cannabisnews.com: GW Pharm Responds to CC










  GW Pharm Responds to CC

Posted by CN Staff on April 22, 2003 at 09:48:31 PT
By Pete Brady 
Source: Cannabis Culture 

UK med-pot researchers defend their research and methods in the face of criticism from Cannabis Culture.GW is a pioneering British company founded by physician, scientist and pharmaceutical product developer Dr. Geoffrey Guy in 1997. GW works to organically grow marijuana, extract the plant's active ingredients and use those extracts to produce prescription medicines.
Dr. Guy granted his first-ever major interview for a marijuana magazine to Cannabis Culture three years ago -- UK doc grows pharmaceutical pot -- http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/1590.html -- and has continued to give our readers exclusive insight into GW's efforts.Before Guy founded GW, he specialized in phytochemistry, a science that studies the useful chemical properties of plants.Guy got interested in marijuana's phytochemical potential after reading a med-pot book by American medical marijuana advocate and registered nurse Mary Lynn Mathre."It seemed to me that here was a very useful plant, with a long history of medical applications, and there were patients and patient groups who swore to its effectiveness and safety," Guy explains. "The legal and social situation surrounding the plant had obscured its potential medical uses, and I became intrigued by it."The doctor started discussing medical cannabis research with the British government; in 1998 the government granted GW Pharmaceuticals unprecedented licenses to cultivate, possess and supply cannabis as part of professional medical research.Guy then entered into exclusive worldwide contract with Hortapharm, a Dutch company that had for ten years been permitted by the Netherlands' government to develop specialized breeds of marijuana.Hortapharm's principal researchers are famous marijuana experts who refuse to allow the media to reveal their identities. Guy says the Dutch company's stabilized, unique varieties of cannabis utilized in GW's breeding, cultivation and selection program, have produced cannabis plants that contain high ratios of a specific cannabinoid, such as THC, CBD, or CBC.Each cannabinoid possesses specific medical properties. GW is testing individual cannabinoids and combinations of cannabinoids on patients with a wide variety of medical problems.The extracts have proven extraordinarily safe and effective in relieving complex and persistent medical conditions such as neuropathic pain and muscle spasms, Guy says.And if groundbreaking clinical studies already conducted are supported by further studies now underway, Guy predicts GW could receive official approval for plant-based cannabis medicines in less than two years.Such approval would result in GW prescription cannabis medicines becoming licensed across the European Union and the Commonwealth, Guy says, with Canada and Australia likely to join Europe in giving doctors the go-ahead to prescribe GW's cannabis products."If we are successful, it means that a whole range of new medicines come on the market," Guy says. "We have found that along with their amazing effectiveness in treating conditions that cannot be treated by currently available medicines, cannabis medicines are far safer than the ones they would replace."Marijuana monopolist?Issue 41 of Cannabis Culture contained an article about GW Pharmaceuticals and medical cannabis, authored by writer, activist and Canadian Supreme Court petitioner David Malmo-Levine, -- Will pot be patented? -- http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/2780.htmlAt first glance, it seems there would be little reason for marijuana proponents to do anything other than praise GW's efforts.After all, Dr. Guy almost single-handedly convinced the British government to let him grow tens of thousands of marijuana plants in secret glasshouses in Southern England, to let him test marijuana extracts on patients, and to legitimize the claims of med-pot advocates who for years have insisted that marijuana is good medicine despite a chorus of doubters who used previous "scientific" research to back up criticisms of med-pot."Before we started this research, there was only anecdotal evidence that this plant had medicinal properties, but the medical establishment had not taken such claims seriously for many years because plant medicines in general were considered too hard to properly produce, test, and administer," Guy says. "Our research has proven that this plant is very useful."Malmo-Levine's article raised issues that Cannabis Culture put to Dr. Guy three years ago during our initial interview with him. These issues involve politics, law, societal perceptions, corporate ethics, and ideology. British med-pot activist Free Rob Cannabis was one of the main critics of Guy's approach; Cannabis Culture asked Guy about Cannabis's claim that GW's government cannabis license in lieu of general legalization amounted to an unfair monopoly that prevented patients from growing their own medicine.Malmo-Levine accuses GW of seeking to create a medical cannabis monopoly by patenting plants, extraction techniques, medicines, and extract inhalers; GW benefits from marijuana prohibition because it gets to race ahead with research on its own while individuals are prevented from growing marijuana and experimenting with it themselves.The critique places GW on par with Monsanto, which has long been criticized for its efforts to patent food crops and to resort to heavy-handed police state tactics to enforce those patents.Malmo-Levine notes GW's plans to build a cannabinoid "delivery device" that would include remote monitoring features and other safeguards designed to prevent people from using too much extract or from diverting extract to unauthorized users. He says the "inhaler" and its monitoring features would be costly and intrusive. He even says Guy is wrong to claim that smoking plant material is bad for the lungs, and he worries that GW might sue home growers for violating GW's marijuana plant patents.Guy is used to criticism from all sides of the cannabis debate, and he reacted with calm logic and sincerity when I questioned him about Malmo-Levine's concerns."The first thing to recognize is that we are not 'Big Pharma,'" Guy said. "Four years ago I had four staff members and since then we've spent $40 million dollars investing in clinical studies that have shown people what cannabis medicine can offer. That investment carried a lot of risk with it- maybe as much risk as operating a clandestine grow room. The activists who say GW wants a monopoly are often participating in another monopoly- the black market production and sales of marijuana- and that market is making huge profit producing cannabis that varies widely in quality, cleanliness, and medical efficacy."Guy says he has "no beef with people who grow, smoke, or provide their own cannabis," but he