The pharmacutical industry's hijacking of medical marijuana

Originally posted by zaiger
reply to post by RRokkyy

 

Whats your point? You admit anyone can grow it. Poppies and Opium Poppies are different strains of the plant. It is illegal because the Pharma Cos want to control your access to it.

No it is perfectly legal to grow poppies, you can buy ornamental "opium" poppies at flower shops.

That is your opinion of a solution. Self medication should be considered a human right.

Well that is the first time i have heard that here. Heroin addicts just need an endless supply of cheap heroin, i do not think that it would help anything.

Growing opium poppies is illegal.

What would medicating heroin addicts help?
1. Eliminate the war on drugs,drug gangs,drug violence,drug profits,drug related thefts,need for prisons,spreading of disease,wasted taxpayer money,corrupt politicians and police,allow addicts to work instead of looking for drugs,reduce prostitution,etc.

reply to post by airspoon

Legit to who? It is already legit to many people. If it works and isn't as harmful as the alternative, then it is legit to whoever is taking it.

People were saying the same exact thing durring the prohibition of alcohol upload.wikimedia.org...
And the number of people who suddenly "needed" alcohol went way up. Just like today with medical pot.

Dude, have you not been reading the thread? How on earth is big pharma going to make it cheaper than free? Are they going to go door to door handing it out for free?

Why do people pay 50 bucks for an oil change when they can do it themselves for 20? Why do people buy lemons when they can grow a tree for free? There will always be people willing to buy it if they do not have to do anything for it and there will always be people willing to sell it to them.

The fact is, it is very threatening as they stand to lose billions in lost profits from other medicines that people decide decide isn't worth it and isn't best for them.

Because it is threatening, they are trying to keep the plant outlawed, however due to very strong and growing popular opinion, you can't keep it illegal for ever so instead, they are going to come up with a way to meter it and charge for it, while outlawing the plant itself. This way, they can continue to rape the American people

Rape the american people? Nice appeal to emotion please save the dramatics. The drug companies do not want to spread the reefer madness mentality because they will be selling drugs that come from the plant and get people equally high. It is the medical pot activists and people growing it like the ones in humbodlt county that want to keep it illegal.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Again, they just can't start selling it if the plant is legal. Most people won't buy it for the prices that they need to turn a big profit. The profits that they would make compared with that of the medicines that it would replace, just wouldn't add up and the industry would lose billions every year

If it is legal for medical purposes they could grow it. The more they grew the cheaper it would be for the customer.

No, pot isn't physically addictive like opiates. Pot is addictive like soda is addictive. Pot is addictive like porn is addictive.

Tobacco is not physically addictive either.

You stop taking the medicine and you are violently sick for weeks, months and even years.

Years? That is an outright lie, months maybe for something like methadone.

In fact, it quickly changes the chemicals in your brain to physically need the drugs and after a while, this change is permanent. I'm not talking psychological, rather physical. When your brain changes permanently, you will never go back to normal again and this change can easily come after months or just a few years of taking the medications.

where do you get this information???

Dude, the more you post, the more you are showing that you have no idea what your talking about and instead of trying to engage in any kind of intellectual debate, you are just grasping at straws to defend your original stance, which has been pretty much sliced up and spit out.

No idea what im talking about, please. Many of the pro medical marijuana studdies are funded by big drug companies

Large pharmaceutical companies such as Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline and Novartis are demonstrating increasing interest in the therapeutic use of cannabinoids and their derivatives, according to a report of the Wall Street Journal on 28 February 2001. Other firms are already conducting research, such as the researchers at the Bayer AG who found that cannabinoid CB(1) receptors were upregulated in a rat model of chronic neuropathic pain (Siegling et al. 2001). Today, the only available cannabinoids are THC (dronabinol, Marinol) and the dronabinol derivative nabilone. Individual scientists, academic labs and small drug firms are currently the main promoters of pharmaceutical research, because large drug companies have traditionally been reserved with regard to the cost and the political problems associated with marketing marijuana as medicine. This situation appears to be changing. “We see them -- Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis -- all the time at the meetings of the society now," says Roger Pertwee, professor at the University of Aberdeen in the U.K. and secretary of the International Cannabinoid Research Society (ICRS). "They never came in the past."

Firms that are engaged in natural cannabis preparations are GW Pharmaceuticals in the UK and the phytopharmaceutical company Bionorica in Germany. Research and development costs of GW Pharmaceuticals increased to 5.1 million British Pounds in 2001 (PA News, June 13, 2001). Bionorica just started to manufacture dronabinol, and according to personal communication, intends to manufacture a cannabis extract and to start with clinical research shortly (Grotenhermen 2002). The Institute for Oncological and Immunological Research in Berlin (Germany) intends to licence their capsulated cannabis extract to a pharmaceuticals manufacturer, once research has demonstrated the extract’s effectiveness for treatment of severeal illnesses. Several million Euros have already been invested in research.

These activities demonstrate that the cannabinoid system is an increasingly interesting target for the devlopment of drugs by the pharmaceutical industry and that firms are investing millions of dollars into the research with natural cannabis. They appear to be confident that these investments are justified by the medicinal potential of the plant. However, according to the Institute of Medicine development of cannabinoid drugs is greately complicated by the Schedule I classification of both cannabis and tetrahydrocannabinols
www.drugscience.org...

So it is the drug companies that are funding those studies people post here on ATS. Even in the local dispensary sells extract which is what the drug companies are making. In fact Eli Lilly used to make Cannabis extract while they were still selling their opiate based pain killers.
www.gwpharm.com...
GW pharma is actually growing plants for their drugs.

[edit on 7-7-2010 by zaiger]

reply to post by zaiger


Alcohol has nothing to do with this. If marijuana treats people's symptoms for a much cheaper price and with far lesser side effects, it is going to be legit to them. You sir, are trying to appeal to emotions. So what if some people abuse the plant, there are many people who need it for the medicinal benefits. Some people have put their hand in with the alternative, narcotics, which didn't work all to well and had to heavy of side effects such as hard-core dependence.

Moving along to whether people will pay or not, sure their will be people who pay but they aren't going to pay extremely high prices when they can get it from their neighbor for a few dollars. All of these people who wean themselves from the very unhealthy chemicals, could easily get weed for a cheap price, when they were spending a fortune on a chemical. This would make it easier on the patients and much harder on big pharma. They would not be able to make nearly the same profits as they do when they have people hooked on chemicals and completely dependent on the pharma industry. The point here, is that the people would no longer be forced to patronize the pharma industry and thus will save themselves from being extorted by big pharma.

Yes, the pharma industry does rape the public, by forcing us to not only jump through hoops to obtain the chemicals needed, but also pay large sums of money and depriving us from creating, making and consuming our own medications. They charge far more than what is necessary to make the drugs and if you doubt it or try to claim otherwise, simply take a look at the drug prices in every other country on this planet. When a drug company is extorting me due to my ailment, I consider it to be rape. I'm forced to patronize the industry and a few companies in particular if I want to live. That's extortion since I should have the right to life and self preservation.

Moving along to how long it takes to recover from narcotics, it can take years and I know this from personal experiences. I came home from the army as a disabled veteran and I was taking several narcotic pain killers. I took them for several years after my injury and when I decided to get off (against the advice of my doctor), I was violently sick for a little over a month and now that it has been a little over a year, I'm still not normal, not in the least. No, I wasn't on methadone. I was on a combination of fentanyl, dilaudid and switching between oxycontin and morphine. I was on these medications non-stop for almost 5 years. Some of my other brothers who were wounded with me, are going through the same time frames to recover since we all decided together to get off of the chemicals.

