high cbd, low thc strains being selected and used is a good thing. this actually has a medicinal application - as do low cbd, high thc strains. just different applications - high cbd strains are great for inflammation & pain.

this is a good thing, and pharm companies in israel aren't the only ones doing it.

Elvis_Bogart: Hey, that's great because every time they interview a medical pot user they swear it isn't about getting high.

Yeah, but what about all the recreational users? Why should something be banned just because it gets people high? Clearly that's what's being said here, that the only problem with marijuana is that it gets people high, get rid of that and you're golden. Now tell me why. Why is the 'high' part the part you take umbrage with?

Slaxl: Clearly that's what's being said here, that the only problem with marijuana is that it gets people high, get rid of that and you're golden.

it's really not, tho. a reproducible solid high cbd strain is a holy grail of actual medical growers. (not all of them, of course) - in CA and CO at least, tested high cbd strains are cloned and passed around specifically because of the high cbd content.

i lack any chemical understanding of what's going on, so perhaps some science talking person could correct or add on to this, but what little i do understand on the topic says there is some process (let's call it evil elves) that only allows for a plant to be one or the other - if it is high in cbd, it will be low in thc - if it is high in thc, it will be low in cbd.

high-thc-get-you-high strains have survived being flat out illegal, and thrived - they aren't going anywhere. high cbd strains being identified and put into circulation just expands the utility of the plant.

That should put a stake in the medical marijuana controversy.

Slaxl: Elvis_Bogart: Hey, that's great because every time they interview a medical pot user they swear it isn't about getting high.

Yeah, but what about all the recreational users? Why should something be banned just because it gets people high? Clearly that's what's being said here, that the only problem with marijuana is that it gets people high, get rid of that and you're golden. Now tell me why. Why is the 'high' part the part you take umbrage with?

I'm sorry, but we're not talking about using marijuana as a recreational drug. We're talking about medicine, right?

Excellent progress. Now they should work to remove the high obtained from taking narcotics and other pharmas. You know, because this is about being high in any manner, not just being high on pot, right? Because they care, alot!

It's gonna be legal some day you anti-pot, shrivs. Lament it all you like. The treadmill of life rolls along and at one end old shrivs are falling off with their archaic and Reefer Madness generated stupidity, to be replaced by logical people that don't give a fark about pot (whether they smoke it or not) being legal because they realize there is no big deal about it. We'll vote it in, or some politician will push it to pander for votes, or in some other manner, but it will be legal. Then, and until then, I'll continue to smoke pot because the high is great and because it settles the stomach and because it chills people out without having to get hung up on all kinds of pharmaceutical BS.

Founded by Buzz Killington

Psychomancer: That should put a stake in the medical marijuana controversy.

Umm... the controversy is that it's being treated differently than any other substance that is used to treat or cure disease. No one is testing safety, efficacy, purity, quality, etc. For some reason, this is the ONLY substance that we can just ignore scientific inquiry into and just say "Eh, fark it, it's pot".

This controversy exists because there are people who are using it as a means to decriminalize recreational marijuana instead of legalizing it. Of course, those same industries who have decriminalized it as medicinal fought straight-up legalization in California.

rudemix: Excellent progress. Now they should work to remove the high obtained from taking narcotics and other pharmas. You know, because this is about being high in any manner, not just being high on pot, right? Because they care, alot!

It's gonna be legal some day you anti-pot, shrivs. Lament it all you like. The treadmill of life rolls along and at one end old shrivs are falling off with their archaic and Reefer Madness generated stupidity, to be replaced by logical people that don't give a fark about pot (whether they smoke it or not) being legal because they realize there is no big deal about it. We'll vote it in, or some politician will push it to pander for votes, or in some other manner, but it will be legal. Then, and until then, I'll continue to smoke pot because the high is great and because it settles the stomach and because it chills people out without having to get hung up on all kinds of pharmaceutical BS.

Medicinal marijuana is what's going to kill the push to legalization. The medicinal marijuana community has WAY too much to lose if it because straight-up legal.

A "no high" strain of marijuana? Where is Mossad's wet-work team when you need them?

meanmutton: Umm... the controversy is that it's being treated differently than any other substance that is used to treat or cure disease.

that, and it really misses the point to think that a high cbd strain will have all medicinal applications - it won't. thc and cdb are 2 of 40 or so cannabanoids present in a pot plant. a high cbd plant isn't going to shiat for appetite, stress/anxiety, and a host of other things. it will be a godsend for people with MS, however.

meanmutton: For some reason, this is the ONLY substance that we can just ignore scientific inquiry into and just say "Eh, fark it, it's pot".

that's exactly what i find interesting about it - there's this plant we've been using for thousands of years, but we're only now scratching the surface of bringing the science to it.

rudemix: Excellent progress. Now they should work to remove the high obtained from taking narcotics and other pharmas. You know, because this is about being high in any manner, not just being high on pot, right? Because they care, alot!

Actually they should but knowing how narcotics work it probably is impossible. The high is responsible for the addiction but it is also responsible for the palitive pain killing effects. If you could have the pain deadening without the high or addiction, hecks yes.

meanmutton: rudemix: Excellent progress. Now they should work to remove the high obtained from taking narcotics and other pharmas. You know, because this is about being high in any manner, not just being high on pot, right? Because they care, alot!

It's gonna be legal some day you anti-pot, shrivs. Lament it all you like. The treadmill of life rolls along and at one end old shrivs are falling off with their archaic and Reefer Madness generated stupidity, to be replaced by logical people that don't give a fark about pot (whether they smoke it or not) being legal because they realize there is no big deal about it. We'll vote it in, or some politician will push it to pander for votes, or in some other manner, but it will be legal. Then, and until then, I'll continue to smoke pot because the high is great and because it settles the stomach and because it chills people out without having to get hung up on all kinds of pharmaceutical BS.

Medicinal marijuana is what's going to kill the push to legalization. The medicinal marijuana community has WAY too much to lose if it because straight-up legal.

Can you please give me an example? Are you saying that the big-pharma has more to lose than the people who grow and sell to recreational users? I don't understand what you are trying to say.

SmellsLikePoo: Can you please give me an example?

those who had a foot in the door in california were some of the biggest opponents of the proposition for legalizing a few years ago.

whether it was disagreement with the specifics in the proposition or simply greed is probably debatable, but...all the same...there are numerous examples of above-the-radar medical growers pushing for 'no' votes.

heap: SmellsLikePoo: Can you please give me an example?

those who had a foot in the door in california were some of the biggest opponents of the proposition for legalizing a few years ago.

whether it was disagreement with the specifics in the proposition or simply greed is probably debatable, but...all the same...there are numerous examples of above-the-radar medical growers pushing for 'no' votes.

But either way, the 'medical marijuana' community is still a TINY TINY spec in a sea of recreational users. I don't think they hold enough weight to push this one way or the other.

SmellsLikePoo: But either way, the 'medical marijuana' community is still a TINY TINY spec in a sea of recreational users. I don't think they hold enough weight to push this one way or the other.

one would think, but this isn't really a topic where sanity or predictable outcomes are a regular thing.

meanmutton: Slaxl: Elvis_Bogart: Hey, that's great because every time they interview a medical pot user they swear it isn't about getting high.

Yeah, but what about all the recreational users? Why should something be banned just because it gets people high? Clearly that's what's being said here, that the only problem with marijuana is that it gets people high, get rid of that and you're golden. Now tell me why. Why is the 'high' part the part you take umbrage with?

I'm sorry, but we're not talking about using marijuana as a recreational drug. We're talking about medicine, right?

This is Fark, we can talk about golden arseburgers if I want. Deal with it.