Medical marijuana

[ValleyGal]

Solution: de-criminalize marijuana. I could have four non-medicinal cannabis plants in my home for personal use, as can every home in BC, no matter how many adults live in the home. This removes the whole idea of "big pharma" getting all the money. People can go to dispensaries where the growth and sale is regulated and monitored. The people who work there are very knowledgeable, and they produce a huge variety of edibles and paraphernalia. They educate consumers on the safe use of it, what to do in case of emergency or marijuana-induced psychosis, how to recognize when things are going bad, and it seems to be working here.

On the other hand, legalizing only medical marijuana was a real problem and still left other consumers at risk, including of lacing with fentanyl.

Messy, there are some psychologists and counsellors who use psilocybin in their therapy sessions. Anyone can have a "bad trip" but the environment is very, very controlled and the amount so minute that it is barely enough to produce hallucinations. It does not mean I agree with it, but where I live it is so controlled and the therapy session so structured (it's still therapy, not just a safe high) that the risks are very small. I would also never recommend for children or for even short term use - one or two sessions, but not the standard 6 sessions. I don't recommend it at all, but I do believe that for certain disorders, client physiology and situations, that it should be studied for efficacy.

All drugs have the potential of unsafe/unwanted side effects. I believe in harm reduction to minimize negative effects to the person, their families, the economy, and the environment. Legalizing and providing a safe drug supply is one way to do that. And as a Christian, I am well aware that I have the right to choose, and I value that right. It would be hypocritical of me, then, to strip anyone else, Christian or not, of that same right.

 

[Messy]

I was on 8 oxazepam a day and then I saw Hal Lindsey preach on Revelation 18, Babylon the Great. Verse 23:
for by your sorcery all the nations were deceived.
And he said sorcery was pharmakeia, witchcraft, drugs and I was like: eeeeeeww! I just threw it all away. I had been taking it for a year and they said you shouldn't quit at once, but just take 1 pill less, then 2 and it would take months to go back to 0, but I just threw it away. I had to come back to a psychiater to see how I was doing and he was amazed that I just quit and was doing so well lol.

 

[Messy]

And as a Christian, I am well aware that I have the right to choose, and I value that right. It would be hypocritical of me, then, to strip anyone else, Christian or not, of that same right.

What about the kids? I would vote for a party that doesn't want it to be legal. Not that they have much to say here. There are villages, where all these teens are on marijuana or some prescription benzo's. It's always these older ppl who say they have a right to get it and want it to be legal, but they don't care about teens or psychiatric patients, who are way too childish to say no to it and same with alcohol. You can just buy alcohol here in the supermarket when you're 18. What about psychiatric patients? That one guy would come visit and drink 20 half liters of beer in one evening. He could just buy it in the supermarket. If you whine to the doc that you don't feel well they give you a load of happy pills just like that. If a boy doesn't behave like a girl and is a bit wild they put pills in him to be calm. And christian parties don't care about that either. As if only marijuana is so bad. And then the weirdest thing: cigarettes, oh boy, don't dare smoke, cause everyone gets mad and judges you, go smoke outside where noone else is. Lets make it even more insane expensive, but marijuana is fine in Holland.

 

[Albion]

Solution: de-criminalize marijuana. I could have four non-medicinal cannabis plants in my home for personal use, as can every home in BC, no matter how many adults live in the home. This removes the whole idea of "big pharma" getting all the money.

However, in places where the stuff has been legalized, it's the illegal, "black market," that has really profited.

On the other hand, legalizing only medical marijuana was a real problem and still left other consumers at risk, including of lacing with fentanyl.

Tens of thousands are still dying from fentanyl--many more than before marijuana was legalized.

All drugs have the potential of unsafe/unwanted side effects. I believe in harm reduction to minimize negative effects to the person, their families, the economy, and the environment. Legalizing and providing a safe drug supply is one way to do that.

That's always the argument. Too bad that reality tells a different story.

 

[ValleyGal]

What about the kids?

In BC, there are restrictions just as there are with alcohol. As Albion points out, there is still a black market which is where a lot of teens get it, just as with alcohol there are still bootleggers. But it is better to have a safe supply for most people. I don't think anyone anywhere would suggest making it readily available to children. I talk about harm reduction. Someone I used to work with has a degree in youth care, and she did a major paper on the effects of marijuana on young people. One of the harms associated with marijuana use on men under age 25 is that it has an adverse effect on how they produce sperm, which then affects the development of the fetus and consequently, the baby. Harm reduction suggests we need to teach our young men and boys about this (and other) adverse effect on their growth and development.