says that unregulated cannabis markets don't meet the needs of medical cannabis users."The unregulated marketplace produces expensive cannabis geared toward the recreational user," he says. "This cannabis is high in THC, but often lacks cannabinoids that benefit specific medical conditions. Much of it is grown in conditions that do not assure quality control. Our cannabis is grown organically with no chemicals, no artificial fertilizers, no radon, as cleanly as possible, with zero contamination by molds and fungi. We grow varieties that contain unique cannabinoid profiles from plants that were designed specifically for us. We extract those cannabinoids and test them rigorously to see how they work to decrease specific medical conditions. Frankly, if people care about medical users, I don't see how they can criticize a program that produces clean, safe medicines for people who need cannabis."USA versus the worldAlthough the British government's handling of recreational marijuana use and cultivation is fraught with the same kinds of hypocrisy and inconsistencies that beset US law, Guy's medical marijuana research has been facilitated by the British government, which has assured the doctor that successful completion of pharmaceutical testing programs will result in official approval of GW's cannabis medicines."We expect to see licensing of our medicines within the next two years," Guy says. "Europe and the Commonwealth have enthusiastically stated that they would welcome our products if they meet British standards. Health Canada is prepared to accept a dossier applying for approval. One European country's health minister said that the day we receive approval in the UK, they want our products available in their country. The US stands alone, among Western nations, in resisting cannabis medicines."According to Guy, the US med-pot debate is tainted by its drug war, and by bureaucratic systems and regulations that work against rational scientific and humanitarian concerns."The US says it wants data generated in the US, so we will have to duplicate our testing there if they will allow it," explains Guy, who has conferenced with high-ranking officials of US drug control and pharmaceutical regulatory agencies. "Their requirements are onerous and costly, but if our medicines are approved and being used across Europe, it is going to be hard for the US to dismiss the process. They'd have to criticize UK doctors and institutions whose reputations are beyond question. They'd have to ignore the clear scientific evidence from a variety of clinical trials. They'd have to ignore the fact that our cannabis medicines are providing relief to patients that no other medicines can provide."Spray me! Guy asserts that "people who grow their own marijuana have nothing to worry about from GW Pharmaceuticals.""The pharmaceutical industry is a business, and everybody seeks to patent their processes, materials and products," he says. "We've spent a lot of our own money and investors' money developing these products, and we would not have done this if there was no chance to make profits. Nobody in the industry was seriously looking into cannabis research when we first started. We've spent five years doing research, and Hortapharm was doing work for ten years before that. If we had not done the work, there would have been little advance in cannabis research. Now that we have done the work, some other companies want to copy that, and we have to protect ourselves. We deserve to make a fair return on our investment, and that's why we pursued patents for our plants, extracts, processes, and delivery devices."Would GW take legal action against a pot grower whose marijuana plants resembled GW's patented plants?"Of course not," Guy said. "But if somebody breaks into our glasshouses or laboratories and steals some of our plants or products, we would take action against them. We're not the police. We aren't worried about people growing plants at home. We're not patenting all known strains of cannabis. Frankly, a lot of these peoples' fears borders on paranoia. If people get into trouble for growing cannabis, it won't be because of my company, it will be because of the laws."GW is not the police, but Malmo-Levine and other critics lambasted GW for its plans to design cannabinoid delivery devices that could be remote-monitored by doctors, pharmacists and law-enforcement officials.Guy says GW is still working on the best ways to administer cannabis extracts."Most patients want to take their medicine, get relief, and go on with their day," Guy says. "They aren't looking to get high. In some of our testing, patients did experience a high at first, until they learned to titrate their doses. Doctors and patients are working together to determine the proper doses and cannabinoid ratios. Presently, we're focusing on a mucosal spray that will be sprayed in the mouth, because cannabinoids are absorbed well through red, shiny tissue. It can be the whole mouth; it doesn't just have to be under the tongue."Safety issues, social concerns and government regulations stipulate that medicines be safely deliverable in controlled doses, and that patients not be allowed to easily share medicines with others. Guy says that even if "little Johnny got a hold of a bottle of our extracts and sprayed the whole thing in his mouth, he might get sick or really high, but he is not going to die. Cannabis is one of the safest medicines known to humanity. It is unlikely to cause death, even in extreme overdose."The medical effectiveness and safety of cannabis continues to inspire Dr. Guy, even as he works through the costly research protocols while facing criticism from cannabis advocates like Malmo-Levine as well as from cannabis opponents."I'm very glad I became interested in this plant," he explains. "Our medicines are going to help millions of people in ways that are unique and safer than medicines they compete with. We can help patients who have experienced no relief from conventional medicines and who would otherwise have no access to cannabis. Patients want to be able to go to their doctors and then to their pharmacists and get a medicine that works well so that they can make the most of their lives. We emphatically say cannabis is a good medicine, and it's time to stop all this silly debate about it." Newshawk: Ethan Russo M.D.Source: Cannabis Culture Author: Pete BradyPublished: April 21, 2003Copyright: 2003 Cannabis CultureContact: ccmag cannabisculture.com Website: http://www.cannabisculture.com/ DL: http://cannabisculture.com/articles/2919.htmlRelated Articles & Web Site:GW Pharmaceuticalshttp://www.gwpharm.com/Cannabis Medicine 'On Sale This Year' http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15773.shtmlGW Sets Up Launch of Cannabis Drugshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15203.shtmlHigh Hopes for Cannabis on Prescription http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14701.shtml

Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help






 


Comment #33 posted by FoM on April 26, 2003 at 10:18:51 PT

Great Show!
Dr. Russo you made perfect sense to me. It is so good to see that Steve is back on the air with Michele. They do such a great job! 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #32 posted by FoM on April 26, 2003 at 10:07:43 PT

Dr. Russo
I'm watching the program now. Go Dr. Russo!!! The Pot TV News for April 26,2003: http://www.pot-tv.net/ram/pottvshowse1895.ramGW Pharmaceuticals: http://www.gwpharm.com/ GW Pharm Responds To CC: http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread16030.shtmlCannabis Medicine 'On Sale This Year': http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15773.shtmlGW Sets Up Launch of Cannabis Drugs: http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15203.shtmlHigh Hopes for Cannabis on Prescription: http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14701.shtml 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #31 posted by FoM on April 26, 2003 at 08:24:35 PT

Dr. Russo
Thank you for the link. I'll watch the program today. 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #30 posted by Ethan Russo MD on April 26, 2003 at 05:35:37 PT:

More on Pot-TV
For more discussion of this "controversy" see Pot-TV for April 26:http://www.pot-tv.net/archive/shows/pottvshowse-1895.html
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #29 posted by Richard Lake on April 23, 2003 at 19:11:43 PT:

GW is doing the right thing for patients

A large and respected number of cannabis law reformers have been, are, and will continue to be involved in the GW Pharmaceuticals effort. We think of it as OUR drug company, for our patients.We know that reform will take many steps, one of which is providing it as a safe medicine to patients in need. Only in the third world nations in terms of medical treatment, where patients must pay the cost of medicine, like the United States, will the costs be a factor. Elsewhere patients will receive good medicine as part of the health care system.This will show the world that cannabis is a safe medicine, which will undermine the idea that it is a killer drug.David Malmo-Levine is well known for articles short on research and long on sensation, designed to sell magazines rather than provide real investigation or common sense.In my opinion.Richard
169 articles about GW Pharmaceuticals
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #28 posted by FoM on April 23, 2003 at 10:40:43 PT

