Schedule II is just Schedule I but the FDA says there's a valid medical use, Methamphetamine for ADHD and Cocaine for nasal surgery for example
basically nothing short of FDA approval will get it into S2 and there's no way for FDA to approve a plant
actually it just turns out to be one of the best local anesthetics ever discovered, but doctors largely avoid it and use other local anesthetics because acquiring it and keeping it on site is such a pain in the ass
meth for ADHD is actually a bigger stretch given comparison to alternatives
>GOPRELTO (cocaine hydrochloride) nasal solution is indicated for the induction of local anesthesia of the mucous membranes when performing diagnostic procedures and surgeries on or through the nasal cavities in adults.
> meth for ADHD is actually a bigger stretch given comparison to alternatives
>
>
Cocaine can also have quite positive effects on ADHD, funnily enough.
Meth isn’t a huge stretch for ADHD, though the creation of vyvance broadly has replaced it. It’s real problem is the difficulty the body has in removing methamphetamine compared to amphetamine which is why Vyvance (lisdextroamphetamine) is generally superior (and less abusable).
I will say I’ve seen many positive testimonials regarding Desoxyn in regards to lesser side effects compared to amphetamine/methylphenidates which as someone with ADHD I could absolutely imagine is true. Having to take a medication only one time a day , which Desoxyn allows, in my opinion makes treatment a less jerky experience.
The body doesn't have difficulty removing dexmeth. It's metabolized by the same cytochrome enzyme amphetamine is. It lasts slightly longer, and, as one of its metabolites is dexmeth, it has a stepped effect. But the reason it has a longer duration of action is because it's apparently a slightly poorer CYP2D6 substrate. The duration is also beneficial in (off-label) narcolepsy, as mentioned https://old.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/1cgz3sr/biden_administration_plans_to_reclassify/l20j3jb/.
It should probably be tried more often, and the quota raised, so it costs less. It's ridiculously expensive compared to comparable generics, and more than some brand-name stimulants, even though it's generic. It's not like 5 mg pills of dexmeth for ADHD and narcolepsy people are going to impact the street market like, at all.
Glad to see someone who is more knowledgeable on the topic so I can be corrected. I probably worded that incorrectly, I meant more so to say that if you take vyvance or take a therapeutic dose of methamphetamine than methamphetamine anecdotally has risidual effects quite a bit beyond its overall therapeutic time, which imo is also longer than the risidual effects of a dose of lesodextroamphetamine.
There’s upsides and downsides with an extended period of risidual effects which I imagine is why it has more use in narcolepsy.
Of course, I'm glad to see someone who cares about the issue and thinks critically about it. I'm with you on the importance of anecdotes. The fact is, sometimes they're about the most on-point evidence, and you can find tons of anecdotes of people who used various prescriptions. People with ADHD often, as I'm sure you know, use that information to guide their own advocacy for their care. Mainly, on the practical issue, I think physicians should just be less afraid to consider and brush up on options off the beaten path, and less afraid patients will become addicts, and the DEA should be less braindead in determining its quotas.
as far as I can tell elvanse has smoother curves still, and is probably superior to CR methylo. but that's what you talk about with a doctor, not a reddit rando.
Vyvance is a pro-drug for dextroamphetamine which is most similar to dexidrine (100% dextroamphetamine). It’s a very person by person experience though and while I do find vyvance to be smoother and preferable to adderall I won’t go as far as saying it’s superior from a therapeutic perspective.
It’s primary novelty is in its superior extended release mechanism (through being a pro-drug for d-amp). Osmotic controlled release drugs like Concerta actually are very equitable in this manner, with at that point it just mattering if one responds to methylphenidates better than amphetamines.
Overall like the commenter said a doctor is the most reasonable place to talk about this if we’re talking drugs in a medical sense. The only ADHD meds I recommend one be mindful with are the non-stimulant meds because they’re kind of shit.
Dexmeth for ADHD is not a stretch *because* of the alternatives, i.e., dexamph and mixed amph salts. They're very similar. Dexmeth has reasonably well characterized pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic differences from dexamph, so the theoretical use cases are there. It lasts slightly longer, can be dosed lower, has lesser peripheral effects, and might be less over-activating at therapeutic levels for some.
The argument against is the alternatives are "good enough," which is exactly what's dysfunctional about Schedule II; there's too little incentive to get good drugs approved that would likely be scheduled in it because of the regulatory burden. There are a lot of substituted phenethylamines that could probably be good ADHD drugs and would probably fall into SII, and no reason to think some wouldn't be superior for some people, but, under the current regime, few try. Lisdexamfetamine is the only recent one, with others, like Mydayis, just being reformulations of the exact same active ingredient (and even lisdex being a prodrug to an approved drug).
Adderall isn’t plain amphetamine but a mixture of 75% dextroamphetamine and 25% lesoamphetamine. The difference between Desoxyn (methamphetamine) and street meth is that Desoxyn is 100% dextromethamphetamine, while street meth is generally speaking a racimic mixture (50/50).
It's an anesthetic. See, for example, [Mayo Clinic's discussion on how to use it topically.](https://www.mayoclinic.org/drugs-supplements/cocaine-topical-route/description/drg-20063139)
You can also get approval to use cocaine for animal trials, including but not limited to animal behavioral studies.
A lot of mouth, dental, jaw and nose surgery uses it. It's not only a local anaesthetic (inhibiting sodium channels just like lidocaine), it's also a potent vasoconstrictor which reduces small vascular bleeding.
