Skip to main content

http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/08/...marijuana/index.html

 


(CNN)
 -- Over the last year, I have been working on a new documentary called "Weed." The title "Weed" may sound cavalier, but the content is not.

I traveled around the world to interview medical leaders, experts, growers and patients. I spoke candidly to them, asking tough questions. What I found was stunning.

Long before I began this project, I had steadily reviewed the scientific literature on medical marijuana from the United States and thought it was fairly unimpressive. Reading these papers five years ago, it was hard to make a case for medicinal marijuana. I even wrote about this in a TIME magazine article, back in 2009, titled "Why I would Vote No on Pot."

 

Well, I am here to apologize.

 

I apologize because I didn't look hard enough, until now. I didn't look far enough. I didn't review papers from smaller labs in other countries doing some remarkable research, and I was too dismissive of the loud chorus of legitimate patients whose symptoms improved on cannabis.

Instead, I lumped them with the high-visibility malingerers, just looking to get high. I mistakenly believed the Drug Enforcement Agency listed marijuana as a schedule 1 substance because of sound scientific proof. Surely, they must have quality reasoning as to why marijuana is in the category of the most dangerous drugs that have "no accepted medicinal use and a high potential for abuse."

 

They didn't have the science to support that claim, and I now know that when it comes to marijuana neither of those things are true. It doesn't have a high potential for abuse, and there are very legitimate medical applications. In fact, sometimes marijuana is the only thing that works. Take the case ofCharlotte Figi, who I met in Colorado. She started having seizures soon after birth. By age 3, she was having 300 a week, despite being on seven different medications. Medical marijuana has calmed her brain, limiting her seizures to 2 or 3 per month.

I have seen more patients like Charlotte first hand, spent time with them and come to the realization that it is irresponsible not to provide the best care we can as a medical community, care that could involve marijuana.

 

We have been terribly and systematically misled for nearly 70 years in the United States, and I apologize for my own role in that.

 

Continue reading this article here- http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/08/...marijuana/index.html

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Originally Posted by Jankinonya:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/08/...marijuana/index.html

 


(CNN)
 -- Over the last year, I have been working on a new documentary called "Weed." The title "Weed" may sound cavalier, but the content is not.

I traveled around the world to interview medical leaders, experts, growers and patients. I spoke candidly to them, asking tough questions. What I found was stunning.

Long before I began this project, I had steadily reviewed the scientific literature on medical marijuana from the United States and thought it was fairly unimpressive. Reading these papers five years ago, it was hard to make a case for medicinal marijuana. I even wrote about this in a TIME magazine article, back in 2009, titled "Why I would Vote No on Pot."

 

Well, I am here to apologize.

 

I apologize because I didn't look hard enough, until now. I didn't look far enough. I didn't review papers from smaller labs in other countries doing some remarkable research, and I was too dismissive of the loud chorus of legitimate patients whose symptoms improved on cannabis.

Instead, I lumped them with the high-visibility malingerers, just looking to get high. I mistakenly believed the Drug Enforcement Agency listed marijuana as a schedule 1 substance because of sound scientific proof. Surely, they must have quality reasoning as to why marijuana is in the category of the most dangerous drugs that have "no accepted medicinal use and a high potential for abuse."

 

They didn't have the science to support that claim, and I now know that when it comes to marijuana neither of those things are true. It doesn't have a high potential for abuse, and there are very legitimate medical applications. In fact, sometimes marijuana is the only thing that works. Take the case ofCharlotte Figi, who I met in Colorado. She started having seizures soon after birth. By age 3, she was having 300 a week, despite being on seven different medications. Medical marijuana has calmed her brain, limiting her seizures to 2 or 3 per month.

I have seen more patients like Charlotte first hand, spent time with them and come to the realization that it is irresponsible not to provide the best care we can as a medical community, care that could involve marijuana.

 

We have been terribly and systematically misled for nearly 70 years in the United States, and I apologize for my own role in that.

 

Continue reading this article here- http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/08/...marijuana/index.html

 ===========

This article today in Young progressives site
The last 3 paragraphs are very telling. I always knew big pharma would do all it could to keep it off the market because they stand to loose a lot selling high priced medicines that weed could treat or even cure. What I had not considered, although I have posted about other things on it, is that private prisons would stand to loose big time, as well as police departments who get a lot of money to keep the lid on weed.
http://youngprogressivevoices....-drug-war-continues/

 

It is really sad when an argument about what could be an inexpensive helpful drug that could cure illnesses and relieve pain and suffering, is even brought up on who will loose money if it is decriminalized. Greed at it's worse at work.

