Category Archives: Uncategorized

My Interview with Australia’s Sydney Criminal Lawyers

29 August 2017


A nice chat about Cannabis Law Reform issues in Australia

Want More: The Australian government announced (a few times) that medical cannabis is now legal in Australia. However, on redefining Medical Cannabis to not need to include Cannabis, even synthetic opioids like Fentanyl are now Cannabis. One impact is economic as the Cannabis gold rush for real Cannabis products outside Australia is heating up, it is creating a fake bubble for Australia’s government introduced fake Cannabis products redefined as Medical Cannabis that include no Cannabis or THC.

Why Australia’s New Pharma Cannabis Stock Bubble Will Burst in 2017 / 2018

Interested in legalising cannabis for medical use in Australia, lets chat.
Our Facebook Pages
Join our 175,000 on Twitter (170,000 and growing)




Why Australia’s New Pharma Cannabis Stock Bubble Will Burst in 2017 / 2018

11 July 2017
Melbourne, Australia

Twitter: @mr_internet
Email: loren @



Well, the top level story is pretty simple. The Australia government has created a new industry based on lies, deceit, and or lack of transparency. This has stimulated an industry wanting to capitalise on the new Australia Cannabis gold / green rush.

The only problem is investors risk losing greatly when global laws, like those in the USA, Canada, Jamaica, Portugal, Uruguay, South Africa, Mexico etc catch up to the Australian Government, with someof these bieng part of the Commonwealth of Nations.

Some are already in the Senate and due for a debate and vote soon, something the mainstream media (MSM) is ignoring.

Even perhaps the UN Acts that Australia is hiding behind are a risk, unlike the countries

mentioned above that either ignore the UN Acts, or simply make amendments to them so they can appear to comply to these now out-dated guidelines, that many have said for decades Australia is ministering on purpose.

Bubbles in a stock price can be based on vaporwave something that does not exist, but in Australia’s case, the Government has created the fake industry.

How Did This Happen? –

  • In 2014 Government in multiple states and federally promised medical Cannabis for the sick.
  • Then in 2015, a survey showed 94% of Australians supported medical Cannabis. The government freaked out.
  • Then spent the rest of 2015, and 2016 introducing new laws and new penalties against Cannabis federally and in the states, redefining what medical Cannabis is, redefining what hemp is, even revoking legal state licenses. All of this so Australia politicians can be seen to be fulfilling campaign promises to offer medical cannabis but making sure no one got access. Something the Australia population is only beginning to understand as “Medical Cannabis” products are being imported from Canada that most have never heard of or want in their native source country.

lucy pharma narcs dealers.png

  • DEFINING THE BUBBLE – WHAT IS MEDICAL CANNABIS? – Outside of Australia, it is the plant genus Cannabis L. that typically is 15% THC and 1% or less CBD. However, in 2016, multiple bills in Australia changed the definition of Cannabis to a bucket of pharma. This includes synthetics, GMO, hemp, CBD and other pharmaceuticals that contain no THC so are not Cannabis but are industrial hemp, and in the case of synthetics not even from a plant. Note: Though hemp and cannabis/marijuana are both Cannabis L, it is worth noting that Cannabis with no THC is genetically different even if the genus is the same. We know this by the work of a Dr Page on the Cannabis genome.

500 cannabis word mean.png


DEFINITIONS – CREATING THE BUBBLE?  – By redefining Medical Cannabis this way to include only 2 groups in Australia Recreational Cannabis and EVERYTHING ELSE – This means products called CBD elsewhere are called Medical Cannabis in Australia, same goes for Synthetics, GMO, hemp and other pharmaceuticals, all called Medical Cannabis in Australia.

cannabis timeline to november 2017.png

LICENSING – The bubble is formed – Under the new ODC (Office of Drug Control) 2016 guidelines, licenses are only offered where there is “demand” or for R&D. “Demand” is defined is where legal conditions are allowed for legal products. This means as there are no conditions where Cannabis with THC is legal, then per the Government, there is no legal demand for Cannabis with THC (real Cannabis). Again this means the only legal medical Cannabis is not Cannabis but hemp. When the ODC was asked by yours truly if it should not be called, “Medical hemp and not Medical Cannabis”  I was told in writing and face to face,

“The definitional problem is not about the levels of THC, but rather about purpose. If a crop is grown for medicinal purposes, then it is subject to regulation by the Office of Drug Control, regardless of THC level.” – Bill Turner ODC

This was then defined into law, in 2016 in various states.

leb 1 straya.jpg

THE BUBBLE GROWS – First government said they were now growing Cannabis, then they said they were testing the cannabis but to speed things along the would now import medical cannabis from Canada. So now any company, that has interests, in hemp, GMO, synthetics, CBD, or other pharmaceuticals that are now defined as medical Cannabis then there is a market for those products and the bubble is formed.


