Posted on 06/14/2005 11:01:59 AM PDT by kaotic133
Of course, the Supreme Court decision has very little to do with wether or not pot is dangerous or helpful as medicine. It basically comes down to the question: Can the federal government tell the states which chemicals they have to ban? And yes, we fought a Civil War so that the federal government could tell the states exactly what to do - regardless of logic or local democracy.
So last week the Supreme Court upheld Washington DC's unquestioned authority to create intrusive and illogical laws that are based on prejudiced perceptions above scientific reality. I can't really find any sources that support the DEA's claims that marijuana is extremely dangerous and has no known medical use (other than, you know, websites sponsored by the DEA or websites that have copy and pasted their little "say no to drugs (but feel free to buy more viagra)" slogans.
I have, however, found that its been in use as a medicine and spiritual aid for 2,700 years with zero deaths from overdose. It was even used as medicine in America until the 1930s - Hey, the Christians couldn't ban alchohol in the 20s, so when they were defeated they just banned pot! Ever wonder why prohibition came BEFORE the pot ban? Well, it was a purely political decision by the religious right to show that they weren't COMPLETELY out of touch with America and a chance to exercise some power early in their history.
Score another loss for State and individual rights, score one for the big money "legal" drug industry in America. Pot can't be patented, so if it was legalized it would become pretty freaking cheap really fast - and guess what, people would stop taking the "Safe" pills that are actually extremely toxic and disruptive - because they would find a cheap and natural remedy.
And if pot were legalized outright, well, the alchohol industry would have one tough, popular, cheap, and even relatively healthy competitor all of a sudden. Hey, according to these doctors, maybe it would be a good thing for your brain if you put down that bottle and picked up a pipe. How the heck is any bar or brewery going to stay in business after peoples' doctors start recommending pot as a better casual intoxication than beer itself!
So! I hate to play the corporate conspiracy card, but they make up about 50% of the deck we're playing with here. Two major industries have a LOT to lose if a single plant is legally introduced to America.
This plant could help people, but hurt those two industries (and maybe more) can't have that hurting their bottom line. The government protects the industry and indoctrinates you to their point of view. The government uses your tax money to finance "D.A.R.E" programs and "public service announcements" that are not based on medical data, but you hear it so many times you start to believe it.
Rinse & Repeat.
For those taking sides and keeping score, here is an interesting fact to remember. The only justices that voted AGAINST banning medical marijuana were appointed by Republican presidents (Thomas - Bush, O'Connor - Reagan, Rehnquist - Nixon). Not a single Democratically appointed justice stood up for the rights of the doctors and their patients. They voted to ensure the power of the federal government. The other big loser are all the traditionally Democratic states that already have medical marijuana laws. Ironically again, only Republicans stood up for the rights of Democratic states.
http://my.webmd.com/content/article/70/80972.htm
"We were somewhat surprised by our finding, especially since there's been a controversy for some years on whether long-term cannabis use causes brain damage," says lead researcher and psychiatrist Igor Grant, MD.
"I suppose we expected to see some differences in people who were heavy users, but in fact the differences were very minimal."
The marijuana users in those 15 studies -- which lasted between three months to more than 13 years -- had smoked marijuana several times a week or month or daily. Still, researchers say impairments were less than what is typically found from using alcohol or other drugs. "
"I just re-published a paper of the first survey for marijuana toxicity done in 1863 by the British government in India that was the most exhaustive medical study of its time in regards to possible difficulties and toxicity of cannabis. And it reached the same conclusion as Grant," Mikuriya tells WebMD.
"This is merely confirming what was known over 100 years ago, as well as what was learned by various government findings doing similar research -- marijuana is not toxic, but it is a highly effective medicine."
"Marijuana is a remarkably safe and non-toxic drug that can effectively treat about 30 different conditions," he tells WebMD. "I predict it will become the aspirin of the 21st century, as more people recognize this."
The idea that weed is a medicine is absurd, the product of a science-worshipping but scientifically illiterate society.
I will never understand why there is Federal authority over any intoxicant if the Constitution had to be amended to confer such authority over alcohol.
What disease, not symptom, does it cure?
Talk about extremism. This has got to be one of the most ridiculous statements ever issued about pot. To compare pot to aspirin is absolutely absurd.
