Medical marijuana decision reversed

"whereas 2.0 per cent marijuana and isoproterenol"

Yeah, I read the same report. But I thought she was smoking a joint, not a mixture of "2.0 per cent marijuana and isoproterenol". But maybe I read the article incorrectly, otherwise why would you waste my time with this scientific experiment?

"Bronchial asthma
5.33 Cannabis and THC dilate the small airways of the lung, and this has suggested a possible application in the treatment of bronchial asthma. However, according to the BMA report, there have been few clinical trials and these were mostly in the 1970s before the advent of the more powerful drugs now available for the treatment of this illness. Smoked cannabis is clearly unsuitable for the treatment of asthma because of the irritant effects of the smoke, and THC delivered by aerosol also appears to have irritating effects."
--BMA Report to the House of Lords

Common sense would indicate that a person with asthma shouldn't smoke anything. But you insist on proof for everything.

If marijuana is found to be medically beneficial for certain illnesses, do you think the "delivery system" will be via smoking?

Until a better one is found, yes.

Do you think that the AMA, IOM, NIH, FDA, or your doctor, will recommend smoking marijuana for asthma?

As you know, at least one doctor already has---and research supports its benefits.

If marijuana is found to have medical benefits, certainly you don't care if the "delivery system" is other than smoking, do you?

Not at all---but a universally superior delivery system does not yet exist, and sick people should not be forced to wait for one.

I thought she was smoking a joint, not a mixture of "2.0 per cent marijuana and isoproterenol". But maybe I read the article incorrectly

You did; marijuana and isoproterenol were not administered to the same subjects. "in morning sessions, subjects inhaled Iso or saline 8 to 9 min after the development of bronchospasm, and in afternoon sessions, subjects smoked 2.0 per cent marijuana or placebo during a period of 10 min immediately after the induction of bronchospasm."

"there have been few clinical trials and these were mostly in the 1970s before the advent of the more powerful drugs now available for the treatment of this illness."

I'm sure doctors try these newer drugs first---but I doubt they work better for every single patient.

Common sense would indicate that a person with asthma shouldn't smoke anything.

Research shows that smoked marijuana does more good than harm.

If marijuana is found to have medical benefits, certainly you don't care if the "delivery system" is other than smoking, do you? Or do you have a hidden agenda?

If marijuana is found to have medical benefits, and that those benefits can be obtainted by simply extracting the THC in alcohol, or simply eating the plant itself, you wouldn't care if people grew their own, rather than requiring that they use a synthetic version from a pharmaceutical company, would you?

You guys have to stop being so Ameri-centric. The Brits are light years ahead of us with cannabis-based medicines and spray-based delivery systems.

GW Announces Positive Results From Each of Four Phase Three Clinical Trials

Thanks for the good news!

Interesting sidelight: "Self-titration (adjustment) of their dose enabled most patients to achieve improvement in their symptoms without incurring a level of unwanted effects which would interfere with day-to-day living." I.e., buzzed but not blasted; wonder if that will satisfy the anti-marijuana zealots?

Lotsa a money to be made too, but not on this side of the Atlantic.

Trials Show Cannabis Spray Helps MS Patients
Source: Guardian Unlimited

Shares in GW Pharmaceuticals, the company pioneering research into cannabis-based medicines, soared 17.5% to 151p yesterday as it prepared to announce positive trial results this morning.

The Salisbury-based business will say tests on treatments for patients with multiple scelorosis (MS) have been successful and it plans to apply for early approval to make products available to patients.

GW has been developing for three years a range of products based on cannabis extracts that can be taken orally via a spray under the tongue.

The latest results are the first from seven, phase three, clinical trials being undertaken on 600 patients but they pave the way for the development of what could become a £250m per annum market.

GW is the only holder of the only UK licence to develop cannabis-based medicines and has been pouring cash into research. This summer it reported a £5.3m loss for the six months to March 31 and now hopes to launch its first cannabis-based drug in early 2004.

There are currently no prescription drugs based on cannabis but any go-ahead from the medicines control agency is likely to have wider social implications.

Hundreds of MS sufferers are believed to be using cannabis illegally amid widespread anecdotal evidence that it relieves pain associated with the condition.

GW Pharmaceuticals declined to comment on heightened speculation about its latest clinical trials. "All I can say is we will be announcing the preliminary phase three results tomorrow as we had previously indicated," said a spokesman.

The company has had to increase the amount of cannabis it grows in Britain to cater for its trials. GW is also undertaking tests on relieving cancer pain and the National Institute for Clinical Excellence is examining whether there are opportunities for future drugs of this kind to be used inside the health service.

Lotsa a money to be made too, but not on this side of the Atlantic.

You don't think having the cannabis pass through the sanctifying hands of Big Pharmaceutical Business will be enough to grease the wheels in the USA?

Doubtful. GW is using whole cannabis extracts, not synthetics. They actually grow their own, which would no doubt raise the ire of the politicians here in Prohibition-Land. Give the U.S. a couple of decades, I'm sure we'll catch up.

Why are you even here?
If marijuana is found to be medically beneficial for certain illnesses, do you think the "delivery system" will be via smoking?
That is up to the doctor and his patient, not me.
Do you think that the AMA, IOM, NIH, FDA, or your doctor, will recommend smoking marijuana for asthma?
I really couldn't say. There is no telling what they will do judging by their past actions. I don't think they even know what they'll do.
If marijuana is found to have medical benefits, certainly you don't care if the "delivery system" is other than smoking, do you?
Marijuana has already been shown to have medical benefits and I again leave "the delivery system" to the doctor and their patient. Pills don't work for some, as you well know!
Or do you have a hidden agenda?
My "agenda" is doing away with the stupid WOD and I'm certainly not "hidden" in that desire.
What's your agenda?