I have been told that I will never get back to normal though I may get a little better as the years move on. The reason? Because these chemicals actually changed my brain in a physical manner. I am permanently screwed up because of the chemicals. Now I'm being told by my doctors that marijuana would probably benefit me more than the narcotics did. Why could they not have told me this sooner? You mean I am permanently screwed up because big pharma wanted me addicted to their chemicals? It's called rape!

Moving back to big pharma providing raw marijuana to customers for cheap. Big pharma is not in the business of wanting to help people. They are a corporation with only one goal and that goal is to make money. If they can corner the market, they will and they are going to charge the highest price that the market will bear and since medicine is a life sustaining product, the market will bear a very high price. If marijuana plants become legal, they stand to lose a bunch of money because not only would they have competition from your friendly neighbor, but they couldn't charge an extremely high price for the product. Many people will just grow it themselves and people will quit the heavy chemicals. It's really not that hard to understand.

If big pharma grows plants to sell them, they would have to sell them cheap, since anyone can grow their own and competition would be fierce. This product would be competing with an already lucrative product for the industry so selling it cheaply would not pay off. Because of this, they are going to do everything possible to ensure that the plants don't become legal.

This is where my theory comes in. The growing support of marijuana amongst the population, especially the sick, our government is not going to be able to keep it illegal for much longer, hence the many states that have legalized it. So, to skirt this massive support, they will try to turn it into a pill or some other form that would only make it possible for the pharma industry to produce it, legally thus going against the interest of the people who only wish to medicate themselves for their ailments. So, when the people could be getting a life sustaining medication for free, big pharma is completely against this as it eats their bottom line. What part of this don't you understand?

Because it doesn't fit your warped view, you are going to try to add irrelevant information or change the subject to something else, as per the rest of your posts on this thread in an effort to divert.

It's real simple:

Big pharma does not want the plant legalized as it will kill their profits and because they are a corporation, their goal is to profit as much as possible.

If marijuana was made legal, big pharma would stand to lose a bunch of money to include future profits. This is irregardless of whether they sell the plant or not.

It really is that simple. For explanations, see above.

--airspoon




[edit on 7-7-2010 by airspoon]

reply to post by airspoon

You sir, are trying to appeal to emotions.

How so?

Moving along to whether people will pay or not, sure their will be people who pay but they aren't going to pay extremely high prices when they can get it from their neighbor for a few dollars.

Now you are back to the black market, just like it would be illegal to brew alcohol and sell it out of your house. And just like it is illegal to buy beer from the store and sell it at my house.

Yes, the pharma industry does rape the public, by forcing us to not only jump through hoops to obtain the chemicals needed, but also pay large sums of money and depriving us from creating, making and consuming our own medications.

No the state, FDA and federal government controll drug laws and what you have to do to get them not big pharma.

They charge far more than what is necessary to make the drugs and if you doubt it or try to claim otherwise, simply take a look at the drug prices in every other country on this planet.

Welcome to business 101.

When a drug company is extorting me due to my ailment, I consider it to be rape. I'm forced to patronize the industry and a few companies in particular if I want to live. That's extortion since I should have the right to life and self preservation.

You do have the right to life and self preservation, nobody is saying you don't.

I came home from the army as a disabled veteran and I was taking several narcotic pain killers. I took them for several years after my injury and when I decided to get off (against the advice of my doctor), I was violently sick for a little over a month and now that it has been a little over a year, I'm still not normal, not in the least.

Yes this is normal a month is typical withdrawl but a year is not withdrawl. The whole "not normal" thing probably has something to do with the war and the reason why you were on all those medications in the first place.

Now I'm being told by my doctors that marijuana would probably benefit me more than the narcotics did. Why could they not have told me this sooner? You mean I am permanently screwed up because big pharma wanted me addicted to their chemicals? It's called rape!

Well you did admit you have brain damage from drug use. I would be blaming my doctor for putting me on such a heavy ammount of pain killers. Big pharma did do this to you, your doctor did. If your doctor Rx'd you insulin would you be blaming the insulin maker for you going into insulin shock?

