It does. That's the only reason voters have been able to get states to allow it... You're thinking of world leaders. The only reason YOU know there's anything wrong with them is because of-wait for it-modern science. Again, you're thinking of the government. The biggest problem with genetically modified food is that people who don't know what they're talking about hear the words "genetically modified" and think of horror movie, mad scientist scenarios. Selective breeding is technically a form of genetic modification, and it doesn't do anything that would hurt a consumer of the food.
If it makes someones last days more comfortable and gives them a small quality of life back, then what is the harm?
I can't believe the federal government is ignoring this issue when people are dying right in front of them.
They're not dying because of the law. Not one single person has ever died because they couldn't have weed. Good God. @Big_Bud: Completely agree. It's just not the hospital's fault that they can't let her partake on their grounds, and she's not actually dying BECAUSE she can't have marijuana for the few hours it takes to go in for testing. It's hard to feel sympathetic when she's using her illness, that many, many people have to deal with, to advance an agenda, and using an argument that isn't logically sound, to boot.
I did not say that certain States do not allow it. I stated that the governing agencies of "modern science" in the health care industry. I was referencing the FDA which is the very same agency that doesn't recognize the medical benefits of marijuana and other natural substances that could hurt the profit of the pharma complex. And if you think that just because States support medical marijuana the Federal Government leaves it at the State level you are ignoring what is taking place and how the DEA is shutting down dispensaries that operate within State law. You obviously missed the point of my post. I absolutely believe in science but I also recognize that science is overshadowed by politics. We don't have a free market and with all the regulatory agencies the laws in place are not there for the benefit of society but for the benefits of those who put those laws in place. I can hardly call it science when the FDA ignores data for aspartame, sucralose, marijuana, Vitamin B15, Vitamin B17. That's not science but political politics. Selective breeding certainly influences genetics but that is how nature operates. Sure, if you select it for nature you are affecting genetics by means of influencing the selection process but you are doing so without modifying the genetic code through genetic engineering and altering of the DNA by manipulating the genome with foreign DNA. Read "A World Without Cancer" as it beautifully illustrates the politics of "modern science".
Curing disease is not the objective of modern science and the pharma complex. There is no profit in curing disease, there is however much profit in masking the symptoms of disease while upselling all kinds of other medicine that "cures" the side effect of the other medicine.
Modern science does not have a "governing body". It's a concept, defined by what we think we know at this time. It's a completely separate idea from the "pharma complex".
Please don't take this as a personal attack but that statement is beyond ignorant given that we have the FDA here in the US who decides what to accept as viable medicine and and what not. Then there is various influence and politics behind the many "modern scientific" research publications. Good luck getting published if you don't fit within the parameters of the predetermined agendae. Please take my comment as constructive criticism to your reply and I suggest you roll a big fat joint and enjoy the two books that I listed above. Disclaimer: Marijuana is illegal and considered dangerous in the United States of America. Please also keep in mind that the AMA and FDA do not see any medicinal value in the plant genus cannabis. There is also a chance that the DEA will arrest your ass for enjoying your book under the influence of your herb of choice and being located in a "marijuana legal" state with prescription does not matter as the the DEA's power trump State law, despite its legality according to the US Constitution.
I appreciate the continued civility in this discussion. Thank you guys for being adults about this. =)
The FDA and AMA are not "governing bodies" of modern science. They're parts of the federal government. If you think they have any control over all of science, you obviously don't think that scientists exist outside of the US. I've already conceded that the American government doesn't acknowledge the usefulness of marijuana medically, so you're just restating my own point back to me.
I did not know she was pursuing SWM (Standard Western Medicine) In that case, removal of cannabis could be a "death sentence" if it is the only thing she is responding to for nausea. (Its relatively easy to vomit oneself to death in a debilitated state) Coping With Chemotherapy and Nausea This is the saddest thing... Tom Lubbock: a memoir of living with a brain tumour | Books | The Observer " Moving very quickly, coming down, against the end. But quite peaceful, too." I certainly hope so.
Governing body wasn't used to describe the title of those agencies but it certainly describes their function and power. Who made sure that pharma doesn't have competition with marijuana? Yes, you acknowledge that they don't admit to the usefulness of that plant from a medical perspective. But in addition to that there are many other uses and cures that the AMA and FDA are making illegal in order to ensure that the money flows where it should flow. And it by no means an American thing as the powers that be in finance, medicine/finance, war, etc. are of International power. Sure, science exists outside the US but you have to understand that in the end, in an anti-free market system, politics trumps science. Money trumps science and with that there is no science as we cannot ignore data just to the benefit of a certain demographic as that is very unscientific but profitable. She was using chemotherapy...
First of all, the "modern science" thing only came up because I said that radiation and chemotherapy are the most effective treatments science has discovered thus far for cancer. It had nothing to do with marijuana in any way.
Yes, and the only reason it is the "most effective discovered" is because of politics and profits as the Leatrile/Vitamin B17 has shown superior results yet is illegal in the US and other countries. That's why I responded the way I did. It has nothing to do with science and all to do with politics and protecting the profits of the pharma industry. It's amazing to me that people can see it with marijuana yet don't with other cases, especially when the same "governing agencies" come to that conclusion.
"Seizing, gripping, pushing away or being open to receiving something". That sounds like the start of a Harold Pinter play?
arewenotmen has raised an important and valid point of discussion i.e; should we who advocate for legal use of marijuana stoop to the level of the anti drug crusaders with half truths and outright lies, however subtle, "for the good of our cause". the answer is no we should not. The Angle Raich case is important most for showing just how uncaring the government, the hospital and the anti drug forces are to a citizens pain and misfortune. So many of them are the same fuck heads that proclaim their Christian morals in their crusade to deny a dying citizen the pain relief of their own choice.