Marijuana, The MRSA Drug?

As the parent of a child with MRSA, I welcome this medical research. Unfortunately, however, politics will probably trump common-sense here in these United States.

If you've never heard of MRSA before, please read this description from the Mayo Clinic. Young children are especially at risk, so it's important to know the symptoms.

ha.. ha... reason to be laughing from all ends!

Researchers from Italy and UK found out this recently!!

We have native medicine which use marijuana as an ingredient which do wonders. They have known this fact even over 2000 years ago. There was nothing new to find!

Come and visit one of the ancient medical universities in the world at Polonnaruwa-Sri Lanka -( now in ruins) which dates back to may be 200AD.

I believe in India too there are many ancient medicines which contain marijuana

I've also read that it's very healthy to ingest and the seeds were a staple of many diets long ago. As far as the current laws? Like many of them, the facts seem pretty clear that they were founded in ignorance and false fears. But hey.. I'm no expert.

Globally we allow ourselves to remain under the rule of the collectively ignorant and poorly motivated who influence their power on topics far more potent and oppressive than this. So it becomes a question of how to get billions of heads out of billions of ass's so that things can be corrected.

Right you are JE. Your original post was exactly correct and relevant. The physics prof got carried away with his personal problems and wrongly critisized you.

As engineers we are bound to stick to the facts and figures, not politically derived opinions. The FACT is that there are no credible studies that prove long term damage (especially brain damage) to humans by normal use. Thousands of scientists have tried and failed. The prof has insulted all of us by falsely leading us to believe that there are numerous studies that "prove this" I feel sorry for his freind that died, but clearly he had deep rooted medical problems that were niether caused by or curable by marijuana use. Just because something is illegal does not mean that it is bad. Legislators make laws for all sorts of reasons, and many times that means self serving reasons for them or their corporate friends. Some times they just make really good and fair laws, but to believe that they all are is foolish and negligent. If laws were implemented against substances that truly caused severe and long term harm to humans, they would have to outlaw tobacco and alcohol, as the damaging effects of both are numerous, widespread, deadly and undeniably well documented

Great answer

I initially was going to make a funny comment, but after reading JE in Chicago's ignorant comment, I could not keep silent and decided that it was far more important to do some education for someone who mistakenly thinks that he has more info than the lawmakers. It is unfortunately only too obvious that you are sorely lacking in knowledge and understanding on the topic and are far more ignorant and clueless than those you accuse of the same. I think the key phrase we'll have to go with is, "But hey.. I'm no expert." Well, mister "no expert," best to keep your ignorance and misplaced self-righteousness to yourself at least until you go collect some facts so that you have a leg to stand on when you talk. "But hey.." since you brought it up, high time to educate you and any other pure idiots (kinder than the word you used for people who actually are educated) who in their lack of knowledge think the same way.

There is ample evidence that marijuana use causes irreversible brain damage. How many scientific medical studies do you need to prove it to you? I can guarantee that there are more than the number you just thought of - far too many studies with the same conclusions to even begin listing. Easy enough to find if one is willing to stretch, or maybe restretch, their brain by doing a little searching and reading. Do you really think drug use comes without consequence? Do you really think that the drugs deemed as illegal were just picked willy nilly? Boy, you really are ignorant; aren't you! In addition to brain damage, the behavioral changes due to the damage or due to immediate use cause additonal social problems and crime. Are you a taxpayer mister "no expert"? Do you really need more social problems to help pay for? I personally know 3 individuals who have each been hospitalized multiple times on taxpayer money to prevent suicide and/or violence to others for their dreams and the voices that now talk to them continuously. Hard drugs? No. Marijuana. Of course, several hard drugs offer the same wondrous benefits to their users and usually but not always - more quickly. Once their episodes are over, these guys are back on the street - homeless, hanging around the corner from houses like yours. They can't and don't live with their families or in group homes any more. Do you need some more guys like these hanging around your town, having an episode who knows when because of the voices in their heads?

Are there medical benefits to marijuana? Yes. You can get marijuana in pill form. The amount of drug is carefully controlled to make sure that it causes the most benefit with the least harm. Is it also harmful? Yes, especially when taken in uncontrolled amounts - such as when smoking it, ingesting it etc. The pill form of the drug is legal and has been, even in the United States for many years. There is no reason for people to use "medical pot". It is simply an excuse for illegal drug use. I had a friend, sadly passed away now, who had a combined heart and lung transplant. Marijuana was one of the drugs of potential benefit to him. He used the pill form, prescribed by his doctor for a long time and did quite well and had an optimistic prognosis. Unfortunately, he had previously had a problem with marijuana use and decided that this was a reasonable excuse to use "medical pot". An extended discussion with him about his health eventually revealed that that was all it really was - an excuse. Within a few months he had started to become phsychotic and pushed everyone he loved or who loved him away. His wife, who had stood by his side through a ton of difficulty and for all that time couldn't take it and left. Even his parents would no longer have anything to do with him. The drug had taken control of him (nobody thinks of marijuana in this way) - it was all he could think about or talk about when he wasn't cursing at whomever was talking to him. Within a year of using his own (unregulated) pot, he passed away, one of his lungs completely shriveled to nothing and the other well on its way and the organs in rejection. Are there other chemicals in the marijuana plant that are potentially useful? Yes. Once again, these plants, like many others, if used properly can be a benefit to man. On the other hand, like many plants certain chemicals in them are not of benefit to man or are only of benefit if the dosages are very carefully controlled.

As with the pill form of marijuana, lawmakers will have no problem legalizing other extracts of the plant that are of medicinal benefit to man and do not carry any of the serious side effects.

Wow, it looks like you are harboring a lot of anger inside.
After doing a quick search here are some studies I found.

Study 1 | Study 2 | Study 3

I did find the study you are referring to but it mentions long periods of continued use.
Also if I read the blog correct, it mentions using it as a topical agent and wouldn't have any of other "side effects".

MSRA can be fatal and is known as a "superbug" because of its resistance to most drugs. I think someone suffering from this would glad for any sort of help they can get.

wow I think next time you need to keep your comments to yourself. And stop reading the national enquirer. As one of the leads for 7 of these marijuana studies, I can a sure you any such side effects in that you have talked about are purely unfounded. In the bud of the plant which is smoked it's been found there is less tar and toxic components then tabacco. Frankly healthwise it's better than tabacco or liqour

Sounds promising, but I doubt current US drug laws and the established medical community will allow any local use. Sad, but true.

During the early seventies I used that stuff Medicinally of course to fend off many bad things. All of the proven hype on POT could be proven for cigarette smokers also.

From Rhabe bless you for a standard answer on the evils of POT however, Big Brother has had Propaganda against that for years. Medicinally used POT and recreationally used POT both make the world a better place. I have met many people who would rather leave a person in pain than alleviate the pain with the properly used herbal remedy. I do not like or place those kind of people in my list to associate with.

Soldiers using POT is of course a bad idea, the Vietnam war had all of my buddies using the stuff turning into flakes. After the war however many of the kindest nicest people I have ever met used that form of recreation and abstained from alcohol. I do not use it now myself, but if I get sick it is on the top of my list.

In my most honest evaluation, Propaganda is the negative and the positive use by far outweighs it.

PhP!? are you ok?

Don't get me wrong. I'm educated. Very well by my standards, but to call me an expert on the subject is like calling you and expert, and I trust that you are not.

Those people you describe are suffering from various life conditions for sure, but worse, they have lost support from their family and friends who would rather call them junkies or ignore them completely instead of dealing with core problems that they might unwittingly facilitate.

To myself, the things you have said sound ridiculous and uneducated.

If you want to know what kills more humans than anything and makes them fight to the death, look no further than the end of your fork.

-power to the people!♥

dbd? how does the law of personal protection factor into that?

