|
|
|
|
|
by taxidump
2354 days ago
|
|
>Personally, I'm a skeptic that 1. CBD+THC offers any additional medical† benefits over CBD used alone; Why? >2. that it makes any medical sense to prescribe a (non-dose-controllable) plant over a pill, Some medication, in pill form, is highly toxic.. see opiates which is a common alternative to thc for pain relief. How did your comment reach the top? |
|
Because there are no studies proving it has any benefit? Because, from clinical anecdote (i.e. stories from my doctor friends) CBD alone seems to work perfectly as a treatment for every problem where "try medical marijuana" is the current line on the treatment flowchart?
I mean, admittedly, I'm not friends with every kind of doctor. I don't know whether THC has any added benefit in cancer treatment, for example. That's why I'm not denying the benefits of THC; I'm just skeptical of them. I'd like to see some supporting evidence!
> Some medication, in pill form, is highly toxic.. see opiates which is a common alternative to thc for pain relief.
Opiates in pills are no more or less toxic in pill form than in their "native" form (e.g. the opium poppy.) There are even animal nerve toxins that are classified as opiates. It is the molecule itself—and the dose—that makes something toxic, not the delivery mechanism.
The point of putting something in a pill—or even more simply, of extracting and distilling an active ingredient into an essence—is to make the dose measurable and to control for any unknown variables (the other stuff besides the active ingredient), so that dosing can be done precisely.
Without first isolating and measuring the active ingredient(s), there is no way to, for example, make "extended release" or "immediate relief" forms of medical marijuana, because you both don't know how much THC+CBD is entering your body, and (with edibles or anything besides smoking) don't even control how quickly your own metabolism takes up the active ingredient from the plant matter.