mariuahana als pijnstiller. iemand ervaring en zo ja, welke?

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 11:59 schreef prisoner_of_rock_and_roll het volgende:
ja probleeis dus dat onze "ouderwetse" huisrats het niet wil voorschrijven, die blijft `r liever volproppen met chemische troep als tramadol en slaappillen

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 11:47 schreef prisoner_of_rock_and_roll het volgende:
[...]
Het stomme is alleen, hoewel ik een grote stads mens ben, ben ik nog nooit van m`n leven in een coffeeshop geweest, ik zoek dan ook suggesties naar wat voor marihuana ik het best zou kunnen aanschaffen.

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 11:59 schreef prisoner_of_rock_and_roll het volgende:
ja probleeis dus dat onze "ouderwetse" huisrats het niet wil voorschrijven, die blijft `r liever volproppen met chemische troep als tramadol en slaappillen

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 12:15 schreef MinderMutsig het volgende:

[..]

En pas een beetje op met de combinatie tramadol en wiet, het kan verder geen kwaad volgens mij maar mijn ervaring is dat het elkaars werking versterkt.

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 11:47 schreef prisoner_of_rock_and_roll het volgende:
Hallo, ik heb een vraag, onze huisarts is tegen het voorschrijven van medicinale marihuana.
Probleem is echter dat mijn vriendin zoveel pijn heeft dat ze `s nachts niet kan slapen, ook niet na grote doses pijnstillers, en dan praat ik niet over ibuprofen en/of paracetamol. :'(
Nu is onze neuroloog niet tegen het gebruik van een blowtje op z`n tijd, maar onze huisarts dus wel en die wil het dus niet voorschrijven, daarom wil ik gewoon eens wat halen in een coffeeshop.
Het stomme is alleen, hoewel ik een grote stads mens ben, ben ik nog nooit van m`n leven in een coffeeshop geweest, ik zoek dan ook suggesties naar wat voor marihuana ik het best zou kunnen aanschaffen.

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 12:18 schreef Captain_Le_Chuck het volgende:

[..]

Waar haal je die meuk?

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 15:47 schreef Mirel het volgende:
Een huisarts die eigenlijk hulp 'weigert'..

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 15:53 schreef DDM het volgende:

[..]

Dat is het recht van elke arts. Je hoeft niet altijd met je patienten mee te gaan. Daarnaast is hier geen sprake van geregistreerde medicatie en er bestaat ook nog geen echte evidence voor. Redenen genoeg voor een arts om het niet te doen. Je bent in dit land vrij om dan gebruik te maken van een andere arts. Als laatste zet je weigert tussen aanhalingstekens...

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 11:59 schreef prisoner_of_rock_and_roll het volgende:
ja probleeis dus dat onze "ouderwetse" huisrats het niet wil voorschrijven, die blijft `r liever volproppen met chemische troep als tramadol en slaappillen

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 16:34 schreef -hypnagogia- het volgende:

[..]

Echt zo'n bullshit is dat he, dat spul is velen malen slechter en enorm verslavend.

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 15:29 schreef prisoner_of_rock_and_roll het volgende:
@Robin_ Tnx, dit was dus het soort info wat ik zocht, overigens woon ik in Amsterdam west, meeste shops daar worden gerund dooor Marokkanen, tenminse de shops die ik ken.

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 16:45 schreef MinderMutsig het volgende:

[..]

Ik geef zo'n arts groot gelijk. De reguliere medicatie heeft dan wel bijwerkingen maar je weet wel precies wat je krijgt en waar je op moet letten. Van wiet is wat dat betreft weinig bekend en er is nog geen bewijs dat het daadwerkelijk helpt.
En drie keer raden wie mensen verantwoordelijk gaan houden als er iets misgaat... juist, de huisarts.

quote:

All sedatives can be abused, but barbiturates are responsible for most of the problems with sedative abuse due to their widespread "recreational" or non-medical use, as well as over-prescribing by medical doctors. People who have difficulty dealing with stress, anxiety or sleeplessness may overuse or become dependent on sedatives. Heroin users take them either to supplement their drug or to substitute for it. Stimulant users frequently take sedatives to calm excessive jitteriness. Others take sedatives recreationally to relax and forget their worries. Barbiturate overdose is a factor in nearly one-third of all reported drug-related deaths. These include suicides and accidental drug poisonings. Accidental deaths sometimes occur when a drowsy, confused user repeats doses. In the US, in 1998, a total of 70,982 sedative exposures were reported to US poison control centers, of which 2310 (3.2%) resulted in major toxicity and 89 (0.1%) resulted in death. About half of all the people admitted to emergency rooms in the US as a result of nonmedical use of sedatives have a legitimate prescription for the drug, but have taken an excessive dose or combined it with alcohol or other drugs. Others get sedatives from friends who have authentic prescriptions or by using fake prescriptions

quote:

The journal PHARMACOLOGICAL REVIEWS [2] reports that decades of research prove that, "Compared with legal drugs...marijuana does not pose greater risks." Yet based upon mortality statistics, we can safely conclude that cannabis is one of the safest medical drugs known, for, while prescription drugs, defined as safe by the FDA, kill up to 27,000 and aspirin up to 1,000 Americans per year, cannabis kills 0 per year [3].

Opponents of legal cannabis access would have us believe that there is not enough research available to determine its safety. Nothing could be further from the truth. Cannabis is one of the most thoroughly researched drugs in history, and the evidence gathered over the centuries clearly proves that it is safe:

* The Indian Hemp Drugs Commission Report (1894): an exhaustive seven-volume, 3,281-page report that concludes: "Moderate [cannabis] use produces practically no ill effects." [5][6][7]

* The Panama Canal Military Study (1916-1929), amassing extensive data on the health impact of cannabis smoking upon American soldiers stationed in Panama, recommended that "No steps be taken by the Canal Zone authorities to prevent the sale or use of Marihuana." The research also concluded that, "There is no evidence that Marihuana...is...'habit-forming.'" [7][8]

* The LaGuardia Report (1939-1944), commissioned by New York City Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia, which included evidence gathered over thousands of years, concluded that "Smoking marihuana does not lead to addiction... does not lead to morphine, heroin, or cocaine addiction" and that "the publicity concerning the catastrophic effects of marihuana smoking in New York City is unfounded." [7][9]

* The Baroness Wootton Report (1968), commissioned by the Advisory Committee on Drug Dependence of the United Kingdom Home Office, concluded, "There is no evidence that...serious physical dangers are directly associated with the smoking of cannabis." The report also noted that "Cannabis use does not lead to heroin addiction" and that "there is no evidence that [can- nabis]...is producing in otherwise normal people con- ditions of dependence or psychosis, requiring medical treatment." [7][10]

The HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL MENTAL HEALTH LETTER [11] reports the findings of other major cannabis studies:


In three major studies conducted in Jamaica, Costa Rica, and Greece, researchers have compared heavy long-term cannabis users with non-users and found no evidence of intellectual or neurological damage, no changes in personality, and no loss of the will to work or participate in society.
The Jamaican study states that, even as cannabis use in Jamaica "is pervasive" and is used "in heavier quantities with greater THC potency than in the U.S.," its use is "without deleterious social or psychological consequences." [12]
What's more, the three studies cited, the largest human cannabis studies to date, also revealed that heavy long term cannabis users scored slightly higher on IQ tests, had slightly lower rates of illness and cancer, and lived longer on average than non-users. Users also proved to be more relaxed and sociable than non-users [4][12][13]. The best evidence indicates, contrary to GovtMedia disinformation, that cannabis is safe and good for you.

In line with the findings of the Panama Canal study and the LaGuardia Report, current research confirms that the addictive potential of cannabis is very low. The journal TRENDS IN PHARMACOLOGICAL SCIENCES states that research shows cannabis has "limited potential for development of...psychological dependence due to the weak reinforcing properties of Delta-9-THC." [14] BRAIN RESEARCH journal observes that "cannabinoid dependence and withdrawal phenomena are minimal." [15]

Research proves that cannabis is nontoxic. For example, in the journal FUNDAMENTAL AND APPLIED TOXICOLOGY [16], Dr. William Slikker, director of the Neurotoxicology Division of the National Center for Toxicological Research (NCTR), described the health of monkeys exposed to very high levels of cannabis for an extended period:

The general health of the monkeys was not compromised by a year of marijuana exposure as indicated by weight gain, carboxyhemoglobin and clinical chemistry/hematology values.
When THE ARKANSAS TIMES [17] asked Dr. Merle Paule of NCTR about evidence of cannabis toxicity and the health of the monkeys in the study, Dr. Paule said, "There's just nothing there. They were all fine."
The journal TOXICOLOGY LETTERS [18] published a study that found no link between cannabis smoking and lung cancer. The seven researchers in the study concluded:

