Medical Cannabis Australia? How long before it's widespread?

[badboybaz]

I've been reading there is numerous clinical trials undergoing, what do people know?

[Johnydark]

Clinical trials are a nice way for politicians and bureaucrats to slow the process of reform under the guise of being careful. Recently I was talking to a chap in Nimbin and he said us baby boomers are the largest group turning to cannabis and we are driving the price up.

I don't like street mj as it can be adulterated with all sorts of rubbish and you don't know what variety it is or what the genetics are. I take the risk and grow my own so I can be certain of what I am getting. Growing your own is an interesting journey and you can become quite involved and passionate about it especially when you help sick friends.

[merl1n]

No matter what process/es take place or are planned for the future, clinical trials will need to be undertaken.

Yes, it may slow the plans down, it may cause plans to be cancelled altogether. But no medical/pharmaceutical substance can be approved without clinical trials being conducted, so in my view this is a first step that MUST be made for any progression to take place. I agree with the fact that all of these tests have been conducted elsewhere in the world so why do we have to reinvent the wheel. Why can't we simply use data already available from other countries?

At least its being looked at, considered. Without Sen. De Natali and other independent poli's putting forward a private members bill, we had very little to no hope of the 2 primary parties, labor/liberal, EVER publicly supporting Canna. Big pharma support their political campaigns with big $$$$ too much. You and I can't compete with big $$$$.

For us 'homegrowers', sure it ain't gonna make fuck all difference. But for those law abiding citizens who could benefit from canna as a 'certified medication' all these dreary processes must be followed. I know of a number of fellow 'sick people' who won't consider canna due to its legal status.

 

I say again, at least its being looked at, finally.

 

Merl1n

Edited August 12, 2015 by merl1n

[Johnydark]

For us 'homegrowers', sure it ain't gonna make fuck all difference. But for those law abiding citizens who could benefit from canna as a 'certified medication' all these dreary processes must be followed. I know of a number of fellow 'sick people' who won't consider canna due to its legal status.I say again, at least its being looked at, finally.Merl1n

I hear you there. We know of a lovely gentleman who has prostrate cancer which responds really well to Rick Simpson oil buy he won't take it because it's illegal. We have many other friends, nurses, doctors, professionals and even police who are secretly using cannabis to treat ailments in spite of the stupid laws.

[misshepburn]

Johnydark, I couldn't agree more. I have had some terrible street MJ. It gave me the opposite desired effect. 

 

I have no idea where the trials are being held. But I do know they're only running trials for terminally ill, chemo patients and children with severe epilepsy. Which excludes so many people it could benefit, chronic pain sufferers for example (my Doctor's are always lecturing me about the dangers of Opoid analgesics. MJ is MUCH safer!) The bill needs to be modified!!  

 

Legalization isn't going to change much at all, a large number of people are still going to go about the way they have always obtained MJ, growing themselves  or buying on the street. 

Edited August 12, 2015 by misshepburn

[PainMan]

No matter what process/es take place or are planned for the future, clinical trials will need to be undertaken.

Yes, it may slow the plans down, it may cause plans to be cancelled altogether. But no medical/pharmaceutical substance can be approved without clinical trials being conducted, so in my view this is a first step that MUST be made for any progression to take place. I agree with the fact that all of these tests have been conducted elsewhere in the world so why do we have to reinvent the wheel. Why can't we simply use data already available from other countries?

At least its being looked at, considered. Without Sen. De Natali and other independent poli's putting forward a private members bill, we had very little to no hope of the 2 primary parties, labor/liberal, EVER publicly supporting Canna. Big pharma support their political campaigns with big $$$$ too much. You and I can't compete with big $$$$.

For us 'homegrowers', sure it ain't gonna make fuck all difference. But for those law abiding citizens who could benefit from canna as a 'certified medication' all these dreary processes must be followed. I know of a number of fellow 'sick people' who won't consider canna due to its legal status.

 

I say again, at least its being looked at, finally.

