Why is Marijuana ILLEGAL in the Philippines?

[emow]

---

i had just talked with my mother in law in canada, and i was just shocked that cannabis is already being prescribed to patients. she was diagnosed with stage 2 cancer of the cervix, and she was given cannabis as part of her treatment. surgery was not nevessary because the tumor was completely gone after 6 mos. i have always thought she just took chemotherapeutic drugs. Her comment regarding Philippines prohibtion, "always behind man gyd pinas. common prescription naman na dri karon ui" oh so true.... i dunno if it is only on her province or it applies to all provinces of canada.

[Brownman_politiks]

@salbahis.... see. This proves my point that we refer to other countries studies. heck, my medical education was in majority based on American literature. Psychology exposure was in Vicente Sotto, using American based approach. Enough said, grandfather. Jerk it off.

@poster, good case on alcohol being more dangerous than cannabis. Dr. Grinspoon of Harvard Psychiatary acknowledges the addictive tendency of cannabis, whose severe withdrawal symtpoms would be about equal to that of caffeine addiction only. no records can be found anywhere in the world for more than 10,000 years of, that a single man has died from using cannabis. Lethal Dose of Cannabis, as documented by Judge Young's 1988 ruling against his own DEA agency, is smoking 1,500 pounds of cannabis in 15 minutes, only then can we expect a slight hint if it is even deadly.

wow ha ok ra nimo ang addictive property sa cannabis tsk tsk. bisan kanang caffeine maka daut.
daghan ko kaila nga mga adik bai kay I used to work in a church nga dunay gropo nga motabang sa mga tao nga gusto mogawas na sa bisyo.

it all started sa marijuana then nagka taas ang doses then ni level up na hangtud na nga boang na.

sa mga marijuana users pod sige lang galutaw ang utok way tumong.

don't confuse cannabis as a medical option, like I said dunay property nga maka ayo dunay dili. extract unsay maka ayo , ilabay ang di maayo.


Cannabis is as dangerous as alcohol kay it will cause impaired judgment .

[emow]

wow ha ok ra nimo ang addictive property sa cannabis tsk tsk. bisan kanang caffeine maka daut.
daghan ko kaila nga mga adik bai kay I used to work in a church nga dunay gropo nga motabang sa mga tao nga gusto mogawas na sa bisyo.

it all started sa marijuana then nagka taas ang doses then ni level up na hangtud na nga boang na.

sa mga marijuana users pod sige lang galutaw ang utok way tumong.

don't confuse cannabis as a medical option, like I said dunay property nga maka ayo dunay dili. extract unsay maka ayo , ilabay ang di maayo.


Cannabis is as dangerous as alcohol kay it will cause impaired judgment .

this is a repost:

At this point, we have already established from both sides of the issue that indeed cannabis HAS medical benefits, whether the prohibitionist side will be able to accept which specific illnesses benefit from cannabis is another story.

A valid point from that side is that Cannabis have negative effects, and yes indeed they have. As Thomas Sowell always points out, there are no absolute risks and safety in everything. there are only relative risks and relative safety. each risk taken might provide a certain level of safety, likewise, every safety taken also provides a certain level of risk, whether readily perceived or not. Water taken in excess can dilute the electrolytes in the body, causing serious complications like disruption in cognitive functions, catdiac overload, and pulmunary congestion, all of these are fatal. however, people dont usually do that, do they? Because water is not addictive.

however, we consume addictive subtances everyday. Sugar, caffeine, cholesterol, salt, alcohol, and nicotine, in various levels of quantity and quality, a both within spectrum of highs and lows, and frequency. Who decides these parameters for the person? the person. i think that is an undeniable fact, unless the person is comatosed, dead, or forced against his will.

does the consumption of sugar makes one a diabetic? Depends, right?
Does the consumption of alcohol makes one an alcoholic? Depends again, right?
Does the consumption of nicotine makes one a nicotine addict? Depends again.
Does the consumption of cannabis makes one an addict as well? Yes, according to prohibitionists.

