"Medical Marijuana" is the whole, unprocessed plant or extracts!
 

From National Institute on Drug Abuse:

"The term “medical marijuana” is generally used to refer to the whole unprocessed marijuana plant or its crude extracts, which are not recognized or approved as medicine by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

But scientific study of the active chemicals in marijuana, called cannabinoids, has led to the development of two FDA-approved medications already, and is leading to the development of new pharmaceuticals that harness the therapeutic benefits of cannabinoids while minimizing or eliminating the harmful side effects (including the “high”) produced by eating or smoking marijuana leaves….."

An FDA-approved drug called Dronabinol (Marinol®) contains THC and is used to treat nausea caused by chemotherapy and wasting disease (extreme weight loss) caused by AIDS. Another FDA-approved drug called Nabilone (Cesamet®) contains a synthetic cannabinoid similar to THC and is used for the same purposes.

A drug called Sativex®, which contains approximately equal parts THC and CBD, is currently approved in the UK and several European countries to treat spasticity caused by multiple sclerosis (MS), and it is now in Phase III clinical trials in the U.S. to establish its effectiveness and safety in treating cancer pain….."

DrugFacts: Is Marijuana Medicine? | National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)

Proponents of "medical marijuana" are NOT demanding prescriptions for the FDA approved prescription drugs listed above. They want the WEED…..as a back-door way of having it legal for recreational use!

My thought exactly !! If he was really all that concerned about his brother, move him to Colorado.

Thank you.

So "medical marijuana" in a sense already exists.

Why then this move to make it available when the results are already available ?
It is very confusing to me, and I am cynical..rightfully or wrongly..that this is just another movement who climbed onto the moving train of movements in the last few years.

I am unconvinced, when speaking of recreational use of ANY positives on something that will alter your mind (different for every person I understand, which even makes it scarier) and has so many side things associated with it.

Creating artificial highs to knock down arrests or cut law enforcement costs makes no sense to me. We have a sufficient number of people who are absorbed in making themselves feel good. I still cannot fathom explaining this to kids at all. Do not you dare smoke...it is not good for you. But do light up that weed..it will make you forget...well, it will just make you forget.

It was all about medical marijuana. Do you really think sick people are going to be smoking pot and then running down to the square to do some dancing and driving?

If You Want
 

If you want to avoid reality, put others at risk on the road, put the youth at risk with children who have multiple birth defects, pay for drug rehabs after 15-20% of pot users have become serious addict(s) of this and other drugs like meth, coke, etc.etc. embarrase yourself, act stupid, maybe get arrested, etc. then by all means move to a state that permits you these options and stay away from our fine and good community. Please don't bring any of these to The Villages and I only hope if you get caught the consequences are big and even cause you to move. I have no sympthy for anyone who put the kids at risk or others because they want to get high and avoid reality. I do have sympthy for those that are seriously ill and that pot may help them avoid some of the pain that goes with their illmess. One is a need and the other is a disgrace.:police:

My sister had terminal lung cancer. Pot helped her with the almost unbearable pain and boosted her appetite a little. If you have ever watched someone suffer the way I saw her suffer, and you knew pot would help them, it would be inhumane to deny it to them. Here she is with her kids long before cancer entered their lives. Clearly not a doper.

I voted "yes" for people like your sister. Too bad the narrow minds of Florida won out.

Well said Sandtrap. I voted "yes" also for people like Wandatime's sister and John Morgan's brother. I agree with John Morgan, esquire.

Good testimonial for a person who suffered and needed the relief. Very sorry you have this sad story to recount.

For our learning, how (in what form) did she consume the pot?

I witnessed
 

I also witnessed a Niece who had a brain tumor and pot really helped relieve her pain, also her father a Dentist developed a brain tumor about 4-5 years after she died. I have great sympthy for those that truly need it for pain. I have no feeling for those that want to abuse it and/or get Doctors to fake perscriptions so they can bring it to the general public. My thoughts go out to those suffering and I only hope we can find a way to control it's use. We also have to think of the under 21 crowd who when using bring potentially terible problems to the unborn or the one that is subject to addition and it causes them to renew their addictions. In the case of the niece my sister went out at night in Washington, DC and got it on the black market from dealers. It is the junkies and the loose Dr's who are stopping the usage for the sick. :mad:

I find it interesting that marijuana is considered a mind altering drug. Those that have medical conditions that can be helped aren't the younger generation...it is our generation. Cigarettes have carcinogens which are present in the tobacco plant, marijuana doesn't. Comparing the two is apples and oranges but I guess that is what we do when we reach old age and generalizations are easier. I would ask the poster what what he do if the prescribed drugs don't ease the pain and suffering of either himself for a loved one. Do we then let the Dr prescribe codeine or other habit forming drugs to dull the pain and suffering? Do we believe that is ok because it is prescribed by a Dr.even though those drugs are extremely addictive. And, I don't think the younger generation, our kids and grand kids are interested in Medical Marijuana. If they want recreational marijuana I'm sure they know where they can get it in their neighborhood.

I believe many who voted against this proposed amendment understand that it can help patients with severe conditions, but have concerns about the propsal. My concern with it was the apparent lack of controls. Where were the regulations over who can prescribe, what training/licensing/certification is required, what conditions qualify and for how long? Do we require trials with "standard" medications before it can be prescribed?

Regulations regarding controlled pharmaceuticals are being tightened more and more. Medical marijuana should be no different. Adequate controls and regulations should be in place prior to approval, not after. It is much harder to put the genie back in the bottle than releasing it.

Actually cannabis smoke contains at least 50 of the carcinogens contained in tobacco smoke. Does smoking cannabis cause cancer? | Cancer Research UK


BTW, I am all for whatever it takes to help alleviate the pain in terminally ill cancer patients, those seeking some relief from glaucoma and people experiencing terrible pain that cannot otherwise be satisfactorily alleviated. The problem with "medical" marijuana use is sleaze bag entrepreneurs find their way around poorly written laws. That is happening right now in several states. Certain doctors grant "patients" medical marijuana prescriptions because they are allegedly experiencing some contrived but unproven "pain". I know a few situations among people of my acquaintance. They are just stoners playing the game to get their weed.

Furthermore there is big money in the medical marijuana business. Guess why those pushing the legislation want it so badly?

I cannot stand John Morgan.
Living in Tampa I've had his commercials up to my eyeballs.
Unfortunately he has commercials here too!

Most of us would agree that people with illnesses and those
terminally ill should be able to use anything that eases pain.
But Amendment 2 was not just about that and that's why it
was defeated.

We already have had numerous drunken driving wrong-way
accidents on our highways! Do we need people high now too???

Based on the large amount of misinformation I have seen in this thread, I think some folks need to read the failed amendment vs buying into what the advocates on both sides had to say on TV.

First, I really hate to be painted as you painted me..."old age"...and using generalizations to make it easy.

I have been asking through out this thread, and got a reply....I have read that there are drugs that can be prescribed that will do EXACTLY what you advocate.

I also said that those who support this, and some have posted to,that affect on here, are simply going step by step to recreational marijuana. I would prefer to have my loved ones treated by a medical professional with drugs approved by the appropriate body.

Painting those opposed to this as unsympathetic boobs is wrong and very misguided, in addition to arrogant.

I have been very open with my questions...very open about my lack of knowledge, and have done some homework on the subject. Do I doubt that it may alleviate pain, etc in some cases...no. Do I think there are alternatives that will do the same thing...yes (actually using the basic contents of marijuan)

Do I think this movement has alternative motives, other than trying to make folks like me look like fools and unsympathetic people...yes. Gameplay on many of these movements is the same...call them a name or too..a make them feel guilty. I, actually in doing some background reading, found two places where I was not only unsympathetic as you willed me, but racist, because I didn't care about the percentage of blacks locked up for using this drug.

