Leading Anti-Marijuana Academics Are Paid By Painkiller Drug Companies

Leading Anti-Marijuana Academics Are Paid By Painkiller Drug Companies

As Americans continue to embrace pot—as medicine and for recreational use—opponents are turning to a set of academic researchers to claim that policymakers should avoid relaxing restrictions around marijuana. It's too dangerous, risky, and untested, they say. Just as drug company-funded research has become incredibly controversial in recent years, forcing major medical schools and journals to institute strict disclosure requirements, could there be a conflict of interest issue in the pot debate?

VICE has found that many of the researchers who have advocated against legalizing pot have also been on the payroll of leading pharmaceutical firms with products that could be easily replaced by using marijuana. When these individuals have been quoted in the media, their drug-industry ties have not been revealed.

Is any one surprised by this? We've been saying this on ATS for a while now, but vice.com has dug up the evidence and presented it below. In the article are three leading academics that are anti legalization. I wonder why? Well read below and get an idea.

1.

Take, for example, Dr. Herbert Kleber of Columbia University. Kleber has impeccable academic credentials, and has been quoted in the press and in academic publications warning against the use of marijuana, which he stresses may cause wide-ranging addiction and public health issues. But when he's writing anti-pot opinion pieces for CBS News, or being quoted by NPR and CNBC, what's left unsaid is that Kleber has served as a paid consultant to leading prescription drug companies, including Purdue Pharma (the maker of OxyContin), Reckitt Benckiser (the producer of a painkiller called Nurofen), and Alkermes (the producer of a powerful new opioid called Zohydro).

Kleber, who did not respond to a request for comment, maintains important influence over the pot debate. For instance, his writing has been cited by the New York State Association of Chiefs of Police in its opposition to marijuana legalization, and has been published by the American Psychiatric Association in the organization's statement warning against marijuana for medicinal uses.

2.

Other leading academic opponents of pot have ties to the painkiller industry. Dr. A. Eden Evins, an associate professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, is a frequent critic of efforts to legalize marijuana. She is on the board of an anti-marijuana advocacy group, Project SAM, and has been quoted by leading media outlets criticizing the wave of new pot-related reforms. "When people can go to a 'clinic' or 'cafe' and buy pot, that creates the perception that it's safe," she told the Times last year.

These academic revelations add fodder to the argument that drug firms maintain quiet ties to the marijuana prohibition lobby.
Notably, when Evins participated in a commentary on marijuana legalization for the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, the publication found that her financial relationships required a disclosure statement, which noted that as of November 2012, she was a "consultant for Pfizer and DLA Piper and has received grant/research support from Envivo, GlaxoSmithKline, and Pfizer." Pfizer has moved aggressively into the $7.3 billion painkiller market. In 2011, the company acquired King Pharmaceuticals (the makers of several opioid products) and is currently working to introduce Remoxy, an OxyContin competitor.

3.

Dr. Mark L. Kraus, who runs a private practice and is a board member to the American Society of Addiction Medicine, submitted testimony in 2012 in opposition to a medical marijuana law in Connecticut. According to financial disclosures, Kraus served on the scientific advisory panel for painkiller companies such as Pfizer and Reckitt Benckiser in the year prior to his activism against the medical pot bill. Neither Kraus or Evins responded to a request for comment.

These academic revelations add fodder to the argument that drug firms maintain quiet ties to the marijuana prohibition lobby. In July, I reported for the Nation that many of the largest anti-pot advocacy groups, including the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions for America, which has organized opposition to reform through its network of activists and through handing out advocacy material (sample op-eds against medical pot along with Reefer Madness-style videos, for example), has relied on significant funding from painkiller companies, including Purdue Pharma and Alkermes. Pharmaceutical-funded anti-drug groups like the Partnership for Drug-Free Kids and CADCA use their budget to obsess over weed while paying lip-service to the much bigger drug problem in America of over-prescribed opioids.

Know your enemy. It is clear that the drug companies are the ones who are resisting legalization. This despite the growing database of knowledge that marijuana is not only safe to use, BUT has medical benefits. Something that drug companies are furious about. I mean how can they keep their wheel of death know as the prescription pill market going if people aren't addicted to their poison?

No surprise there!

Cannabis is and always has been a champion of medicine and threatens more than one pills profit margin!!

No amount of money can stop the people from taking back their rights to self heal! This is not even getting into the myriad of benefits of the male plant (hemp)

Plenty of industries lining the pockets of their puppets to keep this the way it is, however there is no chance of them stopping it. The benefits have been common knowledge to so many it is laughable they are still trying the typical rhetoric!

S&F for you!

i didn't need vice to tell me this was the case but maybe more uneducated people on the subject will be better informed now
good thread S&F

a reply to: elementalgrove

Well said mate! At this point anti-marijuana advocates are throwing money in a bottomless hole. Public opinion is against them and their propaganda machine is breaking down in regards to this issue. You can only demonize something beneficial for so long before people cry foul.

Speaking of standing up to idiocy, we have this article as well:
Football’s in the Air, and in Denver, So Is the Sweet Smell of Herb

But the Broncos, following in the prim footsteps of the N.F.L., have taken a position of sniffy disapproval. Go to the team’s website under the heading of marijuana. “Any form of marijuana consumption,” it says, “is prohibited on Sports Authority Field at Mile High property during public events, including in stadium parking lots.” That goes for edibles; you must leave the gummy bears at home.

The N.F.L. insists it is enforcing Colorado law. Whatever. The Colorado Symphony has taken a laid-back path of no resistance whatsoever. It has “Classically Cannabis: The High Note Series.”

