So we all become.."Infused Products Manufacturer"??

Hello!

In a session that stretched late into the evening yesterday, the House approved HB1284 without any new amendments by a 46-19 vote. This means the bill is now off to the Governor's desk to be signed before becoming law. As has been widely reported by the media, there are a number of bad parts of this bill and many other parts that will be challenged in court in the coming days.

However, there are also a number of very good new additions to Colorado's Medical Marijuana program:

â?¢ Patients are now allowed to grow their own medicine AND name a MMJ Center or primary caregiver. (page 62 lines 4-5)

â?¢ "Higher Plant Count" recommendations in excess of 6 plants now recognized by Health Department. (page 65 line 25 - page 66 line 3)

â?¢ "Infused Products Manufacturer" allowed to sell to any licensed MMJ center in the state without patients registered to the infused products manufacturer's name. (page 41 lines 19-21)

â?¢ "Infused Products Manufacturer" allowed to grow all medicine needed to make their products. (page 40 lines 16-23)

â?¢ Requires the Dept of Health to create a formal policy to add new conditions to the MMJ registry. (page 57 lines 12-15)

â?¢ Encourages Colorado banks and credit unions to work with our industry. (page 38 lines 19-21)

Now that the bills are written and passed by the legislature, it's time for all of us to begin getting on the same page about what these new rules mean. I have attached a copy of the FINAL versions of HB 1284 regarding new dispensary regulations and SB 109 regarding the doctor/patient relationship.

*** Even if you haven't read a single bill so far, this is the time to read both of these new laws ***

Once you have read both bills, please email any questions you have to [email protected] before 8am FRIDAY. I am going to prepare a written Q&A with all your questions and the best answers available and will have evening and online meetings next week to continue answering your questions.

Thanks!

Matt

http://blogs.westword.com/latestword...ll_enthusi.php


If I'm reading this correctly, all a careprovider has to do to get around the 5 patient plant counts is become an "Infused Products Manufacturer" ?? Then you are unlimited???

Wonder what that license will entail and take to get?

An "Infused Products Manufacturer" cannot sell raw mmj to anyone, they can only wholesale edibles, tinctures, etc. to medical marijuana centers. This is a comparatively small market, with a lot of competition.

Wow Matt,

At the risk of starting drama, perhaps you should explain yourself instead of the law! There's a few of us on here that would like to hear why you have potentially sold us all down the river.

Frankly, if I have questions or concerns I'll take them where they belong.

IE: Brian, Rob, Mason, Sean, Warren, on and on. (at the risk of sounding like a name dropper, of course)

I wouldn't take them to some nobody (you) who walked into town and deemed himself Colorado's Pot God.


Justabloke

what he said

selling out the patients and small time caregivers, what about that?

i saw 2 things there,1 Patients are now allowed to grow their own medicine AND name a MMJ Center or primary caregiver. (page 62 lines 4-5).they could always do this lmao.unless he's saying patients can grow there plant count along with allowing a caregiver to grow there count too?

2nd "Higher Plant Count" recommendations in excess of 6 plants now recognized by Health Department. (page 65 line 25 - page 66 line 3)

is he saying that all the people that got higher plant counts signed by their docs would be allowed to have them under this law?

Whoa, wait one minute matt. i think you need to look a little closer at the bill:

â?¢ "Higher Plant Count" recommendations in excess of 6 plants now recognized by Health Department. (page 65 line 25 - page 66 line 3)

First off, the higher plant count is in no way being recognized by the Health Department. This line only reiterates what Amendment 20 already says regarding patients or caregivers using the affirmative defense for any paperwork that has a higher plant count and that they need to prove why such greater amounts were medically necessary to address the patientâ??s debilitating medical condition. 1284 also adds in verbiage regarding the caregiver having to waive confidentiality of their records and the patient involved, but nothing about excess being recognized by the Health Dept.

â?¢ "Infused Products Manufacturer" allowed to sell to any licensed MMJ center in the state without patients registered to the infused products manufacturer's name. (page 41 lines 19-21)

Nope. If you continued reading you might have noticed that it actually says the following:

A MEDICAL MARIJUANA-INFUSED PRODUCTS LICENSEE THAT HAS AN OPTIONAL PREMISES CULTIVATION LICENSE SHALL NOT SELL ANY OF THE MEDICAL MARIJUANA THAT IT CULTIVATES. Page 42, lines 8-10

Also, you need to make sure to include the statement from page 41, lines 8-18, that indicates that the manufacturer would need to have an agreement / contract with a dispensary that would set forth how much medical marijuana can be used in the manufacturing process as well limits them to only use medical marijuana from 5 centers in the production. I am sure that their books and records will be under scrutiny as much as everyone else so i doubt they will be able to have such freedom like you make it sound.

â?¢ "Infused Products Manufacturer" allowed to grow all medicine needed to make their products. (page 40 lines 16-23)

Actually this is in regards to obtaining an optional premises cultivation license and that it may be issued only to a medical marijuana center or an infused products manufacturer. The optional premises is a distinct and definite location that may or may not be connected to the center or manufacturer, which basically means you can have a prime time location for your medical marijuana center and have the optional grow facility 20 miles away, not infused products manufacturer being allowed to grow all medicines.

