VIANARCHRIS
Well-Known Member
I SMOKE (and vape) 4 - 5 oz/month.
LP supporter & invester shame thread...post the idiots pics here...after all...funny is funny.
- Thread starter The Hippy
- Start date
heckler73
Well-Known Member
In herb form? Or extract?
If you smoked half as much, what would happen?
VIANARCHRIS
Well-Known Member
Bud. Why? What the fuck difference does it make how much I smoke? I don't get the reason for the question - what does that have to do with the LP's?
CalyxCrusher
Well-Known Member
Except your logic is flawed in that everyone has a different medical need and has a varying dosage and the term chronic consumption can be used subjectively as a result. Also, 1.5lbs from a 50 plant SOG seems low...........less than 14g a plant
Last edited:
heckler73
Well-Known Member
Oh, you were remarking how your 49 plant license was taken away and how it was necessary to your health.
To which I questioned why you couldn't get adequate "medicine" from 4 plants, which is why you are stuck with requiring the services of LPs if pressed to act under the Law.
After seeing what fellow Canucks have been doing outdoors in the 2018 thread, I am fairly certain one could get enough of a "medicinal supplement" for a year from 2-3 plants...and that still leaves the winter for indoor.
Your supposed consumption rate seems a little out of line for 49 plants. After all, others here seem to think you can garner a lot more than 1.5 lbs from that amount quarterly. Are you sure the micro-producer license isn't the one you really should be applying for instead of lamenting about medical ones?
Then you could turn it into a proper business and make an income while you treat your illness! If you can handle 49 plants, why not 449 ? I'd like to walk into a store and buy a bag of your product...assuming it's any good, that is.
heckler73
Well-Known Member
My logic isn't flawed from the perspective of a recreational user or that of a legislator.
To that end, what medical relief is someone getting that requires 150g/mth ? At that level I question its efficacy. It must be minimal.
That aside, the proposed legislation is creating a means by which someone of his requirements can apply for the 150g/mth license. It doesn't appear to be onerous either, and will likely make allowance for plants, too. So perhaps his old beef is just that, at this stage?
cannadan
Well-Known Member
you have to look at a bigger picture these days...efficacy is subjective....most patients have come from a pain clinic setting...and have been on much stronger narcotic's than mj...
they have also built up a tolerance...and require more...5 grams a day is nowhere near chronic...but rather a beginning dose... for those who are only treating with edibles or vapeing or smoke... or all of them ... add concentrates and the numbers start to look funny but they are accurate...
to treat yourself with 2 grams of oil per day you would require approx 25 to 28 grams of the raw product....per day
they have also built up a tolerance...and require more...5 grams a day is nowhere near chronic...but rather a beginning dose... for those who are only treating with edibles or vapeing or smoke... or all of them ... add concentrates and the numbers start to look funny but they are accurate...
to treat yourself with 2 grams of oil per day you would require approx 25 to 28 grams of the raw product....per day
cannadan
Well-Known Member
you also need to remember that indoor licences calculate out differently than outdoor///Oh, you were remarking how your 49 plant license was taken away and how it was necessary to your health.
To which I questioned why you couldn't get adequate "medicine" from 4 plants, which is why you are stuck with requiring the services of LPs if pressed to act under the Law.
After seeing what fellow Canucks have been doing outdoors in the 2018 thread, I am fairly certain one could get enough of a "medicinal supplement" for a year from 2-3 plants...and that still leaves the winter for indoor.
Your supposed consumption rate seems a little out of line for 49 plants. After all, others here seem to think you can garner a lot more than 1.5 lbs from that amount quarterly. Are you sure the micro-producer license isn't the one you really should be applying for instead of lamenting about medical ones?
Then you could turn it into a proper business and make an income while you treat your illness! If you can handle 49 plants, why not 449 ? I'd like to walk into a store and buy a bag of your product...assuming it's any good, that is.
you should also try and remember that each patient is different and can use the mmj in different ways....
rarely do I even get any kind of buzz/// none from eating.... none from smoking....
for example ..when I used to eat fresh leaves from the plant in salad form...because of the anti inflammatory properties . I could easily use 50 grams per day....of fresh green leaf...
in a salad bowl with some salad dressing......actually is pretty tasty
Last edited:
GreenHighlander
Well-Known Member
No offense but it is quite clear you don't know what you are talking about. That might all be fine for a recreational user. But your ill fated logic almost seems like an attack on medical patients.Oh, you were remarking how your 49 plant license was taken away and how it was necessary to your health.
To which I questioned why you couldn't get adequate "medicine" from 4 plants, which is why you are stuck with requiring the services of LPs if pressed to act under the Law.
After seeing what fellow Canucks have been doing outdoors in the 2018 thread, I am fairly certain one could get enough of a "medicinal supplement" for a year from 2-3 plants...and that still leaves the winter for indoor.
Your supposed consumption rate seems a little out of line for 49 plants. After all, others here seem to think you can garner a lot more than 1.5 lbs from that amount quarterly. Are you sure the micro-producer license isn't the one you really should be applying for instead of lamenting about medical ones?
Then you could turn it into a proper business and make an income while you treat your illness! If you can handle 49 plants, why not 449 ? I'd like to walk into a store and buy a bag of your product...assuming it's any good, that is.
cannadan
Well-Known Member
Heckler....we all have seen the point of view you are expressing here at the forum.....from many different members over the years...
most of them would get it and realize what works for one person may not for someone else.
a couple of oz's a week can seem like a lot ...if your point of view.... is from a strictly recreational view point....
to another its barely enough to get by on.
most of them would get it and realize what works for one person may not for someone else.
a couple of oz's a week can seem like a lot ...if your point of view.... is from a strictly recreational view point....
to another its barely enough to get by on.
GreenHighlander
Well-Known Member
I apologize for my brashness. It just bothers me to no end when someone wants to spout their personal opinions about someone else s health needs.
"The problem with the medical marijuana issue is that too many people don't understand it. Some are attorneys general and cops and some are drug reformers and hipsters. Some of them hate marijuana and everything it stands for and some love marijuana and everything it stands for. But medical marijuana has nothing to do with what marijuana stands for and everything to do with whether Richard Eastman's going to keep his food down or Scott Imler's going to have a seizure or Bob Randall's going to go blind."
"The problem with the medical marijuana issue is that too many people don't understand it. Some are attorneys general and cops and some are drug reformers and hipsters. Some of them hate marijuana and everything it stands for and some love marijuana and everything it stands for. But medical marijuana has nothing to do with what marijuana stands for and everything to do with whether Richard Eastman's going to keep his food down or Scott Imler's going to have a seizure or Bob Randall's going to go blind."
WHATFG
Well-Known Member
...we really are the politest people...lol...
CalyxCrusher
Well-Known Member
Thank you for admitting its flawed, goes a long way to explaining your character. A rec user telling medical patients that their dosage is wrong. Could the virtue signalling be any heavier?
So youre the almighty one who decides what constitutes enough on a per case basis? Based on what evidence and facts? Are you a physician? Ah thats right, you teach people about stocks......LOL get a clue you dillusional moron
VIANARCHRIS
Well-Known Member
I usually like reading your posts, but you are so far out to lunch on this, I question your sobriety and motives. Why don't your elderly relatives cut back on their medications by 95% and see what happens? Let me know in a year, and I'll reconsider my dosage.Oh, you were remarking how your 49 plant license was taken away and how it was necessary to your health.
To which I questioned why you couldn't get adequate "medicine" from 4 plants, which is why you are stuck with requiring the services of LPs if pressed to act under the Law.
After seeing what fellow Canucks have been doing outdoors in the 2018 thread, I am fairly certain one could get enough of a "medicinal supplement" for a year from 2-3 plants...and that still leaves the winter for indoor.
Your supposed consumption rate seems a little out of line for 49 plants. After all, others here seem to think you can garner a lot more than 1.5 lbs from that amount quarterly. Are you sure the micro-producer license isn't the one you really should be applying for instead of lamenting about medical ones?
Then you could turn it into a proper business and make an income while you treat your illness! If you can handle 49 plants, why not 449 ? I'd like to walk into a store and buy a bag of your product...assuming it's any good, that is.
I had a medical doctor prescribe 10g/day and although I think all doctors are scum, I'm going to go with his recommendations over yours - yours seems to focus on the profitability of the LP's over the health and needs of patients. I really don't regulate my garden or usage based on what others think or say and I sure as hell have never had anybody argue that I only need a small fraction of my meds. Your lack of knowledge and poor comprehension of the subject is shining through. "why you couldn't get adequate "medicine" from 4 plants" - the mmpr didn't allow for ANY plants. If we hadn't taken the government to court and won, there would be no recreational grows either.
Why in the fuck would I apply for a micro-producer license to grow my own medicine? My mmar is grandfathered by the court injunction. No doctors, no renewals, no contact with HC - ever. I can grow 49 plants at a time for life. I'm really not sure why my plant count offends you so much. but I sure as fuck don't need to explain myself to you and I really don't give a fuck what anyone thinks.
Now with recreational use, I am free to share up to an oz at a time with friends legally. So can everyone else. I encourage everyone to do just that to undercut the LP's.
I'm not sure why you picked a fight with me, should of picked on someone you could intimidate - I'm not that guy.
Last edited:
VIANARCHRIS
Well-Known Member
I have a job - I'm not now nor have I ever been interested in growing commercially. I don't know why you can't wrap your little mind around the fact that 49 plants is a personal amount for a medical patient. I don't need an extra 400. And I'm no where near the plant counts of some, there are 200 plant licences out there.
How much do you grow and sell per year? Does it supplement your income, or do you grow full time? What happens if you only grow half as much? Can you still meet your rent? People are saying you are not a patient at all and shouldn't grow any plants.
HotWaterKarl
Well-Known Member
Does seem quite low...I am doing a 60 plant SOG right now and certainly hope I get more then that. Last run was less than half the plants (28 ) but double the size on the same 8x4, same lights etc. and I got almost 4lbs. So I think double the plants half the size should yield close to the same...damned if it would be 1.5 lbs though, that would be super tragic for me and the patient I grow for.
heckler73
Well-Known Member
I think I need to point something out here.
This thread has its own half-baked assumptions with people who think THEY have the moral ground to make character judgments on those who invest in the industry. You all have no problem casting aspersions upon people who are actually trying to help us all reach the goals of legalization, while they capitalize on it in the same manner one would with other ""fun" comestibles as their reward, in lieu of the product itself. And sure, I don't consider myself guiltless...I'm fairly certain I've let my grey-market emotions get in the way of my legal-market aspirations on occasion.
Yet, when you're scrutinized as to your motives, look what happens. Look at how protective you get and ready to dog-pile upon someone trying to suss out some basic facts. You act as if you have something to hide. The gov't has even made allowance in the new legislation so one can continue with grandfathered licenses for such purposes while opening a path for new "patients" that need special exemptions; granted, the process is not clearly delineated from my readings of the legislation proposals, but I presume they can and will be worked out in some manner as to be amenable with the needs of future applicants.
You can rightly question my ignorance of "medical" dosages if you feel necessary, but if you can't explain your position cogently, then what is there to defend?
I've read the Weedsel articles (or themes, may be more appropriate), I've watched these LP bashing threads with the sometimes hyperbolic claims. The arguments are spuriously founded and seemingly based on people with personal bones to pick due to their "missing the boat" in some fashion. Sorry, Vianarchris, but those articles are in poor taste and peppered with speculative nonsense. They would be improved with some more fact-digging and reduced guttersnipe sensationalism, because I don't doubt there are some shady characters working in the industry. I've seen plenty of it in the miners, so why not cannabis? .
For the record, I don't care if one grows 49 plants or 49000, although if the latter, I'd be impressed...just be honest about it (within context...no need for some details), especially when it's just for personal use. Your combined reactions are tantamount to someone using a "medical guise". I'm not saying you are, just your reaction leads to that question.
After all, that's why the MMAR was repealed because people WEREN'T honest, conducted "business" inconsiderately and fucked it for the rest when given the opportunity.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/court-ruling-could-send-private-marijuana-grow-ops-up-in-smoke/article23513590/
It's one of those cases where "free-market" principles show themselves for the failing they are, with negative externalities essentially dismissed from the calculus. What's the result? Gov't intervention to enact benchmarks for quality guidance. It must be done this way under this spec, etc. etc... just like every other legal manufacturing business. Does this create a barrier to entry? Yes, but only to those who probably shouldn't be getting into the "business" in the first place. Society at large has certain expectations of professionalism, you know, despite ITS nebulous definition.
It also doesn't help when you openly state a desire to see all LPs fail, without even providing solid rationale for it other than "they took my license". That whiffs of ulterior motives or communist delusions of smashing capitalism.
Also, I took all the responses I received in mind (I wasn't playing devil's advocate to be an asshole) and contemplated them while filling out the questionnaire as ORIGINALLY linked by CannabisCandor.ca
CLICK HERE FOR THE Gov't LINK (open until Jan 20 2018 )
Anything in the proposed legislation that tried to suggest "plant counts" as a metric, I countered with reasoned arguments (including details about growing methods... They want scientific reasoning? I'll give them scientific reasoning!), pushing "area" as the suggested primary metric for license determination because--as evidenced in this thread--plant counts do not determine output, never mind the other suggested metrics they proposed. What I (and my friend/mentor) did with 45 plants is clearly laughable 20 years later, but under the method and conditions (which no one has directly questioned, oddly) it yielded well based on peer-review at the time.
Micro-growers should be comparable in size to micro-breweries, with an area of one "unit" in a small industrial park being sufficient basis for such scale. But that leaves the questions of medical collectives and "U-grows" up in the air, since they would not need to be that size in order to function. Maybe they need some more (voter consulted) legislation defining those branches of production to properly address the "market" in all its "guises"?
I have to acknowledge the value of that link. I don't know if I would have stumbled across that otherwise. So kudos for that. That kind of article writing is more valuable.
I also suggest that anyone genuinely interested in the matter to take a couple hours to go through it and read each of the links to legislation they provide with the questions, even if you don't answer them. It is rather enlightening and I was surprised with how well-constructed some of it was, but it does have some parts that need addressing, like warning labels and content limits. They should NOT be plastering the packaging with crap like tobacco, and the 30mg/mL limit is an unnecessary constraint and expense on extract producers. The consumer will know how to administer the required dosage for effect and doesn't need arbitrary limits set for their "protection" although the content should be clearly determined and labeled.
Overall, if the gov't continues to seek public input in that manner going forward, I will be pleasantly surprised. That is a lot closer to direct democracy than anything I've witnessed in my lifetime, allowing one to properly express themselves without need for representative filtration in the HoC.
You may now return to your regular ironically titled thread, GUILT-FREE
This thread has its own half-baked assumptions with people who think THEY have the moral ground to make character judgments on those who invest in the industry. You all have no problem casting aspersions upon people who are actually trying to help us all reach the goals of legalization, while they capitalize on it in the same manner one would with other ""fun" comestibles as their reward, in lieu of the product itself. And sure, I don't consider myself guiltless...I'm fairly certain I've let my grey-market emotions get in the way of my legal-market aspirations on occasion.
Yet, when you're scrutinized as to your motives, look what happens. Look at how protective you get and ready to dog-pile upon someone trying to suss out some basic facts. You act as if you have something to hide. The gov't has even made allowance in the new legislation so one can continue with grandfathered licenses for such purposes while opening a path for new "patients" that need special exemptions; granted, the process is not clearly delineated from my readings of the legislation proposals, but I presume they can and will be worked out in some manner as to be amenable with the needs of future applicants.
You can rightly question my ignorance of "medical" dosages if you feel necessary, but if you can't explain your position cogently, then what is there to defend?
I've read the Weedsel articles (or themes, may be more appropriate), I've watched these LP bashing threads with the sometimes hyperbolic claims. The arguments are spuriously founded and seemingly based on people with personal bones to pick due to their "missing the boat" in some fashion. Sorry, Vianarchris, but those articles are in poor taste and peppered with speculative nonsense. They would be improved with some more fact-digging and reduced guttersnipe sensationalism, because I don't doubt there are some shady characters working in the industry. I've seen plenty of it in the miners, so why not cannabis? .