somehow, all other susbtances are able to qualify under the umbrella of personal responsibility or choice, but cannabis is not. that is the double standard they have been employing to dismiss the other side of cannabis which most of us barely know, a consequence of its prohibition surely. why are we more able to decide to consume alcohol in temperance? because we know its side effects, we can estimate the strength of the alcohol percentage on our body, the difference between hard drinks and beer, etc... In short, information is readily available for alcohol inspite of its dangers. We, empowered by open information, are able to mitigate the effects of alcohol, adjusting the quality, quantity, and frequency in its consumption.

i push forward to apply this same logic in cannabis, that the people are more able to mitigate the risks of cannabis, if it was legal and regulated. the same thing will happen, information will be available. cannabis will be sold with information as to its content of THC and CBD, its variety, its mix, its origin, date it was harvested, expected side effects, CORRECT administration, correct intervals, correct dosage, correct age restriction, etc... this is only possible in legalized cannabis. people will be buying what they are looking for and what they really need.

lets compare it to the current prohibitve status of cannabis. do people still buy them? yes, in dark alleys, in bad neighborhoods, in environments frequented by men who have no regard for the law. And these types of people only care about money. they will sell cannabis, and also offer dangerous drugs but lets limit it to cannabis. do these people bother to inform their clients about dosage, quality, proper adminstration, thc and cbd content, etc... to their clients? No. and all their merchandise cannot be inspected for CONTAMINANTS like pesticides (thats why studies involving random cannabis user, whose quality of cannabis used cannot be determined due to the effects of its prohibition are considered inconclusive)which could instantly kill or cause irreversible physiologic damage to the brain, heart, liver, lungs, and or kidneys. And inspite of these dangers, criminals can sell cannabis at a high price. basically, prohibtion makes it easy for criminals to profit from selling cannabis. because of this reason, Uruguay legalized Cannabis growing and sale.
( a follow up point, if alcohol is banned, and you want to drink alcohol, you buy from black market, and the it is repackaged in different ways, are you able to know its not absinth you are drinking and not vodka, or vise versa? you would be left experimenting each time.)

Armed with correct information, people will now have the power to choose correctly according to their needs. Yes, there will be people who are going to abuse it, as there are people who abused everything else. thats their life, let them suffer their own consequences.

going back to the issue of cannabis being a medicine, prohibtionists would say,"yeah, but people will go crazy!" People can go crazy but they dont necessarily have to if they know what kind of cannabis they are taking, possible only with legal cannabis. the risks of adverse affects can be mitigated with correct information. Alcohol can cause liver and brain damage but people can adjust their drinking habits to avoid that problem. cannabis user in prohibitive status cannot effectively adjust his cannabis usage because the concentration of substances in his cannabis varies so widely that he is left to constantly guessing the dosage, and at times accidentally causing him to trip instead of aiming for the relaxant effects, or pain relieving effects.

in the United States, LEAP, Law Enforcement against prohibition, estimated more tha half a trillion dollars have already been spent on fighting drugs, but still every year more drugs are going in, and in increasing potency and negative effects. For them, it is an utter failure, as clear as day. The war on drugs would be effective, if lesser funds is spent every year in enforcing it, and/or lesser drugs circulate in the country but that never happened. therfore they are concluding that due to prohibition of drugs, prices of drugs are kept high in the streets, giving incentives to criminals to keep on investing on these drugs. Furhermore, every criminal they capture or drug syndicate they take down, its as if they just helped other drug syndicates take over the abandoned market share, and likewise give incentives for other criminals to fill that void. So not only are the quantity of drugs increasing, but the potency, and number of crime syndicates are increasing as well. a classic Alcohol Prohibition scenario, 90 years ago.

now, cannabis has been shown to treat a lot of illnesses, an absurdity for most (i dont blame you, we have been kept in the dark for a long time). But it really is. have you heard of the myriad of herbal supplements in the market? they are worthless pieces of placebos. just because it contains vitamins, doesnt mean it can treat diseases. its not bad for you, but it cannot do additional good to you as well. Mangosteen, Malunggay, vitamin C, Soursopt fruit, Gogi juice, Coconut, etc.... they do not treat any disease, only " good for", as evidenced by no approved therapeutic claims.

Cannabis has two components (both cannabinoids) that have been shown to have medical therapeutic effects, THC and CBD. THC is the psychoactive sunstance while CBD is not. both have positive medical effects thats why industrial hemp (Cannabis still) have limited medical applications, it has very low thc as compared to its CBD. How do they work in the body? our bodies have natural cannabinoid receptors in many organs and a good concentration of it in the brain. why? scientist theorized that maybe its just part of our evolution, maybe through prehistoric consumption of the plant. We produce very small amounts of Cannabinoids inside our body and only recenlt has the endocannabinoid system been mainstream, it is not taught in medical school yet.

due to our natural affinity to cannabis, its effects are almost if not instantaneous. Pain relief, anti inflammation, neuro regulation, mood regulation, and anti cancer,no phatma drugs comes close to its immediate relief of various maladies. simply writing and describing its effects doesnt give enough justice to its wonderful benefits, try researching about it. the bottom line, it works wonders of unrivaled effectiveness. This is not a supplement, it is medicine.

Merely legalizing cannabis for medical prescription is meaningless, like in New Jersey. Doctors are authorized to prescribed cannabis, however it is illegal to purchase or grow cannabis. Dr. Mehmet Oz (Larry King interview) said," it's ridiculous. Patients will have to break the law to follow the prescription." We can study more examples now on what is the better way to go about this, we have California, Colorado and Washington, Israel, UK, Uruguay, Spain, Netherlands, Sweden and many more coming. Israel is a good example, where the government is currently sponsoring cannabis studies. in fact, patients in specific hospitals can be given cannabis as a treatment. Israel government sponsored retirement homes have also experimented with cannabis use on the elderly and they reported very positive results with pain, dementia, parkinsons, and mood swings. we cannot stop the snowballing effect of this new developments, and it is moot to revert back to 1970-2000 studies as they have generally focused on one side of cannabis only. Even the director of NIDA herself said and implied, she will do her part in expediting investigation on the thereutic effects of cannabis as quickly as she can. a complete change of tone to the rigid close minded stance of yesteryears of the agency.

"yeah, yeah.. it has benefits, many people might have their diseases treated. but still, there are risks." we do not deny that there are risks involved. but the moral argument on that statement is, "Is it moral for a person or a group of person to decide whether a medical patient should or should not be allowed to access cannabis when he or they do not bear any consequence at all? it is the patient's health and life on the table, not yours, not theirs, but his, and as such,ultimately,he will bear the consequence of your or their decision of prohibtition. the patient must have a voice on his own self, weigh the options available with the correct information ( only possible if made legal), and inevitably face the consequence, good or bad. how could we say we are promoting good when by doing so we have produced harm on others? that is the question evaded or ignored by the prohibitionists. As Ron Paul said, " who do you want to control personal behavior? government or you? ....if government, then you want a Nanny State."


its time for the Philippines to consider the plant, delisted as a prohibited narcotics. we have established the medical benefits. how many filipinos are suffering from cancer, SLE, MS, Epilepsy, Diabetese, Musculo skeletal diseases, HIV/AIDs,Alzheimers, Parkinsons, Depression other non infectious diseases? A great part of them will see therapeutic benefit from Cannabis. why make things unnecessary harder for these people? Uplift the roadblock in accessing what is naturally God given.

We do not only help medical patients, we also address livelihood. cannabis will contribute more to our economy than rice, corn, and other agri products combined. Coconut industry will be dwarfed by many folds in terms of revenue. Overall health care costs, both private and by government, will gradually decrease. carbon dioxide levels will decrease. Prices at the gas pumps will decrease, as cannabis can be extracted for biofuel, which has a higher yield than other agri products, with lesser farm area needed. that will bring costs of all related logistics to decrease. Overall, it can possibly decrease the price of consumer goods.

After considering all of positives over negatives in medical, economic, law enforcement and moral angle, legalizing cannabis is the best course of action. We do not presume to know everything, so as the prohibitionists, so as the government... but our knowledge will remain limited if even mere holding of the plant carries a threat of imprisonment. Kudos to those who brave the threat of prosecution to uncover its limitless potential.

