Will VA chief be voice of reason on climate change and medical marijuana in Trump administration?
We all know how concerned the Washington Post is about the healthcare of veterans. That’s why they asked this question in their pages today; Will VA chief be voice of reason on climate change and medical marijuana in Trump administration? That’s veterans’ biggest concern these days. Not that the VA is largely mismanaged, or that they can’t get access to the care that they’re owed. Veterans also want free weed and they want to send taxpayer dollars to China;
[Veterans’ Affairs Secretary, David]Shulkin didn’t mention either controversy during his prepared remarks, delivered in the White House briefing room Wednesday for increased exposure, but they were raised in back-to-back questions from reporters. Each is a delicate issue for the physician Shulkin. He’s a scientist devoted to improved care for veterans and a top official in a Trump administration that denounces enlightened views on marijuana and the changing climate.
It’s a tough spot, but one where he could be a needed voice for reason.
He cautiously signaled a willingness to advance medical marijuana for veterans, while making it clear that he wants no part of the climate change debate.
If anyone can prove that there is a medical reason, beyond a placebo effect, for the use of marijuana as a treatment for anything, I’d be all for it – that doesn’t seem to be the case, though. The potheads at the Washington Post are just trying to get closer to acceptance using veterans – just like the LBGT issue.
Same goes for the climate change issue – what would the VA have to do with making policy in regards to global warming, or cooling, or whatever?
Following his frank depiction of VA’s problems, a reporter asked whether “in the spirit of the candid assessment” [David] Shulkin considers climate change a threat to his department’s mission.
This was the day before President Trump exploded the climate change debate by making the United States an international outcast when he withdrew from the Paris climate agreement.
Shulkin dodged, saying he is “focused on those environmental issues that impact veterans … beyond that, it really is beyond my scope as secretary.”
Was he “repudiating the multiple reports that have come out of your department that say climate change” is a real issue for vets?” the reporter asked. “That’s not something that you’re even considering at this point?”
Shulkin replied: “Look, I am focused on the health of our veterans. And clearly, there — there’s — there’s a relationship between health and the environment. What I’m not focused on is the bigger political issues about United States policy on — on other types of reform. I’m focused on the health of veterans.”
But, of course, climate change is related to veterans’ health, as reports from his department have said.
The author of the Post story presents as evidence a 2014 report from the VA, their “VA Climate Change Adaptation Plan” which begins with this paragraph:
The climate is changing at a pace never before experienced in recorded human history, affecting natural and human systems alike. Climate change is affecting how and when precipitation falls, the intensity and duration of excessively high temperatures, the availability and quality of water, the intensity of storms, the level of the world’s oceans, and the range and intensity of some diseases. In turn, these natural systems affect human systems by increasing the likelihood of damage to built infrastructure, harming human health, impeding operation of existing energy and water systems, damaging plant life and agriculture, and posing risks to national security. All economic sectors and communities, including the federal government, face new challenges.
It also says that; “Temperatures at the surface of the earth rose by more than 1.5°F between 1880 and 2012”. How are we still alive?
The document blames everything from influenza outbreaks to tainted drugs on global whatever. What the document doesn’t explain is how global whatever is preventing veterans from getting care they need in a timely manner. It doesn’t explain why global warming makes it so hard to fire incompetent VA employees.
The Obama Administration politicized every facet of the executive department and apparently the Washington Post liked it that way. Me? I just want the VA to do what it’s supposed to do and stop doing bad things to veterans.
Luckily, it looks like David Shulkin wants to do that, too, despite the stupid-asses at the Washington Post, who, thankfully, don’t run the VA.
Thanks to Chief Tango for the link.
Category: Media, Veterans' Affairs Department
….”despite the stupid-asses at the Washington Post, who, thankfully, don’t run the VA.”
Bingo!
And thank the Lord! There has never been a day in obozo’s 8 years as wrecker-in-chief where some scandal wasn’t being dealt with by him or his staff. The VA scandal was the 2nd worst one, outed only by Benghazi. Well, maybe tied.
