Dealing with chronic pain/illness at church

[Bernard Gui]

6 hours ago, flameburns623 said:

For MEDICAL PURPOSES it should definitely be legal.

Only after it has been vetted by science, prescribed by MDs, and dispensed by real pharmacies. Until then, it should not.

[flameburns623]

45 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Only after it has been vetted by science, prescribed by MDs, and dispensed by real pharmacies. Until then, it should not.

It already is.

In the majority or nearly the majority of American states. 

Btw, it i s none of the business of "science". But that is the libertarian in me speaking.  

Edited March 31, 2018 by flameburns623

[Calm]

53 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Only after it has been vetted by science, prescribed by MDs, and dispensed by real pharmacies. Until then, it should not.

If it is not legal, how can the last two happened?

[Bernard Gui]

6 minutes ago, Calm said:

If it is not legal, how can the last two happened?

Just like any other substance that is being considered for medical use. The FDA has procedures that should be followed before it is declared a legal and beneficent medicine. I’m not opposed....but I see this being driven by emotion and anecdotes, not science. That’s the unfortunate way it was done in Washington. 

[Bernard Gui]

25 minutes ago, flameburns623 said:

It already is.

In the majority or nearly the majority of American states. 

Btw, it i s none of the business of "science". But that is the libertarian in me speaking.  

Vetted by science? Licensed pharmacies? Here in Washington you get your “medicinal” weed from the same strip mall hole-in-the-wall as you get your “recreational” pot. Plus you get free entertainment from the sign spinners out on the street. Hardly the stuff confidence is built on.

Edited March 31, 2018 by Bernard Gui

[pogi]

57 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Only after it has been vetted by science, prescribed by MDs, and dispensed by real pharmacies. Until then, it should not.

It is extremely difficult to get vetted and approved by the FDA for medical use when it is a schedule I drug (no medicinal value and high potential for abuse).  There are all sorts of insane loop holes that researches have to jump through, and most are not up to the task. 

There is absolutely no good reason why it should be a schedule I drug.

[Bernard Gui]

6 minutes ago, pogi said:

It is extremely difficult to get vetted and approved by the FDA for medical use when it is a schedule I drug (no medicinal value and high potential for abuse).  There are all sorts of insane loop holes that researches have to jump through, and most are not up to the task. 

There is absolutely no good reason why it should be a schedule I drug.

And for good reason. Until that changes, it should not be considered to a legitimate medicine. I would like to corner the market on medicinal sagebrush tea. My mom swore that it cured everything from acne to bad attitudes. 

Edited March 31, 2018 by Bernard Gui

[pogi]

Quote

Until that changes, it should not be considered to a legitimate medicine. 

Do you support declassifying it as a schedule I drug so that it can be given a fair shot and properly studied?  

That is a higher schedule then LSD for crying out loud.

Edited March 31, 2018 by pogi

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

Do you support declassifying it as a schedule I drug so that it can be given a fair shot and properly studied?  

That is a higher schedule then LSD for crying out loud.

I would love for this to happen. I'd feel better if the product I buy is what it says it is. But it sure seems to do the trick. 

[Guest]

On March 27, 2018 at 11:58 AM, bsjkki said:

This article truly struck home for me. It is amazing how unkind people can be when you deal with chronic pain and illness at church. So many of the comments made to this girl, I have heard directed at my loved ones. But in the end, she has a hopeful message about dealing with flippant judgments of the ignorant. (Those will always be with us--they don't know what they don't know.) https://bycommonconsent.com/2018/03/27/the-pain-of-being-in-pain-at-church/

"I don’t recount these instances because I want to call these people out or because these experiences are representative of my experience in the church. I recount them because people don’t understand what I mean when I say that church can be painful for people who are already in pain. 

I mean that I am exhausted by the burden of dealing with the spiritual pain brought about others who are unable to understand how a sick person could possibly have true faith. I mean that the addition of this pain to the physical pain I already experience because of my illness has often felt unbearable. I mean that it has made me question my place in a gospel that is supposed to be for everyone.

I know all too well this issue. A number of times I have asked for a chair to be placed in the Relief Society room, that has a full back, where Gospel Doctrine is taught. Each Sunday, the chair would be gone, and when others would point out why it is there, some in the Relef Society have said the following...

1. It does not match the other chairs.

2. It is bad enough that seminary is taught in here, and we have to clean up.

3. Bro Lee is not the only one with back problems, if others can get through class, so can he! 

4. We are getting tired of lugging this chair around. 

In short, I no longer attend Gospel Doctrine. I attend Gospel essentials, instead. More than once, my wife has  pulled a chair (I am unable to do so)  with a full back into the overflow area (we have to open it up each week), only to to get angry looks, usually people wondering why I am not carrying the chair. Others will come up and ask, you are going to put that back are you not. Anyway, we now go 20-30 mins early, to get a bench seat. 

[bsjkki]

24 minutes ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

I know all too well this issue. A number of times I have asked for a chair to be placed in the Relief Society room, that has a full back, where Gospel Doctrine is taught. Each Sunday, the chair would be gone, and when others would point out why it is there, some in the Relef Society have said the following...

1. It does not match the other chairs.

2. It is bad enough that seminary is taught in here, and we have to clean up.

3. Bro Lee is not the only one with back problems, if others can get through class, so can he! 

4. We are getting tired of lugging this chair around. 

In short, I no longer attend Gospel Doctrine. I attend Gospel essentials, instead. More than once, my wife has  pulled a chair (I am unable to do so)  with a full back into the overflow area (we have to open it up each week), only to to get angry looks, usually people wondering why I am not carrying the chair. Others will come up and ask, you are going to put that back are you not. Anyway, we now go 20-30 mins early, to get a bench seat. 

😪

[flameburns623]

On 3/31/2018 at 5:39 PM, Bernard Gui said:

Vetted by science? Licensed pharmacies? Here in Washington you get your “medicinal” weed from the same strip mall hole-in-the-wall as you get your “recreational” pot. Plus you get free entertainment from the sign spinners out on the street. Hardly the stuff confidence is built on.

Here in the greater Saint Louis area, blood laboratories,  Urgent Care, and Cardio Care facilities are located in strip malls. With reportedly some of the best medical care available. 

To receive an Illinois medical marijuana card requires a doctor review your medical history, approve use of marijuana for one or more conditions, and issue a prescription. 

There are a tiny number of uses of marijuana which have almost indisputable medical benefits--post-chemotherapy nausea for example. Some other uses exist for which there is pretty fair evidence from Europe or Canada,  where research has been less constrained. 

There's also a lot of hype. Anecdotally,  it would be hard to find a condition which someone isn't claiming that pot COULD mitigate.

I actually explored the question at some length with my VA doctor. (As a federal institution, the VA cannot do much research nor  prescribe marijuana unless until it's status is removed from Schedule One list. However, starting in late 2017, VA physicians were encouraged to familiarize themselves with available research and discuss any potential benefits with VA patients who enquire). 

Practically the only research with which the VA is cooperating of which my doctor was aware involves opioid dependency.  (Marijuana seems to help wean people away, btw: but these are early results in a long term study).

My physician has several chemo patients using MM with varying degrees of good results. She was doubtful it would significantly mitigate my particular concerns--chronic low back pain owing to fractures, along with hip and knee join pain owing to arthritis--and she worried it might worsen some issues.

With COPD, smoking MM would be a poor means of medicating myself, f'rinstance. (Frankly,  it would also be embarrassing to sit in a ward chapel wondering if I reeked of the stuff). There are other ways of taking MM, such as vaping, capsules, or edibles: but several of these are beginning to cause stomach problems. 

In my case, I decided MM isn't a promising way to address matters. But: had the consultation gone differently, I might have considered this an option.

My point remains: many report very good results with MM, and it is a viable complementary treatment. I stress: as an ADJUNCT to other, more established treatments. Unless & until we confirm it's efficacy as a primary means of treatment.

I had a grandfather with liver cancer in the 1970's, who opted to attempt laetril treatment in Mexico, rather than the newly-emerging chemotherapy treatments of that time. Laetril,  (outlawed in the USA) is still sometimes touted, & is a nutritional supplement therapy for some cancers. At that time, its proponents  ordinarily advocated laetril IN PLACE OF mainstream strategies for treatment.

Granddad's decision to opt for laetril "instead of" established treatments may or may not have shortened his life: the cancer was rather advanced, and chemo in those days dramatically diminished quality of life for many patients,  at least for several months: ergo, my grandfather felt that gaining an extra six months lease on life only to be deathly ill during most of those months, wasn't worthwhile.

