Canada's new medical marijuana rules cut homegrowers, pharma
Curtman @ Wed Sep 18, 2013 11:43 am
Canada's new medical marijuana rules cut homegrowers, pharmacists out
$1:
After two years of study and discussion, the federal government has finalized new rules for medical marijuana and granted a reprieve to pharmacists who opposed the rules in their draft form.
Health Minister Leona Aglukkaq rolled out the regulations today for formal publication in the Canada Gazette on Wednesday.
Under the new regime, the government will no longer produce or distribute medical pot and medical marijuana users will no longer be allowed to grow the product at home.
Health Canada said since the medical marijuana program was introduced in 2001, it has expanded to 30,000 people from the original 500 authorized to use the product.
"This rapid increase has had unintended consequences for public health, safety and security as a result of allowing individuals to produce marijuana in their homes," the department said in a news release.
"Under the new regulations, production will no longer take place in homes and municipal zoning laws will need to be respected, which will further enhance public safety."
Under the new regulations, the government will allow patients to buy prescribed amounts only from licensed growers who will be required to meet strict conditions.
In previous versions of the regulations, pharmacies were to distribute the product just like other medications, provoking concern from pharmacists, who expressed concerns about dispensing a product without sufficient research. They also cited security concerns.
The final version removes the pharmacists from the loop, leaving patients to rely on mail order for their medical marijuana.
"While the courts have said that there must be reasonable access to a legal source of marijuana for medical purposes, we believe that this must be done in a controlled fashion in order to protect public safety," Aglukkaq said in a statement.
"These changes will strengthen the safety of Canadian communities while making sure patients can access what they need to treat serious illnesses."
She used similar reasoning last week when she introduced new hurdles for the creation of supervised drug-injection sites in response to a court ruling.
Physicians and pharmacists alike questioned the regulatory changes, saying there is little evidence that medical marijuana is either effective or safe.
The umbrella group representing the country's colleges of physicians and surgeons said the changes won't protect people.
"We believe that the new federal medical marijuana regulations put patients and the general public at risk," Dr. Rocco Gerace, president of the Federation of Medical Regulatory Authorities of Canada, said in a statement.
"Physicians should not be asked to prescribe or dispense substances or treatments for which there is little or no evidence of clinical efficacy or safety."
In December, the president of the Canadian Medical Association, Dr. Anna Reid, described the proposed marijuana rules as "akin to asking doctors to write prescriptions while blindfolded."
"Not only does prescribing drugs that haven't been clinically tested fly in the face of medical training and ethics, but marijuana's potential benefits and adverse effects have not been rigorously tested."
The Canadian Pharmacists Association responded in February to a set of draft rules.
"There is little information available on safety, effectiveness, dosage, drug interactions or long-term health risks," the association said in its letter to Health Canada.
"Pharmacists, physicians and nurse practitioners need evidence-based information to support safe and effective prescribing and dispensing of (medical marijuana)."
The association said it didn't know how many pharmacies would be willing to participate a revamped system.
"While the distribution process would be regulated, there remains the concern with pharmacists dispensing a product that does not have adequate safety and effectiveness evidence. In addition, the potential security risks to pharmacies due to robberies would need to be considered."
Health Minister Leona Aglukkaq rolled out the regulations today for formal publication in the Canada Gazette on Wednesday.
Under the new regime, the government will no longer produce or distribute medical pot and medical marijuana users will no longer be allowed to grow the product at home.
Health Canada said since the medical marijuana program was introduced in 2001, it has expanded to 30,000 people from the original 500 authorized to use the product.
"This rapid increase has had unintended consequences for public health, safety and security as a result of allowing individuals to produce marijuana in their homes," the department said in a news release.
"Under the new regulations, production will no longer take place in homes and municipal zoning laws will need to be respected, which will further enhance public safety."
Under the new regulations, the government will allow patients to buy prescribed amounts only from licensed growers who will be required to meet strict conditions.
In previous versions of the regulations, pharmacies were to distribute the product just like other medications, provoking concern from pharmacists, who expressed concerns about dispensing a product without sufficient research. They also cited security concerns.
The final version removes the pharmacists from the loop, leaving patients to rely on mail order for their medical marijuana.
"While the courts have said that there must be reasonable access to a legal source of marijuana for medical purposes, we believe that this must be done in a controlled fashion in order to protect public safety," Aglukkaq said in a statement.
