finding out who is lobbying the gov

[Bustin Jieber]

how can we find out who is lobbying the gov? https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/sep/12/sugar-industry-paid-research-heart-disease-jama-report

 

they managed to find out about the sugar industry, can we find out who is lobbying the gov to keep weed illegal?

[Jimboo]

My guess would be Big Pharma 

[sam-i-am]

1 hour ago, Jimboo said:

My guess would be Big Pharma 

 

GW Pharma would be a good guess, having a monopoly on all legal cannabis is quite lucrative I should imagine. 

 

Alcohol industry too, they've taken a big hit from legalisation in the US. 

[botanics]

Probably everybody that is or isn't involved with Cannabis   

 

 

[Simple Jack]

The government capitulated to the anti-cannabis lobby in 2009 when it sacked David Nutt and chose a hysteria based policy. The evidence against cannabis was too alarming not to be true. As news it was too sensational to fact check.

 

The present government does not need lobbying as it is thoroughly committed to the cause. The anti-cannabis campaign is aimed at society as a whole to maintain the illusion. They sow fear, confusion and downright lies to prevent any change in the status quo. They do not have to "win the debate" because they win by default. MPs, journalists, academics, doctors, judges etc etc are all suckered in. It has been a very successful campaign

 

This all has its roots in the 2005 decision to reclassify cannabis as class C. The anti-cannabis lobby struck back against this perceived drift towards normalization with a Hearst like campaign of mendacity launched from the pages of a certain fascist rag. Whatever the role of the pharmaceutical industry, prohibition continues with the support of a disproportionally powerful and influential minority of socially conservatives for whom it is a matter of principle.

 

With the Bayer/Monsanto/GW consortium poised to release whatever it has come up with in Uruguay, I would have thought the lobbying would be more nuanced. Ideally, pharma-cannabis safe, good medicine, raw cannabis bad, bad, bad evil drug, but to achieve this cannabis must be rescheduled. We're kind of there already with Sativex, and good ol' CBD. It is clearly in the industry's interest to extend the range of and accessibility of cannabis based pharmaceuticals. 

 

I would also question how much of a threat the tolerance of raw cannabis poses to big pharma.  If doctors could prescribe cannabis as freely as they prescribe other drugs, I reckon most people would go down that route; those that choose raw will probably do so whatever the law. There is no reason why big pharma should not have its eye on monopolizing the recreational market either (as is happening in the Canadian legalization process right now).