[slabs17]

i had just talked with my mother in law in canada, and i was just shocked that cannabis is already being prescribed to patients. she was diagnosed with stage 2 cancer of the cervix, and she was given cannabis as part of her treatment. surgery was not nevessary because the tumor was completely gone after 6 mos. i have always thought she just took chemotherapeutic drugs. Her comment regarding Philippines prohibtion, "always behind man gyd pinas. common prescription naman na dri karon ui" oh so true.... i dunno if it is only on her province or it applies to all provinces of canada.

kani moy pinaka liki. if mo testify kag ingon ani, klaro na kaayo ning way basis. kay kung pangitaan kag proof mo claim man sad kag anonymity so wala nay pulos

[Kulai2Kalai]

Bawal is Bawal dyd ni..

[aldrin89]

Ka kakuyaw kaha noh kung e lagalize ni mura nalang ug sigarilyo bah, nahh kadaghan raba sa among silingan nga walay trabaho sge lang tambay, hithit ug bisan unsa... kung elagalize ni, nah, susss daghana kaha mabuang ani nila ug daghan pud ma desgrasya. Lisod ni sa atong nasod kay kitang mga taw gamay o halos walay disiplina gud. Okay ra tingali panagsaan pero tanaw nako permihon gyud na sa mga mogamit.

[emow]

kani moy pinaka liki. if mo testify kag ingon ani, klaro na kaayo ning way basis. kay kung pangitaan kag proof mo claim man sad kag anonymity so wala nay pulos

kani moy pinaka liki. if mo testify kag ingon ani, klaro na kaayo ning way basis. kay kung pangitaan kag proof mo claim man sad kag anonymity so wala nay pulos

the anecdotal evidence i presented corroborates the fact that Canada has allowed medical marijuana prescription as early as 2000. Although federal agencies do not endorse marijuana use yet, they allow acces if the patient wants it. @slabs, you're getting pathetic... or being deliberately obtuse. you have not shown any argument that could credit any form of intelligence, coupled with subpar comprehension, i pity that the only recourse you must take is through ridicule just to save face... the fact of the matter is, our side have provided sufficient logical reasoning in favor of cannabis legalization, instead of one liners, and inconsistent application of logic.

read the following:



MMPR Canada Guide: 25 Questions & Answers


A new medical marijuana program officially began on April 1. Here are 25 answers to commonly asked questions about the MMPR.

1. Is medical marijuana legal in Canada?

Yes. Medical marijuana became legal in 2000, when a landmark court ruling overturned the prohibition of marijuana for medical purposes. Since then, numerous court decisions have forced Health Canada to create and adapt federal laws for patients who need medical marijuana.

2. What is the MMPR?

The MMPR (Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulations) is the new set of rules for growing, buying and selling medical marijuana in Canada. It outlines a system for doctors, patients and large-scale commercial growers. These growers are called Licensed Producers.

The MMPR is Health Canada’s first attempt at a commercial industry for medical marijuana. The MMPR replaces the previous rules of the MMAR (Marihuana Medical Access Regulations), which were officially repealed on March 31, 2014.

3. What was the MMAR?

Prior to the new rules, the MMAR outlined a system for doctors, patients and non-commercial growers. The MMAR allowed patients to grow for themselves or designate an individual to grow for them. Health Canada was the only source of medical marijuana for patients that wished to purchase it.

4. Why the switch?

Health Canada was under pressure from courts to improve access to medical marijuana. The new program makes it easier for patients to join and provides them with more product choices.

Health Canada also wanted to ban legal home grows, which have skyrocketed in recent years. However, the ban was controversial and has been temporarily overturned by a court injunction.

5. How do I sign up for the MMPR?

Patients wishing to access medical marijuana no longer need to contact Health Canada. Instead, the responsibility of authorizing patients falls entirely on doctors.

In order to purchase medical marijuana from a Licensed Producer, patients need to have a medical document, which is similar to a prescription.

6. How many Canadians use medical marijuana?

Nearly 40,000 patients across the country are authorized to use medical marijuana. This number is expected to reach upwards of 400,000 over the next ten years.

