Strain Review: Snow Cap

For our first review MJO takes a look at the popular marijuana strain "Snow Cap." Snow Cap, a sativa, has a MJO Score of 66 and a MJO Value Index of 0.66. Details after the break...

Four factor breakdown (see previous post for explanation):

1. Appearance: 7. MJO Staff Comments: lots of hairs, not very crystally, kind of compact though .125 g is still a good size.
   
2. Fragrance: 5. Weak smell. Fruity with a slightly minty/menthol odor.
3. Taste: 5. Lightly fruity but a little bland.
4. Intoxication: 8. At inception - heady but not too heavy, airy, perky feeling. Classic sativa. At 30 mins - still mostly heady but also felt in upper body. At 60 mins - The staff's actions and forgetfulness are indicative of being rather blitzed. At this point, we decided to go wander the city.
   

That gives us a Raw Score of 33 and a corresponding MJO Score of 66. At $50 per .125 g, that gives us a MJO Value Index of 0.66 which represents a decent buy. Snow Cap was a solid strain to kick off our reviews with. Next review coming soon.

Read More...

Strain Review: Methodology

Today the MJO is going to publish the first of hopefully many strain reviews. But we want to lay out our methodology for you first, so that you understand the bases on which we are rating strains. In short, we took some guidelines as laid down by Cannabis Cup judge Jorge Cervantes and then adapted them into a numerical rating system which will be explained below.

In order to completely understand the MJO rating system, we recommend you watch the video above before continuing any further. As can be seen, Cervantes judges strains based on four key factors:

1. The appearance of the marijuana strain. Several things are looked for when judging marijuana appearance including the feel of the marijuana, how covered with stalk tricombs (crystals) it is, and whether it is properly dried.
2. The fragrance of the marijuana strain. We at the MJO want our marijuana to have a strong, pleasing odor.
3. The taste of the marijuana. Better tasting marijuana will be rated higher.
4. How intoxicated the marijuana strain gets you. Obviously, the more the better.

All four factors will be rated on a scale from 1 to 10. Then we double the fourth rating (because the MJO believes that the main objective of smoking marijuana is to get intoxicated) and add it to the ratings for appearance, fragrance, and taste in order to get a Raw Score. The Raw Score is then doubled to produce our first metric, the MJO Score. Obviously, a "perfect strain" would have a Raw Score of 50 and correspondingly a MJO Score of 100.

Because we recognize that the cost of the strain is an important determinant in ascertaining its desirability to you, we want to introduce another metric, the MJO Value Index. The MJO Value Index is determined by taking the Raw Score and simply dividing it by the price per .125 gm (1/8 of an ounce) of the strain. Barring the introduction of extremely cheap, high-quality marijuana into the market, the MJO Value Index will range from 0 to 1 with marijuana strains that are an extremely good value being closer to 1 on the MJO Value Index and strains that can be considered overpriced or a "rip-off" being closer to 0 on the MJO Value Index. For example, take the "perfect" strain above: if it cost $50 its MJO Value Index would be 1 (50/$50) but if it cost $60 its MJO Value Index would be 0.83 (50/$60). This simply corresponds to the principle that if two goods are the same, the cheaper one is a better value. The MJO Value Index for any particular marijuana strain is best ascertained relative to the MJO Value Index of another strain but for the purposes of our initially limited data set let's assume that MJO Value Indexes above 0.5 represent a good buy and MJO Value Indexes below 0.5 represent a bad buy.

Thus, our two metrics: MJO Score and MJO Value Index. If you forget what the metrics mean or how they are derived, don't worry about it. Just remember higher numbers are better on both scales. In the end, our only hope is that MJO Score and MJO Value Index are two figures you keep in mind when making your marijuana purchasing decisions. If you see any errors in our methodology or any way we can improve our rating system please let us know.

Read More...

Ron Paul on Real Time with Bill Maher

Republican Congressman and former presidential candidate Ron Paul was on Real Time with Bill Maher's season premiere which aired on February 20th. Interestingly, in his interview, Paul was in favor of marijuana legalization but not marijuana regulation and taxation.

