[Bored chemist]

guessing is wrong

Since neither of us has data from a proper trial, both of us are "guessing", aren't we?
But one of us is a pharmaceutical chemist and the other is saying that the government should spend millions on the basis of his guess.

Legalization would mean freedom for selftherapy

Not really, because not many people can actually live their lives stoned.
 I take the view that cannabis should be legal because, as with alcohol, grown ups should be allowed to choose to take risks.
 I don't think that it is acceptable to say "Well- you poor people- the only medical help your government will give you is to tell you to get stoned, and hope that it doesn't damage your brain etc too much" .

[Osogovo (OP)]

haha You'll be surprised how the tolerance of the high effect is quick, so no from Sativa forget about stoning, tho now that is norm from decriminalized skunk probably You've seen the video tagged in this thread before ... let me simplfy in concern of recreational use like now the black market drawn many people in submission to wrong friendships and in case of corporatism if its not allowed personal growing the risk is again from the black market for the poor, tho not just poor because nowadays the middle class is just fable coz consumeristic indebted lifestyle, so only solution would be legalization, but as I said rural one so the hype would be drawn out from the cities, also like that chance for many to start selfsufficient farming lifestyle ...

what is more prejudice in this debate between me and You is the mine personal poverty and Your pharmacology profession thus Your arguments goes on one and mine on other side, in the end as I said it would be the awareness of the masses who has advantage ...

also its not acceptable O you blindfaited people your only exit is artificial patching for better immunization, altho here its the measure of human right in question and not why one system should or not impose authoritarianism, when something as substance is natural immunization agent the same should be allowed free for personal use, yet having own risk from any potential hype until the effects of the legalization hype settle it should be carefully addressed in the legislation, as I said moving it as such on country as rural legalization would be bargain ...
 

[Bored chemist]

You didn't come here to listen to reason did you?

[Osogovo (OP)]

You didn't come here to listen to reason did you?

this is subjective who is the voice of reason, by all measures eg. the standard model in particle physics shouldnt be standard anymore yet still is [1] this simply means claiming exclusivity in some debate even when things on paper appears logical is wrong kind of argument, thats why I am pointing that there should be invested extra amount of funds in weighing of artificial vs natural CBD so we would be clear which has better potential, if I was ignorant I would say whola I am exceptionally right, instead I am saying mids pandemics CBD should be either free perscription or allowed as personal remedy obtained by natural homegrown Cannabis Sativa ...

[Bored chemist]

"why CBD is not free distributed mids pandemics?"
Because there is no reason to think it would help.

[Osogovo (OP)]

"why CBD is not free distributed mids pandemics?"
Because there is no reason to think it would help.

says pharmaceutical chemist! at best Your opinion is professionally biased, if we know that if like this boosting T-Cells regularly in the immunity will mean less ill people overall thus less pharmaceutical consumerism do You have big ,mortage there ...

[Bored chemist]

Your opinion is professionally biased

Grown ups call this sort of bias "competence".

"why CBD is not free distributed mids pandemics?"
Because there is no reason to think it would help.

[Osogovo (OP)]

Your opinion is professionally biased

Grown ups call this sort of bias "competence".

yes career man have nothing to loose a what to say careerism usually is conformistic and swap normal reason with corporative or institutional even both as plutocratic hug nowadays so I can understand why by Your measure CBD should not be free prescribed, but think most of the People would reasoning otherwise ...

[Bored chemist]

Are you suggesting that my view is influenced by my job in the pharma industry?

[Osogovo (OP)]

Are you suggesting that my view is influenced by my job in the pharma industry?

indeed is conflict of interest, tho that dont means that per'se coz that You are against free CBD prescriptions mids pandemics, maybe in question is vaxing idolatry sorry for my sarcasm I went too offtopic and too pronaturalistic, but simply cant grasp why such natural remedy is not at least allowed as homegrown immunization plant ...

[Bored chemist]

indeed is conflict of interest,

No it isn't.
It's just prejudice on your part.

