Discussion » Questions » Health and Wellness » If the federal government says pot has no medical value(schedule 1) , why do they buy a patent for medical marijuana?

If the federal government says pot has no medical value(schedule 1) , why do they buy a patent for medical marijuana?

* buy=own

Won't let me edit title

Posted - October 8, 2016

Responses


  • 3191
    Been wondering that for years.  (Sarcasm off.) This post was edited by Bozette at October 9, 2016 1:13 AM MDT
      October 8, 2016 6:47 PM MDT
    2

  • My idea is that it's to continue the war on pot if pot happens to become legal.   If becomes legal on a federal level they can still arrest people for a patent violation.
      October 8, 2016 7:00 PM MDT
    1

  • 7939
    "Rename" is edit title.

    One part of the gov doesn't know what the other part is. Which branch filed for the patent? I found it doubtful the FDA did.

    With that said, can you  imagine what would happen if a drug company owned an exclusive patent to cannabis? It would be a nightmare worse than Monsanto and the other idiot who raised a drug price fro $13 a pill to over $700 earlier this year or last. We should be glad someone in the government had the foresight to file a patent.  
      October 8, 2016 7:03 PM MDT
    2

  • 3191
    It was the Department of Health and Human Services.

    http://www.google.com/patents/US6630507
      October 8, 2016 7:18 PM MDT
    1

  • 7939
    Ah, the mother to the FDA. Huh. Not surprising, I guess. I still stand by my answer. The government needs to be the one with that patent. It shouldn't be in the hands of a private company. 

    Good research, Bozette. I looked, but didn't find it. 
      October 8, 2016 9:09 PM MDT
    2

  • 3191
    If it were really and truly about looking out for our best interests...but it is not. 

    Big pharma runs the FDA.  Big pharma rules in the US.  Not so in other countries...hmmm.

    The 10 big pharma companies blew the other 490 of the "Fortune 500" away in profits in the early 2000s per this article.  I doubt much has changed.  

    In 2002, for example, the top 10 drug companies in the United States had a median profit margin of 17%, compared with only 3.1% for all the other industries on the Fortune 500 list.1 Indeed, subtracting losses from gains, those 10 companies made more in profits that year than the other 490 companies put together.
      October 9, 2016 2:41 AM MDT
    2

  • How about no patents for life forms?   It isn't even a GMO life form.  It's like saying I can take a patent out on Humans.
      October 9, 2016 9:04 AM MDT
    1

  • I know that.  Sometimes when I try to do it though it says my title is over 64 characters,  even when I remove words and have less that I originally posted.
      October 9, 2016 9:35 AM MDT
    0

  • Well, the Federal Government (or a bit of it) is clearly lying.

    My own view is that 'government' has long suspected that weed consumption makes people less susceptible to BS.  That's why it's not viewed kindly by any western government.
      October 8, 2016 9:20 PM MDT
    2

  • 2758
    Wait...what?  The government lies!?

    ROTFLMAO!
      October 9, 2016 12:51 AM MDT
    2

  • Shocking isn't it?  :)
      October 9, 2016 5:47 AM MDT
    2

  • 2758
    I honestly don't know if I'll ever recover from this news!

    LOLOLOL!
      October 9, 2016 3:15 PM MDT
    0

  • 2758
    Why do we allow ourselves to be distracted by an endless succession of red herrings? Whether marijuana has legitimate medical applications (it does) is irrelevant. The question is whether government has any constitutional right to say what you put into or take out of YOUR body (it doesn't).
      October 9, 2016 12:53 AM MDT
    3

  • 3191
    Bingo!
      October 9, 2016 1:02 AM MDT
    1

  • 7939
    How many medical devices and drugs get recalled for causing damage? How many don't make the cut to begin with? How many supplements land on shelves and cause damage or do nothing because they're ineffective? I want government oversight on drugs. I don't think marijuana should be part of this battle, but the FDA plays an important role in keeping us safe. They biff it, but overall, I think the agency does more good than harm.

    And, if you disagree with me, I blame your color choices. They have seared my eyeballs. 
      October 9, 2016 1:09 AM MDT
    2

  • 2758
    In this context the government's principal (if not only) job is to protect consumers from fraudulent claims, acts, etc.  Going strictly by the Constitution (the putative 'supreme law of the land') it has NO other function.

    If people want to ingest, smoke or inject pig poop in an attempt to rid themselves of some disease, it's NONE of the government's business.

    I own my body. You own yours.  Provided that we are harming no one else but ourselves, ANY 'regulation' of what we do with our bodies is called slavery. Government oversight of 'drugs' is synonymous with government oversight of human beings.  I definitely do NOT want such oversight.

    (Edit: for general edification, I'm still suffering the aftereffects of a bad reaction to a 'government approved' antibiotic I took three years ago.  It would seem as if government oversight doesn't always, if ever, achieve the intended result.) This post was edited by Transquesta at October 9, 2016 2:43 AM MDT
      October 9, 2016 1:27 AM MDT
    2

  • 7939
    Right, but let's say you have to go into the hospital for a hip implant. How can you trust that you're getting one that's been tested? How can you trust that the doctor isn't using some lead-laden cheap parts from China? Is that the right you're fighting for? The freedom to have unsafe treatments used as part of your care? I find it hard to believe that you genuinely want no oversight at all. Shoot, heroin used to be sold as a painkiller. People didn't know what it was. They didn't know it was addictive and deadly. No oversight and that's what we're looking at again. We have deaths from crap being slipped into diet supplements and from overdoses on energy drinks. No oversight would be mass carnage. 


      October 9, 2016 1:36 AM MDT
    1

  • 2758
         "Right, ..."

    I know. :-)

         "...but let's say you have to go into the hospital for a hip implant. How can you trust that you're getting one that's been tested?"


    Personal research.  Incidentally, given the number of lawsuits being brought against the manufacturers of 'government approved' hip implants these days, that might have been a bad example. :-)

         "How can you trust that the doctor isn't using some lead-laden cheap parts from China?"

    I can't--not even with the government's 'assistance.'  That's why I look online for patient reviews, malpractice awards, etc.  (Granted that, with "no government oversight," people would suddenly have to take responsibility for...gasp!...themselves! :-))

         "Is that the right you're fighting for? The freedom to have unsafe treatments used as part of your care?"

    No. The right I'm fighting for is the same right which the framers/founders of what WAS the government of the United States were fighting for: the simple right to self determination.  Again, I start from a simple premise: that you/I/we own our own persons.  We are NOT the property of the state.

         "I find it hard to believe that you genuinely want no oversight at all."

    As well you should!  I never said I wanted no oversight.  I intimated that I wanted the oversight with which the government has been constitutionally empowered to provide: protection against acts of force/fraud.

       "No oversight would be mass carnage."

    How do you know?  We've never lived in a climate of 'no oversight.'  Moreover, the current 'carnage' we see all around us is occurring at a time of maximum government 'oversight.' 

      October 9, 2016 1:57 AM MDT
    3

  • Heroin being a schedule 1 instead of 2 is purely out of panic.   Diamorphine is no more or less dangerous as a pain killer than morphine(it actually just breaks down into morphine in your system), oxycontin, dilaudid., or any of the other heroin substitutes.
      October 9, 2016 9:08 AM MDT
    3

  • robert de niro
      October 9, 2016 9:06 AM MDT
    2

  • 2758
    Thanks. I'm here all week. :-)
      October 9, 2016 3:19 PM MDT
    0