A>Who is gonna grow it?
Same folks that handle opiates, coca derivatives, and synthesized analogs. If other pharmaceutical firms want to enter into this market, there are well known ways for them to do it.
B>Who is gonna track it?
Same folks that do the same thing now for these other drugs - no new bureacracy.
C>Who is gonna process it?
Same folks mentioned in reply to A.
D>Who is gonna sell it?
Same folks mentioned in A, along with pharmacies, hospitals, clinics, same as is done now for opiates and coca derivatives.
E>Who is gonna set quality and manufacturing standards?
The market at first, but later the FDA
>What paperwork must be completed for each plant grown
Not necessary per plant, just for facility and weight - same as A.
>and how can we assure the public that plants are not diverted to illegal uses?
By techniques currently used for opiates, coca derivatives, and synthesized analogs.
>Big government is the only answer!
Its the governments proper role to oversee general use and provide against divergance
>But then what are you gonna do when big government says no to your particular drug of choice???
These are not "drugs of choice" - you get into a medical bind, and they're all that works.
You fight through the judicial process.
>Wait, isn't that exactly what is happing here? The problem isn't with the courts...
>Its with the politicians and the FDA regulators. If pot has such wonderous potential as a miricle cure, then why isn't the FDA pushing it? (Pardon the pun) Where is the S.G. that should be demanding this for the collective "health" of the nation?
The hysteria which prevents a hard look at medical usage and medical usage itself is well known.
>We created the beastly government. No how do we get control of it?
Elections - I think that there is a "lifestyle" issue which candidates could use here - as a matter of fact, many people are angered by this to the point of working toward the impeachment of anyone opposed - hmmmm....
>I know...Put the beast in control of ALL medicine like in Canada! That will fix everything, NOT. But then I'm getting off topic.
Yes, you are.
Scott Evil
ep
Current Events » in reply to re: The question then is one of regulation...
For the most part, yes
The whole thread (38 posts)
- Medical marijuana before the Supreme Court again
- As I've said before, I'm for legalization, but against any government sponsership of addiction services.
- The question is: Does the state have any legitmate interest in controlling dope use at all?
- You're confusing the issues: this is about mdeical practice, not about recerational use
- No confussion at all.
- A lot of people are deeply insulted by your remarks
- Once again, it's already legal. It's called Marinol.
- Once again, you're insulting, and Marinol is known not to be as effective
- Why grow it for free when one has the opportunity to enrich the pharm industry? (n/t)
- Once again, it's already legal. It's called Marinol.
- A lot of people are deeply insulted by your remarks
- this keyboard inversion is driving me batty: read "medical", "recreational"
- No confussion at all.
- And a drunk society is worse. The US is a violent society.
- You're confusing the issues: this is about mdeical practice, not about recerational use
- Like whoa dude, far out!
- Drug prohibition is an idiotic policy that has failed from the start, and will continue to fail. (n/t)
- The so called "War on Drugs" like the "War on Terrorism" ignore the realities of each and are failures both.....
- Pack up the skis and head for Hades! I agree with DFM! (n/t)
- Yet another in a nearly infinite list of things that shouldn't be a Federal problem. (n/t)
- read "send" for "sent" (n/t)