"These changes will strengthen the safety of Canadian communities while making sure patients can access what they need to treat serious illnesses."
She used similar reasoning last week when she introduced new hurdles for the creation of supervised drug-injection sites in response to a court ruling.
Physicians and pharmacists alike questioned the regulatory changes, saying there is little evidence that medical marijuana is either effective or safe.
The umbrella group representing the country's colleges of physicians and surgeons said the changes won't protect people.
"We believe that the new federal medical marijuana regulations put patients and the general public at risk," Dr. Rocco Gerace, president of the Federation of Medical Regulatory Authorities of Canada, said in a statement.
"Physicians should not be asked to prescribe or dispense substances or treatments for which there is little or no evidence of clinical efficacy or safety."
In December, the president of the Canadian Medical Association, Dr. Anna Reid, described the proposed marijuana rules as "akin to asking doctors to write prescriptions while blindfolded."
"Not only does prescribing drugs that haven't been clinically tested fly in the face of medical training and ethics, but marijuana's potential benefits and adverse effects have not been rigorously tested."
The Canadian Pharmacists Association responded in February to a set of draft rules.
"There is little information available on safety, effectiveness, dosage, drug interactions or long-term health risks," the association said in its letter to Health Canada.
"Pharmacists, physicians and nurse practitioners need evidence-based information to support safe and effective prescribing and dispensing of (medical marijuana)."
The association said it didn't know how many pharmacies would be willing to participate a revamped system.
"While the distribution process would be regulated, there remains the concern with pharmacists dispensing a product that does not have adequate safety and effectiveness evidence. In addition, the potential security risks to pharmacies due to robberies would need to be considered."
$1:
THC, the principal psychoactive constituent of the cannabis plant, has an extremely low toxicity. A 1998 study published in The Lancet reports: "There are no confirmed published cases worldwide of human deaths from cannabis poisoning, and the dose of THC required to produce 50% mortality in rodents is extremely high compared with other commonly used drugs". Cannabis researcher Dr. Paul Hornby said that "you have to smoke something like 15,000 joints in 20 minutes to get a toxic amount of delta-9 tetrahydrocannibinol"
When will the Harperites crack down on stores selling herbal remedies, vitamins and such? They're clearly much more dangerous.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_he ... se_effects
$1:
Aconite: Heart palpitations and arrhythmias, hypotension, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, respiratory system paralysis, death
Aloe vera juice: "abdominal pain, diarrhea, potentially carcinogenic, with others can potentiate cardiac glycosides and antiarrhythmic agents"
Aristolochic acid: Kidney toxicity associated with kidney failure; associated with development of cancer, particularly of the urinary tract, known carcinogen
Atractylate: Liver damage, nausea, vomiting, epigastric and abdominal pain, diarrhoea, anxiety, headache and convulsions, often followed by coma
...
Aloe vera juice: "abdominal pain, diarrhea, potentially carcinogenic, with others can potentiate cardiac glycosides and antiarrhythmic agents"
Aristolochic acid: Kidney toxicity associated with kidney failure; associated with development of cancer, particularly of the urinary tract, known carcinogen
Atractylate: Liver damage, nausea, vomiting, epigastric and abdominal pain, diarrhoea, anxiety, headache and convulsions, often followed by coma
...
The list goes on with these over the counter herbal remedies, that nobody cares about.
peck420 @ Wed Sep 18, 2013 12:09 pm
The contents of an average 'joint':
Carbon Monoxide
Carbon Dioxide
Ammonia
HCN
Cyanogen
Isoprene
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Acrolein
Acetonitrilebenzene
Benzene
Toluene
Vinyl chloride
Dimethylnitrosamine
Methylethylnitrosamine
Tl particulate - dry
Phenol
o-Cresol
m- and p-Cresol
Dimethylphenol
Catechol
Cannabidiol
D9 THC
Cannabinol
Nicotine
N-Nitrosonornicotine
Naphthalene
1-Methylnaphthalene
2-Methylnaphthalese
Benz(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
From one toker to another, let's not pretend that smoking marijuana has no bad aspects.
