Vote NO to legalize cannabis....Or else

[LSWM]

Indeed. All scheduled drugs must undergo rigorous by the FDA in order to be prescribed by physicians or made available OTC, a process requiring years. At that, they must meet certain standards of efficacy for every prescribed condition. MMJ exists in a grey area essentially outside the law, and may not meet the necessary standards to treat conditions for which people currently use it.

Moving it to a status where it may/must be prescribed is counterproductive & would leave patients in the same grey area as now, maybe worse. It needs to come off the schedule entirely & put into the same status as alcohol & tobacco. Synthetic & semi synthetic preparations sold under prescription like marinol should remain scheduled.

Yes, by all means, please force the public to pay GWPharma, the only ones allowed to research such chemicals, just so they can get that perfect thca/cbda combo that DOESNT get them high.

...rather than juicing raw cannabis at home.

St Johns Wart creates more cognitive changes than thca does, yet you can buy it as an herbal supplement. Why would we continue to restrict medicinal compounds thatdont get you high? Only reason i can come up with is to keep big pharma rolling strong.

Your ignorance about compounds contained in cannabis is clear, and it hurts your validity, at least in my sight. I'll ask you again to go do some research and come back. I already did most of the footwork for you. This ignorance creates a negative perception of the plant itself, and is one of many reasons strict regulation is occurring.

 

[armedoldhippy]

Anyone who doesn't understand that the federal government will need to be enticed, or coerced into removing cannabis from the list of scheduled drugs is a fool. You cannot force things with a stick... you need a carrot. And in addition, any "legalization" only helps that cause. Children have demands that they want met. Adults understand working hard for what you want over years. I don't know what officer budtang wants... in one sentence he wants full freedom, in the other, overbearingly unconstitutional tax men go door-to-door and search your house for an untaxed cannabis grow.

This debate should be: How can we entice or coerce the federal government into declassifying cannabis altogether?

STILL can't give you +Rep, Seafour. you are dead on about framing the debate.

 

[Jhhnn]

Yes, by all means, please force the public to pay GWPharma, the only ones allowed to research such chemicals, just so they can get that perfect thca/cbda combo that DOESNT get them high.

...rather than juicing raw cannabis at home.

St Johns Wart creates more cognitive changes than thca does, yet you can buy it as an herbal supplement. Why would we continue to restrict medicinal compounds thatdont get you high? Only reason i can come up with is to keep big pharma rolling strong.

Your ignorance about compounds contained in cannabis is clear, and it hurts your validity. I'll ask you again to go do some research and come back.

Now you're just being argumentative, which figures. Extracts are neither synthetic nor semi synthetic, but nice try anyway.

It is your contention that green uncured cannabis is not psychoactive, or at least only mildly so. You use that as justification to argue against any form of legalization that doesn't allow for unlimited personal growing to create cannabis juice for the health benefits you claim. You then go on to say that I need to do my research to prove your contention for you.

You have not actually substantiated either claim with links or references, other than to claim that most (not all) THC in green cannabis exists as THCA. You go on to ignore the psychoactive effects of other compounds known to exist in green cannabis.

So let's say I blender up a big ol' fresh cola, add water, press it through filter paper for the juice. What's the dosage for these supposed health benefits? If the THC content of the material is 5% of the THC content of the same material dried & I consume 20 times as much material, it's a wash. If the dosage is only a few drops, then I can obtain that rather easily from a very few plants using a continuous grow style.

OTOH, it seems likely that not 1 user in 1000 does that, probably not 1 in 10,000. Obviously, then, they and the voters should refuse any proposition that doesn't satisfy the desires of that extreme minority but should rather go on being subject to arrest & incarceration as a reasonable alternative, right?

WTF planet is this, anyway?

 

[LSWM]

Now you're just being argumentative, which figures. Extracts are neither synthetic nor semi synthetic, but nice try anyway.

this your contention that green uncured cannabis is not psychoactive, or at least only mildly so. You use that as justification to argue against any form of legalization that doesn't allow for unlimited personal growing to create cannabis juice for the health benefits you claim. You then go on to say that I need to do my research to prove your contention for you.

You have not actually substantiated either claim with links or references, other than to claim that most (not all) THC in green cannabis exists as THCA. You go on to ignore the psychoactive effects of other compounds known to exist in green cannabis.

So let's say I blender up a big ol' fresh cola, add water, press it through filter paper for the juice. What's the dosage for these supposed health benefits? If the THC content of the material is 5% of the THC content of the same material dried & I consume 20 times as much material, it's a wash. If the dosage is only a few drops, then I can obtain that rather easily from a very few plants using a continuous grow style.

OTOH, it seems likely that not 1 user in 1000 does that, probably not 1 in 10,000. Obviously, then, they and the voters should refuse any proposition that doesn't satisfy the desires of that extreme minority but should rather go on being subject to arrest & incarceration as a reasonable alternative, right?

WTF planet is this, anyway?

Marinol contains no "synthetic" cannabinoids, the contents of which are however "synthasized". The current way of scheduling drugs would not differentiate between synthesized THC or extracted THC. The compound is the same. State law may differ.

Most of these "claims" need not be supported by links as they are generally recognized by the scientific community. When i have a minute i will try to find some to help "substantiate these claims." Though I find the likelihood of people actually reading them to be rather low.

There is only one reason why the population of users that would have tried this is so low. The amount of cannabis needed to be consumed makes the expense rather great. Unlimited outdoor growing solves this issue.

And once again back to the thca/fresh marijuana/psychoactivity debate, even if it is mildly psychoactive, yet provides equal or better treatment for certain diseases, why would that not be valid?

EDIT: The point here is that the THC content of fresh wet material is much lower than in dried material. Example at your 5% idea: Wet material 1% thca, 0.1% thc. Dry material 2% thca, 20% thc. It is not "a wash" when the two states contain wildly differing ratios of cannabinoids. I would also love to hear what these other "psychoactive cannabinoids" I'm "ignoring" that are in fresh marijuana? I can list 3 that may be present in any amount wjrth mentioning: THC, CBD, and CBN. CBN is formed after thca is converted to THC. Something that would exist in extremely small quantities. Not to mention CBN is nothing like THC and instead makes you rather sleepy. Try baking weed at 350F for a few hours then smoke it. You're smoking basically CBN in this situation.

 

[LSWM]

Just for you Jhhnn!

In Cannabis sativa, Delta9-Tetrahydrocannabinolic acid-A (Delta9-THCA-A) is the non-psychoactive precursor of Delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Delta9-THC). In fresh plant material, about 90% of the total Delta9-THC is available as Delta9-THCA-A.

Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/19728318/

Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol binds cannabinoid (CB1 and CB2) receptors, which are activated by endogenous compounds (endocannabinoids) and are involved in a wide range of physiopathological processes (e.g. modulation of neurotransmitter release, regulation of pain perception, and of cardiovascular, gastrointestinal and liver functions). The well-known psychotropic effects of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol, which are mediated by activation of brain CB1 receptors, have greatly limited its clinical use. However, the plant Cannabis contains many cannabinoids with weak or no psychoactivity that, therapeutically, might be more promising than Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol.

Source: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016561470900128X

Links to other studies regarding anti inflammatory properties of THCA/CBDA:
http://m.dmd.aspetjournals.org/content/36/9/1917.short
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21532172

 

[Seaf0ur]

Marinol IS synthetic and has nothing to do with legalization.. or cannabis, they're apples and oranges...

Marinol contains no "synthetic" cannabinoids, the contents of which are however "synthasized". The current way of scheduling drugs would not differentiate between synthesized THC or extracted THC. The compound is the same. State law may differ.

Most of these "claims" need not be supported by links as they are generally recognized by the scientific community. When i have a minute i will try to find some to help "substantiate these claims." Though I find the likelihood of people actually reading them to be rather low.

There is only one reason why the population of users that would have tried this is so low. The amount of cannabis needed to be consumed makes the expense rather great. Unlimited outdoor growing solves this issue.

And once again back to the thca/fresh marijuana/psychoactivity debate, even if it is mildly psychoactive, yet provides equal or better treatment for certain diseases, why would that not be valid?

EDIT: The point here is that the THC content of fresh wet material is much lower than in dried material. Example at your 5% idea: Wet material 1% thca, 0.1% thc. Dry material 2% thca, 20% thc. It is not "a wash" when the two states contain wildly differing ratios of cannabinoids. I would also love to hear what these other "psychoactive cannabinoids" I'm "ignoring" that are in fresh marijuana? I can list 3 that may be present in any amount wjrth mentioning: THC, CBD, and CBN. CBN is formed after thca is converted to THC. Something that would exist in extremely small quantities. Not to mention CBN is nothing like THC and instead makes you rather sleepy. Try baking weed at 350F for a few hours then smoke it. You're smoking basically CBN in this situation.

