[Silver]

Is morphine classified the same as marijuana (at least in it's illegal non-prescribed sense)? I have a hard time believing that because it's an illegal drug there is not some official legal way to conduct a study on it's effectiveness rather than rely on dubious anecdotal evidence.

Morphine is schedule 2, along with Cocaine (which would include crack), and meth and ritalin.

Marijuana is schedule 1, along with heroin, LSD, ecstacy, and a few other things I can't think of off the top of my head. Maybe GHB?

Cocaine of course does have a medical use as an anesthetic. I'm not aware of any medical use for crack, but there may be some administrative rule that prevents them from scheduling the drug differently.

 

[Damn True]

Morphine is schedule 2, along with Cocaine (which would include crack), and meth and ritalin.

Marijuana is schedule 1, along with heroin, LSD, ecstacy, and a few other things I can't think of off the top of my head. Maybe GHB?

Cocaine of course does have a medical use as an anesthetic. I'm not aware of any medical use for crack, but there may be some administrative rule that prevents them from scheduling the drug differently.

....and for that you can thank Anhauser (sp?) Busch.

Interesting facts. Thanks, I wasn't aware of the different classification. I suspect that crack and coke are classified the same because they are derrived from the same plant. However, that does not explain why heroin is classified differently from other opiate based drugs. Hmmm confused

 

[Silver]

I know this isn't an objective link, but it seems to have the info we are looking for:

http://www.maps.org/mmj/

 

[Westy]

....and for that you can thank Anhauser (sp?) Busch.

Interesting facts. Thanks, I wasn't aware of the different classification. I suspect that crack and coke are classified the same because they are derrived from the same plant. However, that does not explain why heroin is classified differently from other opiate based drugs. Hmmm confused

The legal penalty differ greatly between crack and regular cocaine. Many attribute this to racist drug laws. In fact many drug laws can to tied to racism. Marijuana was perfectly illegal until it became popular for mexican immigrants in the southwest, same thing with coccaine. Coccaine was used extensively in medicines made for woman, it became illegal when it became popular in the black communites.

Edit: I hate to be a proponent of television but the history channels show on illegal drugs is quite enlightening and I doubt it could be considered a liberal information source.

http://store.aetv.com/html/product/index.jhtml?id=42997

 

[Damn True]

I know this isn't an objective link, but it seems to have the info we are looking for:

http://www.maps.org/mmj/

I wonder if the outcome might have been different if the terms of the study had been different. It seems that they were seeking to study the effects of different forms of delivery of THC (smoking vs vaporization).

They have the cart ahead of the horse here. It seems that the pro-pot groups would have a stronger leg to stand on if they first proved the efficacy of the substance as a treatment for an illness, then debate method of delivery.

 

[Damn True]

The legal penalty differ greatly between crack and regular cocaine. Many attribute this to racist drug laws. In fact many drug laws can to tied to racism. Marijuana was perfectly illegal until it became popular for mexican immigrants in the southwest, same thing with coccaine. Coccaine was used extensively in medicines made for woman, it became illegal when it became popular in the black communites.

Isn't potency a factor here as well?
Crack is essentially an intensified version of cocaine right?

 

[Silver]

I wonder if the outcome might have been different if the terms of the study had been different. It seems that they were seeking to study the effects of different forms of delivery of THC (smoking vs vaporization).

They have the cart ahead of the horse here. It seems that the pro-pot groups would have a stronger leg to stand on if they first proved the efficacy of the substance as a treatment for an illness, then debate method of delivery.

How are you going to do it when you can't legally do a study without the government approving of the study? Seems like a bit of a catch-22.

edit: Maybe they were worried that if they couldn't show vaporization worked, then the whole point is moot? Personally, I don't want people in pain hooked up to oxygen lines having to pull out a zippo to light up. Sooner or later someone would go up in flames...

 

[Westy]

Isn't potency a factor here as well?
Crack is essentially an intensified version of cocaine right?

I beleive the amount of active ingredient is lower but being smoked it hits the system faster. It all comes down to the fact that crack smokers tend to be poor and coccaine users tend to be wealthy.

 

[clancy98]

Well since I can tell you that crack starts with coke, and it is cut with something, I would think that means generally not as intense. Shorter, quicker(maybe) high. Its also cheaper which is why it is so prominent in the areas it is.

I would agree that the way the laws are setup is probably racially biased but that may not be intentional, it could have to do with timing of when crack hit the ghetto and the rush to litigate about it. I am just talking opinion here, no research.

