You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →


[–] freetoshare81 2 points 29 points (+31|-2) ago 

Big pharma will have something to say about this.


[–] G4 1 points 5 points (+6|-1) ago 


[–] [deleted] 0 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago 



[–] ILikeMyDogNotYours 2 points 2 points (+4|-2) ago 

.... big pharma would just start providing alternatives to smoking weed. There is nothing to suggest that they wouldn't benefit immensely from legalizing weed, as the upfront cost of buying farmland and equipment would be minuscule compared to researching and developing opiates/narcotics.

They exist solely to make money, and if weed became legalized they would enter that market as well.


[–] HoneyNutStallmans 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

They exist solely to make money

Why do you think it's illegal and why do you think there's a big push against it?

Follow the money...


[–] dart200 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

lol. Big Pharma banks on making bank with patentable proprietary solutions. It's why you see them pushing SSRIs to boost serotonin, instead of the natural (within humans) serotonin precursor 5-HTP. Likewise, you can't make a weed based solution proprietary. I'm sure they make more money keeping weed illegal, than legalizing it.

It doesn't even make sense that weed it still scheduled one. The US Dept of Health actually has a patent on the anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties of THC and CBD, filed in 1998, almost 2 decades ago ... both extremely medically relevant. Somehow, this information has not propagated to the drug scheduling act. Smells like lobbying efforts are keeping much of the government in the dark about this fact.


[–] ShimmyShimmy 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

But anyone can grow weed. It takes school to be a chemist.