The Institute of Medicine published in its Mar. 1999 report titled "Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base":

"Marinol (dronabinol) is the only cannabinoid with approval for marketing in the United States....

Marinol is manufactured as a capsule containing THC in sesame oil; it is taken orally. It was approved by the FDA in 1985 for the treatment of nausea and vomiting associated with cancer chemotherapy. In 1992, the FDA approved marketing of dronabinol for the treatment of anorexia associated with weight loss in patients with AIDS. The preclinical and clinical research on THC that culminated in the FDA's 1985 approval was supported primarily from the National Cancer Institute (NCI), whose research support goes back to the 1970s....

Marinol is synthesized in the laboratory rather than extracted from the plant. Its manufacture is complex and expensive because of the numerous steps needed for purification. The poor solubility of Marinol in aqueous solutions and its high first-pass metabolism in the liver account for its poor bioavailability; only 10-20% of an oral dose reaches the systemic circulation.

The onset of action is slow; peak plasma concentrations are not attained until two to four hours after dosing. In contrast, inhaled marijuana is rapidly absorbed...

Marinol's most common adverse events are associated with the central nervous system (CNS); anxiety, confusion, depersonalization, dizziness, euphoria, dysphoria, somnolence, and thinking abnormality."

Each MARINOL® Capsule is formulated with
the following inactive ingredients: FD&C Blue No. 1 (5 mg), FD&C Red No. 40 (5 mg), FD&C
Yellow No. 6 (5 mg and 10 mg), gelatin, glycerin, methylparaben, propylparaben, sesame oil, and
titanium dioxide.

Damn... and I was worried about what people pour on their grows...

The estimated lethal human dose of intravenous dronabinol is 30 mg/kg (2100 mg/ 70 kg).
Significant CNS symptoms in antiemetic studies followed oral doses of 0.4 mg/kg (28 mg/70 kg) of
MARINOL® Capsules.

I wont DIE from a cannabis "overdose"... I get hungry, then tired... in that order... I certainly wont need the "Poison Help line" at 1-800-222-1222.

A Solvay Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Company

Yep... The same Solvay Pharmaceuticals that feeds us fluoride and calls it Prozac

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/05n0479/05N-0479-emc0004-04.pdf

 

[LSWM]

Marinol is a SYTHASIZED phytocannabinoid. SYNTHETIC canbabinoids would include analogs of THC not contained in the cannabis plant or any other plant which produces a compound that effects cannabinoid receptors, as well as new compounds such as JWH-XX, HU-XX, and the rest of the research chemical cannabinoids, aka SPICE.

This distinction is not immediately obvious until you begin to look at the compounds at hand. Marinol contains the exact same compound found in marijuana, even the same isomer. 100% THC extracted from plant matter is the same as 100% thc synthesized in the lab, save for whatever impurities exist in either process.

 

[Seaf0ur]

syn·thet·ic
/sinˈTHetik/
adjective
adjective: synthetic
1.
(of a substance) made by chemical synthesis, especially to imitate a natural product.
"synthetic rubber"

(of an emotion or action) not genuine; insincere.
"their tears are a bit synthetic"synonyms: artificial, fake, imitation, faux, mock, simulated, ersatz, substitute; Morepseudo, so-called;
man-made, manufactured, fabricated;
informalphony, pretend
"synthetic leather"
antonyms: natural

2.
Logic
(of a proposition) having truth or falsity determinable by recourse to experience.
3.
Linguistics
(of a language) characterized by the use of inflections rather than word order to express grammatical structure.
noun
noun: synthetic; plural noun: synthetics
1.
a synthetic material or chemical, especially a textile fiber.

How is this even relevant? the bio-tech giants will not help legalization the way we want... they'd LOVE schedule II cannabis.

personally, I'd like to see cannabis treated like carrots... or lettuce... simple garden "greens".

 

[LSWM]

We can define synthetic however we want to. Both are correct in the usages depending on what is being discussed.

If you notice, your definition says to "imitate" and then uses the example of "synthetic rubber." Marinol does not "imitate" the effects of the natural compound THC. IT IS THE NATURAL COMPOUND THC. Also synthetic rubber bares little resemblance to natural rubber in chemical composition.

EDIT: Yes, it should be treated just like a vegatable. That's the point I'm trying to make, while Jhhnn believes it should be regulated like alcohol, at least as far as I can tell.

 

[LSWM]

Opiates are the natural class of drugs contained in the opium plant. Opioids are the synthetic analogs and others that effect opiate receptors. Many times the term opioid is used to contain both opiates and opioids.

Off topic but relevant to the synthetic discussion.

 

[LSWM]

Also, it is relevant because Jhhnn suggests that these compounds be scheduled and prescribed by doctors. Keeping THC/CBD/CBN/CBXXXXX in any schedule puts any extracts of such illegal, as well as making THCA/CBDA illegal for human consumption under the Federal Analog Act.

 

[Jhhnn]

Marinol contains no "synthetic" cannabinoids, the contents of which are however "synthasized". The current way of scheduling drugs would not differentiate between synthesized THC or extracted THC. The compound is the same. State law may differ.

Most of these "claims" need not be supported by links as they are generally recognized by the scientific community. When i have a minute i will try to find some to help "substantiate these claims." Though I find the likelihood of people actually reading them to be rather low.

There is only one reason why the population of users that would have tried this is so low. The amount of cannabis needed to be consumed makes the expense rather great. Unlimited outdoor growing solves this issue.

And once again back to the thca/fresh marijuana/psychoactivity debate, even if it is mildly psychoactive, yet provides equal or better treatment for certain diseases, why would that not be valid?

EDIT: The point here is that the THC content of fresh wet material is much lower than in dried material. Example at your 5% idea: Wet material 1% thca, 0.1% thc. Dry material 2% thca, 20% thc. It is not "a wash" when the two states contain wildly differing ratios of cannabinoids. I would also love to hear what these other "psychoactive cannabinoids" I'm "ignoring" that are in fresh marijuana? I can list 3 that may be present in any amount wjrth mentioning: THC, CBD, and CBN. CBN is formed after thca is converted to THC. Something that would exist in extremely small quantities. Not to mention CBN is nothing like THC and instead makes you rather sleepy. Try baking weed at 350F for a few hours then smoke it. You're smoking basically CBN in this situation.

More tedious attempts at hair splitting. Marinol is the synthetic equivalent of naturally occurring THC and exists only because production of the natural product is prohibited by law in many states. It offers no greater efficacy than the naturally occurring equivalent. Production would likely cease if the natural product were legal nationwide. A near infinite variety of synthetic & semi synthetic cannabinoids is entirely possible, the effects & risks of which are unknown w/o proper clinical testing. Such compounds rightfully belong under the jurisdiction of the FDA.

The notion that the voters will accept unlimited outdoor growing as an immediate alternative to prohibition is not realistic in the slightest. Given that all or nothing choice, they'll stick with nothing, at least for the immediate future. Intermediate steps are something they will accept, have accepted in CO, and serve the interests of the vast majority of users and the community at large in a very functional way. Intermediate steps do not preclude unlimited outdoor growing at some point in the future. They rather enable it, much as MMJ has enabled retail MJ.

 

[Jhhnn]

Also, it is relevant because Jhhnn suggests that these compounds be scheduled and prescribed by doctors. Keeping THC/CBD/CBN/CBXXXXX in any schedule puts any extracts of such illegal, as well as making THCA/CBDA illegal for human consumption under the Federal Analog Act.

Totally inaccurate. Extracts are not synthetics.

 

[LSWM]

More tedious attempts at hair splitting. Marinol is the synthetic equivalent of naturally occurring THC and exists only because production of the natural product is prohibited by law in many states. It offers no greater efficacy than the naturally occurring equivalent. Production would likely cease if the natural product were legal nationwide. A near infinite variety of synthetic & semi synthetic cannabinoids is entirely possible, the effects & risks of which are unknown w/o proper clinical testing. Such compounds rightfully belong under the jurisdiction of the FDA.

The notion that the voters will accept unlimited outdoor growing as an immediate alternative to prohibition is not realistic in the slightest. Given that all or nothing choice, they'll stick with nothing, at least for the immediate future. Intermediate steps are something they will accept, have accepted in CO, and serve the interests of the vast majority of users and the community at large in a very functional way. Intermediate steps do not preclude unlimited outdoor growing at some point in the future. They rather enable it, much as MMJ has enabled retail MJ.

Synthetic & semi synthetic preparations sold under prescription like marinol should remain scheduled.

So only SYNTHASIZED cannabinoids should stay scheduled? Even those such as THC? The Controlled Substances Act would have to be rewritten I believe.

I am currently allowed to grow as much marijuana as is necessary for my medical condition, indoors or out. So if the feds would just back the fuck off, my state law already allows unlimited personal growing.

 

[ElusiveQuark]

Indeed. All scheduled drugs must undergo rigorous testing by the FDA in order to be prescribed by physicians or made available OTC, a process requiring years. At that, they must meet certain standards of efficacy for every prescribed condition. MMJ exists in a grey area essentially outside the law, and may not meet the necessary standards to treat conditions for which people currently use it.

^ Quote from Jhhnn

Who pays for these rigorous tests performed by this wonderful independent agency? I believe there is a fast track for truly miraculous drugs.

 

[Jhhnn]

So only SYNTHASIZED cannabinoids should stay scheduled? Even those such as THC? The Controlled Substances Act would have to be rewritten I believe.

We were discussing that, yes. Your point is? Marinol is only prescribed in situations where natural THC is not allowed. Natural extracts are both less expensive and more efficacious for both anti nausea & appetite stimulation, the reasons why marinol is prescribed at all.

I am currently allowed to grow as much marijuana as is necessary for my medical condition, indoors or out. So if the feds would just back the fuck off, my state law already allows unlimited personal growing.

And your physician has recommended the ingestion of juiced fresh marijuana for that condition, or is that a conclusion you reached on your own? What clinical studies support the efficacy of such treatment & why would your doctor recommend it in the absence of such evidence?

Why would legalization in your state necessarily change the existing MMJ situation at all?

 

[Jhhnn]

Indeed. All scheduled drugs must undergo rigorous testing by the FDA in order to be prescribed by physicians or made available OTC, a process requiring years. At that, they must meet certain standards of efficacy for every prescribed condition. MMJ exists in a grey area essentially outside the law, and may not meet the necessary standards to treat conditions for which people currently use it.

^ Quote from Jhhnn

Who pays for these rigorous tests performed by this wonderful independent agency? I believe there is a fast track for truly miraculous drugs.

That matters how, exactly? Having marijuana scheduled at all prevents legal sales for recreational purposes, does it not?

Would moving marijuana off the schedule entirely prevent medical use?

 

[LSWM]

We are discussing that, yes. Your point is? Marinol is only prescribed in situations where natural THC is not allowed. Natural extracts are both less expensive and more efficacious for both anti nausea & appetite stimulation, the reasons why marinol is prescribed at all.

And your physician has recommended the ingestion of juiced fresh marijuana for that condition, or is that a conclusion you reached on your own? What clinical studies support the efficacy of such treatment & why would your doctor recommend it in the absence of such evidence?

Why would legalization in your state necessarily change the existing MMJ situation at all?

There is a multitude of reasons my doctor has recommended use of marijuana, including a topical as an anti-inflammatory for my psoriasis. Please tell me what reasonable limit I should have on my use of cannabis as a topical. If I had the property to grow outdoors, I would certainly make even more topicals, but currently it is cost prohibitive to do any substantial amount. It does not work as well as steroids but is certainly a valuable alternative, without the negative side effects.

How can a physician use clinical studies when they dont exist? How can clinical studies exist when marijuana is schedule 1? Anecdotal reports for raw marijuanausage are few and far between PURELY due to prohibition and in turn great expense.

Using marijuana for its halucinatory effects requires minimal amounts when smoked. When ingested that amount increases. The amounts of thca/cbda for use as an anti-mutagenic, anti-inflammatory, or a nueroprotective are essentially unknown.

Certainly legalization will help solve this, but until marijuana is rescheduled the research will continue to be hindered and dismissed by regulatory agencies.

As for legalization changing the mmj laws in CA, it will depend. It is my understanding that Washington is using legalization as a way to restrict MMJ growing, although I will not pretend to know the specifics. Assuming the supreme court does their job, MMJ should be upheld unless we modify it by popular vote either when legalization is passed or some other time.

I feel we may be on the same side of the scheduling debate but are simply misunderstanding one another. My point is the system of scheduling needs to be revamped/repealed in order to accommadate the ultimate goal of free use of the plant. Any naturally derived cannabinoid needs to be made legal and able to be sold as an herbal supplement. It need not be prescribed by a physician.

 

[ElusiveQuark]

That matters how, exactly? Having marijuana scheduled at all prevents legal sales for recreational purposes, does it not?

Would moving marijuana off the schedule entirely prevent medical use?

It is just another example of gov't placating the masses by creating a false sense of security. The FDA is quite the rigged game. In case I have not been clear, I see no reason for govt involvement whatsoever.

Having marijuana scheduled at all is a mistake. It could still be recommended by a doctor much the same as aspirin. Why do you feel cannabis should be scheduled?

 

[ElusiveQuark]

I didn't mean to talk over LSWM who just made a similar point.