Cannabis/Hemp Products/Medicinal/Legal

jh79

Jayop wrote: »

To be fair to him nothing. I've posted multiple links backing up claims I've made. Many time and what he does is ignore them and then later as in the post above ask you to post them again. In the other thread we went at it he was the same rubbish asking me to repost a link that he said I'd never posted and he couldn't find it. It was on the previous page and I told him this over and over. His only function in these discussions is to try to cause havoc in them.

No you didn't , I even asked you to quote your own links and you wouldn't.

The only link i found was cancer.gov and it didn't support your claims.

Strange how you still refuse to back up your claims.

meeeeh

ScumLord wrote: »

Yes. Homeopathy is complete nonsense. At the very least cannabis has pain relief, other than that we have to wait and see.

I've heard about that one. I don't have a problem with legalization but alternative mumbo jumbo about other should have no place in traditional medicine until it's actually proven. I have no problem if people use ot for epilepsy for example but it should be clearly stated that it's alternative medicine and nowhere near being properly researched. So basically all other uses (but pain relief) are currently equivalent to homeopathy.

ScumLord

meeeeh wrote: »

I've heard about that one. I don't have a problem with legalization but alternative mumbo jumbo about other should have no place in traditional medicine until it's actually proven. I have no problem if people use ot for epilepsy for example but it should be clearly stated that it's alternative medicine and nowhere near being properly researched. So basically all other uses (but pain relief) are currently equivalent to homeopathy.

The difference with cannabis though is that it's not going to cause harm. If your vaping or eating cannabis it doesn't have any clear harmful effects.

The people who say cannabis works for them are often suffering life altering/ending diseases, and the medications they're given come with some side effects that people can't bare.. Cannabis can give them the relief that makes their condition easier to live with without any serious side effects (other than being stoned). So there's nothing to lose by giving them access. The same could be said for homeopathy remedies, it's not going to kill you, it's just not going to do anything for you. The people that sell it to you know that, the people making them know that, it's simply making money off sick people.

Many people fully believe that cannabis works for all sorts of things, they have anecdotal evidense that it works, it's just the scientific community isn't at a point to say one way or another if it actually works.

meeeeh

ScumLord wrote: »

The difference with cannabis though is that it's not going to cause harm. If your vaping or eating cannabis it doesn't have any clear harmful effects.

The people who say cannabis works for them are often suffering life altering/ending diseases, and the medications they're given come with some side effects that people can't bare.. Cannabis can give them the relief that makes their condition easier to live with without any serious side effects (other than being stoned). So there's nothing to lose by giving them access. The same could be said for homeopathy remedies, it's not going to kill you, it's just not going to do anything for you. The people that sell it to you know that, the people making them know that, it's simply making money off sick people.

Many people fully believe that cannabis works for all sorts of things, they have anecdotal evidense that it works, it's just the scientific community isn't at a point to say one way or another if it actually works.

I have no problem with that. The problem I have is that in eagerness to get it through the Dali (and other parliaments) all sorts of unproven claims are made without being pointed out there is very little research to back them up. On emotional level I hope it goes through. Who wouldn't want a severely epileptic child have some quality of life. On intellectual level it bothers me that the issue is presented as factual when it's anything but. It's dumbing down of debate.

scamalert

people like to crap here how its medicinal but actual goal everyone wants it to be legal alternative like alcohol or tobacco.

if someone suffers cancer,ms they might as well grow it themselves since risk is null in such cases.

other then that Ireland is backwards where getting ibuprofen for tooth ache is like going trough execution,worse if you need some meds for sleeping etc,then you pay 50e gp then referrals and so on -this alone with such a grip of pharma making billions is enough to put oppression that it take every country before ireland would consider it,but facts already could be seen from US that once properly regulated and legalized taxing and profits go into millions which are good money,and now that is all going to few mobs and unregulated growers that look profit vs quality.

while under influence there are risks but if tighten law on DD people would adapt quickly,thus another blow to all clubs and pubs since mj is used in social setting so people dont bother to get more wasted.

At the end of the day id imagine guards would rather cope with few stoners then massive fights out of head situations where alcohol seems main precursor to many injuries,deaths and fatalities.

jh79

meeeeh wrote: »

I have no problem with that. The problem I have is that in eagerness to get it through the Dali (and other parliaments) all sorts of unproven claims are made without being pointed out there is very little research to back them up. On emotional level I hope it goes through. Who wouldn't want a severely epileptic child have some quality of life. On intellectual level it bothers me that the issue is presented as factual when it's anything but. It's dumbing down of debate.

This is the thing, we don't actually know if it will benefit children with epilepsy.

A Cochrane review didn't find any benefits for epileptics.

And the high CBD oil hasn't been properly tested yet but there is a study in progress.

ScumLord

meeeeh wrote: »

On emotional level I hope it goes through.

I think that's the main motivation for pushing through medical cannabis. The people that have really put the push on are MS sufferers. It's kind of next to impossible to tell someone with that condition that they can't have something that makes them feel better.

It's probably the first step on the road to full on legalisation if America is anything to go by. Our politicians really don't want to bite the full legalisation bullet so as with everything else they do, they've taken an action that's neither here nor there, solves very little and stops people ringing Joe Duffy saying their local politician is making them suffer for no valid reason.

jh79

ScumLord wrote: »

I think that's the main motivation for pushing through medical cannabis. The people that have really put the push on are MS sufferers. It's kind of next to impossible to tell someone with that condition that they can't have something that makes them feel better.

It's probably the first step on the road to full on legalisation if America is anything to go by. Our politicians really don't want to bite the full legalisation bullet so as with everything else they do, they've taken an action that's neither here nor there, solves very little and stops people ringing Joe Duffy saying their local politician is making them suffer for no valid reason.

Would you agree that medical marijuanna is just legalisation through the back door, a way of appeasing conservatives and that very few, if any, will benefit from this from a medical stand point?

ScumLord

scamalert wrote: »

while under influence there are risks but if tighten law on DD people would adapt quickly,thus another blow to all clubs and pubs since mj is used in social setting so people dont bother to get more wasted.

I wouldn't be to worried about the pubs, they just need to find a better business model than getting people as drunk as possible. The pubs that are surviving this new non alcoholic Ireland are much better pubs.

The pubs with food can take on cannabis and make a fortune. Just offer cannabis starters in the restaurant and make sure you've got plenty of desserts lined up.

Irish people are pretty good at making money, it won't take long for a cannabis industry to pop up and create thousands of jobs.

ScumLord

jh79 wrote: »

Would you agree that medical marijuanna is just legalisation through the back door, a way of appeasing conservatives and that very few, if any, will benefit from this from a medical stand point?

More or less, yeah. Although, I would say that the minority that will benefit from cannabis legalisation makes it worth it. Given their conditions no one should stand in their way when it comes to quality of life.

I think full on legalisation is probably more important, taking cannabis away from organised crime would be like stopping apple from selling the iPhone. Not a death blow, but a crippling blow nonetheless.

jh79

ScumLord wrote: »

More or less, yeah. Although, I would say that the minority that will benefit from cannabis legalisation makes it worth it. Given their conditions no one should stand in their way when it comes to quality of life.

I think full on legalisation is probably more important, taking cannabis away from organised crime would be like stopping apple from selling the iPhone. Not a death blow, but a crippling blow nonetheless.

I'd like to see it legalised but just without the BS of the medicinal claims.

For some reason certain posters believe if you are pro-legalisation that you have to go along with the medicinal BS.

scamalert

good point guess adaptation would be fast for such industry,but we would still have pharma ,there was post on some thread recently that even corner run down pharmacy manages to clear close to 0.5mill a year in profits.

Canabbis vendors would put massive dent into that - no more people getting 10e box for pain relief,no need to go trough 2-3 md's to get meds for sleep issues or mood disorders.

Of course most vulnerable part in all of this is teens having easier access,and thats hard to control,but many forget that in any secondary school theres plenty that get their hands on it everyday.So mentality is many either ignore it,or create and issues which is already there.

that said arguing of forum for or against is as useful as pissing against the wind,at the end government needs only few votes and its back to square one,for another 5-10 years to debate pros and cons,in forum places.

ScumLord

jh79 wrote: »

I'd like to see it legalised but just without the BS of the medicinal claims.

It has to be legalised through politics, BS is included as standard. It was made illegal using BS so it's only fitting.