Curtman @ Wed Sep 18, 2013 12:18 pm
peck420 peck420:
The contents of an average 'joint':
Carbon Monoxide
Carbon Dioxide
Ammonia
HCN
Cyanogen
Isoprene
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Acrolein
Acetonitrilebenzene
Benzene
Toluene
Vinyl chloride
Dimethylnitrosamine
Methylethylnitrosamine
Tl particulate - dry
Phenol
o-Cresol
m- and p-Cresol
Dimethylphenol
Catechol
Cannabidiol
D9 THC
Cannabinol
Nicotine
N-Nitrosonornicotine
Naphthalene
1-Methylnaphthalene
2-Methylnaphthalese
Benz(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
From one toker to another, let's not pretend that smoking marijuana has no bad aspects.
Carbon Monoxide
Carbon Dioxide
Ammonia
HCN
Cyanogen
Isoprene
Acetaldehyde
Acetone
Acrolein
Acetonitrilebenzene
Benzene
Toluene
Vinyl chloride
Dimethylnitrosamine
Methylethylnitrosamine
Tl particulate - dry
Phenol
o-Cresol
m- and p-Cresol
Dimethylphenol
Catechol
Cannabidiol
D9 THC
Cannabinol
Nicotine
N-Nitrosonornicotine
Naphthalene
1-Methylnaphthalene
2-Methylnaphthalese
Benz(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
From one toker to another, let's not pretend that smoking marijuana has no bad aspects.
Never said it didn't. People kill themselves eating chocolate though. Relative to legally available products, it's literally safer than water. Can I have a source of that list though please? Most of those look like typical products of combustion.
Nicotine?
That is not in the cannabis plant.
OnTheIce @ Wed Sep 18, 2013 12:35 pm
Why are you giving thumbs up to an article that displays that doctors and pharmacists are concerned about the safety of marijuana and don't want to give it to patients.
Doesn't that fly in the face of your agenda?
Curtman @ Wed Sep 18, 2013 12:44 pm
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
Why are you giving thumbs up to an article that displays that doctors and pharmacists are concerned about the safety of marijuana and don't want to give it to patients.
Doesn't that fly in the face of your agenda?
Doesn't that fly in the face of your agenda?
No. I don't believe doctors are the right people to prescribe it, and I don't believe pharmacies are the right places to dispense it. The concern is that when a doctor prescribes something, it's meant to treat an illness and there are clinical trials and evidence to support its effectiveness. There's none of that. What we have now is people convincing themselves that it's going to cure their cancer, and there's no evidence they can point to in making that determination. It's a pseudo-science, and doctors and pharmacists should not be involved in that. What we have now is recreational users along with legitimate medical users, using health care resources needlessly.
And there's no tax on medical marijuana. Regulation and taxation is my agenda, if I have to have one.
OnTheIce @ Wed Sep 18, 2013 12:49 pm
Curtman Curtman:
No. I don't believe doctors are the right people to prescribe it, and I don't believe pharmacies are the right places to dispense it. The concern is that when a doctor prescribes something, it's meant to treat an illness and there are clinical trials and evidence to support its effectiveness. There's none of that. What we have now is people convincing themselves that it's going to cure their cancer, and there's no evidence they can point to in making that determination. It's a pseudo-science, and doctors and pharmacists should not be involved in that. What we have now is recreational users along with legitimate medical users, using health care resources needlessly.
And there's no tax on medical marijuana. Regulation and taxation is my agenda, if I have to have one.
If there's no trials and evidence to support it's effectiveness then there really is no legitimate medical users as there's no basis to use such a drug. They're all recreational users convincing themselves that the drug has medical benefits.
Why do you use medical marijuana?
Curtman @ Wed Sep 18, 2013 12:57 pm
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
Curtman Curtman:
No. I don't believe doctors are the right people to prescribe it, and I don't believe pharmacies are the right places to dispense it. The concern is that when a doctor prescribes something, it's meant to treat an illness and there are clinical trials and evidence to support its effectiveness. There's none of that. What we have now is people convincing themselves that it's going to cure their cancer, and there's no evidence they can point to in making that determination. It's a pseudo-science, and doctors and pharmacists should not be involved in that. What we have now is recreational users along with legitimate medical users, using health care resources needlessly.
And there's no tax on medical marijuana. Regulation and taxation is my agenda, if I have to have one.
If there's no trials and evidence to support it's effectiveness then there really is no legitimate medical users as there's no basis to use such a drug. They're all recreational users convincing themselves that the drug has medical benefits.
