16 ms·
Cannabis legalization decreases stock market value of major pharmaceutical firms
- smm11 4y agoStates where marijuana is legal have lower incidence of opioid use.
- lotsofpulp 4y agoI wonder what the data is on changes in alcohol sales and/or alcohol revenue at bars/restaurants.
- notch656a 4y agoI think a lot more people would switch to weed if: 1) You couldn't get a DUI at T+1-2 days after smoking. Many states including my own, merely need to show marijuana metabolites in your blood to convict for DUI. 2) Gun rights. You're staring down the barrel of 5+ years in jail of the feds find you in possession of weed with a firearm, even if pot is legal in your state. Until those two things are fixed, anyone who depends on driving to keep their job or a firearm to protect their family should have some serious reservations about trading the bar for the dispensary.
- giantg2 4y agoAnd if you have any record of use, even a medical marijuana card, you are prohibited from purchasing a firearm.
- rpvnwnkl 4y agoAre you sure this is true? I was under the impression you can buy firearms legally without background checks at all in much of the USA
- floren 4y agoIf you buy person-to-person, yes, in most states. However, just because a felon (or a marijuana user, both are prohibited from owning guns) can buy a gun like that, doesn't mean they won't get in trouble for it if they ever get caught. Edit: form 4473 question 11e asks if you are an unlawful user of drugs such as marijuana and reminds you that it is still federally illegal. You will fill out this form if you purchase a gun from a licensed dealer. Lying on this form is itself a felony.
- giantg2 4y ago"I was under the impression you can buy firearms legally without background checks at all in much of the USA" I'm not sure if this is legitimate or if you're trolling. The regulations on background checks can vary depending on the state. Even in states where private sales are legal, you would still be prohibited. Granted enforcing that prohibition comes down to people following the laws, and there's nothing physically forcing them to do so (whether requiring a background check or not), merely punishment after the fact.
- rascul 4y agoThat varies by state
- giantg2 4y agoIncorrect, the prohibition is federal. https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/open-letter/all-ffls-sept2011-open-letter-marijuana-medicinal-purposes https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/open-letter/all-ffls-sept2...
- rascul 4y agoYes, it's prohibited at the federal level, but the state laws on that vary, and the states are generally the ones doing the enforcement. An example, in Mississippi (http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/documents/2022/pdf/SB/2001-2099/SB2095SG.pdf http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/documents/2022/pdf/SB/2001-...): > A registered qualifying patient or registered designated caregiver shall not be denied the right to own, purchase or possess a firearm, firearm accessory or ammunition based solely on his or her status as a registered qualifying patient or registered designated caregiver. No state or local agency, municipal or county governing authority shall restrict, revoke, suspend or otherwise infringe upon the right of a person to own, purchase or possess a firearm, firearm accessory or ammunition or any related firearms license or certification based solely on his or her status as a registered qualifying patient or registered designated caregiver. Edit: By enforcement, I mean that it's not going to be the FBI or the ATF that knocks on your door if it's discovered you have purchased a firearm with a medical marijuana card but the state, county, or municipal police. The feds might go after the store, though.
- quercusa 4y agoATF 4473 21.e: Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance? Warning: The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside.
- spookthesunset 4y agoYou just lie when filling that form out. Nobody will do anything because if it got turned into a case that made it to the Supreme Court, it would most likely be the end of a large bit of that background check. A lot of that stuff has very questionable constitutionality. And before the downvotes or flames… let’s be completely honest here. Anybody in a recreational state who owns a gun and filled out that forum lied. I mean technically you aren’t supposed to smoke pot in federal land like a national park or forest yet it happens all the time and nobody cares. Not all laws get enforced.
- scarface74 4y agoYes because your case has any likelihood of making it to the Supreme Court where you have an overzealous prosecutor and an overworked public defender.
- spookthesunset 4y agoThe odds of lying about marijuana use on that form coming back to haunt me is effectively 0%. I'm not loosing any sleep over it!
