NFL and NFLPA joint agreement on pain management, potentially including marijuana

America's Cowboy said:

Because a majority of them that already use street level marijuana, which is very potent, would not qualify as medically needing it. How would the league be able to stop or control them? These players would show up high every day to practice, plus the games. How would the league be able to control them at that point? It would simply open the floodgates.

Click to expand...

According to who? Where are you getting your information that a majority of NFL players use street level Marijuana? Source your opinion.

"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

CBD maybe most important pain relieving component in Marijuana does not get you high, which is why Cannabidiol is being looked at in major pain relieving studies; the FDA about a year ago approved Cannabidiol in the form of Epidiolex to help treat intractable forms of Epilipsy.

CBD and THC are not a miracle drugs it is a molecule in the Marijuana plant that may help against not only chronic pain, but head injuries and CTE which is a major problem in the NFL and which has resulted in lawsuits (see Juniour Seau):

Cannabis Therapeutics and the Future of Neurology
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6200872/

This review will examine the intriguing promise that recent discoveries regarding cannabis-based medicines offer to neurological therapeutics by incorporating the neutral phytocannabinoids tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), cannabidiol (CBD), their acidic precursors, tetrahydrocannabinolic acid (THCA) and cannabidiolic acid (CBDA), and cannabis terpenoids in the putative treatment of five syndromes, currently labeled recalcitrant to therapeutic success, and wherein improved pharmacological intervention is required: intractable epilepsy, brain tumors, Parkinson disease (PD), Alzheimer disease (AD) and traumatic brain injury (TBI)/chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE). Current basic science and clinical investigations support the safety and efficacy of such interventions in treatment of these currently intractable conditions, that in some cases share pathological processes, and the plausibility of interventions that harness endocannabinoid mechanisms, whether mediated via direct activity on CB1 and CB2 (tetrahydrocannabinol, THC, caryophyllene), peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma (PPARγ; THCA), 5-HT1A (CBD, CBDA) or even nutritional approaches utilizing prebiotics and probiotics.


Here is the problem; in today's world an NFL player cannot get a prescription for CBD or THC. It is currently illegal for any physician in any state to give a prescription for CBD or THC (any strain of marijuana).

However, Doctors can give a prescription for Marinol ( which is synthetic THC which as been around since the 80's), however; it has been shown that Marinol has not been as effective as "medical marijuana". Also because it is THC, it can get the user high.

https://www.goodrx.com/blog/marinol-vs-marijuana-whats-the-difference/
Do Marinol and marijuana work for pain?
Marinol (dronabinol) has been studied for post-surgical pain, nerve-related pain, and chronic non-cancer pain. For the first two types of pain, Marinol was not found to be any better than placebo. For chronic non-cancer pain, it has been found to be only slightly better than placebo.

Marijuana has not been studied as much as cannabinoid pharmaceuticals, partly due to regulatory restrictions, but in the few studies that have been done, smoked marijuana was found to be better than placebo at relieving pain. A study that examined the effects of vaporized (not smoked) marijuana found that it too was better than placebo at relieving nerve-related pain.


Doctors can give an authorization to use Marijuana, but a person using Marijuana in a state in which it is outlawed can still be arrested, even using in a state where it is legal federal authorities still have the ability to arrest and indict any user or seller of Marijuana. Theoretically a Doctor can give an NFL player a recommendation to take Marijuana, but since the league has a ban on Marijuana the player can still be suspended.

The NFL has a duty to the players and my argument is that if there is even a small chance that Marijuana can protect against head injuries and CTE than the NFL should not test for Marijuana.


Sin

Sinister said:

20% is not a small number when compared to the fact that according to the Government, Schedule I drugs have no medical use, and severe safety concerns.

Here is the clinical study (Epidiolex) If anyone wishes to read it.:
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2018/210365lbl.pdf

University of Colorado Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Aurora, CO:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30616356

Here is a study from GW Pharmaceuticals (maker of Epidiolex) on a new study; Seizures Associated With Tuberous Sclerosis Complex
http://ir.gwpharm.com/node/10741/pdf

“Some of the most challenging and frustrating aspects of tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) are seizures that cannot be effectively controlled by existing medications,” explained Kari Luther Rosbeck, President and CEO of the Tuberous Sclerosis Alliance, “A new safe and effective treatment option such as Epidiolex is desperately needed. Further, we are grateful to GW, the researchers and the members of the TSC community who participated in this clinical trial. We are truly excited about the potential approval of Epidiolex to treat seizures in TSC as it brings much needed hope to those with TSC and their families who live daily with this difficult disorder.”

