Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Steffan Dalsgaard
Golden Triangle Enterprise, Inc.
3430 East Russell Road. Suite 301-18
Las Vegas, Nevada 89120
info@hempinc.com
There is no Seffan at Hemp Inc, you must have the wrong company.
A couple?
Who the fook is Seffan?
Yes. Bruce has, already, successfully developed a BILLION DOLLAR cannabis organization. It's fact, documented, and cannot be disputed. Bruce was (and is) the King of Pot (now Hemp or Cannabis). Though it was outlawed during the time, Bruce ran a very successful company. Sure, there's always the "new bag of tricks" in this day and age, but wisdom is not taught in one lecture. You have to live and experience certain things in life, and that is what Bruce brings to the table. Virtually no other head of a "pot stock" company has the verifiable credibility of saying they've controlled a $1B enterprise, even though that comes at a stigma of being "convicted" of laws that are today OUTDATED.
Bruce has a good team around him, and he knows how to reach the best farmers providing the best product. He is actually showing this daily in documented film. It's great!
More decent buys coming EOD, EOW
Interesting little micro flash-crash after some decent buying...
Upward pressure?
2020 predictions: Staff changes at FDA, CBD, personalization, and the microbiome
15-Jan-2020 By Stephen Daniells
The year is new and a lot of people are getting out their crystal balls. NutraIngredients-USA is no exception, and here are our top big issues that will impact the dietary supplements industry in this new decade.
4. CBD?
Yes, I held this until number 4 on the list. The dietary supplements industry is worth $45+ billion dollars, and the vast majority of this has nothing whatsoever to do with CBD-containing products. Despite CBD supplements rocketing to the top spot in the natural channel with $52 million in sales?, CBD remains a minor player in the category.
Late last year, the FDA stated that – for the moment – it cannot conclude that CBD (cannabidiol) is generally recognized as safe (GRAS)? for its use in human food, based on a “lack of scientific information supporting the safety of CBD in food”?. The Agency also sent a raft of warning letters, mostly about unacceptable label claims.
This was followed by a wave of potential class actions against CBD companies large and small.
Politicians are pushing hard for clarity and a resolution, and just this week, a new bill proposed the inclusion of CBD under the definition of dietary supplements found in DSHEA?. The bill would not prevent FDA from requiring NDI notifications, enforcing GMP compliance, and other necessary actions. And would this also only be specific to CBD and therefore, would/ could that freeze out opportunities with other cannabinoids?
What's clear is that something needs to happen and soon.
HTTPS://WWW.NUTRAINGREDIENTS-USA.COM/ARTICLE/2020/01/15/2020-PREDICTIONS-STAFF-CHANGES-AT-FDA-CBD-PERSONALIZATION-AND-THE-MICROBIOME
Congressional Hearing Exposes Marijuana Research Limitations Imposed By Federal Law
Published on January 15, 2020
By Kyle Jaeger
At a congressional hearing on Wednesday, federal regulators recognized that valuable research into marijuana is being inhibited cannabis’s current legal status and described previously unreported steps they’re taking to resolve the issue.
The Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health held the meeting to discuss six cannabis reform proposals, including two that would federally legalize marijuana. Most of the hearing involved lawmakers pressing witnesses from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) on the obstacles to marijuana studies that those officials claim are needed before pursuing broader policy reform.
Conversation was more limited when it came to legalization bills such as Judiciary Chairman Jerrod Nadler’s (D-NY) Marijuana Opportunity, Reinvestment and Expungement (MORE) Act, which was approved by his panel last year. That said, formerly anti-reform Rep. Joe Kennedy III (D-MA) did lead a powerful discussion about the failures of prohibition and the need to deschedule cannabis.
Kennedy announced that panel leadership has agreed to hold a second hearing featuring the voices of people negatively impacted by marijuana prohibition, which he said “has failed.”
Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone (D-NJ) said in his opening statement that “while state laws and public perception around cannabis and its derivatives have evolved over the years, much of the federal framework that regulates cannabis has stayed the same.”
After being repeatedly asked about the limited supply of research-grade cannabis and the lack of chemical diversity in those plants cultivated at the nation’s only federally authorized manufacturer, DEA Senior Policy Advisor Matthew Strait said the agency is aware of the issue and is actively developing regulations to address the problem by licensing additional growers.