 

Merl1n

Clinical trials have already been done all over the planet. The evidence is in. There is no harm to be found and cannabis works well for an amazing number of conditions.  That very fact is teaching scientists to look to the endocannabinoid system and learn more about it. There is more evidence on the efficacy and safety of cannabis as a medication than on any parmicuitcal medication ever made. The info is all over the internet. It is not hard to find. I read new abstracts all the time.

 

Then again I read study abstracts on other topics too. I just like science in general.

 

Ever since the first few CBC's (Cannabis Buyers Clubs) came into existence in California, there has been science in the background. So much is known right now about cannabis, that the very idea of "delays" for trials is silly. Sure there is always more to learn. The fact of the matter is that you can buy all the panadol you like, and it will kill your liver and double your chance of a heart attack....but you can't have any cannabis (which hasn't hurt anybody).

 

Now unless one believes that the laws of physics are different in Australia than in other nations (???) then the idea that we need to repeat everything all over again in Australia is a bit nutty.

 

The trials (on efficacy and safety) for cannabis have been being done all over the world for quite some time now, and these studies are done by people who are NOT profiting by owning a patent on the item in question, or in the pay of people who own such a patent (because they can't own it).

 

By comparison the trials on all of our pharmaceutical medications are done by people who profit directly from the drug being approved. Yet they are still allowed to test it themselves. A great deal of the time their studies are often very dodgy. Bu then, that is the company that owns the patent. What else would you expect?

 

* Who Ought To Be In Charge *

 

We are being told by those in power, that access to Medicinal Cannabis needs to go through pharmaceutical companies, because we just can't trust anyone else. Lets take a look at those companies and what they well.

 

Right now in Australia there are medications (Lyrica aka Pregablin for example) which are prescribed all over the country for pain. Both of these are bad medication with poor effectiveness. Lyrica is an outright terrible medication (though it helps a few people). It has poor effectiveness and horrible side effects (like suicide, extreme weight gain, permanent brain and neurological damage, and one of the worst known withdrawal syndromes ever seen).

 

The company that makes Lyrica (Pfizer Inc) was just successfully sued (again) for 2.3 billion USD over criminal charges for illegal marketing (off label promotions at medical conventions....to get docs to use it for everything) over 4 drugs, one of which was LYRICA. They were found to have lied about side effects, the dangers, the severity, and what the drugs were good for. They are facing tons of class action suits over Lyrica and it is FAR from the only one. One of the Pfizer class action suits is from a group of their own shareholders and was just settled for $400 million (out of court).

 

All of those companies lie. They lie in their studies, they lie to the doctors, they lie to the FDA, they lie to everyone. They sell medications which they they know are very dangerous, and which they know do not work well (in many cases) and just like the old mills and chemical plants which poisoned the local population (and did not care, paid the tiny fines, and laughed all the way to the bank) these people make obscene profits from what they do and are never really held accountable for anything.

 

I know this  might seems like it is off topic, but it really isn't. 

 

Now the drug Lyrica was Pfizer's attempt to make a replacement for Gabapentin (one that had a different name so was not associated with all the law suits against Gabapentin).  This was important because just like with Lyrica, they had tried to get doctors to prescribe Gabapentin for just about everything. They marketed both drugs (and a ton of others) at medical conventions, by having their reps tell doctors that the drugs were also good for a ton of other conditions (just to increase sales). With both drugs they lied about the drug reactions, and their severity and what they could treat.

 

In reality both drugs are actually anti-seizure meds, and Pfizer does not really know how either one of them works.

 

Here is a quote on Lyrica direct from Pfizer :

------------ quote ------------

How Does the Medication Work

 

It is not known exactly how Lyrica works to prevent partial seizures in people with epilepsy. Nor is it known how the drug works for nerve pain or fibromyalgia. Lyrica does bind to certain parts of calcium channels in the central nervous system, and this may be how it works for seizures, nerve pain, and anxiety. Although the medication is not approved for anxiety treatment, it has anti-anxiety properties and may be an effective anxiety medication.

