DHS Pot Patents

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Fri Nov 09, 2012 4:30 am

http://www.google.com/patents/US6630507

Cannabinoids have been found to have antioxidant properties, unrelated to NMDA receptor antagonism. This new found property makes cannabinoids useful in the treatment and prophylaxis of wide variety of oxidation associated diseases, such as ischemic, age-related, inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. The cannabinoids are found to have particular application as neuroprotectants, for example in limiting neurological damage following ischemic insults, such as stroke and trauma, or in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and HIV dementia. Nonpsychoactive cannabinoids, such as cannabidoil, are particularly advantageous to use because they avoid toxicity that is encountered with psychoactive cannabinoids at high doses useful in the method of the present invention. A particular disclosed class of cannabinoids useful as neuroprotective antioxidants is formula (I) wherein the R group is independently selected from the group consisting of H, CH.sub.3, and COCH.sub.3. ##STR1##

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Pars ... PN/6630507

Too funny. But it is not medicine according to so many.

Neuroprotectant.

From the comments here:

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/20 ... tion-drugs

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Fri Nov 09, 2012 9:37 pm

The psychological impact of legalizing marijuana

I believe the substance is dangerous when used for pleasure—especially, habitually. It has poorly understood and substantial neurochemical effects on the brain.

No matter what anyone says, I am utterly convinced from my 20 years practicing psychiatry, that it does act as a gateway drug, tempting people to use other illicit substances, including opiates. And that’s just the beginning of the trouble.

Marijuana also delays people from actually searching for the root emotional causes of their problems. They get high, instead of getting to the core of what is bothering them.

Marijuana is the antithesis of insight-oriented psychotherapy. It is a Band-Aid over suffering that will not stay covered up forever by inhaling smoke from a burning plant (marijuana) or, for that matter, injecting the byproduct of another plant (heroin, from the poppy).

That’s why, in the longer run, I predict a second, more destructive wave of trouble from marijuana. This will represent the groundswell of unaddressed psychiatric issues that will have been temporarily camouflaged by the drug.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/11/ ... z2Blta0jKT

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Fri Nov 09, 2012 9:42 pm

Real World meet Escapism...

Escapism, Real World.

Nice to meet you.

kcdodd · Post by **kcdodd** » Sat Nov 10, 2012 12:53 am

Why not outlaw chocolate ice cream too.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Sat Nov 10, 2012 7:12 am

kcdodd wrote:Why not outlaw chocolate ice cream too.

Outlaw alcohol. The #1 escapist drug in America.

=================

BTW my friends, compassion for the ill is winning. Promising to punish violators of YOUR moral code is not the vote getter it once was. Given that YOUR moral code is a transient thing. Otherwise opiates and pot would have been outlawed from the beginning.

Democrats – it is the purpose of the government to steal from those who are too rich.
Republicans – it is the purpose of government to administer beatings to the unrighteous.

Theft won over beatings. But it was close.

=====

"Distrust anyone in whom the desire to punish is powerful" Friedrich Nietzsche

And the American voters do. Smart people. Well actually they chose economic punishment over prison. Too bad for those with money. Let the confiscations begin.

Both Parties are poison. And until the refer madness generation dies off the Rs are going to be in a world of hurt. Well it was a nice country while it lasted.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Sat Nov 10, 2012 7:21 am

BTW can any of you prohibitionist geniuses tell me how you intend to treat the CB1 and CB2 systems in the body without using cannabis analogs?

Of course in some cases agonists will be called for. In other cases an increase of cannabinoids will be called for.

OK. My mistake. Confronting Republicans with science is a lost cause. And that is now part of the Republican brand. Excellent!

The one thing Republicans get is economics. But they can't sell it because they are crazy about everything else. It was a nice country while it lasted.

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Sat Nov 10, 2012 6:25 pm

MSimon wrote:BTW can any of you prohibitionist geniuses tell me how you intend to treat the CB1 and CB2 systems in the body without using cannabis analogs?

Of course in some cases agonists will be called for. In other cases an increase of cannabinoids will be called for.

OK. My mistake. Confronting Republicans with science is a lost cause. And that is now part of the Republican brand. Excellent!