For the record, I don't care if one grows 49 plants or 49000, although if the latter, I'd be impressed...just be honest about it (within context...no need for some details), especially when it's just for personal use. Your combined reactions are tantamount to someone using a "medical guise". I'm not saying you are, just your reaction leads to that question.
After all, that's why the MMAR was repealed because people WEREN'T honest, conducted "business" inconsiderately and fucked it for the rest when given the opportunity.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/court-ruling-could-send-private-marijuana-grow-ops-up-in-smoke/article23513590/
It's one of those cases where "free-market" principles show themselves for the failing they are, with negative externalities essentially dismissed from the calculus. What's the result? Gov't intervention to enact benchmarks for quality guidance. It must be done this way under this spec, etc. etc... just like every other legal manufacturing business. Does this create a barrier to entry? Yes, but only to those who probably shouldn't be getting into the "business" in the first place. Society at large has certain expectations of professionalism, you know, despite ITS nebulous definition.
It also doesn't help when you openly state a desire to see all LPs fail, without even providing solid rationale for it other than "they took my license". That whiffs of ulterior motives or communist delusions of smashing capitalism.
Also, I took all the responses I received in mind (I wasn't playing devil's advocate to be an asshole) and contemplated them while filling out the questionnaire as ORIGINALLY linked by CannabisCandor.ca
CLICK HERE FOR THE Gov't LINK (open until Jan 20 2018 )
Anything in the proposed legislation that tried to suggest "plant counts" as a metric, I countered with reasoned arguments (including details about growing methods... They want scientific reasoning? I'll give them scientific reasoning!), pushing "area" as the suggested primary metric for license determination because--as evidenced in this thread--plant counts do not determine output, never mind the other suggested metrics they proposed. What I (and my friend/mentor) did with 45 plants is clearly laughable 20 years later, but under the method and conditions (which no one has directly questioned, oddly) it yielded well based on peer-review at the time.
Micro-growers should be comparable in size to micro-breweries, with an area of one "unit" in a small industrial park being sufficient basis for such scale. But that leaves the questions of medical collectives and "U-grows" up in the air, since they would not need to be that size in order to function. Maybe they need some more (voter consulted) legislation defining those branches of production to properly address the "market" in all its "guises"?
I have to acknowledge the value of that link. I don't know if I would have stumbled across that otherwise. So kudos for that. That kind of article writing is more valuable.
I also suggest that anyone genuinely interested in the matter to take a couple hours to go through it and read each of the links to legislation they provide with the questions, even if you don't answer them. It is rather enlightening and I was surprised with how well-constructed some of it was, but it does have some parts that need addressing, like warning labels and content limits. They should NOT be plastering the packaging with crap like tobacco, and the 30mg/mL limit is an unnecessary constraint and expense on extract producers. The consumer will know how to administer the required dosage for effect and doesn't need arbitrary limits set for their "protection" although the content should be clearly determined and labeled.
Overall, if the gov't continues to seek public input in that manner going forward, I will be pleasantly surprised. That is a lot closer to direct democracy than anything I've witnessed in my lifetime, allowing one to properly express themselves without need for representative filtration in the HoC.
You may now return to your regular ironically titled thread, GUILT-FREE
VIANARCHRIS
Well-Known Member
All that to accuse me of lying about my plants and what I do with them? I didn't bother to read the rest - nothing you have to say interests me. You continue on with your half-baked assumptions and corresponding accusations and I'll continue doing what works for me. I don't need to explain my life to you or anybody else. You don't need to like my articles either, doesn't hurt my feelings none, but don't jump on me for bashing the LP's just because you don't agree. I haven't written one word that is false, everything I've written has been researched, or is simply observation. If you are looking for absolute rubbish, please refer to the reports and statements submitted to court by LP'sduring the mmpr fight and the Allard trial. I use research and facts.
WHATFG
Well-Known Member
...you haven't read the small scale thread have you?...can't remember the title....ahhhh the hopes and dreams of the small scale craft producers making meds for the sick.....full stop...we as patients had to fight like fuck to retain those grow rights...it was everything LPs could do to shut that down...fuck them! That is reason enough, and the political stench just adds to it.