They can try to stop it all they want, but it isn't working. The people just don't care anymore.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

One of the major factors of this is, funny enough is due to the system TPTB put in place to make so many people sick.

They poison our food/water/air as well as the land we live on. Naturally enough this makes us sick, at which point we traditionally make the decision to see a Dr. aka pharmaceutical rep. They proceed to through pills at us or recommend more often than not unnecessary surgery both of which are ridiculously expense. They do everything they can to say, you are going to be on this _______ for the rest of your life. Sorry it is the best our modern medical system can offer.

In response to this you see the ever increasing pursuit of Chinese medicine/Ayurveda as well as a myriad of other homeopathic methods to work with the bodies natural healing abilities.

It only makes sense that people would head on back to nature and Cannabis is going to be proven to be one of the most effective methods of treating our current epidemic of health issues.

I just saw your post about the Broncos! LOL really!! well good luck with that, for I know many a football fan and as much as they may love their beer, they equally love the Cannabis! I give that policy a year at best! Silly NFL you can not turn a blind eye to the astounding amount of "performance enhancing" drugs and then honestly expect to try and force your rules over state law!

Also Cannabis would be amazing for injuries! Especially ones in relation to the brain! Which I do believe their is an epidemic in the Football arena of those!

Sadly this does not surprise me, i have been thinking this for a long time now, its so obvious, they are the reason its still Illegal in majority of the wotld, it could be helping so many people throughout the world and improving the quality of life of many.. Especially because of its many many uses! But no.. That would mean the big pharma & corporations & most importantly government would lose money cant have that now can we!

So we've had the same discussion soooo many times I wanted to bring up a new point.

I'm so allergic to morphine it's not funny. Has anyone even heard of a person being allergic to M? I certainly haven't.

a reply to: Iamthatbish

I react really weird too morphine it makes me really really sick and itchy! lol.. Every time i have had it which is alot i was sick until it was out of my system, same deal with oxycodone etc! Its very common, alot of people have allergies to various drugs and thats a common one people have issues with.

You know what's more addictive than marijuana? Money.

He who pays the piper picks the tune.

a reply to: Iamthatbish

I haven't heard of it, but I'm sure it's possible...

a reply to: Krazysh0t

The fact that it is illegal is by definition the very epitome of a conspiracy.

A vast conspiracy to keep this amazing plant from the individual in favour of artificial/synthetic poor substitutes that cost $$$$ and require repeat prescriptions.

The proof is in the product, it has the power to change the current status quo between big-pharma and the planets citizens.

It is time to take it back, and now.

S&F

Typical.

Reminds me of when E-Cigs first started gaining popularity. Firstly the tobacco industry pumped money into anti E-Cig research and campaigns. Now they realise it is too late to stem the tide they are pumping money into BUYING E-Cig companies.

Soon enough it will be the pharmaceutical, tobacco and alcohol industries themselves pumping money into Cannabis.

Of course it will then be perfectly acceptable because the big guys say so. (AKA they profit from it)

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Iamthatbish

I haven't heard of it, but I'm sure it's possible...

There are studies that say feeding this plant to children on ASD helps them dramatically.

You're right, I'm sure its possible. We don't give honey, shellfish ... I can't even think of the list to our young. But we give medicine that we know has adverse reaction issues.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

It's not just its medical benefits, it's use as a textile, oil, paper, etc is also another conspiracy in itself. There are literally two conspiracies at work keeping this plant illegal.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Sublimecraft

It's not just its medical benefits, it's use as a textile, oil, paper, etc is also another conspiracy in itself. There are literally two conspiracies at work keeping this plant illegal.

Exactly!

Not only that but it is a matter of pure oppression.

"You can take these dangerous drugs but not these drugs"
"You can grow these plants but you can't grow these plants"
"You can live in a tent but you must buy your own land"
"You can do anything you want as long as you can afford the licence, insurance and monthly membership fee"

Soon enough it will be more along the lines of;
"You can listen to this music but not this music"
"You can view this website but not this website"
"You can watch BBC but you can't watch RT"

We are fast approaching a time like this. Personal liberty victories such as the legalisation of Cannabis are all baby steps towards regaining our freedom. Platforms like YouTube and Facebook, although abysmal most of the time, are actually great tools for opening the floodgates of information.

That's the problem, we are diverted away from the truth. This is how people have supported the prohibition of Cannabis for so long but times are changing.

I am actually a lot more optimistic about the future than I was a few years ago.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Is any one surprised by this?

Nope. They've had decades and decades to do the research ... but have they? Of course not!!

The guys raking in megabucks in the pharmaceuticals industry didn't want that. They were raking in fortunes ... just by keeping it suppressed. It was the taxpayer footing the bill jailing all those people, paying cops' salaries, tying up the court system, blah-blah, blah-blah, blah-blah. And still, big pharma was getting richer the whole time.

I've only got one word for any aspect of government/corporate stance on this: FAIL

a reply to: TechUnique

One could say that the maturation of the internet has really helped to open people's eyes to the truth. It still doesn't happen overnight, but change never does and it is ALWAYS resisted.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

On just about any study, follow the money.

It seems that one gets what one pays for...even in the event that the results don't match the pre-paid hypothesis, there are ways to skew data or completely eliminate results to prove one's point.

originally posted by: Iamthatbish
So we've had the same discussion soooo many times I wanted to bring up a new point.

I'm so allergic to morphine it's not funny. Has anyone even heard of a person being allergic to M? I certainly haven't.

My mom was highly allergic to morphine, and had to have other pain meds.

The things about morphine is its like penicillin, there are lots of other meds derived from it. So being allergic to morphine tells a doctor an entire list of meds you are allergic to.

This plant seems like a much better option.