Breaking! Don't bogart that joint, my friend...

Breaking news!
James Moore said:
u on the other hand want to deny the science that does exist on the subject
Click to expand...

Not a single person has been able to point to any. And no... the articles you've cited do NOT prove the efficacy of MJ products as medication. They're just historical essays and anecdotal. Multiple anecdotes do not make data.

And there's no stipulation of dosaging, contraindications, or other NORMAL SCIENTIFIC PRESCRIBING information with ALL legitimate therapeutic medications. ALL OF THEM. Therefore it is NOT medicine.

But you want to insist this "medication" is exempt.

My position is not denial. It's scientific fact. Again... I have some experience reading scientific literature.

And with that, I'm done beating this dead horse. :)
 
Last edited:
Racer88 said:
My position is not denial. It's scientific fact.
Click to expand...
You are in complete denial.

Here's an article that sites several studies. It lists 221 studies and papers produced on the efficacy of Cannabis.

Cannabinoids and Pain: New Insights From Old Molecules - PMC

Cannabis has been used for medicinal purposes for thousands of years. The prohibition of cannabis in the middle of the 20th century has arrested cannabis research. In recent years there is a growing debate about the use of cannabis for medical ...
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
I'm sure it not an inclusive list and many are not from the US, but there is plenty of evidence that Cannabis is effective for pain management and other systems of cancer. It doesnt cure anything, but then neither does Morphine.

You seem to be hung up on this idea that there has to be a Federally mandated set of rules to be considered a medicine.

Once again I will point out to you that because it has been until now, classified as Schedule 1 drug, it can't be officially

Prescribed and won't be listed in the PDR.

Which is now called the Prescribers Digital Reference, because it is no longer issued in book form and it only includes FDA approved medications and not all of them. Drug companies pay to be listed in the PDR. No pay, no inclusion.

It can be suggested by a Medical Professional in the states where it is legal. There are also dosage guidelines and strict manufacturing guidelines, including THC levels.
 
Last edited:
This 1 list 160 Doctors and their findings/ studies.

Therapeutic Potential of Cannabidiol (CBD) for Skin Health and Disorders - PMC

Though there is limited research confirming the purported topical benefits of cannabinoids, it is certain that cutaneous biology is modulated by the human endocannabinoid system (ECS). Receptors from the ECS have been identified in the skin and ...
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
 
JFYI most of anything in the Anacardiaceae or Cannabaceae faimly will put me in ICU.

I wish I could try that 💩, but dieing a slow agonizing death gasping for air, yea that sucks.
 
James Moore said:
You seem to be hung up on this idea that there has to be a Federally mandated set of rules to be considered a medicine.
Click to expand...

Dude, you have no idea what you are talking about.

Where, ANYWHERE, did I mention any "federally mandated set of rules???" LOL!

Read my posts AGAIN. Slowly. And they are repetitive. Writing it AGAIN is unnecessary and pointless. You can go back and read them again... or not. My comments say NOTHING about so-called "federally mandated rules." Please point out where I said that.
 
Last edited:
Racer88 said:
Where, ANYWHERE, did I mention any "federally mandated set of rules???" LOL!
Click to expand...
You haven't said it specifically, yet,

You keep telling me that it's not a medicine because it's not listed in the PDR and list all the "NORMAL SCIENTIFIC PRESCRIBING information".
That's all mandated by the FDA, (Food and Drug Administration) which is a FEDERAL Institution and follows a "Federally mandated set of rules".

And you keep ignoring any scientific studies done on Cannabis.

Once again, I will point out that because it is/was a Schedule 1 drug it can't be prescribed legally even in States that have legalized Medical Marijuana, so it does not follow the Federally Mandated rules for a prescription medication.
 
Bobster said:
Do you have B&W or colorized version? Or both? (y) :)
Click to expand...
Just B&W version. I got it, hell, 20yrs ago?
I had a Gov/Miltary 1 on LSD also, somebody snatched that 😞
Tryptophan , Im pretty sure I still have, several. DMT Spirit Molecule whatever.
Then theres Men who stare at Goats.
 
Racer88 said:
Not a single person has been able to point to any. And no... the articles you've cited do NOT prove the efficacy of MJ products as medication. They're just historical essays and anecdotal. Multiple anecdotes do not make data.

And there's no stipulation of dosaging, contraindications, or other NORMAL SCIENTIFIC PRESCRIBING information with ALL legitimate therapeutic medications. ALL OF THEM. Therefore it is NOT medicine.

But you want to insist this "medication" is exempt.

My position is not denial. It's scientific fact. Again... I have some experience reading scientific literature.

And with that, I'm done beating this dead horse. :)
Click to expand...
I posted 2 links w/ 200 Scientific Studys presented by a Goverment Website that include studies, observations and dosage recommendations.

JS

The individual links to papers are at the bottom of pages.
 
Last edited:
James Moore said:
You keep telling me that it's not a medicine because it's not listed in the PDR and list all the "NORMAL SCIENTIFIC PRESCRIBING information".
That's all mandated by the FDA, (Food and Drug Administration) which is a FEDERAL Institution and follows a "Federally mandated set of rules".
Click to expand...