Something I hope someone can explain to me is if MJ is schedule 1, why is possession only a misdemeanor? And possession of schedule IV stuff (scrips) is a felony... Is the schedule stuff unrelated to the penalties?

 

[Silver]

Something I hope someone can explain to me is if MJ is schedule 1, why is possession only a misdemeanor? And possession of schedule IV stuff (scrips) is a felony... Is the schedule stuff unrelated to the penalties?

State and federal laws have different penalties. Here are the federal penalties:

http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/agency/penalties.htm

If you get picked up, depending on the state you are in, the penalties are different. You don't get picked up by a federal agent for a joint unless you happen to be a person of considerable interest, I'd imagine.

 

[Damn True]

How are you going to do it when you can't legally do a study without the government approving of the study? Seems like a bit of a catch-22.

edit: Maybe they were worried that if they couldn't show vaporization worked, then the whole point is moot? Personally, I don't want people in pain hooked up to oxygen lines having to pull out a zippo to light up. Sooner or later someone would go up in flames...

That is exactly the point of my question. I'm wondering if they might have more luck in getting approval for a study to see if the stuff actually works as a medication as opposed to studying delivery methods. According to the site you linked NIDA does have the stuff and does distribute it to groups for studies. It seems that this particular study was disaproved perhaps on a lack of relative scientific merit.

Yikes, that might be a bit of a problem eh? A case of the cure being worse than the cold?

 

[llkoolkeg]

I suspect that crack and coke are classified the same because they are derrived from the same plant. However, that does not explain why heroin is classified differently from other opiate based drugs. Hmmm confused

To simplify, crack is concentrated cocaine, heroin is concentrated opium and hashish is concentrated cannabis. The DEA scheduling considers them different because medically, they are different. Even when the active ingredients are not concentrated and purified, the method of delivery makes a HUGE difference in the effects they have on the body, e.g. eating cannabis vs. smoking it.

 

[Silver]

According to the site you linked NIDA does have the stuff and does distribute it to groups for studies. It seems that this particular study was disaproved perhaps on a lack of relative scientific merit.

Can you find an instance of the NIDA approving a study and distributing marijuana? I had trouble (lot of unrelated crap in the links.) I also hate reading green webpages.

I did find this though:

http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=3727

If a bill got introduced, it looks like the past policy was to not approve studies that had FDA approval. I don't know if that is still in effect.

 

[Ciaran]

Interesting. But I wonder if there arent other things available either herbal or pharmacological that would offer the same benefit?

Hypothetically speaking, if immodium (or something similar) controls nausea and dosent cause any other ill effects why use weed?

When I met him the guy had been a quad for over 10 years. I asked the same question and he said that he had tried just about everything out there, and pot was the best.

The reason for not using immodium is that a) pot works faster. It relieves the nausea litterally within seconds. And B) I don't know what the hell chemicals are in Immodium, I at least know a bit about what's in pot. And I don't really want to support the pharm companies any more than I have to.

You are right about anecdotal evidence never convincing anyone. But untill the gov't takes it off of schedule 1 we'll never be able to test to know.

 

[N8 v2.0]

Weed is harmless...

 

[Ciaran]

Weed is harmless...

You might as well blame the gun. BZZZZZT! Thanks for playing, N8. You lose. Please try again.

 

[Westy]

You might as well blame the gun. BZZZZZT! Thanks for playing, N8. You lose. Please try again.

N8 is right. Weed causes drug crimes. Cars cause autotheft and pussy is to blame for prostitution.

 

[Changleen]

N8's just pissed cos the cool kids never offered him any Pot when he was younger. Now they've all grown up to be lawyers and he works in construction...

 

[N8 v2.0]

N8's just pissed cos the cool kids never offered him any Pot when he was younger. Now they've all grown up to be lawyers and he works in construction...

Far from it... my best friend's oldest brother was a cool-cat stoner in back in the late 70's.

Now he is a toothless, homeless wreck of person who picks up beer cans along side the highway for a living. He says he wishes he never tied weed in the first place.

Yep... drugs are real cool!

 

[Zark]

Hey N8, here's a thought. Why blame drugs? If your a looser, your a looser.

 

[N8 v2.0]

Hey N8, here's a thought. Why blame drugs? If your a looser, your a looser.

Didn't start out that way... just got hooked/addicted and is paying for it.

