The BIG medicinal cannabis discussion

Whisko

No study has ever found a direct link between the development of schizophrenia and cannabis use. There is a big difference between THC causing schizophrenia like symptoms and schizophrenia itself.

The link found between and increase in schizophrenia development and cannabis can be explained through self medication. The people who developed schizophrenia after smoking cannabis may very well have developed schizophrenia anyway.

seensensee

Whisko wrote: »

No study has ever found a direct link between the development of schizophrenia and cannabis use. There is a big difference between THC causing schizophrenia like symptoms and schizophrenia itself.

The link found between and increase in schizophrenia development and cannabis can be explained through self medication. The people who developed schizophrenia after smoking cannabis may very well have developed schizophrenia anyway.

Well said and here is a study to back up your claim...

"New study suggests minimal relationship between cannabis and schizophrenia or psychosis October 22, 2009

The study found it would be necessary to stop 2800 heavy cannabis users in young men and over 5000 heavy cannabis users in young women to prevent a single case of schizophrenia. Among light cannabis users, those numbers rise to over 10,000 young men and nearly 30,000 young women to prevent one case of schizophrenia."
http://www.physorg.com/news175425054.html

The main problem with earlier clinical studies was that test subjects were subjected to large doses of pure THC, apparently this could send anyone a little schizo, except of course for the likes of you and me who would probably thrive on it

Pace2008

Samba wrote: »

Head shops were more or less dealers operating within the grey areas of the law, where did they get their stock from? Who supplied them? I'm sure if you followed the paper trail of a head shop, that it wouldn't lead to some rosy field where the sun always shines and people hold hands and make daisy chains all day. Quite the opposite.

People have a notion that because you were walking into a shop and they had a counter and till that everything behind the scenes was legit! You've no idea who or where the products were being supplied from and who were behind these suppliers.

They were buying their products in bulk from labs based in China, where one could legally manufacture and distribute the popular psychoactive cathinones like mephedrone until very recently. There were plenty of websites where you or I could buy kilos of the stuff for little more than €1/g if we had the money to purchase in bulk, and they weren't hard to find nor subtle in their dealings.

I'd lost sympathy for the head shops well before they closed, particularly when they started selling extremely dangerous chemicals after the mephedrone ban, but such was the availability of their produce that they didn't need to go down any dodgy avenues to fill their inventory.

thebigbiffo

there's an elephant in this here thread...

i'm going to get straight to the point: the fella heading up this campaign has post traumatic stress. would this be the easiest to fake?

i'm a smoker already, and genuinely use it as a way to de-stress and reduce anxiety. would this be enough to get a prescription if MC was approved? what say ye?

this type of thinking will be rampant should the campaign be a success - so lets address it now!

Elevator

thebigbiffo wrote: »

there's an elephant in this here thread...

i'm going to get straight to the point: the fella heading up this campaign has post traumatic stress. would this be the easiest to fake?

i'm a smoker already, and genuinely use it as a way to de-stress and reduce anxiety. would this be enough to get a prescription if MC was approved? what say ye?

this type of thinking will be rampant should the campaign be a success - so lets address it now!

that's the thing you see, the government will know full well that it can be prescribed for many many reasons,

more people getting scripts from their doc = monies

HoPpiE

Medical Card FTW so, I guess.

Wompa1

thebigbiffo wrote: »

there's an elephant in this here thread...

i'm going to get straight to the point: the fella heading up this campaign has post traumatic stress. would this be the easiest to fake?

i'm a smoker already, and genuinely use it as a way to de-stress and reduce anxiety. would this be enough to get a prescription if MC was approved? what say ye?

this type of thinking will be rampant should the campaign be a success - so lets address it now!

I know somebody that used due to post traumatic stress and became addicted (And bull**** to people that say it isn't addictive)

I wouldn't think pre-scribing it for post traumatic stress is a good idea, it seems to drain people. I would advise councelling or meditation or other alternatives instead of risking the side effects of drugs..I'd even be hesitant of using pre-scribed anti-depressants

mikom

Wompa1 wrote: »

I know somebody that used due to post traumatic stress and became addicted (And bull**** to people that say it isn't addictive)

Tobacco mixer?

