toddler legally allowed to use Cannabis

jh79

Muhammed_1 wrote: »

An apple a day keeps the doctor away.

Are apples regulated as medicines?

My point is that cannabis is a fairly innocuous substance. It is safe based on huge historical usage and it doesn't need huge numbers of tests to confirm that.


In any event, even if some residual risks remain I am still suggesting that patients and recreational users should be able to CHOOSE to use the substance despite the risks. You know, like adults.


Apples are not regulated despite medical benefits from their use and it is not absolutely necessary that cannabis be regulated either.


I say, allow people to choose like adults.

I agree adults should be allowed use it if they wish but i don't believe it should be regulated as medicine unless it meets the same criteria set for other medicine.

Commotion Ocean

99.999% of Gardaí would prosecute a family (who weren't granted this exemption) for using life-saving cannabis.

They are bullies, scumbags and cowards and pick on easy targets.

Yes, the law is the law. But it was also the law to gas people in Nazi Germany.

Cannabis is one law the Gardaí could easily ignore but choose not to. Instead, they ignore thieves, vandals etc under the guise of "we haven't the time or resources".

I'd rather Hitler or Kim Jong Un as head of our police force. Gards are useless.

K.Flyer

dfeo wrote: »

99.999% of Gardaí would prosecute a family (who weren't granted this exemption) for using life-saving cannabis.

They are bullies, scumbags and cowards and pick on easy targets.

Yes, the law is the law. But it was also the law to gas people in Nazi Germany.

Cannabis is one law the Gardaí could easily ignore but choose not to. Instead, they ignore thieves, vandals etc under the guise of "we haven't the time or resources".

I'd rather Hitler or Kim Jong Un as head of our police force. Gards are useless.

Different argument for a different thread.

Muhammed_1

apologies if this is slightly off topic.

I have written to the Garda Press Office asking what the operational guidelines were in relation to cannabis. They refuse to answer.

I also asked the Press Office about Americans, Dutch or British citizens who have prescriptions for cannabis, who are visiting Ireland with their children with prescriptions.
Are they allowed to possess and to use cannabis if it is a class A drug in Ireland with no medical use?

The Garda Press Office refuses to answer.

The London Metropolitan police and other forces in the UK publish their operational guidelines in relation to cannabis, including going so far as saying that their police force will not prosecute small quantities.

The Irish guards have no intellectual honesty or ability and they treat Irish people like cattle.


Can an American with a prescription for cannabis for their child bring their medicine to Ireland legally?
The Guards don't seem to know.

jh79

Muhammed_1 wrote: »

apologies if this is slightly off topic.

I have written to the Garda Press Office asking what the operational guidelines were in relation to cannabis. They refuse to answer.

I also asked the Press Office about Americans, Dutch or British citizens who have prescriptions for cannabis, who are visiting Ireland with their children with prescriptions.
Are they allowed to possess and to use cannabis if it is a class A drug in Ireland with no medical use?

The Garda Press Office refuses to answer.

The London Metropolitan police and other forces in the UK publish their operational guidelines in relation to cannabis, including going so far as saying that their police force will not prosecute small quantities.

The Irish guards have no intellectual honesty or ability and they treat Irish people like cattle.


Can an American with a prescription for cannabis for their child bring their medicine to Ireland legally?
The Guards don't seem to know.

First of all they wouldn't have a prescription, fda doesn't recognise marijuana as a medicine.

And the law states it is illegal to possess marijuana so of course they would be arrested if caught.

Muhammed_1

Cannabis herb is prescribed in Holland.

Can they bring it here?

also Sativex and other cannabis based sprays and lotions.

ohnonotgmail

jh79 wrote: »

First of all they wouldn't have a prescription, fda doesn't recognise marijuana as a medicine.

And the law states it is illegal to possess marijuana so of course they would be arrested if caught.

And yet medicinal use of cannabis is allowed in some american states.

jh79

Muhammed_1 wrote: »

Cannabis herb is prescribed in Holland.

Can they bring it here?

I would say no for weed and yes for sativex.

jh79

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

And yet medicinal use of cannabis is allowed in some american states.

They get a letter of referral it's not treated the same as real medicine which is regulated by the FDA.

jh79

Muhammed_1 wrote: »

Cannabis herb is prescribed in Holland.

Can they bring it here?

also Sativex and other cannabis based sprays and lotions.

Interesting website that you linked to,

The Dutch suggest that medicinal marijuana only be used if conventional medicine is not working or if side effects are too severe.