I wouldn't get to caught up in that fact. Politicians are in a position where they know they have to do something that a large section of the electorate don't want happening. Like the people they met at funerals, the special interest groups like alcohol producers, vintners, Holy joes, etc.. Medical cannabis is like a foot in the door.

meeeeh

I actually wouldn't want full legalization until a few other European countries do it. The last thing you would want to become is a stoner turist destination where eighteen years olds with very little disposable income clogg up the place.

ScumLord

scamalert wrote: »

good point guess adaptation would be fast for such industry,but we would still have pharma ,there was post on some thread recently that even corner run down pharmacy manages to clear close to 0.5mill a year in profits.

I don't know about that. Medical cannabis that your doctor prescribes is probably going to have to come through an official outlet like a pharmacy. The idea that people will start growing it in their back gardens just isn't going to work out. I could be growing carrots in my back garden but I still go down to the shop and buy them there. Plants take a good 2 months to grow, they have to be dried properly, there's a bit of work involved. even if you do grow yourself there's going to be periods when your waiting on a plant.

Of course most vulnerable part in all of this is teens having easier access,and thats hard to control,but many forget that in any secondary school theres plenty that get their hands on it everyday.So mentality is many either ignore it,or create and issues which is already there.

If anything it will be harder for kids to get with full legalisation. A legitimate shop isn't going to be selling cannabis to kids any more than they'd be selling cigarettes or alcohol to kids. If it doesn't make sense for criminal gangs to keep a stock of cannabis because everyones buying it in legitimate outlets kids won't even be able to get it on the black market.

that said arguing of forum for or against is as useful as pissing against the wind,at the end government needs only few votes and its back to square one,for another 5-10 years to debate pros and cons,in forum places.

This is where minds are changed. The tide has changed and public opinion is turning in favour of legalisation. Once the general public are on side the politicians will have no problems changing the law.

Seanachai

jh79 wrote: »

I'd like to see it legalised but just without the BS of the medicinal claims.

For some reason certain posters believe if you are pro-legalisation that you have to go along with the medicinal BS.

We're like a country that's constantly walking on eggshells, as if we're always worried about what our up-tight aunt will think. You can see it with the politicians treading very carefully in case they upset Dolores and have to get an ear full from her at the next local clinic.

Seanachai

meeeeh wrote: »

I actually wouldn't want full legalization until a few other European countries do it. The last thing you would want to become is a stoner turist destination where eighteen years olds with very little disposable income clogg up the place.

I think it should be 21, but I get where you're coming from

Seanachai

Does anybody know if the new legislation will mean that cannabis derivatives will be legally prescribed or herbal cannabis as is the case in the US?

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Seanachai wrote: »

Does anybody know if the new legislation will mean that cannabis derivatives will be legally prescribed or herbal cannabis as is the case in the US?

It's still only a Bill, yet to even begin the Committee stage, so nothing is decided at all and won't be for quite a while.

scamalert

ScumLord wrote: »

I don't know about that. Medical cannabis that your doctor prescribes is probably going to have to come through an official outlet like a pharmacy. The idea that people will start growing it in their back gardens just isn't going to work out. I could be growing carrots in my back garden but I still go down to the shop and buy them there. Plants take a good 2 months to grow, they have to be dried properly, there's a bit of work involved. even if you do grow yourself there's going to be periods when your waiting on a plant.

your correct if it was prescribed medically then there would be no changes - if MDs are tight now to give few sleep pills etc,crap wont fly with them that some 30yo has cramps or issues falling asleep- like it does in US for any made up reasons,also if pharmacy makes it,most likely it would be mostly cbt form inhaler,spray or pills thus only some help for those in extreme cases.As for general public black market would be the way to go as it was.

now the argument for tourism could be easily avoided by single law not to sell for non nationals or tourists-as its already done in Netherlands in some places.

And cbt part is already legal few irish outlets are selling drops for insane amounts to whoever wants to try out but % and cost vise its like placebo.Since cannabis to grow itself isnt illegal its used in many industries even paper and so on,the illegal part is thc chemical strains,that are banned,from cultivation or any usage/selling.

pure.conya

ScumLord wrote: »

I don't know about that. Medical cannabis that your doctor prescribes is probably going to have to come through an official outlet like a pharmacy.

the state will import it in bud form from the cannabisbureau.nl

pure.conya

Seanachai wrote: »

Does anybody know if the new legislation will mean that cannabis derivatives will be legally prescribed or herbal cannabis as is the case in the US?