“We actually have a draft regulation in place,” he said, adding that it’s currently being reviewed by the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and that regulators have a call scheduled for Thursday to discuss the proposed rule.
“We know that we have to probably do notice and comment rulemaking to implement regulations on two matters: one is how we’re going to evaluate all of our pending applications and two what additional types of regulations might need to be in place in order to impose on those that would grow,” he said. “That regulation is in draft form. I can’t talk too much about it, but rest assured, we have submitted to OMB, it’s been drafted and tomorrow some of us will be getting on a call to talk through it.”
DEA, FDA and NIDA witnesses all agreed under questioning that the current supply of cannabis for study purposes is inadequate and that researchers should be able to access a wider range of marijuana products.
Kennedy, who recently became a cosponsor of the MORE Act, followed up on his opening remarks with a brief statement on his personal evolution on the issue and frustration over policies inhibiting research.
“Meanwhile, millions of Americans—mostly black and brown—have been locked up for non-violent drug offenses. Meanwhile, desperate parents are forced to turn to a black market with no concern for patient safety to get their children the relief that they need. Meanwhile our cities and states are trying, and at times stumbling, to put in place thoughtful and thorough regulatory frameworks with zero support from federal partners. And meanwhile, a brand new corporate industry is rising up, rife with predictable economic injustices that spring up whenever government fails to regulate. Prohibition has clearly failed and America isn’t waiting for its government anymore.”
He then asked NIDA Director Nora Volkow and FDA Deputy Director for Regulatory Programs Douglas Throckmorton whether removing cannabis from the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) would make it easier for researchers to obtain and study it. Both said that the policy change would in fact simply research, though Volkow said it “may have unintended negative consequences.”
FDA and NIDA said their agencies would not be impacted if marijuana was descheduled, and DEA’s Strait acknowledged that his agency would because of its responsibility to enforce the CSA.
Subcommittee Chairwoman Anna Eshoo (D-CA) said researchers are “are in a catch-22” under the current regulatory scheme because they “can’t conduct research until they show cannabis has a medical use, but they can’t demonstrate cannabis has a medical use until they can conduct research.”
“It doesn’t make sense—at least to me,” she said.
Rep. Tony Cardenas (D-CA) said that the “United States Congress made a mistake, and every Congress since has not had honest hearings and honest dialogue and has not allowed—truly allowed—the researchers in this great country to do the true research that needs to be done for us to properly categorize cannabis in this country.”
“As a result of that, we have millions of individuals in this country who have been subjected to incarceration and a criminal record that otherwise they would have a much more productive and better life and that as a society, we would be much better off, including the taxpayers, if we were to actually get this right,” he said.
There were several exchanges throughout the hearing—which was requested by four Republican members last month—where lawmakers opposed to comprehensive reform argued that cannabis is a gateway drug and that legalization represents a public health threat.
Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR) brought cookies in plastic baggies and distributed them to members. He then pointed to an image of a THC-infused cookie that looks similar that are available in Oregon.
“Each of you, by the way, has a cookie in front of you. I have a pizza stand opening in an hour out in the hallway,” he quipped. “Now don’t worry, I didn’t get that carried away. You can actually eat these. The question is, how do you know if your child stumbled upon it?”
The congressman went on to say that descheduling marijuana “is a step too far and is something I cannot support.”
But there were other members who shared anecdotes about the consequences of prohibition, particularly on patients who stand to benefit from medical cannabis.
Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-VA), for example, recalled that in the 1980s, he knew friends who would smuggle cannabis into a hospital for a man suffering from cancer and who wanted to improve his quality of life to spend time with his son. Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-MI) said her late husband, former Rep. John Dingell (D-MI) experienced “great pain” and was told that cannabis might treat it, but he declined in part because of its status as a federally illicit substance.
Several other lawmakers, including Cannabis Caucus Co-Chair Barbara Lee (D-CA), highlighted the hearing and remarked on its significance.
