Posted on 12/12/2005 11:26:03 AM PST by minus_273
Woman died on cannabis drug trial
Sativex is made from the cannabis plant A woman developed mental health problems and later died after taking part in trials of a cannabis-based drug, an inquest has heard.
Diabetic Rene Anderson, aged 69 from Sheffield, was taken to hospital after starting to take Sativex to see if it would relieve pain she was suffering.
She died in March 2004 from acute kidney failure.
The continuing inquest is expected to have implications for the use of drugs derived from cannabis.
Useful relief
Mrs Anderson, a retired supermarket supervisor from Silkstone Close in Frecheville, had been taking part in a trial supervised by diabetes expert Dr Solomon Tesfaye.
He told the court he wanted to investigate whether cannabis could provide useful relief from the severe pain experienced by diabetic neuropathy sufferers.
Sativex, which is not yet licensed in the UK but has been granted a licence in Canada, had shown good results in multiple sclerosis sufferers, Dr Resfaye said.
He was first aware of Mrs Anderson's case when her family complained about her mental problems just days after her treatment began.
Admitted to hospital
The doctor said the dose of the drug, which is taken using an oral spray, was reduced but Mrs Anderson's daughter, Jackie Sadler, rang back two weeks later to tell of her mother's deterioration.
Sheffield coroner Chris Dorries heard how Mrs Anderson suffered a series of physical problems after she was admitted to hospital in October 2003, 23 days after starting to take Sativex
These included pneumonia which culminated in her death five months later.
The coroner said the purpose of the inquest was to examine what links there were, if any, between the experimental treatment and the physical deterioration which led to Mrs Anderson's death.
The inquest, which began on Monday, is expected to last five or six days.
Eating takes a lot of time, energy, and attention. :o)
I have noticed a big difference in the way I feel with just the exercise. I despise ordinary exercise programs, yet really get into martial art, so classes are the best way for me to get in shape.
Don't forget strength training. Put 10 lbs of muscle mass on, and you will burn calories day and night. My solution has been non-gym-oriented. By simply buying a nice weight set and plunking it in front of the TV, I find that I train while I watch TV. It's GREAT!
My sentiments exactly.
Booze & cigs are much more detrimental, and yet legal.
Prison for pot smokers is just plain sick, politically motivated oppression, and a huge waste of taxpayers money.
BTW, I was watching the C-Span tax reform program with Dick Armey as a panelist and one of the leftwingnuts made a statement that stuck in my craw.
He said referring to wise spending of Govt revenue - "the Govt's money" - as if the Govt didn't first get it from taxpayers. I thought it telling of the pro-big govt left and of the Dem party overall.
When I was a young adult during Viet Nam, liberals were against Govt because of it's imposition. They can no longer be seen as liberals in the true sense of the Founders, ie limited Govt & maximum freedom. They stole the name liberals and no longer resemble true liberals and champions of freedom like myself. They are now real leftists who support socialism and communism that only a big constitutionally corrupted central Govt can provide.
Redistribution of incomes, bracketed & high tax rates, high corp rates compared to other countries, trusts and foundations to protect elite fortunes, state schools, over-regulation, special interest pork that we all pay for but which a select group benefits from, welfarism & warfarism.
All very sad to see how Americans were duped out of their rights especially under the master power abuser FDR, who unthinkably gets recent praises from Republicans of all people/parties. Disgraceful to say the least.
You nailed it dude! Unfortunately, the anti-drug crowd hasn't got the common sense to understand what you said. I've always thought that anti-pot people weren't true conservatives.
Um, gee, I said it was bad for your lungs didn't I? That would be exactly the same as saying "Nobody claims it's harmless" wouldn't it? If you EAT pot, it is not any kind of CREDIBLE medical risk, I suppose it is possible to ingest spores or something, but I've never in my life heard of anyone getting hurt from eating it. As for your other "point", not everybody smokes pot alone in their own homes, but what friends do in one of their homes, or in the woods, or anywhere where it DOESN'T HURT other people is nobody's business either. I obviously disagree with anti-pot guys like you, but I respect your opinions and can fathom why you think what you do. What I don't understand is that the anti-pot people are almost always the uncivil ones in these threads, they are always the self-righteous, I'm better than you because I don't do drugs type people. Guys like me almost always just write informative points about pot. Maybe instead of us getting our stories straight, you people ought to learn some respect.
Another good post. It's too bad he put my words in your mouth, but if that guy understood English he'd see that I did say it's bad for your lungs, just not if you eat it etc. Oh well.
"Post Of The Day" nominee.
I'll fourth that.
agree....
No, and you know it. Marijuana is not illegal because it is bad for your lungs.
"... I'm better than you because I don't do drugs type people ..."
Many pro-marijuana people on this forum claim not to do drugs, so how could I have that attitude? It just comes down to the fact that I have yet to hear one good reason why pot (just pot) should be legalized. (As an example, if it could be shown that people would switch from alcohol to pot if pot were legal, I would consider that to be a good reason.)
Now, I have heard good arguments as to why ALL drugs should be legal. I've heard good arguments as to why the drug legalization decision should be turned over to the states. I've heard good arguments as to why marijuana should be decriminalized.
But legal? Nationwide? Nope. I see no overall benefit for the nation as a whole if marijuana were legal.
Huh? I documented three medical studies illustrating that people die from marijuana pneumonitis (brought on by invasive aspergillosis), thus supporting the poster's claim.
What more do you want? What don't you understand about phrases like "has become a significant cause of death" and "90% fatality rate"?
His point was stated clearly: "The demented potheads would have you believe that marijuana is as pure as the driven snow and wholesome." Can you agree that he's right? That marijuana is NOT as pure as the driven snow and wholesome?
Or are you simply going to dick around and nitpick words? If so, save your breath. You're just trolling, adding nothing to the thread, and wasting my time.
That's cause they can't win a lgical argument - so they must lie.
My point WAS that ALL DRUGS SHOLD BE LEGAL. So should prostitution, gambling and many other vices. As you stated "you don't see a good reason to make it legal". My whole point is - I don't give a rat's butt about WHAT freedoms YOU personally prefer. Either believe in freedom and defend it - or move over to DU with the other fascists. If your not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.
Potheads suffer "denial." In such a state, reason and logic are useless.
Let me help your reading comprehension here: The poster said all the time. Sorry if you don't think those three words are important. I can see why you would purposely choose to gloss over them.
Tell me -- how many people in the U.S. or worldwide have died specifically because of marijuana pneumonitis? Let's see your stats. Put up or shut up.
His point was stated clearly: "The demented potheads would have you believe that marijuana is as pure as the driven snow and wholesome." Can you agree that he's right? That marijuana is NOT as pure as the driven snow and wholesome?
Anyone who inhales any burning substance is asking for trouble. That's not so difficult to comprehend.
Or are you simply going to dick around and nitpick words? If so, save your breath. You're just trolling, adding nothing to the thread, and wasting my time
Gee, sorry robertpaulsen. I'll make sure to get your express permission before I ever post again on a public forum.
(Are you still cranky for supporting that sheriff in Texas & getting called on it?)
The drug warriors (like you, for instance) do not use reason or logic in their arguments. Instead they prefer to respond to logic with emotionally based attacks, using many of the same arguments as the gun-grabbers.
They refuse to look at the issue from a rational point of view and rely on government propaganda and disinformation.
Add to that the apparent disdain for conservative principles that most of them seem to share, such as individual responsibility and smaller government. The drug warriors have no concept of freedom and individual rights, rather they believe that the "rights of society" trumps individual rights.
It makes one wonder why they are even on a conservative forum.
Like I was supposed to guess that?
"Either believe in freedom and defend it ..."
Funny that you think a person addicted to recreational drugs is "free".
That's it?! That's your whole argument? He said "all the time" and you just can't let that go, huh?
To me, that's nitpicking. You ARE wasting my time with comments that those, and adding NOTHING to the thread.
"Tell me -- how many people in the U.S. or worldwide have died specifically because of marijuana pneumonitis?"
Why? 100? 1000? 10000? You'd find fault with any number I gave you, so I'm not about to waste my time. You want to know? You look it up.
"Are you still cranky for supporting that sheriff in Texas & getting called on it?"
The undercover cop in Tulia? Start another thread, ping me, and bring it on. You got nothin'.
Whereas wirh formerACLUmembers, hypocrisy and fascism are on FULL display.
Those phrases roll off your keyboard as though those conditions exist. They don't and you know it.
Yet you're perfectly willing to call for the legalization of recreational drugs into a society supported by a large, nanny state government where there is no such thing as personal responsibility anymore.
FIRST, bring those back, THEN we can discuss the legalization of drugs. Otherwise you're just compounding the problem.
See, if you would just admit that "you hate all druggies and regardless of facts, I hate drugs and think they should be shot", we could have a lot more respect for you than lying, twisting, convoluting facts and claiming they support your case.
They are a symptom of the problem. Just like the runny nose is a symptom of a cold. However, if you didn't have a runny nose and sore throat, you wouldn't have a cold then would you. And, likewise, if you remove the symptoms of the nanny state, you will no longer have a nanny state.
As for you little nitpicking over "number of deaths". Who cares?? If somebody wants to drink Benzene or sulphuric acid, they should not be prohibited by law.
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.