For a lot of users, they don't require any evidence other than first hand - but they aren't a medical professional giving professional advice to someone seeking help with an illness. As far as pain relief goes it either works or it doesn't, and for a lot of people it works better than anything the doctor will give you without a lengthy battle and experimentation with everything else in their bag of tricks. And after that, they have absolutely no idea how much to prescribe for you, so they assign you some arbitrarily large quantity. It's a terrible position to put a professional in, where they're being asked to recommend something that they know very little about.
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
Why do you use medical marijuana?
It works.
Freakinoldguy @ Wed Sep 18, 2013 1:31 pm
Curtman Curtman:
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
Why do you use medical marijuana?
It works.
No it doesn't, you just think it does. So here's the question. What drug in marijuana actually kills pain?
Curtman @ Wed Sep 18, 2013 1:43 pm
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
No it doesn't, you just think it does. So here's the question. What drug in marijuana actually kills pain?
Don't know, don't care.
I don't know why coffee in the morning is so good either.
CanadianJeff @ Wed Sep 18, 2013 1:43 pm
It's not so much that anything kills pain itself in pot but more that the mental stimulation of having a slight THC buzz focuses the brain to draw attention away from pain centers.
It's much the same reason pot is prescribed for cancer patients to help reduce nausea.
Short point is that when your brain has even a slight THC buzz the first things that seem to get less attention are pain and harm receptors. More research still needs to be done though to nail down specifics.
Curtman if you don't know why a drug does what it does while pandering to legalize it for casual use you should damn well care or your being a complete fool.
edit: I should also note I know this from personal experience as I smoked a few bowls when I had an abscess tooth infection which was extremely painful. I have experienced the effects of pot on pain first hand. It not only helped to take a great deal of my mind off the pain but actually gave me back my appetite when I had been unable to eat for days due to the pain.
Curtman @ Wed Sep 18, 2013 1:48 pm
CanadianJeff CanadianJeff:
Curtman if you don't know why a drug does what it does while pandering to legalize it for casual use you should damn well care or your being a complete fool.
I'm not pandering to legalize it for medicinal purposes, that's already done. We have plenty of evidence of "what it does", and the results are prohibition of marijuana is a case of the treatment being worse than the disease.
CanadianJeff @ Wed Sep 18, 2013 1:55 pm
I may have actually been willing to have a discussion on that if you were not so jaded you can't even bother to look up research on the effects of the drug your backing on the human body not 2 posts ago.
It makes it more then a little hard to take you seriously on the topic without suspecting serious bias.
Curtman @ Wed Sep 18, 2013 2:06 pm
CanadianJeff CanadianJeff:
I may have actually been willing to have a discussion on that if you were not so jaded you can't even bother to look up research on the effects of the drug your backing on the human body not 2 posts ago.
It makes it more then a little hard to take you seriously on the topic without suspecting serious bias.
It makes it more then a little hard to take you seriously on the topic without suspecting serious bias.
Do your own research. Lets talk about the topic instead.
$1:
"There is little information available on safety, effectiveness, dosage, drug interactions or long-term health risks," the association said in its letter to Health Canada.
Doctors do not have the information for or against safety and effectiveness.
Why should they be put in a position where patients are requesting a prescription for something safer than cough medicine when they have no data on the subject?
You're asking me to provide some? You do it, or at least provide us with a reason that marijuana shouldn't be taxed and regulated I'll discuss that any day.
EDIT: I'll throw you a bone though, only because its in the news.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23587650
$1:
“In conclusion, our findings demonstrate that CBD exerts robust neuroprotective effects”, by “modulating excitotoxicity, oxidative stress and inflammation”.
Freakinoldguy @ Wed Sep 18, 2013 2:19 pm
Curtman Curtman:
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
No it doesn't, you just think it does. So here's the question. What drug in marijuana actually kills pain?
Don't know, don't care.
I don't know why coffee in the morning is so good either.
Then you could just as well take a placebo and get the same result couldn't you?
Curtman @ Wed Sep 18, 2013 2:24 pm
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
Curtman Curtman:
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
No it doesn't, you just think it does. So here's the question. What drug in marijuana actually kills pain?
Don't know, don't care.
I don't know why coffee in the morning is so good either.
Then you could just as well take a placebo and get the same result couldn't you?
Sure. We're only talking hypothetically here anyway. Lets say an epilepsy patient believed that spinning around 3 times an hour counter clockwise would prevent seizures, and it worked!
Here's a video we watched before on the subject.