Elevator

Wompa1 wrote: »

I know somebody that used due to post traumatic stress and became addicted (And bull**** to people that say it isn't addictive)

I wouldn't think pre-scribing it for post traumatic stress is a good idea, it seems to drain people. I would advise councelling or meditation or other alternatives instead of risking the side effects of drugs..I'd even be hesitant of using pre-scribed anti-depressants

thank you doctor, let me counter your views with "bullsh1t to people who say their friend got "addicted" so thats it lads, none of you can try it cos I knows better!"

can I please subscribe to your newsletter?

seensensee

Certain groups disapprove and even forbid the use drugs in treating illnesses ( Scientologists ) however medical studies are proving cannabis to be successful in treating PTSD, it is appropriate to let the patient decide what works best for them.

PTSD drug: Cannabis Science to file first application for FDA clinical trials

2. March 2010 01:05
Dr. Earleywine explained, "Veterans reported that cannabis helped nearly all symptoms of PTSD, with special emphasis on three important components: sleep disturbance, irritability, and disturbing memories. PTSD is notorious for leading to difficulty falling and staying asleep. This insomnia can make other mental and physical symptoms worse. The import of the cannabinoids in sleep is well established, so the idea that it should aid this aspect of PTSD is no surprise.
http://www.news-medical.net/news/20100302/PTSD-drug-Cannabis-Science-to-file-first-application-for-FDA-clinical-trials.aspx?page=2

A bit off topic but other potential recreational drugs are being used too...

FDA approves Ecstasy : New treatment of Iraq war veterans with resistant PTSD . Encouraging results

• August 9th, 2010 7:01 pm MT

http://www.examiner.com/life-coach-in-denver/fda-approves-ecstasy-new-treatment-of-iraq-war-veterans-with-resistant-ptsd-encouraging-results.

Elevator

and sure for a while now there's been anti depressants available that work on serotonin release so the whole illegality of certain chemicals has been worn very thin at this stage!

can't wait to get home to take my 2nd dose of jack herer

seensensee

Wompa1 wrote: »

I know somebody that used due to post traumatic stress and became addicted (And bull**** to people that say it isn't addictive)

As a long term user of cannabis let me give you some perspective on addiction to cannabis because I note reactions amongst some other users which remind me of a situation I once experienced.

I had been a regular user for about 15 years and within that time any period of doing without was not much of a problem, I would make do and have a beer instead.
Then a time came where I developed an allergy to alcohol and started drinking much less and in this period I relied more on cannabis for recreational purposes, There was plenty of good stuff around and I decided it was my natural born right to have cannabis in my life, I made vows and developed bonds of affinity with it, it got deep inside, a situation of my own making.
Then one day there was a drought which lasted a few weeks and it became unavailable to me, Surprised me the lengths I went to try and get some but I remember always thinking about it, always in the back of the mind, this was a new development for me. I finally accepted that there was a problem when the money ran out and I went and pawned my TV for a week for £20 quid, a few days later I reached an all time low and with angry sad tears I seemed to realise that in fact certainly could not have it and would have to do without.


That was the beginning of a new phase, I started practicing a new form (for me) of mental discipline with the slogan " it's good to have some, but better without" I would tell myself " It's not my natural born right to have it whenever I want" and slowly I started to accept the new Ideas, a great help was reading "The Power of Now" Within a few days I managed to set the monkey on my back free!!!:):):)

Within a three month period I had gone from experiencing and living psychological addiction to being cured all by self help and advice from one good friend. Since then (11 years ago) I continue to use cannabis on regular basis but with discipline, I can now take it or leave it with absolutely no problem, do without it for months on end if necessary.

Overcoming psychological addiction is all about education and practice. Send me your worst cases. problem solved in a couple of weeks, It's no big deal when you know how.

Cheers.


