Jump to content

Have Any Of You Met Dea's "dr. Pot"? (Marinol's Competitive Physician)


Recommended Posts

OK, this is a long post, split it up in to pieces if you want, or put it where it should go. You know that never bothers me. I believe the whole DEA, federal laws against marijuana is partially if not largely based on a conflict of FINANCIAL interest. Basically, I just kept "following the money trail" because that's usually behind illogical decision making where the federal government is concerned. (or any government, for that matter, be it local, state, fed, etc.)


The DEA is the perfect federal government agency to keep the competition of Marinol, which is nature provided marijuana, away from the financial competition and OUT of the stock market. Keep in mind, Marinol has been available since the 1980s.


I was looking at the DEA's website to find more of their domestic tearor-ist M.O. towards legally recognized MM people and followed a link on their website. Their version of a physician, they have named Dr. Pot, that prescribes the use of MM caught me by surprise. However, even though the DEA links to that page, the DEA also states at the bottom of this particular page that "the DEA is not affiliated with it"....(whatever).


This is a government agency funded by tax dollars. We pay their salaries for them to abuse, stereotype, and make fun of MM law abiding citizens. The law is the law and they can't handle that.


First you follow a link about marijuana on the DEA's website that goes here:



Then you click on the picture of two shifty looking drug dealers where it is written "get the facts on marijuana". After you click on that photo you get taken to


and there you see the Rx Pot icon to click on. That takes you to the sleazy pimp drug addict looking "Dr. Pot", in his white lab coat, ponytail, chin beard, and sunglasses. He's also smoking what one would assume to be a joint while holding more joints in his hand, smiling. That is the DEA's image they want other people to think of when the general public has a mental image of doctors who prescribe MM.



This link was taken from the DEA's website. It specifically targets the use of MM.



Then they use a cartoon to tell about two kids in school, how one kid does a paper on the benefits of MM but another kid does a paper on how MM is bad.



Also on this particular site, at the very bottom, in tiny letters, it says:"DEA does not exercise control over external web sites.", which this is that they had linked to THEIR main DEA website. So, there is a conflict of interest that DEA shows in linking to and showing approval for "DR. POT" along with advertising a pharmaceutical manufactured drug; Marinol. That's what this is all about, helping big business campaign contributors stay in business and have less competition. The DEA links to sites that slam marijuana but promote the sale of Marinol. If the DEA links to it, they are promoting it. Think of it as a federal government agency campaigning for a pharmaceutical company.



Ok, try not to laugh at this load of DEA associated and affiliated CRAP PROPAGANDA:

This link www.justthinktwice.com/factfiction/MarijuanaisMedicine.cfm

"As Irma lay dying from the effects of an Ecstasy pill, her friends gave her marijuana, mistakenly thinking it was "medicine"..." I guess the same thing would have happened if they had given "Irma" another person's prescribed Vicodin.


Now, after you get past that if any are still with me, doing a Google for that federal government favorite prescription drug, Marinol,is the DEA's dedicated page promoting it's use and sale, without "Dr. Pot" promoting it.



scrolling down on that page you will find this bit of information:

"The DEA helped facilitate the research on Marinol"


The DEA also ONLY tells people that marijuana is so harmful because it is smoked. The DEA says NOTHING about consuming MM other popular ways, whatsoever. (Talk about a conflict of interest and intentionally not being forthcoming.)


Many patients complain that Marinol, which must be swallowed, is an inappropriate treatment for nausea and vomiting.


The bottom line is that greedy people can't patent cannabis and that's their competition.






Here are some warnings for Marinol




218 Patients receiving treatment with MARINOL Capsules should be specifically warned not

219 to drive, operate machinery, or engage in any hazardous activity until it is established that

220 they are able to tolerate the drug and to perform such tasks safely.

Seizure and seizure-like activity have been reported in patients receiving MARINOL

228 Capsules during marketed use of the drug and in clinical trials. (See ADVERSE

229 REACTIONS and OVERDOSAGE.) MARINOL Capsules should be used with caution

230 in patients with a history of seizure disorder because MARINOL Capsules may lower the

231 seizure threshold. MARINOL Capsules should be discontinued immediately in

233 patients who develop seizures and medical attention should be sought immediately.


235 MARINOL Capsules should be used with caution in patients with cardiac disorders

236 because of occasional hypotension, possible hypertension, syncope, or tachycardia. (See



239 MARINOL Capsules should be used with caution in patients with a history of

240 substance abuse, including alcohol abuse or dependence, because they may be more

241 prone to abuse MARINOL Capsules as well. Multiple substance abuse is common and

242 marijuana, which contains the same active compound, is a frequently abused substance.


244 MARINOL Capsules should be used with caution and careful psychiatric monitoring

245 in patients with mania, depression, or schizophrenia because MARINOL Capsules may

246 exacerbate these illnesses.


252 MARINOL Capsules should be used with caution in elderly patients because they

253 may be more sensitive to the neurological, psychoactive, and postural hypotensive effects



256 MARINOL Capsules should be used with caution in pregnant patients, nursing

257 mothers, or pediatric patients because it has not been studied in these patient populations.

259 Information for Patients: Patients receiving treatment with MARINOL Capsules

260 should be alerted to the potential for additive central nervous system depression if

261 MARINOL Capsules is used concomitantly with alcohol or other CNS depressants such

262 as benzodiazepines and barbiturates.


264 Patients receiving treatment with MARINOL Capsules should be specifically warned

265 not to drive, operate machinery, or engage in any hazardous activity until it is established

266 that they are able to tolerate the drug and to perform such tasks safely.


268 Patients using MARINOL Capsules should be advised of possible changes in mood

269 and other adverse behavioral effects of the drug so as to avoid panic in the event of such

270 manifestations. Patients should remain under the supervision of a responsible adult during

271 initial use of MARINOL Capsules and following dosage adjustments.


273 Drug Interactions: In studies involving patients with AIDS and/or cancer, MARINOL

274 Capsules has been co-administered with a variety of medications (e.g., cytotoxic agents,

275 anti-infective agents, sedatives...Although no drug/drug interactions were discovered

277 during the clinical trials of MARINOL Capsules, cannabinoids may interact with other

278 medications through both metabolic and pharmacodynamic mechanisms. Dronabinol is

279 highly protein bound to plasma proteins, and therefore, might displace other protein280

bound drugs. Although this displacement has not been confirmed in vivo, practitioners

281 should monitor patients for a change in dosage requirements when administering

282 dronabinol to patients receiving other highly protein-bound drugs. Published reports of

283 drug/drug interactions involving cannabinoids are summarized in the following table


Carcinogenesis, Mutagenesis, Impairment of Fertility: Carcinogenicity studies

...In the 2-year carcinogenicity study in mice, treatment with

dronabinol at 125 mg/kg/day, about 25 times the maximum recommended human dose on

a body surface area basis, produced thyroid follicular cell adenoma in both male and

female mice but not at 250 or 500 mg/kg/day


A cannabinoid dose-related “high” (easy laughing, elation and heightened awareness)

345 has been reported by patients receiving MARINOL Capsules in both the antiemetic

346 (24%) and the lower dose appetite stimulant clinical trials (8%). (See Clinical Trials.)


Management: A potentially serious oral ingestion, if recent, should be managed with

gut decontamination. In unconscious patients with a secure airway, instill activated




Manufactured by:

Banner Pharmacaps, Inc.

High Point, NC 27265



Solvay Pharmaceuticals, Inc.


WOW! Solvay Pharmaceuticals is a huge money making company.

Solvay Pharmaceuticals SA







Phone: +32 2 5096111

Fax: +32 2 5096617


Spokesperson :

Dr. W. Van den Eynde

Phone: +32 2 5096835

Fax: +32 2 5096304

E-mail: Werner.Vandeneynde@solvay.com


Major locations




Solvay Pharmaceuticals BV








Mailing Address:

P.O. BOX 900




Phone: +31 294 477000

Fax: +31 294 48025


Solvay Pharmaceuticals GmbH








Mailing Address:

P.O. BOX 220




Phone: +49 511 8570

Fax: +49 511 8573120




Solvay Pharmaceuticals, Inc.






United States


Mailing Address:



United States


Phone: +1 770 5789000

Fax: +1 770 5785597


Spokesperson US

Mr. N. Hirsch

Phone: +1 770 5789000

Fax: +1 770 5785597


Marietta, GA 30062

500012 Rev Mar 2008

© 2008 Solvay Pharmaceuticals, Inc


How much money do you think politicians and their friends have invested in their stock???

How much money do you think this pharmaceutical company has invested in political campaigns???

Sovay stock, if I read it right, goes for just over $90.00 a share.



How many federal government officials have their 401K plan invested with Sovay? Better yet, how many people have stock they depend on invested in Sovay?

So, would it be safe to say that, at least in the U.S., that whenever a state lets MM become legal, Sovay will take a tiny hit? It's a strong stock. Stock will go down if marijuana is legalized in the U.S. The good news for Sovay is that it probably won't harm that much, but it will take a financial dent. Greedy people don't like financial dents. So, will people sell their stock before that happens? Making an even bigger dent? Between 2007 - 2009 were good years for Sovay. Sovay stock drastically went down in 2009, according to this link on Sovay http://www.dailyfinance.com/charts/solvay-sa-s-adr/svysy/nao/tech-chart and the PRICE TREND graphic below the bigger one.


Description of Sovay on that stock page:

Through subsidiaries and affiliated companies in about 50 countries, the Belgium-based Solvay operates in two primary sectors: plastics and chemicals. Its plastics compounds include vinyl and polyethylene products; it also processes plastics into pipe, waterproofing foils, and fuel and air intake systems for automobiles. The chemicals sector makes hydrogen peroxide and soda ash (used to make glass). Solvay had also manufactured pharmaceuticals (cardiological drugs, gastrointestinal enzymes, and antidepressants); however, it sold that unit to Abbott Labs in 2010 for about E5.2 billion ($7.6 billion). Belgian holding company Solvac owns more than 30% of Solvay.


In 2009 Sovay did over 12 BILLION dollars in sales.



Their NET was $792,600,000 Just over Seven Hundred MILLION DOLLARS. Now if that can't buy a few people, I don't know what can!!!


As I continue to follow the money trail......


Here's one doctor that won't be saying marijuana is better then Marinol. His name is Laurence Downey, M.D. as New President and CEO of the US division in Georgia. (Remember, this company is international.)



Here, meet Harold Shlevin, CEO of Solvay Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Named to PhRMA Board of Directors (in the U.S. Georgia area)




Smaller wallets vs Big money


Supreme Court Declines to Hear Off-Label Promotion Case Against Solvay Pharmaceuticals, Inc



The Supreme Court has declined to consider two off-label promotion cases involving plaintiffs who sued drug manufacturers for engaging in activities that allegedly helped sway the government to reimburse drugs for unapproved uses, but conflicting decisions in the cases will likely force the court to reconcile the discrepancy in the near future, according to sources familiar with the cases. The legal debate comes as the federal government is becoming more aggressive in cracking down on off-label promotion as part of its health reform effort to cut back on medical expenditures and improve patient safety. These types of legal claims are permitted under the False Claims Act, which indicates that in order to bring a suit on behalf of the federal government, the plaintiffs must identify at least one example of the fraud before a case is brought to the court. The cases -- Hopper v. Solvay Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Duxbury v. Ortho Biotech Products, LP -- involve private citizens who sued a pharmaceutical manufacturer on behalf of the federal government to recoup funds that they allege were paid by the government for fraudulent reasons. Even though the drug manufacturer is not submitting the reimbursement claims, plaintiffs in these cases allege that off-label promotion results in federal payments for off-label uses that aren't covered by CMS. At issue is hundreds of millions of dollars in charges to the federal government due to reimbursement requests from pharmacies seeking CMS funding for off-label uses of products that are not cleared for payment by the agency. An expansion or limits on these qui tam suits could therefore have significant economic impacts on pharmaceutical manufacturers. In such cases, in return for filing the suit on behalf of the federal government, the civilian plaintiffs receive a certain percentage of recouped fees. These cases often emerge from former drug industry employees who turn into whistleblowers, often receiving millions of dollars in royalties by initiating these qui tam suits. In Solvay Pharmaceuticals, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled that in order to file one of these suits on behalf of the government and against a pharmaceutical manufacturer for off-label promotion, the plaintiff must be able to demonstrate that in at least one case a pharmacy obtained CMS reimbursement for an off-label use that was promoted by the drug maker and is not covered by the federal government. Conversely, in Ortho Biotech, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit decided that the plaintiff does not need to show evidence of the reimbursement before beginning the proceeding, thereby in direct conflict with the Eleventh Circuit's ruling.


It all seems so messy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good research there Jennifer.


There are so many money trails in marijuana prohibition that I end up with self induced ADD when I think about it. Pharmaceutical companies, police departments, the DEA, jails, courts and drug rehab centers all have a vested financial interest in keeping pot illegal. I'd bet that there is not one one police department in the country which does not receive federal funding for drug enforcement and education. If that money dried up they would all have to get rid of part of their force.


I'm really starting to believe that the tide has truly turned. We are no longer fighting a losing battle. Marijuana prohibition is going to go the way of alcohol prohibition. I think the tipping point has been reached. We are seeing first hand, the slow acceleration toward legalization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a government agency funded by tax dollars. We pay their salaries for them to abuse, stereotype, and make fun of MM law abiding citizens. The law is the law and they can't handle that.


This is exactly why I havent paid taxes since '75. I refuse to support clandestined government mobsters....

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Create New...