As a Florida MMJ patient from a rural area, 46, having smoked marijuana most of my adult life, I would like to point out that even legal CBD alternatives are not paid for by insurers. This is just as big a part of the problem. I completely agree that marijuana should be rescheduled, and not to point out the obvious, but being able to produce your own cannabis should be something the insurance industry considers. Not only do you reduce opioid use and prescriptions, ideally the cost of one’s medication could be effectively zero but for energy and water/fertilizer. I’m sure there are plenty of pharmaceutical companies who would like me to suffer some pain for this idea… but if we just substituted nicotine for marijuana as a schedule 1 drug, and removed marijuana from the schedule altogether… President Trump would score another victory in the court of public opinion against both cigarette smoker Barack Obama, and an evil industry that murders half a million people every year. Plus, bonus, all those people who can’t quit smoking? You don’t really think they’ll hit the black market, do you? NO! Then they’d be hypocrites for thinking they were better than those dirty pot smokers!
Hi, Neil. Just a note to let you know that not all Christians are against you. I hope you can get the meds that work for you, legally and easily. If not, we know why…$$$.
Neil,
I agree with pretty much everything you said. But, good luck with getting today’s Supply Side Jesus Evanjihad Christian conservative, including those who fake it like Tramp, to agree with you. There are some out here who think marijuana is the same as heroin. In some cases, one poster in particular believes it’s like heroine, and I have no idea what women heroes have to do with this discussion. At any rate, I hope it’s working well for you and once we get Sessions and Tramp out of there, I bet we all see steps towards the direction you are hoping to see. Just a matter of when. Keep the faith, Neil! And, if this is a serious issue for you, understand Tramp is not on your side on this one and never will be.
Captain Planet, is insulting all Evangelical Christians–like myself–necessary? Your comments are inflammatory and anti-intellectual. Assuming that every evangelical Christian supports Trump and opposes medical marijuana is completely asinine. You are not even attempting to dialogue, but running a fool’s errand to needlessly offend.
Augustine – are you grouping yourself into the evanjihad? There is a difference between them and evangelical Christians. I am a Christian, but I don’t go around throwing my religious belief system onto others. And, I have plenty of conservative friends who support marijuana. It sounds like you might be in that camp, that’s fantastic! I will not apologize for not having respect for any man who has confessed to and behaves like Tramp, though. I don’t hate him, I simply do not respect him as a person. I teach my daughters better and to watch out for guys like him.
Agent,
I am perfectly fine. I have been for years and it continues. Then again, I meet the demographic Tramp wants to protect. I am simply advocating for those who didn’t win the lucky sperm contest. Good to see you believe in polls again – funny how that works! The wonderful world of hypocrisy – you can have it. I wouldn’t ever want to live there.
Neither this President or the prior will touch the criminal designations concerning marijuana as they both were bought & owned by Big Pharma before they ever took office & of course it is all perfectly legal{meaning campaign contributions}.
Don’t forget about the prison lobbyists who have a significant financial stake with ensuring people continue to get incarcerated for even minor possession of the stuff!
StorMonica, wasn’t that a great picture of Andrew on this story? Looked a lot like a Recreational guy, not a medicinal guy.
April 5, 2018 at 11:26 am
sal says:
Like or Dislike:
2
0
are you and Agent ok with medicinal marijuana now?
April 5, 2018 at 12:43 pm
sal says:
Like or Dislike:
4
0
Agent–did you seriously just insult Andrew? That’s like being invited to a party and spitting on the floor…you shouldn’t be shocked when you don’t get asked back.
April 6, 2018 at 9:18 am
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
9
1
Not really true Agent, like literally everything you have ever written here that can be fact checked. Trump had significant spending from the Republican Party which gets all their money from outside sources. He also received help from Russia, including financially through their spending on campaigning. He hasn’t come down hard on pharma at all, but since your cited it as fact I’m sure you will provide a source, right?
Clearly, you guys are smoking too much ganja. There is a lot of competition in the health care world, largely in the world of the uninsured. When people pay out of pocket, hospitals and clinics charge them less than insured patients.
If Marijuana was the miracle drug everyone claims it to be, lots and lots of LIBERAL scientists would be hailing the glories of pot from the rooftop. And Walmart and CVS and all the new competitors in health care that are scaring the big insurance companies to death would be pushing to offer it to lower costs.
The bottom line: the medical uses for marijuana are quite limited, according to the most recent science. And your paranoid conspiracy theories would be laughable . . . except you get to vote.
“When people pay out of pocket, hospitals and clinics charge them less than insured patients.”
I’ve never found that to be true. In fact, I’ve only seen hospitals charge MORE to uninsured patients because (a) they already have negotiated reduced rates with health insurance carriers instead of charging the full initial billed amount and (b) they have no incentive to negotiate with the patient as unpaid medical bills can be sent to collections where wages can ultimately be garnished.
As for your argument regarding the lack of scientists touting medicinal marijuana, that’s because (1) Schedule 1 drugs have crazy registrations and application requirements which make legitimate research difficult and, in many cases, nearly impossible, as well as (2) a lack of supply for testing since the only marijuana federally approved for studies comes from a single lab at the University of Mississippi.
I totally agree Rosenblatt. My sister had back surgery but she was uninsured; bills were in excess of $50k. An insured friend had similar surgery; the insurance company was billed as much but with negotiated fees they paid a fraction of the $50k. But I have seen, if you have cash in hand, hospitals will charge you the negotiated rates.
You just confirmed in reality with the point I made about negotiating from a position of strength when you are uninsured . . . and then said the exact opposite.
Here is the reality: hospitals are required by law to treat all comers. But when that person has no insurance, the hospital is desperate to get any payment, a terrible negotiating position to be in. Anyone failing to take advantage just failed to take advantage.
And everyone knows the Minute Clinics at CVS and Walmart are cheap, cheap, cheap. In fact, they were shown to have a large impact on medical costs in America – all for the good.
the uninsured person is arguing from the position of strength? you seriously don’t think the hospital — which can threaten a lawsuit or sending the bill to collections and ruining someone’s credit — has the position of strength in this negotiation?
April 5, 2018 at 6:49 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
1
6
Medical bills are impeccably easy to remove from your history, and the majority of the time if you simply wait for the bill to go to collections, the new company who picked it up will settle the debt at half the cost (unless it’s a clinic, most clinics have far more aggressive collectors that are basically extensions of themselves and they do not sell the debt) and then you have it removed from your credit history.
If they don’t realize the position of strength they have, they are just stupid.
I’ve removed three collections bills from my credit which were honest mistakes from when I had my kids and didn’t realize which were paid and were not.
I didn’t even know how easy it was. I called each of the three on my report, and basically said: If I pay these in full will you remove them from my credit? Because I saw it online. Each of the three did, and not only that, it was so heavily discounted I couldn’t believe it. Medical collectors also never harassed me (maybe I god lucky) or my wife who also had 3 from her past which the collection agencies settled as well and removed from her credit. There is only one local company I’ve ever had problems with on that, and it is basically someone who is hired on to collect debt rather than buying it.
The Hospital is not in a position of power on collecting debt, and they cannot destroy the lives of people who end up not paying.
Confused I can really tell you are not experienced on this matter, so don’t talk form a point of virtue signaling rather than experience.
April 5, 2018 at 6:57 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
2
4
“Each of the three did, and not only that, it was so heavily discounted I couldn’t believe it. Medical collectors also never harassed me (maybe I god lucky) ”
And I didn’t even ask to have it discounted by the way.
I just wanted it off my credit. These 3 bills were $2,200. They settled it for just over $1,000.
It’s Armada around here locally who is tough to deal with, I had more than 3 collections, it’s just I honestly missed 3, and the other ones I didn’t pay on time and was irresponsible. Armada made one hell of a fight of it, but they did remove it. They didn’t want to pay to delete, they said it’s dishonest and should be on my report, and plus it could create an ethical bad standard for their collection habits. I then said essentially a sob story (which was true and would be for anyone in a bad position who had collection bills, rather than just being stupid) that I had more than 45 hospital bills in 5 years totaling well over $10,000 dollars. It was hard to track who to pay, and hard to afford when my wife got out of work, and day care became unaffordable, and I lost her income. They approved it on that basis.
Really. The position of power is certainly in those who are not insured’s court.
Here I am having had over $10,000 in medical debt over 5 years, having paid it off for just under $5,000, and I have nothing on my record. That’s not including my wife. She had about $3,000. Nothing on her record either.
This is also why I don’t like the ACA by the way.
The ACA doesn’t teach you to shop around. I didn’t notice or think about my insurance for years. The issue was when I got sick and went to the doctor, for what should have been a $40 co pay, they kept on using the code as a special visit. This last year when I had the flu and went in twice? Yeah, special visits, I paid about $600 dollars for it. Including my kids flu visits it went to $1,200.
All I had to do was do exactly what Craig pointed out above: I found a local CVC which has basic clinic abilities, and if I feel sick I go to that, if the kids aren’t feeling well, I go there. No more $1,200 bills.
Hospitals do have a serious problem, and Craig is correct.
You speak like you know what you’re talking about and I can tell you have zero experience in it. It’s time to listen and learn, not to be a stubborn know it all virtue signaling type of talk guy.
April 11, 2018 at 1:48 pm
chris says:
Like or Dislike:
2
0
Being uninsured and having cash in hand are two totally different things. If you can afford to pay up front they will give the insurance negotiated rates. If you have no financial means they stick it to you hoping you will pay something; they know it will go to collections anyway. It doesn’t make sense but I have seen it time and time again.
April 12, 2018 at 10:16 am
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
Thank you, Chris. That’s exactly what I was talking about and what I’ve seen too
April 4, 2018 at 2:06 pm
Craig Cornell says:
Like or Dislike:
2
9
So you agree with me: the science on marijuana is in it the most preliminary form.
You can blame whoever you want, but you just confirmed my point.
