Prompted by “CBD Cannabis Alone Wouldn’t Stop Her Son’s Seizures, So This Mom Is Fighting To Give Him THC”: http://reset.me/story/cbd-cannabis-alone-wouldnt-stop-her-sons-seizures-so-this-mom-is-fighting-to-give-him-thc/
“Did it work?” I asked. I had heard that Charlotte’s Web didn’t necessarily work as well for every epileptic patient as it had for Charlotte.
“Yes, wonderfully.” She paused. “At least, for quite a while it did.”
She also remarked on the quality of the batches she received from Colorado; as a nurse, she understood the importance of proper titration, or dose control, so she made sure to test every batch she received before giving any to her son.
“It was quite consistent. Every batch tested very precisely at 20% CBD and 1% THC, which was just what he needed.”
She pulled a single sheet of neatly-folded paper from her purse. “Until we got this.”
Her latest batch of Charlotte’s Web had tested at 0.00% THC.
“That’s when his seizures came back,” she said.
“He needs the THC?” I asked.
“At least a little bit,” she said. “That’s why we had to move.”
— End of Pasted Clip —
One-size-fits-all shoes would be obviously problematic. The unhealthy stress from anyone not fitting those shoes would logically lead to all sorts of unrest — the actual source of abuse (not the legality of drugs), but do not just take my word on that point…
“Researchers have long recognized the strong correlation between stress and substance abuse…” — United States National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) [emphasis mine]
The prohibitionist NIDA authored that statement back in 1995, and there still is no ‘war’ on unhealthy stress, instead of the continuing outrage harming millions of non-violent (i.e. actually innocent by any reasonable rule-of-law) victims in the form of the war on some drugs (the quintessential one-size-fits-all law leading to all sorts of unhealthy stress — so more drug abuse, not less).
While too many Americans negated the true application of an unalienable right to liberty long ago (i.e. liberty limited only by the right itself without “slippery slope starting” exception), after ample careful thought for several years, I realize (and apparently alone promote) the brilliance of that concise definition of liberty that “We the people” are supposed to lawfully uphold — logically, but no longer judicially, via amendment nine in our self-proclaimed “supreme law of the land” (i.e. “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people” — obviously including the unalienable right to liberty).
Part of that brilliance, in addition to necessarily instantly ending slavery and treating women equally by such already-established law (both of those hypocritically avoided due to pre-American conservatism still entrenched across the political spectrum — necessitating instead the effective torturing of law to achieve such supposed equality), would allow any child needing the THC experience to instantly receive it without lawful limit (and corresponding harm demonstrably against public safety).
Like a child probably instantly spitting out alcohol, the notion of many young children actively seeking out cannabis (or any other misfitting experience) for perception alteration is ridiculous. The point here is logic dictates that it remains foolish to form one-size-fits-all (i.e. risk-based) laws for the sake of combating the relatively rare abusive case (unalienable right to liberty be horribly damned), because of the likely exceeding harm ironically from that kind of law (probably a greater risk against public safety). Effective education is the proper solution to prevent such rare cases (e.g. the reverse psychological “meh” approach to prevent children of any age from getting too excited about prematurely launching their brains into the ‘mental cosmos’), and law remains still applicable upon actually proven harm.
Reason abuse has been too often leveraged to form law abuse and the “slippery slope” (typically in the form of legal precedence) carrying our nation disastrously away from its initial reason for being — a revolution against tyranny.
The lack of appreciation for liberty limited only by the right itself is matched by the lack of appreciation for preventing the broad harm from law abuse (and the reason abuse forming that abusive law). If society does not promptly correct this obvious outrage, logic dictates such society will righteously fall hard (perhaps unfortunately by another bloody revolution that should be unnecessary to remind the public of the horrors of tyrannical rule by favoritism increasingly threatening society these days).
Despite terribly popular consensus to the contrary, regulations (including the Controlled Substances Act) are not the answer against corruption, because corruption easily effectively negates regulations by escaping towards favoritism (e.g. bribing regulators). Sufficient public exposure always defeats corruption, because public support (needed by the public and private sectors) obviously presses against that corruption via public outrage. Despite propaganda to the contrary, logic dictates the sufficiently organized masses are always the most powerful human-made force (capable of crushing any private or public sector infrastructure). In the case of private sector abuse, if a company is sufficiently publicly exposed as behaving corruptly, and competition exists without such corruption, then public demand naturally shifts towards that competitor without liberty-infringing law.
in other words, public demand shapes society. Entertainers are logically the masters of shaping public demand (e.g. “the pen is mightier than the sword”). Sadly, entertainers are primarily shaping public demand — including shaping themselves — mainly in a way leading to terrible laws and beliefs effectively increasing the comparison of tyranny in our nation against that revolted against by our Founding Fathers. Regulations are spiraling out of control via the aforementioned “slippery slope” with no sign of public outrage to put the necessary stoppage in place, with logically large thanks to the mainstream media — the best positioned entertainers (yes, they are entertainers) not properly reporting law abuse to naturally raise such obviously necessary public outrage. The result is massive unhealthy stress from increasing rule-by-favoritism strengthening the oligarchical “elitist” class pathetically leading to “pouring gasoline on the fire to put it out” — more public demand for regulatory interference by pre-American conservatives still dominating our nation across the political spectrum after over two hundred years of existence (e.g. the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer due basically to rule-by-favoritism disguised as rule-by-law).
Real progressivism and liberalism (and American conservatism) would negate regulations for the sake of equality (i.e. actuality against favoritism), and this lone wolf defending actual liberty against tyranny by whole truth reasoning continues to repeatedly echo that necessary outrage, so you can hopefully join me in forming the necessary public “choir”, and so the child above needing THC (i.e. The Healthy Child) can be relieved from suffering (obviously the point of any just rule-of-law).
That is my post for this 4/20 and in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts here… Patriots’ Day.