“Today, my [Energy Commerce] colleagues are holding a hearing on legislation to remove marijuana from the list of Schedule I drugs and allow for more research on the uses, impacts, and health benefits of cannabis,” Rep. Mike Doyle (D-PA) said. “Looking forward to their discussion on these bills!”
“After years of working to advance cannabis reform in Congress, this critical hearing is an important milestone where another major congressional committee focused time and attention on our movement,” Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), who spoke to Marijuana Moment on Tuesday about his expectations for the hearing, said in a press release. “It was important to hear a number of senior members of Congress affirming the change that is taking place at the state level and affirming the contradictions that are created by the federal government being out of step and out of touch.”
Pro-legalization group NORML also submitted written testimony for the hearing, stating that as “evident by the title of this hearing, our federal marijuana policies are stuck in the past.”
“It is time for Congress to amend them in a manner that comports with our current political and cultural reality,” the organization said. “For some 50 years, the cannabis plant has been improperly categorized and criminalized by federal law. It is time to re-examine and amend this longstanding failed policy.”
Ahead of the hearing, a coalition of cannabis reform groups—including the National Cannabis Industry Association, Cannabis Trade Federation and Minority Cannabis Business Association—sent a letter to subcommittee leadership ahead of the meeting, encouraging members to take action on the various pieces of legislation.
“As organizations that collectively represent thousands of state-legal cannabis businesses around the country, ancillary industries, and our communities, we applaud your decision to hold a hearing on cannabis policy so early in the new legislative session,” the groups wrote. “This is a wonderful opportunity to continue the robust and groundbreaking discussion on this issue that took place in Congress last year and we commend your leadership in carrying it over into 2020.”
“As an industry, we understand that many lawmakers have concerns about the impact of the changing legal status of cannabis. We do not take these concerns lightly. These concerns underscore the need to establish a legal federal cannabis framework, as current federal policies can cause and exacerbate these concerns. We welcome the opportunity to work with lawmakers and regulators to determine the best paths forward as state and federal cannabis policy evolves.”
In their written testimony, DEA, FDA and NIDA representatives generally described the current state of federal marijuana policy, unsurprisingly without advocating for changes to cannabis’s current criminal status. That said, both DEA and NIDA seemed to at least recognize that existing policies are inhibiting research into the plant and signaled that changes are on the horizon.
Volkow wrote that the growing availability of cannabis products, particularly with high concentrations of THC, “raise serious public health concerns.” At the same time, however, “despite the public health urgency, legal and regulatory barriers continue to present challenges to advancing cannabis research.”
“Obtaining or modifying a Schedule I registration [for researchers to study marijuana] involves significant administrative challenges, and researchers report that obtaining a new registration can take more than a year,” she said. “Adding new substances to an existing registration can also be time consuming.”
“It would be useful to clarify aspects of the [Controlled Substances Act] that have been sources of confusion and administrative burden for the research community,” she said.
Additionally, Volkow acknowledged that the current situation, where the government has only authorized one facility to cultivate cannabis for researchers, “limits the diversity of products and formulations available to researchers and slows the development of cannabis-based medications.”
“Although the University of Mississippi supplies cannabis for clinical trials, it does not have the capacity to manufacture a broad array of cannabis-derived formulations for research or to supply these cannabis products for commercial development,” she said.
Strait wrote that his agency remains committed to expanding the number of federally authorized cannabis manufacturers for research purposes, noting that DEA is reviewing the situation but that ” adjustments to DEA’s policies and procedures may be necessary under applicable U.S. law to be consistent with certain treaty functions.”
“In the near future, DEA intends to propose regulations that would govern persons seeking to become registered with DEA to grow marihuana as bulk manufacturers, consistent with applicable law, taking into account recent changes in the Controlled Substances Act,” he said. “At present, a notice of proposed rulemaking is under review by the Office of Management and Budget.”
Volkow raised another issue, which other federal agencies have previously recognized, noting that “researchers supported by NIDA and other federal agencies are unable to access marketed cannabis products through state marijuana dispensaries.”
“There is a significant gap in our understanding of their impact on health,” she said. “The recent outbreaks of e-cigarette or vaping product use associated lung injury (EVALI), which has been linked to informally-sourced THC-containing vape products, underscores the critical importance of facilitating researcher access to different product sources.”
