The term “addiction” gets thrown around quite freely in everyday language—this is nothing new. Who among us hasn’t declared themselves addicted to some habit or substance, more jokingly than seriously? Who hasn’t accused someone else of being addicted to some substance, device, or routine that we consider excessive? How many songs claim the performer is addicted to love, to pain, to chaos, to you? This isn’t necessarily a bad thing: language is, after all, our playing field. The problem arises when healthcare professionals use such diagnoses just as casually.

This is precisely what a new study from the University of Valencia takes aim at. Published in Nature Reviews Psychology and aptly titled “To the addiction hammer, every habit looks like a nail,” the study highlights a growing tendency among some healthcare professionals to overdiagnose addiction by applying criteria designed for problematic alcohol or drug use to virtually any activity performed with high intensity or frequency.

This trend has clear consequences. As the study’s author, Víctor Ciudad-Fernández, states, it creates an “addiction factory,” trivializing the struggles of people who genuinely suffer from serious dependencies, while applying clinical labels and unnecessarily pathologizing those who are simply enjoying something intensely.

What counts as an addiction?

In an article published by the University of Valencia, Ciudad-Fernandez (who is also a researcher at the Polibienestar Institute of the University of Valencia) details the methodology behind this approach: “First, someone observes that a person engages very frequently in an activity (dancing, playing games, using their phone) and assumes that this must be an addiction. Then, a questionnaire is created by repurposing criteria for alcoholism or drug addiction and adapting them to the new behavior. The questionnaire is then applied and, naturally, it ‘confirms’ what was initially assumed.”

So, what counts as an addiction for these professionals? Listening to music, running, dancing, tanning, using ChatGPT… all these activities are, in the eyes of some clinicians, comparable to the problematic use of, for example, alcohol or cocaine.

Of course, this does not mean that some everyday habits cannot become problematic. The misuse of artificial intelligence tools like ChatGPT is already being well documented (though not yet effectively addressed), has serious consequences, and could be treated as a public health problem. Or consider the case of gambling addiction, which has been wreaking havoc for some time, and is now even more prevalent among young people. But we can’t go about mixing apples and oranges.

It’s worth remembering: a behavior is considered addictive not only because of its repetition or intensity, but also because of its effect on a person’s daily life. Addiction implies a loss of control, an inability to break the habit, the emergence of dangerous behaviors, and the deterioration of the patient’s life, health, and relationships, to name a few factors. Dependence, for its part, has to do with the body’s adaptation to the continuous use of a substance.

The study also cites, as an example, research on professional tango dancers who were labeled as “addicted” to this musical genre. Is passion for one’s profession really comparable to, say, debilitating fentanyl addiction? Is it valid, useful, or wise to lump them together?

The Dangers of Overdiagnosing Addictions

This tendency to overdiagnose addictions has very real consequences. As Ciudad-Fernandez explains, “if we start calling almost everything an ‘addiction,’ the term loses its meaning, and the suffering of those with a serious disorder is trivialized.” People with addiction already face stigmatization, excessive social judgment, legal problems, extreme institutionalization, and health problems, among others. Minimizing the seriousness of their suffering by equating it with behaviors like “running a lot” not only actively harms them but borders on insulting.

On the other hand, the researcher cites another study that questions the over-pathologization of everyday life and warns about the risks this can pose to the field of addiction research. In this regard, he explains: “Labeling normal activities as pathological (using technology, exercising, enjoying a hobby) generates unnecessary alarm and can lead perfectly healthy people to believe they have a clinical problem.”

That said, we can’t rule out the possibility that many unscrupulous actors are profiting by artificially creating illnesses in healthy people. After all, an addiction diagnosis implies undergoing sustained treatment over time, opening the door to a constant flow of patients and access to their money.

Likewise, we must not overlook the fact that this pathologization of pleasure occurs in a context of increasing pressure to be “useful,” under a constant social mandate to produce and a culture that glorifies work and financial gain over pleasure.

Ultimately, this approach of overdiagnosing addictions erodes trust in medical science and undermines the credibility of a field already affected by a lack of effective policies and social stigma. Being mindful with language is always important, even in everyday life—but in the medical field, it’s critical.

<p>The post ‘Addiction Factory’: Study Denounces the Dangers of Overdiagnosing Habits first appeared on High Times.</p>

The post ‘Addiction Factory’: Study Denounces the Dangers of Overdiagnosing Habits appeared first on Paradise Found.

Colombia is moving forward with a controversial plan to euthanize dozens of invasive hippos descended from Pablo Escobar’s private collection, as their population continues to grow uncontrollably. The decision highlights a complex clash between environmental protection, public safety, and animal welfare, with no easy solution in sight.

As early as 2022, Colombia’s growing hippopotamus population had become a topic of concern. And for good reason: although hippos have not caused a single death in the country, Colombian authorities recognize that this wild population does not belong to the local ecosystem. As a result, it has no natural predators, allowing unchecked expansion and widespread disruption of the landscape. 

And that’s not all: even though they haven’t caused major incidents in Colombia, data from Uganda—where hippos are native—shows that 87% of encounters between this species and humans have been fatal.

But these aren’t just any hippos. They were once the pets of one of Latin America’s—and arguably the world’s—most notorious drug traffickers: the infamous Pablo Escobar Gaviria. Today, Colombia still holds Escobar responsible for this relentless expansion and is actively seeking ways to curb it. Current projections estimate that the population could reach around 500 hippos by 2030—and double just five years later.

How Did Non-Native Hippos End Up in Colombia, and Why Are They a Concern for the Government?

In the 1980s, Pablo Escobar Gaviria brought four hippos to Colombia as part of his private collection. They lived on his Hacienda Nápoles estate alongside other exotic animals, including giraffes, elephants, zebras, ostriches, rhinos, and buffalo. 

But in 1993, the narco-empire collapsed with the death of the powerful drug lord, leaving the estate completely abandoned. Some animals were relocated, but no one wanted to take in the hippos. Left behind, they escaped and spread throughout the Magdalena River basin. 

Decades later, their numbers have risen in ways few could have predicted. What began with just four animals has grown to an estimated 169 to 200 hippos today, according to various sources. Projections suggest that the number could climb to 500 by 2030 and 1,000 by 2035, making this the only wild hippo population outside of Africa. 

Hippos devour, compete, disrupt, and reshape

Officially designated an invasive exotic species since 2022, hippos have no natural predators in Colombia, giving them “free rein” to devour large quantities of native flora, compete with local wildlife, disrupt the ecosystem, alter the landscape with their footprints (they weigh over a ton), and pollute the water with their excrement.

Furthermore, they impact species such as manatees and river turtles by altering water quality, reducing aquatic vegetation, and altering the ecosystems on which these species depend for feeding and reproduction.

They have also affected humans, encroaching on fishing areas, rural communities, and even a schoolyard. Fishermen are afraid of them, and they make their work more difficult. Additionally, encounters between children, residents, and these animals create ongoing tension in many areas due to the risk of attack they pose.

So how have they thrived so successfully in a non-native environment?  The expansion of hippos in Colombia comes down to two key factors that have enabled their growth: plenty of water and abundant food. They live like kings—at least for now. 

Colombia plans to euthanize at least 80 hippos

Initially, Colombia considered “relocating” some of the animals to avoid resorting to lethal measures. In fact, as mentioned earlier, nearly all the animals from Escobar’s private zoo were eventually rehomed, except for the hippos. But why did no one want them? 

The problem is that all of Colombia’s hippos are direct descendants of the original four that Pablo Escobar brought in. In other words, they are all closely related. In biology, when there is little genetic diversity, the same genes are repeated over and over again, which increases the likelihood of genetic defects.