And if you don’t think uninsured people can negotiate great deals, tell your hospital you are uninsured the next time you have a large bill and see if you can negotiate half off. That is the usual response.
Sir, you just moved the goalposts from “lots and lots of LIBERAL scientists would be hailing the glories of pot from the rooftop [if marijuana had medical benefits]” to “we don’t know if it has medical benefits” – that’s not the same argument, and I do not agree with your original statement.
And clearly I have personal experience attempting to negotiate bills for uninsured patients directly with hospitals (which is why I wrote “I’ve never found that to be true. In fact, I’ve only seen hospitals charge…”)
Even using terms like “Usual and Customary Rates” and “this is the wrong ICD code for this line item, so the invoice amount isn’t correct” was utterly useless.
EVERY time, their response was “that’s the billed amount, that’s what the patient owes. Either they pay it in full, they get put on a payment plan, or we’ll send them to collections. We’re not negotiating.”
This is getting exhausting. The two things I said are EXACTLY the same point.
We don’t know crap about the supposed medical benefits of marijuana and that is also the reason liberal scientists ARE NOT screaming from the rooftops about the medical benefits of marijuana. Geez.
April 4, 2018 at 2:56 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
10
1
Pro Tip: don’t post a condescending reply telling someone they agree with you if you have no interest in hearing them explain their stance on the topic you raised.
‘Lots and lots’ is exactly how many? And, why does – in your mind – that threshold of approval imply ‘recrea-pot’ should be legalized?
April 5, 2018 at 8:57 am
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
4
0
Yogi, why don’t you ask Craig that question?
APRIL 4, 2018 AT 11:18 AM
Craig Cornell says:
POORLY-RATED. LIKE OR DISLIKE:
Thumb up 2Thumb down 13
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Clearly, you guys are smoking too much ganja. There is a lot of competition in the health care world, largely in the world of the uninsured. When people pay out of pocket, hospitals and clinics charge them less than insured patients.
If Marijuana was the miracle drug everyone claims it to be, lots and lots of LIBERAL scientists would be hailing the glories of pot from the rooftop. And Walmart and CVS and all the new competitors in health care that are scaring the big insurance companies to death would be pushing to offer it to lower costs.
April 5, 2018 at 7:07 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
5
“And clearly I have personal experience attempting to negotiate bills for uninsured patients directly with hospitals (which is why I wrote “I’ve never found that to be true. In fact, I’ve only seen hospitals charge…”)”
Oh really?
If they were uninsured, how were they your client for you to negotiate on their behalf? You are talking as if you do this as part of a job, which would be impossible to occur on a regular basis if you happen to write medical (as this would be before people got insurance with you, so you’re telling me that the standard insurance policy is to negotiate bills for people they don’t insure? I call B.S.) or, you tried to help a few friends and were familiar with code due to being an insurance agent, which is the more likely, and you did not explain that very well to that scenario, possibly intentionally.
As for what you’re talking about:
I’m pretty darn familiar with coding issues, and yes, bad clinics will say this is what it’s coded at, we aren’t changing it, and send the bill to collections. In fact, the clinic I go to has horrible reviews for this, I just mentioned that I ended up paying $1,200 for flu visits.
But what else did I mention? I negotiated it off. And If I had told Armada that they weren’t coded right, and reported that with any bit of evidence to a credit company, it would be easy to remove from the credit report. The main topic at hand isn’t even directed by my commentary because of how much you derailed. Pretty much all of what I said doesn’t even matter.
You moved the goal post. You moved the topic of debate. His slight wording difference didn’t move the topic of debate. YOU DID.
April 6, 2018 at 8:14 am
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
5
0
I will keep this brief as it’s Friday and you’ve played your hand of “make shotgun arguments, then never reply again” so many times it’s clearly part of your M.O. That said….
I had my friends sign a POA so I could negotiate on their behalf, having nothing to do with who their carrier/agent is or if they are or aren’t uninsured.
They’re my friends who don’t work in the industry and don’t know what an ICD-9 code is or what “reasonable and customary rates” mean, so I tried to help them out.
You wrote “bad clinics will say this is what it’s coded at, we aren’t changing it, and send the bill to collections”
Thank you for supporting my argument. Bad clinics, of which there are many, have no interest in negotiating bills even when there are clear technical errors. You seem to be arguing against my position yet simultaneously acknowledging what I said is accurate.
“Pretty much all of what I said doesn’t even matter.” They why did you even bother writing it? Shotgun arguments much? Please try sticking to the points that matter rather than saying a bunch of self-acknowledged irrelevant fluff.
April 6, 2018 at 9:49 am
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
4
0
Wait Rosenblatt haven’t you heard, when he spews nonsense, gets destroyed and then leaves it’s because he’s too smart to even address what you’ve said and even if the facts don’t got they are then changed, resulting in you getting owned.
April 6, 2018 at 4:23 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
3
0
As expected, Shotgun Bob is nowhere to be found on this thread anymore. Modus Operandi confirmed.
April 4, 2018 at 5:00 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
2
2
Wrong yet again. Hospitals often negotiate with uninsured patients.
Craig, I am a friend and agree with you, but I see the down voting Recreational boys are after you on every post. So be it. I couldn’t care less. They are all high as we speak and spout nonsense.
April 4, 2018 at 6:03 pm
Tax Cuts 4 PolaRich Bears says:
Like or Dislike:
0
9
These pot stories on IJ certainly draws a vociferous crowd of stoners to the comment pages, to down vote or to actually attempt to defend use of recrea-pot and to legalize it, despite what the public opinion polls say and what the Federals Laws mandate regardless of what a few misguided state legislatures have enacted.
April 4, 2018 at 7:44 pm
CCC says:
Like or Dislike:
7
0
Tax Cuts 4 says: “…actually attempt to defend use of recrea-pot and to legalize it, despite what the public opinion polls say…”
Remind me, what DO the American public opinion polls say regarding the legalization of marijuana?
April 9, 2018 at 5:54 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
So your default is to disagree and argue without reading or thinking about the preceding comments. That explains a lot.
April 4, 2018 at 1:26 pm
UboreMe says:
Like or Dislike:
5
1
Ah, yes. On cue, it’s Craig! here to save the day with wit and wisdom.
Craig,
I also highly disagree with you assertion that the use is limited and as you put it that is backed up by “the most recent science”. I disagree because the most recent science has advocated toward the notion that along with the plethora of benefits that can be achieved through different types of Cannabis there are negative side effects that can develop with certain people. They did say that Cannabis, especially the CBD version, has even more benefits with even less negatives. They would like to study it more, but it is extremely hard with the it still being a scheduled one drug. Please stop spouting off your opinions as facts because you had a bad experience (which I don’t know since you mislead people about yourself frequently) when the science does not support your notions from either side.
Did you even read the article? It is preliminary research based on, wait for it, statistics.
Meaning NOT scientific research. Nobody has any idea yet if marijuana can replace opioids, a laughable proposition for many doctors who know that opioids are properly used for severe pain where CBDs would be an aspirin by comparison.
Geez, maybe you bong suckers can’t even read anymore.
Before you spout insults – generating a similar response from me – try sticking to fact.
Did you reread your post that I replied to where you where the one who brought up the science aspect which I was referring to. You are the immature one who also diminishes the other sides point to being “bong suckers” without knowing if I partake or not. Which I do not, but it should be a personal freedom to choose this as I and many others have stated multiple times. I never insulted you, but I challenged your attempt to dilute facts with opinions.
You said I mislead people. That is an insult to most normal people.
April 5, 2018 at 9:10 am
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
4
0
DECEMBER 29, 2017 AT 3:32 PM
Agent says:
LIKE OR DISLIKE:
0
1
You need the insult
April 5, 2018 at 2:05 pm
helpingout says:
Like or Dislike:
3
0
Craig,
I do not know how many people think this is an insult, when it is commonly used as a tactic for adults. I apologize that by identifying the tactic you use came across as an insult. I was again pointing out the way you debate on here frequently.
April 5, 2018 at 9:01 am
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
4
0
Craig says, “Before you spout insults – generating a similar response from me – try sticking to fact.”
RIGHT AFTER HE SAID THIS ABOUT OTHER POSTERS!!!
“Geez, maybe you bong suckers can’t even read anymore.”
Cap’n, it’s only hypocrisy if someone ELSE does it!
April 5, 2018 at 11:32 am
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
6
Craig, I insure a respected doctor who is contracted with the county jail to treat the prisoners. He said that a large percentage of prisoners are being treated for the effects of Marijuana abuse, Meth, Cocaine, Heroine. They all got started on Marijuana and many graduated to the more serious drugs. That is the main reason they are in jail, because they commit crimes to get that next fix. Yes, he has seen some Scromiting cases and the only treatment is to go cold turkey and hope they pull out of it, but is not hopeful on that score.
is someone who uses marijuana to legitimately treat pain after they’ve tried every option they could find to no avail, or someone with cancer who uses marijuana to help counteract the side effects of chemo a “pothead”?
Is someone who used it 20+ years ago then lost interest in it but doesn’t have a problem with anyone else smoking pot responsibly because it’s no worse than alcohol or other other legal substances a “pothead”?
In my experience, maybe so and maybe not. In the case of the Insurance Journal, most of the pro-pot crowd gave up thinking a long time ago.
You can be pro-pot and see the downsides and limitations.
You can be anti-pot and see the legitimate uses.
But anyone failing to see how limited the science is so far supporting medical uses of marijuana – including this silly article – well, you make the call.
“In their analysis, they found that the use of prescription pain drugs fell SIGNIFICANTLY after a medical marijuana law went into effect.” (emphasis mine)
Good news. Fewer deaths, fewer Federal dollars being spent, more freedom. Win-win-win.
Get this plant off the Federal Schedule so that it can be researched properly and utilized to its fullest potential.
Here is another possibility: concurrence with out correlation.