Actually its a quite accurate statement, and although I'm not some long-haired hippy saying legalize weed, I've seen the benefits it has in the treatment of cancer patients. Aspirin is fairly toxic and most experts believe if it was up for FDA approval today it definitely would not be OTC and probably would be fairly stringently controlled. Having said that, my advocacy for the medical use of marijuana is based soley upon watching a family member dwindle to almost nothing and return to close to normal weight. My aunt has an inoperable brain tumor, and my family watched her dwindle from around 160 lbs. to 100 lbs, unable to keep any food down. Her oncologist suggested she try smoking marijuana to ease her nuasea, and help her with her appetite. She now weighs around 145 lbs. and looks a lot better. Did the pot cure her cancer, of course not, but her quality of life is immeasurably better and I'd go as far as to say that smoking pot has probably extended her life. With regards to the case on which the SCOTUS recently ruled, I believe that the court decision was correct, that being said the DEA should reschedule marijuana to Schedule 2 placing it in the same catagory as cocaine which is used routinely in facial surgery. To say that doctors should have the right to prescribe medication as they see fit is different that calling for the legalization for recreational use. That inevitably leads to claims that unscrupulous doctors will over-prescribe and falsely prescribe. I personally have full faith in the DEA's ability to investigate these claims, case in point the recent crack-down on doctors who over-prescribe Oxycontin.
Whereas pot has absolutely no negative effect on the human population...It's a panacea!
Source please. This sounds wildly absurd...
Ya, actually a related article says "a survey conducted by Harvard Medical School in 1991 revealed that 44 percent of oncologists had proposed marijuana use to their patients."
http://my.webmd.com/content/article/13/1691_50142.htm
I think it says something about potency and safety if almost half of all cancer specializing doctors recommend it even though its technically illegal according to DEA scheduling.
The MEDICAL evidence suggests that Marijuana belongs in the same category as alchohol or tobaccco. Instead, big government uses smokers to fill the cells and create demand for new prison construction projects.
I don't know if I want marijuana regulated like alcohol and tobacco, but I think the DEA is doing many Americans a disservice by keeping marijuana Schedule I (grouped with heroin, drugs with NO medical value and cannot be prescribed under any circumstances) as opposed to Schedule II (grouped with cocaine, drugs with LIMITED medical value which can be prescribed under certain circumstances).
In San Francisco its the same thing. I was watching O'Reilly and he had one of his producers go into the Doc's office and complain (falsely) of back pain. Without so much as an argument, the Doc prescribed him medical marijuana.
It's a joke. Supposedly, people are selling pot right on the street, right in front of these places.
Hahaha the joke is that its treated any differently than alchohol or tobacco.
Heres a toxicology summary on aspirin:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=7469627&query_hl=2
Salicylates are the types of acids in the Aspirin family of chemicals. They all affect the body in the same way, aspirin is just a corporate name like "kleenex," its different than the technical name.
No suicides or DUI deaths result from pot. Absolutely, none. Aspirin is defintely more dangerous than pot. -sarcasm
BTW, how many teenagers and adults are in rehab because of Aspirin?
Aspirin has saved many people's lives. Name one case where someone's life was spared because of the use of pot.
Most posters on FR think they know more about medicine than doctors do; there's a name for people who generally believe that way. Corpses
Obviously you didn't take the time to read my comment. I personally watched my aunt's health deteriorate rapidly and then bounce back! Why? Because she was able to EAT! No the legal derivatives did not work, she couldn't hold them down, and just because people abuse a drug doesn't mean that it holds no value. People go to rehab every day for a multitude of drug/alcohol related problems. We don't ban vicodin, xanax, or oxycontin because some people become addicted to them. Marijuana has prolonged my aunt's life and I for one will say that it saved someone important to me.
To bring other drugs into the argument after you have shown that your comparison was over the top is disengious. This is what the extreme drug lobby does to muddy the waters as to soften the damage pot causes our society. We already have enough people with chemical dependencies in our society, so the solution is to make pot legal? It doesn't make any sense.
Marijuana has lead to the ruining of some close friends of mine and I for one say that is did nothing but cause problems for everyone involved.
Correction:
You made the ludicrous implication that aspirin is more dangeous than pot.
Okay let's look at the mortality rates...
(1996): "Each year, use of NSAIDs (Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs) accounts for an estimated 7,600 deaths and 76,000 hospitalizations in the United States." (NSAIDs include aspirin, ibuprofen, naproxen, diclofenac, ketoprofen, and tiaprofenic acid.)
