Any reason we haven't okayed medical marijuana on a National basis yet?

[HawktimusPrime]

http://www.webmd.com/pain-management/features/medical-marijuana-uses

More states are passing laws that allow people to use medical marijuana. So what does it treat, and who can and should use it?

Pain is the main reason people ask for a prescription, says Barth Wilsey, MD, a pain medicine specialist at the University of California Davis Medical Center. It could be from headaches, a disease like cancer, or a long-term condition, like glaucoma or nerve pain.


Recommended Related to Pain Management

Chronic Pain: New Research, New Treatments

As recently as 20 years ago, people with chronic pain were too often dismissively told that their problem was "in their heads" or that they were hypochondriacs. But in the last decade, a handful of dedicated researchers learned that chronic pain is not simply a symptom of something else -- such as anxiety, depression, or a need for attention -- but a disease in its own right, one that can alter a person's emotional, professional, and family life in profound and debilitating ways. Today, doctors have...

Read the Chronic Pain: New Research, New Treatments article > >



If you live in a state where medical marijuana is legal and your doctor thinks it would help, you’ll get a “marijuana card.” You will be put on a list that allows you to buy marijuana from an authorized seller, called a dispensary.

Doctors also may prescribe medical marijuana to treat:

• Muscle spasms caused by multiple sclerosis
• Nausea from cancer chemotherapy
• Poor appetite and weight loss caused by chronic illness, such as HIV, or nerve pain
• Seizure disorders
• Crohn's disease

 

[Titanhawk2]

I cannot see anyone's opposition to regulating a drug as drug.

 

[HawktimusPrime]

I cannot see anyone's opposition to regulating a drug as drug.

Then why hasn't it happened yet? What are they(the ones who haven't made it legal) waiting for?

 

[shank hawk]

I cannot see anyone's opposition to regulating a drug as drug.

It's not a drug, it's a plant. Kinda like walnuts. Only in this effed up, over regulated world of ours would something like marijuana or walnuts be considered drugs..........................Oh, crap.
The FDA stated in the warning letter [3]:
"Because of these intended uses, your walnut products are drugs… Your walnut products are also new drugs … because they are not generally recognized as safe and effective for the above referenced conditions. Therefore … they may not be legally marketed with the above claims in the United States without an approved new drug application.

Additionally, your walnut products are offered for conditions that are not amenable to self-diagnosis and treatment by individuals who are not medical practitioners; therefore, adequate directions for use cannot be written so that a layperson can use these drugs safely for their intended purposes. Thus, your walnut products are also misbranded… in that the labeling for these drugs fails to bear adequate directions for use… "

Did you know Titan, that according to the geniuses at the FDA, even water - if used to "treat" a medical condition like dying of thirst - is classified as a drug. You just can't make up insane crap like this. And unfortunately, you just can't escape it either.

With one in ten Americans now taking anti-depressants, the boys in Big Pharma sure as hell aren't going to let their bought-and-paid-for stooges in congress take a chunk out of their profits by "legalizing" a plant.

 

[torbee]

So here is a probably naive question - but when one is prescribed "medical marijuana" is it in edibles or liquid form only? Or are you supposed to smoke it?

I find it kind of hard to believe that inhaling ANY type of smoke is safe.

 

[Wahawk56]

Cartels are paying the government to keep it illegal.

 

[shank hawk]

Cartels are paying the government to keep it illegal.

You got it Wahawks. Like the cartel out of Medellin, Colombia.

And also the ones at GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Pfizer, etc.

 

[22*43*51]

Illinois is waiting to get their grow infrastructure built so they can have monopoly on distribution.

Then they can legalize recreational use and really corner the market.

 

[torbee]

Illinois is waiting to get their grow infrastructure built so they can have monopoly on distribution.

Then they can legalize recreational use and really corner the market.

