Cannabis/Hemp Products/Medicinal/Legal

K.Flyer

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

The pharma lobby won't allow it. Everywhere where cannabis has been legalised demand for their wares has dropped. The pharma corps are the biggest obstacle.

Thats why GW Pharma are trying their best to obtain patents for different strains of cannabis plant.

kleefarr

K.Flyer wrote: »

Thats why GW Pharma are trying their best to obtain patents for different strains of cannabis plant.

Won't happen as all the strains are now legal elsewhere I would have thought.
Ridiculous to be able to patent a plant.

theValheru853

drunkmonkey wrote:

Can you see why legalising the plant is a quicker road. Let them do the medical trials like any other medicine but in the meantime just legalise it.

They won't ever just legalise it. It's in the mindset and I think that when it is legalised, the medicinal route will be the one that will be taken.

K.Flyer

kleefarr wrote: »

Won't happen as all the strains are now legal elsewhere I would have thought.
Ridiculous to be able to patent a plant.

There is a segment later in the documentary "Inside Medicinal Marijuana" (Netflix) where its mentioned. Maybe its more to do with particular strains producing particular ratios to be used for particular treatments, but to be fair they are investing hugely in the research and getting good specific scientific results in the treatment of certain conditions.
The more of these positive results that they produce the more people can benefit from the natural plant rather than being pumped with synthesized junk that doesn't work for them.
An interesting presentation given by Geoffrey Guy..

Jimmy Garlic

theValheru853 wrote: »

The pharma make the money out of it regardless. If its legalised for medicinal use, who do you think is gonna process it?

Herbal cannabis doesn't need any processing beyond drying and curing. Of course the pharma corps will want to monopolize and profit from cannabis that they have altered to the point of being just another synthetic pharmaceutical. It is a plant, different strains of which there are many can be used for different conditions. The pharma corps aren't needed at all.

kleefarr

K.Flyer wrote: »

There is a segment later in the documentary "Inside Medicinal Marijuana" (Netflix) where its mentioned. Maybe its more to do with particular strains producing particular ratios to be used for particular treatments, but to be fair they are investing hugely in the research and getting good specific scientific results in the treatment of certain conditions.
The more of these positive results that they produce the more people can benefit from the natural plant rather than being pumped with synthesized junk that doesn't work for them.
An interesting presentation given by Geoffrey Guy..

Synthetic versions may be, but I would think that the natural plant is/should be untouchable.
They also charge approximately £600 for a months supply of Sativex which is way too expensive for what it is, basically a cannabis oil which can be done quite easily.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sGWxz0DMSI

jh79

kleefarr wrote: »

Synthetic versions may be, but I would think that the natural plant is/should be untouchable.
They also charge approximately £600 for a months supply of Sativex which is way too expensive for what it is, basically a cannabis oil which can be done quite easily.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sGWxz0DMSI

They don't just provide an oil they provide an oil produced to GMP standards.

mulbot

jh79 wrote: »

They don't just provide an oil they provide an oil produced to GMP standards.

Which is really only for purposes of standardization to get a license to patent their product.

jh79

mulbot wrote: »

Which is really only for purposes of standardization to get a license to patent their product.

The purpose of GMP is to make sure medicine is made correctly and that there is a full paper trail for the production. Has nothing to do with patents. It applies to all medicine.

mulbot

jh79 wrote: »

The purpose of GMP is to make sure medicine is made correctly and that there is a full paper trail for the production. Has nothing to do with patents. It applies to all medicine.

Of course it does,by producing a standardized product exclusively to a company means it can be patented. I.e. Sativex. Obviously we know it must meet certain criteria to be accepted/labelled as a medicine

jh79

mulbot wrote: »

Of course it does,by producing a standardized product exclusively to a company means it can be patented. I.e. Sativex. Obviously we know it must meet certain criteria to be accepted/labelled as a medicine

The product is patented, GMP is a process that has to be followed for all medicine production even generics.

kleefarr

jh79 wrote: »

They don't just provide an oil they provide an oil produced to GMP standards.

And if it's based on the same standards of cannabis used for trials then I'm not sure it's going to cut the mustard.

jh79

kleefarr wrote: »

And if it's based on the same standards of cannabis used for trials then I'm not sure it's going to cut the mustard.

What about Bedrocan?

kleefarr

jh79 wrote: »

What about Bedrocan?

And what is Bedrocan? Another illegal drug?

drunkmonkey

jh79 wrote: »

What about Bedrocan?

What about them, not worth a hoot if you need some Afghan kush or Charlotte’s Web.

Are they using Bedrocan for the trial? How are they picking the strains? That's got to have a massive influence on the trial results.

jh79

drunkmonkey wrote: »

What about them, not worth a hoot if you need some Afghan kush or Charlotte’s Web.

Are they using Bedrocan for the trial? How are they picking the strains? That's got to have a massive influence on the trial results.

Without a GMP process you wouldn't know if you got Charoltte's Web, you would be at the mercy of the producer. For medicine you have to quarantee quality.

You do what perfect quality cannabis based medicine don't you?

jh79

kleefarr wrote: »

And if it's based on the same standards of cannabis used for trials then I'm not sure it's going to cut the mustard.

Different issue. The example you posted wasn't weed produced to a GMP standard.

kleefarr

And I wouldn't trust Government/Pharmacy or Criminals/Dealers, so the best option is to let people grow it themselves!!

jh79

kleefarr wrote: »

And I wouldn't trust Government/Pharmacy or Criminals/Dealers, so the best option is to let people grow it themselves!!