GOVERNMENT INTEREST AND DILEMMA – The pharmaceutical industry has been well embedded as part of government since way before the poppy industry. The current pharma industry turnover is estimated to be worth $AUD 28.5billion annually in 2017. With 90% of OTC (over the counter) sales and prescription sales being roughly 90% for pain, and mirroring the 90% use of Medical Cannabis in countries like Canada, USA & Spain. Further data shows that a growing amount of that 90% using Medical Cannabis for pain do so for arthritic pain, and that is growing also do to an aging population.

While the real Cannabis market is expected to be worth $9.6Billion in the USA by 2020 per investment group Archview as reported by the SMH, the Australia Industry Market is at great risk from medical Cannabis. Even the Prime Minister is touched by this as Mrs Turnbull is chairman of a biotech pharmaceutical company that one of their main money makers is a product to treat melanoma (skin cancer) which was the main reason Rick Simpson Oil (RSO) was initially introduced. RSO pretty much set the dosing protocol for Cannabis treatment with 1gm a day of cannabinoids being the suggested treatment. This 1gm would typically include 70% THC and 1% CBD, beginning life as a 15% THC to <2% CBD that when converted to oil becomes the 70:1 potency used in RSO oil for a full dose.


THE TRUTH IS STILL HERE – So now there is an entire industry formed and continues to form to support the needs of the patient that is allowed legal “medical cannabis” (but none with real Cannabis). Some estimate it will be 10 years before Medical Cannabis with Cannabis is legal others say it could be 12 months or less. With Australia’s first Cannabis bill in the Senate in NSW, if it becomes law, it means 2 important things.

  1. Medical Cannabis would contain Cannabis, and
  2. The new laws would enable a legal demand for real Cannabis for the first time.
  3. It means that where 100% of what is legal becomes 1-5% of what is actually wanted or required



Companies that have all their Cannabis investment eggs in the Australia basket are typically anti-cannabis but involved with CBD, synthetic, GMO, pharma, or hemp will see an instant impact when folks learn the truth. This happens when laws for real Cannabis are passed, realised when products sold as having THC and CBD imported from Canada are extreme low dosages 1/30th or less of an RSO dosage, thus costing $7000 a month, and $350 a bottle requiring a bottle a day.  The new products were hailed as being cheaper than existing products but fail to address their very low potency that is not a natural product.

Many Companies are having to invest heavily for 1 year licenses that need sometimes a 5 year ROI (return on investment) they are counting on renewing their licenses on an annual basis, but if demand is reduced by 95% when laws change or the public become aware, then that demand could equally be reduced by 95%. Many of these businesses are tied to investments and stock prices. Some companies will spend millions on security for a product that could lose demand by 95% in the next 12 months alone.


Cannoperations Pty Ltd (Cann Group), Stemcell United, MMJ Phytotech, AusCann, Zelda, MGC, Tasmanian Botanic, AusCann, MediFarm, Queensland Bauxite, The Hydroponics Company (THC), EcoFibre, Lambert Hemp, UIC, ACL and others . Are they pro pharma or pro-patient (supporting real Cannabis products with THC over 10%)

shell 2.png

THE PHARMA MISDIRECTION – As we see new products meeting Australia standards entering the marketplace, it is worth noting the deception. One brand mentions their product is 18% THC and less than 1% CBD, yet does not get you high, how is this possible? A close look shows that the product is an isolate. It started life as Cannabis but then it is so diluted and dissected that a whole bottle is equal to 1gm or 1000mg of Cannabinoid. Real Cannabis products would be 30,000mg or 30gm per bottle with the dosage being 1gm a day or less depending on the condition. – Pharma and importers are failing to address this.

 WHAT STOCKS / COMPANIES SURVIVE / DO BEST – If a law passed tomorrow, that legalised real Cannabis, then the demand for the current legal Medical Cannabis potentially goes away by 90-95%. What would survive would be those that had R&D cannabis in the ground or available, that people would want or those that survive offering full spectrum Cannabis that was CBD dominant, but with THC above 1%, an actual growing market trend globally.

Fixing The Laws – Supporting an existing Bill – Currently,  in NSW there is a framework Bill that legalises Cannabis for those with serious illnesses. It is a more relaxed view of the current laws supporting patients and not Pharma interests. It does not address the many problems in other bills but does a few smart things also. 1) Creates a legal  “demand” for real Cannabis products, vs pharma. 2) Protects patients, allows grow your own, make your own medicine, nominate a caregiver, or buy from the black market while supply is worked out. 3) Bypasses the process or need for the TGA for medicine, as the TGA is federal. 4) Creates a framework used in other countries but can be cut and paste into other states also.