- scarface74 4y agoLet’s say you got pulled over for “fitting the description” or because you “looked suspicious” and let’s say that it’s one of the cops “specially trained to detect being under the influence” [1]. Let’s also say that you are legally allowed to carry. Do you really think there is a non zero chance that cops won’t use any excuse to make an arrest seem legit? https://www.11alive.com/article/news/investigations/the-drug-whisperer-drivers-arrested-while-stone-cold-sober/85-437061710 https://www.11alive.com/article/news/investigations/the-drug... I choose not to trust that the justice system will ever veer in my favor.
- giantg2 4y agoThe justice system isn't about justice, it's about control, power, and winning.
- oaththrowaway 4y agoThis is the dilemma for everyone I know who is interested in switching to cannabis.
- galangalalgol 4y agoI know several who switched from social alcohol usage to hallucinogenic mushrooms instead and reported positive health outcomes. The legality issue is probably worse not better. But my understanding is that the testing situation is less of a concern.
- sianemo 4y agoYou're correct about the testing not being a concern. Testing for psilocybin is very expensive and unreliable. Really only one major drug testing lab in the country will even try to test for psilocybin, and that's because you can, for the right price, try to get them to test for just about anything in a mass spec sample. I won't go so far as to say that nobody can ever successfully test you for psilocybin, but it's about as close to never as you can get.
- lotsofpulp 4y agoInteresting, thanks for the additional information. I assume it will take 60 votes in the US Senate to get moving on #2, so alcohol businesses have no reason to worry.
- notch656a 4y agoIANAL, but I think DEA can remove cannabis from scheduling without congress.
- giobox 4y agoWhile those are of course valid concerns, I don't think it even enters into the decision making process for most when considering booze vs weed in a state with legal dispensaries. The likelihood of either of these happening in states like CA or WA is just so incredibly low that I don't think either of them is stopping all that many who might consider it today. I think there are far stronger cultural forces at play in terms of why people drink or smoke weed rather than concerns about the above. You also still can't buy and consume weed in a bar/cafe style setting as you can booze either anywhere in the US AFAIK, which will also play a large part in this. Drinking alcohol can be a social activity in a bar, and of course booze can be bought in supermarkets etc etc.
- nichch 4y agoI wonder how open and shut those DUI cases really are. In Michigan, they’ve recently discovered their THC test would return positive with the presence of CBD. https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2022/08/michigan-police-say-faulty-marijuana-tests-could-impact-more-than-3250-cases.html https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2022/08/michigan-polic...
- throwaway0a5e 4y ago1 is only an issue because moral panic gave legislators a blank check to write DUI laws that are so immensely broad they would be opposed in any other context. 2 is only an issue because drugs were a moral panic and people hated weed enough to not argue much when it got tied to their gun rights Everyone loses when we cater to lemmings going off half cocked about the moral panic of the minute.
- WastingMyTime89 4y ago1 is a serious problem. 2 is self inflicted. As no one depends on a firearm to protect their family, the solution is simple. Just don’t own a firearm.
- scarface74 4y agoI’m far away from a gun nut. I don’t see the need to carry and I am more worried about getting shot by the police because I both “fit the description” and “don’t look like I belong” in my own neighborhood than I am a criminal shooting me. But I very much believe in gun ownership in the home - especially properly secured. If someone breaks into my home, they prima facie mean me harm. They will get shot without a second thought or ounce of remorse. What am I suppose to do? Wait on the police to show up?
- WastingMyTime89 4y agoYes, that’s exactly what you should do. Breaking in followed by violence are mostly an imaginary problem anyway. You are far more likely to mistakenly shoot someone who incorrectly thought was breaking in than ever having to defend yourself.
- scarface74 4y agoSo I’m suppose to ask someone who broke in my house “do you mean me harm”? There are only two other people who should come in my house unannounced and as soon as they come in the alarm will sound and they know how to turn it off. One of those people sleep next to me. If you’re breaking in, I’m assuming violence. The odds of burglary is 1/36 https://policyadvice.net/insurance/insights/burglary-statistics/ https://policyadvice.net/insurance/insights/burglary-statist...
