Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: NobleFree
Just because a doctor testified in 1937 that the AMA had no data about deleterious effects of marijuana use does NOT mean that the effects weren't happening and that people were not noticing them.

The AMA Chief Counsel's testimony is evidence - as opposed to what you've posted, which is purely hot air.

What I did here was to explain *exactly* what the doctor meant and the implications when he said that the AMA has no evidence. He really did mean that the AMA had done no studies and so did not have any data. He meant no more and no less than that the AMA had no data. It is not my problem that you do not know how medical professionals think or communicate, and that you do not understand how precisely they communicate.

I'm certain that the pro-legalization advocates love to take that statement out of context and interpret it to mean something that the doctor did not intend. That doesn't change the doctor's meaning, and it does not mean that marijuana is perfectly safe (and it is clear that the ultimate goal of the pro-legalization advocates want everyone to believe it is completely safe and harmless).

162 posted on 01/02/2018 7:05:29 PM PST by exDemMom (Current visual of the hole the US continues to dig itself into: http://www.usdebtclock.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies ]


To: exDemMom
What I did here

was continue to provide no evidence for your speculation that marijuana was banned because people were noticing deleterious effects.

it does not mean that marijuana is perfectly safe

Beat your straw men elsewhere.

164 posted on 01/02/2018 7:34:48 PM PST by NobleFree ("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson