Cannabis could soon be rescheduled: from 1 to 3

[Bill from NYC]

7 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

I do farm but not a cannabis farmer

 

There are some fairly well studied links between certain herbicides and cancers...they deal primarily w ingesting the substance. It's why one of the issues re: cannabis that's meant for smoking is tough because there isn't much literature on what happens when you burn these herbicides/pesticides and then inhale the smoke. Now you may not run into that issue but there are a lot of home gardeners who might.

 

As far as I understand it, inhaling the product of combustion of anything isn't great for your health. That goes for tobacco, cannabis, campfires, whatever. full disclosure I used to smoke cigs also and was a heavy cannabis user in my youth

And I'm sure that there will not be any time soon because the government wants the tax dollars. That said,at some point they will fund studies to say how bad it is and so they will have an excuse to raise taxes even higher, much like they did with tobacco.

 

I am not pro-tobacco. I wish that everyone would quit smoking today (although the government doesn't want to lose the tax dollars) but; I never did believe the government funded studies that prattle on about 3rd or 4th hand smoke. 

 

Jmo.

[billsfanmiamioh]

7 hours ago, Bill from NYC said:

Pesticides?

 

Really, right? 

Products from the regulated cannabis marketplace are tested for pesticides, heavy metals, microbials, fungi, and a number of other things in accordance with the regulations required by that state. Some cultivators don’t use pesticides at all just like “organic” produce. One caveat though is that “lab shoppping” is prevalent in the cannabis industry (aka processors using third party testing labs that provide favorable analysis)  

[Bill from NYC]

I hear ya. I'm a skeptic by nature and even have a hard time believing in supposedly organic fruit. 

[boyst]

You p*ssies just need to do meth. Be real men. 

22 minutes ago, billsfanmiamioh said:

Products from the regulated cannabis marketplace are tested for pesticides, heavy metals, microbials, fungi, and a number of other things in accordance with the regulations required by that state. Some cultivators don’t use pesticides at all just like “organic” produce. One caveat though is that “lab shoppping” is prevalent in the cannabis industry (aka processors using third party testing labs that provide favorable analysis)  

Never believe a farmer until you have been to their farm to see first hand

 

 

For that I can tell ya, whole foods grassfed beef in the Carolinas ain't truly what you would expect grassfed beef to be, sadly.

 

Same with what's sprayed on the plants,.etc. It's not just the plants. It is the ground etc.

Edited September 1, 2023 by boyst

[billsfanmiamioh]

3 minutes ago, boyst said:

You p*ssies just need to do meth. Be real men. 

Never believe a farmer until you have been to their farm to see first hand

 

 

For that I can tell ya, whole foods grassfed beef in the Carolinas ain't truly what you would expect grassfed beef to be, sadly.

 

Same with what's sprayed on the plants,.etc. It's not just the plants. It is the ground etc.

For sure. That’s why independent lab testing and a COA is required for cannabis products in any regulated marketplace. Most of the “lab shopping” i referenced is in relation to THC potency being inflated so the prices can be inflated. Every state has different requirements and thresholds for pesticides / contaminants / microbials though, so a harvest that was totally rejected in one state may be on shelves in another. More reason to have some kind of federal framework in place (for medicinal cannabis at least). 

[boyst]

7 minutes ago, billsfanmiamioh said:

For sure. That’s why independent lab testing and a COA is required for cannabis products in any regulated marketplace. Most of the “lab shopping” i referenced is in relation to THC potency being inflated so the prices can be inflated. Every state has different requirements and thresholds for pesticides / contaminants / microbials though, so a harvest that was totally rejected in one state may be on shelves in another. More reason to have some kind of federal framework in place (for medicinal cannabis at least). 

Gross.

 

Don't involve the federal government in any labeling for such things. Let the states decide, for one. But more importantly, keep the gov out of it the business aspect of all things to keep it good.

[Beck Water]

On 8/30/2023 at 7:22 PM, GoBills808 said:

Aren't most medicines plant derivatives?

 

A lot are.  A lot are deriviatives of the plant compound, modified to be more efficiently absorbed, or metabolized more slowly, or just to produce them more efficiently than they can be produced from the native plant.

[GoBills808]

Organic doesn't mean no pesticides 

[Beck Water]

56 minutes ago, boyst said:

Gross.

 

Don't involve the federal government in any labeling for such things. Let the states decide, for one. But more importantly, keep the gov out of it the business aspect of all things to keep it good.

 

Pull up a chair, Old Bean, and let me tell you a story about diptheria antitoxin (once hailed as one of the "seven wonders of the world" because of how diptheria could wipe out entire families of children, with no treatment).  Except then we had "Jim the Horse" and children died from tetanus-contaminated antitoxin.  Thus the Biologics Control Act of 1902.

 

Now I'd like to tell you a story about a marvelous miracle drug, sulfanilamide - first effective antibiotic against streptococcal infections.  Except it was bitter, and difficult to get children to swallow.  Massengill made a marvelous new palatable-to-children formulation - sweet-tasting, and raspberry flavored!  100 people were poisoned and died (many children) because that sweet-tasting solvent was diethylene glycol and toxicity testing was not required at the time.  In response, the 1938 Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic (FD&C) Act, which required proof of safety before the release of a new drug, was passed.

 

There are a lot of Federal laws that are written in blood. 

 

What, you want to depend upon the conscience, good sense, and public service of corporations?  Because that worked so well before the Federal Regulations.

 

On 8/30/2023 at 6:49 PM, WhoTom said:

This also opens up the potential for serious research on the positive and negative effects of cannabis. Big-pharma won't sponsor it because they can't patent a plant (although they could do like Big-ag and patent a genetic strain of a plant), and the NSF won't fund cannabis-related grants because Schedule 1 means no valid use whatsoever. What little scientific research exists is due to a handful of dedicated scientists who jumped through ridiculous hoops in order to conduct their studies.

 

Knowledge is power.

 

I would really like to see research be easier to conduct.  I've been looking into it because I'd like more effective pain control for my mom, and everywhere I turn, I get "we really don't have any studies on that".

Edited September 1, 2023 by Beck Water

[Beck Water]

1 hour ago, billsfanmiamioh said:

Products from the regulated cannabis marketplace are tested for pesticides, heavy metals, microbials, fungi, and a number of other things in accordance with the regulations required by that state. Some cultivators don’t use pesticides at all just like “organic” produce. One caveat though is that “lab shoppping” is prevalent in the cannabis industry (aka processors using third party testing labs that provide favorable analysis)  

 

We got organic farmers who can speak to this more, but as far as I know organic does not mean "free of pesticides". 

It just means organic farmers use "natural" pesticides that are approved for organic use.  Stuff like neem, nicotine, spinosad, copper sulfate, etc.

These natural pesticides may be, or may not be, less toxic to people or less damaging to pollinators then the chemically produced kind.

 

As far as I know.

[Goin Breakdown]

On 8/30/2023 at 8:18 PM, nucci said:

it's called a DUI. Though alcohol is much more dangerous when driving

Wait so your reaction time isn't impaired while high?  I'm not being sarcastic at all I'm asking. I got messed on gummies once and I was having crazy time lapses. I could never imagine driving. 

[nucci]

6 hours ago, Goin Breakdown said:

Wait so your reaction time isn't impaired while high?  I'm not being sarcastic at all I'm asking. I got messed on gummies once and I was having crazy time lapses. I could never imagine driving. 

