Friday, February 19, 2010

Medical studies show cannabis effective for treating pain, spasms

See? Heads have known that for years. And they thought we just a buncha spaced-out stoners when we were really on the cutting edge of science...

Some of the new made-up or dredged-up from obscurity bullshit diseases to sell you factory-made chemical dope medicines might come in handy to get a scrip for weed, like Restless Leg Syndrome. I could fake that easy! "Geez, Doc, I gots da jimmylegs! I needs me some mota!" whilst sorta uncontrollably kickin' the crap outta the exam room. Heh.

Raw Story

With the results of a medical study summarized by a new report delivered to the California state legislature, the California Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research (CMCR) claims it has established scientific proof that inhaled cannabis holds medical value at or above the level of conventional prescription medicines used for a variety of ailments.

Much more. Also see one way to get your Medical Marijuana Card, at least in California.

I went to my Offthulmolijest Opfallmollyfest eye doctor the other day. He's really a good guy and part of our conversation went like this after he checked my Intraocular Pressure (IOP):

"Well, no glaucoma."

"I guess that means no weed scrip, huh, Doc? How about for ADD?"

"Nah, but I think I can squeeze you in for OCD."

Pretty quick comeback! I like having a quick-thinking smartass for a Doc!

He then went on to tell me that weed for glaucoma is sort of a scam. He said it lowers your IOP by about one point and lasts for about an hour, but it's just enough to qualify as legit treatment. He also said a patient would have to go 23 hours a day without relief.

He doesn't know much about heads, I guess. I told him that was easy to fix - just smoke 24 joints a day.

I did not mention that if a person started treating his or her glaucoma in that manner when they got up in the morning, by about noon they wouldn't remember their name or even the necessity for one, being one with the cosmos and all, and are we out of Twinkies already?

No comments: