Page 6 of 6 First ... 3456
Results 126 to 150 of 150

Consuming Cannabis ...

40 people have voted on this poll. You may not vote on this poll

... is a health issue (discuss)
20 50.00%
... is a criminal act (discuss)
3 7.50%
... is like smoking and should be discouraged (discuss)
5 12.50%
... could be done another way (discuss)
12 30.00%
  1. Post
    bradc wrote:
    There's definite proven consequences by sciencey guys, hence the "obvious". I just didn't bother substantiating myself.
    There have been exceedingly few longitudinal studies done on the effects of cannabis use which have adequately ruled out reverse causation. For example, most studies done to date suggest heavy cannabis users have a higher rate of depression - is that because heavy cannabis use causes depression, or that those suffering depression are more likely to become heavy cannabis users?

    Again, unless the government changes come the election it is almost certainly going to have a luxury tax applied. It's just a personal viewpoint. I'd rather a punitive sugar tax than a cannabis tax with the massive difference in the amount of supporting evidence.

  2. Post
    For the first time ever

    The World Health Organisation has recommend that countries change cannibas from a schedule 4 drug to a schedule 1 drug - you’d still need GP prescription but it would much easier to get

    The second recommendation is that Canibidoil be removed from all schedules all together - in other words you’d be able to buy it from your supermarket right next to paracetamol

    https://www.newsweek.com/who-recomme...=Partnerships&

  3. Post
    Celticknife wrote:
    There have been exceedingly few longitudinal studies done on the effects of cannabis use which have adequately ruled out reverse causation. For example, most studies done to date suggest heavy cannabis users have a higher rate of depression - is that because heavy cannabis use causes depression, or that those suffering depression are more likely to become heavy cannabis users?
    Some claims in the past have been wrong, and sure, some of the studies are non conclusive regarding casualty.
    But there's enough studies to tell you there's an increased likelihood of a various range of physiological and psychological issues over and above a non user. That it's lower than alcohol is true but irrelevant, society still has to wear the increased cost of dealing with these issues. Making that a user pays initiative seems fairest to me.

  4. Smile
    I think cannabis is a health issue, would be good to have it as a tool that doctors can prescribe.

    Tbh though, NZ's health system is a bit screwed atm anyway, Some people like myself need help which we just don't get.

  5. Post
    Magic Robertson wrote:
    I think cannabis is a health issue, would be good to have it as a tool that doctors can prescribe.

    Tbh though, NZ's health system is a bit screwed atm anyway, Some people like myself need help which we just don't get.
    It is very ironic how NZ used to be a world leader in these kinds of liberal ideals and yet by today's standards we are a ultra conservative nation - more so than the highly religious USA!

    The WHO says cannabidiol is perfectly safe and should be sold in supermarkets/dairies and be unregulated etc - NZ goverment says you need to be on your cancer death bed before we'll give you a script for it and it's hundreds of dollars for 1 month supply

  6. Smile
    I think I'm a bit conservative too.

    When the vote comes up I'll be voting in favor of it, But i hope that it's done right and not rushed.
    I'd like the whole thing to be well thought out and not just have shelves of ounces or something nuts like that.

  7. Post
    bradc wrote:
    Some claims in the past have been wrong, and sure, some of the studies are non conclusive regarding casualty.
    But there's enough studies to tell you there's an increased likelihood of a various range of physiological and psychological issues over and above a non user. That it's lower than alcohol is true but irrelevant, society still has to wear the increased cost of dealing with these issues. Making that a user pays initiative seems fairest to me.
    Forgive me as I'm jumping in here. But wouldn't those health costs be more than offset by the reduction in policing costs, incarceration costs and gang funding?

  8. Post
    Magic Robertson wrote:
    I think I'm a bit conservative too.

    When the vote comes up I'll be voting in favor of it, But i hope that it's done right and not rushed.
    I'd like the whole thing to be well thought out and not just have shelves of ounces or something nuts like that.
    IIRC in California it has to be packaged in 8ths of an ounce and tested for potency, pesticide, herbicide etc.

    Given the somewhat chaotic quality of weed I purchased as a young fella - the stuff so overfertilised it could function as gunpowder, the stuff sprinkled with "mystery substance X" that gave you a bad night etc, and the fact that I was a 15 year old buying this from gang houses, I can't wait for regulation.

  9. Post
    bradc wrote:
    Some claims in the past have been wrong, and sure, some of the studies are non conclusive regarding casualty.
    But there's enough studies to tell you there's an increased likelihood of a various range of physiological and psychological issues over and above a non user. That it's lower than alcohol is true but irrelevant, society still has to wear the increased cost of dealing with these issues. Making that a user pays initiative seems fairest to me.
    Are there? I'm aware of studies that show that it is very bad in developing teenaged brains, and that people with a predisposition towards schizophrenia should totally avoid it, but I've missed studies that show a causative relation between usage and psychological issues in people outside of these groups.

  10. Post
    Those are what I'm mainly referring to in regards to psychological problems. Then there's the physiological.

    Thinking about it more, it's pretty clear there's a percentage of the population self medicating mental health issues via alcohol and drugs, so at the very least we can tax consumption and put it into improved mental health services.

  11. Post
    Celticknife wrote:
    'Obviously' is not sufficient grounds to apply a penal tax to a particular class of goods.
    It's good enough for me. Consensus is enough of a reason to apply x amount of tax to y particular substance.

  12. Post
    Quasi ELVIS wrote:
    It's good enough for me. Consensus is enough of a reason to apply x amount of tax to y particular substance.
    Which products would a cannabis tax apply to?

