The Psychoactive Substances Bill has some interesting amendments in it with regard to medicinal cannabis.
Not well up on how to to read these bills but it looks like a step in the right direction.
Anyone with more knowledge in political matters able to throw some light on how likely this will make it into law?
(
Cerebus Sticky! Sticky! Stick! Stick!, Tue 23 Jun 2015, 10:24,
Share,
Reply)
As far as I know,
there's only one cannabis-derived drug approved under the MHRA; the amendment wouldn't make any difference on the ground, as far as I can tell. All it would do would be to pave the way for guidance about prescribing it should the law on cannabis change. But if the law on cannabis changes, then the amendment would likely become otiose.
So it might be there as a place-marker more than anything else. As to whether it'll be passed... well, since it would make little to no practical difference, it might, but it might not.
More interesting are the demands that this, and the MDA, should be subject to an impact assessment. That seems like a hard thing to argue against, especially give the mauling that this Bill (and - to a lesser extent, the MDA) has had from the police, lawyers, and academics working in the field.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Tue 23 Jun 2015, 10:46,
Share,
Reply)
Thanks for explaining that.
I'll hold off the loft conversion for now.
The one drug you're talking about is that Sativex? (Private only England, NHS Wales)
There's some more coming up the pipeline which are of interest.
www.gwpharm.com/product-pipeline.aspx
(
Cerebus Sticky! Sticky! Stick! Stick!, Tue 23 Jun 2015, 10:57,
Share,
Reply)
I'm beyond frustrated about this bill
I don't have time to rant about it now, which is probably for the best.
(
Turquoise Hexagon Sun has just dropped acid on, Tue 23 Jun 2015, 12:50,
Share,
Reply)