Phillip Allendale

[Phillip Allendale @AllendalePhill]

My argument has expanded:

Congress tried to solve a problem with intoxicating hemp products. Instead, it changed federal law in a way that reaches back to the plant and its genetics—with consequences for two major American industries: hemp and marijuana.

The debate has largely been about intoxicating, mislabeled “gas station” hemp and synthetics. Those are legitimate problems. But Congress didn’t simply regulate those products. It changed the biological definition of hemp itself.

Unless Congress acts before implementation, farmers will no longer have a commercially viable pathway to grow cannabinoid hemp, tens of millions of Americans will lose access to non-intoxicating CBD products, and marijuana seed/genetics commerce will also be disrupted.

The biological problem is simple. The new law moves from 0.3% delta-9 THC to 0.3% total THC, including THCA. Cannabis doesn’t produce CBD in isolation. As CBD/CBDA develops, some THC/THCA develops with it. Even CBD-dominant plants bred for minimal THC cross this very low threshold as cannabinoids mature.

I’ve personally reviewed specifications for many hundreds of cannabis strains and I could identify no viable cannabinoid-producing genetics—hemp or marijuana—that remain below 0.3% total THC through commercial cultivation. That means this isn’t simply a tighter standard eliminating intoxicating hemp while preserving CBD. The genetics necessary to commercially produce cannabinoid hemp won’t comply. If farmers can’t legally grow it, nothing moves downstream. The federally legal cannabinoid-hemp industry will be eradicated.

Then there are seeds. The new law excludes viable cannabis seeds when the plant producing them exceeds 0.3% total THC. So a seed containing virtually no measurable THC now loses hemp status because of its parent plant’s chemistry. Compare that with federal treatment of the opium poppy: Papaver somniferum is defined as an “opium poppy” except for its seed. Federal law has long distinguished the controlled plant from its seed. Inexplicably, Congress has taken essentially the opposite approach with cannabis. Congress should consider the precedent this sets.

And the impact doesn’t stop at hemp. Seeds from state-legal marijuana plants exceeding 0.3% total THC will no longer qualify federally as hemp, disrupting interstate genetics supporting state-legal cultivation.

Consider the scale. Whitney Economics values the hemp-cannabinoid market at $38.7B with 350,000 jobs. State-legal marijuana is forecast at $30.5B in 2026 sales and 412,500 jobs. That’s roughly $69B across the two markets and 760,000+ American jobs. Roughly 50M Americans are also estimated to use hemp-derived CBD products. They will lose access alongside intoxicating products because the plants needed to commercially produce CBD can’t satisfy the new cultivation standard.

Intoxicating products can be age-restricted, tested and regulated. Deceptive packaging and synthetics can be banned. Hemp can remain natural, U.S.-grown and low in THC, clearly distinguished from marijuana through standards such as a strong CBD:THC ratio. Instead, Congress addressed a finished-product problem by rewriting the definition of the plant.

Congress owes the public a well-informed and impartial review before implementation. Why is eradication of cannabinoid hemp necessary? What alternatives were considered? Was the biological feasibility of commercial CBD cultivation analyzed? What consideration was given to marijuana seeds and genetics—or to farmers, businesses, lenders, 50M CBD consumers and 760,000+ jobs?

[Phillip Allendale @AllendalePhill]

@maggiore_mike @StephenMil48 That

[Phillip Allendale @AllendalePhill]

THC Inc. calls itself an independent documentary, yet you are its executive producer, and founder and CEO of Smart Approaches to Marijuana. That seems like fairly important context for people to understand.

The problem isn’t that the film discusses cannabis harms. It’s that it builds its case largely by selecting harms, tragic individual stories and worst outcomes, then packages them as a portrait of legalization and the cannabis industry.

That’s advocacy filmmaking. Personal tragedies are emotionally powerful, but they don’t establish population-level risk or causation. ER cases aren’t representative samples. Association isn’t automatically causation. And repeatedly showing the numerator while ignoring the denominator can make almost any widely used substance look bad.