Read More...

Economics: The Stimulus, State Budget Deficits, and Marijuana.

Like many of you, the staff at MJO has been closely following the stimulus proceedings in Washington. While President Obama was able to use his mandate to push through a $787 billion spending plan in record-breaking time, several states were still facing the difficult propositions of budget deficits and, unlike the federal government, states are not allowed to go into the red to pay for their programs. After watching CNBC's Marijuana, Inc. and other documentaries about the marijuana industry (reviews coming soon!), we have been thoroughly convinced that marijuana is a multi-billion dollar business. Thus, we at the MJO were curious: 1) Would legalization and taxation of marijuana provide significant revenue to the states? and 2) Is the political climate ripe for such a drastic change in American marijuana public policy?

The issue of state budget shortfalls has become more acute this week with the state of California's maneuverings to remain solvent. California is facing a budget deficit of some $42 billion dollars, with a $11.2 billion revenue shortfall for this year alone. This Tuesday, in order to motivate California Senate Republicans to agree to the proposed Schwarzenegger/Democrat budget, Schwarzenegger sent out 10,000 layoff notices to state workers. In order to avoid the laying off of another 10,000 state workers (as promised by the Governator if no budget was agreed upon) state lawmakers finally passed California's 2009 state budget. California's problems may be more pronounced, but other states are also facing huge deficits.

When one considers that illegal marijuana sales have been estimated to exceed $14 billion a year nationally, a figure larger than California's yearly budget shortfalls, one has to at least consider the possibility of taxing marijuana for fundraising purposes. But, of course, the entire $14 billion would not go to the states, so what kind of tax revenue are we really looking at? Luckily, Jefferey Miron, a Harvard economics professor, has done the calculations for us in his landmark paper, "The Budgetary Implications of Marijuana Prohibition." We recommend you read the entire report, but Miron's somewhat conservative conclusion is that marijuana legalization would yield tax revenue of $2.4 billion annually if marijuana was taxed like all other goods and $6.2 billion if marijuana was to be taxed at rates similar to alcohol or tobacco. But it doesn't stop there, Miron also estimates that legalizing marijuana would save $7.7 billion per year in government expenditure due to prohibition enforcement. $5.3 billion of this savings would accrue to state and local governments, while $2.4 billion would accrue to the federal government.

Making the safe assumption that marijuana would be subject to a sin tax like alcohol and cigarettes, that leads to a total governmental savings of $13.9 billion dollars. While this figure pales in comparison to recent government stimulus packages, it is still a quite a bit of money. Moreover, while no state would reap as much as California, every state would make at least some revenue. And before Morin is dismissed as a pothead or crackpot New England liberal, it must be noted that 500 prominent economists signed a letter agreeing to his findings including Nobel Laureates Vernon Smith, George Akerlof, and the godfather of free-market economics himself Milton Friedman.

This leads us to our second question, is the political climate right for such a drastic change in American drug policies? Recently, Zogby International released a poll commissioned by the California arm of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws indicated that 58% of respondents from the west coast of the United States favored legalizing marijuana and taxing it like alcohol or cigarettes, while only 36% opposed the regulated sale of marijuana. This cannot be characterized as a purely west coast phenomena either, as a more mainstream poll commissioned by CBS and The New York Times revealed that 41% of Americans nationwide favored legalization, as opposed to 27% in 1979. It must be noted that the latter poll did not ask any questions about taxation or states revenue-raising, so responses may be more favorable in a subsequent poll incorporating either of these concepts.

Ultimately, even the best-case figure of 58% is probably not a high-enough percentage of people to change a marijuana narco-policy that has been well-established for years. With the populace trending younger and thus less prohibitionist, one day it may be politically possible to advocate marijuana legalization. However, with states facing ever-increasing budget deficits and calls to raise personal income taxes to meet them potentially forthcoming, perhaps we are approaching the time when calling for marijuana legalization and taxation becomes politically necessary and not just politically possible.

Related Articles

• California Passes Nation's Biggest Tax Increase (teambio.org)
• California Budget: Stop the Insanity (crooksandliars.com)
• The papers on the $787 billion stimulus bill (slate.com)
• California May Cut 20,000 Jobs (shoppingblog.com)
• 10000 California state workers could lose jobs if new budget is not passed says Governor Schwarzenegger (telegraph.co.uk)
• Facing Deficits, States Get Out Sharper Knives (nytimes.com)
• Your economy: Bad to worse (money.cnn.com)
• New State Budget Will Bring a 9.75% Sales Tax to LA County (laist.com)
• No State Budget Yet, Senators to Bring Toiletries for Sleepover (laist.com)

Read More...

Documentary Review: BBC's Should I Smoke Dope?

Today MJO reviews BBC Three's documentary "Should I Smoke Dope?" The episode is part of a series hosted by Nicky Taylor in which she acts as a human guinea pig; in other episodes she has tried binge drinking or gone under the knife for cosmetic surgery in order to see what the effects on her body were. Overall, while we at MJO did not find the documentary to be that informative, it was quite funny watching the middle-aged, ditzy Taylor smoking marijuana. Whether that is worth an hour of your time we'll leave up to you to decide.

The basic premise of the show has Taylor taking up marijuana smoking for a month while she examines the cannabis sub-culture. It starts off with Taylor in her home country, Great Britain preparing for her experiment. First, she visits a doctor that appears quite horrified at the prospect of Taylor taking up marijuana smoking even for an intermediate period of time and tells her that she shouldn't do it. Then, she talks to a British barrister who informs her that yes, marijuana is still illegal in England. With the preliminary background information in hand, Taylor sets off for Amsterdam, the mecca of marijuana, to learn about smoking firsthand.

In order to fully immerse herself in the marijuana culture, Taylor agrees to work behind the counter at one of Amsterdam’s most famous coffee shops, the Dampkring. After learning Taylor has no experience with marijuana, the hesitant shop owner recommends a Jamaican strain, something she assures Taylor is very light and suitable for beginners. Taylor seems earnest enough and listens while the owner doles out well considered advice - after two puffs rest for 10 minutes to see how the green affects this first time smoker. Simple enough advice, but after taking two puffs and not feeling an immediate effect, Taylor takes it upon herself to smoke nearly the entire joint in ten minutes. Inevitably, and to the amusement of the viewer, Taylor becomes overcome with a paranoid panic attack as a result of her "newbie" mistake. The next morning shows Taylor in dire need of a good facial and a couple of muscle relaxants.

Day two of Taylor's marijuana project is less dramatic but no less entertaining: the haphazard journalist returns to the coffee shop and manages to lend a helping hand as a hostess behind the counter without any major mishaps. Her second smoking experience involved a gentle strain of hashish. The hash suits Taylor much better than the Jamaican marijuana, and there are several scenes showing Taylor giggly. energetic, and downright loopy; she can barely manage her next interview at The Hash, Marihuana, and Hemp Museum without cracking up at the sight of guinea pig bedding made from hemp.

The rest of the documentary mostly abandons scenes of Taylor's reactions to smoking and instead explores several different medical facets of marijuana, mostly in England. One of the more entertaining scenes involves Taylor and a driver’s ed instructor contrasting the effects of intoxication from marijuana and alcohol. Their scientific testing consisted of Taylor, either stoned or drunk, trying to achieve a high speed in the test car and then swerving successfully away from a row of baby dolls. When stoned, Taylor drove overly cautious and was unable to drive faster than a blue-haired lady from Ft. Lauderdale. On the other hand, after downing a bottle of wine before taking the driver's seat, Taylor drove incredibly fast and ran over one of the baby dolls, popping off its little baby head to great visual effect. Not satisfied in letting flattened baby doll be the sole barometer of driving competence, Taylor actually offers a real number: statistically, in England, marijuana doubles the likelihood of accidents, while booze increases it six times.

Taylor wraps up her piece with a look into the link between psychosis and marijuana use. Volunteering, again, to be a guinea pig Taylor undergoes an experiment that evaluates her reactions on a written questionnaire under the influence of pure THC versus THC mixed with cannabinoids, which is the naturally occurring form found in marijuana plants. The THC/cannabinoid mixture leaves Taylor giggly, elated, and just plain comical. However, the pure THC creates a paranoid, somewhat depressed Taylor that the evaluating psychiatric later labels as ballpark schizophrenic. The documentary also points out that while naturally grown marijuana has a 3% to 5% THC content, the newer homegrown genetically-modified versions approach as much as 15% THC. Perhaps Taylor's implication is that things are best left the way nature intended.

Finally, the documentary ends somewhat ambivalently; beyond displaying Taylor as a paranoid schizo or a giggly wacko, the report neither makes it a mission to extol or demonize marijuana use. Predictably, Taylor concludes by stating she would rather stick to her preference of drug: booze. Well enough.

Special thanks to Yellowcake and Shakagirl for contributing to this review.

Read More...

Medicine: Marijuana Leads to Testicular Cancer?

A study published on Monday by the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center claims that marijuana use may increase the risk of getting testicular cancer. As you can imagine, we at the MJO were not too pleased to see headlines such as: "Could smoking pot raise testicular cancer risk?," "Marijuana linked to higher rate of testicular cancer," and "Okay guys if you value your balls drop that joint." After a brief but thorough investigation, it appears to us that even if the research is accurate, the actual risk of smoking marijuana causing testicular cancer is minimal at most.

The Fred Hutchinson study's central thesis is that usage of marijuana increases the risk of getting nonseminoma, a testicular malignancy that tends to strike men between the ages of 20 and 35 and accounts for about 40% of all testicular-cancer cases. The researchers decided to explore a possible link between marijuana and testicular cancer when they noticed that since the 1950s, the incidence of the two main subtypes of testicular cancer, nonseminoma and seminoma has increased by 3% to 6% per year in the United States, Canada, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand while the use of marijuana in these places has also risen accordingly.

For the population-based, case-control study 369 Seattle-Puget Sound-area men, ages 18 to 44, who had been diagnosed with testicular cancer were interviewed about their history of marijuana use. For comparison the researchers also assessed marijuana use among 979 randomly selected age- and geography-matched healthy controls. In order to statistically control for other factors participants were asked about their smoking, alcohol consumption, and their family history of testicular cancer. From their results, marijuana use emerged as a significant, independent risk factor for testicular cancer.

So, you ask, where's the rub? Well, there does not seem any obvious reason to doubt Fred Hutchinson's numbers. They may be wrong, but we have no way of knowing that without doing the research ourselves. Rather, the problem is that, even if the numbers are right, they are meaningless because they are statistically insignificant. The study itself tells you that only 1% of American men get testicular cancer a year, but what it does not tell you is that only 1 out of 100,000 men get nonseminoma, the particular type of testicular cancer they are trying to tie marijuana use to. Moreover, while they are correct that the incidences of nonseminoma and seminoma together has risen 3% to 6% a year, from 1973 to 1978, nonseminona rates themselves only rose 24% whereas seminoma rates have increased a whopping 64%. Thus, the association between the rise in testicular cancer and marijuana use is tenuous at best.

That said, we won't blame you for taking the word of scientific medical research over the musings of a marijuana-centered blog. We feel the same way and even though we, like you, know that marijuana has often been speciously connected to some malady or the other, it is still very unsettling to see the words "marijuana" and "cancer" linked together in so many headlines. Thus, it was nice to be reminded of an older marijuana/cancer connection: "Study: Marijuana Appears to Slow Cancer Growth in Laboratory Setting."

Related articles

• Marijuana might lead to increased risk of testicular cancer (sciam.com)
• Marijuana linked to higher risk of testicular cancer (ctv.ca)
• Cannabis could cause testicular cancer study (telegraph.co.uk)
• Could smoking pot raise testicular cancer risk? (cnn.com)
• Going to Pot: Weed and Testicular Cancer (abcnews.go.com)
• Pot ups chances for testicular cancer: Study (windsorstar.com)
• Okay guys if you value your balls drop that joint (inquisitr.com)
• Cannabis doubles testicular cancer risk, says US study (guardian.co.uk)
• Marijuana testicular cancer link (news.bbc.co.uk)
• Weak link found between smoking pot, testicular cancer (cbc.ca)

Read More...

Correction: NOT Michael Phelps' Bong

First of all, we'd like to apologize for covering this issue twice considering how few posts we currently have. But this has been the major MSM (mainstream media) marijuana news story and our suspicions in our last piece turned out to be inaccurate, so we're going to do a followup. As the title implies, there is new information today that reveals that the bong used by Michael Phelps in the infamous tabloid picture did not actually belong to him.
A lot has happened since our last story. The Columbia, South Carolina police have made eight arrests in their attempt to make a case against Mr. Phelps: seven for drug possession and one for distribution. This has led to an outcry against the Columbia police for selective prosecution. Even the governor of South Carolina, Governor Mark Sanford, has appeared on Geraldo stating that Phelps should not be prosecuted stating, "I don't see what that gets us at this point." However, the police seem determined to make an example of Phelps and there are a few more twists and turns before this saga plays itself out.

But of course what is most interesting to MJO is the revelation that the owner of the bong in question was not Michael Phelps. In fact, the owner was not even at the party and may have evaded the law completely except for one small thing: he tried to sell the bong on eBay for $100,000. Now, this genius is one of the eight charged and, to top it off, his bong was confiscated by the police.

Also, its worth noting that while Phelps has lost endorsements with Kellogg's and IBM since the photo was published, he was not dropped by Subway or Activision the makers of Guitar Hero. This is not surprising as it is well known that smokers like to eat fast food and play video games. However, it also would have been pretty remarkable for Activision to drop Phelps considering the other recently disgraced "Hero" that appears along with Phelps and who also has not yet lost his job:

Read More...

Market Recap: Stocks Down? Stock Up!

Timothy Geitner unveiled his bank proposal this morning and the market responded to it as if it was ground up marijuana placed in their wide-mouthed bowl with the S&P 500 quickly losing 4.9%. If you were short, congratulations and enjoy your spoils tonight. If not, one of the effects of smoking marijuana is short-term memory loss and if you keep smoking, you'll pass out eventually. Either way, we suggest you set aside some time in the near future to stock up on nonperishable canned food, guns, and, if you are a smoker, marijuana.  

Read More...

Television Review: CNBC's Marijuana, Inc.

Today MJO reviews CNBC's special report Marijuana, Inc.: Inside America's Pot Industry that first aired on January 22, 2009. We'll admit we came in with high expectations considering it was being offered by America's Business Channel. However, ultimately, we found it disappointing and believe it did not give the multi-billion dollar Marijuana Industry the proper treatment it deserves.

The beginning started solidly, covering the rise of the Marijuana trafficking industry in Mendocino County and featuring interviews with Eric Sligh the editor of the popular trade magazine Grow. They painted a picture of Mendocino as a county in which the marijuana industry was so prevalent that it was reliant upon marijuana growing and selling for its very economic survival. Scary figures were thrown about:

1. Sixty percent of the county's populace was involved in the trade.
2. The industry constituted two-thirds of the local economy.
3. And a half of all of the fires in the county were the result of growing mishaps.

When they showed the nice, Caucasian, salt of the earth family that was forced to move out of their home because of their fear of the marijuana growers, even we at MJO were alarmed. The rest of the documentary proceeded to heighten our fears: there were stories of crime sprees, a desperate woman's 911 call when her son's head was brutally bashed in during a marijuana robbery (not to fear, she shot the bastards), worries about the environmental effects of the industrial pollution produced by growers, and a desperate plea by a former chairman of Mendocino County's Board of Supervisors for federal and state help.

Next, was a story about Bruce Perlowin and his early-80s San Francisco based marijuana smuggling empire. Undoubtedly, an interesting tale that ends with Perlowin leaving his Playbook in a Denny's and being apprehended. However, MJO learned nothing from this segment aside from the dangers of greed and stupidity. And considering that Perlowin got out after nine years in a federal penitentiary with at least some of his millions seemingly intact, the dangers do not seem that great.