[Kryptid]

this is subjective who is the voice of reason

No, it isn't. Truth isn't subjective.

[Osogovo (OP)]

No, it isn't. Truth isn't subjective.

arguably, if we are observers and the mirror skewed then even small angle makes difference how is percieved the same, in this case as contra arguments through the Bored chemist pharmaceutical experience of the truth, I am not talking about potential but proposed real studies that show T-Cell boosting by CBD ...

[Bored chemist]

indeed is conflict of interest,

No it isn't.
It's just prejudice on your part.

Can you explain why there's a conflict of interest rather than just bias on your part?

[evan_au]

proposed real studies that show T-Cell boosting by CBD ...

Ok, so now you would like to propose a study, to see if CBD boosts T-Cell activity.
- Phase 3 Clinical Studies cost $10 million++
- What laboratory evidence do you have that would justify investing this sort of money into a Clinical Study?

[Bored chemist]

proposed real studies that show T-Cell boosting by CBD ...

Ok, so now you would like to propose a study, to see if CBD boosts T-Cell activity.
- Phase 3 Clinical Studies cost $10 million++
- What laboratory evidence do you have that would justify investing this sort of money into a Clinical Study?

I don't mind, in the circumstances, burning £10^7  to find out if the idea works. It's a reasonable investment (or "punt" if you prefer).  If you like, I will send you the ten pence that is my share.


It's a thousandth of what we gave Dido Harding to screw things up (because her husband "champions" the UK govt's  anti corruption efforts). I'm much more annoyed about that, but it's not the point.

I do mind spending more than that every year, on an ongoing basis, on something where nobody knows if it works or not.

And I'm also intrigued to hear the OP's response to this.

indeed is conflict of interest,

No it isn't.
It's just prejudice on your part.

Can you explain why there's a conflict of interest rather than just bias on your part?

[Kryptid]

on paper as formula, in reality studies show that there is glitch, why this is the result suppose bioresonance could be case, yet this is for now still fringe field, maybe in natural CBD there is some extra spin of electrons

Chemistry doesn't work that way. Electrons can only be arranged in a specific way in a molecule's ground state. Two molecules with the same structure must have identical electron configurations and thus identical chemical properties (unless there are different isotopes involved, and even those have a very minimal effect on chemistry for all elements except for the lightest ones).

[evan_au]

T-Cell boosting by CBD .

This news story (with a link to the peer-reviewed paper in Nature) suggests that exercise improves your immune system health.

Doctors have been telling us for ages that exercise is good for us. This is just one more reason why.

So do we invest a lot of money in something that probably won't work, or do we promote something that we are pretty sure will work?
https://thenewdaily.com.au/life/wellbeing/2021/03/19/walking-grows-bones

[Osogovo (OP)]

probably You both are ignoring the facts from the proposed quoted studies from the SiFo thread? Please rereed all the proposed links also that are part of the thread so You will not guess that CBD will not work, it works, only problem is that there are some studies that point to opposite results, for what I think the answer is synthetic cbd, and alone just this should be leveled, in same manner is going my reasoning in BiFo thread ...

@Bored chemist the spending on studies most probably would be lesser if that is joint transnational effort, for start there should be one international scientific CBD eForum where all discrepancies in the current studies will be leveled quickly and proposed joint direction on what should be the focus ...

@Kryptid hm when I say bioresonance here I mean how the body is recognizing the natural vs synthetic cbd, for what maybe in question are the natural bonds in other paired substances in the plant or how they left its fingerprint on CBD, as I am aware from the experiments of the biologist Petr Garyaev the electron fingerprints are leaved from everything on everything, still this is alternative and not mainstream science so it would be difficult such variables to go in the current scientific studies ...

[Kryptid]

the body is recognizing the natural vs synthetic cbd

It can't tell the difference. If the molecules are structurally identical, then the body has no means of knowing which one is synthetic and which one is natural.

the electron fingerprints are leaved from everything on everything

No, they're not. Electrons don't work that way.

I am aware from the experiments of the biologist Petr Garyaev

You should read the "criticism" section of that page.