Cannabis on Malou

Cannabis!

And, is not it a beautiful, scary words?!
Wait - scary?!
Note how they continually return to using the term "cannabis", instead of talking about the CBD, or CBD oil, or hemp, or hemp oil, or industrial hemp.
It is not as hard hitting with these expressions, Instead, use "cannabis" and re, which means that the audience is already a firm opinion, samt de som är tveksamma men fortfarande oroliga för dope hellre lutar sig åt hållet att det som avhandlas är just knark, and the drug should of course not release free, It would be crazy!
Why it is important to emphasize the use of this term is that it has become so stigmatized over the years. Ever since the propaganda machine against cannabis started in the 30's, where sheer commissioned work in the film industry led to a worldwide scare against cannabis, there has been an expression that is associated with strong feelings.

One way to determine if you are the victim of propaganda is to ask yourself what you think about a topic - any topic, and feel how you feel. Do you have strong feelings about this topic, no matter which way they lean, positive or negative - when is this topic to your heart.
Nästa fråga du nu ställer dig är – vad vet jag om detta ämne? Had I been able to give a talk in this area? If someone asks me intricate issues, can I answer them based on the knowledge I gathered me?
If it turns out that you feel unsure of the actual knowledge you have on the subject, if you had not been able to give a lecture, and if you can not answer the intricate questions based on a deep understanding - you have been a victim of propaganda.

Propaganda is to create views. Strong opinions.
It is to lead the people where you want them, which is usually an obedient stage where not questioning authority or the knowledge that is taught in schools.

For the fact is, that the knowledge taught in schools, for including cannabis, can not be considered factual knowledge as it is not based on the consensus that exists in science in this topic. Children fed then with propaganda. Not only from schools, but also from the media.

How is it that a plant that lived with humans for millennia, that is less lethal than the toothpaste you have in the bathroom cabinet (Compare the "Lethal dose 50" of cannabis, to various things in your home, to see how many things you use daily that are hundreds and thousands of times more lethal than cannabis) create such strong emotions in people?
Strong emotions and opinions that are rarely based on thorough knowledge of the subject.

This is why it is so important to understand why it is manipulative to use an expression that you've worked up a stigma around, to have it as a generic term in a subject that includes so much more than the image ordinary people have cannabis today.

Would you buy stock in drug death?

The 24 January 2018 published an article on the site Fever entitled "More and more people want to invest in the death drug".

The writer obviously wants to attract readers by creating a "klickis", and shoes on the fear of the drugs. When it comes to cannabis, it is especially funny about this kind of sensational journalism as it is such a harmless plant that does not kill anyone. The drug claims victims in droves is not something we should reflect on the moral and ask ourselves if we really should invest money in the "death drugs".

The article is written from a DN article that raised the "problem" on pension funds involuntarily investing in cannabis shares.

TV4 and Malou went out to ask people on the street whether they would consider buying shares in listed companies cannabis.
The question may seem innocent, which in principle is, but to such a question should also add significant information. The gist of the matter is that there is a moral dilemma whether to invest money in cannabis shares, and it is compared with buying shares in companies alcohol or cigarette.

The whole point of raising the issue of cannabis is all about, it is something that is becoming more room clean, and something that more and more countries decide to legalize. How is it then that countries choose to legalize the "death drug"? Are they completely mad, while Sweden is one of the few countries left in the world with sound values?

Frågan om why så många länder legaliserar och varför cannabisodling och cannabisföretag börsnoteras handlar inte om ett ökat missbruk. It's all about the amazing and positive effects of cannabis and hemp products come up to the surface. Hundreds of thousands of people can finally live pain-free life, get rid of the difficult conditions or regulate severe ailments - something that the pharmaceutical industry has failed, which is the reason why people start taking your health into your own hands.

Buying shares in a company that produces cannabis is not a question of a moral decision.
It is to invest money in a company that makes countless people well when they get the opportunity to buy medication without side effects, legally, without having to go to a foam type in a dark alley without any guarantee of purity or activity of the product.

To completely ignore the fact that this is what is happening, that's why countries are legalizing and that is why companies go public is a huge blunder.

In the article mentioned above, about the "death dope" has been quoted Avanza savings economist Claes Hemberg, which manifests itself in a matter he obviously has no clue. Claes has commented on many issues he has knowledge of, and has many years of Avanza behind him with great articles and good portfolio team, but not everyone can be the best at everything. Claes include consistently advised people to invest in crypto-currencies. Year after year. All who obey Claes advice remained with their savings accounts with a stable, low, return, medan rikstagare (or more well-read?) got a journey of thousands of percent profit.

Claes quoted the following opinion
"Since they happen to sell something that people feel very badly of. I can only say: realize that you are supporting the industry buying shares. "

Listed companies that work with cannabis compared to street-level dealers, a professional who will understand how investments in deeper planes.
Here we have a classic example of someone who has been exposed to propaganda. To express themselves strongly in a matter in which you have no knowledge.
If people would feel very bad to buy cannabis-related products, how is it then that the market is growing by huh 3000% every year? Is the world full of masochists, who can not stop themselves once they are stuck in the swamp? Listed companies that sell products without health benefits that only serves to hurt people and make money on them?

There are plenty of such companies - but the companies involved in cannabis products will probably end up at the bottom of the list. The companies that are at the top are the companies that we could never mention or talk about in the same way as we talk about cannabis today. Lobbying is a big part of the propaganda machine, namely,.

"Crime is to make money"
- Stewe Alm, Strategic analyst NOA

In the studio of Malou is Stewe Alm and Jens Nordström to talk about how the black market cannabis affects society.

Both express themselves appropriately and good, although there are certain things that rub some.
Stewe expresses a very interesting thing, which is what the police mission.

”Polisen har ett klart uppdrag från Regering och Riksdag att bekämpa brottslighet, and as long as the government and parliament decided that possession of cannabis and cannabis cultivation is a crime and we will work towards that. "

This really put your finger on the merits. What it is about is that we have agencies that provide other agencies mandated to follow certain guidelines and laws. When these become obsolete must somehow be able to replace them with guidelines and laws knowledge we have reached the time being.
Det är because vi har debatter om cannabis, det är because länder legaliserar. Men i Sverige missar vi denna fundamentala poäng – why är det kriminellt? Is outdated laws? What they are based on? Have we learned something that changes the prevailing conditions?

Cannabis belong to a preparation that has no positive medical benefit to man, that is addictive and harmful to health. This is the reason why cannabis is illegal in Sweden today.
If we break down these claims one by one, what remains, we will look at the evidence available today?
According to current evidence there is no evidence they claim is crucial to why cannabis is considered to be illegal today.

Stewe hitting nail on the head with the opinion of the police task.

Later sets Malou a question to Stewe concerning his own mind about whether it would be good to decriminalize or not. Stewe then responds

"Our view is that it will not affect our work in terms of crime in general. As I said at the outset; crime is to make money. /../ If you read the statistics from Colorado yesterday notifications regarding cannabis obviously down, On the other hand, we of course then costs to society in another place, Colorado writes about the increased health care costs. /../ Regarding the police operation around cannabis, we see the little difference if you were to remove the holding /../ den kriminella strukturen är ändå där och vill tjäna pengar och då börjar man istället med annan typ av verksamhet”.

You miss Stewe the key issue he brought up earlier - that the police carry out assignments for the government and parliament.
There is only so long as cannabis is considered illegal as it is the police mission to devote resources to work around this. It is not a question of maintaining something illegal just because criminals will move to another type of business.
The question must surely stir something to be considered criminal or not? If we now make it illegal to ride public transportation will get an amazingly tough job with black-transport. Should we refrain from investigating whether it makes sense to decriminalize public transport again just because criminals will find other ways to earn black money?

Att kriminalitet går ut på att tjäna pengar är en plattityd som passar in på det mesta i samhället. Name something that is not out to make money? It shall be deemed criminal, or dirty, to make money? Then we will probably change our social structure. It is not a question of criminals are making money - it's the question of what is considered to be criminal or not.

Be honest citizens punished for being forced to become criminals because they do not have a car and want to take public transport anyway?
There are numerous examples around the world with the life stories where people finally found a way to live a decent life, thanks to cannabis or CBD oils, only to have it all destroyed, because they are notified, deprived of his medicine, convicted of drug offenses and imprisonment or a fine.

Stewe also mentions that social costs will be transferred elsewhere - because you can not see anything positive in the legalization where the money would go into the city treasury - because we would get equal spending with increased healthcare needs. He also adds that "disclaimer" as a final line where Malou mention the enormous contribution of tax money owed to the legalization.
Again, this is, unfortunately, a result of the distorted truth, on the border of propaganda manipulation. This is precisely why so many turn to these "illegal" option - because it is the last resort when medical care is not able to provide assistance for a decent life. Read our article "Norway decriminalizing cannabis” för att läsa lite mer om vad som hände i Portugal då man beslöt att avkriminalisera , droger.

Certainly there is addiction and pleasure smoking cannabis use. But how many smokers on the town is attacked by the police and thrown in jail? How many people walked around with a beer in their hands will be notified of anonymous tipsters?
And in these cases it is not about people who have turned to these products to self-medicate or live a decent life. In the case of cigarettes, it is a dependence that has no medical benefits, in the case of alcohol, it is a drug that is socially accepted who do not offer any medical benefits nor.

But we will judge cannabis as a drug for the person to use the plant without a medical purpose in mind?

It is in such cases a double standard without equal.
If you are still hesitant to cannabis and hemp - significantly a preparation that offers as many healthy benefits, medically, equal harmless, not addictive, which can be used to make textiles, fuel, replace plastic, used for isolation, clear the land from environmental pollutants, takes extremely small space to grow or produce, and is as cost.

If you do not accept the challenge, or going on a substitute - you introspection enough to understand that the propaganda reached even you?