Medical Cannabis Patent

Posted July 7th, 2008 at 05:52 PM by wayward
in

Medical cannabis is apparently patented ... by the U.S. government. 

US Patent 6630507 - "Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants" was issued to The United States of America as represented by the Department of Health and Human Services on October 7, 2003.

Source: http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6630507.html

Discuss.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Glock21's picture
On July 7th, 2008 at 06:34 PM, Glock21 said:

I had to look for myself... sure enough, the US patent office confirms.  Apparently they patented cannabinoids with and without psychoactive effects for the treatment in all sorts of health treatments, not just THC in particular.  It seems odd that nobody did this prior to the government... perhaps they did already?  Interesting stuff nonetheless.  Be hard for the federal government to deny the possibility of medical use if they hold the patent on it.

 

--

Glock21 Op/Ed

On July 8th, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Lee (not verified) said:

"Be hard for the federal government to deny the possibility of medical use if they hold the patent on it"

Exactly! This is a huge Gotcha! Our government uses the excuse that cannabis has no medical value to arrest 800,000  people a year for using it-- and then takes out a patent on its medical value. This is worthy of the Jon Daily Show. Do you think folks in Congress ought to be informed about this? The Hinchley/Rohrabacher Amendment, which protects medical cannabis users from Federal prosecution is coming up for a vote soon. I, for one am writing to my representative.

On July 9th, 2008 at 11:58 AM, wayward said:

I like Obama's position on medical cannabis - treat it like any other prospective drug and do more research.  If the results merit it, change the laws.  I wouldn't go so far as to say that smoking lots of pot is harmless.  Then again, neither are some of the other heavy-duty drugs used for serious medical problems (e.g., fentanyl, oxycodone, etc.).

On July 9th, 2008 at 12:21 PM, prairie biker (not verified) said:

I would suggest that this move was actually intended not to give credibility but to expand enforcement options. If someone is prescribing medical marijuana and they aren't paying royalties to the patent holder, are they not liable?

Glock21's picture
On July 9th, 2008 at 02:38 PM, Glock21 said:

It may not have been intended to give credibility... but that may be the unintended consequence. 

 

--

Glock21 Op/Ed

On July 9th, 2008 at 04:36 PM, Narc said:

 

Our government uses the excuse that cannabis has no medical value to arrest 800,000  people a year for using it-- and then takes out a patent on its medical value.

I'd like to point out that just because they take out a patent on it's medicinal value does not mean that it actually has medicinal value.

 

I'm a little more uncomfortable about the federal government even taking out patents. Shouldn't the benefits of federal research be available to everyone without having to license technology from our own government?

IlliniPundit's picture
On July 9th, 2008 at 04:47 PM, IlliniPundit said:

"I'm a little more uncomfortable about the federal government even taking out patents. Shouldn't the benefits of federal research be available to everyone without having to license technology from our own government?"

How very libertarian of you!

;-)