If THC Inc. really wants an evidence-based discussion, give viewers the whole picture: absolute risks, how outcomes vary with age, dose and frequency, competing explanations, trends before and after legalization, evidence that doesn’t support the thesis, medical use, and the consequences of prohibition.

Otherwise, don’t complain that the cannabis industry won’t acknowledge inconvenient evidence while making a film that seems to have the same problem in reverse.

[Phillip Allendale @AllendalePhill]

The slogan is catchy, but it substitutes an insult for evidence.

Dr. Randall has been publicly campaigning against cannabis legalization for years. Her own published work largely describes adverse cases encountered in an emergency department—a setting specifically populated by people experiencing adverse outcomes. That’s not a representative sample of tens of millions of cannabis users.

Calling people “reefer blind” doesn’t resolve causation, selection bias, or absolute risk. And using the worst cases arriving in your ER to characterize tens if millions of people who never arrive there isn’t a balanced assessment of cannabis.

Maybe the real blind spot is mistaking what you see from one particular vantage point for the entire view.

[Phillip Allendale @AllendalePhill]

That 241 number sounds terrifying until you look at what was actually measured. This wasn’t the risk to cannabis users. It was an age- and sex-adjusted hazard ratio for people who had already shown up in an ER with cannabis-associated psychosis, compared with the general population.

That’s an extraordinarily selected group. The study found an association; it did not establish that cannabis caused either the initial psychosis or the later schizophrenia diagnosis. Excluding people with a previously diagnosed psychotic disorder doesn’t tell us whether some were already in the early stages of schizophrenia when cannabis use and the ER visit occurred.

The useful conclusion is that a drug-associated psychotic episode is a serious warning sign deserving follow-up. Turning that into “cannabis caused schizophrenia” goes well beyond what this observational study demonstrated and is just advocacy being dressed up as science.

[Phillip Allendale @AllendalePhill]

That 241 number sounds terrifying until you look at what was actually measured. This wasn’t the risk to cannabis users. It was an age- and sex-adjusted hazard ratio for people who had already shown up in an ER with cannabis-associated psychosis, compared with the general population.

That’s an extraordinarily selected group. The study found an association; it did not establish that cannabis caused either the initial psychosis or the later schizophrenia diagnosis. Excluding people with a previously diagnosed psychotic disorder doesn’t tell us whether some were already in the early stages of schizophrenia when cannabis use and the ER visit occurred.

The useful conclusion is that a drug-associated psychotic episode is a serious warning sign deserving follow-up. Turning that into “cannabis caused schizophrenia” goes well beyond what this observational study demonstrated and is just advocacy being dressed up as science.

[Phillip Allendale @AllendalePhill]

@Sched_one @PopPotIllinois I was going to write a commentary but you nailed it.

[Phillip Allendale @AllendalePhill]

This confuses evidence that marijuana has potential risks with evidence that it belongs in Schedule I. Those aren’t the same thing.

Claiming marijuana “consistently fails” for pain ignores the National Academies finding of substantial evidence that cannabis can be effective for chronic pain in adults.

And “no FDA-approved marijuana indication” isn’t proof of “no accepted medical use.” HHS/FDA reviewed the evidence and concluded marijuana DOES have a currently accepted medical use and recommended Schedule III. DOJ later concluded that DEA’s older medical-use test was impermissibly narrow.

Schedule III doesn’t mean legal, it means controlled. It also means that evidence determines the appropriate level of control rather than starting with the desired conclusion and working backward.

[Phillip Allendale @AllendalePhill]

@trabelleNC1 @TrumpGirlLove Agreed!

[Phillip Allendale @AllendalePhill]

Don’t listen to anyone telling you you’re not a good son. That’s ridiculous. You obviously care a lot about your father, and there is no one in your same exact situation. People on X seem to forget there is usually another person on the other end of these posts.

I know from personal experience how difficult these decisions can be. How heart wrenching and also crushingly expensive. Moreover, things don’t always line up the way we plan, but we do the best we can at the time. It sounds to me like you made the best choice you could at the time and things worked out in the end.