However, in places where the stuff has been legalized, it's the illegal, "black market," that has really profited.

There will always be a black market, but I fail to see how the black market will thrive a whole lot when it's available at the cannabis pharm and fully regulated.

Tens of thousands are still dying from fentanyl--many more than before marijuana was legalized.

We aren't talking about fentanyl. Of course people are still dying from it, but people aren't overdosing from smoking fentanyl laced marijuana, which is what I brought up.

That's always the argument. Too bad that reality tells a different story.

One of my profs actually conducted her dissertation research on harm reduction. Research supports legalization, safe supply and safe injection/use sites (all forms of harm reduction).

 

[Messy]

In BC, there are restrictions just as there are with alcohol. As Albion points out, there is still a black market which is where a lot of teens get it, just as with alcohol there are still bootleggers. But it is better to have a safe supply for most people. I don't think anyone anywhere would suggest making it readily available to children. I talk about harm reduction. Someone I used to work with has a degree in youth care, and she did a major paper on the effects of marijuana on young people. One of the harms associated with marijuana use on men under age 25 is that it has an adverse effect on how they produce sperm, which then affects the development of the fetus and consequently, the baby. Harm reduction suggests we need to teach our young men and boys about this (and other) adverse effect on their growth and development.

It is a consequence though. They think: lets regulate it, medical marijuana and before you know it 16 year olds smoke it on the school yard for fun. They did that in the 80s already in my school, but then it was only a small group.
I had a 16 y o boy at my door asking me if I could go get him some marijuana around the corner in the coffeeshop, cause he had seen an ex going there. They'd always try get it from someone over 18.

 

[Albion]

There will always be a black market, but I fail to see how the black market will thrive a whole lot when it's available at the cannabis pharm and fully regulated.

Okay. You don't see how what's happening can possibly be happening. That takes care of that.

We aren't talking about fentanyl.

You were talking about it.

Of course people are still dying from it, but people aren't overdosing from smoking fentanyl laced marijuana, which is what I brought up.

Maybe you've just forgotten why you brought it up.

One of my profs actually conducted her dissertation research on harm reduction. Research supports legalization, safe supply and safe injection/use sites (all forms of harm reduction).

In a theoretical world, perhaps. In this one, no.

 

[Stravinsk]

It is a consequence though. They think: lets regulate it, medical marijuana and before you know it 16 year olds smoke it on the school yard for fun. They did that in the 80s already in my school, but then it was only a small group.

In Southern California in the 80's and early 90's Cannabis was definitely not legal/regulated. Somehow I managed to find it nearly every morning before my high school classes, usually for free. It never influenced me to do violence or anything super stupid. Except maybe sleep during 3rd-4th period. When I decided to leave it alone several years later, it didn't have any adverse affects, such as withdrawal and I had no issues leaving it alone.

Obviously you don't like it in your country but I think you can admit that among the "drugs" available (legal or not) it really is the least in terms of any "harmful" effects.

 

[ValleyGal]

Maybe you've just forgotten why you brought it up.

I brought up fentanyl laced marijuana, which you then tried to generalize to just fentanyl. I had been talking about harm reduction and safe supply of marijuana as a harm reduction method, rather than people taking chances of it being laced. No matter how you try to twist it, the research is boots on the ground in the DTES. You can't just assume that it's not going to work when previous harm reduction research shows that it does work.

 

[Stravinsk]

Okay. You don't see how what's happening can possibly be happening. That takes care of that.

You were talking about it.

Maybe you've just forgotten why you brought it up.

In a theoretical world, perhaps. In this one, no.

Dude, judging by the responses in this thread, I have probably used more Cannabis than anyone in this forum, was a daily user for several years in high school, and sporadically after. In all that usage, I only once had a (suspected) laced dose, and it certainly wasn't with something good (I felt sick).

Yet you talk like it's an epidemic. Because why? You saw a news article on it? And why is MJ to blame exactly for it's being polluted? How does it single MJ out as the problem? Couldn't just about anything be adulterated with fentanyl?

Honestly, what is Christians beef with MJ? Can they just not handle that their "God government" once made it a crime (when it was legal before) and then "changed His mind" and then "changed His mind" again for only certain US states or what exactly? Oh wait, I already know. God never made any rules on it or changed his mind, the onus is on the Christian who equates Government with "God's will".

