American Medical Association Reconsiders Marijuana

[M.W.T.B.F.]

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/theh...na-will-the-justice-department-follow-no.aspx

This Tuesday, the American Medical Association has reconsidered its stance on the use of Marijuana for medicinal purposes, citing that the plant does provide numerous benefits, such as lessened neuropathic pain, improved appetite and caloric intake among patients with reduced muscle mass, and may relieve spasticity and pain in patients with multiple sclerosis.

Anyway, the reason I've put this into politics, is because this may be the first step towards legalizing marijuana in different areas of the country. Current estimates point out that if marijuana were to be legal and taxed as it is where already legal, then it could generate four billion dollars in revenue, and that's a whole lotta cash.

Personally, what people put in their bodies is none of my concern as long as their use of it does not result in any infringements of the rights of others, but that's just me.

Discuss.

 

[Niocan]

It's interesting to note, that most if not all medical establishments at the time of Cannabis prohibition were dead set *against* the law because of the plethora of uses cannabis has.
For these uses as per the scientific literature, please google: "Granny Storm Crow's List" [First link] and check out this site.

It can be safety said, that cannabis is more of a nutrient then a drug; It's effects are stimulating to the body, not toxic, and with zero deaths caused by cannabis alone it's irrational to have any law against it's use. Please keep this in mind at all times, thank you

 

[darthrender2010]

It's interesting to note, that most if not all medical establishments at the time of Cannabis prohibition were dead set *against* the law because of the plethora of uses cannabis has.
For these uses as per the scientific literature, please google: "Granny Storm Crow's List" [First link] and check out this site.

It can be safety said, that cannabis is more of a nutrient then a drug; It's effects are stimulating to the body, not toxic, and with zero deaths caused by cannabis alone it's irrational to have any law against it's use. Please keep this in mind at all times, thank you

it's also interesting to note that most if not all medical experts view colloidal silver as toxic with little to no benefit when ingested...

 

[creamcheese]

It's already legal for medicinal use here.

Most of the rest of the country is just backwards.

 

[5810Singer]

I remember a documentary that I watched as a child in the early 80s, in which a number of political/intelligence analysts pointed out a curious correlation between ruling administrations and drug policy in the USA.

It went like this: when the Republicans are in power there's more cocaine on the streets, and when the Democrats are in power there's more cannabis.

That could all be hokum, but I've kept my eye out for the trend ever since and the correlation does seem to bear up.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

I don't care about the legalization for recreational use, which should be a completely separate issue from the medicinal use issue.

If it works as medicine, and the benefits outweigh the risks, it should be available for doctors. I don't understand why there's a political issue surrounding it, with potheads and libertarians on one side and right-wing scolds on the other.

 

[Niocan]

*Sigh* It's recreational use IS medicine; If we were legally allowed to grow this plant [Such a pathetic law by the way, you can't grow a frakin' plant?] and people invested a little into extracting it's essential oils via solvents or vaporizing it would help countless ailments...
Cannabis = medicine = extremely high LD50 rating = SAFE for damn near everyone on earth; You don't need a prescription for such a harmless thing.

I feel the importance of this plant is vastly underestimated..

 

[darthrender2010]

I feel the importance of this plant is vastly underestimated..

wait... seriously??? you do??? OH MY GOSH!! and all this time I thought you didn't have any stance on marijuana at all!

 

[Nogre]

When it comes to the legalization of anything, my policy is this: if it harms others, it should be illegal; if not, it should definitely be legal. So my general stance on drugs is that they should be legalized except in specific cases where the drugs harm others who don't choose to participate. When it comes to marijuana, this is especially so because it cuts the support out from under a lot of drug lords and allows both regulation and taxation, which are some pretty big benefits for all involved.

Of course, I also think there should be even stricter laws about smoking in public than we have now, even in Utah, because noone should have to deal with the effects of second-hand smoke unless they choose. This would mean some rules about houses with children, too.

 

[scalyblue]

By that logic, opiates and alcohol should be illegal.

To say marijuana is harmless is naive, but it certainly shouldn't be criminalized. I think the only real justification they have is the 'gateway drug' hypothesis, and iirc that's been refuted.

 

[Giliell]

It can be safety said, that cannabis is more of a nutrient then a drug;

Either you're using it while typing or you clearly never used it.
It's a freakin' drug.
It is, if we take the bodily effects alone, pretty harmless, I grant you that.
But just like any other drug it's addictive, especially psychologically. Yes, and like with any other drug, there are people who can handle it and those who can't.
I agree that it's illegal status is purely based on culture and to me, the best argument to take it out of the dealers' hands and into the coffee-shops is that the dealers don't want to sell cheap low profit canabis, but other, more profitable stuff.

And it's more THAN, hell, that's orthography 101

 

[Don-Sama]

Either you're using it while typing or you clearly never used it.
It's a freakin' drug.
It is, if we take the bodily effects alone, pretty harmless, I grant you that.
But just like any other drug it's addictive, especially psychologically. Yes, and like with any other drug, there are people who can handle it and those who can't.
I agree that it's illegal status is purely based on culture and to me, the best argument to take it out of the dealers' hands and into the coffee-shops is that the dealers don't want to sell cheap low profit canabis, but other, more profitable stuff.