Not only is marijuana an inexpensive and effective treatment for certain medical conditions, but the hemp plant (from which  which the high-tetrahydrocannabinol form was derived) produces a high-quality fiber that should be available for commercial use, but is not, because our drug police are afraid the pot growers will try to hide patches of the high-proof stuff within larger fields of ordinary hemp. This is really a shame.  Our pioneering ancestors, including many of our founding fathers, grew hemp and used it for rope and for making cloth.  But we can't legally grow this useful product.

Originally Posted by Contendah:

Not only is marijuana an inexpensive and effective treatment for certain medical conditions, but the hemp plant (from which  which the high-tetrahydrocannabinol form was derived) produces a high-quality fiber that should be available for commercial use, but is not, because our drug police are afraid the pot growers will try to hide patches of the high-proof stuff within larger fields of ordinary hemp. This is really a shame.  Our pioneering ancestors, including many of our founding fathers, grew hemp and used it for rope and for making cloth.  But we can't legally grow this useful product.

=======

I believe George Washington once left diplomatic negotiations in France so that "he wouldn't miss the hemp harvest at Mt Vernon" . (ya think he was only interested in the fiber ?)

 

Originally Posted by direstraits:

Except for a trip to Barbados, George Washington never travel abroad. 

___

More likely that would have been Jefferson, since he spent considerable time in France.

There were actually  LAWs in the 1700s requiring farmers to grow hemp.  That is how important this crop was in that era.  Read all about the history and importance of hemp here:

 

http://hemphistoryweek.com/timeline.php

IMO, Marijuana is no more dangerous than alcohol or tobacco, in some cases it is no where near as dangerous.  It has been *******ized for decades.  It is responsible for sending too many young men to prison and for huge amounts of government expenditures to keep them there. From what I have seen, marijuana use does not lead to "harder drugs", that is usually due to dependent personality disorcers that could just as easliy be influeced by alcohol or prescription meds.

IMO, the government ought to legalize it, tax it, and allow the medical professionals to utilize the promperties of the plant that have been reverred in the media (ie, anti nauseam etc.).  Give granny a toke if it will help with her glaucoma. I doubt the smoke from marijuana is any more toxic than that from a pack of Marlboro, and most weed heads are not out robbing banks or shooting up public gatherings.  The ones I have been acquainted with are usally peaceful and sibdued.

Originally Posted by teyates:

IMO, Marijuana is no more dangerous than alcohol or tobacco, in some cases it is no where near as dangerous.  It has been *******ized for decades.  It is responsible for sending too many young men to prison and for huge amounts of government expenditures to keep them there. From what I have seen, marijuana use does not lead to "harder drugs", that is usually due to dependent personality disorcers that could just as easliy be influeced by alcohol or prescription meds.

IMO, the government ought to legalize it, tax it, and allow the medical professionals to utilize the promperties of the plant that have been reverred in the media (ie, anti nauseam etc.).  Give granny a toke if it will help with her glaucoma. I doubt the smoke from marijuana is any more toxic than that from a pack of Marlboro, and most weed heads are not out robbing banks or shooting up public gatherings.  The ones I have been acquainted with are usally peaceful and sibdued.

==========

I agree with the taxing of it if it is sold at a store or exchange. However , I think it should be legal to grow your own. (After all, it really is just a weed that can be grown almost anywhere)

 BTW, if you watched the show last night, there is a lot more medical uses for it than grannie's glaucoma.
It just amazes me that so many people, after all these years, still oppose legalizing it, although three who oppose the legalizing of MJ stand to loose a lot of money : Big Pharma (why would someone pay hundreds of dollars for something that a little weed would fix ? ), private prisons (who want the state to throw any and everybody in the pen), and police unions whose departments would loose a lot of federal dollars they now get to chase down those dangerous tokers.

The last two , however many people would loose money, would be a tremendous win for the tax payers of this country.

Originally Posted by semiannualchick:

If it were to become available by prescription only, how would it be decided who could use it?

Big Pharma would have to find a way to charge outrageous prices for it first, then I would guess, a doctor would write a script.

 On the good side of that, the cost may become covered by insurance, thereby screwing everyone with an insurance policy, but helping those who need it.

Not here to get on the legalization debate but it’s pretty obvious Gupta’s change of heart came just in time for the CNN special Weed that Seeweed started a thread on.  So if you’re looking for a motive...think "ratings."

 

Funny thing was almost like a premonitory strike, one of the history sort of channels ran their pot expose about the same time.  Only I think theirs was produced around 2009.

 

I read/saw nothing new.  Did you?  Sort of same-o, same-o?  If you don’t like the law, change it.  Quit the "female dog complaining" about LEO’s doing their job.  They are not lawmakers, people.

 

Carry on.