Possible Constitutional Challenges – As most ignore the many new laws and bills against Cannabis patients, that passed in 2016, they even more so ignore, the 1974 era Royal Commission on Drugs. The writings of this focused that the UN Act, on Cannabis addresses the prevention of trafficking, not personal use or medical use. The summation was that Australia is hiding behind the Act and choosing to misinterpret and incorrectly enforce laws based on it. Now 43 years later we see Canada, USA, Jamaica, South Africa, Israel, Netherlands, Mexico, and others either amend the Act or ignore it. It has been suggested for some time that a fresh interpretation of C109 and c117 of the Australian constitution offers good directions in the lack of uniformity in laws and prejudice against what state or even how large you are in respect to saliva testing are all worthy of being addressed.

Targeting Legal Challenges – One of my idols, / mentors into Cannabis Law Reform is Keith Stroup NORML. He said it well, “It is about wins, small wins or big wins, you need to chip away at the laws”. Rallys and protests are fine but they are part of the journey, not the end.

To fix the laws, funding or crowdsourcing funding for those legal challenges if needed but they need to be about patient rights, not pharma rights and protection. 

mel gibson cannabinoid brave heart cannabis.png


Cannabis Conference Melbourne 2017 – Welcome


22 June 2017
Loren W

leb pharma cannabis suits


dignity real cannabis real people

  • Since 2016 multiple new laws, bills, and acts have been introduced in Australia, in support of certain activists, that turned out to be only activists for pharmaceutical companies. These new laws in the name of “patients’ rights”, introduced many new and much harsher drug laws in multiple states in Australia in 2016. These include;
  • A new bill in 2016, sold as a new law against ICE, but turned out to be more about new penalties against Cannabis patients, caregivers, and researchers, with “Cannabis” never mentioned in the bill (Feb 2016)


  •          “WORST LEGISLATURE WITH HIDDEN INTENT WE HAVE EVER SEEN” – Law                   Institute Victoria

  • New groups of mandatory sentences for serious crimes, that only include terrorism, rape, murder, incest, and cannabis cultivation
  • Changing existing laws supposedly to protect children, moving the selling or buying of cannabis medicine from 300m to 500m of a school even out of school hours and even adult to adult.
  • Adding new laws with up to 10-year penalties for sharing books, or magazines, emails, or websites on Cannabis.
  • Redefining synthetic opioids as Cannabis including Fentanyl that the pop icon Prince died of in 2016.
  • Redefining “medical Cannabis” from a plant as it is in the rest of the world to a suite of pharma including; GMO, Synthetics, Industrial Hemp, CBD, and pharmaceuticals. None of these with THC none called Cannabis anywhere else in the world, and in the case of synthetics, not even form a plant. (2016)
  • NONE of these have been properly notified to the pubic
  • Welcome to what some activists have done with Government, say hello to them in Melbourne
 singer prince

THESE ARE THE NEW LAWS FORM 2015, 2016, AND 2017 – Welcome to Cannabis law reform Australia 2017. 

heather posters

Stop by our Other Pages:
Facebook Pages
170,000 on Twitter: @mr_internet


Is Australia Ready For Legal Cannabis for Medicinal Use ?

13 April 2017
Melbourne Australia –

heather posters

There is a new Cannabis Bill in NSW Australia, and most believe it is the first Real Cannabis bill, for many reasons. Called the Medicinal Cannabis Bill 2017, it is a few years in the making, and a lot has happened since the comittee report was produced in 2013.

Most do not realise that leglaising Cannabis  for medical or reacreaitonal use is a state issue.

In the years since there have been multiple bills on Cannabis in states and federally. All have done similar things, fufil the voter promises to legalise medical cannabis (for the voters) and fulfilling the opposite promise to all others by prevneting it from happening, to the beneffit of others such as industry, pharmcuticals and politicians that are oposed.

So what happened ?

