youngjim: I call bullshiite. Citation please?
"British Medical Association, Therapeutic Uses of Cannabis. 1997. P.48 . . . etc." LINK TO ALL THESE HERE
Sir Francis Dashwood: "There's a sucker born every minute." (P.T. Barnum)
If you look at this link one can see where RP has found this "information." I commented before that the intellectual dishonesty of RP is breathtaking. Note that in providing these citations RP and SFD did not provide the above link to verify their provenance. Of course if they had, this would diminish his argument significantly.
The homepage of this site is here: Lambton Families in Action for Drug Education. If you click on the link you'll be treated to comments (in red 18 point type over a puke green background) like "Is the Canadian Medical Association for real???????? Recently the CMA recommended to a senate committee that marijuana be decriminalized. They allege that addiction to marijuana should be treated as a disease. What these so called medical practitioners overlook is that the addiction is self inflicted. It's not like catching a cold. If the addiction is treated as a disease then the addict is no longer responsible for his/her conduct as that responsibility is passed on to society. Society did not create the addict, marijuana did as a result of the addicts conduct. Based on this theory of the CMA, doctors should be recommending smoking tobacco for weight loss. It's time the CMA got in touch with reality and learned just exactly what marijuana is all about and how silly the notion is of removing the criminality. . . .
Smoked Marijuana: is Mutogenic, Fetotoxic and Carcinogenic - can Impair the Immune System, break down the Male Genetic Code and Injure or Destroy the Eggs in the Ovaries - can cause Bipolar Psychosis, can trigger Schizophrenia, can Slowdown the Brain's Energy and can be a co-factor in producing full blown AIDS in HIV patients. . . MEDICAL EXCUSE MARIJUANA is all about GETTING STONED not treating an illness. . . HARM REDUCTION - Part of the PROBLEM NOT part of the SOLUTION."
But back to the originally cited links. I googled a number and found that these links are studies from patients with HIV and AIDS. Essentially, the argument that MJ is immunosuppressive comes from studies based on subjects with immune systems ALREADY SUPPRESSED BY HIV OR AIDS. The conclusion that MJ is immunosuppressive in all instances is a specious extrapolation of the results of these tests.
On this thread the pro-woddies are exposed for all to see--playing fast and loose with the "facts", slippery slope extrapolations, snarky ad hominems, specious appeals to authority and the masses, and citations from dubious fanatical websites. Rather thin gruel for the serious debater.
The 'sucker born every minute' comment from SFD only adds to the delicious irony of triumph.
Dr. Donald Abrams is a homosexual who pushes pot as a treatment for "subjects with immune systems ALREADY SUPPRESSED BY HIV OR AIDS."
I didn't think it necessary. The studies speak for themselves, no matter who lists them.
If you think shooting the messenger benefits your argument that marijuana is not immunosuppressive, go for it. But I would think a listing of studies with contrary conclusions to be more effective. Got any?
"Essentially, the argument that MJ is immunosuppressive comes from studies based on subjects with immune systems ALREADY SUPPRESSED BY HIV OR AIDS."
Some studies involved subjects with HIV/AIDS. Some without. Some were on animals. Some were in vitro experiments.
But the above article is about patients with HIV smoking marijuana to relieve pain. Good idea, given the studies I listed?