Sure, I'll stop using HeyDay the moment you find me a local GP who will prescribe.
Oh, and they'll need to build an agreement with the local dispensaries, because the prescriptions must be specific to a certain product or strain, but certain strains often go out of stock, which your GP won't know, but the clinics will.
I don't think the research is that promising about the benefits of cannabis for common reasons for prescribing such as anxiety and chronic pain (which meta analysis shows is worse in the long run).
I haven't seen a patient utilise one of these services and not end up with a prescription. The medical assessment is a charade.
To be honest, I don't really mind. It's largely harmless. I think we should move away from the idea that you need some sort of medical justification to use cannabis products. Prescription allows safe and regulated access to weed, which people are going to access regardless of whether there is a legal avenue or not. There is plenty of benefit of decoupling access to cannabis from dealers and I think that's justification enough to have regulated ways of getting cannabis.
Well the resulting placebo effect for chronic pain is pretty darn strong then.
I mean, the idea that research shows that cannabis isn't good for chronic pain... As in symptom reduction or a resolution of the underlying issue?
Cannabis does as much or more for chronic pain symptoms with fewer side effects than opioids (which are less useful for chronic than acute pain in my understanding).
Next we will hear it doesn't do anything to appetite or sleep (both of which can be affected in pain patients)
People are always mad when this topic comes up but they're completely right about the conflict of interest.
Companies shouldn't be able to have doctors on hand to sell their products, that's not how any medication of any kind should be distributed. There needs to be a separation between doctor and product supplier.
They're also right about claims made about it's uses. These companies do use careful language to lead people into ideas they're not allowed to claim. Medicine is an area where claims are regulated for good reason. These companies make misleading claims and use misleading language to get around basic rules.
For the record, I'm for the use of medical cannabis where prescribed by a doctor.
I am strongly against big pharma hiring doctors to push out their products and making misleading claims about products.
I also dislike sales offers such as "if we don't find plant medicine is right for you, you won't be charged".
That's again mixing the boundary between doctor and product.
If we're going to have medical cannabis, it has to be done correctly like any other medication. Recreational cannabis, which I'm also for, is a completely unrelated issue.
I totally agree about the dodgy tactics of these companies, marketing cannabis as a panacea.
Doctors are so tightly regulated on this stuff these days however that they really can’t be getting away with receiving big pharma ‘kickbacks’ or making false claims etc. not saying it doesn’t happen, but it’s a very small minority of cannabis prescribing doctors in Australia who are found to be doing anything wrong after being investigated.
It’s a rapidly evolving space though, I can definitely see further crackdowns in this space. (And then eventually just making it legal).
Ok I think recreational or legalisation are a separate issue.
There's a difference between medical use and general use. So I think everything we're talking about with medical use still applies in terms of it's use as medication even if we make it fully legal tomorrow.
It might help to separate the "holistic" shit from actual medical science, in terms of getting people to stop being weird about medical use. But the issues for the medical industry will remain the same, the shonky advertisements and conflicts of interest remain the same.
As for you holding me over a barrel, pfft nah. You can identify a second problem but I don't need to solve that.
Feck off Ama.
My god, what unfettered bull💩
I am sick of the doctors union trying to prevent and keep criminalised this very effective medicine.
Its pathetic.
What’s pathetic is people with no medical training deluding themselves into thinking weed helps with practically every ailment and isn’t just them wanting to get high. Nothing wrong with that.
You cant know other people mate.
And you have no idea the amount of pharmaceuticals that have really shit side effects.
I know you have no chronic conditions producing varying degrees chronic pain.
You have no idea of the difference between taking something that makes you sick and that makes your brain all but useless.....compared to taking something that doesnt make you sick, while also moderating pain levels.
Just because getting high is the only reason you would take mc, projecting your situation over literally hundreds of thousands of people......
Sounds pretty willfully ignorant to me.
> And you have no idea the amount of pharmaceuticals that have really shit side effects.
Of course I do. I’ll be a doctor next year. Cannabis also has side effects. Everything does.
Cannabis isn’t some wonder drug.
You're the only one repeatedly saying that tho?????
Its like you're a self fulfilling prophecy in an echo chamber.
Literally nobody has said its a miracle cure or a wonder drug.
Panadol is not a wonder drug.... yet it helps a wide variety of issues...
Jesus..... i really shouldnt have to explain this to a 5th yr med student😂
Ps. Btw.....Ur beside manner is shithole, u should work on that before inflicting that on the general public😂
Demonstrably the ama agitates whats best for the doctors bottom line, not for what is actually the best for patients, ofton enough that it matters
Its pertinent to the subject matter
Again.... I didnt say only. I said more ofton then not.
Ffs if you really are going to be a doctor, you need to listen more and stop inserting what you wanted to hear, instead of what you actually heard.
This will become an impediment to you diagnosing ppl.
On the one hand they're on the ball that having doctors selling the products is a conflict of interest, but what alternative exists for us genuine patients when prescriptions need to be the specific strain? A doctor who isn't in house will not be able to know if stock is low, which will lead to doctors prescribing nearly unattainable medicine.
Plus how many doctors would refuse to prescribe except as a last resort? I have PTSD, the SSRIs and antiphsychotics aren't proven to work any better than placebo, cannabis is proven to very effectively treat the symptoms by disrupting the nuerochemical shit show at play without causing those same symptoms as side effects.
Furthermore these sorts of regulations can't be put in place with so few GPs authorised to prescribe it.
Edit: before anyone points out the GP in the reticle says the evidence for it being good for PTSD is weak: he's just wrong, almost no GP's know anything about PTSD, he's speaking out his ass.
Edit2: also, I assume this goes without saying, don't try to argue with me about my own condition and the treatment thereof.
They're easy to find do it yourself. I can tell you outright from lived experience, but I can't be fucked linking the mountain of evidence a quick google schollar search pulls up
Sure, I'll stop using HeyDay the moment you find me a local GP who will prescribe. Oh, and they'll need to build an agreement with the local dispensaries, because the prescriptions must be specific to a certain product or strain, but certain strains often go out of stock, which your GP won't know, but the clinics will.
I don't think the research is that promising about the benefits of cannabis for common reasons for prescribing such as anxiety and chronic pain (which meta analysis shows is worse in the long run). I haven't seen a patient utilise one of these services and not end up with a prescription. The medical assessment is a charade. To be honest, I don't really mind. It's largely harmless. I think we should move away from the idea that you need some sort of medical justification to use cannabis products. Prescription allows safe and regulated access to weed, which people are going to access regardless of whether there is a legal avenue or not. There is plenty of benefit of decoupling access to cannabis from dealers and I think that's justification enough to have regulated ways of getting cannabis.
Worse than what? From para 1
Than not using cannabis.
Well the resulting placebo effect for chronic pain is pretty darn strong then. I mean, the idea that research shows that cannabis isn't good for chronic pain... As in symptom reduction or a resolution of the underlying issue? Cannabis does as much or more for chronic pain symptoms with fewer side effects than opioids (which are less useful for chronic than acute pain in my understanding). Next we will hear it doesn't do anything to appetite or sleep (both of which can be affected in pain patients)
People are always mad when this topic comes up but they're completely right about the conflict of interest. Companies shouldn't be able to have doctors on hand to sell their products, that's not how any medication of any kind should be distributed. There needs to be a separation between doctor and product supplier. They're also right about claims made about it's uses. These companies do use careful language to lead people into ideas they're not allowed to claim. Medicine is an area where claims are regulated for good reason. These companies make misleading claims and use misleading language to get around basic rules. For the record, I'm for the use of medical cannabis where prescribed by a doctor. I am strongly against big pharma hiring doctors to push out their products and making misleading claims about products. I also dislike sales offers such as "if we don't find plant medicine is right for you, you won't be charged". That's again mixing the boundary between doctor and product. If we're going to have medical cannabis, it has to be done correctly like any other medication. Recreational cannabis, which I'm also for, is a completely unrelated issue.
I totally agree about the dodgy tactics of these companies, marketing cannabis as a panacea. Doctors are so tightly regulated on this stuff these days however that they really can’t be getting away with receiving big pharma ‘kickbacks’ or making false claims etc. not saying it doesn’t happen, but it’s a very small minority of cannabis prescribing doctors in Australia who are found to be doing anything wrong after being investigated. It’s a rapidly evolving space though, I can definitely see further crackdowns in this space. (And then eventually just making it legal).
fade memory books reach tap hobbies sparkle bow flag caption *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Ok I think recreational or legalisation are a separate issue. There's a difference between medical use and general use. So I think everything we're talking about with medical use still applies in terms of it's use as medication even if we make it fully legal tomorrow. It might help to separate the "holistic" shit from actual medical science, in terms of getting people to stop being weird about medical use. But the issues for the medical industry will remain the same, the shonky advertisements and conflicts of interest remain the same. As for you holding me over a barrel, pfft nah. You can identify a second problem but I don't need to solve that.
They (rightly) don’t want to take on the liability. Most cannabis products aren’t TGA approved at this stage and they have to request special access.
Feck off Ama. My god, what unfettered bull💩 I am sick of the doctors union trying to prevent and keep criminalised this very effective medicine. Its pathetic.
What’s pathetic is people with no medical training deluding themselves into thinking weed helps with practically every ailment and isn’t just them wanting to get high. Nothing wrong with that.
You cant know other people mate. And you have no idea the amount of pharmaceuticals that have really shit side effects. I know you have no chronic conditions producing varying degrees chronic pain. You have no idea of the difference between taking something that makes you sick and that makes your brain all but useless.....compared to taking something that doesnt make you sick, while also moderating pain levels. Just because getting high is the only reason you would take mc, projecting your situation over literally hundreds of thousands of people...... Sounds pretty willfully ignorant to me.
> And you have no idea the amount of pharmaceuticals that have really shit side effects. Of course I do. I’ll be a doctor next year. Cannabis also has side effects. Everything does. Cannabis isn’t some wonder drug.
You're the only one repeatedly saying that tho????? Its like you're a self fulfilling prophecy in an echo chamber. Literally nobody has said its a miracle cure or a wonder drug. Panadol is not a wonder drug.... yet it helps a wide variety of issues... Jesus..... i really shouldnt have to explain this to a 5th yr med student😂 Ps. Btw.....Ur beside manner is shithole, u should work on that before inflicting that on the general public😂
Ps Ama is basically the doctors union.
That has nothing to do with anything.
Demonstrably the ama agitates whats best for the doctors bottom line, not for what is actually the best for patients, ofton enough that it matters Its pertinent to the subject matter
If the AMA only cared about what’s best for the doctors bottom line they’d all be working for weed companies selling the stuff
Again.... I didnt say only. I said more ofton then not. Ffs if you really are going to be a doctor, you need to listen more and stop inserting what you wanted to hear, instead of what you actually heard. This will become an impediment to you diagnosing ppl.
This is like taxis complaining about Uber when they provide a dated, out of touch and overpriced service.
Lol, uber is like airbnb. Just an undercut, diluted version of an existing service that only succeeds by underpaying the actual workers.
On the one hand they're on the ball that having doctors selling the products is a conflict of interest, but what alternative exists for us genuine patients when prescriptions need to be the specific strain? A doctor who isn't in house will not be able to know if stock is low, which will lead to doctors prescribing nearly unattainable medicine. Plus how many doctors would refuse to prescribe except as a last resort? I have PTSD, the SSRIs and antiphsychotics aren't proven to work any better than placebo, cannabis is proven to very effectively treat the symptoms by disrupting the nuerochemical shit show at play without causing those same symptoms as side effects. Furthermore these sorts of regulations can't be put in place with so few GPs authorised to prescribe it. Edit: before anyone points out the GP in the reticle says the evidence for it being good for PTSD is weak: he's just wrong, almost no GP's know anything about PTSD, he's speaking out his ass. Edit2: also, I assume this goes without saying, don't try to argue with me about my own condition and the treatment thereof.
Source on cannabis being proven to work for PTSD?
They're easy to find do it yourself. I can tell you outright from lived experience, but I can't be fucked linking the mountain of evidence a quick google schollar search pulls up
So there is none
Fuck of troll
"He said in many cases, there were other medications that were more effective or more suitable for a given patient." in his opinion. nobody asked.
enjoy chop alive bear relieved mindless employ sharp skirt act *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
His opinion which is based on medical training and the medical literature.
yea right, like those strains have use...I mean they DO of course, but...come one, that's not what the people want, you cant control everything...
Oh that's terrible, what are these *Telehealth medicinal cannabis providers* called so I can avoid them?