Cannabis could soon be rescheduled: from 1 to 3

[PromoTheRobot]

https://www.greenmarketreport.com/biden-administration-calls-on-dea-to-move-marijuana-to-schedule-3/

 

Quote

The move is potentially the first step toward cannabis legalization in the United States, since Schedule 1 is reserved for drugs that have “no currently accepted medical use,” such as heroin, while Schedule 3 is defined as having “a potential for abuse” and “may lead to moderate or low physical dependence.” Schedule 3 drugs are easily available for medical patients, and the category includes ketamine, Tylenol with codeine, and some anabolic steroids.

Not to mention make banking easier for Cannabis companies.

[Logic]

5 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

https://www.greenmarketreport.com/biden-administration-calls-on-dea-to-move-marijuana-to-schedule-3/

 

Not to mention make banking easier for Cannabis companies.

This is the key point to me.

I live in Oregon and my wife works in cannabis, and it is positively INSANE what these companies have to go through to do their banking. Totally unreasonable.

As for rescheduling cannabis -- and, frankly, full federal legalization -- it's long past time. There is no legitimate reason whatsoever for cannabis to be a schedule 1 drug or to be illegal in any state. It's preposterous and prehistoric. If nothing else, the revenue that states can make from taxing cannabis is absolutely massive, and any state not reaping those rewards is making a huge mistake.

End the madness. Reschedule cannabis and end all state and federal prohibition. It's time.

 

[PromoTheRobot]

1 minute ago, Logic said:

This is the key point to me.

I live in Oregon and my wife works in cannabis, and it is positively INSANE what these companies have to go through to do their banking. Totally unreasonable.

As for rescheduling cannabis -- and, frankly, full federal legalization -- it's long past time. There is no legitimate reason whatsoever for cannabis to be a schedule 1 drug or to be illegal in any state. It's preposterous and prehistoric. If nothing else, the revenue that states can make from taxing cannabis is absolutely massive, and any state not reaping those rewards is making a huge mistake.

End the madness. Reschedule cannabis and end all state and federal prohibition. It's time.

 

 

Baby steps...especially when the DEA is involved.

[Augie]

https://www.google.com/search?q=what+about+bob&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:a1d8de35,vid:tk9iWXsdB-8

 

Baby steps. 

 

Sorry, I don’t know how to do that right. 

[WhoTom]

This also opens up the potential for serious research on the positive and negative effects of cannabis. Big-pharma won't sponsor it because they can't patent a plant (although they could do like Big-ag and patent a genetic strain of a plant), and the NSF won't fund cannabis-related grants because Schedule 1 means no valid use whatsoever. What little scientific research exists is due to a handful of dedicated scientists who jumped through ridiculous hoops in order to conduct their studies.

 

Knowledge is power.

 

 

[billsfanmiamioh]

34 minutes ago, Logic said:

This is the key point to me.

I live in Oregon and my wife works in cannabis, and it is positively INSANE what these companies have to go through to do their banking. Totally unreasonable.

As for rescheduling cannabis -- and, frankly, full federal legalization -- it's long past time. There is no legitimate reason whatsoever for cannabis to be a schedule 1 drug or to be illegal in any state. It's preposterous and prehistoric. If nothing else, the revenue that states can make from taxing cannabis is absolutely massive, and any state not reaping those rewards is making a huge mistake.

End the madness. Reschedule cannabis and end all state and federal prohibition. It's time.

 

It looked like there was finally some promise and enough bipartisan support with the SAFE banking act last year, but then our wonderful elected officials had to screw it up yet again. 
 

Rescheduling is long overdue. Makes zero sense for the feds to deem that it has “no accepted medicinal use”, while multiple FDA approved cannabinoid medicines are on the market. 
 

What does your wife do in the industry? I’m getting into it myself. In May, I finished up a masters degree in medical cannabis science and therapeutics from the Univ. of Maryland's school of pharmacy. I was actually out in Portland in April at the Cannabis Science conference. 

[billsfanmiamioh]

23 minutes ago, WhoTom said:

This also opens up the potential for serious research on the positive and negative effects of cannabis. Big-pharma won't sponsor it because they can't patent a plant (although they could do like Big-ag and patent a genetic strain of a plant), and the NSF won't fund cannabis-related grants because Schedule 1 means no valid use whatsoever. What little scientific research exists is due to a handful of dedicated scientists who jumped through ridiculous hoops in order to conduct their studies.

 

Knowledge is power.

 

 

It’s going to be a lot easier to do research now between the Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research Expansion Act and possible rescheduling. We’re just scratching the surface of our collective knowledge about cannabis, the endocannbinoid system, benefits, risks, etc. This is mainly due to the insane restrictions and hoop jumping you mentioned.
 