The vast majority of current patients obtained their authorizations under the MMAR. Although the MMAR has been repealed, these patients can still sign up with a Licensed Producer using their old authorizations.

Doctors

7. What is the role of doctors in the MMPR?

Doctors are now the sole gatekeepers of medical marijuana. Patients who wish to access medical marijuana need to obtain a medical document from a doctor or nurse practitioner.

8. What does the medical document cover?

The medical document covers basic information such as the daily amount needed and the condition being treated. In this regard, it is similar to a prescription.

A sample medical document can be accessed on Health Canada’s website.

9. How many doctors support medical marijuana?

More than 5,000 doctors have written a recommendation for medical marijuana in the past. This represents about 7% of all doctors in the country.

10. What conditions can marijuana be prescribed for?

The MMPR allows medical marijuana to be recommended as a treatment for any condition. But there are no official guidelines on its use for specific conditions.

Under the old program, conditions were split into categories and patients with certain conditions were required to obtain support from multiple doctors.

Patients

11. How do I get a medical document?

Besides requesting one from your family physician, there are a number of clinics that specifically cater to medical marijuana. Many offer both in-person and online appointments.

Patients may need to pay out of the pocket expenses for these services. Typical costs for an online appointment range from $200-400.

12. Where do I buy medical marijuana?

Licensed Producers are the only legal source of medical marijuana under the MMPR. The MMPR also prohibits storefronts and dispensaries, meaning that all sales must be done online or by phone. Orders are delivered to patients by mail.

13. How much does medical marijuana cost?

Under the MMPR, Licensed Producers are given full control over prices. Current prices range from $5-12 per gram, with some producers offering discounts for low-income patients. Prices are expected to drop as the program matures.

14. Can I buy edibles, tinctures or other forms of medical marijuana?

The MMPR only allows dried marijuana to be sold. The sale of all other forms of medical marijuana is prohibited.

However, a B.C. judge previously overturned a similar law and a group of patients have already launched a constitutional challenge against the MMPR’s ban on non-dried forms of marijuana.

15. What happens if I want to grow my own?

The MMPR prohibits anyone other than Licensed Producers from growing marijuana. But this rule has been temporarily reversed by a federal court injunction.

The injunction allows growers with a license from the old program to continue growing until a trial is heard. The upcoming trial will challenge the ban on residential grows and is expected to take place in early 2015.

16. How do I find the right strain?

There are no official guidelines on what strains of marijuana are better for specific conditions. However, some Licensed Producers offer strain recommendations based on patient feedback.

Licensed Producers

17. Who are the Licensed Producers?

Licensed Producers are companies that have been authorized by Health Canada to grow and sell medical marijuana under the new program.

Many are start-up businesses headed by entrepreneurs with diverse backgrounds. A few Licensed Producers were formed by existing medical marijuana companies, such as Holland-based Bedrocan and former Health Canada supplier Prairie Plant Systems.

18. How many Licensed Producers are there?

As of April 1, there are 12 Licensed Producers listed on Health Canada’s website. Four of them currently have product available for sale: Bedrocan, CanniMed, Mettrum and Peace Naturals Project.

19. How do I register with a Licensed Producer?

After obtaining a medical document, patients can register with a Licensed Producer of their choice. The registration process is different for each Licensed Producer, but typically involves submitting a registration form and validating the medical document.

20. Can I sign up with more than one Licensed Producer?

Yes, but it’s complicated. Patients are permitted to register with more than one Licensed Producer, but a separate medical document must be submitted for each, meaning that a doctor will have to issue multiple medical documents and split the daily amount of marijuana between them.

21. How do I become a Licensed Producer?

Becoming a Licensed Producer involves applying through Health Canada. It is an expensive and time-consuming process, since the rules for growing and selling medical marijuana are strict and require a sizeable investment.

But Health Canada predicts the MMPR will generate roughly $1.3 billion in yearly sales by 2024. Likewise, the industry has already become very competitive. Since last summer, Health Canada has received over 600 applications from hopeful Licensed Producers.

Health Canada

22. What is Health Canada’s position on medical marijuana?

Health Canada states that it “does not endorse the use of marijuana” and that “marijuana is not an approved drug or medicine.” But “courts have required reasonable access to a legal source of marijuana for medical purposes,” which is why a federal program exists.