If greater genetic diversity means better health, this situation is the exact opposite. If a population descends from a small number of individuals and breeds within the same family, there is a higher risk of disease and a lower capacity for adaptation. This can lead to birth defects, malformations, health problems, reduced disease resistance, and more reproductive issues. 

This lack of genetic diversity is one of the main reasons other countries and zoos have shown little interest in taking them in: they are not particularly suitable for conservation programs because they do not contribute to genetic diversity, are more prone to health complications, and are more costly and complex to maintain. This is why the Colombian government has found it so difficult to relocate Pablo Escobar’s hippos, whose numbers have grown exponentially in recent decades. 

In addition to the idea of transferring them to other zoos, Colombian authorities have also attempted chemical sterilization and explored exporting the animals abroad. It’s not that solutions weren’t pursued; none proved effective at slowing population growth. This leads to the current plan: euthanizing 80 hippos in an effort to reduce the population in a controlled, sustained way.

The new plan was announced by Minister Irene Vélez, who stated that the goal is to reduce the population by at least 33 individuals per year under the Plan for the Prevention, Control, and Management of the Invasive Exotic Species Hippopotamus, with a total budget of COP 7.2 billion (approximately USD 2 million). 

Each procedure will cost COP 50 million (USD 14,000) per animal, not including additional costs such as international transport (which is very costly) and mandatory burial for health reasons.

The process is expected to be quick: the animals will be injected, and some will be shot with darts, following a protocol described as “ethical, safe, and responsible.” According to the government, this measure—while unfortunate—is scientifically necessary and was considered a last resort after multiple failed attempts at alternative solutions. 

Experts warn that without immediate action, the situation could spiral out of control within the next 10 to 20 years. Animal rights groups, however, strongly oppose the plan, and Senator Andrea Padilla has even described the measure as “short-sighted and cruel”. They argue that if the animals were brought into the country as victims of human decisions, then non-lethal solutions should be prioritized. The dilemma is complex: animal ethics versus ecological preservation, and human responsibility versus damage control.

But the challenges are clear, and the obstacles significant: dozens of countries have already made it clear that they are not willing to take in the hippos that were once the pets of the region’s most notorious drug trafficker; the logistical cost of relocation is extremely high (though it would need to be weighed against the cost of euthanizing 80 animals); the genetic issues these hippos have reduced their “value” for conservation; previous measures have failed; and the population of this species continues to grow.

It is clearly a one-of-a-kind case: African wildlife that has become a Latin American pest. Anecdotal and peculiar, sure, but it has turned into a real and problematic environmental crisis that poses significant environmental and public safety concerns. 

Photo by Colombian National Police, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons (edited)

<p>The post Colombia to Cull Dozens of Hippos: From Pablo Escobar’s Pets to a Chronicle of a Death Foretold first appeared on High Times.</p>

The post Colombia to Cull Dozens of Hippos: From Pablo Escobar’s Pets to a Chronicle of a Death Foretold appeared first on Paradise Found.

Doja Pak helped popularize Permanent Marker, contributed to the rise of Zoap and RS11, and spent years building one of the most respected names in California cannabis culture. Now it is moving into the regulated European medical market — and it has a specific complaint about what it is finding there.

The brand, founded by Ryan Bartholomew and rooted in Northern California’s cannabis heritage, has announced a partnership with CP Medical to enter Germany and the United Kingdom through exclusive arrangements with Bloomwell and Mamedica respectively. The first products to reach German patients are Doja Z and Doja Permanent Marker. The UK launch follows closely, adding CP Z and CP Super Lemon Haze to the lineup.

Doja Z marks the first introduction of the multi-award-winning Z genetic into Germany’s medical sector. Doja has served as custodian of the original breeder cut for over seven years. Permanent Marker — named Leafly’s 2023 Strain of the Year and originally commercialized by Doja Exclusives — brings one of the most recognizable cultivars in recent cannabis history into a fully regulated pharmaceutical framework for the first time.

The quality problem they’re trying to solve

The partnership is built around a pointed critique of the European medical cannabis market as it currently operates. According to CP Medical, compliance has become the endpoint rather than the starting point — and the gap between regulatory approval and actual product quality is significant.

The specific issues they identify: genetics selected for ease of cultivation rather than consumer experience, seed selections passed off under commercial strain names with no meaningful connection to original genetics, and a near-total absence of legacy cultivation expertise in production decisions. The result, they argue, is compliant cannabis that lacks the terpene depth, genetic authenticity and experiential quality that long-term consumers recognize.

One of their more direct critiques targets irradiation, which much of the industry uses to meet microbial limits. CP Medical argues this reflects upstream failures in cultivation hygiene rather than a genuine solution — and that irradiation can degrade terpene profiles, including the sulphur-containing compounds responsible for the “gas” or “dank” character of premium flower. Their alternative is to control sterility from the beginning: hospital-grade SOPs, tissue culture germplasm, DNA sequencing for genetic verification, and clean cultivation environments that make irradiation unnecessary.

“We only sell what we smoke, and we only smoke what we sell.”

Ryan Bartholomew, Founder, Doja Pak

How the supply chain works

All genetics enter the supply chain as original breeder cuts imported in tissue culture under phytosanitary controls. Cultivation takes place in Thailand under GACP standards, with GMP processing handled through Blossom Pharma in Portugal before qualified-person batch release in Germany and the UK. Temperature-controlled pharma-grade logistics are used throughout.

Doja’s involvement is not limited to genetics and brand licensing. The team maintains active input across cultivation strategy, post-harvest handling and finished-product review — including the burn characteristics, ash profile and smoke quality that the brand considers non-negotiable markers of quality.

What comes next

Following the Germany and UK launches, CP Medical and Doja plan to expand into additional regulated medical markets globally. A collaboration with Burning Rope Pharms is already part of the initial launch and further details are expected to follow.

The partnership between CP Medical and Doja is eight years in the making, rooted in a working relationship that predates CP Medical’s current form — the company evolved from CP Exotics, which was active in California during the early rollouts of RS11 and Zoap.

<p>The post Doja Pak Takes on Europe: The Cali Brand Known for Elite Genetics Enters Regulated Medical Markets first appeared on High Times.</p>

The post Doja Pak Takes on Europe: The Cali Brand Known for Elite Genetics Enters Regulated Medical Markets appeared first on Paradise Found.

Oakland built the cannabis culture before there was a legal market. Now the city has a certification mark to prove it.

The City of Oakland launched the nation’s first cannabis equity certification mark on April 20, giving consumers a way to identify businesses owned by operators who were most impacted by the War on Drugs and who helped build the culture the legal industry now profits from.

The program is called Oakland Legendary. Verified equity operators can display the certification mark on packaging, advertising and retail windows. The mark is intentionally tilted, with the word “Legendary” ascending — a design choice meant to reflect the upward trajectory of equity operators who built their businesses against the odds and are still here.

“These are the operators who defined the culture and perfected the craft long before there was a legal market,” said Dale Sky Jones, Executive Chancellor of Oaksterdam University, which is supporting the campaign. “When you buy Oakland Legendary, you aren’t just supporting a local business; you are getting access to the most authentic, high-caliber cannabis in the world.”

Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee, who co-chaired the Cannabis Caucus during her time in Congress and introduced the first federal bill calling for cannabis equity programs, framed the launch as a direct response to the harm the drug war caused Black and Brown communities.

“Today, the Oakland Legendary label puts power back where it belongs, helping consumers make informed choices and ensuring those most impacted are leading and thriving in today’s economy.”

Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee

Oakland was the first city in the country to create a cannabis equity program, establishing it in 2017 to prioritize people most harmed by prohibition and minimize barriers to entry into the legal market. The Oakland Legendary campaign builds on that foundation, adding a consumer-facing signal that connects purchasing decisions to equity outcomes.

Verified equity businesses participating in the launch include Ceremonium, Conscious Mindz, Dakota West Coast, Muse Cannabis Company, Next Level Edibles, Old Money New Ink (O.M.N.I.) and The Weed Lady. Certified Oakland Equity retailers carrying their products include Root’d in the 510, which features a lounge, and Oakanna Dispensary. True Deliveries offers delivery.

“These legacy equity brands are the rooting ecosystem of our culture; the bigger and stronger the roots, the healthier the culture is.”

Rickey McCullough, Root’d in the 510

McCullough has a long history in the cannabis industry and was featured on the front page of the New York Times as one of the first equity dispensary owners in the country.

The Oakland Legendary awareness campaign runs through April 2028 and is supported by the Equity Trade Network. More information and a directory of verified operators is available at legendary.green.

<p>The post The Legends Who Built Cannabis Culture Are Finally Certified. It’s Called Oakland Legendary. first appeared on High Times.</p>

The post The Legends Who Built Cannabis Culture Are Finally Certified. It’s Called Oakland Legendary. appeared first on Paradise Found.

As federal cannabis rescheduling looms on the horizon and more states across the country begin rolling out regulations for legal psychedelic therapy, health officials have increasingly been targeting a centuries-old psychoactive plant from Southeast Asia with newly introduced measures of prohibition. 

Kratom is a leafy green botanical native to Southeast Asia that acts on the opioid receptors and is noted for its ability to offer pain relief and euphoria to the more than 2 million Americans who are estimated to use it each year. It is this ancient plant medicine that is being increasingly scrutinized as a key issue in the often contradictory framing of drug policy reform.

While many have looked to the current administration for movement on federal cannabis rescheduling and broader natural medicine policy reform, increasing restrictions on hemp products and rising scrutiny of kratom suggest that drug policy may be shifting in more complex—and in some cases more restrictive—directions. Since it has not been federally scheduled under the Controlled Substances Act, kratom has emerged as a prominent product in the legal psychoactive plant market.

The 7-OH Crackdown and Its Ripple Effects

Kratom contains several active alkaloids, most notably mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine (7-OH). While 7-OH occurs naturally in trace amounts, regulators have raised concerns about newer products that concentrate or synthesize this compound at much higher levels.

Over the last year, health authorities have launched a crackdown against 7-OH products in the wake of a series of unsettling reports about the addictiveness and potential dangers of the synthetic opioid. In communications from federal agencies, 7-OH has been described as significantly more potent than morphine in certain contexts, particularly when isolated or synthetically enhanced.

While 7-hydroxymitragynine occurs naturally in trace amounts in kratom, many of the products drawing regulatory scrutiny are synthetically concentrated versions.

The rising pushback against synthetic 7-OH products has cast a pall upon the kratom market itself, with health authorities across various counties currently considering restrictions against the sale and distribution of kratom products alongside their synthetic derivatives. 

As of March 25, 2026, the state of Connecticut has implemented a ban against kratom products and required stores to remove any remaining inventory from shelves. The domino effect of prohibition is poised to spread across state lines, signaling an escalation of the war on plant medicine. 

Kansas has a similar bill that has passed legislation and is awaiting the governor’s action to be signed into law. Several other states and counties are also currently moving the needle on the natural leaf kratom market regulation or proposed prohibition in the wake of the 7-OH product bans. 

“The press often conflates 7-OH with kratom, and as a result, we’re seeing increasing prohibition against natural leaf kratom,” says kratom industry operator Soren Shade of Top Tree Herbs.

“If existing kratom regulations can be overturned and replaced with bans, it’s actually easier for marijuana regulations to get overturned and replaced with bans too,” he continues.

Local Bans and the Fight Over ‘Third Spaces’

Such is also the case in Nassau County, New York, where lawmakers passed a bill banning the sale of all kratom products and synthetic counterparts in March. As of last week, new legislation has been introduced in neighboring Suffolk County—a district that makes up two-thirds of Long Island—to potentially ban kratom products, signaling a domino effect in the region. 

“The propaganda surrounding natural kratom leaf is reaching ‘Reefer Madness’ levels again,” says Travis Doupe of The Mock Pit, a non-alcoholic bottleshop that sells kratom in Huntington Station, New York. 

Kratom is a staple of the kava bar scene in New York that serves as a ‘third space’ for people to congregate together and enjoy alternatives to alcohol. Kava is a mild psychoactive root traditionally used in the South Pacific islands to induce relaxation and promote social bonding. Together, kava and kratom have become the backbone of a rising trend towards public venues offering alcohol alternatives for people who want to socialize and relax without the hangover. 

While New York public health officials have raised concerns about the addictiveness of kratom and its reported potential liver toxicity, a community of kratom users and small business owners is working to educate the public about the utility of the plant and its role in helping to shape the alcohol alternative market. 

“What we’ve built is a beautiful community of people who can meet, work, and relax away from a bar setting. In 2026, it’s sad to think they are suppressing this vibe and trying to ban a safe and natural plant,” continues Doupe. 

Other members of the kratom community in New York see the potential ban of kratom as classic government overreach. For these small business owners who have helped shape the alcohol alternative movement by creating ‘Third Spaces’ offering legal psychoactive plants like kratom and kava tea, the specter of a crackdown on kratom products poses the threat of undermining the local community connections and values they champion.

“Nassau County’s ban on the sale of kratom supersedes both state and federal regulations. County Executive Bruce Blakeman is threatening up to one year of jail time for selling a plant that is 100 percent legal in the rest of New York State,” says Eric Ott of Roots Kava Bar in Long Island. 

“In a state where cannabis was legalized, and psilocybin therapy frameworks are being considered, one of the biggest counties in the state is considering a ban on kratom. The war on plants that we thought was over is actually coming back masked as public safety in an overreach response to cracking down on totally unnatural synthetic drugs like 7-OH,” says Robert Lattig of Roots Kava Bar.

A Shifting Landscape for Drug Policy Reform

Recent political movements have signaled potential openness to expanding access to natural medicines and alternative therapies. However, the evolving regulatory landscape around kratom suggests that progress may not be uniform across all substances.

The crackdown against 7-OH, being extended to potentially ban the sale and distribution of kratom at large in various counties, showcases the domino effect of shifting public and political opinion on natural healing modalities. 

In an era when the War on Drugs has faced increasing criticism for its historical and political implications, kratom has become, for some, a test case for how governments approach emerging and existing psychoactive substances.

Whether these developments represent a temporary course correction or a longer-term shift remains to be seen. But as cannabis legalization expands and psychedelic policy evolves, the trajectory of kratom regulation may offer an early signal of where broader drug policy is headed next.

This article is from an external, unpaid contributor. It does not represent High Times’ reporting and has not been edited for content or accuracy.

<p>The post Kratom Crackdown Signals New Drug Policy Shift first appeared on High Times.</p>

The post Kratom Crackdown Signals New Drug Policy Shift appeared first on Paradise Found.

It may not be Switzerland’s political capital, but it could easily be its cannabis capital. We’re talking about Zurich, one of the country’s largest cities and its main financial hub. Given its influence, it makes sense that cannabis-related developments there to draw attention. And this latest one is significant. Following a vote held in March, the government decided to take a key step: extending the scientific pilot program for regulated cannabis in order to keep gathering data before moving into the debate over national legalization. 

