Medical marijuana

[regoRylloJ]

On 10/18/2022 at 9:27 AM, mjkacmom said:

 

Vapes were invented with nicotine as another way to inhale nicotine.

 

That makes it a nicotine vape which, BTW, is a LOT more dangerous to one's health than a cigarette.

[MotownVoice]

2 minutes ago, regoRylloJ said:

 

That makes it a nicotine vape which, BTW, is a LOT more dangerous to one's health than a cigarette.

Junk science.

[IronRobi]

5 hours ago, regoRylloJ said:

 

That makes it a nicotine vape which, BTW, is a LOT more dangerous to one's health than a cigarette.

Nicotine vapes are not a LOT more dangerous to one's health than a cigarette. It's actually quite the opposite. But just because it's safer doesn't mean that it's actually safe. It comes with its own set of risks.

[HuliHuli]

56 minutes ago, IronRobi said:

Nicotine vapes are not a LOT more dangerous to one's health than a cigarette. It's actually quite the opposite. But just because it's safer doesn't mean that it's actually safe. It comes with its own set of risks.

Thanks for your opinion Dr. @IronRobi, though I note you did not include the peer reviewed science data to support your statement.  Some well schooled authorities like the American Heart Association (AHA)Trusted Source , believe this is not necessarily the case. Mounting evidence suggests that vaping is dangerous, possibly more dangerous.  You can read the studies supporting this fact at https://www.uhhospitals.org/Healthy-at-UH/articles/2019/12/vaping-may-be-more-dangerous-than-cigarette-smoking-studies-show#:~:text=Vaping May Be More Dangerous Than Cigarette Smoking%2C,or tobacco cigarettes. ... 3 Superheated Chemicals.

 

[brad0576]

On 10/18/2022 at 1:39 AM, regoRylloJ said:

 

 

WTH is a "tobacco vape"? 

There are vapes that you can get nicotine laced cartridges for......there are also over the counter vapes for tobacco users

[regoRylloJ]

1 hour ago, brad0576 said:

There are vapes that you can get nicotine laced cartridges for......there are also over the counter vapes for tobacco users

 

Almost ALL vape fluid contains nicotine and they are available for most any vape.  They are also much more detrimental to one's health than smoking a cigarette.  How would a vape 'designed for tobacco users' be any different than others?

[IronRobi]

22 hours ago, IronRobi said:

But just because it's safer doesn't mean that it's actually safe. 

21 hours ago, HuliHuli said:

Mounting evidence suggests that vaping is dangerous, possibly more dangerous.  

 

 

Seriously though.... this is cruise critic not a medical board, so not all posts that are considered common knowledge need to be backed by peer reviewed scientific studies. 🙄

 

And I say common knowledge, because the CDC considers them safer. They also link to several references and studies if you REALLY need to read them. As a Canadian, I should also add that Health Canada, the Canadian Lung Association, and the Canadian Thoracic Society all agree with the assessment that they are safer than a normal cigarette. EDIT: As does the Public Health of England.

About Electronic Cigarettes (E-Cigarettes) | Smoking & Tobacco Use | CDC

 

What I find extremely interesting here is that you seem to be able to read all of these peer reviewed studies and claim to fully comprehend them yet you seem to not be able to comprehend a simple post on cruise critic that never once said they weren't dangerous, only that they were less dangerous. 

Sincerely,

Dr Robi

 

Are e-cigarettes less harmful than regular cigarettes?

Yes—but that doesn’t mean e-cigarettes are safe. E-cigarette aerosol generally contains fewer toxic chemicals than the deadly mix of 7,000 chemicals in smoke from regular cigarettes.³ However, e-cigarette aerosol is not harmless. It can contain harmful and potentially harmful substances, including nicotine, heavy metals like lead, volatile organic compounds, and cancer-causing agents.¹

 

 

Edited October 20, 2022 by IronRobi

[IronRobi]

15 hours ago, regoRylloJ said:

They are also much more detrimental to one's health than smoking a cigarette. 

Except they're not. See quote directly above. 

[sanger727]

On 10/5/2022 at 5:58 PM, IronRobi said:

For the record, marijuana that's prescribed for medicinal purposes would be no different to the person taking it than your thyroid or blood pressure medication. So you probably shouldn't be judging those who use it for legitimate medical reasons as prescribed by their physician. And for those that use it recreationally, it's likely safer than alcohol since it does not cause dependencies and you can't OD from it. Also, a little fun fact, during prohibition, marijuana was only made illegal a few years later. But discussion for non-medical use is a whole different topic here lol

 

What surprises me is that NCL can deny somebody access to their prescription medications and even ban them completely if they're caught bringing it. Imagine being told you can't bring your thyroid or blood pressure meds. I believe this is all be due to laws about crossing international borders with it, which is entirely beyond their control.

 

 

 

Marijuana is not FDA approved as a medication. And its federally schedule 1; which means that it legally has no medical use. We can all agree or disagree with this stance, but NCL is correct to ban this substance until federal laws change. 

 

I'm pretty sure you have noticed that you can't get your marijuana prescription fulfilled at Walgreens, it's not the same as thyroid medication legally.

 

And just as a side note, it's not just cruising. Employers are still allowed to drug test for marijuana and not hire or fire you for using it (even with a prescription). Marijuana is not yet a medication legally. 

Edited October 20, 2022 by sanger727

[sanger727]

On 10/6/2022 at 5:12 PM, fastpitchdad said:

If you want to bring Marijuana or CBD on a west coast cruise nobody will stop you even if they thought they knew what it was. Security doesn't care and i have never seen dogs but even so, the dogs in Seattle are not even trained to detect it anymore. I do think it would be dumb to bring flower since smoking it on the ship would be inviting problems. 

 

Dogs not being trained to detect marijuana are becoming more and more common. Drug dogs can always be trained to detect a new drug. But once they are trained to detect a drug, they can't be untrained. Thousands of dollars go into training a dog, and having one that alerts to marijuana is useless once marijuana is legal in the jurisdiction or if it ever becomes legal federally. Alot of places side on the side of caution and don't train it anymore. 

[IronRobi]

13 minutes ago, sanger727 said:

I'm pretty sure you have noticed that you can't get your marijuana prescription fulfilled at Walgreens, it's not the same as thyroid medication legally.

I'm Canadian, it's fully legalized up here. We've got provincially run cannabis stores, mostly attached to our liquor stores.

 

However, prior to legalization, it was available on a prescription basis. And no, we couldn't walk in to a typical pharmacy and pick it up. Your prescription would be filed with the manufacturers and they would directly fill it. In those days there was a lot of additional security measures around it. Through my line of work, I got the see the inner workings of many of these facilities and at one point they were required to have a bank vault fully encased in cement (I forget the thickness required) followed by a 6ft air gap and a second re-enforced cement barrier around it. They were concerned criminals would smash cars through the side of the building to steal the marijuana LOL. Today.... some of them keep it in a fenced-in area, but most just store the finished product in a standard warehouse just like they would boxes of cereal or a shipment of TV's.

 

I get it's fully against the rules and regulations. I personally find it very discriminatory though. When it was prescribed to me many years ago, it wasn't a life or death situation. I could easily live without it. But that's not the case for everyone. Denying access to their prescription is really no different than denying access to someone's heart medication or thyroid medication that they need to survive. Remember, we're talking prescriptions here for medical use not recreational. I'd have a completely different stance if medical use was permitted and recreational was not.

Edited October 20, 2022 by IronRobi

[sanger727]

Just now, IronRobi said:

I get it's fully against the rules and regulations. I personally find it very discriminatory though. When it was prescribed to me many years ago, it wasn't a life or death situation. I could easily live without it. But that's not the case for everyone. Denying access to their prescription is really no different than denying access to someone's heart medication or thyroid medication that they need to survive. Remember, we're talking prescriptions here for medical use not recreational. I'd have a completely different stance if medical use was permitted and recreational was not.

 

But it's not. Maybe things are different in Canada than in the US. But in the US all "medications" are run through rigorous clinical trials and then approved by the FDA. Marijuana has never done that. It's not a medication. It's essentially treated the same as a supplement once you have a medical card. Legal, but not proven to work, regulated, or legally protected. Also, if we are being honest, the medical side as turned into a bit of a joke in the US. Groupon sells medical marijuana cards now. 

[IronRobi]

2 minutes ago, sanger727 said:

Also, if we are being honest, the medical side as turned into a bit of a joke in the US. Groupon sells medical marijuana cards now. 

It got the same way up here too before full legalization. The prescription I was given was for up to 40g/day!! For those who don't know, 1 joint is around 0.2g or so. So my prescription allowed for up to 200 joints PER DAY. I settled on oils at 10mg/day, so around 0.3g per month. 

[MoCruiseFan]

18 hours ago, IronRobi said:

Except they're not. See quote directly above. 

Any that have nicotine are vastly more dangerous.  It is purely logical.  The particulate of, while small, is vastly larger than that of vapor.  As such it gets deeper into the lung sacs and causes much more damage.  People can quote whatever they want in an effort to justify their actions or make themselves feel better about their choices, but they cannot contradict pure science.

 

[MoCruiseFan]

On 10/19/2022 at 5:48 PM, IronRobi said:

Nicotine vapes are not a LOT more dangerous to one's health than a cigarette. It's actually quite the opposite. But just because it's safer doesn't mean that it's actually safe. It comes with its own set of risks.

Except it is by no means at all 'safer'.  Liquid nicotine is a hazardous substance that requires anyone handling it to wear a full hazmat suit.  Additionally, being a liquid (as opposed to the more solid tobacco smoke ) it gets even deeper in the lungs causing even more damage.  In many aspects, vaping is more dangerous than smoking a cigarette.

[MoCruiseFan]

18 hours ago, IronRobi said:

I'm Canadian, it's fully legalized up here. We've got provincially run cannabis stores, mostly attached to our liquor stores.

 

However, prior to legalization, it was available on a prescription basis. And no, we couldn't walk in to a typical pharmacy and pick it up. Your prescription would be filed with the manufacturers and they would directly fill it. In those days there was a lot of additional security measures around it. Through my line of work, I got the see the inner workings of many of these facilities and at one point they were required to have a bank vault fully encased in cement (I forget the thickness required) followed by a 6ft air gap and a second re-enforced cement barrier around it. They were concerned criminals would smash cars through the side of the building to steal the marijuana LOL. Today.... some of them keep it in a fenced-in area, but most just store the finished product in a standard warehouse just like they would boxes of cereal or a shipment of TV's.

 

I get it's fully against the rules and regulations. I personally find it very discriminatory though. When it was prescribed to me many years ago, it wasn't a life or death situation. I could easily live without it. But that's not the case for everyone. Denying access to their prescription is really no different than denying access to someone's heart medication or thyroid medication that they need to survive. Remember, we're talking prescriptions here for medical use not recreational. I'd have a completely different stance if medical use was permitted and recreational was not.

 

The fact is that prescriptions for weed are handed out like candy on Halloween.  Many sources will write a prescription on request with no real legitimate underlying medical reason for doing so.  It is a joke and totally laughable to think that ANY prescription for weed is a 'life or death' situation.

 

[MoCruiseFan]

18 hours ago, sanger727 said:

 

Dogs not being trained to detect marijuana are becoming more and more common. Drug dogs can always be trained to detect a new drug. But once they are trained to detect a drug, they can't be untrained. Thousands of dollars go into training a dog, and having one that alerts to marijuana is useless once marijuana is legal in the jurisdiction or if it ever becomes legal federally. Alot of places side on the side of caution and don't train it anymore. 

 

Weed can be legalize in a 'jurisdiction' but it is still illegal at the federal level, ergo it is not useless by any means.

[CptBoatface]

Dude, where's my stateroom.   Hey, a buffet, now we're talking....😆

[BermudaBound2014]

1 hour ago, MoCruiseFan said:

.....but it is still illegal at the federal level

 

Not for long.

 

1 hour ago, MoCruiseFan said:

  It is a joke and totally laughable to think that ANY prescription for weed is a 'life or death' situation.

 

 

You are misinformed. Take a look at the research associated with  "Charlotte's Web' and seizures.

 

 

Regarding vaping.... I would hope that anyone using a vape (tobacco or otherwise) is aware of the connection popcorn lung. 

 

 

 

 

[njhorseman]

2 hours ago, MoCruiseFan said:

Weed can be legalize in a 'jurisdiction' but it is still illegal at the federal level, ergo it is not useless by any means.

 

1 hour ago, BermudaBound2014 said:

 

Not for long.

Earlier this month POTUS said he would ask secretary of Health and Human Services and the attorney general to review how marijuana is scheduled under federal law. It's giant leap from POTUS making that request to concluding that marijuana won't be illegal for long. 

 

 

[ontheweb]

22 hours ago, sanger727 said:

 

But it's not. Maybe things are different in Canada than in the US. But in the US all "medications" are run through rigorous clinical trials and then approved by the FDA. Marijuana has never done that. It's not a medication. It's essentially treated the same as a supplement once you have a medical card. Legal, but not proven to work, regulated, or legally protected. Also, if we are being honest, the medical side as turned into a bit of a joke in the US. Groupon sells medical marijuana cards now. 

Of course marijuana has not been run through clinical trials as researchers cannot get it as it is classified as a level 1 drug. And then not being researched is held against it like in your post.

[sanger727]

1 hour ago, ontheweb said:

Of course marijuana has not been run through clinical trials as researchers cannot get it as it is classified as a level 1 drug. And then not being researched is held against it like in your post.

Right. I wasn’t trying to imply that it was a fair system. Just that marijuana is nowhere close to comparable to heart medication. And until it’s no longer a schedule 1 substance, ‘prescriptions’ will continue to be contested subject. For me personally, my job drug tests. So a prescription for it isn’t an option event if it would be beneficial.

[CILCIANRQTS]

So glad to see that, after 3 years, this thread has finally been able to reach some solid conclusions about products that we cannot legally take on a cruise. 🙄😴

[BermudaBound2014]

3 hours ago, njhorseman said:

 

Earlier this month POTUS said he would ask secretary of Health and Human Services and the attorney general to review how marijuana is scheduled under federal law. It's giant leap from POTUS making that request to concluding that marijuana won't be illegal for long. 

 

 

 

After the next election, I will be surprised if there are more than a couple states remaining where recreational usage is illegal. That alone is going to add great pressure to the Feds. IMO; when voters in 48 out of 50 states have voted to legalize recreational usage, the feds should not be far behind. 

[hallux]

4 hours ago, njhorseman said:

 

Earlier this month POTUS said he would ask secretary of Health and Human Services and the attorney general to review how marijuana is scheduled under federal law. It's giant leap from POTUS making that request to concluding that marijuana won't be illegal for long. 

 

 

 

11 minutes ago, BermudaBound2014 said:

 

After the next election, I will be surprised if there are more than a couple states remaining where recreational usage is illegal. That alone is going to add great pressure to the Feds. IMO; when voters in 48 out of 50 states have voted to legalize recreational usage, the feds should not be far behind. 

None of which matters for cruise passengers if the GLOBAL maritime regulations don't change to allow the substance on the ship...