Source: Robyn Tamblyn, PhD; Laeora Berkson, MD, MHPE, FRCPC; W. Dale Jauphinee, MD, FRCPC; David Gayton, MD, PhD, FRCPC; Roland Grad, MD, MSc; Allen Huang, MD, FRCPC; Lisa Isaac, PhD; Peter McLeod, MD, FRCPC; and Linda Snell, MD, MHPE, FRCPC, "Unnecessary Prescribing of NSAIDs and the Management of NSAID-Related Gastropathy in Medical Practice," Annals of Internal Medicine (Washington, DC: American College of Physicians, 1997), September 15, 1997, 127:429-438, from the web at http://www.acponline.org/journals/annals/15sep97/nsaid.htm, last accessed Feb. 14, 2001, citing Fries, JF, "Assessing and understanding patient risk," Scandinavian Journal of Rheumatology Supplement, 1992;92:21-4.
An exhaustive search of the literature finds no credible reports of deaths induced by marijuana. The US Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN) records instances of drug mentions in medical examiners' reports, and though marijuana is mentioned, it is usually in combination with alcohol or other drugs. Marijuana alone has not been shown to cause an *overdose* death.
Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN), available on the web at http://www.samhsa.gov/; also see Janet E. Joy, Stanley J. Watson, Jr., and John A. Benson, Jr., "Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base," Division of Neuroscience and Behavioral Research, Institute of Medicine (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1999), available on the web at http://www.nap.edu/html/marimed/; and US Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration, "In the Matter of Marijuana Rescheduling Petition" (Docket #86-22), September 6, 1988, p. 57.
Flame nothing, but just because there is an association doesn't mean there is a correlation. People who ABUSE pot aren't going to get anywhere in life but neither are people who ABUSE any drug.
"Successful" "pot-heads" don't advertise their hobbies in public because they are illegal. And when you're "successful," admitting to illegal activities can be hazardous to your career.
So who is to say if un-motivated people are more attracted to pot & alchohol abuse to begin with, or if it has any negative effect when used in moderation by ambitious people?
Further, how can you know that all those people still work at a gas station because a couple dozen potential employers never gave them a chance because of this single choice?
I know pot-heads in high places. VPs, IT admins, network architects. Ya, people who smoke multiple times daily still keep getting promotions and furthering their own education.
I personally resent the insinuation that I do drugs and although I do not disagree with you that those who illegally abuse marijuana do suffer the consequences of their actions, this is not about legalization. It is about the ability of doctors to make decisions on how to treat their patients. Having seen first hand the effect marijuana had on my aunt (a godly woman if ever there was one) I can personally attest that marijuana does have some medical value. Just because some dumb stoners abuse it doesn't mean that it shouldn't be available for those who truly need it.
Aspirin comes from a plant.
Ephedrin (cold relievers) come from a plant.
Painkillers come from a plant.
So, I can absolutely understand how you would state that THC, which also comes from a plant, isn't medicinal.
All of you libertarian jerks who applauded the court when they ruled against the Texas sodomy law have now have your chickens coming home to roost. Maybe next time you will support states rights.
I read this far and gave up. If the author can't be bothered to proof his writing (or at least run a spell check), I'm not going to waste my time reading him.
Consuming copious amounts of weed has never stopped me from drinking like a fish.
To have many people in a room full of 300 recognize the same correlation at a class reunion is statistically significant.
Yeah, there are always exceptions ... but far and above the practical evidence is on the side of what I have stated.
It's my understanding that most of the folks in rehab for weed are there because a court ordered them to be there.
Is aspirin exactly the same thing as ibuprofen?
An exhaustive search of the literature finds no credible reports of deaths induced by marijuana.
You mean to tell me not one death has been the result of marijuana use? This sounds like an incredible claim!
Also, if you are going to include all of the NSAIDs on one side of the argument to be intellectually honest, you need to add the drugs that are like marijuana on the other side of the argument as well.
John Mcdonald
If pot makes a cancer patients life immeasurably better, I'm sure that doesn't include dealing in it. If I had cancer and needed it, I'd grow my own and keep quiet about it.
