Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Court Rules Against Pot for Sick People
AP ^ | 6/6/05 | Gina Holland

Posted on 06/06/2005 8:58:28 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-117 next last
To: poobear
There is a company I believe called GW Pharmaceuticals that has already gotten a product approved in Canada that is in a spray form. It is a cannabis extract product that makes use of other cannabinoids found in marijuana. THC is not the only "active ingredient" and it's supposedly not the only one with medicinal properties. One of the ex higher ups from the ONDCP, Andrea Barthwell, is their lobbyist here. They are working in partnership with Bayer. It will be interesting to see if the government allows this product to be placed on the market in the U.S.
81 posted on 06/06/2005 2:04:23 PM PDT by TKDietz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: TKDietz; bassmaner

Not many people are grasping just how much the Commerce Clause grew with this decision. They basically said, "We know it ain't interstatec commerce, but we're treating it like it is". The Federal gov't grew by leaps and bounds today.


82 posted on 06/06/2005 2:08:22 PM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4

"The nonsense finally ended [all that remains is for you losers to whine]. It's over. I'm out. :o)"

What is over? The feds have been saying all along that they were going to ignore the state laws regarding medical marijuana. Now the Supreme Court has said it is okay for them to ignore the state laws. The states, on the other hand, have their own laws. They aren't going to enforce the federal laws. The feds will have to get up off their butts and do this themselves. Medical marijuana is just as legal in the states that legalized it today as it was yesterday. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.


83 posted on 06/06/2005 2:15:02 PM PDT by TKDietz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: CSM

The only thing unconstitutional about Roe v Wade is that it mandated all states outlaw abortion.

If you repeal Roe v Wade, it goes back to the states where it belongs.


The federal government has no more right to pass an outright ban then it does to pass an outright mandate.


84 posted on 06/06/2005 2:16:06 PM PDT by AzaleaCity5691 (Farragut got lucky, if we had been on our game, we would have blasted him off Dauphin Island)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: TKDietz
There is a company I believe called GW Pharmaceuticals that has already gotten a product approved in Canada that is in a spray form. It is a cannabis extract product that makes use of other cannabinoids found in marijuana. THC is not the only "active ingredient" and it's supposedly not the only one with medicinal properties. One of the ex higher ups from the ONDCP, Andrea Barthwell, is their lobbyist here. They are working in partnership with Bayer. It will be interesting to see if the government allows this product to be placed on the market in the U.S.

Spray on what?

85 posted on 06/06/2005 3:07:31 PM PDT by donh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

Comment #86 Removed by Moderator

Comment #87 Removed by Moderator

To: donh
"Spray on what?"

It's a mouth spray. I think it's supposed to work transdermally which I guess would cause it to be faster acting like smoking it is. One of the downsides of taking a pill is that it takes a long time to work.
88 posted on 06/06/2005 7:23:13 PM PDT by TKDietz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Terabitten

That's my question. Why is it that the "legalize pot" types never seem to be interested in a pill form?




Because I don't believe it gets you high. "medicinal" weed is just a phony ploy to get the ball rolling toward complete legalization. And you can see from that headline which side the media is on.


89 posted on 06/07/2005 12:16:46 AM PDT by The Foolkiller ( Why......That sounds.....FOOLish!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Terabitten

Oh, and the theory about Big Pharma never wanting to see it legalized is also quite correct.


90 posted on 06/07/2005 12:30:13 AM PDT by The Foolkiller ( Why......That sounds.....FOOLish!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691

"The federal government has no more right to pass an outright ban then it does to pass an outright mandate."

Don't be silly. The Interstate Commerce Clause gives them that right with regards to any subject they deem mandatable.


91 posted on 06/07/2005 4:34:17 AM PDT by CSM ( If the government has taken your money, it has fulfilled its Social Security promises. (dufekin))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: TKDietz

"It will be interesting to see if the government allows this product to be placed on the market in the U.S."

Let's certainly hope so. Good info.


