“Cannabis-induced psychosis is not always ‘denial.’ In many cases, it may well be anosognosia, a brain condition where the person truly cannot recognize that they are ill...To them, the delusions feel real.” Elle Constantine
To the observer, it may look like denial or defiance. It may not be what can all too often be hedonic recalcitrance perse but actually the manifestation of a condition known as anosognosia.
Now, let’s be clear from the outset of this read, that this is not just another ‘useful tool’ to avoid accountability for the bio-behavioural disorder commonly referred to as addiction due to the utterly unwise engagement with psychotropic toxins, but it is a ‘flag’ worth having on your diagnostic radar.
I hope I haven’t lost any of you yet – Don’t bail, keep reading!
Walking with a person suffering psychosis or even one of the various forms of dementia, is incredibly difficult and taxing. (This author has very personal experience with this decline) It remains important (and self-care and good personal supports needed for the carer) to maintain a calm demeanour and avoid adversarial, seemingly accusatory or even open ‘corrective’ tones, especially in the dementia dealing context. Building trust will take time and a consistent affirming of your desire to understand (not agree with the delusions) is part of that. Learning of and working for prevention of a growing dysfunction is also important in assisting you in helping people potentially ‘get’ what they are not currently seeing.
The following are some of the signs of Anosognosia in Psychosis:
Insists nothing is wrong even when symptoms are clear to others.
Rejects treatment or medication because they don’t believe they’re ill.
Explains away delusions or hallucinations as “real” experiences.
Gets angry or defensive when told they need help.
Stops follow-up care after a hospital stay, claiming they’re “fine now.”
Blames others for problems caused by their illness (e.g., paranoia, loss of work, family conflict).
Lives with complete conviction inside their false beliefs, unable to recognize them as symptoms.
Anosognosia is a neuropsychiatric condition characterized by a person's lack of awareness or denial of their neurological or psychiatric deficits, often despite clear evidence of impairment. (1)
Where Did This Come From? Anosognosia means “without knowledge of disease.” The term was introduced in 1914 by the French neurologist Joseph Babinski, who observed that some stroke patients lacked awareness of their paralysis (hemiplegia). (2)
Main Affected Populations: Anosognosia most commonly occurs in individuals with:
Stroke (especially right hemisphere lesions)
Traumatic brain injury
Dementia (notably Alzheimer’s disease)
Schizophrenia (also drug induced Schizo-affective states)
Whilst stats on substance users experiencing this are not as readily available, yet it’s important to note that up to 80% of Alzheimer’s patients, around 50–98% of those with schizophrenia, and 40–50% of those with bipolar disorder exhibit anosognosia. One can reasonably speculate that growing numbers of substance users will be experiencing this, as the anecdata below will affirm. (4)
Symptoms and Presentation: Individuals with anosognosia may:
Fail to recognize they have a medical or mental health condition
Possible examples of these symptomatic realities are never more clearly manifest than with so called ‘medicinal cannabis’ users who self-medicate with non-pharmaceutical grade offerings.
One such manifestation that goes beyond mere denial or recalcitrant conduct may be found in Cannabis Hyperemesis presentations in areas where cannabis is both legal for ‘recreational’ and ‘medicinal’ use
The following is a synoptic summary of just one Emergency Doctor from Colorado (Ground Zero for cannabis legalisation in the USA). Note how corrupted pro-cannabis bureaucracy and the accompanying of exhaustion of trying to confront the irrationality, not just denial, that led to way UNDER reporting and recording of Cannabis Hyperemesis Syndrome (CHS).
The following in their own words.
With regards to CHS (Cannabis Hyperemesis Syndrome), we saw it EVERY SINGLE DAY.
Only ONCE did I have a patient and his girlfriend recognize and accept that it might be the weed. I had one guy - who had been to the ER every day for a week with ‘scromiting’ [Screaming and vomiting simultaneously] and his 6 previous work ups (including blood work, CT, ultrasound etc) were all negative except that persistently + urine drug screen for THC [tetrahydrocannabinol]. I suggested it might be CHS and his father (who was probably 60) took a swing at me yelling “it’s not the pot! I’ve smoked pot all my life and look at me!” (BTW, he was not the picture of health)
We had a girl who started with CHS at 15. She presented so frequently to the ED that her parents stopped going to the ER with her. Just sent by ambulance, get the vomiting controlled, and send her home by whoever would pick her up. Sadly, after 2 years of this, I think she graduated to other drugs. She obviously wasn’t in school. No education, no skills, just an addiction and vomiting. For her 17th year, I think she had over 70 visits to the ER. And no, never acknowledged that it was the pot.
I had another guy 63 - also having CHS. He also refused to believe it was the pot.
So, honestly, only one person that I can recall admitted (at least to me while in the ED) that it might actually be the pot.
And we literally had at least one a day.
(Veteran E. R Medicine Doctor and Cannabis trained medical expert)
The lack of insight may be selective, affecting awareness of some deficits but not others. For example, someone may realize they have language difficulties but not recognize their memory loss. (6)
Disruption of brain regions involved in self-monitoring and error awareness (e.g., prefrontal and insular cortex, default mode network)
Impaired ability to update self-image or incorporate new information about one’s deficits2
It can also arise with psychiatric disorders, where functional (rather than structural) brain changes affect insight.(8)
Clinical Assessment and Diagnosis: Diagnosis relies primarily on clinical interviews and observation. Physicians assess whether patients recognize, understand, and respond appropriately to their own deficits. (9) However, as we have seen with the previously mentioned cannabis hyperemesis issue, it can be a tough ask and that is why gathering data on this is slow, but still vital.
Impact and Importance: Anosognosia can hinder rehabilitation, treatment adherence, and safety. In conditions like Alzheimer’s disease, it is linked to faster progression, greater caregiver burden, and increased risk of dangerous behaviours. Concerningly, this applies very much to recovery efforts with substance users as well. (10)
Correctly identifying, understanding and properly managing anosognosia, especially in the substance using demographic is vital for effective care planning, patient support and ‘substance use exiting’ recovery.
Shane Varcoe - Executive Director, Dalgarno Institute
Classified briefings and explosive Congressional testimony reveal the shocking extent to which Chinese cannabis criminal networks have infiltrated American soil, ultimately transforming what politicians promised would be harmless marijuana legalisation into a sophisticated weapon of mass social destruction.
What Congressional testimony has uncovered will shock even seasoned observers of organised crime: specifically, a meticulously orchestrated invasion that exploits America’s drug liberalisation policies to fund human trafficking, finance deadly fentanyl operations, and potentially compromise national security infrastructure.
THE SMOKING GUN: $153 BILLION IN MISSING CANNABIS
Evidence proves damning and undeniable. Furthermore, internal documents examined show that in Oklahoma alone, a single American state, Chinese cannabis criminal networks have actively created what can only be described as a parallel economy worth ten times the state’s entire government budget.
The numbers stagger beyond comprehension: Between March 2024 and March 2025, licensed grow sites reported 87.2 million cannabis plants. However, dispensaries sold merely 1.6 million pounds of marijuana.
Subsequently, Donnie Anderson, Director of the Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics, delivered the devastating calculation to a hushed Congressional hearing room: “Over 85 million plants are unaccounted for, representing an estimated $153 billion in missing product and proceeds.”
To put this criminal enterprise in perspective: Oklahoma’s entire state budget amounts to just $13 billion. Consequently, the illegal cannabis trade controlled by Chinese cannabis criminal networks generates ten times what it costs to run an entire American state.
CALIFORNIA PRECEDENT: THE 100-HOUSE SEIZURE OPERATION
California Cannabis Legalisation Failure: Black Market Volumes Surge Despite Legal Dispensaries: New data reveals California cannabis legalisation failure as black market volumes increase by 20% whilst consumption soars among heavy users - A comprehensive report on California’s cannabis market has delivered a damning verdict on the state’s cannabis legalisation failure, revealing that the promised elimination of criminal drug networks has spectacularly failed to materialise. Instead, the data shows that black market volumes have actually increased whilst overall consumption has rocketed by 90%.
Consumption Explosion Undermines Public Health Claims
The data reveals another concerning aspect of the California cannabis legalisation failure that undermines public health arguments. The 90% increase in consumption since 2017 has been “primarily driven by an increase in heavy cannabis users,” according to the report’s findings.
This contradicts assurances from legalisation proponents that regulated markets would promote responsible use. Instead, the evidence suggests that legal availability has enabled existing users to dramatically increase their consumption levels, with obvious implications for dependency and associated health harms.
The report notes that California’s per capita consumption remains “still lower than in states that legalised recreational cannabis before California,” suggesting that further increases may be inevitable as this policy continues to unfold.
Economic Incentives Favour Criminal Networks
Whilst criminal organisations face some pricing pressure from legal competition, the California cannabis legalisation failure report suggests they may actually benefit from reduced operational costs. Operating “from within the cover of a wider legal market” appears to have made distribution and production easier for illegal suppliers.
The document notes that wholesale prices have declined substantially, which from a public health perspective represents a particularly troubling development, as “cheaper drug drives up use & harms.”
(And we want to bring this disaster into Australia!) (Source: WRD News)
In the haze of cannabis legalization, the dominant narrative whispers reassurances: “It’s natural,” “It’s safer than alcohol,” “No one dies from marijuana.” Yet, these comforting mantras mask a growing body of evidence that demands a reckoning. Cannabis is not the benign substance its advocates claim. Beneath the green marketing lies a darker reality—one marked by sudden deaths, fatal neonatal outcomes, and an alarming rise in youth mortality. The question is not whether cannabis can harm or kill, but how much damage we are willing to ignore. The phenomenon of “Overdosing’ on Weed” further dismantles the myth of cannabis as a harmless substance, revealing the potential for fatal consequences.
“Death by a Thousand Hits” — Sudden, Unexpected Deaths
Contrary to the widespread belief that cannabis cannot kill, several case studies tell a more troubling story. In Louisiana, Dr. Christy Montegut reported what is considered the first THC overdose, concluding that a 39-year-old woman suffered fatal respiratory failure after vaping high-concentration THC oil. Her autopsy revealed no other contributing substances or conditions [19].
German researchers Hartung et al. documented two cases of young men, ages 23 and 28, who died unexpectedly under the acute influence of cannabis. Full autopsies and toxicological analyses pointed to fatal cardiovascular complications, such as arrhythmias and heart failure, triggered by cannabis use. Neither individual had significant underlying health issues [20][23]. These reports dismantle the “no-fatalities” myth, exposing a direct, albeit rare, link between cannabis and sudden death.
Further complicating the narrative are reports suggesting that cannabis can trigger hypertensive crises and thrombus formations, conditions typically associated with high cardiovascular risk profiles. Marijuana’s effect on increasing heart rate and blood pressure places significant strain on the cardiovascular system, especially when combined with the higher potency THC products now saturating the market.
“Not So Harmless for the Helpless” — Pediatric and Neonatal Risks
The narrative of cannabis safety becomes even more grotesque when it touches the most vulnerable. In 2019, the American Journal of Case Reports detailed the death of an 11-day-old neonate from extensive necrosis and hemorrhage of the liver and adrenals—directly linked to maternal marijuana use during pregnancy. This was not a case of confounding factors; extensive autopsy ruled out other causes [22].
Meanwhile, Arizona’s 2013 child mortality data revealed a harrowing statistic: marijuana was the most prevalent substance linked to the deaths of children under 18—outpacing alcohol and methamphetamine. Sixty-two young lives were snuffed out in one year alone [21], underscoring a grim reality: the normalization of cannabis use comes at a steep, often invisible, cost.