Listen if you can find me one report, just one of a death by marijuana *overdose* I will recant everything I said. Also, I appologize but I screwed up the hyperlinks, remove the comma, or semi-colon at the end of each. Having said that 7600 people are dead as a direct result of NSAIDs, let's suppose (yes it is a supposition but a legitamate one in my opinion) that 5% of them are related to aspirin use that's 380 people yearly.
I'd appreciate if my arguement was seperated from those here proposing or endorse legalization. To support the priniciple that doctors have the right to decide what to prescribe for their patients. My support is limited to changing marijuana from Schedule I (grouped with heroin, drugs with NO medical value) to Schedule II (grouped with cocaine, drugs with limited medical value).
"I read this far and gave up. If the author can't be bothered to proof his writing (or at least run a spell check), I'm not going to waste my time reading him."
Congratulations, thousands of views on multiple websites today and I finally found the guy who should be my editor!
Actually, wether doesn't show up on a spell-checker because its an antiquated word for a castrated goat. I stand by my earlier assertion that the SCOTUS decision has nothing to do with castrated goats.
I mean, um, I'll add an h and promise to be more thorough when I'm getting paid for my writing.
You will waste your time whining about a typo like some holier than thou pinhead.
To actually compare pot to aspirin is absurd and over the top.
I've heard that marijuana actually decreases the body's ability to fight disease. I'm not sure if this is true but I wouldn't put it past the legalized drug community to suppress this possibility...
Aspirin does much more than just treat pain symptoms, champ; It can be used as aspirin "therapy" to prevent heart attacks and strokes. Also, it saves lives every day.
I did not make the original outrageous statement that pot is better for you than aspirin. That is a ridiculous statement.
From:
Aspirin - The Miracle Drug by Eric Metcalf:
Thousands of medical studies have determined that aspirin lessens the chance of developing many serious conditions. Individual chapters target specific diseases and their prevention and treatment, including:
- breast, prostate, and colon cancer
- Alzheimer's disease and age-related memory loss
- stroke, hypertension, and vascular disease
- leukemia and Hodgkin's disease
- heart disease.
similar points could be made for cannabis but i doubt that you want to hear them; if you do, google is your friend
Google also reveals how nuts the pro-cannibis movement really is as well:
Oh, and I forgot that Jesus smoked Cannabis discussion as well...Pot is the panacea! Give me a break.
I'm well aware of the propaganda that the pot heads push out in the attempt to legalize their addiction. Don't get in the way of a pot head trying to legalize their stash, you'll be called an extremist, a prude, a hypocrite, a fascist and other enlightened terms.
The oppression in this country is horrible -sarcasm
So, it in fact it does kill people. Yet I don't know of any long term study to this effect so someone somewhere must be oppressing this information, right? - sarcasm
Hyperbole and over the top outrageous comments and claims hurt the cause by some drug law reform advocates to lessen the prison sentences for very small offenders (stupid arcane one joint sentencing, other very small time offenders). Stupid arguments like the one in this thread and that Jesus was a pot smoker and the like hurts the legitimate movement of reducing very small time pot offenders sentences in prison. It's counter productive.
BTW, the bug up my ass regarding marijuana is that I have seen it ruin many of my close friends lives. I know you will say the same thing about alcohol but alcohol can be used in moderation to actually improve your health. Since pot's only use can be derived by over indulging in the product it is gluttony, pure and simple. No one smokes just one joint in order to gain its health benefits. Pot may be used to relieve pain but aspirin does this without getting you high. People who take prescription drugs (any OTC drug as well) to get high have a problem.
How about growing a species of pot that does not get you high and we'll do a study and see how many smoke this miracle drug to ease their pain. My prediction is that there will be few, if any takers...
It was amended, sure. What makes you say it had to be amended? Can you please tell me why?
An amendment was desired, not required. A federal statute would have sufficed.
Half of ALL? Here's some additional information.
"The 1990 survey was mailed to about one third (N = 2,430) of all United States-based ASCO members and yielded a response rate of 43% (1,035). More than 44% of the respondents report recommending the (illegal) use of marijuana for the control of emesis to at least one cancer chemotherapy patient."
First, it was only ASCO members.
Second, the survey was only mailed to one-third of those members.
Third, only 43% of those responded.
Fourth, 44% of those recommended pot.
That's 455 people. Hardly "half of all".
Another similar-sized survey of oncologists was conducted in 1997. Only 1% recommended smoked marijuana.
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.