WRONG. It's the MEDICAL Standard of Care. Doctors are held to the Standard of Care.... not to the FDA. The FDA does not regulate medical practice. They do not hold any purview over doctors.

The FDA’s purpose is to protect public health by ensuring the safety, efficacy, and security of food, drugs, medical devices, and other health-related products while providing science-based information to the public.

When a doctor prescribes a medication, he or she is held to a STANDARD OF CARE (which is NOT a law of ANY kind). The SoC stipulates that the doctor must know the indications, dosage, contraindications, interactions, black box warnings, side effects, etc. of that medications AND all the OTHER medications being taken by the patient.

If a doctor ends up in court, it's ALL about the Standard of Care, which is NOT something that is codified in law.

In tort law, the standard of care is the only degree of prudence and caution required of an individual who is under a duty of care. (Again... it's not codified in statutory law or by any gov't agency.)

The requirements of the standard are closely dependent on circumstances.[1] Whether the standard of care has been breached is determined by the trier of fact, and is usually phrased in terms of the reasonable person; this is sometimes labeled as the "reasonable physician standard".

This WHOLE time I've been referencing the STANDARD OF CARE. It's based on Science, clinical experience, Evidence-Based Practice, the peer reviewed literature, etc. And yes... the "go to" pharmaceutical reference for doctors has long been the "PDR." It's where they look the info I mentioned for all medications. Though, there are now various phone apps that do the same thing, which are far more efficient... especially when patients are on multiple medications.

So, again (sigh)... like ALL other medications, please reference the dosing info (therapeutic level, intervals, max for 24 hours, etc), the interactions, the contraindications, the indications, etc.... Because ANY DOCTOR who is practicing WITHIN THE STANDARD OF CARE.... MUST know and apply this information. Where can a doctor find that information for MJ products? (It doesn't yet exist.) Because it's what any REASONABLE doctor would do for ANY medication prescribed.

If MJ is medication, then a doctor must be able to apply that standard of care.

I've also said before.... It's not medication, YET. When the research and data comes out such that doctors can apply Evidence-Based practice and can point to the Standard of Care (as it pertains to those criteria I've mentioned countless times at this point), THEN it qualifies as a legitimate medication along with all the others.
 
Last edited:
One more thing.... I don't see SMOKING any product (including MJ) ever being a "reasonable" Standard of Care drug delivery method. Smoking ANYTHING has very serious medical consequences.

In medical practice, doctors must consider the risks vs benefits of any treatment modality. Smoking incurs many serious risks. And yeah... back in the 40s and 50s, they had doctors ENDORSING cigarettes! LOL!

If any MJ derivative is going to be used in proper medical practice, it would have to be a much "cleaner" delivery method than smoking. Yes, I know those products exist and / or are in development.

If you're smoking it... it's recreational.
 
Last edited:
Racer88 said:
WRONG. It's the MEDICAL Standard of Care. Doctors are held to the Standard of Care.... not to the FDA. The FDA does not regulate medical practice. They do not hold any purview over doctors.

The FDA’s purpose is to protect public health by ensuring the safety, efficacy, and security of food, drugs, medical devices, and other health-related products while providing science-based information to the public.

When a doctor prescribes a medication, he or she is held to a STANDARD OF CARE (which is NOT a law of ANY kind). The SoC stipulates that the doctor must know the indications, dosage, contraindications, interactions, black box warnings, side effects, etc. of that medications AND all the OTHER medications being taken by the patient.

If a doctor ends up in court, it's ALL about the Standard of Care, which is NOT something that is codified in law.

In tort law, the standard of care is the only degree of prudence and caution required of an individual who is under a duty of care. (Again... it's not codified in statutory law or by any gov't agency.)

The requirements of the standard are closely dependent on circumstances.[1] Whether the standard of care has been breached is determined by the trier of fact, and is usually phrased in terms of the reasonable person; this is sometimes labeled as the "reasonable physician standard".

This WHOLE time I've been referencing the STANDARD OF CARE. It's based on Science, clinical experience, Evidence-Based Practice, the peer reviewed literature, etc. And yes... the "go to" pharmaceutical reference for doctors has long been the "PDR." It's where they look the info I mentioned for all medications. Though, there are now various phone apps that do the same thing, which are far more efficient... especially when patients are on multiple medications.

So, again (sigh)... like ALL other medications, please reference the dosing info (therapeutic level, intervals, max for 24 hours, etc), the interactions, the contraindications, the indications, etc.... Because ANY DOCTOR who is practicing WITHIN THE STANDARD OF CARE.... MUST know and apply this information. Where can a doctor find that information for MJ products? (It doesn't yet exist.) Because it's what any REASONABLE doctor would do for ANY medication prescribed.

If MJ is medication, then a doctor must be able to apply that standard of care.

I've also said before.... It's not medication, YET. When the research and data comes out such that doctors can apply Evidence-Based practice and can point to the Standard of Care (as it pertains to those criteria I've mentioned countless times at this point), THEN it qualifies as a legitimate medication along with all the others.
Click to expand...

