A thought I had

Cory and trevor

Cory and trevor

Well-Known Member
The new SC verdict that a caregiver can only transfer to his/her 5 (max) patients had me thinking; if MERK or Pfiser or SCJWax ect. came up with a cure for AIDS or Cancer, would there be any limitation to distribution of their product? the answer, I think we know, is hell no. in fact there are laws in place that prevent knock-offs (generics at the pharmacy) from butting in on their profits for a given time. I forget that amount of time before generics are allowed but if we're growing medicine and we are very good at this as a caregiver how is it that we are limited to the number of people we help? How is it that as a society we're OK with a monoply on our new drugs? That's what the prevention of generics does. These companies are protect in their profits, they say to recoup the R&D money spent on developing these drugs so they can cintinue to help humanity by continued research. Now, I don't have enough evidence for me personally to call medical pot a cure for cancer but some chose this as their treatment plan, how is it that the great caregivers of the state can only help 5 people at a time? Hopefully now that I typed it out it will get out of my head it's all I have been thinking lately and it's making me crazy because it is infact a crazy ass thought-but also a reality! banning dispensaries is doing the exact oposite as law does for these pharm companies-it's keeping the help a great caregiver can give to an absolute minimum. Any thoughts? :peace:
 
N

NEEDMMASAP

Well-Known Member
Cory and trevor said:
The new SC verdict that a caregiver can only transfer to his/her 5 (max) patients had me thinking; if MERK or Pfiser or SCJWax ect. came up with a cure for AIDS or Cancer, would there be any limitation to distribution of their product? the answer, I think we know, is hell no. in fact there are laws in place that prevent knock-offs (generics at the pharmacy) from butting in on their profits for a given time. I forget that amount of time before generics are allowed but if we're growing medicine and we are very good at this as a caregiver how is it that we are limited to the number of people we help? How is it that as a society we're OK with a monoply on our new drugs? That's what the prevention of generics does. These companies are protect in their profits, they say to recoup the R&D money spent on developing these drugs so they can cintinue to help humanity by continued research. Now, I don't have enough evidence for me personally to call medical pot a cure for cancer but some chose this as their treatment plan, how is it that the great caregivers of the state can only help 5 people at a time? Hopefully now that I typed it out it will get out of my head it's all I have been thinking lately and it's making me crazy because it is infact a crazy ass thought-but also a reality! banning dispensaries is doing the exact oposite as law does for these pharm companies-it's keeping the help a great caregiver can give to an absolute minimum. Any thoughts? :peace:
Click to expand...
I think that your thinking process is right on target , but where things go wrong is that Big Pharma does not and never will be thinking about the peoples health , dollars are all they understand and they use those ill gotten dollars to move the system to their advantage , they have known for a long time that the health benefits are in the MM plant and they will slowly but surely move in what ever direction that will be most profitable for them and the government will do the same . Its sad but it’s a fact of life , do you think this MM movement is being done by the people that like to grow the plant and truly want to help the sick ?
 
B

bloodytrichomes

New Member
is it that mabe we our numbers are growing so much and more people are smoking insted of eating pills that we are puting presure on big pharmacy
 
TheMan13

TheMan13

Well-Known Member
As marijuana is a naturally occurring substance it cannot be patented nor profited from as big pharma requires of their supply lines. Furthermore, through cronyism, our government had banned all such naturally occurring substances nationally (if not globally) to ensure no R&D of such "worthless" medicine this century when most medicinal R&D had been done. This same government also ensured that the literally trillions of US tax dollars used to subsidize such R&D would be profitable for their 'friends". I think it is worth note here that it is EXACTLY this prohibition/manufactured "drug war" that has created the big phama industry we know and face today :(
 
Red1966

Red1966

Well-Known Member
bloodytrichomes said:
is it that mabe we our numbers are growing so much and more people are smoking insted of eating pills that we are puting presure on big pharmacy
Click to expand...
MM is used to treat the effects of disease or it's treatments. MM doesn't "cure" anything I know off, but perhaps I am unaware. I don't think the pharma industry considers MM a real threat to their profits. I think MM may be used in addition to, but not instead of, conventional pharmacy.
 
Cory and trevor

Cory and trevor

Well-Known Member
red, people chose lots of treatments for cancer and one is cannabis. I don't think it's the route I'd go but people can choose what they want. I also think drug comapanies would label sink water as GR134 if the FDA would let them and say it cured everything so a new snake oil on the market with no inventor with intelectual properties rights to it is a free for all they'd like to control and profit from. I think it does alot of good and could cure lots of shit and it surely does alieviate pain but drug companies don't care if it works. They care if it will be FDA aproved, and if they will ever have to pay any class action suites should it kill enough people to warant one. weed won't cause any damage they have to pay for and being harmless with some belief and more growing every day that it helps medically they are salivating over it. of course for the wrong reasons but believe it will be a hot comodity for them.
 
mrbungle79

mrbungle79

Well-Known Member
TheMan13 said:
As marijuana is a naturally occurring substance it cannot be patented nor profited from as big pharma requires of their supply lines. Furthermore, through cronyism, our government had banned all such naturally occurring substances nationally (if not globally) to ensure no R&D of such "worthless" medicine this century when most medicinal R&D had been done. This same government also ensured that the literally trillions of US tax dollars used to subsidize such R&D would be profitable for their 'friends". I think it is worth note here that it is EXACTLY this prohibition/manufactured "drug war" that has created the big phama industry we know and face today :(
Click to expand...
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=6630507.PN.&OS=PN%2F6630507&RS=PN%2F6630507
 
TheMan13

TheMan13

Well-Known Member
I'm a bit confused with this. If the fed does not find MJ legal then why would they allow an obviously unenforceable/unlawful patent to be registered or even exist? This county is going to hell in a hand basket if we don't wake up and start calling absurdity exactly what it is ...

We have medical marijuana "legalized" in nearly half the states across this country (18 + DC) today.

We also have the 10th Amendment to the US Constitution: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Yet we still have a federal government finding medical marijuana "illegal" simply by allowing a god given plant to remain on their Schedule I narcotics list regardless of contrary reality: Substances in this schedule have no currently accepted medical use in the United States, a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision, and a high potential for abuse.
 
FatMarty

FatMarty

Well-Known Member
We need a Revolution. Money trumps common sense and it won't change until we make it change.
Unfortunately anyone with a flat screen TV thinks they are doing just fine and will until the power grid fails for an extended period.
We are fat Romans. Literally.
And the parasites are eating the host while we sleep.
 
Cory and trevor

Cory and trevor

Well-Known Member
seems despite their best efforts to insure there is not a concentration of power in our government by the founding fathers we, the new generations, have slowly changed that with forming political teams and distilling those to two teams and allowing justices to write law from the bench. that now in place money is able to buy the power from the few who hold it. Now the individual and their greed can sway opinions and change laws autonomous from the will of the people. Sadly Marty is just about right. it's almost always a part of any political discussion anymore. us and them. we are no longer our government THEY are and we battle them, and lose often. I think they know this. disarm the enemy would be a good idea for them, they are attempting it. I'm usually a hippy with my beliefes but with that comes a pretty staunch support of the 2nd amendment and a dislike for gun control. How else could revolt should it ever come to that?
 
TheMan13

TheMan13

Well-Known Member
Cory and trevor said:
seems despite their best efforts to insure there is not a concentration of power in our government by the founding fathers we, the new generations, have slowly changed that with forming political teams and distilling those to two teams and allowing justices to write law from the bench. that now in place money is able to buy the power from the few who hold it. Now the individual and their greed can sway opinions and change laws autonomous from the will of the people. Sadly Marty is just about right. it's almost always a part of any political discussion anymore. us and them. we are no longer our government THEY are and we battle them, and lose often. I think they know this. disarm the enemy would be a good idea for them, they are attempting it. I'm usually a hippy with my beliefes but with that comes a pretty staunch support of the 2nd amendment and a dislike for gun control. How else could revolt should it ever come to that?
Click to expand...
Tru dat :eyesmoke: No gun control, no tyranny! This country not only developed and mass manufactured the "gun", we then used them to free ourselves and others from tyranny. Any question of these facts?!?
 
Cory and trevor

Cory and trevor

Well-Known Member
coincidence that the new medical marijuana dilema is your need to lie on a form to obtain a firearm that is registered? I'm thinking no, I'm also thinking registering your guns wouldn't be high on jeferson or washingtons list of necessary government info to have on citizens... at least me and my gramps can agree onthis one thing even if I am a tree hugging hippy oboma loving demon-crat LOL
 
st0wandgrow

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
Cory and trevor said:
seems despite their best efforts to insure there is not a concentration of power in our government by the founding fathers we, the new generations, have slowly changed that with forming political teams and distilling those to two teams and allowing justices to write law from the bench. that now in place money is able to buy the power from the few who hold it. Now the individual and their greed can sway opinions and change laws autonomous from the will of the people. Sadly Marty is just about right. it's almost always a part of any political discussion anymore. us and them. we are no longer our government THEY are and we battle them, and lose often. I think they know this. disarm the enemy would be a good idea for them, they are attempting it. I'm usually a hippy with my beliefes but with that comes a pretty staunch support of the 2nd amendment and a dislike for gun control. How else could revolt should it ever come to that?
Click to expand...
I agree with most of what you say, but I do not agree with your last sentence. Maybe 100 years ago this would have been true, but with todays military, I highly doubt that Skeeter in Kentucky is going to overthrow the US military (think drones, bombs, tanks, etc) with his shotgun.
 
TheMan13

TheMan13

Well-Known Member
potsnoberry said:
Tyranny? lol tyranny? fkn num-nuts lollollol
Click to expand...
Tyranny (Government, Politics & Diplomacy)a. government by a tyrant or tyrants; despotism
b. similarly oppressive and unjust government by more than one person

... did I miss something here?
 
TheMan13

TheMan13

Well-Known Member
st0wandgrow said:
I agree with most of what you say, but I do not agree with your last sentence. Maybe 100 years ago this would have been true, but with todays military, I highly doubt that Skeeter in Kentucky is going to overthrow the US military (think drones, bombs, tanks, etc) with his shotgun.
Click to expand...
Posse Comitatus? What is the difference between sending in a LEO SWAT team to break up a local poker game rather than an 82nd ID Spec Ops unit? A story line or "tyranny" may be?!?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top