No, it wouldn't.You do realize that when there is a list of 40 possible side effects on a particular drug, all that means is that one person in the study had that particular side effect. And they HAVE to list it. The funny thing is when they conduct these trials, they have a placebo group as well, and the placebo group most always has the same list of side effects. If marijuana had the same type of clinical trials, I almost guarantee you would see the same list of stupid side effects.
And you're completely talking out of ignorance.And Velvet, you are on a PRO-weed site. It is almost useless to try to get people to see it from your point of view. The have indoctrinated themselves into the thinking that there are NO side effects possible since they themselves have not experienced anything. Know your audience.
Ignorant generation. Opinions without facts.Entitlement generation. ME ME ME NOW NOW NOOOWWWW
Really? We are on Rollitup...ROLLITUP. Stating that the majority of this site wouldn't be biased on the subject of MARIJUANA...LOL. Can you say...And you're completely talking out of ignorance.
Why yes, yes you can.Ignorant
And yes, yes it would.No, it wouldn't.
The side effects of drugs are not all the same, which is what you seem to be implying. Feel free to continue being wrong.And yes, yes it would.
Old study that failed to create appropriate controls. Next. Low income... read: smokers, drinkers and the like included.Look I can google too.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7539879
BUT unlike some, I always take what I read with a grain of salt.
You pulled up a garbage study with garbage methodology. There's been exactly one study where the subjects weren't exposed to other drugs as well by and large and it was a cultural one done long ago.Well to be fair, I never stated a side, and I don't have one, because I don't know. I was just merely pointing out that people are skewed toward what they WANT to believe. And the fact that we are on a pro-weed site like this, would definitely lead to some biased opinions. Just like that guy who googled up the piece stating there were no side effects on babies. I know some popped up going the other way, stating there WERE adverse affects on babies, just as they did when I googled it. But why did he choose to only provide the one that shows his point of view? Because that is what he WANTS to believe
Ok then. And all drugs have the same side effects.And since you you are too slow to comprehend, I will elaborate for you. The point wasnt what I pulled off google. Its that you can find whatever you want to suit your argument on google. Just as you did
Since you obviously have comprehension problems, I suggest you read the thread again. No where did I say or even IMPLY that. In fact, that wasnt even what I was talking aboutOk then. And all drugs have the same side effects.
So where are all the fucked up children in cultures where it's normal to consume cannabis all through life?I dont know just as much as you dont know. And the fact that you continue to spread what you do like you know it is absolute fact, just goes to show your ignorance. I dont know. But I least I say I dont know and dont purport that I do.
Actually you heavily downplayed the listed potential side effects through clinical trials and suggested that placebos and marijuana have all the same listed side effects because some % of people will experience something random during the trial.Since you obviously have comprehension problems, I suggest you read the thread again. No where did I say or even IMPLY that. In fact, that wasnt even what I was talking about