And: doctors couldn't even guarantee that chemotherapy would extend his existence. So, he elected to try laetril treatments and lasted only about six or nine months. Would he have preferred to have suffered for, say, six additional months under chemotherapy? My grandfather seems to have decided that he would not. I can only hope this was a fully informed decision for him.

This shapes how I approach discussions of such matters, btw. Where alternative medicine can serve as a complement to mainstream medicine: OR where they prove so successful as to be adapted into the mainstream, I think such should be left between a doctor and a patient. Neither the law, nor any religious body, should intervene, IMHO.  

And: church members should attempt to refrain from making moral judgements in such situations. No matter how good or wise or "scientific" or skilled one's team of doctors and medical specialists may be, everyone, EVERYONE here is going to perish of their final infirmity.

Most of us will feel ourselves breaking down,  will be more or less aware that we are soon to enter that long dark night: and, we will not go gently nor without at least some suffering. 

How we mitigate that, if we are given luxury to do so, should be left between us and competent medical advice.  Medically prescribed opioids are an option--increasingly, one accompanied by reservations. Medical marijuana deserves to be another. Imho. 

Edited April 2, 2018 by flameburns623

[Bernard Gui]

3 hours ago, flameburns623 said:

How we mitigate that, if we are given luxury to do so, should be left between us and competent medical advice.  Medically prescribed opioids are an option--increasingly, one accompanied by reservations. Medical marijuana deserves to be another. Imho. 

Until there’s real scientifc evidence of its efficacy  I will continué to call it “medical” marijuana. We followed closely the debates here in Washington leading up to the foolish legalization of “medical” and recreational weed. The evidence was mostly emotional and anecdotal. The proponents are almost religious in their faith and devotion to all things pot.

Now we in Washington are lucky to have the new wonder drug....pot extract CBD (cannabidiol)....being pedaled as the greatest cure-all.  It’s a “super-nutrient” that cures or reverses cancer, repairs aged skin, puts you to sleep at night then perks you up in the morning, cures foot and back aches, reduces stress, fixes whatever is wrong with your doggy, and comes highly recommended by Gwyneth Paltrow. Well, that settles it. Must be good stuff if she likes it. Appropriately, my iPad auto-fill keeps trying to change cannabidiol to cannab idiot.

http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/marijuana/article207301739.html

An example of the claims: https://www.projectcbd.org/about/what-cbd

Quote

Scientific and clinical research—much of it sponsored by the US government—underscores CBD’s potential as a treatment for a wide range of conditions, including arthritis, diabetes, alcoholism, MS, chronic pain, schizophrenia, PTSD, depression, antibiotic-resistant infections, epilepsy, and other neurological disorders. CBD has demonstrable neuroprotective and neurogenic effects, and its anti-cancer properties are currently being investigated at several academic research centers in the United States and elsewhere. Further evidence suggests that CBDis safe even at high doses. [emphasis added]

Those are some pretty specific high-expectancy claims! Kinda like when otc remedies claim to support immune systems, better vision, or prostate health. Whatever support means.

I will say again that I am not opposed to calling it real medicine if it is shown to be safe and effective and is prescribed by an MD and dispensed in real pharmacies by licensed pharmacists, not by potheads in strip mall holes with stoned sign spinners out on the street. 

People will do what they feel is best in their health situations, but we should be wary and informed about substances that are questionably declared cures for everything from cancer to foot pain.

We also have medical clinics and urgent care centers in strip malls here. Pot dispensaries are not in the same league in any sense of the word.

 

Edited April 2, 2018 by Bernard Gui

[Meerkat]

On 3/27/2018 at 9:05 AM, will227457 said:

I read the article, color me not impressed. While I have sympathy for those who suffer from chronic illness the young lady who writes the article somehow manages to find 6 plus hours a day for school and homework, and time to write the article. Yet going to church or church activities is a burden.  I believe that she received bad counsel from her church leaders but she need to look inward not outward.

Several studies are referred to at WebMD on this subject.  I know one cancer survivor, and one RA survivor gaining relief with creams.  I don't believe it affects their TR status. 

My aunt died at age 33 of RA.  She may have benefitted from this, had it been available. I think it's worth discussing. I understand the arguments against recreational use, and agree with many or most.  Still, I wouldn't judge those who do use it to cope with their pain.

Edited April 2, 2018 by Meerkat

[Tacenda]

8 hours ago, Meerkat said:

Several studies are referred to at WebMD on this subject.  I know one cancer survivor, and one RA survivor gaining relief with creams.  I don't believe it affects their TR status. 

My aunt died at age 33 of RA.  She may have benefitted from this, had it been available. I think it's worth discussing. I understand the arguments against recreational use, and agree with many or most.  Still, I wouldn't judge those who do use it to cope with their pain.

I hope it wouldn't affect their TR status! I gave some cream to my friend for her pain in her feet. She said she didn't feel it helped, but that would be too bad if I put her in jeopardy of not getting her recommend current. 

I was thinking the other day of all the new drugs that come out and then in their ads in the magazines/commercials they put that there are many side affects. In their magazine ads it goes on and on and in the commercial they have to put it on fast speed for the speaker to get it all in with in the time allotment of the commercial. It made me wonder why some on this thread may not be just as afraid to use some of these drugs the pharmaceuticals put out. And a lot of them then are seen in the ads for an attorney to go after the pharmaceutical company that put out the drug, for causing health problems. 

I just saw this on my FB group that speaks of the success stories for Cannibus use for medicine's page. 

http://ushealthtimes.com/cannabis-oil-from-marijuana-is-having-success-as-copd-treatment/

I think Cannibus is far more harmless.

ETA: Saw this on the same news feed, sure hope it's true since that's one of the things I'm trying to combat!

http://ushealthtimes.com/thc-from-cannabis-found-to-dramatically-slow-memory-loss-by-protecting-brain-cells-new-finding/

Edited April 2, 2018 by Tacenda

[Rain]

On 3/27/2018 at 10:20 AM, mfbukowski said:

I agree.  She is young and bitter and resentful and hopefully will learn how to grow from the experiences.  Resentment kills you and eats at your soul, and comes out of a sense of entitlement and pride that life should be something other than the reality of what it is- pain turned to joy.

All of religion- both Eastern and Western is about transforming pain into joy- that is the central teaching of the atonement if you think about it.

Pain can be the greatest teacher if you use it properly to build your life.  It lets you know every day why we are here and how difficult life is, and demonstrates the plan of salvation every day if you but see it that way

I see it as a gift in many ways.  It can be a constant reminder of of how to turn trials into joys, if we but have the right attitude.

 

On 3/27/2018 at 10:28 AM, CV75 said:

Grace can help us endure, overcome, or transcend. Like forgiveness, once we receive it, we extend it to others.

She seemed bitter at first - then after the conference quote her heart changed. Now she is asking for empathy for those around us who are in pain. 

That grace she received from the Spirit when hearing the quote she is extending to others. She has learned through physical pain and emotional pain to have charity and empathy for others. Beautiful!

 

 

 

[Rain]

I've been told I would be healed on my type 1 diabetes if I had faith. If you haven't heard this then count yourself blessed. Luckily, far more often I have been told if I took this substance (rolling eyes) I would be cured than if I had faith.

The whole focus of this article is NOT a whine fest, or a case for drugs or an excuse, but that faith can sustain you despite not being healed and that we should share that peace with others instead of piling up more pain on them.

 

[pogi]

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I was thinking the other day of all the new drugs that come out and then in their ads in the magazines/commercials they put that there are many side affects. In their magazine ads it goes on and on and in the commercial they have to put it on fast speed for the speaker to get it all in with in the time allotment of the commercial. It made me wonder why some on this thread may not be just as afraid to use some of these drugs the pharmaceuticals put out.

The reason that people feel safer with FDA approved medicines is because they can better weigh the risk vs benefit of a medicine which has undergone rigorous and large scale studies.  These larger scale studies are more likely to find rare side effects and interactions with other medications and conditions that the drug might exacerbate. 

When it comes to cannabis, it is much more difficult to weigh the risk vs benefit because we simply don't have the rigorous and large scale studies for most conditions that it is reported to treat.  Does it actually work with these conditions?  Maybe...we just don't have enough info in most cases.  Are there potential side effects?  Absolutely!  So, the question that people should ask themselves is this - is it worth taking a drug with known and potentially unknown side effects to treat a condition that it may not even treat, and could potentially exacerbate other issues?    It is simply more of a gamble with your health when you can't reliable measure the benefits vs the risks.  How is it going to react with this rare medicine that you take, or this rare condition that you have? 

When it comes to cannabis, people frequently fall into one extreme or the other 1) it is a natural remedy for just about everything with no harmful side effects because its "natural", or 2) It has no medicinal value and high potential for abuse and deserves the schedule 1 rating.  I think both extremes are way off the mark.  

If Bernard and others are annoyed by all the ridiculous claims of marijuana (as am I) they should support declassifying cannabis from a schedule 1.  This will allow it to undergo the rigorous studies that it deserves, and will shut up a lot of the "cure all" advocates with credible evidence of what it actually treats and will help us better understand what the actual risks are.  That way it will be more properly controlled by the FDA leading to safer prescriptive use by doctors.  As it is, marijuana is used as a sort of alternative medicine herbal remedy or snake medicine cure all.  That needs to stop.  If we want to better control and regulate its use, we NEED to declassify it in order to get the FDA behind it.  

You speak of long lists of side effects with big pharmaceuticals.  Be aware Tacenda, in FDA approved uses, marijuana will come with a long list of side effects too.  Just because they are not listed in non-FDA approved uses, doesn't mean it is without risk. 

Here is a long list of some of the side effects we know about (there may be others that we have not yet identified with larger scale studies):

Quote

Use of marijuana can cause dry mouth, nausea, vomiting, dry or red eyes, heart and blood pressure problems, lung problems, impaired mental functioning, headache, dizziness, numbness, panic reactions, hallucinations, flashbacks, depression, and sexual problems.

Special Precautions & Warnings:
Pregnancy: Marijuana is UNSAFE when taken by mouth or smoked during pregnancy. Marijuana passes through the placenta and can slow the growth of the fetus. Marijuana use during pregnancy is also associated with childhood leukemia and abnormalities in the fetus.

Breast-feeding: Using marijuana, either by mouth or by inhalation is LIKELY UNSAFE during breast-feeding. The dronabinol (THC) in marijuana passes into breast milk and extensive marijuana use during breast-feeding may result in slowed development in the baby.

Heart disease: Marijuana might cause rapid heartbeat, short-term high blood pressure. It might also increase the risk of a having heart attack.

A weakened immune system: Cannabinoids in marijuana can weaken the immune system, which might make it more difficult for the body to fight infections.

Lung diseases: Long-term use of marijuana can make lung problems worse. Regular, long-term marijuana use has been associated with lung cancer and also with several cases of an unusual type of emphysema, a lung disease.

Seizure disorders: Marijuana might make seizure disorders worse in some people; in other people it might help to control seizures.

Surgery: Marijuana affects the central nervous system. It might slow the central nervous system too much when combined with anesthesia and other medications during and after surgery. Stop using marijuana at least 2 weeks before a scheduled surgery.

https://www.webmd.com/vitamins-supplements/ingredientmono-947-marijuana.aspx?activeingredientid=947&activeingredientname=marijuana

 

Edited April 2, 2018 by pogi

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I was thinking the other day of all the new drugs that come out and then in their ads in the magazines/commercials they put that there are many side affects. In their magazine ads it goes on and on and in the commercial they have to put it on fast speed for the speaker to get it all in with in the time allotment of the commercial. It made me wonder why some on this thread may not be just as afraid to use some of these drugs the pharmaceuticals put out. And a lot of them then are seen in the ads for an attorney to go after the pharmaceutical company that put out the drug, for causing health problems. 

I just saw this on my FB group that speaks of the success stories for Cannibus use for medicine's page. 

http://ushealthtimes.com/cannabis-oil-from-marijuana-is-having-success-as-copd-treatment/

I think Cannibus is far more harmless.

Just because the law doesn't require the same listing of side effects with non-regulated drugs does not mean they don't exist.

Edited April 2, 2018 by Calm

[Tacenda]

On 3/31/2018 at 4:45 PM, Bernard Gui said:

And for good reason. Until that changes, it should not be considered to a legitimate medicine. I would like to corner the market on medicinal sagebrush tea. My mom swore that it cured everything from acne to bad attitudes. 

I'm glad this woman didn't wait for "legitimate" medicine before starting to use cannibus on her son. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5579041/Toddler-painful-scales-skin-cured-cannabis-oil.html

[Kenngo1969]

As I understand how adverse reaction reporting to the Food & Drug Administration works (I could definitely be wrong, so I welcome correction from anyone more in-the-know), if there is one instance of a particular side effect during human trials for a particular drug, potential users must be advised of it in advertising for the drug.  If it turns one person's big toenail brown, and no other apparent cause for that strange side effect can account for its occurrence, it must be reported to the FDA and, thence, to the public.

[Calm]

21 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

As I understand how adverse reaction reporting to the Food & Drug Administration works (I could definitely be wrong, so I welcome correction from anyone more in-the-know), if there is one instance of a particular side effect during human trials for a particular drug, potential users must be advised of it in advertising for the drug.  If it turns one person's big toenail brown, and no other apparent cause for that strange side effect can account for its occurrence, it must be reported to the FDA and, thence, to the public.

The doctor in charge of my daughter's ECT was talking about the safety of gabe-pentin (widely prescribed and very safe, better for somethings than others though) and how recently death is being cited as a possible result of taking it because people have overdosed or died from other causes but have had gabe-pentin in the blood as well, so rare occurrences of side effects can be less than precise because of caution.

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

I'm glad this woman didn't wait for "legitimate" medicine before starting to use cannibus on her son. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5579041/Toddler-painful-scales-skin-cured-cannabis-oil.html

I’m glad, too. On the other hand, without clinical testing of a substance and proper prescribing, she could have done harm to the baby. Then what? Charges of child abuse? Even then, are there possible long term negative effects?  Did a doctor verify the results and were they proven to be brought about by pot oil? Does the child have to use it for the rest of its life? Is there evidence this has worked for others? Have they discontinued use to test if the condition returns? This is the problem with anecdotal evidence.

i never got bad acne as a teenager. Is that proof the daily glass of sagebrush tea that my mom had me drink prevented it? Prove it didn’t.

.

Edited April 5, 2018 by Bernard Gui

[Tacenda]

15 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

I’m glad, too. On the other hand, without clinical testing of a substance and proper prescribing, she could have done harm to the baby. Then what? Charges of child abuse? Even then, are there possible long term negative effects?  Did a doctor verify the results and were they proven to be brought about by pot oil? Does the child have to use it for the rest of its life? Is there evidence this has worked for others? Have they discontinued use to test if the condition returns? This is the problem with anecdotal evidence.

i never got bad acne as a teenager. Is that proof the daily glass of sagebrush tea that my mom had me drink prevented it? Prove it didn’t.

.

Bernard, is it your son or someone elses that is homeless or on the streets with drug problems? If so, maybe that's the hesitancy with it being legal. My youngest son is a pot smoker and I don't see him accomplishing as much as he could have. He is all about weed, he wants to grow it and make a living doing it. This son was an avid sportsman at one time and you'd never see him still always playing b-ball. But now doesn't play much except for golf here and there. So if you have any children that are addicted to any drugs such as weed, I could understand any push back on it until it's been tested through the right avenues. 

I feel torn between believing it's a wonder drug, to knowing that it has it's bad side too. I wish more than anything my son wasn't addicted to it. I guess he could be addicted to alcohol though, or prescription drugs. So I'm glad weed isn't as harmful. I've got a brother that is an alcoholic and this is his second go around in a rehab. 

So I'm with any of you out there that are against recreational. I understand the worries over it. I'm sick to my stomach that my son needs to smoke weed to feel happy. I feel I've let him down somehow. 

[Bernard Gui]

Yes, we have family issues with addiction. Pot was the gateway drug .

I have serious problems with those in our state who successfully pushed for “medical” pot using only anecdotal and emotional appeals with no scientific evidence to support their claims. 

After “medical” weed was legalized, the real agenda was revealed.....legalizing “recreational” pot. Now that that is done, the state is reaping the tax benefits, but not as much as they promised, and the black market continues to thrive. They promised legalization would dry it up. Nope.

I live in a residential area. The county just gave approval for a weed growing, processing, and distribution facility in a house less than half a mile away, near a school, youth athletic center, and homes. 

Marijuana really makes people stupid. 

Edited April 5, 2018 by Bernard Gui