I think you are reading far too much into this. They are just another retail outlet, not some influential entity. I have every reason to believe it will actually be shot down rather quickly. If a medical product requires a pharmacist to dispense it, it would need a DIN and governments and insurance companies would be forced to pay. Besides, they saw what happened last time they took away growing rights...Logical step from their perspective. It takes the constitutional issues off the table. If mmj is available at pharmacies, under the supervision of a pharmacist, it will probably pass the challenges that drove the last court decisions.
Sure, your 5g/day script will cost you $100, but it will be available. You won't need to be allowed to grow, and all your meds will be in prescription bottles. And no mmj dispensaries needed.
They win. As if there was ever a doubt in their minds.
Sorry, I'm looking at it from an murican's pov. Here, just because a drug is sold at a pharmacy doesn't mean that it needs to be covered by insurance, and it doesn't need a din (think pseudophedrine).I think you are reading far too much into this. They are just another retail outlet, not some influential entity. I have every reason to believe it will actually be shot down rather quickly. If a medical product requires a pharmacist to dispense it, it would need a DIN and governments and insurance companies would be forced to pay. Besides, they saw what happened last time they took away growing rights...
The last SC decision was not solely about availability. It was about the right to grow...government arguments were ruled to be unfounded. With recreational legalization 8 months away and the current framework allowing cultivation, there is no way the government will pick a fight that they would not only lose, but would spark negative press at the same time they are trying to implement rec.Sorry, I'm looking at it from an murican's pov. Here, just because a drug is sold at a pharmacy doesn't mean that it needs to be covered by insurance, and it doesn't need a din (think pseudophedrine).
But even your sc decision is built on assumptions of availability being restricted. what happens when availability is no longer limited by distribution or undue regulation? Could the decision be revisited?
How do they get ed drugs like v* or c* today?Canadians will not accept having to release personal information to a stranger in a pharmacy to acquire a plant. It's a privacy issue, among other things.
Do doctors dispense meds in CA? Down here they just write you a script and you take it to a pharmacy to be filled. Pharmacists can only fill prescriptions. They can't write them. And doctors can give out free samples, but they can't sell meds.You need a prescription therefore you see your doctor...no strangers.
But they might not have that strain of purple monkey fuck that works so well for me.....nope, want nothing to do with those drug pushers.Do doctors dispense meds in CA? Down here they just write you a script and you take it to a pharmacy to be filled. Pharmacists can only fill prescriptions. They can't write them. And doctors can give out free samples, but they can't sell meds.
I don't see how that would be any different for cannabis. You go to the pharmacy, give them your script and ask for what you want.