Imagine a situation where new health emergencies linked to the hemp business, such as those at Mary Jane Berlin, or reviews of contaminated cigarettes from California, become a popular phenomenon. These incidents, while isolated, emphasize a disturbing trend toward the hazardous manipulation of plants after celebrated for their healthy benefits.
In fact, the food market offers a disturbing parallel. If we could go back in time and use what we currently possess, would n’t we make mistakes like over-relying on high-fructose corn syrup or over-processing our foods? We’ve learned that the closer our foods is to its cause, the better. This knowledge underpins the Farm to Table motion, emphasizing that pure, natural ingredients are fundamental for health.
Why, therefore, are we not applying this knowledge to the burgeoning cannabis and cannabis business?
The appeal of cannabis and cannabis lies in their clarity and their long-standing, misunderstood, and unrecognized, historical purposes. However, as both have entered the lawful business, we’ve witnessed an alarming change.
Sophisticated technology is being used more frequently to create products than it is to enforce consumer safety. Despite rigorous testing and quality control claims, the reality is n’t always as reliable. The parallel to Big Meal is unmistakable—endless technology for income, often at the expense of customer safety.
For instance, the disputes surrounding cannabis products made from synthetic materials are considerable. These products, typically created in laboratories through complicated chemical procedures, bear little resemblance to the chemical’s normal state. Then, if we take the lessons learned from food and argue for the survival of cannabis in its purest form?
As an economy, we face a key question: How do we guard this plant and its customers from becoming casualties of corporate abuse? My goal is for cannabis products to be as prevalent and governed as over-the-counter medications or alcohol but still have the same level of integrity as organic products.
This prospect is only feasible if we act quickly. If products that have been artificially altered are n’t able to meet strict safety standards, we may require that they be clearly labeled and perhaps even taken off the market. Our aim should get products that one could theoretically make at home—simple, healthy, and healthy, not the result of industrial-scale manipulation.
The industry’s path forward is n’t just regulated but also cultural. We may promote a culture of accountability and transparency, drawing the line between legitimate cannabis merchandise and those produced without any tampering. It’s time to go back to our roots and view cannabis as a flower, not as a pretext for profit-driven technology that might undermine its fundamental qualities.
We have a choice: to remain on a path of unregulated development or to move toward a future where hemp retains its original beauty and purpose. Let’s choose properly, ensuring that this amazing plant remains a secure, respected, and advantageous part of our lives.
Photo by Jeff W on Unsplash