No, of course not. Just that they are better as opposed to driving after drinking. Just from my experience

[Pete]

7 hours ago, GoBills808 said:

Organic doesn't mean no pesticides 

Not to mention that is a double negative

[GoBills808]

4 minutes ago, Pete said:

Not to mention that is a double negative

I don't think you understood me

[LeviF]

3 hours ago, Pete said:

Not to mention that is a double negative

 

http://npic.orst.edu/ingred/organic.html

[Pete]

39 minutes ago, LeviF said:

 

http://npic.orst.edu/ingred/organic.html

From the article you linked-

 

Sometimes people refer to pesticides based on natural substances as "organic pesticides," or "naturally derived pesticides." Pesticides allowed in organic agriculture are typically not human-made, although there are exceptions. They tend to have natural substances like minerals and plant extracts as ingredients. However, not all natural substances are allowed in organic production. Natural substances like arsenic, strychnine, and tobacco dust (nicotine sulfate) are prohibited.

[LeviF]

1 minute ago, Pete said:

From the article you linked-

 

Sometimes people refer to pesticides based on natural substances as "organic pesticides," or "naturally derived pesticides." Pesticides allowed in organic agriculture are typically not human-made, although there are exceptions. They tend to have natural substances like minerals and plant extracts as ingredients. However, not all natural substances are allowed in organic production. Natural substances like arsenic, strychnine, and tobacco dust (nicotine sulfate) are prohibited.

 

In other words, "organic doesn't mean 'no pesticides.'"

[PromoTheRobot]

On 8/30/2023 at 8:09 PM, boyst said:

All for it as long as there are consequences for being under the influence.

 

Tired of smelling potheads driving around so damn much you can smell it as they drive by and it's not legal in NC. 

 

Pot isn't like alcohol. You can't do an on-site test to determine impairment. But if you can smell it in a car that should be enough. I'm amazed how smells of smoke, even tobacco, can waft down a highway. 

[Bill from NYC]

2 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

Pot isn't like alcohol. You can't do an on-site test to determine impairment. But if you can smell it in a car that should be enough. I'm amazed how smells of smoke, even tobacco, can waft down a highway. 

Enough for what? If there is a passenger in the car, couldn't a driver claim that it was said passenger who was smoking the weed? To many jurors, this would certainly constitute a "reasonable doubt," despite the testimony of a police officer who claimed to smell marijuana, wouldn't you say?

 

Many DAs are refusing to set bail for or even prosecute a host of crimes these days, especially in the boroughs of Manhattan, Brooklyn, and Bronx. They are not going to bother pot smokers. The governments wanted it to be legalized so they can reap tax dollars from it, just like gambling, etc.  I can understand it to a certain degree but meanwhile, the roads are chock full of drivers that are stoned out on weed. 

[PromoTheRobot]

Just now, Bill from NYC said:

Enough for what? If there is a passenger in the car, couldn't a driver claim that it was said passenger who was smoking the weed? To many jurors, this would certainly constitute a "reasonable doubt," despite the testimony of a police officer who claimed to smell marijuana, wouldn't you say?

 

Many DAs are refusing to set bail for or even prosecute a host of crimes these days, especially in the boroughs of Manhattan, Brooklyn, and Bronx. They are not going to bother pot smokers. The governments wanted it to be legalized so they can reap tax dollars from it, just like gambling, etc.  I can understand it to a certain degree but meanwhile, the roads are chock full of drivers that are stoned out on weed. 

 

Enough that you could charge the equivalent of an "open container." Passengers aren't allowed to drink while you drive either. 

[Simon]

10 hours ago, Goin Breakdown said:

Wait so your reaction time isn't impaired while high?  I'm not being sarcastic at all I'm asking. I got messed on gummies once and I was having crazy time lapses. I could never imagine driving. 

 

It's not much different from alcohol, imo.

You can have one beer and still drive with minimal, if any impairment. Just like you can have one small hit of marijuana and still drive with minimal impairment.

But if you have 4-5 hits (or an edible), then you get the same effect as if you've had 4-5 beers in a short time.

That's when you put away the keys.

[Augie]

8 minutes ago, Simon said:

 

It's not much different from alcohol, imo.