23. Why is marijuana not an approved drug?

Like the FDA, Health Canada is responsible for reviewing and approving all new drugs. Typically, pharmaceutical companies are required to submit extensive clinical trial data to have a drug approved.

Health Canada states that it has not approved marijuana as a prescription drug because it “has not gone through the necessary rigorous scientific trials for efficacy or safety.” Although some clinical data exists, no company or government agency has funded large-scale trials on medical marijuana.

24. What resources does Health Canada provide?

Along with the MMPR, Health Canada recently published a review of the evidence surrounding marijuana’s use as a medicine. The review can be accessed on Health Canada’s website and covers dosing, potential therapeutic uses, precautions and adverse effects.

Health Canada is planning to provide an additional document on medical marijuana “to help support doctors and nurse practitioners in making decisions.”

25. What initiatives is Health Canada undertaking?

On March 31, Health Canada announced an initiative to “address common concerns around the use of marijuana as a treatment.”

According to the department, this involves working with Licensed Producers and provincial doctor and nurse licensing bodies to monitor “how doctors and nurse practitioners are authorizing the use of marijuana.”

[emow]

Ka kakuyaw kaha noh kung e lagalize ni mura nalang ug sigarilyo bah, nahh kadaghan raba sa among silingan nga walay trabaho sge lang tambay, hithit ug bisan unsa... kung elagalize ni, nah, susss daghana kaha mabuang ani nila ug daghan pud ma desgrasya. Lisod ni sa atong nasod kay kitang mga taw gamay o halos walay disiplina gud. Okay ra tingali panagsaan pero tanaw nako permihon gyud na sa mga mogamit.

you see, this is just a typical ignoramus who didnt even bother to read the post above which is on the same page. but hey,so long as you can post eh.

[ondoy]

questions:
1.)unsay naa sa mary joana nga makatambal man?
2.)unsa nga sakit iyang matambalan?
3.)if ma legal,unsa klase nga legal? legal to use with prescription o legal to use like yosi?
4.)kining gusto ma legal naa diayni sila sakit ky ngano gusto man ma legal o gusto lang ni sila ma high-way to hell

[Brownman_politiks]

this is a repost:

At this point, we have already established from both sides of the issue that indeed cannabis HAS medical benefits, whether the prohibitionist side will be able to accept which specific illnesses benefit from cannabis is another story.

A valid point from that side is that Cannabis have negative effects, and yes indeed they have. As Thomas Sowell always points out, there are no absolute risks and safety in everything. there are only relative risks and relative safety. each risk taken might provide a certain level of safety, likewise, every safety taken also provides a certain level of risk, whether readily perceived or not. Water taken in excess can dilute the electrolytes in the body, causing serious complications like disruption in cognitive functions, catdiac overload, and pulmunary congestion, all of these are fatal. however, people dont usually do that, do they? Because water is not addictive.

however, we consume addictive subtances everyday. Sugar, caffeine, cholesterol, salt, alcohol, and nicotine, in various levels of quantity and quality, a both within spectrum of highs and lows, and frequency. Who decides these parameters for the person? the person. i think that is an undeniable fact, unless the person is comatosed, dead, or forced against his will.

does the consumption of sugar makes one a diabetic? Depends, right?
Does the consumption of alcohol makes one an alcoholic? Depends again, right?
Does the consumption of nicotine makes one a nicotine addict? Depends again.
Does the consumption of cannabis makes one an addict as well? Yes, according to prohibitionists.

somehow, all other susbtances are able to qualify under the umbrella of personal responsibility or choice, but cannabis is not. that is the double standard they have been employing to dismiss the other side of cannabis which most of us barely know, a consequence of its prohibition surely. why are we more able to decide to consume alcohol in temperance? because we know its side effects, we can estimate the strength of the alcohol percentage on our body, the difference between hard drinks and beer, etc... In short, information is readily available for alcohol inspite of its dangers. We, empowered by open information, are able to mitigate the effects of alcohol, adjusting the quality, quantity, and frequency in its consumption.

