real effects of thirdhand smoke to become apparent.
“There is still much to learn about the specific mechanisms by which cigarette smoke residues harm non-smokers, but that there is such an effect is now clear,” remarked Professor Manuela Martins-Green of the UCR study.
PN 