I don't believe there is a magic bullet for epilepsy especially Lennox-Gastaut and Dravet which are mostly life killing, but cannabidiol have certainly given some hope to those suffering with those intractable diseases, I'm not saying that Epidiolex is a cure all, Epidiolex is only a first step, what I am saying what everyone should be demanding is more tests and above all, for Marijuana to be removed from the Schedule I testing so that we can allow medical professionals to test this plant and find out how we can use it to better the lives of everyone including NFL players.

Click to expand...

Schedule I means experimental, no current medical use. It's common for any de novo chemical compound to be designated Schedule I until a medical usage is determined through clinical trials, demonstrating favorable risk vs. benefit, then gaining FDA approval.

THC studies are numerous, as are CB trials.
Large pharmaceutical companies with sophisticated R&D departments search perpetually for the next blockbuster drug; they must keep the pipeline flowing in order to assure profitability. Therefore, they have every incentive to thoroughly investigate and develop.

There has simply been limited success in finding medical uses for these compounds. The 20% seizure reduction reduction for the rare disorders noted previously is indeed clinically significant, but annual sales of that drug for the limited number of those cases will struggle to meet the costs of the drug's development.

Research is ongoing.

Doc50 said:

Schedule I means experimental, no current medical use. It's common for any de novo chemical compound to be designated Schedule I until a medical usage is determined through clinical trials, demonstrating favorable risk vs. benefit, then gaining FDA approval.

THC studies are numerous, as are CB trials.
Large pharmaceutical companies with sophisticated R&D departments search perpetually for the next blockbuster drug; they must keep the pipeline flowing in order to assure profitability. Therefore, they have every incentive to thoroughly investigate and develop.

There has simply been limited success in finding medical uses for these compounds. The 20% seizure reduction reduction for the rare disorders noted previously is indeed clinically significant, but annual sales of that drug for the limited number of those cases will struggle to meet the costs of the drug's development.

Research is ongoing.

Click to expand...

Thanks, Doc...

America's Cowboy said:

Because a majority of them that already use street level marijuana, which is very potent, would not qualify as medically needing it. How would the league be able to stop or control them? These players would show up high every day to practice, plus the games. How would the league be able to control them at that point? It would simply open the floodgates.

Click to expand...

LOL Street level MJ is not more potent. You act like its some kind of manufactured drug made in a lab. I dont know ANYONE beside young morons that buy that crap. The fact is now that US has legal MJ growers " that are regulated" Its easier for anyone to get. Times are changing and while a bunch of people still like the smoking/ burning leaves, there is much easier and better ways. People will do what they want regardless if its legal or not. Most of your questions have been given through this thread, you seem to just not like what has been said. The NFL just liek any company can control it just like they have or any other big company. Booze is legal ... do all workers show up drunk? You can get pain killers that will get you high as the moon from Docs .... according to you everyone showing up high at work ?

The fact is making legal helps more then just the patients that can benefit from it. If you cant see that or able to realize the big picture then its a waste of time to even try.

Nightman said:

that is a bunch of nonsense......of course more people are dying while driving stoned.....of course they are

To say otherwise is ludicrous

And to bring up alcohol is a false comparison..... it is also bad.....you figured it out.... no one is recommending that these guys self medicate with alcohol either or opioids

All you are doing is excusing marijuana use to get high by trying to make it something it isn't... the advocates have made an effective argument to fool the public but it is still just a drug that gets you high... it may be legal now just like your evil alcohol but that doesn't make it good medicine .... it just masks the pain

Click to expand...

Actually, its a plant which has been used as far back as 200 BC for everything from clothes, building material, fuel, food, medicine and more. How is Alcohol a false comparison? Its really almost spot on good . The Prohibition showed us what happens when you try to control peoples free will . People dying from being stoned? People die ... its the circle of life, can you link some statistics of deaths from MJ ? Here I will even help ya a bit ... Booze has a 5x more death rate than ALL illicit drugs and legal prescription drugs combined and Tobacco is 15x more.

