Big pharmaceutical companies don't want cannabis legalized.

Sorry about that. I was never notified that my challenge was accepted. Hmmm? Anyway...here goes. This is a hard topic to prove, obviously because of the subject matter, the covering of evidence and the politically damaging potential of the subject matter, so I will offer "corroborating evidence" and ask that folks use their minds and think critically before forming their own opinions. Here's a list of congressional leaders who are top recipients of campaign contributions from large pharmaceutical companies, none of which support legalization. (1) The Community Anti-Drug Coalition of America (a.k.a "CADCA") is largely funded by Purdue Pharmaceuticals (2) the makers of Oxycontin and other opiate based drugs that kill 1,000 a year in Kentucky alone. Yet CADCA is one of the loudest opponents of cannabis legalization (3). But even though CADCA claims to be against all drug abuse, they don't advocate publicly against the real drug abuse killers, opiate-based pharmaceuticals. Consequently, there's no documented evidence that ANY deaths have occurred from marijuana without any other drugs present, mental / physical health history an issue. The fact that cannabis is still a federally-scheduled drug as one with NO POTENTIAL to help ailments, yet the federal government themselves own the patent for cannabis and submitted it as such with the following language, Patent #6,630,507: "Cannabinoids have been found to have antioxidant properties, unrelated to NMDA receptor antagonism. This new found property makes cannabinoids useful in the treatment and prophylaxis of wide variety of oxidation associated diseases, such as ischemic, age-related, inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. The cannabinoids are found to have particular application as neuroprotectants, for example in limiting neurological damage following ischemic insults, such as stroke and trauma, or in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and HIV dementia. Nonpsychoactive cannabinoids, such as cannabidoil, are particularly advantageous to use because they avoid toxicity that is encountered with psychoactive cannabinoids at high doses useful in the method of the present invention. A particular disclosed class of cannabinoids useful as neuroprotective antioxidants is formula (I) wherein the R group is independently selected from the group consisting of H, CH.sub.3, and COCH.sub.3. ##STR1##" (4). This patent implicates many within our own federal government in the 1930's that outlawed cannabis (previously legal and widely prescribed medicine) because of political pressure from pharmaceutical companies who could not profit from a plant that could be grown and did not require synthesis and manufacturing. Since, many prominent doctors and scientists are coming out and stating it's potential (5). As long as cannabis is scheduled as a drug with no medical value, it is difficult to conduct research that proves its benefits. Yet there are thousands of years of anecdotal evidence and many families getting relief from seizures and moving to Colorado in order to avoid persecution and prosecution (6). Yet, if cannabis was legal for centuries, and many are getting relief from many disorders and ailments including cancer (7), than why hasn't it been researched thoroughly? The only logical conclusion is that by legalizing cannabis, pharmaceutical companies would potentially lose billions and billions of dollars of revenue. 1. http://www.opensecrets.org... 2. http://www.cadca.org... 3. http://www.cadca.org... 4. http://patft.uspto.gov... 5. http://thehill.com... http://www.cnn.com... 6. http://en.wikipedia.org... 7. http://www.sciencedirect.com...