Zurich launched Züri Can – Cannabis with Responsibility, a scientific initiative designed to study how consumer behavior changes when people have access to legal cannabis within a regulated system. The results were so robust and consistent that the country chose to double down on the initiative.

What Is Züri Can, Why Does It Matter, and Why Is It Working?

Although Switzerland still prohibits the general commercial sale of cannabis for adult use, the country has been adopting an increasingly pragmatic stance toward the plant. In recent years, the federal government has authorized a series of scientific pilot programs to study what happens when access to cannabis is regulated in a controlled manner.

The logic behind the strategy is, forgive the pun, logical: before drafting a final law, real data is needed. It also requires acknowledging that certain behaviors already exist among the population and that, rather than simply banning them, governments should determine the safest way to regulate them. This is the view of Andreas Hauri, Zurich’s Director of Health, who acknowledges that “thousands of people consume cannabis in Zurich. We must acknowledge this reality and act accordingly.”

Zurich was one of the first cities to move forward with this approach and today leads one of the most closely watched cannabis experiments on the continent.

With this new authorization, the government can continue studying changes in consumption patterns, impacts on public health, effects on the illicit market, user behavior under regulated access, and which sales model works best. After all, it is impossible to create good laws without understanding who they affect and how those laws impact the population in practice. “The scientific findings emerging from the study will form the basis for discussions concerning an evidence-based and practical future implementation of a responsible cannabis policy in Switzerland,” stated the Federal Office of Public Health (FOPH) when asked about the study.

And we’re not just talking about allowing citizens to buy legal cannabis. Zurich chose to study participant behavior across three different distribution channels in order to compare their effectiveness and efficiency:

1. Pharmacies
2. Cannabis social clubs
3. Municipal centers specializing in drug and harm reduction

This is key because the goal is not merely to determine whether regulation works, but—if it does—to figure out how it should be implemented.

The Numbers Behind the Program’s Two-Year Extension

After evaluating the preliminary results, the government decided to continue this pilot program for another two years, through October 2028. So far, the study has already yielded highly significant figures for a restricted-access scientific program.

In total, 2,456 registered users participated—0.56% of the city’s total population—through a network of 21 access points offering selected products grown under controlled conditions and in compliance with strict regulatory standards, typically sold in 5-gram packages. Over the course of the program, 110,500 sales were recorded, and 940 kg were distributed, showing that demand is both real and sustained.

What could this mean for Europe?

Alongside Germany, the Netherlands, Malta, and the Czech Republic, Switzerland appears to be moving faster on cannabis reform than much of the rest of Europe. If these pilot programs continue to show reductions in the illicit market, stable, non-problematic use, and improvements in traceability and public health, they could become compelling evidence that national legalization makes sense on multiple fronts.

As the logic behind the program makes clear, forcing people to rely on unregulated, illegal access that may be riskier than what the state itself could provide is not a policy Andreas Hauri appears willing to defend: “An uncontrolled black market with contaminated products is not an option,” the official summarized. It’s hard to argue with that.

<p>The post Zurich’s Weed Trial Is Working So Well Switzerland Just Extended It Again first appeared on High Times.</p>

The post Zurich’s Weed Trial Is Working So Well Switzerland Just Extended It Again appeared first on Paradise Found.

From medical rumors to a possible upper-crust grow op, a new story is once again linking King Charles III to cannabis. This time, however, it has nothing to do with health speculation or the monarch’s well-known passion for botany. Instead, the connection comes by way of a police raid at a historic property tied to his royal past.

Police in North Wales discovered a large-scale illegal cannabis cultivation operation inside Plas Glynllifon, a 19th-century mansion that hosted the investiture ball for then-Prince of Wales Charles—now King Charles III—in 1969.

According to North Wales Police, officers executing a search warrant under the Misuse of Drugs Act uncovered what they described as a “significant grow operation” on the building’s top floor. Superintendent Arwel Hughes told the BBC: “We uncovered a grow, which was on the top floor of the building. We estimate around 12 rooms with grows in them and they were fairly mature plants.”

Authorities also confirmed that the operation relied on illegally tampered electrical systems and diverted water lines into the building—common hallmarks of sophisticated clandestine grow sites.

No arrests have been made so far, though police say forensic work and digital evidence analysis remain ongoing as the investigation continues.

A Royal-Era Mansion Turned Into an Indoor Grow

The story quickly drew attention across the UK not only because of the operation’s scale, but because of the property itself. We’re talking about Plas Glynllifon, a sprawling aristocratic mansion with a dramatic history, decaying interiors, and its own local folklore. Most notably, the estate hosted the official ball following King Charles III’s 1969 investiture as Prince of Wales, tying the now-crumbling property directly to modern royal history.

Alan Fryer / Plas Glynllifon

Built in the 1830s near Caernarfon in Gwynedd, the Grade I-listed neoclassical mansion once belonged to Lord Newborough and was long considered one of North Wales’ grandest private estates. In recent years, however, the largely vacant property has fallen into disrepair, its decaying halls becoming a magnet for urban explorers and paranormal enthusiasts.

The sprawling estate has reportedly earned a haunted reputation over the years, with visitors claiming eerie phenomena inside its deteriorating corridors. One of the mansion’s most enduring legends centers on Maria Stella Chiappini, an Italian-born aristocrat tied to the property whose dramatic life later inspired ghost stories surrounding the estate.

Those same historic halls, stone walls, and aristocratic interiors have now been overshadowed by a far less ceremonial scene: entire formerly ceremonial rooms transformed into clandestine grow spaces.

Another Odd Coincidence Linking King Charles III to Cannabis

there is no indication that the current British king is connected whatsoever to the operation or to the property’s current use, the story inevitably revives memories of another cannabis-related headline that circulated widely in 2025: rumors claiming that Charles had explored medical cannabis as part of his cancer treatment.

Those reports, never officially confirmed, claimed the monarch had considered cannabinoids as a therapeutic complement, consistent with his long-documented interest in integrative medicine, organic agriculture, and plant-based therapies.

Though the two stories are entirely unrelated, this latest development adds yet another chapter to the strange and recurring pattern of headlines linking the British Crown to cannabis.

It also highlights a uniquely British paradox: while medical cannabis has been legal since 2018 with a doctor’s prescription and regulated access continues to expand slowly, the illicit market continues to meet substantial parallel demand, often through increasingly sophisticated clandestine operations set up even in historic properties and heritage buildings.

In this case, the contrast could hardly be more British: a mansion once used for royal pageantry has, decades later, become the site of a massive clandestine cannabis grow.

<p>The post From Royal Balls to Weed Walls: Massive Grow Found in Mansion Linked to King Charles III first appeared on High Times.</p>

The post From Royal Balls to Weed Walls: Massive Grow Found in Mansion Linked to King Charles III appeared first on Paradise Found.

A $10 million payment tied to a Florida Medicaid settlement moved through the Hope Florida Foundation, into two anti-drug nonprofits, and then into a political committee fighting marijuana legalization. Public filings also show a major funding surge at SAM Action during the same period. The full picture remains incomplete, but the overlap, timing, and money trail raise serious questions.

Two months before Florida voters decided the fate of marijuana legalization, $10 million tied to a Medicaid overbilling settlement quietly resurfaced in a campaign to keep cannabis illegal.

