Justice Dept: No Accepted Medical Use For Marijuana

[circa02]

YouTube - ‪Obama Justice Dept: No Accepted Medical Use For Marijuana‬‏

 

[Blayz]

Well if anyone is qualified to decide what is or is not medicine, it's law enforcement and judges.

No...wait....

 

[Fenny the Fox]

Because the body of literature on Marijuana as a medicinal is not at all compelling (on the side of benefit way over shadowing any negatives), right? Oh wait, it is.

And all research on Marijuana points to high potential of addiction and long-term effects [much like other legal drugs like alcohol, caffeine, nicotine, etc.], right? Oh wait...it doesn't. It does quite the opposite...

 

[circa02]

It's because of stuff like this why I really don't understand why people think Republicans and Democrats are different.

 

[Billnew]

I can't see the video(or there is no link, which usually means its a video)
but what I guess they are saying is:
In the eyes of the law, there is no accepted medical use for marijuana.
Which is true. Law enforcement can not just decide a substance can treat a condition, problem, or disease.

First, Doctors must demonstrate their victories in treating conditions with the substance. Then they have to get the FDA to change it from schedule 1 to a 2 at least. Once it is a 2, then real American studies can be done, thus proving what pot puffers have been saying for a long time.

One condition is all that is needed to remove it from sch 1. The one is obvious, it is the one that changed my mind on the subject. Chemotherapy patients use marijuana, it helps with nausea and stimulates them to eat.(Get the munchies, man)

I am not a conspiracy loving person, but it does seem like someone is keeping this from being made legal federally. Drug companies want to produce drugs that simulate or come close to pot, that they can charge large sums of money for. Pot they can't.

It would be another asprin. Been around for so long that people won't pay large amounts for it, but it is very good for the conditions it treats.

I think the best way to get this legalized is to attack the anti's with the chemo arguement. I doubt anyone could dispute the benefit. Then once it is legal, it can be decreased quickly, possibly being available over the counter.(That might be reaching for now though)

 

[blueapplepaste]

*sigh*

Unfortunate that we have unqualified people making decisions on our behalf. Even if there is no accepted medical use of marijuana (which, of course, there is), is there any accepted medical use of cigarettes or alcohol? Nope.

Yet it could easily be argued that those are much more damaging to society than legal pot would be.

 

[Belk]

I can't see the video(or there is no link, which usually means its a video)
but what I guess they are saying is:
In the eyes of the law, there is no accepted medical use for marijuana.
Which is true. Law enforcement can not just decide a substance can treat a condition, problem, or disease.

First, Doctors must demonstrate their victories in treating conditions with the substance. Then they have to get the FDA to change it from schedule 1 to a 2 at least. Once it is a 2, then real American studies can be done, thus proving what pot puffers have been saying for a long time.

One condition is all that is needed to remove it from sch 1. The one is obvious, it is the one that changed my mind on the subject. Chemotherapy patients use marijuana, it helps with nausea and stimulates them to eat.(Get the munchies, man)

I am not a conspiracy loving person, but it does seem like someone is keeping this from being made legal federally. Drug companies want to produce drugs that simulate or come close to pot, that they can charge large sums of money for. Pot they can't.

It would be another asprin. Been around for so long that people won't pay large amounts for it, but it is very good for the conditions it treats.

I think the best way to get this legalized is to attack the anti's with the chemo arguement. I doubt anyone could dispute the benefit. Then once it is legal, it can be decreased quickly, possibly being available over the counter.(That might be reaching for now though)

How do you demonstrate successfully treating a condition with a schedule 1 drug? Schedule 1 means you can not proscribe it to patients.

 

[Supreme]

A disappointing ruling. Medical marijuana helps cancer patients deal with their suffering. It's no where near as bad as alcohol.

 

[Amber the Duskbringer]

That's ok, cause their prices were higher than most of my dealers.

 

[Fenny the Fox]

How do you demonstrate successfully treating a condition with a schedule 1 drug? Schedule 1 means you can not proscribe it to patients.

Given the number of states that allow it and the number of shops that sell to prescription holders...apparently you can? Somehow...

Also..it isn't illegal in other countries. So it can still be demonstrated anyway.

 

[jayem]

I am not a conspiracy loving person, but it does seem like someone is keeping this from being made legal federally. Drug companies want to produce drugs that simulate or come close to pot, that they can charge large sums of money for. Pot they can't. )

Of course. There is Marinol, which is synthetic delta-9-THC. It's a Schedule III drug. There's also nabilone (Cesamet, Schedule II) which is a different synthetic cannabinoid that's prescribed for pain. The DEA's opinion is that these legally available drugs are sufficient for any medical condition which can be treated with medical marijuana. A problem with Marinol is that it takes an hour or so for the pills to be absorbed, whereas inhaled marijuana acts within minutes. And the psychoactive effects of pure THC can be too intense for some users. Elderly patients especially just don't tolerate Marinol, but will do much better when smoking grass. But these are patented, proprietary drugs and will be paid for by insurance plans.

 

[jayem]

How do you demonstrate successfully treating a condition with a schedule 1 drug? Schedule 1 means you can not proscribe it to patients.

