Hey everyone. With 300+ more days to hope that this is the year and that the previous 2000+ days were just the dark before the dawn, what would a perfect system in Michigan look like?
Just to get the ball rolling, there are many, many ways of providing access to medical marihuana of varying potencies and effects, what are the necessary parts? After the necessary parts, what are the ideal combinations? What produces quality and how is it assessed and regulated?......Discuss, more starting points below.
Just ignore anything off topic or that is trying to start arguments with personal attacks and let's see what kind of ideas are out there from the people who voted!
______
When I voted for the program I kind of thought "well, a caregiver would be someone who does the job of making the medicine for the person. Making effective meds in this case requires a significant investment in both equipment and ongoing time. People who do jobs get paid. Not everyone is going to know a grower producing effective meds (can we all concede that it isn't as easy as poppin seeds in a ditch?), so those people will go to a store or something - honestly I didn't think much about it, it is a given that we buy things at a store, all things (someone please argue that in the 'what the common voter would understand' argument). The typical person would not require the meds offered by four plants, but might need the benefits of four strains. An uninterrupted supply would require a perpetual harvest with 4, 4, 4 in clone, veg, flower. Also, by having more than is necessary, the grower can plan for not only fluctuations in demand, but hardships to supply (anyone ever have bugs, lose a batch of clones, lose power for a week, or have anything go wrong during a grow?) while still having adequate supply to meet the "uninterrupted supply" of the sacred contract of connection (this is how I feel the new court sees it, sacred lines of connection serving to trace the meds, maybe we need a position superior to caregiver whereby product goes to a registered dispensary."
there are consistencies between your card numbers, use these numbers to tag and trace the meds, but put something higher than the caregiver in the org relationship. A patient without a caregiver gives rights to a dispensary, the dispensary has collection rights, but no grow rights "may collect up to 2.5 ounces per registered patient". Regulate the dispensary to validate the quantity requirements. Now a patient who wants a dispensary must be in frequent contact with the doctor - or as frequent as deemed necessary relative to overall danger
. The dispensary will be limited in quantity (c'mon, we don't want 10,000 lbs sittin around as an attractive nuisance....nor do we want a 1 shop town. Per county, we know how many patients do not have a caregiver, we do not know how many of those patients are not growing. X shops per patients without caregiver and not growing per county, no more than Z within Y miles or within Q feet of schools, churches, far right book stores, breast feeding areas, or any place where people might get offended by the revenue.) The locker system from McQueen works.
I don't think that having 5 patients carry the cost of growing quality meds of sufficient variety is the compassionate way to go. The caregiver needs to become a portion of the division of labor - something I assumed when I voted - the division of labor works by a limited number producing a large number and tasking others with the components of reaching the customer. I didn't realize we had to legislate how that worked, I thought we regulated industries when needed or deemed needed, but largely I thought we tried and hoped not to interfere. Inherent in my vote was a portion of divided labor, but I did not anticipate the resistance - I was riding the high of voter driven change that had lifted a vale of ever growing darkness regarding the ways of the world, so to speak. I'm getting off topic. The "caregiver" needs to be a role in society just like any other role in society. Tag it, test it, buy it, register patients according to # regulations, distribute it like a pharmacy. Compensate caregivers according to quality and market standards: quantified through testing, quantified through repeat purchase, quantified through quality standards on bag appeal and effectiveness on specific medical effect as well as incidental effects (you'll be hard pressed to get me to call them side effects for this drug: anything other than the intended use is a side effect as opposed to a main effect - when morphine is used as a pain reliever, loose stool is a side effect, when morphine is used as a stool softener, pain relief is a side effect - in my understanding of the technicalities.)
Just to get the ball rolling, there are many, many ways of providing access to medical marihuana of varying potencies and effects, what are the necessary parts? After the necessary parts, what are the ideal combinations? What produces quality and how is it assessed and regulated?......Discuss, more starting points below.
Just ignore anything off topic or that is trying to start arguments with personal attacks and let's see what kind of ideas are out there from the people who voted!
______
When I voted for the program I kind of thought "well, a caregiver would be someone who does the job of making the medicine for the person. Making effective meds in this case requires a significant investment in both equipment and ongoing time. People who do jobs get paid. Not everyone is going to know a grower producing effective meds (can we all concede that it isn't as easy as poppin seeds in a ditch?), so those people will go to a store or something - honestly I didn't think much about it, it is a given that we buy things at a store, all things (someone please argue that in the 'what the common voter would understand' argument). The typical person would not require the meds offered by four plants, but might need the benefits of four strains. An uninterrupted supply would require a perpetual harvest with 4, 4, 4 in clone, veg, flower. Also, by having more than is necessary, the grower can plan for not only fluctuations in demand, but hardships to supply (anyone ever have bugs, lose a batch of clones, lose power for a week, or have anything go wrong during a grow?) while still having adequate supply to meet the "uninterrupted supply" of the sacred contract of connection (this is how I feel the new court sees it, sacred lines of connection serving to trace the meds, maybe we need a position superior to caregiver whereby product goes to a registered dispensary."
there are consistencies between your card numbers, use these numbers to tag and trace the meds, but put something higher than the caregiver in the org relationship. A patient without a caregiver gives rights to a dispensary, the dispensary has collection rights, but no grow rights "may collect up to 2.5 ounces per registered patient". Regulate the dispensary to validate the quantity requirements. Now a patient who wants a dispensary must be in frequent contact with the doctor - or as frequent as deemed necessary relative to overall danger
. The dispensary will be limited in quantity (c'mon, we don't want 10,000 lbs sittin around as an attractive nuisance....nor do we want a 1 shop town. Per county, we know how many patients do not have a caregiver, we do not know how many of those patients are not growing. X shops per patients without caregiver and not growing per county, no more than Z within Y miles or within Q feet of schools, churches, far right book stores, breast feeding areas, or any place where people might get offended by the revenue.) The locker system from McQueen works. I don't think that having 5 patients carry the cost of growing quality meds of sufficient variety is the compassionate way to go. The caregiver needs to become a portion of the division of labor - something I assumed when I voted - the division of labor works by a limited number producing a large number and tasking others with the components of reaching the customer. I didn't realize we had to legislate how that worked, I thought we regulated industries when needed or deemed needed, but largely I thought we tried and hoped not to interfere. Inherent in my vote was a portion of divided labor, but I did not anticipate the resistance - I was riding the high of voter driven change that had lifted a vale of ever growing darkness regarding the ways of the world, so to speak. I'm getting off topic. The "caregiver" needs to be a role in society just like any other role in society. Tag it, test it, buy it, register patients according to # regulations, distribute it like a pharmacy. Compensate caregivers according to quality and market standards: quantified through testing, quantified through repeat purchase, quantified through quality standards on bag appeal and effectiveness on specific medical effect as well as incidental effects (you'll be hard pressed to get me to call them side effects for this drug: anything other than the intended use is a side effect as opposed to a main effect - when morphine is used as a pain reliever, loose stool is a side effect, when morphine is used as a stool softener, pain relief is a side effect - in my understanding of the technicalities.)