Thesame idiots promoting marijuana smoking, are the same IDIOTS that were against cigarette smoking! smoke in the lungs is smoke in the lungs you freaking MORONS!!
Read up on MMJ Jonn, especially CBD’s. Read especially vets’ first hand experiences with MMJ vs. pharmaceuticals.
“vets’ first hand experiences”
That’s called anecdotal evidence. It’s purely subjective and one step above no evidence at all. Anecdotal evidence is what every sham study touts, because their research doesn’t stand up to acceptable research methods.
Well, if you’re a vet whose tried a rainbow of pharmaceuticals with limited success and from your experience THC and/or CBD does help your PTSD, that’s all the evidence you would need. And in fact anecdotal evidence can factor into a more rigorous study. Often studies are initiated because a wealth anecdotal evidence points us in a specific direction.
“And in fact anecdotal evidence can factor into a more rigorous study.”
Actually it has to or it’s pretty much worthless. The anecdotal evidence needs to include all sides as well. The majority of anecdotal evidence I see is biased to an agenda. It often omits information that doesn’t support the agenda, but is nonetheless relevant. It uses words like amazing, miraculous, phenomenal etc…FFS
Remember the shark cartilage cures cancer shtick? Anecdotal evidence supported it and people spent enormous amounts of money to get cancers treated with cartilage.
Turns out the shark cartilage successes were simply the expected rate for spontaneous remission. Those it didn’t work for simply died and were never divulged in the claims as desperate people flocked to the facilities when they could have been getting bona fide treatments elsewhere with a much higher rate of cure.
Bullshyt! it is just something to occupy your little mind…sucking on anything would do that 😉
Vet’s first hand experiences like Wayward Bill Chengelis the guy who has to smoke pot to forget about his wartime experiences cutting off the ears of Viet Cong as a company clerk in Germany?
The double-blind controlled study, in a statically significant size pool of subjects, is the gold standard for studies.
Unless and until such studies enter the conversation, the “for” data is “anecdote” and “rumor”.
Pot will make lots of folks “feel better”. That is not the same as reduction of mortality and/or morbidity.
I also note that many “medical marijuana” advocates decline to address medical use of THC extract and derivatives, especially non-buzz versions, versus advocating for “lighting up a jay”.
It is quite reasonable and defensable to argue -for- the right to consume substances, under the rights to “Life, Liberty, and Property/(Pursuit-of-happiness)”, as llong as one is not directly doing harm to another. (Note, becoming a pseudo-houseplant, non-self-supporting, is not a -direct- harm to others, unless one is property of another.)
It is -not- reasonable it invent specious or speculative “medical” reasons to enable a broader selection of Buzz. It -is- valid to address the need for a controlled study that doesn’t get the study subjects sent away for years.
But far, far, far too many advocates “for” are making a bog of the effort at decriminalization of minor intoxicants. On the “against” side, this idiotic “drug war” is wrecking what was one a very Free country, and is slowly strangling Lady Liberty “for her own good”.
Personally? I would legalize the lot of it, and absolutely ban -support- of addicts. After one generation, the incorrigible dipshits would die off, and leave a really, really bad example to road-sign “don’t take crap you cant handle”. Prosecute the violent idiots, and irresponsible idiots, who harm others without just cause.
I am convinced the current drug law/war method is an abject failure. I am also convinced the current “advocates” for “medical” include folks that are way-over-medicating, and not helping the effort at all.
Well said
‘I also note that many “medical marijuana” advocates decline to address medical use of THC extract and derivatives, especially non-buzz versions, versus advocating for “lighting up a jay”.’
That’s what CBDs are. THC gives the “buzz”.
Says the guy whose only time in a uniform was a school janitor coverall.
Kinda putting down school janitors… more like a rental security guard, like Da-Da.
Go watch a few videos of Charlotte Figi.
I’m going to go roll a fatty now!
It works as well as echinacea, but echinacea doesn’t give you a buzz.
Does it work as well as Jack Daniels?
