Supreme Court outlaws medical marijuana

Medical Marijuana is vastly over-rated as medicine.

I think Marijuana should be legalized too, but not just medical reasons.
Just because it should be, and it's a victimless crime.

Most of you in here who claim to be outraged probably couldn't care less about sick people using pot as medicine. You're outraged that this is a step back for outright across the board legalization that would make it safe & legal for you to buy pot at the 7-11 and get high in public.

 

How the hell do you know what people's intentions are? I don't use marijuana, medically or recreationally, but being a chronic pain patient, I know people who do. It is THEM I am concerned about, not myself. (These people, can cancer patients and AIDS patients and MDA patients and glacoma patients ect.)

And mj is far from being "over rated" medically, if anything, there is more it can do, that hasn't been properly documented yet.

 

From what I have heard, a plant itself cannot be patented, and a company cannot get EXCLUSIVE rights to selling a plant. This is one of the reasons many feel that Medical MJ has not been legalized so far. And we know that these companies are only interested in things they can get a patent on for a certian number of years (and then try to extend it, like Clarinex and Serafem!)

I'll have to go to the NORML site and see if this is accurate. Does anyone know?

 

I did say most of you...

I guess you're the exception. But from my own experiences with my own pot-head friends, they all support medical marijuana for the sole reason that it may open the door for full legalization.

 

I don't know Maggie. . . look at the money made from tobacco!

If it was an approved pharmaceutical, with indications, they could obtain a patent. What they can't stop is people growing their own or buying it on the street. I think the pharmaceutical product would be the preferred supplier for legitimate patients. The could get it for a copay!

 

rock on, man. i agree completely with what you're saying about the harder drugs compaired to mary jane.

 

Young kids, pot-heads or not, don't really think of anyone but themselves. That doesn't mean pot doesn't have medicinal value or that most pot smokers don't care about the medicinal value.

Pot has major medicinal value. It was the only thing that would allow me to keep food down for a month after having my gallbladder and appendix removed. I cycled through 3-4 prescriptions for nasuea and lost 20 lbs in one month before I finally just stopped taking them at all and bought an ounce of pot. The first joint I smoked was the first time I was able to hold down a meal after surgery.

Nothing was like the feeling I got when my constant nasuea after surgery finally subsided. I was totally sold on it's medicinal value after that point.

 

That would be a golden day for many!

I am going to go to the NORML site and get the info about patents, if I can. Tobacco was never patented, just the processes for certain "blends" of tobacco, and also, no one needs a prescription for cigarettes. I'll see what I can find.

 

No . . . my real point, which wasn't very clear, is that money CAN and IS made from smoking plants!

I do think they could get a patent, though, in this country, if they did the clinical research.

 

Here's the info I was able to get in Patenting Pot, and it looks like only derivitives (things like Marinol) which are not nearly as effective and can have nasty side effects is what the drug companies can do. It appears that it is not possible to patent a plant itself, unless it is Genetically Modified, which opens a whole new can of worms. Pot is fine the way it is, GMOing it would cause a lot of problems, but would probably be the ONLY way that the big drug companies could market it, and they are more interested in "derivatives" anyway.


http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/maryj.html



from an interview (above) with Dr. Lester Grinspoon Medical MJ expert

JR: Do you think pharmaceutical drug companies have anything to do with the government's prohibitive stand against medicinal cannabis use?

Dr G: Absolutely. The Partnership for a Drug Free America has a budget of about a million dollars a day. A lot of that money comes from drug companies and distilleries. You see, these companies and distilleries have something to lose- the distilleries for obvious reasons. The drug companies are not interested in marijuana as a medicine because the plant cannot be patented. If you can't patent it, you can't make money on it. Their only interest is a negative one. It will eventually displace some of their pharmaceutical products.





The drug companies want control, rather than just a ban, for they know the medicinal benefits of marijuana. They have attempted to substitute synthetic derivatives for the raw herb, because the raw herb cannot be patented."
- Ed Rosenthal and Steve Kubby, Why Marijuana Should be Legal.

On May 21, 2003, GW Pharmaceuticals announced their marketing partnership with Bayer AG. GW Pharmaceuticals and Bayer AG have entered into an exclusive marketing agreement for GW's cannabis-based medicinal extract product, to be marketed under the brand name Sativex.

Bayer has obtained exclusive rights to market Sativex in the UK. In addition, Bayer has the option for a limited period of time to negotiate the marketing rights in other countries in the European Union and selected other countries around the world, excluding the US.

