Given that California legalized recreational use as of Jan 2018, you are technically correct as to the mechanics of medical cannabis, but that's not the best kind of correct.
Re:Meadow is the Amazon of weed
by blacksmith_tb on Friday April 20, 2018 @12:32PM
(#16886205)
In Oregon there is a real distinction, and patients do need a doctor to refer them to get a card[1], which gives them lower prices than recreational customers get at dispensaries.
Perhaps I did just completely misquote what my (Californian) friend told me.
He's splitting hairs a bit. It's true that a doctor gives a patient a recommendation instead of a prescription (so you can purchase cannabis legally), but otherwise what you wrote is correct.
I disagree, and the reason Is that the word prescription is a legal and medical jargon term with specific meanings and ethical requirements.
However an opinion is not. Thus building a moral barrier there.
Some other opinions that many doctors have: everyone should drink more water. Everyone should exercise. Many people will get this advice/opinions without a prescription for such.
Right, but a doctor is bound by the Hippocratic Oath, and because the recommendation, specifically, for cannabis has legal implications (i.e. the patient can now purchase it under the law), a cannabis rec has similar ethical considerations as a prescription.
What you do get is a recommendation by a doctor that you would benefit from cannabis. This is a critical difference. It’s merely a doctors opinion you would benefit.
And as many have noted, sone doctors appear to hold the opinion most adults would benefit. They might not be wrong.
Btw, old injuries can have lasting pain for the rest of your life. Difficult to control pain. Medicine recognized this in the 90s, and one result was the opioid crisis. (Turns out opioids aren’t great for chronic pain.)
Oh and it isn’t a bs script either. Because it’s not a script. As I noted above. To quote a certain movie, that’s funny not a single word you just said was correct.