So you don't trust Bedrocan as a product?

kleefarr

jh79 wrote: »

So you don't trust Bedrocan as a product?

I think it's the company that makes the medical cannabis isn't it? So I wouldn't trust them very much to provide the best for the least price, no.

jh79

kleefarr wrote: »

I think it's the company that makes the medical cannabis isn't it? So I wouldn't trust them very much to provide the best for the least price, no.

They gurantee a certain % thc/cbd, a requirement if it wants to be treated as medicine.

A home grower wouldn't be able to control the % 's well enough.

Ye are all very confused, one minute the strains and %thc /cbd is of critical importance, the next it isn't and an amateur can grow it blind at home..


Is the % thc/cbd/strain important or not?

theValheru853

jh79 wrote:

Is the % thc/cbd/strain important or not?

To me, yes, to others, no.

kleefarr

"A home grower wouldn't be able to control the % 's well enough."

Complete tosh. A home grower given the chance to buy seeds from a regulated source which documents the amounts of THC and CBD in that particular variety would be able to grow their own with out any issue.

You seem to be the one who is confused and think this is a black and white case as in regards to cannabis and in particular medical cannabis, which different varieties suit different medical conditions. Talking to you about this is like being on a farking roundabout. You have your view and others have theirs, yet you are the one that always has the answers, not the right ones either.

End of conversation.

jh79

kleefarr wrote: »

"A home grower wouldn't be able to control the % 's well enough."

Complete tosh. A home grower given the chance to buy seeds from a regulated source which documents the amounts of THC and CBD in that particular variety would be able to grow their own with out any issue.

You seem to be the one who is confused and think this is a black and white case as in regards to cannabis and in particular medical cannabis, which different varieties suit different medical conditions. Talking to about this is like being on a farking roundabout. You have your view and others have theirs, yet you are the one that always has the answers, not the right ones either.

End of conversation.

Really, so what level of variation does the average home grower achieve and what is the level of variation allowable to still see a therapeutic effect?

These are hardly difficult questions, the reason you and others struggle is because so called medical marijuana hasn't yet enough research behind it to be classified as medicine.

drunkmonkey

jh79 wrote: »

Without a GMP process you wouldn't know if you got Charoltte's Web, you would be at the mercy of the producer. For medicine you have to quarantee quality.

You do what perfect quality cannabis based medicine don't you?

Ah now come on your going daft, if I want some Charoltte's web, I'll go get some feminised seeds, plant them and then hey presto in 90 days I've got my own. It would be medicinal grade if you wanted to class it as.
There's no difference in what you can grow yourself and what a medicinal licenced grower can grow. It just needs Air, light and water.

I don't want to buy anything commercially, I just want the basic right to grow and harvest a plant that's been legal for billions of years until American foreign policy decided it was evil.

I'd just like to add, you can have all the checks in place you want but horse burgers.

drunkmonkey

theValheru853 wrote: »

To me, yes, to others, no.

It matters to everyone the patients and the gigglers.

jh79

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Ah now come on your going daft, if I want some Charoltte's web, I'll go get some feminised seeds, plant them and then hey presto in 90 days I've got my own. It would be medicinal grade if you wanted to class it as.
There's no difference in what you can grow yourself and what a medicinal licenced grower can grow. It just needs Air, light and water.

I don't want to buy anything commercially, I just want the basic right to grow and harvest a plant that's been legal for billions of years until American foreign policy decided it was evil.

I'd just like to add, you can have all the checks in place you want but horse burgers.

Your last comment is silly given you are calling for less regulation.

The context here is whether medicinal marijuana can be approved, gmp is a requirement for that. Read up on the purpose of GMP and tell me why that isn't required for weed.

scamalert

throw away word medical and issue solved,this crap beating around the bush,when xyz countries use it for nearly 10 years and somehow here it has to pass some sort of tests because here pharma can only sell it,load of bull excuse.How come in Canada they treat people and its fine,here they make is seems like headless chickens that no one has clue it has been already tested and studied and proven it works abroad but not here.how stupid it is to apply it in one country and make excuses here it needs some special license when its a fcking plant at the end of the day,someone spoke of the kids life,what life is that if kid gonna grow up to be vegetable or stoned but functioning and alive,if we spoke of minor cases id imagine debate could be held,but in case where one is carrot,and theres chance to make it better with risk of some minor side effects to prolong life and make it livable its no brainer.

drunkmonkey

Can we just take Charlotte's web for example. Currently there is only 2 ways to get it in Ireland, either grow it illegally or buy it on the black market.
The black market is expensive but it'll be a lot cheaper than if you say only certain businesses conforming to GMP can make medicinal cannabis or if your of the opinion buying/growing the medicinal cannabis has to be strictly controlled.

In the actual growing of the product the process is identical for both back alley and medicinal growers. They both can replicate then same growing conditions.

The costs will be sky high going the medicinal route or only allowing access through the medical system.

The question isn't can it conform, the question is why should it. Who wants a situation much like we have today with ownership controlled by 1 group, all we're going to end up with is a monopoly with 2 greedy stakeholders. It's currently controlled by just one group.

Why not just legalise the plant to grow at home and bypass all this medicinal argument while there trying to prove it one way or another.

Eva doesn't need the right to access to buy medicinal cannabis, she needs the right to grow a plant at home without fear of prosecution. We're caught up in the wrong argument with Harris at the moment, it's not about Eva it's about everyone's basic human right.

kleefarr

http://www.unilad.co.uk/drugs/heres-how-weed-growers-in-the-uk-avoid-prosecution/