Originally Posted by budsfarm:

Not here to get on the legalization debate but it’s pretty obvious Gupta’s change of heart came just in time for the CNN special Weed that Seeweed started a thread on.  So if you’re looking for a motive...think "ratings."

 

Funny thing was almost like a premonitory strike, one of the history sort of channels ran their pot expose about the same time.  Only I think theirs was produced around 2009.

 

I read/saw nothing new.  Did you?  Sort of same-o, same-o?  If you don’t like the law, change it.  Quit the "female dog complaining" about LEO’s doing their job.  They are not lawmakers, people.

 

Carry on.

__________________

 

Ummm well seeing as how his article was about the documentary that aired....yeah, they are linked. Not sure why you think that is so brow raising or what it has to do with ratings though. 

 

Did you watch the documentary? And you saw nothing new? Interesting. There was a lot of information in that doc that is related to very new studies, mostly done in Europe. 

 

Before a law can be changed the people have to be informed and understand what the issue is. Prominent Dr's speaking out is a step in that direction. I don't blame the LEO's for doing their job, but you would be blind and stupid to not see why the LEO depts don't want the laws to change. It has nothing to do with the danger of Marijuana and everything to do with how they fund their depts. Follow the money trail. 

 

What you call b i t ch ing I call discussing a very important issue. Not only on for medical reasons but to also stop the incarceration of young people for doing something that should never have been illegal to start with.

 

The only way that MJ ruins someone life is if they get caught with it. Then the system will most definitely do more damage to their lives than the weed ever did or would have. The cost of attorneys, loss of job, jail time away from their families, and hindering future employment can destroy a family. 

for those of you with a "scientific mind"... here is a wonderful documentary titled "what if cannabis cured cancer".  the majority of cancer research is in "cannabinoids". big phara is finding a way... i promise you that! the next big cancer drug will be marijuana based.

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt16...ummary?ref_=tt_ov_pl

 

here is a link to the FULL MOVIE, on youtube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jWWVtS2gEg

 

here is the video, embedded

Originally Posted by Jankinonya:
Originally Posted by budsfarm:

Not here to get on the legalization debate but it’s pretty obvious Gupta’s change of heart came just in time for the CNN special Weed that Seeweed started a thread on.  So if you’re looking for a motive...think "ratings."

 

Funny thing was almost like a premonitory strike, one of the history sort of channels ran their pot expose about the same time.  Only I think theirs was produced around 2009.

 

I read/saw nothing new.  Did you?  Sort of same-o, same-o?  If you don’t like the law, change it.  Quit the "female dog complaining" about LEO’s doing their job.  They are not lawmakers, people.

 

Carry on.

__________________

 

Ummm well seeing as how his article was about the documentary that aired....yeah, they are linked. Not sure why you think that is so brow raising or what it has to do with ratings though.

 

Oh my I seem to have struck a nerve or two.  Not understanding bumping ratings is nothing I can help you with.  By the way, did you associate the two or was I the first to point it out? 

 

Did you watch the documentary? And you saw nothing new? Interesting. There was a lot of information in that doc that is related to very new studies, mostly done in Europe.

 

Europe?  Why do you care about Europe?  Last I heard you were moving to Japan.  What's the laws there? 

 

Before a law can be changed the people have to be informed and understand what the issue is. Prominent Dr's speaking out is a step in that direction. I don't blame the LEO's for doing their job, but you would be blind and stupid to not see why the LEO depts don't want the laws to change. It has nothing to do with the danger of Marijuana and everything to do with how they fund their depts. Follow the money trail. 

 

Blind and stupid.  Right back at you, sweetheart.  LEO agencies got along quite well with funding before the drug LAWS passed by your law makers changed to reward LEOs with seized drug profits.  Being blind and stupid, we only took what you gave us.  Oh, and thank you.

 

Change the d a m n laws and law enforcement will survive.  Trust me.

 

"Follow the money."  LOL!!!  On a cop's salary yet.   If trips around the world cost a dime, I couldn't afford to get out of sight.

 

What you call b i t ch ing I call discussing a very important issue. Not only on for medical reasons but to also stop the incarceration of young people for doing something that should never have been illegal to start with.

 

"Quit the "female dog complaining" about LEO’s doing their job."  Got a comprehension problem much?  Change the d a m n law.

 

 

The only way that MJ ruins someone life is if they get caught with it. Then the system will most definitely do more damage to their lives than the weed ever did or would have. The cost of attorneys, loss of job, jail time away from their families, and hindering future employment can destroy a family.

 

I got that.  Change the d a m n law. 

 

Last edited by budsfarm
Originally Posted by budsfarm:
Originally Posted by Jankinonya:
Originally Posted by budsfarm:

Not here to get on the legalization debate but it’s pretty obvious Gupta’s change of heart came just in time for the CNN special Weed that Seeweed started a thread on.  So if you’re looking for a motive...think "ratings."

 

Funny thing was almost like a premonitory strike, one of the history sort of channels ran their pot expose about the same time.  Only I think theirs was produced around 2009.

 

I read/saw nothing new.  Did you?  Sort of same-o, same-o?  If you don’t like the law, change it.  Quit the "female dog complaining" about LEO’s doing their job.  They are not lawmakers, people.

 

Carry on.

__________________

 

Ummm well seeing as how his article was about the documentary that aired....yeah, they are linked. Not sure why you think that is so brow raising or what it has to do with ratings though.

 

Oh my I seem to have struck a nerve or two.  Not understanding bumping ratings is nothing I can help you with.  By the way, did you associate the two or was I the first to point it out? 

 

Did you watch the documentary? And you saw nothing new? Interesting. There was a lot of information in that doc that is related to very new studies, mostly done in Europe.

 

Europe?  Why do you care about Europe?  Last I heard you were moving to Japan.  What's the laws there? 

 

Before a law can be changed the people have to be informed and understand what the issue is. Prominent Dr's speaking out is a step in that direction. I don't blame the LEO's for doing their job, but you would be blind and stupid to not see why the LEO depts don't want the laws to change. It has nothing to do with the danger of Marijuana and everything to do with how they fund their depts. Follow the money trail. 

 

Blind and stupid.  Right back at you, sweetheart.  LEO agencies got along quite well with funding before the drug LAWS passed by your law makers changed to reward LEOs with seized drug profits.  Being blind and stupid, we only took what you gave us.  Oh, and thank you.

 

Change the d a m n laws and law enforcement will survive.  Trust me.

 

"Follow the money."  LOL!!!  On a cop's salary yet.   If trips around the world cost a dime, I couldn't afford to get out of sight.

 

What you call b i t ch ing I call discussing a very important issue. Not only on for medical reasons but to also stop the incarceration of young people for doing something that should never have been illegal to start with.

 

"Quit the "female dog complaining" about LEO’s doing their job."  Got a comprehension problem much?  Change the d a m n law.

 

 

The only way that MJ ruins someone life is if they get caught with it. Then the system will most definitely do more damage to their lives than the weed ever did or would have. The cost of attorneys, loss of job, jail time away from their families, and hindering future employment can destroy a family.

 

I got that.  Change the d a m n law. 

 

==========

Before the law can be changed, the ignorance and bigotry must first be changed. That is why this documentary, and for that matter these postings are a good thing. We need more.

 

Originally Posted by budsfarm:
Originally Posted by Jankinonya:
Originally Posted by budsfarm:

Not here to get on the legalization debate but it’s pretty obvious Gupta’s change of heart came just in time for the CNN special Weed that Seeweed started a thread on.  So if you’re looking for a motive...think "ratings."

 

Funny thing was almost like a premonitory strike, one of the history sort of channels ran their pot expose about the same time.  Only I think theirs was produced around 2009.

 

I read/saw nothing new.  Did you?  Sort of same-o, same-o?  If you don’t like the law, change it.  Quit the "female dog complaining" about LEO’s doing their job.  They are not lawmakers, people.

 

Carry on.

__________________

 

Ummm well seeing as how his article was about the documentary that aired....yeah, they are linked. Not sure why you think that is so brow raising or what it has to do with ratings though.

 

Oh my I seem to have struck a nerve or two.  Not understanding bumping ratings is nothing I can help you with.  By the way, did you associate the two or was I the first to point it out? 

 

Did you watch the documentary? And you saw nothing new? Interesting. There was a lot of information in that doc that is related to very new studies, mostly done in Europe.

 

Europe?  Why do you care about Europe?  Last I heard you were moving to Japan.  What's the laws there? 

 

Before a law can be changed the people have to be informed and understand what the issue is. Prominent Dr's speaking out is a step in that direction. I don't blame the LEO's for doing their job, but you would be blind and stupid to not see why the LEO depts don't want the laws to change. It has nothing to do with the danger of Marijuana and everything to do with how they fund their depts. Follow the money trail. 

 

Blind and stupid.  Right back at you, sweetheart.  LEO agencies got along quite well with funding before the drug LAWS passed by your law makers changed to reward LEOs with seized drug profits.  Being blind and stupid, we only took what you gave us.  Oh, and thank you.

 

Change the d a m n laws and law enforcement will survive.  Trust me.

 

"Follow the money."  LOL!!!  On a cop's salary yet.   If trips around the world cost a dime, I couldn't afford to get out of sight.