The money, drawn from a $67 million settlement with the state’s largest Medicaid contractor, moved through a charity founded by First Lady Casey DeSantis and then to two nonprofits with close ties to Governor Ron DeSantis’s political orbit. Within days, $8.5 million landed in political committees fighting Amendment 3, the marijuana legalization ballot measure, according to state campaign finance records and documents obtained by the Associated Press.

The amendment failed to reach the required 60% supermajority in November 2024, though 56% of Florida voters supported it.

56% voted yes, but it still failed.

One of those nonprofits, Save Our Society From Drugs, a little-known St. Petersburg organization with less than $50,000 in assets, received $5 million and transferred 95% of it to a political committee within days.

A nonprofit that reported just $43,125 in net assets in its last available tax filing before the grant received $5 million.

Recent reporting has exposed how the DeSantis administration steered millions tied to the settlement into the political fight over marijuana. But an examination of tax filings, corporate records and financial disclosures suggests the public record may tell a broader story about prohibition networks, financial overlap and unanswered questions around who funded the anti-legalization push during a critical election year.

What appears at first glance to be a Florida campaign finance scandal looks more complicated when placed next to national prohibition groups. Save Our Society From Drugs is closely affiliated with Smart Approaches to Marijuana, the nation’s leading anti-legalization lobbying organization, whose 501(c)(4) arm reported receiving $8.6 million in contributions in 2024, a 445% increase from the prior year, according to its Form 990 filed with the Internal Revenue Service.

SAM Action reported an $8.6 million funding surge in 2024.

The overlap raises questions that remain unanswered. But public records reviewed by High Times do not show that Save Our Society From Drugs transferred any portion of the Hope Florida grant directly to Smart Approaches to Marijuana or SAM Action, and this article does not assert that such a transfer occurred.

The Money Trail

The flow of funds is documented in state records, sworn testimony and investigative reporting tied to the Florida House inquiry.

On Sept. 27, 2024, Florida reached a $67 million settlement with Centene Corporation, the state’s largest Medicaid contractor, over allegations the company had overbilled the state. The settlement agreement directed $10 million of that total to the Hope Florida Foundation, a charitable organization founded by First Lady Casey DeSantis to support her signature welfare initiative.

Within weeks, Hope Florida Foundation made two $5 million grants, according to foundation chairman Joshua Hay’s testimony to state investigators. One went to Secure Florida’s Future, a nonprofit controlled by executives at the Florida Chamber of Commerce. The other went to Save Our Society From Drugs.

Both organizations then transferred a combined $8.5 million to Keep Florida Clean, a political action committee, state campaign finance records show. Keep Florida Clean was chaired by James Uthmeier, who at the time served as Governor Ron DeSantis’s chief of staff and is now Florida’s attorney general.

Text messages obtained by the Associated Press show that Uthmeier helped connect Amy Ronshausen, executive director of Save Our Society From Drugs, to the grant process. According to the AP timeline and the House inquiry, those contacts began before the foundation’s board had been formally notified that the $10 million was coming.

“Can you send me wire instructions?” Jeff Aaron, the foundation’s attorney, wrote to Ronshausen on Oct. 18, 2024, according to text messages shared with the AP.

On Oct. 22, 2024, Hope Florida Foundation wired $5 million to Save Our Society From Drugs, Hay told investigators. The next day, Save Our Society donated $1.6 million to Keep Florida Clean, followed by $3.15 million more in the following days, according to Florida Division of Elections records.

In total, Save Our Society transferred $4.75 million of the $5 million it received, 95% of the grant, to the political committee within days of receiving it.

Within days, 95% of the grant was transferred to a political committee.

Keep Florida Clean subsequently sent more than $10 million to the Republican Party of Florida and over $1 million to the Florida Freedom Fund, Governor DeSantis’s personal political committee, campaign finance records show.

The Leon County State Attorney opened a grand jury investigation in 2025. State Representative Alex Andrade, the Republican who led the Florida House investigation, has alleged that the transactions could amount to money laundering and wire fraud. No charges had been filed as of publication.

A National Network

Save Our Society From Drugs operates as the lobbying arm of the Drug Free America Foundation, a larger nonprofit organization founded in 1987 by Mel and Betty Sembler, according to the foundation’s corporate filing. Both organizations share the same address, 333 3rd Ave. N., Suite 200, St. Petersburg, FL 33701, and the same executive director, according to their respective websites, public profiles and tax filings.

That executive director, Amy Ronshausen, has longstanding ties to Smart Approaches to Marijuana. Ronshausen has appeared at SAM events and, in February 2025, spoke at SAM’s Good Drug Policy Summit in Washington alongside SAM president Kevin Sabet and members of Congress, according to SAM’s own materials.

Similarly, Sabet has been announced as the keynote speaker at the Drug Free America Foundation’s 2026 National Prevention Summit, according to the foundation’s website.

The overlap extends beyond speaking engagements. The National Drug-Free Workplace Alliance, described on its website as a division of Drug Free America Foundation, lists Smart Approaches to Marijuana among its partner organizations for substance abuse policy and prevention.

Save Our Society From Drugs also has a documented history of funding anti-marijuana campaigns. In 2016, the organization gave more than $1 million to fight legalization initiatives in multiple states, as it had done previously in Colorado.

The relationships described here show overlap in personnel, addresses, public events and advocacy networks, but do not by themselves establish coordination on any specific transaction unless otherwise documented.

Financial Discrepancies

The timing of Save Our Society’s $5 million grant coincides with an unusual pattern in the financial filings of Smart Approaches to Marijuana’s lobbying arm.

SAM Action, the organization’s 501(c)(4) entity, reported $8,601,743 in contributions for 2024, according to its Form 990 filed with the IRS. That represents a 445% increase from the $1,576,210 the organization reported receiving in 2023.

Meanwhile, SAM Inc., the related 501(c)(3) educational organization, experienced a sharp financial decline. Its 2024 Form 990 shows revenues fell 64% to $1.2 million, while expenses increased 59% to $2.26 million. The organization operated at a loss of more than $1 million and reported $656,395 in legal fees, nearly 30% of its total budget.

Despite the financial distress at SAM Inc., SAM Action reported holding $23.04 million in net assets, according to its 2024 Form 990.

Tax law protects the identities of donors to 501(c)(4) organizations like SAM Action. The donor information is contained in Schedule B of the organization’s Form 990, which is redacted from public view.

Save Our Society From Drugs’ 2023 Form 990, filed with the IRS in March 2024, shows the organization had just $43,125 in net assets and operated at a loss of $84,795. A subsequently filed 2024 Form 990 — covering the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, before the October grant — shows net assets had recovered to $96,091. Full filing history is available via ProPublica’s Nonprofit Explorer.

The $5 million the organization received from Hope Florida in October 2024 represented more than 100 times its previous net assets. Of that amount, $4.75 million went to Keep Florida Clean. The disposition of the remaining $250,000 is not documented in currently available public records.

The Form 990 covering Save Our Society From Drugs’ fiscal year ending September 30, 2025 — which would include the October 22, 2024 Hope Florida wire transfer — is not publicly available yet.

The Scandal Unfolds

The controversy became public in early 2025, when the Miami Herald and Tampa Bay Times reported on the diversion of Medicaid settlement funds.

The Florida House Health Care Budget Subcommittee, led by Representative Andrade, launched an investigation. In contentious hearings, state officials defended the transactions while Andrade accused them of misappropriating public funds.

“Instead of taking the settlement money that was paid by this large company and putting it back into the state coffers, they said, $10 million of what you owe us, just give it to the Hope Florida Foundation,” Andrade said in an April 10, 2025 podcast interview, as reported by multiple outlets.

The investigation ended abruptly in late April 2025 after key witnesses refused to cooperate and Hope Florida Foundation officials declined to appear at scheduled hearings.

The fallout was swift. James Holton, chairman of Save Our Society From Drugs’ board of directors, resigned on May 15, 2025, saying in his resignation letter that he had been unaware the organization accepted $5 million from Hope Florida Foundation or that it subsequently donated millions to a political committee, according to reporting by the Tampa Bay Times and Miami Herald.

“I learned about the transactions in news reports,” Holton wrote, calling for “a thorough investigation and audits” of the organization.

Ronshausen was suspended from her position on April 22, 2025, according to a whistleblower complaint she filed with the board on May 7, 2025, as reported by Florida Politics. In the complaint, Ronshausen said her suspension was retaliation for questioning the board’s choice of legal counsel.

The suspension came six weeks after Ronshausen had been honored at the Governor’s Mansion as a “Florida Hero” for her “efforts to combat drug legalization” and her “key role in grassroots campaigns, including successfully defeating Florida’s proposed Amendment 3 in 2024,” according to the March 28, 2025 reception program obtained by the Orlando Sentinel.

In a letter to House Speaker Daniel Perez, Ronshausen disputed Andrade’s characterization of events, saying she had been pressured to testify and that Andrade had misrepresented her statements. She specifically denied that Uthmeier had directed her on how to use the Hope Florida grant funds.

“At no time has James Uthmeier directed me or SOS on how to use funds received from an entirely appropriate grant from Hope Florida,” Ronshausen wrote, according to her April 25, 2025 letter published by Florida Politics.

Andrade told Florida Politics that Ronshausen’s claims were false. “Nothing she said in that letter happened,” he said.

Unanswered Questions

Several key questions remain unanswered.

Public records do not show whether Save Our Society From Drugs donated any portion of the $5 million Hope Florida grant to Smart Approaches to Marijuana or SAM Action. The Form 990 covering the fiscal year ending September 30, 2025 — which would detail how the organization handled the $5 million — is not publicly available yet.

The sources of SAM Action’s $8.6 million in 2024 contributions also remain unknown. Federal tax law shields the identities of donors to 501(c)(4) organizations, and SAM has consistently refused to voluntarily disclose this information.

Kevin Sabet, president and CEO of Smart Approaches to Marijuana, has previously stated that the organization does not accept money from pharmaceutical companies, prison guard unions, or other industries with financial interests in prohibition.

“We get all of our money for these campaigns from individual donors, many people who lost family members to drug abuse, including from marijuana,” Sabet told Vice News in 2016.

But the organization has consistently refused to voluntarily disclose its donors, fighting state-level transparency requirements. In 2019, SAM opposed New York state laws requiring donor disclosure, according to public reporting and lobbying records.

Smart Approaches to Marijuana Action actively campaigned against Amendment 3 in Florida. In October 2024, the organization launched television advertisements featuring former U.S. Representative Patrick Kennedy warning about marijuana lollipops and “stoned drivers.”

The exact amount SAM Action spent on the Florida campaign is not disclosed in available public records.

A Web of Connections

The financial ties between the various organizations involved in the Florida scandal extend across multiple states and involve figures with long histories in drug policy advocacy.

Late Mel Sembler, who co-founded Drug Free America Foundation with his wife Betty, donated $1 million to fight marijuana legalization in Florida in 2016.

Sembler, a former U.S. ambassador and major Republican fundraiser, also co-founded Straight Inc., a controversial “troubled teen” drug rehabilitation program that former participants have described as abusive.

Save Our Society From Drugs was founded by Betty Sembler in 1998 as the lobbying arm of Drug Free America Foundation, according to the foundation’s website and public records. The organization is registered as a 501(c)(4) in Florida and engages in lobbying activities, according to its own website.

The connection between Drug Free America Foundation and Smart Approaches to Marijuana runs through multiple organizational channels. The National Drug-Free Workplace Alliance, described on its website as “a division of Drug Free America Foundation,” lists Smart Approaches to Marijuana among its partner organizations. Both organizations also collaborate through the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America, a national coalition prevention network that has provided funding to SAM in the past.

The Semblers also had connections to the Church of Scientology, which maintains its headquarters in Clearwater, Florida, less than 10 miles from the Drug Free America Foundation offices. Ronshausen was interviewed in 2016 by Freedom Magazine, a Church of Scientology publication, about her work opposing marijuana legalization.

These connections reflect decades of institutional overlap in drug war activism and prevention programming, though public records reviewed by High Times do not establish coordination on any specific marijuana ballot measure beyond the relationships and activities documented above.

What Happens Next

The grand jury investigation continues in Leon County, though Attorney General Uthmeier, who chaired Keep Florida Clean and has been identified in reporting and legislative inquiries as helping coordinate aspects of the transfers, now heads the office that would typically handle such matters.

State Representative Andrade has called for Uthmeier to recuse himself, but the attorney general has maintained that he had no involvement in the settlement negotiations or the Hope Florida Foundation grants.

The Florida Legislature defunded the Office of Hope Florida within the Florida Department of Education in June 2025, according to news reports, though the Hope Florida Foundation continues to operate as a private charity.

U.S. Representatives Kathy Castor and Darren Soto have requested a federal investigation by the Office of Inspector General at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services into the “unlawful diversion of Medicaid funds in Florida,” according to a letter they sent in May 2025.

For marijuana reform advocates, the scandal has exposed what they describe as a well-funded network of prohibition organizations that operate largely out of public view.

The 2024 financial filings from Smart Approaches to Marijuana Action, showing an unprecedented surge in contributions during the same period that millions of dollars moved through Florida’s anti-marijuana network, raise obvious questions. They do not, on the public record alone, answer all of them.

What the Florida case exposes, at minimum, is how public money can move through private entities in ways that complicate accountability, blur political and charitable lines, and keep the true sources of influence out of public view.

Correction, April 11, 2026: This article originally stated that the 2024 Form 990 for Save Our Society From Drugs was not publicly available. That filing was available at the time of publication via ProPublica’s Nonprofit Explorer, and covers the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024 — prior to the October 22, 2024 grant. The Form 990 that would document how the organization handled the $5 million is the filing covering the fiscal year ending September 30, 2025, which remains unavailable. The article has been updated accordingly.

Editor’s note: This article is based on public records, campaign finance disclosures, IRS filings, corporate records and linked reporting. Where facts remain disputed or unproven, that is stated in the text.

This article is a reported analysis. The commentary, views or interpretations expressed do not imply that any uncharged conduct has been proven in court unless explicitly stated. Readers are encouraged to review the underlying materials and draw their own conclusions.

<p>The post How $10 Million Meant for Florida Taxpayers Ended Up in the Anti-Marijuana War first appeared on High Times.</p>

The post How $10 Million Meant for Florida Taxpayers Ended Up in the Anti-Marijuana War appeared first on Paradise Found.

By Michael Krawitz with the assistance of the Veterans Action Council.

For many decades, those of us working at the intersection of Veteran healthcare, medical cannabis advocacy, and international drug policy have encountered the same response from the DEA that the international treaties allow the DEA, up until now, to block medical access to cannabis.

The 1961 Single Convention defines “cannabis” primarily as the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant from which the resin has not been extracted. Seeds and leaves without the flowering tops are explicitly excluded from that definition.¹ Governments around the world pointed to the treaty framework as justification for limiting access to medical cannabis, imposing restrictive monitoring systems on patients, and maintaining punitive approaches toward cannabis cultivation and possession, even in cases involving serious illness. For Veterans living with chronic pain, PTSI, or other service-related conditions, these policies often translated into a stark reality: legal obstacles standing between patients and a medicine that many found effective when other treatments had failed.

At the same time, the same treaty language was frequently used to justify the strict regulation of hemp-derived products, including cannabinoids with low abuse potential, such as cannabidiol (CBD). These compounds originate from the cannabis plant; many regulators assumed they must automatically fall under the same international narcotics controls as flowering tops and resins of the cannabis plant. That interpretation is now being challenged.

In 2018, the World Health Organization Expert Committee on Drug Dependence (ECDD) conducted a comprehensive review of CBD. It concluded: “Cannabidiol (CBD) exhibits no effects indicative of any abuse or dependence potential… CBD is generally well tolerated with a good safety profile.”² Based on this evaluation, the WHO recommended that preparations containing predominantly CBD and not more than trace levels of THC should not be placed under international drug control.

Over the past several years, we have witnessed a significant evolution in how the international drug control system is understood. The rigid prohibition framework that defined much of the twentieth century is gradually giving way to a more nuanced approach, one that places greater emphasis on public health, scientific evidence, and human rights.

Subsequent clarification from the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) reinforced this interpretation. In its guidance on the treaty provisions relating to cannabis, the Board noted: “THC, its isomers and delta-9-THC are controlled under the 1971 Convention… CBD is not included in the Convention’s schedules and therefore is not subject to control.”³ This clarification matters. It means that under the current treaty framework, CBD itself is not an internationally controlled narcotic. Governments may regulate CBD products domestically, but the treaties do not require them to treat CBD as a controlled drug.

Crucially, these changes are not coming solely from advocacy organizations or reform-minded governments. They are also emerging from the institutions responsible for enacting and overseeing the international drug control treaties themselves. The International Narcotics Control Board (INCB), long considered the guardian of strict treaty compliance, has begun clarifying interpretations that recognize the need for flexibility when it comes to patient care, scientific research, and modern agricultural uses of the cannabis plant. These interpretive shifts represent more than technical adjustments. They signal a growing international consensus that drug policy must ultimately serve patients’ well-being and rights.

The CBD Breakthrough: Interpreting the Treaties by Their Purpose

One of the most important developments concerns the international treatment of cannabidiol (CBD). For years, treaty interpretation created a peculiar legal paradox. Because CBD is extracted from the cannabis plant, it was initially classified as a “cannabis extract.” Under a strict reading of the 1961 Convention, this classification placed CBD within the scope of Schedule I controls, even though the compound itself lacks potential for abuse or dependence.

This interpretation has created regulatory confusion worldwide. Products widely recognized as safe, used by patients seeking relief from inflammation, epilepsy, anxiety, and other conditions, were sometimes treated under the same legal framework as substances considered highly addictive or dangerous. The problem stemmed from an overly literal reading of treaty language written more than sixty years ago, at a time when modern cannabinoid science did not yet exist. Beginning in recent years, the INCB has moved toward a more sophisticated method known as teleological interpretation. In legal terms, this approach examines the purpose of a treaty rather than relying exclusively on the literal meaning of its words. The purpose of the international drug control conventions is not to prohibit plants or molecules simply because they exist. Rather, the system was designed to prevent the misuse of substances that can cause addiction, harm, or significant public health risks. CBD does not fit that profile.

Recognizing this, the INCB’s guidance and related treaty analysis support the view that CBD products lacking significant THC should not be treated as controlled drugs under the conventions.⁴ Governments remain free to establish reasonable thresholds of THC, but the international legal basis for treating CBD as a dangerous narcotic has effectively weakened. For patients and industry alike, this clarification removes a major obstacle that once constrained research, medical access, and economic development in hemp-derived products. This also highlights the fact that the INCB recognizes that a good CBD medicinal product necessarily has some THC in it.

The Industrial Evolution: Rethinking Hemp in the Modern Era

Another major interpretive shift concerns Article 28, paragraph 2 of the 1961 Convention, which provides an exemption for cannabis cultivation conducted for “industrial purposes (fiber and seed).” For decades, many governments interpreted this clause narrowly. Under that restrictive view, hemp could legally be grown only for traditional agricultural uses such as textile fiber production or seed-based food products. Any cultivation connected to cannabinoid extraction, even if the cannabinoids lack abuse potential, was often treated as falling under the same strict controls applied to drug-type cannabis.

Modern agricultural and industrial uses of hemp, however, have expanded dramatically. Today, hemp is used in construction materials, bioplastics, nutritional products, and cannabinoid extraction. The INCB has acknowledged the scope of this exemption: “Only cannabis cultivation for industrial purposes (fiber and seed) or horticulture is exempt from international control.”³ While the treaty text specifically mentions fiber and seed, many legal scholars and policymakers interpret those terms as examples reflecting the agricultural uses known in 1961 rather than a closed list of permissible activities.

Recent communications from the INCB to national authorities, including Circular Letter E/INCB/NAR/C.L.20/2024,⁷ further discuss how cannabis-related substances should be interpreted under the conventions. These private multilateral communications emphasize that only certain cannabinoids, primarily THC and its isomers, are internationally scheduled, reinforcing the distinction between drug and non-drug components of the plant.³

This interpretation created unnecessary regulatory barriers for farmers and innovators exploring the many modern applications of hemp. Advocates and legal scholars long argued that the phrase “fiber and seed” should be understood as illustrative rather than exhaustive. In other words, the treaty language was meant to provide examples of industrial uses, not a closed list of permissible activities.

Recent legal analysis and policy discussions, including remarks by Dr. Pavel Pachta, suggest this broader interpretation is gaining support. The Board’s publicly available language makes clear the exemption exists, though the full scope of that exemption remains a matter of interpretation.

This clarification has significant implications. Cultivation of hemp for the extraction of non-controlled cannabinoids, such as CBD, can reasonably be considered an industrial agricultural activity rather than drug production, so long as psychoactive components such as THC are appropriately regulated within existing frameworks.⁷

For farmers, researchers, and manufacturers, this recognition provides a pathway toward regulatory certainty. It also reflects a broader understanding that the cannabis plant is not a monolithic entity. Its industrial, nutritional, medicinal, and scientific applications are diverse, and international policy must be flexible enough to accommodate that reality.

These clarifications are significant for modern hemp industries. They suggest that cultivation aimed at producing non-controlled cannabinoids such as CBD may reasonably be understood within the treaty framework as an industrial agricultural activity, provided psychoactive components remain regulated under domestic law. Discussion of these developments was also presented officially by Dr. Pavel Pachta during an international policy event held during the 2026 session of the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs.⁴ Dr. Pachta served on the board of the INCB from January 2004 to June 2013, as its Secretariat, and rejoined the board as a member from Dec 2022 – May 2025.

Medical Access as a Human Rights Obligation

Perhaps the most profound transformation in international drug policy concerns the growing emphasis on human rights and patient access. Article 4(c) of the 1961 Single Convention states, “The parties shall take such legislative and administrative measures as may be necessary: Subject to the provisions of this Convention, to limit exclusively to medical and scientific purposes”.¹ In 2020, the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs voted to remove cannabis from Schedule IV of the 1961 Convention, the category reserved for substances considered particularly dangerous and lacking therapeutic value. The vote represented an important symbolic and scientific acknowledgment that cannabis has legitimate medical uses. However, the evolving interpretation of the treaties goes beyond scheduling classifications.