Doc50 said:

Schedule I means experimental, no current medical use. It's common for any de novo chemical compound to be designated Schedule I until a medical usage is determined through clinical trials, demonstrating favorable risk vs. benefit, then gaining FDA approval.

THC studies are numerous, as are CB trials.
Large pharmaceutical companies with sophisticated R&D departments search perpetually for the next blockbuster drug; they must keep the pipeline flowing in order to assure profitability. Therefore, they have every incentive to thoroughly investigate and develop.

There has simply been limited success in finding medical uses for these compounds. The 20% seizure reduction reduction for the rare disorders noted previously is indeed clinically significant, but annual sales of that drug for the limited number of those cases will struggle to meet the costs of the drug's development.

Research is ongoing.

Click to expand...

Yet those companies are for profit ..... They care only about profit. So as soon as they can find a way to make it profitable trust me we will see it. Now the truth is since it is a schedule I
They have not really been allowed to do research on it and its also been blocked when they could. Why? Because they want to make money .... The same companies that raise prices on life-saving meds ... for no other reason to increase already overpaid salaries more. The research is out there and has been for a long time. Im just gonna stop because it could take a book on the subject and part of it would be banned on this site.

Doc50 said:

Schedule I means experimental, no current medical use. It's common for any de novo chemical compound to be designated Schedule I until a medical usage is determined through clinical trials, demonstrating favorable risk vs. benefit, then gaining FDA approval.

THC studies are numerous, as are CB trials.
Large pharmaceutical companies with sophisticated R&D departments search perpetually for the next blockbuster drug; they must keep the pipeline flowing in order to assure profitability. Therefore, they have every incentive to thoroughly investigate and develop.

There has simply been limited success in finding medical uses for these compounds. The 20% seizure reduction reduction for the rare disorders noted previously is indeed clinically significant, but annual sales of that drug for the limited number of those cases will struggle to meet the costs of the drug's development.

Research is ongoing.

Click to expand...

Setting aside the idea that these chemical compounds are de novo, the arguments around Marijuana have always been political.

Most of the studies concerning Marijuana have to do with psychoactive problems associated with the use of and abuse of the 'drug' and not for efficacy of the plant itself. There are those that believe that Marijuana has no current medical use and stand by that no matter what the scientific research has shown.

Marijuana is a political hot potato for large pharmaceutical companies, because there is so much anecdotal evidence that Marijuana can help a number of different diseases undercutting their own prices and treatments.

To say annual sales of the drug will be limited is just false, the stock price alone shot up over 66% once Epidiolex was announced:
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4245232-gw-pharmaceuticals-epidiolex-promising-start
The company stated there were 4,500 new patient enrolments and over 500 doctors had prescribed patient enrolment forms. Over 150 pharmacy distribution points were now set up. At the analyst call, the company stated that, after the reporting period, in January there had been a further prescription growth of 150% over the December figure. Patients initially start on lower doses to ensure there are no negative reactions, so the amount of epidiolex used per prescription would rise as this process takes place.

Epdiolex for two childhood epilepsy conditions is just the tip of the iceberg.

My article in October last year detailed how Nemus Bioscience (NMUS) could follow a similar path to that of GW Pharmaceuticals. The stock price has doubled as the market sees the potential of the company.

So you are saying that Epidiolex will not make money, BS.

America's Cowboy said:

Because a majority of them that already use street level marijuana, which is very potent, would not qualify as medically needing it. How would the league be able to stop or control them? These players would show up high every day to practice, plus the games. How would the league be able to control them at that point? It would simply open the floodgates.

Click to expand...

Nightman said:

that is a bunch of nonsense......of course more people are dying while driving stoned.....of course they are

To say otherwise is ludicrous

And to bring up alcohol is a false comparison..... it is also bad.....you figured it out.... no one is recommending that these guys self medicate with alcohol either or opioids

All you are doing is excusing marijuana use to get high by trying to make it something it isn't... the advocates have made an effective argument to fool the public but it is still just a drug that gets you high... it may be legal now just like your evil alcohol but that doesn't make it good medicine .... it just masks the pain

Click to expand...

It just masks the pain? What do you think opioids do?