â?¢ Encourages Colorado banks and credit unions to work with our industry. (page 38 lines 19-21)

if it encourages them to work with our industry, why did TCF ask all dispensary owners to close their account earlier this week??

I wonder why you think it is okay to highlight your own interpretation of a bill instead of just inserting a link for the bill and allowing other to read it for themselves. if someone read only what you wrote they would be sadly mistaken and misinformed. While HB 1284 is a monstrosity of a bill, your misconstrued statements far from help. If you truly consider yourself a legitimate advocate then you need to provide both sides of the issue, and stop making your opinions seem like they are legal facts based on any knowledge at all. Guess that is the problem with opinions, they are just like assholes, everyone has one.

With only $1,456.66 of backing from contributors since January it doesn't seem like the dark side is paying off for you buddy. maybe its a sign for you to get out while you can before you do any more damage to your name. So my only question for your pending Q & A is When exactly will your naughty sex tape with Romer be leaked on the internet? I want to make sure I'm logged on for that one.

I dunno bout yall but I'm still waiting for Matt to explain himself!

Come on, Matt, We're listening.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dieseldiva

Whoa, wait one minute matt. i think you need to look a little closer at the bill:

â?¢ "Higher Plant Count" recommendations in excess of 6 plants now recognized by Health Department. (page 65 line 25 - page 66 line 3)

First off, the higher plant count is in no way being recognized by the Health Department. This line only reiterates what Amendment 20 already says regarding patients or caregivers using the affirmative defense for any paperwork that has a higher plant count and that they need to prove why such greater amounts were medically necessary to address the patientâ??s debilitating medical condition. 1284 also adds in verbiage regarding the caregiver having to waive confidentiality of their records and the patient involved, but nothing about excess being recognized by the Health Dept.

I wonder why you think it is okay to highlight your own interpretation of a bill instead of just inserting a link for the bill and allowing other to read it for themselves. if someone read only what you wrote they would be sadly mistaken and misinformed. While HB 1284 is a monstrosity of a bill, your misconstrued statements far from help. If you truly consider yourself a legitimate advocate then you need to provide both sides of the issue, and stop making your opinions seem like they are legal facts based on any knowledge at all. Guess that is the problem with opinions, they are just like assholes, everyone has one.

---

I hope it did a lot of good for your ego to chide Matt for a crime you have committed as least as egregiously he did.

To be specific, the higher plant count section is pg 53 section e, not the pages you referred to. This amendment does far more than reiterate amendment 20. To quote 1284:

Quote:

---

2 (e) TO POSSESS MORE THAN SIX MEDICAL MARIJUANA PLANTS AND
3 TWO OUNCES OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA FOR EACH PATIENT WHO HAS
4 REGISTERED THE CENTER AS HIS OR HER PRIMARY CENTER PURSUANT TO
5 SECTION 25-1.5-106 (6) (f), C.R.S.; EXCEPT THAT AMEDICALMARIJUANA
6 CENTER MAY HAVE AN AMOUNT THAT EXCEEDS THE SIX-PLANT AND
7 TWO-OUNCE PRODUCT PER PATIENT LIMIT IF THE CENTER SELLS TO
8 PATIENTS THAT ARE AUTHORIZED TO HAVE MORE THAN SIX PLANTS AND
9 TWO OUNCES OF PRODUCT. IN THE CASE OF A PATIENT AUTHORIZED TO
10 EXCEED THE SIX-PLANT AND TWO-OUNCE LIMIT, THE CENTER SHALL
11 OBTAIN DOCUMENTATION FROM THE PATIENT'S PHYSICIAN THAT THE
12 PATIENT NEEDS MORE THAN SIX PLANTS AND TWO OUNCES OF PRODUCT.

---

On the other hand, amendment 20 does not explicitly allow someone to possess more than 6 plants, it simply allows an affirmative defense:

Quote:

---

a) A patient may engage in the medical use of marijuana, with no more marijuana than is medically necessary to address a debilitating medical condition. A patient's medical use of marijuana, within the following limits, is lawful:
(I) No more than two ounces of a usable form of marijuana; and

(II) No more than six marijuana plants, with three or fewer being mature, flowering plants that are producing a usable form of marijuana.

(b) For quantities of marijuana in excess of these amounts, a patient or his or her primary care-giver may raise as an affirmative defense to charges of violation of state law that such greater amounts were medically necessary to address the patient's debilitating medical condition.

---

About higher plant limits: If a patient has a recommendation from their Dr. to have 7 or 60 plants, they wave their affirmative defense rights spelled out in Constitution 20. This means if they are raided, they will be arrested for a higher plant count and the only way they can stay out of prison is if they make public their health records.

Previously, per Constitution 20, all that was required was so show an inquisitive LEO their Dr.'s recommendation.

In the USA everyone is protected by HIPA rules, which keeps health records secret from everyone but their own primary care physician. HIPA rules are a complicated legal vehicle that protects the ill from discrimination in hiring, continued employment, the ability to obtain health insurance, etc.

