Skip to comments.Medical marijuana: The real stakes
Posted on 12/17/2004 9:12:14 AM PST by inquest
click here to read article
"These groups do NOT want to see medical marijuana in the form of a pill, patch, injection, mist, or suppository"
Why must a God given healing herb be altered in some commercial venture before it is consumed? Answer: to make it commerce and thereby controllable.
And those who favor smoked marijuana for medical purposes don't understand how dangerous that can be.
Were you on chemotherapy for your cancer? Did your oncologist explain that chemo compromises the immune ststem, and you were susceptible to infection? (While on chemo, my brother-in-law stubbed his toe, it became infected, and they had to amputate to stop the rapid progression.)
Did you know that marijuana may be contaminated with salmonella bacteria which gives diarrhea and with a fungus, aspergillus, which may cause severe bronchopneumonia? Bad enough for a healthy person -- lethal for those on chemo.
Do you still believe that people on chemo "would benefit greatly from MJ"?
Trust me. I'm not the least bit concerned with the Founding Fathers growing anything. YOU brought it up.
If they were growing it for hemp, what's your point? If they were growing it to smoke it and get high, I'd like to see some proof.
Otherwise, go away.
"Legalizing just marijuana is equivalent to legalizing just wine during Prohibition."
Wine was still legal as a sacrament during prohibition.
Moreover, grapes were not illegal to grow.
But, I'd liken it to how grape juice remained legal.
So in other words you diametrically disagree with Madison. That's fine, if that's your opinion, but I'd advise from now on not invoking the Founders in support of your opinion.
"If they were growing it for hemp, what's your point? If they were growing it to smoke it and get high, I'd like to see some proof."
Intent is irrelevant. It is an herb! Prove the enumerated power exists to eradicate an herb gifted by God!
Of course, if the person dies because they smoked your harmless plant, you can always say it was "God's Will". Right, my Bible-quoting friend?
You smoke, boil, or chew what you want. Me? I'm goin' with Merck & Co.
"marijuana may be contaminated ...Do you still believe that people on chemo "would benefit greatly from MJ"?"
Perhaps the ill would benefit from a clean regulated and legal growing environment.
Your chemist buddies have almost killed me three times now.
I will stick with my Lord and savior. You can stick with the beast
to which you surrender your sovereignty.
You must have won the dance contest as a kid.
It's amazing how far you will go to avoid admitting what you believe and who you are. You just can't bring yourself to answer honestly.
Get rid of the nanny state first
If ever there was a safe rock for a coward to hide behind, it's that one. Not to mention, it has nothing to do with what I asked.
I would be willing to outlaw all substances and submit to anything any government wanted to do to me, as soon as you start flapping your arms and fly to Mars under your own power. LOL
then I'm willing to discuss the legalization of drugs
Then you are willing to discuss it? LOL
More childish BS. And it still didn't address my question, which had to do with your opinion, not a law.
If you read the complete text, you'll find that this letter was a response from Madison to a question raised by Cabel.
Cabel was wondering if he could tax imports, not to raise money, but to encourage local manufacturing. In other words, if the commerce clause power to regulate commerce with foreign nations included the power to tax to favor local goods over imports. The exact question:
"It is a simple question under the Constitution of the U. S. whether "the power to regulate trade with foreign nations" as a distinct & substantive item in the enumerated powers, embraces the object of encouraging by duties restrictions and prohibitions the manufactures & products of the Country?"
Madison basically said, sure, everybody else does it, without exception.
I agree with Madison.
YOU would restrict "an herb gifted by God"?? You would regulate God's gift? A simple herb?
Sick children, God's children, could not benefit from God's gift?
Blasphemy! You heartless person, you.
This isn't the first time this has been explained to you, so why are you being so dishonest about it?
Then let's have different speed limits based on a person's ability to drive. Maybe taxing people for the actual services they get? Homes sized for the number of occupants? Number of children based on the ability to raise them?
I bet you'd like your little fascist dictatorship, making exceptions, helping "friends", micromanaging peoples lives.
Sorry. Our system doesn't work that way.
Okay, but you're being just as duplicitous in using the lack of studies to prove your point. When studies don't exist for whatever reason one has to at least listen to anecdotal evidence, and there's a lot more out there for MJ than there is for most of the other quack stuff available at the GNC.
Personally I don't smoke it though I claim the 5th on what I did 25 years ago. I do feel that having completely unenforceable laws such as banning pot only encourages further abuse of the laws and the system. Anyone can grow pot - it's just a weed, for pete's sake. If you couldn't ban alcohol, how do you expect to keep people from growing it?