Imprint
I've been doing news for a long time now and have seen all the disagreements over issues that are important. I know we have passion about this issue and rightfully so but I've learned to look down the road a ways and in the end I believe we all will win. The issues that divide the reform community will not be important then. Everyone wants to have the answer to solve this war on Cannabis but all we have are bits and pieces to contribute. That's good and necessary but we are all important and our feelings are valid. It's up to us to try to understand why someone is passionate in one aspect of reform even if it isn't important to us as an individual. When we stand and say I know this way is the right way and I refuse to think any other way we become narrow in our thinking and we get stuck going in circles. That's how I see it all!
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #27 posted by FoM on April 23, 2003 at 09:25:03 PT

Insurance To Help Pay for Prescriptions
This is sort of on topic. On Sunday my sister and I talked about health, medicine and the rights of citizens to get adequate health care. My sister is older then me and retired and has good insurance. Anyone that I know doesn't have insurance. The jobs we had that were good like where my husband worked for 10 years ( General Electric ) have moved to Mexico. I don't know how many people can afford prescription medicine. My sister said what would I do if something serious surfaced with my health. I thought and then said. I guess I will die. I said remember don't be fooled we are expendable. She sat back and shook her head and sadly said that I was right. 
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #26 posted by Sam Adams on April 23, 2003 at 07:06:00 PT

Don't forget the money!
The other thing to remember about GW's work is that the U.S. is the only Western country without a single-payer health care system. The debate about how much prescription drugs cost is a somewhat academic one in Europe, where the government foots the bill for everyone.Here in the US, about 1/3rd of the population does not have any health care insurance, so GW's products will likely be totally out of reach for those people. In fact, Marinol is so expensive here that many people's health plans won't cover it.It's easier for us to view Big Pharm with suspicion because we're paying three times as much for the same drugs as Europeans also.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #25 posted by charmed quark on April 23, 2003 at 04:50:49 PT:

FoM - vaporizers and inhalers
GW was orignally talking about inhalers that worked by carrying the cannabinoids in some sort of solvent that could be absorbed through the mucous membranes,or through the blood vessels under the tounge.This article also talkes about vaporizers. Vaporizers do NOT burn the mateial, but heat to the point where the cannbinoids become warm enough that they evaporate out of the plant material into a mist. You inhale these through your lungs. There are no combustion products when done right.Both methods are useful. I think an inhaler has the potental of being smaller, more portable as you don't need a lot of stored energy to power the heater.And a legal source of fast-acting cannabinoids would be great! The GW work on the best comination of cannabinoids for different disorders is priceless research. Right now, all I have for treatment is a single cannabinoid (THC) tat takes 2 hours to reach a peak level in my system.-Pete

[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #24 posted by Ron Bennett on April 22, 2003 at 23:34:38 PT

Thinking Outside That Box Again :;
Forgot all about the U.S. Patent Office...Click on over to http://www.uspto.gov/ and click on Patents, then search all patents, and use "inhaler" in term one and "cannabinoids" in term two and click search......amazing how simple that was :)6,509,005 .DELTA.9 Tetrahydrocannabinol (.DELTA.9 THC) solution metered dose inhaler 6,250,301 Vaporizer for inhalation and method for extraction of active ingredients from a crude natural product or other matrix http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=0&f=S&l=50&TERM1=inhaler&FIELD1=&co1=AND&TERM2=cannabinoids&FIELD2=&d=pall(this above link may die eventually, so it may be best to do the search manually as I explained above)Enough reading for tonight LOL!Ron

[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #23 posted by Ron Bennett on April 22, 2003 at 23:09:53 PT:

Googling: inhaler delivery system cannabinoids
Found more than I expected regarding inhalers and cannabinoids.Nice to see so many diverse folks coming to the same conclusion, inhaler delivery is the safest way to go; not 100% of course, but far safer than smoking nevertheless.Some of the difficulties GW may be running into is delivering precise dosage and extracting/mixing specific cannabinoids, etc - however, for many folks, especially those seeking a noticiable high, precise dosage and exact formulations of cannabinoids aren't of any concern and thus the only real problem remaining, though far from trivial, with developing an "underground/homemade" inhaler device is delivery...Liquid, which is then "atomized" so to speak into a gas and inhaled. Or simply as a gas to begin with, but likely more difficult to store/manufacture. Or powder (google is full of information LOL), but how does one make cannabinoids into a usable powder? Perhaps a chem wizard will be kind enough to drop in and fill in the blanks :;Anyways, I'd bet some folks with advanced chemistry knowledge, creativity, and *persistance* could develop a crude, but usable delivery system for a cannabinoid inhaler that folks could easily build themselves. Think outside the box...if only more did, the drug war would already be over.Ron

[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #22 posted by FoM on April 22, 2003 at 22:23:15 PT

Ron
Isn't Google great! I am sitting over in the corner sort of in this thread and taking it in. It's interesting to read even though I really don't understand it all very well. I'd never consider taking you on! I know better! LOL!
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #21 posted by Ron Bennett on April 22, 2003 at 22:17:30 PT

As a Delivery Device Asthma Inhalers are Safe
I was referring to the delivery aspect of asthma inhalers as being relatively safe, not referring to the medication itself.To reiterate, my point was that an inhaler device for cannabinoids is more ideal than a vaporizer device.Anyways, I guess the real key to cracking this nut is to determine what chemicals are used in various inhalers now for the delivery aspect only (not talking medication here) and see which, if any, are compatible with any known, easy to perform cannabinoids extractions. Sounds like a simple research project...time to hit up google again :)Ron

[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #20 posted by Imprint on April 22, 2003 at 22:15:22 PT

Like it
Sam Adams, Your so right, new drugs would never be developed if there weren’t money to be made. And that is fair; it’s like any other enterprise. It would also be fair to say GW Pharmaceuticals is basically trying to do a good thing. It just that there are those that will try to misuse the situation to win if not prolong the drug war. FoM, I think I get it. The scenario I outlined could just be a brief stopping point on our way to freedom. I hope your right. Gee, I’d hate for it to be the end point. Thanks for keep a good light on things. 
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #19 posted by The GCW on April 22, 2003 at 20:15:01 PT

Didn't Dr. Russo say it a while back?
GW discredits the Schedule 1 placement of cannabis, stating that cannabis has no medical value.I understand the fears, but I trust the doctor here.Biblicaly: Proverbs 3:27, Do not withhold good from those to whom it is due, when it is in Your power to do it.(Kinda makes it sound like Bush et al. are being disobedient in attempting to exterminate cannabis [kaneh bosm] off the planet, especially considering people get relief from cannabis/GW products that is unavailable otherwise.)
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #18 posted by FoM on April 22, 2003 at 20:07:52 PT

Thrush
Sam they can cause Thrush? I didn't know that. That's not good. I remember my son getting Thrush and it wasn't good at all.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #17 posted by Sam Adams on April 22, 2003 at 20:03:47 PT

Ron
Sorry, one more post. I just wanted to point at that asthma inhalers are by no means "clean and safe to use." Asthma deaths have been increasing each year and some studies have shown that albuterol inhalers may be to blame. If not used correctly, or if used too frequently, they increase the chance of dying from asthma! Also, they include inactive ingredients like freon and other stuff that cause the heart to race, and also nausea and other side effects.And that's only albuterol! Nowadays doctors are pushing steroid inhalers on everyone. These can cause "thrush", which is a yeast infection of the mouth. They can also cause liver damage and host of other serious side-effects.  I would say cannabis delivered through a convection vaporizer has less dangerous side effects that any asthma inhaler I am aware of. And I've had asthma for 30 years!
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #16 posted by FoM on April 22, 2003 at 20:03:31 PT

Another Comment
I see some here that appear a little upset about pharmaceutical companies and I'm not sure why. I know that the pharmceutical industry is one industry that I do everything in my power to avoid. I can't afford to pay for medicine so I use medicinal herbs and they've worked to help keep me healthy so far. I know an under the tongue spray would have helped my father in law in his final days but whole cannabis would have been too harsh for him. I guess I think of the folks who are to weak or sick to use the plant itself when I think of a sprays worth. It isn't the first choice but I hope it becomes an option for those who would benefit from it.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #15 posted by Sam Adams on April 22, 2003 at 19:58:53 PT