----------------------------

 

So it is pretty pain that they are not trustworthy at all. However they are only one company. There are lots of others. The problem is that the rest of them do the very same crap. This lie about everything. People get hurt and some die. Then they get sued and lose in court. They they pay the fines and laugh all the way to the bank. Here is a list of some very LARGE settlements in which other companies did the same crap.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_pharmaceutical_settlements

 

You might not at that link that GlaxoSmithKlein had a similar law suit in 2012 that cost them 3 BILLION dollars US.

If we did want a regulatory framework, and put growing and processing of the plant into the hands of one licensed group of people, then it ought to be people familiar with the plant, and with herbal medicine in general. Of course that isn't what it being done. For some reason our representative are set on the idea of having cannabis to companies that nobody ought to ever trust with anything.

 

AHEM

 

So... nobody has any idea of how Lyrica works, and it could kill you, or make you kill yourself, or leave you half brain dead for life.

 

That is not the case with Cannabis. People keep learning more about it all the time (111 cannabinoids and counting) but what is already known is so far above what is known about EVERYTHING your doctor normally prescribes, and the safety is so much higher, that these "trials" have nothing to do with safety. It is all down to "the politics of fear". It is also about supporting an existing system that is BROKEN, because if they do NOT do that... they might have to admit that it is broken, and put some actual science into it.

 

* Politics and other Lies *

 

For ages now the politicians have been personally profiting by building their careers on lies; lies intended to make people. They know it. A lot of the public are aware of this. The trouble is, if they back down and act sensible there will be a lot of "highly uncomfortable" questions asked.

 

There is also the fact that as a nation, Australia has no "initiative system" like the ones in those US states that have legalized cannabis for medicinal use and for recreational use. In Australia we have to BEG for change. We have to "do as we are told" (or else). We can't bypass our politicians (no matter what evidence we have of their being corrupt). That sort of corruption is why about half the the US states have those initiative systems. But in our case, no matter how much people are profiting from graft and fear, we get very little say.

 

I am pretty sure that pretty much all political system are broken in ways (that are intentional) - and that in all of them unethical people have long politicial careers, based on lies and graft.

 

The prohibition of cannabis in Australia is a symptom of a broken political system, just as it's prohibition in the USA (and everywhere else) is a symptom of a broken system.

 

Which really brings us back to what WE as individuals are going to do about it.

 

Are we willing to risk prison?

Are we willing to risk losing our homes?

If sent to prison would we die (a real possibility)?

Are we well enough (and do we have the needed location) to grow on our own?

If not...are we well enough that we can get "out and about" and have the social contacts so we can buy?

 

It is all rather confronting.

Edited October 18, 2015 by PainMan

[merl1n]

Hey Painman,

Yes the system sux but it could be a hell of a lot worse. We could have a hell of a lot less freedoms than we presently do. The political system is broken, but what are the alternatives. Lobbyists (power) and the almighty, sacred dollar have always tainted the system and always will imo. And the big pharmas have both power and money. They can hide negative reports and falsify positive results, throw in a bit of cash to shut people up and hide the facts.

I agree that the science has be proven elsewhere, so why do we have to 'reinvent the wheel', but, OK, so now they are saying they want to have their own proof. Fine, do it. But for Christ sake (and mine) HURRY UP. Get it done already

 

Now we can sit here and have a theological debate about the system and how bad it is, but this is the system we have to work with so again I say "...HURRY UP. Get it done already"

 

Merl1n

[PainMan]

Johnydark, I couldn't agree more. I have had some terrible street MJ. It gave me the opposite desired effect. 

 

I have no idea where the trials are being held. But I do know they're only running trials for terminally ill, chemo patients and children with severe epilepsy. Which excludes so many people it could benefit, chronic pain sufferers for example (my Doctor's are always lecturing me about the dangers of Opoid analgesics. MJ is MUCH safer!) The bill needs to be modified!!  

 

Legalization isn't going to change much at all, a large number of people are still going to go about the way they have always obtained MJ, growing themselves  or buying on the street. 

