The fact that marijuana is illegal does not conceal its effects from the medical community. If you'd care to learn more about that, as I've suggested to you before, visit NORML's website and goto the Medical Information pages. One thing you will learn is there is no record anywhere in the annals of medical science of anyone being made sick or dying from smoking or digesting marijuana.
Actually, it does. It makes it hard to study, and even harder to conduct clinical research on as, in the vast majority of states, it's not something that Doctors can prescribe for. I've looked at the NORML links. There is nothing terribly conclusive in the studies. Of course, NORML has their own agenda so I am not counting on them to report the bad and ugly along with the good.
I am aware that no one has died of acute intoxication from THC. That doesn't make MJ an benevolent substance. No one has overdosed from smoking cigarettes either.
Has the origin of the specimen from which this finding is derived been identified? Because the CDC put out findings similar to what you've cited, but it was later learned that the specimen the CDC used was obtained from the DEA and was seized in a raid. So the purity of the sample is highly questionable. Most street-grade pot is contaminated with pesticides and growth-inducing hormones. In fact, I read about a DEA raid that found hundreds of marijuana plants growing in a radioactive waste dump.
Like I said. Not "well controlled or studied".
So unless you have data on the specimen used to derive these reports, be skeptical of the accuracy.
I can be skeptical, but I can't operate off the assumption that facts that don't support my position "must be flawed".
True. Which is one very good reason why marijuana should be legal. Because if it were legal there would be all sorts of edible pot products available, from brownies to cookies and veggie-burgers, which would eliminate smoking as the expedient method of ingestion. As soon as people realize that the effect of digested THC is much nicer and lasts a lot longer than the effect from inhaling it smoking pot would become passe.
That's pure speculation and the failure of marinol to gain any sort of popularity among the people that use it tends to disagree with you.
No one in this forum ever made such an absurd statement to you or to anyone else. The only medical claim I've ever seen made here is the simple truth that marijuana is known to be useful in treating the nausea effect of chemotherapy and that it reduces the painful swelling associated with glaucoma.
And HIV patients that have difficulty tolerating HAART therapy.
So why is it being used for anxiety, fibromyalgia, and a plethora of other medical indications in California?
And if you'll take the time to do a Google search you'll find there have been some promising results from treating malignant tumors in mice with properties extracted from THC.
None of this is "bullshit."
I am aware of this. Again, I have no problem with any sort of evidenced based medicine finding uses for THC. If that's the case, I am sure there will be a more efficient way to synthesize the compound and deliver it to the cancerous tissue than smoking a joint.
And again, the vast majority of "medical marijuana" users in California don't have cancer, glaucoma, or HIV.
Let's just be honest and admit that a significant portion of people in the state of California have MJ scripts to use it recreationally or for pathologies that could be better addressed through other means (i.e. SSRIs, therapy, etc).