 

What you call b i t ch ing I call discussing a very important issue. Not only on for medical reasons but to also stop the incarceration of young people for doing something that should never have been illegal to start with.

 

"Quit the "female dog complaining" about LEO’s doing their job."  Got a comprehension problem much?  Change the d a m n law.

 

 

The only way that MJ ruins someone life is if they get caught with it. Then the system will most definitely do more damage to their lives than the weed ever did or would have. The cost of attorneys, loss of job, jail time away from their families, and hindering future employment can destroy a family.

 

I got that.  Change the d a m n law. 

 

_______________________

 

You seem to be the one getting all but hurt Bud. Still smarting because I might leave the country? I had no idea I meant that much to you...I am flattered. If you don't think that LEO depts have gotten some pretty cool gadgets and equipment by drug arrest then I say again. Blind and stupid. I never said that the LEO's themselves have gained financially. I have no idea where you got that, probably the same place you got that I was moving to Japan...your own imagination. 

 

This discussion is about changing the law Bud. Try to keep up. Are you sure you don't partake in the weed yourself? You seem a little....slow sometimes. You seem to not be able to connect the dots with the article and the documentary either. Slow down on that bag man...you don't have to smoke it all at once. 

Originally Posted by Jankinonya:
Originally Posted by budsfarm:
Originally Posted by Jankinonya:
Originally Posted by budsfarm:

Not here to get on the legalization debate but it’s pretty obvious Gupta’s change of heart came just in time for the CNN special Weed that Seeweed started a thread on.  So if you’re looking for a motive...think "ratings."

 

Funny thing was almost like a premonitory strike, one of the history sort of channels ran their pot expose about the same time.  Only I think theirs was produced around 2009.

 

I read/saw nothing new.  Did you?  Sort of same-o, same-o?  If you don’t like the law, change it.  Quit the "female dog complaining" about LEO’s doing their job.  They are not lawmakers, people.

 

Carry on.

__________________

 

Ummm well seeing as how his article was about the documentary that aired....yeah, they are linked. Not sure why you think that is so brow raising or what it has to do with ratings though.

 

Oh my I seem to have struck a nerve or two.  Not understanding bumping ratings is nothing I can help you with.  By the way, did you associate the two or was I the first to point it out? 

 

Did you watch the documentary? And you saw nothing new? Interesting. There was a lot of information in that doc that is related to very new studies, mostly done in Europe.

 

Europe?  Why do you care about Europe?  Last I heard you were moving to Japan.  What's the laws there? 

 

Before a law can be changed the people have to be informed and understand what the issue is. Prominent Dr's speaking out is a step in that direction. I don't blame the LEO's for doing their job, but you would be blind and stupid to not see why the LEO depts don't want the laws to change. It has nothing to do with the danger of Marijuana and everything to do with how they fund their depts. Follow the money trail. 

 

Blind and stupid.  Right back at you, sweetheart.  LEO agencies got along quite well with funding before the drug LAWS passed by your law makers changed to reward LEOs with seized drug profits.  Being blind and stupid, we only took what you gave us.  Oh, and thank you.

 

Change the d a m n laws and law enforcement will survive.  Trust me.

 

"Follow the money."  LOL!!!  On a cop's salary yet.   If trips around the world cost a dime, I couldn't afford to get out of sight.

 

What you call b i t ch ing I call discussing a very important issue. Not only on for medical reasons but to also stop the incarceration of young people for doing something that should never have been illegal to start with.

 

"Quit the "female dog complaining" about LEO’s doing their job."  Got a comprehension problem much?  Change the d a m n law.

 

 

The only way that MJ ruins someone life is if they get caught with it. Then the system will most definitely do more damage to their lives than the weed ever did or would have. The cost of attorneys, loss of job, jail time away from their families, and hindering future employment can destroy a family.

 

I got that.  Change the d a m n law. 

 

_______________________

 

You seem to be the one getting all but hurt Bud. Still smarting because I might leave the country? I had no idea I meant that much to you...I am flattered. If you don't think that LEO depts have gotten some pretty cool gadgets and equipment by drug arrest then I say again. Blind and stupid. I never said that the LEO's themselves have gained financially. I have no idea where you got that, probably the same place you got that I was moving to Japan...your own imagination.

 

Yeah.  You got me there Jank.  I was worried you might run off to Tokyo thinking it was the Amsterdam of the East.  And yes, you should be flattered.  I'm going to give you points for that.

 

Why heck yes, we in the law enforcement community have been blessed by your law makers bestowing on us some cool gadgets and I want to thank you personally for pointing that out.  You know stuff like body armor and radios and guns that are at least the equivalent of those carried by bad guys.  Even cell phones and computers just like the cartels have.  And Crown Vics.  New ones.  Wow!  Just wow!  Can't thank my BFF enough, can I?

