4 ms·

While I understand your sentiment, unmitigated access to treatment modalities is generally not a good thing. People, often children with no real informed consen

• vidarh 10y ago
  The efficacy and safety of the treatments are not the issue. The issue is when government uses the threat of violence to prevent people from accessing substances that cause no harm to others. I agree that people should not use it as treatment without seeking help, but there are far more dangerous substances you can buy over the counter. E.g. acetaminophen/paracetamol causes a range of deaths via liver failure every year, yet not only do we allow it to be sold, in many countries it is now allowed to be sold mixed with codeine - a highly addictive opoid, creating an incentive for addicts to push the limits of their intake of highly toxic compound. And yet people worry about cannabis - a substance where the LD50 is so high we don't know what it is, or if there is one (short of choking on it...) Attack quackery, sure. But if you are to go after quackery, then go after current drug laws too, because they are not based on a concern over science, efficacy or safety.
  • mack73 10y ago
    It makes you wonder what The Goverment's agenda is, does it not? I mean, either you base you actions on science or you base it on something other than science. It's a shame politics so often lead to uninformed decisions. To me, these days, politics seems like a grown-up version of the high-school game you used to play when you wanted to become popular. But of course, the real issue here money. Everyone wants it. Need it. Live for it. I call shenanigans on society.
    • Chardok 10y ago
      Bingo. Just follow the money and see who profits from cannabis being illegal. 1. Can't put a patent on it and can literally grow it in your backyard - pharmaceutical industry is going to lose a large chunk of cash inflow from anti-nausea and opioids. Not to mention the fact a large portion of opioid/herion addicts started out on prescription medicine, which leads into my other points. 2. The entire law enforcement procedures will have to rethink the status quo. Smelling cannabis was a great way to have "reasonable suspicion" for violating privacy, and going after cannabis dealers were incredibly easy targets to bust. Don't forget RICO that gives LE a nice cash bonus from drug dealer assets. 3. Prison industry will have a hard time filling in the since a large majority of the prisoners are nonviolent drug offenders. Perhaps with less opioid addicts that sought cannabis instead would cause some extra vacancy as well. 4. The Cartel and several other underground organizations that I have a hard time believing would not have ties to politicians and decision makers on the subject.
• wu-ikkyu 10y ago
  Is the government the ultimate arbiter of science? Is it not possible to have access to medicines and have relevant scientific information without being subjugated by bureaucratic proxies for big pharma[1]? >People, often children with no real informed consent, die every year because they forsake science-based medicine for quackery. People, often children, die every year due to "science-based medicine" as well. Overdose deaths involving prescription opioids have quadrupled since 1999, and so have sales of these prescription drugs[2]. [1]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture [2]https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/data/overdose.html https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/data/overdose.html