May refuses to back Hunt on changing medicinal cannabis laws

Watch
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#1
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...-politics-live

This was brought up recently due to a mother of an epileoptic child being denied access to the cannabinoid based treatment for her epileptioc son.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...is-oil-into-uk

Tories are pro epilepsy and the causes of epilepsy. :yy:
4
reply
TheMcSame
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#2
Report 2 years ago
#2
I question the story in it's entirety... CBD oil has consistently been shown to help with seizures. Has she tried CBD oil that doesn't contain more THC than the legal limit? If not, why not? CBD, providing the THC levels are below the legal limit, is 100% legal here in the UK. Unless she's tried UK legal CBD oil, it just seems like she's making a big issue over her own ignorance
1
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#3
(Original post by TheMcSame)
I question the story in it's entirety... CBD oil has consistently been shown to help with seizures. Has she tried CBD oil that doesn't contain more THC than the legal limit? If not, why not? CBD, providing the THC levels are below the legal limit, is 100% legal here in the UK. Unless she's tried UK legal CBD oil, it just seems like she's making a big issue over her own ignorance
Yeah why would a mother make an issue over her son having more seizures.
1
reply
TheMcSame
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#4
Report 2 years ago
#4
(Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
Yeah why would a mother make an issue over her son having more seizures.
How about you read my post in it's entirety rather than cherry picking for you own means... CBD oil helps with seizures. Unless she's tried CBD oil that's legal to purchase in the UK, this story holds no water.
2
reply
debs20153
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#5
Report 2 years ago
#5
(Original post by TheMcSame)
How about you read my post in it's entirety rather than cherry picking for you own means... CBD oil helps with seizures. Unless she's tried CBD oil that's legal to purchase in the UK, this story holds no water.
I think the cannabis oil her son needs requires THC for it to work there is no legal limit of THC in the uk its just banned. Also people under 18 are not legally allowed to have it so your point is invalid for this case. The concentraion of CBD in these oils is also extremely low so it would be very unlikely to help anyone with such symptomps as said by the people who sell the oil themselves. Also he has taken the oil but it has failed to help him in anyway so he needs that type of oil.
3
reply
the beer
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#6
Report 2 years ago
#6
What a ****.

(Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
Tories are pro epilepsy and the causes of epilepsy. :yy:
They're very pro cannabis when it's in their greenhouses making them money.
1
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#7
(Original post by TheMcSame)
How about you read my post in it's entirety rather than cherry picking for you own means... CBD oil helps with seizures. Unless she's tried CBD oil that's legal to purchase in the UK, this story holds no water.
Mr Hunt doesn't agree.
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8
Report 2 years ago
#8
(Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...-politics-live

This was brought up recently due to a mother of an epileoptic child being denied access to the cannabinoid based treatment for her epileptioc son.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...is-oil-into-uk

Tories are pro epilepsy and the causes of epilepsy. :yy:
There is no doubt that "medicinal" use of cannabis has been a stalking horse for legalisation elsewhere.

The government is right to oppose the situation where any doctor with a medical registration can write a private prescription for whatever formulation of "medicinal" cannabis, the market is willing to offer, for whatever conditions the doctor and patient decide can be treated with it.

It seems to me there is no need to change the law. The Home Secretary can grant a licence for the medicinal use of cannabis. What needs to change is that obtaining such a licence should not need a press campaign, a publicity stunt and a junior minister making stupid comments.

Guns are generally illegal in the UK but the Home Secretary licences the holding of prohibited weapons. I once met a man with enough AK47s to arm a battalion.

The problem with medicinal cannabis is the absence of a system whereby a consultant can make an application (an urgent one if necessary) and get a Home Office licence. You would think an application should be made to the Chief Medical Officer who should then internally advise the Home Office to grant or refuse the licence application.
1
reply
LL2018
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#9
Report 2 years ago
#9
(Original post by nulli tertius)
There is no doubt that "medicinal" use of cannabis has been a stalking horse for legalisation elsewhere.

The government is right to oppose the situation where any doctor with a medical registration can write a private prescription for whatever formulation of "medicinal" cannabis, the market is willing to offer, for whatever conditions the doctor and patient decide can be treated with it.

It seems to me there is no need to change the law. The Home Secretary can grant a licence for the medicinal use of cannabis. What needs to change is that obtaining such a licence should not need a press campaign, a publicity stunt and a junior minister making stupid comments.

Guns are generally illegal in the UK but the Home Secretary licences the holding of prohibited weapons. I once met a man with enough AK47s to arm a battalion.

The problem with medicinal cannabis is the absence of a system whereby a consultant can make an application (an urgent one if necessary) and get a Home Office licence. You would think an application should be made to the Chief Medical Officer who should then internally advise the Home Office to grant or refuse the licence application.
Ah, so it's a problem for a doctor with a medicinal degree to prescribe a drug that has caused zero cases of (overdose) deaths ever but it's perfectly okay for the local off-license to prescribe tobacco and alcohol, both of which cause hundreds of thousands of deaths worldwide annually?
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#10
Report 2 years ago
#10
(Original post by LL2018)
Ah, so it's a problem for a doctor with a medicinal degree to prescribe a drug that has caused zero cases of (overdose) deaths ever but it's perfectly okay for the local off-license to prescribe tobacco and alcohol, both of which cause hundreds of thousands of deaths worldwide annually?
Yes, its a problem. The drugs we allow and the conditions under which we allow them are matters for Parliament and the government. Those who do not support those decisions should not be allowed to circumvent those decisions. If they want the law changing they can campaign for that. However, the policy of Parliament should not prevent the granting of exceptions in truly exceptional cases.
0
reply
the beer
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#11
Report 2 years ago
#11
(Original post by nulli tertius)
There is no doubt that "medicinal" use of cannabis has been a stalking horse for legalisation elsewhere.