- WastingMyTime89 4y ago
- scarface74 4y agoIt’s even worse cops can arrest you if they think you are impaired. There are specially trained “drug whisperers”. She was sober, no drugs in her system. But she was still arrested. Before you look at the article, take a wild guess what color she was… https://www.11alive.com/article/news/investigations/the-drug-whisperer-drivers-arrested-while-stone-cold-sober/85-437061710 https://www.11alive.com/article/news/investigations/the-drug...
- beebmam 4y agoCorrelation is not causation. There are many, many reasons why opioids are used.
- spaetzleesser 4y agoYou never find clear causation for social issues. Legalizing marijuana seems a no brainer to me. Less people in prison and hopefully less opioid use.
- giantg2 4y agoOn top of that, this is speculative correlation - they're studying that that stock dropped 1-2% after a legalization event because traders are speculating that there will be lower returns.
- filoleg 4y agoIs it actually the case for major coastal cities/states? I accept that this might be true, but living in Seattle it surely doesn't feel like it (as long as you count fentanyl as an opioid, because it is one).
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- spookthesunset 4y agoNot sure that is entirely true. A hell of a lot of cities on the west coast have absolutely massive opioid addiction problems. Street Fentanyl is doing a number on people. I really don’t understand fentanyl addiction either. Ain’t that the shit they give you when you have surgery and stuff? All I know is that stuff knocks me the hell out when I had it for some wisdom tooth operation. Plus the difference between an appropriate dose and an serious overdose is razor thin (from my understanding).
- notch656a 4y agoCannabis products are a pharmaceutical. You're putting drugs in your body, just a different one.
- spaetzleesser 4y agoBy that definition everything you eat is a pharmaceutical. Everything you eat has some effect on you.
- Z_Z 4y agoit's true though, everything you can consume has an effect on you not unlike pharmaceuticals. we just classify them differently. and as a corollary, anyone that can make money off of that effect, will
- huetius 4y agoThis is obscurantism. If there’s no difference between marijuana and food, what’s with all the excitement and advocacy? OP’s point seems to be pretty reasonable to me. If marijuana is outcompeting established anodynes it implies they are in the same category.
- staticassertion 4y ago`Of or relating to pharmacy or pharmacists.` You probably aren't getting marijuana from a pharmacy and no pharmaceutical company has a patent on marijuana, which I think both technically and colloquially puts it well outside of the realm of pharmaceuticals.
- cantSpellSober 4y agoExactly, a different one. This article is more about stock prices, linked to a study that concludes cannabis is as a new competitor in drug markets. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0272492 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
- meroes 4y agoYay. Recreational marijauna user here and opioids scare the crap out of me. Had to take 10 oxycodone after a surgery and if they can hand those out they can hand out marijauna capsules or whatever. It's really that simple.
- colechristensen 4y agoAre opioids really making that much money? Most of what is prescribed are generics and they're not expensive.
- bsedlm 4y agothat's just how cheap they're to make (once you have the factory setup; which isn't cheap)
- encoderer 4y agoDon’t worry they are literally prescribing billions of them. It adds up to enough money for everybody (at the top).
- colechristensen 4y agoBut 30 generic percoset, for example, looks to cost about $14 locally where one struggles to pay less than that at lunch outside McDonalds. Doesn't really seem like a cash cow.
- staticassertion 4y agoIs that before or after insurance? Some quick googling and all I can find is anywhere from 100s of millions to 10s of billions.
- swatcoder 4y agoPretty sure Netflix and Spotify do alright with less than that. And it’s not even accounting for those premium tier subscriptions that come with trendy new formulations not yet acknowledged as dangerous.
- jessaustin 4y agoThank goodness we had this whole covid thing to prop up these poor pharma companies, a subset of whose yearly profit of $35B dwarfs the revenue of entire sectors of our economy. (Cable news: less than $6B revenue.) https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/pfizer-biontech-and-moderna-making-1000-profit-every-second-while-worlds-poorest https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/pfizer-biontech-and-...