It is very possible within the statistical scenario described that people who used to go to their doctor whining to get pain treatment the never needed just stay home and get stoned instead.
And if that is the case, here is a very simple solution: tell doctors to quit prescribing Opiods like candy in every state. THAT would reduce deaths everywhere without having to listen to silly arguments about the “Federal Schedule” blah blah blah.
Here is a funny thought: if marijuana research has been so restricted by the Feds. as all the pot-boys say, then the downsides of marijuana haven’t been studied either . . . Oh Oh!
That is not what the other side says. You should attempt to listen instead of demean and dimish what we say. There has been research into this field, but if can be improved by removing this drug from the schedule 1 list.
(I’m not answering for helpingout, this is my belief) Proper scientific research would cover positive and negative impacts of a substance over both the short-term and longer-term time frames.
April 4, 2018 at 5:04 pm
helpingout says:
Like or Dislike:
10
1
Of course it can be studied. The substance as a whole should be studied for the overall effects of it. They should study scromiting and figure out if they have found a genetic component that causes this to happen to those rare people. Your notion that the pro side only wants to study positive benefits is illogical, because scientific research uncovers benefits and negatives of substances.
I apologize for missing two key strokes agent. Diminish, but even though it was similar it appears you want to play these childish games and discredit me as being high. Are you so immature that you cannot argue with facts rather than attacking my personal character and what I do in my free time. I have already stated that I do not partake. I do not call you out for your grammar mistakes, but I can start if you believe it is helpful and that is why you decided to let me know. If not, please have an actual rebuttal and not personal attacks.
April 5, 2018 at 9:07 am
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
7
0
Agent,
If you want to play grammar police so badly, look no further than Tramp’s daily tweets. You know the guy, he’s your hero. You’re welcome for the direction and happy to help!
Perhaps you should proofread before hitting the post button.
April 5, 2018 at 11:45 am
confused says:
Like or Dislike:
7
0
“Perhaps you should proofread before hitting the post button.”
says the guy who JUST posted that people are addicted to heroine
April 4, 2018 at 7:31 pm
CCC says:
Like or Dislike:
4
1
Craig Cornell: I disagree that arguments about the “Federal Schedule” are silly. Schedule 1 drugs are so restricted that meaningful research can be difficult. It’s the MAIN reason this article has be based on statistics rather than actual scientific research.
From the article: “The 2017 NAS report is ‘quite good evidence that cannabis is useful and, of course, what this implies is that a fine reading of the Controlled Substances Act would reschedule cannabis away from Schedule 1 and then to probably a 3 or a 4.'”
Once the schedule is changed the real research can be done. Then you will know the actual benefits AND dangers of this plant, rather than having to rely on anecdotal evidence. Also, California will know what to put on the warning labels. Lol.
Stop being reasonable and respectful. You might get attacked.
I don’t disagree with your points. Fine with me.
But to hear people claim the glories of marijuana no matter what the subject matter is absurd and sad. I know it has some uses that are very good (some MS patients, nausea relief for chemotherapy . . .). But is also has many legitimate downsides.
I find it sad/laughable that all the people demanding more research because of what we might find don’t recognize we might find more bad than good when all is known.
Instead, the constant “Refer Madness” attacks on me whenever I point out the dangers. And the dangers are real and largely buried by the media in order to support “the agenda”. That’s not my opinion; that’s the opinion of mental health workers and those who work in rehabilitation. Those experts are very sad that the dangers are disregarded; real people are hurt every day in the ignorance.
Warbling Craig says… But is also has many legitimate downsides.
Have you heard the disclaimers on TV commercials for APPROVED drugs, developed and marketed by BigPharma? Many of them end with “….including death”. Please. To judge the potential of cannabis by your “legitimate downsides” boogyman is preposterous. Wise up.
April 5, 2018 at 11:36 am
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
9
Boring, we have already wised up. Time for you to do so.
Who is this “we” you speak of? Could it be your little cabal of nattering nabobs of negativism, or maybe it’s the guys in your echo chamber of flat earthers and last-to-be-picked in dodge ball. Either way, you go right ahead enjoying your better life through chemistry. Just watch out for the side effects which include headache, nausea, vomiting, dizziness, dysentery, cardiac arrhythmia, varicose veins, mild rash and even death. I’ll be sure to stay off your lawn next time, old man.
I read your posts twice to try to find an idea in there. The only one I found goes like this:
“pharmaceuticals have side effects. Marijuana does not except for preposterous boogeyman.”
Craig,
your post is the perfect example of you misleading people based on what someone said. He is pointing out that the pharmaceutical drugs can have severe side effects and then they listed a few. They never brought up the notion that cannabis is completely harmless, because that is false. Again you attempted to mislead people, it is not an insult, it is a tactic you use to enhance your ideas. It is not an insult, but you should not care if it is one or not. You have constantly insulted me and others on this site with actual digs such as being “immature brats” among other things.
I didn’t connect pharmaceuticals to pot. He did. Not sure what the connection is, except to make pot look less harmful by comparison I guess.
Hey, pot is less harmful than radioactivity too!
Bogeyman!
April 5, 2018 at 5:17 pm
Craig Cornell says:
Like or Dislike:
1
3
Never, ever did I call you an “immature brat”. Truly. Must have been someone else.
April 6, 2018 at 11:51 am
helpingout says:
Like or Dislike:
4
0
Craig,
It is completely reasonable to compare medicinal cannabis to pharmaceuticals, because they sometimes can be prescribed for similar symptoms. He was pointing out that the side effect of those substances can be equal too if not worse than medicinal cannabis. If you do not understand this comparison you should not be debating the topic at hand. I do recall you saying that to me when we first debated on an IJ article, but oh well.
April 5, 2018 at 2:28 pm
UboreMe says:
Like or Dislike:
6
0
Craig. C’mon man. YOU are treating this cannabis thing in your Henny Penny voice as: “There are legitimate downsides! There are legitimate downsides!” and I am treating this cannabis thing as “ya, there are lotsa legitimate downsides in life, especially with FDA approved big pharma chems that have million dollar ad campaigns. Pick your own poison, but I like mother nature in this one. Now, could you and Agent please stop being legitimate downsides to this otherwise lovely IJ forum? In return, I’ll be sure to write to a Flesch reading ease score of 100 just for you.
These were comments about an article on Marijuana.
What did you think it was?
Not sure you have a point. “Big Pharma must warn us, but marijuana growers don’t have to. Therefore, marijuana is safer.”?
There are no warnings on whiskey bottles about driving drunk either.
But booze has been around forever and legal pot is brand new. If you think everyone knows the downsides, you aren’t being honest.
April 5, 2018 at 3:45 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
6
0
Craig – you may want to rethink your argument here. You said “There are no warnings on whiskey bottles about driving drunk either.” That is just straight-up false. The Alcoholic Beverage Labeling Act requires the labels of alcoholic beverages carry a government warning.
The warning reads:
GOVERNMENT WARNING:
(1) According to the Surgeon General, women should not drink alcoholic beverages during pregnancy because of the risk of birth defects.
(2) Consumption of alcoholic beverages impairs your ability to drive a car or operate machinery, and may cause health problems.
April 5, 2018 at 3:49 pm
UboreMe says:
Like or Dislike:
5
0
Dear God…you still miss the point. Which was (last time for the remedial course) that the downsides (your word) are certainly no worse than the stuff that the FDA has approved. Nothing about warning or not. Look, I don’t know if you live in one of the legal marijuana states or just flapping your ill informed gums from somewhere else, but if you took the time to check you’d find that in every state that has allowed it, the laws are very protective of the buying public. Never said it was “safer” but plant based beats lab based in my book.
::But booze has been around forever and legal pot is brand new.::
The “legal” part might be new but the “pot” part is NOT. Cannabis use pre-dates Jesus Christ by 3000 years and pre-dates booze as well. And are you familiar with the concept of “personal responsibility” or have you abdicated responsibility to the government?
Now if you don’t mind, I’m taking my own advice: Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.
April 5, 2018 at 4:16 pm
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
6
0
Actually everyone, legal pot is not new. It was outright prohibited in the 1920’s. By the 1930’s, it was regulated as a “drug” in all states. Before then, it was legal for medicinal, recreational, and industrial uses. There Craig goes misleading again.
April 5, 2018 at 4:09 pm
Craig Cornell says:
Like or Dislike:
0
5
On the one hand, pot-lovers tell me marijuana has been around forever, so it is super-duper tested and safe and cool, especially compared to evil pharmeceuticals.
On the other hand, they tell me the evil Federal Government won’t let pot get tested for more super medical live saving purposes we haven’t yet learned about yet.
So, if pot hasn’t been tested, how do we know how safe it really is? What if all the pot smokers find out in 30 years that they damaged their brains/emotions/life with false notions of safety that science later refuted, once the evil Federal Government got out of the way?
Oh, never mind. Just smoke away as much as you like. Sleep tight and give to your kids. After all, it’s natural and proven safe over thousands of years.
1) There is not 1 comment in the 70+ posts here where anyone advocating for medicinal or recreational marijuana has claimed it is 100% safe and has no downsides. You stating that as fact is disingenuous at best and a blatant lie at worst.
2) If you want to know what happens to SOME marijuana smokers after 30 years, talk to adults who have continued to use marijuana since the 60’s. Wait – 1969 was 49 years ago! Okay, talk to someone who used in the 80’s and still does, since 1989 was 29 years ago.
I didn’t say anyone said it was “100% safe”. I said it was safer than pharmaceuticals, according to UBoreMe.
Comparing is to pharmaceuticals, which is not what I did but someone
else did, clearly is intended to make the claim pot is safer than pharmaceuticals.
Otherwise, what is the point? Right?
And just cause you can find a pothead from 30 years ago does not mean that ALL potheads in the future will be just fine, thank you. Scientific knowledge – you may know – tends to advance into the future. And pot is much stronger than 30 years ago (unless you think I made that up too).
I said there were downsides. So what’s the problem if everyone agrees with me that there
are downsides?
(Maybe science will find that pot destroys the capacity for logic.)
“1) There is not 1 comment in the 70+ posts here where anyone advocating for medicinal or recreational marijuana has claimed it is 100% safe and has no downsides. You stating that as fact is disingenuous at best and a blatant lie at worst.”
Actually, on something which could be harmful, it’s not disingenuous nor a lie. It’s a piece of consideration, and there are many pot smokers who state what he commented regarding.
“2) If you want to know what happens to SOME marijuana smokers after 30 years, talk to adults who have continued to use marijuana since the 60’s. Wait – 1969 was 49 years ago! Okay, talk to someone who used in the 80’s and still does, since 1989 was 29 years ago.
Wait 30 years to find out if we should regulate pot? And let’s just take a chance in the meantime, and think people will use it responsibly when legalized, and not while driving etc in ways that could cause harm.
I think we should have waited 30 years for any action on LSD. Do you agree?
“and there are many pot smokers who state what he commented regarding.” I’m sure there are, but I said “There is not 1 comment in the 70+ posts here…” I’m only speaking to what’s been posted here.
“Wait 30 years to find out if we should regulate pot?” This comment is misdirected to me. I did not make that argument, Craig said “What if all the pot smokers find out in 30 years that they damaged….” His time frame – his argument.
Some of the people on here are just ridiculous. You are wasting your time. They live in a different world, sheltered and closed out from the rest. They can travel 1000 miles and never leave their inner circle. They refuse to believe anything that breaks their norms – Climate Change, Medical Marijuana is not reefer madness, ect.
They will change their argument to suit their needs and continuously attack you.
You can’t argue with stupid. They just drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
April 6, 2018 at 12:37 pm
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
6
0
Yes,
What do you expect, right? They are all getting their marching orders from Faux Newz and Sinclair Broadcast Group.
April 6, 2018 at 6:09 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
3
0
Get ready to have the definitions and debate changed on you Rosenblatt, if you aren’t accused of debating the wrong way!
I’ll break my boycott real quickly. Hey Bob, remember when you said Trump didn’t want to kill the family members of terrorists and then said I was a liar for citing him, and then threatened me with physical violence? Whoops, wrong again although that was pretty clearly just an attempt to pretend Trump and his supporters were respectable.
h ttps://www.google.com/amp/amp.nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/04/trump-asked-why-cia-drone-avoided-terrorists-family-report.html
April 6, 2018 at 1:32 pm
FFA says:
Like or Dislike:
4
0
There is enough evidence to suggest that there are MEDICAL benefits. Of course there are side effects, there are side effects to everything. Just watch a drug commercial on TV. 5 seconds of benefits and 25 seconds of side effects.
What works for me may not work for you. If it works for me, then why not let me have it? One way or another, Im gonna get it.
Where did you come up with that from? My statement does not imply anything other then what it says. A simple truth that you already know.
Gonna have to look elsewhere for your daily argument.
Truthfully, I have no idea what your comment meant.
Are there medical benefits to CBDs? No one is doubting that. But the benefits are quite limited based on current science. Anyone who denies that is just ignorant or lying.
Are you referring to something specific? Nothing is mentioned, so how would I know.
Referencing side effects of pharmaceuticals in your comment would lead anyone to compare it to marijuana, since this is an article on marijuana.
A legitimate question has to do with availability over-the-counter. Just because
a pharmaceutical works doesn’t mean it should be over-the-counter, and the same applies to marijuana in my opinion.
So, I was making a legitimate point based on your comment, which was vague in the least.
Explanation is simple. Needs more research.
At this point, with what knowledge is available, I support the call for Medical Use as I have personally seen the benefits over the narcotics in my daily life. I Disagree with Agent.
I have also seen the negative effects of recreational use over a period of years – back to the 70’s. Too many of my high schoolmates went on to use harder drugs. Acid. Coke. Heroine. Mushrooms. Too many have od’d, cutting their life too short. In my life time, in my personal experience, I have come to the conclusion that the gateway effect is real and should not be discredited or ignored. I agree with Agent 100% (more if possible) on this issue. For you folks that discredit the theory, your wrong. Its real.
I’m vague because I have seen the plusses and minuses of it. I’m vague because on one hand, its great, on the other hand, not so much. The O’le Ben Franklin (yes, I use that all the time) isn’t working for me on this subject.
BTW, I would rather buy it from a pharmacist then some guy in an over coat say “PSSS, Hey Buddy, Over here”. Im sure everyone can agree with that.
April 6, 2018 at 2:08 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
4
0
I would suggest you stop making Straw Man Arguments and ask folks for clarification on what they meant. I’m not FFA, but I’m 99.999999% sure he wasn’t advocating for all drugs to be sold over the counter. In fact, I didn’t infer he was even arguing that medicinal marijuana alone should be an over the counter purchase.
Turns out, he later says he would rather buy marijuana from a pharmacist. So now we both know what he meant in the first place.
Guess what? I couldn’t agree more. “Recreational” marijuana will damage many people, just like FFA points out. (Can’t wait for you all to attack him for saying that.)
Out here in California, we first legalized “medical” marijuana by putting it not in pharmacies but in so-called “Medical Marijuana Clinics” run by potheads(not pharmacists). And every high school kid knew he could make a phony Medical Marijuana Card and go get some pot.
Now whose brilliant idea was that? No bonus points for the answer.
I don’t get attacked because I don’t attack. You have your opinion and I have mine. Its ok to agree to disagree. Everyone here seems to know that about me.
Come your judgment day, I wont be around. What ever happens – good bad or indifferent- thats on you.
April 6, 2018 at 2:26 pm
helpingout says:
Like or Dislike:
4
0
Craig,
If you do not want me to insult you by saying you mislead people, stop misleading people. You have done it yet again. Stop attempting to twist others words to attempt to inflate your points. If you mislead others, you lose credibility.
Re-read it again: it was a QUESTION. A legitimate question.
He could have answered yes or no. He didn’t. But I had to ask him again to explain himself.
Try thinking. You accuse me of misleading people over an over. What the hell are you even talking about?
No where in his post did he insinuate this. It was you who asked about a scenario no one brought up. Why should those be over the counter? They should not be, just like cannabis should be at a dispensary. “Try thinking” I believe you said. You should follow your advice.
April 6, 2018 at 2:28 pm
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
2
0
MARCH 14, 2018 AT 6:22 PM
Craig Cornell says:
LIKE OR DISLIKE:
0
0
While trying to teach a fish to do math is pointless . . .
I know this is getting pretty heady for you, but give thinking a try . . .
I’ve seen enough of your comments to know that you and your wife have been in more pain than you should be. If marijuana gives you any kind of relief, I have absolutely no problem with you using it. You do not deserve to be in such pain. Best of luck to you.
I’d like to workshop on Sal & Planet’s sentiments (although I’m sure I’ve said it to you in the past) … I am very sorry to hear about your and your wife’s situation and the pain, both mental & physical, it’s caused in your lives. No matter what any of our differences may be on any topic (meant generically – not just specific to you), I never wish anyone or their loved ones any pain or hardships.
I just dont do a lot on here any more because the arguments just aren’t worth the time. Everyone has an opinion which I do respect – you are entitled to that much. I don’t insult people and as a result, I don’t get insulted. (Imaging that). But the name calling. The twisting of words. People like Craig make me go away for long stretches. I expected comments like – “NO Kidding”. “Come up with something that hasn’t been said over and over again”.
I got a pretty good laugh out of Craigs response. So, maybe Ill be back sooner rather then later.
you’re a good man, FFA…wish you’d stick around. we need more posters like you around here. It shows that we can sometimes disagree but still treat each other like professionals. I wish you absolutely nothing but the best.
FFA, we have been blog buddies for a long time. However, you should realize that Craig, Polar and I are Conservatives and we get demeaned, insulted and down voted ad nauseum on this forum. They would rather try to take away our 1st Amendment rights and see us go away. After the last election, it has gotten worse and IJ continues to publish Progressive stories and promote weed as the answer. Sorry, that will not fly with Conservatives. They can Scromit all they want. I couldn’t care less.
NOBODY has ever convinced anyone that their side was right by insulting them. FFA is also a conservative but has never attacked or insulted anyone, just voices his opinion respectfully. It’s not a question of free speech, it’s a question of civility.
Neither you, Craig, or PolarEtc are victims here, and people who disagree with you are not your enemies. You have a tremendous wealth of insurance knowledge, which I’ve always respected. Use it for good.
Yes agent. We have a lot in common with our views, experience in the biz and the struggles with pain with the ones we care the most about. Im at the point where I will try anything to eliminate my wife’s struggles. Small amounts of Marijuana seem to help when the pain is starting to come on. Once the pain is there, all she can do is ride it out. .
I do appreciate all the well wishers no matter what side of what ever argument you are on. I am at the “In Sickness” part of the vows rolling up on 20 years. . .
I hope no one else ever has to go through a Diabetes / Fibromyalgia / Degenerative Disc Disease combo diagnosis. Mix in a Thyroid issue and you have my life.
Never fun watching someone / anyone crying in pain and be completely helpless. Pot does help sometimes but not always. There is no real rhyme or reason as to why it helps today, but not yesterday. No clear cut definable pattern.
Was very discouraging when the PT sent her home after three visits stating its not helping.
Wisc is working on Med Marijuana so at the very least I’ll be able to get it in a safer environment. Maybe this new doc will come up with something.
One more thing….GO CUBBIES! They spanked the hell out of Milwaukee last night.
So it’s better for people to be pot-heads rather than pill-heads? How about sobering these people up so they can live happy productive lives? Any human being who is enslaved to any intoxicating substance (pills, weed, alcohol, etc.) deserves a chance to live a better life. Rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic does not work.
Ive been through narcotics and steroids and pot. The least of the “side effects” has been pot. Again, what works for me may not work for you. You may not experience the roid rage like I have. You may be better off on Narcotics and not have the extreme mood swings.
And no, she don’t like getting stoned. when she does it, its very little just to take the edge off the pain.
So, to answer your question, IN MY CASE, yes it is.
Alternative rehabilitation drug therapy is a viable means of hard drug addiction avoidance. AA has failed miserably on the whole with a less than 12% success rate and the religious bent is a big turnoff for many.
“So let’s legalize more substances that can get people addicted. Like marijuana!”
Love the logic.
PS It is called Alcoholics ANONYMOUS. People don’t have to report on their own
results to anyone. Your 12% number is impossible to prove or disprove.
Are you counting people who drop out in the first month? 6 months?
As a Florida MMJ patient from a rural area, 46, having smoked marijuana most of my adult life, I would like to point out that even legal CBD alternatives are not paid for by insurers. This is just as big a part of the problem. I completely agree that marijuana should be rescheduled, and not to point out the obvious, but being able to produce your own cannabis should be something the insurance industry considers. Not only do you reduce opioid use and prescriptions, ideally the cost of one’s medication could be effectively zero but for energy and water/fertilizer. I’m sure there are plenty of pharmaceutical companies who would like me to suffer some pain for this idea… but if we just substituted nicotine for marijuana as a schedule 1 drug, and removed marijuana from the schedule altogether… President Trump would score another victory in the court of public opinion against both cigarette smoker Barack Obama, and an evil industry that murders half a million people every year. Plus, bonus, all those people who can’t quit smoking? You don’t really think they’ll hit the black market, do you? NO! Then they’d be hypocrites for thinking they were better than those dirty pot smokers!
Hi, Neil. Just a note to let you know that not all Christians are against you. I hope you can get the meds that work for you, legally and easily. If not, we know why…$$$.
Neil,
I agree with pretty much everything you said. But, good luck with getting today’s Supply Side Jesus Evanjihad Christian conservative, including those who fake it like Tramp, to agree with you. There are some out here who think marijuana is the same as heroin. In some cases, one poster in particular believes it’s like heroine, and I have no idea what women heroes have to do with this discussion. At any rate, I hope it’s working well for you and once we get Sessions and Tramp out of there, I bet we all see steps towards the direction you are hoping to see. Just a matter of when. Keep the faith, Neil! And, if this is a serious issue for you, understand Tramp is not on your side on this one and never will be.
Captain Planet, is insulting all Evangelical Christians–like myself–necessary? Your comments are inflammatory and anti-intellectual. Assuming that every evangelical Christian supports Trump and opposes medical marijuana is completely asinine. You are not even attempting to dialogue, but running a fool’s errand to needlessly offend.
Augustine – are you grouping yourself into the evanjihad? There is a difference between them and evangelical Christians. I am a Christian, but I don’t go around throwing my religious belief system onto others. And, I have plenty of conservative friends who support marijuana. It sounds like you might be in that camp, that’s fantastic! I will not apologize for not having respect for any man who has confessed to and behaves like Tramp, though. I don’t hate him, I simply do not respect him as a person. I teach my daughters better and to watch out for guys like him.
Agent,
I am perfectly fine. I have been for years and it continues. Then again, I meet the demographic Tramp wants to protect. I am simply advocating for those who didn’t win the lucky sperm contest. Good to see you believe in polls again – funny how that works! The wonderful world of hypocrisy – you can have it. I wouldn’t ever want to live there.
Neither this President or the prior will touch the criminal designations concerning marijuana as they both were bought & owned by Big Pharma before they ever took office & of course it is all perfectly legal{meaning campaign contributions}.
Don’t forget about the prison lobbyists who have a significant financial stake with ensuring people continue to get incarcerated for even minor possession of the stuff!
Our President took no money from special interests so they couldn’t influence him. In fact, he has come down hard on Big Pharma.
Big Pharma – is that the name of the next porn star to reveal herself?
‘Big Pharma’ is the street name for large (capital volume) pharmaceutical conglomerates.
StorMonica, wasn’t that a great picture of Andrew on this story? Looked a lot like a Recreational guy, not a medicinal guy.
are you and Agent ok with medicinal marijuana now?
Agent–did you seriously just insult Andrew? That’s like being invited to a party and spitting on the floor…you shouldn’t be shocked when you don’t get asked back.
Not really true Agent, like literally everything you have ever written here that can be fact checked. Trump had significant spending from the Republican Party which gets all their money from outside sources. He also received help from Russia, including financially through their spending on campaigning. He hasn’t come down hard on pharma at all, but since your cited it as fact I’m sure you will provide a source, right?
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
“When people pay out of pocket, hospitals and clinics charge them less than insured patients.”
I’ve never found that to be true. In fact, I’ve only seen hospitals charge MORE to uninsured patients because (a) they already have negotiated reduced rates with health insurance carriers instead of charging the full initial billed amount and (b) they have no incentive to negotiate with the patient as unpaid medical bills can be sent to collections where wages can ultimately be garnished.
As for your argument regarding the lack of scientists touting medicinal marijuana, that’s because (1) Schedule 1 drugs have crazy registrations and application requirements which make legitimate research difficult and, in many cases, nearly impossible, as well as (2) a lack of supply for testing since the only marijuana federally approved for studies comes from a single lab at the University of Mississippi.
I totally agree Rosenblatt. My sister had back surgery but she was uninsured; bills were in excess of $50k. An insured friend had similar surgery; the insurance company was billed as much but with negotiated fees they paid a fraction of the $50k. But I have seen, if you have cash in hand, hospitals will charge you the negotiated rates.
You just confirmed in reality with the point I made about negotiating from a position of strength when you are uninsured . . . and then said the exact opposite.
Here is the reality: hospitals are required by law to treat all comers. But when that person has no insurance, the hospital is desperate to get any payment, a terrible negotiating position to be in. Anyone failing to take advantage just failed to take advantage.
And everyone knows the Minute Clinics at CVS and Walmart are cheap, cheap, cheap. In fact, they were shown to have a large impact on medical costs in America – all for the good.
the uninsured person is arguing from the position of strength? you seriously don’t think the hospital — which can threaten a lawsuit or sending the bill to collections and ruining someone’s credit — has the position of strength in this negotiation?
Medical bills are impeccably easy to remove from your history, and the majority of the time if you simply wait for the bill to go to collections, the new company who picked it up will settle the debt at half the cost (unless it’s a clinic, most clinics have far more aggressive collectors that are basically extensions of themselves and they do not sell the debt) and then you have it removed from your credit history.
If they don’t realize the position of strength they have, they are just stupid.
I’ve removed three collections bills from my credit which were honest mistakes from when I had my kids and didn’t realize which were paid and were not.
I didn’t even know how easy it was. I called each of the three on my report, and basically said: If I pay these in full will you remove them from my credit? Because I saw it online. Each of the three did, and not only that, it was so heavily discounted I couldn’t believe it. Medical collectors also never harassed me (maybe I god lucky) or my wife who also had 3 from her past which the collection agencies settled as well and removed from her credit. There is only one local company I’ve ever had problems with on that, and it is basically someone who is hired on to collect debt rather than buying it.
The Hospital is not in a position of power on collecting debt, and they cannot destroy the lives of people who end up not paying.
Confused I can really tell you are not experienced on this matter, so don’t talk form a point of virtue signaling rather than experience.
“Each of the three did, and not only that, it was so heavily discounted I couldn’t believe it. Medical collectors also never harassed me (maybe I god lucky) ”
And I didn’t even ask to have it discounted by the way.
I just wanted it off my credit. These 3 bills were $2,200. They settled it for just over $1,000.
It’s Armada around here locally who is tough to deal with, I had more than 3 collections, it’s just I honestly missed 3, and the other ones I didn’t pay on time and was irresponsible. Armada made one hell of a fight of it, but they did remove it. They didn’t want to pay to delete, they said it’s dishonest and should be on my report, and plus it could create an ethical bad standard for their collection habits. I then said essentially a sob story (which was true and would be for anyone in a bad position who had collection bills, rather than just being stupid) that I had more than 45 hospital bills in 5 years totaling well over $10,000 dollars. It was hard to track who to pay, and hard to afford when my wife got out of work, and day care became unaffordable, and I lost her income. They approved it on that basis.
Really. The position of power is certainly in those who are not insured’s court.
Here I am having had over $10,000 in medical debt over 5 years, having paid it off for just under $5,000, and I have nothing on my record. That’s not including my wife. She had about $3,000. Nothing on her record either.
This is also why I don’t like the ACA by the way.
The ACA doesn’t teach you to shop around. I didn’t notice or think about my insurance for years. The issue was when I got sick and went to the doctor, for what should have been a $40 co pay, they kept on using the code as a special visit. This last year when I had the flu and went in twice? Yeah, special visits, I paid about $600 dollars for it. Including my kids flu visits it went to $1,200.
All I had to do was do exactly what Craig pointed out above: I found a local CVC which has basic clinic abilities, and if I feel sick I go to that, if the kids aren’t feeling well, I go there. No more $1,200 bills.
Hospitals do have a serious problem, and Craig is correct.
You speak like you know what you’re talking about and I can tell you have zero experience in it. It’s time to listen and learn, not to be a stubborn know it all virtue signaling type of talk guy.
Being uninsured and having cash in hand are two totally different things. If you can afford to pay up front they will give the insurance negotiated rates. If you have no financial means they stick it to you hoping you will pay something; they know it will go to collections anyway. It doesn’t make sense but I have seen it time and time again.
Thank you, Chris. That’s exactly what I was talking about and what I’ve seen too
So you agree with me: the science on marijuana is in it the most preliminary form.
You can blame whoever you want, but you just confirmed my point.
And if you don’t think uninsured people can negotiate great deals, tell your hospital you are uninsured the next time you have a large bill and see if you can negotiate half off. That is the usual response.
Sir, you just moved the goalposts from “lots and lots of LIBERAL scientists would be hailing the glories of pot from the rooftop [if marijuana had medical benefits]” to “we don’t know if it has medical benefits” – that’s not the same argument, and I do not agree with your original statement.
And clearly I have personal experience attempting to negotiate bills for uninsured patients directly with hospitals (which is why I wrote “I’ve never found that to be true. In fact, I’ve only seen hospitals charge…”)
Even using terms like “Usual and Customary Rates” and “this is the wrong ICD code for this line item, so the invoice amount isn’t correct” was utterly useless.
EVERY time, their response was “that’s the billed amount, that’s what the patient owes. Either they pay it in full, they get put on a payment plan, or we’ll send them to collections. We’re not negotiating.”
This is getting exhausting. The two things I said are EXACTLY the same point.
We don’t know crap about the supposed medical benefits of marijuana and that is also the reason liberal scientists ARE NOT screaming from the rooftops about the medical benefits of marijuana. Geez.
Pro Tip: don’t post a condescending reply telling someone they agree with you if you have no interest in hearing them explain their stance on the topic you raised.
Did you ever figure out the name of the author or the byline or get a link to that WSJ story we kind of talked about yesterday? https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2018/04/02/484992.htm/?comments
‘Lots and lots’ is exactly how many? And, why does – in your mind – that threshold of approval imply ‘recrea-pot’ should be legalized?
Yogi, why don’t you ask Craig that question?
APRIL 4, 2018 AT 11:18 AM
Craig Cornell says:
POORLY-RATED. LIKE OR DISLIKE:
Thumb up 2Thumb down 13
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Clearly, you guys are smoking too much ganja. There is a lot of competition in the health care world, largely in the world of the uninsured. When people pay out of pocket, hospitals and clinics charge them less than insured patients.
If Marijuana was the miracle drug everyone claims it to be, lots and lots of LIBERAL scientists would be hailing the glories of pot from the rooftop. And Walmart and CVS and all the new competitors in health care that are scaring the big insurance companies to death would be pushing to offer it to lower costs.
“And clearly I have personal experience attempting to negotiate bills for uninsured patients directly with hospitals (which is why I wrote “I’ve never found that to be true. In fact, I’ve only seen hospitals charge…”)”
Oh really?
If they were uninsured, how were they your client for you to negotiate on their behalf? You are talking as if you do this as part of a job, which would be impossible to occur on a regular basis if you happen to write medical (as this would be before people got insurance with you, so you’re telling me that the standard insurance policy is to negotiate bills for people they don’t insure? I call B.S.) or, you tried to help a few friends and were familiar with code due to being an insurance agent, which is the more likely, and you did not explain that very well to that scenario, possibly intentionally.
As for what you’re talking about:
I’m pretty darn familiar with coding issues, and yes, bad clinics will say this is what it’s coded at, we aren’t changing it, and send the bill to collections. In fact, the clinic I go to has horrible reviews for this, I just mentioned that I ended up paying $1,200 for flu visits.
But what else did I mention? I negotiated it off. And If I had told Armada that they weren’t coded right, and reported that with any bit of evidence to a credit company, it would be easy to remove from the credit report. The main topic at hand isn’t even directed by my commentary because of how much you derailed. Pretty much all of what I said doesn’t even matter.
You moved the goal post. You moved the topic of debate. His slight wording difference didn’t move the topic of debate. YOU DID.
I will keep this brief as it’s Friday and you’ve played your hand of “make shotgun arguments, then never reply again” so many times it’s clearly part of your M.O. That said….
I had my friends sign a POA so I could negotiate on their behalf, having nothing to do with who their carrier/agent is or if they are or aren’t uninsured.
They’re my friends who don’t work in the industry and don’t know what an ICD-9 code is or what “reasonable and customary rates” mean, so I tried to help them out.
You wrote “bad clinics will say this is what it’s coded at, we aren’t changing it, and send the bill to collections”
Thank you for supporting my argument. Bad clinics, of which there are many, have no interest in negotiating bills even when there are clear technical errors. You seem to be arguing against my position yet simultaneously acknowledging what I said is accurate.
“Pretty much all of what I said doesn’t even matter.” They why did you even bother writing it? Shotgun arguments much? Please try sticking to the points that matter rather than saying a bunch of self-acknowledged irrelevant fluff.
Wait Rosenblatt haven’t you heard, when he spews nonsense, gets destroyed and then leaves it’s because he’s too smart to even address what you’ve said and even if the facts don’t got they are then changed, resulting in you getting owned.
As expected, Shotgun Bob is nowhere to be found on this thread anymore. Modus Operandi confirmed.
Wrong yet again. Hospitals often negotiate with uninsured patients.
Hey, that’s what I said. For once, we agree!
(Maybe you want to correct yourself to disagree with me instead . . .)
My bad – I got so used to attacks it was a knee jerk reaction. Sorry.
Craig, I am a friend and agree with you, but I see the down voting Recreational boys are after you on every post. So be it. I couldn’t care less. They are all high as we speak and spout nonsense.
These pot stories on IJ certainly draws a vociferous crowd of stoners to the comment pages, to down vote or to actually attempt to defend use of recrea-pot and to legalize it, despite what the public opinion polls say and what the Federals Laws mandate regardless of what a few misguided state legislatures have enacted.
Tax Cuts 4 says: “…actually attempt to defend use of recrea-pot and to legalize it, despite what the public opinion polls say…”
Remind me, what DO the American public opinion polls say regarding the legalization of marijuana?
So your default is to disagree and argue without reading or thinking about the preceding comments. That explains a lot.
Ah, yes. On cue, it’s Craig! here to save the day with wit and wisdom.
Craig,
I also highly disagree with you assertion that the use is limited and as you put it that is backed up by “the most recent science”. I disagree because the most recent science has advocated toward the notion that along with the plethora of benefits that can be achieved through different types of Cannabis there are negative side effects that can develop with certain people. They did say that Cannabis, especially the CBD version, has even more benefits with even less negatives. They would like to study it more, but it is extremely hard with the it still being a scheduled one drug. Please stop spouting off your opinions as facts because you had a bad experience (which I don’t know since you mislead people about yourself frequently) when the science does not support your notions from either side.
Did you even read the article? It is preliminary research based on, wait for it, statistics.
Meaning NOT scientific research. Nobody has any idea yet if marijuana can replace opioids, a laughable proposition for many doctors who know that opioids are properly used for severe pain where CBDs would be an aspirin by comparison.
Geez, maybe you bong suckers can’t even read anymore.
Before you spout insults – generating a similar response from me – try sticking to fact.
Did you reread your post that I replied to where you where the one who brought up the science aspect which I was referring to. You are the immature one who also diminishes the other sides point to being “bong suckers” without knowing if I partake or not. Which I do not, but it should be a personal freedom to choose this as I and many others have stated multiple times. I never insulted you, but I challenged your attempt to dilute facts with opinions.
You said I mislead people. That is an insult to most normal people.
DECEMBER 29, 2017 AT 3:32 PM
Agent says:
LIKE OR DISLIKE:
0
1
You need the insult
Craig,
I do not know how many people think this is an insult, when it is commonly used as a tactic for adults. I apologize that by identifying the tactic you use came across as an insult. I was again pointing out the way you debate on here frequently.
Craig says, “Before you spout insults – generating a similar response from me – try sticking to fact.”
RIGHT AFTER HE SAID THIS ABOUT OTHER POSTERS!!!
“Geez, maybe you bong suckers can’t even read anymore.”
Do you hypocrites even hear yourselves think?
Cap’n, it’s only hypocrisy if someone ELSE does it!
Craig, I insure a respected doctor who is contracted with the county jail to treat the prisoners. He said that a large percentage of prisoners are being treated for the effects of Marijuana abuse, Meth, Cocaine, Heroine. They all got started on Marijuana and many graduated to the more serious drugs. That is the main reason they are in jail, because they commit crimes to get that next fix. Yes, he has seen some Scromiting cases and the only treatment is to go cold turkey and hope they pull out of it, but is not hopeful on that score.
They are being treated because of female protagonists? GET OUT!
Wow, rwll that to physicists.
MARCH 23, 2018 AT 3:08 PM
Craig Cornell says:
LIKE OR DISLIKE:
4
11
What I said is true, undeniably so.
If you don’t know the facts, I can’t help you.
You fashion yourself a fair-minded person. Then tell the truth.
You’re not adding anything but din to the discussion.
• MARCH 23, 2018 AT 3:13 PM
Craig Cornell says:
LIKE OR DISLIKE:
1
4
Your bias is showing.
Whats the Under Over on how many comments for vs against?
3-5 against, the rest for.
is someone who uses marijuana to legitimately treat pain after they’ve tried every option they could find to no avail, or someone with cancer who uses marijuana to help counteract the side effects of chemo a “pothead”?
Is someone who used it 20+ years ago then lost interest in it but doesn’t have a problem with anyone else smoking pot responsibly because it’s no worse than alcohol or other other legal substances a “pothead”?
In my experience, maybe so and maybe not. In the case of the Insurance Journal, most of the pro-pot crowd gave up thinking a long time ago.
You can be pro-pot and see the downsides and limitations.
You can be anti-pot and see the legitimate uses.
But anyone failing to see how limited the science is so far supporting medical uses of marijuana – including this silly article – well, you make the call.
“In their analysis, they found that the use of prescription pain drugs fell SIGNIFICANTLY after a medical marijuana law went into effect.” (emphasis mine)
Good news. Fewer deaths, fewer Federal dollars being spent, more freedom. Win-win-win.
Get this plant off the Federal Schedule so that it can be researched properly and utilized to its fullest potential.
Here is another possibility: concurrence with out correlation.
It is very possible within the statistical scenario described that people who used to go to their doctor whining to get pain treatment the never needed just stay home and get stoned instead.
And if that is the case, here is a very simple solution: tell doctors to quit prescribing Opiods like candy in every state. THAT would reduce deaths everywhere without having to listen to silly arguments about the “Federal Schedule” blah blah blah.
Here is a funny thought: if marijuana research has been so restricted by the Feds. as all the pot-boys say, then the downsides of marijuana haven’t been studied either . . . Oh Oh!
That is not what the other side says. You should attempt to listen instead of demean and dimish what we say. There has been research into this field, but if can be improved by removing this drug from the schedule 1 list.
Can the research on the dangers of marijuana be improved? Or only what you want to hear?
(I’m not answering for helpingout, this is my belief) Proper scientific research would cover positive and negative impacts of a substance over both the short-term and longer-term time frames.
Of course it can be studied. The substance as a whole should be studied for the overall effects of it. They should study scromiting and figure out if they have found a genetic component that causes this to happen to those rare people. Your notion that the pro side only wants to study positive benefits is illogical, because scientific research uncovers benefits and negatives of substances.
What does dimish mean? Are you high again?
I apologize for missing two key strokes agent. Diminish, but even though it was similar it appears you want to play these childish games and discredit me as being high. Are you so immature that you cannot argue with facts rather than attacking my personal character and what I do in my free time. I have already stated that I do not partake. I do not call you out for your grammar mistakes, but I can start if you believe it is helpful and that is why you decided to let me know. If not, please have an actual rebuttal and not personal attacks.
Agent,
If you want to play grammar police so badly, look no further than Tramp’s daily tweets. You know the guy, he’s your hero. You’re welcome for the direction and happy to help!
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
“Perhaps you should proofread before hitting the post button.”
says the guy who JUST posted that people are addicted to heroine
Craig Cornell: I disagree that arguments about the “Federal Schedule” are silly. Schedule 1 drugs are so restricted that meaningful research can be difficult. It’s the MAIN reason this article has be based on statistics rather than actual scientific research.
From the article: “The 2017 NAS report is ‘quite good evidence that cannabis is useful and, of course, what this implies is that a fine reading of the Controlled Substances Act would reschedule cannabis away from Schedule 1 and then to probably a 3 or a 4.'”
Once the schedule is changed the real research can be done. Then you will know the actual benefits AND dangers of this plant, rather than having to rely on anecdotal evidence. Also, California will know what to put on the warning labels. Lol.
Stop being reasonable and respectful. You might get attacked.
I don’t disagree with your points. Fine with me.
But to hear people claim the glories of marijuana no matter what the subject matter is absurd and sad. I know it has some uses that are very good (some MS patients, nausea relief for chemotherapy . . .). But is also has many legitimate downsides.
I find it sad/laughable that all the people demanding more research because of what we might find don’t recognize we might find more bad than good when all is known.
Instead, the constant “Refer Madness” attacks on me whenever I point out the dangers. And the dangers are real and largely buried by the media in order to support “the agenda”. That’s not my opinion; that’s the opinion of mental health workers and those who work in rehabilitation. Those experts are very sad that the dangers are disregarded; real people are hurt every day in the ignorance.
Warbling Craig says… But is also has many legitimate downsides.
Have you heard the disclaimers on TV commercials for APPROVED drugs, developed and marketed by BigPharma? Many of them end with “….including death”. Please. To judge the potential of cannabis by your “legitimate downsides” boogyman is preposterous. Wise up.
Boring, we have already wised up. Time for you to do so.
Who is this “we” you speak of? Could it be your little cabal of nattering nabobs of negativism, or maybe it’s the guys in your echo chamber of flat earthers and last-to-be-picked in dodge ball. Either way, you go right ahead enjoying your better life through chemistry. Just watch out for the side effects which include headache, nausea, vomiting, dizziness, dysentery, cardiac arrhythmia, varicose veins, mild rash and even death. I’ll be sure to stay off your lawn next time, old man.
I read your posts twice to try to find an idea in there. The only one I found goes like this:
“pharmaceuticals have side effects. Marijuana does not except for preposterous boogeyman.”
Deep Thoughts . . .
Craig,
your post is the perfect example of you misleading people based on what someone said. He is pointing out that the pharmaceutical drugs can have severe side effects and then they listed a few. They never brought up the notion that cannabis is completely harmless, because that is false. Again you attempted to mislead people, it is not an insult, it is a tactic you use to enhance your ideas. It is not an insult, but you should not care if it is one or not. You have constantly insulted me and others on this site with actual digs such as being “immature brats” among other things.
I didn’t connect pharmaceuticals to pot. He did. Not sure what the connection is, except to make pot look less harmful by comparison I guess.
Hey, pot is less harmful than radioactivity too!
Bogeyman!
Never, ever did I call you an “immature brat”. Truly. Must have been someone else.
Craig,
It is completely reasonable to compare medicinal cannabis to pharmaceuticals, because they sometimes can be prescribed for similar symptoms. He was pointing out that the side effect of those substances can be equal too if not worse than medicinal cannabis. If you do not understand this comparison you should not be debating the topic at hand. I do recall you saying that to me when we first debated on an IJ article, but oh well.
Craig. C’mon man. YOU are treating this cannabis thing in your Henny Penny voice as: “There are legitimate downsides! There are legitimate downsides!” and I am treating this cannabis thing as “ya, there are lotsa legitimate downsides in life, especially with FDA approved big pharma chems that have million dollar ad campaigns. Pick your own poison, but I like mother nature in this one. Now, could you and Agent please stop being legitimate downsides to this otherwise lovely IJ forum? In return, I’ll be sure to write to a Flesch reading ease score of 100 just for you.
These were comments about an article on Marijuana.
What did you think it was?
Not sure you have a point. “Big Pharma must warn us, but marijuana growers don’t have to. Therefore, marijuana is safer.”?
There are no warnings on whiskey bottles about driving drunk either.
But booze has been around forever and legal pot is brand new. If you think everyone knows the downsides, you aren’t being honest.
Craig – you may want to rethink your argument here. You said “There are no warnings on whiskey bottles about driving drunk either.” That is just straight-up false. The Alcoholic Beverage Labeling Act requires the labels of alcoholic beverages carry a government warning.
The warning reads:
GOVERNMENT WARNING:
(1) According to the Surgeon General, women should not drink alcoholic beverages during pregnancy because of the risk of birth defects.
(2) Consumption of alcoholic beverages impairs your ability to drive a car or operate machinery, and may cause health problems.
Dear God…you still miss the point. Which was (last time for the remedial course) that the downsides (your word) are certainly no worse than the stuff that the FDA has approved. Nothing about warning or not. Look, I don’t know if you live in one of the legal marijuana states or just flapping your ill informed gums from somewhere else, but if you took the time to check you’d find that in every state that has allowed it, the laws are very protective of the buying public. Never said it was “safer” but plant based beats lab based in my book.
::But booze has been around forever and legal pot is brand new.::
The “legal” part might be new but the “pot” part is NOT. Cannabis use pre-dates Jesus Christ by 3000 years and pre-dates booze as well. And are you familiar with the concept of “personal responsibility” or have you abdicated responsibility to the government?
Now if you don’t mind, I’m taking my own advice: Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.
Actually everyone, legal pot is not new. It was outright prohibited in the 1920’s. By the 1930’s, it was regulated as a “drug” in all states. Before then, it was legal for medicinal, recreational, and industrial uses. There Craig goes misleading again.
On the one hand, pot-lovers tell me marijuana has been around forever, so it is super-duper tested and safe and cool, especially compared to evil pharmeceuticals.
On the other hand, they tell me the evil Federal Government won’t let pot get tested for more super medical live saving purposes we haven’t yet learned about yet.
So, if pot hasn’t been tested, how do we know how safe it really is? What if all the pot smokers find out in 30 years that they damaged their brains/emotions/life with false notions of safety that science later refuted, once the evil Federal Government got out of the way?
Oh, never mind. Just smoke away as much as you like. Sleep tight and give to your kids. After all, it’s natural and proven safe over thousands of years.
1) There is not 1 comment in the 70+ posts here where anyone advocating for medicinal or recreational marijuana has claimed it is 100% safe and has no downsides. You stating that as fact is disingenuous at best and a blatant lie at worst.
2) If you want to know what happens to SOME marijuana smokers after 30 years, talk to adults who have continued to use marijuana since the 60’s. Wait – 1969 was 49 years ago! Okay, talk to someone who used in the 80’s and still does, since 1989 was 29 years ago.
I didn’t say anyone said it was “100% safe”. I said it was safer than pharmaceuticals, according to UBoreMe.
Comparing is to pharmaceuticals, which is not what I did but someone
else did, clearly is intended to make the claim pot is safer than pharmaceuticals.
Otherwise, what is the point? Right?
And just cause you can find a pothead from 30 years ago does not mean that ALL potheads in the future will be just fine, thank you. Scientific knowledge – you may know – tends to advance into the future. And pot is much stronger than 30 years ago (unless you think I made that up too).
I said there were downsides. So what’s the problem if everyone agrees with me that there
are downsides?
(Maybe science will find that pot destroys the capacity for logic.)
“1) There is not 1 comment in the 70+ posts here where anyone advocating for medicinal or recreational marijuana has claimed it is 100% safe and has no downsides. You stating that as fact is disingenuous at best and a blatant lie at worst.”
Actually, on something which could be harmful, it’s not disingenuous nor a lie. It’s a piece of consideration, and there are many pot smokers who state what he commented regarding.
“2) If you want to know what happens to SOME marijuana smokers after 30 years, talk to adults who have continued to use marijuana since the 60’s. Wait – 1969 was 49 years ago! Okay, talk to someone who used in the 80’s and still does, since 1989 was 29 years ago.
Wait 30 years to find out if we should regulate pot? And let’s just take a chance in the meantime, and think people will use it responsibly when legalized, and not while driving etc in ways that could cause harm.
I think we should have waited 30 years for any action on LSD. Do you agree?
