Posted on 12/20/2001 4:46:29 PM PST by getsoutalive
I don't remember...
No. He said it "has no medical benefits worthy of an exception."
/john
However, Sinequan, an antidepressant/tranquilizer, must be prescribed, and is legal. The resemblance of the molecular structures, at least the dibenzopyran skeleton is, to say the least, curious.
The cultivation and dispensing of Henbane, Hyoscyamus niger, is not Approved. However, the sale of the belladona alkaloid Hyoscyamine sulfate in Contac(TM) cold capsules, is OK.
Many things in Nature, when isolated, become legal and acceptable because they will produce reproducible results.
Some examples include willow bark (Aspirin), Rauwolfia serpentina (digitalis), Nux vomica (Strychnine), Goldthread root (Brucine), and probably hundreds of others.
There are several "Problems" with cannabis:
1: The mixtures of THC Isomers and other active components is widely variable with regard to strain, location of growth, and other conditions. If _one_ compound could be isolated and rigorously FDA Tested and proven safe and effective, there would not be this dispute. For example, let us say that we specifically mean one isomer, more specifically, 1-Hydroxy, 6,6,9-trimethyl dibenzopyran. The problem is that it does not affect different people the same way... And other people will react differently some times.
I have gotten some things approved by the FDA. It is neither cheap nor fun, but really, there are reasons for the cautions- Thalidomide comes to mind.
2: The stuff grows like a weed. Well, in some places it IS a weed. How can anyone base a monopoly on this? :-)
Like many I do not exactly consider SKF, Merk, etc. and others to be entirely altruistic organizations.
3: The medicine is too much fun and too uncontrollable- Despite its use for milennia. But whenever one sees polycyclic molecules nowadays, in the back of the mind, the word "Carcinogen Suspect" appears. If someone wishes to smoke their silage on their own, I can see where that is none of my business.
But if I am a stockholder in a drug company, I am not sure I want to see this stuff prescribed. I believe I read the half life of THC's in the body is 70+ days. If so, this is asking a lot of the liver, and it means that Mister Liver is not doing that well clearing it.
so not only are the drug companies a bit unwilling to invest a lot in a technology 5,000 years old, they are also very risk-shy. In old societies where cannabis was used a lot, what was the life expectancy of the people? Did they live long enough to develop cancer?
Let's watch what happens when all the '60's people, myself included, make it to Rest Home Age.
No. He said it "has no medical benefits worthy of an exception."
Look again. He did not say that. He said the "text of the Act" written by congressional comittee. So politicians made medical law without formal research performed by qualified scientists. The research is now being done and it appears they were wrong. How many people have suffered to appease politicians?
The "legalize it" lobby would be better served if it was honest and used the angle that it's much less dangerous and much less intoxicating than alcohol, and that sending someone to jail for possising it is beyond absurd.
I can never climb on the libertarian boat that wants alldrugs (even the most dangerous) legalized, but the time and resources we utilize going after people who smoke weed is crazy, given its relatively mild effects.
Please just check the links. You have been mislead.
The problem with the "medical marijuana" debate is that the pro-legal forces are being intellectually dishonest. No reputable doctor would EVER prescribe a medicine like marijuana, which is a cocktail of more than 40 active chemicals, some of which are carcinogenic.
Now, separating ONE chemical, doing research and clinical trials on it that are based on science is a good idea.
The anti-legal forces fear, correctly, that the agenda underlying "helping the sick people" has to do with recreational use of marijuana rather than medical use. Obviously being able to grow it yourself for "medical reasons" is de facto legalization, since cops won't be able to the intentions of the grower.
The PARS method is credible. Other methods that involve smoking the whole thing are not.
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.