 

[H8R]

Far from it... my best friend's oldest brother was a cool-cat stoner in back in the late 70's.

Now he is a toothless, homeless wreck of person who picks up beer cans along side the highway for a living. He says he wishes he never tied weed in the first place.

Yep... drugs are real cool!

I know alot of loser alcoholics that have never tried weed. Actually, most losers that I've met never smoked weed.

They drink alot.

Most of the weed smokers I know get alot done in a day, and they hold down good jobs.

You're friends bro is just a shmuck using weed as an excuse.

 

[llkoolkeg]

Far from it... my best friend's oldest brother was a cool-cat stoner in back in the late 70's.

Now he is a toothless, homeless wreck of person who picks up beer cans along side the highway for a living. He says he wishes he never tied weed in the first place.

Yep... drugs are real cool!

Didn't start out that way... just got hooked/addicted and is paying for it.

What's my excuse, then? A stereotype is a stereotype and birds of a feather flock together. If you are a loser pot smoker, you will likely hang out with other loser pot smokers. For the most part, I choose to hang out with other married professional-type stoners(and non-stoners)...except for when I'm biking, at which time I slum and hang out with "two-wheeled locusts" and other forms of riff-raff. Know why? Because you don't have to be a stoner OR a biker to know how to have fun; you just have to be somewhat open-minded and willing to give others the benefit of the doubt even if you have been otherwise influenced to dislike "their type". I hate to say it, N8, but chances are pretty good that some of your own highbrow friends, associates and coworkers burn a little buddha from time to time w/o your knowledge and approval.

 

[Changleen]

'Till me eyes a bleed...

 

[HarryCallahan]

Last night on the news one doctor was saying there was a "mountain of anecdotal evidence" (with the attitude of "come on you stupid judges get with the program").........since when do Dr's and scienctists anaylize the effectiveness of a medication based on anecdotal evidence. If weed is such an effective medication for pain, why is the AMA on the fence on the matter, why are there no conclusive scientific studies on the issue?

Doctor's definitely look at anecdotal evidence, as do researchers. Sometimes that's how doctors figure out what does or doesn't work, or researchers get ideas on promising new fields. Medicine is still evolving, and good doctors are always reading, always learning. The AMA is pretty conservative; just the fact that it is on the fence about this topic means that a significant portion of its members think there is something to this.

I'm not saying I believe all the claims that the medical marijuana folks make. But from what I've read, the feds, largely through the DEA, throw some pretty significant obstacles in the way of research on this topic.

 

[N8 v2.0]

What's my excuse, then? A stereotype is a stereotype and birds of a feather flock together. If you are a loser pot smoker, you will likely hang out with other loser pot smokers. For the most part, I choose to hang out with other married professional-type stoners(and non-stoners)...except for when I'm biking, at which time I slum and hang out with "two-wheeled locusts" and other forms of riff-raff. Know why? Because you don't have to be a stoner OR a biker to know how to have fun; you just have to be somewhat open-minded and willing to give others the benefit of the doubt even if you have been otherwise influenced to dislike "their type". I hate to say it, N8, but chances are pretty good that some of your own highbrow friends, associates and coworkers burn a little buddha from time to time w/o your knowledge and approval.

You Sir, are an exception!

 

[HarryCallahan]

Interesting. But I wonder if there arent other things available either herbal or pharmacological that would offer the same benefit?

Hypothetically speaking, if immodium (or something similar) controls nausea and doesn't cause any other ill effects why use weed?

From what I've heard, weed is more effective on nausea, perhaps because it is inhaled. I remember having the flu real bad when I was a kid, and not being able to keep anything down, not water, not nausea relieving syrup or pills.

I've take immodium for traveler's stomach and it makes you very constipated.

As far as pain relief, my vet told me something about treating animals that might explain something about people with chronic pain who use weed. he said if he is treating big dogs, he sedates them, using something that
physically knocks them out or at least makes them very placid. But those same drugs aren't effective on cats, and for them, he uses drugs that are "disassociative", that is the cat is fully functional physically, but doesn't understand what is happening to it. Perhpas weed has this disassociative effect for folks with chronic pain, not so much eliminating the pain as pushing it into the background.

Honestly, I am not surprised the the supreme court decision. It was what I expected, that they would assert the primacy of federal law over state(s). I am pleasantly surprised by Rehnquist and Thomas dissenting.

