To: mysterio
So you’re saying the medical researchers in the study were lying? On what basis?
A joint DOESN’T hit the lungs like 5 cigarettes? It DOESN’T cause the lung damage that showed up on the CAT scans? Did they falsify the results to prove the point they wanted?
64 posted on
08/01/2007 8:48:14 AM PDT by
metmom
(Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
To: metmom
“A joint DOESNT hit the lungs like 5 cigarettes? It DOESNT cause the lung damage that showed up on the CAT scans? Did they falsify the results to prove the point they wanted?”
Perhaps you should read (or reread) my post regarding water.
Then read (or re-read) the several points I made that could also have been made in the story.
Understand now?
To: metmom
So youre saying the medical researchers in the study were lying? On what basis?
My opinion? Yes, I think they are skewing the results in an organized campaign to recriminalize marijuana possession in Britain.
A joint DOESNT hit the lungs like 5 cigarettes?
The studies I posted say no. Didn't bother to read them, did you?
It DOESNT cause the lung damage that showed up on the CAT scans? Did they falsify the results to prove the point they wanted?
According to non-politically motivated studies, smoking marijuana does not have the same cancer risk as tobacco cigarettes. I think they cherry picked data to reach a predetermined, politically motivated conclusion. They are drug warrior zealots participating in an organized disinformation campaign, after all.
69 posted on
08/01/2007 8:57:55 AM PDT by
mysterio
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson