Marijuana is Medicine "Journal of the American Medical Association" concludes

a reply to: Aleister

So they have absolutely no non medicinal uses - check.

I raise that point because of the response by some in this thread who think its a free for all with this AMA report.

a reply to: Aleister

Eureka!! plants are beneficial... and are medicinal and nutrient rich!!! Who knew?


21st century folks have much learning to do...... to evade the current pill popping pharma answer to everything that ails us...


We have all we need, if we put forth an effort to learn.......

a reply to: JacKatMtn

Well said. And I didn't think of that, that big (or little) pharma will see this AMA statement as hindering their economic interests in "curing" the symptoms of diseases with costly tiny pills. Probably some unhappy CEO's out there after this unexpected high-level (pun unintended) report.

The cynic in me thinks :

Pharma saw how much money was made in colorado etc...we better make it medical so it gets Pharmaceutically dispensed.

a reply to: Aleister

Thanks, although I should have said RE learn what was once known... generation to generation... we have skipped quite a few, and personally I am trying to relearn what was what common knowledge... and pass that on to our future generations...

It's a BIG fail IMO for us to dismiss thousands of years of knowledge.... for convenience....

think about it

a reply to: Aleister

Of course they did. Now the pharmaceutical companies can take over the production and sale of it. Or maybe this is payback to the tobacco industry and they'll handle the growing. Either way, I see home grown being illegal again and it being a controlled substance like alcohol. Only way corporations and the government get their cut.

These two medical researchers, Ms. Garfunkel and Ms. Oates, presented this testimony which may or may not have been used by the American Medical Association to reach their potentially tipping point decision to endorse the medical benefits of the herbal plant...

a reply to: Bilk22

Pessimism again. This ruling from on-high from the AMA endorses the medical use of the plant but it doesn't mean that the accelerating trend for full legalization will be hindered. This is likely just a bit of honesty from the American Medical Association which, combined with the loosening of the rules for medical testing, is another step in saying that cannabis prohibition - in all forms, medical, recreational, and societal - was a mistake, a mistake that the AMA has taken a step to correct.

As far as substances having both medicinal/non medicinal benefits, coffee is a great example, I use it both ways. I'm prone to headaches, hate pills. One strong cup of coffee nips that headache in the bud fast.

I enjoy coffee whether I have a headache or not so I use it recreationally as well. BTW lack of coffee isn't what gives me headaches, I've had them since childhood and never drank coffee as a kid.

I really don't see a problem with an adult using MJ in whatever way they see fit as long as it doesn't involve a minor or bother anyone else.

Some people are recreational eaters while others eat just enough to stay alive. Should we dictate how people use food? I don't see anything wrong with people drowning their sorrows in a box of doughnuts/pint of ice cream, alcohol either for that matter. Many substances can be used medicinally or recreationally depending on how the person feels/wants to use it.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Aleister

So they have absolutely no non medicinal uses - check.

I raise that point because of the response by some in this thread who think its a free for all with this AMA report.

So that is what you took from what Aleister posted?

Ridiculous.

originally posted by: Aleister
a reply to: mortex

Your post may be a bit pessimistic. With the number of eyes on the topic now, with the financial incentives growing by the day (pun unintendedidly intended), and with the specific strains being cultivated in governmental areas where the product is legal, the chance to change the plant into something different and less interesting to the people focused on the issue has come and gone.

I hope you're right.
But I wouldn't hold my breath that the pharma corporations will not do something like reduce the effectiveness of it in order to increase peoples time on subscriptions for it, once they've taken control of it and are pumping it out at industrial levels.
After all, their primary concern is profits. Not our health.

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
The cynic in me thinks :

Pharma saw how much money was made in colorado etc...we better make it medical so it gets Pharmaceutically dispensed.

Uh... no.

This is a well-respected group finally admitting that marijuana does, in fact, have medicinal benefits instead of playing the "more research must be done" card like they have for years.

This is a step from "MJ has no positive benefit" to "MJ definitely has medicinal benefits."

This is a very good thing because now the "MJ is totally bad and only crackpot doctors claim it has benefits" crowd has to shut up and admit that MJ has legitimate positive uses. This is also an absolutely vital step in removing MJ from its current Schedule 1 status because "has no medical benefit" is a requirement for being in that class of drugs.

a reply to: Aleister

Let's be real honest here Al - this is a major step in the right direction. What needs to be the icing on the cake is corporations adopting this edict and amending their drug and alcohol policies to suit the fact that even though it stays in your system well after it's effects dissipate, the testing method needs to reflect that fact and not be detrimental to ones ability to keep their job - ie SWABS only pick up things in the last 24hrs but even that is not good enough - it should reflect "under the influence" levels - just like an alcohol breathalyzer is designed to register to a certain extent, so too should THC levels be comparable, and an associated method of capturing that developed..........there's a patent idea right there.

THEN, we shall see the fruits of our labour be made manifest.

a reply to: Answer

No anecdotes here. I did, however, find this hit piece earlier today, New Study Finds Medical Marijuana Doesn’t Work So Well After All

I was hoping to send this link along to someone here as he likes this kind of stuff and tears it apart but he's not around, I guess, so you guys can have fun with it.

originally posted by: TheSpanishArcher
a reply to: Answer

No anecdotes here. I did, however, find this hit piece earlier today, New Study Finds Medical Marijuana Doesn’t Work So Well After All

I was hoping to send this link along to someone here as he likes this kind of stuff and tears it apart but he's not around, I guess, so you guys can have fun with it.

You always have to look at the details of the study.

This is probably the most important line in the article that coincides well with this thread:

It’s possible medical marijuana could have widespread benefits, but strong evidence from high-quality studies is lacking, authors of both articles say.

THAT is the line that has been used for years by so-called experts. "Well, we really need more studies..."
They say that because nobody wants to put their career on the line or be associated with "those types" by coming out and declaring what most of us have known for a long time. Now that the AMA has come out with this declaration, you better believe that other researchers will follow suit because they don't have to worry about being ostracized.

I found this line entertaining... considering the laundry-list of side effects that come along with every over-the-counter medication, this is what they claimed in the article:

Side effects were common and included dizziness, dry mouth and sleepiness

Wow... Marijuana is terrible. It definitely deserves to be a Schedule 1 drug like crack, heroin, and meth.

So what about this?

Argh I can never just know whom to believe!

This part made me chuckle.

"Perhaps it is time to place the horse back in front of the cart," Drs. Deepak Cyril D'Souza and Mohini Ranganathan wrote in the editorial.

They note that repeated recreational marijuana use can be addictive and say unanswered questions include what are the long-term health effects of medical marijuana use and whether its use is justified in children whose developing brains may be more vulnerable to its effects.

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: Aleister

Let's be real honest here Al - this is a major step in the right direction. What needs to be the icing on the cake is corporations adopting this edict and amending their drug and alcohol policies to suit the fact that even though it stays in your system well after it's effects dissipate, the testing method needs to reflect that fact and not be detrimental to ones ability to keep their job - ie SWABS only pick up things in the last 24hrs but even that is not good enough - it should reflect "under the influence" levels - just like an alcohol breathalyzer is designed to register to a certain extent, so too should THC levels be comparable, and an associated method of capturing that developed..........there's a patent idea right there.

THEN, we shall see the fruits of our labour be made manifest.

Luckily, there are companies working on testing methods to determine the level of impairment instead of simply detecting THC in the system.

When those tests are available, it would change a lot of things for the better. As it stands currently, the states with legalized marijuana have "DUI" limits based on THC levels which, as you've pointed out, are a piss-poor method for determining if someone is actually impaired or not.

If you get the wrong cop, you could end up with a DUI because you smoked a joint 2 weeks prior to the traffic stop.

If pharmaceutical companies reduce effectiveness there's not much point in using it. There are dedicated growers here in CO growing Charlotte's Web for its high CBD content. I believe some growers in CA have developed a similar strain.

If pharmaceutical companies can't produce a comparable product people will turn to growers. That's why, imo, recreational use is important, it keeps plants in the hands of the general public/hobbyist. They can safeguard MJ quality.

There's lots of people just wanting to cash in but there's also some serious, dedicated growers who take pride in their work and empathize deeply with the people they help. Imo people simply won't settle for less.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
So what about this?

Argh I can never just know whom to believe!

It's the same article linked above.

Here's one line you should heed:

They include a small study suggesting that many brand labels for edible marijuana products list inaccurate amounts of active ingredients. More than half of brands tested had much lower amounts than labeled, meaning users might get no effect.

So they're admitting that many users aren't getting as much THC as they believe...

This article is also akin to saying "Well this patient didn't respond well to this medication so that medication probably has no benefit."

They're throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Clearly, many people are helped by cannabis. Nobody is saying it's an end-all, be-all wonder drug that works perfectly well for everyone. The study is basically implying that, because it didn't work for EVERYONE in the study, then the medical benefits are questionable. There isn't a single drug available that passes that level of scrutiny.

Frankly, it looks like another case of a "research study" that starts with an agenda and tries to prove their point.

I have a friend who has taken almost every sleeping pill available for her insomnia and most either don't work or have horrible side effects. Using her as a test-case would imply that those medications have no benefit... even though plenty of people benefit from Ambien and the like. Ironically enough, when she uses her vaporizer with cannabis before bed, she sleeps just fine and doesn't have side effects.

How would these studies use a placebo for inhaling the marijuana?