You can have one beer and still drive with minimal, if any impairment. Just like you can have one small hit of marijuana and still drive with minimal impairment.

But if you have 4-5 hits (or an edible), then you get the same effect as if you've had 4-5 beers in a short time.

 That's when you put away the keys.

 

….assuming you can find them in the first place.  😂 

[Not at the table Karlos]

38 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

Pot isn't like alcohol. You can't do an on-site test to determine impairment. But if you can smell it in a car that should be enough. I'm amazed how smells of smoke, even tobacco, can waft down a highway. 

Smell of marijuana isnt a valid reason to search a vehicle anymore so I doubt it's enough to convict. Police have been found to lie and say anything smells like weed. 

 

They do or did roadside coordination tests to determine if you're good to drive. Pretty much the same as the dwi tests minus the breathalyzer 

16 minutes ago, Simon said:

 

It's not much different from alcohol, imo.

You can have one beer and still drive with minimal, if any impairment. Just like you can have one small hit of marijuana and still drive with minimal impairment.

But if you have 4-5 hits (or an edible), then you get the same effect as if you've had 4-5 beers in a short time.

That's when you put away the keys.

I wish 4-5 hits did anything close to that 

[Goin Breakdown]

17 minutes ago, Simon said:

 

It's not much different from alcohol, imo.

You can have one beer and still drive with minimal, if any impairment. Just like you can have one small hit of marijuana and still drive with minimal impairment.

But if you have 4-5 hits (or an edible), then you get the same effect as if you've had 4-5 beers in a short time.

That's when you put away the keys.

Gotcha. Thanks you. It's actually kind of scary. I've got kids that are starting to drive. Between alcohol texting and now weed I just get nervous. I already know a girl who died (and her boyfriend) because of the other driver being impaired and hitting her and her boyfriend head on. 

[Bill from NYC]

32 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

Enough that you could charge the equivalent of an "open container." Passengers aren't allowed to drink while you drive either. 

Yes but I don't think this would help much. I hope that in the future some sort of test becomes available.

[Mr Info]

46 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

Enough that you could charge the equivalent of an "open container." Passengers aren't allowed to drink while you drive either. 

Passengers can drink from an open container in VA. This may be true for other states as well.

https://www.allenandallen.com/can-passengers-in-a-car-drink-or-possess-alcohol/

[boyst]

fwiw a kid i went to high school with was about 23-24 and smoked. he smoked regularly. but he went driving one day, hadn't smoked recently and when reaching for something in his car lost control and struck & killed a 8-9 year old girl on a bike.

 

he was drug tested and found to be under the influence of weed since the test could not determine how high he was - he ultimately pled out and did significant time.

 

he swore he wasn't high at the time, but the drug was in his system. so was he high? (this was back in like 2004).

[Simon]

1 hour ago, Not at the table Karlos said:

 

I wish 4-5 hits did anything close to that 

 

I guess it's a matter of personal tolerance.

I can drink 4 light beers without too much effect, but if I have 4 hits of good ganja I turn into Wooderson.

Put them together and they act like a force multiplier on each other. Awesome. 🤙

[Not at the table Karlos]

29 minutes ago, Simon said:

 

I guess it's a matter of personal tolerance.

I can drink 4 light beers without too much effect, but if I have 4 hits of good ganja I turn into Wooderson.

Put them together and they act like a force multiplier on each other. Awesome. 🤙

I'm opposite. 4 beers I'm done. 4 joints and I start my day

[PromoTheRobot]

3 hours ago, Simon said:

It's not much different from alcohol, imo.

You can have one beer and still drive with minimal, if any impairment. Just like you can have one small hit of marijuana and still drive with minimal impairment.

But if you have 4-5 hits (or an edible), then you get the same effect as if you've had 4-5 beers in a short time.

That's when you put away the keys.