ETA: The above account is from a recreational POV. Obviously a completely different set of standards apply for medicinal use.

why so serious?

King Felix wrote: »

There's nothing like snorting a good line of indica.

But it's true, you can simply just eat it.

seensensee

I remember in my earlier day's before soapbar existed, we used to go into dublin centraal and buy hash. It was sold in very very thin strips, tiny deals but we used to get "wrecked" on the stuff, one of our crew went on in time to become a heroin user, I met him many years later and he had a story to tell about how the hash we used to buy was actually manufactured in the area and mixed with "scag" (brown heroin). Looking back that does'nt surprise me and it appears that it still goes on today....

Heroin laced cannabis heading to Brighton streets, police fear

8:53am Thursday 13th August 2009
By Naomi Loomes »

Dealers are lacing cannabis with highly addictive heroin to get users hooked on the deadly drug.
Secret off-the-record discussions between police and a supplier in London have revealed how recreational drug users are being tricked into becoming addicted to Class A drugs.
Officers fear it could lead to a surge in addicts in Brighton and Hove, which is already known as the drug death capital of England.

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/4543376.Heroin_laced_cannabis_heading_to_Brighton_streets__police_fear/?action=complain&cid=7908793


Sh!t happens in a squeaky clean under the carpet prohibitionist society.
It's almost criminal to evade responsibility to the citizens of our society who require Medicinal Cannabis for their illnesses.





ETA:
Marijuana Laced with Crack Cocaine
November 19, 2008

"I wrote a post not too long ago about the dangers of marijuana and received a few comments about how ignorant I am and calling me names you wouldn’t really want to publish.

One of the things I talked about was marijuana being laced with other drugs. That, too, was considered ignorant.

Since I’ve been around for a while and have endeniable proof that’s the case, the comments didn’t really bother me.

In the news today is a warning from police about marijuana laced with crack cocaine. In England, the mixture is known as Mach5 and, according to the police who’ve been busting people with the stuff, this combination is used so the marijuana is more addictive and dangerous."
http://blog.drugrehabreferral.com/views/2008/11/19/marijuana-laced-with-crack-cocaine/


This may explain post #193

Kurtosis

Elevator wrote: »

that's the thing you see, the government will know full well that it can be prescribed for many many reasons,

more people getting scripts from their doc = monies

The government doesn't decide what conditions a medicine is prescribed for. They would merely be reclassifying it in medicines legislation to allow for medical use. The Irish Medicines Board grants the licence for a medicine and this decides the conditions that it can be prescribed for, based on the evidence/trials put forward by the manufacturer.

seensensee

So, we have just been witness to the fact that cannabis has been laced with drugs such as heroin and crack, it is common knowledge that cannabis has been mixed with powdered glass, and now we find...
Lead Poisoning Due to Adulterated Marijuana

N Engl J Med 2008; 358:1641-1642April 10, 2008
As a consequence of strict regulations, lead intoxication has not occurred in Germany in recent decades. Recently, during a period of 3 to 4 months, 29 patients (16 to 33 years of age) were admitted to four different hospitals in the greater Leipzig area (population, approximately 650,000) with classic signs and symptoms of lead intoxication. Twenty of these patients were admitted to our hospital (University Hospital Leipzig), 16 on an emergency basis (Table 1Table 1Clinical and Laboratory Characteristics of 16 Patients with Lead Intoxication.). The patients presented with abdominal cramps, nausea, anemia of varying severity, and fatigue. Most patients had basophilic stippling and a “Burton's line,” and some had neurologic symptoms. In other hospitals, one patient had severe encephalopathy with hallucinations and peripheral neuropathy with permanent extensor palsy in the forearm, and another patient underwent exploratory laparoscopy.1
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc0707784

Makes you think.... do some people develop illnesses due to absorbing the toxic ingredients which are cut and mixed into the cannabis?

ETA 1:
"Lead poisoning causes permanent and irreversible brain damage. Research shows that lead poisoning causes autism, schizophrenia and other mental disorders. Only early detection and treatment can prevent a lifetime of mental and physical disabilities"
http://www.src-mn.org/SRCIntPageLeadHome.htm

ETA 2:
" The primary side effect of smoking fry (PCP-laced formaldehyde-soaked marijuana or tobacco cigarettes) is toxic psychosis. Other effects include hallucinations, delusions, panic, paranoia, increased sexual arousal, and loss of consciousness (Klein & Kramer 2004). Side effects associated with inhalation of formaldehyde embalming fluid are disorganized thoughts, decreased attention span, psychomotor agitation, and up-regulation of the sympathetic nervous system (Klein & Kramer 2004)."
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_6831/is_2_40/ai_n31462573/

seensensee

People who require Cannabis to treat their Illnesses must be protected from societies malevolence in what ever form it poses. There can be no justification in denying or punishing an individual who seeks to gain relief from their ailments. In light of recent exposures I have no choice but to endorse every single aspect of Gordon McArdles compassionate use of Cannabis Act.
Individuals who vote against or deny the act would be tacitly in approval of the current barbarity that exists.

celtic Liger

i need it to help me sleep.

Shulgin

License cannabis sales, expert says

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11287130




By Pallab Ghosh Science correspondent, BBC News

Policymakers should consider allowing the licensed sale of cannabis for recreational use, says one of the UK's leading researchers of the drug.

Professor Roger Pertwee is to make the call in a speech at the British Science Association festival in Birmingham.

He is expected to say that radical solutions have to be considered because he believes the current policy of criminalising cannabis is ineffective.

"I'm talking about harm minimisation," he told BBC News.

The dismissal last year of Professor David Nutt as the previous government's leading drugs adviser showed it was in no mood to consider relaxing the status of cannabis as an illegal class B drug.

It is a view shared by the current government, but Prof Pertwee, an expert on cannabis-like chemicals, is to tell scientists that he, like Professor Nutt, believes it is a policy that is doing more harm than good.
Continue reading the main story

"At the moment there is an awful lot of harm caused by what we have at the moment, with children going to a drug dealer or they try and grow it themselves and then they get into trouble with the law," he said.

The University of Aberdeen researcher added: "And by dealing with criminals they may well go on to other drugs as well".

Instead, Prof Pertwee argues, one option policymakers should consider is the setting up of a committee to license the sale of recreational cannabis.

"You would have to think about licensing a suitable supplier and have retail outlets and the next step would be to have marketable, branded products that someone wants to use. At the same time it's got to be as safe as possible," he explained.

Prof Pertwee said licensed products should not be sold in cigarette form - so called "joints".

Kurtosis

seensensee wrote: »

In light of recent exposures I have no choice but to endorse every single aspect of Gordon McArdles compassionate use of Cannabis Act.
Individuals who vote against or deny the act would be tacitly in approval of the current barbarity that exists.

I'm still curious as to why you think cannabis-based medicines require a whole new regulatory system. Surely people should be campaigning for the quickest and most likely mechanism the government could use to allow medicinal use.

Safe to say, I see this thread has crossed the narrow line between promoting medicinal cannabis use and pushing legalisation for recreational use. What a surprise.

thebigbiffo

penguin88 wrote: »

I'm still curious as to why you think cannabis-based medicines require a whole new regulatory system. Surely people should be campaigning for the quickest and most likely mechanism the government could use to allow medicinal use.

Safe to say, I see this thread has crossed the narrow line between promoting medicinal cannabis use and pushing legalisation for recreational use. What a surprise.

no, it's not a surprise and never should be. it's the most widely used and one of the least dangerous recreational drugs in the world. but apart from that - it can be used to treat a very very large multitude of illnesses (or symtoms of) so it has the potential to be a very widely used drug, meaning the likes of myself who may very well become alcoholic due to a stressful and hectic lifestyle self medicate with a less harmful alternatives. it would not be 'self medicating' if it could be precsribed - hence the very narrown line

ScumLord

penguin88 wrote: »

Safe to say, I see this thread has crossed the narrow line between promoting medicinal cannabis use and pushing legalisation for recreational use. What a surprise.

