Cannabis/Hemp Products/Medicinal/Legal

pure.conya

jh79 wrote: »

Why would weed be any different to all the other herbal remedies that don't work?

Simple really, I'd have thought a reasonably smart character like yourself would have copped it on your own. Weed is different to all the other herbal remedies that don't work because it works. There's an old saying that's apt for this drug, it goes like if it ain't broke then don't try to fix it

jh79

pure.conya wrote: »

It's not a "pharma" drug though. Despite the recent 50 years of prohibition, it's an excellent natural drug that's been successfully cultivated and used by humans for thousands of years, with not a single fatality from its use, EVER. Guess what, we don't need GW Pharmacy for fúck all

How do you know it is an excellent natural drug? Old wives tales and testimonials are not sufficient evidence.

By the way, GW Pharma use the natural product. It is the ratio and delivery method that they have the IP on.

jh79

pure.conya wrote: »

Simple really, I'd have thought a reasonably smart character like yourself would have copped it on your own. Weed is different to all the other herbal remedies that don't work because it works. There's an old saying that's apt for this drug, it goes like if it ain't broke then don't try to fix it

Instead of telling me it works show me it works with a scientific study. Why would anyone take medical advice from some random person on the internet? Would you consider that wise?

There are quack cures for every disease according to some on the internet, do you believe all those too?

pure.conya

meeeeh wrote: »

Very strong potential does not medicine make. There is a reason why very rigorous testing is needed and even then things can go wrong. Pharmaceuticals have offten very rightly bad reputation but at least their stuff needs to be a bit more than strong potential before it goes on the market.

Cannabis has been on the market for thousands of years

pure.conya

jh79 wrote: »

Sorry k flyer while there is on-going research in this area i disagree that cannabinoids have shown "very strong" potential .

Sanchez's research required huge quantites of cannabinoids, beyond anything possible to smoke, and this seems to be a common trend across research in this area.

Don't forget envasive brain surgery was required becuase the cannabinoids had such poor potency/ bioavailability.

What us your fascination with administering cannabis medication by smoking it, the ideal delivery method is the Rick Simpson method of refining/concentrating a large amount of top quality female flowers down to a thick hemp oil and injesting 1ml a day, mixing the hemp oil with organic coconut oil actually delivers the beneficial active chemicals to the body a lot quicker

jh79

pure.conya wrote: »

What us your fascination with administering cannabis medication by smoking it, the ideal delivery method is the Rick Simpson method of refining/concentrating a large amount of top quality female flowers down to a thick hemp oil and injesting 1ml a day, mixing the hemp oil with organic coconut oil actually delivers the beneficial active chemicals to the body a lot quicker

So you just believe the concentrated oil is medicinal not joints themselves?

So how effective is this oil, what illness and to what extent?

ie it reduces tumours by x% in x% of those who take it.

meeeeh

pure.conya wrote: »

Cannabis has been on the market for thousands of years

So has water. I'd still prefer actual medication when getting sick.

Jimoslimos

pure.conya wrote: »

Really? http://www.newstarget.com/2016-03-09-synthetic-cannabis-drug-trial-results-in-hospitalization-and-death.html

Oh sweet Jesus! I'm trying my hardest not to be condescending here...but do you have a fcuking clue what you are talking about? Normally I'd say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing but I'm struggling to even grant you that.

Q1: Do you understand what cannabinoid receptors are?

Q2: What are endocannabinoids? Hint: Clue is in the name.

Q3: Do you know what the drug was trying to target? Explain to me how it is a "synthetic cannabis" drug.

Go "look it up"..."educate yourself"...whatever and get back to me but please avoid that godawful newstarget website (brought to you by the same people who gave you NaturalNews).

Billy86

meeeeh wrote: »

So has water. I'd still prefer actual medication when getting sick.

Depends on what "getting sick" is. If it's an upset stomach causing nausea or vomiting (yes, hangovers included) or an inability to go to sleep, I'll take marijuana over "actual medication" on both counts. Well, not the upset stomach if I have to be productive during the day (work, etc) but I do find it more effective. For sleep, without question - safer, less addictive, less last effects the next day.

For pain relief, a good number of cancer patients would also consider marijuana very much to be "actual medication" also.

meeeeh

Billy86 wrote: »

For pain relief, a good number of cancer patients would also consider marijuana very much to be "actual medication" also.

I think some here can't distinguish between might help and is proven to help. The same people who are all evangelical about marihuana would be probably scoffing at homeopathy and similar nonsense yet marihuana is at about the same stage at the moment.

K.Flyer

PubMed (NCBI) The antitumor activity of plant-derived non-psychoactive cannabinoids

This is a very detailed, yet balanced, summary review of the various tests and research carried out over the recent years.
This article, like I have said before, shows that there are clear inroads being made for the treatment of some cancers with cannabis extracts, but its not the cure all magic bullet.
If anyone is interested in the article, or the subject matter, take the time to read it.
It also mentions that pharma companies are putting money into R & D in the hope of fine tuning cannabinoid dosages towards certain cancers.
I will only quote the summary as the article is quite lengthy.

6. Summary
Over the past decade researchers have refocused their efforts on the therapeutic potential of non-psychotropic cannabinoids in CS, in particular CBD. As presented in this review, the preclinical data strongly support the notion that non-psychoactive plant-derived CBs can act as direct inhibitors of tumor progression as well as enhance the activity of first-line therapies. While many anecdotal reports by cancer patients using various formulations of CS suggest significant efficacy, the lack of pure pharmacologically active compounds and legal restrictions surrounding schedule I drugs have delayed the clinical research that will ultimately determine whether cannabinoids are effective in the treatment of cancer beyond their proven palliative effects. It is promising to note that pharmaceutical companies have initiated clinical programs that include GMP-grade cannabinoids for targeting glioblastoma. Elucidation of the molecular pathways mediating non-psychoactive cannabinoid antitumor effects will be particularly important as the drugs move toward the clinic. A discussed earlier, certain tumors appear to be responsive to treatments while others are not. Currently, no markers have been discovered that can help oncologists identify which patients might benefit most from treatment with cannabinoids. Additional basic research will help lead to the development of cannabinoid-based therapies for the treatment of aggressive cancers and will also bring us closer to understanding the novel CB1- and CB2-independent component of the cannabinoid system that controls cancer progression.

Billy86

meeeeh wrote: »

I think some here can't distinguish between might help and is proven to help. The same people who are all evangelical about marihuana would be probably scoffing at homeopathy and similar nonsense yet marihuana is at about the same stage at the moment.

I don't know of many sanctioned medical boards prescribing homeopathy for serious issues like chronic pain, chemo relief and insomnia to be fair.

Jimoslimos

Billy86 wrote: »

I don't know of many sanctioned medical boards prescribing homeopathy for serious issues like chronic pain, chemo relief and insomnia to be fair.

Well the NHS were funding "alternative medical practices" including homeopathy up until recently (might still be).

meeeeh

Billy86 wrote: »

I don't know of many sanctioned medical boards prescribing homeopathy for serious issues like chronic pain, chemo relief and insomnia to be fair.

Most herbal remedies don't need to be prescribed because they are legal without prescription. But I know that my health insurance does cover cost of some alternative medicical treatments.

Water John

don't know the status of herbal remedies now, but a big effort was made a few years ago to have St John's Worth taken off the market. One wonders why?

K.Flyer

Water John wrote: »

don't know the status of herbal remedies now, but a big effort was made a few years ago to have St John's Worth taken off the market. One wonders why?

The pharmaceutical society of Ireland successfully lobbied to have it removed from health stores. Only to turn around and make it available on prescription only... One wonders why? Profit I imagine.
Freely available over the counter in pharmacies and health stores in N.I. and the U.K.

Seanachai

Water John wrote: »

don't know the status of herbal remedies now, but a big effort was made a few years ago to have St John's Worth taken off the market. One wonders why?

I know that if people are self-prescribing it for depression it can cause mania if used for the wrong type of depression, in one way I can understand the health services not wanting to deal with the consequences of this. At the same time I do feel that some of the recent herbal bans are draconian and in some cases absurd seeing as you can plant some of them in your garden, it becomes illegal if you harvest and consume them.

Seanachai

jh79 wrote: »

That had to be placed directly into the tumour. Not an ideal delivery method but the only option due to its poor potency / bioavailability.

My reference to smoking joints is to remind people that studies like these do not support the theory that inhaled weed has medicinal properties.

Sativex is available in the UK and they don't have so called medicinal marijuana.

Is Sativex not available for prescription already in Ireland?, if it is it will make the bill a bit pointless if it doesn't include the whole herbal form.

ohnonotgmail

K.Flyer wrote: »

The pharmaceutical society of Ireland successfully lobbied to have it removed from health stores. Only to turn around and make it available on prescription only... One wonders why? Profit I imagine.
Freely available over the counter in pharmacies and health stores in N.I. and the U.K.

Or perhaps to stop people from self-prescribing something that could be harmful to them? Or perhaps to ensure that what is sold is of a known strength?

jh79

Water John wrote: »

don't know the status of herbal remedies now, but a big effort was made a few years ago to have St John's Worth taken off the market. One wonders why?

It interacts with certain types of medicine.

The fact that you are not aware of this highlights why making it a prescription drug was the right choice.

K.Flyer

jh79 wrote: »

It interacts with certain types of medicine.

The fact that you are not aware of this highlights why making it a prescription drug was the right choice.