Yes, you are obviously smarter and more knowledgeably than a man who is a Doctor of Medicine and has practiced for 20 years. Obviously the man knows nothing about medical science.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Sat Nov 10, 2012 6:33 pm

Diogenes wrote:
MSimon wrote:BTW can any of you prohibitionist geniuses tell me how you intend to treat the CB1 and CB2 systems in the body without using cannabis analogs?

Of course in some cases agonists will be called for. In other cases an increase of cannabinoids will be called for.

OK. My mistake. Confronting Republicans with science is a lost cause. And that is now part of the Republican brand. Excellent!
Yes, you are obviously smarter and more knowledgeably than a man who is a Doctor of Medicine and has practiced for 20 years. Obviously the man knows nothing about medical science.

Well tell me then. What medicines do you propose to treat the systems with cannabinoid receptors? Surely you have looked up the subject? Or are you unable to do internet searches? If so my condolences.

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Sat Nov 10, 2012 6:41 pm

MSimon wrote:
kcdodd wrote:Why not outlaw chocolate ice cream too.
Outlaw alcohol. The #1 escapist drug in America.

=================

BTW my friends, compassion for the ill is winning. Promising to punish violators of YOUR moral code is not the vote getter it once was. Given that YOUR moral code is a transient thing. Otherwise opiates and pot would have been outlawed from the beginning.

I think the most escapist drug is whatever it is that makes you say the stuff you do. The moral code is not subjective, it is objective and nature decides what it is. You, like all the other liberals, are trying to force nature to conform to what you want.

You play games with nature, and nature bites back.

MSimon wrote:[

Democrats – it is the purpose of the government to steal from those who are too rich.
Republicans – it is the purpose of government to administer beatings to the unrighteous.

It is the purpose of government to stop the drilling of holes in the bottom of the ship in which we are all riding. You somehow believe that there will be no ill consequences if you get what you want. You are exactly like the Progressive Prohibitionists you always hate, but you don't realize it.

They thought totally eradicating all alcohol would work. You think totally allowing all drugs will work. You are both idiots.

MSimon wrote: Theft won over beatings. But it was close.

Oh yes, immiserating and impoverishing (possibly killing) half the population is so much better than making a few bad apples behave in a civil society. The reality is, we, as a society, have become so stupid/ignorant/misinformed that we can't understand priorities.

MSimon wrote:
"Distrust anyone in whom the desire to punish is powerful" Friedrich Nietzsche

What does he say about trusting someone who makes up obsessive shit and keeps accusing others of it?

While we're talking about Nietzsche, isn't he the @sshole that inspired Hitler to produce his Supermen? (Ubermenschen.) Not sure i'd be wanting to listen to advice from someone who inspired one of the biggest mass murderers of all time, but given your drug advocacy will likely produce the same result (massive death) perhaps the philosophies are not so far apart after all?

MSimon wrote: And the American voters do. Smart people. Well actually they chose economic punishment over prison. Too bad for those with money. Let the confiscations begin. .

Well I might be mistaken, but the signs are looking to me like we will get plenty of prisons, plenty of impoverishment, plenty of death, and plenty of misery. We shall see just how smart were the American voters. Seems to me they were as smart as German Voters in the 1930s.

MSimon wrote: Both Parties are poison. And until the refer madness generation dies off the Rs are going to be in a world of hurt. Well it was a nice country while it lasted.

Yeah, it was the "War on Drugs" that done us in, not the Socialist idiocy.

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Sat Nov 10, 2012 6:51 pm

MSimon wrote:
Diogenes wrote:
MSimon wrote:BTW can any of you prohibitionist geniuses tell me how you intend to treat the CB1 and CB2 systems in the body without using cannabis analogs?

Of course in some cases agonists will be called for. In other cases an increase of cannabinoids will be called for.

OK. My mistake. Confronting Republicans with science is a lost cause. And that is now part of the Republican brand. Excellent!
Yes, you are obviously smarter and more knowledgeably than a man who is a Doctor of Medicine and has practiced for 20 years. Obviously the man knows nothing about medical science.
Well tell me then. What medicines do you propose to treat the systems with cannabinoid receptors? Surely you have looked up the subject? Or are you unable to do internet searches? If so my condolences.

