House And Senate Voted To Amend The Act Last Night

[Restorium2]

My mistake. I thought you were going to apply.

I had every intention to apply until I read the application. That's why I directed you to the application. You need to go there first so you aren't just spinning your wheels.

[peanutbutter]

I wonder if there would be any benefit in quoting cannabis medical use before 1900.

 

It was commonly used for asthma then.

Edited December 17, 2012 by peanutbutter

[Restorium2]

I wonder if there would be any benefit in quoting cannabis medical use before 1900.

 

It was commonly used for asthma then.

Not unless you can do a decent job answering question 3 first.

[peanutbutter]

Not unless you can do a decent job answering question 3 first.

 

Someone managed to do it with Parkinson's disease.

 

I suppose you could attempt to use the tact that the condition is only covered for palliative (symptom relief) use and not therapeutic use. That is, only the symptoms are addressed, but not the condition directly.

[peanutbutter]

Read the application questions. 3 asks why it doesn't fall under another already approved condition. Asthma obviously does in my opinion. Doctors think so too. It's very straight forward. I'm not going to make a case that I don't believe in(question 3).

 

Asthma is NOT a named condition. It can be implied through the symptom section. As a result many doctors believe the condition is not covered.

 

Adding Asthma to the named conditions list would clarify the issue for physicians.

 

Would something like that work?

[Restorium2]

In the law;

 

General Diseases , Medical Conditions, and treatment not listed but authorized in Statute: Open ended definition of "Debilitating medical condition" includes any other conditions below [section 3 (a)2]

A chronic disease or its treatment

A chronic medical condition or its treatment

A debilitating disease or its treatment

A debilitating medical condition or its treatment

if it produce sany of these symptoms or side effects:

cachexia or wasting syndrome;

severe nausea;

seizures, including but not limited to those characteristic of epilepsy; or

severe and persistent muscle spasms, including but not limited to those characteristic of multiple sclerosis.

 

 

3. Specifically, why doesn't this condition (ASTHMA)adequately fall under one of the already approved qualifying medical conditions for the use of medical marijuana in Michigan?

[Restorium2]

QUOTE:

It can be implied through the symptom section.

 

You answered your own question.

[peanutbutter]

QUOTE:

It can be implied through the symptom section.

 

You answered your own question.

 

OK .. I tried to help. When you get it figured out, I'll be interested to see how you answer question number three.

[Restorium2]

OK .. I tried to help. When you get it figured out, I'll be interested to see how you answer question number three.

I have been successfully making the case that the law already covers Asthma. I would have to go directly against myself to answer question 3. I would suggest those that have been arguing against me submit the argument they have been making. My credibility is shot making the case that Asthma isn't already covered. I can't just flip flop like that.

[+Malamute]

well the next time you are at one of these meetings ask them or file a form for spondyloarthropathy. what is this you ask, it is a form of Arthritis

it is a degenerative arthritis,it's just like Cancer, but it kills you slow

 

Yes, please file for this new condition. I know i have been asking for a couple/few months for people to get together and produce quality application/requests for new conditions.

 

This is actually something almost anyone can do, and anyone can do with a little help, and could make an enormous impact on the medical cannabis program and large numbers of ailing patients who may qualify for the MMMP because of the work you have done. And if even believed a condition exists currently under the Act, why not doggy pile on the rabbit and put an ABSOLUTE to that assumption. It isn't going to hurt anything and this panels job is to simply review what "WE" put in front of them and to decide, whether to recommend addition to the list of qualifying conditions based on the merits of the information on the application form, public testimony, and their personal professional experience and knolwedge.

 

Lets get together, as a "community", and put together rock solid applications that have extensive medical studies and scientific information supporting our requests; get wonderful people, patients and experts to give heartfelt and indisputable testimony; and assure these panel members are given a non difficult task of approving our requests.

 

It is up to you, each of you to help make this happen.

 

It is not the "new conditions" panels job to come up with conditions; it is only the panels job to review the submitted information, discuss the submitted information and make a judgment ont he submitted data.

 

No excuses here people. It is up to you. Will we add dozens of conditions to our kick assss medical cannabis law?, or will be bicker about stuff that is simply not going to get the job done?

[Hayduke]

There is open testimony, live and in person in Lansing on January 25th in regard to PTSD and Parkinson's.

 

Please come out and lend your voice as to how medical marijuana helps your life and the symptoms of your illness....

 

As of January 11th, LARA will have up an online portal to give written testimony to....

 

It really does make a difference. Please join us....

[peanutbutter]

They already have one big donkey binder that has been provided by Steven Creamer. They don't need another big donkey binder, except full of hyperlinks that can't be clicked.

 

You need to use that resource yourself to construct a cogent petition for burns. I will help by reviewing it when you think you are close, and we will run it past John Evans, who did a great PTSD petition.

 

Would it be proper to reference page numbers from the binder that Steven already presented?

[peanutbutter]

And does anyone have any access to pre 1937 pharmaceutical company promotional materials?

[peanutbutter]

http://antiquecannabisbook.com/

 

I hesitate to even provide this link, however. I don't think there is much here of a quality that would be appropriate for this panel.

 

Pharmaceutical companies making medical claims about cannabis?????

 

I'm sure GW Pharmaceutical studies would be of value.

Edited December 17, 2012 by peanutbutter

[CaveatLector]

And does anyone have any access to pre 1937 pharmaceutical company promotional materials?

Seriously? You plan to cite something from almost a century ago? As someone stated previously, the panel is mostly doctors. Do you know a doctor that relies on century-old anecdotal evidence when devising a treatment plan? Come on. You want to look like a clown to this panel as well? May as well also cite cigarette ads from that time period. Lucky Strike: "Feel your level best!" SEE, smoking DOES help people!

 

Or how about the "asthma" cigarettes they used to make?

[peanutbutter]

The record of AMA congressional testimony during the tax stamp debate?

 

Administrative Justice Laws statement?

[peanutbutter]

Or how about the "asthma" cigarettes they used to make?

 

That is exactly what I had in mind.

 

Although most of the time it was promoted for asthma, it was tincture.

[peanutbutter]

Yes on the studies, they even referenced a Nabilone study. Studies specific to the condition or its symptoms being treated by or palliated by cannabinoids would of course be relevant in reviewing the petition, along with well-documented anecdotal data.

 

No on everything else.

 

The documentation from before 1937 shows common medical usage before being made illegal. Specific conditions. That should qualify under the anecdotal heading, I would think.

 

If there were anecdotal stories from those dates, it would seem logical the medical literature of the time would be of at least equal value.

Edited December 17, 2012 by peanutbutter

[peanutbutter]

Did the board exclude medical literature before a certain date?

[Highlander]

Did the board exclude medical literature before a certain date?

 

No, but what Zap is trying to tell you is that the board will think you are a clown if you present it. I think you are too disconnected from mainstream society to understand this. That isn't an insult; it just means that you think differently.

 

Knowing/believing something is one thing. Convincing other people is quite another matter altogether. If you want to convince someone, yo have to do so at their level, on their terms. Anything else is just preaching and counter-productive.

[peanutbutter]

Our anecdotal experience seems to be confirming the claims being made at that time ..

[phaquetoo]

Tried that with a cannabis specialist and it seemed he would rather walk on fire than be convinced. Others just seem to easily see it. Some doctors are very hard to convince if they didn't think it up themselves.

 

I have asthma, Im seeing a dr. they know im on mm, she actualy renewed me 2 yrs ago, but stopped participating in the mm program, but she still sees me, she knows im on mm, when I first started seeing her she gave me one of them breathing tests, and always checks my breathing on all apts, she gave me patches to quit smoking cigs, they were working pretty good, i was smoking maybe 10 a day on them, (they were the kind you can smoke on at first) and I moved on to the next step, and was prob smoking maybe 2 cigs a day!

 

I started mixing my mm in my cigs, I roll my own ciggerettes, and I only vaporized for along time, she could not belieive how much better my breathing got, she ran out of the patches and my gov ins dont cover that, so I stopped and was smoking at least a pack a day again, but because of the vaporizing she could not beleive how good my lungs sounded! my qualifying condition is chronic pain (lower back) but we also found that it helps asthma! Ive got records, to bad the joined st. marys and dont do rec's or renewels any longer, but no biggie I get my renewell every yr no prob!

 

If you vaporize your mm it will make you breath a whole lot better, one time I had a horrible chest cold, I couldnt breath for schitt, I couldnt smoke cigs, and I read that mm helps with asthma, I rolled a joint, I could hardly hack it down, but when id get a half of joint in me, it wouldnt take but only 15 mins after I was done and I was breathing realy good, kinda unbeleivable that we can smoke something and make our lungs work better eh?

 

Peace and Happy Hollidays to All!

Jim

[SFC]

Pb, this should be your moment to really make a difference. For once, take the advice being offered you. Do not try and take the easy road, it will not work. Make an honest effort...

[Highlander]

I would think that presenting anecdotal evidence in a well-organized manner would be far more persuasive to the board than old-timey bottles and boxes. Standards of medicine have changed radically since then.

 

And we have only a guess as to how the cannabis of 100 years ago compares to cannabis today.

 

I can find anecdotal evidence to suggest that shocking crazy people with electricity makes them sane, that drilling a hole in your skull makes you think more clearly, and that draining blood from your body is an excellent way to cure infection.

[shishka]

Gosh, it's almost as if everyone here is working toward a common goal, while being respectful of others.

 

Not sure I believe it, but it's nice to see.