And it's more THAN, hell, that's orthography 101

Living in the Netherlands and knowing ALOT of people who use it I have to say I there is not a big psychological effect. Everyone can pretty much handle it, it is a softdrug. Also you can offcourse choose how much you take urself. And the addiction well, I dunno really. But as long once or twice a week isn't an addiction, I haven't seen any addiction to any of the MANY people that I know use it from time to time.

 

[Giliell]

Living in the Netherlands and knowing ALOT of people who use it I have to say I there is not a big psychological effect. Everyone can pretty much handle it, it is a softdrug. Also you can offcourse choose how much you take urself. And the addiction well, I dunno really. But as long once or twice a week isn't an addiction, I haven't seen any addiction to any of the MANY people that I know use it from time to time.

Everything can be addictive
And I've known people who thought they couldn't make it through the day unless they started it with a good joint. And since that made them mess things up, they felt in more need than ever. They clearly couldn't handle it and they ended up using harder stuff because marihuana let through too much of reality.
I know other people who consume it once in a while, just like I have my glass of wine and a good whisk(e)y. And nobody would argue about the existence of alcoholics. Once in a while is probably one of the least damaging drugs you can consume (unless you smoke it, of course).
Just like everything else: Consume it responsibly. Don't drink and drive, don't consume marihuana and drive. Don't try to solve your problems with it.

 

[creamcheese]

Just like everything else: Consume it responsibly. Don't drink and drive, don't consume marihuana and drive. Don't try to solve your problems with it.

This about sums up why it should be legal. If things like alcohol and nicotine are legal, then marijuana should have the same legal status.

 

[Jorick]

Just like everything else: Consume it responsibly. Don't drink and drive, don't consume marihuana and drive. Don't try to solve your problems with it.

This about sums up why it should be legal. If things like alcohol and nicotine are legal, then marijuana should have the same legal status.

Funny you should mention alcohol... I personally have no problem with things like marijuana and hallucinogenic mushrooms being legal, but I think alcohol is worse than either of them. Look at how many people die and kill others because of alcohol; look at drunk driver fatalities alone and you can see how bad alcohol is, and that doesn't take into account any of the domestic violence and bar fights that happen because of alcohol's influence.

My thoughts on the legal status of whatever drugs is pretty much the same as Nogre said; if it doesn't harm anyone but yourself, it's fine. But if it clearly causes harm to other people, it should be done away with. I know that won't ever happen with alcohol (look how well the last major prohibition movement in the US worked), but it still falls under the 'harmful to others' thing and I'd support new booze taxes or regulation as a way to lessen the problem.

 

[Niocan]

Either you're using it while typing or you clearly never used it.
It's a freakin' drug.

I've been perpetually high for about a year now [Vaporizing, huzzah], so I understand the claims I'm making

Let me list why I believe it's better classified as a nutrient:
There's only one plant that I know of that contains Phytocannabinoids, which are sister molecules to our own Endocannabinoids. (Delta-9 THC, meet Anandamide)
This plant has been domesticated by humans for at least 10,000 years as per it's recorded uses in ancient China.
The effects, as mentioned above in the literature, all pertain to the homeostatic mechanisms of the body; Keeping it in balence.
The LD50 rating hasn't been found in humans; it's extremely safe.

There could be many other reasons, but if one were to grasp the overall picture these points make you can see why I make such a stance.

It is, if we take the bodily effects alone, pretty harmless, I grant you that.

More harmless than D) your tap water.

But just like any other drug it's addictive, especially psychologically. Yes, and like with any other drug, there are people who can handle it and those who can't.

Just like anything in this world, which doesn't make it a very good point.... at all.

I agree that it's illegal status is purely based on culture and to me, the best argument to take it out of the dealers' hands and into the coffee-shops is that the dealers don't want to sell cheap low profit canabis, but other, more profitable stuff.

I agree 100%, and it'll also take cannabis out of the mixing pot of underground chemicals (which is, if there's *any* merit to the stepping stone hypothesis, the only reason people try the harder drugs).

Drop the social conditioning that has painted it as a demon through societies' eyes and embrace the fact that it can cure cancer and many other aliments

 

[5810Singer]

See....Niocan...I was right with you up until the bit about curing cancer.

 

[Niocan]

See....Niocan...I was right with you up until the bit about curing cancer.

Then please look into it, because I assure you I'm not saying that just because the herb is great. Granted, you won't cure much if you only consume it via combustion; Ingesting the extracted oils at about 1ml / day for ~2 months is the preferred medicinal treatment.

 

[5810Singer]

See....Niocan...I was right with you up until the bit about curing cancer.

Then please look into it, because I assure you I'm not saying that just because the herb is great. Granted, you won't cure much if you only consume it via combustion; Ingesting the extracted oils at about 1ml / day for ~2 months is the preferred medicinal treatment.

Ok I've found reports that some cannabinoids have anti-cancer properties, however the only treatment method I could find associated with any of these was for lung cancer, and curiously enough the ingestion method was smoking.

So when you say "the preferred medicinal treatment" can you point me in the direction of reports describing the treatment you're referring to, and who exactly is administering it? Please?

 

[Niocan]

I say that's the preferred way because the cannabinoids remain in their natural state, and as they're chemical sisters of endogenous molecules the closer they are to their natural configuration the better. Though I can't point to any specifics about this, I can only assume that the extraction method would be a large factor in these types of things. *shrug* You don't want to denature them at all if you can help it.