dpreguy 14 #26 January 9, 2014 No one is actually buying the mother's story "...found a cookie on the ground ...", it's kinda like the "...dog ate my homework..." story. No one knows the actual story of the event that led to the child having THC in her body, but the "...found the cookie and ate half of it..." yadda yadda story is obviously bogus. The rest of the posts are the usual banter about usage with legalization or usage without legalization. Fascinating reading, but for the most part, persons have long ago made up their minds about this; and nothing that is posted will change anyone's mind. This includes me Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,257 #27 January 9, 2014 kelpdiverPot advocates have long maintained that there's never been a drug overdose from marijuana. Brownies have long been around, and your story is not the first one I've heard of kids getting them. (funny-sorta story of a SF baker delivering a whole lot to a class - apparently he baked both kinds and took the wrong ones) so there's some sort of disconnect here. What disconnect? The kid's fine, isn't she?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #28 January 9, 2014 jakee What disconnect? The kid's fine, isn't she? no, the kid is dead in jcalor's event. So either it is falsely attributed to pot, or the claim of never verified OD deaths only applies to adults, or option C. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,257 #29 January 9, 2014 kelpdiver*** What disconnect? The kid's fine, isn't she? no, the kid is dead in jcalor's event. No. Read it again, there's no mention of death. QuoteSo either it is falsely attributed to pot, or the claim of never verified OD deaths only applies to adults, or option C. Jclalor did not say that anyone died, so there's no OD death to falsely or correctly attribute. Maybe he should chime in and clarify.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #30 January 9, 2014 "The next morning her mother could not wake her up, 911 was called and they took her to the ER, where they could not arouse her, even with painful stimuli." this sounds like dead to me, but there is a little bit of vagueness. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,257 #31 January 9, 2014 "They thought she was postictal from a severe seizure until the drug screen came back. It It turns out Grandma's new boyfriend is quite the baker and left some of his cookies out. A very scary experience. " Postictal means not dead. Well, it means a bit more than that but not being dead is a major part of it. I'd also be surprised if death was described merely as "A very scary experience" Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cryptocoin 0 #32 January 12, 2014 QuoteTwo yea rold pops positive for THC after eating pot cookie. Ain't that grand?Unimpressed Because children should never have access to THC, right? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1383240/Boy-brain-cancer-cured-secretly-fed-medical-marijuana-father.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/30/marijuana-over-chemo_n_4017985.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #33 January 12, 2014 cryptocoin Quote Two yea rold pops positive for THC after eating pot cookie. Ain't that grand?Unimpressed Because children should never have access to THC, right? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1383240/Boy-brain-cancer-cured-secretly-fed-medical-marijuana-father.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/30/marijuana-over-chemo_n_4017985.html I'm pretty damn sure that the weed is not what cured the cancer. I believe the media would have made a little bigger story than the Daily Mail did.That said. What cancer did the kid in the original article have a need to injest a controlled substance?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cryptocoin 0 #34 January 12, 2014 Before I give you plenty of testimonials, what is it that makes you 'pretty damn sure' that it was not the cannabis that cured the cancer? Big Pharma are not into cannabis... chemo makes heaps more money. https://www.google.com/search?q=cannabis+cancer+survvor+testemonies&oq=cannabis+cancer+survvor+testemonies&aqs=chrome..69i57.12562j0j7&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8 Here is a recent story from Australia. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/desperate-parents-turn-to-medical-marijuana-in-lastditch-effort-to-improve-their-childrens-lives/story-fni0fit3-1226799787147 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #35 January 12, 2014 cryptocoinBefore I give you plenty of testimonials, what is it that makes you 'pretty damn sure' that it was not the cannabis that cured the cancer? Big Pharma are not into cannabis... chemo makes heaps more money. Is a testimonial a scientific conclusion?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cryptocoin 0 #36 January 12, 2014 we'll the many many accounts of, "there is nothing more we can do for you" after undergoing chemo and forking out handsomely for it, and then going ahead and going into remission after using THC and CBD is better than a study. there are also plenty of studies. why don't you try looking... you might be surprised. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16250836 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 340 #37 January 12, 2014 QuoteWhen we woke up, my brothers and I (I'm the oldest, and must have been the ringleader) went downstairs instead of into our parents' bedroom (as was our consistent pattern). I saw all the pretty colors in the glasses, took a chair and moved it to the counter, and my brothers and I got snockered tasting the little bits in the bottom of the glasses. I do hope you picked out the cigarette butts first. Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,257 #38 January 12, 2014 Quotewe'll the many many accounts of, "there is nothing more we can do for you" after undergoing chemo and forking out handsomely for it, and then going ahead and going into remission after using THC and CBD is better than a study. No dude, it's really not. Honestly, it's difficult to express just how much it's not better than a study.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #39 January 12, 2014 cryptocoinwe'll the many many accounts of, "there is nothing more we can do for you" after undergoing chemo and forking out handsomely for it, and then going ahead and going into remission after using THC and CBD is better than a study. The value of pot for reducing nausea and enabling chemo patients to eat more has been pretty well demonstrated. It was a key argument for medical marijuana, even though it's really been quasi legalization. And it's fairly straightforward to study. While nausea is a subjective rating by the patients, calorie intake is quantifiable. But a notion that THC can force remission - very difficult to establish cause versus correlation, and impossible to conduct an ethical study. But bear in mind that 'a lot' of people pray to God and are also cured. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,257 #40 January 13, 2014 Quoteand impossible to conduct an ethical study. How so?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cryptocoin 0 #41 January 13, 2014 QuoteBut a notion that THC can force remission - very difficult to establish cause versus correlation, and impossible to conduct an ethical study. But bear in mind that 'a lot' of people pray to God and are also cured. I guess it is just really good luck then that hundreds if not thousands of people can vouch for this curing or helping their cancer into remission after medicine has failed to... http://www.medicaljane.com/2013/12/18/studies-suggest-cannabinoids-may-kill-human-cancer-cells/# I know of someone that had weeping holes in their face from melanoma after surgery (attempting to remove the cells on the worst sore) the cancer continued to grow... They then applied THC oil to the areas (the operated area and two other areas of cancer that were not operated on) and within a month they were gone... Yes gone! Before prohibition Cannabis was used extensively in medicine... Now that medicine is about money and not health, cannabis is a great threat to the shareholders. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davjohns 1 #42 January 13, 2014 I think an awesome argument for legalization of weed is: It's less harmful than alcohol, we can tax it, and we can cut the DEA's budget as well as kick some prisoners out on the street. Legalize weed and you could argue for a cut in income tax. Everyone's happy and yet they still have something to moan about. There. Next problem?I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #43 January 13, 2014 jakeeQuoteand impossible to conduct an ethical study. How so? giving no care at all to your control subjects generally means they will die of the cancer. And if you start with no notion of how THC actually would do anything at the cellular level, you're risking giving no meaningful treatment to that half of the study as well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,257 #44 January 13, 2014 kelpdiver***Quoteand impossible to conduct an ethical study. How so? giving no care at all to your control subjects generally means they will die of the cancer. And if you start with no notion of how THC actually would do anything at the cellular level, you're risking giving no meaningful treatment to that half of the study as well. If those objections prevent any evaluation THC how do they not apply to any new drug for any potentially fatal disease?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #45 January 13, 2014 jakee If those objections prevent any evaluation THC how do they not apply to any new drug for any potentially fatal disease? It's always an issue. New proposed items have to demonstrate a reason to believe they could be effective. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,257 #46 January 13, 2014 kelpdiver*** If those objections prevent any evaluation THC how do they not apply to any new drug for any potentially fatal disease? It's always an issue. You didn't say there were issues. You said it was impossible. Evidently, drug testing is possible. I can tell, because there are drugs.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #47 January 13, 2014 jakee****** If those objections prevent any evaluation THC how do they not apply to any new drug for any potentially fatal disease? It's always an issue. You didn't say there were issues. You said it was impossible. Evidently, drug testing is possible. I can tell, because there are drugs. seems to be a pandantic pattern here....it will be impossible to ethically do such a study with THC until someone can actually identify how it can achieve the objective...iow, how do the THC molecules interact. You can't just wave your hands and say - it seems to work for for this friend of a friend I knew, so let's commit 100 people to a blind trial! The fact that it has not yet happened leads me to believe it does not have any clear interaction, that instead we're seeing a coincidental factor in some of the numerous patients who are using pot to better endure the chemo. While getting funding in the US for any sort of research that might show pot to be used is virtually impossible, that's not true elsewhere. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,257 #48 January 13, 2014 Quoteseems to be a pandantic pattern here... Are you just pissed because you were wrong earlier? I don't see knowing the meaning of words as being pedantic. Quoteit will be impossible to ethically do such a study with THC until someone can actually identify how it can achieve the objective...iow, how do the THC molecules interact. You can't just wave your hands and say - it seems to work for for this friend of a friend I knew, so let's commit 100 people to a blind trial! Ok, so it's just like everything else. Cool.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cryptocoin 0 #49 January 14, 2014 Quotegiving no care at all to your control subjects generally means they will die of the cancer. And if you start with no notion of how THC actually would do anything at the cellular level, you're risking giving no meaningful treatment to that half of the study as well. That is why they test on rats and mice etc... The US government already tested THC on cancer cells in the 1970's and found it to reduce the growth and move subjects into remission... If you actually looked at the links I posted instead of grasping at straws to remain correct you might actually learn something. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cryptocoin 0 #50 January 14, 2014 anther bloody good luck story? http://au.news.yahoo.com/nsw/video/watch/20712196/cannabis-success-for-young-cancer-patient/ Do you suggest opiates are better for children? Cover the symptom or go for the cause? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
