Replies

If that's true, then why not do the study with Marinol vs. a placebo?

The study eh? How about trying a study. Or maybe this study.

Nothing about this study is stopping anyone, maybe even someone like you, from performing a Marinol study.

You are spinning a bit there ain't ya? Why not do a study like this RP? Could you offer some reasons?

Do you fear the truthful knowledge that is exposed? That it really does make a positive difference in some people's lives?

That if something has a positive effect on someone's life, and it doesn't directly negatively effect someone else's life substantially, that they shall be allowed to persue it because they have the right to do so?

Any truthful addition made to the knowledge base we have today is a good thing right? Isn't that called learning? Something can be learned from every study ever done RP. Yet you seek to selectively ignore this one, calling it a joke. I would offer to you that knowledge is not a joke.

How about this angle RP, It seems you would be arguing for the pharm industry here a bit. Arguing for the processing of something that studies like this can show needs no processing. Would that be your position?

It's natural in a study like this. What is wrong with studying the positive effects of something used in it's natural state? Natural_ like imbibing a potato or a carrot or a tomato or a peanut.

As an aside, peanuts are very bad for some people too. In fact, acute deaths have been recorded for very limited exposure to peanuts. Could you present that same thing on the same scale or more for buds? Yet, buds are illegal when peanuts are legal? Doesn't make much sense, now does it? Ironicly, a bunch of peanut butter just got pulled from the shelves, gee whodathunkit?

What would be so wrong with leaving out the 'middle man' so to speak? If people grow their own medicine, and it works for them, it is as cheap as it gets. What is wrong with that man? Isn't that a kind of progress toward better, more efficient and more affordable healthcare?

No one forces anyone to puff any more than they force vicodin, RP, it is their own choice, even if they don't inhale or swallow. (sorry I couldn't resist)

I am not saying I dismiss all things said on the negative side. Some arguments are valid. However, I'm Just sayin those negatives should be weighed on the scale of decision making. The fact they are there is not enough to tip the scale to prohibition.

Banning a substance is the wrong approach RP, a substance is not an action. Accountability for individual actions taken is the answer, for individual actions are what tip the scale.