As someone who lives approximately 2 miles from Illinois, across from Rock Island where one of these grow centers is currently being built, I approve of this plan.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

It's not a drug, it's a plant. Kinda like walnuts. Only in this effed up, over regulated world of ours would something like marijuana or walnuts be considered drugs..........................Oh, crap.
The FDA stated in the warning letter [3]:
"Because of these intended uses, your walnut products are drugs… Your walnut products are also new drugs … because they are not generally recognized as safe and effective for the above referenced conditions. Therefore … they may not be legally marketed with the above claims in the United States without an approved new drug application.

Additionally, your walnut products are offered for conditions that are not amenable to self-diagnosis and treatment by individuals who are not medical practitioners; therefore, adequate directions for use cannot be written so that a layperson can use these drugs safely for their intended purposes. Thus, your walnut products are also misbranded… in that the labeling for these drugs fails to bear adequate directions for use… "

Did you know Titan, that according to the geniuses at the FDA, even water - if used to "treat" a medical condition like dying of thirst - is classified as a drug. You just can't make up insane crap like this. And unfortunately, you just can't escape it either.

With one in ten Americans now taking anti-depressants, the boys in Big Pharma sure as hell aren't going to let their bought-and-paid-for stooges in congress take a chunk out of their profits by "legalizing" a plant.

Although that was funny and well done and even had a good point, the idea that something is or isn't considered a drug based on its usage makes sense.

It's sort of like the CO2 debate. Is it a pollutant or not? The nay-sayers point to the fact that it is a natural product that we (and plants) have been breathing pretty much forever. But in some concentrations it causes harm. So it makes sense to regulate it when it approaches those concentrations, even though that never used to be a problem.

If you watched the rerun of the Frontline show on chicken-borne diseases you heard them talk about the problem of regulating salmonella - because there have been rulings saying it is not an "adulterant." Which limits regulatory agencies from taking the same action to curb salmonella that they can take to curb e coli and most other disease-causing agents.

Same concept. Similar reasoning. And the reasoning actually makes some sense - even if it eventually becomes a problem.

 

[BioHawk]

In the immortal words of Matt Roth - "2 words!! Commercial Motor Vehicles". Do you want semi drivers driving an 80,000 # missle down the road, high as a kite? Think of the wrongful death lawsuits after a deadly accident involving a truck driver who tested positive.

You recreational stoners really need to think these things through, er, if you can.

Reefer Madness everywhere!!! Dogs and cats to live together! The end of the world as we know it!!!

A couple of things for the older folks who have been brainwashed by decades of propaganda. One, alcohol is already legal. Sure, there are issues but it is more or less manageable. If we can do it with alcohol there is no reason we can't do it with pot. Second, the high from pot doesn't last very long. Someone can be too stoned to walk and an hour later be perfectly fine. Sitting around and waiting it out becomes a much more viable option.

 

[BioHawk]

As someone who lives approximately 2 miles from Illinois, across from Rock Island where one of these grow centers is currently being built, I approve of this plan.

Yeah, get ready for the checkpoints on the Iowa side of the centennial and arsenal bridges. Might be tougher to do that on the freeways though...

 

[torbee]

In the immortal words of Matt Roth - "2 words!! Commercial Motor Vehicles". Do you want semi drivers driving an 80,000 # missle down the road, high as a kite? Think of the wrongful death lawsuits after a deadly accident involving a truck driver who tested positive.

You recreational stoners really need to think these things through, er, if you can.

Things far, far likelier to result in your death at the hands of a truck driver than pot:

• Weather
• Fatigue
• Speed pills (whities)
• Booze
• Meth

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

In the immortal words of Matt Roth - "2 words!! Commercial Motor Vehicles". Do you want semi drivers driving an 80,000 # missle down the road, high as a kite? Think of the wrongful death lawsuits after a deadly accident involving a truck driver who tested positive.

You recreational stoners really need to think these things through, er, if you can.

Can anyone explain why that argument appeals to some people when, to the rest of us, it is so transparently stupid?

You can explain to the INXSs of the world why it's wrong-headed - using logic or analogy - but it won't sink in. And they don't try to explain why they think they are right because, to them, it's self-evident.