From my program I’ve gotten to know some pretty amazing and smart people who are really spearheading these changes both in the lab and through grassroots activism. If you’re looking to support people like this I recommend joining / donating to Americans for Safe Access, Council For Federal Cannabis Regulation, or NORML. These people are the ones on the front lines in DC leading the fight. 

Edited August 31, 2023 by billsfanmiamioh

[boyst]

All for it as long as there are consequences for being under the influence.

 

Tired of smelling potheads driving around so damn much you can smell it as they drive by and it's not legal in NC. 

[DrDawkinstein]

3 minutes ago, boyst said:

All for it as long as there are consequences for being under the influence.

 

Tired of smelling potheads driving around so damn much you can smell it as they drive by and it's not legal in NC. 

 

You're like by far the youngest person in this thread, and managed the most Boomer take.

[nucci]

7 minutes ago, boyst said:

All for it as long as there are consequences for being under the influence.

 

Tired of smelling potheads driving around so damn much you can smell it as they drive by and it's not legal in NC. 

it's called a DUI. Though alcohol is much more dangerous when driving

[GoBills808]

32 minutes ago, WhoTom said:

This also opens up the potential for serious research on the positive and negative effects of cannabis. Big-pharma won't sponsor it because they can't patent a plant (although they could do like Big-ag and patent a genetic strain of a plant), and the NSF won't fund cannabis-related grants because Schedule 1 means no valid use whatsoever. What little scientific research exists is due to a handful of dedicated scientists who jumped through ridiculous hoops in order to conduct their studies.

 

Knowledge is power.

 

 

Aren't most medicines plant derivatives?

[WhoTom]

Just now, GoBills808 said:

Aren't most medicines plant derivatives?

 

Yes, but they extract a chemical from the plant, mix it with other stuff that might enhance the effect, and patent the formula. If cannabis, all by itself, can serve as a treatment, then patients can simply grow their own. That's bad for business if your business is making drugs.

[GoBills808]

Just now, WhoTom said:

 

Yes, but they extract a chemical from the plant, mix it with other stuff that might enhance the effect, and patent the formula. If cannabis, all by itself, can serve as a treatment, then patients can simply grow their own. That's bad for business if your business is making drugs.

You mean the cannabis plant, all by itself? If you truly believe there's medical value in a substance, wouldn't you want the professionals doing the cultivation/production of the medicine?

[4merper4mer]

18 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

You're like by far the youngest person in this thread, and managed the most Boomer take.

 

15 minutes ago, nucci said:

it's called a DUI. Though alcohol is much more dangerous when driving

Like I totally drive better when I’m stoned duuuuuuuuuuuude.

[boyst]

50 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

You're like by far the youngest person in this thread, and managed the most Boomer take.

Listen, youngster...

 

But, yeah, it's a boomer response. Otherwise legalize everything. Just make sure it's not abused and gross. 

47 minutes ago, nucci said:

it's called a DUI. Though alcohol is much more dangerous when driving

Depends on how much alcohol. Depends on how much weed. Depends on how much pickle juice.

[T&C]

A lot of boomers have smoked a lot of weed.

[ExiledInIllinois]

1 hour ago, WhoTom said:

This also opens up the potential for serious research on the positive and negative effects of cannabis. Big-pharma won't sponsor it because they can't patent a plant (although they could do like Big-ag and patent a genetic strain of a plant), and the NSF won't fund cannabis-related grants because Schedule 1 means no valid use whatsoever. What little scientific research exists is due to a handful of dedicated scientists who jumped through ridiculous hoops in order to conduct their studies.

 

Knowledge is power.

 

 

And what happens if these studies comeback negative... Like the link between schizophrenia and cannabis use with an at risk population

 

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32839678/

 

Not trying to be solely negative... It's just that we need to be able to handle the unintended consequences,  NOT flip the script. 

[GETTOTHE50]

If marijuana cured cancer, wouldn’t bob Marley still be alive?

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

This book really changed my mind on medical marijuana and legalization. Strong evidence linking marijuana use as causing mental health disorders. 
 

https://www.amazon.com/Tell-Your-Children-Marijuana-Violence/dp/1982103663

 

2 hours ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

And what happens if these studies comeback negative... Like the link between schizophrenia and cannabis use with an at risk population

 

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32839678/

 

Not trying to be solely negative... It's just that we need to be able to handle the unintended consequences,  NOT flip the script. 

Didn’t see your post here. But I agree. It is really concerning if you read the literature. Also the THQ content in marijuana Today appears to be way higher than that of the 1960s.

[Bill from NYC]

9 hours ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

And what happens if these studies comeback negative... Like the link between schizophrenia and cannabis use with an at risk population

 

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32839678/

 

Not trying to be solely negative... It's just that we need to be able to handle the unintended consequences,  NOT flip the script. 

Speaking of consequences, are they using pesticides on weed? My guess is yes. If so, how will the dangers compare to those of cigarettes?