I guess what I'm *for* is research into medical use of marijuana and/or its consituent elements.
If the medically beneficial ingredients can be isolated, and appropriate dosages identified, that would be wonderful! Simply "smoking" enough off-the-street marijuana until you feel better is, as I believe you've said, pretty sloppy/archaic, and may be dangerous.
In the meantime, I'm still in favor of seeing states allowed to set their own policies regarding the medical use of such a (relatively) powerful drug.
As to this latest Feb. 13th offering -- I don't disagree with Madison. Something very similar was said in The Shreveport Rate Cases years later by Justice Hughes:
"It is of the essence of this (Commerce Clause - rp) power that, where it exists, it dominates. Interstate trade was not left to be destroyed or impeded by the rivalries of local government. The purpose was to make impossible the recurrence of the evils which had overwhelmed the Confederation, and to provide the necessary basis of national unity by insuring 'uniformity of regulation against conflicting and discriminating state legislation.'"
In this letter, Madison is clarifying his earlier statements about foreign trade. Keep in mind, the Commerce Clause does not define differently regulate with foreign nations and regulate among the several states. Madison is saying that although regulate with foreign nations gives our federal government the power to tax their imports to favor our country, regulate among the several states does not give our federal government the power to tax one state to favor another.
He reminds Cabel that the original intent of the Commerce Clause was to prevent injustice among the States themselves, even though the power could also be used against imports for the general good. I agree.
How do you read this letter, and what do you offer as proof?
I should have asked before. What kind of studies are you talking about? Are you talking about studies using smoked marijuana to relieve some condition?
Just how would that study be conducted? It wouldn't be all that scientific and it would probably be no better than anecdotal information.
C'mon. This isn't science.
I agree. And I would support such a product.
"I'm still in favor of seeing states allowed to set their own policies regarding the medical use of such a (relatively) powerful drug."
On that, I disagree. We do not do that for any other drug. Why start now, and why start with marijuana? That is a Pandora's Box that I do not want to open.
Because that's the only way to make a pro-WOD argument.
Wrong. Wine, beer, and liquor are just different delivery systems for the same drug, whereas marijuana does not deliver the same drug as, say, heroin or meth.
"it's just a weed, for pete's sake. If you couldn't ban alcohol, how do you expect to keep people from growing it?"
"Weed" is an ignorant dysphemism! as are "pot" and "dope."
Some seem to believe that an herb given by God to man and beast alike at the beginning of time and which has grown freely almost everywhere,
including here long before our nation was formed, is permissibly eradicable or controllable by the federal government through powers granted by the
interstate commerce clause of the Constitution. Though, it is an impossible task to devise a logical explanation of how this could be true. In light of
the rest of the Constitution any such perceived mandate dissolves.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their
Creator with inherent and inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of
Preamble: ...secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity...
Amendment V: nor shall (anyone) be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment IX: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or
disparage others retained by the PEOPLE.
Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to
the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the PEOPLE.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
Nowhere in the Constitution is it enumerated what one may put into ones body. Therefore, that right is reserved for the states or the people. However,
since God has already specified in the Bible what one may consume, it is, in fact, the Peoples God given right.
Legalizing one part of the WOD will not have the same effect as legalizing all parts of Prohibition.
Oh, and I'd say, "Welcome Back" but that would be a lie.
Oh ... oh, the heartlessness. The inhumanity.
You would regulate God's gift?
Yes, for noncontamination, as is rightly done for many of God's gifts. Respecting God's gifts doesn't imply permitting their fraudulent sale (which is what the sale of contaminated goods is).
So you claim that marijuana does deliver the same drug as heroin or meth?
Legalizing one part of the WOD will not have the same effect as legalizing all parts of Prohibition.
I never said it would. I pointed out the falsity of a statement you made ... and my observation stands unrefuted.
Do you agree that smoking legal and regulated marijuana would be significantly less sloppy, archaic, and dangerous?
As I said, you wouldn't deny "an herb gifted by God", would you? You wouldn't regulate God's gift away from this needy child of God, would you?
Without knowing what the ratio was before Alaskan legalization, that factoid is meaningless.
But receiving the appropriate and effective cannabinoids via a pill, patch, injection, mist or suppository would definitely be less sloppy, archaic, and dangerous.
With the consent of his paerents, of course ... just as he may nowe legally make medical use of much stronger drugs.
So all your ruckus about contaminants was just a smokescreen. Why am I not surprised?
