Posts by Russell Brown
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Speaker: The Shaken Generation, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
Once you take the ‘ire’
out of resilience
all that’s left is ‘silence’…Like.
-
Speaker: The Shaken Generation, in reply to Lilith __,
I got this from a quite a few Christchurch people. James Dann, who was robust (bolshie even) through the aftershock years, admitting how vulnerable and upset he felt when the quakes came back on Sunday.
And that’s just the people who can talk about it. The gap between the National government’s talk and its actions is a disgrace. They say they care, and they don’t.
Part of the problem, I’m sure, is the current Minister of Health. I can’t recall a minister whose oversight of his successive portfolios has seemed so focused on his own political advancement. He’s the emptiest of empty vessels.
-
Hard News: Helen Kelly's letter, in reply to Craig Young,
I support Helen in her fight, but one of the chief obstacles to reform seems to be the pot lobby itself.
That’s not new. Some people have a lot of trouble making the right allies.
Otoh, there’s been speculative corporate money behind the legalisation lobby in the US and I’m not sure we want that either.
-
Matt at TransportBlog sums up the stoush so far.
-
Hard News: Helen Kelly's letter, in reply to Shane Le Brun,
I would propose splitting MC products based on THC:CBD ratio.
high THC, as in, anything more potent than 2:1 THC:CBD stays as a class B med, as it has recreational potential, anything between 2:1 and 1:4 goes to class C, as a low risk med next to codeine, diazpeam, and anything lower in THC can be unscheduled as such, perhaps restricted to a specialist only medicine, so the high CBD stuff is recognized as having no abuse potential at all.That seems logical, although it would require some new thinking.
Although having been around people on both, it still seems odd to me to have diazepam considered only about as risky as cannabis.
-
Was it just me or did everyone else have an inordinately high proportion of trampers among their high-school teachers? Perhaps it was just the time, but many of mine seemed to be mad for it.
School tramping trips were thus serious affairs. Although there was one awful incident when a student fell during a river crossing and dragged a couple of others down. One of the teachers was swept away and, horrifyingly, later discovered dead downstream.
-
Here’s the UK Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs letter of advice to the Home Office minister in 201. Key part:
In 2003, the ACMD made its recommendation for Sativex to be placed in Schedule 4. The ACMD at its meeting on 30th June 2010 concluded that the 2003 recommendation remains appropriate. At this meeting the ACMD discussed, in detail, the relative merits for placing the new marketed drug in either Schedule 2 or 4. The ACMD concludes that Sativex has a low abuse potential and low risk of diversion. Therefore, the ACMD concludes that based on this assessment, “Sativex” should be scheduled as a Schedule 4, Part 1 substance.
The ACMD is conscious that the Home Office will need to take into account the UK’s obligations under the UN drug conventions, more particularly the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs 1961 and its provisions relating to preparations.
Sativex was subsequently moved to Schedule 4 of the British Misuse of Drugs Act, along with the minor tranquillisers, while other forms of cannabis remain in Schedule 1, which is for drugs thought to have no therapeutic value and therefore cannot be lawfully possessed or prescribed.
The reassignment to Schedule 4 means Sativex can be much more easily prescribed (i.e.: no requirement to apply to the ministry for every prescription), without burdensome requirements around reporting and destruction. In New Zealand Because it is a cannabis preparation, Sativex is still classified as a Schedule 2 Class B (1) drug product under Misuse of Drugs Act 1975.
The UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency also has a substantial note on Sativex. It includes this:
4.9 Overdose
There is no experience of deliberate overdose with Sativex in patients. However, in a Thorough QT study of Sativex in 257 subjects, with 18 sprays taken over a 20-minute period twice daily, signs and symptoms of overdose/poisoning were observed. These consisted of acute intoxication type reactions including dizziness, hallucinations, delusions, paranoia, tachycardia or bradycardia with hypotension. In three of 41 subjects dosed at 18 sprays twice a day, this presented as a transient toxic psychosis which resolved upon cessation of treatment. Twenty-two subjects who received this substantial multiple of the recommended dose successfully completed the 5-day study period.
In the case of overdose, treatment should be symptomatic and supportive.The recommended maximum dose is 12 sprays a day, so this is a substantial overdose. Don’t try this with any other pharmaceutical drugs.
Much of the MHRA entry is replicated in Medsafe's Sativex data sheet. Someone with more patience than me could do a side-by-side.
-
Hard News: Helen Kelly's letter, in reply to Sacha,
Not so. See paras at top of p3 of the cover letter. Looks like they missed a 2013 reference, and are committing to review and revise that aspect of the offical advice. Says “no other” references were found, not none.
Yes, sorry – I did say I was rushing!
It does make you wonder how hard they were looking, given that it hasn't taken Shane long. I'll have another look at the British drugs advisory panel report for sources.
Meanwhile, an apparently successful Australian trial of Sativex for managing the symptoms of cannabis withdrawal. Which is interesting given the emphasis the 2007(!) NDP document places on the potential for dependence and psychosis and other disorders as a result of its use.
-
Hot take before I have to go out:
The criteria were drawn up in light of the Alex Renton case and are principally based on a Rapid Assessment by Stewart Jessamine, which strongly emphasises the view that medical cannabis products should ideally only be considered when they are on a "pharmaceutical pathway" – i.e., being trialled like any other drug.
But it's also clear how tightly the criteria are tied to the Renton case and "the challenge of expanding use of CBD..." (which is news to me). There seems to have been a determination to make the criteria tough to meet.
It seems pretty rich of the ministry to fault Helen Kelly's doctor for failing to seek peer review from palliative medicine specialists when, as I suspected, the ministry itself barely considered palliative care. This really needs work.
They also say they found no evidence to challenge the view that Sativex is "desirable and divertible". Which is odd.
-
My OIA arrived on time!
I have to go out soon so I can't read it closely now, but I’ve uploaded it with this comment.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 221 222 223 224 225 … 2279 Older→ First