“and there are many pot smokers who state what he commented regarding.” I’m sure there are, but I said “There is not 1 comment in the 70+ posts here…” I’m only speaking to what’s been posted here.
“Wait 30 years to find out if we should regulate pot?” This comment is misdirected to me. I did not make that argument, Craig said “What if all the pot smokers find out in 30 years that they damaged….” His time frame – his argument.
Rose,
Some of the people on here are just ridiculous. You are wasting your time. They live in a different world, sheltered and closed out from the rest. They can travel 1000 miles and never leave their inner circle. They refuse to believe anything that breaks their norms – Climate Change, Medical Marijuana is not reefer madness, ect.
They will change their argument to suit their needs and continuously attack you.
You can’t argue with stupid. They just drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
Yes,
What do you expect, right? They are all getting their marching orders from Faux Newz and Sinclair Broadcast Group.
Get ready to have the definitions and debate changed on you Rosenblatt, if you aren’t accused of debating the wrong way!
I’ll break my boycott real quickly. Hey Bob, remember when you said Trump didn’t want to kill the family members of terrorists and then said I was a liar for citing him, and then threatened me with physical violence? Whoops, wrong again although that was pretty clearly just an attempt to pretend Trump and his supporters were respectable.
h ttps://www.google.com/amp/amp.nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/04/trump-asked-why-cia-drone-avoided-terrorists-family-report.html
There is enough evidence to suggest that there are MEDICAL benefits. Of course there are side effects, there are side effects to everything. Just watch a drug commercial on TV. 5 seconds of benefits and 25 seconds of side effects.
What works for me may not work for you. If it works for me, then why not let me have it? One way or another, Im gonna get it.
So you think all pharmaceutical drugs should be sold over-the-counter, since what’s good for you may not work for me?
Where did you come up with that from? My statement does not imply anything other then what it says. A simple truth that you already know.
Gonna have to look elsewhere for your daily argument.
Truthfully, I have no idea what your comment meant.
Are there medical benefits to CBDs? No one is doubting that. But the benefits are quite limited based on current science. Anyone who denies that is just ignorant or lying.
Are you referring to something specific? Nothing is mentioned, so how would I know.
Referencing side effects of pharmaceuticals in your comment would lead anyone to compare it to marijuana, since this is an article on marijuana.
A legitimate question has to do with availability over-the-counter. Just because
a pharmaceutical works doesn’t mean it should be over-the-counter, and the same applies to marijuana in my opinion.
So, I was making a legitimate point based on your comment, which was vague in the least.
If you don’t want to explain it, fine.
Explanation is simple. Needs more research.
At this point, with what knowledge is available, I support the call for Medical Use as I have personally seen the benefits over the narcotics in my daily life. I Disagree with Agent.
I have also seen the negative effects of recreational use over a period of years – back to the 70’s. Too many of my high schoolmates went on to use harder drugs. Acid. Coke. Heroine. Mushrooms. Too many have od’d, cutting their life too short. In my life time, in my personal experience, I have come to the conclusion that the gateway effect is real and should not be discredited or ignored. I agree with Agent 100% (more if possible) on this issue. For you folks that discredit the theory, your wrong. Its real.
I’m vague because I have seen the plusses and minuses of it. I’m vague because on one hand, its great, on the other hand, not so much. The O’le Ben Franklin (yes, I use that all the time) isn’t working for me on this subject.
BTW, I would rather buy it from a pharmacist then some guy in an over coat say “PSSS, Hey Buddy, Over here”. Im sure everyone can agree with that.
I would suggest you stop making Straw Man Arguments and ask folks for clarification on what they meant. I’m not FFA, but I’m 99.999999% sure he wasn’t advocating for all drugs to be sold over the counter. In fact, I didn’t infer he was even arguing that medicinal marijuana alone should be an over the counter purchase.
Turns out, he later says he would rather buy marijuana from a pharmacist. So now we both know what he meant in the first place.
Guess what? I couldn’t agree more. “Recreational” marijuana will damage many people, just like FFA points out. (Can’t wait for you all to attack him for saying that.)
Out here in California, we first legalized “medical” marijuana by putting it not in pharmacies but in so-called “Medical Marijuana Clinics” run by potheads(not pharmacists). And every high school kid knew he could make a phony Medical Marijuana Card and go get some pot.
Now whose brilliant idea was that? No bonus points for the answer.
I don’t get attacked because I don’t attack. You have your opinion and I have mine. Its ok to agree to disagree. Everyone here seems to know that about me.
Come your judgment day, I wont be around. What ever happens – good bad or indifferent- thats on you.
Craig,
If you do not want me to insult you by saying you mislead people, stop misleading people. You have done it yet again. Stop attempting to twist others words to attempt to inflate your points. If you mislead others, you lose credibility.
Re-read it again: it was a QUESTION. A legitimate question.
He could have answered yes or no. He didn’t. But I had to ask him again to explain himself.
Try thinking. You accuse me of misleading people over an over. What the hell are you even talking about?
No where in his post did he insinuate this. It was you who asked about a scenario no one brought up. Why should those be over the counter? They should not be, just like cannabis should be at a dispensary. “Try thinking” I believe you said. You should follow your advice.
MARCH 14, 2018 AT 6:22 PM
Craig Cornell says:
LIKE OR DISLIKE:
0
0
While trying to teach a fish to do math is pointless . . .
I know this is getting pretty heady for you, but give thinking a try . . .
I’ve seen enough of your comments to know that you and your wife have been in more pain than you should be. If marijuana gives you any kind of relief, I have absolutely no problem with you using it. You do not deserve to be in such pain. Best of luck to you.
Thanks. Its been a real struggle as of late. Last two days been ok. She has at least got the grocery shopping done.
I want to echo Sal’s comment. I hope your family starts to see some improvement, FFA. You’ve had a rough go and do not deserve it. Pulling for you!
Thanks Cap. Still looking for that light….
I’d like to workshop on Sal & Planet’s sentiments (although I’m sure I’ve said it to you in the past) … I am very sorry to hear about your and your wife’s situation and the pain, both mental & physical, it’s caused in your lives. No matter what any of our differences may be on any topic (meant generically – not just specific to you), I never wish anyone or their loved ones any pain or hardships.
I just dont do a lot on here any more because the arguments just aren’t worth the time. Everyone has an opinion which I do respect – you are entitled to that much. I don’t insult people and as a result, I don’t get insulted. (Imaging that). But the name calling. The twisting of words. People like Craig make me go away for long stretches. I expected comments like – “NO Kidding”. “Come up with something that hasn’t been said over and over again”.
I got a pretty good laugh out of Craigs response. So, maybe Ill be back sooner rather then later.
you’re a good man, FFA…wish you’d stick around. we need more posters like you around here. It shows that we can sometimes disagree but still treat each other like professionals. I wish you absolutely nothing but the best.
Thanks Sal…
This is a subject that is near and dear to me as I search for the right answer.
So, I’ll be around.
FFA, we have been blog buddies for a long time. However, you should realize that Craig, Polar and I are Conservatives and we get demeaned, insulted and down voted ad nauseum on this forum. They would rather try to take away our 1st Amendment rights and see us go away. After the last election, it has gotten worse and IJ continues to publish Progressive stories and promote weed as the answer. Sorry, that will not fly with Conservatives. They can Scromit all they want. I couldn’t care less.
NOBODY has ever convinced anyone that their side was right by insulting them. FFA is also a conservative but has never attacked or insulted anyone, just voices his opinion respectfully. It’s not a question of free speech, it’s a question of civility.
Neither you, Craig, or PolarEtc are victims here, and people who disagree with you are not your enemies. You have a tremendous wealth of insurance knowledge, which I’ve always respected. Use it for good.
Yes agent. We have a lot in common with our views, experience in the biz and the struggles with pain with the ones we care the most about. Im at the point where I will try anything to eliminate my wife’s struggles. Small amounts of Marijuana seem to help when the pain is starting to come on. Once the pain is there, all she can do is ride it out. .
I do appreciate all the well wishers no matter what side of what ever argument you are on. I am at the “In Sickness” part of the vows rolling up on 20 years. . .
I hope no one else ever has to go through a Diabetes / Fibromyalgia / Degenerative Disc Disease combo diagnosis. Mix in a Thyroid issue and you have my life.
Never fun watching someone / anyone crying in pain and be completely helpless. Pot does help sometimes but not always. There is no real rhyme or reason as to why it helps today, but not yesterday. No clear cut definable pattern.
Was very discouraging when the PT sent her home after three visits stating its not helping.
Wisc is working on Med Marijuana so at the very least I’ll be able to get it in a safer environment. Maybe this new doc will come up with something.
One more thing….GO CUBBIES! They spanked the hell out of Milwaukee last night.
Go Cubs Go!
I was with you until that blasphemous parting sentence!
So it’s better for people to be pot-heads rather than pill-heads? How about sobering these people up so they can live happy productive lives? Any human being who is enslaved to any intoxicating substance (pills, weed, alcohol, etc.) deserves a chance to live a better life. Rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic does not work.
Ive been through narcotics and steroids and pot. The least of the “side effects” has been pot. Again, what works for me may not work for you. You may not experience the roid rage like I have. You may be better off on Narcotics and not have the extreme mood swings.
And no, she don’t like getting stoned. when she does it, its very little just to take the edge off the pain.
So, to answer your question, IN MY CASE, yes it is.
Alternative rehabilitation drug therapy is a viable means of hard drug addiction avoidance. AA has failed miserably on the whole with a less than 12% success rate and the religious bent is a big turnoff for many.
“So let’s legalize more substances that can get people addicted. Like marijuana!”
Love the logic.
PS It is called Alcoholics ANONYMOUS. People don’t have to report on their own
results to anyone. Your 12% number is impossible to prove or disprove.
Are you counting people who drop out in the first month? 6 months?
Better toke up and take the edge off . . .