A NIDA staffer told Marijuana Moment in an email last week that “rigorous research is essential for understanding how the changing cannabis landscape will affect public health, for guiding evidence-based policy, and advancing therapeutics.”
“However, there are significant regulatory challenges to conducting research with marijuana and other Schedule I drugs,” the official said. “NIDA [has] been working with the DEA and FDA on ways to ameliorate these challenges, but there is nothing publicly available to share at this time.”
Source: https://www.marijuanamoment.net/watch-live-congressional-committee-holds-hearing-on-six-marijuana-bills/
CBD makers shouldn’t face liability claims until FDA acts, judge rules
Published January 13, 2020
A decision by a federal judge in Florida to put a CBD lawsuit on hold pending federal clarity on the extract signals the judiciary isn’t yet ready to start hearing class action claims against the industry.
U.S. District Judge Ursula Ungaro ruled Jan. 3 that a CBD manufacturer shouldn’t face certain liability claims until the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) finishes work reviewing CBD policy. That FDA review was promised last year, but has yet to appear.
In the Florida case, the judge decided that the federal health agency’s current rules “provide little guidance with respect to whether CBD ingestibles, in all their variations are food supplements, nutrients or additives and what labeling standards are applicable.”
The ruling came in a labeling lawsuit against Green Roads, a CBD manufacturer in Deerfield Beach, Florida.
Ungaro also dismissed an attempt to make the Green Roads case a class action lawsuit.
Green Roads is one of several CBD manufacturers facing liability claims based on labeling or branding. The FDA’s statements that CBD cannot be sold as a dietary supplement are underpinning all those cases.
Ungaro noted the FDA is planning to update its CBD guidelines.
The judge also acknowledged that the state of Florida recently started regulating CBD products, but she added in her order that “the court would benefit greatly from the FDA’s regulatory oversight.”
Source: https://hempindustrydaily.com/cbd-makers-shouldnt-face-liability-claims-until-fda-acts-judge-rules/
Congress ramping up pressure to ‘provide a pathway forward’ for hemp, CBD
Published 1/15/20 | By Laura Drotleff
New legislation introduced by the top-ranking member of the U.S. House Agriculture Committee could require federal food and agriculture regulators to treat hemp-derived CBD as a dietary supplement.
Agriculture Chair Collin Peterson, a Minnesota Democrat, suggests changing the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FD&C) to include the regulation of hemp-derived CBD and products containing the substance.
For months now, hemp-friendly lawmakers have been asking for regulations allowing the sale of hemp-derived CBD without a doctor’s prescription.
The bill introduced this week signals that legislators are considering requiring such changes to open market opportunities for CBD.
“The last two Farm Bills (2014 and 2018) were landmark successes for hemp, but we are still very early in this process and growers need regulatory certainty,” Peterson said in a statement.
If enacted, the legislation would change the definition of “dietary supplement.” Supporters say the change would force the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to allow CBD to be marketed in dietary supplements.
“This bill will allow FDA to regulate CBD that comes from hemp as a dietary supplement, providing a pathway forward for hemp-derived products,” Peterson said.
The bill would also require the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to study and report market barriers for farmers producing hemp. The USDA study would include:
---Costs and requirements for establishing and operating a hemp testing program, including the costs and requirements for operating or contracting with a laboratory approved by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
--Costs and requirements for the destruction of hemp crops determined to be above 0.3% delta-9 THC or opportunities for remediation or alternative uses.
---Feasibility of producer compliance with reporting requirements.
The findings of these studies would be submitted to the House and Senate agriculture committees within a year.
According to Peterson, the USDA’s role would help inform “growers and policy makers of the challenges facing this new industry.”
Lawmakers want to see action for hemp farmers, businesses
The proposal signals bipartisan interest in helping the hemp and CBD industry move forward, according to Eric Steenstra, president of advocacy group Vote Hemp.
Sponsors include Kentucky Republicans James Comer and Thomas Massie and Maine Democrat Chellie Pingree.
“It was really nice to see people on both sides of the aisle coming together to solve this problem, and we’re hopeful that there will be a Senate version of the bill and we could see some action on this in 2020,” Steenstra told Hemp Industry Daily.
