A lawyers take on delta 8

CannaBusiness
, ,
101

The term “synthetically derived” is open ended and if a federal prosecutor wants to make the case that D8 is synthetically derived then they have a lot of room to do so.

Congress SCHEDULES drugs, they do not define them explicitly. The definition of what is legal and what is not is not explicit until it has been made so through judicial action. Until then there IS uncertainty.

You really think people would be paying tens of thousands of dollars in legal retainers if this was as cut and dry as you claim it to be? Fuck no.

You haven’t found some loophole that no one else is aware of. You made up your mind about it and talk shit on anyone who disagrees. And then you quote some long winded legalese that is barely in line with the conversation like it reinforces you statement which it doesn’t.

Defining substances is a culmination of effort from judicial, executive and legislative branches.

1 Like
102

Bro do you hear wtf you’re saying?

Not trying to he a dick but you don’t know wtf you’re talking about

Do some research, congress doesn’t schedule ANY DRUG The fda and DEA do

You obviously can’t even have a valid argument because you don’t know wtf you’re talking about

You obviously don’t know how drugs are scheduled now

Want a lesson?

103

D8 meets literally none of these criteria especially if it is not DERIVED (extracted) from hemp.

Literally every chemical industry in the world would consider this a semi-synthetic product. Because it requires catalytic synthesis.

Arguing is not going to change your mind, but I’ve done enough research and am confident enough in my intellect to know that fucking with D8 is risky as fuck.

And I sure as fuck and not going to go to court and say: “but @kingofthekush said it was fine!!!”

2 Likes
104

Do you know the difference between a pharmaceutical and a neutraceutical? Obviously not because you’d understand d8 from hemp is a neutraceutical unlike d8 derived synthetically which falls under the definition of a pharmaceutical

D8 with under .3% d9 would fall into the definition of non psycho active hemp according to the farm bill so idk where you’re getting this from

105

I mean considering I was a pharma engineer for about 5 years, I’m pretty confident I know the difference.

The DEA schedules the drug, per 21CFR Chapter 13. The code of federal regulations (CFR) is under the purview of congress.

Listen man, you’ve burned all your bridges and I’ve been cool with you but if you’re going to be a fucking dick and pretend like you’re the only one who knows anything you can fuck off.

And for the years I’ve been on the forum I keep my tone pretty mild and decent but you are honestly a fuckin cancer on here sometimes dude.

YOU will look in the face of people who know loads more than you do and say “you’re wrong.”

You’re the only one that doesn’t know what the fuck they’re talking about here.

And d8 is a cannabimimetic. There’s already plenty of research involving its affinity to CB1 receptors. Not to mention it’s clearly psychoactive.

And you ain’t worth another second of my time.

:v:t3:

Enjoy your isolated corner after pissing off every single ally you’ve had in the industry dude.

Edit: §811. Authority and criteria for classification of substances

(a) Rules and regulations of Attorney General; hearing

The Attorney General shall apply the provisions of this subchapter to the controlled substances listed in the schedules established by section 812 of this title and to any other drug or other substance added to such schedules under this subchapter. Except as provided in subsections (d) and (e), the Attorney General may by rule—

(1) add to such a schedule or transfer between such schedules any drug or other substance if he—

(A) finds that such drug or other substance has a potential for abuse, and

(B) makes with respect to such drug or other substance the findings prescribed by subsection (b) of section 812 of this title for the schedule in which such drug is to be placed; or

(2) remove any drug or other substance from the schedules if he finds that the drug or other substance does not meet the requirements for inclusion in any schedule.

Rules of the Attorney General under this subsection shall be made on the record after opportunity for a hearing pursuant to the rulemaking procedures prescribed by subchapter II of chapter 5 of title 5. Proceedings for the issuance, amendment, or repeal of such rules may be initiated by the Attorney General (1) on his own motion, (2) at the request of the Secretary, or (3) on the petition of any interested party.

Suck on that ya dweeb

10 Likes
106

Yet it hasn’t been scheduled :thinking: I wonder why? Because the DEA knows it won’t fall under Schedule 1 or 2 when binding studies are done because the WHO has proven it binds to both cb1 and cb2 (its not a cb1 full agonist like cannabimimetic substances are)

Go read the literature dude

They have studies where they give d8 to kids with no negative effects but it prevented puking in 100% of the kids tested when administered before

I’m sorry it doesn’t bind to the cb1 like d9 and full agonists

You should know this if you’re really a “pharma engineer”

Screenshot_20210317-215141_Instagram
Screenshot_20210317-215141_Instagram1080×2400 700 KB

Last sentence red dash

1 Like
107

I have and I continue to, and the opinion I’ve expressed is based on it.

Go read a book on discourse and dialogue so you learn how to speak to your peers, before you lose them all.

108

Nice dodge

109

Dude.

Just because you don’t fucking hallucinate or have anxiety doesn’t mean it’s not cannabimimetic.

Please tell me you understand that.

110

Yes, read the definition of cannabimimetic substance I posted above then go read the WHOs report on thc isomers specifically D8

It isn’t a full cb1 agonist!

If it was it would’ve been scheduled!

111
5 Likes
112

It doesn’t fucking say FULL CB1 agonist dude. It says cannabimimetic. A cannabimimetic drug is literally something that has a similar biochemical mechanism to THC, d8 and d9 work the same way with different affinities

An agonist is an agonist is an agonist is an agonist.

It just has a different affinity.

Do you even neurobiology bro? Jesus.

Edit: start with the Wikipedia. If you need more info I have several of my neurobiology textbooks in pdf form. I’ll send you one so you can stop spewing your bullshit all over this forum.

2 Likes
113

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/chemistry/cannabinoid-1-receptor-agonist

Here go read a paper that talks about cb1 agonists and cb1 full agonists, also go look up the receptor affinity of the cannabimimetic substances and tell me what you find

http://www.swisstargetprediction.ch/

Funny when you find they’re full agonists…

1 Like
114

It’s funny watching you act like a biologist, engineer, chemist and lawyer all at once. Pick a lane dude.

Again an agonist is an agonist. Full agonist vs partial agonist is a function of affinity and affinity only.

Next caller.

4 Likes
115

CBG is the principal precursor of phytocannabinoids in its acid form. This compound is nonpsychoactive and is a relatively weak partial agonist for both CB1 and CB2. Because of its low cannabinoid receptor potency, it can functionally antagonize the CB1 effects of THC.

Cbg is an agonist and isn’t scheduled

Same with cbn

:thinking:

Keep trying!

It’s all about the BINDING study they do obviously

" Albeit there would be many potential therapeutic uses of CB1 agonist-based protocols, in general, CB1 full agonists are unlikely to be developed as drugs unless they are peripherally selective, due to the strong psychotropic effect mediated by CB1 receptor itself, but they are indeed potent pharmacological tools for assessment of cannabinoid receptor function."

116

CBG is also something that is easily derived and not synthetically derived. Keep trying.

117

Doesn’t matter according to you

D8 is easily derived from hemp so idk what you’re talking about

118

Cannabimimetic=/=synthetic Thc

119

All the big words hurt my brain

2 Likes
120

Synthetically, yes.
Otherwise, no.

3 Likes