Medical Marijuana

PS...Maybe it's not certain people scamming the system, but maybe the system is scamming us by requiring us to pay a yearly fee to the government to have access to a plant that should have never been kept from us in the first place. Didn't people have to get medical recommendations for alcohol during prohibition? Now does that have a better effect on your once yearly headache. But if you enjoy a a glass of wine today, keep in mind it would be because of the "scamming boozer", getting his license, from decades ago.

And so what if someone decides to get medical marijuana for the occasional headache? If I can get Tylenol and take a real good shot at my liver, why would I not be able to use a natural, safe substance instead? Some use Aspirin, some use Tylenol, some use Advil, some use Vicodin. Use what ever works for you and quit trying to tell me what works best on my aches and pains.

On the Contrary, PS, calling everyone else foolish for voting a certain way on a law only makes you look foolish. Many of us are actually quite literate and as I explained in my earlier post, I see no efforts on your behalf to get vicodin / codine / oxycontin, morphine & opium banned. I wonder what the average age of those users are? I'm thinking it might also be in the 30s though I am unaware of any study for that. As I'm able to understand that younger people often end up with conditions which cause chronic pain, this does not surprise me. Think of our recently returned vets, or the fact that women of reproductive age and all younger people are the majority of people who are first diagnosed with lupus, fibromyalgia, MS and rheumatoid arthritis, or that every woman whom I've known in the last 10 years to get breast or uterine cancer have all been under 40 (with a couple in their late teens). The average age of a cervical cancer patient is 48, which means that there are many women under that age who have that problem. It is not your place to 2nd guess doctors who write these prescriptions. You do not know their history with their patients, nor should you assume it would be better ("safer") for them to write a prescription for oxycontin.

Unfortunately, what is most telling is what you chose to quote and refute in my earlier post. You are not disputing that marijuana was legal until fairly recently. You are not disputing than an MD with the AMA was the person opposed to the initial ban, whereas yellow journalism by those whose interests were affected by hemp were the ones who started the laws for the ban - in secret - for two years before the medical or science communities were even made aware. This isn't about "junk science". No science was ever involved. Instead, what got your goat is that you assume, out of thin air, that no one truly understands this bill and that doctors may have a better idea of what is good for their patients than you. Those who think that the rest of the world is always wrong whereas they are always right tend to be the ones who are the least equipped to survive in the world, with the inability to understand facts which may be contrary to preconceived notions.

Ahhhh - the ends justify the means argument. Since it should never have been classified as a controlled substance to begin with, anything done to reverse that inequity is within reason.

I disagree MM. Peaceful civil disobedience is a wonderful thing - as long as those who choose to engage in such behavior are willing to also accept the consequences for their illegal activity. That isn't the case here though, is it. No, those that desire to enjoy the psychotropic effects of THC for recreational purposes are fraudulently participating in the legal exception carved out by the compassionate voters of Colorado and elsewhere to avoid the consequences inherent in their disobedience of the law. Cowardly is the proper description for what these folks are doing, and coward would be the proper label for the people engaged in the fraud.

RenaissanceLady wrote: On the Contrary, PS, calling everyone else foolish for voting a certain way on a law only makes you look foolish. Many of us are actually quite literate and as I explained in my earlier post, I see no efforts on your behalf to get vicodin / codine / oxycontin, morphine & opium banned.

One can only surmise that your misstatement of my premise is intentional RL. I never said those voting a certain way were foolish, I said that those who sought to pretend that the majority of those currently in possession of, or that have submitted an application for, a "medical" marijuana card were not recreational users seeking to avoid the legal consequences for their violation of existing law were being foolish in their belief that anyone of even meager intelligence was not aware that they were fraudulently participating in the program.

You don't see me calling for the banning of the medical substances you cite because I am not seeking the banning of any medical substance at all, including marijuana. I believe that there are real medical benefits that can be had by using marijuana or opiate derivatives. I just happen to be willing to recognize that the majority of the people currently in possession of a "medical" marijuana card have fraudulently obtained them for the purpose of indulging their personal desire to use it for recreational purposes. I oppose the recreational use of opiates as well, strongly believing that their use should be limited to the medical treatment under the supervision of a physician. Surely you are not offering the argument that a "caregiver" such as MM is as medically knowledgeable as an actual physician that has spent over a decade of their lives earning the ability to practice medicine in our society, are you?

PS said, " I just happen to be willing to recognize that the majority of the people currently in possession of a "medical" marijuana card have fraudulently obtained them for the purpose of indulging their personal desire to use it for recreational purposes."

This is only your opinion PS. In other words you assume that is true and we know what that means. Do you have any proof or facts. Of course not. This is a total generalization. Are you more qualified to make the decision if someone should receive MM?

I ass-u-me nothing SG. I base my premise upon empirical evidence. Though I have mentioned it before, I will do so again. MM's offer to doctor shop for someone so that they can obtain their "medical" marijuana card if they haven't found their regular physician accommodating of their "need". The 300% increase in first hour sales in a Breckenridge "dispensary" on April 20th (4/20) of this year. The median age of the people that have received their "medical" marijuana card is 32 years of age. Doctors are not overseeing the care of their patients for whom they felt "medical" marijuana might be useful, "caretakers" are the ones providing the care. Do the "caretakers" and doctors have any process to review the results of "medicinal" marijuana use and reevaluate the success or lack thereof of the "treatment"? Of course not.

These are indeed facts SG, empirical evidence of my premise. If you, or anyone else for that matter, have similar empirical evidence which refutes the premise, I'm always willing to reevaluate in light of that new evidence. MM saying that none of his patients fall into the categories I've offered is not empirical evidence, that is anecdotal evidence.

Would like to see the report that shows a 300% increase in first hour sales in Breck... You do realize that could mean they had 3 patients the first hour that day. Right? Eitherway


my choice is what I choose to do
and if I'm causing no harm
it shouldn't bother you
your choice is who you choose to be
and if your causin' no harm
then you're alright with me

if you don't like my fire
then don't come around
cause I'm gonna burn one down

If you are really interested Dude, you could do a little search using the key words Breckenridge and 4/20 and see what hits were returned. There was also an article in the Denver Post and on more than one TV station regarding the significant increase in sales from "dispensaries" on 4/20 and the days leading up to it.

Here's a quote from the Summit Daily:

According to The Breckenridge Loft manager Dylan Welch, the almost four-month old dispensary usually sees only four or five people in its first hour of business. But Tuesday, he — along with owner Cory McNeill — saw at least 15 patients in the same time period.

From 4 or 5 to at least (indicating the number could even be higher) 15 "patients" out to purchase their "medicine" on 4/20. Purely coincidence, I'm certain, that they had a significant flare up of their "symptoms" on the national day of protest aimed at full legalization of their "medicine". Both of us are intelligent enough to parse such nonsense, aren't we?

First thanks. Yes I could have searched. I just figured you keep bringing up the article you had it handy. Second. And with all due respect.. The way you talk of the system being abused and the way you use that statistic one would think the number of patients visiting that dispensary that first hour of 4/20 would be closer to 100... If you ask me 15 people is not a staggering amount to prove your point that the system is being abused.

PS writes "Though I have mentioned it before, I will do so again. MM's offer to doctor shop for someone so that they can obtain their "medical" marijuana card if they haven't found their regular physician accommodating of their "need".

Yes, I've now remember the 20 times you've already said it. Again, this is only YOUR opinion (or accusation) whichever you prefer. So, you know him, his clients, and his clients medical need on a personal level do you. YOU LET ME know what empirical evidence YOU HAVE to the contrary. This should be easy for you because you seem to know everything about these peoples private lives. I'm listening. Enlighten me.