"Ron" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Dutch" >
> wrote:
>
>> "Ron" > wrote
>>
>> >> > Which point from the website that you asked me to read
>> >> > should we review, publicly. Do you need to check with the clique
>> >> > before
>> >> > you can respond?
>> >>
>> >> How about this part..
>> >>
>> >> Myth: No one has ever died from using marijuana
>> >> The Kaiser study also found that daily pot users have a 30% higher
>> >> risk
>> >> of
>> >> injuries, presumably from accidents. These figures are significant,
>> >> though
>> >> not as high as comparable risks for heavy drinkers or tobacco addicts.
>> >> That
>> >> pot can cause accidents is scarcely surprising, since marijuana has
>> >> been
>> >> shown to degrade short-term memory, concentration, judgment, and
>> >> coordination at complex tasks including driving.(1) There have been
>> >> numerous
>> >> reports of pot-related accidents --- some of them fatal, belying the
>> >> attractive myth that no one has ever died from marijuana. One survey
>> >> of
>> >> 1023
>> >> emergency room trauma patients in Baltimore found that fully 34.7%
>> >> were
>> >> under the influence of marijuana, more even than alcohol (33.5%); half
>> >> of
>> >> these (16.5%) used both pot and alcohol in combination.(2) This is
>> >> perhaps
>> >> the most troublesome research ever reported about marijuana; as we
>> >> shall
>> >> see, other accident studies have generally found pot to be less
>> >> dangerous
>> >> than alcohol. Nonetheless, it is important to be informed on all sides
>> >> of
>> >> the issue. Pot smokers should be aware that accidents are the number
>> >> one
>> >> hazard of moderate pot use. In addition, of course, the psychoactive
>> >> effects
>> >> of cannabis can have many other adverse effects on performance, school
>> >> work,
>> >> and productivity.
>> >
>> > Are you prepared to defend this study? Cut and paste is not a
>> > substitute
>> > for clear thinking.
>>
>> I'm waiting...
>
> Provide the study. I'm assuming you've read it in its entirety before
> quickly jumping to the conclusion that is unbiased or accurate. What was
> your impression of the methodology?

I didn't read either study. I looked at the conclusions and they confirm
everything I know about pot based on nearly forty years of exposure to it. I
know for a fact that pot contributes to automobile accidents, I know for a
fact that it affects memory, concentration, judgment, and coordination. It
is also not insignificant that this paragraph is on a website advocating
legalization, which alleviates the probablity of negative bias. The
statements conclude that care and caution are important when using pot,
rather than blithely belieiving it is harmless. Undeniable. I don't care how
about the numbers and how they arrived at them, I assume since the studies
were published that they are probably relatively reliable. Now if you are
convinced that these studies and conclusions, against all reason, are
misguided or wrong, then what are the errors in the studies and what are the
correct conclusions? Stop with the disinformation and start looking for the
truth.