Introducing Digg Dialogg!
Check out the first Digg Dialogg with Nancy Pelosi. More guests to be announced soon!
State Aims For Less Medical Marijuana In Revised Rule
wenatcheeworld.com — After meeting with law enforcement, Washington's Health Department has cut its suggested 60-day supply of medical marijuana by nearly a third — a change that riled patients' advocates and sparked threats of a lawsuit. The DOH's originally recommended 35 oz and a 100-sq-ft growing area. The new rules call for 24 oz, 6 mature plants and 18 seedlings.
alapoet- 362 diggs
- digg it
- Detritus, on 07/03/2008, -5/+2224oz in 60 days? For one patient?! I couldn't smoke that much even in my prime... okay maybe I could, but then I'd get cancer and need medical mariju... ohhhh.
- alapoet, on 07/03/2008, -0/+33Medical marijuana use does not equal recreational marijuana use.
The primary goal is symptom alleviation rather than getting high. And sometimes the symptoms (pain, nausea) are very hard to get rid of.
Also, many patients eat rather than smoke their medicine. It takes at least twice as much that way.- edebolt, on 07/04/2008, -2/+1If done well with oil or alcohol extraction it's more efficient and lasts longer to ingest it. Setting MJ on fire destroys many of the THC crystals. Vaporization is more efficient and kicks in quickly like smoking it.. Also far carbon monoxide, tar, resins are deposited in the lungs. A combo of ingesting and vaporizing is ideal. People who smoke it are damaging their lungs and liver.
- WallyAnti, on 07/04/2008, -1/+3@edebolt
"People who smoke it are damaging their lungs and liver."
Do you have sources to back up that assertion or are you just assuming?
- WallyAnti, on 07/04/2008, -1/+3@edebolt
- edebolt, on 07/04/2008, -2/+1If done well with oil or alcohol extraction it's more efficient and lasts longer to ingest it. Setting MJ on fire destroys many of the THC crystals. Vaporization is more efficient and kicks in quickly like smoking it.. Also far carbon monoxide, tar, resins are deposited in the lungs. A combo of ingesting and vaporizing is ideal. People who smoke it are damaging their lungs and liver.
- debunkthelies, on 07/03/2008, -1/+25If something works to help people, the big Pharma attack dogs will try to stop people from having access to it.
- TheMachine1, on 07/04/2008, -1/+3Can you post any evidence that Big Pharma has a role in this?
Maybe but sounds more like the Big Law Enforcement Industrial Complex to me.- mrsteveman1, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2Exactly, its idiot politicians and police.
"Pot is bad.......we uh......we can't let people use it....yea. Makes our job harder. Yea."
Its a legitimacy issue, if they can say "pot is illegal 100%" it makes their ***** talking points easier to shove down peoples throats. If there is even a minor percentage of the population using pot for medical reasons without becoming wasted losers raiding the fridge, moving on to harder drugs and raping white women, it makes the LEAs job harder because people no longer believe their crap. Not that they do now, but medical marijuana is being treated as the front line because its going to be the first situation where the government rolls back the ***** and is forced to shut the ***** up.
- mrsteveman1, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2Exactly, its idiot politicians and police.
- TheMachine1, on 07/04/2008, -1/+3Can you post any evidence that Big Pharma has a role in this?
- greytfriend, on 07/03/2008, -0/+7I read in one article that maybe if the amount allowed is lowered the legislators will be more comfortable with supporting it. I certainly hope so.
- JukesDen, on 07/03/2008, -1/+11Its not for ANY human monkey to decide whether or not its 'legal' to begin with. Another life form on this planet. Been here before you were born, will be around (hopefully) long after YOU have died.
I read that hemp has 2000 uses (at the body shop). So be it that you want to smoke it or make use of it in the 1999 forms, that should be your choice.
End of story.- wexmajor, on 07/04/2008, -2/+1Marijuana should clearly be legal but arbitrary hippie reasoning should not factor into the decision any more than arbitrary status quo reasoning should. Buried.
- JukesDen, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1Instead of flinging dirt, why not justify and elaborate?
What reasoning arms you to be the judge on the matter?
- JukesDen, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1Instead of flinging dirt, why not justify and elaborate?
- wexmajor, on 07/04/2008, -2/+1Marijuana should clearly be legal but arbitrary hippie reasoning should not factor into the decision any more than arbitrary status quo reasoning should. Buried.