92 posted on 06/07/2005 5:39:13 AM PDT by poobear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: The Foolkiller
That's my question. Why is it that the "legalize pot" types never seem to be interested in a pill form?

I answered this pretty thoroughly in this thread, but apparently, you aren't interested in defending your feeble, insulting argument.

93 posted on 06/07/2005 6:55:31 AM PDT by donh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: The Foolkiller
Because I don't believe it gets you high.

On what basis?--a fever dream you once had? Let's see what the FDA says about marinol:

Marinol (dronabinol) is a medication with a potential for abuse. Physicians and pharmacists should use the same care in prescribing and accounting for Marinol as they would with morphine or other drugs controlled under Schedule II (CII) of the Controlled Substances Act.

Because of the risk of diversion, it is recommended that prescriptions be limited to the amount necessary for the period between clinic visits.


94 posted on 06/07/2005 10:35:14 AM PDT by donh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: sayitaintso; VaBthang4
I found it interesting that the three 'conservative' appointed judges were the dissenters in this ruling. So you side with the majority 'liberal' judges on this ruling?

VaGthang has been known for a while on FR as one of the more liberal posters, but is aroused by law enforcement, so he thinks he's conservative. Check out his comments on some past Terri Schiavo threads to get an idea of his schtick.

95 posted on 06/07/2005 10:46:25 AM PDT by jmc813 (All I cared about was booze, stock cars and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: atomic_dog
"This whole business of the Feds controlling marijuana is idiotic. Can anyone tell me how, for example, someone growing pot in Santa Cruz, California for use (or sale) in Santa Cruz, California is a concern for the Federal government. To see the idiocy, forget that it's marijuna and pretend it's strawberries wheat."

Apparently during the Depression, the court ruled that Congress could pass laws regulating wheat grown on farms, for a farmer's own use. It was argued that even when wheat was grown for personnal use,it could affect the price on the interstate market and therefore the Commerce Clause applied.

96 posted on 06/07/2005 10:59:43 AM PDT by NathanR (Mexico: So far from God; So close to the USA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: NathanR
It was argued that even when wheat was grown for personnal use,it could affect the price on the interstate market and therefore the Commerce Clause applied.

Ah yes, WICKARD v. FILBURN rears its ugly head.
It was not the fact that the farmer grew what - rather that he grew wheat in excess of his quota that he had agreed to. If he had not taken subsidies and agreed to the quota they would have had no action against him. While an oject lesson about "taking the King's shilling" it is in no way applicable to the subject at hand.

97 posted on 06/07/2005 12:46:39 PM PDT by atomic_dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Terabitten

Because when a sick person can grow their own it is cheap and plentiful. When the drug companies make their weak pills, it will cost $100 a pill.

"That's what insurance is for."

Cuz, you know, everyone has health insurance. Or at least veterans do, right?


98 posted on 06/07/2005 1:42:30 PM PDT by Woman on Caroline Street (I'm sick and tired of pressing 1 for english)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: donh

Really thin-skinned, aren't you? I wasn't bashing anyone, merely giving an opinion. And I only meant from everything I've read/heard, the synthetic version doesn't get you off, I really don't give a damn, as I stopped smoking weed years ago.


99 posted on 06/07/2005 2:59:08 PM PDT by The Foolkiller ( Why......That sounds.....FOOLish!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: The Foolkiller
Really thin-skinned, aren't you?

You bet I am. I don't find it very amusing that we throw kids in prison for pot, so, by extention, I also don't find it very amusing when when people blithly pass on planted prohibitionist misinformation.

I wasn't bashing anyone, merely giving an opinion. And I only meant from everything I've read/heard, the synthetic version doesn't get you off, I really don't give a damn, as I stopped smoking weed years ago.

Well, I do give a damn, much as I would if we were throwing every fourth black ghetto teenager in jail for overflossing.

100 posted on 06/08/2005 1:40:08 AM PDT by donh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-117 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson