You seem to have it all figured out @Shag
Enjoy your thread. I’ve been here too long and starting to feel like the fool you make me out to be, but not for the same reasons.
3 Likes
Folk contributing valuable insight to the thread for discussion and this is where it ends-up. Again. Why?
4 Likes
You say valuable insight, I say misinformation.
My info comes from the FDA is there a better source?
Name calling and false allegations is the reason for my statement.
Someone that does not review the FDA info claiming they have better info is really just spreading misinformation unless the FDA document is wrong.
https://www.fda.gov
Here is the most recent example.
I provided a link above to disprove this so-called valuable insight.
https://www.fda.gov/news-events/rumor-control/facts-about-dietary-supplements
Up until recently there was no regulation. Now they only do something if there is some kind of problem like hundreds of people get poisoned.
Stop quoting me.
1 Like
That sounds like misinformation to me.
Did hundreds get poisoned in the links below?
I don’t think they did.
But was corrective action taken?
Yes it was.
1 Like
if you’re not trolling i can’t help you. it’s not opinion, it’s fact, and they are NOT the same, not even close. that’s like saying a sheet of paper is the same as a tree. or a plastic chair is the same as a barrel of crude oil. go sit in the chair or send a letter on a tree. man, get out of here with your “matter of opinion” crap.
1 Like
What is the point of this dicussion?
I originally said they would certainly be handled by the FDA as 2 different drugs.
Why are we still taking about this?
I’ll remind you that this is your OP and it was explained a couple of times already that forum threads are not your personal bandstand.
That is taking disagreements for what they are, keep an open mind, allow other perspective and insights, provide your evidence if you desire, debate the merits, drop the continuing attempts at throwing insults.
This thread will get shut-down if you are unable to keep the discussion cordial. You’ve also been informed to flag any offending posts … consider why we’ve been telling you this.
1 Like
You seem to be saying accept misinformation as truth.
My mind is open to facts not feelings, do I need to accept feeling as facts?
Even when it is misinformation?
Absolutely and I try to provide documents and links to credible sources.
And if the statement such as “The FDA does not regulate supplements” has no merit we should be free to say that especially if we can provide proof of the contrary.
I guess you just cant see the insults coming from the other side.
Just me?
No mention of the others here?
1 Like
By corollary, I’d wager one major dimension of PTSD is withdrawals. Adrenalin is itself a narcotic, and every bit as addictive. The effects of PTSD and withdrawals are similar. One reason (among many others) we’re all too often unable to treat PTSD is that what we don’t understand or account for that aspect.
2 Likes
You are not the arbiter of truth nor fact despite how many times you claim it by using the word of the week. You need to convince others and get on with your life if unable. Third party readers can make their own determination from that point when disagreements remain and there is no further debate.
The topic is good and interesting, the execution is like flubber. Finding the interesting tidbits requires getting slimed.
Third, maybe fourth time, you are the OP of this thread and have been instrumental in creating drama.
Here are some examples of your most recent attempt to shut down the discourse while integrating insults:
This is not conducive to a productive discourse. This last one for instance could be reworded to something such as:
Ok. I’m reading through these documents and the FDA makes note of the following “asdfasdfq”. I’m thinking that applies to this situation. At least as of today.
2 Likes
But they consider ketchup as a dietary supplement
Do they really!?
ya know, that’s a good question. the only reason i stopped in was to point out a factual error by the person claiming to have all the facts, then found a glaring oversight that just could not be allowed to stand unchallenged. but back to the two questions, i do not have a clear and logical answer. good day sir.
2 Likes
It is important to remember the legislative process. Many things to do with not much time certainly leads to these products being lumped together and worked on at the same time. So many proposals will treat these compounds similarly. Also I do concur that it will be easier for policy makers to acquiesce to big corporations to help facilitate process and compliance. This does not bode well for home growers.
3 Likes
Exactly
I don’t see my state allowing home grow
They want it all I hate to say it
So for now
I remain an outlaw
7 Likes
Glad to know a brother outlaw
8 Likes
I was trying to let this go, but you had to rub my nose in it… 
What does science tell us about CBD and THC.
Does science say they are very different or similar?
Science seems to indicate the 2 are very very much alike.
Take a look.
On a molecular level, they are almost indistinguishable.
Both CBD and THC share the exact same molecular formula, C21H30O2, containing twenty-one atoms of carbon, thirty of hydrogen and two of oxygen. Their molecular mass is practically identical with THC and CBD having masses of 314.469 g/mol 314.464 g/mol, respectively.
CBD And THC: The Only Difference Is One Chemical Bond
What I extrapolated from the data was that CBD and THC and very much alike and not that different at all.
Structurally and chemically they are identical except for 1 chemical bond.
But hey, that is just science, what do they know? 
2 Likes
and that’s why you catch so much flak on here, you can’t seem to understand that you’re wrong sometimes. it’s crazy really the hills you choose to die on, like this one. go ahead and look up the definition of almost. then figure out what it really means when you say “almost indistinguishable” and “identical except for 1 chemical bond”. while you go look it up, i’ll spare you the trouble by telling you what i get from it. almost means close but not quite and when you put that one little ‘e’ word in there (except) it changes the definition from being an identical copy, which is the same exact thing, to a close copy, which no matter how close it gets is NOT the same exact thing, so that makes it different. you posted a whole lot of words, a picture, and a link to something presumably trying to convince me that your redefined words and phrases now mean what you say they mean instead of what the rest of the world accepts as valid. i’m not sure why but no longer care. oh, just one more thing: it’s ok to be wrong, especially on the internet. (i love columbo). have a great weekend.
4 Likes
if you remember the craze of research chemicals you will know that one tiny change in the chemistry equals a very large change in the chemical.
1 Like