FOM
There is a big difference. A convection vaporizer (like Aromazap, Eterra, Inavap, Evape) delivers a mist of hot air and volatile oils from cannabis into the lungs, where it's absorbed into the bloodstream through the lung tissue. There is no flame or burning with these devices.A sub-lingual spray delivers the pure cannabinoids to the tissue below the tongue, where it's absorbed directly into the bloodstream through capillaries in the skin.As Dr. Russo mentioned, even pure cannabinoids without any smoke or combustion by-products can irrirate the lungs. So a sub-lingual spray is better in that it does not irritate the lungs at all. And an inhaler is probably slight healthier as well, in that it would be near-pure cannabinoids, where a vaporizer will still deliver some other irritants with the cannabinoids.However, if you look at the cost/benefit ratio, the vaporizer is extremely effiecient. It costs 80 bucks and probably eliminates 95% of the harm from smoking. The other devices will eliminate 100%, but at what cost?I definitely respect GW for bringing a useful product to the market, but I respect people that breed cannabis for free and help sick people directly a lot more.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #14 posted by Sam Adams on April 22, 2003 at 19:50:17 PT

Imprint
Thanks for clarifying, I agree with everything you said. GW's developments are indeed exciting. But to me, it's a sad expression of our society.  Our current cultural/government framework is a blend of capitalism and fascism, where the global corporate elite call the shots. The only way we can deal with medical cannabis under this system is for a corporation, motivated by greed (sorry, it's true), to patent everything and extort huge amounts of money from the sick. It's a poor solution.If the cannabis plant were not banned, there would surely be tons of research into which strains are the best and cheap seeds specifically bred for medical problems and available to everyone. Companies like GW could make expensive but extremely low-impact delivery devices like inhalers; other companies could offer cheap vaporizers available to the general public with 90% of the benefit of the expensive, corporate solution.I don't blame GW one bit. By definition, corporations are designed from top to bottom to MAKE MONEY. That is the number one objective. Therefore, it is perfectly logical to design a ridiculous device that lets government authorities control patient dosage - if that is required to sell to the American market, then they'll do it without hesitation. It is the logical thing to do for them.I've often thought about this before in terms of legalization. Look at how it's handled (quite well) in Holland - small, independent, neighborhood coffee shops sell the cannabis. In America, that system would be impossible, because only huge, homogenized mega-corporations can survive under our system - we don't have individual coffeeshops, we have Starbucks, another huge, greedy corporation. The only distribution possible for cannabis would be a greedy corporation - who can blame people for not wanting youth brainwashed into cannabis consumption like they are by Budweiser and Coors? That's why cannabis is a "lynchpin" type public policy issue. It's like the canary in the coal mine, except it's an indicator of personal and economic freedom. To confront the issue of cannabis prohibition, you must confront the reasons why our current draconian system has evolved and thrived, and it's not pretty.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #13 posted by FoM on April 22, 2003 at 19:42:08 PT

Vaporizer or under the tongue spray
To me those two things don't seem the same. I'm not familiar with vaporizers or the under the tongue spray but isn't there a big difference?Don't you need matches to light a vaporizer? I don't think you need to light an under the tongue spray.Help me out because I'm just guessing.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #12 posted by Ron Bennett on April 22, 2003 at 19:16:11 PT:

Re: Sounds like a vaporizer
It certainly does according to what Ethan Russo MD wrote "GW is working on an inhaler device that uses a solid state ignition that vaporizes the cannabis extract with no solvent at all."A vaporizer is *not* the same as an inhaler.A true inhaler device involves absolutely no ignition/heat, but instead operates much like an asthma inhaler - compact, portable, clean, and safe to use. I thought that was what GW was developing...guess not?Sounds as if GW is instead simply developing a vaporizer, but that surely doesn't sound right, since zillions of companies already sell such products; and vaporizers are certainly not innovative (been around for ages and are relatively easy to make) nor as clean/safe as a true inhaler device would be.Ron Bennett

[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #11 posted by charmed quark on April 22, 2003 at 18:37:31 PT

Sounds like a vaporizer
The GW device sounds ike a vaporizer. I have seen some very effective vaporizers deonstrated,but none are very portable.
But the available ones do see to do the trick.-Pete
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #10 posted by FoM on April 22, 2003 at 18:18:55 PT

Imprint 
I understand how you feel. I really do. I just know that we will be fought every step along the way. Just look at the objections over lowering penalties in some of the states. John Walters hates marijuana. He will use whatever is put in front of him. I think we all know that is the problem. Education about Cannabis should help us. It has help us and we need to continue in that direction. I can't see the future but the plant will be the winner in the end and then we will be free.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #9 posted by Imprint on April 22, 2003 at 18:04:25 PT

Thanks for hearing me FoM
I like that, its one plant and it should be one plant accessible to all. I think were on the same page here. And I agree with your comments. Good data from GW pharmaceuticals should be a good thing. It should be seen as a validation.  Unfortunately, the government will use this validation in a different way. They will give it the “Spin” and make it fit into the drug war strategy. They could easily use it against the recreational user. For me, I just don’t trust the government anymore. I had to learn the hard way. It’s all about misdirection, half-truths and outright lies. This is how the drug warriors have played the game so far, why wouldn’t they continue?  Despite my distrust of the government I’m hopeful that we can win. That marijuana will once again be free so we can be free too. Because that’s what this fight is all about “OUR FREEDOM”. 

[ Post Comment ]





 


Comment #8 posted by FoM on April 22, 2003 at 16:08:27 PT

Imprint 
Very well said. Thank you being honest and speaking how you see this issue. I don't think about medical or recreational users but I think of the cannabis plant by itself. I feel much harm has come to this plant thru propaganda and it desrves all the good reports that are available. It helps remove the veil from the unknown. People will see that this whole war isn't worth it as we show the world how good cannabis is and whatever harms it could have aren't anything near the harms that prohibition causes.
[ Post Comment ]





 


Comment #7 posted by Imprint on April 22, 2003 at 15:54:28 PT

Comment about medical vs. recreational
There really are two issues here, the medical users and the recreational users. And as much as I want to see relief for the sick I want to see freedom for us all. So, if I may, I think many recreational users are worried that they will be left to the wolves. I hope no one will get angry with me for stating the obvious. We have had several examples of medical pot users denouncing recreational use (i.e. recently one of the remaining US sponsored medical users). We now have a burgeoning pharmaceuticals company creating forms of marijuana that ultimately might make it more difficult to end the prohibition. We have the US government spending a lot of energy promoting the idea that the medical pot movement is ruse to legalize pot. We have law enforcement disregarding mandates from the people that they serve. Now, for the average recreational user when you put this all together it doesn’t mix well. The obvious leap is this; medical pot eventually legal but only in the forms the government deems appropriate (i.e. not smoked). Since the methods of ingestion (i.e. pill or spray) will be such that only a pharmaceuticals company can make it so, any kind of growing would still be prohibited. I can see a system that accommodates all parties except the recreational user. Medical users get relief, pharmaceutical companies can make a fortune, police, judges, prosecutors, prisons will continue to grow. I’m not saying I have sour grapes over this. It is what it is. And frankly, if I knew that ultimately we could only accomplish one thing, I would push for medical use. But, I do think the success of GW pharmaceuticals could possibly hurt the big picture more than it helps. Its success could give the government a legitimate chance to make a very clear distinction between medical users and recreational users. Medical users use APPROVED drugs and recreational uses don’t. And this is all they need to remove the compassion component from this issue. Once the medical users (the ones that deserve compassion) are taken care of it will become open season, with no limits, for the recreational user. Sounds kind of gloomy but hey the drug war is full of dark outcomes. I really do hope for better but you can’t fault folks for worrying about the worst case. 
[ Post Comment ]





 


Comment #6 posted by Ethan Russo MD on April 22, 2003 at 13:34:23 PT:

Ron
With all due respect, I think that you are being short-sighted.Firstly, you are correct about THC and other cannabinoids being easy to extract. However, an inhaled device is extremely complex. THC is extremely sticky and usually requires a solvent, such as ethanol, that is a bad thing to put in your lungs. Additionally, although THC is a bronchodilator, it is irritating by itself, and produces coughing. This is why you have not seen a Marinol inhaler to this point.GW is working on an inhaler device that uses a solid state ignition that vaporizes the cannabis extract with no solvent at all. Given that it contains the terpenoid essential oils that are anti-inflammatory and bronchodilatory in their own right, there is a specific advantage over other systems, and total elimination of potential irritants and carcinogens in smoke.It is naive to think that anyone would give this technology away for nothing. A nice thought, but unrealistic. Nothing they are doing should detract from "the movement." Rather, I believe that when cannabis medicines are available, help people, and the sky fails to fall, it will advance acceptance of "recreational" usage. Certainly, nothing else is working.When this happens, there will always be artisans that prefer to grow and roll their own. Nobody who is realistic expects that to disappear. There are plenty of people that like Pinot Noir, but not everyone wants to grow the grapes, stomp and ferment them.As I like to say, "Cannabis or Cabernet? Shouldn't it be a personal choice?"
[ Post Comment ]





