Cancer and the drug companies

**bogan** · 7th June 2015, 11:21

Originally Posted by Edbear

Again, what legal alternatives did they really try?

Why don't you reasearch that yourself

Also, why does the legalality matter? Tramadol is about to become illegal, and weed legal, will you make the switch then, despite all your 'research'?

**Katman** · 9th June 2015, 17:38

At least the stupid old prick has suddenly realised there's more to being a politician than just falling asleep in parliament.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA150...ol-product.htm

**Edbear** · 9th June 2015, 18:01

http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/seiz...rounds-6334800

This is something I have no problem agreeing with.

**Katman** · 19th June 2015, 15:32

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/heal...cinal-cannabis

**husaberg** · 19th June 2015, 15:52

**mashman** · 19th June 2015, 16:50

Originally Posted by Katman

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/heal...cinal-cannabis

Great news... about time such things took their place in the medicine world.

**RDJ** · 19th June 2015, 16:58

The process for getting new drugs approved is tortuous, and ofttimes I think it is unnecessarily slow and therefore disappointing, to the point of imposing unnecessary suffering on patients.

That said, I vividly remember the problem with thalidomide even though it was "before my (training) time", horrific consequences resulted from too-rapid approval without enough in vivo testing. Because the drug was so effective for what it was designed to be treating...

Striking the balance is hard. We should try harder...

**Katman** · 19th June 2015, 17:04

Originally Posted by RDJ

The process for getting new drugs approved is tortuous, and ofttimes I think it is unnecessarily slow and therefore disappointing, to the point of imposing unnecessary suffering on patients.

That said, I vividly remember the problem with thalidomide even though it was "before my (training) time", horrific consequences resulted from too-rapid approval without enough in vivo testing. Because the drug was so effective for what it was designed to be treating...

Striking the balance is hard. We should try harder...

Yeah, because cannabis is such an unknown quantity.

**RDJ** · 19th June 2015, 17:06

Originally Posted by Katman

Yeah, because cannabis is such an unknown quantity.

It is an unknown quantity in terms of appropriate prescribing. Not in terms of inappropriate use - in that context it is a very well-known quantity. Knowing the difference is crucial.

**Katman** · 19th June 2015, 17:10

Originally Posted by RDJ

It is an unknown quantity in terms of appropriate prescribing. Not in terms of inappropriate use - in that context it is a very well-known quantity. Knowing the difference is crucial.

The reality is that the distinction shouldn't need to be made.

Results have shown there are real benefits from cannabis as a treatment.

There is nothing to suggest that it doesn't necessarily have similar potential as a prevention.

Nobody has yet died of a cannabis overdose.

**James Deuce** · 19th June 2015, 17:17

https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org...ersus-science/

https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org...t-cure-cancer/

**mashman** · 19th June 2015, 17:28

Originally Posted by RDJ

It is an unknown quantity in terms of appropriate prescribing. Not in terms of inappropriate use - in that context it is a very well-known quantity. Knowing the difference is crucial.

A snip from the article.

"2001: Canada is the first nation to allow patients to legally use medical marijuana.

2009: Nearly 4,000 patients have successfully enrolled in Canada’s MMAR program. – See more at: http://www.vimm.ca/legal/brief-history-of-the-medical-use-of-marijuana/#sthash.6DLtfix3.dpuf"

It's 6 years later that 2009. Not enough? People have been moving there to receive the treatment for their kids. The results are striking. You reckon they may have proven the point by now. It's not a new drug. Not even medically. What is a new drug, is ANY big pharma synthetic version. Do you work for them?

**RDJ** · 19th June 2015, 18:22

Originally Posted by Katman

Nobody has yet died of a cannabis overdose.

#

You. Are. Wrong.

**RDJ** · 19th June 2015, 18:24

Originally Posted by mashman

A snip from the article.

"2001: Canada is the first nation to allow patients to legally use medical marijuana.

2009: Nearly 4,000 patients have successfully enrolled in Canada’s MMAR program. – See more at: http://www.vimm.ca/legal/brief-history-of-the-medical-use-of-marijuana/#sthash.6DLtfix3.dpuf"

It's 6 years later that 2009. Not enough? People have been moving there to receive the treatment for their kids. The results are striking. You reckon they may have proven the point by now. It's not a new drug. Not even medically. What is a new drug, is ANY big pharma synthetic version. Do you work for them?

As I have said in another thread, if I work for them, could you please remind them to pay me.

I work for what's best for the patient's I treat or have dealings with. Clearly you don't have any understanding of that type of involvement, so I should refrain from posting further in these threads.