  • In 2014 Politicians promised to legalise Cannabis for medical purposes, so parents and patients alike would not have to buy “evil, crude, mold-infested”  Cannabis from the black market.
  • In 2015 a survey immerged showing 94% of Australians supported Cannabis. Oops, the problem is the government never intended to make it available.
  • So in 2016 multiple bills in multiple states introduced laws increasing penalties for Cannabis patients, growers, and caregivers, and at the same time began to redefine Cannabis itself from a genus of a plant to a suite of products. This evolved bill by bill and state by state. In the case of Victoria, they got many new laws and increased penlalties on Cannabi sincluding social media, books, magazines, blogs and websites (oops) all with penalties of 10 years prison. This got worse when the word Cannabis was not even used in bills and law changes. All the anti-cannabis laws passed 33-6 or 32-6 as is typical in Victoria. My own amendmend got added that was spsecfic to the changing of the defition of Cannabis, it did not change the outocme of the bill but the amendment was addressed and is in Hansard for fact checking now and in the future.
  • This was made worse again in QLD Australia when they re-defined the synthetic opioid Subsys (Fentynal) a synthetic opioid that 50-100 times more potent than morphine) as Cannabis in early 2016, and it was addressed in the QLD bill itself that passed without amendmeent in October 2016.

qld syn pic

There is no “legal” demand for Cannabis in Australia so there will be no growing. 

  • The result of all this activitiy and promises, was the birth of a new group in the department of health. Called the Office of Drug Control or ODC. They are repsonsible for licenscing of Cannabis grow and manufacturing licenses, as well as import and export. Previous to this each state controlled their own licenses, so now there wopuld be another tier of license control to make sure Australia proper fulfilled the international laws and agreements. This is how government was to control Cannabis.
  • Licenses would only be granted if there was demand, “legal demand”. With all the new laws in bills and states coinsidentally having no legal condtions for Cannabis this meant there was no legal demand. But what if more conditions were legal (or if they were forced with a elgal challenge) then yes the same ODC framework would work.

3 laws




Response Patient Access to Medicinal Cannabis in South Australia

The original paper this is referencing can be found here –


 logo twiw final 2015 november

Mr. Loren Paul Wiener
this week in weed tv (
Cannabis Law Reform Australia
31 Jan 2017 

My Background –

  • My brother died a few years ago of colon cancer in California as my father did only years prior. Prior to passing my brother discovered the wonders of what would later be called RSO (Rick Simpson Cannabis oil) this was 6 years ago when much was not known on dosages etc and how to use it for Cancer, as he was already in the late stage before it was discovered. Though a legal grower in California supplying legal dispensaries, he had given up smoking Cannabis recreationally years earlier. On discovering he was sick he investigated the oil and became a legal medical user. Doctors soon discovered he reacted well to the medical Cannabis oil and his tumors reduced dramatically. Selfishly, this gave me time to get to the USA to see my brother still strong.
  • Unfortunately, he came off the oil too soon and the tumors came back and got him. Originally from California before becoming a proud Australian 11 years ago, I was a little involved in legalisation of Medical Cannabis in 1996 in the USA, talking to politicians, doctors, and law enforcement at the time. I had no interest in Australia law reform here, however, at the same time as my brother passed others in Australia in 2014 were going through the same struggles for the same oil. I was then encouraged by the words of Australian Government to get more involved. I set up various websites to aid in information and consulting to politicians and others, that are for and even those against the use of Cannabis for medicinal use, offering some views on bills laws acts etc. based on my experience and exposure to previous legislation. I was honored to be asked by MP Mary Wooldridge Victoria to consult on the Access for Medical Cannabis Victoria Paper in 2016 and had my amendment added/addressed with a kind thank you in the Senate. I also work across and assist with all activists groups where our ideologies match. Uniquely to some, we are a big fan of law enforcement, initial discussions with law enforcement unknown to many, helped progress the laws in California. We discovered then as now bad laws are bad for law enforcement also. I also consult on global Cannabis issues and in Australia when the government or others ask.


  • Unfortunately, South Australia appears to be continuing the trend of 2016 and redefined the words “Medical Cannabis” and “Medicinal Cannabis”.
  • On earth outside of Australia and even in Australia prior to 2016 Medical Cannabis was the same as Recreational Cannabis in definition with only the regulations and processes being different. (Typically, a cannabis plant with 10-15% THC and 1% or less CBD to increase the CBD and THC potency, oil is made creating a 6-7x increase in potency this is often referred to as RSO or Rick Simpson Oil.)
  • Australia’s most recent Cannabis legal evolution dates back to 2014 with Australian governments promising medical Cannabis, then a survey in 2015 showed 94% of the population supports medical Cannabis. ( The resulting period of 2015 to 2016, saw every bill with support from multiple “activists” and MPs in 2015 and 2016, change the definition of Medical Cannabis from a plant to a suite of pharmaceutical products, GMO, chemicals, and synthetics (as not even from a plant).
  • The government and media took this further calling the pharmaceutical products “medical marijuana’ as well as “medicinal and medical Cannabis”. QLD was first in 2016 to specify in Ch2  7c that “anything” that, “acts like Cannabis is cannabis” including synthetics (as not from a plant) and including in QLD documents also the synthetic opioid Fentanyl that killed the singer prince in 2016. –  (page 6)
  • However, Victoria was the first state to introduce new laws against Cannabis in multiple bills but never mentioned the word “Cannabis, instead, they opted for an old reference “drugs of dependence”.