It's a hard line not to cross in fairness. Once you start talking about the ins and outs of making cannabis available only as a medical drug and the checks and balances needed to keep it just medical you just have to wonder, why not just make it completely legal as it's the easiest option.

Wompa1

seensensee wrote: »

As a long term user of cannabis let me give you some perspective on addiction to cannabis because I note reactions amongst some other users which remind me of a situation I once experienced.

I had been a regular user for about 15 years and within that time any period of doing without was not much of a problem, I would make do and have a beer instead.
Then a time came where I developed an allergy to alcohol and started drinking much less and in this period I relied more on cannabis for recreational purposes, There was plenty of good stuff around and I decided it was my natural born right to have cannabis in my life, I made vows and developed bonds of affinity with it, it got deep inside, a situation of my own making.
Then one day there was a drought which lasted a few weeks and it became unavailable to me, Surprised me the lengths I went to try and get some but I remember always thinking about it, always in the back of the mind, this was a new development for me. I finally accepted that there was a problem when the money ran out and I went and pawned my TV for a week for £20 quid, a few days later I reached an all time low and with angry sad tears I seemed to realise that in fact certainly could not have it and would have to do without.


That was the beginning of a new phase, I started practicing a new form (for me) of mental discipline with the slogan " it's good to have some, but better without" I would tell myself " It's not my natural born right to have it whenever I want" and slowly I started to accept the new Ideas, a great help was reading "The Power of Now" Within a few days I managed to set the monkey on my back free!!!:):):)

Within a three month period I had gone from experiencing and living psychological addiction to being cured all by self help and advice from one good friend. Since then (11 years ago) I continue to use cannabis on regular basis but with discipline, I can now take it or leave it with absolutely no problem, do without it for months on end if necessary.

Overcoming psychological addiction is all about education and practice. Send me your worst cases. problem solved in a couple of weeks, It's no big deal when you know how.

Cheers.


ETA: The above account is from a recreational POV. Obviously a completely different set of standards apply for medicinal use.

Thanks for the insight it's pretty interesting. Many members of my family and a few friends are what I would class as addicted to it currently and are completely ignorant to the fact they are. Like you said near the end of your post they all say they could go without for months if they HAD to. They never go as far to test that theory. Have you gone months since you started doing it recreationally again? I respect that you kicked it once as apparently its a tough thing to do!

thebigbiffo

Wompa1 wrote: »

Thanks for the insight it's pretty interesting. Many members of my family and a few friends are what I would class as addicted to it currently and are completely ignorant to the fact they are. Like you said near the end of your post they all say they could go without for months if they HAD to. They never go as far to test that theory. Have you gone months since you started doing it recreationally again? I respect that you kicked it once as apparently its a tough thing to do!

all this talk of cannabis being addictive and hard to kick etc is making me nervous...so i want to point out something as obviously as i can.

i had a friend who was addicted to jelly tots. i am not joking. she went through 15 packets a days until she realised it was a problem. she found it very hard to stop buying packets every time she went to a shop and it actually depressed her for a few weeks.

do you know people who cant live without coffee? i do...

extreme sports (for the adreneline)? i do...

psycological addiction can be attached to anything ANYTHING which gives you pleasure.

CANNABIS IS NOT PHYSICALLY ADDICTIVE.

seensensee

penguin88 wrote: »

I'm still curious as to why you think cannabis-based medicines require a whole new regulatory system. Surely people should be campaigning for the quickest and most likely mechanism the government could use to allow medicinal use.

Safe to say, I see this thread has crossed the narrow line between promoting medicinal cannabis use and pushing legalisation for recreational use. What a surprise.

Did I say regulatory system? I myself am curious to why within the misuse of drugs act some drugs are classified because they are "strictly controlled" (schedule 2) and others are "controlled" (schedule 3)

Will you please explain the distinction to help us all gain further clarity.

