Jump to content
  • Sign Up
  • 0

Medical Economics - 5 reasons physicians should choose marijuana over


merl1n

Question

Here's a report from a reputable medical journal Neurology Times

Maybe someone should point this out to the almighty AMA

 

5 reasons physicians should choose marijuana over opioids
http://medicaleconomics.modernmedicine.com/medical-economics/news/5-reasons-physicians-should-choose-marijuana-over-opioids?GUID=405B56F8-CDF6-4A24-A3CE-0570136DC0BC&XGUID=&rememberme=1&ts=19012018

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Again I agree Auqadoll, If we left an animal to suffer we would be charged with a crime of animal cruelty, but a human... ...ohh that's different. This is why now I 'try'(not always successfully)to avoid the medical profession. I'll manage my way for me, not them.

 

Pedro I agree canna does send some people off the rails, but not anywhere near the numbers that opiates do. It's our unfailing following of the mighty US of A that has lead to this banning of canna via the UN in the first place. We can only wish/hope/pray that our following leads us down the path of eventually following the U.S. into legalising canna. But my fear here is that the big pharmas are going to get the first bite of that pie and all we'll be left with is a mix of their poisons. Christ the yanks have got a lot to be answerable for. And then on the news tonight the yanks want to expand their military bases here and make us even more of a target and without doubt our govt will agree. Let's just hope the bullseye of that target is Canberra lol

you're right opiates are a lot worse, they used Indian hemp to treat people with morphine addiction in the 1890's, shows how far we have fallen

it was made illegal  before the UN was around, in the 1920's, more to do with the poms then the yanks here, follow the opium trail 

 

war between America and China is almost inevitable, and is the main game being played at the moment, that and turkey getting all Ottoman empirish in Syria

we live in interesting times

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

For a little bit of history, America never joined the league of nations, didn't sign the 1925 convention because they were more anti drugs than any other nation

they proposed opium use be completely banned world wide within 10 years and walked out when it was rejected, before cannabis was mentioned

Thx Pedro, interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

As of early 2017, the UN’s position on Cannabis is unchanged. It’s a class 1 drug.

 

The last planned meeting to discuss drug reform was in 2009. Since then it had to be reconvened on the matter of Cannabis in 2012 due to the amount of countries legalising Cannabis.

The UN has chosen to hinder research and still promotes a poor view of its use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Does anyone know the current UN stance on cannabis?

This is a bit of a multi sided question Auqa

The U.N.'s 'official' policy is still from 1961 and is called the Single Convention on Narcotic drugs

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

The new UN Secretary General, António Guterres, is Portuguese and he has recommend a rethink on drug policy. As his nation has already done.

BUT

At last year’s UN General Assembly Special Session on drugs, unfortunately, they maintained the outdated criminal approach to drugs, despite strong concerns from a number of countries.

UN Secretary General António Guterres last year, on the International Day Against Drug Abuse, called for “prevention and treatment” approaches which maintain human rights.

Now have a guess at who objected most vocally... ... the MIGHTY USA. So who do you think Australia will agree with... ... that's right. The mighty US of A. Our pollies follow them just like a poor little lost puppy. IDIOTS.

 

This is a real basic review of what occurred and individual states in the U.S. have made their own rules and released their own statements, but as per UN rules, the status quo remains the same. There is talks happening, but presently its all talk aka lip service. We'll have to wait and see what the U.S. does federally before our piss weak politicians make any positive change towards canna. Ohh they'll come out with all sorts of nice statements to appease, but in reality they'll do SFA as per normal. IMO anyway.

Edited by merl1n
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using the community in any way you agree to our Terms of Use and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.