 |
 |
 |
 |
#626425 - 01/07/08 05:49 PM
Re: Let's put to rest the question
[Re: temple]
|
Member
Registered: 02/18/07
Posts: 177
Loc: Nunya
|
So Crack is Sch II, and Cannabis, which is not even really addictive and has no real physical w/d symptoms (besides wishing you had it lol) is Sch I. The priorities of the DEA are really, really messed up. No, crack is not a schedule 2. Cocaine, in its powder form is. Crack is altered to be smoked, abused. Crack is a illegal narcotic which serves no medical purpose. Cocaine is used commonly in surgery for its vasoconstrictive properties (i.e. to stop bleeding) in low doses in specially prepared solutions (i.e. diluted in a fluid preparation). I've heard cocaine is even used in extreme cases of epistasis (nose bleeds) in ERs. So, yes it does serve a medical purpose. THC, in some cases, is sch. 3, such in the case of Marinol, a medication made for nausea. A new medication, called Sativex (I believe that's the name) will hit the market soon. It's made of THC for cancer patients and pain management. Its active ingredient is THC, the active ingredient in marijuana. Not sure of its schedule. I think we will see THC used more and more in research and in medications, as it has medicinal use. Some people (a handful) even receive government grown and rolled joints. I saw it in a documentary called, "In Pot We Trust." What a good film. Any medication or drug that is altered and used in a way that is not intended is illegal.
_________________________
VIP? Drinks on me!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
#626586 - 01/07/08 09:20 PM
Re: Let's put to rest the question
[Re: DonVito]
|
Board Addict
Registered: 02/08/05
Posts: 374
|
So Crack is Sch II, and Cannabis, which is not even really addictive and has no real physical w/d symptoms (besides wishing you had it lol) is Sch I. The priorities of the DEA are really, really messed up. No, crack is not a schedule 2. Cocaine, in its powder form is. Crack is altered to be smoked, abused. Crack is a illegal narcotic which serves no medical purpose. Cocaine is used commonly in surgery for its vasoconstrictive properties (i.e. to stop bleeding) in low doses in specially prepared solutions (i.e. diluted in a fluid preparation). I've heard cocaine is even used in extreme cases of epistasis (nose bleeds) in ERs. So, yes it does serve a medical purpose. THC, in some cases, is sch. 3, such in the case of Marinol, a medication made for nausea. A new medication, called Sativex (I believe that's the name) will hit the market soon. It's made of THC for cancer patients and pain management. Its active ingredient is THC, the active ingredient in marijuana. Not sure of its schedule. I think we will see THC used more and more in research and in medications, as it has medicinal use. Some people (a handful) even receive government grown and rolled joints. I saw it in a documentary called, "In Pot We Trust." What a good film. Any medication or drug that is altered and used in a way that is not intended is illegal. From the DEA own website "crack cocaine" is schedule II. However, we have special "crack laws" (separate from it's scheduling) which I think are being changed/overturned because the laws are essentially racist.
Edited by Cooly (01/07/08 09:21 PM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
#627228 - 01/08/08 07:41 PM
Re: Let's put to rest the question
[Re: Cooly]
|
Member
Registered: 02/18/07
Posts: 177
Loc: Nunya
|
So Crack is Sch II, and Cannabis, which is not even really addictive and has no real physical w/d symptoms (besides wishing you had it lol) is Sch I. The priorities of the DEA are really, really messed up. No, crack is not a schedule 2. Cocaine, in its powder form is. Crack is altered to be smoked, abused. Crack is a illegal narcotic which serves no medical purpose. Cocaine is used commonly in surgery for its vasoconstrictive properties (i.e. to stop bleeding) in low doses in specially prepared solutions (i.e. diluted in a fluid preparation). I've heard cocaine is even used in extreme cases of epistasis (nose bleeds) in ERs. So, yes it does serve a medical purpose. THC, in some cases, is sch. 3, such in the case of Marinol, a medication made for nausea. A new medication, called Sativex (I believe that's the name) will hit the market soon. It's made of THC for cancer patients and pain management. Its active ingredient is THC, the active ingredient in marijuana. Not sure of its schedule. I think we will see THC used more and more in research and in medications, as it has medicinal use. Some people (a handful) even receive government grown and rolled joints. I saw it in a documentary called, "In Pot We Trust." What a good film. Any medication or drug that is altered and used in a way that is not intended is illegal. From the DEA own website "crack cocaine" is schedule II. However, we have special "crack laws" (separate from it's scheduling) which I think are being changed/overturned because the laws are essentially racist. They list the synonyms for drugs (for all of the controlled substances), and crack is a synonym used for cocaine. Cocaine, in "crack" form is not addressed specifically as a CII med. Cocaine is. But WE know it is illegal to alter controlled substances. So crack, my friend, is illegal.