I myself would campaign for decriminalisation in accordance with dutch or spanish policy, but not on this thread.

seensensee

Wompa1 wrote: »

Thanks for the insight it's pretty interesting. Many members of my family and a few friends are what I would class as addicted to it currently and are completely ignorant to the fact they are. Like you said near the end of your post they all say they could go without for months if they HAD to. They never go as far to test that theory. Have you gone months since you started doing it recreationally again? I respect that you kicked it once as apparently its a tough thing to do!

I now suspect that some of the cannabis I was using at that time may have been laced with crack cocaine ( Google "mach5 cannabis" ), the compulsion to have it was unlike anything I had previously been aware of.

Yes I occasionally go for long periods without. Meditation, exercise, expanded awareness and music production satisfy in similar ways but it took time to work it out. Of course many recreational users would view the cannabis habit similarly to an alcohol habit so there would be no requirement to do without for long periods because it's normal to have a few drinks so what would be the big deal in having a few smokes, like having a glass of wine with a meal how about the after dinner joint.
Horses for courses?

Herbal Deity

penguin88 wrote: »

Safe to say, I see this thread has crossed the narrow line between promoting medicinal cannabis use and pushing legalisation for recreational use. What a surprise.

Legality for medicinal use is an obvious stepping stone towards legality for recreational use. Just look at California. So it's a pretty big deal for those of us who wish for it to be legal for recreational purposes.

As it becomes more widely used for medicinal purposes, it will become more normalised in society, and the myths spread by 40 years of propaganda will begin to disappear from public consciousness, making recreational legality more of a possibility.

Kurtosis

seensensee wrote: »

Did I say regulatory system? I myself am curious to why within the misuse of drugs act some drugs are classified because they are "strictly controlled" (schedule 2) and others are "controlled" (schedule 3)

Will you please explain the distinction to help us all gain further clarity.

You said you supported Gordon McArdle's act, which proposes the establishment of a new regulatory system to deal with cannabis-based medicines.

Drugs are supposed to be classified in the MDA according to how liable they are to be misused. Schedule 1 lists drugs liable to be misused where there is no medical benefit/use or where the abuse potential outweighs their usefulness (this is what cannabis is currently classified as here). Schedule 2-5 lists drugs that are used medicinally and their classification is supposed to be based on their misuse liability. There are controls in place based on this classification so Sch2 is most controlled, Sch5 least controlled.

When you asked me about the distinction, were you querying what the practical implications are of a drug being Schedule 2 as opposed to Schedule 3 for example?

Kurtosis

thebigbiffo wrote: »

no, it's not a surprise and never should be. it's the most widely used and one of the least dangerous recreational drugs in the world. but apart from that - it can be used to treat a very very large multitude of illnesses (or symtoms of) so it has the potential to be a very widely used drug, meaning the likes of myself who may very well become alcoholic due to a stressful and hectic lifestyle self medicate with a less harmful alternatives. it would not be 'self medicating' if it could be precsribed - hence the very narrown line

To be honest, I think there is quite a clear distinction between medical and recreational use. From the above I do not think you see the difference. Unless it's a condition which requires a diagnosis from a doctor, I don't think it's fair to consider it as medicinal use.

ScumLord wrote: »

It's a hard line not to cross in fairness. Once you start talking about the ins and outs of making cannabis available only as a medical drug and the checks and balances needed to keep it just medical you just have to wonder, why not just make it completely legal as it's the easiest option.

Thing is, such a system of checks and balances already exists for medicines that are liable to be misused/used recreationally.

seensensee

From my understanding, taken from... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misuse_of_Drugs_Act_%28Ireland%29#Schedule_2 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misuse_of_Drugs_Act_%28Ireland%29#Schedule_3 the primary distinction is that one group is "strictly controlled" and the other is "controlled"
Please understand that I am layman in regards to legal and medical matters, I do not have a complete understanding of regulatory systems but am eager to learn.
what do you think or know those above distinctions to mean ?

Thank you.