How do we break this impasse?

 

[ParkerHawk]

So here is a probably naive question - but when one is prescribed "medical marijuana" is it in edibles or liquid form only? Or are you supposed to smoke it?

I find it kind of hard to believe that inhaling ANY type of smoke is safe.

http://www.medicaldaily.com/smoking...s-if-its-joint-day-even-after-20-years-318432

Yeah, you still get some tar and carbon monoxide but you are also getting anti oxidant and anti inflammatory responses.

 

[torbee]

Can anyone explain why that argument appeals to some people when, to the rest of us, it is so transparently stupid?

You can explain to the INXSs of the world why it's wrong-headed - using logic or analogy - but it won't sink in. And they don't try to explain why they think they are right because, to them, it's self-evident.

How do we break this impasse?

Three words - Shotgun Hit

 

[INXS83]

Reefer Madness everywhere!!! Dogs and cats to live together! The end of the world as we know it!!!

A couple of things for the older folks who have been brainwashed by decades of propaganda. One, alcohol is already legal. Sure, there are issues but it is more or less manageable. If we can do it with alcohol there is no reason we can't do it with pot. Second, the high from pot doesn't last very long. Someone can be too stoned to walk and an hour later be perfectly fine. Sitting around and waiting it out becomes a much more viable option.

28 days is a long time to wait. That's how long it takes for your body to rid itself of the THC.

We weren't talking about alcohol, but since you brought it up: "Combining marijuana with alcohol or other depressant drugs can produce a multiplied effect, increasing the impairment caused by all substances". Words to live by from the FMCSA (Federal Motor Carrier Safety Admin.).

 

[torbee]

http://www.medicaldaily.com/smoking...s-if-its-joint-day-even-after-20-years-318432

Yeah, you still get some tar and carbon monoxide but you are also getting anti oxidant and anti inflammatory responses.

So when it is prescribed, it is prescribed as buds?

 

[torbee]

Three words - Shotgun Hit

28 days is a long time to wait. That's how long it takes for your body to rid itself of the THC.

We weren't talking about alcohol, but since you brought it up: "Combining marijuana with alcohol or other depressant drugs can produce a multiplied effect, increasing the impairment caused by all substances". Words to live by from the FMCSA (Federal Motor Carrier Safety Admin.).

You serious, Clark?

If they actually invented weed that kept you high for 28 days, the U.S. economy would come to a grinding halt, lol.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Second, the high from pot doesn't last very long. Someone can be too stoned to walk and an hour later be perfectly fine. Sitting around and waiting it out becomes a much more viable option.

28 days is a long time to wait. That's how long it takes for your body to rid itself of the THC.

Another example of why it's so hard to discuss this intelligently with the anti-pot types.

I don't know that BioHawk's 1-hour assertion is correct, but INXS's apparent belief that detectability=impairment is about what we would expect from a supporter of the anti-science wing of the American electorate.

 

[SSG T]

In the immortal words of Matt Roth - "2 words!! Commercial Motor Vehicles". Do you want semi drivers driving an 80,000 # missle down the road, high as a kite? Think of the wrongful death lawsuits after a deadly accident involving a truck driver who tested positive.

You recreational stoners really need to think these things through, er, if you can.

How do we currently handle truck drivers driving an 80,000 # missile down the road while drunk? Or on meth/speed? Or while asleep?

 

[22*43*51]

As someone who lives approximately 2 miles from Illinois, across from Rock Island where one of these grow centers is currently being built, I approve of this plan.

LOL

It is at least a revenue plan for a state that desperately needs one.

 

[shank hawk]

Although that was funny and well done and even had a good point, the idea that something is or isn't considered a drug based on its usage makes sense.

It's sort of like the CO2 debate. Is it a pollutant or not? The nay-sayers point to the fact that it is a natural product that we (and plants) have been breathing pretty much forever. But in some concentrations it causes harm. So it makes sense to regulate it when it approaches those concentrations, even though that never used to be a problem.