[Phillip Allendale @AllendalePhill]

@SDSLLC_USA We all think this is funny, but we already know how absurd the propaganda is the folks pushing prohibition use. That said, I can’t help thinking that this looks a lot like their stuff and may end up inadvertently pushing their agenda with people who aren’t knowledgeable.

[Phillip Allendale @AllendalePhill]

@DescheduleEarth @todd_harrison Excellent and timely post. Thank you.

[Phillip Allendale @AllendalePhill]

This is a heartbreaking story, and I have nothing but sympathy for a mother who lost her son. But in the article she says: “What came first: pot or his mental illness? I will never know.”

The article notes the son had major depression and bipolar disorder, struggled with substance abuse, and died by suicide. Those facts deserve to be taken seriously. They do not establish that marijuana caused his suicide though. Association and causation are not the same thing, however, especially when depression, bipolar disorder, other substance use and self-medication are involved.

We can warn people about the risks of misusing cannabis without trying to turn a family’s tragedy into scientific proof of something the story itself cannot establish.

[Phillip Allendale @AllendalePhill]

Brian, I’ve done some follow-up research on the horrifying problems with China’s and cartel huge illegal grows in California. How is this not national news outlet news instead of regional? And why isn’t there an FBI joint task force hitting each one immediately? What is going on is close to an act of terrorism on US soil. And people think is the plant is causing things like scromitting—it’s obviously the illegal pesticides and chemicals they are spraying on the products.

[Phillip Allendale @AllendalePhill]

@BrianDaniel1972 So, you’re telling us regulation and site inspection are working as they are supposed to and are making the industry safer.

[Phillip Allendale @AllendalePhill]

I’m not an industry professional, or compensated in any way.

The edits to the Farm Bill made hastily last year will eradicate more than intoxicating cannabinoids. Non-intoxicating wellness cannabinoids such as CBD, which my family members use, will also be made illegal.

I write on these issues to try to bring awareness to the problems with what has been written into law because there seems to be a big knowledge gap. Media doesn’t cover it, and our leaders seem uninformed. So, I write on this because it’s going to affect my family.

[Phillip Allendale @AllendalePhill]

@AlexTanbrn @christopherrufo Well said sir

[Phillip Allendale @AllendalePhill]

@bloom_always @christopherrufo Almost certainly

[Phillip Allendale @AllendalePhill]

This needs joint Federal Law Enforcement involvement , not just local. I’m just a civilian but I think there’s a good recent model for response to this. Last month DOJ announced another Chinese-national illegal-grow prosecution in Nevada conducted through a Homeland Security Task Force combining FBI, HSI, DEA, ATF, IRS-CI, U.S. Marshals and local law enforcement. DOJ described the target as transnational criminal networks associated with labor exploitation, weapons offenses and multimillion-dollar money laundering. I hope they hammer them.

[Phillip Allendale @AllendalePhill]

This needs joint Federal Law Enforcement involvement, not just local. I’m just a civilian but I think there’s a good recent model for response to this. Last month DOJ announced another Chinese-national illegal-grow prosecution in Nevada conducted through a Homeland Security Task Force combining FBI, HSI, DEA, ATF, IRS-CI, U.S. Marshals and local law enforcement. DOJ described the target as transnational criminal networks associated with labor exploitation, weapons offenses and multimillion-dollar money laundering. I hope they hammer them.

[Phillip Allendale @AllendalePhill]

This needs joint Federal Law Enforcement involvement , not just local. I’m just a civilian but I think there’s a good recent model for response to this. Last month DOJ announced another Chinese-national illegal-grow prosecution in Nevada conducted through a Homeland Security Task Force combining FBI, HSI, DEA, ATF, IRS-CI, U.S. Marshals and local law enforcement. DOJ described the target as transnational criminal networks associated with labor exploitation, weapons offenses and multimillion-dollar money laundering. I hope they hammer them.