- gruez 4y ago>a subset of whose yearly profit of $35B dwarfs the revenue of entire sectors of our economy. (Cable news: less than $6B revenue.) Is that supposed to be a problem? You can argue that pharama companies are extracting too much profit for what they do, but they certainly deliver more value to society in my mind than cable news.
- suoduandao2 4y agoCable news may be a bad example if we're talking about positive value delivered to society. But how much of the health benefits from modern sanitation are modern pharmaceuticals taking credit for? It seems an unreliable value proposition, particularly given how many new medications study-shop when comparing against existing ones.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- jessaustin 4y agoI'm more concerned with the practical effects of the number than with its moral weight. There is a whiff of corruption about USA's response to covid, among other health challenges. I refer not to covid's murky origin, although more investigation of that is probably warranted. I refer to the fact that although we spend more on healthcare than anyone else, our covid performance was the worst in the world, except for Peru, Brazil, and portions of Eastern Europe. There isn't only one reason for this, but "more spending for worse results" is a strong indicator of corruption. Why has e.g. Nigeria had fourteen covid deaths per million population while we have had 3100? Differences in reporting probably explain some of that. Some would blame the stingy level of primary care that our government provides to the poor. Others, including expensive private physicians who care for the rich, have noticed how common ivermectin use is in Nigeria. It is possible that ivermectin is of no use against covid (which is a virus not a living protostome), but we don't know that. Not only has research been throttled, but mere discussion of such research has been throttled on most popular corporate media. What was so terrible about ivermectin, that not only could we not discuss it, but the little discussion that did occur inspired extreme and fairly dishonest official reactions like the many weeks of "You're not a horse!" media campaigns we endured? It's simple. Ivermectin is a cheap, widely-available drug with decades of safe human use. If it had been found to treat covid, there would have been less justification for novel mRNA vaccines with exceptionally curtailed safety tests (the details of which were to be kept under wraps for 75 years). That justification would have seemed even thinner after it became clear that the disease-preventing performance these "vaccines" required a redefinition of the word. If we had an open society that welcomed honest discussion of various possible covid treatments, vaccination could have been concentrated on the elderly and obese, and these firms might have seen e.g. $20B profits rather than $35B. Now forget about ivermectin (...vitamin D, etc.), and consider the similar treatment received by the Great Barrington Declaration and its signatories, who in retrospect were absolutely right in every respect. Did these experts' message ever show up on cable news? Hmm... why did I mention their yearly revenue? Deluded "unicorn" fans might sniff at $35B (the important number, revenue, is about twice that; more competitive industries see larger such multipliers than two), but it is large enough to totally swamp the self-interest of other industries, such as cable news, politics, and others who influence opinions and governance. Have you ever watched CNN in USA for twenty minutes (yeah, I know) and not seen multiple advertisements for pharmaceuticals? (A similar analysis obtains for the military-industrial complex.)
- cmrdporcupine 4y agoSurely I'm not the only person for who cannabis just makes pain far worse. In fact I know I'm not I've heard it from other people. Opiates are spooky, but ... they work really well.
- newguynewphone 4y agoafter a bad knee injury i was given the 512 variant of percocet, after a month, i was so hooked to the point of constipation and needing medical intervention. At my worst point after switching to medical cannabis, the worst i have had is a groggy day. Opiates work well, too well i would say.
- freedomben 4y agoYou're not the only one - it does me as well. But unfortunately, the people who make the rules don't care about our suffering.
- bittercynic 4y agoOne more here. I'm very glad that I experimented with cannabis while healthy, and not when needing relief from acute pain.
- UnpossibleJim 4y agoWhat an odd statement. I had shoulder surgery not all that long ago and they prescribed me 100 Oxy's (far too many) and I took one of them. I was woken up with waves of paranoia and nausea... obviously the dosage was too high. I'm 5'7 and 170-180 lbs, so not large. I took Acetaminophen for about a week and was fine. If I was to say that no one cared about suffering because people are prescribed Oxy for pain simply because it makes me nauseas and paranoid, that would be ridiculous on its face. People simply react differently to different medications, including marijuana.
- freedomben 4y agoYou're several years behind on the status quo. 90% of the time they don't even give pain pills anymore post surgery, and when they do they'll give you a 1 to 3 day supply at most. If you need more than that, "Tylenol extra strength". When I say the people who make the rules don't care, that's what I'm talking about. And a bunch of people who support this new model will say "just use cannabis." You can find examples all throughout this thread
- swayvil 4y agoHere in Illinois they charge huge $ for a license to grow. And they suppress opiates. And promote weed. And the dispensaries are all owned by the usual billionaires. That includes our governor. Weed legalization is a cash-channeling strategy.
- pm90 4y agoThis is simply how markets work. Currently the US has so much wealth disparity that billionaires will simply move from monopolizing one industry to another, whenever it becomes legal and lucrative. Ideally, we would have mechanisms that prevent this kind of consolidation to make the market work better.
- swayvil 4y agoYeah, but when you tweak the laws to favor certain investments that ain't quite "how markets work" anymore.
- maxbond 4y agoCapitalists will always hop on the bandwagon during the last mile, when the risk has been largely eliminated and the rewards are huge. This is their usual playbook; externalize costs and risk while reaping the rewards. But what made weed legalization happen is decades of activism, not business interests.
- joemazerino 4y agoIts easier to get opioids than it is to buy weed in some States. I wonder why?
- ceejayoz 4y agoBecause they're legal?
- oblak 4y agoWasn't that joemazerino's point?
- base698 4y agoBecause pharma is 70% of the ad spend on Television news and one of the top lobbying industries?
- spookthesunset 4y agoSure but it isn’t the generics doing any ad spend. Unless there is some hip new opioid I’m not aware of (street fentanyl?) all the opioids are generic at this point. “Bob & Dave’s Pill Company” sure as heck isn’t pimping their generic hydrocodone on TV nor are they taking doctors out to golf.
- ceejayoz 4y agoDon't worry, they know how to fight that scenario. Drug companies have gotten really good at fighting/delaying/squashing generics. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2013/04/17/177602393/why-fdas-rejection-generic-oxycontin-may-have-side-effects https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2013/04/17/1776023... > In 2010, Purdue Pharma LP replaced the original OxyContin with an abuse-resistant form, in an effort to reduce deaths and overdoses caused by the powerful pain medication, which was licensed in 1995. > The new version of OxyContin includes an ingredient, a polymer, that makes it harder to crush and snort or inject to get a quick, heroin-like high. When the new version was introduced, Purdue pulled the original OxyContin off the market. The patent on the new version runs until 2025. > On Tuesday, the FDA said that it won't approve generic versions of the original formulation of OxyContin, a long-acting narcotic pain medication, which went off patent that day.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y agoThen why do the few weed stonks that I have only go down?
- ehnto 4y agoProbably because it's still a really volatile environment for the companies operating in it, both through regulation and in practice, getting cooperation from banks and payment providers still sucks. It also has it's own little venture capital boom and bust cycle going on. It should really be a straight forward business proposition, but there's a lot of people trying to innovate on the idea with the help of VC cash.
- JackMorgan 4y agoA serious answer: many people overvalued weed stocks when they were new, and reality did not match up. The stocks were priced far higher than they should have been had they been priced only on raw business fundamentals. Lots of people bought weed stocks because they love weed, which doesn't mean that particular company will be able to turn a profit high enough to match the stock price they paid.
- purim 4y agoI don't think the impact is as great as they say. Pharma firms collude to create very strong lobby and special interest groups that keeps people elected. Cannabis legalization created a lot more fragmented cannabilizing groups. Just take a look at Canadian legal market. The grey market always outperforms it and many have begun shunning the expensive legal weed. Lot's of weird actors in this space, especially these psychedellic therapy groups who are self-licensed and have history of misconduct. I find these one off studies to be highly sensational and idealizing a very tough market to break into. The impact of marijuana is still not known 100%. There is reason why some countries like Singapore have been extra careful to adopt these western libertarian ideas. While probably an overreaction, the impact of marijuana needs to be observed over a very long period of time and this is where pharmaceuticals shine.
