KarenB
New
- Messages
- 1,067
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 0
The Charlie Foundation
For the record, here is The Charlie Foundation's position on marijuana derivatives for epilepsy treatment:
The Charlie Foundation was founded on the principle that the medical standard of care needs to be be a process of informed, joint decision making between a patient or caregiver, and his/her health care provider. We have the highest regard for the value and necessity of science. We have much less sympathy for the intervention of government in this process.
What's more, science doesn't always lead the way. Frequently there is a painstaking period while science takes a great deal of time to substantiate or rule out what may be fact. Many don't have the luxury of that time. That's when factors such as anecdotal evidence and risk/benefit ratio need to be considered without government interference. That's where it appears we are with CBD today.
If we had waited for a randomized controlled study to be published on the efficacy the ketogenic diet, Charlie would have been seventeen years, rather than 20 months old before he started the diet, and I don't know that we would still have him today.
What's more, to paraphrase "first do no harm": "To pretend that multiple drug treatments for children with difficult to control epilepsy are science and then argue against CBD is the cruelest of double standards."
Jim Abrahams, The Charlie Foundation
https://www.facebook.com/TheCharlieFoundation/posts/603971599697529
For the record, here is The Charlie Foundation's position on marijuana derivatives for epilepsy treatment:
The Charlie Foundation was founded on the principle that the medical standard of care needs to be be a process of informed, joint decision making between a patient or caregiver, and his/her health care provider. We have the highest regard for the value and necessity of science. We have much less sympathy for the intervention of government in this process.
What's more, science doesn't always lead the way. Frequently there is a painstaking period while science takes a great deal of time to substantiate or rule out what may be fact. Many don't have the luxury of that time. That's when factors such as anecdotal evidence and risk/benefit ratio need to be considered without government interference. That's where it appears we are with CBD today.
If we had waited for a randomized controlled study to be published on the efficacy the ketogenic diet, Charlie would have been seventeen years, rather than 20 months old before he started the diet, and I don't know that we would still have him today.
What's more, to paraphrase "first do no harm": "To pretend that multiple drug treatments for children with difficult to control epilepsy are science and then argue against CBD is the cruelest of double standards."
Jim Abrahams, The Charlie Foundation
https://www.facebook.com/TheCharlieFoundation/posts/603971599697529