After re-illegalization, teen marijuana use in Alaska dropped to that of the lower 48.
If you smoke marijuana in spite of all the evidence that shows it diminishes cognitive ability, then you're already an idiot and it probably won't do much harm.
I see. Taking out the bacteria and fungi makes marijuana safe for everyone to use? Is that what you're saying?
Medical marijuana - BAD. Religious peyote - GOOD. Go figure.
"Encouraged by such signs of progress as six state prohibition laws since 1907 and congressional passage early in 1913 of the Webb-Kenyon Act, a long-sought federal statute against transporting liquor into states that wished to block its entry, the Anti-Saloon League declared in November 1913 that it would seek a federal constitutional amendment providing for nationwide prohibition."
"An amendment to the Constitution obviously appealed to temperance reformers more than a federal statute banning liquor. A simple congressional majority could adopt a statute but, with the shift of a relatively few votes, could likewise topple one. Drys feared that an ordinary law would be in constant danger of being overturned owing to pressure from liquor industry interests or the growing population of liquor-using immigrants. A constitutional amendment, on the other hand, though more difficult to achieve, would be impervious to change. Their reform would not only have been adopted, the Anti-Saloon League reasoned, but would be protected from future human weakness and backsliding.
Post #188 from http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/history/rnp/RNP1.html
Unless there are secret spy cameras in everybody's home, how are you going to know how many people are actually smoking pot? If the study used any sort of polls or surveys, the results are meaningless, since it is quite possible that legalization of pot would double the percentage of people who would admit to using it, whether or not it had any effect whatsoever on the number of people who actually did.
Further, with just about any drug, usage will cause more problems for some people than for others. If the drug is being banned because it causes serious problems for some people, the n for the ban to accomplish a useful goal it should reduce usage among the people for whom the drug would otherwise cause serious problems. If the people among whom the ban reduces usage are those who would not have had problems anyway, what's the point?
So you would say that people should be required to spend hundreds of dollars per month on pills even if they could get results they would deem equally acceptable with some plants they could cheaply grow themselves if allowed to?
Detoxing from Marijuana
What is Detoxing?
Detoxing is the way in which your body gets rid of the toxins accumulated from years of using. It happens the first few days or weeks after getting clean and/or sober. It is also the very beginning of getting used to dealing with reality and real feelings with no numbing agent.
Can there be physical effects from quitting marijuana?
In spite of numerous years of being told that there are no physiological effects from marijuana addiction, many of our recovering members have had definite withdrawal symptoms. Whether the causes are physical or psychological, the results are physical. Others have just had emotional and mental changes as they stop using their drug of choice. There is no way of telling before quitting who will be physically uncomfortable and who will not. Most members have only minor physical discomfort if any at all. This pamphlet is for those who are having trouble and wonder what's happening to them.
Why do some effects last so long?
Unlike most other drugs, including alcohol, THC (the active chemical in marijuana) is stored in the fat cells and therefore takes longer to fully clear the body than with any other common drug. This means that some parts of the body still retain THC even after a couple of months, rather than just the couple of days or weeks for water soluble drugs.
Can this affect a drug test?
The experiences of some members have shown that if you quit marijuana and expect to take a drug test you should not go on a crash diet at the same time. Fasting, or a crash diet, can release the THC into the bloodstream very rapidly and can give a positive reading. This has happened to several of our members, but each time only with crash diets and major weight loss, not with just eating less than usual.
What are some of the more common symptoms?
By far the most common symptom of withdrawal is insomnia. This can last from a few nights of practically no sleep at all, up to a few months of occasional sleeplessness. The next most common symptom is depression (that is, if you're not euphoric), and next are nightmares and vivid dreams. Marijuana use tends to dampen the dreaming mechanism, so that when you do get clean the dreams come back with a crash. They can be vivid color, highly emotional dreams or nightmares, even waking up then coming back to the same dream. The very vivid, every-night dreams usually don't start for about a week or so. They last for about a month at most and then taper off. "Using" dreams (dreams involving the use of marijuana) are very common, and although they're not as vivid or emotional as at first, they last for years and are just considered a normal part of recovery.
The fourth most common symptom is anger. This can range from a slow burning rage to constant irritability to sudden bursts of anger when least expected: anger at the world, anger at loved ones, anger at oneself, anger at being an addict and having to get clean. Emotional jags are very common, with emotions bouncing back and forth between depression, anger, and euphoria. Occasionally experienced is a feeling of fear or anxiety, a loss of the sense of humor, decreased sex drive, or increased sex drive. Most all of these symptoms fade to normal emotions by three months. Loss of concentration for the first week or month is also very common and this sometimes affects the ability to learn for a very short while.