These are the illnesses they say there are suggested indications and they also say the list is small due to lack of studies.


NCSM 2011-2017 | Disclaimer | Sitemap
Indications for medicinal cannabis use


"Recommended use

Dutch medicinal cannabis is only available on prescription from pharmacies. The Dutch Health authorities made a list of indications based on the outcome of an extensive review of the scientific literature.

Currently, there is sufficient reason to assume that medicinal cannabis can help in cases of:

pain and muscle spasms or cramps associated with multiple sclerosis or spinal cord damage;
chronic neuropathic pain (mainly pain associated with the nervous system, e.g. caused by a damaged nerve, phantom pain, facial neuralgia or chronic pain which remains after the recovery from shingles);

nausea, loss of appetite, weight loss and debilitation due to cancer or AIDS;
nausea and vomiting associated with chemotherapy or radiotherapy used in the treatment of cancer, hepatitis C or HIV infection and AIDS

Gilles de la Tourette syndrome;

therapy-resistant glaucoma.

The reason for this limited list of indications is that the efficacy of medicinal cannabis use for other medical conditions has not yet been properly studied in convincing clinical trials. The list is subject to change based on new studies."

K.Flyer

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

And yet medicinal use of cannabis is allowed in some american states.

But still remains illegal under Federal law country wide.

jh79

K.Flyer wrote: »

But still remains illegal under Federal law country wide.

Because it isn't actually a regulated medicine.

ohnonotgmail

K.Flyer wrote: »

But still remains illegal under Federal law country wide.

A federal law with nobody to enforce it is moot.

Muhammed_1

This site,
http://www.bedrocan.nl/english/home.html

is the company that actually sells prescription cannabis herb. Real dried plants. They're the only company in the world to do so they claim.

I've seen the site before. They say that prescription cannabis plants have been legal in Holland since Sept, 2003.


Can they visit Ireland with their medicine?

I think that they can't. This would be an example of a layperson overriding a doctor on a medical matter.


Wouldn't it be great to live in a grown up country.

ToddyDoody

We've come a long way as a society. A lot more forward thinking in some ways.

jh79

Muhammed_1 wrote: »

This site,
http://www.bedrocan.nl/english/home.html

is the company that actually sells prescription cannabis herb. Real dried plants. They're the only company in the world to do so they claim.

I've seen the site before. They say that prescription cannabis plants have been legal in Holland since Sept, 2003.


Can they visit Ireland with their medicine?

I think that they can't. This would be an example of a layperson overriding a doctor on a medical matter.


Wouldn't it be great to live in a grown up country.

No the government authority in charge of medical marijuana in Holland.

www.ncsm.nl

What do think of their opinions on medical marijuana?

Mouseslayer17

Can see it now,dispensary beside the dole office,
Another reason for them not to work

mulbot

Muhammed_1 wrote: »

This cannabis oil, for medical purposes, is different to 'dabs' or 'extracts' as sold in the legal US market is it?


'Dabs' or 'extracts' are also called cannabis oil, when sold in the legal shops in US states.
This type of cannabis 'oil' is extracted from whole, dried, cannabis plants using solvents like carbon dioxide at high pressure if done legally on a large commercial scale, and using butane gas if done illegally on a small scale. Using butane is extremely dangerous and is highly illegal due to the risks.


Oils like Olive oil for cooking are obtained by squashing the olives themselves, and oil comes out. Olive oil is 100% fat.
I'm aware cheaper olive oils are extracted using chemical methods but I'm not sure what those methods are.



Is cannabis oil for medical use obtained by squashing cannabis plants and collecting the oil which comes out?
Or
is cannabis oil for medical use more like chemically extracted oil using solvents?


On the topic of the OP.
Of course doctors should be able to provide effective medicines to sick people. I am ashamed at the attitude of Irish politicians who seem to think that they know more than doctors. I wish politicians would get out of the way and that they'd stop forcing people to suffer.

I detest Irish politicians for their small minded and self interested approach, not just to this issue, but to every issue.

It can be extracted using alcohol too,and another way is heat pressing,no chemicals involved.

evolving_doors

Mouseslayer17 wrote: »

Can see it now,dispensary beside the dole office,
Another reason for them not to work

Don't think that child with dravets syndrome is of the legal age to work yet!

gctest50

Muhammed_1 wrote: »

apologies if this is slightly off topic.

I have written to the Garda Press Office asking what the operational guidelines were in relation to cannabis. They refuse to answer.

...................

You might ( very small might) get an answer if you asked their opinion if medicinal cannabis was supplied like this :


http://imgur.com/iydGhir

There are three varieties of medicinal cannabis available through Dutch pharmacies:

                    THC             CBD
Bedrocan,  about 19%   < 1%
Bedrobinol  about 12%   < 1%
Bediol        about 6%           about 7,5%

Cannabis with high levels of THC (Bedrocan and Bedrobinol) is preferred for
disorders such as Gilles de la Tourette syndrome, therapy-resistant glaucoma and
symptoms like weight loss, nausea and vomiting

Smoking
Smoking cannabis regularly is bad for your health. Smoke damages the lungs and
could lead to infections of the nose, throat and lungs.For this reason, smoking medicinal cannabis is not recommended.

Tea

Bedrocan is the most suitable variety for making tea.

•Boil 500 ml of water in a pan with the lid on.
•Add 0.5 grams (about 2 teaspoons or 1 measuring scoop) of medicinal cannabis.
•Turn down the heat and let the tea simmer gently for 15 minutes with the lid still on the pan.
•Take the tea off the stove and pour it through a sieve.
•Keep the tea in a thermos flask if you plan to drink it the same day

Inhalation

To inhale medicinal cannabis we advise you to use a reliable vaporiser. Vaporisers –
with instructions – are obtainable in the Netherlands from ‘Stichting NCSM’
(Volcano®) and in pharmacies. The pharmacies order the vaporisers from
Fagron BV.


Dosage:
•The initial dose should be about 200 mg (1 teaspoon or ½ measuring scoop).
•Place this in the vaporiser, heat the cannabis, then inhale once.
•Wait 5 to 15 minutes before inhaling again.
•Repeat this a few times – including the interval between two inhalations – until
the desired effect is achieved, or until the onset of undesirable side effects
(physical or mental). Start by performing this procedure once or twice a day.
•It’s important that you gradually build up your intake. Inhaling several times a day
can only be considered after some time has elapsed. Always consult your doctor
first, since the dosage and amounts used vary widely between individual patients.

Mouseslayer17

All the stoners thinking you will be allowed to get high now,its laughable if it wasn't so pathetic.
Its not medicine and it ain't effin harmless

InTheTrees

Mouseslayer17 wrote: »

All the stoners thinking you will be allowed to get high now,its laughable if it wasn't so pathetic.

Head in the sand?

Its now 100% legal (not medicinal or "decriminalised" but totally legal) for over a hundred million people in the USA and legalisation is spreading east fast.

_Jamie_

InTheTrees wrote: »

I think the whole point with recreational cannabis is that people do use it more easily. If it causes a drop in demand for alcohol then thats a good thing.

Its been fully legal here in Washington for two years now and last month California and Massachusetts voted for full recreational legalisation as well, meaning he etire west coast of the USA now is fully legal.

So there's 60-70 million people now living with FULL legalisation.

Is it legal in Oregon?

jh79

Would those in favour of medicinal marijuana be happy if we adopted the Dutch model?

Basically medicinal marijuana to be used if conventional medicine fails or side effects are too much and that it would be recommended for a small number of indications that it might work for?

mulbot

jh79 wrote: »

Would those in favour of medicinal marijuana be happy if we adopted the Dutch model?

Basically medicinal marijuana to be used if conventional medicine fails or side effects are too much and that it would be recommended for a small number of indications that it might work for?

So basically force someone to use Pharma medicine first? I think it really should be up to the person what treatment they want to use. (depending on results,and reactions to whatever they decide etc)

jh79

mulbot wrote: »

So basically force someone to use Pharma medicine first? I think it really should be up to the person what treatment they want to use.

These are recommendations only , best practice, nobody is forced to do anything

What kind of Doctor would allow a sick person to chose a herb that hasn't been sufficiently tested over medicine proven to work for a certain % of people?

mulbot

jh79 wrote: »

These are recommendations only , best practice, nobody is forced to do anything

What kind of Doctor would allow a sick person to chose a herb that hasn't been sufficiently tested over medicine proven to work for a certain % of people?

Of course then yes. I can't speak for Doctors but I presume well informed professionals will be able to make the best decisions,especially now that more testing will become available

jh79

mulbot wrote: »

Of course then yes. I can't speak for Doctors but I presume well informed professionals will be able to make the best decisions,especially now that more testing will become available

So you agree or disagree that based on current research conventional medicine should be tried first as it has the better quality research behind it?

K.Flyer

jh79 wrote: »

So you agree or disagree that based on current research conventional medicine should be tried first as it has the better quality research behind it?

No, not necessarily, It really depends on what you are trying to treat and all the information available to both patients and doctors at that given time.
Given that there is different information available today, compared to say only a year ago, choices will be different and just because something has been around longer doesn't mean it is better.
I imagine any parent whose child has the same or similar condition to the young boy in Cork will now be looking to how well he is doing on the oil.
Why waste time trying something that doesn't have any great track record for success when there is a living proof of the oil working for someone else.
I believe research is going to catch up with the anecdotal evidence and Cannabinoids with THC / CBD formula will take their place (somewhere) in mainstream medications.

jh79

K.Flyer wrote: »

No, not necessarily, It really depends on what you are trying to treat and all the information available to both patients and doctors at that given time.
Given that there is different information available today, compared to say only a year ago, choices will be different and just because something has been around longer doesn't mean it is better.
I imagine any parent whose child has the same or similar condition to the young boy in Cork will now be looking to how well he is doing on the oil.
Why waste time trying something that doesn't have any great track record for success when there is a living proof of the oil working for someone else.
I believe research is going to catch up with the anecdotal evidence and Cannabinoids with THC / CBD formula will take their place (somewhere) in mainstream medications.

I'm talking about actual weed for smoking / waterfalls etc.

The dutch say these should be used if all else fails.

ScumLord

jh79 wrote: »

These are recommendations only , best practice, nobody is forced to do anything

What kind of Doctor would allow a sick person to chose a herb that hasn't been sufficiently tested over medicine proven to work for a certain % of people?

Plenty of doctors. I have a friend who goes into the doctor and tells the doctor what drugs she wants and the doctor writes out a prescription. Plenty of doctors will just give their patients what they ask for.

The advantage of cannabis is that in the vast majority of adults it has less harmful side effects than most prescription drugs. The doctor has nothing to lose by trying it.

The only reason not to try it is a moralistic view that it's one of the bad drugs.

jh79

K.Flyer wrote: »

No, not necessarily, It really depends on what you are trying to treat and all the information available to both patients and doctors at that given time.
Given that there is different information available today, compared to say only a year ago, choices will be different and just because something has been around longer doesn't mean it is better.
I imagine any parent whose child has the same or similar condition to the young boy in Cork will now be looking to how well he is doing on the oil.
Why waste time trying something that doesn't have any great track record for success when there is a living proof of the oil working for someone else.
I believe research is going to catch up with the anecdotal evidence and Cannabinoids with THC / CBD formula will take their place (somewhere) in mainstream medications.

What evidence is there that the oil is more effective than the current best treatment?

K.Flyer

jh79 wrote: »

What evidence is there that the oil is more effective than the current best treatment?

In relation to the young boy in Cork, none of the conventional medication worked. Hence they had to do what they did.

jh79

K.Flyer wrote: »

In relation to the young boy in Cork, none of the conventional medication worked. Hence they had to do what they did.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11089822

Here is the clinical trial for the conventional treatment.

Which should a doctor prescribe first in your opinion?

mulbot

jh79 wrote: »

So you agree or disagree that based on current research conventional medicine should be tried first as it has the better quality research behind it?

No I don't necessarily agree,as has just been written,it would depend on what the actual illnesses etc are. That boy in Cork is a great example. It seems though,going by what you believe,that he shouldn't be allowed to use cannabis at all

jh79

mulbot wrote: »

No I don't necessarily agree,as has just been written,it would depend on what the actual illnesses etc are. That boy in Cork is a great example. It seems though,going by what you believe,that he shouldn't be allowed to use cannabis at all

No issue with the kid in cork all other options were explored first. It was worth a go and good luck to him.

But every new patient should have to try conventional treatment first before being allowed a licence to import.

It would be unethical for a docotor to try the oil first.

mulbot

jh79 wrote: »

No issue with the kid in cork all other options were explored first. It was worth a go and good luck to him.

But every new patient should have to try conventional treatment first before being allowed a licence to import.

It would be unethical for a docotor to try the oil first.

Do you think the same about Sativex?

InTheTrees

_Jamie_ wrote: »

Is it legal in Oregon?

Yup. Up here in Washington It's been three years, along with Colorado. Oregon legalised in 2015. And last year California, Nevada and Massachusetts.

Elections in the USA are in November and later this year a few more (Vermont and Maine?) will vote on full recreational legalization.

It's only a matter if time before it spreads into Europe.

jh79

mulbot wrote: »

Do you think the same about Sativex?

Sativex is fully tested if it is the most effective treatment available of course it should be used first.

I don't care that these oils are cannabis derived. There is insufficient evidence that these work simple as that.

mulbot

jh79 wrote: »

Sativex is fully tested if it is the most effective treatment available of course it should be used first.

I don't care that these oils are cannabis derived. There is insufficient evidence that these work simple as that.

Sativex is cannabis-it is identical in profile-to say it works and "regular" cannabis doesn't is contradictory-

ScumLord

jh79 wrote: »

Sativex is fully tested if it is the most effective treatment available of course it should be used first.

How can a cannabis based drug be tested if cannabis isn't?

I don't care that these oils are cannabis derived. There is insufficient evidence that these work simple as that.

That doesn't mean it doesn't work though. We can't restrict access to things just because medical professionals haven't made up their minds about it yet. It's going to take them some time to come up with treatment plans. Is it right that everyone else that needs it should be made suffer in the meantime?

If we were talking about a drug with very clear harmful side effects I could agree with you but cannabis doesn't fit into that category.

Cannabis hasn't been proven to work, but that doesn't mean it doesn't work.

byhookorbycrook

jh79 wrote: »

Already approved according to the HPRA website.

I linked to it earlier.

Sativex is very expensive though.

jh79

mulbot wrote: »

Sativex is cannabis-it is identical in profile-to say it works and "regular" cannabis doesn't is contradictory-

It is an proprietary formulation that has undergone clinical trials proving it is effective.

Now the cannabis you are referring to has not.

Should we replace clinical trials with youtube videos is that how you want medicine to be regulated??

jh79

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Sativex is very expensive though.

Because it is a standardised product quaranteed to work ina certain% of those taking it.

It has to adhere to the same GMP practices as other drugs. It is not made by some stoner in his basement.

jh79

ScumLord wrote: »

How can a cannabis based drug be tested if cannabis isn't?

That doesn't mean it doesn't work though. We can't restrict access to things just because medical professionals haven't made up their minds about it yet. It's going to take them some time to come up with treatment plans. Is it right that everyone else that needs it should be made suffer in the meantime?

If we were talking about a drug with very clear harmful side effects I could agree with you but cannabis doesn't fit into that category.

Cannabis hasn't been proven to work, but that doesn't mean it doesn't work.

Just because Sativex works doesn't mean weed or oils work. They have different compositions.

What's wrong with the current system seeing as that kid in cork got the oil after all?

mulbot

jh79 wrote: »

Because it is a standardised product quaranteed to work ina certain% of those taking it.

It has to adhere to the same GMP practices as other drugs. It is not made by some stoner in his basement.

The only way it has achieved a standard is by the company having equal ratios of THC and CBD-It's chemical profile has not been altered in any way-It is cannabis in every sense. Every medicine needs to have a standard and that was the problem with cannabis,too many strain with too many different ratios of THC and CBD in each-Sativex have basically patented cannabis because they can be sure that each bottle has the same chemical cocktail

mulbot

jh79 wrote: »

Just because Sativex works doesn't mean weed or oils work. They have different compositions.

What's wrong with the current system seeing as that kid in cork got the oil after all?

They have not different compositions chemically-they are identical( even to the point that Sativex will get you high and/or stoned).Sativex has a comparable ratio of CBD and THC,the only way they could advance the product to market

ScumLord

jh79 wrote: »

Just because Sativex works doesn't mean weed or oils work. They have different compositions.

Sativex is a commercialized (and standardised) version of cannabis. The only reason it exists is because people have been going on about the benefits of cannabis for centuries. The very fact a company has gone to the trouble of commercialising cannabis shows there's something there.

What's wrong with the current system seeing as that kid in cork got the oil after all?

Because we're expecting extremely ill people to spend months if not years in court to get access to the treatment. It's making people jump through hoops just to send a message to the rest of the population.

jh79

ScumLord wrote: »

Sativex is a commercialized (and standardised) version of cannabis. The only reason it exists is because people have been going on about the benefits of cannabis for centuries. The very fact a company has gone to the trouble of commercialising cannabis shows there's something there.



Because we're expecting extremely ill people to spend months if not years in court to get access to the treatment. It's making people jump through hoops just to send a message to the rest of the population.

How does Sativex success prove that an oil with a totally different ratio of thc to cbd works?

InTheTrees

You get the impression that if it was proved that tea could relax people then the pharmacists would want to restrict it's use and make it by prescription only.