The INCB has repeatedly stressed this responsibility in its annual reports, warning that overly restrictive regulations can result in serious public health consequences when patients are unable to obtain necessary medicines.⁵ This principle historically focused on opioid pain medications, which remain severely under-available in many parts of the world. But the same logic increasingly applies to cannabis-based medicines, particularly following the 2020 decision by the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs to remove cannabis and cannabis resin from Schedule IV of the 1961 Convention.⁶

The international drug control system, in other words, is not meant to prevent patients from receiving treatment. It is meant to ensure that medicines are available while minimizing misuse. In recent years, the INCB has increasingly framed this obligation within the broader context of human rights, including the right to health. When patients are unable to obtain necessary medicines because of excessive regulation, bureaucratic barriers, or political hesitation, the system is not functioning as intended.

This perspective has important implications for medical cannabis. Governments are encouraged to develop regulatory frameworks that allow safe and controlled access for patients who may benefit from cannabis-based treatments. In some situations, especially where commercial distribution systems remain limited or inaccessible, alternative mechanisms may be appropriate. In this context, the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs can be seen as a contract requiring member states to provide access to these important medicines to their people. Dr. Pavel Pachta stated,⁴ “In fact, it is an obligation of parties to the treaties to control these substances and, at the same time, to make them available for medical purposes, implementation at the national, federal, and state levels.” “When I was on the board, there was a discussion about home cultivation, and some people were, you know, this is a problematic issue.

This can be easily misused. The quality is not like what you would get from a medical practitioner and so on. But the final conclusion of the board, and it was also communicated to governments, that also home cultivation of cannabis is in line with treaty obligations, it is for medical purposes, is in line with the requirements of the treaties.”⁴ “a cultivation for medical purposes, and that should not be prevented. So the governments should consider that this exists, and it should also be considered as a legal activity for medical purposes.”⁴

Among these possibilities is home cultivation for personal medical use. As Dr. Pachta described it at the CND side event, home cultivation may be compatible with treaty obligations when it is necessary to ensure patient access.⁴ For disabled individuals, rural patients, or Veterans living with service-related injuries, this flexibility can make the difference between theoretical legality and real-world access.

Moving Beyond the Myth of International Barriers

For many years, the global drug control treaties were presented as immovable obstacles to cannabis reform. Today, that narrative is increasingly difficult to sustain. The treaties themselves contain significant flexibility, and the institutions responsible for interpreting them are demonstrating a growing willingness to apply that flexibility in ways that prioritize health, science, and human dignity.

Clarifications regarding CBD, industrial hemp, and medical access illustrate a broader transformation in international thinking. The goal is no longer simply to enforce prohibition. It is to balance legitimate concerns about misuse with the equally important need to protect patients’ access and support scientific progress.

The remaining barriers are now largely domestic. National governments must decide whether to continue relying on outdated interpretations or to embrace the evolving international consensus that places patients at the center of drug policy. For advocates, healthcare professionals, and policymakers alike, the challenge ahead is to translate these international developments into practical reforms at the national and local levels. Laws must be updated, regulations modernized, and stigma replaced with evidence-based policymaking.

The international framework is no longer the wall it once appeared to be. The wind is shifting in favor of patient rights, scientific progress, and humane policy. Now it is up to governments, and to all of us who care about patient access, to ensure that this momentum leads to meaningful change.

The wind is at our backs. It is time to finish the work.

In-article images provided by Veterans Action Council.

This article is from an external, unpaid contributor. It does not represent High Times’ reporting and has not been edited for content or accuracy.

References

Circular Letter E/INCB/NAR/C.L.20/2024 Private Multilateral Governmental “The Implementation of the provisions of the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs as amended by the 1972 Protocol, and the 1971 Convention on Psychotropic Substances in relation to cannabis and cannabis-related substances.

United Nations. Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs (1961), Articles 1, 4, and 28.
https://www.unodc.org/pdf/convention_1961_en.pdf

World Health Organization. WHO Expert Committee on Drug Dependence: Critical Review Report – Cannabidiol (CBD) (2018), pp. 5–6.

International Narcotics Control Board. Implementation of the provisions of the 1961 Single Convention… in relation to cannabis and cannabis-related substances, paras. 4–5, pp. 1–2.

UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs side event, 13 March 2026, discussion of treaty interpretation and CBD.
https://youtu.be/W1mmnSyJqvg

International Narcotics Control Board. INCB Annual Report 2022, sections on availability of controlled medicines and public health obligations.

United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs. Decision 63/17 (2020) removing cannabis and cannabis resin from Schedule IV of the 1961 Convention.

<p>The post Everything You Know About CBD Is Probably Wrong first appeared on High Times.</p>

The post Everything You Know About CBD Is Probably Wrong appeared first on Paradise Found.

The artist is entering cannabis as co-founder and brand ambassador of Young Gong, a new venture with Dr. Sha-Ron Pierre-Kovler’s Glenmere Farms Enterprises.

YG Marley is entering the cannabis business.

The artist is launching Young Gong, a new cannabis brand created with Glenmere Farms Enterprises, the New York-based company led by biomedical scientist Dr. Sha-Ron Pierre-Kovler. The official launch is set for April 19 with a “Countdown to 4/20” event at Partake NYC in Long Island City, during the 2nd day of NYC’s weekend-long Kanafest.

According to materials shared exclusively with High Times, Marley is part of the venture as co-founder and brand ambassador, giving the project a more direct connection to the artist than the usual celebrity licensing play. The brand is being positioned around cannabis, music and meditation, with the name “Young Gong” drawing on both Marley’s identity and the idea of sound as a healing force.

“I’ve wanted to work with Dr. Sha-Ron for a while now,” Marley said. “I saw that she is a creative genius. She understands this plant is more than just a feeling — it’s a frequency.”

Pierre-Kovler said Marley made sense as a partner not just because of his public profile, but because of his long relationship to cannabis culture and his instinct for pairing strains with mood, setting and experience. In her view, New York also offers the right backdrop for that kind of rollout, giving the brand a chance to build cannabis-centered experiences in a market still taking shape.

That language carries through the rest of the rollout. Young Gong is framed not just as a cannabis line but as a broader lifestyle brand, one that leans on the overlap between cannabinoids, sound and wellness. The company says packaging will include QR codes unlocking exclusive digital content from Marley, tying the physical product to music and other branded experiences.

The first products will roll out across New York on April 19, according to Pierre-Kovler, with a New Jersey launch expected this summer. The debut lineup includes Harmon-E, K-Lab, Melody Makers and Roads of Flames, each positioned around a different intended effect and audience.

Pierre-Kovler said her role in the venture is to help shape the science, formulation and broader vision behind the brand, drawing on her research background and a focus on giving consumers products that feel safe, consistent and grounded in more than just marketing language.

Pierre-Kovler, whose Glenmere Farms Enterprises is part of the joint venture, is described in launch materials as one of the few Black women operating at scale in legal cannabis and as a longtime advocate for cannabinoid-based wellness. Glenmere says its broader portfolio includes both Dr. Sha’s and Young Gong Cannabis.

For Marley, the move adds a cannabis venture to a public image already closely tied to one of music’s most storied family legacies. But the pitch here is not nostalgia. It is a modern wellness-forward brand with celebrity visibility, scientific branding and a launch timed for the cannabis industry’s most crowded week of the year.

The official Young Gong launch event is scheduled for Sunday, April 19 at 9 p.m. at Partake NYC, located at 10-29 44th Rd, Long Island City, NY. More details are expected through the brand’s Instagram account, @younggongcannabis, and its website.

<p>The post Exclusive: YG Marley Launches Young Gong Cannabis Brand first appeared on High Times.</p>

The post Exclusive: YG Marley Launches Young Gong Cannabis Brand appeared first on Paradise Found.