Perhaps we come from such divergent backgrounds we will never agree. I basically would rather rely on a medical professional for remedies, and find that the law enforcment issues are not one of race, but bad behavior.

I AM NOT unsympathetic....just unconvinced and if that makes me what you deemed me to be, then so be it

I will accept you have a problem with us of old age ( I prefer experienced, but you would find fault with that), and as to generalizations, I have asked a few VERY SPECIFIC questions on this thread. Your post to me is the very epitome of generalization.

I will agree to disagree......and I'm 71 so I think I qualify for "old age" in the context. Some of us see things differently and that's ok and we will all work for what we believe.

Charolette's Web was a cannabinoid oil extract that eliminated the high. Again I say that the use of medical marijuana has to ne metered so that it can be closely controlled.

People equate marijuana with cigarettes or alcohol but forget both are regulated but yet both always find there way to under age people
Cigarettes are bad but marijuana has more cancer causing agents than cigarettes and today's marijuana is has substantially more THC then that of 1970. Studies have indicate that regular use (once a week) can drop IQ by 6 points

....

Gee maybe that would help with the animus of republicans and democrats LOL Can you imagine watching CNN on a day when they all smoked pot?

Okay, to get serious, there were several good points above. I never read the actual language so perhaps that is really the problem. I voted for it because I pretty much believe if you are in pain, get relief. I also believe if you are terminally ill, you should be able to choose to end that downhill journey when YOU want to and not have to endure unnecessary suffering. I would be happy to have those two pills in my medicine closet.
From what i know, it is technically marijuana but they have extracted the part that makes you high. I do believe it is a miracle for seizures and they are actually working on it in Colorado to make the most potent form for seizure issues. I would much prefer to use marijuana rather than some of the other alternatives that are extremely harsh on your liver, and have other side effects.

As for dissing seniors, he's an idiot. Just my humble opinion.

We always seem to end up in the same place on this.

I can only speak for myself on this. I really get upset being painted as unsympathetic and non feelings. That is so far from the truth and it really upsets me to have that implied.

I have asked....are there other medications that will achieve the same thing. I have been told on this thread and have read it THAT THERE ARE. Actually, drugs that more assimilate marijuana than those on ballots. I will ask again, and I ask again in the most sympathatic way......are there not alternatives to pot now ?????? Drugs that obtain the very same results ? If I am being informed correctly ON THIS THREAD the medical marijuana is without the strongest component of the drug.

Why is this not being explored within the medical community and going through the same thing that any new drug needs to go through ? Why is all political and on a ballot ? Why does noone who supports it even admit that there are alternatives that will do the same thing ?

If there are no other alternatives that offer the same results you seek, then I am with you on making MEDICAL MARIJUANA legal but still asking WHY the medical community is not pursuing it and why it is made political ?

I note on this thread that there are those who ignore the medical part of this and talk about the recreational part of it.....that bothers me A LOT. And if you listen to the supporters of MEDICAL marijuana, they are almost giddy about getting it legal for recreational use.

If someone can address these questions, I am open. Trying to make me feel guilty...and I can only speak for myself, is terribly unfair. I have sympathy for all of you and anyone who suffered.....I also know suffering but choose not to discuss it.....I am NOT a cold person as you seem to want to make me.

Please address my questions.....I have been accused of dealing in only generalities, yet those who support this measure talk in generalities only and I have asked and asked SPECIFIC questions and only receive stories about how it helped family and I am glad that you were able to get that....honestly, but that is NOT speaking to the subject or the national debate.

I would also ask that you give your opinion on recreational use, just to keep your comments in context.

Thank you and sorry if you feel I am cold and unfeeling but it is not the case.

If there are no other alternatives that offer the same results you seek, then I am with you on making MEDICAL MARIJUANA legal but still asking WHY the medical community is not pursuing it and why it is made political ?

My understanding is that whatever is in marijuana, with our without the THC but they are making it without the THC specifically FOR seizures, is extremely potent for seizures. My understanding is it works even when other synthetic pharmaceuticals are unable to. Why not use it?
I didn't read this entire thread but I am sorry if people are making you feel badly for your opinion. Everyone has one. :)

Forget "recreational marijuana" that is not what is being discussed. That's actually the problem...no one is looking for a "high" when using MM. If you are, then move to Colorado, or purchase illegally....that's not what this is about.

As for other drugs doing the same....doing what? Eliminating seizures? Eliminating pain? The legal drugs that eliminate pain are highly addictive and have terrible side effects.....MM does not.

Well, thus far I am old, narrow minded, talk in generalities (nobody will answer my specific questions) and a lot of other things. One who used the narrow minded comments applauded the increase in legal recreation use so that flies in the face of using it for medical reasons.

I am NONE of those things. If you want to stick with the actual title of the thread, this ammendment was very very poorly worded relative to obtaining it.

Again, this politics, and it IS politics, of calling anyone who disagrees with you names or unsympathetic or racist (THAT is a claim of some if you oppose this) or whatever name you want to use.....that is wrong and those who do it, are simply showing their ignorance and inability to have a discussion.

I have asked questions on this.....I cannot understand why nobody will respond to those questions and only tell sad stories of their loved ones. I understand those feelings for sure.....just trust me....I DO understand but that story whether it be mine or yours is NOT what should being discussed.

Again, I am sorry sometimes I even post on some of this threads. People do not want to discuss...just make sure they are able to feel better than you who disagree with their views, and NEVER support them.

Do those who post and imply that I, or anyone, is not sympathetic to their plight or that of their family REALLY AND HONESTLY feel that way ? And if so, how do you arrive at that ?

AND BY THE WAY....I LOVE hearing other opinions....that is how we learn. But, an opinion is not implying I am something I am not or calling me and others narrow minded. That is arrogant to me...as if YOURS is the only opinion. Sharing opinions is great.....sharing pontifications is not educational to anyone.

Forgot recreational...only mentioned because a supporter of the medical mariuna ammendment referenced how happy they were relative to more states allowing recreational.

Listen, I am not smart enough to continue this conversation and my ego can stand no more of the shots taken at me for my questions...my questions now, NOT my stand.

I have read and they are probably crap sites..but have read about at least 10 drugs that mimic cannabis and just want to know what is wrong with them,....You say they have bad side affects...I am not reading that.

I wish all of you well......you are obviously more well versed than I on this subject and I will bow out......please accept my apologies if I hurt anyones feelings with my QUESTIONS, not opinions or stands...QUESTIONS...still unanswered but did not want to offend so many people.

Again, I AM old, but not narrow minded, not unsympathetic, not racist and enjoy learning things. What I have learned here is that many have suffered and have had relief with marijuana...that is good. What I want to learn is about the alternatives to using marijuana.

I don't know how MM proponents expect it to become a prescribed substance when the clinical trials required for all other prescription drugs have not been done on "medical marijuana" which is the whole, unprocessed plant according to the link I posted earlier.

One of the biggest reasons for required clinical trials is to find out by scientific method whether it actually helps, and to find out if it does more good than harm! (First, do no harm.)

As this research article from National Institutes of Health shows, there are many complexities to both crude cannabis and the prescription drugs made from derived canniboids that remain untested and unresolved:

Cannabinoids in the management of difficult to treat pain

"Even after political and legal considerations, it remains extremely unlikely that crude cannabis could ever be approved by the FDA as a prescription medicine as outlined in the FDA Botanical Guidance document (Food and Drug Administration 2004; Russo 2006b), due to a lack of rigorous standardization of the drug, an absence of Phase III clinical trials, and pulmonary sequelae (bronchial irritation and cough) associated with smoking (Tashkin 2005). Although cannabis vaporizers reduce potentially carcinogenic polyaromatic hydrocarbons, they have not been totally eliminated by this technology."

Cannabinoids in the management of difficult to treat pain

Wanda, I also voted "yes" for those like your sister.