If you watched the rerun of the Frontline show on chicken-borne diseases you heard them talk about the problem of regulating salmonella - because there have been rulings saying it is not an "adulterant." Which limits regulatory agencies from taking the same action to curb salmonella that they can take to curb e coli and most other disease-causing agents.

Same concept. Similar reasoning. And the reasoning actually makes some sense - even if it eventually becomes a problem.

So my post was funny, well done and made a point: yet you refused to give me a 'LIKE'. You sombitch, what the hell more am I supposed to do????????

I did watch some of Frontline last night. The problem as I see it is neither salmonella, nor e coli, staph, strep, listeria, etc. actually "cause" disease. They will colonize and become a problem when a compromised immune system doesn't do it's job or when they access part of the body where they don't belong. The only thing we accomplish by 'regulating-i.e.killing' salmonella and the others is to make them stronger and smarter: and tougher to kill when it is needed. If we kill off all the staph bacteria in the world the human race wouldn't be far behind: it is that vital to our existence. Marijuana? Ummm, not so much. But it should still be legal.

 

[ParkerHawk]

So when it is prescribed, it is prescribed as buds?

it is prescribed as marijuana and the patient chooses how they get it filled

 

[LifelongHawk]

Feds have 5 classes of drugs based upon medical use, potential for abuse, and safety of use with medical supervision.

The real joke currently is Marijuana is classified as Schedule 1, with no medical use, high probability of abuse, and no safe method of use with supervision. Along with Heroin and LSD.

For reference, Cocaine, Morphine, some stimulants, and some barbiturates are schedule 2.

Reefer Madness lives on federally.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

How do we currently handle truck drivers driving an 80,000 # missile down the road while drunk? Or on meth/speed? Or while asleep?

We bring them to a stop by inserting other vehicles, guard rails and similar obstacles into their pathway. Or we ignore them and they get away with it. Not ideal but, hey, if those pet rocks aren't delivered on time, they might spoil.

But I have a solution for INXS and others who feel that way. Let's just make it illegal to drive while impaired by pot. That's what we do for texting, drinking, and other things.

I read that in Germany they even have a law about sneezing while driving. It isn't illegal to sneeze while driving - because that would be a dumb law, and the Germans are rarely that dumb except on a colossal scale. Not, it's illegal to sneeze while driving without putting both hands on the wheel. Which actually makes good sense when you think about it.

But laws like those get violated. So the real question is whether more draconian laws are a good solution.

 

[INXS83]

How do we currently handle truck drivers driving an 80,000 # missile down the road while drunk? Or on meth/speed? Or while asleep?

Arrests, fines, losing their CDL and possibly imprisonment after the fact. Pre-crime arrests haven't been enacted yet. Watch Minority Report if you want to know more about that.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Feds have 5 classes of drugs based upon medical use, potential for abuse, and safety of use with medical supervision.

The real joke currently is Marijuana is classified as Schedule 1, with no medical use, high probability of abuse, and no safe method of use with supervision. Along with Heroin and LSD.

For reference, Cocaine, Morphine, some stimulants, and some barbiturates are schedule 2.

Reefer Madness lives on federally.

I agree with you. But the argument the other side has sometimes used is that pot's listing with heroin "proves" just how dangerous it is.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Arrests, fines, losing their CDL and possibly imprisonment after the fact. Pre-crime arrests haven't been enacted yet. Watch Minority Report if you want to know more about that.

And yet you are advocating the current policy of pre-crime deprivation and pre-accident criminalization and arrests. Seems like you're the one pushing the Minority Report way of life.

 

[icu81222]

Reefer Madness everywhere!!! Dogs and cats to live together! The end of the world as we know it!!!

A couple of things for the older folks who have been brainwashed by decades of propaganda. One, alcohol is already legal. Sure, there are issues but it is more or less manageable. If we can do it with alcohol there is no reason we can't do it with pot. Second, the high from pot doesn't last very long. Someone can be too stoned to walk and an hour later be perfectly fine. Sitting around and waiting it out becomes a much more viable option.

