'Weed wars' on Netflix

Irishcrx

OH NO! not another legalise cannabis thread , well not exactly , bear with me.
I watched this show (documentary) on netflix last night , it basically revolves around one of the larger medical marijuana health centres in California, Oakland and how they conduct their business and deal with the pressure from the IRS etc.

I'm a supporter of cannabis reform and do believe it has a lot of value to 'actual' sick patients who can make use of it's properties and I do believe it should be legalised and regulated, but I was very disapointed with what I saw for this show in a lot of ways and I learned thing's also that I didn't really know.

First off , it's a family run business but I find it hard to believe that the entire family that work there needs to 'medicate' (Get high as a kite) every 5 minutes, what exactly is their illness? Are they all 'sick'? , from what I see all there are stoned as **** 24/7. You wonder why you get no respect from local autority when you send in your head of finance to a meeting with red eyes and his partner is a guy called 'dress' who yes is a 60 year old man wearing shoes and a multi coloured dress to what is meant to be a serious meeting with the IRS , of course they were told to **** off.

Secondly , I learned the differance between CBD & THC , basically THC is the component that caused the high effect and the majority if not all the medical research and benefit comes from the CBD compound which does not cause a 'stoned' effect and has been proven to be the most beneficial from treating illness as below.

http://www.chicagonow.com/chicago-medical-marijuana/2013/11/cannabidiol-the-side-of-marijuana-you-dont-know/

Surely then , CBD strains should be the one's most recommended and sold by these dispensories , breeders should be working on strains that are CBD dominant not ultra potent THC starins like are being sold in the show. If your sick and need cannabis or have been given a doctors recommendation then the medical quality is what you want.

I don't know why I'm ranting but it really annoyed me , I expected something differant from it but I think it was a poor showing of these places been run by people who haven't really a clue what their doing and are shooting themselves in the foot already. Instead of these health centres being run by stoners they need to be run by doctors and professionals to regulate correctly and take step forwards by promoting strains that take the high out the beneficial aspects. I know the THC has value as well but really all I saw last night was people faking illness to get weed 70% of the time which is unfair to the other 30% it was actually helping.

Sunnyisland

Tldr man, I am all whacked out.

solomafioso

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54xWo7ITFbg

Grayson

I'm in favor of 100% legalisation. I think it should be taxed and regulated.

I do however think that legalising for personal/recreational use is a different issue to legalising for medical reasons. I think refusing someone the right to get stones for fun is wrong. However refusing a sick person medication is criminal.

Grayson

realies wrote: »

Tldr man, I am all whacked out.

They're selling strains to get you really stoned as opposed to strains which help against illness. And they're supposed to be selling medicinal stuff.

EoghanIRL

Did David Attenborough narrate it ?
That would be cool .

solomafioso

Legalize gay marijuana marriage!

Overflow

Irishcrx wrote: »

OH NO! not another legalise cannabis thread , well not exactly , bear with me.
I watched this show (documentary) on netflix last night , it basically revolves around one of the larger medical marijuana health centres in California, Oakland and how they conduct their business and deal with the pressure from the IRS etc.

I'm a supporter of cannabis reform and do believe it has a lot of value to 'actual' sick patients who can make use of it's properties and I do believe it should be legalised and regulated, but I was very disapointed with what I saw for this show in a lot of ways and I learned thing's also that I didn't really know.

First off , it's a family run business but I find it hard to believe that the entire family that work there needs to 'medicate' (Get high as a kite) every 5 minutes, what exactly is their illness? Are they all 'sick'? , from what I see all there are stoned as **** 24/7. You wonder why you get no respect from local autority when you send in your head of finance to a meeting with red eyes and his partner is a guy called 'dress' who yes is a 60 year old man wearing shoes and a multi coloured dress to what is meant to be a serious meeting with the IRS , of course they were told to **** off.

Secondly , I learned the differance between CBD & THC , basically THC is the component that caused the high effect and the majority if not all the medical research and benefit comes from the CBD compound which does not cause a 'stoned' effect and has been proven to be the most beneficial from treating illness as below.

http://www.chicagonow.com/chicago-medical-marijuana/2013/11/cannabidiol-the-side-of-marijuana-you-dont-know/

Surely then , CBD strains should be the one's most recommended and sold by these dispensories , breeders should be working on strains that are CBD dominant not ultra potent THC starins like are being sold in the show. If your sick and need cannabis or have been given a doctors recommendation then the medical quality is what you want.

I don't know why I'm ranting but it really annoyed me , I expected something differant from it but I think it was a poor showing of these places been run by people who haven't really a clue what their doing and are shooting themselves in the foot already. Instead of these health centres being run by stoners they need to be run by doctors and professionals to regulate correctly and take step forwards by promoting strains that take the high out the beneficial aspects. I know the THC has value as well but really all I saw last night was people faking illness to get weed 70% of the time which is unfair to the other 30% it was actually helping.

ah come on, really ??? Open your eyes, we have booze in various strengths from weak to 'lose your fecking mind' strength, weed with its THC will always be safer than alcohol, yet where is your big rant about booze ?

Too Tough To Die

I've read that THC has medicinal qualities too.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/279571.php

I agree that they shouldn't be getting high on the job.

Irishcrx

Overflow wrote: »

ah come on, really ??? Open your eyes, we have booze in various strengths from weak to 'lose your fecking mind' strength, weed with its THC will always be safer than alcohol, yet where is your big rant about booze ?

I don't have one , and as I said I'm in favour of legalization and regulation, your missing my point. My point is why are they not producing more CBD potent strains that are proven to be the most beneficial for treating illness in patients. Not everyone who uses as medicine wants to be stoned as a result of it , they might have jobs or need to be up and about during the day, high sativas aren't good enough.

Also , I don't think having the owners of these places constantly using themselves and claiming it's medicinal paints it in a good light it's not believeable that the entire family is sick and needs marijuana. If your running a professional service , particularly one like this...be professional about it. If you just want to get stoned , be honest about it.

And yes of course weed is safer than drink , but we don't use booze to treat cancer patients effectively do we?

Hande hoche!

Overflow wrote: »

ah come on, really ??? Open your eyes, we have booze in various strengths from weak to 'lose your fecking mind' strength, weed with its THC will always be safer than alcohol, yet where is your big rant about booze ?

To be fair, I have never been in an offie where the staff are clearly hammered.

suicide_circus

I read that 98% of sex crimes are committed by someone who knows what cannabis is. Coincidence?

solomafioso

suicide_circus wrote: »

I read that 98% of sex crimes are committed by someone who knows what cannabis is. Coincidence?

I've also heard that at least 92% of statistics are made up on the spot.

Hande hoche!

suicide_circus wrote: »

I read that 98% of sex crimes are committed by someone who knows what cannabis is. Coincidence?

My cousin had two cannabises and then he died.

Rough Sleeper

What's the main purpose of visual media? Entertainment. Of course you have plenty of documentaries that manage to be engaging as well as informative. But think of the subject matter in the one you're discussing: it's a shop run purportedly to sell cannabis to people for medicinal purposes. Where is the scope for entertainment there? If there are dispensaries that run as you'd imagined they would, do you think they'd provide enough entertainment value to be the subject of documentary? The reason they picked the people you saw is because watching dysfunctional stoners in dresses is more amusing than watching responsible pharmacists in white coats. It's like American Chopper with bags of Kush in place of bikes. If it were about concerned professionals the show would be about as entertaining as a documentary about your local Doc Morris.

Secondly, whatever about how they started out, the fact of the matter is that medical marijuana dispensaries are now basically the equivalent of off licenses running on loop holes in the blue states. The medical aspect is essentially a front. This has been the case in Canada for years, where weed is de facto legal. It may come as a surprise to you that weed is not legal in the Netheralands, they've just developed a policy of non-enforcement over the years. Legalisation of weed, at least in the states where they vote Democrat, is an inevitability, and these places are a product of the transitional stage where the US is at right now.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

I'm a fairly big anti smoking weed guy on a personal level, but as a society I think it is complete madness that people can get a criminal record and locked up for growing a few plants of the stuff in their own back garden. We have zero issue with hundreds of thousands of people on extremely potent prescription pills or people buying alcohol but if you want to get a bit stoned you will have to do so with the threat of jail hanging over you.

We need to move towards decriminalisation as quickly as possible. There are no good or practical reasons not too.

Irishcrx

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

I'm a fairly big anti smoking weed guy on a personal level, but as a society I think it is complete madness that people can get a criminal record and locked up for growing a few plants of the stuff in their own back garden. We have zero issue with hundreds of thousands of people on extremely potent prescription pills or people buying alcohol but if you want to get a bit stoned you will have to do so with the threat of jail hanging over you.

We need to move towards decriminalisation as quickly as possible. There are no good or practical reasons not too.

It's madness alright , I know a few guards who are friends and they've told me the courts aren't really prosecuting people who grow 3-4 plants for personal use anymore, it's not on their agenda. If caught they will bring you to court yes but jail is unlikely unless you have intent to supply.

Still though , I fully agree just leave people to it FFS they are harming nobody. Even in Spain you can grow 4plants for personal use.

Davarus Walrus

Weed must be the only drug in the world where a doctor writes a prescription that involves you smoking a carcinogenic depressant.

Rough Sleeper

Davarus Walrus wrote: »

Weed must be the only drug in the world where a doctor writes a prescription that involves you smoking a carcinogenic depressant.

Smoking? Perhaps. But you could hardly count the number of drugs that have far more severe side effects than cannabis. I mean, there are treatments that shut down the inflammation response. If the benefit of the drug is seen to outweigh the risk then it can be prescribed. I doubt someone on chemotherapy will be too worried about the route of administration if it stops them from having to spend hours with their head in the porcelain spewing up their guts. Not really sure why you think the fact that it's a depressant is any way significant either. Depressants are a huge and diverse class of pharmaceutical drugs.

strobe

Rough Sleeper wrote: »

What's the main purpose of visual media? Entertainment. Of course you have plenty of documentaries that manage to be engaging as well as informative. But think of the subject matter in the one you're discussing: it's a shop run purportedly to sell cannabis to people for medicinal purposes. Where is the scope for entertainment there? If there are dispensaries that run as you'd imagined they would, do you think they'd provide enough entertainment value to be the subject of documentary? The reason they picked the people you saw is because watching dysfunctional stoners in dresses is more amusing than watching responsible pharmacists in white coats. It's like American Chopper with bags of Kush in place of bikes. If it were about concerned professionals the show would be about as entertaining as a documentary about your local Doc Morris.

Secondly, whatever about how they started out, the fact of the matter is that medical marijuana dispensaries are now basically the equivalent of off licenses running on loop holes in the blue states. The medical aspect is essentially a front. This has been the case in Canada for years, where weed is de facto legal. It may come as a surprise to you that weed is not legal in the Netheralands, they've just developed a policy of non-enforcement over the years. Legalisation of weed, at least in the states where they vote Democrat, is an inevitability, and these places are a product of the transitional stage where the US is at right now.

Who the **** do you think you are coming in here with your common sense post and reasoned opinions?

Little CuChulainn

Overflow wrote: »

ah come on, really ??? Open your eyes, we have booze in various strengths from weak to 'lose your fecking mind' strength, weed with its THC will always be safer than alcohol, yet where is your big rant about booze ?

As far as I'm concerned this is one of the single worst arguments for the legalisation of marijuana. Alcohol destroys thousands of families and lives so it shouldn't be held as a benchmark against anything when trying to prove it's safe.

Irish Guitarist

I've never seen it but it sounds like reality TV nonsense. If you've ever watched Pawn Stars you'll see that it's not enough for them to just show how a business is run, they have to make up bizarre situations and make the cast have weird, badly scripted conversations where it's obvious that they're reading their lines from a cue card (if you watch Corey and Chumlee when they're talking you'll often them looking to the side of the camera).

Any American reality TV I've seen is made in the same way. Why people get upset at what happens on any of them baffles me.

ScumLord

Irishcrx wrote: »

I watched this show (documentary) on netflix last night , it basically revolves around one of the larger medical marijuana health centres in California, Oakland and how they conduct their business and deal with the pressure from the IRS etc.

First of all your have to realize your watching an American TV show, It's about as dependable as getting your information through a 6 year old child.

First off , it's a family run business but I find it hard to believe that the entire family that work there needs to 'medicate' (Get high as a kite) every 5 minutes, what exactly is their illness? Are they all 'sick'? , from what I see all there are stoned as **** 24/7.

How long was this documentary? Was it really over a hundred hours long. These people could have smoked 3 times a week and a TV show could have made it like it was all day, every day.

I do remember the show though, (I think they did turn it into a reality TV show that ran for a few weeks) It was typical scripted American shyte, I don't believe it represented that industry in the slightest because they could run a business and be stoned all the time.

catallus

suicide_circus wrote: »

I read that 98% of sex crimes are committed by someone who knows what cannabis is. Coincidence?

Hande hoche! wrote: »

My cousin had two cannabises and then he died.

If this is true then it is truly shocking. Appalling, even! What an evil substance.

Super-Rush

I read that this thread has been done about 375761 times this year.

Steodonn

Irishcrx wrote: »

I don't have one , and as I said I'm in favour of legalization and regulation, your missing my point. My point is why are they not producing more CBD potent strains that are proven to be the most beneficial for treating illness in patients. Not everyone who uses as medicine wants to be stoned as a result of it , they might have jobs or need to be up and about during the day, high sativas aren't good enough.

Also , I don't think having the owners of these places constantly using themselves and claiming it's medicinal paints it in a good light it's not believeable that the entire family is sick and needs marijuana. If your running a professional service , particularly one like this...be professional about it. If you just want to get stoned , be honest about it.

And yes of course weed is safer than drink , but we don't use booze to treat cancer patients effectively do we?

