Medical Marijuana Ban 38 replies

Please wait...

Blood n Guts

Wolverine Starting 9/6/2006

50 XP

22nd March 2005

0 Uploads

758 Posts

0 Threads

#11 14 years ago

[color=black]Sigh[/color] [color=black]the NIH and science seem to have my back :rolleyes:[/color] [color=black]The political push to get rid of it was probably spearheaded by pharmaceutical companies, I'm sure they saw it as a threat to their overpriced medicines.[/color] [color=black]I don't doubt that, but if studies are going to show that it is ineffective as a glaucoma medication, why the hell market it as one? I don't doubt that it's a good painkiller, I know it is. But if THC is responsible for preventing nausea in chemothearapy patients, there's no reason why it has to be provided through marijuana. The solution here for pricing isn't to legalize marijuana to undermine the drug companies, it's to allow foreign drugs (that pass FDA inspection) to be imported into the US so the American pharmaceutical companies can't maintain their monopoly.[/color]




Guns4Hire

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

22nd September 2002

0 Uploads

15,559 Posts

0 Threads

#12 14 years ago
Blood n Guts[color=black]Sigh[/color] [color=black]the NIH and science seem to have my back :rolleyes:[/color] [color=black]The political push to get rid of it was probably spearheaded by pharmaceutical companies, I'm sure they saw it as a threat to their overpriced medicines.[/color] [color=black]I don't doubt that, but if studies are going to show that it is ineffective as a glaucoma medication, why the hell market it as one? I don't doubt that it's a good painkiller, I know it is. But if THC is responsible for preventing nausea in chemothearapy patients, there's no reason why it has to be provided through marijuana. The solution here for pricing isn't to legalize marijuana to undermine the drug companies, it's to allow foreign drugs (that pass FDA inspection) to be imported into the US so the American pharmaceutical companies can't maintain their monopoly.[/color]

Ok I take it back, you are informed :) :beer: I still say there is nothing wrong with patients using it if they want to. The evil against this poor harmless plant is really getting patheticly ridiculous.




Nordicvs VIP Member

A Man among humans

50 XP

4th May 2005

0 Uploads

2,865 Posts

0 Threads

#13 14 years ago

I see no problem with it, for obvious reasons but especially people who are dying of cancer, or are terminally ill with anything. Even if they only want to get high off it, who cares? They're dying. It's not as if it's doing them any harm. My friend's mother in BC used it (she was dying of cancer--is dead now) and said that nothing else helped as much--all the other pills added to the nausea and/or had nasty side-effects on their own. Blood n Guts, if your grandmother was dying of cancer and wanted to smoke some weed to ease her suffering, would you tell her to piss off and take and pill?




Blood n Guts

Wolverine Starting 9/6/2006

50 XP

22nd March 2005

0 Uploads

758 Posts

0 Threads

#14 14 years ago

[color=black]My argument was more focused against using it for commonplace stuff like glaucoma, or even headaches (which some people use as an excuse to use it medicinally). If you're terminally ill, you should be able to do whatever the hell you want, as long as you don't hurt anyone else. If my grandmother was dieing, and wanted to smoke some reefer, she could go right ahead with it. If you have a cancer and are on chemo, I don't see why pot has to be your source of THC, or pain relief. If you've got a good chance of surviving, you shouldn't have to stuff up your lungs to relieve yourself of nausea or pain.[/color]




Nordicvs VIP Member

A Man among humans

50 XP

4th May 2005

0 Uploads

2,865 Posts

0 Threads

#15 14 years ago
BloodnGutsMy argument was more focused against using it for commonplace stuff like glaucoma, or even headaches (which some people use as an excuse to use it medicinally). If you're terminally ill, you should be able to do whatever the hell you want, as long as you don't hurt anyone else. If my grandmother was dieing, and wanted to smoke some reefer, she could go right ahead with it. If you have a cancer and are on chemo, I don't see why pot has to be your source of THC, or pain relief. If you've got a good chance of surviving, you shouldn't have to stuff up your lungs to relieve yourself of nausea or pain.

Okay--I just wanted to clarify what your problem with it was. So, basically you disagree with its medicinal use for other ailments until it's proved that it can actually treat these problems?