Actually alcohol is an example of medicinal chicanery with a long history as well. Aside from an antidote for for methanol poisoning and certain minor effects that are arguably not worth the potential risks like MJ it’s just more recreational than anything.
Alcohol, MJ, echinacea et al are all very effective if you really don’t have anything seriously wrong with you to begin with, but possess a brain driven to a large extent by the physiological reward system.
Besides the fact that I was being a smart-adz, as I recall alcohol was used to numb the pain of pre-anesthesia-era surgery, and/or sterilize an open wound.
Not current protocol, to be sure.
And certainly not up to the efficiency of modern medical tools in any case.
I think weed is better than JD, at least you can pretty much still function and it won’t demolish your liver, won’t leave you with a hang over and your not prone to superman syndrome either
BUT like anything else it must be used in moderation. Too much and you will just sleep the day away
probably so…but no one is lobbying to get JD labeled as medicinal and to be prescribed as such.
For those of you talking livers…I would suggest you read some of the newer studies on MJ and the Brain. It’ll just wad your panties, so maybe not.
Right now btw…the number one reason for referral to rehab in Europe is MJ related syndromes.
Shoot – I knew in the ’60’s that Maryjane was not a girl I wanted to play with.
Step one: Get medicinal MJ for a “medical Problem”
Step two: Develop MJ induced “Hypomotivational syndrome (HS)”
Step three: Obtain permanent disability at 100% based on your inability to work due to the medical problem and prescribed treatment which gave you HS.
America: Fuck Yeah!
I choose cannabis over the poison the VA pushed on me for years. I’ve received more help from hippies and yoga than I have from the VA in the last decade. Keep killing your liver at the VFW, you will find me in the outdoors smoking a fatty with a smile on my face.
*facepalm*
Yep, that’s the primary concern of veterans, all right. /s
I don’t know what the Waa-Po hacks have in their pipes, but it sure ain’t tobacco.
“The climate is changing at a pace never before experienced in recorded human history, affecting natural and human systems alike. Climate change is affecting how and when precipitation falls, the intensity and duration of excessively high temperatures….” Blah, blah, blah.
That entire paragraph refers to WEATHER. If the climate were to actually change, it does, as REAL research has shown, taking full generational timeframes to occur, AND the changes are something over which we puny humans have absolutely NO CONTROL. PERIOD.
Climate change is a naturally occurring cycle. It’s been going on for a couple billion years now, long before we humans existed.
I’m seeing complaints online about the greening of Africa, for Pete’s sake.
Complaints because the desert is growing grass again?
If that is not the best example of pure insanity, then what is it?
I will say this much: Joey exhales CO2 (CARBON!!!! DIOXIDE) every time he breathes and/or speaks, so he should learn to do his part for the climate and get his mouth sewn shut.
I detest pot for a good reason. A very good reason.
Apparently “history” is just the 20th century, for climate purposes.
Thus no one experienced anything “worse”. You know, like the little ice age knocking out global agriculture, creating continental famines. The Black Death followed, exterminating up to half the total population weakened by hunger.
Or, somewhat more recently, the river Thames freezing solid so reliably that winter festivals were held on it. Hmm.
Or further back, the Ocean was somewhat higher, like tens of feet, which permitted a relative handful of Greeks to hold off the entire Persian army at Thermopylae. Impossible today, as the lower ocean results in a much wider area to cover, impossible for the forces then present. The era was something of a golden age, with booming population, yet the oceans were tens of feet higher, and the climate -much- hotter than today.
In other words, the climate alarmists are as full of crap as geese in a grain field.
Eurax? Does that stuff work on ticks, too?
It’s tick season now. I don’t dare go into the woodlands without bug spray, which is not the best thing to use constantly.
Oops! Wrong spot!
I was looking for one heck of a typo……
The medical marijuana issue is a catch-22. Because the Feds outlaw medical marijuana, there are very few studies. People then say “there are very few studies that support the use of medical marijuana.” Chicken, meet egg.