What is political, and congress should act on, is how marijuana is classified.

 

[fluff]

More than 50% of all the people I have smoked weed with earn over $100k pa.

 

[BSEVEER]

More than 50% of all the people I have smoked weed with earn over $100k pa.

That's cool, they must always have some good stuff then.

 

[Changleen]

US$100K isn't much in UK Pounds... We get pretty good weed in the UK though, or at least it's easy to get pretty good weed. I used to have a choice between 3 varieties at most times, but the varieties availible would change all the time. It's alos pretty cheap in the UK compared to most places. The cheapest and best quality weed I've ever had (illegally - I'm not counting Holland) was in Canada or maybe Portland and the most expensive was in SF, although that was pretty damn good stuff too. So far over here in NZ weed is (comparative to a living wage) average priced and averagely good. I've only had had really good weed a few times here. That's fine with me. I used to smoke hash in college. Do any of you guys know who GLC are?

 

[TN]

Hypothetically speaking, if immodium (or something similar) controls nausea and dosent cause any other ill effects why use weed?

well, immodium basically paralyzes your colon. it stops spasms & slows everything down. This is no good if there is actually something wrong with your colon, like inflammation, lesions, bacterial/viral infection, etc... Just maybe if you ate too many nachos & beers. I am not sure it actually works on nausea, it never has for me.

I have Chrohn's Disease & when I am flaring, cannabis is the only thing that makes me feel normal.

I have taken Vicodin, Darvocet, Morphine, & Loratab for pain which is no good because they stop my colon from processing anything & if the inside of your colon is inflamed & bleeding this is the last thing you need. Not to mention the long term damage these drugs do to your liver & kidneys. They also have adverse effects of your mental health. Withdrawal sucks ass.

I have also been given a lifetime script (more or less) for Lomotil which is like immodium but also has narcotic effects since it has the same chemicals in it as Demerol (ever flown before?). I cant take this. If i take one 5mg pill I am f*ked up & will vomit bile the next morning.


There is no cure, only strong chemicals like those mentioned above & a new drug that i get every 4 months called Remicade that is basically made from rat DNA & some other really nasty stuff.

You may think "well pot doesnt help cure the disease, it just supresses the symptoms". every drug i mentioned (plus the 2 others i take, that wont go into) does nothing to cure the disease....just the symptoms. its like taking an aspirin for a headache caused by a brain tumor.
the chemical cocktail I take helps but not as well as pot.



I guess what I am trying to say is fvck Bush & his moral crusading cronies.
(dont get me started on stem cell research)

...oh yeah & the mega-pharma-corp-blood-suckers too.
:mumble:

 

[TN]

From what I've heard, weed is more effective on nausea, perhaps because it is inhaled. I remember having the flu real bad when I was a kid, and not being able to keep anything down, not water, not nausea relieving syrup or pills.

I've take immodium for traveler's stomach and it makes you very constipated.

As far as pain relief, my vet told me something about treating animals that might explain something about people with chronic pain who use weed. he said if he is treating big dogs, he sedates them, using something that
physically knocks them out or at least makes them very placid. But those same drugs aren't effective on cats, and for them, he uses drugs that are "disassociative", that is the cat is fully functional physically, but doesn't understand what is happening to it. Perhpas weed has this disassociative effect for folks with chronic pain, not so much eliminating the pain as pushing it into the background.

Honestly, I am not surprised the the supreme court decision. It was what I expected, that they would assert the primacy of federal law over state(s). I am pleasantly surprised by Rehnquist and Thomas dissenting.

What is political, and congress should act on, is how marijuana is classified.

I will have to find the article i just read, but it says what you are saying....
There are 3 ways to kill pain. being knocked out, dissociative, & physically taking away feeling. weed supposedly uses all three ways but enough so that it is not debilitating.

 

[dhtahoe]

We don't want people stoned and not working.

Yo I had cancer four years ago. If it we not for weed life would have sucked. You try going DAYS without food because of the nausa. Pot was THE ONLY thing that would get me to eat. Yes I was stoned no I was not working, but FU I had cancer.

 

[Ciaran]

Yo I had cancer four years ago. If it we not for weed life would have sucked. You try going DAYS without food because of the nausa. Pot was THE ONLY thing that would get me to eat. Yes I was stoned no I was not working, but FU I had cancer.

I think that's the best evidence presented yet.