Edited by DonVito (01/08/08 07:43 PM)
_________________________
VIP? Drinks on me!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
#628561 - 01/10/08 07:01 PM
Re: Let's put to rest the schedule 2 question
[Re: castlecrazy]
|
GRAND Pooh-Bah
Registered: 09/04/06
Posts: 10303
Loc: NOT 40!
|
Let's get a couple of things straight here. This is an INTERNATIONAL forum, not only for USA residents, therefore you are going to get different meds in different categories according to the laws of your home country. 'Schedule II' meds are more or less the same the world over, except that certain analgesics are rated differently in the US than elsewhere. Also, there are some which are available ONLY in the USA, like hydrocodone and meperidine, both of which I would dearly love to be able to access but not a single American supplier will ship either to the UK or Ireland. Which is a great pity, because SWIM has used hydro for breakthrough pain thanks to friends in the US, and found it to be just the job, in a dosage of around 40-50mg, for the 4 hours or so where the OxyContin stops working (it lasts around 8 hours, NOT 12!). If anyone knows of a site which ships hydro at a decent price over the pond, PLEASE let us know - it would fill the 'gap' we have here in analgesia. Same goes for meperidine. As for benzodiazepines, they are all Class 'C' here and in Schedule IV, except for two which have been recently 'upgraded' to Schedule III - temazepam and flunitrazepam (Restoril/Normison and Rohypnol/Rohydorm). There are also some meds which in the USA are classed as Schedule I, meaning that a doctor can not even prescribe them, yet are used frequently and effectively in the UK. The better known ones would be Diconal (dipipanone) and Heroin Hydrochloride (diacetylmorphine). I don't think a British doctor could operate without the option of prescribing these meds. I mean, a Road Traffic accident frequently requires the fastest-acting and most powerful pain relief for those involved, and Heroin is certainly the drug of choice in those situations. How, then, can the US FDA say that there is 'no medical use' for these? And I have just been told that Rohypnol, far from being classed along with diazepam and lorazepam as it is here, is also non-prescribable in the USA. WHY? It is one of the most useful and effective benzodiazepine sleeping aids on the market, and has the added benefit of a longer half-life than most benzo hypnotics, which means I can do without a morning dose of Xanax! That is the silliest one I have heard of. Rohypnol is probably, along with Flormidal (midazolam), the most effective and useful sleeper available on prescription. Yet what Americans call 'Ambien', Stilnoct or Stilnox to everybody else, is marketed aggressively without any mention of the dreadful side-effects that drug (zolpidem) can produce, some of the worst of which are hallucinations, night panics, and next-day hangover which can include confusion and ataxia. You wouldn't want to drive to work the day after taking one of those! They also lose their effect after only about 4 or 5 nights' use. Zopiclone (Zimovane) would be a better choice, though the fast tolerance build-up remains, as with all of the 'Z' drugs. On the whole, though, the scheduling of medicines is pretty much the same the world over, with the major exceptions being those I have outlined above. And please, if anybody knows of anywhere that will ship hydro or meperidine to the UK, please let us know! SWIM has tried three brands of hydrocodone; Watson, Vintage/Qualitest and Mallinckrodt, and far and away the best and most effective of these are the 10/325mg 'M367' Mallinckrodt pills. They are much higher quality than the others, which are yellow, not white. First-class analgesic, though pricey. Worth my finding a transatlantic supplier, though... Just a couple of points: meperidine is used frequently in the UK as pethidine, and they have made flunitrazepam a CD now, along with temazepam. The other benzodiazepines in the UK are POM. God only knows where to get pethidine online though! I wish I did; it's vital that I get it quick in case of a kidney stone, and casualty cannot be relied upon (except to give ibuprofen).