i push forward to apply this same logic in cannabis, that the people are more able to mitigate the risks of cannabis, if it was legal and regulated. the same thing will happen, information will be available. cannabis will be sold with information as to its content of THC and CBD, its variety, its mix, its origin, date it was harvested, expected side effects, CORRECT administration, correct intervals, correct dosage, correct age restriction, etc... this is only possible in legalized cannabis. people will be buying what they are looking for and what they really need.

lets compare it to the current prohibitve status of cannabis. do people still buy them? yes, in dark alleys, in bad neighborhoods, in environments frequented by men who have no regard for the law. And these types of people only care about money. they will sell cannabis, and also offer dangerous drugs but lets limit it to cannabis. do these people bother to inform their clients about dosage, quality, proper adminstration, thc and cbd content, etc... to their clients? No. and all their merchandise cannot be inspected for CONTAMINANTS like pesticides (thats why studies involving random cannabis user, whose quality of cannabis used cannot be determined due to the effects of its prohibition are considered inconclusive)which could instantly kill or cause irreversible physiologic damage to the brain, heart, liver, lungs, and or kidneys. And inspite of these dangers, criminals can sell cannabis at a high price. basically, prohibtion makes it easy for criminals to profit from selling cannabis. because of this reason, Uruguay legalized Cannabis growing and sale.
( a follow up point, if alcohol is banned, and you want to drink alcohol, you buy from black market, and the it is repackaged in different ways, are you able to know its not absinth you are drinking and not vodka, or vise versa? you would be left experimenting each time.)

Armed with correct information, people will now have the power to choose correctly according to their needs. Yes, there will be people who are going to abuse it, as there are people who abused everything else. thats their life, let them suffer their own consequences.

going back to the issue of cannabis being a medicine, prohibtionists would say,"yeah, but people will go crazy!" People can go crazy but they dont necessarily have to if they know what kind of cannabis they are taking, possible only with legal cannabis. the risks of adverse affects can be mitigated with correct information. Alcohol can cause liver and brain damage but people can adjust their drinking habits to avoid that problem. cannabis user in prohibitive status cannot effectively adjust his cannabis usage because the concentration of substances in his cannabis varies so widely that he is left to constantly guessing the dosage, and at times accidentally causing him to trip instead of aiming for the relaxant effects, or pain relieving effects.

in the United States, LEAP, Law Enforcement against prohibition, estimated more tha half a trillion dollars have already been spent on fighting drugs, but still every year more drugs are going in, and in increasing potency and negative effects. For them, it is an utter failure, as clear as day. The war on drugs would be effective, if lesser funds is spent every year in enforcing it, and/or lesser drugs circulate in the country but that never happened. therfore they are concluding that due to prohibition of drugs, prices of drugs are kept high in the streets, giving incentives to criminals to keep on investing on these drugs. Furhermore, every criminal they capture or drug syndicate they take down, its as if they just helped other drug syndicates take over the abandoned market share, and likewise give incentives for other criminals to fill that void. So not only are the quantity of drugs increasing, but the potency, and number of crime syndicates are increasing as well. a classic Alcohol Prohibition scenario, 90 years ago.

now, cannabis has been shown to treat a lot of illnesses, an absurdity for most (i dont blame you, we have been kept in the dark for a long time). But it really is. have you heard of the myriad of herbal supplements in the market? they are worthless pieces of placebos. just because it contains vitamins, doesnt mean it can treat diseases. its not bad for you, but it cannot do additional good to you as well. Mangosteen, Malunggay, vitamin C, Soursopt fruit, Gogi juice, Coconut, etc.... they do not treat any disease, only " good for", as evidenced by no approved therapeutic claims.

