New Cannabinoid Laws ban Common Products

As stated above the law (s) exempt substances that are already FDA approved (like tylenol).

But non FDA regulated items (like echinacea, a cannabinoid receptor agonist which is not approved by the FDA) are subject to it and are now "illegal".

This is getting silly.....
 
This is ridiculous...acetaminophen? Come the fuck on, it's in almost everything. Pretty soon there won't be a pharmacy section at stores anymore. I'm glad I don't live in those states, but heaven forbid I'm driving through, get pulled over randomly, and have some non-narcotic headache relief sitting in my purse!
 
^ People will get too pissed. What we are seeing around the world, especially in the Middle East, are people starting to get fed up with their governments. I'll give it until December then either the UK or the US have major rioting
 
My grandparents told me today that they heard on the news that acetaminophen (well, they said Tylenol of course) is a very bad drug and should be avoided...they're old so didn't indicate what news station/when/the rest of the context, but I instantly wondered if it had any connection to this.
 
probably because it can be hard on the liver. thats why my mom says she wont take it
 
My grandparents told me today that they heard on the news that acetaminophen (well, they said Tylenol of course) is a very bad drug and should be avoided...they're old so didn't indicate what news station/when/the rest of the context, but I instantly wondered if it had any connection to this.


They are correct! It is a bad drug because there is only a factor of 10 between the ED50 and the LD50. Very few drugs have such a narrow margin, especially OTC ones.

Very hard on the liver indeed!
 
It's very effective, I don't think I'd consider it a bad drug. I know I have headaches that respond to APAP but not so much ibuprofen or aspirin. I think acetaminophen only causes serious liver damage when it's combined with alcohol, used constantly for years, or in overdose. I hear you on the narrow therapeutic range though.
 
^ Yeah, it's hard on the liver, but for someone like me that RARELY takes it, CWEs it out of opiates, and rarely ever drinks (and never mixes apap with alcohol if I do), it's relatively safe for headaches. I don't find it all too effective, but it's definitely one of the more dangerous OTC drugs because of that narrow margin. Plus, I know way too many people who were teenagers and "tried to OD on tylenol" and when I've told them that even years later they could have still caused some damage to their liver, they tell me I don't know what I'm talking about. Ah, the perks of being a BLer and trying to educate friends 8)
 
There are already hundreds of cannabinoids out that they haven't banned and won't because they're 100% structurally different than JWH-XXX or AM-XXXX or whatever. Like ZZ-1 or O-XXX, zz-1 is really easy to get and it's a cute little molecule that doesn't look at all like any other cannabinoid I've seen.

zz-1 might not be a cannabinoid at all, it is an opioid analgesic according it's MPPP designation, please read all you can on MPPP's and their dangers.
I am working on a wiki article on ZZ-1 as soon as the lab results come in and there are verifiable references.
 
As stated above the law (s) exempt substances that are already FDA approved (like tylenol).

But non FDA regulated items (like echinacea, a cannabinoid receptor agonist which is not approved by the FDA) are subject to it and are now "illegal".

This is getting silly.....

I could be wrong, but it is my understanding that they have to be synthetically created substances. So echinacea would still be legal.
 
Why dont they ban human beings while theyre at it for producing endocannabinoids? -.-
 
Good thing we don't call 5-HT receptors "LSD Receptors" or these fuckheads would be banning damn near every food in existence. Same goes for calling Dopamine receptors "Cocaine Receptors".

off topic: what other receptors (besides cannabinoid) are named after drugs? I can think of opioid receptors, GHB receptors, nicotinic receptors...

Muscarinic receptors as well. Until the late '70s it was not uncommon for the literature to refer to an "LSD receptor" and referring to uncompetitive NMDA channel blockers as agonists of the "PCP receptor" was even more common. There are also several examples of DARIs being called "cocaine receptor agonists." I definitely think laws like this would not be passed if cannabinoid receptors were called "Anandamide receptors." In this political climate scientists must be very conscious of their word choice.
 
What molecule is ZZ-1?

its' actually not a synthetic cannabinoid, it is a MPPP.

Basically it is a vendor name for a synthetic opioid now found in many commercial spice brands now that just about every synthetic cannabinoid is prosecutable under analogue laws companies are turning to more dangerous alternatives.

jerm %)
 
Why dont they ban human beings while theyre at it for producing endocannabinoids? -.-
Don't give them any suggestions,
our minds are the final frontier as far as civil liberties go, so the way in which we control/regulate our own Anandamide levels is still our personal right......

jerm
 
ha! this is pretty stupid, but in australia they are trying (or hopefully they have dropped it) to ban:

1) datura and brugmansia (no street in the country would be without a 'commercial producer' under this designation)
2) ANY PLANT CONTAINING DMT (you know like, lawn grass)
3) ANY PLANT CONTAINING MESCALINE (>10% of cacti)

and lots of other retarded shit. fuck tha poleece not, fuck the idiot politicians.

all the more reason to get educated and get involved in policy making. check out ethan nadelmann as a US example and alex wodak as an aus example of people trying to reverse this kind of idiocy. edit: also david nutt as a UK example. best article title regarding his forced resignation from the drug council: Nutt Sacked!


finally, i have never heard of this acetaminophen, i have only heard of paracetamol

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paracetamol =D
 
Top