 

And you know what, LEO's salaries did benefit from that because if the local agencies didn't have drug forfeitures, then our salaries would have been impacted because these cool tools are not a luxury but a necessity.  No sweat because your taxes would go up to fund our salaries going up.   Dynamic equilibrium I call it.  Oh, here we go...thanks again.

 

You know, you just gotta love them druggies.  They do so much good for the community and especially those of us in public service.  Sometimes they are the reason why we LEOs have such elaborate funerals that tie traffic up for miles.  Thank you again for your patience.  And hey, let's not forget the neat stuff those DUI's buy us.  But, heck fire, you knew all that didn't you, you sweet tease.   

 

This discussion is about changing the law Bud. Try to keep up. Are you sure you don't partake in the weed yourself? You seem a little....slow sometimes. You seem to not be able to connect the dots with the article and the documentary either. Slow down on that bag man...you don't have to smoke it all at once. 

 

Yeah, poor pitiful slow blind and stupid me.  I sorta figured it was all about changing the law.  Many, many times I thought about saying " change the d a m n law" but I was afraid you would ignore me.  And you did, doggone it.  Now the only feeling I had left is hurt.  Shame on you.

 

Me doing weed?  Naw.  I've  peed in a cup  for many, many years with negative results proving I'm too lazy to find the stuff and too cheap to buy it.  Not to mention I'd screw 2 careers and retirements and be the poster boy of "hypocrisy."

 

But one of these days, maybe over a glass of sake you're going to have to tell me about those dots you see connecting.

 

Stay cool, Jank.  Check your 6.

 

Last edited by budsfarm
 

But one of these days, maybe over a glass of sake you're going to have to tell me about those dots you see connecting.

 

Stay cool, Jank.  Check your 6.

 ________________________

 

I'll pass. Thanks though.

 

So you are finally getting the idea there Bud. Drug laws generate income which in turn becomes gadgets for the dept. I think I said that somewhere waaaay up there. Once again you are a little slow catching on but given time, you usually catch up. 

 

Why do I need to "check my 6"? Are you following me? Kinda creepy...

 

JAnk, What bud said is true.  There is definitely more than a coincidence that the "prominent" Dr.. gupta "changed his mind" and aired it publically right before CNN's broadcost.  Whter I agree with the doctrine or not, he did it for only one reason, and that was for the blind followers of the "prominent Hollywood" Gupta could have their minds molded by the broadcast.  The information in that broadcast has been around for several years. The medical profession has seen research showing the benefits of medical marijuana, but the research remains somewhat subjective, in that it has been hard to reproduce, and like all drugs it does not work the same way in every person.  It is well known however for helping those with cancer to either gain back some appetite or relieve nausea, and that is a documented fact.  It is certainly less dangerous than some prescription drugs.

While I agree that the war on drugs has been a wholehearted failure, a costly misdaventure, and a burden on our society, I do not think law enforcement officers are using the war on drugs to finance their offices.  They like most of us are victims of our legislators, forced to uphold a law that is too strict in most cases.

Dr. Gupta is on CNN for one reason, his looks.  Much like the other medical informaniacs on TV, sometimes their opinions confuse people and  create more problems than they solve.

Originally Posted by budsfarm:
Originally Posted by Jankinonya:
Originally Posted by budsfarm:
Originally Posted by Jankinonya:
Originally Posted by budsfarm:

Not here to get on the legalization debate but it’s pretty obvious Gupta’s change of heart came just in time for the CNN special Weed that Seeweed started a thread on.  So if you’re looking for a motive...think "ratings."

 

Funny thing was almost like a premonitory strike, one of the history sort of channels ran their pot expose about the same time.  Only I think theirs was produced around 2009.

 

I read/saw nothing new.  Did you?  Sort of same-o, same-o?  If you don’t like the law, change it.  Quit the "female dog complaining" about LEO’s doing their job.  They are not lawmakers, people.

 

Carry on.

__________________

 

Ummm well seeing as how his article was about the documentary that aired....yeah, they are linked. Not sure why you think that is so brow raising or what it has to do with ratings though.

 

Oh my I seem to have struck a nerve or two.  Not understanding bumping ratings is nothing I can help you with.  By the way, did you associate the two or was I the first to point it out? 

 

Did you watch the documentary? And you saw nothing new? Interesting. There was a lot of information in that doc that is related to very new studies, mostly done in Europe.

 

Europe?  Why do you care about Europe?  Last I heard you were moving to Japan.  What's the laws there? 