For the State to deny a patient's right to keep their health records private is a gross violation of their legal rights.

I hope this clause is the first to be challenged in court. Because it's so blatantly unconstitutional, I'm sure it will be tossed as soon as it lands on a judge's bench. And, that makes a lie out of the whole legislative process which claimed to protect patient's rights on the first page.

If this it's the first to be challenged, the next time someone goes to court on a HB 10-1284 issue, the defense atty can show the court the legislature acted without "clean hands." And, that should make all subsequent challenges a lot easier.

However, for it to be challenged, I believe a patient must 1st be arrested, booked, finger-printed, photographed, etc. If that happens to a migraineur, they could stroke due to the trauma of the arrest and be dead before they saw a judge.

I feel this is another one of those clauses designed to encourage the seriously ill to leave the state.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kartel

I hope it did a lot of good for your ego to chide Matt for a crime you have committed as least as egregiously he did.

To be specific, the higher plant count section is pg 53 section e, not the pages you referred to. This amendment does far more than reiterate amendment 20. To quote 1284:



On the other hand, amendment 20 does not explicitly allow someone to possess more than 6 plants, it simply allows an affirmative defense:

---

Actually I wasn't trying to boost my ego or feel better by about myself, i was merely trying to clear up what he wrote so that others can have a better understanding of what exactly HB 1284 entails, not what Matt Brown thinks it entails.

For example, I am well aware of the fact that medical marijuana centers are now allowed under HB 1284 to have more than 6 plants and that the language used is far different from what is in Amend 20. however, if you notice that Matt wrote "Higher Plant Count" recommendations in excess of 6 plants now recognized by Health Department (page 65 line 25 - page 66 line 3) which is incorrect and why I listed the lines pertaining to caregivers on page 65. Caregivers and their patients are still restricted to the 6 plants, as listed in HB 1284:

(10) Affirmative defense. IF A PATIENT OR PRIMARY CAREGIVER RAISES AN AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 14 (4) (b) OF ARTICLE XVIII OF THE STATE CONSTITUTION, THE PATIENT'S PHYSICIAN SHALL CERTIFY THE SPECIFIC AMOUNTS IN EXCESS OF TWO OUNCES THAT ARE NECESSARY TO ADDRESS THE PATIENT'S DEBILITATING MEDICAL CONDITION AND WHY SUCH AMOUNTS ARE NECESSARY. A PATIENT WHO ASSERTS THIS AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE SHALL WAIVE CONFIDENTIALITY PRIVILEGES RELATED TO THE CONDITION OR CONDITIONS THAT WERE THE BASIS FOR THE RECOMMENDATION. IF A PATIENT, PRIMARY CAREGIVER, OR PHYSICIAN RAISES AN EXCEPTION TO THE STATE CRIMINAL LAWS AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 14 (2) (b) OR (c) OF ARTICLE XVIII OF THE STATE CONSTITUTION, THE PATIENT, PRIMARY CAREGIVER OR PHYSICIAN WAIVES THE CONFIDENTIALITY OF HIS OR HER RECORDS RELATED TO THE CONDITION OR CONDITIONS THAT WERE THE BASIS FOR THE RECOMMENDATION MAINTAINED BY THE STATE HEALTH AGENCY FOR THE MEDICAL MARIJUANA PROGRAM. UPON REQUEST OF A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY FOR SUCH RECORDS, THE STATE HEALTH AGENCY SHALL ONLY PROVIDE RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE INDIVIDUAL RAISING THE EXCEPTION, AND SHALL REDACT ALL OTHER PATIENT, PRIMARY CAREGIVER, OR PHYSICIAN IDENTIFYING INFORMATION.


i apologize if i offended you or came off sounding like a jerk, that's the last thing i wanted to do. it's been a rough few weeks trying to figure out where to go from here and when i read matt brown's article in the westword it made me angry and i felt compelled to respond. sorry :(

About Infused Products. A spoon full of sugar makes the medicine go down."

From the Victorian era to the discovery of aspirin, a tincture of cannabis was the most widely used Rx drug USA. For spastic disorders (anything described as neurological today) doctors would give their patient up to two tablespoons of the tincture a couple of times a day.

In a typical pot brownie today you might have the equivalent of an eye-dropper squirt of cannabis infused in the edible. So two table spoons of tincture was way powerful medicine, a level very few would consider using today. But, I've seen the effects when you use this amount on seriously ill patients and the results are nothing less than astounding. It's no wonder primitive medicine used this stuff so much.

If you are a male, 6'2", 260 lbs, can't smoke and have a neurological condition (epilepsy, MS, a migraineur, etc) you could use a pound of raw cannabis per month in the form of concentrates for the effects to be truly worthy. This is why there ARE patients in CO who have 60 plants written on their Dr.'s recommendation.

Plus, with a 60 plant limit you can afford to make edibles, sublingual sprays, etc. out of honey oils which doesn't have a taste that could cause a healthy person to vomit. Because, even a spoonful of sugar won't mask that gwad awful taste.