Cannabis has two components (both cannabinoids) that have been shown to have medical therapeutic effects, THC and CBD. THC is the psychoactive sunstance while CBD is not. both have positive medical effects thats why industrial hemp (Cannabis still) have limited medical applications, it has very low thc as compared to its CBD. How do they work in the body? our bodies have natural cannabinoid receptors in many organs and a good concentration of it in the brain. why? scientist theorized that maybe its just part of our evolution, maybe through prehistoric consumption of the plant. We produce very small amounts of Cannabinoids inside our body and only recenlt has the endocannabinoid system been mainstream, it is not taught in medical school yet.

due to our natural affinity to cannabis, its effects are almost if not instantaneous. Pain relief, anti inflammation, neuro regulation, mood regulation, and anti cancer,no phatma drugs comes close to its immediate relief of various maladies. simply writing and describing its effects doesnt give enough justice to its wonderful benefits, try researching about it. the bottom line, it works wonders of unrivaled effectiveness. This is not a supplement, it is medicine.

Merely legalizing cannabis for medical prescription is meaningless, like in New Jersey. Doctors are authorized to prescribed cannabis, however it is illegal to purchase or grow cannabis. Dr. Mehmet Oz (Larry King interview) said," it's ridiculous. Patients will have to break the law to follow the prescription." We can study more examples now on what is the better way to go about this, we have California, Colorado and Washington, Israel, UK, Uruguay, Spain, Netherlands, Sweden and many more coming. Israel is a good example, where the government is currently sponsoring cannabis studies. in fact, patients in specific hospitals can be given cannabis as a treatment. Israel government sponsored retirement homes have also experimented with cannabis use on the elderly and they reported very positive results with pain, dementia, parkinsons, and mood swings. we cannot stop the snowballing effect of this new developments, and it is moot to revert back to 1970-2000 studies as they have generally focused on one side of cannabis only. Even the director of NIDA herself said and implied, she will do her part in expediting investigation on the thereutic effects of cannabis as quickly as she can. a complete change of tone to the rigid close minded stance of yesteryears of the agency.

"yeah, yeah.. it has benefits, many people might have their diseases treated. but still, there are risks." we do not deny that there are risks involved. but the moral argument on that statement is, "Is it moral for a person or a group of person to decide whether a medical patient should or should not be allowed to access cannabis when he or they do not bear any consequence at all? it is the patient's health and life on the table, not yours, not theirs, but his, and as such,ultimately,he will bear the consequence of your or their decision of prohibtition. the patient must have a voice on his own self, weigh the options available with the correct information ( only possible if made legal), and inevitably face the consequence, good or bad. how could we say we are promoting good when by doing so we have produced harm on others? that is the question evaded or ignored by the prohibitionists. As Ron Paul said, " who do you want to control personal behavior? government or you? ....if government, then you want a Nanny State."


its time for the Philippines to consider the plant, delisted as a prohibited narcotics. we have established the medical benefits. how many filipinos are suffering from cancer, SLE, MS, Epilepsy, Diabetese, Musculo skeletal diseases, HIV/AIDs,Alzheimers, Parkinsons, Depression other non infectious diseases? A great part of them will see therapeutic benefit from Cannabis. why make things unnecessary harder for these people? Uplift the roadblock in accessing what is naturally God given.

We do not only help medical patients, we also address livelihood. cannabis will contribute more to our economy than rice, corn, and other agri products combined. Coconut industry will be dwarfed by many folds in terms of revenue. Overall health care costs, both private and by government, will gradually decrease. carbon dioxide levels will decrease. Prices at the gas pumps will decrease, as cannabis can be extracted for biofuel, which has a higher yield than other agri products, with lesser farm area needed. that will bring costs of all related logistics to decrease. Overall, it can possibly decrease the price of consumer goods.

After considering all of positives over negatives in medical, economic, law enforcement and moral angle, legalizing cannabis is the best course of action. We do not presume to know everything, so as the prohibitionists, so as the government... but our knowledge will remain limited if even mere holding of the plant carries a threat of imprisonment. Kudos to those who brave the threat of prosecution to uncover its limitless potential.

and still this semantics can't negate the fact that it can cause addictive behavior. Wa pa man ko kita og tao nga mangawat kay na addict sa asukar og caffeine.

Marijuana can also caused impaired judgment, memory impairment, can alter behavior, can cause depression.

wa pa sab ko kita og diabetic nga na rehab kay na addik sa asukar og kaha kape.

see how useless the semantics purported by people who are paid to sell this idea to the public when it is pitted against reality.