Finally, the report presents an immigration problem. The filmmakers exposed several remote outdoor gardens and highlighted the beans, tortillas, and salsa that were left by the criminals at the site. There was some discussion of the superb irrigation systems used by Hispanics along with talk of the growers incredible innate ability to survive on a relative pittance alone in the forest. And finally much of the blame for the entire situation was pinned on Mexican drug cartels.

All of these stories were presented with sound effects and general production values that you would expect from an episode of Extra. The reporter, Trish Regan, while expressing her astonishment with the prevalence of marijuana at every opportunity availed to her, also kept a quizzical, if not confused, look on her face throughout her "investigative journalism." When presented the opportunity to ask the head DEA agent of Northern California why they did not crackdown on the industry, Regan let the agent off the hook with "Well, you cant blame it on us." Armed with the knowledge that an American county's economy is thriving in the marijuana trade, there were no queries about the suitability of this on a national scale. In light of our present economic troubles, this seems to be a particularly egregious error on the part of America's Business Channel.

Ultimately, that is why we cannot call Marijuana, Inc. a documentary. There were simply too many personal stories and not enough facts. While the sensationalistic stories are entertaining, in the end we just didn't learn anything of substance because of their limited scope. Because of this, MJO sees Marijuana, Inc. as a failed opportunity by CNBC to present an informative, objective, and macroscopic glimpse into the underground Marijuana narco-economy.

Did you see Marijuana, Inc.? Let us know what you thought. Leave a comment!

Read More...

Michael Phelps' Bong

Recently, a British tabloid published a picture of Michael Phelps smoking out of a bong.  A media uproar ensued and there was much debate over whether Phelps had jeopardized his public standing and, more importantly, his endorsement portfolio.  We at MJO found this discussion to be humorous considering our past three presidents have admitted to drug use in some form or another.  However, our interest was piqued by Mr. Phelps' equipment.  What kind of bong does Aquaman use? 

Without question it is a Roor, as the lettering is plainly visible. Considering the high tech swimwear favored by Phelps, it is not surprising that he would have a state of the art water piece.  The MJO  is a big fan of the Roor lines of bongs in all of its various conceptions, but even we had never seen the model used by Phelps in the picture.  After some digging, it turns out that Phelps is using a customized Roor in the picture - a Roor "Custom Fairmaster 5.0 Red Vengeance" to be exact. If the equipment in the picture does indeed belong to Phelps, then this indicates that he is quite the sophisticated (and committed) smoker.  

Get Michael Phelps' Bong

Disclaimer: In no way does MJO endorse or is associated with Everyonedoesit.com. Buy products from them at your OWN risk.  

Read More...

CNBC Tackles the Marijuana Industry

CNBC recently produced a documentary on the "American Pot Industry", which we will publish a review for in the next few days. But as a teaser we offer CNBC's own teaser - A Gallery of Medical Marijuana.

We at MJO plan to produce in-depth reviews of all of the strains featured in the gallery so we want to know what you think. Have you smoked any of these strains? What type of high was it? What did you like/dislike about them? Let us know by either leaving a comment or sending us an email! Read More...

Mission Statement

Welcome! The Marijuana Observer is a new blog, launched on Jan 16, 2009. MJO covers the recreational, medicinal, legal, and economic aspects of the Marijuana sub-culture. Specifically, we provide reviews, commentary, and discussion about marijuana smoking, marijuana in popular culture, and marijuana as big business.

We're a community site, and we encourage you to participate in the following ways:

• Send us news and/or information
• Comment
• Write (Send us posts, refer us to your blog, or become a regular contributor)
• Send us photos and/or videos

Disclaimer: MJO does not endorse the use of marijuana in areas where it is illegal. If marijuana is illegal where you live, either take it up with your government (or move to CA). If you break the law, be prepared for the consequences of your own decision. Read More...