Research can be done with marijuana. Studies must be approved by the NIH, and the investigators will be supplied with marijuana from the fed's own stash, which is specially grown at the Univ. of Mississippi. This is the only cannabis that can be used. It does make some sense to do it this way. A big problem with research on any botanical drug is standardization. There are hundreds of compounds in a plant, with concentrations that can vary widely depending on growing conditions, the strain of the plant, etc. Results of any patient studies will be hard to interpret if these variables aren't controlled as much as possible. I've heard that the government's official marijuana is grown more with an eye towards standardizing its chemical makeup, than towards its potency. If true, this also makes any research results questionable. So marijuana research can be done, but it's under tight government control.

 

[Wayte]

Well....that's a step backwards. Gotta love the war on drugs: A drug thats hard to get addicted too, nigh impossible to OD on, and causes damage to nothing but any nearby Fritos, is illegal. But a drug that is MADE to be addictive and has a pretty good chance of causing cancer, and one that's involved in many violent crimes, are totally ok.

 

[Billnew]

Of course. There is Marinol, which is synthetic delta-9-THC. It's a Schedule III drug. There's also nabilone (Cesamet, Schedule II) which is a different synthetic cannabinoid that's prescribed for pain. The DEA's opinion is that these legally available drugs are sufficient for any medical condition which can be treated with medical marijuana. A problem with Marinol is that it takes an hour or so for the pills to be absorbed, whereas inhaled marijuana acts within minutes. And the psychoactive effects of pure THC can be too intense for some users. Elderly patients especially just don't tolerate Marinol, but will do much better when smoking grass. But these are patented, proprietary drugs and will be paid for by insurance plans.

When you mentioned Marinol I thought you were siding against maryjane.
It is good to point out the problems with the drug.

It is alot more expensive and the user has less control over the dose of the medicine. Which means nasty side effects that are not common for herb users.
Even with the illegal status, I believe most people can afford weed without insurance coverage.
Drug companies skirted the law to get a drug similar to weed, but they didn't come close to the natural plant in simplicity, lmited side effects and ease of use and cost(Its a weed, ie it grows easily).

 

[Billnew]

Given the number of states that allow it and the number of shops that sell to prescription holders...apparently you can? Somehow...

Also..it isn't illegal in other countries. So it can still be demonstrated anyway.

Actually, legally it can not be prescribed. I believe if the Federal goverment pushed it they could revoke or punish any Dr that issued a prescription for the "illegal" substance. Because every Dr that prescribes medicine(or is it just narcotics?) has a DEA number(federal drug enforcement agency number) Which can be revoked for "Misuse". Prescribing an illegal substance for a non-FDA approved treatment is misuse in the feds eyes.

The FDA has to rule, it doesn't accept any other organization in the world to decide on a substance.

 

[Fenny the Fox]

Actually, legally it can not be prescribed. I believe if the Federal goverment pushed it they could revoke or punish any Dr that issued a prescription for the "illegal" substance. Because every Dr that prescribes medicine(or is it just narcotics?) has a DEA number(federal drug enforcement agency number) Which can be revoked for "Misuse". Prescribing an illegal substance for a non-FDA approved treatment is misuse in the feds eyes.

The FDA has to rule, it doesn't accept any other organization in the world to decide on a substance.

My comment was more...a question/musing than anything else. Hence "somehow..." at the end.
Of course, the DEA could revoke licensing/remove ability to give Rx - if they wanted to.

My point about proof in other countries is still valid - and I think you took it different than I meant. If the research is not done or is hard to do here, it can still be done in other countries. Whether the FDA accepts this as "worthy" is up for debate, but that does not change research being done on something. I am sure that research abroad has been used for FDA approval before, and that it could be in this case too.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

Ok,but I don't understand why it ilegal in the first place.Is seems to calm my nerves,helps me sleep.I would think for people that can't sleep or eat,it seems to help.

 

[Umaro]

Ok,but I don't understand why it ilegal in the first place.Is seems to calm my nerves,helps me sleep.I would think for people that can't sleep or eat,it seems to help.

Mostly because hemp was poised to be a competitor to the timber industry.

 

[stelow]

When I was going through chemotherapy, for third stage esophageal cancer last year, I smoked a little green, it did help some with the nausea, and lack of appetite. I had heard it could help some, so I tried it; chemo is some nasty stuff, it really takes a toll on your health. I would never advise anyone to do want I did, I was desperately sick, I got to the point, I was ready to, just quit living.

I no longer, spark up!!!

 

[fuji]

When I was going through chemotherapy, for third stage esophageal cancer last year, I smoked a little green, it did help some with the nausea, and lack of appetite. I had heard it could help some, so I tried it; chemo is some nasty stuff, it really takes a toll on your health. I would never advise anyone to do want I did, I was desperately sick, I got to the point, I was ready to, just quit living.

I no longer, spark up!!!

Inspiring story.

I myself have never smoked until recently(I watched a move called "The Union", a great one to watch), because I fell into the belief about weed causing brain damage, lung cancer, death, etc. When in reality it is safer then most foods we eat.

One funny note, did you know the "declaration of independence" was written on cannabis hemp paper?