 

3 hours ago, Not at the table Karlos said:

They do or did roadside coordination tests to determine if you're good to drive. Pretty much the same as the dwi tests minus the breathalyzer 

I wish 4-5 hits did anything close to that 

 

That's another thing with THC. Heavy users don't even feel it. I have a buddy who has been using THC to minimize the pain after a liver transplant. He takes in enough THC to knock out an elephant and he barely feels a buzz.

Edited September 1, 2023 by PromoTheRobot

[Pete]

9 hours ago, LeviF said:

 

In other words, "organic doesn't mean 'no pesticides.'"

It’s a loaded word that people confuse with deadly chemical.  Vinegar, salt, and lemon are pesticides by that loose definition 

[billsfanmiamioh]

8 hours ago, Bill from NYC said:

Yes but I don't think this would help much. I hope that in the future some sort of test becomes available.

It’s being worked on. I actually bought some stock in a company that has a patent for a weed breathalyzer (It’s way more difficult than alcohol to create for a bunch of reasons). How to test for recent use / impairment is one of the biggest question marks still out there regarding cannabis. There’s a lot of different approaches, I’m guessing within a couple years something will emerge that’s on par with the functionality, practicality, and accuracy of a breathalyzer. (Hope I can spot it beforehand and invest😂)

[Nextmanup]

Every time one of these sorts of threads comes up, I write the same thing.

 

Pot will be legal in all 50 states soon.

 

 

[BillsFan4]

On 8/30/2023 at 8:09 PM, boyst said:

All for it as long as there are consequences for being under the influence.

 

Tired of smelling potheads driving around so damn much you can smell it as they drive by and it's not legal in NC. 

umm… so in other words it’s already against the law to drive around smoking weed and you’d face consequences if caught? 😂

 

On 8/31/2023 at 1:20 PM, Bill from NYC said:

Well, farmers use them for tobacco. I am under the impression that they cause cancer. If they are used to grow tobacco, why should I believe that farmers won't use them to grow weed? I grow vegetables without them. If I was growing weed I would not spray the plants with pesticides. Now, do all weed farmers use them? I don't know. Do you?

Btw, please don't take my post as being snide. I was a cigarette smoker until 8 years ago, so my body certainly took in enough poisonous substances.

 

any cannabis sold by a legal dispensary has to pass very strict tests for pesticides, mold, mildew, bugs, microorganisms, heavy metals, residual solvents, etc. 

 

https://cannabis.ny.gov/system/files/documents/2023/01/ocm-testing-limits.pdf

 

thats one of the major advantages of legalized cannabis.

 

Now, buying cheap bulk cannabis on the illicit market? Yes, there are absolutely growers who use poison on their plants to treat all sorts of things (powdery mildew, mite outbreaks, viruses, etc). And with cannabis being an accumulator plant (it can pull + store heavy metals from the soil. Hemp has been used around the globe for centuries to remediate soil) it’s important that you know the grower wasn’t using nutrients with heavy metals in them. All reasons why legalization is safer.

Edited September 3, 2023 by BillsFan4

[boyst]

7 hours ago, BillsFan4 said:

umm… so in other words it’s already against the law to drive around smoking weed and you’d face consequences if caught? 😂

 

 

any cannabis sold by a legal dispensary has to pass very strict tests for pesticides, mold, mildew, bugs, microorganisms, heavy metals, residual solvents, etc. 

 

https://cannabis.ny.gov/system/files/documents/2023/01/ocm-testing-limits.pdf

 

thats one of the major advantages of legalized cannabis.

 

Now, buying cheap bulk cannabis on the illicit market? Yes, there are absolutely growers who use poison on their plants to treat all sorts of things (powdery mildew, mite outbreaks, viruses, etc). And with cannabis being an accumulator plant (it can pull + store heavy metals from the soil. Hemp has been used around the globe for centuries to remediate soil) it’s important that you know the grower wasn’t using nutrients with heavy metals in them. All reasons why legalization is safer.

Well, cops are too scared to enforce laws these days for one.

 

But yeah, it should be a states right to make these calls.