Posts Tagged ‘Bad Science’

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/02/190213172307.htm

This is a classic case of confusing correlation with causality.  While I have no doubt that the researchers found a correlation between cannabis use and depression, it is more likely that the depression was causal, rather than vice versa.  A student, struggling with school, due to low IQ or poor study habits, will often get depressed over it.  Some will self-medicate with intoxicants to help cope.  These researchers are trying to imply that the cannabis is causal, but that has not been established.

AuntieBS

 

 

newatlas.com/australian-cannabis-chronic-pain-study/55298/

I have first hand knowledge that this is untrue and was likely funded by Big Pharma to cast doubt about a plant that can reduce opiate use and promote sleep, not to mention that CBD is one of the most powerful anti-inflammatory drugs available.  The blatant lies to get funding from Big Pharma just amaze me– scientists selling out the truth for money!

AuntieBS

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/04/180416085927.htm

Puh-leeze.  “However, the AASM has concluded that sleep apnea should be excluded from the list of chronic medical conditions for state medical cannabis programs due to unreliable delivery methods and insufficient evidence of treatment effectiveness, tolerability and safety.”  What a crock-o-shit.  Unreliable delivery methods?  What is unreliable about eating a given amount of THC?  I know of many who have self-medicated for pain, sleep, etc, very reliably by ingesting cannabis chocolate containing 10-30 mg THC, about two hours before expecting the desired effect.  True, tolerance quickly builds and within a month or two of daily ingestion like that, the dosage can be quadruple the virgin dose, but a month of abstinence restores the initial sensitivity just fine.  How can researchers not know this?

Evidence of treatment can be determined almost immediately, through a respiration monitor, even if subjective.  Safety is well known and tolerability can also be subjectively determined, but starting with low doses until the patient is acclimated and not fearful.

The tone of this paper smacks of Big Pharma, trying to cast fear, uncertainty, and doubt about a plant product which doesn’t generate obscene revenue for the pharmaceutical corporation.  They would much rather sell you a much more dangerous, less-effective pill, than to admit that a plant is not only safe but can be even more effective.

AuntieBS