So why have they not made codeine based otc products only available on prescription.
There is a big problem in this and other countries with the likes of Neurofen Plus being abused and the problems it is causing to people and their families. Don't often hear much about it as it seems to be a problem that gets swept under the carpet by pharmacies et al. with only a token questioning of the users at the p.o.s.

ohnonotgmail

K.Flyer wrote: »

So why have they not made codeine based otc products only available on prescription.
There is a big problem in this and other countries with the likes of Neurofen Plus being abused and the problems it is causing to people and their families. Don't often hear much about it as it seems to be a problem that gets swept under the carpet by pharmacies et al. with only a token questioning of the users at the p.o.s.

you must pass on the names of the pharmacies that only do a token questioning. I sometimes think i'm asking for heroin with the questions they ask. And it wasnt swept under the carpet. a problem was recognised and something was done. Making it prescription only would just negatively affect those of us who do need it.

jh79

K.Flyer wrote: »

So why have they not made codeine based otc products only available on prescription.
There is a big problem in this and other countries with the likes of Neurofen Plus being abused and the problems it is causing to people and their families. Don't often hear much about it as it seems to be a problem that gets swept under the carpet by pharmacies et al. with only a token questioning of the users at the p.o.s.

Because codeine based medicine taken correctly do not cause any problems. They are only a problem if abused.

St John's Wort taken innocently can cause issues so as a precaution a prescription is needed. That way your Pharmacist can see what other medications you are taking and if any of these are known to interact with each other.

ohnonotgmail

jh79 wrote: »

Because codeine based medicine taken correctly do not cause any problems. They are only a problem if abused.

St John's Wort taken innocently can cause issues so as a precaution a prescription is needed. That way your Pharmacist can see what other medications you are taking and if any of these are known to interact with each other.

wasnt the problem with the paracetamol that is combined with the codeine not the codeine itself? People were apparently taking a lot of codeine to get a buzz and then OD'ing on the paracetamol?

ScumLord

jh79 wrote: »

Because codeine based medicine taken correctly do not cause any problems. They are only a problem if abused.

It seems easy enough to abuse them though. So many Americans have gone from being prescribed codeine medicines to full blown addiction without realising it's happening and often end up moving onto something illegal when their codeine addiction has gotten out of hand.

At least with cannabis the negative side effects are few. Even developing a full blown addiction would be easier to break and just wouldn't cause the same level of problems. It's the fact that cannabis doesn't come with a long list of possible side effects that makes me think we should just let those that want to use it, use it. There's just no evidence that they'll suffer any serious side effects outside of the munchies.

While we may hymn and haw over whether or not cannabis is effective as a medicine, there's no real evidence that it's harmful to the majority of people when smoking is avoided. There is a small section of the population that could develop the early onset of pre existing conditions, if they abuse the drug while still developing. But making them do a test would probably be beneficial to them so they know about the condition.

jh79

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

wasnt the problem with the paracetamol that is combined with the codeine not the codeine itself? People were apparently taking a lot of codeine to get a buzz and then OD'ing on the paracetamol?

No idea to be honest.

jh79

ScumLord wrote: »

It seems easy enough to abuse them though. So many Americans have gone from being prescribed codeine medicines to full blown addiction without realising it's happening and often end up moving onto something illegal when their codeine addiction has gotten out of hand.

At least with cannabis the negative side effects are few. Even developing a full blown addiction would be easier to break and just wouldn't cause the same level of problems. It's the fact that cannabis doesn't come with a long list of possible side effects that makes me think we should just let those that want to use it, use it. There's just no evidence that they'll suffer any serious side effects outside of the munchies.

While we may hymn and haw over whether or not cannabis is effective as a medicine, there's no real evidence that it's harmful to the majority of people when smoking is avoided. There is a small section of the population that could develop the early onset of pre existing conditions, if they abuse the drug while still developing. But making them do a test would probably be beneficial to them so they know about the condition.

You are talking about the plant itself?

The issue with medical marijuana isn't safety but effectiveness.

If you haven't got effectiveness it doesn't really matter that it is relatively harmless.

The HPRA will have their report out next month.

So what is the evidence that you think will convince them that the natural plant is actual medicine?

Seanachai

drunkmonkey wrote: »

What's the penalties for under 21's?

Do you mean why I don't think U21's should be allowed to purchase or what the punishment should be?

xckjoo

I'd like to see it legalised so all that money stops going to criminal gangs. Then the pharma companies can do all the research they want to see what magical medical properties it might have. If it doesn't have any then so be it. People are still going to buy it.

InTheTrees

ScumLord wrote: »

It seems easy enough to abuse them though. So many Americans have gone from being prescribed codeine medicines to full blown addiction without realising it's happening and often end up moving onto something illegal when their codeine addiction has gotten out of hand.

Not codeine but Oxycodone. A many times more harmful substance. Hillbilly Heroin.

There was a period of about fifteen years when they were handed out like sweets. Every dental procedure and you'd get a bottle, every ache and pain and doctors and pharmacists would dole them out like they were harmless. A big bottle at a time.

Now the US has the worst heroin crisis in its history as the people who developed a habit for Oxycodone realise heroin does the same thing at a fraction of the price.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxycodone