Edit: I'm gonna look over what I wrote a little later and proof read, then reorganize due to the length of the post (I had a 500+ word response that dives a lot deeper into this)
Essentially, assuming that people here who would like to see more information on a journal article that is clearly trying to push an agenda (It says, "this is another reason not to smoke marijuana" with in it, while also giving a handful of other reasons why not to) are brainwashed into believe marijuana is only good and nothing will change that, is absolutely idiotic. You are directly calling the individuals here who work hard to spread not only the positive, but the negative information surrounding recreational drugs, to help reduce harm, brainwashed sheep motherfuckers. That is beyond ridiculous and only an attempt to feed a fire. You have nothing of worth to say so you attempt in whatever way you can to seem like your are the one last hope of sanity on this forum The one person who isn't blinded and the rest of us mindless idiots. Grow up. Learn to realize questioning information that is presented to you is not only a healthy thing to do, it is the right thing to continue to push the world forward.
Thanks for the link neko. That was the info that makes a person shake their head as to how an article like this could even come out. Seems to me, in this day in 2012, controlled studies are all but impossible except for a few things. If something is determined to cause cancer, we often see other things a person comes in contact with that does also. Uranium in water, new pharm being pushed on people that have bad effects, car exhaust, the sun's rays, etc... Unless someone lives in a cage and not exposed to anything, studies are going to prove to contradict one another. Vtiamic C is good, no it's bad, no it's good. Fish oil is good, no it's not, yes it is. You get the point.
