An Offer .. A "olive Branch"

[Highlander]

They couldn't... I think PB is confusing Cannabinoids like Beta Caryphyllene with THC, a Delta-9 Tetrahydrocannabinol. It's like the whole thing a square is a rectangle but a rectangle is not a square.

 

Delta9 Tetrahydrocannabinol is a cannabinoid, and Delta9 Tetrahydrocannabinol is commonly known as THC and is a schedule 1.

 

Beta Caryphyllene is a cannabinoid, but it is not a Tetrahydrocannabinol, and it is not a schedule 1. The source overall is unimportant since there are legal sources for it, unless they can prove the source, there is no case.

 

NOT all cannabinoids are Schedule 1, in fact I don't see them listed on any schedule. Tetrahydrocannabinols are listed, which are only a few of the cannabinoids available in the marijuana plant. The hundred or so others are not drugs, not on a schedule, and not illegal. Delta-9 THC is not found in other plants.

 

Oh by the way, the hundred or so other cannabinoids that are not Delta9 THC in Marijuana are also found in places like Cow milk, mothers milk, Chocolate, almost all fruits, nuts and berries... I could go on.

 

I agree.

[peanutbutter]

I agree.

 

I've read about genetic grafting that results in other plants being able to produce THC.

 

After that grafting, seeds produced by the plants grow into plants with THC in them.

 

I'm pretty sure that doesn't make the THC legal.

[Highlander]

I've read about genetic grafting that results in other plants being able to produce THC.

 

After that grafting, seeds produced by the plants grow into plants with THC in them.

 

I'm pretty sure that doesn't make the THC legal.

 

Well, yeah I was discussing non-THC cannabinoids - those that are not specifically listed in CSA.

 

So there are two issues -

 

#1) Get the legislature to recognize that non-CSA listed compounds extracted from non-cannabis plants are not regulated under CSA

 

#2) Get the legislature on board with the idea that THC in deminimus concentrations, not derived from cannabis sativa shall not be construed as a CS.

 

Absent both findings, ordinary citizens could become law breakers. There exists a need for legislation to address the issue.

[CedarSpringsCG]

I've read about genetic grafting that results in other plants being able to produce THC.

 

After that grafting, seeds produced by the plants grow into plants with THC in them.

 

I'm pretty sure that doesn't make the THC legal.

 

You are right, Delta9 THC is specifically listed as a CS. It is illegal in Marijuana, out of marijuana, anywhere. But, other cannabinoids like BCE are 100% legal, and aren't listed as drugs at all, just compounds.

 

Highlander - As far as the other cannabinoids go, he is 100% fine. As far as having trace elements of THC, that's where I say he is not fine and is walking a thin line between freedom and jail. And if he doesn't disclose that there are small trace amounts of THC, he can be charged with tricking people into using illicit drugs, which is a felony.

 

Just think if B S allows PB to give him a treatment, just so he can turn around and charge him with counts of tricking someone into ingesting illegal drugs, manufacture of illegal drugs (you aren't making it for a PT, therefore it is illegal) and all sorts of other things. Might be able to get a plea down to like 15 years, 3 with good behavior, and since they were drug felonies, PB could now no longer ever be a caregiver.

[CedarSpringsCG]

Well, yeah I was discussing non-THC cannabinoids - those that are not specifically listed in CSA.

 

So there are two issues -

 

#1) Get the legislature to recognize that non-CSA listed compounds extracted from non-cannabis plants are not regulated under CSA

 

#2) Get the legislature on board with the idea that THC in deminimus concentrations, not derived from cannabis sativa shall not be construed as a CS.

 

Absent both findings, ordinary citizens could become law breakers. There exists a need for legislation to address the issue.

I don't see the need for number 1. That's like asking them to recognize that cow's milk and lettuce are not drugs.

 

Now if it were "Get the legislature to recognize that non-CSA listed compounds extracted FROM cannabis plants, but have other sources are not regulated under CSA. That I could see having bearing.

 

The real difficult one is number 2, getting them to recognize that THC in small enough concentrations is not a CS. Who determines the concentration? How do you prove what your concentrations are? What if in processing something happens and you end up with slightly more than that? 0.1% is not much, and it would be easy to get to 0.15% and if 0.1% were the limit, do you now have to answer for a drug felony?

 

Until #2 happens, I personally feel giving the oil to non-patients is against the MMMA2008, and could be illegal. So you need the #2 to happen first, which will be hard without people trying it, kind of a chicken or egg, who came first situation.

[Highlander]

I don't see the need for number 1. That's like asking them to recognize that cow's milk and lettuce are not drugs.

 

Now if it were "Get the legislature to recognize that non-CSA listed compounds extracted FROM cannabis plants, but have other sources are not regulated under CSA. That I could see having bearing.

 

The real difficult one is number 2, getting them to recognize that THC in small enough concentrations is not a CS. Who determines the concentration? How do you prove what your concentrations are? What if in processing something happens and you end up with slightly more than that? 0.1% is not much, and it would be easy to get to 0.15% and if 0.1% were the limit, do you now have to answer for a drug felony?

 

Until #2 happens, I personally feel giving the oil to non-patients is against the MMMA2008, and could be illegal. So you need the #2 to happen first, which will be hard without people trying it, kind of a chicken or egg, who came first situation.

 

Testing labs will have a "practical quantification limit" or "method detection limit" which is the lowest concetration that can still be quantified. I wonder what the MSP uses as the PQL/MDL for THC. Maybe that threshold could be adopted as the statutory max. concetration to be considered unregualted? So if the MSP doesn't look for THC below 1/10 of 1% then the MI CSA is amended to regulate THC only above above that threshold? Anybody know the detection thresholds used by MSP labs? If we found that onions contained THC at .05%, there would be a good arguement that regulating THC at or below that threshold is not a good use of our law enforcement resources.

 

I wonder then, if PB oil could somehow limbo under the CSA bar, how would it be regulated if at all? We have controlled substances prescribed by Doctors, and we have MMJ provided by patients and CGs. This new classification of PB's oil doesn't seem to fit anywhere? How would it be regulated? Is this a matter for FDA? Or can anyone mix together some herbal oils and sell it as medicine? I don't know - anyone..? Are topical oils regulated different from those that are injested?

 

As far as accidentally going over the THC% limit if one existed, if these products were prepared by a pt or CG, then said person would be able to possess as much as 15 oz of pure cannabis oil. So possesson of trace amounts of THC would not be an issue until it was distributed to non-MMJ folks. The pt or CG could have the material tested to show THC content. If it is too high, dilute it and retest, then don't distribute it until the THC % has been adjusted to below the "regulated" concentration.

 

Dunno - I'm trying to find a good answer here.

[peanutbutter]

Testing labs will have a "practical quantification limit" or "method detection limit" which is the lowest concetration that can still be quantified. I wonder what the MSP uses as the PQL/MDL for THC. Maybe that threshold could be adopted as the statutory max. concetration to be considered unregualted? So if the MSP doesn't look for THC below 1/10 of 1% then the MI CSA is amended to regulate THC only above above that threshold? Anybody know the detection thresholds used by MSP labs? If we found that onions contained THC at .05%, there would be a good arguement that regulating THC at or below that threshold is not a good use of our law enforcement resources.

 

I wonder then, if PB oil could somehow limbo under the CSA bar, how would it be regulated if at all? We have controlled substances prescribed by Doctors, and we have MMJ provided by patients and CGs. This new classification of PB's oil doesn't seem to fit anywhere? How would it be regulated? Is this a matter for FDA? Or can anyone mix together some herbal oils and sell it as medicine? I don't know - anyone..? Are topical oils regulated different from those that are injested?

 

re thresh hold levels, I asked someone working in the MSP labs about that.

 

They truncate the test results. 2.3ng becomes 2ng. Now this is for blood testing. So 0.3 ng becomes 0 ng.

 

It is probable that they use the same method for materials.

[peanutbutter]

I wonder then, if PB oil could somehow limbo under the CSA bar, how would it be regulated if at all? We have controlled substances prescribed by Doctors, and we have MMJ provided by patients and CGs. This new classification of PB's oil doesn't seem to fit anywhere? How would it be regulated? Is this a matter for FDA? Or can anyone mix together some herbal oils and sell it as medicine? I don't know - anyone..? Are topical oils regulated different from those that are injested?

 

As far as accidentally going over the THC% limit if one existed, if these products were prepared by a pt or CG, then said person would be able to possess as much as 15 oz of pure cannabis oil. So possesson of trace amounts of THC would not be an issue until it was distributed to non-MMJ folks. The pt or CG could have the material tested to show THC content. If it is too high, dilute it and retest, then don't distribute it until the THC % has been adjusted to below the "regulated" concentration.

 

Dunno - I'm trying to find a good answer here.

 

The FDA doesn't regulate herbs. They do, from time to time, prevent a herb that causes injury from being marketed.

 

There are zero herbs that are required to be prescribed.

[Highlander]

re thresh hold levels, I asked someone working in the MSP labs about that.

 

They truncate the test results. 2.3ng becomes 2ng. Now this is for blood testing. So 0.3 ng becomes 0 ng.

 

It is probable that they use the same method for materials.

 

OK then it is a matter of signficant digits - so by definition, we can generally believe that THC is probably not accurately or precisely quantifiable below 1 nanogram/ml using the procedures LEO uses. So LEO and the courts and the PAs don't see an issue with THC below that specific concentration. IT may be there but they don't care and never have. I would imagine, since we are talking about testing liquids, that a similar threshold would apply to oil too.

 

So the legislature is shown that 1.) THC exists elsewhere besides marijuana. 2.) "We" (or "they") don't see the need to regulate THC below 1 nanogram/ml, therefore, it would be be reasonable to redefine THC in the CSA as "THC occuring at concetrations exceeding 1 nanogram per mL."

 

Sounds like a pretty reasonable requestof our lawmakers.

[Highlander]

The FDA doesn't regulate herbs. They do, from time to time, prevent a herb that causes injury from being marketed.

 

There are zero herbs that are required to be prescribed.

 

OK, so for example about 10 years ago we had Metabolife on the market, which contained, what was it??? Some herb that was accused of leading to heart attack, and that herb was later banned by FDA.

 

So you're saying that FDA either bans certain herbs, or they take hands-off approach? There is no in between? Any mixture of legal food products and herbs or herbal extracts is legal and unregulated?

 

Please confirm.

[peanutbutter]

OK, so for example about 10 years ago we had Metabolife on the market, which contained, what was it??? Some herb that was accused of leading to heart attack, and that herb was later banned by FDA.

 

So you're saying that FDA either bans certain herbs, or they take hands-off approach? There is no in between? Any mixture of legal food products and herbs or herbal extracts is legal and unregulated?

 

Please confirm.

 

I believe that is the case. Generally.

 

If some herbal preparation is causing damage to the population, it could be banned. Do you know of any herb that is only available as a prescription?

[peanutbutter]

The FDA system isn't able to "regulate" cannabis. Or any herb.

 

The FDA system is designed to regulate specific compounds.

 

Any plant has many compounds and never in the exact same ratio. Therefore they can't be regulated like a pharmaceutical drug.

[Highlander]

I believe that is the case. Generally.

 

If some herbal preparation is causing damage to the population, it could be banned. Do you know of any herb that is only available as a prescription?

 

I'm not aware of an herb available as a prescription. I would bet that there are none. But I'm a lightweight on the topic.

 

But for purposes of this discussion, you are satisfied that PB oil is otherwise lawful? That the only issue is cannabinoid content?

 

Point being, you don't want to rehearse for the big game, win hearts and minds as it relates to the cannabis element only to be stymied by some other regulatory element that was overlooked. That the FDA might have some labeling requirement that can't be legally met, some food inspection item - anything..some tricky stamp tax impossible to comply with thing? Anything?

 

Question is: Is PB oil .... ummm "shovel ready?"

 

If you could tie up the cannbis loose end, would PB oil be ready to hit the market for the general population?..generally speaking and in your opinion, which I assume has considered these other factors before.

[peanutbutter]

I'm not aware of an herb available as a prescription. I would bet that there are none. But I'm a lightweight on the topic.

 

But for purposes of this discussion, you are satisfied that PB oil is otherwise lawful? That the only issue is cannabinoid content?

 

Point being, you don't want to rehearse for the big game, win hearts and minds as it relates to the cannabis element only to be stymied by some other regulatory element that was overlooked. That the FDA might have some labeling requirement that can't be legally met, some food inspection item - anything..some tricky stamp tax impossible to comply with thing? Anything?

 

Question is: Is PB oil .... ummm "shovel ready?"

 

If you could tie up the cannbis loose end, would PB oil be ready to hit the market for the general population?..generally speaking and in your opinion, which I assume has considered these other factors before.

 

That's about it ..

 

The slight amount of THC makes it possible that someone might be thrust into the legal system.

 

This would be unfortunate considering that it is impossible to get high from it.

[CedarSpringsCG]

First, Highlander, THC isn't available from other legal sources, only illegal ones. And cannabinoid content isn't an issue since it is in everything including milk. The THC isn't in milk. I don't see a problem with PB oil other than the thc, which if the patient/cg is adding it themselves, there is no problem.

 

Seriously PB, I am only trying to make sure you think this through completely. Be safe my friend.

 

Cedar

[peanutbutter]

First, Highlander, THC isn't available from other legal sources, only illegal ones. And cannabinoid content isn't an issue since it is in everything including milk. The THC isn't in milk. I don't see a problem with PB oil other than the thc, which if the patient/cg is adding it themselves, there is no problem.

 

Seriously PB, I am only trying to make sure you think this through completely. Be safe my friend.

 

Cedar

 

It's all good. This is a very good discussion about this oil.

[CedarSpringsCG]

forgot to mention that you can't sell it as a "medicine" only as a supplement. Medicines are regulated and have to be OK'd by the FDA. As long as nothing in it is illegal, a supplement can be anything as long as you don't claim in advertising it "cures". Only medicine can cure something, which has to be approved...

 

So the PB Oil Supplement.

[peanutbutter]

forgot to mention that you can't sell it as a "medicine" only as a supplement. Medicines are regulated and have to be OK'd by the FDA. As long as nothing in it is illegal, a supplement can be anything as long as you don't claim in advertising it "cures". Only medicine can cure something, which has to be approved...

 

So the PB Oil Supplement.

 

Mixture .. preparation .. blend .. natural flavors ..

 

or just oil.

 

Spiced oil.

[CedarSpringsCG]

exactly, let me know when Meijer carries it, I'll pick some up

[Highlander]

That's about it ..

 

The slight amount of THC makes it possible that someone might be thrust into the legal system.

 

This would be unfortunate considering that it is impossible to get high from it.

 

Ok well my opinion is that this effort needs/deserves minor new legislative protection. Case law is very limited in application and very difficult, time consuming, and expensive to establish – and in this case it requires someone stare down felony charges.

 

First, let’s recognize that most people really don’t have a grasp as to how little marijuana we are talking about when we discuss things on the nanogram level. We are talking billionths of a gram. People, think a teaspoon dissolved in a water tower …

 

New legislation should be able to state a problem, then offer a solution. This really isn’t a discussion about the availability of PB oil, but the availability of PB oil will be featured as a consequence of the solution. We are not asking legislators to endorse PB oil. We are asking that they consider the negative consequences of regulating marijuana at the sub nanogram/mL concentration.

 

The problem: “The availability of hemp seed products leads to conditions that allow consumer products designed to be ingested and/or applied topically to result in the detectable presence of trace-concentrations of delta 9 THC. The passing and implementation of the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act, IA No 1 2008 (MMMA) provides for the manufacture and use of marihuana for medical purposes. The probability is that one or more of the 100,000+ individuals acting in full compliance with the MMMA will transfer through normal handling and incidental contact with marihuana, trace concentrations of marihuana and its components and/or derivatives , to other media, including other medications and/or foodstuffs. The MMMA also provides protections to any person who assists a qualifying patient with using or administering marijuana. Again, the opportunity arises that any person in the State or Michigan could legally come into contact with marijuana and/or its derivatives and transfer detectable concentrations of delta 9 THC, the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana, to other items, including but not limited to medications and/or foodstuffs. There also exists a growing body of evidence that plants species other than cannabis sativa exhibit detectable concentrations of delta 9 THC.“ (insert sources)

 

The solution:

“In recognition of the likelihood that trace concentrations of marihuana and its components and/or derivatives have the potential to incidentally but lawfully be introduced to ordinary objects, other medications and/or foodstuffs, and that the generally-accepted threshold for marijuana impairment is .5 nanograms/mL, there shall be a presumption that that detection of THC at a concentration of less than .5 nanograms/mL in any bodily fluid, medical product, foodstuff, or any other product or item, shall be considered a de minimus occurrence of a controlled substance and shall not constitute a violation of the Michigan Controlled Substances Act.”

 

Or something like that. This is off the cuff, but I’d write letters of support to my legislators. PB oil can be held out as the carrot, but it can’t be the only reason…

 

I’d encourage my reps to vote “yes.” Not cleaned up, but my general view on the topic. My free opinion – worth what was paid for it. Maybe a tiny bit more.

 

If one is clever, he could sell this to his conservative legislator as a bill designed to 'restrict' allowbale, incidental marijuana to some tiny, trace level, when in reality, the effort decriminalizes low levels of mj. Think about that. You tell your senator, "we want to set a legal cutoff for marijuana at 1 part per million" (sounds pretty small, right?) When in reality, the senator's support for "our" bill results in the legal cutoff rising from "any detectable concentration" to an established and predictable number.

 

Make sense?

[Highlander]

First, Highlander, THC isn't available from other legal sources, only illegal ones. Cedar

 

What about hemp seed products? Isnt there trace THC in hemp seeds? I believe I read somewhere that THC occurs in the hull of the seed so unless the seeds are really scrubbed, you get some THC.

[greenbuddha]

MMJ / cannabis 'is good for what ails ya'.

 

No doubt about it.

[lawyercaregiver]

You are talking about doing a medical experiment. Any medical study involving the actual ingestion of cannabis dispensed from one person to another requires a DEA controlled substances license, DEA approval, FDA approval, and approval from NIDA (National Institute of Drug Abuse) which only gives approval to show the harmful effects of a drug.

 

Your idea is wonderful. The law is not.

[lawyercaregiver]

You are talking about doing a medical experiment. Any medical study involving the actual ingestion of cannabis dispensed from one person to another requires a DEA controlled substances license, DEA approval, FDA approval, and approval from NIDA (National Institute of Drug Abuse) which only gives approval to show the harmful effects of a drug.

 

Your idea is wonderful. The law is not.

 

BTW: Cannabis Oil is a miraculous substance that provides almost instant relief for nerve root pain.