There is a study of studies (what else?) that shows mixed results but in some cases, marijuana seems to have benefits.
https://www.nap.edu/catalog/24625/the-health-effects-of-cannabis-and-cannabinoids-the-current-state
The National Institute on Drug Abuse has a summary that is rather interesting and cites evidence of benefits.
https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana-medicine.
Last November the state of Florida passed a medical marijuana amendment. The constraints put on the drug and its distribution and selling for medical use are mind boggling. This is not just a thing of “go to a store, roll a doobie and light up walking down the street.” There is much more to it than that.
Finally, since medical studies take a long time, it is difficult to say with any scientific certainty of the long term medical benefits or ill effects of medical marijuana. We have inklings of some benefits, but studies are still ongoing. However, in states that have legalized medical marijuana, there aren’t the dire effects that people who were against legalization said would come true. Drug abuse is not up, it is down. Opiod use and abuse is down. DUI’s remain consistent or down.
I voted against the medical marijuana issue in Florida last November. I have never smoked or used marijuana in any form so I don’t have a dog in this fight. Yet doing more research and listening to the proposed controls for distribution and allowing more research would probably have swayed my vote for allowing it.
You are 180 out on drug abuse being down. Overdoses are higher than than they have been in decades.
Users are moving on to stronger stuff like Fentanyl and dying in even higher numbers.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-26/new-haven-declares-public-health-emergency-after-never-seen-heroin-overdose-epidemic
http://wtop.com/local/2017/01/hooked-on-heroin-designer-opioids-infiltrate-drug-trade/
Let me clarify – drug abuse of legal drugs such as opiods is down.
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/healthcare/286965-legalize-marijuana-and-reduce-deaths-from-drug-abuse
Tell that to the first responders and medical professionals around my area.
We have 5 overdose deaths for every traffic fatality here.
And natiinally, the CDC disagrees with you:
https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/data/statedeaths.html
The CDC link you quote makes no statement on deaths in medical marijuana states.
I am not denying that opiods are a problem. The question is whether states with medical marijuana show an increase, decrease or same deaths.
The government says there is a decrease.
https://www.drugabuse.gov/news-events/nida-notes/2016/05/study-links-medical-marijuana-dispensaries-to-reduced-mortality-opioid-overdose
Logically this makes sense. If you can manage pain with medical marijuana instead of physically addictive opiods, there are 1) fewer addictions, 2) less opiods on the streets and 3) less cost to patients and as studies have shown, less cost to Medicare.
If I were ill and had the choice between opiods and medical marijuana, I would choose marijuana every day and twice on Sunday because of the higher risks with opiods.
My state has MMJ, and also one of the highest opioid overdose/death rates.
One reason is the availability and cost of opioids versus pot.
Which still doesn’t address the point that deaths and opiod use is down in states with medical marijuana.
I got you, it is down where Marijuana has been legalized at the State level. I don’t know if that is true or not but it could be.
Breaking in Orlando:
ORLANDO — A 45-year-old man described as “disgruntled” entered his former workplace in an Orlando industrial park with a handgun and a hunting knife, fatally shooting five people Monday before turning a gun on himself, authorities said.
The deadly incident happened about 8:03 a.m. at Fiamma, Inc., a small RV accessories business at 2427 Forsyth Road, not far from University Boulevard. The shooter was identified as John Robert Neumann, Jr., an Army veteran who was discharged from service in 1999 and who lived alone, authorities reported.
http://www.floridatoday.com/story/news/2017/06/05/numerous-dead-orlando-shooting/369955001/
so the guy was discharged half his life ago. Another dipshit thinking he can make his firing better by shooting his ex-boss.
Per the Post: “Reactionary know-nothing” is someone who doesn’t worship at the climate change altar. “Voice of Reason” is someone who suck’s Al Gore off daily.
I know quite a few vets, and y’know, I don’t think any of them have discussed global warming in my hearing past “godDAMN it is hot out today.” But I live in Houston.
Isn’t it strange how, for some, the answer to every political, economic, and scientific question is “Worldwide Socialism”.