I found Mr. Morgan's argument about MM to be a smokescreen for his hidden intentions. Especially curious was the commercial featuring the little girl who had seizures. According to this article, the MM that would help her is already available.

Gov. Rick Scott signs 'Charlotte's Web' medical marijuana bill | Tampa Bay Times

It is a bit hard to believe that this poor little girl would actually be smoking weed to help with her seizures. Her father's plea for a way to help his child is a bit unnecessary since he can already get the drug she needs.

I'm all for MM to help those who have no other alternatives. What was presented to voters did not adequately address controlling access. My understanding is that doctors can't prescribe it since it is an illegal substance. The feds are simply overlooking the violations in favor of States' Right on the issue. Hmmm, why are we respecting the states on this issue but not on others? That's another question for another day.

Sorry Mr. Morgan. You'll just have to make your money from more frivolous lawsuits instead of your pot farm.

"Grandma & Grandpa, would you run down to the corner store and pick up some medical marijuana?" You know whose hands this will get into. We had a case in a nearby city a couple of years ago when some college student went down a city street at 60mph during mid afternoon and took out five cars. When the officers walked towards his car, you'd never guess what he was lighting up......again.....in front of the officers.

Glad you recognize the politicization of this subject. Why respecct the states ? Game is put it on the ballot and bring out the voters....period. Did not work on Tuesday but that is the game plan !!

The language of the of the Question was extremely poorly written .

Even I could drive a " truck " through it . Given Mr. Morgan`s strong interest and financial backing for his " cause " I was very surprised that the language was not a great deal " tighter ".
As it was written it would require the voters to give over a " Carte Blanche " with respect to any reasonable control / regulation over the sale and distribution .

I am not aware of any trucks that preceded the existence of speech.

Good catch !

Thanks for the note ! I will correct it .

23 Legal Medical Marijuana States and DC - Medical Marijuana - ProCon.org


Twenty three states plus the District of Columbia have passed laws allowing the use of medical marijuana. It would be interesting to hear from posters on how these laws in their home states effected their lives.

California's law allowing medical marijuana seems to be the earliest enacted, dating all the way back to 1996. Other states allowing it are Arizona, Alaska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, New Mexico, Washington, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Michigan, Maryland, Maine, Connecticut, Colorado, Minnesota, Hawaii, Montana, Oregon, Nevada, Vermont, and too many others to list.

Ok, I will try to give some light and not much heat.

The designation of marijuana as a schedule one drug makes the possession illegal even by doctors or researchers. With rare exceptions it has been and continues to be illegal to conduct studies using weed especially if any federal dollars are involved in the research facility.
University of Florida says it won't risk federal funding to participate in marijuana research - SaintPetersBlog
The politics of how marijuana became a schedule one drug are another topic for another day.

THC is the prime active ingredient in pot, but it is not the only active ingredient. Cannabinoid comes in different chemical forms, think of it like saying Ford which can be a Mustang, Fiesta.... Some forms of THC differ in their profile from others. Some seem to be less likely to produce euphoria than others. The relative amounts in a plant of THC and the other active ingredients in pot differ from plant to plant. There are cannabinoids which produce extremely little euphoria.

There are NO drugs which mimic marijuana because the natural product has many different chemicals.
"Pharmacologically, the principal psychoactive constituent of cannabis is tetrahydrocannabinol (THC); it is one of 483 known compounds in the plant including at least 84 other cannabinoids, such as cannabidiol (CBD), cannabinol (CBN), tetrahydrocannabivarin (THCV), and cannabigerol (CBG)."

It would be like saying taking a nicotine pill is the same as smoking tobacco, or taking a caffeine pill is the same as drinking coffee. So while there are some approved product which contain cannabinoids none of them provide the wide (alleged) benefits of the real thing.
105 Peer-Reviewed Studies on Marijuana - Medical Marijuana - ProCon.org
has the most complete list of studies I can find. Some involve smoking, many involve extracts and commercial products. The studies are of variable quality and look at different issues. No broad conclusions can be drawn.

