MEDICAL MARIJUANA AUSTRALIA.

[-RC-]

This year marks when we enter the end game for cannabis legalisation in Australia. It was a matter of time, then money.

Money always wins though these days, and I reckon definitely by the end of the year it will be all over, with full recreational availability in the next 5 years around the nation. First in wins big!

[Yeti101]

Just don't let your optimism turn into complacency

August/September might be pretty interesting in federal politics, if this measure doesn't get parked in a dead-end committee for the next 10 years...

[-RC-]

Money doesn't allow itself to be parked. Only spent

Seriously, it is millions for each state. This charade is on its last legs, thank fuck

[Strontium Dawg]

I'm drafting my submission now.

[Strontium Dawg]

And yes rc, if the public had a choice between a rise in the gst, and what is essentially free money for the states from taxes on sales of cannabis, I bet a lot of conservative voters might suddenly take an interest on the matter.

Edited August 3, 2015 by Glaukus

[Change]

The Genotoxicity of Mainstream and Sidestream Marijuana and Tobacco Smoke Condensates

While the prevalence of tobacco use has decreased in Canada over the past decade, that of marijuana use has increased, particularly among youth. However, the risks of adverse health effects from marijuana smoke exposure, specifically as compared to tobacco, are currently not well understood. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the relative ability of matched marijuana and tobacco condensates to induce (geno)toxic responses in three in vitro test systems. This study provides comparative data for matched sidestream and mainstream condensates, as well as condensates prepared under both a standard and an extreme smoking regime designed to mimic marijuana smoking habits. The results indicate that tobacco and marijuana smoke differ substantially in terms of their cytotoxicity, Salmonellamutagenicity, and ability to induce chromosomal damage (i.e., micronucleus formation). Specifically, the marijuana condensates were all found to be more cytotoxic and more mutagenic in the presence of S9 than the matched tobacco condensates. In contrast, the tobacco condensates appeared to induce cytogenetic damage in a concentration-dependent manner, whereas the matched marijuana condensates did not. In addition, when corrected for total particulate matter yield, little difference was observed in the mutagenic activity of samples smoked under the extreme vs the standard regime for both tobacco and marijuana condensates.

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/tx9000286

Why do so many marijuana advocates say cigarette smoke is much more toxic than marijuana smoke ?

[Strontium Dawg]

It's more cytotoxic but the studies haven't been able to correlate this with an increase in cancer risk. Something in tobacco smoke prevents damaged cells being destroyed and this differs from cannabis smoke.

[Change]

This was posted in another thread but i think its more relevant to this discussions so ill post it here

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3185189/Taking-cannabis-teens-NOT-linked-depression-lung-cancer-asthma-later-life-study-reveals.html#ixzz3hs6vF7ty

The headline written by a journalist reads "Taking cannabis in your teens is 'NOT linked to depression, lung cancer or asthma in later life', study reveals"

The conclusion written by the scientists that publish the paper reads like

Although the present study generated consistent findings across a variety of indicators of health, the results should be interpreted with caution because of several limitations. First, the lack of group differences may have been due to selection effects. It is possible that individuals who had a higher risk of developing marijuana-related health problems chose to use less marijuana and individuals who had a lower risk of developing marijuana-related health problems chose to use more marijuana (thus masking the health risks associated with use). Future research is needed to determine whether (and the extent to which) individuals systematically calibrate their marijuana use based on their understanding of their risk for subsequent mental and physical health problems, based on their perception of the risks associated with the drug, and based on their subjective appraisal of their physical and psychological reaction to marijuana.

http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/adb-adb0000103.pdf

I think its important to highlight that main stream media is trying to sell a story so its in their best interests to interperut the data in such a way that will attract readers as apposed to be an accurate interpretation of the data that was collected in the study.

[Change]

CANNABIS USE AND RISK OF LUNG CANCER: A CASE-CONTROL STUDY

Aim:

To determine the risk of lung cancer associated with cannabis smoking.

Methods:

A case-control study of lung cancer in adults ≤55 years of age was conducted in eight district health boards in New Zealand. Cases were identified from the New Zealand Cancer Registry and hospital databases. Controls were randomly selected from the electoral roll, with frequency matching to cases in 5-year age groups and district health boards. Interviewer administered questionnaires were used to assess possible risk factors including cannabis use. The relative risk of lung cancer associated with cannabis smoking was estimated by logistic regression.

Results:

There were 79 cases of lung cancer and 324 controls. The risk of lung cancer increased 8% (95% CI 2% to 15%) for each joint-year of cannabis smoking, after adjustment for confounding variables including cigarette smoking, and 7% (95% CI 5% to 9%) for each pack-year of cigarette smoking, after adjustment for confounding variables including cannabis smoking. The highest tertile of cannabis use was associated with an increased risk of lung cancer RR=5.7 (95% CI 1.5 to 21.6), after adjustment for confounding variables including cigarette smoking.

