 bet for actually resolving this issue would be to see a health professional, which I am not. I recommend several different avenues, which I have listed at the end of this response.
I am, however, someone who can share some insight into this particular situation.
What I’m reading between the lines here is your partner is addicted to weed and this is causing adverse effects in his life, including a low sex drive.
Being stoned is not the issue in this situation. I think the more significant problem here isn’t the substance itself, but the substance abuse and the root cause of this abuse.
Marijuana is a beautiful plant with seemingly endless uses, including important medicinal purposes. Like anything though, it can quickly become an addiction if used for the wrong reasons.
As a general rule, weed doesn’t have negative effects when used in alignment with what the body needs. However when weed is overused it will often lead to negative side effects including (but not limited to): Lethargy, memory loss, lack of self-care, lack of communication, excessive social awkwardness, brain ‘fogginess’, bad breath, laziness, overall bad health and… ta-da, low sex drive!
Unfortunately, and to the detriment of many, because of the seemingly ‘lightness’ of these side effects, people are very quick to normalise a weed addiction.
Although often seen as unimportant, these symptoms of an addiction can damage a person’s life, and their harmful effects will undoubtedly spill over into the life of their ‘other half’.
 Unfortunately, I cannot offer a quick fix on this one. For your partner to be able to improve his sex drive, he is going to have to recognise that he has an addiction, understand why he is addicted and then spend a lot of time healing those genuine psychological issues.
Moving forward, it would be really worthwhile for you to sit down and communicate to your partner how you’re feeling, how the situation affects you and what you’re desiring/needing.
You need to get clear on what you want in your life and the experience you want to have. Understand that if your partner is unwilling to heal his addiction, you either have the choice to accept it and be okay with a low sex drive from him, or to decide that you aren’t okay with that and let the relationship go with love.
There is so much more advice I can offer here but I’m going to wrap it up. I wish the very best of lucky luck to you and your partner, Suzie.
Im not saying the patent has anything to do with individual ownership. Im saying that the brokers of the deal for the patent will be rewarded for their brokering of the patent and they stand to make royalties from said patent. Hell they cant even legally give their royalties back even if they wanted too! The reasons they redact parts of the contract is because if people found out the amount of money to be made by the corporations who hold said patents they would proabably start to question who brokered those deals and ask why? Why is it that the high priest of science and heath in this country ignores multiple other very affordable treatment options that are seeing incredible results in other nations? Could it be that he has a vested interest in the widespread deployment of a particular vaccine that, when patented entitles the patent holders to multible billions of dollars in royalties that cannot legally be returned? Could it be that those other treatment methods are public domain and generic and cost next to nothing to prescribe possibly ending the pandemic and curing millions saving hundreds of thousands of lives and destroying big pharmas hopes of developing a hundred billion dollar vaccine industry (mRNA vaccines as a whole). Probably not, the doctors that tout those methods are banned off of social media for wrong think. Luckily our high priest Fauci is looking out for us. Luckily for us he has no reason to value the interests of big pharma over the American people. I mean, its not like he helped broker a deal that would see his own organization owning half of a patent for a multi billion tax payer dollar vaccine or anything, thank God. If that were the case I might start thinking "hey, this guy has a massive conflict of interest" or something similar.Connecting state and local government leaders
Experts worry that politically-motivated acts by the Trump administration will undermine Covid-19 therapies.
When President Donald J. Trump fell ill with Covid-19 two weeks ago, his doctors gave him an experimental therapy that contains synthetically-produced versions of the body’s disease-fighting proteins, known as antibodies. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, the developer, is still testing the therapy for safety and efficacy, and it is not widely available.
But ordinary citizens can get a natural source of those antibodies: convalescent plasma, an age-old treatment that involves giving a person sick with an infectious disease like Covid-19 a transfusion of antibody-rich blood from people who have recovered from it. The Food and Drug Administration announced the emergency use authorization of plasma for Covid-19 at a presidential news conference on Aug. 23. Trump heralded the move as a “historic breakthrough.” Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar called the treatment “a major advance.” And based on the experience of patients receiving plasma through the FDA’s expanded access program, the agency’s commissioner, Stephen Hahn, claimed that it reduced mortality by 35 percent.
Hahn said Americans could trust his judgement that those results are “pretty clinically significant” because he’s a cancer doctor. But, as explained in a Factcheck.org analysis, Hahn grossly misrepresented data from a Mayo Clinic study (something he himself eventually acknowledged on Twitter). But even beyond that, the study is far from definitive. It is still under peer review and, crucially, it does not include a control group — patients who didn’t get plasma. Without that point of comparison, it’s impossible to say for certain whether the therapy provided any benefit over the usual care.
The push to authorize an unproven treatment based on preliminary findings mirrors what happened with the drug hydroxychloroquine last spring, when the FDA issued an emergency use authorization for the Trump-favored treatment. Two and a half months later, the agency had to revoke it due to reports that the drug was harming patients rather than helping them.
After the plasma announcement, science Twitter lit up with outrage over the misrepresentation of evidence. The Center for Integration of Science and Industry at Bentley University, for example, called out Hahn for “shocking anti-science behavior.” Fred Ledley, the center’s director, told me that until the press conference, he had refrained from commenting on political issues. “But that was unconscionable,” he said. “The abject lies coming from the FDA just scared everybody.”
The pandemic has added urgency to the question of how best to speed therapies to patients. One approach is to accelerate research by streamlining controlled clinical trials — a process already underway in the United Kingdom —as well as through mining medical records for data on how patients who aren’t part of a trial respond to a treatment in the real world. Another complementary tack is for the FDA to greenlight therapies faster — in some cases based on less strict standards of evidence. However, ultimately, how fast a therapy gets to market is moot if the medical community and public don’t trust the FDA to make a sound determination of whether it works and is safe.
The FDA has spent decades establishing a science-based framework for rigorously reviewing products and must be allowed to apply it without political interference, said Ledley. “I’m not confident this will happen,” he added. Neither are seven former FDA commissioners who, in an op-ed for The Washington Post, expressed concern that the Trump administration’s fingerprints were all over FDA decision making — not just in encouraging the agency to promote unproven treatments, but also in curbing its rule-making authority and trying to rush approval of a vaccine. Those politically motivated actions, they argued, are eroding the public’s confidence in any vaccines that gain approval — and public health authorities in general.
Until now, the FDA has had an impressive track record, said Kenneth Kaitin, director of the Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development in Boston. “All the work they have done to generate that level of trust is being undermined,” he said. “And that's a scary proposition.”
"There has been a call to speed up the drug development process for decades and decades,” said Kaitin. Nonetheless, he points out that on average it takes about the same amount of time to go from discovery to market approval now as it did three decades ago — about 15 years. The vast majority of that timeline is fairly evenly split between development, where researchers identify promising candidates and test them in animals, and the three standard phases of human trials. In the final step, the FDA reviews the evidence and gives the therapy a thumbs up or down.
The push to go faster often focuses on the FDA. But “the approval part is lightning fast,” said Ledley. While standard reviews can take a year, the FDA has established two pathways to rule on drugs for serious conditions in weeks to months, especially if they are the first available treatment or have significant advantages over alternatives. In addition, the agency has three programs to help accelerate the testing phases — by consulting with drugmakers on how to compress clinical trials, for example. More than half of the 367 new drugs the FDA approved from 2011 through 2018 traveled on at least one of these fast lanes.
The urgency of the pandemic has prompted researchers to find new ways to speed up human studies. “Covid has really challenged the whole system to try to really push the boundaries and try new things, given the urgency, the necessity, and all the data that’s coming