And another pure coincidence is that when the former advocates of Worldwide Socialism watched their patron State, the USSR, crash and burn in a spectacular economic implosion, suddenly there sprung forth a myriad of “Of course, we are not communists” who seemed to always answer every question with “Worldwide Socialism”.
And there there are the pure frauds, snake-oil hucksters who want to sell “indulgences” to the marks. Of course, they call them “carbon credits”, but it is just another scheme to separate folks from their money. They cant seem to explain how to keep volcanos from vomiting carbon dioxide volumes exceeding the entire output human civilization, ever.
I guess volcanos have no money, so they can be ignored. Just as Marxist carbon emitters can be ignored…..
“If anyone can prove that there is a medical reason, beyond a placebo effect, for the use of marijuana as a treatment for anything, I’d be all for it – that doesn’t seem to be the case, though.”
Pain Relief. It is worlds better than the currently prescribed drugs which tend to be highly addictive, build tolerance and cause severe withdraw. Many of them need to be gotten rid of like hydrocodone and all of it’s off shoots. Just about all prescribed pain relief meds these days are bad some are very bad. Hundreds of people die every day from either accidental or on purpose over dose from the pills. No one has ever died from a Marijuana overdose.
A lot of drug addicts start with pills and then move on to the strong stuff like heroin when the pills are not enough. Marijuana is not addictive and you don’t build up a tolerance for it, although it is habit forming. In a pill form it might not even be habit forming.
http://www.webmd.com/pain-management/news/20100830/marijuana-relieves-chronic-pain-research-show
https://www.qualityhealth.com/pain-articles/marijuana-pain-relief
I don’t use weed and I don’t have any pain issues, but I do sympathize with those who do.
Giving pain sufferers opiate based pain pills is about the worst thing that doctors do their patients these days. We have practically gone full circle back to the 1880-1920s when we had millions of opium and laudanum addicts due to all the over the counter meds with those substances in them. But the “wonder drug” dealer are MD’s not carny hucksters, so it is “all good”.
A lot wounded vets are amputees. Phantom pain is one of those things that is not well understood and not easily treated. Marijuana does block nerve receptors and some amputee users report relief with it. I say give it a trial run and see where it goes. What is the worst that could happen? No one will die we know that for certain. If it improves quality of life and keeps people away from drugs that are dangerous and highly addictive how can this be bad?
“you don’t build up a tolerance for it”… pull the other one. Anyone who has known or been a stoner is rolling on the floor laughing about now.
You don’t, at least not the way you are thinking.
Drug users are always doing the same thing: They are chasing their first high. If they use a lot and then they are already high and smoking more won’t get them much higher but it may get them a little more. They are just so messed up they don’t realize they are already high.
“I don’t have any pain issues, but I do sympathize with those who do.”
Everybody does.
That doesn’t mean you throw out evidence based medicine.
As soon as you change medicine into a give them what they want instead of give them what they need endeavor the first thing that suffers is patient outcomes.
Guess you missed those links?
You have thrown out the evidence and refuse to see it because you are in an “Us vs. Them” mindset.
Your argument for not doing harmless medical studies is because someone you don’t like wants to do them? Therefore you think it will cause harm, without any reasoning or basis whatsoever? That is very logical, not.
Talk about screwing over vets. You are so blinded by your politics you would rather people suffer than finding out you be wrong.
Truth be told, I trust IDC SARC’s medical knowledge over The Old Maj’s.
Something about education and experience…
not what I meant at all but evidently your oppositional defiance is in overdrive.
Your links are news stories. They aren’t research. If the data that is used to derive the results is not shown then there’s a reason for it. One of those “papers’ uses more news stories in its works cited. In short there is no real evidence of evidence.
I’m all for trying new things. All I said was don’t overhype it and call it something that it isn’t. Carry On.
Want to take charge, I suggest you start with a course in biostatistics so you can actually read a study with some level of confidence.