Because some people make poor choices and can’t use a substance responsibly, isn’t a solid argument for it to be illegal. If that were the case, alcohol would be illegal. Prescription painkillers would be illegal because they impact your ability to drive.

Cigarettes would be illegal because they basically do nothing but kill people.

Heck guns would be illegal too because some people decide to misuse them.

People arguing for marijuana to remain illegal are also ignoring the fact that marijuana is already very easy to access, through the black market. The war on drugs has failed. Billions of dollars thrown down the toilet trying to stop the flow of drugs into the country and in law enforcement for those using them.

It doesn’t work. Never has and never will.

The money would be better spent on treating those who have substance use issues. The outcomes are usually far better.

I just checked out the "High Times" web site & there's an article having been posted up about 18 hours ago, stating Colorado police conducted ( raids) on 183 wildcat green reefer growers across the state, netting 240 million dollars in green reefer plants&13.5 million dollars in marketable product green reefer,,,they confiscated 80,000 green reefer plants outta' 41 Denver area homes alone,,, this long running investigation of several years went down about 4 days ago on last Wednesday,,,so, yeah, the fuzz still views it in a not so warm-n-fuzzy light

Birdgang said:

Yet those companies are for profit ..... They care only about profit. So as soon as they can find a way to make it profitable trust me we will see it. Now the truth is since it is a schedule I
They have not really been allowed to do research on it and its also been blocked when they could. Why? Because they want to make money .... The same companies that raise prices on life-saving meds ... for no other reason to increase already overpaid salaries more. The research is out there and has been for a long time. Im just gonna stop because it could take a book on the subject and part of it would be banned on this site.

Click to expand...

Your point about limited access to research Sched I
substances is simply untrue, for the reasons I indicated in the previous post.

Yes, any product's survival is dependent on its profitability.

Sinister said:

They do sell high potent THC in legal dispensary's which tells you exactly how much THC you are getting, why would an NFL player risk going to the streets to get an unknown amount of THC when he can go to a legal dispensary and get exactly what he wants?

There is no such thing as "medically controlled" cannabis, it just doesn't exist supposed or otherwise.

What excuse are you talking about?

Your arguments don't make any sense.

Click to expand...

Obviously he’s never been in a dispensary

America's Cowboy said:

Exactly. They are making excuses because they are likely users themselves. It never fails.

Click to expand...

Guilty!

Gonna go smoke now!

Birdgang said:

LOL Street level MJ is not more potent. You act like its some kind of manufactured drug made in a lab. I dont know ANYONE beside young morons that buy that crap. The fact is now that US has legal MJ growers " that are regulated" Its easier for anyone to get. Times are changing and while a bunch of people still like the smoking/ burning leaves, there is much easier and better ways. People will do what they want regardless if its legal or not. Most of your questions have been given through this thread, you seem to just not like what has been said. The NFL just liek any company can control it just like they have or any other big company. Booze is legal ... do all workers show up drunk? You can get pain killers that will get you high as the moon from Docs .... according to you everyone showing up high at work ?

The fact is making legal helps more then just the patients that can benefit from it. If you cant see that or able to realize the big picture then its a waste of time to even try.



Actually, its a plant which has been used as far back as 200 BC for everything from clothes, building material, fuel, food, medicine and more. How is Alcohol a false comparison? Its really almost spot on good . The Prohibition showed us what happens when you try to control peoples free will . People dying from being stoned? People die ... its the circle of life, can you link some statistics of deaths from MJ ? Here I will even help ya a bit ... Booze has a 5x more death rate than ALL illicit drugs and legal prescription drugs combined and Tobacco is 15x more.

Click to expand...

Dude, there's an article up over at
Ancient Origins that's saying they've traced back to the first known area of the green reefer up on the plateau's of Tibet,,,18,000 years ago.

Melonfeud said:

Dude, there's an article up over at
Ancient Origins that's saying they've traced back to the first known area of the green reefer up on the plateau's of Tibet,,,18,000 years ago.

Click to expand...

Its amazing how long its been around , I just noticed I meant 2000bc. But still gets to point its been around and used forever. Thanks Im gonna go check it out

Doc50 said:

Your point about limited access to research Sched I
substances is simply untrue, for the reasons I indicated in the previous post.

Yes, any product's survival is dependent on its profitability.