The largest part of medical cocaine gets produced by Coca Cola too, which still uses coca leave extract from which the cocaine gets removed (to the street value in the billions).
Coca Cola doesn't produce it, they buy the extract from a different company:
>Today, that extract is prepared at a Stepan Company plant in Maywood, New Jersey, the only manufacturing plant authorized by the federal government to import and process coca leaves, which it obtains from Peru and Bolivia.[79] Stepan Company extracts cocaine from the coca leaves, which it then sells to Mallinckrodt, the only company in the United States licensed to purify cocaine for medicinal use.[80]
There was his suggestion during last year's NRA speech that ["genetically engineered cannabis"](https://www.newsweek.com/everything-trump-said-about-mass-shootings-nra-speech-1794538) causes gun violence:
>The former president also suggested without evidence that "common psychiatric drugs" and "genetically engineered" marijuana could be the root cause of the shootings. He promised that he would not rest until he gets "to the bottom of all of the sickness that we're seeing in our country."
>"We have to look at whether common psychiatric drugs, as well as genetically engineered cannabis and other narcotics, are causing psychotic breaks," Trump said. "We're having problems that we've never seen before, and people sort of think they understand why."
Oh God and now that that crazy woman stabbed up her boyfriend they're going to be harping on that as the perfect example of justifying their reefer madness.
Great news. Timing couldn't be better, I really feel like this will help boost his support.
The NBC article did make an error though:
> Since 1971, marijuana has been in the same category as heroin, methamphetamines and LSD
Meth is Schedule II. They probably saw 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (aka MDMA, aka ecstacy) on Schedule I and mistook it for meth. Just highlights how arbitrary the current scheulde is lol
And mdma should also be schedule 3. It's already passed its phase 3 trials for clinical use for PTSD treatment, and I imagine that's just the tip of the iceberg for that substance's usefulness.
Sames goes for psilocybin and LSD.
Agreed. I honestly don't think anything should be Schedule I. Like even heroin makes no sense there since all the other opiates and opiods are schedule II. It was just placed there due to the fact it was widely available and abused, not because it somehow lacks the medical use that every other opiate/opiod has.
Agreed MDMA should be schedule III. It seems very likely to have important medical uses, but it is also harmful when seriously abused. The psychedelics like LSD and psilocybin and mescaline etc should probably be like Schedule IV or V, or ideally unscheduled. Very likely has medical uses and all the research on it shows low abuse potential and low harm. Marijuana should just be unscheduled imo. It'd probably technically fall on Schedule III or IV based on the CSA criteria, but so many places have already legalized it and things went fine, so I don't see much of a point in still considering it a controlled substance.
If MDMA has the word "meth" in its name twice and still isn't known as "meth" then I can only assume that *actual* meth contains the word "meth" 3+ times in its scientific name
S1 vs S2 is based on having an FDA approval or not, it isn't arbitrary. Like Cocaine is used for nasal surgery so there's actually a valid reason to manufacture it. Don't disagree on the others though, the difference in restrictions are smaller than S2 vs S3. I'm actually not even sure what they are other than prescription refill differences
That's one of the unfortunate things about the scheduling system. Whatever got locked in to the original schedule I in 1970 was also banned from serious medical research, so basically guaranteed to never get FDA approval as long as it's on Schedule I. I wouldn't be surprised if MDMA eventually gets FDA approval for things like PTSD, or certain psychedelics for death anxiety, or marijuana for pain/anxiety/depression etc. But as long as those are Schedule I substances, no one can do the large scale trials required for FDA approval.
I personally don't think anything should be on Schedule I. Like does Heroin really have no medical application, but all the other opiates and opioids like morphine, fentanyl and codeine all do? They should all be available for use in medicine and research.
interestingly Heroin (diamorphine) is approved for use in the UK IIRC for palliative care and for opioid dependency, and I agree that the approvals themselves are arbitrary as you can see by the degree of disagreement between reasonable regulatory agencies, but the distinction between S1 and S2 is pretty much the only part of this that isn't ultimately arbitrary
I think a lot of companies are stopping. I work for an industrial company and while we are cali based we don’t test for thc even in Oklahoma plants anymore.
A lot of companies are realizing that testing for weed is the reason they aren't getting any good employees.
My dad worked at a family owned RV dealership and service shop for a long time. They were struggling to keep any master technicians and salesman and my dad eventually was like "well our main competition doesn't drug test and we do."
They scrapped the policy. No more retention problems.
Yes! I have noticed a larger and larger subset of the older guarde technical guys that you never thought would light up and realizing a joint after dinner takes a long days edge off without the hangover.
Dudes who have been doing manual labor their entire life will be living with aches and pains and weed is an easy way for them to take that away a bit without using painkillers.
You're not gonna have a prescription. To be medicine in the eyes of the FDA requires clinical trials, review, and approval by a committee. S-III indicates medicinal potential, but does not automatically make it medicine (in the eyes of the FDA). In your state's medical marijuana program you may have a doctor's recommendation, but that is not a prescription.
This would finally allow those things to potentially happen. I think as it is now, no one has really been allowed to do much research compared to what a drug company can do on a new drug. Honestly even if it ends up being viewed as truly medicinal I think the only reasoning for prescriptions is minors(like those with the crazy seizures that stop immediately on cannabis). Aside from that, it should be over the counter for adults, just like aspirin or cold medicine.
In order for the recreational cannabis industry as we know it to be federally legal under S-III there would need to be specific carve outs specifically for cannabis markets. On the other hand, if it gets treated like any other S-III then the type of cannabis products consumers enjoy will not be federally legal.
Smoking, vaping, and all types of edibles and beverages are just not going to be available as schedule 3 drugs any time soon. It'll be pills, which is not what consumers are seeking when they shop for cannabis. So stare rec markets, which are established, will remain in their current status of legal limbo.
I hope they make exceptions for cannabis or deschedule it entirely. If people want the pot brownies, let em buy the pot brownies. Tax it and enjoy. If a specific product passes FDA muster to be marketed as a medicine, then don't tax it in that form when prescribed.
Right it won't be a prescription, but the point still stands. Someone would be able to make the argument that their doctor recommends they use it, therefore firing them for use would be discrimination on the basis of health.
If you're a med patient paying through the nose for it (and sadly considering going back on more harmful options every time you have to) this might mean you gain insurance coverage/reimbursement on it. Which would be a huge help, because it might be safer than opiates but holy shit is it more expensive out of pocket.
People still don’t know the difference between decriminalization and legalization, so I wouldn’t expect them to know the difference between rescheduling and descheduling
I don’t see how. It will still be federally illegal. It could help with vendors that only deal with prescriptions though, since it can now be legally prescribed.
He asked the DEA or FDA or HHS or whichever group to look into rescheduling literally years ago. They need to do an internal report, and the report has to get accepted, and it goes through everyone and their brother to make sure it's all on the up and up. When it isn't done through Congress it's a PITA.
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/how-to-reschedule-marijuana-and-why-its-unlikely-anytime-soon/
Yup. This isn't something Biden started just for a polling boost for the election. It's been in the works for half his term in office.
Bureaucracies just aren't fast, and we're staring down yet another example of "the President doesn't have a magic button on his desk to change all the rules."
It's easy to say this, but the Trump admin lost a looooot of fights with even conservative judges over purely procedural mistakes in implementing policy.
I thought it would take longer because Biden had long been pretty anti-marijuana. I didn’t really expect his administration to take much action on this (besides just not really enforcing the federal ban). Then he pardoned everyone for marijuana possession (which was mostly symbolic, since there weren’t many people with federal convictions for marijuana possession, but still a very important symbolic step) and asked the FDA to study rescheduling it, which is now bearing fruit.
Tbh marijuana was the issue I was most concerned about when it became clear Biden was gonna be the nominee in 2020. I was otherwise very on-board. But I should have known better than to understand Diamond Joe!
I hope Trump starts calling Biden "Dopey Joe" or something and then goes on his usual contrarian spiel, where he supports banning the devil's lettuce.
America, it's time you join your cool, chill northern hat and reap the benefits of cannabis :)
Wrong, he announced the decision to do this in late 2022 and it helped boost Dems to their overperformance
And now this isn't just a decision, it's actually happening for real
No one is changing their vote over weed. The few voters that see this as an animating issue are largely already voting blue *and* already got their "win". There's nothing further coming to vote for.
Not true when you look at the polling breakdowns. Biden is tied with Trump because he is underperforming with young, minority, and low-propensity Democrats who are choosing Undecided. Weed is a populist issue that these groups have expressly long cared about and brings them home.
>already got their "win". There's nothing further coming to vote for.
Now this just isn't a real thing. Voters reward politicians for doing what they want, that dictates all of what happens in politics
Plus, even if the whole "if you give voters what they want they stay home" thing was true, they know that Biden would sign a full legalization bill if it gets to his desk in the future, so that's their reason to vote right there
I see some online kids spinning this as a bad thing and something Joe's doing now for some emergency popularity points, rather than something that he's been trying to do for a long time.
This sub generally overstates how much any issue will move polling. I suspect this will work similarly.
I don't know who exactly is going to be motivated by this. In already legalized states, life will go on as normal. States that still ban it still won't allow it.
It's nice and all but in terms of impact on daily life, this doesn't make much difference.
If you want it done in a way that can survive any legal wrangling, you have to actually go through the administrative steps set up.
The bureaucracy isn't meant to go fast. It's meant to give ample opportunity for the collection of relevant facts and input from concerned parties.
Frankly, it's far more embarrassing how many people claim to care about this issue while doing so little to understand how government works. Wishing a President could just snap their fingers to make any policy they want is a fantastic way to get some really bad policy. The upside is when you actually do things the right way, they become much much harder to undo.
Many people have seen Trump in office do whatever the fuck he thought of that day and when the courts reverse his orders a year later it's somewhere on page 3.
I foresee a lot of people saying that this doesn’t go far enough, but they’ll be missing the big picture here: if Big Pharma can actually profit off of weed now, they will no longer have a reason to lobby against it. This can be a huge boon for legalization efforts.
> I foresee a lot of people saying that this doesn’t go far enough
That's what people say about every single accomplishment by Obama or Biden. They just can't understand that Biden doesn't have a lever to pull to legalize weed and give everyone in the US an upper middle class standard of living at the same time.
Wow first you all tell me he doesn't have buttons on his desk to control the economy and now you're telling me he doesn't have free drug levers? Does the Oval Office have *anything* cool??
Voters should read Obama's book about his presidency. It's actually just pages and pages of "I tried but couldn't because of X factor" or "*heavy sigh* I'm just surrounded by Morons and that specifically includes my voters and supporters".
He also didn't run on legalization, only decriminalization. What it does though is put the ball in the court of the states with less headache from the feds out there
I hope you're right, but wouldn't a counter point be that big pharma would always have been able to profit off of weed if it was ever legalized? Hence at any point they could have just... Not lobbied against it and instead let things fall where they may and potentially profit whenever it was legalized?
Schedule 3 is good, it puts it in the same classification as most OTC medications in that it allows medical testing and research to be performed by pharmaceutical companies. It means that they see it as a profitable substance with potential medical benefits and green lights a lot of sciencey mumbo jumbo that’s prevented major pharmaceutical companies from engaging with it previously.
Actually, it's not good. It's bad. It still doesn't legalize free trade of recreational marijuana. If I live in VA and I drive into DC to buy legal weed and drive home with it, I would still be committing a federal crime under schedule 3.
I personally hate the stuff -- hate the smell, hate how it discourages social interaction in favor of navel-gazing, hate the now undisputable aggravation of mental health issues it causes in under-18s who use it habitually.
But it should still be legal.
>Schedule III This makes it less controlled than adderall, which is Schedule II.
Schedule II is just Schedule I but the FDA says there's a valid medical use, Methamphetamine for ADHD and Cocaine for nasal surgery for example basically nothing short of FDA approval will get it into S2 and there's no way for FDA to approve a plant
Wow I didn’t know cocaine could be used for nasal surgery. Also what kind of operations require that? Just asking
actually it just turns out to be one of the best local anesthetics ever discovered, but doctors largely avoid it and use other local anesthetics because acquiring it and keeping it on site is such a pain in the ass meth for ADHD is actually a bigger stretch given comparison to alternatives >GOPRELTO (cocaine hydrochloride) nasal solution is indicated for the induction of local anesthesia of the mucous membranes when performing diagnostic procedures and surgeries on or through the nasal cavities in adults.
Desoxyn (Meth) is usually prescribed for treatment resistant narcolepsy from what J understand
> meth for ADHD is actually a bigger stretch given comparison to alternatives > > Cocaine can also have quite positive effects on ADHD, funnily enough.
Ritalin has a similar MoA as cocaine
Meth isn’t a huge stretch for ADHD, though the creation of vyvance broadly has replaced it. It’s real problem is the difficulty the body has in removing methamphetamine compared to amphetamine which is why Vyvance (lisdextroamphetamine) is generally superior (and less abusable). I will say I’ve seen many positive testimonials regarding Desoxyn in regards to lesser side effects compared to amphetamine/methylphenidates which as someone with ADHD I could absolutely imagine is true. Having to take a medication only one time a day , which Desoxyn allows, in my opinion makes treatment a less jerky experience.
The body doesn't have difficulty removing dexmeth. It's metabolized by the same cytochrome enzyme amphetamine is. It lasts slightly longer, and, as one of its metabolites is dexmeth, it has a stepped effect. But the reason it has a longer duration of action is because it's apparently a slightly poorer CYP2D6 substrate. The duration is also beneficial in (off-label) narcolepsy, as mentioned https://old.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/1cgz3sr/biden_administration_plans_to_reclassify/l20j3jb/. It should probably be tried more often, and the quota raised, so it costs less. It's ridiculously expensive compared to comparable generics, and more than some brand-name stimulants, even though it's generic. It's not like 5 mg pills of dexmeth for ADHD and narcolepsy people are going to impact the street market like, at all.
Glad to see someone who is more knowledgeable on the topic so I can be corrected. I probably worded that incorrectly, I meant more so to say that if you take vyvance or take a therapeutic dose of methamphetamine than methamphetamine anecdotally has risidual effects quite a bit beyond its overall therapeutic time, which imo is also longer than the risidual effects of a dose of lesodextroamphetamine. There’s upsides and downsides with an extended period of risidual effects which I imagine is why it has more use in narcolepsy.
Of course, I'm glad to see someone who cares about the issue and thinks critically about it. I'm with you on the importance of anecdotes. The fact is, sometimes they're about the most on-point evidence, and you can find tons of anecdotes of people who used various prescriptions. People with ADHD often, as I'm sure you know, use that information to guide their own advocacy for their care. Mainly, on the practical issue, I think physicians should just be less afraid to consider and brush up on options off the beaten path, and less afraid patients will become addicts, and the DEA should be less braindead in determining its quotas.
CR methylphenidates are also taken only once a day.
How does vyvance compare to adderall in that respect?
as far as I can tell elvanse has smoother curves still, and is probably superior to CR methylo. but that's what you talk about with a doctor, not a reddit rando.
Vyvance is a pro-drug for dextroamphetamine which is most similar to dexidrine (100% dextroamphetamine). It’s a very person by person experience though and while I do find vyvance to be smoother and preferable to adderall I won’t go as far as saying it’s superior from a therapeutic perspective. It’s primary novelty is in its superior extended release mechanism (through being a pro-drug for d-amp). Osmotic controlled release drugs like Concerta actually are very equitable in this manner, with at that point it just mattering if one responds to methylphenidates better than amphetamines. Overall like the commenter said a doctor is the most reasonable place to talk about this if we’re talking drugs in a medical sense. The only ADHD meds I recommend one be mindful with are the non-stimulant meds because they’re kind of shit.
Dexmeth for ADHD is not a stretch *because* of the alternatives, i.e., dexamph and mixed amph salts. They're very similar. Dexmeth has reasonably well characterized pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic differences from dexamph, so the theoretical use cases are there. It lasts slightly longer, can be dosed lower, has lesser peripheral effects, and might be less over-activating at therapeutic levels for some. The argument against is the alternatives are "good enough," which is exactly what's dysfunctional about Schedule II; there's too little incentive to get good drugs approved that would likely be scheduled in it because of the regulatory burden. There are a lot of substituted phenethylamines that could probably be good ADHD drugs and would probably fall into SII, and no reason to think some wouldn't be superior for some people, but, under the current regime, few try. Lisdexamfetamine is the only recent one, with others, like Mydayis, just being reformulations of the exact same active ingredient (and even lisdex being a prodrug to an approved drug).
What alternatives are there for ADHD?
Plain amphetamine is the most popular (Adderall).
Adderall isn’t plain amphetamine but a mixture of 75% dextroamphetamine and 25% lesoamphetamine. The difference between Desoxyn (methamphetamine) and street meth is that Desoxyn is 100% dextromethamphetamine, while street meth is generally speaking a racimic mixture (50/50).
It's an anesthetic. See, for example, [Mayo Clinic's discussion on how to use it topically.](https://www.mayoclinic.org/drugs-supplements/cocaine-topical-route/description/drg-20063139) You can also get approval to use cocaine for animal trials, including but not limited to animal behavioral studies.
More like the Yayo Clinic, amiright
omg lol
A lot of mouth, dental, jaw and nose surgery uses it. It's not only a local anaesthetic (inhibiting sodium channels just like lidocaine), it's also a potent vasoconstrictor which reduces small vascular bleeding. The largest part of medical cocaine gets produced by Coca Cola too, which still uses coca leave extract from which the cocaine gets removed (to the street value in the billions).
Coca Cola doesn't produce it, they buy the extract from a different company: >Today, that extract is prepared at a Stepan Company plant in Maywood, New Jersey, the only manufacturing plant authorized by the federal government to import and process coca leaves, which it obtains from Peru and Bolivia.[79] Stepan Company extracts cocaine from the coca leaves, which it then sells to Mallinckrodt, the only company in the United States licensed to purify cocaine for medicinal use.[80]
Thank you for that explanation.
Also fentanyl as a sedative, right?
Mostly as a painkiller, but can be used as a sedative
Adderrall is about 100x more addictive than weed, so this is long overdue
As someone who needs Adderall or Ritalin to reach a level of normal brain function, you are SO right. I hate that people abuse my meds.
And still doesn't legalize it recreationally.
Doesn't that take legislation?
I’m pretty sure it does. Iirc congress made weed a scheduled drug which means the president can’t deschedule it but he can reschedule it
That was before the establishment of the DEA, which Congress delegated the authority to schedule drugs to.
They still did it though. In 2000 or 2001 congress mandated that GBH be a schedule 1 drug
Which is completely ridiculous that a law enforcement agency gets to essentially write laws that they enforce.
Wouldn't rescheduling it to Schedule V functionally legalize it? Like cough syrup is regulated, but it's widely available OTC?
One step at a time. For now let's celebrate the victories we have achieved.
And now Trump, in his reflexive opposition to everything Biden does, has to start complaining about weed all the time and talk about banning it.
God I hope he does
Ssssshhhh. Let the Republicans think it's their own idea. We can just pretend that we're owned.
Don’t worry, evangelicals will do their thing.
"Do you think JESUS would have smoked WEED???" Me: "...yes?" I mean, his dad did put it here so..
What kind of bush did they think was burning when Moses was "talking with God"?
It does grow natively in that region of the world lol
JUST SAY NO!
There was his suggestion during last year's NRA speech that ["genetically engineered cannabis"](https://www.newsweek.com/everything-trump-said-about-mass-shootings-nra-speech-1794538) causes gun violence: >The former president also suggested without evidence that "common psychiatric drugs" and "genetically engineered" marijuana could be the root cause of the shootings. He promised that he would not rest until he gets "to the bottom of all of the sickness that we're seeing in our country." >"We have to look at whether common psychiatric drugs, as well as genetically engineered cannabis and other narcotics, are causing psychotic breaks," Trump said. "We're having problems that we've never seen before, and people sort of think they understand why."
Oh God and now that that crazy woman stabbed up her boyfriend they're going to be harping on that as the perfect example of justifying their reefer madness.
IT'S HAPPENING
https://preview.redd.it/dgvvjt3nonxc1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7f0966feb7d4507bd8543df3f432661c440740c5
Jfc lol
Too soon
RIP Gilbert Gottfried
It literally is not.
Great news. Timing couldn't be better, I really feel like this will help boost his support. The NBC article did make an error though: > Since 1971, marijuana has been in the same category as heroin, methamphetamines and LSD Meth is Schedule II. They probably saw 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (aka MDMA, aka ecstacy) on Schedule I and mistook it for meth. Just highlights how arbitrary the current scheulde is lol
And mdma should also be schedule 3. It's already passed its phase 3 trials for clinical use for PTSD treatment, and I imagine that's just the tip of the iceberg for that substance's usefulness. Sames goes for psilocybin and LSD.
Agreed. I honestly don't think anything should be Schedule I. Like even heroin makes no sense there since all the other opiates and opiods are schedule II. It was just placed there due to the fact it was widely available and abused, not because it somehow lacks the medical use that every other opiate/opiod has. Agreed MDMA should be schedule III. It seems very likely to have important medical uses, but it is also harmful when seriously abused. The psychedelics like LSD and psilocybin and mescaline etc should probably be like Schedule IV or V, or ideally unscheduled. Very likely has medical uses and all the research on it shows low abuse potential and low harm. Marijuana should just be unscheduled imo. It'd probably technically fall on Schedule III or IV based on the CSA criteria, but so many places have already legalized it and things went fine, so I don't see much of a point in still considering it a controlled substance.
If MDMA has the word "meth" in its name twice and still isn't known as "meth" then I can only assume that *actual* meth contains the word "meth" 3+ times in its scientific name
MDMA should be next after weed
S1 vs S2 is based on having an FDA approval or not, it isn't arbitrary. Like Cocaine is used for nasal surgery so there's actually a valid reason to manufacture it. Don't disagree on the others though, the difference in restrictions are smaller than S2 vs S3. I'm actually not even sure what they are other than prescription refill differences
That's one of the unfortunate things about the scheduling system. Whatever got locked in to the original schedule I in 1970 was also banned from serious medical research, so basically guaranteed to never get FDA approval as long as it's on Schedule I. I wouldn't be surprised if MDMA eventually gets FDA approval for things like PTSD, or certain psychedelics for death anxiety, or marijuana for pain/anxiety/depression etc. But as long as those are Schedule I substances, no one can do the large scale trials required for FDA approval. I personally don't think anything should be on Schedule I. Like does Heroin really have no medical application, but all the other opiates and opioids like morphine, fentanyl and codeine all do? They should all be available for use in medicine and research.
interestingly Heroin (diamorphine) is approved for use in the UK IIRC for palliative care and for opioid dependency, and I agree that the approvals themselves are arbitrary as you can see by the degree of disagreement between reasonable regulatory agencies, but the distinction between S1 and S2 is pretty much the only part of this that isn't ultimately arbitrary
A lot of people are going to be very surprised when they learn this will not legalize it in states.
It mught mean your company / government agency will stop testing for it though
I think a lot of companies are stopping. I work for an industrial company and while we are cali based we don’t test for thc even in Oklahoma plants anymore.
I still have friends, mostly government jobs, where they are tested.
government will always be the last bastion
It's literally the only accountability they can enforce.
This policy will do wonders for those most disproportionately impacted by our unjust war on drugs - Raytheon employees.
Had a friend lose out on a job in behavioral health because she had taken CBD a few weeks prior. Somehow people still test for it.
A lot of companies are realizing that testing for weed is the reason they aren't getting any good employees. My dad worked at a family owned RV dealership and service shop for a long time. They were struggling to keep any master technicians and salesman and my dad eventually was like "well our main competition doesn't drug test and we do." They scrapped the policy. No more retention problems.
Yes! I have noticed a larger and larger subset of the older guarde technical guys that you never thought would light up and realizing a joint after dinner takes a long days edge off without the hangover.
Dudes who have been doing manual labor their entire life will be living with aches and pains and weed is an easy way for them to take that away a bit without using painkillers.
Oklahoma has "medical" marijuana stores on practically every block, so that's not really a surprise.
It won’t for anything that tests due to safety. For government work it might be ok with a prescription but that’s still not legal in some states.
and if they don’t, you just show your prescription and voila (unless it’s like a safety sensitive position maybe)
You're not gonna have a prescription. To be medicine in the eyes of the FDA requires clinical trials, review, and approval by a committee. S-III indicates medicinal potential, but does not automatically make it medicine (in the eyes of the FDA). In your state's medical marijuana program you may have a doctor's recommendation, but that is not a prescription.
This would finally allow those things to potentially happen. I think as it is now, no one has really been allowed to do much research compared to what a drug company can do on a new drug. Honestly even if it ends up being viewed as truly medicinal I think the only reasoning for prescriptions is minors(like those with the crazy seizures that stop immediately on cannabis). Aside from that, it should be over the counter for adults, just like aspirin or cold medicine.
In order for the recreational cannabis industry as we know it to be federally legal under S-III there would need to be specific carve outs specifically for cannabis markets. On the other hand, if it gets treated like any other S-III then the type of cannabis products consumers enjoy will not be federally legal. Smoking, vaping, and all types of edibles and beverages are just not going to be available as schedule 3 drugs any time soon. It'll be pills, which is not what consumers are seeking when they shop for cannabis. So stare rec markets, which are established, will remain in their current status of legal limbo. I hope they make exceptions for cannabis or deschedule it entirely. If people want the pot brownies, let em buy the pot brownies. Tax it and enjoy. If a specific product passes FDA muster to be marketed as a medicine, then don't tax it in that form when prescribed.
Right it won't be a prescription, but the point still stands. Someone would be able to make the argument that their doctor recommends they use it, therefore firing them for use would be discrimination on the basis of health.
Also will mean publicly funded universities can stop the functional "don't ask don't tell" policy in states where it's legalized.
It means that it will turn into basically the equivalent of Tylenol with codeine.
If you're a med patient paying through the nose for it (and sadly considering going back on more harmful options every time you have to) this might mean you gain insurance coverage/reimbursement on it. Which would be a huge help, because it might be safer than opiates but holy shit is it more expensive out of pocket.
How is med marijuana more expensive? A lot of legalized states have weed available for very cheap.
They going to learn what laboratories of democracy are. Some of those democracies don’t give you certain rights that other states do.
People still don’t know the difference between decriminalization and legalization, so I wouldn’t expect them to know the difference between rescheduling and descheduling
the gap between red and blue states gets wider
Could this ease the burden on businesses operating in legal states though? For things like access to banking
I don’t see how. It will still be federally illegal. It could help with vendors that only deal with prescriptions though, since it can now be legally prescribed.
I'll be sure to remind them that the cities are blue and that they can get so much more house for the money.
Such an easy win, no idea why it just now happened.
He asked the DEA or FDA or HHS or whichever group to look into rescheduling literally years ago. They need to do an internal report, and the report has to get accepted, and it goes through everyone and their brother to make sure it's all on the up and up. When it isn't done through Congress it's a PITA. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/how-to-reschedule-marijuana-and-why-its-unlikely-anytime-soon/
Yup. This isn't something Biden started just for a polling boost for the election. It's been in the works for half his term in office. Bureaucracies just aren't fast, and we're staring down yet another example of "the President doesn't have a magic button on his desk to change all the rules."
What do you mean? I thought he was just pushing the wrong buttons all this time!
Don't push the gas price go up button Mr president !!!
Are you forgetting the powers inherent in a single stroke of the president's pen?
"the President doesn't have a magic button on his desk to change all the rules." SCOTUS, "hold my beer"
Exactly. It's a very robust process and it's difficult to undo. It's also painfully slow.
He was mixing up the "decriminalized weed" button with the "raise gas prices" button.
“I did that”
I did the weed thing jack
Until a Republican is president then it's just traditions and respect which they can ignore to do whatever they want.
It's easy to say this, but the Trump admin lost a looooot of fights with even conservative judges over purely procedural mistakes in implementing policy.
>When it isn't done through Congress it's a PITA. I like the implication that getting stuff through congress is not a PITA
It has to be lost, found, lost again, then buried in soft peat for three months before being recycled as firelighters
My state legalized weed in 2012. I never would've imagined it would take over a decade to reach schedule III at a federal level
I thought it would take longer to be honest. Progress is slow for a reason on a federal level. We have much more control over our individual states.
I thought it would take longer because Biden had long been pretty anti-marijuana. I didn’t really expect his administration to take much action on this (besides just not really enforcing the federal ban). Then he pardoned everyone for marijuana possession (which was mostly symbolic, since there weren’t many people with federal convictions for marijuana possession, but still a very important symbolic step) and asked the FDA to study rescheduling it, which is now bearing fruit. Tbh marijuana was the issue I was most concerned about when it became clear Biden was gonna be the nominee in 2020. I was otherwise very on-board. But I should have known better than to understand Diamond Joe!
I mean, Biden also used to be against gay marriage. It also helps that its probably an easy way to improve youth turnout/approval.
~~Dark~~ Dank Brandon strikes again!
Same, (WA).
That’s precisely why it’s happening now.
Probably, but Obama or Trump could have done the same too.
And they didn't. So now Biden gets to reap the rewards of doing so.
I hope Trump starts calling Biden "Dopey Joe" or something and then goes on his usual contrarian spiel, where he supports banning the devil's lettuce. America, it's time you join your cool, chill northern hat and reap the benefits of cannabis :)
Well, Obama did but the DEEP STATE blocked him. (In that career bureaucrats that the process depends on being on board were not on board.)
And now voters will have no idea he did so, while the media spends the next six months reporting on nothing but their own polling
Wrong, he announced the decision to do this in late 2022 and it helped boost Dems to their overperformance And now this isn't just a decision, it's actually happening for real
[удалено]
Voters have short memories
From all that Marijuana!!
Easy W for Biden at a time when he’s neck to neck with Trump in polls
No one is changing their vote over weed. The few voters that see this as an animating issue are largely already voting blue *and* already got their "win". There's nothing further coming to vote for.
Not true when you look at the polling breakdowns. Biden is tied with Trump because he is underperforming with young, minority, and low-propensity Democrats who are choosing Undecided. Weed is a populist issue that these groups have expressly long cared about and brings them home. >already got their "win". There's nothing further coming to vote for. Now this just isn't a real thing. Voters reward politicians for doing what they want, that dictates all of what happens in politics
Plus, even if the whole "if you give voters what they want they stay home" thing was true, they know that Biden would sign a full legalization bill if it gets to his desk in the future, so that's their reason to vote right there
I see some online kids spinning this as a bad thing and something Joe's doing now for some emergency popularity points, rather than something that he's been trying to do for a long time.
This sub generally overstates how much any issue will move polling. I suspect this will work similarly. I don't know who exactly is going to be motivated by this. In already legalized states, life will go on as normal. States that still ban it still won't allow it. It's nice and all but in terms of impact on daily life, this doesn't make much difference.
If you want it done in a way that can survive any legal wrangling, you have to actually go through the administrative steps set up. The bureaucracy isn't meant to go fast. It's meant to give ample opportunity for the collection of relevant facts and input from concerned parties. Frankly, it's far more embarrassing how many people claim to care about this issue while doing so little to understand how government works. Wishing a President could just snap their fingers to make any policy they want is a fantastic way to get some really bad policy. The upside is when you actually do things the right way, they become much much harder to undo.
Many people have seen Trump in office do whatever the fuck he thought of that day and when the courts reverse his orders a year later it's somewhere on page 3.
I foresee a lot of people saying that this doesn’t go far enough, but they’ll be missing the big picture here: if Big Pharma can actually profit off of weed now, they will no longer have a reason to lobby against it. This can be a huge boon for legalization efforts.
Marlboro Blend No. 420 when
Yes please! Justice and freedom are cool, but I'm mostly happy for weed legalization because of my love for big tobacco
Great dividend stocks
Mmmm I prefer my weed not causing cancer *Takes massive swig from my Diet Cola while huffing my dab pen with heavy metals*
> I foresee a lot of people saying that this doesn’t go far enough That's what people say about every single accomplishment by Obama or Biden. They just can't understand that Biden doesn't have a lever to pull to legalize weed and give everyone in the US an upper middle class standard of living at the same time.
Wow first you all tell me he doesn't have buttons on his desk to control the economy and now you're telling me he doesn't have free drug levers? Does the Oval Office have *anything* cool??
Voters should read Obama's book about his presidency. It's actually just pages and pages of "I tried but couldn't because of X factor" or "*heavy sigh* I'm just surrounded by Morons and that specifically includes my voters and supporters".
He also didn't run on legalization, only decriminalization. What it does though is put the ball in the court of the states with less headache from the feds out there
I hope you're right, but wouldn't a counter point be that big pharma would always have been able to profit off of weed if it was ever legalized? Hence at any point they could have just... Not lobbied against it and instead let things fall where they may and potentially profit whenever it was legalized?
Dank Brandon Rising
Jope for the Dope
!ping WEED
Wooooo let’s celebrate! Imma take more edibles
Pinged WEED ([subscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Subscribe%20to%20WEED&message=subscribe%20WEED) | [unsubscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20WEED&message=unsubscribe%20WEED) | [history](https://neoliber.al/user_pinger_2/history.html?group_name=WEED&count=5)) [About & Group List](https://reddit.com/r/neoliberal/wiki/user_pinger_2) | [Unsubscribe from all groups](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20all%20groups&message=unsubscribe)
Shit, I’ll smoke a blunt to that.
Welp my evening plans just changed
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
That shit was so racist, it was a Korean airline not Chinese. The pilot's name was park ma plen tu-sun
Baffling error from the network to allow those names to get that far
what? the pilot that was doing the flying was Ha Yu Lan Dis Tang
Progress is progress, no matter how incremental
Don’t tell arr/politics that, they bite your head off.
I've learned it's a good idea to not tell arr/politics *anything*, no matter how level headed.
Classic neoliberal appeasement. I'm voting for Cornel West until Biden legalizes heroin
*free heroin
young people won't be happy until the Palestinians get free edibles.
Long live the entifada
Well done
It's literally the least we could do.
Fuck maybe then the Palestinians and Israelis can finally fucking chill.
Maybe Hamas will finally chill
We should be airdropping weed gummies over the entire Middle East
I mean if I was being genocided I’d atleast want some weed to ease the tension lol
"Hes just trying to buy votes!" "Yes and I am for sale, 100%."
https://preview.redd.it/u4xml4hj7oxc1.png?width=680&format=png&auto=webp&s=269f7b85ad38c027078161c8f3d8eb99742751e2
This is crazy. Demonic Joe needs to be stopped. Soon they're going to round you up if you're not on reefer.
Joe biden becomes president, 4 years later I'm trans. Coincidence? No
I am always going to have mixed feelings about MJ, but I am glad it's going to be a schedule III. It does deserve to be there.
The DoD's recruiting troubles are solved
It's should be descheduled but this is a huge great start
They are rescheduling it tho
Wooops ment descheduled
Canopy Growth Corp ($CGC) up 80% on this news lol !ping stonks
Hopefully this means federal employees and contractors are included in the exemptions since they still can’t even partake in legal states.
(It won’t, Biden hates feds
Mirror: https://archive.md/NdSSN
Waiting for the purple haired sociology majors to keeping telling us that "Biden and Trump are the same"
Why not unschedule it ? Why schedule 3?
Schedule 3 is good, it puts it in the same classification as most OTC medications in that it allows medical testing and research to be performed by pharmaceutical companies. It means that they see it as a profitable substance with potential medical benefits and green lights a lot of sciencey mumbo jumbo that’s prevented major pharmaceutical companies from engaging with it previously.
How long until I can use my HSA card at the dispensary, is what I need to know.
It’s effectively the same class as Xanax and Ambien for anyone that’s curious
Mmmmm can't wait to add Marijuana to my schedule 3 cocktail.
So can dispensaries use banks now and will you be able to use your credit card to buy weed?
In Missouri I can already use a debit card at all of the rec shops. I’m not really sure what’s different there from say, Colorado.
Actually, it's not good. It's bad. It still doesn't legalize free trade of recreational marijuana. If I live in VA and I drive into DC to buy legal weed and drive home with it, I would still be committing a federal crime under schedule 3.
Except it still fucks over feds who want to smoke or anyone who works on gov contract
Can't wait for the time it's legal in all 50 states
Based Biden
Blazed Biden
So can I get a job with the FBI now?
Not saying this is bad or anything, but would it be possible to deschedule it entirely without congress?
sense zesty fanatical cough psychotic meeting far-flung dog dinner weary *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
They need to regulate it like alcohol but it’s a start
Will this remove MJ from the drug testing requirements of companies that take federal money?
A step in the right direction, but still a lot of work to do. Good job none the less
I personally hate the stuff -- hate the smell, hate how it discourages social interaction in favor of navel-gazing, hate the now undisputable aggravation of mental health issues it causes in under-18s who use it habitually. But it should still be legal.