It has been suggested that marijuana smoking is a proximal cause of respiratory cancer. However, these intimations have not been borne out by epidemiological investigation.
Not only is the evidence linking cannabis smoking to cancer negative, but the largest human studies cited indicated that cannabis users had lower rates of cancer than nonusers. What's more, those who smoked both cannabis and tobacco had lower rates of lung cancer than those who smoked only tobacco -- a strong indication of chemo-prevention [4][12][13]. Even more, in 1975 researchers at the Medical College of Virginia found that cannabis showed powerful antitumor activity against both benign and malignant tumors (the government then banned all future cannabis/cancer research) [4]. In fact, the NEW ENGLISH DISPENSATORY of 1764 recommends boiled cannabis roots for the elimination of tumors [19]. Powerful evidence that cannabis not only does not cause cancer, but that it may prevent and even cure cancer.

The few studies that the GovtMedia drums into the public mind over and over, which claim to show that cannabis is a harmful drug, are almost all the work of the the government's top hired gun, Dr. Gabriel Nahas. The NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE described Nahas's work as "psychopharmacological McCarthyism that compels him to use half-truths, innuendo and unverified assertions." The JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION also condemned his work, stating, "Examples of biased selection and...omissions of facts abound in every chapter." [20]

Conclusion:
Not only does the best scientific research overwhelmingly confirm that cannabis is both an effective medicine and a safe drug, but that it may be both chemo-preventive and therapeutic and generally beneficial to health. What this shows us most clearly, in light of the consensus to the contrary, is the enormous power of a Big Lie.

With its vast resources, the "GovtMedia elite" are able to fabricate and fob off a pharmacological fraud against both cannabis and the public interest. Through sheer repetition and consistent suppression of contrary information, they are able to construct an edifice of public consensus which even the hardest scientific facts fail to topple.

The truth is no stronger than the ability of true information to surpass the public distribution of false and misleading information. The GovtMedia has a greater ability to distribute a Big Lie than any other sector of society has to distribute the truth. However, this report right here contains copious quantities of carefully referenced scientific facts that consistently and conclusively confirm that cannabis is safe --thereby exploding the GovtMedia's Big Lie.

As truth is only as powerful as it is known, do all that is in your power to make these powerful facts known, that we might put an end to the destructive and illogical prohibition of the proven safe and effective drug cannabis, for possession of which 10 million Americans have been arrested since 1965 [21].

quote:

Advances in cannabinoid science of the last 16 years have given rise to a wealth of new
opportunities for the development of medically useful cannabinoid-based drugs. The accumulated
data suggest a variety of indications, particularly for pain relief, antiemesis, and appetite
stimulation. For patients, such as those with AIDS or undergoing chemotherapy, who suffer
simultaneously from severe pain, nausea, and appetite loss, cannabinoid drugs might offer broad
spectrum relief not found in any other single medication.

Marijuana is not a completely benign substance. It is a powerful drug with a variety of
effects. However, the harmful effects to individuals from the perspective of possible medical use
of marijuana are not necessarily the same as the harmful physical effects of drug abuse.

EFFECTS OF ISOLATED CANNABINOIDS

Cannabinoid Biology
Much has been learned since a 1982 IOM Marijuana and Health report. Although it was
clear then that most of the effects of marijuana were due to its actions on the brain, there was little
information about how THC acted on brain cells (neurons), which cells were affected by THC, or
even what general areas of the brain were most affected by THC. Additionally, too little was
known about cannabinoid physiology to offer any scientific insights into the harmful or
therapeutic effects of marijuana. That all changed with the identification and characterization of
cannabinoid receptors in the 1980s and 1990s. During the last 16 years, science has advanced
greatly and can tell us much more about the potential medical benefits of cannabinoids.

CONCLUSION: At this point, our knowledge about the biology of marijuana and cannabinoids
allows us to make some general conclusions:
· Cannabinoids likely have a natural role in pain modulation, control of movement, and
memory.
· The natural role of cannabinoids in immune systems is likely multifaceted and remains
unclear.
· The brain develops tolerance to cannabinoids.
· Animal research demonstrates the potential for dependence, but this potential is
observed under a narrower range of conditions than with benzodiazepines, opiates, cocaine, or
nicotine.
· Withdrawal symptoms can be observed in animals, but appear to be mild compared to
opiates or benzodiazepines, such as diazepam (Valiumâ).