 

Before a law can be changed the people have to be informed and understand what the issue is. Prominent Dr's speaking out is a step in that direction. I don't blame the LEO's for doing their job, but you would be blind and stupid to not see why the LEO depts don't want the laws to change. It has nothing to do with the danger of Marijuana and everything to do with how they fund their depts. Follow the money trail. 

 

Blind and stupid.  Right back at you, sweetheart.  LEO agencies got along quite well with funding before the drug LAWS passed by your law makers changed to reward LEOs with seized drug profits.  Being blind and stupid, we only took what you gave us.  Oh, and thank you.

 

Change the d a m n laws and law enforcement will survive.  Trust me.

 

"Follow the money."  LOL!!!  On a cop's salary yet.   If trips around the world cost a dime, I couldn't afford to get out of sight.

 

What you call b i t ch ing I call discussing a very important issue. Not only on for medical reasons but to also stop the incarceration of young people for doing something that should never have been illegal to start with.

 

"Quit the "female dog complaining" about LEO’s doing their job."  Got a comprehension problem much?  Change the d a m n law.

 

 

The only way that MJ ruins someone life is if they get caught with it. Then the system will most definitely do more damage to their lives than the weed ever did or would have. The cost of attorneys, loss of job, jail time away from their families, and hindering future employment can destroy a family.

 

I got that.  Change the d a m n law. 

 

_______________________

 

You seem to be the one getting all but hurt Bud. Still smarting because I might leave the country? I had no idea I meant that much to you...I am flattered. If you don't think that LEO depts have gotten some pretty cool gadgets and equipment by drug arrest then I say again. Blind and stupid. I never said that the LEO's themselves have gained financially. I have no idea where you got that, probably the same place you got that I was moving to Japan...your own imagination.

 

Yeah.  You got me there Jank.  I was worried you might run off to Tokyo thinking it was the Amsterdam of the East.  And yes, you should be flattered.  I'm going to give you points for that.

 

Why heck yes, we in the law enforcement community have been blessed by your law makers bestowing on us some cool gadgets and I want to thank you personally for pointing that out.  You know stuff like body armor and radios and guns that are at least the equivalent of those carried by bad guys.  Even cell phones and computers just like the cartels have.  And Crown Vics.  New ones.  Wow!  Just wow!  Can't thank my BFF enough, can I?

 

And you know what, LEO's salaries did benefit from that because if the local agencies didn't have drug forfeitures, then our salaries would have been impacted because these cool tools are not a luxury but a necessity.  No sweat because your taxes would go up to fund our salaries going up.   Dynamic equilibrium I call it.  Oh, here we go...thanks again.

 

You know, you just gotta love them druggies.  They do so much good for the community and especially those of us in public service.  Sometimes they are the reason why we LEOs have such elaborate funerals that tie traffic up for miles.  Thank you again for your patience.  And hey, let's not forget the neat stuff those DUI's buy us.  But, heck fire, you knew all that didn't you, you sweet tease.   

 

This discussion is about changing the law Bud. Try to keep up. Are you sure you don't partake in the weed yourself? You seem a little....slow sometimes. You seem to not be able to connect the dots with the article and the documentary either. Slow down on that bag man...you don't have to smoke it all at once. 

 

Yeah, poor pitiful slow blind and stupid me.  I sorta figured it was all about changing the law.  Many, many times I thought about saying " change the d a m n law" but I was afraid you would ignore me.  And you did, doggone it.  Now the only feeling I had left is hurt.  Shame on you.

 

Me doing weed?  Naw.  I've  peed in a cup  for many, many years with negative results proving I'm too lazy to find the stuff and too cheap to buy it.  Not to mention I'd screw 2 careers and retirements and be the poster boy of "hypocrisy."

 

But one of these days, maybe over a glass of sake you're going to have to tell me about those dots you see connecting.

 

Stay cool, Jank.  Check your 6.

 

Bud, I think making threats is totally out of place anytime but to use your position as a law officer to make one for personal reasons will get your job with departments around here. We all know what you meant. You insinuate you will follow jank for what ever reason and she should watch for you behind her . You have just chipped away at respect any of us should have for law enforcement officers. I suggest you resign if you are actually a police officer.

Originally Posted by teyates:

JAnk, What bud said is true.  There is definitely more than a coincidence that the "prominent" Dr.. gupta "changed his mind" and aired it publically right before CNN's broadcost.  Whter I agree with the doctrine or not, he did it for only one reason, and that was for the blind followers of the "prominent Hollywood" Gupta could have their minds molded by the broadcast.  The information in that broadcast has been around for several years. The medical profession has seen research showing the benefits of medical marijuana, but the research remains somewhat subjective, in that it has been hard to reproduce, and like all drugs it does not work the same way in every person.  It is well known however for helping those with cancer to either gain back some appetite or relieve nausea, and that is a documented fact.  It is certainly less dangerous than some prescription drugs.