Old Maj,
Living in a state that has legalized pot, and working in the medical field, I can tell you the old line of ” nobody has died from MMJ” is now patently false.. the assumption was originally that it was not possible to smoke enough to kill you, which is most likely true. The problem(s) are that it doesn’t account for stupid shit you do when stoned, like driving, etc, and an even bigger problem now is the edibles. in these, the doses can be so massively high (one example is a cookie that is supposed to be 8 doses.. ever seen a stoner eat just 1/8 of a cookie?) that it can kill people (especially kids that get into them) and has caused a number of people to freak out and do things like jump off 10th floor balconies (in Denver last year).
Not saying that more studies shouldn’t be done, the non-buzz varieties like “Charlottes Web” etc seem to have some great potential for children with uncontrolled seizures, but being truthful about all the good, and bad is important
“…but being truthful about all the good, and bad is important”
Exactly….anything else is an insult to our post enlightenment world.
If it works we can prove it works, the results will be reproducible and its safety can be measured.
FFS…you don’t even have to know HOW something works to know it does work and it’s safe.
I’d say time after time we have proved how bad opiods are and we still use them despite all the dying. We need other alternatives.
No argument to that
People die from misadventure on drugs all the time. I am only saying that you can’t overdose from Cannabis alone.
I don’t agree with the recreational use of any drugs, including alcohol (which is also more dangerous than weed). People behave stupidly when intoxicated.
“People behave stupidly when intoxicated.”
Serendipitously, some of them helped discover modern anesthetics. 🙂
“Crawford W. Long practiced medicine in Jefferson, Georgia, a small rural community. While a medical student at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, he was aware of the exhilarating properties of both nitrous oxide and ether. After he began medical practice in Georgia, he used ether recreationally,both alone and socially.
He was aware that injuries sustained by him and his friends while under the influence of ether did not cause pain. ”
http://www.aana.com/newsandjournal/20102019/discovery-modern-anesthesia-1215-p410-415.pdf
Again Old Maj, that is an outdated and incorrect statement “I am only saying that you can’t overdose from Cannabis alone.” As i pointed out, it only applies to smoked mmj.. when you start dealing with concentrates / edibles, that is NOT accurate, people can and do die from overdosing on them.
I’d have to see several such cases to believe it. It is possible that if someone were allergic might go in to shock and die from it. This would be extremely rare.
Marijuana in conjunction with other things can kill you too but 100X a dose found in a cigarette does not.
Synthetic Marijuana (Spice) can kill you too. Most of it is made in China with low quality controls often with other dangerous intoxicants blended in.
Yes we have group sessions at my local VA to discuss climate change every 3rd Thursday and think tanks on what to do about it, we usually get a 0% turn out for these in depth discussions…..oh! BTW that’s sarcasm
Outlaw smoking unless it’s weed, then let’s legalize it even though it’s even worse for you!
– Libtard logic 101
My theory is that this is an intentional thing being pushed, so people can use the settlement that will surely happen in a few decades as a retirement package for their poor choices.
I believe that the campaign against tobacco was not so much the product, but the fact that they could go after a large corporation. With pot, one couldn’t go after any large company and the cartel would just kill you. I wonder why the anti- tobacco folks aren’t up in arms in the states where pot has been legalized. This is why I think it had to do more with bringing down big tobacco than looking out for your health.
Actually FC, i think it’s more the fact that a society of stupid stoners is much easier to govern / rule over (think sheep)
Shulkin replied: “Look, I am focused on the health of our veterans. And clearly, there — there’s — there’s a relationship between health and the environment. What I’m not focused on is the bigger political issues about United States policy on — on other types of reform. I’m focused on the health of veterans.”
Well said. Too bad the ahole reporter has to stay on message given by his editors.
“a reporter asked whether “in the spirit of the candid assessment” [David] Shulkin considers climate change a threat to his department’s mission.
So, not being able to get a timely appointment at the VA is because climate change is threatening it’s mission? Really. First the VA should have no opinion on climate change and the words should not appear in any VA document. It is for other departments to ponder the senselessness of, not the VA. Second, the fact that it is being considered at all means there is VA money in a VA ‘climate change bucket” that should be going to the department’s mission, which is treating veterans. Makes as much sense as having the FAA or FCC have an opinion or be involved in how well my water softener is working.