Blood n Guts

Wolverine Starting 9/6/2006

50 XP

22nd March 2005

0 Uploads

758 Posts

0 Threads

#16 14 years ago

[color=black]From what I've read it's been proven impractical for the other ailments. For example for Glaucoma, it relieves pressure on the eyes, but also decreases blood flow to the eyes. Also, relief only occurs well high, so anyone seeking long lasting relief would have to chain smoke joints to gain any worthwhile relief. Headaches: it’s a pain killer, so of course it would work, but allowing it to be used in such a way would open a huge opportunity for abuse. [/color]

[color=black]To some it up, any medical benefits attributed to marijuana should be studied, the source found, and that implemented in pill form. The fact that it damages the lungs as a side effect violates the Pure Food and Drug act, so equally effective alternates should be used. On a tangent, the US should also open up its market to foreign pharmaceuticals so our own companies lower their price as a result of competition.[/color]




Nordicvs VIP Member

A Man among humans

50 XP

4th May 2005

0 Uploads

2,865 Posts

0 Threads

#17 14 years ago
BloodnGutsFrom what I've read it's been proven impractical for the other ailments. For example for Glaucoma, it relieves pressure on the eyes, but also decreases blood flow to the eyes. Also, relief only occurs well high, so anyone seeking long lasting relief would have to chain smoke joints to gain any worthwhile relief. Headaches: it’s a pain killer, so of course it would work, but allowing it to be used in such a way would open a huge opportunity for abuse.

Well, I agree with Glaucoma and its use as an analgesic--more research is needed. I'm not sure how much funding or enthusiasm will go into this research, however, given the attitude with the whole War on Drugs deal.

[color=black]

To some it up, any medical benefits attributed to marijuana should be studied, the source found, and that implemented in pill form. The fact that it damages the lungs as a side effect violates the Pure Food and Drug act, so equally effective alternates should be used. On a tangent, the US should also open up its market to foreign pharmaceuticals so our own companies lower their price as a result of competition.

[/color] Well, cigarettes damage lungs, too, and it's not really a controlled substance (just age restrictions); some argue that marijuana is more harmful to the lungs than tobacco...while true, this is misleading: no one smokes a pack or even a half a pack of joints per day. And tobacco causes cancer--marijuana can treat systems of cancer and the negative effects of other treaments. Anyway, I agree that if a pill form can be implimented, then that would be even better. (Given that the "high" is much less pronounced when ingested compared with inhalation, it would be all the better for medicinal purposes.)




Guns4Hire

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

22nd September 2002

0 Uploads

15,559 Posts

0 Threads

#18 14 years ago
Blood n Guts[color=black] [color=black]To some it up, any medical benefits attributed to marijuana should be studied, the source found, and that implemented in pill form. The fact that it damages the lungs as a side effect violates the Pure Food and Drug act, so equally effective alternates should be used.

Very good points. I think then patients should have to sign a waiver when prescribed, knowing the risks of smoking it. if it relieves their pain for Glaucoma then by all means they should be able to use it as long as they understand and are legaly bound to the risks.

I also think forming the effects of weed in a pill is a great idea, but can it be done? Would be great and I'm sure it wouldn't take long to hit the streets ;)




WiseBobo

Most loved forum member.

50 XP

9th February 2004

0 Uploads

5,668 Posts

0 Threads

#19 14 years ago

Don't fear the reefer! La, la la, la, la




Nordicvs VIP Member

A Man among humans

50 XP

4th May 2005

0 Uploads

2,865 Posts

0 Threads

#20 14 years ago
ßeefI also think forming the effects of weed in a pill is a great idea, but can it be done? Would be great and I'm sure it wouldn't take long to hit the streets

Probably--but interesting point...reminded me of something I read years ago about how the 'high' is produced in the brain (which still isn't very well understood), something to do with the THC needing to be inhaled by smoking of course for it to be taken up to the brain and produce a full effect, or even an appropriate effect. I've heard some people say that eating cannibas in some form produces a high--like 'hash brownies'. I've never done that, so I can't say, but there is obviously a high there--it's just quite different and less than when smoked.