Select a page

May 5th

The existing black market for cannabis should be replaced by a regulated market with youth and consumer protection (control of quality and THC content).

Posted by with No Comments

The existing black market for cannabis should be replaced by a regulated market with youth and consumer protection (control of quality and THC content).

Hanf UndHelfer Mon., Nov. 05. 2012 16:55



Legalize cannabis = regulate the market for adults! The existing black market for cannabis should be replaced by a regulated market with youth and consumer protection (control of quality and THC content). More drug prevention can be financed through taxation.

Marko Burk Mon., Nov. 5, 2012 4:52 pm



Quote: “The substance that is a component of cannabis entered the blood through a drug”. It would have been interesting which active ingredients were still in the drug … After the drug was discontinued, the patient was symptom-free … Great, but to assume the blame for the cannabinoids borders on cannabinoia! Immediately blaming the (presumably synthetic) cannabinoids instead of investigating what really caused the complaints has the bitter aftertaste of propaganda! Spreading something like that in the press does not show journalistic diligence …

Ignaz-Kutschnberger Mon., Nov. 5, 2012 11:42 am


A friend of mine has been complaining of severe flatulence and problems emptying the bowel for 2 days … could it be that he is also using drugs?

Rakaar Mon., Nov. 5, 2012 4:20 pm


No your boyfriend is healthy, he just read too many of your posts ….

Mon., Nov. 5, 2012 4:30 pm


warlord, your friend should go through with a lot, then everyone can potty;)

Timmaeh Mon., Nov. 5, 2012 4:46 pm


@ Marcel: Sach ma, young, how much tobacco do you put in there? No wonder you always have to go to the potty after smoking weed xD

Ignaz-Kutschnberger Mon., Nov. 05. 2012 18:19


🙂 … the dear editorial team … Well, let me put it differently … @ you … dear Austrians dear Austrians … dear … “I’m missing the words” Thanks for the numerous tips, well-intentioned advice and helpful postings … 😉


Connect with Facebook

Page 1 of 1 ”

Cannabis helps, it is healthy, it is socially acceptable: especially on the

Many people build medicinal effects, including in Austria.

But what can the plant really do, what does it work against? Smoking weed is nowhere near as harmless as it is being propagated, warns addiction medicine specialist Kurosch Yazdi in his new book “The Cannabis Lie”. He does not condemn smoking weed per se, but belittling it – and the multi-million dollar business with green gold at the expense of people.

According to the 2015 Austrian drug report, 30 to 40 percent have used cannabis at least once in their life. The cannabis plant contains over 100 proven cannabinoids, the two best-known active ingredients of the plant are cannabidiol (CBD) and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). While CBD has an antipsychotic, anti-epileptic and anxiety-relieving effect, THC is considered to be pain reliever, muscle-spasmodic, appetizing – and 123 From a medical point of view, these properties are quite useful, but for the book author and physician Kurosch Yazdi not everything is in the green area:

You write “smoking weed is part of good manners”. How well has this drug already established itself in Austria? Of course, many sections of the population have nothing to do with smoking weed. But I can already see a change, especially among young people. In the past three or four years in particular, it has been observed that many young people consider smoking weed to be more harmless than in previous years. And there are an increasing number of 16 to 18 year olds who smoke weed regularly, i.e. once or twice a week. This now also applies to students. With some groups the question arises: “Who doesn’t smoke weed? And how can I still be part of it?”

© Christoph Gantner Addiction medicine specialist Kurosch Yazdi »I also don’t ask my patients:” Would they rather have AIDS or cancer? “«

Austria’s legal people’s drug is alcohol. What would be different if marijuana took the place of alcohol? In principle, I have no problem at all with any drug, as long as it is consumed to an extent that I do not harm myself or others. Under this criterion I have no problem if someone consumes alcohol in small quantities, although most of my patients do


are. I have no problem if someone uses cocaine once a year, as long as they don’t harm themselves or others with it. I’m not a policeman, I’m a medic. In this way, even as a doctor, I have no problem with smoking weed. But one should not generally compare one evil with another. I also don’t ask my patients: “Would they rather have AIDS or cancer?” The comparison lags.

At what amount is weed not harmful? For most people, smoking weed infrequently, once a month or a few times a year, is medically not a problem. As long as you don’t get behind the wheel for a few days afterwards or harm yourself or others in any other way. But there are a few percent of the population who can react very strongly psychotically to cannabis. It can become a problem for them in the long term. Unfortunately, we don’t know in advance who these few percent are.

What does regular consumption do?

If you drink an eight of wine in the evening, you will have zero alcohol in your blood the next morning. Someone who smoke once or twice a week has THC in their body all the time. Assuming you smoke a whole joint, THC can definitely still be detected in the body 5 days later. If someone smokes weed regularly, for example on Friday, Saturday and Sunday, the active ingredient can still be detected after three weeks without consumption. Why? THC is fat-soluble, it is distributed in the adipose tissue and then slowly comes out of the adipose tissue again. Man is not high for 3 weeks. Even if he does not feel it, his concentration, memory and driving ability are reduced.

“It’s a very different stuff these days than it was in the 1970s, just let’s name it the same.”

Can the increased and socially acceptable consumption of cannabis be seen as a kind of revival of the flower power era? I wish it would be like this. In the 1970s, smoking weed hardly made anyone psychotic. At that time, normal marijuana in Europe had about 1 to 2 percent intoxicating THC and of healthy cannabidiol about 0.5 percent. In the 1980s and 1990s it was around 2 to 4 percent THC; today it is 10 to 15 percent in Europe. In America, individual brands legally sell marijuana with up to 38 percent THC. If people wanted to get psychotic in the 70s, they would take LSD or psilocybin, foolish mushrooms. The cannabis today is a psychedelic one. So it’s not a revival because it’s a whole different stuff. We just call it the same.

Why does the medicinal cannabis in the USA contain so much of the intoxicating substance THC? The first, undifferentiated reason, is that medical clearance in America is just a back door for people to smoke weed legally. In California, cannabis is only medically approved for chronic conditions. According to statistics, the average age is 23 years. Does that mean that all 23-year-olds in California are chronically ill? That is absurd. The second point is that CBD and THC have certain medicinal effects. THC relieves muscle spasms, for example in patients with multiple sclerosis. And it stimulates the appetite, for example in AIDS sufferers or against nausea during chemotherapy in cancer patients. I am not a fanatic. I’m not saying “THC is bad”. It should definitely be used where there is nothing better. But you don’t need to smoke pot for that. THC is already available in tablets and drops, also in Austria.

“An exact dosage is not possible when smoking weed”

If they support the medical use of cannabis in principle. Then what speaks against smoking weed as medicine? Smoking weed as a drug is absurd. An exact dosage has been standard in medicine for decades because you want a dose that is just sufficient to treat the disease but does not have many side effects. For every drug, doctors give milligrams of exactly how much of a substance they want. This is not possible with smoking weed. You don’t know what percentage of THC it contains, how deeply someone inhales or whether or not they are using a filter.

What if the joint came from the doctor himself? Even then, dosing is not possible. What do you say to the patient? Do you tighten for 7 seconds every minute? There are fluctuations of hundreds of percent in between. It also depends on how tightly someone pulls, what combustion temperature is created. And from a medical point of view, there is another argument against smoking weed. There are many other substances in the marijuana plant that we don’t even have a rough idea of ​​whether they do something or what they do. How does a doctor justify prescribing something that he doesn’t know how it will work in the long term?

“A cannabis recommendation letter takes the doctor about five minutes and he gets $ 40 to $ 100 for it.”

Who makes money on the cannabis machinery in the countries where the joint is available on prescription? From the smallest companies to the tobacco industry that pounces on the subject, everyone makes money from it: licensed dispensaries, middlemen, biologists who grow the cannabis, and doctors make money. Especially in certain US states like California there are many general practitioners, so-called green doctors, who do nothing more than prescribe cannabis. A cannabis recommendation letter takes the doctor about five minutes and he gets $ 40 to $ 100 for it. I saw it myself in California. On the popular beaches there are small stands, similar to a sausage stand, in which a sleepy family doctor sits in a Bermuda shirt, swimming trunks and flip-flops. People go there and say, “I need a cannabis permit card.” The doctor asks: “What do you have?” Then you answer that you have a headache all the time. Done, that’s it. Next to it is the next booth, an efficient, licensed dispensing point for cannabis. Seven well-dressed employees stand there and advise you on what works best – not against the headache, how should the employees know that. Rather, they say: “You are totally dazed by it, only half as much of it”. What does that have to do with medicine? It will stimulate the economy, but at what price?

© Bryukhanova Green-Doctors in Venice Beach, California

What do authorities and politics say about it? The absurd thing in America, as it has recently been in Germany, is that the FDA, the American drug authority, has actually approved cannabis drugs for two indications. Politicians have drawn up a list of illnesses such as sleep disorders and headaches. A doctor may prescribe cannabis for them and for any other condition for which the doctor finds it appropriate. What kind of admission is that? With no other drug in the world would politicians dare to interfere with the drug authorities. Politicians act like this because they are afraid of losing voters. Even the CDU in Germany, which was against smoking weed up until now, doesn’t dare to say anything anymore.

Since March 1st, seriously ill people in Germany have been given cannabis on prescription. How do you feel about the change in the law? The German law did not say in detail what cannabis means. It is entirely up to a German doctor whether to prescribe the already known drugs or hashish and marijuana. The law also says that a government agency should control the levels of THC in cannabis, with fixed levels of THC again not being the law. And the European Medicines Agency, which would actually be responsible for the approval of drugs, has not medically approved smoking weed for any indication. I am concerned that Austria will emulate German law, which is completely inadequate.

What do you say to those Austrians with chronic pain who smoke weed because the health insurance company does not cover an expensive therapy with cannabis drugs and the patients therefore cannot afford it? I run an addiction department. How many inquiries do you think we have from people who have read or heard that cannabis helps against their disease. These people put a lot of pressure on. Once the disease actually fits, and I think to myself that cannabis could help in this case and I want to prescribe the drug, the patient says: “No, no. I want marijuana”. Then I say that I am not even allowed to prescribe it in Austria. And I’m happy about that, because otherwise I would have to spend hours explaining to the patient why I am sure not to prescribe it. The patient goes out and thinks, “The doctor is a fool”. In my experience, these are mostly people who have not tried any other approved medication for their disease before. I ask the patient: “You haven’t tried anything, why do you want cannabis?” He says he heard it works so well. Then I say: “No, that’s not true”. And he says: “Yes, Doctor, I’ve already tried it, that’s how it is, believe me”. I understand that you are ready for anything when you are under pressure. And in the short term you feel better when you smoke weed. But that doesn’t mean my illness is getting better. According to studies, many patients still have pain, but say they are still better. Clearly, it would be exactly the same with alcohol. I can give alcohol to any pain patient and they will be better in the short term because alcohol is pain reliever.

And what about the financial aspect? If the diagnosis is correct, made by a specialist and other medications do not help, the health insurance company should cover the cost of cannabinoids in drugs.

What’s your conclusion? If it is actually neuropathic pain (with damage or diseases of the nervous system; editor’s note), it could be that smoking weed also has a medical effect. But that also applies to heroin. The junkie who injects heroin also treats any pain. Heroin is one of the most powerful pain relievers. I am only saying that the same standards must be applied to cannabis as a medicine as to any other drug: exact dosage, attention to the side effects, education about the side effects and if it is an addictive drug, it must be limited. And you mustn’t pretend that it will help against any disease. When I google cannabis, I get the impression that it is a panacea.