That's how is leaning for now, it's anybody's guess if it's in the final bill

ScumLord

scamalert wrote: »

now the argument for tourism could be easily avoided by single law not to sell for non nationals or tourists-as its already done in Netherlands in some places.

I don't see any point in curbing tourists. It works well in Amsterdam, it pulls in more tax (cannabis is sold with a 15% tax in Amsterdam, so it's quite high).

Since cannabis to grow itself isnt illegal its used in many industries even paper and so on,the illegal part is thc chemical strains,that are banned,from cultivation or any usage/selling.

Cannabis and hemp are two different things. Hemp plants are also illegal, but for no good reason, just they're lose relation to cannabis plants.. You can't get high from hemp, even if you smoked an entire field of the stuff. Hopefully changing the law on cannabis would allow our farmers to start growing hemp, it's a high value crop that's easy to grow.

pure.conya wrote: »

the state will import it in bud form from the cannabisbureau.nl

I'd hope they could find a way of getting Irish businesses to make our own.

The fact is legalised cannabis could be happening around the globe. Ireland has the opportunity to get a head start on that market. If we start growing hemp and cannabis now we might be able to set up a brand for Irish cannabis products. If we wait for everyone else to legalise first we'll miss that boat and there will be less money to be made out of the industry.

Jayop

jh79 wrote: »

No you didn't , I even asked you to quote your own links and you wouldn't.

The only link i found was cancer.gov and it didn't support your claims.

Strange how you still refuse to back up your claims.

Typical rubbish. It certainly did back up MY claims. It may not have backed up strawman claims you keep on saying were made my by.

Change that record dude. You asked for evidence, I gave it. As per, you ignored it and then mouthed that it wasn't given. I told you the exact page number it was on and you still expected me to go get it for you. Why would I do that for you to lie about the contents if it backed me up or ignore it if you have no come back.

SeanieMon

Seanachai wrote: »

Does anybody know if the new legislation will mean that cannabis derivatives will be legally prescribed or herbal cannabis as is the case in the US?

Not sure what range of products will be considered to have medicinal or therapeutic properties, but I can imagine CBD oil (which is currently legal) and other similar cannabis derivatives would be prescribed due to the substantial evidence that displays their medicinal properties/qualities. It'll take time but I'm sure a list will be available in the not too distant future. Of course, there are a number of commonly used medicines in many other countries that contain trace amounts of cannabis that are still illegal, so I'd imagine they will also become legal.

bodhrandude

I'm surprised this hasn't been posted yet, but maybe we should be putting our balls into the microwave now, this Southpark clip still gives me a titter and possibly NSFW.

jh79

Jayop wrote: »

Typical rubbish. It certainly did back up MY claims. It may not have backed up strawman claims you keep on saying were made my by.

Change that record dude. You asked for evidence, I gave it. As per, you ignored it and then mouthed that it wasn't given. I told you the exact page number it was on and you still expected me to go get it for you. Why would I do that for you to lie about the contents if it backed me up or ignore it if you have no come back.

Here is your chance to show me up, what was your claim and what link did you provide ?

In the mean time i'll look back over the old thread and see if what your saying is true and if it is i'll apologise.

InTheTrees

pure.conya wrote: »

the state will import it in bud form from the cannabisbureau.nl

Interesting to note that only one of those medicinal strains (products?) they list is low in THC. All the others are regular strengths which will make a person "high".

"Medicinal" doesnt just mean high CBD and no THC.

nice_guy80

talk to someone who lives in California...
they will tell you the damage it does after 2 or 3 generations of use
complete potheads and stoners unable to do anything with their lives

I voted for "Only legalise it for medicinal and industrial use."

Jayop

jh79 wrote: »

Here is your chance to show me up, what was your claim and what link did you provide ?

In the mean time i'll look back over the old thread and see if what your saying is true and if it is i'll apologise.

You couldn't find something on the last page after being told it was there. I doubt you'll find anything.