cough medicine and marijuana


askandanswer
 Share

Recommended Posts

What’s the theological difference between cough medicine, with its high alcohol content, and medical marijuana? There seems to be a willingness to use cough medicine and a reluctance to use marijuana, even though some of the medical profession now seem to be willing to prescribe marijuana.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, askandanswer said:

What’s the theological difference between cough medicine, with its high alcohol content, and medical marijuana? There seems to be a willingness to use cough medicine and a reluctance to use marijuana, even though some of the medical profession now seem to be willing to prescribe marijuana.

 

I personally don't see much difference at all, if the marijuana is used in a medicinal fashion. In other words, I have friends who use marijuana extract and oils to treat their son's autism.  It appears to be working very well for them.  

Just like I don't have a problem using oxycotin for pain, alcohol in cough medince, etc, I don't see a problem with medicinal cannabis .  It is certainly against the WoW to use it in a non-medicinal fashion.

D&C 89:8 And again, tobacco is not for the body, neither for the belly, and is not good for man, but is an herb for bruises and all sick cattle, to be used with judgment and skill.

I would apply the above to marijuana too.  It is one of my pet-peeves . . .the drug war (especially on marijuana).  The DEA labels it a Schedule 1 drug with no medical use and a high abuse rate.  Yet the Federal Government itself holds a patent on cannibis claiming: 

Cannabinoids have been found to have antioxidant properties, unrelated to NMDA receptor antagonism. This new found property makes cannabinoids useful in the treatment and prophylaxis of wide variety of oxidation associated diseases, such as ischemic, age-related, inflammatory and autoimmune diseases.

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6630507.PN.&OS=PN/6630507&RS=PN/6630507

The history behind why hemp (as it was called prior to the 1930s) was outlawed is ridiculous.  It was outlawed for 2 reasons only, 1) racism 2) paper-industry.

The congressional records on when it was originally fined (and then outlawed) show that the Congressmen who were against it started calling it marijuana because a bunch of Mexicans were coming through the border who were heavy users of the drug and they wanted to find a way to basically throw them in jail. The 2nd reason (and more powerful reason) was because of the paper industry. The Constitution was written on hemp and as modern machinery started making growing crops much easier the price of hemp paper was set to drop dramatically as they could outproduce paper made from trees.  The papermill industry saw this and lobbied Congress to outlaw hemp-so they first put a $ 100 fine (IIRC) on every manufacturer of hemp and then within a few years they drove the hemp producers out of business, called it marijuana (ever wonder why we call it a Spanish word?-this is why) and outlawed it.

Now the Fed. Gov. (and local governments) doesn't want to reclassify it b/c a) that is where they get the majority of their drug busts from. It's an easy source of making them "look good" and "recovering" (i.e. stealing) money from people. And b) once they reclassify, it will open the door for actual real medical research which will find very shortly that there are a lot of benefits from it so it will make the government look stupid and it will also drive a lot of pharmaceutical company profits down as it will become much cheaper to treat medicinal problems (such as pain, etc.) with an over-the-counter solution rather than a prescribed narcotic.

I would however be very leery about smoking marijuana for "medicinal purposes". The big difference being that you don't drink a bottle of alcohol for a cough-you take cough medicine. 

Edited by yjacket
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good question, and I, too, will be interested in the answer.

At this point I don't see much difference, theologically. Legally, one requires a prescription (in most states where it is legal) and the other does not. Medicinally, I thought that the alcohol in the cough syrup is mostly there as a solvent/co-solvent and is not the actual active ingredient (I believe there are other medicines that are best delivered in an alcohol based solvent rather than water). But, theologically, I don't know what the difference is between the medicinal use of alcohol and marijuana.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Among the things I noted, Carborendum, about the Church's statement on those bills, I noted that they never addressed any "theological" issues. They addressed legal issues (what happens when state law conflicts with Federal law)  and scientific issues (the AMA has not seen any studies that convince them that marijuana use has true medical benefits). Perhaps those intersect with "theology" when we teach that we should be obedient to law and should use sound judgement in our stewardship over our bodies. But, to the extent that the law allows and the medical science recommends marijuana or alcohol, I don't see any difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Sunday21 said:

My scary experience with cough medicine! I was really sick and fevery and had a bad cough. I took a big slug and 1/2 an hour later...I thought oh well, I must be dying...I never took that stuff again!?

I was not aware that slugs were a form of cough medicine. I guess things must be different in Taranna. No doubt this was also a scary experience for the slug.  :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/17/2016 at 4:02 PM, askandanswer said:

What’s the theological difference between cough medicine, with its high alcohol content, and medical marijuana? There seems to be a willingness to use cough medicine and a reluctance to use marijuana, even though some of the medical profession now seem to be willing to prescribe marijuana.

 

I am not sure that I understand the question.  I don't think that either have any theological difference as long as prescribed by a physician both are A OK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

With every drug there are side effects – I have no problem with medical marijuana.  My objection is the using of medical marijuana for non-medical purposes as well as the insistence that marijuana made legally available for medical purposes retain elements (the side effects - like paranoid schizophrenia) that are not needed for medical purposes.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share