5 ms·

It's worth pointing out that the drug industry has already brought both THC (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrahydrocannabinol#Marinol https://en.wikipedia.org

by hga 12y ago

It's worth pointing out that the drug industry has already brought both THC (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrahydrocannabinol#Marinol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrahydrocannabinol#Marinol and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nabilone https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nabilone) and CBD (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabidiol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabidiol) and both (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nabiximols https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nabiximols) to market as official, legal drugs. (UPDATED and corrected to four drugs, including the new to me one with both.) Another update: here's a nice table of all the drugs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_cannabis#Pharmacologic_products https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_cannabis#Pharmacologic...

Tloewald 12y ago
In formulations they can patent and charge arbitrary prices for.
- hga 12y ago
  And you see no value in knowing exactly what you're getting or prescribing? E.g. per Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabidiol#CBD-enhanced_cannabis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabidiol#CBD-enhanced_canna...): "Decades ago, selective breeding by growers in US dramatically lowered the CBD content of cannabis; their customers preferred varietals that were more mind-altering due to a higher THC, lower CBD content. To meet the demands of medical cannabis patients, growers are currently developing more CBD-rich strains." This is a major reason to prefer pharmaceuticals over the original raw herb, who's concentrations and additional and potentially unwanted active ingredients varies from plant to plant.
  - Tloewald 12y ago
    It's more important if you need to be prescribed something. I need to eat fruit and vegetables to live, and the value of their being exactly formulated is negligible. Marijuana is hard to OD on and doesn't cause long term liver damage when used at reasonable levels for extended periods (which opiates do). Prescriptions aren't necessary.
    - hga 12y ago
      Please reread what I posted, and perhaps follow the links. E.g., if you want the medicinal properties of CBD, how can you know you're actually getting a significant dose? It's like the old use of curare in surgical anesthesia (prior to inserting a tube down the airway), the anesthesiologist or nurse anesthetist (my mother was one of the latter, along with Bill Clinton's mother) didn't grind up some plant material with a mortar and pestle and hope she was administering just the right amount. No, they used properly titrated extract prepared by those eeeeevil drug companies. Or what if you're concerned about THC exposure? As I understand it, it's at least associated, perhaps correlated, with some very unpleasant things, like an increased incidence of schizophrenia. All drugs, whatever the source, are dangerous, and will harm and kill small fractions of the people who might take them. Comparing the mass quantities of stuff you get from normal eating to the low doses of these drugs, whatever the source, is not, I think relevant. You can reasonably expect different concentrations of essential foodstuffs to balance out, and for vitamins and some minerals take a generic one a day pill to make sure you don't inadvertently get any deficiency diseases.
      - Tloewald 12y ago
        Right now any clinical data we have on marijuana's active ingredients is massively tainted by the fact that NIH will only fund research into harmful effects, so essentially you're suggesting that we're better off getting "prescribed" a quantity of something based on faulty/biased research. (Incidentally, CBD products are now technically legal in the US -- you can order them on Amazon!) The point with curare is that a small amount will kill you. All drugs are to some extent dangerous, but some are safe enough that people are allowed to buy them on their own and figure out the dosage they need -- e.g. aspirin, most antihistamines. The same arguments would apply to them.
        hga 12y ago
        Really, please, follow the links and read. Some of these drugs were or are being developed in other countries, so it's obviously not axiomatic the NIH's research had anything to do with their development. And at least 3 of them are being done in conjunction with the FDA, 2 approved, the CBD drug in Phase 2/3 FDA level trials. This massive tainting somehow hasn't convinced the FDA that THC and CBD are bad. Errr, I hope it's obvious that drug trials produce clinical data.... As for your final point, I would hope bmelton's comment would underline the folly of trying to use raw herbs of uncertain potency for reliably getting what is needed. Does Charlotte Figi need serious, hard to obtain quantities of CBD to stop her seizures, or will any old weed suffice???

by hga 12y ago

Tloewald 12y ago

In formulations they can patent and charge arbitrary prices for.

hga 12y ago
And you see no value in knowing exactly what you're getting or prescribing? E.g. per Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabidiol#CBD-enhanced_cannabis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabidiol#CBD-enhanced_canna...): "Decades ago, selective breeding by growers in US dramatically lowered the CBD content of cannabis; their customers preferred varietals that were more mind-altering due to a higher THC, lower CBD content. To meet the demands of medical cannabis patients, growers are currently developing more CBD-rich strains." This is a major reason to prefer pharmaceuticals over the original raw herb, who's concentrations and additional and potentially unwanted active ingredients varies from plant to plant.
- Tloewald 12y ago
  It's more important if you need to be prescribed something. I need to eat fruit and vegetables to live, and the value of their being exactly formulated is negligible. Marijuana is hard to OD on and doesn't cause long term liver damage when used at reasonable levels for extended periods (which opiates do). Prescriptions aren't necessary.
  - hga 12y ago
    Please reread what I posted, and perhaps follow the links. E.g., if you want the medicinal properties of CBD, how can you know you're actually getting a significant dose? It's like the old use of curare in surgical anesthesia (prior to inserting a tube down the airway), the anesthesiologist or nurse anesthetist (my mother was one of the latter, along with Bill Clinton's mother) didn't grind up some plant material with a mortar and pestle and hope she was administering just the right amount. No, they used properly titrated extract prepared by those eeeeevil drug companies. Or what if you're concerned about THC exposure? As I understand it, it's at least associated, perhaps correlated, with some very unpleasant things, like an increased incidence of schizophrenia. All drugs, whatever the source, are dangerous, and will harm and kill small fractions of the people who might take them. Comparing the mass quantities of stuff you get from normal eating to the low doses of these drugs, whatever the source, is not, I think relevant. You can reasonably expect different concentrations of essential foodstuffs to balance out, and for vitamins and some minerals take a generic one a day pill to make sure you don't inadvertently get any deficiency diseases.
    - Tloewald 12y ago
      Right now any clinical data we have on marijuana's active ingredients is massively tainted by the fact that NIH will only fund research into harmful effects, so essentially you're suggesting that we're better off getting "prescribed" a quantity of something based on faulty/biased research. (Incidentally, CBD products are now technically legal in the US -- you can order them on Amazon!) The point with curare is that a small amount will kill you. All drugs are to some extent dangerous, but some are safe enough that people are allowed to buy them on their own and figure out the dosage they need -- e.g. aspirin, most antihistamines. The same arguments would apply to them.
      - hga 12y ago
        Really, please, follow the links and read. Some of these drugs were or are being developed in other countries, so it's obviously not axiomatic the NIH's research had anything to do with their development. And at least 3 of them are being done in conjunction with the FDA, 2 approved, the CBD drug in Phase 2/3 FDA level trials. This massive tainting somehow hasn't convinced the FDA that THC and CBD are bad. Errr, I hope it's obvious that drug trials produce clinical data.... As for your final point, I would hope bmelton's comment would underline the folly of trying to use raw herbs of uncertain potency for reliably getting what is needed. Does Charlotte Figi need serious, hard to obtain quantities of CBD to stop her seizures, or will any old weed suffice???