Newer data trends suggest that cannabis exposure during pregnancy can lead to low birth weights, developmental delays, and long-term neurocognitive deficits in surviving infants. These risks remain underreported in mainstream cannabis debates.
“The Green Epidemic” — Rise in Adolescent Harms
With legalization comes accessibility, and with accessibility comes consequence. Colorado’s post-legalization data shows a 22% surge in marijuana use among adolescents aged 12-17—38% higher than the national average [21]. This trend is not benign.
Research indicates that cannabis use during adolescence significantly impairs memory, learning, attention, and reaction time—with cognitive deficits lingering long after intoxication wears off. Longitudinal studies have tied chronic adolescent cannabis use to a permanent loss of up to eight IQ points. More chillingly, marijuana use increases the risk of psychosis and suicidal ideation in youth [21].
Educational performance is equally impacted. Adolescents who regularly use cannabis are significantly less likely to graduate high school or complete a college degree. Increased cannabis availability also correlates with higher rates of academic failure, truancy, and social disengagement—factors that contribute to a broader societal cost.
Mental health repercussions are equally concerning. Heavy teenage cannabis users are more likely to suffer from mood disorders, anxiety, and suicidal behaviour later in life. These mental health burdens place additional strain on already overburdened healthcare systems.
“The Quiet Killer” — Chronic Conditions and Underreported Syndromes
Cannabis’ chronic dangers do not always arrive in dramatic fashion. Sometimes, they erode life silently.
Take Cannabinoid Hyperemesis Syndrome (CHS), a little-known but increasingly prevalent condition among heavy cannabis users. It causes relentless vomiting, nausea, and abdominal pain. In Indiana, 17-year-old Brian Smith died from dehydration linked to CHS, his kidneys failing under the strain [26]. Emergency departments in states with legal cannabis report increasing numbers of CHS cases, yet awareness remains low among both users and medical professionals.
Beyond CHS, marijuana use has been associated with lung damage comparable to smoking a pack of cigarettes a day, increased cancer risks, and up to sixfold higher rates of schizophrenia among users [23]. A systematic review published in the British Medical Journal notes that heavy cannabis users are far more likely to suffer from chronic bronchitis and other respiratory ailments compared to non-users.
Moreover, modern high-potency cannabis concentrates, often exceeding 70% THC, may pose even greater risks to respiratory and mental health than traditional smoked cannabis, magnifying the potential for long-term harm.
“Hidden in Plain Sight” — Hemp, Contaminants, and Unregulated Exposure
Even consumers seeking health-conscious alternatives are not safe. A study on consumer-grade hemp seeds—widely regarded as a “superfood”—revealed THC levels exceeding legal limits by as much as 1250%. A daily recommended serving could deliver up to 3.8 mg of THC—unregulated, unmonitored, and potentially dangerous [24].
This isn’t an isolated issue; it’s a symptom of a marketplace where regulation lags dangerously behind commercialization. Unintended exposures and cumulative low-dose intake add another layer of risk that the public is largely unaware of.
Moreover, contamination issues extend beyond THC. Pesticides, heavy metals, and mould have been detected in numerous cannabis and hemp products, including those marketed as “organic” or “medical grade.” Without stringent oversight and standardized testing protocols, consumers are left vulnerable to these hidden hazards.
Conclusion
The biggest myth surrounding cannabis is the belief that legalizing it would make it safer, healthier, and less harmful. This idea, dressed up in polished legal language, doesn’t hold up under real scrutiny. The truth is clear and alarming—cannabis is not the harmless substance it’s often portrayed to be. From sudden deaths and complications in newborns to cognitive decline, mental health issues, and hidden contaminants, the risks are significant and growing. The reality of overdosing’ on weed further breaks the illusion of safety, showing that cannabis can have serious and even fatal consequences.