Unless, I read the article incorrectly and it was a reporter adding their narrative to the story and not Shulkin’s opinion.
Being against medical marijuana is ridiculous. And there are versions that have most of the medicinal effects without the high.
It is as though this blog want to be on the wrong side of every issue.
And the ultimate hypocrisy is that most of you whining about other people using marijuana have no issues with alcohol and likely consume it yourselves.
And don’t give me the “illegal drug” tautology. There is far more cause to criminalize alcoholbthan marijuana and this whole debate is about whether marijuana should be legal for medicinal purposes.
All the while you have no issue with the prescription narcotics being shoveled at vets at a massive annual cost.
More deaths and more side effects and addiction is being generated by the toxic soup of prescriptions vets are being given.
Hell, my dresser has more prescription drugs than socks in it at this point.
I’m not against it.
Fuck, you want it, fire it up! All you’re doing is guaranteeing my job security and ever-increasing salary when you can’t stay sober or not have to do the daily, “wake and bake.”
Drug test for my job? Sure thing, boss! Now, about that raise… (and yes, it pretty much goes like that.)
I’ve got no issue at all against true medical mmj. My issue is lies and hypocrisy.. when the “medical” version was first legalized here, the vast majority of those getting their “red card” were males in their 20’s with “back pain” most of them getting their Dr. certification from docs they found advertising in the back of mmj magazines, who basically sold the certs for $50… for the people that actually need it, especially the non-buzz strains, if it works, go for it.
The other part is the inaccuracies / lies about RECREATIONAL mmj being totally harmless …
OH, I get it. The Piuperdink wants medical marijuana, not because he has cancer and the chemo kills his birdlike appetite, or severe and painful rheumatoid arthritis or any of those other reasons.
No, he wants it to be legal because then he can get some VA doc to certify that he should be allowed to have it because then he can legally blaze up a doobie anywhere he wants to, and the rest of us can just go to hell.
The problem with public smoking of that crap is that the intoxicant in Mary Jane’s smoky flatus, when blown into the air after holding it in to get higher faster, goes to other people in the vicinity of the smoker and they get hit by the intoxicant, too, whether they want it or not.
I can think of nothing more rude or obnoxious than realizing that some asshole sitting nearby, who wants to get high even if you don’t, has done something like that, regardless of the effect it has on other people.
Since I worked for people like that, I know what it’s like to be on the receiving end of this unmitigated crap. It is NOT harmless. NO DRUGS ARE HARMLESS. NONE OF THEM. But this one, inflicted on other people whether they want it or not, is worse because now, in some states, it’s legal.
If you want it, Piuperdink, I hope it rots your damned lungs. ALL CARBONIZED MATERIALS DO THAT. ALL OF THEM, INCLUDING WOODSMOKE.
And last but not least, since it makes people chow down on the worst crap possible, I HOPE YOU GET FAT AND NOBODY LOOKS AT YOU, PIUPERDINK, YOU ASSHOLIO.
They don’t anyway, but it’s the thought that counts.
He wants the state to do everything for him… it’s how he rolls.
That happens anyway. Easy way to cut back on it is to make public consumption illegal just as alcohol is in many places. You light up in the Walmart parking lot you still go to jail.
Most places public intoxication is illegal too. There is no standard normally for what constitutes public intoxication. Merely being an ahole and being intoxicated at any level is enough.
Zampolit, did you actually -read- the above posts? Your post above suggests “nope”.
And once again, you started off with an ass-pull of a “lets fight!” statement. For a Civil Affairs person, you seem singularly incapable of engaging in discussion or persuasion. You tend to default to “Hulk Smash!”, but without the vocabulary, charm, or the muscle.
Can’t you at least -try- to participate in a civil discusssion?
“It is as though this blog want to be on the wrong side of every issue.”