 

[Albion]

Dude, judging by the responses in this thread, I have probably used more Cannabis than anyone in this forum, was a daily user for several years in high school, and sporadically after. In all that usage, I only once had a (suspected) laced dose, and it certainly wasn't with something good (I felt sick).

Yet you talk like it's an epidemic. Because why?

Because it's an epidemic?

But I think my persistence, if that is what it was, is related more to the lighthearted attitude exhibited here to the widespread (and increasing) use of a drug that is harmful. A more balanced response to the introduction of this topic is what I had expected.

 

[Lamb]

Dude, judging by the responses in this thread, I have probably used more Cannabis than anyone in this forum, was a daily user for several years in high school, and sporadically after. In all that usage, I only once had a (suspected) laced dose, and it certainly wasn't with something good (I felt sick).

Yet you talk like it's an epidemic. Because why? You saw a news article on it? And why is MJ to blame exactly for it's being polluted? How does it single MJ out as the problem? Couldn't just about anything be adulterated with fentanyl?

Honestly, what is Christians beef with MJ? Can they just not handle that their "God government" once made it a crime (when it was legal before) and then "changed His mind" and then "changed His mind" again for only certain US states or what exactly? Oh wait, I already know. God never made any rules on it or changed his mind, the onus is on the Christian who equates Government with "God's will".

He probably brought up about the laced fentanyl, because of multiple cases throughout the US happening. There have been some local I've read about, and not just in the news, on my town's group. So it's happening more often than the liberal media is willing to report.

 

[Albion]

He probably brought up about the laced fentanyl, because of multiple cases throughout the US happening. There have been some local I've read about, and not just in the news, on my town's group. So it's happening more often than the liberal media is willing to report.

Actually, I wasn't the one who brought up the subject of fentanyl-laced marijuana. The member who did introduce it almost immediately wanted to avoid the topic. But--

The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reported that the rates of overdose deaths involving synthetic opioids, which includes fentanyl, increased in 2020 to more than 18 times the number in 2013, and that has "accelerated" in the two years since 2020, reaching more than 100,000 deaths annually. The primary vehicle for fentanyl overdosing is marijuana.

 

[Stravinsk]

Because it's an epidemic?

But I think my persistence, if that is what it was, is related more to the lighthearted attitude exhibited here to the widespread (and increasing) use of a drug that is harmful. A more balanced response to the introduction of this topic is what I had expected.

Which drug are you referring to, MJ or fentanyl?

Why aren't you against the latter and instead harp on the former? Why don't you instead advocate for laws that allow the general populace to grow their own Cannabis if you are so hung up on commercial Cannabis being laced with the harmful PHARMACEUTICAL drug fentanyl?

Prey tell, tell us. Because I'm smelling a really foul aroma of super-hypocrite here.

 

[Albion]

Which drug are you referring to, MJ or fentanyl?

Why aren't you against the latter and instead harp on the former?

I've taken up specific aspects of the matter as others here have introduced them. I also know that it would be wrong to cherry-pick the matter as I see being attempted by some posters who are more than willing to comment on what they think are the "good" aspects of some drug use while pretending that there is no downside to consider at all.

 

[Stravinsk]

He probably brought up about the laced fentanyl, because of multiple cases throughout the US happening. There have been some local I've read about, and not just in the news, on my town's group. So it's happening more often than the liberal media is willing to report.

Ok, well "laced Cannabis" may be a new phenomenon in the US. It certainly wasn't when I lived there. I don't trust international news, but I do pay attention to more local news, which is sometimes more honest.

So I have to wonder WHY (if it is true) this is a new phenomenon? And what is the answer?

Here is what I believe: Cannabis is a threat to many many pharma drugs. People use it and are able to get off of many pharma drugs. This of course is a threat to a multi-billion dollar industry. Therefore, something must be done about this threat (from the perspective of the monopoly).

(Real or just reported): A harmful pharma drug is used to adulterate Cannabis. Somehow, now, Cannabis is the problem again, not the pharma drug.

Solution is simple. De-regulate, and de-criminalize Cannabis. Let the people grow it for their own use. Whether that be pain relief, textiles, clothing, whatever. It has many uses. It is the right and moral decision, but this isn't likely to happen. Because of monopoly, and because of $$ interests, (and because of ingrained attitudes, some of which are religiously based), people like Albion will demonize it in any way they can. I honestly have to wonder if it's just ignorance and lack of knowledge that people are biased, or if it's intentional (either overtly or through systematic brainwashing).

