Rumors (Not Fleetwood Mac Related)

[+EdwardGlen]

With everything we are fighting in the movement rumors shouldn't be one of them. I have received a few emails and texts that just floored me over the past week or so.

 

If you hear something that you're not sure of ask them to back it up or, research it don't repeat it. Truth is a must especially at this point and time coming from our side of the argument.

 

One text reported that the ruling in the B and T case rendered all MM patients certifications null and void...WRONG!

 

After the raid in Ferndale an email reported that the Michigan State Police had subpoenaed CG files from MDCH..WRONG!

 

Misinformation unchecked can reek havoc on our community especially something like that one.

 

So besides making sure that any articles printed, posted or whatever is correct. Our enemies are masters in the use of dis-information.

 

If you read a story or hear one reported that is blatantly false or contains just a couple little errors you have to check them on it.

 

The general public isn't as informed as we are and we can change that and we need to.

[The Digital Nomad]

exactly - what is going on is INFOWARFARE.

 

They want to disrupt the groups working together. They want to put fear into any new activists. They want to instill FEAR, UNCERTAINTY, and DESPAIR (FUD) in to this movement. They want people to believe that they are powerless and must rely on the government to "help" them.

 

-DN

[bobandtorey]

One text reported that the ruling in the B and T case rendered all MM patients certifications null and void...WRONG!

 

i do know that it was wrong but are case is very inportant to all that got a Rec: from a MMJ Doc:

[The Digital Nomad]

One text reported that the ruling in the B and T case rendered all MM patients certifications null and void...WRONG!

 

i do know that it was wrong but are case is very inportant to all that got a Rec: from a MMJ Doc:

 

Specifically the court is questioning the lack of patient/doctor relationship with a doctor who is only going to sign for a MM rec. I believe the MM doc, having records from your primary doctor - should be sufficient enough - while MM docs that sign recs with no records - are suspects by LEO now.

 

While I got my Rec from a doctor other than my primary doc, I used my primary doc's records to support my request to the MM doctor.

 

Test Case? Or over zealous prosecutor? It will come out soon enough.

 

-DN

[bobandtorey]

Specifically the court is questioning the lack of patient/doctor relationship with a doctor who is only going to sign for a MM rec. I believe the MM doc, having records from your primary doctor - should be sufficient enough - while MM docs that sign recs with no records - are suspects by LEO now.

 

While I got my Rec from a doctor other than my primary doc, I used my primary doc's records to support my request to the MM doctor.

 

Test Case? Or over zealous prosecutor? It will come out soon enough.

 

-DN

 

i think they have a plan and the PA is trying every last one of her tricks their are more then half of the people went to a MMJ Doc with their notes as we did

[+Annnie]

Well when i took my son to the surgeon about his elbow.. our regular dr sent his records to him and then he spent like 10 min looking at it and then a surgery was scheduled and the surgeon did it.. After only like 10 min with him.. I think thats the way specialist work right?

[bobandtorey]

Well when i took my son to the surgeon about his elbow.. our regular dr sent his records to him and then he spent like 10 min looking at it and then a surgery was scheduled and the surgeon did it.. After only like 10 min with him.. I think thats the way specialist work right?

 

 

the PA wants every one to think he was just a POT Doctor but he is not he is a Medical Marihuana Specialist that is why we went to him

 

after i had went to my own Hip Doc: he one one of the first Doctor my Hip Doctor even told me how to research Medical Marijuana and how to spell it with the H

[greenbuddha]

Judges and PAs should NOT be making medical decisions about a patient, but If a person received a 'recommendation' after only one visit and there was no 'history' of a medical problem prior to that visit, and the reason the 'recommendation' was given was for something that cannot be 'verified' by examination and / or medical tests it is much more likely that the case will not go well for the 'patient' in some jurisdictions.

 

But I also think there will come a time when 'judges' making decisions about a 'patient's' health and their right to have a 'card' will be challenged by the 'medical' profession... may be a while since it seems many doctors are against the use of MMJ.. but it will happen.

 

Some 'judge' of PA will throw his / her weight around and the docs will protect their territory... and hopefully it will result in more than just a slap on the wrist to the court / PA.

[bobandtorey]

well with me any way my Hips have been bad for some time now and i have seen my Hip Doc for over 10 years now

[bobandtorey]

well with me any way my Hips have been bad for some time now and i have seen my Hip Doc for over 10 years now

 

 

but because of money i only see him once a year i used to see him more but most of the time i go to the V.A And my Doc: their knows i use MMJ also

[phaquetoo]

Specifically the court is questioning the lack of patient/doctor relationship with a doctor who is only going to sign for a MM rec. I believe the MM doc, having records from your primary doctor - should be sufficient enough - while MM docs that sign recs with no records - are suspects by LEO now.

 

While I got my Rec from a doctor other than my primary doc, I used my primary doc's records to support my request to the MM doctor.

 

Test Case? Or over zealous prosecutor? It will come out soon enough.

 

-DN

 

 

I had to do the same, use my primary dr's records and use a diff dr. for my rec, Its fricking sad that we have to do this,,what im not an addict while im on their prescribed narcotics, but when I have mm in my system I am?

 

There are alot of people going to these traveling clinics and getting pushed thru like live stock (nothing against it) I beleive it should be legal for all of legal age! and like to see it made easy for people to get their cards,,I personaly went with a very close friend to a traveling clinic in saginaw a few weeks ago and the dr. asked her what to put for qualifying condition, I said chronic pain, and that it was, and than he actualy wrote in comments that there is evidence that marijuana releives her pain..he didnt read no records,

 

wham bamm 200 bucks, and 100 to the state, thank you sam!

 

Peace

FTW

Jim

 

(if i have to I will go there for my renewel!!)

[greenbuddha]

but because of money i only see him once a year i used to see him more but most of the time i go to the V.A And my Doc: their knows i use MMJ also

 

B&T... sounds like you've got a 'long' medical history established, so they can't just ignore the 'fact' that you have the 'medical' problem, and hopefully if or when it goes back to the 'lower' courts they'll have enough sense and 'respect' for the 'law' to find in your favor.

 

I wish you the best of luck and good health.

[phaquetoo]

well with me any way my Hips have been bad for some time now and i have seen my Hip Doc for over 10 years now

 

 

You like Me were qualified patients the minute the law came into affect, My records always said chronic pain. I was disabled in may of 98!

 

Peace

FTW

Jim

[bobandtorey]

B&T... sounds like you've got a 'long' medical history established, so they can't just ignore the 'fact' that you have the 'medical' problem, and hopefully if or when it goes back to the 'lower' courts they'll have enough sense and 'respect' for the 'law' to find in your favor.

 

I wish you the best of luck and good health.

 

 

i think that just may happen if the lower court see that it's going nowere they may just toss it

 

no one wins but we will be FREE

[+EdwardGlen]

One text reported that the ruling in the B and T case rendered all MM patients certifications null and void...WRONG!

 

i do know that it was wrong but are case is very inportant to all that got a Rec: from a MMJ Doc:

Yeah the part in the ruling about the length of a Dr patient relationship bugged me. I know many,many people w/out med insurance who haven't had a regular Dr for years and the only way to get certified was to go to a MM cert clinic.

 

So why should those who don't have insurance or can't afford a monthly Dr visit be treated any different in the eyes of the law than the person who does have a regular Dr.

[bobandtorey]

Yeah the part in the ruling about the length of a Dr patient relationship bugged me. I know many,many people w/out med insurance who haven't had a regular Dr for years and the only way to get certified was to go to a MM cert clinic.

 

So why should those who don't have insurance or can't afford a monthly Dr visit be treated any different in the eyes of the law than the person who does have a regular Dr.

 

i feel the same as most people here the Leo's are trying to stop some of the bad Doc's i think the courts got it wrong in some ways

 

When i told my Reg; Doc: he said it was because on the Internet Doc's they want to stop

 

my spirit may be Bruised but not broken