Click to expand...

Yes but because of the number of ailments it can help treat could be counterproductive for them. If you think about it , it goes very very far into a rabbit hole of suppliers, agreements, red tape etc etc. You seem like a smart guy so you know that life-changing things are never even given the light of day because of profit. Companies buy companies for patents just so that idea never get used. So when it comes to Government " Ive worked for last 20 years " and big corporations ... I take what they say with a half a grain of salt.

Birdgang said:

Yes but because of the number of ailments it can help treat could be counterproductive for them. If you think about it , it goes very very far into a rabbit hole of suppliers, agreements, red tape etc etc. You seem like a smart guy so you know that life-changing things are never even given the light of day because of profit. Companies buy companies for patents just so that idea never get used. So when it comes to Government " Ive worked for last 20 years " and big corporations ... I take what they say with a half a grain of salt.

Click to expand...

Your argument is counterintuitive.
The more useful a product is, the more valuable it is.

I've been in clinical research for over 20 years, and I can testify that the scientific process is a fine method for determining efficacy and safety. If it's corruptible by inevitable greed, the tremendous level of liability serves as a deterrent.

Melonfeud said:

I just checked out the "High Times" web site & there's an article having been posted up about 18 hours ago, stating Colorado police conducted ( raids) on 183 wildcat green reefer growers across the state, netting 240 million dollars in green reefer plants&13.5 million dollars in marketable product green reefer,,,they confiscated 80,000 green reefer plants outta' 41 Denver area homes alone,,, this long running investigation of several years went down about 4 days ago on last Wednesday,,,so, yeah, the fuzz still views it in a not so warm-n-fuzzy light

Click to expand...

Right, that's like havin a still in your backyard
(I have no evidence that you do).

We just can't make or grow this stuff ourselves.

America's Cowboy said:

What you guys refuse to understand is that if the NFL includes supposed "medically controlled" cannabis into the league, many players are going to use that as an excuse to get the way more potent version from the streets...and use it.

Click to expand...

We understand. We don't care.

Nightman said:

that is a bunch of nonsense......of course more people are dying while driving stoned.....of course they are

To say otherwise is ludicrous

And to bring up alcohol is a false comparison..... it is also bad.....you figured it out.... no one is recommending that these guys self medicate with alcohol either or opioids

All you are doing is excusing marijuana use to get high by trying to make it something it isn't... the advocates have made an effective argument to fool the public but it is still just a drug that gets you high... it may be legal now just like your evil alcohol but that doesn't make it good medicine .... it just masks the pain

Click to expand...

Opioids, "just mask the pain"? Does that mean they're not good medicine?

Nightman said:

that is a bunch of nonsense......of course more people are dying while driving stoned.....of course they are

To say otherwise is ludicrous

And to bring up alcohol is a false comparison..... it is also bad.....you figured it out.... no one is recommending that these guys self medicate with alcohol either or opioids

All you are doing is excusing marijuana use to get high by trying to make it something it isn't... the advocates have made an effective argument to fool the public but it is still just a drug that gets you high... it may be legal now just like your evil alcohol but that doesn't make it good medicine .... it just masks the pain

Click to expand...

I posted this earlier-

Haimerej said:

Check this out from NHTSA's Drug and Alcohol Crash Risk: A Case-Control Study, (emphasis added)-

"Conclusions

The study confirmed previous research indicating alcohol is a greater contributor to crash risk than drugs ... When age, gender, race/ethnicity, and alcohol consumption are taken into account, there was no significant contribution of drugs to crash risk. This finding seems to contradict previous studies (Asbridge, Hayden, & Cartwright, 2012; Blows et al., 2005; Hels et al., 2011) that indicate a statistically significant contribution of drugs to crash risk, even if sometimes small or moderate. However, the strength of this study lays in its rigorous methodology, stringent data collection procedures, controlled case-control matching, comprehensive laboratory testing, and sophisticated statistical analyses...

Additionally, because drug classes affect driving skills differently, overall crash risk estimates may underestimate the contribution of certain drugs to specific types of crashes. The role of THC may differ in its crash risk profile than stimulants. The results indicate that alcohol remains the main contributor to crash risk. Drugs other than alcohol, and when combined with alcohol was not a significant factor in crash risk."

Click to expand...