Policymakers need to take action. Legalizing cannabis was a mistake—one that may be difficult to undo, but it’s not too late to address. At the very least, legalization must come with strict regulations: public health campaigns, limits on THC potency, standardized testing, clear warning labels, and accountability for the health costs caused by manufacturers and sellers. We’ve already seen the damage caused by the tobacco and alcohol industries when profit is prioritized over safety. We can’t afford to let the same thing happen with cannabis.
It’s time to rethink the narrative. We need to confront the hard truths about cannabis before more lives are affected. Legalization without strong, enforced regulations isn’t progress—it’s negligence disguised as freedom.
The question is no longer whether cannabis can kill. The question is: how much collateral damage are we willing to tolerate in the name of getting high?
Headlines, once not reported in our rush for the legalisation of the highly lauded (and to many advocates) panacea of most ills – cannabis – are now begrudgingly starting to emerge.
The evidence of this growing public health disaster has always been gathering just not reported in the mainstream media. However, the pro-pot gag is starting to slip, and the many inescapable harms are now emerging more in the public square. It’s way past time that our community demands a better public health response to the ‘vote for medicine’ debacle that has facilitated much of this growing mess.
It’s important to note that this 2021 publishing is now three years behind the new concerning evidence about the harms of this recreational substance, turned medicine. Not least the new research revealing that CBD (Cannabidiol) is not the benign substance it was touted to be, even in this publication. It is research emerging in the last three years that have raised serious alarms about the long-term harms of this cannabis component and other cannabinoids.
The primary sentiment behind this generalised classification of CBD is ‘harmless’ was that around the fact that it it’s unadulterated form it doesn’t get you ‘high’; but that outcome is only one side-effect of this psychotropic toxin.
Even back then the somewhat muted concerns of the RACGP were clear. On reading their publication it is important to also note that this peak medical body made the very clear distinction between fully trialled pharmaceutical prescribable medicines, and the new more ‘holistic’ offerings allowed by the TGA.
While medicinal cannabis offers very few benefits other than mere temporary relief of symptoms of a small number of medical conditions, it more concerningly poses significant risks, particularly in relation to mental health. The increase in psychosis cases and the development of cannabis use disorder among users alone, call for stricter regulations and more comprehensive patient evaluations.
The very few positive benefits associated with medicinal cannabis are outweighed by the growing number of short- and longer-term harms of this highly engineered and increasingly under-performing therapeutic and they can no longer be ignored or easily dismissed as outliers.
Manufacturing consensus – The Start of ‘Vote for Medicine’ Protocol
Where did this very concerning and inevitable public health issue begin?
I’ll start the journey here back in December 2014, the Victorian Law Reform Commission Consultation on ‘medicinal’ cannabis released its report. It drew from a miniscule 9 very poorly attended public hearings in Victoria and a mere 99 submissions, mostly from then illicit cannabis users.
This exceedingly small sampling of a community largely unaware, and arguably disinterested in, this issue was to become the basis for simply ‘rubber stamping’ (as we’ll see) a fait accompli of predetermined government decision. A being ‘seen to do the due diligence’ pantomime.
As mentioned, these ‘town halls’ drew very small numbers, with the major one in the city of Melbourne, having less than one hundred people attending, and all but a few clearly pro-cannabis delegates.
At this particular consultation, the Dalgarno Institute was represented by Drug Free Australia Research Fellow who was deeply concerned, but not surprised, by this small Melbourne consultation. Prepared evidence-based research on the harms of cannabis was ready to be shared, but our representative was quickly marginalised and/or managed, by the facilitators when they noted his voice was a dissenting one.
Repeated attempts to have his well-prepared evidence tabled were no less than stifled. However, our affiliate in the room experienced, observed and noted the following,
Emotive tone seemed not merely permitted but set for meeting by facilitators. The meeting was facilitated by representatives of the VLRC who appeared to have a bias toward the legalisation of ‘medical marijuana’ in manner that suited the self-medicating option, regardless of evidence-based science.