What about physical symptoms?
The most common physical symptom is headaches. For those who have them, they can last for a few weeks up to a couple of months, with the first few days being very intense. The next most common physical symptom is night sweats, sometimes to the point of having to change night clothes. They can last from a few nights to a month or so. Sweating is one of the body's natural ways of getting rid of toxins. Hand sweats are very common and are often accompanied by an unpleasant smell from the hands. Body odor is enough in many instances to require extra showers or baths. Coughing up phlegm is another way the body cleans itself. This can last for a few weeks to well over six months.
One third of the addicts who responded to a questionnaire on detoxing said they had eating problems for the first few days and some for up to six weeks. Their main symptoms were loss of appetite, sometimes enough to lose weight temporarily, digestion problems or cramps after eating, and nausea, occasionally enough to vomit (only for a day or two). Most of the eating problems were totally gone before the end of a month.
The next most common physical symptoms experienced were tremors or shaking and dizziness. Less frequently experienced were kidney pains, impotency, hormone changes or imbalances, low immunity or chronic fatigue, and some minor eye problems that resolved at around two months. There have been cases of addicts having more severe detox symptoms, however this is rare. For intense discomfort, see a doctor, preferably one who is experienced with detoxing.
How can I reduce discomfort?
For some of the milder detoxing symptoms, a few home remedies have proven to be useful:
* Hot soaking baths can help the emotions as well as the body.
* Drink plenty of water and clear liquids, just like for the flu.
* Cranberry juice has been used effectively for years by recovery houses to help purify and cleanse the body.
* Really excessive sweating can deplete the body of potassium, a necessary mineral. A few foods high in potassium are: melons, bananas, citrus fruits, green leafy vegetables, and tomatoes.
* Eliminate fat from the diet until digestion is better.
* Greatly reduce or eliminate caffeine until the sleep pattern is more normal or the shakes are gone.
* The old fashioned remedy for insomnia, a glass of warm milk before bedtime, helps some people.
* Exercise not only helps depression and other unpleasant emotions, it helps the body speed up the healing process.
Conference Approved Literature
©1992 Marijuana Anonymous
All Rights Reserved
For all the times you've raised the Alaska case, this is the first time I've seen you make this claim. What's your source?
In case you weren't aware of the situation, "pain" can be a serious medical condition that adversely affects the lives of the sufferers.
I have to live with chronic pain from arthritis, luckily I can get by with ibuprofin, although I've got Rxs for more powerful, narcotic drugs, which I very rarely use (I can't work if I take them). I do NOT use MJ at all. I just wanted to make that point here. But I've also known very severe, long term pain. I had "shingles" and it took more then 6 months for the pain to completely subside. The first 2 months were the worst. There were nights where I really wanted to die, and even with a Rx for oxycontin, the pain was serious. And I like to think that I have a very high pain threshhold.
This is completely anecdotal, but it's a real situation. I've got a friend who was in a severe auto accident a number of years ago. Many broken bones, including a smashed pelvis. To this day, she suffers severs pain due to the accident. She has Rxs for narcotic pain meds, including oxycontin. However, all of those leave her in a state where she really can't do anything. They also seem to supress her appitite, and she's already a size 0, being about 5' tall, and 95#. She lives in Oakland, CA, and she's been using the "medical MJ" for some time. Actually, she was buying it illegally even before, because she liked the relief it gave her better than the "legal" narcotic drugs that she could be taking. It doesn't leave her in a "comatose" state, where all she wants to do is sleep. It's also increased her appetite, and the last time I spoke to her, she said that she's gained 5 pounds over the last 6 months, which for her, is really something.
The thing is, that chronic pain will ruin your life. I'm all for giving people who live in chronic pain whatever relief they need. Even if that relief is not scientifically proven.
"A simple congressional majority could adopt a statute [to ban alcohol]"
Many approved medicines, and legal recreational drugs, have withdrawal effects. What's your point?
You've got numbers on that, don't you? Plus, TKDietz made some general claim that the numbers were about equal.
I mean, I'd look them up, but why? You'd just make some excuse that they weren't valid, so why bother?
Now, if you're willing to admit up front that if the teen numbers today were about equal, it means that legalization for adults does impact teen use ... well, I'd make the effort.
But hey, thanks for playing on this thread. We've got some nice parting gifts for you backstage. Don't let the door hit ya.
But your chronic pain won't ruin robertpaulsen's life.
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.