House And Senate Voted To Amend The Act Last Night

[Restorium2]

So what do they want? Confessions of criminal activity?

 

We file a signed document where we demonstrate that a person is clearly not covered by the law. Next we bring people in to confess that they are violating the MMMA?

 

Not to mention, every one of those confessions will be irrelevant to the approval? (double blind evidence only)

Why don't you post about the review panel on the thread about the review panel?

[peanutbutter]

It is my advice to you to stay out of this if you are going to approach it with some sort of defiant attitude. Not that it isn't warranted or whatever, just that your attitude will not help the process, and could likely hurt. Why would you try to make patients afraid to testify before the panel or submit applications?

 

Simple .. if the "evidence" of personal confessions is going to be used against that person in court in criminal charges, the "evidence" is less than worthless.

 

Again .. if double blind studies are the ONLY thing being considered, why put people at risk?

[peanutbutter]

Absolutely not true. Nobody that was at the meetings said this. Every person attending the meeting said that they will consider:

 

1) Good studies

2) Poor studies

3) Studies using pharmaceuticals like Marinol, Sativex, Nabilone

4) Foreign studies

5) Anecdotal evidence in the form of petitions and public comment

 

Perhaps I misunderstood CL. Since he is an attorney, I thought he should know.

[CaveatLector]

Simple .. if the "evidence" of personal confessions is going to be used against that person in court in criminal charges, the "evidence" is less than worthless.

 

Again .. if double blind studies are the ONLY thing being considered, why put people at risk?

First, what the heck are you talking about regarding "evidence?" I suppose if someone is embroiled in criminal charges they maybe ought forgo admitting to anything criminal. However, if they are NOT charged then how is their story of how they have used marijuana going to get them convicted? It generally won't. Ever heard of the corpus delicti rule? A confession alone cannot be used to convict someone. So someone claiming that they used marijuana 2 years ago and it helped with xyz is highly unlikely, in and of itself, to cause them law troubles.

 

Secondly, a double-blind study was but ONE example of a scientific study using methodology that is accepted in the medical community. Your acting as if every clinical trial uses double-blind, is either a) you showing your ignorance or b) you being very very obtuse. Someone trained in medicine, I would think, would be likely to CONSIDER case studies as well as other types of controlled studies.

 

I pointed out the danger of using anecdotal evidence. Obviously I need to make things crystal clear. By anecdotal I am referring to "evidence" that is based on hearsay and very old. I likened it to "old wives' tales." Some anecdotal evidence is hearsay on top of hearsay. That is what you end up with when you deal with 100 year old anecdotal evidence. You are basically relaying info to the board that is then at least 4th hand. That isn't reliable info. Someone telilng someone else, whom then tells you, whom then tells the board, is a shaky chain to say the least. Add to that about 100 years in between and I think you see where reliability becomes a major concern.

 

Clearly there is another category of anecdotal evidence which involves personal experiences or experiences of those close to you. Obviously that is a little more reliable. It ain't scientific but it's more reliable. Heck, I just asked someone on this board about their experience with mm regarding a health condition. Their opinions are, of course, also hearsay and also anecdotal but they are also more reliable than something being passed down 100 years heretofore.

 

So stop pitching that whiny fit peanut.

[peanutbutter]

I pointed out the danger of using anecdotal evidence. Obviously I need to make things crystal clear. By anecdotal I am referring to "evidence" that is based on hearsay and very old. I likened it to "old wives' tales." Some anecdotal evidence is hearsay on top of hearsay. That is what you end up with when you deal with 100 year old anecdotal evidence. You are basically relaying info to the board that is then at least 4th hand. That isn't reliable info. Someone telilng someone else, whom then tells you, whom then tells the board, is a shaky chain to say the least. Add to that about 100 years in between and I think you see where reliability becomes a major concern.

 

So stop pitching that whiny fit peanut.

 

Thanks for clearing that up.

 

Words have meaning. I accepted your words as having their actual meaning. And believed them.

[Dr. Bob]

Thanks for clearing that up.

 

Words have meaning. I accepted your words as having their actual meaning. And believed them.

 

As a helpful suggestion, reports of current patients and their recent history/experience with a treatment is generally referred to as a 'case study' in medicine. CL is correct on the concept of 'old wives tales' have little if any value. That is a far cry from a specific patient.

 

Dr. Bob

[peanutbutter]

As a helpful suggestion, reports of current patients and their recent history/experience with a treatment is generally referred to as a 'case study' in medicine. CL is correct on the concept of 'old wives tales' have little if any value. That is a far cry from a specific patient.

