Legal grow Looking for help

[iTiC]

Gday CC,

I have joined in an incubator grow working with Govt liaison and investors. I havent heard back from the first investor I spoke with. Im not too worried, this thing is set to explode. I have a mate that can run the first wearhouse, that would be a starter facility they would give me 2 Million to see if its viable. If it contines then I have given them a buisness plan that target producton specific to a condition

ie if I want to beat cancer I need to be able to produce enough oil to beat the incidence of new cancers as they occur. This first real step is a very big step in the Numer of square meters Im going to need to work.

Simply put. This is also me giving back to this community. Ive learned a lot here and Id like to provide an opportunity to those who have helped and to the many more new friends that would be keen.

So, please let me know what you would like to do.

This will be an indoor medical MJ wearchouse sized grow that will be feeding at least one wear house sized extraction facility.

I also have many other research projects so if your keen to work in that area I'll need at least one Laboratory Scientist there.

Realistically this is a time thing so if you want to start now, I don't blame you. Nothing here seems to happen quickly, we are so very close.

Edited November 3, 2016 by iTiC

[Bazza]

Are you saying that you could have the contract to supply the national requirements for a chosen ailment?

[merl1n]

Hey Canna,

Sounds interesting. Please keep us informed on your progress cos to say I'm interested is an understatement. Anything that supports medical use is a must IMO. They keep saying they need the science behind canna. Then do it. GET the science DONE. Prove what many of us already know. I just read a post about Jan Copeland and the demise of NCPIC. HOORAAY

Hopefully all of that funding can go to you

 

Good luck with it all and as I said "Please keep us informed". I want to know

 

Merl1n

[Jagged]

Yeah i'm ready to do something, have had enough at the propaganda and feet dragging from all and sundry involved.

 

I am really down on how this has all evolved and has been allowed to evolve under the guise that the government only had concern for our obligations in stockpiling controlled drugs.

 

The companies involved in these so called cannabis trials which i find concerning is the way in which the cookie has been made to appear to crumble good old Dan comes to party first how can we let the kiddies suffer que mike baird we all care about the kiddies were gonna do a trial too, nek minut QLD the midnight express govt is like fuck it were gonna do a trial on epilepsy too.

 

Now does it seem like were in a tv show and one state is gonna get a mono rail? the winning govt ahem conglomerate, ooops sorry i meant to say conglomerate gets the adulation of the country for being the saviour of the kiddies and what ever perks come from the forward looking govt that was inspired to act and use these lovely packaged cannacuetical life changing products by:insert winner here:

 

To the winner of the contest come the spoils the right to gouge and use the australian public as test subjects on how much money can be made helping people, you get a minimal tax rate to keep investors happy and easy exit with our hand earned from a fledgling aussie industry that is being held under water like i used to do to my brother in the pool, is that what is happening?

 

Oh and ahhhh Mal he didnt even bother with theatrics he just got the feds in for their share by gazumping the states and saying u cheeky buggers didnt think we werent gonna want our slice.

 

It sounds so fucked up in my head that it seems plausible, i mean isnt the first lesson of politics never ask any questions or commission any studies if u dont already know the answer?

 

I asked my other side why do more trials if they already have been done she was sure they cant do the same trials it has to be different and so this is where i squint up and bite my tongue between teeth is that what this is a nice show look we did 3 cannabis trials and out of our vision and political know how there seems to be a clear winner of the 3 potions hoo rahhh oh bad luck sativex ur race is done and ur boys theyre just playing the game for the other 2.

 

Sorry in my mind my previous up there ^^^^^^^^^^^^ leads me nicely into its pretty good to see someone, a local company active in a local forum over a long period asking for help or indeed input from locals aussies nice one

 

I'm not a scientist but i would love it if there was something meaningful i could do with my time other than harrass u guy

[Bazza]

I just don't agree with the way they are trying to link specific cannabanoids to certain conditions. It does make sense to a degree to make treatments more effective, but they are unwilling to acknowledge the benefits of traditional canna use (whole plant) and the way thc is being written off and demonised. Like "street cannabis" is a different thing to "medicinal".

I am also annoyed that things are tied up in red tape and ppl aren't allowed to grow their own medicine. Such a helpful herb should be able to be used freely. It's our right to be able to not buy their products and supply ourselves.

Terminal patients, palliative care and treatment of conditions is one thing but what about its use as preventative medicine and just the fact that it is enjoyable with no negative effects.

[Bazza]

If you single out the "active" compound you can end up with a medicine with bad side effects. Herbal medicine usually contains compounds within itself to counter act the negative effects of the "active" compound.