Not nearly as statistically probable that you yourself are likely in error at least some of the time.
In this case it doesn’t appear that you have read the OP very thoroughly or the majority of the comments.
Also, I suggest you send your personal findings, relevent metastudies etc. to the NEJM, Nature, Neuron, NASEM, NIH and the AMA to name a few to clear up their misconceptions. Yanno…since it’s really so obvious.
SARC, you are of course correct that treatment efficacy must be properly established and documented through controlled studies. However, in my two decades of calling on military providers with dermatological products, I constantly mined “Pearls,” those off the book usages that proved effective, and shared them with everyone from military derms to GMO’s to PA’s and NP’s as well as medics and independent duty corpsmen such as yourself.
An example: an Army PA discovered quite by happenstance that my scabies cream, EURAX, which was an effective topical antipruritic, prevented the development of secondary pustules in fire ant bites as well as very quickly eliminating the itching. No pustules? No itch? Guess what? No secondary infections. Then when Eurax began to be used more widely, primarily by infantry units, we found that when applied prophylactically, it kept the little bastards off. No more swarming up the legs of an unsuspecting soldier or marine.
My sales went through the roof.
As a result of that single pearl, yours truly, sold more Eurax to military accounts than the entire rest of my company sold to the whole US civilian market. And the beauty of it was that it worked, it helped our soldiers with a very real problem, and that success was one of the reasons I later headed up the military sales department.
So my point is, anecdotal reports can sometimes prove very helpful.
Eurax? Does that stuff work on ticks, too?
It’s tick season now. I don’t dare go into the woodlands without bug spray, which is not the best thing to use constantly.
Sadly, Ex, the damned company sold the product to another company which kept the active ingredient, Crotamiton, but changed the base. I tried some of it a few years back and it was worthless as an antipruritic and as a preventer of pustules.
It had to be an interaction between the active ingredient, crotamiton, and the base ingredients that gave the product it’s incredibly effective against fire ants.
Was the base itself ever tested for the effectiveness as the ant-repellant and or itch treatment?
Is that base published in the product labeling?
A parallel is the use of “skin so soft” as bug repellant. (Not a good one, but it appears to be better than nothing)
I phrased item two badly.
Is the base in the “effective” product something you can discuss here, because it is a published item, not covered by non-disclosure, etc?
“So my point is, anecdotal reports can sometimes prove very helpful.”
All I’m saying is it cannot be used in the decision making process. It can be used in formulating ideas. Dunno if it just the unfamiliarity with the research process and discerning evidence based decisions and the process of quantitative/qualitative statistics that is preventing me from being understood here.
Ideas can be sparked from anecdotal evidence, treatments must be derived from more objective information. There are so many ways that anecdotal reporting can be incorrect it needs to be quantified/qualified as much as possible before subjecting humans to reckless experimentation.
You all remember the good idea fairy, right…she operates largely anecdotally
So, you are saying that it is anecdotal information which often triggers further study to determine just what, if any, relationship might exist? And if some evidence of a direct relationship is found, further study is warranted?
Dang, SARC, that sounds suspiciously like scientific method and logical progression, open mindedness, and all that other silly stuff.
why yes, yes it does. 🙂
I have the “PTSD”.
Give me dope.
I am too cheap to even buy it from the dealer down the street. Give it to me, VA!
But wait! I cannot take all of my pills if the VA approves it! The “PTSD” does not require narcotics?
I am screwed.
This is a very slippery slope.
No issue with dope. But it is about to get abused.
If by “about” you mean “abused for thousands of years” then, yes. All intoxicants are abused. It is a very mammalian in nature. Even the beasts of the field abuse intoxicants if they can find them.
While it may not be, nor should it be, the most pressing issue among Veterans, marijuana is something that many do want becaue it does help with both mental and physical pain. I can personally attest to that. Hell, one of my VA doctors even told me, at one point, that they couldn’t officially recommend it but, unofficially, recommended it for my myriad pain problems. It’s not a cure-all, to be sure, but it’s legal in one form or another in over half of the states in the US.