- qazwse_ 4y agoJust take a look at Canadian legal market. The grey market always outperforms it and many have begun shunning the expensive legal weed. This is not true, the opposite is happening. Illegal market share continues to decline, with 63% of people reporting buying from legal outfits in 2021, versus 43% in 2019. https://www.ccsa.ca/sites/default/files/2022-06/CCSA-Cannabis-Legalization-2021-2022-Observations-Policy-Brief-2022-en.pdf https://www.ccsa.ca/sites/default/files/2022-06/CCSA-Cannabi...
- LordDragonfang 4y agoAnd this is precisely what you'd expect, right? Initially, almost every regular smoker already has a cheaper grey/black market hookup, because that was the only way to get it, and gradually that withers away.
- bamboozled 4y agoNot to mention buying legal is super fun. Going into stores, trying new strains, flavours etc. So much fun.
- purim 4y ago
- RappingBoomer 4y agothat gets me right here (slaps chest with fist)
- PartiallyTyped 4y agoSomething something more competition is good for the market something something.
- Animats 4y agoFrom the actual paper: "The difference is about 1.5-2%, statistically significant, and persists during the 20 business days following the (legalization) event."[1] This is more like a useful hint for short-term traders, not a long-term effect. [1] https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0272492 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
- kosyblysk666 4y ago
- drummer 4y ago
- juanani 4y ago[dead]
- cantSpellSober 4y agoDo people replace opioids with cannabis?
- bobthepanda 4y agoIt’s mostly used more for chronic pain, I thought. Particularly where pain starts suppressing appetite, weed induced munchies are a great way to keep things down.
- barbazoo 4y agoVery much so. Here's just a few resources on this from Vancouver: https://www.vice.com/en/article/ne45vd/more-vancouver-opioid-users-are-choosing-weed-as-a-substitute https://www.vice.com/en/article/ne45vd/more-vancouver-opioid... https://mugglehead.com/vancouver-cannabis-harm-reduction-project-takes-to-the-streets/ https://mugglehead.com/vancouver-cannabis-harm-reduction-pro...
- cantSpellSober 4y agoThanks, a replacement for methadone though? I'm skeptical: "...no consensus among studies that cannabis use is associated with reduced opioid use or longer treatment retention when used during methadone maintenance therapy" https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31744904/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31744904/
- GeekyBear 4y ago>States with medical marijuana laws had a 24.8 percent lower average annual opioid overdose death rate compared to states without such laws. In 2010, that translated to about 1,729 fewer deaths than expected. The years after implementation of medical marijuana laws also were associated with lower overdose death rates that generally got stronger over time: year 1 (-19.9 percent), year 2 (-25.2 percent), year 3 (-23.6 percent), year 4 (-20.2 percent), year 5 (-33.7 percent) and year 6 (-33.3 percent). https://media.jamanetwork.com/news-item/lower-opioid-overdose-death-rates-associated-with-state-medical-marijuana-laws/ https://media.jamanetwork.com/news-item/lower-opioid-overdos...
- drspock11 4y agoCorrelation is not causation. The fact that drug companies stocks declined may have something to do with cannabis legalization or nothing to do with cannabis legalization.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- aqme28 4y agoThese researchers published their findings and your comment is just “that might not be true.” Please, add some substance.
- suoduandao2 4y agoDo you have an alternate theory to explain the correlation?
- dec0dedab0de 4y agoMaybe people sold stock to buy weed legally? I was joking, but now I'm curious how many people selling one share would be enough to influence the price.