When attempts were made to present evidence contrary to the seemingly predetermined agenda of these facilitators, he was either quickly shut down (after daring to speak in the first place) or continually ignored; apparently, dissenting opinions were not welcome. Whilst at the same time, proponents for ‘self-medication’ use of cannabis were given complete and unfettered access to the floor, producing statements such as:
“Many, many people have been cured – from just about anything and everything.”
“What would you rather have – infertility or 35 seizures a day?”
“Random workplace drug testing is wrong.”
Not only are these statements (now on record) outrageous, but they are also utterly unsubstantiated by any legitimate clinical research, as the overwhelming evidence from the last 10 years has utterly confirmed. This small contingent of pro-cannabis lobbyists was permitted to simply spruik anecdotes with no evidence-based presentation yet also had their evidenced-deprived opinions affirmed and validated by the consultants.
The facilitators inferred that the Government (of Victoria, at least) already has legislation in place with this current ‘consultation’ process simply in play to validate those changes and therefore it is in essence a forgone conclusion.
Beyond these confirmation-bias laden gatherings, there was also a strong indication that either the A.M.A. or T.G.A. recommendations or processes would be side-stepped and/or negated wherever possible by simple legislative changes.
So, to assist with framing these potential science negating changes, new language and concepts had to be introduced by these lawyers. The following ideas and terms were introduced to help leverage the consensus manufacturing process.
Not science, or best practice, but sentiment, anecdote and impassioned pleas, as we saw in our live snapshot of the community consultation shared above.
Cowboy Legislation in a Cowboy State?
Once this box-ticking ‘consultation’ was completed, it was then time to introduce the already drafted – Access to Medicinal Cannabis Bill 2015
The Victorian Labor Government had decided, against better practice national option and instead to create its own Medicinal Cannabis industry, even after assurances from the Federal Health Minister at the time that a National Scheme under T.G.A. purview would be a better option. The Labor government, at the taxpayers’ expense, was setting up another bureaucracy and self-styled pharmaceutical practice/process that will, if not run parallel to T.G.A., most likely negate it. Dalgarno Institute raised many concerns directly with Health Minister and was systematically acknowledged and then ignored.
Dalgarno Institute was able to liaise with Opposition Health Minister and through several correspondences and evidence/concern exchange, she was able to be part of a group that saw seven hours of debate in the Senate resulting in over 400 Government amendments (believed to be a new record according to Clerk of Court) the revised bill was passed. One such amendment is that at no point or occasion will cannabis be prescribed for delivery via ‘smoking’.
According to the then Shadow Minister for Health, Mary Wooldridge, the bill also provides that if the T.G.A. down schedules Medicinal Cannabis from a Schedule 9 drug to Schedule 8 (which is proposed to happen) that it will not be down scheduled in Victoria. The Victorian Government argues that they would rather regulate it via our State specific, purpose-built scheme than participate at a national level. ‘I am concerned that the opportunity to ultimately be part of a national scheme will be missed if Victoria insists on going it alone’ the Shadow Minister stated.
However, launch their own trial they did and with great expense, and all but zero positive outcomes for the Victoria Taxpayer. The following newspaper article revealed just how fruitless this cowboy action proved to be.
MORE than a third of children receiving medicinal cannabis from the Victorian Government have discontinued their taxpayer funded treatment after the drugs failed to work.
The Opposition's health spokesperson, Mary Wooldridge, said the dropouts are proof the policy — which the Government says costs around $35,000 per child — has not delivered good value for Victorian taxpayers.
What highlights the cowboy culture even more, was that the fully clinically trialled pharmaceutical grade cannabis based medicine Epidiolex® epilepsy drug had been approved by the Food and Drug Administration in the US in the very same month. This product went through a near 10-year full clinical investigation. This medicine had been thoroughly, double-blind, placebo accounted for trial giving it a full understanding of its capacity, limitations and its shortcomings. They followed the complete quality of evidence research pyramid to the very top as outlined in the following graphic.
Western Australia was to soon follow suit in this new Vote for Medicine protocol, with the State government there, becoming the actual ‘pusher’ of this now untrialled substance.