 

Dr. Bob

 

Have you examined historical literature from the time cannabis was commonly used by medical professionals?

[t-pain]

just because knowledge is old, doesnt make it wrong.

i think the point you are trying to make is that the panel wants first hand info (from today or from 100 years ago).

journals written by people who were afflicted. medical records. things written by doctors.

the panel does not want snake oil advertisements about 'cure alls'.

 

would the cannabis entries from the us pharmacopoeia be acceptable evidence?

http://antiquecannabisbook.com/Appendix/AppendixC.htm

 

hah. the old USP describes how to make cannabis oil / RSO !

http://antiquecannabisbook.com/Appendix/USP1926.htm

"Recover the alcohol from the percolate by distillation, and evaporate the residue with frequent stirring, at a temperature not exceeding 70C., to a pilular consistence."

 

still think the knowledge from 100 years ago is bogus? you think rick simpson invented cannabis oil?

[Dr. Bob]

Have you examined historical literature from the time cannabis was commonly used by medical professionals?

 

First study in the US Library of medicine is a British Study on 'Indian Cannabis Sativa' from like 1846. My version of Granny's list covers 840 pages of links.

 

So yes, I've read a study or two.

 

Oh and T-Pain, old studies are nice evidence, especially professional case reports and double blinds. But I think the point CL is making is that you can also find cases studies on evil humors, bleeding with leeches, curing female 'hysteria' by removing the uterus, and other questionable practices. The more modern the study the better, and the older ones are best used to support the newer ones simply to show the modern study findings have been known for quite some time, as shown by the older ones.

 

Dr. Bob

Edited December 19, 2012 by Dr. Bob

[Restorium2]

First study in the US Library of medicine is a British Study on 'Indian Cannabis Sativa' from like 1846. My version of Granny's list covers 840 pages of links.

 

So yes, I've read a study or two.

 

Dr. Bob

We really should be talking about the panel and conditions etc. on the thread about that. That way people can find the information of value. Posting it here is just burying it. You could help more in that way.

[peanutbutter]

First study in the US Library of medicine is a British Study on 'Indian Cannabis Sativa' from like 1846. My version of Granny's list covers 840 pages of links.

 

So yes, I've read a study or two.

 

Oh and T-Pain, old studies are nice evidence, especially professional case reports and double blinds. But I think the point CL is making is that you can also find cases studies on evil humors, bleeding with leeches, curing female 'hysteria' by removing the uterus, and other questionable practices. The more modern the study the better, and the older ones are best used to support the newer ones simply to show the modern study findings have been known for quite some time, as shown by the older ones.

 

Dr. Bob

 

And THAT's what I was thinking.

 

Current studies are thin. Having been repressed by the government.

 

"Take my word for it." is thin also.

 

However "This happened to me" supported by historical evidence of common medical practice would be stronger testimony.

 

Obviously it would have to be presented very carefully. But our available modern medical literature information is lacking.

[Dr. Bob]

We really should be talking about the panel and conditions etc. on the thread about that. That way people can find the information of value. Posting it here is just burying it. You could help more in that way.

 

You know, I tend to agree, I shouldn't have addressed the issue.

 

So we got Parkinson's and will likely get PTSD with more Vet testimony. Insomnia has potential, but it has several problems- it is too generic, everyone can claim it. Also, severity in my book means it is bad enough to seek professional medical care. Insomnia is generally not well documented because only a few go and get treated for it. Generalized Anxiety is too broad, though more have documentation for that. Perhaps limiting that to those on medication for their anxiety.

 

Dr. Bob

[Restorium2]

You know, I tend to agree, I shouldn't have addressed the issue.

 

So we got Parkinson's and will likely get PTSD with more Vet testimony. Insomnia has potential, but it has several problems- it is too generic, everyone can claim it. Also, severity in my book means it is bad enough to seek professional medical care. Insomnia is generally not well documented because only a few go and get treated for it. Generalized Anxiety is too broad, though more have documentation for that. Perhaps limiting that to those on medication for their anxiety.

 

Dr. Bob

That would be a great post.... for the other thread. I would just move it there for you but I can't do that here.

[t-pain]

i agree, having newer studies or anecdotal evidence backed up by ancient studies is the way to go.

show them the new medicine sativex next to the old medicine tincture of cannabis.

 

thank you for working to form a consensus

Edited December 19, 2012 by t-pain

[hic]

I will say 1 thing and let it be because this is not my area at all.....you may PM me.

 

If I can help I will.... marijuana not only helps with my cronic low back pain but it helps with aspergers where pills will send me into a wreck marijuana will help the spin of thoughts SLOW DOWN so that life is more pleasant overall.

 

I will tell a judge that or a committee.....might take time to spit it out but they can see then why it is good.

[GanjaWarrior]

topic?

[Fat Freddy]

Okay before I go off the deep end on this , put it in a nut shell for me please.

Are they saying I Can not grow out doors if someone can climb up on a garage or into a tree and see into my garden??

If so Michigan can just KISS MY BUNNY MUFFIN MAKER!! As a michigan tax payer of over 40 years I have had enough. Come the fall of this year I am moving out of this corrupt state. You all can have this decaying trash heap of a state. What is so offensive about seeing a plant?? We look at trees, grass, bushes everyday. Piffft

So it does look like Joe Cain may be right after all, when he said that the state reps want to gut the mmm law. Yeah I am pissed. Mark my words well if they do this after the fact they seemingly gave us some concessions. Then expect more BS to come until The PEOPLES LAW is no more but a shadow of it's self. Obviously we can not trust our elected officials. So Farewell oh captives of a corrupt and highly disdained government.

[t-pain]

i think you just have to cover it with some cloth or non-transparent plastic, so that the plants are unseen, but the sunlight can get in.

[Fat Freddy]

i think you just have to cover it with some cloth or non-transparent plastic, so that the plants are unseen, but the sunlight can get in.

 

Just another expense I have to foot, all because someone wants to hide Gods creation. Whats next?? I find maple trees offensive lets enclose them and cover them!!

See how silly this is?? Piffft

[+Malamute]

Whimper whimper cry cry.

 

Enjoy your new home.

[Fat Freddy]

Whimper whimper cry cry.

 

Enjoy your new home.

 

Foya. you are just the type that sold us out in the 1st place. I just wonder how you sleep at night knowing you betrayed people with your soft words of misguidance.

Bet you think your position is going to make you a fortune cause you can afford to grow indoors. Big man with little ideals. Pifft

 

 

As a seconjd thought, if I am not mistaken you are one of the ppl behind getting dispensaries here in mich. Well the court has ruled them illegal.

And know this as long as I reside here I will oppose any and all bills introduce in favor of them!!

 

Put that in your pipe and smoke ua

Edited February 8, 2013 by Fat Freddy

[Herb Cannabis]

Okay before I go off the deep end on this , put it in a nut shell for me please.

Are they saying I Can not grow out doors if someone can climb up on a garage or into a tree and see into my garden??

If so Michigan can just KISS MY BUNNY MUFFIN MAKER!! As a michigan tax payer of over 40 years I have had enough. Come the fall of this year I am moving out of this corrupt state. You all can have this decaying trash heap of a state. What is so offensive about seeing a plant?? We look at trees, grass, bushes everyday. Piffft

So it does look like Joe Cain may be right after all, when he said that the state reps want to gut the mmm law. Yeah I am pissed. Mark my words well if they do this after the fact they seemingly gave us some concessions. Then expect more BS to come until The PEOPLES LAW is no more but a shadow of it's self. Obviously we can not trust our elected officials. So Farewell oh captives of a corrupt and highly disdained government.

 

You are a valued member of this community, escaping/running away is the wrong move, please consider staying in this little slice of heaven and helping your brothers and sisters in this battle. We need new faces in our states capitol and you and your friends are just the people to help make this happen. If you aren't politically active, volunteer. Help us fight the good fight.

[Herb Cannabis]

Whimper whimper cry cry.

 

Enjoy your new home.

Way to make friends and influence people, ayh!

[mibrains]

Way to make friends and influence people, ayh!

 

great book herb...

i read it when i was a kid... my dad had it..

[Restorium2]

Foya. you are just the type that sold us out in the 1st place. I just wonder how you sleep at night knowing you betrayed people with your soft words of misguidance.

Bet you think your position is going to make you a fortune cause you can afford to grow indoors. Big man with little ideals. Pifft

 

 

As a seconjd thought, if I am not mistaken you are one of the ppl behind getting dispensaries here in mich. Well the court has ruled them illegal.

And know this as long as I reside here I will oppose any and all bills introduce in favor of them!!

 

Put that in your pipe and smoke ua

You are mistaken.