Personally, if I could make the trade off I would quit smoking forever if people who need it could have it. (Yeah, I know. It's easy to make an altruistic statement like that.)

DHT, thumbs up on beating it. I sincerely hope you never have to deal with anything like that again.

 

[H8R]

Yes I was stoned no I was not working, but FU I had cancer.

Typical cancerous liberal excuse.

 

[H8R]

Typical cancerous liberal excuse.

BTW, J/K.

Right on for kicking the cancer. Anyone who goes through that and lives has big brass balls.

 

[dhtahoe]

I think that's the best evidence presented yet.

Personally, if I could make the trade off I would quit smoking forever if people who need it could have it. (Yeah, I know. It's easy to make an altruistic statement like that.)

DHT, thumbs up on beating it. I sincerely hope you never have to deal with anything like that again.

Four years as of 5/18/05. One more year and I'm 95% in the clear. The same cancer took my grandmother 20 years ago because it was not treatable. Cancer research has come sooooooooooooooooo far. Just got a bad gean I guess. It on my dads side because he has it now too.

 

[Damn True]

well, immodium basically paralyzes your colon. it stops spasms & slows everything down. This is no good if there is actually something wrong with your colon, like inflammation, lesions, bacterial/viral infection, etc... Just maybe if you ate too many nachos & beers. I am not sure it actually works on nausea, it never has for me.

I have Chrohn's Disease & when I am flaring, cannabis is the only thing that makes me feel normal.

I have taken Vicodin, Darvocet, Morphine, & Loratab for pain which is no good because they stop my colon from processing anything & if the inside of your colon is inflamed & bleeding this is the last thing you need. Not to mention the long term damage these drugs do to your liver & kidneys. They also have adverse effects of your mental health. Withdrawal sucks ass.

I have also been given a lifetime script (more or less) for Lomotil which is like immodium but also has narcotic effects since it has the same chemicals in it as Demerol (ever flown before?). I cant take this. If i take one 5mg pill I am f*ked up & will vomit bile the next morning.


There is no cure, only strong chemicals like those mentioned above & a new drug that i get every 4 months called Remicade that is basically made from rat DNA & some other really nasty stuff.

You may think "well pot doesnt help cure the disease, it just supresses the symptoms". every drug i mentioned (plus the 2 others i take, that wont go into) does nothing to cure the disease....just the symptoms. its like taking an aspirin for a headache caused by a brain tumor.
the chemical cocktail I take helps but not as well as pot.



I guess what I am trying to say is fvck Bush & his moral crusading cronies.
(dont get me started on stem cell research)

...oh yeah & the mega-pharma-corp-blood-suckers too.
:mumble:

I only suggested immodium because it was the only thing that came to mind as a treatment for gastro-distress.
My aunt has chronins as well, though I don't think her condition is as bad as yours sounds, does it get worse over time?

Again, I'm only asking questions. IMO the stuff should be tested, and if found to offer genuine releif then by all means legalize it for medicinal purposes. But it should remain a prescription drug.

 

[TN]

I only suggested immodium because it was the only thing that came to mind as a treatment for gastro-distress.
My aunt has chronins as well, though I don't think her condition is as bad as yours sounds, does it get worse over time?

Again, I'm only asking questions. IMO the stuff should be tested, and if found to offer genuine releif then by all means legalize it for medicinal purposes. But it should remain a prescription drug.

every case is different, but usually no. The disease sort of comes & goes too. You can go days/weeks/months without ever feeling a symptom. of course living healthy helps a ton. I no longer drink copious amounts of alcohol, I eat ALOT better & of course exercising helps too.

My case is considered active & only sometimes is it severe.

I am not a sick person....I just have a $hitty disease.


The FDA seems to rush drugs on to the market waaaaayyy too quickly if you ask me (look at viox, phen-fen, & even Remicade, a new drug that they now say causes lymphoma, luekemia & some nasty blood diseases).

I have started taking less RX's of lately thanks in part to naturally stable fish oil, bee propolis & a healthy diet.

Pot has been an herbal remedy for thousands of years & it is natural. I guess I am going to have to blame the smelly-ass-hippies for the bad stigma pot gets.

 

[TN]

Four years as of 5/18/05. One more year and I'm 95% in the clear. The same cancer took my grandmother 20 years ago because it was not treatable. Cancer research has come sooooooooooooooooo far. Just got a bad gean I guess. It on my dads side because he has it now too.

Good luck to your Dad. I hope he can beat it like you did.