- sukmydigg, on 07/03/2008, -1/+9Not that I'm a Christian, but Man made liquor and God made reefer...who the ***** do you trust? If you can TAX it, it's cool to smoke??? I guess so...,but they know we would all be growing our own ***** if they ever legalized it outright. I'd have a backyard full of 'medicine.'
- lambda, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1Man made liquor, but God also made man. Therefore, by the commutative property, God made liquor.
- DrainBamaged138, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1you dont have to be christian to believe in God
- WallyAnti, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1...but being a drinker helps.
- VKMO, on 07/03/2008, -0/+8It's ridiculous for law enforcement to inject themselves into the process. Medical marijuana, for those who qualify, should be between the patient and his or her doctor.
- btschul, on 07/04/2008, -0/+14Ok, people. We have heard your complaints. You and your doctors have both told us that medical marijuana is the most effective form of pain relief you can find. So here's what we're gonna do. We will let you have it, but we won't give you enough to relieve your pain. You can only have a tiny little bit. We know much more than your doctor about what is right for you, so we will be determining your dose. Ok, problem solved.
*silence*
Why aren't you people content???!!?- edebolt, on 07/04/2008, -2/+112 ounces a month is a tiny bit? maybe for a extended family of Rastafarians. I would propose a tiered allotment.If a patient has a verified terminal illness then a higher amount but if its someone younger who says they are jittery or have a little glaucoma etc then they should get a smaller amount... Isn't that reasonable?
- WallyAnti, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2I find it more unreasonable for the government to be getting involved in the first place.
- edebolt, on 07/04/2008, -2/+112 ounces a month is a tiny bit? maybe for a extended family of Rastafarians. I would propose a tiered allotment.If a patient has a verified terminal illness then a higher amount but if its someone younger who says they are jittery or have a little glaucoma etc then they should get a smaller amount... Isn't that reasonable?
- JarJar420, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2Grow yousa own herb :)
- DarkReign16, on 07/04/2008, -0/+4"Legalize it, time to recognize it"
- samfrench, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2I see why there is an uproar here, because it is really nobodies choice of how much medicine you need, except your doctor. This is for understandable because 35 OZ of high quality weed can sell for about $9,100 if sold by the oz, probably about half if sold all at once. This is to prevent people from becoming big drug dealer, getting their drugs legally.
Assuming conservatively that 6 plants can grow about 12oz every 3 months that's 8oz every 30 days, combined with 21 oz is 29oz. This means about 14g every day. With high quality buds 14g will have you high every hour of the day.- willr001, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1I dunno if prices are high around here, or if the stuff round here is better, but i would say closer to 13,000... that's per 60 days, so... almost $80,000 a yr w/o going over your legal limit
Not that i'm saying that it's wrong for it to be that high of a limit, steve kubby in california used to have a 5-6 pound limit or something till he moved to canada, he smoked 2 oz a day i think. If he weren't smoking, he supposedly would die from unregulated adrenaline production if i remember right.
- willr001, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1I dunno if prices are high around here, or if the stuff round here is better, but i would say closer to 13,000... that's per 60 days, so... almost $80,000 a yr w/o going over your legal limit
- NikoKun, on 07/04/2008, -0/+4Since when does the law determine dosages for patients? Isn't that the doctor's job?
Medical patients can sometimes use a very large amount of cannabis, since they often cook it into foods, so they don't have to smoke it (and a single dose lasts longer that way). Patents tend to need a lot more than recreational users. - feckineejit, on 07/04/2008, -0/+11legalize this plant already. anybody who wants to should be able to smoke marijuana.
a pot smoker will never puke or piss or break bottles in your street, never pick a fight and never die of a pot overdose. - odacity509, on 07/04/2008, -0/+0OMG you linked to the Wenatchee world. I live in Wenatchee!
Wer'e famous! Wenatchee FTW
...I never thought I'd see this day. - NecroSexy, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1Time to take out the roach tweezers.
- Pantheras420, on 07/04/2008, -0/+11oz is amazing to me... If I had 24 I'd be in heaven
- triad203, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1@alapoet: No, I'm sure inhaling burning smoke and particulate into your lungs does them no damage whatsoever...
- jepizacar, on 08/03/2008, -0/+1nice resource....
http://topforex.co.cc
http://skincare.freehostia.com
http://acnecare.890m.com
http://acne.ej.am
http://gofinance.890m.com
http://fastcar.890m.com
http://carbeauty.co.cc
http://gadingan.com
http://gadingan.com/indexsc.php
http://gadingan.wordpress.com
http://23ltd.info
http://jeniya.info
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by