West Australian patients are finding it almost impossible to obtain medicinal cannabis more than eight months after it was legalised, advocates say.
By May, no health professional had applied to prescribe the drug, despite it being made legal in November.
The Department of Health confirmed this week it has granted permission to three doctors to prescribe cannabinoid-based drugs and is in the process of assessing two more applications.
"The AMA is certainly not supportive of shortcuts, and instead of avoiding all the regulatory steps, we should be investigating cannabis-based products, how good they are, how safe they are, and once that's been done, they should available just like any other drug," AMA WA president Omar Khorshid
One of the further consequences of the ‘anecdata’ driven socio-political sentiment in medical legislation making, has seen our peak medicine approving body the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) fall in line with said sentiment. In this context, again, science and best-practice research are not the cornerstone of this new procedural approval system, but, as with the Victorian consultation it appears that compassion now becomes the preferred basis for action, regardless of any unforeseen side-effects.
So, for all intents and purposes, a loophole for ‘medicinal’ cannabis was created in this regulatory setting. A caveat that enables concoctions to be made and dispensed outside the long-held gold-standard of clinical pharmaceutical research process. This then enables side-stepping the need for full double-blind, placebo accounted for and exhaustive clinical trials, like the ones conducted by G.W. Pharmaceuticals on their Epidiolex® product.
The following is an excerpt from recent correspondence sent from the Prime Minister’s office to the Taskforce for Drug Prevention to clarify this new TGA cannabis protocol.
“The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) also administers several mechanisms to enable access to therapeutic goods which are not registered on the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods (ARTG) and are otherwise termed as ‘unapproved’ therapeutic goods.
These mechanisms include the Special Access Scheme (SAS), the Authorised Prescriber (AP) pathway, the Clinical Trial Notification (CTN) scheme and the Clinical Trial Approval (CTA) scheme. It is a condition of TGA approval or authorisation that the prescribing health practitioner (applicant) assumes responsibility for any adverse outcome associated with use of any ‘unapproved’ therapeutic good. Any Australian registered medical practitioner can make an application under these schemes.”
“Importantly, unapproved therapeutic goods accessed through these pathways have not been evaluated by the TGA for safety, quality and efficacy. As such health practitioners who engage in the prescribing of an unapproved therapeutic good are required to do so in accordance with Good Medical Practice and the code of conduct published by the Medical Board of Australia (MBA).
It is expected that prescribing health practitioners will have considered clinically appropriate treatment options that are included in the ARTG before applying to access unapproved therapeutic goods. These considerations apply to accessing any ‘unapproved’ product, not just medicinal cannabis.”
(Prime Minister’s Office 18th June 2024)
REMS – The Minimum Filter for Public Health Protection
Making plain here just some of the catastrophic medical flaws of this vote for medicine debacle is not difficult, nor is it the fix, if the political will isn’t there to conform with best-practice medicine.
For any substance to be properly considered for release as medicine in the public square, requires – well at least it SHOULD require – not only rigorous testing, but on review by public health watch dogs, should at the very least go through what is known as a REMS review Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies .
How Do REMS Work? REMS involve various interventions to support the safe use of a medication. Here are a couple of examples:
Controlled Administration Settings: For drugs that can cause severe allergic reactions immediately after administration, a REMS might mandate that the drug be administered only in healthcare facilities with trained personnel who can manage such reactions. These facilities would have immediate access to necessary treatments and equipment.
Lab Testing Requirements: Another scenario involves ensuring that specific lab tests are completed and their results checked before a medication prescription is refilled. This helps monitor patient safety and tailor treatment appropriately.
REMS as a Safeguard Involves:
Healthcare Providers: They receive education and guidance on safe prescribing practices.
Patients: They may receive educational materials about the risks and safe use of the medication.
Pharmacists: They play a crucial role in dispensing medications according to REMS requirements.