Bayer and GW are teaming up to provide a "medically acceptable cannabis-derived product" for the treatment of Multiple Sclerosis and severe neuropathic pain. The product is a whole plant medicinal cannabis extract containing THC, which GW has given the brand name "Tetranabinex" and CBD, which GW calls "Nabidiolex," as its principal components. The medicine is administered by means of a spray into the mouth.









"The commercial success of new cannabinoid products will depend to a considerable extent on how vigorously the prohibition against marijuana is enforced," writes Grinspoon, pointing out that pharmaceutical companies would likely be less motivated to develop their cannabinoid products "if they had to compete with natural marijuana on a level playing field; that is, if marijuana were legally available as a medicine."

These drug companies are trying to convince us that, instead of picking from the best-bred pot grown in the world's various growing regions, instead of trying different-tasting and smelling Sativas and Indicas for their various effects, we should study and use only brand-name cannabinoids, such as Synhexal (the first synthetic cannabis medicine), or Marinol, Dronabinol, Nabalone, Cecemet, and now Tetranabinex and Nabidiolex.

Because of the financial realities of their situation, these companies cannot truly support an end to cannabis prohibition, as legal marijuana would affect their profits. Many people would not want to use an expensive synthetic pill or computerized delivery device when a cheap, easy and effective plant-based medicine is readily available.



From an Erowid article on Med MJ

What's more, pot's recreational reputation scares away grant money for studies. And private drug companies are reluctant to spend research dollars on a natural substance that will carry no patent royalties.

More (and an other quote from the ubiquitous Grinspoon) http://www.druglibrary.org/think/~jnr/goodmed.htm



No one knows how cannabis acts on the body, how it eases pain or produces a high.

Even research may not tell them--just as science cannot explain how long-used drugs such as digitalis and aspirin work.

Federal health experts maintain that a variety of drugs can provide the same relief attributed to marijuana, including the synthetic form of pot's main active ingredient, THC, which is sold under the trade name Marinol.

But many patients who have tried both say Marinol does not work as well.

Swallowing a pill, they argue, is not an effective way to treat nausea. And, they say, smoking marijuana gives them immediate relief and they can better control consumption.

Some advocates believe that the plant has not been approved as a medicine because no firm is likely to make much money on it.

Typically, pharmaceutical companies spend $200 million or more to develop a drug and win FDA approval, then receive 17-year patent rights that allow them to recoup their investment and make a profit, said Lester Grinspoon, a Harvard professor of psychiatry and co- author of the 1993 book "Marihuana, the Forbidden Medicine."

But because marijuana is a plant, Grinspoon said, there can be no patent--and no big profit.

Moreover, legal medicinal marijuana would be very cheap to produce, costing pennies per dose, and could cut into revenues from competing drugs.

"Here, there is no money to be made," Grinspoon said. "Even worse, the drug companies have something to lose."

If anyone has evidence to the contrary, it would be good to see it.

Yeah, the drug companies COULD sell MJ without a patent, but it looks like they have absolutely NO interest in doing that. If it were totally legal, new companies could open up to do this, but, as it stands, between the alcohol, drug industries and our Draconian Goverment I can't see this happening anytime in the near future.


Maggie

 

The thing that kills me about the medicinal marijuana issue is that there is a drug, Marinol (delta-9-tetrahydro-cannabinol) that is a C2 narcotic, and it is not illegal. It is essentially synthetic THC. Why is this drug a C2 while the actual plant is a C1 (no medicinal value)?
Photogra1, maybe you can explain the reasoning behind the classification of these drugs....its just not logical to me. While in school(i'm a pharm tech) none of my instructors could give me a reasonable answer.

 

Marinol is dronabinol, and it is in schedule III (C3) federally, though some states may have classified it schedule II (C2). This drug is legal, because drug companies isolated a specific compound and payed for clinical trials to obtain data proving its safety and effectiveness for certain conditions (namely: anorexia in patients with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome ~AIDS wasting, and for nausea in chemotherapy patients who failed to respond to conventional antiemetics). Many patients do very well on Marinol, but it has many problems. The effects vary greatly from patient to patient (like pot does from user to user). The onset and duration of action are highly unpredictable. Patients prescribed Marinol experience side effects similar to pot users, such as decreased sex drive, hunger, and memory loss.

Anyway, to answer your question, if a company were to invest money in clinical trials for marijuana, and it showed a favorable risk to benefit ratio, it would be approved. This would take a LONG time. . . a very long study would be necessary to obtain data on the risks of smoking it. That is one reason why drug companies are more interested in derivatives, or alternate delivery systems. There is a THC inhaler that is in clinical trials. Drug companies are reluctant to invest in marijuana research for two primary reasons:
1.) A lot of politics come into play with any large corporation. Many don't want the public image and controversy that studying marijuana would afford them.
2.) There is also a perceived lack of return on their financial investment, because they can't keep street dealers from selling pot or keep people from growing their own. I say perceived, because I think they are dead wrong. I think most patients would prefer to get their drugs from a pharmacy, and purchase a product that is known to be pure, and within a certain potency range. I also think that you CAN patent a plant. . . nurseries very frequently both patent their hybrid plants AND make the ones for sale to the public incapable of reproducing.

 

Two things. As Photo says, Marinol can have some problems. There are over 400 active substances in Cannabis, not just THC, as in most herbs, these other substances have not been adequately studied, and some beleive that some of these may help "soften" the effect of THC so that it is not so anxiety and "paranoid" producing (a common complaint from people on Marinol. The ENTIRE herb is preferable, in many cases, especially in Cannabis.

I belong to a Migraine support group, and some of the members (not me, though) use Marinol and the other one (can't remember the name, it's only available in Europe and Aus and NZ) and they almost all say regular Cannabis, preferable eaten rather than smoked is much preferable. (some smoke to get immediate releif and then eat it, usually in food, for longer drug action.) (They use this drug mostly for nausea, but some do for pain control, which is an off label use, but totally legal.) Also doctors who prescribe Marinol are closely watched by the DEA.

Long time experience users of Cannabis have said that Marinol contains the worst of weed, paranoia, feelings of dissociation, fear ect, and is VERY VERY different in effect than the pure herb. Even some who have a prescription for Marinol use Cannabis instead.

This is certainly an issue which needs a LOT more study, but in the present political climate, I think what wil happen is the shutting down of more studies, and lies about the effects of the herb itself.

 

Marijuana is really easy to grow, and can't be patented. If it was legal, the drug companies couldn't hold their monopoly on providing "health" to people, so they'd lose a lot of money. Plus, the alcohol producers might lose some of their market, which is going to cost them a lot of money.

If they could really gain by it, they'd be behind legalizing it, at least medically. They have all the angles figured out, and they know they'd lose a lot of money.

 

Years ago I read somewhere that smoked MJ created a whole new type,or changed the chemical compound of MJ.Bare with me on this for a minute,they are well aware of a lot of the different compounds in MJ,,,,however,when lighted,and smoked,a change occurs,that they haven't been able to figure out.Thats why smoking it has so much more benifits then the marinol,or any other form of synthetic MJ,or derivitives.I have tried many times eating it in various forms,ie:baked goods,butter,etc.I never much cared for that,,reason:to hard to control the amount,or dose,if you will.I very likely smoke far less a day then someone who just smokes it to get high.For me,it looks like I will always be a lightweight in that dept.Be that as it may,it works,works very well,and it's very easy to control the amount I take.Some days more,some days less.Some days it works good on my glaucoma,and physical pain,other days,not so well.Sort of a "jack of all trades,,,,master of none",but far better then recommended chemicals from the VA.That my friends is my story,,,and I'm a gonna stick to it ;}>

 

Does the government ever listen to voices like yours? It seems liike their buddies in the corporations won't make a profit, and since they can't get anything out of it, we shouldn't. That's what messed up about this whole mess

 

Whenever one tunes into a political blog, one reads much outrage against the U.S. Goverment.
Outrage over The Patriot Act.
Outrage that forign fighters are detained in Guantanmo Bay Cuba.
Outrage that Abu Gareb prison became a platform for kinky games by the night crew.
One reads very very little outrage by our press and pundits about young Americans busted for pot. It seems that a dirty bomber like Jose Padilla will gain more press sympathy than say, Al Gore III who was busted with a joint in DC 6 months ago.
Our supposed civil libretarians and the ACLU seem to care little for the plight of hippies, instead they try to burn Bush.

Well I'm outraged that Civil Libretarians and press puundits care more about forigin nationals than Americans.
When The Patriot Act is revoked, marajuana will still be illegal.

 

But there is a HUGE profit to be made, whether it be by drug companies or tobacco companies, or by the inception of marijuana comanies. . . not to mention HUGE "sin tax" revenues for the government. It is too simple to blame this on profit motivated corporation/government collusion.

 

the problem with letting the government control the selling of marijuana is that they will overcharge for it, just like drugs right now. and what is saying that that marijuana is going to be clean. it's going to be just like cigarettes. the government is going to make money off of it, and there is going to be poisons and rat feces in it.

 

You are apparently misinformed. The government does not price drugs, pharmaceutical companies do. The government does not make cigarettes, tobacco companies do. . .