Just legalise it.

[merl1n]

Hey Bazza,

"...the fact that it is enjoyable with no negative effects." That all depends on your definition of 'enjoyable' and what you consider to be a 'negative effect'. Some people argue that what you call enjoyable others feel is a negative effect. This is part of the reason why they are isolating individual components, removing the THC, as it's the THC that gives us the 'stoned' feeling.

 

Another reason for isolating components is big pharma wanting to make big $$$$. They cannot patent (own) a plant, but if they use a unique extraction method to extract and isolate a particular active ingredient they can then patent the process for extraction and patent the resulting active ingredient. They can then 'own' both the process and the compound. It's all about the mighty $$$$. If big pharma cannot 'own' it, they will not invest in it.

 

As for "Just legalise it." I totally agree BUT in doing so we would be in breach of our international obligations under the United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961.There is however a loop hole and this is "...except under licence for specific purposes, such as medical treatment and research."

There is another option, not all countries have signed the convention. Chad, East Timor, Equatorial Guinea, Kiribati, Nauru, Samoa, South Sudan, Tuvalu, and Vanuatu are not signatories, so we could all move there

 

Merl1n

[Jagged]

Hey Bazza,

"...the fact that it is enjoyable with no negative effects." That all depends on your definition of 'enjoyable' and what you consider to be a 'negative effect'. Some people argue that what you call enjoyable others feel is a negative effect. This is part of the reason why they are isolating individual components, removing the THC, as it's the THC that gives us the 'stoned' feeling.

 

Another reason for isolating components is big pharma wanting to make big $$$$. They cannot patent (own) a plant, but if they use a unique extraction method to extract and isolate a particular active ingredient they can then patent the process for extraction and patent the resulting active ingredient. They can then 'own' both the process and the compound. It's all about the mighty $$$$. If big pharma cannot 'own' it, they will not invest in it.

 

As for "Just legalise it." I totally agree BUT in doing so we would be in breach of our international obligations under the United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961.There is however a loop hole and this is "...except under licence for specific purposes, such as medical treatment and research."

There is another option, not all countries have signed the convention. Chad, East Timor, Equatorial Guinea, Kiribati, Nauru, Samoa, South Sudan, Tuvalu, and Vanuatu are not signatories, so we could all move there

 

Merl1n

Hey Merlin that treaty is for the stockpiling of controlled drugs?

 

The aisholes cant even be upfront when it comes to that as medical canna is in very short supply, does this negate the treaty somewhat?

[merl1n]

Hey Jagged,
'that treaty is for the stockpiling of controlled drugs?" No it isn't only for controlled drugs but for all illicit substances. From the convention's definitions here's the list for canna

“Cannabis” means the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant (excluding the seeds and leaves when not accompanied by the tops) from which the resin has not been extracted, by whatever name they may be designated.
c) “Cannabis plant” means any plant of the genus Cannabis,
d) “Cannabis resin” means the separated resin, whether crude or purified, obtained from the cannabis plant.

'The aisholes cant even be upfront when it comes to that as medical canna is in very short supply, does this negate the treaty somewhat?' I do not believe so, but with the changes around the world to attitudes towards canna I think the treaty needs to be revised, urgently. It seems it was last revised in 1972. Back then canna was seen to have no therapeutic use and therefore classified in the same class as heroin.

 

Merl1n

Edited November 4, 2016 by merl1n

[Bazza]

Before the 1930's there were heaps of medicines but they called it hemp or cannabis. Marijuana was used as a name to get laws passed without being noticed. Now that everyone is sick of the corruption they act like "medicinal marijuana" is some new shit they cooked up in the lab. Edited November 4, 2016 by Bazza

[merl1n]

Hey Bazza,

Marijuana is a Mexican word for canna. Hemp is a latin word, where kannabis is from greek. Hemp was government ordered to be grown by farmers for the making of rope etc for the war effort.

The Americans demonised marijuana as something the nasty, untrustworthy Mexicans brought with them. Harry Alsinger, who was the head of the Bureau of Narcotics, now the FDA (Federal Drug Administration)went all out in an attack on the evil drug marijuana and in 1937 marijuana was banned at a Federal level.

The propaganda behind it was massive.

Druggies "injecting it", Children using it, The 'Demon' effects of it and the drug 'peddlers'. .

FEAR THE EVIL WEED

The idea that it is cooked up in some lab makes it even more evil and gives it a connotation like 'Ice'. Big pharma is pushing against the idea of legal grows to protect their market share, so they will only demonize it further.

 

Merl1n

Edited November 5, 2016 by merl1n