Quote:
Originally Posted by Rino
No the pot one did not cite anything.
It quickly referenced them but did not cite them. The first article did state where the information could be found. But we all know that a lot of people die from tobacco. There is no reference to tobacco being better or worse in that article. As fewer people smoke pot than smoke tobacco you would expect the numbers to be lower. Citing includes a reference to which exact study it came from.
You refuse articles that do not cite references all the time. I reserve the same right. Please give me the studies themselves.
Please post what has been stated. "Pot is less dangerous than cigarettes." If not please go on about your business.
|
You want to pretend like the studies don't exist, fine. It doesn't help your case though. You have been able to provide zero evidence that marijuana has ANY inherent negative health effects. Therefore your opinion, which runs counter to conventional wisdom, fails to meet even a Prima Facie case. The "evidence" presented that marijuana is harmful (to include the "worse-than-lung-cancer" symptoms of coughs and itchy throats) is not evidence of that at all. It is evidence that
smoke inhalation is inherently harmful. I know of no substance that is healthy to smoke. But you have confused the substance itself with the method of consumption, and transferred the ill effects of the method onto the substance. Find a case of pot brownies causing health problems, then you might have the beginnings of a case. Tobacco, by the way, causes CANCER and DEATH even in the chewing variety, so to prove pot is worse, you are going to need to find large numbers of people who died of pot. Good luck.