In summary, Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies should be a minimum and vital part of ensuring that anything promoted as medicine or medications with serious risks are used safely or not at all. These protocols can bridge the gap between medical innovation and patient well-being, emphasizing the importance of balancing benefits and risks in the realm of public health.
Epilogue – The Final Diagnosis?
These growing public-health predicaments (and arguably culpable failings) around this super-hyped substance are beyond concerning. We have labelled this propagandized ‘medicinal’ promoting as the new Reefer Madness. All this was foreseen by anyone who refused to buy said cannabis culture and cannabis industry palaver – such as those medically trained and not in the pocket of big cannabis physicians of Western Australia some seven years ago.
What the average ‘Jo Public’ is unaware of, is that there has been a fifty plus year war for this drug. It was only the Trojan Horse strategy of the ‘Medicinal Marijuana’ campaign, introduced by such actors as NORML, in the early 1990’s that saw more people be drawn and this new tactic of ‘medicalising’ cannabis to shift momentum back in favour of the pro-cannabis recreational use lobby.
What is also essentially unknown by almost all, is that since around 1997 up until March 2024 there have been 11,420 studies11,420 studies conducted on Cannabis THC alone, (not including Cannabis CBD or other cannabinoids) at a cost of $4.877 billion (USD) and the very best we can come up with from all this promised panacea of all ills is essentially the same therapeutics that were already available for prescription, with the exception of the newest pharmaceutical Epidiolex ®
In this brief expose, we have not spelunked the thousands of published research on the environmental, community and productivity harms of this psychotropic toxin, parading as medicine, but we do seriously encourage, no, goad you into looking at this issue and discover the unrobust nature of pro-cannabis literature and the short-cuts being taken to promote this addiction for profit enterprise – You, your family and your community deserve to know what is really happening and get the heads up you need for what ramifications this will mean for public and community health in the future.
Shane Varcoe - Executive Director, Dalgarno Institute.
Walking with a person suffering psychosis or even one of the various forms of dementia, is incredibly difficult and taxing. (This author has very personal experience with this decline) It remains important (and self-care and good personal supports needed for the carer) to maintain a calm demeanour and avoid adversarial, seemingly accusatory or even open ‘corrective’ tones, especially in the dementia dealing context. Building trust will take time and a consistent affirming of your desire to understand (not agree with the delusions) is part of that. Learning of and working for prevention of a growing dysfunction is also important in assisting you in helping people potentially ‘get’ what they are not currently seeing. 
Classified briefings and explosive Congressional testimony reveal the shocking extent to which Chinese cannabis criminal networks have infiltrated American soil, ultimately transforming what politicians promised would be harmless marijuana legalisation into a sophisticated weapon of mass social destruction.
California Cannabis Legalisation Failure: Black Market Volumes Surge Despite Legal Dispensaries: New data reveals California cannabis legalisation failure as black market volumes increase by 20% whilst consumption soars among heavy users - A comprehensive report on California’s cannabis market has delivered a damning verdict on the state’s cannabis legalisation failure, revealing that the promised elimination of criminal drug networks has spectacularly failed to materialise. Instead, the data shows that black market volumes have actually increased whilst overall consumption has rocketed by 90%. 
In the haze of cannabis legalization, the dominant narrative whispers reassurances: “It’s natural,” “It’s safer than alcohol,” “No one dies from marijuana.” Yet, these comforting mantras mask a growing body of evidence that demands a reckoning. Cannabis is not the benign substance its advocates claim. Beneath the green marketing lies a darker reality—one marked by sudden deaths, fatal neonatal outcomes, and an alarming rise in youth mortality. The question is not whether cannabis can harm or kill, but how much damage we are willing to ignore. The phenomenon of “Overdosing’ on Weed” further dismantles the myth of cannabis as a harmless substance, revealing the potential for fatal consequences.
Headlines, once not reported in our rush for the legalisation of the highly lauded (and to many advocates) panacea of most ills – cannabis – are now begrudgingly starting to emerge.
