There are POLITICAL INTERESTS at work behind virtually every kind of research. YOU would be doing the young people who look to you for wisdom a favor by consulting your common sense and empirical evidence as much as you consult the research.
I'm sure the research is valuable on many fronts -- but my own real-life experiences with life-long recreational pot smokers (I know quite a few -- I'm from coastal California, what can I say) indicates that if not for the pot, they would have put Stephen Hawkings to shame, because even with their lifelong (since their teens -- and no, not me, but a number of professionals I know very well) recreational pot use, they are a hell of a lot smarter, innovative, and productive than the average professional.
Lying to kids about the consequences of pot and alcohol use is the best way to lose their regard, because the truth will out. And the truth is that what pot does long-term to "chronic users" is misrepresented in the research you cite in your post. You can send me research all you want that peaches will not grow in my particular neighborhood ... as I have seen material that says just that. Fortunately, my peach tree cannot read the research. :^)
So, you are certain that your anecdotal information is more accurate than medical and statistical information? Good luck with that. While you might find exceptions to the rule, for the vast majority, what I have said holds true.
Heck, even I know of some exceptions. One young man whose home life was so horrible and fearsome, that he could only function when stoned. (And yes, his home life was intolerable, almost deranged.)
However, recreational use and serious daily use are very far afield. My advice holds true, not to smoke marijuana solely because it makes you dull and slows you down. Life should be better than that.