Research undermines medical marijuana claims

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

StillwaterTownie

Federal Marshal
Jun 18, 2010
16,909
2,196
743
Where else but Stillwater
#41
I'll vote for 788. My brother after chemo had no appetite and couldn't keep food down. Went to Colorado, has put on a few well needed pounds, and his last scan was cancer free. Colorado got the taxes, and he risked incarceration here to get well.
My congratulations to your brother getting over the ordeal of cancer.

The opponents of SQ788 don't seem to realize that the Oklahoma Legislature has the power to gut it after it passes or even throw the whole thing out. I'm afraid that after legislators get through with it, the no side will likely be much more happier with the changes than the yes side.

The Reefer Madness TV ad by the opposition might as well be a joke. The Lost Ogle addresses it here: https://www.thelostogle.com/2018/06/19/new-tv-ads-go-reefer-madness-on-sq-788/

To answer the Reefer Madness people, prior work the House has done on HB3468 to put regulations in SQ788 makes clear how businesses can ban smoking medical marijuana as shown on page 170. https://legiscan.com/OK/text/HB3468/id/1763773 The House passed HB3468. The Senate wouldn't give it a hearing.
 

Pokey

Territorial Marshal
Sep 13, 2013
5,557
1,198
743
Left field
#42
My congratulations to your brother getting over the ordeal of cancer.

The opponents of SQ788 don't seem to realize that the Oklahoma Legislature has the power to gut it after it passes or even throw the whole thing out. I'm afraid that after legislators get through with it, the no side will likely be much more happier with the changes than the yes side.

The Reefer Madness TV ad by the opposition might as well be a joke. The Lost Ogle addresses it here: https://www.thelostogle.com/2018/06/19/new-tv-ads-go-reefer-madness-on-sq-788/

To answer the Reefer Madness people, prior work the House has done on HB3468 to put regulations in SQ788 makes clear how businesses can ban smoking medical marijuana as shown on page 170. https://legiscan.com/OK/text/HB3468/id/1763773 The House passed HB3468. The Senate wouldn't give it a hearing.
Brother is 6 foot 2 inches tall and was down to 120-125 lbs.. nice to see him looking less skeletal.
 

StillwaterTownie

Federal Marshal
Jun 18, 2010
16,909
2,196
743
Where else but Stillwater
#45
Oh c'mon. Smoke from a wood burning fireplace has effects on the lungs. The concept that you can repeatedly burn any substance and suck it into your lungs over and over and not have a health effect from it is just stupid. As Rx said, just because the association has not been found yet, does not mean it isn't there.

I support the right of a person to suck a harmful substance into his lungs if that is what he chooses to do in a way that does not bother anyone else. And, maybe if this lung specialist actually claimed that it should not be banned he was thinking the same thing. But, the MJ advocates need to get away from this idea that it is some mystical substance that does not follow the rules of physiology and just gives medicine and makes people high without a downside. It is just dumb.
The lung doctor, who determined smoking marijuana does not cause lung cancer, would simply tell you that marijuana has protective properties to counteract any cancer causing chemicals it may have. But, yes, smoking marijuana can cause bronchitis.

What about the people who think they have to drink at least one 6 pack every day. Do you ever worry about them?
Oh c'mon. Smoke from a wood burning fireplace has effects on the lungs. The concept that you can repeatedly burn any substance and suck it into your lungs over and over and not have a health effect from it is just stupid. As Rx said, just because the association has not been found yet, does not mean it isn't there.

I support the right of a person to suck a harmful substance into his lungs if that is what he chooses to do in a way that does not bother anyone else. And, maybe if this lung specialist actually claimed that it should not be banned he was thinking the same thing. But, the MJ advocates need to get away from this idea that it is some mystical substance that does not follow the rules of physiology and just gives medicine and makes people high without a downside. It is just dumb.
Do you not realize that much doctor recommended medical marijuana is not even smoked?
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
71,200
50,546
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#46
Regarding "Research weakens medical pot claims" (Our Views, June 17): There are more studies published (over 25,000) about the safe medical uses of cannabis than there are research studies for Tylenol. More at: https://newsok.com/article/5598660/advocate-reasons-to-back-oklahoma-medical-marijuana-question
Utter bullspit. This is the result of a medline search where acetaminophen and cannabis where the focus of the article. Note that there have been roughly twice as many articles with acetaminophen as the focus of the article. Limiting the search to strictly human trials and there are still twice as many acetaminophen trials as cannabis. The only way you could get more research on cannabis is if you actually use Tylenol as your search term, which no one who knows anything about medical information searching would ever do.

1529577902140.png
 

kaboy42

Territorial Marshal
May 2, 2007
7,982
8,444
1,743
#54
Then since so many people are addicted to the practice of hypocrisy, just try to practice what you preach when and if rec marijuana in Oklahoma is legalized. Tell me something? Are you ignorant of the FACT that there is a petition now in Oklahoma gathering signatures to vote on legalizing rec marijuana?
Exactly what am I being hypocritical about. I'm anti-"medical" marijuana because its never been proven by clinical trials. I'm pro-decriminalizing marijuana possession below carrying a certain amount. I'm pro-incarceration for dealers. AND I'm pro-legalizing rec weed AND taxing it substantially higher than the current tobacco taxes. And I'm pro using some of that tax money to properly study and report the scientific facts of marijuana usage... just like we currently do with tobacco and alcohol taxes. In other words... treat it just like tobacco and alcohol today.

Yes, I'm aware there are petitions to try and get rec weed legalized in Oklahoma. Good luck with that.

I'll vote for 788. My brother after chemo had no appetite and couldn't keep food down. Went to Colorado, has put on a few well needed pounds, and his last scan was cancer free. Colorado got the taxes, and he risked incarceration here to get well.
CBD oil makes the exact same claim as "medical" marijuana as a digestive aid/appetite stimulant... I will ask it again for the 5th time... Why do we need "medicinal" marijuana in Oklahoma when we already have a substance making ALL of the same claims and also claiming it's backed by "research and proven science"??? And you don't even need to mess with a Doctor to get it. :confused:

Which is why I favor decriminalization instead of legalizing.

Growing and possessing pot should carry the same criminal penalty as growing and possessing Big Boy tomatoes.

I don't smoke it, but I know a lot of people that do, and most of them are pretty successful.

I don't give a deuce what you're doing, if you're doing it to excess it's probably somewhat bad for you and those around you, and that includes beer, golfing, fishing, cheeseburgers and going to church or work.
I'd be down for decriminalizing weed for users, but not necessarily the dealers and pushers. And I don't smoke it either... not even once, ever. Not one single drag. But my experiences are different than you. I've known about 8-10 weed users in my lifetime. All pretty much have ruined their lives... divorced, can't keep a steady job, don't think they have a problem, are fine mooching off of others so that their money gets used for weed... Only 1 of those acquaintances got away from it (after 2 divorces) and is now a successful father and school administrator. Another two of them are grandparents that smoke it around their grandson. Their daughter has pleaded and pleaded and threatened and they just kept smoking away, pretty much daily, around an 18 mo. old child. They say they'll quit and they never have.

I haven't experienced weed being a "positive factor" in any ones life. Quite the opposite. You could easily say the same about alcohol... BUT I know countless social drinkers... those that drink A glass of wine or A beer with friends. Almost never consume in excess. I don't know any weed users that are "social" tokers. In my experience, they all did it/do it to get high. I know everyone's experiences are going to be different, just relaying mine.
 

StillwaterTownie

Federal Marshal
Jun 18, 2010
16,909
2,196
743
Where else but Stillwater
#56
Roughly 4x as much research on aspirin as MJ. Tell you what, when MJ has as much evidence of outcomes benefit as aspirin then I will happily accept it and help push for it's legalization.
View attachment 62068
No wonder. This is because aspirin isn't a Schedule 1 drug. Lots more research in the U. S. would be done on marijuana to verify its medical good if it wasn't Schedule 1. So other countries, like UK and Israel are leading the research, including clinical trials. As a matter of fact, marijuana will have to be changed down to at least Schedule 2, if any marijuana based drugs from those countries can be prescribed in the U. S.

Some doctors don't even advise the use of aspirin.
 
Last edited:

Rack

Federal Marshal
Oct 13, 2004
19,644
8,892
1,743
Earth
#57
So neither is drinking alcohol until you are seeing in doubles. Yet alcohol is legal.
Yeah, I don't really care what you or others do...only what my kid does and I don't want him smoking pot or drinking alcohol. As far as the legality of things...I only have one vote. Is what it is.
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
71,200
50,546
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#59
No wonder. This is because aspirin isn't a Schedule 1 drug. Lots more research in the U. S. would be done on marijuana to verify its medical good if it wasn't Schedule 1. So other countries, like UK and Israel are leading the research, including clinical trials. As a matter of fact, marijuana will have to be changed down to at least Schedule 2, if any marijuana based drugs from those countries can be prescribed in the U. S.

Some doctors don't even advise the use of aspirin.
The database I searched was world wide and included foreign language articles. So, more bullspit.
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
71,200
50,546
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#60
And to you, it's still wrong, stupid and immoral to smoke medical marijuana even if you owe your life to it?
I don't think using any medication is immoral. It may be stupid if there is inadequate literature support, and I believe that for most uses the literature support for MMJ is inadequate. No one owes their life to it, that is a nonsensical statement. I don't even think that using a pharmacological substance recreationally is necessarily immoral. Even the Bible allows that drinking wine in and of itself is not a sin, and medicinal use of alcohol certainly isn't a sin. However, the Bible says a LOT about drunkeness, and I believe it. That would also include intoxication from other pharmacological substances including MJ. From a personal standpoint, I do not see what good comes from it. From a professional standpoint I've seen a lot of harm.

But you're an expert on what I think. Put. The bong. Down.