If big pharma grows plants to sell them, they would have to sell them cheap, since anyone can grow their own and competition would be fierce.

A couple things here. If anyone could grow plants in their back yard big pharma would not need to sell any plants, they would lose that share of the market. But this would not really hurt their bottom line. The top 10 most proffitable drugs are not even pain killers.
health.howstuffworks.com...
Once a drug patent expires it loses its proffitablity as anyone can make a cheap generic. So drug comapnies are used to losing large ammounts of income from any given drug when the patent expires. People will say things like "i took viccodin" but 9 times out of ten they are taking a cheaper generic version of it, there is no difference between the two just what people call them.

The growing support of marijuana amongst the population, especially the sick, our government is not going to be able to keep it illegal for much longer, hence the many states that have legalized it.

Nobody has outright legalized it yet. Legal for med use is not the same as legal to grow in your back yard. In california it is legal to get an Rx for it but it is not legal to grow and sell to your neighbors.

So, when the people could be getting a life sustaining medication for free, big pharma is completely against this as it eats their bottom line. What part of this don't you understand?

Life sustaining? I don't think so. Like i said earlier the big money comes in from the heart medication and psych medications.

Because it doesn't fit your warped view,

It's different than yours so it is warped?

If marijuana was made legal, big pharma would stand to lose a bunch of money to include future profits. This is irregardless of whether they sell the plant or not

Not the case they make plenty of money off of everything else they sell, like Lipitor that pulls in $12.9 billion dollars a year.

[edit on 7-7-2010 by zaiger]

Originally posted by zaiger
Tobacco is not physically addictive either.

Now I've heard all there is to know. Where'd you pull that out of? A place the sun don't shine?

As an ex-smoker I know you are way off base with that claim. Please provide some sources for your claims for once.

reply to post by zaiger


There you go again, trying to skirt the subject. Who is talking about alcohol? Is this thread about alcohol or marijuana? Why do you keep bringing up alcohol? I'm akin to believe that you are now just trolling, though I would hope not.

Unlike alcohol which requires a still, ingredients, skill, know-how and other resources, marijuana requires a couple seeds and dirt. It's really apples to oranges. Weed is legal to grow in several states (for medicinal purposes)and eventually in many more, unless of course the pharmaceutical industry changes that by cornering the market, thus preventing people from having access to life sustaining medicines.

Moving along, as long as I'm deprived of life sustaining medicines, I do not have the right to preservation of life. Same as food and water. If you were prevented from having food, water or air even, you would not have the right to preservation of life. Many people can't afford the extortion fees of big pharma, and so go without the much needed medicines that they could otherwise get for free, thus they are denied the right to life. If you deprive someone the right to medicine, you are depriving them the right to preservation of life. I'm not saying give them medicine for nothing, only allow them to medicate themselves if they can find an alternative.

Good, so you get Business 101. Adding on to that, a business' profits are not more important than basic human liberties, such as that of life. I should not be able to prevent you from going to down to the stream to get a drink of water because I want to sell you a sip of water for all the money you could possibly pony up. However, these basic kindergarten level principals are besides the point and neither here nor there.

Here is the issue of this thread:

If marijuana becomes legal in more places, big pharma's profits are going to tank since a huge chunk of their quarterly earnings come from narcotic pain medicines, no-narcotic, anti-anxiety, anti-nausea and other chemicals to where an abundant and cheap alternative exists. As a better, cheaper and often free alternative becomes available, people will no longer be willing to pay the over rated prices for the harmful chemical alternatives. For this reason, big pharma is going to do whatever is necessary to prevent this from happening. Big pharma will not be able to corner a raw marijuana market, thereby pushing to come up with an alternative based on the raw plant that only a pharma company can produce and further push the government from keeping the plant legal. Such a move would be preventing people to the right to life and is the anti-thesis of freedom and liberty.