Specifics to the Paper

  • There are various references in the Executive Summary, that require comment.

There is public interest in the medicinal use of cannabis and cannabis-derived products and their use is subject to ongoing debate among health professionals and representative organizations.

  • I see no reference to the often referenced by government survey by Roy Morgan per above that showed there was a 94% support of the use of Cannabis (full spectrum) for medical use. –


The available evidence supporting the efficacy of medicinal cannabis generally falls short of the standards required for approved medicines

If you search the phrase above you get over 1.3 million references, so common is this in papers from around the world as it was 21 years ago.

  • Simply put where a medicine is illegal federally, doing research is difficult if not impossible unless the government is attempting to do research to prove a negative. One definition of efficacy is defined as, ‘the ability to produce a desired or intended result’. Where that desired effect is for Cannabis to be ineffective, then its proof of effectiveness is also a failure of efficacy.
  • However, with Cannabis being legal since 1996 in the USA and later in Canada and with over 200 million citizens, now able to access Cannabis legally in the United States alone without a single death, it is safe to say Cannabis (the plant is safe).
  • Unfortunately, tests on pharmaceutical extracts of Cannabis such as pure CBD such as GW Pharma product Epidiolex has shown many serious side effects including 2 deaths during trials – . It can also be argued that the suggested criteria to meet efficacy for Cannabis the Cochrane or Gold Standard test do not work for Cannabis. This is because the human body contains a group of receptors in the brain and thought-out the human nervous center called the endocannabinoid system (ECS). A runners high is believed to be the result of a stimulated ECS. Though the efficacy is proven in various studies. The fact that human dosage required varies greatly, it was noted in a study 80% benefited when Cannabis was used for pain management. Pain 112 (2004) Berman, Symonds, Birch –
  • This is complimented by most if not all Cannabis doctors that have patients with legal access, where approximate 90% is for pain management and 66% of those for arthritis pain specifically. This mirrors the Australian OTC (over the counter) sales and prescriptions as well per recent reports.

However, there are various references to efficacy available.


Medical Cannabis and use of Cannabis as a Medicines  – Steps are being taken to facilitate availability of high quality “medicinal cannabis” products


Again, of those using Cannabis legally medically 90% of the world that use medical Cannabis do so for pain. This only works with real Cannabis. Unfortunately, the new pharmaceuticals, being created do not work well for that and failed phase 3 trials as well (GW Pharma Sativex failed trials).

Appendix 1

Other trials are a preference by the department, with many SAEs (serious adverse effects) being your definition of Cannabis seems to indicate the new dangerous pharmaceutical Cannabis chemicals those side effects are typical and why they should not be approved in favor of natural Cannabis products.

What is Cannabis, medicinal Cannabis, hemp, industrial hemp, and recreational Cannabis?

Unfortunately, with the inconsistent definitions of Cannabis in Australia, illustrated above any reference to the word “Cannabis” in this paper has to be vetted for their meaning. Medical Cannabis everywhere but Australia is the same as recreational Cannabis with just different regulations. In Australia, Medical Cannabis need not include Cannabis at all.

Aligned with the national initiatives, the Department is developing a patient access pathway for medicinal cannabis.

Again, in this context, Cannabis is something other than Cannabis the plant, and very dangerous.


While legally produced medicinal cannabis products are currently not readily available in

Australia, the national intention is that eventually there will be access to high-quality Australian-grown and manufactured pharmaceutical products on prescription. It is anticipated that access to medicinal cannabis products produced to TGA standards may be possible in 2017. 

Australia Creates Multiple New Government Backed Black Markets for Cannabis in Australia 

  • With the new licensing regime created by the TGA and ODC, the false demand created for new pharmaceutical Cannabis and “new” medicines to be grown per above, has criteria where demand must be quantified. Demand is based on not what is needed, but what is lawful, and for what conditions they are lawful. Demand in Australia as in the rest of the world is based on the efficacy of medicine that works. This is Cannabis a full spectrum plant, not isolated chemicals from Cannabis or synthetics that need not come from a plant at all. The result of this is that many hemp growers looking to capitalize, on this new black market, (some funded by government) are offering thousands of dollars in Australia for lists of names of potential patients. Where those lists are hard to come by, they pretend to be looking to supply medical Cannabis (the plant) hoping to engage more names and addresses for a demand for a placebo no one wants. This is similar to lawsuits in the USA in 2014, where the Hemp industry purposely confused Cannabis users with hemp users and medicines. Unfortunately, this is being done via the government in Australia, not industry currently and one of the likely legal challenges in 2017.
  • The current black market for illegal Cannabis for medical users is also growing due to the government repeating sound bites in the media that states medical Cannabis is now legal in Australia. A search reveals 861,000 references to this with many from Australia government web sites.

