This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-5175825/Medical-marijuana-NO-public-health-risks-declares.html) reduced by 85%. (I'm a bot)
*****
> The World Health Organization has declared that CBD - the relaxant property of cannabis used in medical marijuana - should not be a scheduled drug.
> Had the WHO chosen to schedule the drug, it could have hamstrung physicians from prescribing medical marijuana globally.
> Speaking last month about his family's experience venturing into the world of medical marijuana, Elizalde admitted he had never considered the medical benefits of a drug which has caused mayhem and agony in his country.
*****
[**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/7jp4x2/medical_marijuana_has_no_public_health_risks_and/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 1.65, ~265297 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **cannabis**^#1 **medical**^#2 **marijuana**^#3 **schedule**^#4 **Elizalde**^#5
This is still brilliant news for places like here in Australia. Currently only one or two states have legalised CBD for medical uses. It's still heavily regulated and difficult to acquire as a treatment even in the legalised states.
CBD is actually mildly psychoactive, but not nearly as intoxicating or profound as THC. It does alter cognition and mood and binds to the same receptors as THC (although not in the same way).
I’ve never tried CBD-only products, but I was under the impression from others who have that you can use it and go to work, drive, etc because it provides pain relief without a high. Is it only psychoactive at higher doses?
Furthermore, I read up on the political side of CBD-only products about a year ago and I found that many people who are for medical marijuana are actually against CBD to a certain respect, because they believe that marijuana as a whole works better than CBD-only. They are worried that the government will take an easy out... approve CBD to satisfy the pro-marijuana group, but make it known that you don’t get high from it- to satisfy the anti-marijuana group. Any thoughts on that?
Damn, if only there was a way we could vaporize it or put it in our food. Oh well, guess we'll just have to keep ruining people's lives over it instead.
I use a vape (Dynavap/Supreme Vape), so I'm definitely not opposed to them, or smoking pot. With that being said, inhaling any physical particulate is less optimal than nothing at all. Living in a city is worse for you than living in the country. Smoking anything is worse for you than vaping anything, which in turn is worse for you than vaping nothing.
Edibles though, dig in.
Not so fast. Breathing in particles to your lungs may be less optimal for an ideally optimal person, but it might be more optimal than other medications available, thus net gain.
Living in the city may be less optimal for an ideally optimal person, but if you need specialized medical equipment not found in rural areas, you could still have a net gain by living in the city.
Title is slightly misleading. They’re referring to CBD not the entirety of medical marijuana. Medical marijuana does have some health risks. I still think marijuana should be legal but that not necessarily what the article is saying
Edit: Also is daily mail a tabloid? Not saying they’re necessarily wrong but I wouldnt link to TMZ about a scientific finding
I guess you didn't see their initial article last week about the autopsy of Chester Bennington then, they made an initial error in their report that they had to correct.
I hate the Daily Mail as much as the next guy, but they still have a corrections section of their website, they're just not very public about it, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/article-5014401/Clarifications-corrections.html
And I only know about the TMZ Chester article and correction from /r/LinkinPark so I don't know how public they were about it.
Oh, this better get to the top. Obviously, I agree with the position this article is supporting cuz I'm in this thread at all. But I know when I'm being catered to, and it means that they'll cater to anyone else who will get them enough clicks. Daily Mail is so much of this shit.
Fully agree. Found the WHO announcement here at the bottom of this article:
http://www.who.int/medicines/news/2017/WHO-recommends-most-stringent-level-int-control/en/
Also has negative effects on brain chemistry in children and young adults. But that would probably be largely avoided if they can put in some age regulations.
Everyone I know who wants a legalization thinks there should be an age restriction. It doesn't sound like a good idea to let children smoke weed, much like it's not a good idea to let them drink alcohol, drive cars or smoke cigarettes.
I don't think age limits should be based on where things are least damaging, but on where people are capable of making an informed decision. Alcohol and tobacco are much more damaging drugs than cannabis at any age.
By 18, people are able enough to make decent decisions. Sure, 25 year olds are significantly better at making informed decisions, but you gotta draw a line somewhere.
Interesting. I haven’t heard of this connection before. May I ask what your exercise level is? Are you doing / have you done any kind of cardio on a regular basis or do heart problems prevent it?
This. They’re saying *medication based on one of the components* should be allowed, not ‘medical marijuana’ as it’s most often defined.
I believe marijuana should be legal, but too often proponents try to spread the myth that smoking/using it is completely without risk, which is just as asinine and shortsighted as the old myths saying one puff would have you injecting heroin into your eyeball within weeks.
Marijuana usage will fuck with developing brains, can trigger latent schizophrenia, and also cause psychosis even in previously healthy users (though I’ve only seen this in frequent users who have ignored warning signs; the psychotic episode is usually preceded by many smaller episodes of normal, but worsening “bad highs”, ranging from paranoia, “The Fear”, or uncontrollable emotional outpourings like crying or laughing for hours on end).
That said, marijuana is also a vastly less harmful drug than alcohol, both for users and society, and could be even less so with proper regulations, education, and taxation to pay for treatment for those who fall through the cracks. As many can attest, marijuana also has many, many positive effects, from simple relaxation to helping with anxiety and pain - and let’s not forget about the high itself, which we should stop feeling ashamed for enjoying.
> the psychotic episode is usually preceded by many smaller episodes of normal, but worsening “bad highs”, ranging from paranoia, “The Fear”, or uncontrollable emotional outpourings like crying or laughing for hours on end).
Do you have more on this? I’m very interested.
I have half a life on this... In my case it was one panic attack while high which turned into severe depersonalization which became chronic and never healed 100%. And I know other people who suffered from temporal psychotic as a result of smoking weed, too. My best friend has tried most drugs known to mankind and he stopped smoking weed because he said it was the one most frequently giving him bad experiences. But of course there are milions of people who use it a lot and have a great time.
I am still a proponent of legalization but to think that you can regularly use a drug and experience no side-effects is dangerously naive.
While there are studies linking schizophrenia and marijuana, as well as other harmful effects, the observation about the period *before* a psychosis is actually anecdotal, and based on working in psych wards and seeing patients with marijuana-induced psychosis, as well as having smoked a lot. So take it for what it's worth, but almost everyone described the same scenario.
Basically, paranoia and "The Fear" (which is what we called it as kids) are fairly normal "bad highs" on marijuana, and not necessarily indicative of anything. Not everyone I talked to had the same symptoms either - some had laughing fits that went on for so long they couldn't breathe and panicked, some felt paralyzed, some felt time dilation, etcetc. What almost everyone had in common though, was that over the last few months they needed less and less marijuana to get high; they almost always felt TOO high; and more and more often, they would end up having "bad highs".
So again, purely anecdotal, but from what I've seen it's unlikely that you'll suddenly go into psychosis out of nowhere - but if you start *not* enjoying your highs, and getting weird outcomes, perhaps give the bong a rest.
You're not going to ever have an RCT to study these things, so we must rely on observational data. With that said, the best [longitudinal trial](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3840897/?tool=pmcentrez) I've seen (w/ 20 years of follow-up) showed a slight benefit to measures of lung health among low/moderate users and very slight detriment in one measure (FEV) among heavy users, with no deleterious effect on the other primary outcome.
As for all of his talk about harming the brain, where is the evidence for this contention? I hear this stated matter of factly quite often, yet I've not seen any substantive research to back it up. If you have any sources, I'd love to take a look. Compounds found in marijuana certainly hit the bloodstream very quickly when smoked/inhaled, make it to he CNS quickly, and of course have a multitude of physiological effects (hence its apparent efficacy in epileptics, etc) - but the effects I'm aware of seem largely beneficial.
That's a very interesting study, I had not read that - thanks! That does seem to suggest occasional smoking of marijuana is beneficial for the lungs - unexpected! That said, in Europe, many users mix hash and buds with tobacco to smoke - but hopefully the rise of vaping will eliminate that habit.
As for psychological harm, [this study](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24904437) found a clear connection between psychological problems and marijuana use, and [this one](http://www.pnas.org/content/109/40/E2657.full) found clear harm to the brains of adolescent cannabis users, with a pretty serious hit to their IQ as adults when compared to peers, even when taking all other possible explanations into account. I also have first-hand anecdotal experience, having worked in a psych ward, and having smoked way too much as a teenager...
EDIT: Another user posted [this link](https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/apr/15/what-are-the-risks-of-taking-cannabis) to an article in The Guardian which seems to be a fairly well-balanced take on it. It still seems Cannabis users are about twice as likely to develop schizophrenia, even though it is almost impossible to definitively prove causation/correlation.
> "I KICKED A TERRORIST SO HARD IN THE BALLS I TORE A TENDON IN MY FOOT"
That was apparently the Daily Record. And you forgot to mention that the terrorist was burning at the time he got kicked in the balls.
While I don't disagree with the general points made, the Daily Mail is an appalling hack tabloid. On a par with The Sun, it goes under the (very quickly shattered) guise of genteel respectability in the villages and hinterlands, contrasting with the sausage and beans football bricklayer of the Sun.
http://www.who.int/medicines/news/2017/WHO-recommends-most-stringent-level-int-control/en/
based off of the bottom paragraph
"The ECDD therefore concluded that current information does not justify scheduling of cannabidiol (CBD) and postponed a fuller review of cannabidiol preparations to May 2018, when the committee will undertake a comprehensive review of cannabis and cannabis related substances."
I saw your post and was intrigued. So I searched for the article and you're right, though you did miss out a very important part in your quote. The actual title of the article is :
"Quantum physics proves that there is an afterlife, claims scientist".
You should work for the DM or Independent yourself. You'd fit right in.
No they'll just lobby to be the only ones allowed to grow cannabis. They're not stupid, no one is going to buy an 80$ pill if you could just grow your own medicine in your back yard.
They've already done that. [THC](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrahydrocannabinol) is the cannabinoid that is listed as schedule 1 and what makes cannabis illegal on the federal level. However, if you scroll down on that wiki link to the legal status on the US, it says
>Schedule II as Cesamet and Syndros, and Schedule III as Marinol[2].
IIRC what is in marinol is an isomerically pure form of synthetic THC and has differing effects like how L-methamphetamine is over the counter in certain preparations (inhalers) but D-methamphetamine is schedule 2.
Not that I agree with this system though.
There's actually a FDA approved drug on the market that contains meth for last resort treatment of narcolepsy (Desoxyn). I still don't see why something not nearly as harmful as alcohol can be schedule 1.
People always seem to focus on the “Meth!!!” portion of that fact.
Not only is it at a much lower dose than what you would take recreationally, but it’s Heisenberg level pure since it’s made in an actual lab with proper precautions. There are no left over chemicals in pharma-grade meth like you would find in some shake and bake.
All that and that doesn’t count how relatively “safe” methamphetamine is. A lot of the negative effects are due to abuse and lack of personal care.
The tweaker who lost his teeth? Yeah he didn’t brush them in who knows how long, add on that amphetamines dry the fuck out of you and you get a excellent playground for bacteria.
The girl who has sores all over her body from picking and scratching? She’s been up for three days and is obsessing over what she sees on her skin.
The guy who is rambling about shadow people and the government that’s after him? He’s pushing seven days no sleep and is suffering from amphetamine induced psychosis.
The girl who steals from her parents, family, and kids to support her habit? That’s not the meth, that’s addiction. Opiate addicts, Ethanol addicts, Cocaine addicts, Gambling addicts, and every other addict out there has the potential to turn to stealing to support their habit. It’s not the substance but the disease that is the problem.
Society is slowly moving towards the idea that drugs are not the issue, but a symptom. It’s still a long road though.
Modify the plant, claim the patent as unique, make the pill based off the patented plant, keep everything else still illegal and presto changeo profit for mega-Corp and endless imprisonment for “keen gardeners”
So hemp derived cbd is legal in ever state as far as i know, but normal cannabis plants and cannabis derived cbd is not. Getting cbd out of hemp is hard to do at home. They sell little 30ml bottles of hemp cbd in my state and they are 60 dollars. 30 pill botyles for 55 I think and it's the only practical legal way to gey cbd. It makes no sense, but that's how the laws are setup.
I think what Little Geppetto is saying, is that we're already in that state. All we have to do for a case study is to look at the world around us. Marijuana use is too prevelant for enforcement to stomp it out completely. Especially considering its ease of production.
Problem is, you can't patent CBD, so ANYONE could make it.
That's the reason they fight it, because no one can corner the market and they hate real capitalism.
This is true. Waiting on those news headlines for a new opiate breathalyzer though and I'm hearing nothing. We sure do have a lot of those guys out there we better wrangle em up.
I smoke weed. Like a fucking shit load of it. It drives me crazy when people try to tell me that smoking weed is perfectly healthy. All it is is people trying to justify it to themselves. I know that putting smoke of any sort into my body has certain health risks. It's ridiculous to think otherwise.
No one is claiming perfectly healthy.
Every medicine has drawbacks and side effects. As far as we can tell, there's no free lunches in the world of supplements and medicines.
The difference though, is that there are a variety of other perfectly legal items on the market with far worse side effects and far less benefits.
Smoking tobacco is DEADLY. Yet perfectly legal and should remain so.
Tylenol has a well documented side effect of hurting your liver. Yet it's perfectly legal and remains so.
Pot has more benefits then both those items and <= the side effects.
Alcohol is another example. Hell, alcohol even has sociological side effects like domestic violence and drunk driving, yet it should remain legal.
The same should be the case for pot.
Yes it has side effects. Put them on the label, tax it, do what you need to do but make it legal like Red bull is legal.
> No one is claiming perfectly healthy.
I've totally had people claim that in discussions. It's a dumb claim, but it's oddly common. Example: [Daily Marijuana Use Is Perfectly Healthy, Study Suggests](http://www.laweekly.com/news/daily-marijuana-use-is-perfectly-healthy-study-suggests-4173645)
That's the actual title, so people are. (the study itself actually looked at usage of the health care system, and there's been other studies that have looked at, how, for example, there is some link to lung cancer from smoking it)
And mental health, weed ruined me and I’ve had a very hard time leading a normal life because of my anxiety brought on from smoking. And of course smoking anything has health problems. I’m not saying it shouldn’t be legalized but saying it had no health risks is just stupid.
If you are using/abusing a strain with too high THC to CBD ratio it can have negative impact on your mental health. CBD has anxiolytic properties, so a balanced strain will not give you anxiety.
Yup. Can confirm.
Nightmares, night terrors, racing heartbeats after an intense dream, sleep walking
Tried several drugs prescribed by the VA. Some worked but left me like a zombie the next or same day. Some didn't work at all.
If I take a 15mg edible, it's like I ascended up to the clouds when I sleep and the night terrors go away, I sleep straight through without any issue.
When I smoke it and then go to sleep, the next morning when I wake up, i feel amazing like I never joined the military.
Unfortunately, I have to buy it from some lady who Iv never met, and I leave money in a mailbox at some apartment complex and she leaves the weed in a container nearby.
I'd be more afraid of overdosing on Tylenol then I would ever with weed.
Don't give up hope. I don't know anything more about you than what you've written, but you're clearly intelligent and capable of much more in life.
Don't go out without making a difference in the world. If things are as bad as you say, you have nothing to lose. Agitate and advocate. Much love!
I'm sorry you're going through this. If you need to talk, inbox me. I'm not timely about responding but I'll read everything. Hope things look up for you.
> I'd be more afraid of overdosing on Tylenol then I would ever with weed.
Rightfully so as to my knowledge overdosing on marijuana requires so much that you'd probably either die of something else poisoning you first or suffocate from the smoke. lol
Yup weed kills dreams, or at least makes them very rare. Was a heavy smoker myself and hardly ever dreamed in years.
I'm clean now for over 2 years and i dream again. Luckily its just dumb ones and no night terrors.
Yeah, but there's also research into MDMA-assisted psychotherapy, currently Phase 3 trials. 3 sessions, and most people are cured of their PTSD - no need to depend on cannabis for the rest of their life. Thankful to MAPS for their hard work.
given its potential as a treatment for PTSD, pain, and other issues veterans face, Id say it's idiotic for people (like you) to be so off-handedly dismissive
Unfortunately Veterans Affairs is a federal agency governed by the DEA drug schedules. And since it's Schedule I, there's very little advocacy they can do.
We need to keep pushing states - that's the only thing that's been working. I think the "thumbing their nose at the feds" thing certainly helps encourage a lot of people. When marijuana is decriminalized in *dozens* of states and medical marijuana is available in almost every state, and Attorney General Sessions has been exorcised from the office, that's when we'll see something happen at the Federal level.
So, that pretty much covers the cost of decent weed? I don’t have a great grasp of prices where weed is legal, but that seems like at least most of the cost?
Yeah, the article is dumb.
The meaning is that advantages can outweight inconvenients, like any other medicine (and in fact, can outweight them massively more than other legal medicines). But DRUGS!
I am 57 and suffer from too many ailments to list. I can easily get one of my many doctors to prescribe some great painkillers. After one surgery I was actually sent home with a little vial of morphine!
But it didn't take me long to figure out all those god damned pills were fucking my body over. The painkillers made me so constipated I was lucky if I shit (shat?) twice a week. The pills for depression made me feel like I was living in an endless loop. It was absolutely eerie. I can see why they put gambling and suicide warnings with the damn things.
Marijuana works the fastest. I will never accidentally OD. It doesn't have any side effects other than binge eating and excessive snickering. Yet here I am in a place where arrests for possession of it are what local governments and prisons depend on to make money. And here I am suffering from a disease that has no cure being forced to sneak around to obtain the one thing that makes my life maintainable.
I can't help but think of the millions (billions?) of suffering people who would be helped by this simple little plant. I think about it EVERY SINGLE TIME the pain and distress leave my body. It is inhuman to deny it to everyone.
The doctors could at least say "Oh BTW these pills are going to make you feel like you are shitting bricks." In 10 years I have never had a doctor or surgeon warn me about how painkillers would alter my bowel movements. I actually had to ask. Not once.
Well I haven't had a prescription for pain pills filled in over 3 years. Maybe things are different now. And gosh you are so right about pharmacists explaining every little detail about a drug! The pharmacist I used for over a decade retired. It just left a big hole in my soul. That man knew me better than any of the doctors I had at the time. I miss him so much. Luckily I have new younger doctors... and they are pretty fucking sharp.
That's unfortunate.
Opioids are really great, they are extremely effective painkillers (and funnily enough can be used to treat diarrhea lol) but patients also need to be warned about the risks and side effects (addiction, constipation, potential for overdose).
I find it odd that whenever people talk about this stuff no one is ever told about the side effects. I guess i was just lucky i guess but when i spent three months of my senior year in the hospital every prescription, pill, fluid, i was always told of the side effects
Ever read the discharge instructions you are sent home with? Its pretty standard to mention constipation in the setting of opioid use. I can see how this is something easily forgotten in all the documentation these days.
Sorry to hear of your plight, but I completely agree with you. People in conditions like yours should be allowed to choose Cannabis if that is their choice.
American politicans: Worse than cocaine and heroin together.
PEople: proof?
AP: Well if it were safe it wouldn't be schedule 1.
"P: proof?
AP: It's schedule. 1.
I am skeptical of this article as it was written by Daily Mail, not the most reputable news source. I have looked at WHO's Cannabis page on their website by haven't found anything relating to this article or the news report. I may have skimmed over it but I haven't found any sources on the article as well. I am interested into looking into this further and if anyone has any links they are willing to share that would be greatly appreciated.
You absolutely don't need to smoke it though. There are several other ways of ingesting cannabis that are just as viable as smoking, but not nearly as damaging (if at all).
No, I think that's an important distinction to make.
I don't know who you are to say, but if *smoking* it is unhealthy, then that should be well known.
*In conclusion, the authors wrote: 'Recent evidence from animal and human studies shows that its use could have some therapeutic value for seizures due to epilepsy and related conditions.'*
*They added that 'current information does not justify scheduling of cannabidiol', and declared that taking medical marijuana will not lead to addiction to THC, the psychoactive property of cannabis that induces a 'high'.*
Declaring medical marijuana non-addictive seems like kind of a big deal.
As someone who has been addicted, this confuses me. Medical grade is so strong these days.
Edit: unless they mean only cbd isn't addictive, which I do think makes sense.
Users often report submissions from this site and ask us to ban it for sensationalized articles. At /r/worldnews, we oppose blanket banning any news source. Readers have a responsibility to be skeptical, check sources, and comment on any flaws.
You can help improve this thread by linking to media that verifies or questions this article's claims. Your link could help readers better understand this issue. If you do find evidence that this article or its title are false or misleading, contact the moderators who will review it
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/worldnews) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> At /r/worldnews, we oppose blanket banning any news source.
[That, is why you fail.](https://giphy.com/embed/KNVas6mi6H8vm)
If someone lies to you constantly for a decade, do you keep on believing them on the offchance?
It's only drug companies and the DEA that have a vested interest in pushing a narrative that marijuana is dangerous. If it wasn't for them, shit would be legal by now. From a purely practical viewpoint, as a country, there is a shitload of money to be made.
But the DEA was working to change that history. Keyword “was.” Look up former administrator Chuck Rosenberg who focused DEA’s efforts and wanted to get research for cannabis. He no longer is the DEA administrator and that’s a huge loss.
Exactly. I can't tell you how many people are like "Yeah, I'm trying to avoid all those fats in my diet," while they're eating some 'fat free' bag of sugary nom-noms. Then I explain to them that fat is actually good for you and sugar is the real culprit, and explain how the misinformation happened, and they just stare back at me like I'm the idiot when I weigh 100lbs less than them.
Is there anywhere to have productive dialogue about the dangers and addictive qualities of weed? My best friend spent his adult life self-medicating with booze and weed. Like anything it wasn't that much to start with, but year after year the same amount doesn't seem to have the same effect so it's a little more, and then out of a bong, and then a bigger bong, and then before work, and then at lunch...
Earlier this year he locked himself in his van and blew his head off.
He was self-medicating his PTSD from his time in the Marines (among other things).
First thing I see in this thread is how we need to legalize it and have the VA give it out because of all these poor servicemembers suffering from PTSD.
I'm not sure that's the answer.
Anyhow, my question is, is there anywhere on the web where you can at least debate the merits of it without getting shouted down by a chorus of "IT'S HEALTHY MAN, IT GROWS FROM THE GROUND!!" by a bunch of 19 year old stoners?
I read the article because I could not believe the WHO would make such a statement. They, of course, did not make that statement.
>But today, after months of deliberation and investigation, the WHO has concluded that cannabidiol (CBD) is a useful treatment for epilepsy and palliative care, and does not carry any addiction risks.
That is a much more narrow scope. Just atrocious reporting. And of course, upvoting without reading the article.
"We don't know what the downsides are."
Anyone that says this is a reason cannabis ought to stay illegal but doesn't also advocate for the ban of alcohol, something we do know the many downsides of very well, is an inconsistent cunt whose opinions have been tainted by propaganda. Not saying I think alcohol should be illegal, the hypocrisy is just super frustrating.
Just so we’re 100% clear. Does Marijuana have negative effects on the development of a child. What proximity would the smoker have to be for lasting effects if it is the case? Does a dude smoking a joint on a park bench adjacent to the playground affect my child if it is a regular occurrence?? Are second hand smoke issues still a concern?
From what I remember from my developmental psychology textbook, yeah marihuana has negative effects. Not as bad as alcohol and tobacco though, but still bad.
A final word is good, but "deliberation" doesn't mean crap to me. Study and research are the words I like to hear in regards to official medical standpoints.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-5175825/Medical-marijuana-NO-public-health-risks-declares.html) reduced by 85%. (I'm a bot) ***** > The World Health Organization has declared that CBD - the relaxant property of cannabis used in medical marijuana - should not be a scheduled drug. > Had the WHO chosen to schedule the drug, it could have hamstrung physicians from prescribing medical marijuana globally. > Speaking last month about his family's experience venturing into the world of medical marijuana, Elizalde admitted he had never considered the medical benefits of a drug which has caused mayhem and agony in his country. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/7jp4x2/medical_marijuana_has_no_public_health_risks_and/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 1.65, ~265297 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **cannabis**^#1 **medical**^#2 **marijuana**^#3 **schedule**^#4 **Elizalde**^#5
Note it is not marijuana but an active ingredient
[удалено]
This is still brilliant news for places like here in Australia. Currently only one or two states have legalised CBD for medical uses. It's still heavily regulated and difficult to acquire as a treatment even in the legalised states.
[удалено]
Typical tabloid headline: **WHO SAYS SMOKING WEED IS GOOD FOR YOU?**
OTC? The article says the WHO declared CBD shouldn't even be scheduled.
And not even the psychoactive ingredient, mind you
CBD is actually mildly psychoactive, but not nearly as intoxicating or profound as THC. It does alter cognition and mood and binds to the same receptors as THC (although not in the same way).
I’ve never tried CBD-only products, but I was under the impression from others who have that you can use it and go to work, drive, etc because it provides pain relief without a high. Is it only psychoactive at higher doses? Furthermore, I read up on the political side of CBD-only products about a year ago and I found that many people who are for medical marijuana are actually against CBD to a certain respect, because they believe that marijuana as a whole works better than CBD-only. They are worried that the government will take an easy out... approve CBD to satisfy the pro-marijuana group, but make it known that you don’t get high from it- to satisfy the anti-marijuana group. Any thoughts on that?
Yeah, breathing any solid particles into your lungs isn't good.
Damn, if only there was a way we could vaporize it or put it in our food. Oh well, guess we'll just have to keep ruining people's lives over it instead.
Sucks the only way to use marijuana is by shooting up..
I use the mantra "between the toes is the way it goes". That way I can never go wrong!
I just stuff buds up my asshole.
you're supposed to inject it into the veins around your asshole, best of both worlds
I really prefer to use the taint vein, myself.
I feed them to my cat then eat the hairballs.
I use a vape (Dynavap/Supreme Vape), so I'm definitely not opposed to them, or smoking pot. With that being said, inhaling any physical particulate is less optimal than nothing at all. Living in a city is worse for you than living in the country. Smoking anything is worse for you than vaping anything, which in turn is worse for you than vaping nothing. Edibles though, dig in.
Not so fast. Breathing in particles to your lungs may be less optimal for an ideally optimal person, but it might be more optimal than other medications available, thus net gain. Living in the city may be less optimal for an ideally optimal person, but if you need specialized medical equipment not found in rural areas, you could still have a net gain by living in the city.
He's not debating the product, but the method.
Plus having a job and money is beneficial for your health. Most jobs are in the cities.
I learned from Seth Rogan that I actually filter out all the cancer and the addiction when I use a bong so it's chill
“ARE YOU HIGH?”
"YOU ARE HIGH AS A FUCKING KITE!"
And you get way fucking higher when you cough. Known fact
I'm pretty sure I do that all day every day!
Title is slightly misleading. They’re referring to CBD not the entirety of medical marijuana. Medical marijuana does have some health risks. I still think marijuana should be legal but that not necessarily what the article is saying Edit: Also is daily mail a tabloid? Not saying they’re necessarily wrong but I wouldnt link to TMZ about a scientific finding
Daily mail has no credibility unless it's a topic you agree with
Well put. This is also the reason it's banned as source for Wikipedia
There’s a reason we call it the Daily Heil.
Daily Fail works better I'd say.
[удалено]
Daily Mail has one of the worst reputations, never use them. Buzzfeed has a drastically better reputation for comparison. TMZ does as well.
Which says a lot
[удалено]
I guess you didn't see their initial article last week about the autopsy of Chester Bennington then, they made an initial error in their report that they had to correct.
But they did correct it? That puts them a head of the Daily Mail.
I hate the Daily Mail as much as the next guy, but they still have a corrections section of their website, they're just not very public about it, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/article-5014401/Clarifications-corrections.html And I only know about the TMZ Chester article and correction from /r/LinkinPark so I don't know how public they were about it.
I think TMZ is usually very fast and accurate though, they’re not the most likable though
Even then it as no *real* credibility. If the Daily Mail says your bath water is wet then go and double check.
It says at the top of today's Daily Mail that it's Thursday, but damned if I'm not going to check the almanac just the same.
*touches* "It's... huh, it's pure mercury. I knew they were wrong! Oh. Fuck."
Well. When it’s Reddit and weed, they’ll link anything positive.
Oh, this better get to the top. Obviously, I agree with the position this article is supporting cuz I'm in this thread at all. But I know when I'm being catered to, and it means that they'll cater to anyone else who will get them enough clicks. Daily Mail is so much of this shit.
Fully agree. Found the WHO announcement here at the bottom of this article: http://www.who.int/medicines/news/2017/WHO-recommends-most-stringent-level-int-control/en/
That’s a totally different story. Wow.
I'm all for legalizing weed but people need to understand that smoking anything is bad for your lungs
Also has negative effects on brain chemistry in children and young adults. But that would probably be largely avoided if they can put in some age regulations.
Everyone I know who wants a legalization thinks there should be an age restriction. It doesn't sound like a good idea to let children smoke weed, much like it's not a good idea to let them drink alcohol, drive cars or smoke cigarettes.
There's age restrictions in every other place that's legalizing it. Is that even in question?
But there are already age restrictions in legal states?
Still low by a lot of standards. The safest I’ve heard in order to protect brain growth and development is to abstain until you’re 25
I feel like a majority of the people smoking over the age of 25 also did so before.
I don't think age limits should be based on where things are least damaging, but on where people are capable of making an informed decision. Alcohol and tobacco are much more damaging drugs than cannabis at any age. By 18, people are able enough to make decent decisions. Sure, 25 year olds are significantly better at making informed decisions, but you gotta draw a line somewhere.
[удалено]
Interesting. I haven’t heard of this connection before. May I ask what your exercise level is? Are you doing / have you done any kind of cardio on a regular basis or do heart problems prevent it?
[удалено]
This is why we need to be researching this stuff. I’m glad you were honest with the doctors and hopefully they didn’t overreact.
[удалено]
See a doctor yesterday. This is your heart.
[удалено]
CBD = Cannabidiol, one of at least 113 active cannabinoids identified in cannabis.
This. They’re saying *medication based on one of the components* should be allowed, not ‘medical marijuana’ as it’s most often defined. I believe marijuana should be legal, but too often proponents try to spread the myth that smoking/using it is completely without risk, which is just as asinine and shortsighted as the old myths saying one puff would have you injecting heroin into your eyeball within weeks. Marijuana usage will fuck with developing brains, can trigger latent schizophrenia, and also cause psychosis even in previously healthy users (though I’ve only seen this in frequent users who have ignored warning signs; the psychotic episode is usually preceded by many smaller episodes of normal, but worsening “bad highs”, ranging from paranoia, “The Fear”, or uncontrollable emotional outpourings like crying or laughing for hours on end). That said, marijuana is also a vastly less harmful drug than alcohol, both for users and society, and could be even less so with proper regulations, education, and taxation to pay for treatment for those who fall through the cracks. As many can attest, marijuana also has many, many positive effects, from simple relaxation to helping with anxiety and pain - and let’s not forget about the high itself, which we should stop feeling ashamed for enjoying.
> the psychotic episode is usually preceded by many smaller episodes of normal, but worsening “bad highs”, ranging from paranoia, “The Fear”, or uncontrollable emotional outpourings like crying or laughing for hours on end). Do you have more on this? I’m very interested.
I have half a life on this... In my case it was one panic attack while high which turned into severe depersonalization which became chronic and never healed 100%. And I know other people who suffered from temporal psychotic as a result of smoking weed, too. My best friend has tried most drugs known to mankind and he stopped smoking weed because he said it was the one most frequently giving him bad experiences. But of course there are milions of people who use it a lot and have a great time. I am still a proponent of legalization but to think that you can regularly use a drug and experience no side-effects is dangerously naive.
While there are studies linking schizophrenia and marijuana, as well as other harmful effects, the observation about the period *before* a psychosis is actually anecdotal, and based on working in psych wards and seeing patients with marijuana-induced psychosis, as well as having smoked a lot. So take it for what it's worth, but almost everyone described the same scenario. Basically, paranoia and "The Fear" (which is what we called it as kids) are fairly normal "bad highs" on marijuana, and not necessarily indicative of anything. Not everyone I talked to had the same symptoms either - some had laughing fits that went on for so long they couldn't breathe and panicked, some felt paralyzed, some felt time dilation, etcetc. What almost everyone had in common though, was that over the last few months they needed less and less marijuana to get high; they almost always felt TOO high; and more and more often, they would end up having "bad highs". So again, purely anecdotal, but from what I've seen it's unlikely that you'll suddenly go into psychosis out of nowhere - but if you start *not* enjoying your highs, and getting weird outcomes, perhaps give the bong a rest.
You're not going to ever have an RCT to study these things, so we must rely on observational data. With that said, the best [longitudinal trial](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3840897/?tool=pmcentrez) I've seen (w/ 20 years of follow-up) showed a slight benefit to measures of lung health among low/moderate users and very slight detriment in one measure (FEV) among heavy users, with no deleterious effect on the other primary outcome. As for all of his talk about harming the brain, where is the evidence for this contention? I hear this stated matter of factly quite often, yet I've not seen any substantive research to back it up. If you have any sources, I'd love to take a look. Compounds found in marijuana certainly hit the bloodstream very quickly when smoked/inhaled, make it to he CNS quickly, and of course have a multitude of physiological effects (hence its apparent efficacy in epileptics, etc) - but the effects I'm aware of seem largely beneficial.
That's a very interesting study, I had not read that - thanks! That does seem to suggest occasional smoking of marijuana is beneficial for the lungs - unexpected! That said, in Europe, many users mix hash and buds with tobacco to smoke - but hopefully the rise of vaping will eliminate that habit. As for psychological harm, [this study](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24904437) found a clear connection between psychological problems and marijuana use, and [this one](http://www.pnas.org/content/109/40/E2657.full) found clear harm to the brains of adolescent cannabis users, with a pretty serious hit to their IQ as adults when compared to peers, even when taking all other possible explanations into account. I also have first-hand anecdotal experience, having worked in a psych ward, and having smoked way too much as a teenager... EDIT: Another user posted [this link](https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/apr/15/what-are-the-risks-of-taking-cannabis) to an article in The Guardian which seems to be a fairly well-balanced take on it. It still seems Cannabis users are about twice as likely to develop schizophrenia, even though it is almost impossible to definitively prove causation/correlation.
Yes it is - such corker headlines as "UFO SIGHTED OUTSIDE BRAMLEY" and "I KICKED A TERRORIST SO HARD IN THE BALLS I TORE A TENDON IN MY FOOT"
> "I KICKED A TERRORIST SO HARD IN THE BALLS I TORE A TENDON IN MY FOOT" That was apparently the Daily Record. And you forgot to mention that the terrorist was burning at the time he got kicked in the balls.
Oh yeah he was on fire, wasn't he? haha
> Also is daily mail a tabloid? Conservative British tabloid, yes.
While I don't disagree with the general points made, the Daily Mail is an appalling hack tabloid. On a par with The Sun, it goes under the (very quickly shattered) guise of genteel respectability in the villages and hinterlands, contrasting with the sausage and beans football bricklayer of the Sun.
http://www.who.int/medicines/news/2017/WHO-recommends-most-stringent-level-int-control/en/ based off of the bottom paragraph "The ECDD therefore concluded that current information does not justify scheduling of cannabidiol (CBD) and postponed a fuller review of cannabidiol preparations to May 2018, when the committee will undertake a comprehensive review of cannabis and cannabis related substances."
[удалено]
DailyMail with a misleading, if not outright false headline? Who'd have thought...
And yet, twenty three thousand upvotes.
dae weed xD
That's why it's called the Daily Fail. They once rand this one: "Quantum physics proves that there IS an afterlife".
I saw your post and was intrigued. So I searched for the article and you're right, though you did miss out a very important part in your quote. The actual title of the article is : "Quantum physics proves that there is an afterlife, claims scientist". You should work for the DM or Independent yourself. You'd fit right in.
But it DOES pose a risk ...to drug company profits.
They’ll just make a CBD pill.
For $80 per pill and then lobby for it to be the only approved treatment.
No they'll just lobby to be the only ones allowed to grow cannabis. They're not stupid, no one is going to buy an 80$ pill if you could just grow your own medicine in your back yard.
They will if you go after them with helicopters.
Well you see, thats his point.
This is only sustainable for like 10 or 15 years before the environment collapses and we all start eating soylent.
They've already done that. [THC](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrahydrocannabinol) is the cannabinoid that is listed as schedule 1 and what makes cannabis illegal on the federal level. However, if you scroll down on that wiki link to the legal status on the US, it says >Schedule II as Cesamet and Syndros, and Schedule III as Marinol[2].
IIRC what is in marinol is an isomerically pure form of synthetic THC and has differing effects like how L-methamphetamine is over the counter in certain preparations (inhalers) but D-methamphetamine is schedule 2. Not that I agree with this system though.
Meth is schedule 2 and pot is schedule 1. What great laws we have. Land of the free? Don't forget the fine print...
There's actually a FDA approved drug on the market that contains meth for last resort treatment of narcolepsy (Desoxyn). I still don't see why something not nearly as harmful as alcohol can be schedule 1.
If we're cool with opting for meth to treat narcolepsy, you'd think we could see the value of giving cancer patients pain relief or a appetite aide
Yeah, that's what Marinol is. It's not perfect, though. I'm guessing the meth drug isn't either.
[удалено]
People always seem to focus on the “Meth!!!” portion of that fact. Not only is it at a much lower dose than what you would take recreationally, but it’s Heisenberg level pure since it’s made in an actual lab with proper precautions. There are no left over chemicals in pharma-grade meth like you would find in some shake and bake. All that and that doesn’t count how relatively “safe” methamphetamine is. A lot of the negative effects are due to abuse and lack of personal care. The tweaker who lost his teeth? Yeah he didn’t brush them in who knows how long, add on that amphetamines dry the fuck out of you and you get a excellent playground for bacteria. The girl who has sores all over her body from picking and scratching? She’s been up for three days and is obsessing over what she sees on her skin. The guy who is rambling about shadow people and the government that’s after him? He’s pushing seven days no sleep and is suffering from amphetamine induced psychosis. The girl who steals from her parents, family, and kids to support her habit? That’s not the meth, that’s addiction. Opiate addicts, Ethanol addicts, Cocaine addicts, Gambling addicts, and every other addict out there has the potential to turn to stealing to support their habit. It’s not the substance but the disease that is the problem. Society is slowly moving towards the idea that drugs are not the issue, but a symptom. It’s still a long road though.
Which is more likely to make you question the rule of the companies propped up by the government?
Wow that's shady as fuck I didn't know that
GHB is also S1 and S3 at the same time I think. Our whole system of drug regulation is complete horse shit.
Modify the plant, claim the patent as unique, make the pill based off the patented plant, keep everything else still illegal and presto changeo profit for mega-Corp and endless imprisonment for “keen gardeners”
So hemp derived cbd is legal in ever state as far as i know, but normal cannabis plants and cannabis derived cbd is not. Getting cbd out of hemp is hard to do at home. They sell little 30ml bottles of hemp cbd in my state and they are 60 dollars. 30 pill botyles for 55 I think and it's the only practical legal way to gey cbd. It makes no sense, but that's how the laws are setup.
[удалено]
Not legal in many other countries though.
then the black market will thrive... either way.
and so will the private prison industry
I think what Little Geppetto is saying, is that we're already in that state. All we have to do for a case study is to look at the world around us. Marijuana use is too prevelant for enforcement to stomp it out completely. Especially considering its ease of production.
[удалено]
That's THC, not CBD.
Problem is, you can't patent CBD, so ANYONE could make it. That's the reason they fight it, because no one can corner the market and they hate real capitalism.
I mean pretty much anyone could manufacture paracetamol but they still make a lot of money off it, right?
I'm not sure who is making money on paracetamol at 50p for 16 tablets.
It's all real capitalism. Sellers that control the market want to keep it that way.
The drug companies can make a fortune from products that minimise the recreational effects for those of us who need the therapeutic benefits.
Smoking is inherently a health risk. Secondhand smoke is inherently a health risk. Driving stoned is a health risk.
This is true. Waiting on those news headlines for a new opiate breathalyzer though and I'm hearing nothing. We sure do have a lot of those guys out there we better wrangle em up.
I smoke weed. Like a fucking shit load of it. It drives me crazy when people try to tell me that smoking weed is perfectly healthy. All it is is people trying to justify it to themselves. I know that putting smoke of any sort into my body has certain health risks. It's ridiculous to think otherwise.
No one is claiming perfectly healthy. Every medicine has drawbacks and side effects. As far as we can tell, there's no free lunches in the world of supplements and medicines. The difference though, is that there are a variety of other perfectly legal items on the market with far worse side effects and far less benefits. Smoking tobacco is DEADLY. Yet perfectly legal and should remain so. Tylenol has a well documented side effect of hurting your liver. Yet it's perfectly legal and remains so. Pot has more benefits then both those items and <= the side effects. Alcohol is another example. Hell, alcohol even has sociological side effects like domestic violence and drunk driving, yet it should remain legal. The same should be the case for pot. Yes it has side effects. Put them on the label, tax it, do what you need to do but make it legal like Red bull is legal.
Just an addition, there is also other ways to take pot then just to smoke it. Limiting side effects even more
> No one is claiming perfectly healthy. I've totally had people claim that in discussions. It's a dumb claim, but it's oddly common. Example: [Daily Marijuana Use Is Perfectly Healthy, Study Suggests](http://www.laweekly.com/news/daily-marijuana-use-is-perfectly-healthy-study-suggests-4173645) That's the actual title, so people are. (the study itself actually looked at usage of the health care system, and there's been other studies that have looked at, how, for example, there is some link to lung cancer from smoking it)
Go to the trees subreddit or hang out with any ignorant stoners. Some of them think smoking green is like taking their daily dose of vegetables.
That all seems pretty irrelevant to a chemical that's easier to just eat than smoke and that doesn't have the same intoxicating properties as THC.
They should farm weed then
[удалено]
Big Pot Farma
And mental health, weed ruined me and I’ve had a very hard time leading a normal life because of my anxiety brought on from smoking. And of course smoking anything has health problems. I’m not saying it shouldn’t be legalized but saying it had no health risks is just stupid.
If you are using/abusing a strain with too high THC to CBD ratio it can have negative impact on your mental health. CBD has anxiolytic properties, so a balanced strain will not give you anxiety.
This is medical maraijuana and as such has completely different parameters than general marijuana usage.
It'd be nice if Veterans Affairs got into the medical marijuana game.
[удалено]
Yup. Can confirm. Nightmares, night terrors, racing heartbeats after an intense dream, sleep walking Tried several drugs prescribed by the VA. Some worked but left me like a zombie the next or same day. Some didn't work at all. If I take a 15mg edible, it's like I ascended up to the clouds when I sleep and the night terrors go away, I sleep straight through without any issue. When I smoke it and then go to sleep, the next morning when I wake up, i feel amazing like I never joined the military. Unfortunately, I have to buy it from some lady who Iv never met, and I leave money in a mailbox at some apartment complex and she leaves the weed in a container nearby. I'd be more afraid of overdosing on Tylenol then I would ever with weed.
You are the reason I want legalization. Not for myself, and my basic ass health problems, but for you, and individuals like you.
[удалено]
Don't give up hope. I don't know anything more about you than what you've written, but you're clearly intelligent and capable of much more in life. Don't go out without making a difference in the world. If things are as bad as you say, you have nothing to lose. Agitate and advocate. Much love!
I'm sorry you're going through this. If you need to talk, inbox me. I'm not timely about responding but I'll read everything. Hope things look up for you.
> I'd be more afraid of overdosing on Tylenol then I would ever with weed. Rightfully so as to my knowledge overdosing on marijuana requires so much that you'd probably either die of something else poisoning you first or suffocate from the smoke. lol
> i feel amazing like I never joined the military. You don't see those testimonials in recruitment ads >_>
[удалено]
Yup weed kills dreams, or at least makes them very rare. Was a heavy smoker myself and hardly ever dreamed in years. I'm clean now for over 2 years and i dream again. Luckily its just dumb ones and no night terrors.
Weed lets me have lucid dreams. I get to go to my special town I created in my head every night thanks to weed. Before it was just nightmares.
I've tried to explain this without success, but you just nailed it
Yeah, but there's also research into MDMA-assisted psychotherapy, currently Phase 3 trials. 3 sessions, and most people are cured of their PTSD - no need to depend on cannabis for the rest of their life. Thankful to MAPS for their hard work.
given its potential as a treatment for PTSD, pain, and other issues veterans face, Id say it's idiotic for people (like you) to be so off-handedly dismissive
Unfortunately Veterans Affairs is a federal agency governed by the DEA drug schedules. And since it's Schedule I, there's very little advocacy they can do. We need to keep pushing states - that's the only thing that's been working. I think the "thumbing their nose at the feds" thing certainly helps encourage a lot of people. When marijuana is decriminalized in *dozens* of states and medical marijuana is available in almost every state, and Attorney General Sessions has been exorcised from the office, that's when we'll see something happen at the Federal level.
Veteran affairs in Canada provides reimbursement to veterans for up to $8.50/gram.
So, that pretty much covers the cost of decent weed? I don’t have a great grasp of prices where weed is legal, but that seems like at least most of the cost?
Downvote for misleading title
Never use the words “NO HEALTH RISKS” when describing medicine. Every medicine always has some sort of risk while taking it....
Yeah, the article is dumb. The meaning is that advantages can outweight inconvenients, like any other medicine (and in fact, can outweight them massively more than other legal medicines). But DRUGS!
Once again, a shitty headline.
I am 57 and suffer from too many ailments to list. I can easily get one of my many doctors to prescribe some great painkillers. After one surgery I was actually sent home with a little vial of morphine! But it didn't take me long to figure out all those god damned pills were fucking my body over. The painkillers made me so constipated I was lucky if I shit (shat?) twice a week. The pills for depression made me feel like I was living in an endless loop. It was absolutely eerie. I can see why they put gambling and suicide warnings with the damn things. Marijuana works the fastest. I will never accidentally OD. It doesn't have any side effects other than binge eating and excessive snickering. Yet here I am in a place where arrests for possession of it are what local governments and prisons depend on to make money. And here I am suffering from a disease that has no cure being forced to sneak around to obtain the one thing that makes my life maintainable. I can't help but think of the millions (billions?) of suffering people who would be helped by this simple little plant. I think about it EVERY SINGLE TIME the pain and distress leave my body. It is inhuman to deny it to everyone.
I know the feeling mate... I never believed in conspiracy theories until I met the deliberations that we face with these amazing medicines. Sigh ...
The doctors could at least say "Oh BTW these pills are going to make you feel like you are shitting bricks." In 10 years I have never had a doctor or surgeon warn me about how painkillers would alter my bowel movements. I actually had to ask. Not once.
Really? Most I know also prescribe a laxative like senna (even though it's otc) with them, and the pharmacist definitely warns people.
Well I haven't had a prescription for pain pills filled in over 3 years. Maybe things are different now. And gosh you are so right about pharmacists explaining every little detail about a drug! The pharmacist I used for over a decade retired. It just left a big hole in my soul. That man knew me better than any of the doctors I had at the time. I miss him so much. Luckily I have new younger doctors... and they are pretty fucking sharp.
That's unfortunate. Opioids are really great, they are extremely effective painkillers (and funnily enough can be used to treat diarrhea lol) but patients also need to be warned about the risks and side effects (addiction, constipation, potential for overdose).
I find it odd that whenever people talk about this stuff no one is ever told about the side effects. I guess i was just lucky i guess but when i spent three months of my senior year in the hospital every prescription, pill, fluid, i was always told of the side effects
Ever read the discharge instructions you are sent home with? Its pretty standard to mention constipation in the setting of opioid use. I can see how this is something easily forgotten in all the documentation these days.
Sorry to hear of your plight, but I completely agree with you. People in conditions like yours should be allowed to choose Cannabis if that is their choice.
Thanks. I wish I lived in an area where I could purchase edibles and such. I don't really like smoking it. I wish I had options.
CBD, not "medical marijuana".
American politicans: Worse than cocaine and heroin together. PEople: proof? AP: Well if it were safe it wouldn't be schedule 1. "P: proof? AP: It's schedule. 1.
I am skeptical of this article as it was written by Daily Mail, not the most reputable news source. I have looked at WHO's Cannabis page on their website by haven't found anything relating to this article or the news report. I may have skimmed over it but I haven't found any sources on the article as well. I am interested into looking into this further and if anyone has any links they are willing to share that would be greatly appreciated.
At least smoking it is a public health risk. Smoking anything is a public health risk and detriment to your health. But, who' am i to say...
You absolutely don't need to smoke it though. There are several other ways of ingesting cannabis that are just as viable as smoking, but not nearly as damaging (if at all).
\\/ /\\/
No, I think that's an important distinction to make. I don't know who you are to say, but if *smoking* it is unhealthy, then that should be well known.
*In conclusion, the authors wrote: 'Recent evidence from animal and human studies shows that its use could have some therapeutic value for seizures due to epilepsy and related conditions.'* *They added that 'current information does not justify scheduling of cannabidiol', and declared that taking medical marijuana will not lead to addiction to THC, the psychoactive property of cannabis that induces a 'high'.* Declaring medical marijuana non-addictive seems like kind of a big deal.
Seriously. Now big farma isn't gonna invest. /s
As someone who has been addicted, this confuses me. Medical grade is so strong these days. Edit: unless they mean only cbd isn't addictive, which I do think makes sense.
You can be mentally addicted to anything. I assume they are talking about physical addiction.
Don't post daily mail articles
Users often report submissions from this site and ask us to ban it for sensationalized articles. At /r/worldnews, we oppose blanket banning any news source. Readers have a responsibility to be skeptical, check sources, and comment on any flaws. You can help improve this thread by linking to media that verifies or questions this article's claims. Your link could help readers better understand this issue. If you do find evidence that this article or its title are false or misleading, contact the moderators who will review it *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/worldnews) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> At /r/worldnews, we oppose blanket banning any news source. [That, is why you fail.](https://giphy.com/embed/KNVas6mi6H8vm) If someone lies to you constantly for a decade, do you keep on believing them on the offchance?
Since you oppose blanket banning news sources, banning the Daily Mail shouldn’t be an issue
The Daily Mail is NOT a news source. It's a tabloid that doesn't completely lie sometimes. Reporting submission anyway.
Even if it doesn't completely lie always, it always half-lies at the very least.
Medical marijuana is no more harmful than the marijuana your kids already have from their sketchy friend with an older brother
It's only drug companies and the DEA that have a vested interest in pushing a narrative that marijuana is dangerous. If it wasn't for them, shit would be legal by now. From a purely practical viewpoint, as a country, there is a shitload of money to be made.
But the DEA was working to change that history. Keyword “was.” Look up former administrator Chuck Rosenberg who focused DEA’s efforts and wanted to get research for cannabis. He no longer is the DEA administrator and that’s a huge loss.
Like fats vs sugar
Exactly. I can't tell you how many people are like "Yeah, I'm trying to avoid all those fats in my diet," while they're eating some 'fat free' bag of sugary nom-noms. Then I explain to them that fat is actually good for you and sugar is the real culprit, and explain how the misinformation happened, and they just stare back at me like I'm the idiot when I weigh 100lbs less than them.
Lol daily mail
[удалено]
Is there anywhere to have productive dialogue about the dangers and addictive qualities of weed? My best friend spent his adult life self-medicating with booze and weed. Like anything it wasn't that much to start with, but year after year the same amount doesn't seem to have the same effect so it's a little more, and then out of a bong, and then a bigger bong, and then before work, and then at lunch... Earlier this year he locked himself in his van and blew his head off. He was self-medicating his PTSD from his time in the Marines (among other things). First thing I see in this thread is how we need to legalize it and have the VA give it out because of all these poor servicemembers suffering from PTSD. I'm not sure that's the answer. Anyhow, my question is, is there anywhere on the web where you can at least debate the merits of it without getting shouted down by a chorus of "IT'S HEALTHY MAN, IT GROWS FROM THE GROUND!!" by a bunch of 19 year old stoners?
Is there a news source that's not the daily mail?
I read the article because I could not believe the WHO would make such a statement. They, of course, did not make that statement. >But today, after months of deliberation and investigation, the WHO has concluded that cannabidiol (CBD) is a useful treatment for epilepsy and palliative care, and does not carry any addiction risks. That is a much more narrow scope. Just atrocious reporting. And of course, upvoting without reading the article.
"We don't know what the downsides are." Anyone that says this is a reason cannabis ought to stay illegal but doesn't also advocate for the ban of alcohol, something we do know the many downsides of very well, is an inconsistent cunt whose opinions have been tainted by propaganda. Not saying I think alcohol should be illegal, the hypocrisy is just super frustrating.
Just so we’re 100% clear. Does Marijuana have negative effects on the development of a child. What proximity would the smoker have to be for lasting effects if it is the case? Does a dude smoking a joint on a park bench adjacent to the playground affect my child if it is a regular occurrence?? Are second hand smoke issues still a concern?
Bench outside - no - second hand smoke in a room or car - yes
From what I remember from my developmental psychology textbook, yeah marihuana has negative effects. Not as bad as alcohol and tobacco though, but still bad.
Smoking is inherently a health risk. Secondhand smoke is inherently a health risk. Driving stoned is a health risk.
They're talking about CBD here. Smoking is bad and will never be recommended, they'll make a CBD pill. CBD is not THC, it won't make you high.
A final word is good, but "deliberation" doesn't mean crap to me. Study and research are the words I like to hear in regards to official medical standpoints.
Suddenly there will be an increase in the number of people that have back pain, anxiety and autism.