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
#631287 - 01/15/08 09:47 AM
Re: Let's put to rest the schedule 2 question
[Re: jonjoe]
|
Board Addict
Registered: 12/30/02
Posts: 371
Loc: The Deep South (USA)
|
Can someone please explain what the difference and some examples of Class/Schedule??? 1, 2, and 3 drugs? What is Hydro? Class/Schedule II??? schedule I includes heroin(tm), marijuana, lsd, and other non-prescribablye drugs. schedule II includes morphine, cocaine, oxycontin, more or less pure anything (including codeine) schedule III is mixes of stuff like percodan, vicodin, t3's, etc... schedule IV stuff I'm not real hip on... I think benzos are class IV now... schedule V is stuff like paragoric... you can actually buy this stuff OTC in some states. I don't do stimulants so I forget where they fit in.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
#631293 - 01/15/08 10:03 AM
Re: Let's put to rest the schedule 2 question
[Re: spacejew]
|
Board Addict
Registered: 12/30/02
Posts: 371
Loc: The Deep South (USA)
|
You have to understand there are a myrad of circumstances that bring people here, and to order meds online. For many of us we don't have insurance, Hi, I know I've bought meds from IOPs since the late 80s after my mother found an article in the AARP magazine about saving money buying overseas. For years the only stuff I bought from IOPs was stuff like blood pressure meds and cholesterols meds for her and non-schedule pain meds ( Tramadol and Soma) for me since I could get them for less than the insurance co-pay from the UK (100 Soma for 30$ and 100 Tramadol for 30$ vs. 30 Soma for 15$ and 30 Tramadol for 15$). now that I don't have insurance I buy virtually ALL my meds from IOPs (except hydrocodone, that's cheap through legal sources and expensive online). even schedule II stuff... the only schedule II stuff I take is Testosterone but I buy it for 60$ a 10cc bottle online which is about half what the local drug store charges.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
#631300 - 01/15/08 10:10 AM
Re: Let's put to rest the schedule 2 question
[Re: dws1]
|
Board Addict
Registered: 12/30/02
Posts: 371
Loc: The Deep South (USA)
|
I agree cll medication, if needed should be easy enough to get from pain management or your regular doctor if you have a legitimate pain condition. I have had 2 lumbar spinal surgeries, and I have never had a problem in getting my cll medication from my regular doctor which I have had for the past 4-5 years. My doctor understands that i need the medication and he does not want me off of it because I need to be able to function, I can not when I am in severe pain. Now I have lowered my meds by at least 50%, I just did not want my tolerance to get to high, even though the doc is willing to prescribe more. I understand that in some areas it is hard to find a doctor that will treat pain proporly. For you guys with legitimate conditions hang in there and just keep looking for a pm doc that will treat even if you have to drive an hour one way! Please do not order cll's over the net it is illegal and not worth it! who's going to pay for it? not just the meds... methadone for example is dirt cheap. I mean all these doctor visits at a couple hundred a whack just to finally find a compasionate doc who'll write a reasonable script for say... 2 vicodin a day plus some Soma? month after month. sure I don't do 2 vics EVERY day... some days I do none, some days I'll do 1 just to knock the pain back for sleep, some days I do 6 (1 every 4 hours). thanks to the IOPs I can buy my own Soma, ibuprofen/codeine, and Tramadol that takes care of 29 days out of the month... and on that 1 BAD DAY I can toss on either some benzo just to sleep or 1 of my preciously horded vicodins from the doc.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
#631312 - 01/15/08 10:19 AM
Re: Let's put to rest the question
[Re: TheMoodyBlue]
|
Pooh-Bah
Registered: 11/17/04
Posts: 1077
Loc: In God's Grace in Austin!
|
"They list the synonyms for drugs (for all of the controlled substances), and crack is a synonym used for cocaine. Cocaine, in "crack" form is not addressed specifically as a CII med. Cocaine is. But WE know it is illegal to alter controlled substances. So crack, my friend, is illegal." Actually Cooly, that is not exactly correct. The CSA really does not distinguish between variants of a scheduled substance as long as the basic pharmacology remains the same (the same precursors and salts, for example). Now, I seriously doubt that a physician would prescribe crack for a myriad number of extremely obvious reasons, but at least technically it would be the same as prescribing pharmaceutical cocaine (although certainly not in practice, and no physician in his/her right mind would prescribe it). The difference is in medical indication - there is no medical reason or treatment that would indicate the prescribing of the crack variant of cocaine and no FDA approved production of that type of cocaine either. With that said, it would not be right of the bat illegal if a pharmaceutical house applied for permission to produce such a compound for medical prescription (and that would be one entertaining substance production application to DEA)!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|