South Australia Government Endangering Public Safety with New Pharmaceuticals Hidden in New Cannabis Laws –

  • With the department choosing to consider new and untested and cannabis chemicals versus the real Cannabis products legal in the USA, Canada, Jamaica, Israel etc it is endangering the community.
  • A simple dialogue recently, where the government was asked if the Synthetic Cannabis they were using for trials is the same Synthetic Cannabis that they were reporting on the same day as being dangerous, highlights the confusion.

 shell 2

Likely Australia legal challenges in 2017 for not allowing Cannabis to be used as medicine.

  • Australia has referenced the Canadian Cannabis model many times especially via the ODC. Canada was sued in 2016, for being in violation of their own constitution preventing safe and access to Cannabis for medicinal use (the plant). This has merit in Australia as well.
  • Canada was also sued by the people in 2008, for not allowing those other than government to provide Cannabis for medical use (the plant)
  • Many companies were sued in 2014 in the USA for misrepresenting hemp products as Cannabis. The same is true for the Australian government as is referenced in this paper.
  • In the Royal Commission, South Australia on Drug Use. The chairman Ron Sackville wrote in 1984 that Australia was misinterpreting and incorrectly enforcing the UN Single Use Act, as it was about trafficking and not personal use or medical use. This was ignored and the lowering of the benchmark for what trafficking is continues with tougher laws today. In light of these and other factors especially the legalizing of Cannabis in countries that have jurisprudence with Australia, it is anticipated a new interpretation of constitutional elements are justified and likely forthcoming.

Paper Questions –

  1. Should a medical practitioner be required to hold a section 18A authority before prescribing an unregistered schedule 8 medicinal cannabis product?

No. A Cannabis GP in the USA when asked how he can suggest Cannabis with no training. He asked if we have Panadol or Paracetamol in Australia? I said yes. He reminded me that they work on the human endocannabinoid system (ECS) just as does Cannabis. If they cannot suggest Cannabis then they should not be suggesting Panadol or similar drugs that work on the ECS. Especially as people dies from Panadol but never from Cannabis though there is a rumor a bale fell on someone on 20 April 2005.

  1. Should a medical practitioner be required to hold a section 18A authority before prescribing an unregistered schedule 8 medicinal cannabis product for patients over 70 years of age and Notified Palliative Care Patients?

No, Per above with over 200m with legal access to Cannabis, globally, making anything more complicated to any patients that can benefit patients is not in their best interest.

  1. Should there be consideration of a provision for a general practitioner to be able to hold a section 18A authority to continue treatment initiated and overseen by a specialist medical practitioner?

Again why make this more complicated, new specialists to access medicine that has been used in the Australia pharmacopeia for decades until prohibition is nonsensical, and to in the public interest.

  1. Should there be different requirements (compared with the usual requirements that apply to sale or supply of drugs of dependence) for pharmacists in relation to dispensing medicinal cannabis on prescription or supplying medicinal cannabis on order and recording such supply? If so, please detail what requirements should apply.


Drugs of dependence as a definition include hundreds of other drugs all more dangerous than Cannabis. Regulation and supply of Cannabis for medicinal use should be no more difficult than the USA,  Canada, Netherlands etc.


  1. Should there be different requirements (compared with the usual requirements that apply to administration and supply of drugs of dependence) for recording administration or supply of medicinal cannabis by a registered health practitioner, including when the drug is administered in a health service facility? If so, please detail what requirements should apply.

Yes, it should be easier, again with reference to the over 200m with access to legal Cannabis, it is unclear why Australia takes a perspective reminiscent of the early prohibition reefer madness.


  1. Should there be different requirements for the destruction of medicinal cannabis products? If so, what requirements should apply?

Again depends on what you mean by medicinal Cannabis. If the full spectrum plant then confiscation should be allowed to be used for research if nothing else.


  1. Are there any factors unique to medicinal cannabis products that need to be taken into account in relation to the storage and transport requirements for these products? If so, please provide details of any relevant factors.

Again depends if referring to cannabis the full spectrum plant (and products) or medical cannabis the dangerous pharmaceutical. If the plant in Canada most sales are online and delivered by post avoiding the issue.

