I think that medical weed has myriad possibilities in treating physical addictions, which I have personally witnessed. The moral prohibition on studying this possibility is a crime itself.

Even LSD was seen to have therapeutic potential for addicts before white man government got their hands on it: https://www.centeronaddiction.org/the-bu…
The active element in weed, THC, is safer than caffeine and has no physical overdose levels.

Mostly, the Christians got tired of seeing people have fun getting stoned so they made it illegal; christian teaching has it that every living human must be as miserable as the christian humans.

As if Jeff Sessions doesn't want people to die of fucking opioid abuse.

"The analysis found a correlation and can’t prove that marijuana use led to a reduction in the growth of opioid use."

I want Dan's headline to be true, and it may well be, but this study doesn't prove it.

@2,
Yes, however the take away from the main study in the article is that easier access to marijuana might reduce that opioid use.

@2) MORON, did you read my COMMENT???
The moral prohibition on studying this possibility is a crime itself.

No study can prove anything until it is legal to study the subject in question. Nobody claimed 'proof' so, keep your dipshit fantasies to yourself.
.

Jeff Sessions has his feet firmly planted in the 1950s. There is virtually nothing that would convince him that even studying cannabis is safe and worthwhile, let alone legalizing it on the federal level.

Well, my personal experience can confirm this. Last spring I injured my back and it is still very painful. The doctors are treating me like an addict just because I need some Vicodin to get through some days and dole it out unwillingly. Only access to legal pot has allowed me to function.

“Seems likely” is hardly resounding scientific data, Dan.

Uni variant analysis is so fucking amateur that only some thick as oatmeal potheads would try and apply it to this scenario.

We all want pot to be researched extensively for medicinal utility.

This isn’t that research.

The resident conservative trolls are tripping over one another in order to prove how stupid they can come across in this post. It's best to just sit back and chuckle at them, Popelick Monster, and guess which ones are trolling and which are genuine.

Big pharma opposing legalization should not come as a big surprise:
http://www.businessinsider.com/companies…

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017…

@1:

I wouldn't necessarily chalk up our long national prohibition against cannabis exclusively on Christians. Read up on the history of the Federal Narcotics Bureau (forerunner of the DEA), and it's long-time head Harry Anslinger, who waged a personal crusade against cannabis, which he viewed in the context of a cultural war primarily against people of color.

@13: Anslinger was also protecting his own self-interest. He had been the chief federal enforcer of Prohibition. In December 1933, when the 21st Amendment repealed the 18th Amendment and ended Prohibition, he was out of work. He had to come up with something to make illegal. The fact that weed was primarily used by people of color made it an easy sale.

I have nothing against legalization other than the way its advocates lead me to dislike them, but it seems sloppy to equate medical and recreational.

@6

No. Wahlburg didn't read your comment.
They were typing @2 when you posted it.
@2 was not directed @1, it was directed @ Dan.
But when Wahlburg reacted to your tantrum @9 you went squealing to the webmaster like a reamed out bitch, and got the post deleted?
Really?
What a limp dicked little blowhard.
You know, you might have overreacted;
Wahlburg wasn't really going to spank your fanny with a rolled up newspaper....

@12 Great post. From your reference:

“ ‘It’s pretty absurd that federal law considers marijuana to have no medical value, but allows for the development of synthetic versions of the same ‘‘substance,” ‘ said Mason Tvert, of the Marijuana Policy Project, which has backed many state legalization measures.

In one investor filing, [Big Phucking Pharma giant] Insys* even directly admitted that marijuana legalization could 'significantly limit the commercial success' of its cannabis-based products.

‘All of these pharmaceutical companies rely upon the FDA for their monopolistic protections,’ said Holyoak. ‘They’re going to continue to try to keep marijuana illegal except for that.’ ”

* Insys -- Proud makers/pushers of Fentanyl. Likely, you've heard of it.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017…

Kristofarian @ 18
Big pharma also successfully pushed for outlawing homeopathy in the 1940's, and are attempting to do the same nowadays, starting with "risky remedies."