Drugs, Profits and more to think about?? PS Don't read if you can't think!
Question:
First, there have been some studies on Marijuana (however, they were looking for measurable changes, not "do you feel better"). Check out www.nmss.org for info on recent ones. Second, in the US the researchers can’t do it. The drug abuse problem prevents use of Marijuana (or derivates) for anything legal. There may be some non-US research going on in this. Do any of the Europeans know? Especially y’all in Holland. Z – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -ateasd5…@aol.com wrote: >Why are drugs companies allowed to put together chemical cocktails, >try them out on poor defenceless animals and vulnerable sick people. >When a lot of those sick people are reporting benefits with another >drug i.e. Cannabis yet can not get this on prescription? Are there >regulations AGAINST the drugs companies testing these compounds? >If so why? >What happened to observation in research, perhaps it doesn’t apply to MS research? >Isn’t there any money in Cannabis? Maybe it’s because the >Neurologists wouldn’t be able to cope with the influx of people >claiming to have MS. It’s an interesting theory don’t you think? >You are consumers, and sometimes comfort is just as important as a >cure. Perhaps doctors can’t be trusted to prescribe these sorts of drugs? >I can’t for the life of me think why, not as they are let loose with a >prescription pad to prescribe far more dangerous things. >Seriously though what gives with this, has there been past studies that anyone knows of ? >Carol
http://www.mindspring.com/~cczimmer/ +————————————————————————+ + Carolyn C. Zimmer | "I’ve been warped by the rain, | + Duluth, GA | driven by the snow, I’m drunk and dirty, | + cczim…@mindspring.com | don’t you know, But I’m still…willin’" | + STANDARD DISCLAIMER | Lowell George | +————————————————————————+
Response:
In article <01bc45ca$d1869620$4e947dc2@pamteam>, "Sean Edgeworth" <Seane…@indigo.ie> writes: >Canabis tends to be researched under the school a) line of approach,i.e. >lets wait untill we understand more before we use this stuff.This tends to >put science as the prime priority >and the ill as irrelivent.In Ireland there seems to be a softening of this >approach,and it is >being prescribed for pain relief to terminal patients.I mean who gives a >monkeys about long >term effects when the person is terminal.Just help them through the process >with the least distress. > Regds Sean
What if I was to add that, this is a matter of humanity, good PR for the drugs firms and could be controlled in a responsible manor by the drugs firms themselves?. Not all profit is visable straight away most of the very big money spinning companies know this. Lets face it if your pain killers came with "From the makers of Pink Chocolate Drops" written on the bottle, and your pain killers work well you are more likely to believe in the value of the Pink Chocolate Drops. Carol I am wondering the same thing. There is a cannabis derivative used for palliative care but it doesn’t seem to do the job. You have to have access to the real stuff and that doesn’t come cheap or legal. Has anyone seen the awful old movie "Reefer Madness". It’s a hoot (pardon the pun) If you take a look at a good pharmacological textbook, you will see that there are some absolutely horrendous drugs in there. Maybe you shouldn’t look – you’d never let a Rx drug pass your lips or enter your body again. Oh, scratch that – the companies work very hard to find the right amount to treat an illness and most of the time the drugs do benefit. All drugs including cannabis do have the potential to harm. That’s why they are so strictly regulated. Just think. The government would make heaps of money if they marketed pot. I think that tobacco and liquor are worse. In any event, there is always potential abuse for any of these things. All things in moderation is the key. Thanks for listening. I do ramble on. Lorelle
Response:
Hi Carolyn, LSD did get approval from the FDA for the research after a long ban on it. I note that you are a beliver in "the pendulem" theory of public sentiment and views.It`s well proven at this stage and is one of my pet beliefs.:-) I do see the whole drugs problem as another example of badly managed social issues.Countless opportunitys have been missed to get some control over this one,but it was/is the old case of closing the stable door after the horse has bolted.We are now into the third generation of this one and I believe the windows have all passed.Its a case of containing the consequences of of those missed opportunitys at this stage.:-( Regds Sean Carolyn C. Zimmer <cczim…@mindspring.com> wrote in article <5iji5s$…@camel2.mindspring.com>… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Hi Sean, > I really wasn’t aware that there was current research going on with > LSD in the US. > I don’t know about the rest of the world (except for maybe Jamacia and > Holland), but here in the US, it seems that recreational drugs of any > sort (including Marijuana) are equated with murder, as far as > morality, legality, etc. Granted that public opinion has swung waaay > to far on this, but that’s how it goes. In a few years public opinion > may swing back a bit and people in this country will look at the > situation with a more realistic perspective.
Response:
On 9 Apr 1997 23:14:12 GMT, ateasd5…@aol.com wrote: >Why are drugs companies allowed to put together chemical cocktails, >try them out on poor defenceless animals and vulnerable sick people. >When a lot of those sick people are reporting benefits with another >drug i.e. Cannabis yet can not get this on prescription? Are there >regulations AGAINST the drugs companies testing these compounds? >If so why?
In the US at least, yes there are laws prohibiting research using cannabis. Most of the studies that have been done recently have been done with Marinol (isolated THC, I’m not sure if it’s natural or synthetic). I understand that among those who have been proscribed Marinol it is widely reported that it is not as effective as natural pot. — Craig Arrogance seeks to knows all the answers, Wisdom seeks to understand the questions.
Response:
ateasd5…@aol.com wrote:
: drug i.e. Cannabis yet can not get this on prescription? Are there : regulations AGAINST the drugs companies testing these compounds? : Isn’t there any money in Cannabis? Maybe it’s because the : Carol Lots of good points, CArol. But for US people it just isn’t going to happen very fast. Ever since "Reefer Madness" hit the "silver Screen" 40 or 50 years ago the country has been in a panic. It’s mostly financial, as you noted. CAnnabis is cheap and easily grown and companies just can’t make any money that way. It wasn’t always that way. In a discussion with my grandfather many years ago (He died at age 90, or so) he told me of his younger days when he troubadored around with his mandolin and smoked "hemp" for recreation. This would have been in northern Ohio in the late 1800’s. BTW, I only tried it once or twice. — /^ | []| Itazuke Tower, this is AF 801 [ Former Itazuke H.S Students ] |=|-| …—… Go around, go around [contact me at obri...@sound.net] |=| | John O’Brien
Response:
Hi Carolyn,:-) Why then have they allowed the reinitiation of research on LSD if that is the case.Surely this is a far more dangerous drug?Research here found that there was no measurable benefit to using canabis but that does not prove that there is no benefit,even if it is psycological.It only proves that their measurments cannot detect it.It is prescribed to terminal cancer patients here and the prime concern is that there is no effective stats on long term use,potential side effects,or indeed how the active ingredient actually affects brain chemistry. There are genuine concerns and its a debatable subject,but it goes back to the two different approaches on research.Researchers fall into two main categories (this is touching on cognative science) a)This lot are the guys who take known and proven research and try to build on the data. They try to push back the barriers,one stage at a time and extensively test their hypothesis and findings as they go.They take a structured logical approach and persue it methodically.This is a slow process and each stage provides opportunity to develop products/drugs.It costs a fortune but is a safe way to go and does not lead to famous monumental breakthroughs.It is less prone to the Thalomide syndrome. b)This lot work almost in reverse.They will develop a theory based on gut feeling combined with their current knowledge base and will set about proving this theory.This is almost the reverse of the aboveNotable among these are Einstine,Oppenhimer,Lorenzo………,the guy who discovered Carbon 60 and gangs of other famous people.Marie Cure could be classed in this group.They tend to make a number of assumptions to reach their theory conclusions and then proceed to test that theory.Hence the debate around cures and proven tested treatments. Canabis tends to be researched under the school a) line of approach,i.e. lets wait untill we understand more before we use this stuff.This tends to put science as the prime priority and the ill as irrelivent.In Ireland there seems to be a softening of this approach,and it is being prescribed for pain relief to terminal patients.I mean who gives a monkeys about long term effects when the person is terminal.Just help them through the process with the least distress. Regds Sean Carolyn C. Zimmer <cczim…@mindspring.com> wrote in article <5iiv6i$…@camel4.mindspring.com>… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> First, there have been some studies on Marijuana (however, they were > looking for measurable changes, not "do you feel better"). Check out > www.nmss.org for info on recent ones. > Second, in the US the researchers can’t do it. The drug abuse problem > prevents use of Marijuana (or derivates) for anything legal. > There may be some non-US research going on in this. Do any of the > Europeans know? Especially y’all in Holland. > Z
Response:
Hi Sean, I really wasn’t aware that there was current research going on with LSD in the US. I don’t know about the rest of the world (except for maybe Jamacia and Holland), but here in the US, it seems that recreational drugs of any sort (including Marijuana) are equated with murder, as far as morality, legality, etc. Granted that public opinion has swung waaay to far on this, but that’s how it goes. In a few years public opinion may swing back a bit and people in this country will look at the situation with a more realistic perspective. Z – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -"Sean Edgeworth" <Seane…@indigo.ie> wrote: >Hi Carolyn,:-) > Why then have they allowed the reinitiation of research on LSD if that is >the case.Surely this is a far more dangerous drug?Research here found that >there was no measurable benefit to using canabis but that does not prove >that there is no benefit,even if it is psycological.It only proves that >their measurments cannot detect it.It is prescribed to terminal cancer >patients here and the prime concern is that there is no effective stats on >long term use,potential side effects,or indeed how the active ingredient >actually affects brain chemistry. >There are genuine concerns and its a debatable subject,but it goes back to >the two different approaches on research.Researchers fall into two main >categories (this is touching on cognative science) >a)This lot are the guys who take known and proven research and try to build >on the data. > They try to push back the barriers,one stage at a time and extensively >test their > hypothesis and findings as they go.They take a structured logical >approach and persue > it methodically.This is a slow process and each stage provides >opportunity to develop > products/drugs.It costs a fortune but is a safe way to go and does not >lead to famous > monumental breakthroughs.It is less prone to the Thalomide syndrome. >b)This lot work almost in reverse.They will develop a theory based on gut >feeling combined > with their current knowledge base and will set about proving this >theory.This is almost the reverse of the aboveNotable > among these are Einstine,Oppenhimer,Lorenzo………,the guy who >discovered Carbon 60 > and gangs of other famous people.Marie Cure could be classed in this >group.They tend to > make a number of assumptions to reach their theory conclusions and then >proceed to test > that theory.Hence the debate around cures and proven tested treatments. >Canabis tends to be researched under the school a) line of approach,i.e. >lets wait untill we understand more before we use this stuff.This tends to >put science as the prime priority >and the ill as irrelivent.In Ireland there seems to be a softening of this >approach,and it is >being prescribed for pain relief to terminal patients.I mean who gives a >monkeys about long >term effects when the person is terminal.Just help them through the process >with the least distress.
http://www.mindspring.com/~cczimmer/ +————————————————————————+ + Carolyn C. Zimmer | "I’ve been warped by the rain, | + Duluth, GA | driven by the snow, I’m drunk and dirty, | + cczim…@mindspring.com | don’t you know, But I’m still…willin’" | + STANDARD DISCLAIMER | Lowell George | +————————————————————————+
Response:
Why are drugs companies allowed to put together chemical cocktails, try them out on poor defenceless animals and vulnerable sick people. When a lot of those sick people are reporting benefits with another drug i.e. Cannabis yet can not get this on prescription? Are there regulations AGAINST the drugs companies testing these compounds? If so why? What happened to observation in research, perhaps it doesn’t apply to MS research? Isn’t there any money in Cannabis? Maybe it’s because the Neurologists wouldn’t be able to cope with the influx of people claiming to have MS. It’s an interesting theory don’t you think? You are consumers, and sometimes comfort is just as important as a cure. Perhaps doctors can’t be trusted to prescribe these sorts of drugs? I can’t for the life of me think why, not as they are let loose with a prescription pad to prescribe far more dangerous things. Seriously though what gives with this, has there been past studies that anyone knows of ? Carol
Response:
Hi Carol, Thought I would forward these two to add to your post. Regds Sean Hi all, I believe that the FDA have allowed the reopening of research on the benefical effects of LSD,especially with regard to cognition and some mental conditions.The guy who put forward the proposal said that he was surprised that they had allowed this research to be funded ,in view of it`s reputation,and he is now starting some studys.It was researched extensively in the 60`s with some sucess but when it became a recreational drug there was a blanket ban on all research.I believe there was some research done,which showed promise , with regard to some mental conditions and also inteligence enhancment.Never took it myself and even if I had I would not have inhaled either,honest Bill,I wouldnt.(I know ya don`t smoke it,ya shoot it, drop it or snort it or something):-) Regds Sean Hiya X I was just noting the fact that medical research has been re-initiated into LSD and not supporting the use of it in any way.:-)I genuinely never touched the stuff,the last line was a bit of humourous banter.(whatever that is). If research has been re-initated on LSD then it is likely that canabis research is not being supressed for political reasons.The FDA are very sensitive to political lobbying and sentiment,hence the surprise expressed by the proposer. I would suspect that it is being supressed to avoid cheap competition to the established drugs for pain,stress,anxiety and other such conditions.The problem is that canabis is a "naturally occuring substance" and as such cannot be patented.Drugs companys have tried to design synthetic versions of it but have been unsucessfull so far.One trial was a version which tried to remove the happy factor and focus on any medical advantages,needless to say,it failed miserably.(pun not intended):-).LSD is another " kettle of spiders" though in that it is usually a synthetic drug made in labs.The closest natural version is known as "iawasca" and has been used extensivly by the south american indians during rituals and for relaxation.It is legal in Brazil and is used by a number of doctors and other professionals to improve their life/work style.Me,I try to avoid anything that is not guaranteed to benefit my health,except for cigaretts.I am a hopless addict to those things and will probably pay the price to them rather than MS.It`s a case of "once bitten,twice shy".I think life and old age do the most damage to your mind;after that comes phone bills,gas bills,income tax,mortages,personal loans,bank managers………………………………….. Now it`s time for another cancer stick,so with that I will leave you.:-) Regds Sean ateasd5…@aol.com wrote in article <19970409231300.TAA09…@ladder01.news.aol.com>… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Why are drugs companies allowed to put together chemical cocktails, > try them out on poor defenceless animals and vulnerable sick people. > When a lot of those sick people are reporting benefits with another > drug i.e. Cannabis yet can not get this on prescription? Are there > regulations AGAINST the drugs companies testing these compounds? > If so why? > What happened to observation in research, perhaps it doesn’t apply to MS research? > Isn’t there any money in Cannabis? Maybe it’s because the > Neurologists wouldn’t be able to cope with the influx of people > claiming to have MS. It’s an interesting theory don’t you think? > You are consumers, and sometimes comfort is just as important as a > cure. Perhaps doctors can’t be trusted to prescribe these sorts of drugs? > I can’t for the life of me think why, not as they are let loose with a > prescription pad to prescribe far more dangerous things. > Seriously though what gives with this, has there been past studies that anyone knows of ? > Carol
Response:
Filed under: Lobbying
Leave a Comment
XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
TrackBack URL | RSS feed for comments on this post.