  1. Are there any other matters that need to be considered in developing the access pathway? If so, please provide details.

If patients’ rights, needs, the SA department obligations, and a move away from creating bigger black markets, are a consideration, then Australia needs to move beyond arresting their way out of the need for a medicine from the Cannabis plant. Australia either embraces the black market and risking the public health in having to use it or evolves to a more mature model similar to any of the countries that have an evolved model especially Canada and the USA.



  • If a health and safety manual said that for a gas fire you need to use a certain fire extinguisher, but that fire extinguisher may also be a petrol container, it would seem nonsensical.
  • The government, the department and this paper are doing this by re-defining the word Cannabis multiple times in this paper and away from global definitions.
  • With Cannabis already re-defined in some references from being a plant to being a suite of pharmaceutical products and synthetics that need not include Cannabis, adding a further definition as the drug of dependence is not in the public interest.
  • Two bills passed in the Victoria in 2016 introducing new penalties and laws against The words Cannabis were never used in favor of drugs of dependence. Both laws passed with little debate and have still not been notified to the public.
  • By South Australia saying and the department saying legal Medical Cannabis will not contain Cannabis offers no value for patients. Patients to date have not addressed their rights, on the promise that government would fulfill their obligations to do so.
  • Creating new Black Markets and increasing the validity of existing ones by saying medical Cannabis is legal, as it is not, is not in the public interest.
  • Empowering black markets that sell Cannabis, as well as ICE, cocaine, weapons and other things, is not in the public interest.
  • “Considering” cannabis to be used for very rare cases and with very hard to get approved circumstances is not in the public interest, and empowers the black market further.
  • Creating a process as Qld, Vic, and NSW has done that results in no supply of medicine, enforces the black market, and also the need for legal action and is not in the public interest.


Australia Cannabis Law Reform Edition January 2017

extracted from below (

Posted: January 9, 2016 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Update 5 January 2017

You do not need to read tea leaves to see the impact of new laws, acts, and Bills, that passed in 2016 in Australia nationally, to understand that things are changing for the worse if you support Cannabis for medical use (different to “medical cannabis” that needs not be Cannabis at all as a result of new defintions of even what Cannabis is) more below on that.

It was interesting for me this year to consult (as I am sure others do) to the government in multiple bills, acts, and legislature. One on occasion I got a kind mention in the Victoria Senate and to my surprise, my suggested amendment added in the Access to Medical Cannabis Bill. My concern then as now and the purpose of my amendment was to clarify the definiton of what “Medical Cannabis”is. This is because it has gone from being a plant to be re-defined as a suite of products that do not need to include Cannabis. My amendment made no impact on the laws, but I hoped, that should mainstream media or others want to fact check the issue, having it on the government web site might help offer credibility. Ironically with all the amendments in the bill neither the Sex Party, Greens or any others than the coalition and labor got any amendments, while I did. This is wrong but neither listened to me being on their side, while the Coalition did though they are 100% opposed to everything I say and do really. That is irony at its best.

“I also had a very comprehensive marked-up version of the legislation from Loren Wiener from the Australian Cannabis Law Reform Movement. His concerns were about the definition of cannabis, and these are also questions I will ask on behalf of Loren in relation to the definition. His concern is that the definition of cannabis does not actually include or allow for the extent and range of types of cannabis plants there are and also the issue about the mix of tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol and whether that is covered in the legislation” MP Mary Wooldridge Victoria Senate


Prior to bills being written debated and subsequently ignored,  motions were already in play. A private $34m donation in NSW and an equal amount of Government money, saw research begin into something called “medical Cannabis”. However defining what medical Cannabis even was,  seemed silly to some, but not to those like myself that had been consulting to government on the issue.


Then a much ignored video emerged from the head researcher saying that Cannabis in Australia was “defective” as it got people high, contained something called THC and not enough of something called CBD. The end result is they needed something with more CBD so it could be “good” Cannabis. For those not accustomed to this jargon speak it was like saying the water was defective as it was clear and wet. This new “medical Cannabis” was not to be Cannabis at all. At best it would be pharmaceutical sprays, or pills, at worst the government was going to grow this new Cannabis, that was not really Cannabis but GMO Hemp, that has high CBD and no THC. Unfortunately the amount of SAEs (serious side effects), risks of side effects with outer medications, and over doses of serotonin and deaths have gone ignored as have the tests and trials.

This was only the beginning and things got worse.