Well the current model being pushed certainly isn't going to help much. Laying aside the fact that it could (at best) only help a tiny number of people, even those people would have better access to better strains just by buying it on the black market or growing it.

 

Australian politicians seem intent on replicating the very same bad medical access model that the Canadian government tried out first, and used also used in Amsterdam. It failed to work in both of those places. The government pot was crappy quality and only one strain.  Doctors told their patients very directly to just buy it or grow it and both systems collapsed under their own incompetence.

 

So now I guess it is our turn to replicate the mistakes everyone else already made.

[PainMan]

Hey Painman,

Yes the system sux but it could be a hell of a lot worse. We could have a hell of a lot less freedoms than we presently do. The political system is broken, but what are the alternatives. Lobbyists (power) and the almighty, sacred dollar have always tainted the system and always will imo. And the big pharmas have both power and money. They can hide negative reports and falsify positive results, throw in a bit of cash to shut people up and hide the facts.

I agree that the science has be proven elsewhere, so why do we have to 'reinvent the wheel', but, OK, so now they are saying they want to have their own proof. Fine, do it. But for Christ sake (and mine) HURRY UP. Get it done already

 

Now we can sit here and have a theological debate about the system and how bad it is, but this is the system we have to work with so again I say "...HURRY UP. Get it done already"

 

Merl1n

I agree. I do which they would hurry up. Unfortunately they are more interested in cover their own asses. They are having to deal with all of the societal paranoia caused by the entrenched set of lies that they promoted (in order to look like they were "doing the right thing" when they knew they were not).  It is hard to back peddle when you've done a thing like that for so long.

[Husky]

Lyrica is without doubt THE worst drug I have been trialled on in 5 years of specialist pain management. There is a 3-4 day blank space in my life, I remember just, staggering around house like Id had a bottle of Jack ( and I don't drink). The Dr suggested I try it a bit more , get use to it.......I told him to fuck off as I felt suicidal on it ( never been like before or since) . He just stopped pushing the point and put me back to Oxy.

 

 

And Painman....I read they don't even understand how Paracetamol works and it will kill you, available a supermarket ! So any argument about needing clinical trials is convenient hypocrisy.  

[PainMan]

Lyrica is without doubt THE worst drug I have been trialled on in 5 years of specialist pain management. There is a 3-4 day blank space in my life, I remember just, staggering around house like Id had a bottle of Jack ( and I don't drink). The Dr suggested I try it a bit more , get use to it.......I told him to fuck off as I felt suicidal on it ( never been like before or since) . He just stopped pushing the point and put me back to Oxy.

 

 

And Painman....I read they don't even understand how Paracetamol works and it will kill you, available a supermarket ! So any argument about needing clinical trials is convenient hypocrisy.  

Yup. My wife and I (with out various crap wrong with is) were put on all the FIRST ROUND ... the standard crap they put you on first (for pain) whcih rarely works and nrealy always has terribel side effects.

 

Tramadol, Gabapentin...

 

We already had a pretty open relationship with that doc, and he knew my wife and I are both hard science (she was in university at 9) so when I mentioned that Tramadol is only supposed to work in about 2% of people and IS addictive (most doctors still try and claim it isn't) THAT doctor told me that 2% is far too high and in his experience it is less that half of a percent. But they do put everyone on that sort of crap anyway ...even though both tramadol and gabapentin are both more addictive and more damaging than morphine. Lyrica is just scary. I thought about it (neuropathy) but as the law suits and testing by OTHER groups (not by Pfizer) came out - we both said no to that.

 

And god help you of you are allergic to most opiates (my wife is - and nearly all antibiotics too). Just to get through the "testing" of the various pain meds, they had to put her on their strongest anti-nauseant which is normally reserved for chemo patients (and you can only get 5 pills of it at a time under the PBS).

 

What gets me is I LIKE good solid science. I can look up any of the herbals or animo acids I am on (the things that let me get off of most of my pain meds) and find more solid science on what THEY do, and exactly HOW, than I can about extreme majority of pharmaceuticals.