The bipartisan coalition involved in the bill’s introduction is a good indicator that there is already strong support and that the legislation will be well received, Steenstra said.
The requirements also show that members of the U.S. Congress are tiring of the FDA’s delay in regulating CBD and are ready to move forward on the agency’s suggestion that Congress should get involved if it wants to see action sooner than later.
“I think it’s an acknowledgement of the reality that in failing to act, the FDA is leaving what has become a largely unregulated marketplace,” Steenstra told Hemp Industry Daily.
“The FDA had a hearing more than eight months ago. They received over 4,000 comments, all overwhelmingly positive, and they have yet to step up and acknowledge that products are out there everywhere and that they should be overseeing the companies that are making them and making sure that they’re following existing guidelines for dietary supplements and foods.”
Mixed signals
The FDA’s most recent action in November to state that CBD is not generally recognized as safe (GRAS), quoting liver toxicity studies, further undermined the market, Steenstra said.
“There are a lot of good CBD products on the market,” he said. “But there are also some really bad ones that are not following existing regulations that you would have to meet for any food or dietary supplement.
“What we want to do is get the bad actors out and just see good quality products out there in the market.”
Introducing legislation was “the right thing for Congress to do,” Steenstra said, adding that the change for CBD products would “take them out of this gray area.”
The directive for the USDA studies and report will also be useful, in light of the issues presented by the USDA’s interim final rule for hemp production, according to Steenstra.
“It’s great to further study that and make sure that we’re removing barriers to the industry becoming successful,” he said.
A little sideways trading at the top, with a green close would be sweet!
Let's go!
Congress introduces bill to legalize CBD once and for all
Losing its patience with the FDA, a bipartisan bill was introduced to allow CBD into foods and supplements.
Josh Long | Jan 14, 2020
Legislation was unveiled Monday in the U.S. House of Representatives to allow hemp-based CBD to be marketed in dietary supplements and conventional food.
The bill, introduced by House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-MN), is a simple, three-page bill that would explicitly include hemp-derived CBD in the definition of a dietary supplement.
It also would create an exception for CBD to a “prohibited act” in Section 301(ll) of the Federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act (FDCA), which essentially bars the introduction into interstate commerce of a food (including a dietary supplement ingredient) that was first studied as a pharmaceutical drug.
The FDA has continually cited the FDCA as the reason it cannot declare hemp CBD as a legal dietary ingredient—and thus has done little to regulate the booming market other than occasionally send out a dozen or so warning letters to companies making egregious disease claims around products.
Peterson’s bill also would require the Agriculture Secretary, “in consultation with other relevant federal and state agencies,” to “complete a study on the market and regulatory barriers for producers operating under the domestic hemp production program specified” in USDA’s regulations.
An end-around to the FDA
Since 2015, FDA has reiterated in public speeches, written statements and warning letters that CBD was first authorized for investigation as a new drug and the subject of substantial clinical investigations by GW Pharmaceuticals plc. Consequently, under the FDCA, CBD cannot be marketed in dietary supplements or added to conventional food, according to the FDA.
CBD, nonetheless, has flourished on the U.S. market and is sold virtually everywhere from e-commerce sites to gas stations, grocery stores and restaurants.
FDA’s public stance that CBD cannot be sold in food and supplements has not been incorporated in a formal regulation or adjudicated in the courts. Marketers with collectively tens of millions of dollars in annual sales are expected to tangle with FDA in the judiciary if the agency moved to shut down the industry.
If passed into law, HB 5587 could avoid a protracted battle between industry and regulators over the compound’s legality. But members of Congress may be reticent to interfere with FDA, which has raised growing concerns and unanswered questions about the safety of CBD.
Although FDA has been exploring whether to create a legal pathway for CBD in food and supplements, it has not begun a formal rulemaking.
“Since it’s probably not going to be resolved for two to three years, it’s great that someone in Congress wants to quicken the process,” Geoff Whaling, chairman of the National Hemp Association, a nonprofit organization, said in an interview. “But I think that Congress has got a lot of other priorities, and they want the FDA to be able to do their job and not interfere, and that’s what I’m hearing from some congressional members.”