This has nothing to do with alcohol. Also, business 101 is not synonymous with extortion 101.

Even though this is besides the point, a year, two or even more is perfectly normal for the lasting effects of narcotic pain killers, according to the doctors. Normally, someone who has been on narcotics so long, won't ever get off. Instead, if they no longer need the drug, they will still have to take it in what's called opiate maintenance. I personally do not want to harm my body further by going on any kind of maintenance therapy, so I quit cold turkey. I couldn't allow this obviously harmful chemical to rule my life through the red-tape, costs and even more damage to my body. It is ridiculous that I should even have to go through all of that when there is a natural substance that doesn't include all of that. These narcotic pain killers actually physically change your brain, not really damage. It has nothing to do with the war, or any other psychological reasons, my brain has physically changed due to the harmful chemicals being introduced into my body, as it does everyone else. Usually, people just stay on maintenance therapy until they can no longer afford it, then die. Usually, due to the extreme discomfort, they will pony up the extortion fees even over purchasing food and shelter. Such is the case with addiction and frankly, I see no difference between big pharma and local drug dealer pushing heroin on children in the school yard.

As far as big pharma raping us by making us jump through hoops to get their chemicals, it is not entirely the fault of the FDA and government. It is the pharmaceutical industry who works so hard at depriving the people a natural and free alternative to their drugs. Because there is no alternative, thanks to big pharma, we have to jump through hoops and go broke for basic life sustaining medicines. Again, I shouldn't be able to keep you from drinking from the stream, only because I have bottles of cool-aid for $100 a pop. That would be extortion and yes, rape.

Furthermore, I do blame big pharma for my brain alteration (it's not damage as it didn't damage my brain, it altered my brain to where my brain no longer produces the chemicals to fight pain or dysaphoria on its own). My doctor had to work with only what he was allowed to work with. I need the pain killers because my body would have went into shock without them. My doctor saved my life with the tools at his disposal. Big pharma is one of the main reasons that an alternative was not available. This is not even mentioning the heavy lobbying effort on behalf of big pharma to the various doctors to push their drugs.

Now, moving along to the bottom line of big pharma. It's not only narcotic pain medicines that marijuana can replace. I was only using those as a "for instance". Anti-anxiety, non-narcotic pain medicines, anti-nausea, blood pressure, nerve medicines, anti-depressants etc... The fact is, it would hurt their bottom line. If it didn't, Pfizer would not have spent so much money in campaign contributions and other lobbying efforts in Connecticut alone to beat the medical marijuana initiative that passed through their state government a few years back. They made no bones about their opposition to medical marijuana. Now, going back to business 101, they wouldn't have spent the money and/or effort to do that unless MM threatens their bottom line. They may have won in Connecticut (most likely due to Pfizer HQ), but they are losing in many other states and just may lose federally, hence the theory provided in the OP.

--airspoon

reply to post by airspoon

There you go again, trying to skirt the subject. Who is talking about alcohol? Is this thread about alcohol or marijuana? Why do you keep bringing up alcohol? I'm akin to believe that you are now just trolling, though I would hope not.

I was dressing the topic directly, you respond with this ad hominem.

Unlike alcohol which requires a still, ingredients, skill, know-how and other resources, marijuana requires a couple seeds and dirt. It's really apples to oranges. Weed is legal to grow in several states (for medicinal purposes)and eventually in many more, unless of course the pharmaceutical industry changes that by cornering the market, thus preventing people from having access to life sustaining medicines.

Im not saying that one is harder or easier what i was saying is that selling it out of your house is illegal. Just like selling medical pot from your neighbor would be illegal.

Moving along to whether people will pay or not, sure their will be people who pay but they aren't going to pay extremely high prices when they can get it from their neighbor for a few dollars.

Remember? Is this the brain problem you were talking about earlier manifesting itself?