The government is right to oppose the situation where any doctor with a medical registration can write a private prescription for whatever formulation of "medicinal" cannabis, the market is willing to offer, for whatever conditions the doctor and patient decide can be treated with it.

It seems to me there is no need to change the law. The Home Secretary can grant a licence for the medicinal use of cannabis. What needs to change is that obtaining such a licence should not need a press campaign, a publicity stunt and a junior minister making stupid comments.

Guns are generally illegal in the UK but the Home Secretary licences the holding of prohibited weapons. I once met a man with enough AK47s to arm a battalion.

The problem with medicinal cannabis is the absence of a system whereby a consultant can make an application (an urgent one if necessary) and get a Home Office licence. You would think an application should be made to the Chief Medical Officer who should then internally advise the Home Office to grant or refuse the licence application.
Why should cannabis be a special case we don't put these barriers against opiates?
0
reply
Ladbants
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#12
Report 2 years ago
#12
This is usually what leads to legalisation. In the US, loads of people claim they have “medical issues” to get a medical marijuana card- and many of the states that had these laws are now progressing on to legalisation of cannabis. I don’t think the same should happen in the UK.
2
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#13
Report 2 years ago
#13
(Original post by the beer)
Why should cannabis be a special case we don't put these barriers against opiates?
Parliament chose to make it a special case.

The medicinal use of opiates was well established. I think Parliament was sceptical about the claimed medicinal uses of cannabis.

That does not mean sceptical about the medicinal properties of cannabis but sceptical that in the absence of campaigns to legalise cannabis for recreational purposes, it would be the preferred treatment for any or many patients. Parliament almost certainly viewed medicinal use of cannabis as a stalking horse for recreational legalisation in a way that morphine wasn't.

Even with the poor boy, we only know that cannabis works and the first line treatments tried by the clinicians didn't. Given time, which the boy might no longer have, other drugs might also have shown themselves effective on his condition. The Home Secreatry's decision was a humane one but might never have had to be made if the mother had not been so forcefully campaigning for the use of cannabis for the last couple of years.
0
reply
the beer
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#14
Report 2 years ago
#14
(Original post by nulli tertius)
Parliament chose to make it a special case.

The medicinal use of opiates was well established. I think Parliament was sceptical about the claimed medicinal uses of cannabis.

That does not mean sceptical about the medicinal properties of cannabis but sceptical that in the absence of campaigns to legalise cannabis for recreational purposes, it would be the preferred treatment for any or many patients. Parliament almost certainly viewed medicinal use of cannabis as a stalking horse for recreational legalisation in a way that morphine wasn't.

Even with the poor boy, we only know that cannabis works and the first line treatments tried by the clinicians didn't. Given time, which the boy might no longer have, other drugs might also have shown themselves effective on his condition. The Home Secreatry's decision was a humane one but might never have had to be made if the mother had not been so forcefully campaigning for the use of cannabis for the last couple of years.
That's mad, so his suffering is politically motivated, a punishment for his mothers views?
0
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#15
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#15
(Original post by nulli tertius)
There is no doubt that "medicinal" use of cannabis has been a stalking horse for legalisation elsewhere.
If only there was any good reason outlawing recreational cannabis use.

We already use opium for medical use for ****s sake. Stop denying potential treatments for stuff. IF only so I can be pumped full of mind altering drugs when I am dieing.
0
reply
debs20153
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#16
Report 2 years ago
#16
(Original post by Ladbants)
This is usually what leads to legalisation. In the US, loads of people claim they have “medical issues” to get a medical marijuana card- and many of the states that had these laws are now progressing on to legalisation of cannabis. I don’t think the same should happen in the UK.
Why because weed ruins families and the other nonsense you read in the paper it’s people like you that cause thousands of deaths due to a futile drug war because members of your family and friends are incapable of personal responsibility
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#17
Report 2 years ago
#17
(Original post by the beer)
That's mad, so his suffering is politically motivated, a punishment for his mothers views?
(Original post by the beer)
That's mad, so his suffering is politically motivated, a punishment for his mothers views?
No, the politicians eventually ameliorated a situation brought about by his mother’s obsession over the last couple of years with cannabis treatment.
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#18
Report 2 years ago
#18
May, it would seem, is trying to avoid rocking the tory boat. She seems to be ignorant of the fact it loosely resembles the sinking of the titanic under her leadershp though.
0
reply
the beer
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#19
Report 2 years ago
#19
Cannabis war 'comprehensively lost', says William Hague
0
reply
the beer
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#20
Report 2 years ago
#20
(Original post by nulli tertius)
No, the politicians eventually ameliorated a situation brought about by his mother’s obsession over the last couple of years with cannabis treatment.
That's an interesting spin on in. What justifies all this, what exactly do we have to be so afraid of?
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Should the school day be extended to help students catch up?

Yes (34)
29.06%
No (83)
70.94%

Watched Threads

View All