From David West:
On August 11, 2016, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Department of Justice, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Food and Drug Administration jointly issued a “Statement of Principles on Industrial Hemp.” This document repeats a convention that traces all the way back to the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937:
“The State agricultural pilot program must provide for State registration and certification of sites used for growing or cultivating industrial hemp. Although registration and certification is not further defined, it is recommended that such registration should include the name of the authorized manufacturer, the period of licensure or other time period during which such person is authorized by the State to manufacture industrial hemp, and the location, including Global Positioning System coordinates, where such person is authorized to manufacture industrial hemp.”
“Manufacture” is used when what is clearly meant is “grow,” and “manufacturer” takes the place of “grower.” The conflation of agriculture and industry implicit in this doublespeak has legal consequences. There is no other instance (to my knowledge) where the small miracle of a seed germinating and a plant unfurling its solar collectors is treated as something a man could fashion with his hands (manus factus). Please, make me a plant. Do it! I’ll watch.
It may seem a small obfuscation on the part of the government. But in the same week, we were also informed that the FDA approved Syndro, “a synthetic form of THC.” What is truly manufactured is defined as medicine by the same federal agencies that categorize the THC-rich plant that grows naturally as having no medical use. We invoke E. E. Cummings’ admonition: “a world of made is not a world of born.”
The author, retired as a plant breeder, edits Newhead News, where you’ll find items you might have missed from a POV you might appreciate.
