Please provide a link to any of the following that make exactly the claims that you and others have made — that pot is less harmful as cigs or not harmful at all:
1. Growers.
2. Producers.
3. Distributors.
4. Retail shops.
And it can't be a loosely affiliated group of pro-pot entities. It must be directly and financially tied to the above entities. Either funded by or somehow financially tied.
Why, because by making the claims that you and others are making, if you were a business making money off of those “claims,” that later turned out to be wrong, you would be open to litigation. Just like the tobacco manufactures of a few years ago.
We have the history of tobacco to refer to. And the tobacco companies made similar claims when it was clear that tobacco was indeed harmful.
Also, these links must be very clear. No mights or maybes or we don't know right now, or further studies are necessary.
Hey, you’re confused. He makes unsubstantiated assertions and drills other for empirical data to substantiate the obvious. He doesn’t answer questions.
In post #43 I told you that I say the opposite of "pot is not harmful" - why are you still pretending otherwise?
What I said is, "The clinical and epidemiological evidence against tobacco is stronger than that against pot." And YOUR link said: "frequent marijuana smokers can have many [they did NOT say ALL] of the same respiratory problems experienced by people who smoke tobacco. These include coughing and phlegm production on most days, wheezing, bronchitis, and greater risk of lung infection [they did NOT put emphysema or lung cancer in this list]."
Why, because by making the claims that you and others are making, if you were a business making money off of those “claims,” that later turned out to be wrong, you would be open to litigation.
I am not a business and I know of no such statements by pot businesses. What's your point - do you think any self-serving statement a business does not make is thereby proved to be not true?