I have pretty much came to the same conclusion over time. Having never smoked pot, I have no personal experience here.

I have seen documentaries that changed my perspective but on the flip side, seen a few studies that makes me wonder if there are truly more dangers.

I have to side with being fine with mj. Personal freedoms and the like. To me, that would be consistent with hating liberalism. So on this, I part ways with the right.

 

[icu81222]

Another example of why it's so hard to discuss this intelligently with the anti-pot types.

I don't know that BioHawk's 1-hour assertion is correct, but INXS's apparent belief that detectability=impairment is about what we would expect from a supporter of the anti-science wing of the American electorate.

Dumb. He did t say impaired. He said thc trace.

You are a dope.

 

[ParkerHawk]

Medical marijuana is stupid. Either legalize it all, or don't. Stop being pussies about it.

Completely agree unless there comes a day when insurance companies cover it and don't see that happening anytime soon. All it takes is one cool buddy in a small stoner circle to buy in bulk and share with their friends at cost.

 

[HawktimusPrime]

In the immortal words of Matt Roth - "2 words!! Commercial Motor Vehicles". Do you want semi drivers driving an 80,000 # missle down the road, high as a kite? Think of the wrongful death lawsuits after a deadly accident involving a truck driver who tested positive.

You recreational stoners really need to think these things through, er, if you can.

I smoke weed occasionally, I've never killed anyone, and I'm not exactly the 'non-thinking' type. Perhaps, you're a little naïve to this subject? Also, medical marijuana wouldn't be allowed to be purchased by just anyone. Don't forget to factor in that people are already smoking it regardless.
I'd wager that MUCH more accidents are caused by simply playing with your phone whilst driving.

 

[HawktimusPrime]

28 days is a long time to wait. That's how long it takes for your body to rid itself of the THC.

We weren't talking about alcohol, but since you brought it up: "Combining marijuana with alcohol or other depressant drugs can produce a multiplied effect, increasing the impairment caused by all substances". Words to live by from the FMCSA (Federal Motor Carrier Safety Admin.).

28 days is false. It's easily much less than that. Also, do you claim that the effects of it still linger 28 days later?

 

[ParkerHawk]

In the immortal words of Matt Roth - "2 words!! Commercial Motor Vehicles". Do you want semi drivers driving an 80,000 # missle down the road, high as a kite? Think of the wrongful death lawsuits after a deadly accident involving a truck driver who tested positive.

You recreational stoners really need to think these things through, er, if you can.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/11/stoned-driving-crash-risk_n_6654810.html

What is wrong with this study? I'm not advocating driving stoned, just an end to the fear mongering

 

[ParkerHawk]

28 days is false. It's easily much less than that. Also, do you claim that the effects of it still linger 28 days later?

I passed a piss test after 8 days sober and was completely saturated at the beginning of the 8 days

 

[theIowaHawk]

I'm curious why some posters think the "its a plant" standard relieves it from being properly labeled a drug.

Can one of you expand on that?

 

[ParkerHawk]

28 days is a long time to wait. That's how long it takes for your body to rid itself of the THC.

We weren't talking about alcohol, but since you brought it up: "Combining marijuana with alcohol or other depressant drugs can produce a multiplied effect, increasing the impairment caused by all substances". Words to live by from the FMCSA (Federal Motor Carrier Safety Admin.).

So we should ban alcohol and pharmaceutical pain killers?

 

[ParkerHawk]

Big pharma is paying the government to keep it illegal.

Fify

 

[SSG T]

Arrests, fines, losing their CDL and possibly imprisonment after the fact. Pre-crime arrests haven't been enacted yet. Watch Minority Report if you want to know more about that.

That's my point. How is trying to stop a trucker smoking weed any different than a trucking driving drunk?

I guarantee you it's already happening and legalizing it wouldn't make much of a difference.