On the other hand, “FDA is saying, ‘We’re working within the laws and rules that Congress has given us,’” Whaling noted. “So what do you do? You need to get Congress to change those rules. And that’s what this piece of legislation would do.”
“It seems that both parties [FDA and Congress] were waiting for someone else to make the first move,” said Tami Wahl, a strategic policy advisor with experience in the natural products industry, in an interview.
Added Mike Greene, a consultant with Greene GR Strategies and seasoned lobbyist who previously served as senior vice president for government relations with the Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN): “It is Congress’ job to tell the agencies what to do, when to do it, how to do it, and to be as clear as possible in the legislative language so that they understand it.”
Greene said he and Wahl worked with House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-Minnesota) to introduce the legislation. He expressed hope that the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, which oversees FDA, would consider the legislation at some point in 2020 during a hearing.
“It’s our goal that this bill would be considered and Chairman Peterson would have a chance to testify or maybe even explain why he introduced the bill,” Greene said in an interview.
Eric Steenstra, president of the advocacy group Vote Hemp, expressed support for Peterson’s legislation, saying it would “help provide clarity to the marketplace and ensure that CBD supplements can be marketed and sold nationwide.”
“We urge Congress to pass this legislation quickly and FDA to regulate hemp-derived CBD the same as any other supplement under existing regulations,” Steenstra said in a statement.
Frustration with FDA
The hemp industry has expressed frustration with FDA’s failure to develop a legal path for CBD in food and supplements.
“FDA’s past promises to lay out a regulatory path for the retail sale of hemp-derived CBD products have so far gone unfulfilled,” the U.S. Hemp Roundtable, a coalition of hemp companies and organizations, wrote in an email blast. “Inaction by the agency has led to a worst of all worlds: While a legal cloud hovers over commerce in safe, quality-assured, popular CBD products, unregulated bad actors continue to sell inferior products that give misleading information to consumers and potentially endanger public health and safety.”
“Congress,” the U.S. Hemp Roundtable added, “has begun to lose its patience.”
Signed into law, the 2018 Farm Bill removed hemp from the Controlled Substances Act, treating the substance as an agricultural commodity subject to USDA’s jurisdiction. But it didn’t solve the definitional problems identified by FDA related to CBD in food and supplements.
“The last two Farm Bills were landmark successes for hemp, but we are still very early in this process, and growers need regulatory certainty,” Peterson said in a statement. “This bill will allow FDA to regulate CBD that comes from hemp as a dietary supplement, providing a pathway forward for hemp-derived products. It would also identify barriers to success for hemp farmers, informing growers and policy makers of the challenges facing this new industry.”
Reps. James Comer (R-KY), Chellie Pingree (D-ME) and Thomas Massie (R-KY) signed on as original co-sponsors of HB 5587.
“Despite legalization of hemp in the last Farm Bill, there’s been a lack of clarity around hemp and hemp-derived CBD,” Pingree said in a statement. “Businesses have suffered due to murky regulations on banking, insurance, marketing, and generally operating above ground. With this bill, we’re providing a pathway forward for hemp farmers by allowing hemp-derived CBD products to be marketed like any other dietary supplement.”
Spokespeople for Comer and Massie did not immediately respond to emailed requests for comment.
Source: https://www.newhope.com/regulatory/congress-introduces-bill-legalize-cbd-once-and-all
FDA Would Be Required To Allow CBD Product Marketing Under New Bipartisan Bill
Published on January 14, 2020
By Kyle Jaeger
A bipartisan coalition of lawmakers have introduced a new bill that would allow for hemp-derived CBD to be lawfully marketed as a dietary supplement.
While hemp and its derivatives were federally legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is still in the process of developing regulations that would let businesses sell it in the food supply or as nutritional supplements. Former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb said that rulemaking could take years without congressional action.
This legislation, filed on Monday, could be one way to resolve the problem, in that it amends the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act to include CBD in the definition of dietary supplements.
Rep. Collin Peterson (D-MN), chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, filed the bill. Initial cosponsors include Reps. Thomas Massie (R-KY), James Comer (R-KY) and Chellie Pingree (D-ME).