EXAMPLE 1- VICTORIA In the last 12 months alone in State Victoria, there have been 9 new laws introduced against Cannabis without the word “Cannabis” even being in the bill so as to pass quietly with little debate. Both bills passed 33 and 32-6 respectively. The first bill in Feb 2016, ( Victoria DPSA Bill 2016) known as the ICE bill it was sold as just that. However it used an old reference in, ICE and other “drugs of dependence” that turns out to include Cannabis. It introduced 7 laws against Cannabis patients, caregivers, researchers, and growers offering 5 years for looking at websites, or emails, books, or magazines on Cannabis. It offers 10 years for producing or sharing those same things. It changed laws of selling from 300m of a school to children to 500m of a school regardless of the age and from 15 to 20 years.



In another b3bill, ( Victoria Access Cannabis Bill 2016) it continued to change the definition of Cannabis from a plant to a suite of pharma products that include GMO, synthetics (as not from a plant), and pharmaceuticals. The contect now being trials and tests are beginning in the future for medical cannabis where medical cannabis is no longer needs to be the plant Cannabis. This is unique to the rest of the world, where Cannabis is Cannabis, and pharma, CBD, hemp and synthetics are all different. I got to see the process first hand as I consulted on the bill for the Government, (them opposed, asking for my contrary view being for Medical Cannabis with Cannabis ). It resulted in a nice mention in the senate, and an amendment in the bill. Neither the Sex Party or Greens unfortunately had any amendments. It made little difference, it had to do with the definition of the word Cannabis. My thoughts were if mainstream media did not believe me or the LIV (Law Institute Victoria) then they could google me and Hansards and see the issue for themselves on the government own website. Media were either not interested or in the case of the TheProject, did not believe me and would not fact check me to the site or to the LIV, or MPs that were happy to discuss the matters.


In a 3rd bill in November 2016, ( and also refers to drugs of dependence, and created new categories of mandatory sentencing in a Bill that introduced Cannabis with rape incest, and terrorism. As mentioned both bills passed with little debate and per government mandate no media attention.

Victoria Australia Passes Harsher Laws for Cannabis Patients as Government Pushes “Medical CBD” Instead of Cannabis












November 2016

Last week – NEW Victoria Bills
New Cannabis Laws Pass Victoria Assembly – 10 November 2016, – ROAD LEGISLATION FURTHER AMENDMENT BILL 2016
Refusing a roadside drug test from 6 months and 12 months license ban to 2 years and 4 years. This is to align with alcohol though the Cannabis tests are viewed as mostly illegal globally, do not have anything to do with impairment only past usage that can be hours, days, or weeks. – Link –

9 November 2016,
Sentencing (Community Correction Order) and Other Acts Amendment Bill 2016– Passed Parliment 31-6, now goes to the Governer –
Introduces mandatory sentencing for NEW category 1 and category 2 offenses, including rape, terrorism, and growing cannabis.-



31 October 2016 –

In a special sentencing group that includes per the new Bill includes “rape and incest”. The Victorian Government that has set national benchmarks previously for hiding new penalties for growing Cannabis, for medical use has done it again. This coming in the same news cycle that licensing for growing medical Cannabis is now live. No coincidence. Meanwhile, the government has redefined hemp (with no THC) as “medical cannabis”. The government ODC contact said, “Do not confuse the potency of hemp or Cannabis with its intended use, anything can be medical Cannabis including, GMO, and synthetics not from a plant” – The media has been played AGAIN for not spending 30 seconds’ fact checking – while folks are dying. Well done MCUA

Meanwhile, the government has redefined hemp (with no THC) as “medical cannabis”. The government ODC contact said, “Do not confuse the potency of hemp or Cannabis with its intended use, anything can be medical Cannabis including, GMO, and synthetics not from a plant” – The media has been played AGAIN for not spending 30 seconds’ fact checking – while folks are dying. Well done MCUA as well for ignoring facts again.

The media has been played AGAIN for not spending 30 seconds’ fact checking – while folks are dying. Well done MCUA and media who remains defiant of the truth, obviously for their own interests.

Drugs of Dependence –
Like a previous bill in Feb 2016, the word Cannabis is not even in the bill, but is referenced by an obscure reference “drugs of dependence” that is mainly Cannabis. –

Legal Growing –
Meanwhile, the media cycle has released information on the new Cannabis grow laws. They are based on demand of what is safe and legal, this currently excludes Cannabis with THC in it. The focus is for the government to fulfill promises to legalise medical Cannabis for the few but little if any THC from natural Cannabis will see the light of day.

What this means –
Simply put folks can spend $7,000 for a 40-page license form to get on every police blotter in the country to then be denied , as the grow laws only support large pharma the $7,000 is not refundable.