As far as big pharma raping us by making us jump through hoops to get their chemicals, it is not entirely the fault of the FDA and government. It is the pharmaceutical industry who works so hard at depriving the people a natural and free alternative to their drugs.

No... The state laws make you go through all the crap you have to to get Rx medications, the pharmaceutical industry does not enforce drug laws.

Furthermore, I do blame big pharma for my brain alteration (it's not damage as it didn't damage my brain, it altered my brain to where my brain no longer produces the chemicals to fight pain or dysaphoria on its own).

sounds like dammage to me.

Time will show that marijuana is not the miracle drug it is being said to be. Look up perscritions of alcohol durring prohibition it is the same BS claims.

reply to post by zaiger


There is no need for this line picking , anyone can take a whole speach tear it to shreds with quotations. And from what i can see , you are pro pharma man, got anything to gain by discretiting medical marijuana?

Here is a little look into the pharma world
1/7

2/7

3/7

4/7

5/7
couldn´t find this one
6/7

7/7


Typical scare tactics by officials, Note the refrence to crack cocain, and the statement that dealers are targetting kids


Another scare tactic, 1 hour video that has no proof at all. Just a guy tossing around the word "FACT" without any kind of evidence.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

Here are true facts about Medicinal Marijuana and how the goverment would gain profit from it rather then what it is doing today. Im only going to post 2 videos about it. If u have any interest in the subject and how the goverment is clearly avoiding this whole issue becouse they are getting paid by big corperation, i suggest u watch a documentory or 2, there´s loads of them.


Medical facts


News report on the issue.



Enjoy

This message was brought to you by the Icelandic pro choice on everything issue.

(,")ME(",)








[edit on 8-7-2010 by Spacedman13]

[edit on 8-7-2010 by Spacedman13]

reply to post by Spacedman13

And from what i can see , you are pro pharma man, got anything to gain by discretiting medical marijuana?

No am very against big pharma,see? But the whole ideal that big pharma is the reason why pot is illegal (the premise of the OP) is flat out wrong.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/b7039dc78d5e.jpg[/atsimg]
In fact it would be easier for big pharma if it was les restricted because they would be able to do what they wanted without having to go through the DEA for approval to do everything with plants. In fact eli lilly used to sell cannabis extract, the same stuff people sell in medical marijuana stores.
Then the OP blames big pharma for how hard it is to get Rx pain pills, which is again wrong as "Big pharma" does not make drug laws and they would probably by happy if people could buy their medication over the counter because that would mean more money for them.
Big pharma has nothing to gain by trying to discredit pot, they want to make pills out of it and will eventually market those pills to customers. How would they plan to market their drugs if they try to convince everyone it is bad for them?
The OP also states the drug companies ties to state government is what is keeping it from being legal in certian states, which again is false. Big pharma has ties to pretty much every state and president.

While Drug Industry Has Pooled a Record-breaking $80 Million for California

Measures, Schwarzenegger Remains Second Only to George W. Bush in Campaign.
www.prnewswire.com...

The lobbying group is just one of several altruistic-sounding entities with financial links to the drug industry that have materialized around the Capitol.
www.biopsychiatry.com...

These one is importiant

A couple of payments raised questions about compliance with university guidelines on industry relationships. Benjamin Ansell, associate professor at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, received $1,787 in meals and travel from Pfizer during the six-month period, even though UCLA's Guidelines on Industry Activities state that "Faculty, staff, and trainees are strongly encouraged not to accept such meals at any location under any circumstances."
californiawatch.org...

UCLA is inviting people with fibromyalgia, IBS, interstitial cystitis, chronic pain, and other chronic and recurring conditions to sign up and participate in a year-long Internet-based survey, called PROCAIM. PROCAIM was developed under a grant from the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine to UCLA researchers to study:
www.kindgreenbuds.com...

Medical pot research (with a pro MJ outcome) was funded by pfizer.

[edit on 8-7-2010 by zaiger]