I don't pretend to know more about Bio-Chemistry and Medicine than does a Medical Doctor. I have several doctor friends. When I want to know something in this regard, I ask them, rather than cruising all the drug-legalization sites.

I do know this much. You call them "cannabinoid receptors", but they weren't designed to attach to cannabis. Cannabis was designed to attach to them. The chemical was designed by the plant to F*ck up our neurology, and some people are just too slow to have figured this out yet! Plants evolved chemical toxins similar to our own endocrinal secretions so that they would be effective in rendering predators harmless. Perversely, some predators now seek out the plant just to experience the toxic effects. I'm betting the plant is going to win in the long run though.

Of course I am usually never talking about Cannabis, I am always talking about Crack, Meth, Cocaine, Heroine, and other drugs which I have personally seen F*ckup and Kill various people in my lifetime.

You always want to talk about teddy bears, and I keep pointing out that Grizzly bears will eat you.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Sat Nov 10, 2012 7:07 pm

Ah. But the War On Drugs drove the youth to the left. I remember Nixon very well. And every Republican President since.

Youth is when political habits of a lifetime are formed. And the Brilliant Rs have been running a War On Youth AKA the Drug War for four decades. In case you didn't know it - pot use peaks in the 15 to 25 YO cohort.

It is hard to get them back after warring on them.

But I despise both parties. Although this week I despise the Rs more. For being terminally stupid. For believing that "We will make war on our own citizens" is a winning political stance. Not that the Ds aren't making war on us too. They just hide it better during campaign season.

The Ds pretend to only make war on the 1% and the Rs make no bones about warring on 50%. Such political savvy. Genius in fact.

It is almost as if the Rs hadn't studied the political shifts that came with the end of Alcohol Prohibition. FDR ring a bell? Didn't think so.

It is as if the Rs want to be losers. Well they earned it.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Sat Nov 10, 2012 7:12 pm

Well the Drug Warriors don't seem to be doing a very good job of differentiating teddies from grizzlies. They treat all the bears alike. Catch them all and jail them is their motto.

Not a very winning political stance is it?

The shift in the tide pleases me very much. Especially given your stance on the whole matter. I LOVE seeing prohibitionists in pain. Have a drink. It might make you feel better. Or not.

paperburn1 · Post by **paperburn1** » Sat Nov 10, 2012 7:16 pm

Your answering the question your self, you use anologs in place of cannabis

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Sat Nov 10, 2012 7:21 pm

You can't run a full fledged drug war on opiate users alone. There are not enough of them. So you are stuck with what you have. Can't get off the tiger and can't continue riding it either.

The horns of a dilemma. Just where any good military commander wants the opposition. The only way to win is to not engage. But the prohibition faction is too enmeshed to try that now. Stuck.

How does it feel to be a Democrat enabler? FDR and the End of Alcohol Prohibition ring a bell? I thought not.

Well I have been warning the Right about this problem for a decade or two. And now it is coming to pass. Lucky you guys are so smart that you derided me at every opportunity available. I get the last laugh. Delicious.

MSimon · Post by **MSimon** » Sat Nov 10, 2012 7:47 pm

paperburn1 wrote:Your answering the question your self, you use anologs in place of cannabis

But the analogs are only endogenous so far. And cannabis is the cheapest route to the chemicals. So funny how otherwise sane people will go to extreme lengths to avoid reality. It is as if emotion has taken away reason. The very thing you accuse the opposition of. Too funny.

Well the younger generations are not so encumbered. And they have reached an age where they have started to vote in enough numbers to turn elections.

The times they are a changin'. And I predicted it (well my timing was off - but I had he direction dead on).

From the start of a substance prohibition until its end takes about 50 years. Historically. Alcohol Prohibition was an aberration. Probably because it affected so many people at once. If you count the start with Nixon ramping up the WOD in '72 you get 2022 as the end. Won't be long now. Might even come sooner if the Republicans stop being stupid. But what are the odds of that? Slim and none.

With faith in the correctness of their positions they have abjured thinking about them. It will cost them. The only unfortunate thing about that is having to live under Democrat rule until the Rs get it.