    I wouldn't want a tax being applied to cannabis products with small amounts of THC (e.g. CBD oil) and no psychoactive effect.

  13. Post
    Just the recreational stuff.

  14. Post
    I can imagine how it might become difficult to distinguish recreational and medicinal products.

    To a certain extent the only distinguishing features are intent of use and packaging.

  15. Post
    You could draw a line with CBTHC ratios.

  16. Post
    Arthur Morgan wrote:
    I can imagine how it might become difficult to distinguish recreational and medicinal products.

    To a certain extent the only distinguishing features are intent of use and packaging.
    If they sell it out of a munter shop on K-Road then tax it. If they sell it out of a doctor's office then don't. Or tax both, I don't care, it's better than it being illegal.

    The medical use argument is pretty dubious anyway imo, it always seems to be stoners campaigning for medical marijuana, I strongly suspect that it's just a vehicle to push toward legalisation and the number of people for whom it's actually the best medicine is very low. I don't care about that either though, it should just be legal.

  17. Post
    It's stoners arguing because sick people often don't have a lot of extra fight left in them.

  18. Post
    Quasi ELVIS wrote:
    If they sell it out of a munter shop on K-Road then tax it. If they sell it out of a doctor's office then don't. Or tax both, I don't care, it's better than it being illegal.

    The medical use argument is pretty dubious anyway imo, it always seems to be stoners campaigning for medical marijuana, I strongly suspect that it's just a vehicle to push toward legalisation and the number of people for whom it's actually the best medicine is very low. I don't care about that either though, it should just be legal.
    A lot of stoners do campaign for medicinal marijuana and they give it a lot of negative press when they park up outside parliament with their kindergarten placards and fat joints. I am also dubious of their intentions when they try and push the health benefits of weed.

    But there is nothing dubious about the medicinal use of cannabis. CBD has been proven to reduce seizures in people with epilepsy. That has been very well studied and documented.

    So far that is the only medicinal use of CBD that has been proven through multiple studies with effective controls.

    The next two medicinal uses of cbd to be proven will be it's use in treating anxiety and insomnia.

    And the one I'm personally most hopeful about is its use in alleviating chronic pain. 1/6 people in New Zealand live with chronic pain and rely on opioids. If CBD is effective in getting even a tenth of those people off opioids then the net benefit to society will be massive.

  19. Post
    1/6 people in New Zealand live with chronic pain and rely on opioids.
    That can't be a real statistic.

  20. Post
    WillAY wrote:
    That can't be a real statistic.
    I've definitely overstated the opioid use. But according to this study 1/6 reported chronic pain.

    https://www.nzma.org.nz/journal/read...ticle-dominick

  21. Post
    Arthur Morgan wrote:
    I've definitely overstated the opioid use. But according to this study 1/6 reported chronic pain.
    It's an important difference, a lot of those people would be taking panadol and ibuprofen or just dealing with it. Having chronic pain doesn't automatically imply long term opiate use. In my experience doctors are pretty stingy when it comes to prescribing opiates. A week or two worth of codeine is the most I've ever got despite being quite badly injured a couple of times.

    Also CBD isn't the same as smoking a fat blunt.

  22. Post
    Quasi ELVIS wrote:

    The medical use argument is pretty dubious anyway imo, it always seems to be stoners campaigning for medical marijuana, I strongly suspect that it's just a vehicle to push toward legalisation and the number of people for whom it's actually the best medicine is very low. I don't care about that either though, it should just be legal.
    Maybe just count yourself lucky you can claim it's 'dubious' because you don't have any first hand experience with it.

  23. Post
    WillAY wrote:
    That can't be a real statistic.
    Nowhere near that high

    If he said 1 in 6 use anti depressants then that would sound more realistic since it’s probably the most prescribed

    For chronic pain Drs don’t want to give opiates anyway and for good reason - studies show that they don’t work well for chronic pain, acute pain yes but not chronic pain. So they try everything else first including yoga/dealing with it - i don’t have data to support the theory, but I think the reason studies came up with that is because having long term chronic pain is very likely to indicate nerve problems and opiates just don’t work very well unless you’re talking very high doses - actually little helps for nerve pain, it’s either surgery or deal with it
    Hopefully cannabis offers an alternative

  24. Post
    Cannabinoids have huge pharmalogical potential. Why else is the pharmaceutical industry getting involved?.

    It's not hard to Google scholar and see the multitude of beneficial effects from cannabonoids. It's hardly surprising given there's thousands of different cannabonoids that modulate the dopamine system/opioid receptors in slightly different ways.

    My ex professor was getting government weed to isolate compounds that targeted the same receptors as oxycotin. If you look up cannabonoids and anesthesia you'll see that's just one medical application. Try looking up cannabonoids and inflammation. The Science supports its use alongside more study.

    Of course weed isn't perfect and psychiatric health is one side effect in susceptible individuals. It's also been found to be an effective treatment for psychiatric disorders too.

  25. Post
    Also, of course with legalization/regulation the product will be more safe for the consumer. As mentioned by someone above, it's tested for residual solvents, pesticides, potency/purity, molds and bacteria. Additionally you can opt for premium products that use cleaner extraction methods (ie: Rosin - a solventless concentrate) .

    The grey market is a huge problem, people are just faking the labeling and selling the stuff they made in their garage.

    Reputable sources like dispenserys need support. Plus taxes from cannabis should go into funding research to update and guide policy/usage.