[Bush2000]

For one, weed is illegal. Any sample made up of marijuana smokers is a smaple taken from criminals, who are statistically more likely to suffer from mental illness.

You're contradicting yourself now. Your side doesn't consider the use of drugs to be criminal...

So, I think this "scientist" has rediscovered the "gateway drug" fallacy, and falsely concluded that marijuana is causal of, as opposed to correlated with, mental disorders such as schizophrenia, depression and psychosis.

Hmmmmm.... let's see. Given a choice between a scientist with hard statistical data and your blather ... so difficult to choose... Oh, what the Hell. I'll go out on a limb and choose the scientist's supported facts...

[MrLeRoy]

I think this "scientist" has rediscovered the "gateway drug" fallacy, and falsely concluded that marijuana is causal of, as opposed to correlated with, mental disorders such as schizophrenia, depression and psychosis.

Hmmmmm.... let's see. Given a choice between a scientist with hard statistical data and your blather

Go read up on correlation versus causation, then wipe the egg off your face.

[vin-one]

You're contradicting yourself now. Your side doesn't consider the use of drugs to be criminal...

the only reason it is criminal is the stupid, wasteful WOD
sounds like many WOD supporters, you can't smoke pot because it's against the law.......

Hmmmmm.... let's see. Given a choice between a scientist with hard statistical data and your blather ... so difficult to choose... Oh, what the Hell. I'll go out on a limb and choose the scientist's supported facts...

what hard data this idiot looked at other studies some of them more than 10 years old, to come up with this conclusion.
So for you it is absolute proof.....what did you do during the 60's

[Yeti]

Hmmmmm.... let's see. Given a choice between a scientist with hard statistical data and your blather ... so difficult to choose...

Anyone who puts much stock in a high-dollar study whose only definite conclusion is that more funds are needed to study further is destined to part way with his tax money.

The sources for sample bias are so obvious that if the study were legit, they would be talking more about how they eliminated the effect of the bias than anything else.