 

[tango]

Well, I expect that it's a question whether the benefit outweighs the drawbacks. I'm not sure that it does--which is just about what I said in the beginning in response to the idea that of course smoking this weed is a good idea.

If you think it's a bad idea you are, of course, free to act on that belief and not smoke weed. That's the beauty of freedom - something being legal doesn't mean it's mandated.

Like increased deaths and/or loss of memory. How long do I have to decide whether or not those are "benefits?"

As long as you want.

I don't think anyone is disputing that.

... except for the people who want the law to say people aren't allowed to consume a product they believe offers them a benefit that outweighs the costs.

 

[tango]

Yeah I don't know. I get the idea that a christian or muslim govt is a bunch of parents who want to protect their kids and then the not believing adults are like leave me alone, democracy, I want to do what I want. In Holland you can get it in any coffee shop. It would have been nice if a christian govt had protected me. It has to do with christianity. You can use it here because non christian parties said it was fine. I wish they banned medical drugs too to protect people, but that may get dangerous, cause yes it keeps some calm and there is no alternative for a lot of people. Lot of churches rather send ppl to a psychiater than that they do some effort to pray for you. My ex took our son to a psychologist who wanted to put him on drugs. I said: Do you want to kill him too? Then he kicked me out of his house lol. Come on. He was a preacher who knew how to pray. So I said to son: tell your dad you're healed. But then I lie. No. That's what the Bible says. He who the Son sets free is free indeed. So he did and he didnt believe him but within a week it was gone and they didnt put him on poison.

So what do you expect? Are you seriously saying that because one person might need protecting from something nobody else should be allowed to use it? You can't ban things because a child might get their hands on it - if you start down that path it doesn't go anywhere good.

Perhaps we should ban alcohol in case a child gets drunk? Ban cars, in case a child steals their parents' keys and gets in a wreck? Where does it stop? Bicycles? Regular over-the-counter painkillers?

Your point about medical drugs is valid - some of them can have all sorts of nasty side effects. A friend of mine showed me the prescription sheet for his antidepressants and my first thought was that I wouldn't want to chance any of them, but based on his situation he obviously believed it was better to take them than to refuse them.

 

[Albion]

If you think it's a bad idea you are, of course, free to act on that belief and not smoke weed. That's the beauty of freedom - something being legal doesn't mean it's mandated.



As long as you want.



... except for the people who want the law to say people aren't allowed to consume a product they believe offers them a benefit that outweighs the costs.

There are all sorts of people who "think" they can drive at 100 miles and hour because they are more alert than other people.

And there are people who think they can refuse to pay their taxes because, you see, they feel entitled to decide on which laws they will adhere to and which they will not recognize.

And lately, we have people who believe that they can help themselves to whatever is on the shelves in a Target or Walmart store since, you know, they or their relatives were not treated right by society at some time in the past.

Most of us do not agree with such rationalizations. We do, unfortunately, continue to hear them or ones similar to them.

 

[tango]

What about the kids? I would vote for a party that doesn't want it to be legal. Not that they have much to say here. There are villages, where all these teens are on marijuana or some prescription benzo's. It's always these older ppl who say they have a right to get it and want it to be legal, but they don't care about teens or psychiatric patients, who are way too childish to say no to it and same with alcohol. You can just buy alcohol here in the supermarket when you're 18. What about psychiatric patients? That one guy would come visit and drink 20 half liters of beer in one evening. He could just buy it in the supermarket. If you whine to the doc that you don't feel well they give you a load of happy pills just like that. If a boy doesn't behave like a girl and is a bit wild they put pills in him to be calm. And christian parties don't care about that either. As if only marijuana is so bad. And then the weirdest thing: cigarettes, oh boy, don't dare smoke, cause everyone gets mad and judges you, go smoke outside where noone else is. Lets make it even more insane expensive, but marijuana is fine in Holland.

At some point parents have to take responsibility for their kids. If you're on a medication that doesn't play nicely with other products you need to take responsibility and not mix them. It's crazy to say we should ban everything that might clash with anything else.

Where I used to live we had a neighbor who was an alcoholic. When he was sober he was the nicest guy you could imagine but every once in a while something would trigger him and he'd walk to the end of the road to buy alcohol. His drink of choice was cheap rum - he'd buy two or three bottles of it, then the next day he'd go and buy more. He literally drank himself to death - another neighbor who had a key to his house noticed he hadn't been seen for a few days, and found him dead just inside his front door. Cause of death - alcohol poisoning. And yet millions of people drink a beer or two of an evening and don't do anything stupid.