[CA] Medical Marijuana Ruling

[gn0me]

Originally Posted by Seo

however i'm tired of every fucking pothead and hippy ever using medicine as a reason. not when there are way better medicines to treat everything people claim pot does.

Name these "way better medicines" and also provide your reasoning why a patient who has the legal option in California to treat their condition with marijuana should not be allowed to use it if they so choose.

[dak]

Bottom line is we are talking about medical marijuana for cancer patients here and state rights to allow doctors to administer treatment without interference from federal overriding legislature.

Addiction isn't the issue here for these cases. Opiates are all horribly addictive but we give them to people with symptoms much less severe than what the average chemo patient is going through. They give much more addictive chemicals to people legally just to help them sleep or lose weight.

Can only imagine how someone who is dying in pain must feel when they are given a medication (marijuana) that actually helps them without causing them to vomit their guts out only to have the feds kick their door in and arrest them on their death beds because it's potentially mildly addictive.

A good portion of the population (10%) simply cannot take opioid based treatments because they lack properly functional enzymes needed to metabolize them resulting in violent gastrointestinal distress.

Same goes with a lot of appetite stimulants which many chemo/aids patients have to take. Many result in severe muscle pain and marinol (synthetic THC) is the only recourse.

[Screamfeeder]

Originally Posted by Seo

not when there are way better medicines to treat everything people claim pot does..

Ok Doctor.

Tell me, what is the safer, cheaper and easier way to treat nausea associated with chemotherapy for a patient that has an allergy to asprin and thus can't take many of the common salicylates?

You seem to know all about this stuff, so why don't you enlighten me. I admit I did smoke quite a bit of weed a few years ago so I'm sorry if that is too easy a query for someone so well versed in the medical field as you obviously are.

[BigMovieBuff]

Originally Posted by Seo

wrong but believe what you want. i dont even know if i want to go digging for proof right now just because even if i do people wont listen because hey its the internet and everyone who disagrees with you is wrong.

No, you won't go digging because it is a fucking indefensible argument.

[xHyLiOs55x]

Crack-head top....Pot Head(s) bottom....you tell me which one a.) Is more Addictive b.) "Fucks with your brain" c.) Turns you into and "idiot"

[Menoz]

Originally Posted by gn0me

Name these "way better medicines" and also provide your reasoning why a patient who has the legal option in California to treat their condition with marijuana should not be allowed to use it if they so choose.

Marinol.

I'm not against smoking pot, but claiming that smoking it should be legal on this basis doesn't fly. The inhaler version of the drug is what should be given to those in need. There's a lot more in pot than just THC.

[dak]

Dunno, I hear crackheads can be two term mayors.

[Ameraves Loyalheart]

Originally Posted by dak

Opiates are all horribly addictive but we give them to people with symptoms much less severe than what the average chemo patient is going through.

This. I have had two major back surgeries, and both times I was on quite a bit of pain medication, namely percocet and the fentanyl patch. Getting off of that shit was far more difficult than it ever was for me to quit smoking pot. The physical withdrawls were absolutely horrible.

Get out of here with your retardation Seo

[Manseed]

Originally Posted by Eduardo

It is not PHYSICALLY (chemically) addictive. It CAN BE mentally addictive, but those are two very different things. A strong mind can overcome any mental addiction. The strongest mind on earth would still have a hard time overcoming PHYSICAL addiction because of body chemistry.

This is a bunch of bullshit. You might as well classify fucking everything as addictive. Call it habit forming if you'd like, but not addictive. Nobody ever 'jones' for pot. You might really want to smoke pot, just like you really want to eat a fucking piece of cake, but you're not going through withdrawls or anything. Whereas with heroin and coke people go through physical and mental anguish when they try to stop. That simply does not happen with pot.

[Gurgeh]

Originally Posted by Menoz

but claiming that smoking it should be legal on this basis doesn't fly.

When in Rome do as the Romans do. The reasons for banning pot don't fly either.

[Eduardo]

Originally Posted by Manseed

This is a bunch of bullshit. You might as well classify fucking everything as addictive. Call it habit forming if you'd like, but not addictive. Nobody ever 'jones' for pot. You might really want to smoke pot, just like you really want to eat a fucking piece of cake, but you're not going through withdrawls or anything. Whereas with heroin and coke people go through physical and mental anguish when they try to stop. That simply does not happen with pot.

Hence it is not chemically addictive, which is the whole point of what I stated... Not sure why you are saying what I stated is bullshit since it is simply the more scientific wording of what you just said...

[Chips]

I find pooping to be physically addictive and as hard as my great mental mind tries, I cannot overcome my addiction

[Menoz]

Originally Posted by Gurgeh

When in Rome do as the Romans do. The reasons for banning pot don't fly either.

That might be the true, but if you're going to motivate people to legalize something, you need a legitimate argument. You're not going to change anyone's view using half-baked (pardon the pun) proofs.

I see a strong pro-marijuana presence but people's rationale are all over the place. Perhaps if we took the time to think about what we were saying we would start to make the case on the issue that's really in the forefront of most people's minds. Legalization of marijuana for recreational use.

[dak]

According to Freud you should be disorganized, open and probably gay.

[Gurgeh]

There's not much of a case to make, let's say we draw a line at alcohol (which is a quite seriously destructing & addictive drug) , well then pot is on the ok side of the line. It's far less dangerous than alcohol from every point of view.