Conclusions:

Long term cannabis use increases the risk of lung cancer in young adults

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2516340/

[Strontium Dawg]

I think it's also worth noting that almost all studies of cannabis use and effects are related to smoking, whereas many medical users in particular choose edible products as their roa. This would mitigate any risks associated with smoking obviously.

As for recreational users, no doubt smoking is by far the most prevalent, but as vaping becomes more common, it will be interesting to see what research is carried out.

My opinion is that anyone who thinks smoking cannabis is healthy for their lungs and overall wellspring is deluded, but the committee is considering personal choice. That's what this comes down to, personal choice. If there was less moral hysteria around the topic in society, there would probably be better informed people, who are in a position to make personal choices based on good information.

[-RC-]

Pretty sure the Tashkin study should have a place at the table here, and I certainly support the right of every individual to make responsible choices about their drug use from an informed perspective

Edited August 7, 2015 by Responsible Choice

[Change]

Thanks for the suggestions Responsible Choice.

Here is the link if anyone else wants to see

http://www.atsjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1513/AnnalsATS.201212-127FR#.VcSoPPmqpBc

[sharxx101]

I'm just waiting to hear it on the news that Medical Cannabis is legal.

Some interesting points from the hemp party click link below

https://australianhempparty.com/

[Change]

The Australia hemp party is a joke

Its a shame they think writing blogs and opinion pieces on their personal beliefs about cannabis is a better idea then backing up their position with scientific facts.

maybe they are just to stoned to think critically..... im pretty sure that's what the rest of the parliament is thinking

[Change]

 

[sharxx101]

Well at least the hemp party have a clear head on making a CHANGE to laws that obviously don't work. You are entitled to your opinion and so are they. Some groups fight for what they believe in. Only gullible people believe science has all the answers

[sharxx101]

That video is a crock of shit saying Cannabis has killed people through over dose. Big pile of bs from a Cannabis hater!!!

its a revolution baby get with the program. Don't hate the players hate the game Now is a time for CHANGE

Edited August 19, 2015 by sharxx101

[Change]

Concordance states that he is neither pro or anti cannabis, he is just a medical researcher presenting documented facts.

Concordance (n.) arriving at the same conclusion by multiple lines of enquiry (not a bad motto if i do say so myself)

Im not sure why people think that science has all the answers, the job of a scientist is to design experiments to further humanities understanding of this poorly understood world we are in.

If science had all the answers then why do scientist go to work everyday discovering new things ?

No scientist thinks everything is understood, people turn to science to expand the current level of understanding eg Albert Einstein

There are plenty of gullible pot smokers that believe its a natural herb that does them no harm, but drug education and harm reduction shouldn't be based on beliefs it should be based on evidence.

Rather then stating "this video is a crock of shit" why not disprove it with some evidence

Scientist love evidence and CHANGE their position every time new credible evidence it brought to the table

Having an evidence based debate about cannabis would be so much more constructive then a belief based debate.

Spiritual people fight for their beliefs, often times killing each other over opposing beliefs that they cant even prove

Scientist fight to prove their theories with facts that can be repeated

Edited August 19, 2015 by Change

[sharxx101]

I have stated my opinion as I have had a family member die from lung cancer. He wanted this medicine but couldn't get it due to stupid laws that are totally ridiculous stating that Cannabis has no medical values.

It has been proved by science and Cannabis users that Cannabis does have many medicinal values some of which are still being discovered. Any medicine that people use will always be subject to abuse and misuse. That is the world we live in.

People should have the right to chose what works best for them as RC has said. Bring on the medical and recreational Cannabis that is my opinion.

Edited August 19, 2015 by sharxx101

[Change]

Im really sorry for your loss sharxx101, loosing a loved is a difficult process, there is no doubt about that

Trials have started in both NSW and Vic so medical researches can gather data on the effects of cannabis on terminally ill patients

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-27/nation-first-cannabis-study-announced-at-newcastle-hospital/6650832

i look forward to reading the finding of the trial.

[sharxx101]

Some more news

http://www.marijuana.com/blog/news/2015/07/australia-looks-at-legalizing-medical-marijuana-by-the-end-of-2015/

cheers mate we are all entitled to our own opinion. It is good to hear peoples concerns. We need to look at the cons and pros to move forward

Edited September 1, 2015 by sharxx101

[waterboy 2.0]

the job of a scientist is to design experiments to further humanities understanding of this poorly understood world we are in.

dunno about that as a scientist as the be all and end all. I'll mull over it when I am not munted.

There is much more scientists contribute towards.

I will be intrigued to see how such "studies" are structured. Good to see "leaf cannabis" is not excluded yet to the advancement of pharma produced derivatives.

[Change]

i look forward to hearing more about your perspectives, every time im shown that my positions is wrong it brings me a step closer to understanding what is correct

[sharxx101]

http://m.dailytelegraph.com.au/rendezview/why-hasnt-australia-legalised-medicinal-marijuana-yet/story-fnpug1jf-1227479255149

[sharxx101]

It looks like the oil and tincture is already available here in Oz from an Australian owned company.

https://www.marijuanaoil.com.au/