Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Federal chokehold on marijuana stymies studies on epilepsy, autism

spectrumnews.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 179 posts

Re: Federal chokehold on marijuana stymies studies on epilepsy, autism

#141

Post by refurb »

Thriptic wrote: post #16
stephengillie wrote: post #2

> Federal law vs. state law: While the DEA was insisting on thoroughly vetting everyone who came into contact with the tiny amount of marijuana product used in our study, the reality was that less than a mile from the hospital, anyone could walk into a boutique shop or dispensary and buy it. Why does a drug have to be legalized to be studied? If it can be purchased down the road, why are you involving the DEA at all?…

Marijuana is defined as a schedule one drug by the DEA, meaning they believe it has no accepted medical value and should not be studied. Being in possession of or trying to purchase this drug for a medical study would therefore be illegal. Publishing the results would be admitting you performed a federal crime and you would be arrested. Additionally, human studies require approval by an on site or third party institu…

That's not true at all. There are plenty of studies conducted on schedule 1 drugs. Yes, you need to get permission from the DEA to possess and use the drug, but it happens.

There are over 170 active clinical trials in the US for THC.[1]

[1]https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=&term=thc&cntry=...

Re: Federal chokehold on marijuana stymies studies on epilepsy, autism

#142

Post by cheeko1234 »

pitaj wrote: post #48
honkycat wrote: post #35

Everyone confused about the fucked up laws around drug control and the like in the united states: It is about locking up poor people in order to keep them from voting. It is about filling our prisons with non-violent offenders so we can force them to work for slave wages, and line the owners of the prisons and the politicians they fund's pockets. It's about political suppression, not about some moralistic crusade to…

> It is about locking up poor people in order to keep them from voting. Poor people already don't vote in high numbers. > It is about filling our prisons with non-violent offenders so we can force them to work for slave wages, and line the owners of the prisons and the politicians they fund's pockets. That's part of it, but private prisons hold a small minority of the prison population. > It's about political suppres…

The most recent Jon Oliver[0] was on this topic. Disenfranchising people was one of the main reasons for the prohibition:

[0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpPyLcQ2vdI

Re: Federal chokehold on marijuana stymies studies on epilepsy, autism

#143

Post by Thriptic »

refurb wrote: post #141
Thriptic wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Marijuana is defined as a schedule one drug by the DEA, meaning they believe it has no accepted medical value and should not be studied. Being in possession of or trying to purchase this drug for a medical study would therefore be illegal. Publishing the results would be admitting you performed a federal crime and you would be arrested. Additionally, human studies require approval by an on site or third party institu…

That's not true at all. There are plenty of studies conducted on schedule 1 drugs. Yes, you need to get permission from the DEA to possess and use the drug, but it happens. There are over 170 active clinical trials in the US for THC.[1] [1] https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=&term=thc&cntry=...

Fair enough, my understanding was there was nearly a categorical ban on research w/ schedule 1 drugs. I am pleased to see this is not the case. Thank you for the correction.

Re: Federal chokehold on marijuana stymies studies on epilepsy, autism

#144

Post by TaylorAlexander »

Ntrails wrote: post #91
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of people really believe that marijuana is some horrible substance that will ruin you. My dad was one of those people and I believed him until I tried it in my 20’s and saw that it’s a vice akin to drinking at its worst, and often very positive. I think some people had hidden racist or imperialist intentions and so found what they could hate about blacks and hippies and spread the lies. (Edit: obviously overt r…

> My dad was one of those people and I believed him until I tried it in my 20’s and saw that it’s a vice akin to drinking at its worst, and often very positive. Not the whole truth, as there are known rare side effects that are significantly detrimental. In my experience it also seems harder/rarer to be a high functioning regular user. But yeah. If I do accept that position though - I'm not sold the argument is in fa…

I’m sure the same would be said of alcohol. For either - what good has prohibition ever done for us?

Re: Federal chokehold on marijuana stymies studies on epilepsy, autism

#145

Post by eftychis »

gnulinux wrote: post #70
nopacience wrote: post #27

> In March, Insys launched a multinational study of 190 children to evaluate cannabidiol as a first-line therapy for infantile spasms. We are eager to see how well the compound performs when given in the first days and weeks of the condition. If it turns out to be effective, cannabidiol would represent a substantial improvement over current drugs, all of which have serious side effects: One, for example, causes irrev…

What drives me crazy is, if you go to a psychiatrist today and lie about having hard time sleeping, they can immediately prescribe you Ambien which not only causes dementia and other neurological problems in long term use, but systematically makes people do absolutely batshit crazy things they'll never remember the next morning. In the US, drug regulations are absolutely ridiculous and have no scientific basis, it is…

So far I did not have that issue, but I am getting a bit concerned. If that is correct, going to a doctor, despite paying a hefty price, I have to double and sanity check my doctor's prescriptions. I don't want to end up accidentally dealing with terrible side-effects for little gain...

And I can not say I can trust my pharmacist to raise a flag on a dangerous prescription or interference between medication, as I would back home. Perhaps this is a subjective feeling.

P.S. On second thought: I am concerned about a friend who is getting over prescribed addictive medication for chronic back pain (see Vicodin/ Hydrocodone w. paracetamol). I have discussed this with a few family doctors overseas who all agree it is a terrible idea. Yet it is kind of standard in the U.S. Anyone with medical training in the U.S. has experience, thoughts or care to pitch in?

Re: Federal chokehold on marijuana stymies studies on epilepsy, autism

#146

Post by jmcmichael »

dang wrote: post #120
[deleted] wrote: post #86

[deleted]

Please don't respond to a bad comment by breaking the site guidelines yourself. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Sorry, you're right. I'd delete but it looks like HN won't allow me to do so now.

Re: Federal chokehold on marijuana stymies studies on epilepsy, autism

#147

Post by gnulinux »

eftychis wrote: post #145
gnulinux wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What drives me crazy is, if you go to a psychiatrist today and lie about having hard time sleeping, they can immediately prescribe you Ambien which not only causes dementia and other neurological problems in long term use, but systematically makes people do absolutely batshit crazy things they'll never remember the next morning. In the US, drug regulations are absolutely ridiculous and have no scientific basis, it is…

So far I did not have that issue, but I am getting a bit concerned. If that is correct, going to a doctor, despite paying a hefty price, I have to double and sanity check my doctor's prescriptions. I don't want to end up accidentally dealing with terrible side-effects for little gain... And I can not say I can trust my pharmacist to raise a flag on a dangerous prescription or interference between medication, as I wou…

It is true. We had endless conversations about Ambien in Hackersnews, one example here 50 days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17591515

I was prescribed Ambien by going to a doctor for insomnia. No tests, no nothing. Sure I legit had insomnia, a pretty bad one at that, but they just asked me my problem I told them I can't sleep, next thing I know I'm prescribed Ambien. This the university hospital one of the best universities in US, not some random rural hospital.

You should never ever use any drug without doing your own research about it. Doesn't matter if #1 MD in the Western World prescribed it. Drug industry is nothing but a game to make 1% of 1% richer.

Re: Federal chokehold on marijuana stymies studies on epilepsy, autism

#148

Post by schreiaj »

eftychis wrote: post #145
gnulinux wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What drives me crazy is, if you go to a psychiatrist today and lie about having hard time sleeping, they can immediately prescribe you Ambien which not only causes dementia and other neurological problems in long term use, but systematically makes people do absolutely batshit crazy things they'll never remember the next morning. In the US, drug regulations are absolutely ridiculous and have no scientific basis, it is…

So far I did not have that issue, but I am getting a bit concerned. If that is correct, going to a doctor, despite paying a hefty price, I have to double and sanity check my doctor's prescriptions. I don't want to end up accidentally dealing with terrible side-effects for little gain... And I can not say I can trust my pharmacist to raise a flag on a dangerous prescription or interference between medication, as I wou…

My other half has a chronic psychiatric condition, after struggling for 2 years we'd found a combo that worked. Prior to that though, we'd had to check drug/drug interactions ourselves because a previous doctor simply didn't, nor did the pharmacist...

Been using Epocrates (the free parts) to check interactions and side effects. Beats digging through the FDA website for it.

One suggestion, NEVER look up common drugs like Advil.

Re: Federal chokehold on marijuana stymies studies on epilepsy, autism

#149

Post by hmschreck »

heurist wrote: post #62
e40 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This shows the derangement of the people in charge. Why is this? Why this derangement on the subject of cannabis? I've read a fair amount, and every time I've brought it up, I get downvoted to hell. So, I'll ask: Anyone have a hypothesis on why a large number of our leaders, who happen to be older white men, are insanely against this plant?

In addition to blatant racism, I suspect much of it is due to the potential for cultural and spiritual revolution should marijuana (or psychedelics in general) become legal. We can look to the 60's for an example of what can happen when mind-altering substances become widely used recreationally. There were a lot of other factors at play then, but the growth of counterculture and subsequent pushback was the origin of…

Michael Pollan's "How To Change Your Mind" delves into this in some depth.

As someone who has found some actual relief from previously crippling anxiety using cannabidiol, I'm really hoping to see progress on this front. It's all upwards from here for me.

Re: Federal chokehold on marijuana stymies studies on epilepsy, autism

#150

Post by FireBeyond »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #31
stephengillie wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't piracy also a federal crime, thus the FBI warning on all non-pirated DVDs?

Crimes have different sorts of consequences. A drug felony will usually haunt folks for life. A doctor or pharmacist will likely lose their license - even if they don't, most places won't employ them. Slews of places won't employ them after that drug charge. Some places withhold benefits and some will turn them down for housing. Yes, some of this happens with other crimes as well, but there are special restrictions f…

> A doctor or pharmacist will likely lose their license - even if they don't, most places won't employ them.

Yep, in my state, a simple Dept of Health Provider Credential Search (whether by public or prospective employer) will give you Enforcement Action: YES in nice big bold red type as soon as any such thing happens.

Post reply on HN