I guess it's just Semantics. Cannabis doesn't comply with the standards You've deemed necessary to be considered a medicine. While completely ignoring a vast sum of Scientific information validating the efficacy of Cannabis in the treatment of some medical conditions.

Because of that Scientific evidence, many states have made it legal. The difference in the way it is Prescribed or Suggested is is a bothersome condition of also being considered a Schedule 1 drug by Federal Mandates.

There are dosage suggestions and usage suggestions to go along with a Doctors order for the use of Cannabis.

I think we can all agree that Aspirin is a Medication.

Find it in the PDR you keep mentioning, that supposedly contains ALL medications.

You won't find it!

You will find different Brand named drugs that contain Aspirin, but not Aspirin itself.
That because, like I've pointed out before, the PDR, is a Pay to Play publication.
 
Racer88 said:
If any MJ derivative is going to be used in proper medical practice, it would have to be a much "cleaner" delivery method than smoking. Yes, I know those products exist and / or are in development.
Click to expand...

They are called edibles and have been around as long as Medical Marijuana.
 
Racer88 said:
If you're smoking it... it's recreational
Click to expand...
I suppose someone dealing with the systems of Cancer and the side effects of Cancer treatments might weigh the negative aspects of smoking a joint over the negative aspects of become addicted to Opiods.
 
This is what AI has to say about State Medical boards and the "Standard of Care" pertaining to Cannabis.


Significant Recent Changes (April 2026)
As of April 22, 2026, the federal government officially moved state-licensed medical marijuana and FDA-approved products from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act. This reclassification acknowledges the "currently accepted medical use" of these products and eases federal restrictions on research,
Medical boards do not "approve" cannabinoids in the same way regulatory agencies like the FDA do; however, many state medical boards have adopted formal guidelines for physicians recommending them.
Oklahoma Medical Board
Oklahoma Medical Board
+1
Regulatory Landscape (2026)
As of April 2026, the regulatory environment for cannabinoids has shifted significantly due to federal rescheduling.
JD Supra
JD Supra
+1
FDA-Approved Products: The FDA has approved specific cannabinoid-derived and synthetic drugs, including Epidiolex (CBD), Marinol, Syndros, and Cesamet.
State Medical Boards: Boards in 40 states now oversee programs where physicians can legally "recommend" (rather than prescribe) medical cannabis.
Federal Status: Effective April 22, 2026, state-licensed medical marijuana and FDA-approved products were moved from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act, recognizing their accepted medical use.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (.gov)
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (.gov)
+6
Board Guidelines
The Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) has established "Model Guidelines for the Recommendation of Marijuana in Patient Care," which many state boards, such as the Oklahoma State Board of Medical Licensure and Supervision, have adopted or used as a template.
Oklahoma Medical Board
Oklahoma Medical Board
+1
Core Board Requirements for Physicians:
Medical Education: Starting January 1, 2026, some states (like Oklahoma) require physicians to complete specific medical marijuana education before making recommendations.
Good Standing: Physicians must maintain active licensure in good standing with their respective state medical or osteopathic boards.
Standard of Care: Recommendations must adhere to "accepted standards a reasonable and prudent physician would follow" for any medication.
Patient-Physician Relationship: A bona fide relationship and formal diagnosis of a qualifying condition are generally required.
 
Last edited:
James Moore said:
Cannabis doesn't comply with the standards You've deemed necessary to be considered a medicine
Click to expand...

LOL! Thanks for giving me credit and elevating me to such a lofty position. Alas, I do not determine the Standards of Care. It's the medical community itself.... AND, believe it or not.... PI attorneys (in court). Yep. Standard of Care isn't a law... nor determined by a gov't agency... or professional organizations bylaws... or regulations. If you read the excerpts I posted or followed the links to the definition, you'd understand.

Standard of Care is what a "reasonable" practitioner would be expected to do by peers and (medical) community practices. Oh... state medical boards do not stipulate SoC. They don't set the standards. They CAN consider them in licensure actions, penalties, etc. But they do not codify the SoC. Nobody does. Again.... read the definitions and links I posted.

And I can tell you that no "reasonable" medical practitioner would prescribe ANY medication without first KNOWING all those criteria I've listed multiple times in this thread. They don't just say, "Here... take some of this." Furthermore, a proper prescription stipulates dosage, timing, ect. to the patient. In fact, to just prescribe a medication without stipulating dosing, informed consent about interactions, side effects, etc... would be EASILY deemed MALPRACTICE. It would be negligence.

Just an example... if a doctor is prescribing Altace for hypertension, he should know the potential interactions with other medications. He should know the proper dosage for that patient. He should know that 0.1 - 0.7% of patients who take it may develop angioneurotic edema (a type of allergic reaction), which can portend a more serious allergic reaction. (Happened to my dad, BTW.) And so on. It's not a law or regulation. It's just SoC. And not doing so would be indefensible in a malpractice case. It's not because a law or regulation was violated. It's because the doctor didn't perform such due diligence when any lawyer can argue that any REASONABLE medical practitioner WOULD have done so in the same circumstances.
 
Last edited:
This is the current "prescription" for weed: "Smoke it / eat it until you feel better. (or pass out)" :ROFLMAO:
 

Share this page

Back
Top