 


Comment #5 posted by Ron Bennett on April 22, 2003 at 12:46:53 PT:

Homemade Inhaler Device Possible? Thoughts...
I, for one, like to see some folks with chemistry knowledge, creativity, and a desire to truly help medicinal cannabis folks, develop an easy to build "homemade" inhaler device.Extracting cannabinoids as a group (laymans catch-all term: THC) isn't that difficult - anyone with alcohol can do it; other solvents/methods will also work.In short, anyone with minimal knowledge can perform cannabinoid extraction from cannabis. However, the real difficulty comes with the formulation of a suitable liquid/gas? that can be safely and comfortably inhaled.But surely, some grower/chemist or whatnot who is determined should be able to come up with a simple solution for building a homemade inhaler device...An easy to build inhaler would allow anyone to use cannabis without smoking, etc in the privacy of their home *without* spending excessive amounts of money. Also, without fear of government and private companies monitoring their activities.As of now GW Pharmaceuticals is seeking/has various patents (patents grants one a legal monopoly on a device/substance/method, etc for typically around 20 years) on cannabis and delivery devices that would make cannabis and its cannabinoids *LESS* accessible to people who really need it; and more expensive as well.If GW Pharmaceuticals truly wants to help, they need to ensure that people continue to have open and free access to cannabis. While they deserve to be rewarded for their research, etc, they must have more of a balanced approach than what I've seen so far...oppressive patents and security devices on inhalers isn't helping the movement.Ron Bennett

CANNABIS.COM / Marihemp Network
[ Post Comment ]





 


Comment #4 posted by FoM on April 22, 2003 at 10:56:12 PT

Just A Comment
I don't understand why anyone would be upset. I'm very happy that this cannabis based medicine is working and will help people just like the plant itself can. Getting upset about this topic has never made sense to me.
[ Post Comment ]





 


Comment #3 posted by NoahTao on April 22, 2003 at 10:49:20 PT:

Can't we all just get along?
I don't understand why someone would be upset with the research that GW has been doing. Remember they are trying to make cannabis products avaliable to patients with medical problems. If we are to be upset at anyone it should be the law makers for they are the ones who make this process even nesassary. Dr. Russo gave a great presentation on the GW product at the NORML conference and I am looking forward to the day we can be pescribed this medicine in the US. I won't hold my breath though...
[ Post Comment ]





 


Comment #2 posted by FoM on April 22, 2003 at 10:48:04 PT

Dr. Russo
Welcome Home! Do you think NORML will have a video of the conference to be viewed online? That would be great. Hope you had a wonderful time and I was there with you all in spirit!
[ Post Comment ]





 


Comment #1 posted by Ethan Russo MD on April 22, 2003 at 10:39:38 PT:

Issues
This article addresses a few issues of concern out there, including two raised by Dr. Grinspoon in his address at NORML in San Francisco: 1) The inclusion of a "device" with cannabis-based medicine extracts, and 2) Does this material prevent a "high".In one of my addresses at NORML, I discussed the answers. The Advanced Delivery System was developed with the expectation that a security device would be required by the DEA/FDA before approval of such drugs in the USA. Interestingly, it has not been used in the UK research studies, nor will it be required before drug licensing. There has been no "abuse" and no diversion.The CBME (cannabis-based medicine extracts) contain cannabinoids including THC with most formulations, and it certainly is the case that people will become "high" if they use a certain amount. No, that is not necessarily bad. The important thing is that being high is usually not a prerequisite for good relief of medical symptoms. In fact, the "high" is not a desirable endpoint for many medicinal cannabis users. Rather, they are seeking relief and an increase in function, whether it be work, school or enjoyable activities of daily living. These things, the medicine seems to provide nicely. 
[ Post Comment ]








  Post Comment