There are many anecdotal reports, including some posted here, where patients and families have reported that smoked pot was the best drug for the symptoms needing treatment, most effective with fewest side effects.

Benefits reported include control of nausea, increased appetite, improved sleep, pain control, improved mood, and in patients with spasticity improvement in spasms. And as everyone knows, an anticonvulsive benefit in children with Dravet syndrome from the non-euphoria compounds in pot.

So to summarize.. There are no approved products that are the same as pot. There is extremely limited research which the government would require to reclassify pot off of schedule one because you can't do research on schedule one drugs (see reference above). The answers to :

Why is this not being explored within the medical community and going through the same thing that any new drug needs to go through ? Why is all political and on a ballot ? Why does no one who supports it even admit that there are alternatives that will do the same thing ?

is because none of those things are possible at this time, so it is politics that have marijuana a schedule one drug, and it will be politics that will undo that situation if it is to be undone.

Thank you for sharing. Too bad others don't have your compassion and common sense.

Thank you for an adult response. Now I need to do more reading.

Thanks again for your maturity ! There are websites that dispute the options available and they need to be vetted.

One more question I have been asking.....how many who favor medical marijuana also would like legalization of recreational marijuana and more importantly for what reason ?

The reasons for medical have been expounded and are clear.

Thanks again

Just medical marijuana - not recreational.

I heard on NPR that in Colorado that around 40% of the recreational marijuana sold is sold in food products from the pot shops. They had a discussion of "dosage" being labled on the food packages since eating an entire marijuana cookie or brownie could send some people into such a high that they have hurt themselves seriously.

So, for Sandtrap328, I will pass up the recreational MJ and just hope the medical marijuana makes it legally to Florida.

I have a hard time believing Amendment 2 was really about providing for the physically sick. Mentally maybe, but because of the way it was written made me believe it was for the wide spread sale of dope. It would have made it available for anyone who could get a MD to write a prescription. Follow the money! Wish one could find out how many dispensaries were being planned in south Florida and by whom.

Thanks for your compliment. I will pause to suggest that these are very different issues. A decision whether to allow the state to regulate the availability of medical marijuana seems like it should be decided on medical evidence. That means both evidence in favor and against. And balance the risk vs benefit. While it is legitimate to ask the "what if" questions they should not dominate the discussion, as they did too often IMO. If there is a product which according to a licensed physician would benefit a patient more than present risk to that patient, and in fact there are hundreds or thousands of similar cases, that would make me question the classification of that product as having no known benefit. Keep in mind we allow medications which have a huge amount of potential for abuse to be prescribed and just do our best to control that abuse. Oxycontin has an enormous abuse potential, but sometimes is the only pain medication that provides some relief to patients with severe pain. Could there be doctors who abuse the right to prescribe and patients who fake symptoms and divert their pills to the street, of course. But we don't make oxycontin a schedule one drug because it is a needed weapon in the battle against pain.

Legalization of recreational marijuana is not one which should be based mostly on the medical considerations. The one medical/psychological concern might be the theory of gateway drug use. IMO this is not settled in the literature but most data suggests pot does not lead to other drugs, it more is a stop over point for people who are going that way anyhow. Example, most people get to having intercourse. But at some point they behaviorally pause at second or third base. Petting didn't gateway going all the way, it was just easier to get there first.

Legalization should be decided on whether the societal costs of criminalization, prosecution, incarceration, creating a high profit drug underground, loss of potential tax revenue, and those kinds of considerations are worth keeping. What is the downside of legalization vs continued criminalization? Reasonable people will see the data differently, and we all come pre-loaded with our cultural constraints. In a few short months we will have 4 states with wide availability of recreational pot. Those who oppose de-criminalization should be prepared to produce real data showing that the consequences they predicted actually happen. That means something more than just a case report here and there of an individual who did poorly. In the absence of adverse outcomes, I would hope that those who oppose decriminalization would reconsider.