“The last two Farm Bills were landmark successes for hemp, but we are still very early in this process, and growers need regulatory certainty,” Peterson said in a press release. “This bill will allow FDA to regulate CBD that comes from hemp as a dietary supplement, providing a pathway forward for hemp-derived products.”
Massie told Marijuana Moment that he’s “excited to be an original cosponsor of this bill.”
“Bipartisan allies in Congress and in the grassroots have worked hard for many years to pave the way for hemp legalization,” the congressman said. “In its first year, Kentucky’s industrial hemp industry added hundreds of new jobs and $100 million to the state’s economy! I’m confident H.R. 5587 will be another step in the right direction for industrial hemp.”
As it stands, FDA has said it is using enforcement discretion when it comes to CBD products that are already widely available in markets across the U.S. Only businesses making especially outlandish claims about the therapeutic benefits of the cannabis products are being targeted for the time being, with the agency sending a series of warning letters to select companies.
Numerous lawmakers, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), have made clear to FDA that Congress intended to allow CBD products to be marketed when it passed the legalization provision, and they’ve urged the agency to expeditiously enact regulations allowing for that activity.
Eric Steenstra, president of the advocacy group Vote Hemp, said in an email blast to supporters that the organization “supports this important new bill which will help provide clarity to the marketplace and ensure that CBD supplements can be marketed and sold nationwide.”
“We urge Congress to pass this legislation quickly and FDA to regulate hemp derived CBD the same as any other supplement under existing regulations,” he said.
The bill, which has been referred to the Agriculture and Energy and Commerce Committees, also includes a provision that would require the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to study the “regulatory and market barriers for farmers engaged in hemp production.”
Specifically, the department would be required to research the costs of implementing a hemp testing program, the costs of destroying hemp with excess THC content, the “feasibility” of the testing timeline farmers must follow and “other known or potential challenges” related to participation in a domestic hemp market. The department would have to issue a report on its findings within one year of the bill’s enactment.
USDA also became responsible for creating new rules for hemp since the crop was legalized, and it issued an interim final rule outlining proposed regulations in October. Several lawmakers and industry stakeholders have weighed in and recommended certain changes to ensure that the hemp industry isn’t unduly restricted.
Read the full text of the CBD bill below:
https://www.scribd.com/document/442930072/Congressional-CBD-Dietary-Supplement-Bill#from_embed
Source: https://www.marijuanamoment.net/fda-would-be-required-to-allow-cbd-product-marketing-under-new-bipartisan-bill/
I mean, if we net out the 15% @ $500/lbs, and the remaining is going at $7.50/lbs wholesale, then we are looking at $296,665,132.50 combined, but surely some percentage reductions on lot-pricing....
Still sticking with my sub $50M projection though, would LOVE to be proven wrong :)))
Yes, thousands of products to choose from. It's undoubtedly a trillion dollar industry. HEMP will eat its fill of pie. Bruce knows.
Bruce just commented on quantity
Carlos Medeiros How many pounds do you have of the pre -98 oj bubba
Bruce Perlowin Carlos Medeiros 100,000
Pretty sure if Bruce is making these statements in the public domain, it's probably safe to assume it's darn close to 100,000lbs.
This is amazing progress from just a couple of years ago.
There is still more to process. Likely several hundred, if not thousands of totes still coming. Those are just the A/B and low-grade buds. Does not include the thousands of pounds of biomass. Does not include the hundreds of pounds of roots. Does not include NC (which is minuscule to what was produced in Medford)
I think the $200M was a little bit of a stretch from the get-go. Not sure who made that statement. I think we are looking at $20-30M, and maybe more depending on how well the prerolls sell. Don't think exceeding $100M is realistic, but, good god, would I love to be wrong on that.
At any rate, $10, $20, $30 mil is a HUGE improvement from <$2M in 2018. And that's not saying that '19 will meet expectations, but surely the 2020 performance will be epic.
And who knows what's going on with the kenaf lines.... it was always a stepping stone to hemp, and will be icing on the cake.
Better?
I would safely presume in Medford, Oregon. Where else?
CONFIRMED
Taylor Padula Trent Packer we are still trimming! We have hundreds of super sacks still to go through. Lots of finished product ready for sale but still a few weeks of work ahead of us!
Taylor Padula We have made so much progress it’s crazy to think where we were a few weeks ago and where we are now. We ended up with way more product then we thought we would. Truly blessed this season, can’t wait for you all to taste and see (in person) all of our hard work. So many people/growers/buyers stop by and the opinion is always the same... we grew amazing product!
Thousands of pounds still to process! My estimates were extremely low-balled!
And the remainder is to go to KoH prerolls, which, by same estimated variables, comes to $11,444,815.88...
and still TBD how much more left to process. Only judging by what's seen in the vid.
and if this hemp production thing doesn't work out, that Taylor has a bright future as a narrator of audiobooks.
Some quick calculations
A rough glance estimate of the video shows approximately 134 totes in the finished product room, and approximately 400 totes in the outside floor area, for roughly 534 totes. Judging by some of the totes in view, they are labeled anywhere between 5 to over 8 lbs. Let's assume the average weight per tote is 7 pounds, that's 3,738 lbs of premium CBD bud. We have, literally, over a ton of bud, and by gauging the amount of super sacks, they still have a lot more to go. According to the post on Bruce's FB page, 10-20% of the A/B buds are to be sold for $500/lbs. Therefore, just with this amount seen, staying on the conservative 10%, we have an estimated $186,900 sale, keeping in mind it's tough to say how much more buds they have left to process...
Nonetheless, money is about to start flowing like 80's ballad rockstar hair.
Did somebody say FLOODGATES?
Bruce over 11K FB followers, and rising. Very Nice.
We plan to sell 10-20% of our Pre-98 OJ Bubba Kush, high CBD buds for $500 a pound (they are definitely worth it for those that want to go to Medford and see the product) and the rest? will be ground up and blended for the King of Hemp prerolls featuring the Marijuana smugglers of yesteryear- each with their own specific blend. If you’re interested in the flower email Taylor at flower@hempinc.com:
https://www.facebook.com/KingOfPot/videos/10219529957096008/
Who isn't?
MSRP, and people will pay. Demand is higher than ever. Price will continue to drop as supply vol increases year after year, which is great for consumers and manufacturers.
Much needed pullback. The RSI was starting to overheat.
News, deals, and numbers all still have yet to hit the wire.
Record breaking sales are in the works, and it could be a breakout year for HEMP and the industry. Hold on!
Let's keep the momo going, folks!
Bruce is 25 FB followers away from 11,000.
Hemp Inc's page is almost 31k following.
Keeps moving up. Lots of interest. Lots of prerolls. Lots of truckloads. Lots of sales.
HEMP didn't open their own case, and nothing was "falsified", just more bogus claims made but those who were misled.
And the sanctions are still being appealed...
But SEC still not enough evidence for squat:
However, because the defendants’ discovery violations do not threaten the rightful decision of the case on the merits, the court will not recommend terminating sanctions
NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANTS BARRY K. EPLING, FERRIS HOLDING, INC., AND HOBBES EQUITIES, INC.
Yes, providing Gov't officials with misleading information to open a case with false allegations would be considered a threat to the perpetrators liberty.
I guess more excuses, illusions, and fairy tales, but HEMP will proceed with more shipments and sales of prerolls and other verified products with verified customers.
Funny, cause HEMP the one getting "sued"... without evidence. If I was going to press charges, I would at least want some facts to support my claims... but the whistleblowers don't have, and led the SEC on a wild goose chase... sad, very sad. Waste waste waste
Innocent people don't settle. False allegations and misleading gov't authorities is a big no-no. The counter-suit will be quick, heads rolling in village square. SEC will gladly help persecute. Tiny cots...
Whimsy, without evidence to support claims.
Going on 4 yrs now.... nothing.
0.015 is possible next week, if buys keep coming.
Close above .01 would be nice. Still has upward momo and news hasn't even dropped.
FDA comes at EOM too
What are you talking about?
It has already happened. It has been proven, by Bruce.
You want to bring Pablo into this?
LOL!
That's a funny one. Completely unrelated to what Bruce did, and certainly not to anyone's harm. Low level comparison at best.
It's ok, bud, Bruce is back in the game, and ready for another BILLION dollar empire... THE HEMPIRE.
You see it growing?