Cannabis based products to be legalised

partyatmygaff

zenno wrote: »

This is the problem right here... the pharmaceutical companies will be producing their own chemicals to have a similar effect as real cannabis but how would pharma's made-up chemicals have the same health benefits as the real thing, well imo they won't.

What makes you think derivatives won't have as much of an effect as the compounds found in nature?

You only need to look to a very common example to see that it's possible. Acetylsalicylic acid/Aspirin (Which was synthesized in a lab) is a far more effective painkiller than its parent compound found in nature salicylic acid.

If people using natural cannabis feel pain relief from the original cannabis plant then i cannot see different man-made chemicals working exactly the same as the real thing, more dangerous i'd say.

Why would it be more dangerous? Natural doesn't mean safe and synthesized doesn't mean dangerous. As for efficacy of plant medicine, sometimes you've got to use extracts of the whole plant but when they can pinpoint the exact compounds responsible for the therapeutic effect, they can isolate them and see how their activity can be improved.

Pharma's man-made chemicals will obviously not have the same effect as the real thing and who knows what side-effects their so-called similar chemicals will have.

There is absolutely no scientific basis for that. Man-made chemicals can have the same if not better effects than the "real thing" (Which I assume means the parent compound).

mikom

ceegee wrote: »

. You also avoid the problem of variation in strength which is inherent in plants.

Google

phenotype
clone

Educate yourself.

steddyeddy

I dont smoke it but wont deny that once or twice in the past I have. Its not for me personally and I do think that theres increasing evidence of mental health politics. Saying that, sugar can cause diabetes, some processed foods can cause cancer, smoking does cause lung cancer and drink can cause mental and physical damage. Also according to research all of these things could predispose your children to further diseases and even affect your grandkids.

All of the above are legal why not cannabis which in my view is a lot safer than some of the above.

partyatmygaff

mikom wrote: »

Google

phenotype
clone

Educate yourself.

Clonal propagation is not sufficient to stop variation in strength in plants.

Genetically identical plants have the same ability (Or cellular machinery if you will) to produce similar amounts of product. To make the exact same amount of product, they need to be grown in the exact same conditions which isn't easy to achieve. Say if one had less of a certain nutrient or marginally less light or suffered a disease of some kind, the quantity or even the compound itself may change.

steddyeddy

By the way if they identify a drug in a plant a lot of the time its easier to synthesise it in a lab than to isolate it and continually extract it from the plant. aspirin for example was found in a plant but its now synthesised in labs and the synthetic version is identical to the plant version.

rubadubduba

cannabis is natures way of saying high. pharma is chemicals way of saying low,

steddyeddy

rubadubduba wrote: »

cannabis is natures way of saying high. pharma is chemicals way of saying low,

Do you know its the job of chemists to accuratly synthesise chemicals to mimic their natural compounds? A lot of the time the chemical found in a plant and one made in the lab is the same.

rubadubduba

steddyeddy wrote: »

Do you know its the job of chemists to accuratly synthesise chemicals to mimic their natural compounds? A lot of the time the chemical found in a plant and one made in the lab is the same.

synthesise chemicals to mimic cannabis is'nt the real thing.:rolleyes:

mikom

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Clonal propagation is not sufficient to stop variation in strength in plants.

Genetically identical plants have the same ability (Or cellular machinery if you will) to produce similar amounts of product. To make the exact same amount of product, they need to be grown in the exact same conditions which isn't easy to achieve. Say if one had less of a certain nutrient or marginally less light or suffered a disease of some kind, the quantity or even the compound itself may change.

Clonal propagation is the first step in strength continuity.
The makers of Sativex will be controlling their growing environment and nutrients in a similar fashion to thousands of home growers.

partyatmygaff

Actually, if they could synthesise all the compounds found in the plant and have them in the exact same proportions as found in the plant it would have the exact same effect. The only problem is it's incredibly expensive and doesn't make sense economically.

If they can pinpoint the action to one or a few compounds and then simply synthesise them or improve on them, they'd be able to make an even better alternative.

As i've said before, natural doesn't always mean good and pharmaceutical doesn't always mean bad.

donegal_road

quick.. tranquilize the public ahead of the budget!

mikom

partyatmygaff wrote: »

As i've said before, natural doesn't always mean good and pharmaceutical doesn't always mean bad.

Tell that to the King of Pop.

Nichololas

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Clonal propagation is not sufficient to stop variation in strength in plants.

Genetically identical plants have the same ability (Or cellular machinery if you will) to produce similar amounts of product. To make the exact same amount of product, they need to be grown in the exact same conditions which isn't easy to achieve. Say if one had less of a certain nutrient or marginally less light or suffered a disease of some kind, the quantity or even the compound itself may change.

If you RTFA they go into a little detail on the labs they use to grow, think automated hydroponics and lighting, controlled environments, sensors out the hootenaney. Presumably they do some quality control during and after the growing phase and once it's been processed and pill-pressed. Probably a little more variation in the final product than a machine printing silicon boards (which also suffer minor manufacturing defects), but I don't see why with stringent controls this would be an issue.

And on the subject of chemicals found 'naturally' in the plant and lab-synthesized ones - a chemical is a chemical is a chemical, and yes most often the synthesized chemicals are far more potent than their natural equivelent. I believe the problem with most cannabis medical products (although apparently not sativex which uses the entire plant) is that they currently can only synthesize some of the hundreds of canniboids that are found naturally in the plants, and getting the same ratio in a synthesized product is going to be quite difficult. Hell, there's differences in chemical composition between different strains within the same species of cannabis so there's probably way more between the two major species too.

Actually, reading over the last paragraph I'm guessing that the way they'll go is with several different product lines. Man, I can't wait until I can buy a pack of (medicinal tbd) cannabis fruit gums.

partyatmygaff

mikom wrote: »

Clonal propagation is the first step in strength continuity.

I don't see your point. If I designed an engine five were built in different conditions by people of different skill levels using different materials, there'd be differences between each engine. The design (Genotype) is important but without controlled production, the product won't always be of the same quality.

The makers of Sativex will be controlling their growing environment and nutrients in a similar fashion to thousands of home growers.

I highly doubt that. Unlike home growers, Sativex have to meet very stringent standards and have controls and practices in place to ensure that everything they produce is of the same high quality.

ElleEm

I'm VERY interested in this!

I have been using cannabis recreationally for years, and got diagnosed with MS two years ago. I don't know what the MS would be like without cannabis but I'm curious to see how the Sativex stuff will work for me.

mikom

partyatmygaff wrote: »

I don't see your point. If I designed an engine five were built in different conditions by people of different skill levels using different materials, there'd be differences between each engine. The design (Genotype) is important but without controlled production, the product won't always be of the same quality.

I highly doubt that. Unlike home growers, Sativex have to meet very stringent standards and have controls and practices in place to ensure that everything they produce is of the same high quality.

Would vegetable soup that I buy in can from the supermarket be better than the vegetable soup my mother makes from the vegetables growing in her garden. A soup that she has made over the past 20 years.

steddyeddy

rubadubduba wrote: »

synthesise chemicals to mimic cannabis is'nt the real thing.:rolleyes:

Actually if you synthesise chemicals to mimic thc and you end up making thc by definition it is the same thing. Can you point out the difference?

120_Minutes

Pah. It's a side step dressed up as a step forward.

rubadubduba

steddyeddy wrote: »

Actually if you synthesise chemicals to mimic thc and you end up making thc by definition it is the same thing. Can you point out the difference?

i'd much rather the real thing than a load of mimic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrahydrocannabinol

Comparisons to medical marijuana
Main article: Medical marijuana
Female cannabis plants contain more than 60 cannabinoids, including cannabidiol (CBD), thought to be the major anticonvulsant that helps multiple sclerosis patients;[84] and cannabichromene (CBC), an anti-inflammatory which may contribute to the pain-killing effect of cannabis.[85]
It takes over one hour for Marinol to reach full systemic effect,[86] compared to seconds or minutes for smoked or vaporized cannabis.[87] Some patients accustomed to inhaling just enough cannabis smoke to manage symptoms have complained of too-intense intoxication from Marinol's predetermined dosages. Many patients have said that Marinol produces a more acute psychedelic effect than cannabis, and it has been speculated that this disparity can be explained by the moderating effect of the many non-THC cannabinoids present in cannabis. For that reason, alternative THC-containing medications based on botanical extracts of the cannabis plant such as nabiximols are being developed. Mark Kleiman, director of the Drug Policy Analysis Program at UCLA's School of Public Affairs said of Marinol, "It wasn't any fun and made the user feel bad, so it could be approved without any fear that it would penetrate the recreational market, and then used as a club with which to beat back the advocates of whole cannabis as a medicine."[88] United States federal law currently registers dronabinol as a Schedule III controlled substance, but all other cannabinoids remain Schedule I, excepting synthetics like nabilone.I][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed"][COLOR=#0066cc]citation needed[/COLOR][/URL][/I

partyatmygaff

mikom wrote: »

Would vegetable soup that I buy in can from the supermarket be better than the vegetable soup my mother makes from the vegetables growing in her garden. A soup that she has made over the past 20 years.

Vegetable soup can be any number of things. There is no substance in existence that you can get the entire world to agree on as being "Vegetable soup". What is "high quality" is subjective and is up to the person drinking the soup to decide.

Medicines on the other hand have strict definitions. Aspirin is acetylsalicylic acid otherwise known as 2-acetoxybenzoic acid. If I went to any chemist in the world and asked them "What is aspirin?" their sole answer would be 2-acetoxybenzoic acid. If I asked them identify aspirin, they'd pop it in to an IR machine and they'd have a result fairly quickly.

Unlike vegetable soup, the definition isn't just "A few vegetables, a bit of water, some seasoning and a few spices".

rubadubduba wrote: »

i'd much rather the real thing than a load of mimic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrahydrocannabinol

THC isn't cannabis. THC is a compound contained in cannabis. If you synthesised all the compounds in cannabis and mixed them in the right proportions there would be little to no difference.

MagicSean

"We need cannabis for medical reasons"

"Ok here, we put it in a tablet and taken out the high"

"Em... it's not the same. Look here's a study to say it's better to smoke it"

It'll be interesting to see the arguments arising out of this, especially as it takes one of the main reasons for lrgalisation out of the icture.

Kurz

MagicSean wrote: »

"We need cannabis for medical reasons"

"Ok here, we put it in a tablet and taken out the high"

"Em... it's not the same. Look here's a study to say it's better to smoke it"

It'll be interesting to see the arguments arising out of this, especially as it takes one of the main reasons for lrgalisation out of the icture.

The effect it has on recreational users is the same effect it has on medicinal users. Removing this would remove its' usefulness as a medicine. If it was possible to just "remove the high" it would have already been done and legalised all over the world by now.

steddyeddy

If we seen cannabis made legal I wonder would it encourage people who never smoked it to start smoking it?

Kurtosis

Kurz wrote: »

The effect it has on recreational users is the same effect it has on medicinal users. Removing this would remove its' usefulness as a medicine. If it was possible to just "remove the high" it would have already been done and legalised all over the world by now.

Not true. Sativex itself contains similar quantites of CBD and THC which effectively removes its psychoactive effects, so no high but highly useful as a medicine.

OU812

I wouldn't even know where to get cannabis. Been years since I did. Wouldn't even know who to ask on anonymous forums... Pity Man, real shame...

Haelium

http://www.sativex.co.uk/patients-and-carers/patients-on-sativex/frequently-asked-questions

In clinical trials, less than 3% of patients treated with Sativex found that it caused a euphoric mood (feeling high). If this does happen, patients should reduce their dose and talk to their doctor or nurse.

DOCTOR DOCTOR! I'm feeling content about life and extremely happy, what should I do?

mikom

MagicSean wrote: »

"We need cannabis for medical reasons"

"Ok here, we put it in a tablet and taken out the high"

"Em... it's not the same. Look here's a study to say it's better to smoke it"

It'll be interesting to see the arguments arising out of this, especially as it takes one of the main reasons for lrgalisation out of the icture.

It's not the same....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNv7lY-ZhKA

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Vegetable soup can be any number of things. There is no substance in existence that you can get the entire world to agree on as being "Vegetable soup". What is "high quality" is subjective and is up to the person drinking the soup to decide.

Medicines on the other hand have strict definitions. Aspirin is acetylsalicylic acid otherwise known as 2-acetoxybenzoic acid. If I went to any chemist in the world and asked them "What is aspirin?" their sole answer would be 2-acetoxybenzoic acid. If I asked them identify aspirin, they'd pop it in to an IR machine and they'd have a result fairly quickly.

Unlike vegetable soup, the definition isn't just "A few vegetables, a bit of water, some seasoning and a few spices".

THC isn't cannabis. THC is a compound contained in cannabis. If you synthesised all the compounds in cannabis and mixed them in the right proportions there would be little to no difference.

So they are extracting it why?

ArseLtd

ceegee wrote: »

You also avoid the problem of variation in strength which is inherent in plants.

This is all irrelevant because wherever its grown or whoever grows the cannabis, it can be tested for thc/cbd levels after being harvested, just like they do with medical marijuana in the US.

partyatmygaff

mikom wrote: »

So they are extracting it why?

It's cheaper and easier to standardise a plant extract than to synthesise tens of compounds each with their own processes and quality controls. It's bad enough when it's a single compound but with the sixty or so found in cannabis it makes no economic sense.

NegativeCreep

Fcuk it I'll try it anyway, synthesized or not. Has to be better than solpadeine anyway, that crap's useless.