Then it's not relevant to your claims about permanent brain damage.
Um... I was basically selecting papers at random, not papers to support or refute any particular point. Thus, just because none of the papers I randomly selected do not support points I have previously made about specific deleterious effects of marijuana use, does not mean that *no* papers show those specific examples.
You actually have the skills now that enable you to search for those papers yourself. If you are genuinely curious about the effects of marijuana use, then why not search the literature for yourself?
can say that substances which cause short term effects on function (whether it's brain function or some other organ system) do cause permanent damage when those effects are prolonged.
Do let us know when that's been peer-reviewed and appears on Pubmed.
That is a principle of toxicology--meaning that it is formulated on the basis of knowledge gained through thousands of studies and is not the result of any specific study. We see that principle in action in many every day situations--for example, if you are exposed to a whiff of tobacco smoke, your liver enzymes will detoxify it almost immediately and there will be no effect on your health. On the other hand, if you keep chain smoking over the period of several years, the chance of permanently damaging various organs--lungs, heart, bladder, etc.--increases. And there reaches a point when the damage is irreversible. The same principle applies to a wide variety of substances.
That has been the theme of NORML ever since I've heard of the organization
Still peddling this falsehood even after I showed you the truth (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3597432/posts?page=73#73)? For shame.
Nope, it is still the message pushed by NORML, even if marijuana proponents who keep pushing their agenda at FR try to deny it. I found this statement just minutes ago at the NORML website: "By comparison, marijuana is nontoxic and cannot cause death by overdose."
Contrary to NORML's assertions, the evidence shows otherwise.
Weird. Why?
You actually have the skills now that enable you to search for those papers yourself. If you are genuinely curious about the effects of marijuana use, then why not search the literature for yourself?
I did, and found no support for your claim about permanent brain damage. Ball's in your court.
can say that substances which cause short term effects on function (whether it's brain function or some other organ system) do cause permanent damage when those effects are prolonged.
Do let us know when that's been peer-reviewed and appears on Pubmed.
That is a principle of toxicology
And I guess we're supposed to just take your word for this, because you'll provide as much evidence for this claim as you have for any other of your claims - that is, zip.
That has been the theme of NORML ever since I've heard of the organization
Still peddling this falsehood even after I showed you the truth (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3597432/posts?page=73#73)? For shame.
Nope, it is still the message pushed by NORML, even if marijuana proponents who keep pushing their agenda at FR try to deny it. I found this statement just minutes ago at the NORML website: "By comparison, marijuana is nontoxic and cannot cause death by overdose."
"Nontoxic and cannot cause death by overdose" also does not mean "harmless", backpedaller.
Contrary to NORML's assertions, the evidence shows otherwise.
And I guess we're supposed to just take your word for this, because you'll provide as much evidence for this claim as you have for any other of your claims - that is, zip.