There are strong CBD strains out there popular with both medical and no medical users. Both produce a high with THC producing the "head high" and CBD giving you the body high. If you want to be up during the day you'd be looking for a lower CBD content although your right in saying more medical benefits come from CBD ( great for anti-anxiety for example ) than THC they both get you high

henryporter

Davarus Walrus wrote: »

Weed must be the only drug in the world where a doctor writes a prescription that involves you smoking a carcinogenic depressant.

I'd take that risk over some other legal prescription drugs that have listed side effects, such as internal bleeding, birth defects, narcolepsy, liver failure etc.

Jimoslimos

Rough Sleeper wrote: »

Smoking? Perhaps. But you could hardly count the number of drugs that have far more severe side effects than cannabis. I mean, there are treatments that shut down the inflammation response. If the benefit of the drug is seen to outweigh the risk then it can be prescribed. I doubt someone on chemotherapy will be too worried about the route of administration if it stops them from having to spend hours with their head in the porcelain spewing up their guts. Not really sure why you think the fact that it's a depressant is any way significant either. Depressants are a huge and diverse class of pharmaceutical drugs.

With any drug developed for medical purposes the goal has to be controlled and measurable delivery. Doctors don't prescribe infusion of foxglove for cardiac patients. Minimisation of side-effects is also a priority and "getting high" is not a desirable trait in any anti-nausea or pain medication.

If the medical marijuana industry is actually genuine then they should be more effort to develop and run more large scale clinical trials on either synthetic cannabinoids or chemical extracts from plants against current best treatments (rather than placebo as is common). At the same time they should distance themselves from the recreational side if they want to be taken seriously. That's not an argument against legalisation for recreational use, but rather to avoid blurring of the lines between it and the medical side.

catallus

"Medical Marijuana" is just a smokescreen, in much the same way as a drinker will say they need to drink a bottle of brandy everyday to keep pain away.

Notwithstanding the proven effects of pain relief provided by cannabis in specific illnesses, the approach of legalising it for this purpose is nonsensical. It destroys lives.

ScumLord

Jimoslimos wrote: »

With any drug developed for medical purposes the goal has to be controlled and measurable delivery. Doctors don't prescribe infusion of foxglove for cardiac patients. Minimisation of side-effects is also a priority and "getting high" is not a desirable trait in any anti-nausea or pain medication.

The problem is I don't think there's a way to separate the high from the beneficial pain relief effects. They haven't managed to do it with morphine. The high is part of the pain relief effect and it can't be separated, it's not a debilitating high anyway, I don't see any reason to separate them.

catallus wrote: »

"Medical Marijuana" is just a smokescreen, in much the same way as a drinker will say they need to drink a bottle of brandy everyday to keep pain away.

Nonsense, You're comparing someone with withdrawal from alcohol abuse to someone with chronic pain that's looking for a solution. One is suffering the effects of their actions (drinking) the other is suffering from real medical pain and looking for something to relieve the pain. It's a pretty disgusting and dismissive association to make.

Notwithstanding the proven effects of pain relief provided by cannabis in specific illnesses, the approach of legalising it for this purpose is nonsensical. It destroys lives.

In what way?

Rough Sleeper

Jimoslimos wrote: »

With any drug developed for medical purposes the goal has to be controlled and measurable delivery. Doctors don't prescribe infusion of foxglove for cardiac patients. Minimisation of side-effects is also a priority and "getting high" is not a desirable trait in any anti-nausea or pain medication.

My point wasn't that cannabis in plant form meets pharmaceutical standards as it obviously doesn't. I was replying to the poster who seemed to believe that the fact that cannabis had potential adverse effects seemed to set it apart from other drugs, or even more bizarrely, that it being a depressant makes it an unsuitable candidate for a drug treatment, as there are many drugs with far more serious side effects and plenty of depressants currently approved and in widespread use that are intoxicating and highly addictive to boot, benzos and opiates being the obvious examples.

Of course if current research comes to fruition and they develop a treatment with similar efficacy but without the unwanted (in a medical sense) effect of intoxication it'd be great. It's proving difficult as cannabis is composed of a fairly complex mix of chemicals and a lot of the synthetic cannabinoids produced some far, for medical or recreational ends, are more dangerous than their botanical counterpart. I'm fairly sure that if I were suffering from spasticity or frequent nausea to the extent that it was seriously affecting my quality of life, I wouldn't shy away from any treatment that improved my condition, measured doses or not. Especially as the acute health risks are not severe.

If the medical marijuana industry is actually genuine then they should be more effort to develop and run more large scale clinical trials on either synthetic cannabinoids or chemical extracts from plants against current best treatments (rather than placebo as is common). At the same time they should distance themselves from the recreational side if they want to be taken seriously. That's not an argument against legalisation for recreational use, but rather to avoid blurring of the lines between it and the medical side.

As I stated in an earlier post, I personally think at this stage it's a front, in the US at least, where legalisation in the liberal states is impending.