Efficacy of Cannabinoid Drugs
The accumulated data indicate a potential therapeutic value for cannabinoid drugs,
particularly for symptoms such as pain relief, control of nausea and vomiting, and appetite
stimulation. The therapeutic effects of cannabinoids are best established for THC, which is
generally one of the two most abundant of the cannabinoids in marijuana. (Cannabidiol, the
precursor of THC, is generally the other most abundant cannabinoid.)
The effects of cannabinoids on the symptoms studied are generally modest, and in most
cases, there are more effective medications. However, people vary in their responses to
medications and there will likely always be a subpopulation of patients who do not respond well
to other medications. The combination of cannabinoid drug effects (anxiety reduction, appetite
stimulation, nausea reduction, and pain relief) suggests that cannabinoids would be moderately
well suited for certain conditions, such as chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and AIDS
wasting.

Defined substances, such as purified cannabinoid compounds, are preferable to plant
products which are of variable and uncertain composition. Use of defined cannabinoids permits a
more precise evaluation of their effects, whether in combination or alone. Medications that can
maximize the desired effects of cannabinoids and minimize the undesired effects can very likely be
identified.
Although most scientists who study cannabinoids agree that the pathways to cannabinoid
drug development are clearly marked, there is no guarantee that the fruits of scientific research
will be made available to the public for medical use. Cannabinoid-based drugs will only become
available if public investment in cannabinoid drug research is sustained, and if there is enough
incentive for private enterprise to develop and market such drugs.

CONCLUSION: Scientific data indicate the potential therapeutic value of cannabinoid drugs,
primarily THC, for pain relief, control of nausea and vomiting, and appetite stimulation; smoked
marijuana.

In cases where symptoms are multifaceted, the combination
of THC effects might provide a form of adjunctive therapy; for example, AIDS wasting patients
would likely benefit from a medication that simultaneously reduces anxiety, pain, and nausea while
stimulating appetite.[/b]

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 17:26 schreef -hypnagogia- het volgende:

[..]

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 17:46 schreef prisoner_of_rock_and_roll het volgende:
eeehm, de tramadol is zeker wel verslavend, ik heb rare dingen gezien toen mijn vriendin er tijdelijk mee moest stoppen, het was net een stuk uit een film, doodeng gewoon.

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 17:48 schreef MinderMutsig het volgende:

[..]

Niemand ontkent dat toch? Of lees ik ergens overheen?

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 17:46 schreef MinderMutsig het volgende:

[..]

En ik kan ook wel even googlen en je met artikelen die het tegendeel beweren om de oren slaan maar daar schieten we niks mee op.

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 17:55 schreef -hypnagogia- het volgende:

[..]

Een recenter en betrouwbaar onderzoek met een neurologische onderbouwing die ontkent dat THC een pijnstillende werking heeft? Dan ben ik erg benieuwd

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 18:13 schreef MinderMutsig het volgende:

[..]


Mijn vraag is eerder: Waarvan probeer jij mij te overtuigen?

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 16:45 schreef MinderMutsig het volgende:

[..]

Van wiet is wat dat betreft weinig bekend en er is nog geen bewijs dat het daadwerkelijk helpt.

quote:

Tolerance
Tolerance develops to many of the therapeutic effects of benzodiazepines rapidly with daily or frequent use. Generally, tolerance to the hypnotic and sedative effects occurs within days, however, tolerance to the anxiolytic effects of benzodiazepines rarely, if ever, occurs as is evidenced by a 20-year study on alprazolam (Xanax®) in the treatment of panic disorder. [2]


Dependence

Long-term benzodiazepine usage generally leads to some form of tolerance and/or dependence. It is estimated that up to 50 percent of patients prescribed diazepam for 6 months at therapeutic dosages are physically dependent. Withdrawal symptoms due to abrupt discontinuation may include:

Insomnia
Rebound REM (or dreaming) sleep
Anxiety, possible panic attacks
Tachycardia
Hypertension
Depression, possible suicidal ideation
Tremor
Perspiration
Loss of appetite
Dysphoria

An abrupt discontinuation of benzodiazepines may result in a severe and very unpleasant withdrawal syndrome that may additionally result in:

Convulsions
Delusions
Psychosis
Effects similar to delirium tremens

Hence, every person on long-term or high dosage of any benzodiazepine should be slowly and carefully weaned off the drug, preferably under medical supervision by a physician who is knowledgeable about the benzodiazepine withdrawal syndrome. This can usually be avoided or minimized by use of a long half-life benzodiazepine and very gradually tapering off the drug over a period of many weeks or even months.

Onset of the withdrawal syndrome from long half-life benzodiazepines might be delayed, although withdrawal from short-acting benzodiazepines often presents early.

Some of the withdrawal symptoms are identical to the symptoms for which the medication was originally prescribed. The ability to determine the difference between relapse and rebound is very important during the withdrawal phase.

abuse Potential
Although benzodiazepines are invaluable in the treatment of anxiety disorders, they have some potential for abuse and may cause dependence or addiction. It is important to distinguish between addiction to and normal physical dependence on benzodiazepines. Intentional abusers of benzodiazepines usually have other substance abuse problems. Benzodiazepines are usually a secondary drug of abuse-used mainly to augment the high received from another drug or to offset the adverse effects of other drugs. Few cases of addiction arise from legitimate use of benzodiazepines. [3]

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 17:55 schreef -hypnagogia- het volgende:

[..]

Een recenter en betrouwbaar onderzoek met een neurologische onderbouwing die ontkent dat THC een pijnstillende werking heeft? Dan ben ik erg benieuwd

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 18:34 schreef -hypnagogia- het volgende:

[..]

Nou, dat er aan de hand van neurologisch onderzoek wel degelijk bewezen is dat THC een pijnstillende werking heeft aangezien je dit eerder beweerde.

quote:

En in welk opzicht is THC schadelijk? Bedoel je nu dat onderzoek van laatst waarin beweerd werd dat als je in het bezit bent van een bepaald soort gen, je schijnbaar 25% meer kans hebt om een psychose te ontwikkelen? Dat werd erg leuk in de media gebracht met koppen als:

1/4e van wietgebruikers krijgt psychose

Als je de bron terugtraced dan is dat bericht niet zo schokkend. Een objectief en compleet overzicht over de gevaren van THC kun je hier terugvinden:

http://newton.nap.edu/html/marimed/

quote:

Het derde hoofdstuk.

Ik ben het met je eens dat het roken van THC schadelijk is voor de gezondheid maar die schade is echt niks ten opzichte van de de schade en verslaving die opiaten en benzodiazepines (pijnstillers/slaappillen, kortom de 'legale' drugs) met zich meebrengen. Veel mensen hebben een grenzeloos vertrouwen in het oordeel van de arts maar je zou eens moeten weten hoeveel mensen er in Nederland, laat staan in een land als Amerika, ernstig verslaafd zijn aan dit spul.

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 18:57 schreef DDM het volgende:

[..]

CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study demonstrated that a generalized statement that delta-9-THC is an analgetic drug cannot be made. However, a sub-population of FM patients reported significant benefit from the delta-9-THC monotherapy. The unaffected electrically induced axon reflex flare, but decreased pain perception, suggests a central mode of action of the cannabinoid.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=16834825&query_hl=3&itool=pubmed_docsum

quote:

electrically induced pain was significantly attenuated after doses of 10-15 mg delta-9-THC

quote:

a sub-population of FM patients reported significant benefit from the delta-9-THC monotherapy

quote:

The unaffected electrically induced axon reflex flare, but decreased pain perception, suggests a central mode of action of the cannabinoid.

quote:

Experimentally Induced Acute Pain
Early studies of cannabinoids on volunteers did not demonstrate consistent analgesia when experimental pain models were used. In fact, three early volunteer studies of THC and experimental pain caused by a variety of pain modalities--electrical stimulation, tourniquet pain, and thermal pain--resulted in an increase in pain sensitivity (hyperalgesia).22,84,108

Other studies also failed to show an analgesic effect of THC, but they were not well designed. Raft and co-workers found no evidence of THC effect on pain thresholds and pain tolerance following electrical stimulation and noxious pressure.150 But their study suffers from two major methodological problems. First, they measured only the extremes of pain sensation--threshold (the lowest intensity at which a particular stimulus is perceived as painful) and tolerance (the maximum intensity of pain that a subject can withstand). However, most pain is experienced in an intermediate range, where effects on pain suppression are most detectable. Modern methods of pain assessment in humans typically use ratings of the intensity of the sensation of pain; those methods are superior to assessing the effects of a drug on the extremes of pain.192 Second, Raft and co-workers did not include a positive control; that is, they did not demonstrate the adequacy of their method by showing that an established analgesic, such as an opiate or narcotic, was effective under their study conditions.

quote:

Op zondag 8 oktober 2006 19:20 schreef MinderMutsig het volgende:


Nee dat onderzoek bedoelde ik niet. Er is een onderzoek dat aantoont dat wietgebruik neurologische schade kan veroorzaken. Hoe het heet weet ik zo niet meer maar daar kwam de neuroloog mee aanzetten.