While I agree that the war on drugs has been a wholehearted failure, a costly misdaventure, and a burden on our society, I do not think law enforcement officers are using the war on drugs to finance their offices.  They like most of us are victims of our legislators, forced to uphold a law that is too strict in most cases.

Dr. Gupta is on CNN for one reason, his looks.  Much like the other medical informaniacs on TV, sometimes their opinions confuse people and  create more problems than they solve.

_____________________________

 

Of course the article and the Documentary went hand in hand. The article itself points that out. I even said so myself in my first response to Bud. I am confused by why you and he think this is some kind of secret or something only your guys have figured out. The very first paragraph says it all:

 

"CNN) -- Over the last year, I have been working on a new documentary called "Weed." The title "Weed" may sound cavalier, but the content is not.

I traveled around the world to interview medical leaders, experts, growers and patients. I spoke candidly to them, asking tough questions. What I found was stunning."

 

Regardless it does not change the fact that a very prominent Dr is now speaking out in favor of Medical Marijuana. I say prominent, because he is. 

 

Sanjay Gupta (/ˈsɑːn ˈɡptə/ ronunciation_respelling_key" title="Wikipediaronunciation respelling key">sahn-jay ronunciation_respelling_key" title="Wikipediaronunciation respelling key">goop-tə; born October 23, 1969) is an American neurosurgeon and an assistant professor of neurosurgery at Emory University School of Medicine and associate chief of the neurosurgery service atGrady Memorial Hospital in Atlanta, Georgia.

 

Teyates, you don't get those positions just because you have a pretty face.

 

Obviously he knows a thing or two about medicine. He was also considered for the position of Surgeon General. I'm going to have to take his word over yours that Marijuana has true health benefits. 

Yeah right Jank, because there are probably no other neurosurgeons in the country wh o know more than Dr. Gupta, but just don't have that "personality" on the camera....haha.

I worked at Emory's Grady for a while, you think I can get a gig like that???  BTW, Jethro Bodeen was an aspiring brain surgeron.

No one is questioning his credentials. I just question why "his" opinion should or does carry so much weight? He puts his breeches on one leg at a time just the rest of the physicians in this country. I don't care that he changed his mind, and it is not newswrothy.  The information and the research which show a benefit are of more interest. I had much rather wish people would put more emphasis on the information rather than the provider. Too many times here I see people who will degrade good information because it comes from Beck, or Limbaugh, or Maddow.

And for the record Jank, I used to work with the now Surgeon General when she was in south Alabama. The selections for surgeon general must be getting pretty slim.  My guess is that Gupta was diehard Obamite which is probably what threw his name in the hat. The position of surgeon general has not meant a whole lot to the medical profession since Koop.

What is your problem with Gupta anyway? I don't even watch CNN unless there is some major crisis going on. I get most of my news from the internet.

 

So you worked at Emory huh? Big deal. I am sure there are a lot of people that can say that. Even the folks who clean the bathrooms can say they worked at Emory. The point is that Gupta is a prominent and well educated Neurosurgeon. He has earned that, right? Why do you want to act as if his accomplishments are nothing? So he is a nice looking man...does that some how negate his medical experience and education?

 

If you bothered to check the facts you might find that the reason he was not appointed the position of Surgeon General was because he was against Single Payer healthcare. Many Democrats congress did not want him. There goes your theory. 

 

Once again I say, I will take the word and advice of a REAL Dr over you anyday. The reason it means something when someone like Gupta comes out and supports Medical Marijuana is because he has the actual credentials to back up his opinion. What you got?

Jank sez " Once again I say, I will take the word and advice of a REAL Dr over you anyday. The reason it means something when someone like Gupta comes out and supports Medical Marijuana is because he has the actual credentials to back up his opinion. What you got?"

 

Haha....I will be willing to match Dr. Gupta's credentials any day you want to call him over. And I don't give a rat's hind patootie whether you value my opinion or not.  However, I can tell you this, I bet in the circles that matter, my opinion could carry about as much weight as Gupta's. I wasn't cleaning toilets at Emory.  What I said was let the information stand for itself and stop getting all googleyeyed over whether or not a "TV doctor" thinks something is OK for you to smoke. If you actually read what I said, you would see that I did agree with part of Gupta's assessment, but you the OP, titled this little tirade of yours as "Gupta changes his mind (sp)"....big deal, I decided not to wear khakis today, it hasn't made the news yet.

You really need to lighten up Francis.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×