- andsoitis 4y agoJust wait to see the impact of psychedelics on pharma…
- jmyeet 4y agoYears ago before the cannabis legalization wave of the last decade I read an article about how the War on Drugs had resulted in black tar heroin being cheaper than cannabis. The War on Drugs will go down as an inhumane, horrific failure. We should never forget its origins as a reactionary wave against counterculturalism (ie hippies) and black people. Cannabis remains a Schedule I drug (meaning no medical uses despite all evidence to the contrary). There have been vast disparities in sentencing guidelines between crack and powder cocaine (eg 5g of crack vs 500g of powder for trafficking [1]). We have a pipeline here of the overprescription of opiates by US doctors to a level no other country does. IIRC I read once that if you're still taking opiates 2 weeks after you're prescribed them there's a 50% chance you'll be taking them in a year. Illegal opiate pills are expensive. Heroin (including black tar heroin) is cheap. A lot of heroin addicts started with a legal opiate prescription [2]. The likes of Purdue and the Sacklers were complicit in lies about Oxycontin and profited on creating opiate addiction. In a fairer world, Purdue would be seized by the government, the assets of the Sacklers would be seized and those most responsible would be executed (and the rest get to spend their lives in jail). It is utterly no surprise cannabis reduces the demand for opiates (and thus the stock price of pharama companies). Just how much evidence do we need to legalize cannabis at the Federal level? The president doesn't seem to have unliteral powder to legalize cannabis [3] but could trigger a reclassification and he could change how the DEA treats and prosecutes cannabis offences. Over a third of people now live in states where recreational cannabis usage is either legal or soon will be. It's really time to demand change. [1]: https://www.usnews.com/news/national/articles/2007/10/01/crack-vs-powder-cocaine-a-gulf-in-penalties https://www.usnews.com/news/national/articles/2007/10/01/cra... [2]: https://nida.nih.gov/publications/research-reports/prescription-opioids-heroin/prescription-opioid-use-risk-factor-heroin-use https://nida.nih.gov/publications/research-reports/prescript... [3]: https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/can-president-biden-legalize-marijuana-1220802/ https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/can-president-biden-legali...
- girishso 4y ago> They found that stock market returns were 1.5-2% lower at 10 days following a cannabis legalization event 10 days? That only affects short term “traders”, can be used as a trading opportunity at most. I’m interested in long term effects, has legalization affected sales of medicines over 2/3 years?
- yowayb 4y agoThe power/problem of cannabis is that it’s not as addictive/strong as opium. Make no mistake, this is a business problem. Just like disposable razors, the (stock) market always rewards the high that doesn’t last, or leaves you wanting more. The one thing that both of these drugs get right is an ingredient that Katt Williams called “f* it”. It is the idea that maybe you’re sweating the small stuff a bit too much and maybe you should just let the power bill go and light those candles that have been sitting around forever. But the market won’t let a good-enough solution alone. The market will always demand something a little better, a little stronger, and before you know it, you’re hooked.
- bern4444 4y agoWhat I always fail to understand about these situations is why an incumbent firm wouldn't latch on to this to beat out their competitors. You can see this in energy companies' hesitation to accept and invest in renewable energy. Until the last few years they all stayed far far away from it. Perhaps this is all the result of their existing vested interests - but I'm constantly surprised just how little these massive incumbents resist new ideas that really can instead give them a competitive advantage against their peers.
- iroh2727 4y agoWe don’t need silly statistics to show this. It’s just common sense. I mean, if alcohol were banned, that would send pharmaceutical sales through the roof since we’d lose our most common medication for anxiety, depression, burnout, and general this-hustle-culture-is-fucking-people-up disorder (GTD is the technical term).
- encryptluks2 4y ago> I mean, if alcohol were banned, that would send pharmaceutical sales through the roof since we’d lose our most common medication for anxiety, depression, burnout, and general this-hustle-culture-is-fucking-people-up disorder (GTD is the technical term). I actually get the opposite impression.
- confidantlake 4y agoThey gave me 60 vicodin when I got my wisdom teeth taken out. I took one and chucked the bottle after. I feel like I dodged a bullet there.
- notsavvy 4y agoasset management groups are not so happy with this since they deal with pharma, bar/entertainment, and other areas that are receiving profit drops. they could sell on site but even then people would homegrow then smoke use before entering. but pharma is very upset because with extreme pain the patient is given a pain killer and an antianxiety med. cannabis happens to be both.
- drummer 4y agohttps://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLunBXl8kd0GgDkHUWb-ZqxyQZGfZH_71K https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLunBXl8kd0GgDkHUWb-Zqxy...