JEinChicago and Prof.

would you to move your comments off line to each other. neither of you said much that was relevant to this post. if you reread the original post, there was no mention of smoking or injesting marjuana. therefore both of you are off topic and Prof, you are snapping like a rabid dog. take it off line. you are both welcome to your own opinions, but not in this thread.

now, back to the thread. the facts seem very plausible to me. i have read many things that reflect this same information. some of it very old. there is a religious group up in canada that has some very interesting things that they believe and historical information that backs them up. of course what they believe has very little to do with why they have a church, in my opinion. personaly i believe it is just so they can smoke pot, using religion as their protection from the law.

but when you read into their references and literature, it completly backs up the contention of the original poster. it showed up in the original annointing oil used in antiquity. this was used by most of the priests in all of the major religions in the area of the middle east. this annointing oil was also used in ritual cleansing of the priests bodies, their parehenalia of their religion, their alters, their holy places and the ritual annointin of new priests. when the formula for the oils is examined it is all products that have cleansing and medicinal properties. those materials were liquid myrh, dried cinnamon, liquid cinnamon and cannabis. when you open an herbal book to look at the medicinal properties of these things you find lists 20 and 30 different results from their application to the outside of the body. anti microbial, anti fungal, anti this, anti that. plus marijuana in topical form is known to mitigate nuerolgical problems.

so, i have no problem believing the original poster. now, weather modern medicine will ever allow itself to investigate and possibly accept the realities of these herbs, i don't know.

While some of (most everyones) the comments are off topic, bringing up the "ongoing brouhaha" as the article suggests to be a market blocking factor is not off topic.

I'm merely suggesting that there are many other potential medical, health, and service uses that can lot be enjoyed due to laws that would have put the people in your story on the wrong side of the law.

Just because there is a LAW against it:

Does not mean the LAW is right.

i completly agree. i got into this in a different forum about 6 months ago. unjust laws are institionalized by what is called "established law". that means that as far as the law is concerned, the precident is considered binding on all of the courts. until congress or the president changes the law. of course, the courts could still try to declare them unconstitutional, but seldom do. so, bad laws are enforced for a very long time, until it is finaly brought to a head. think slavery and womens right to vote. both took generations to change "the law". this is because the people in power did not want to give up that power. heard a good quote last night on the radio. can not attribute it to the author though, (memory problems). but paraphrased, it said you can either have true democracy, or an emensly wealthy class, but not both. reason, the emensly wealthy will always buy the government and pass laws that favor them.

Be careful in wishing for "true democracy" or majority rule. What if a majority of 51% voted to make a law that made building a fire for any purpose illegal? Then if some of the minority built fires to keep from freezing to death they could be imprisoned for wanting to stay alive. "True democracy" is not always fair and respectful toward the rights of minorities and is often little different from mob rule.

The US is a democratic republic & a representative democracy operating within a framework of established laws, the Constitution and the various state constitutions. Supposedly the people will elect leaders who are wiser and more level-headed than they are.

Slavery existed long before this nation and was not considered "bad law" at the time by the people who lived then. You cannot judge the people of the past by modern standards. At a certain period of history people decided that slavery was not a good thing and abolished it [at least in most countries]. The same goes for allowing women to vote. It was not "bad law", because that was simply the way people thought it should be at the time. Only near the time those laws were changed was there a struggle between some of the people in power and those who were coming into power. Some people cannot adapt to new ideas easily.

The Prohibition of Alcoholic beverages was a bad law, because it was contrary to the wishes of the people and brought about criminal gangs. That is why it was repealed. Really bad laws are repealed, because the people elect leaders who have sense.

Ask which senators were being influenced by money from the heads of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae; Frank, Dodd, Obama, to name a few. Money always talks loudly. Those who are immensely wealthy have a louder voice and also have more to lose. They are vastly outnumbered by us ordinary people who fall for the same political lies and trickery over and over again. We have the collective memory of a gnat. We ignore the past actions and speeches of our politicians and go with whatever their latest speech says, truth or lie. We allow those with money to influence government, because to most of us being rich and successful equals being smart and being good leaders and we are not entirely wrong. We just forget that they too put on one shoe at a time, just like us, that they are just people with the same strengths and failings we have and they too need to be watched to prevent wrongdoing.

The law against growing and smoking marijuana for the express purpose of getting "high" is just as good as laws against drinking too much alcohol and getting "high". It has been taken to a bad extreme by banning the growing of harmless hemp which is very useful and by the knee-jerk reaction to anything made from marijuana or even harmless hemp as if they were equally bad.

"Supposedly the people will elect leaders who are wiser and more level-headed than they are."

That pretty much IS the catch, isn't it? The problem I see with it is that so many of the electorate is neither wise nor level-headed enough to recognize someone who is. Which may explain how so many dunderheads (from both major parties, I hasten to add) seem to get not only elected, but re-elected repeatedly. I've never favored term limits, I always thought that when people were fed up enough, they would limit the term by voting for someone else. But too many people just won't vote for a candidate of the other party no matter how inept, crooked, or morally bereft their own party's candidate is. And their party won't oust an incumbent until he is caught with a dead girl or a live boy (and sometimes not even then!). I believe I read somewhere that after the last election a majority of our House and Senate were lawyers - and that gives me pause...

A good and true lawyer joke. - A lawyer was in our office telling my wife about the neurotic dog she had adopted. She said she had kept the dog in her home for about 6 months and it had gradually become to be a normal dog. However she had been taking it to her office for about 6 weeks and it was again just about as neurotic as when she had first gotten it and she couldn't understand why.

My wife answered, "It's simple, the dog just figured out what you did for a living."

Our anti-marijuana people in the US are so short-sighted that if a medical drug made from it would cure cancer it would be banned here. I oppose pot-smoking like any rational person, but the use of marijuana to make medicines makes sense.

The anti-pot laws are so silly that they include hemp, of which you could smoke a bale and never get high, simply because it is hard to tell the difference between the plants. Those with MRSA may have to leave the US to be treated and who knows what the DEA will do when they return.

You are more than right!

The ban is existing in delaying the use of ultrasmall magnetic particles in imaging and treatment of cancer.

See the results of Barentsz in Nederlands and "Advanced Magnetics" company.

RHABE

Israel recently (about a year ago) adopted a local version of the American permit for legal use of pot products for authorised medical use ("Government Pot") in cases of glaucoma, lack of appetite due to medical condition and as a valid drug for use as a pain-killer in some chronic conditions, etc.

There are licensed people in Israel farming for growth, and others for THC extraction, under government control and regulation.

A growing problem here demanding more and more means to control is rampant alcohol abuse by young and inexperienced drivers, which contributed to the media attention shift, and the realisation that Marijuana is just another drug, like alcohol and tobacco, but not the mythical "Weed From Hell" as it was portrayed for decades, in the popular culture, and governmental restriction.

People slowly come to the rational realisation, that there are far worse drugs than Marijuana, which nobody does something about, especially a new breed of "designer drugs" which have no study to asses their use and potential side-effects.

Marijuana is a drug, but not the worse of the lot.

Bug Resistance 2008

hi everyone,

i just ran across an article on salon.com talking about what is happening in marijuana in the elections. i copied some from the article about the history of its prohibition. eye opening to say the least.

here it is:

Harry J. Anslinger, who headed the Bureau of Narcotics, was the man behind anti-marijuana cult film "Reefer Madness." Anslinger was an extremely ambitious man, and he recognized the Bureau of Narcotics as an amazing career opportunity -- a new government agency with the opportunity to define both the problem and the solution. He immediately realized that opiates and cocaine wouldn't be enough to help build his agency, so he latched on to marijuana and started to work on making it illegal at the federal level.

Anslinger immediately drew upon the themes of racism and violence to draw national attention to the problem he wanted to create. Here is a quote regarding marijuana...
"There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others."

The DuPont Chemical Company had, in 1937, been granted a patent on a sulfuric acid process to make paper from wood pulp. At the time DuPont predicted their sulfuric acid process would account for 80% of their business for the next 50 years. William Randolph Hearst, who made millions from paper production, became a strong advocate for elimination of hemp. DuPont also had just invented nylon, and saw rope made from hemp fiber as a rival product, a significant threat.

hi again,

i forgot: in case any one wants to read the whole article on the previous post, here is the link.

http://open.salon.com/content.php?cid=40921&source=newsletter

Ya, interesting stuff art.

On 4Nov, the voters here in the Peoples Republic decriminalized pot by a large margin. Finally some sanity.

Great article. Thanks for sharing

education is key