Catholic Church and medicinal marajuana?

[LittleSoldier]

If Marinol actually worked,which it doesn’t,that’s what your Doc would recommend.

It is crazy expensive and it doesn’t work…That’s why your Doc want’s you on a MM program.

It will help.Docs and patients have proven that.

Good luck to you.

I’ll pray the MM will help you as much as it has the other MM patients.

That is what I was afraid of. Even if it worked I don’t have the money to pay for it, if it’s expensive.

All I want is to grow a few marijuana plants and use it when I need it - when the pain is so bad I can’t stand it. I am terrified now that with the TMJ pain and the back pain I’m just going to be one whole body of pain and I don’t think I can stand that. I’m really afraid I’m going to kill myself and I know that’s wrong.

Why do these anti-MM people feel marijuana is so awful? It’s a plant. It’s just a plant. And it can help people who just want their pain to stop. We aren’t tweakers. I used to be on oxycontin (or oxycodone - I can’t remember which) and suddenly the news stations were reporting that people were grinding it up and snorting it like cocaine.

Do you anti-MM people want to know how many times I ground up my medication and snorted it? Not one time. I never did it.

I think that if some of you experienced the pain that some of us feel you wouldn’t be so quick to judge us. It’s so easy to judge those you can’t empathize with.

I am sorry but I am in a lot of pain today and it does make me a bit touchy, but I am so frustrated that here it is the 21st century and people who lived fifty years ago had it better off re pain control than we have now. It’s the government feeling it would be sending the wrong message to allow MM. What message? People HURTHURTHURT!!!

 

[Bishop93]

That is what I was afraid of. Even if it worked I don’t have the money to pay for it, if it’s expensive.

All I want is to grow a few marijuana plants and use it when I need it - when the pain is so bad I can’t stand it. I am terrified now that with the TMJ pain and the back pain I’m just going to be one whole body of pain and I don’t think I can stand that. I’m really afraid I’m going to kill myself and I know that’s wrong.

Why do these anti-MM people feel marijuana is so awful? It’s a plant. It’s just a plant. And it can help people who just want their pain to stop. We aren’t tweakers. I used to be on oxycontin (or oxycodone - I can’t remember which) and suddenly the news stations were reporting that people were grinding it up and snorting it like cocaine.

Do you anti-MM people want to know how many times I ground up my medication and snorted it? Not one time. I never did it.

I think that if some of you experienced the pain that some of us feel you wouldn’t be so quick to judge us. It’s so easy to judge those you can’t empathize with.

I am sorry but I am in a lot of pain today and it does make me a bit touchy, but I am so frustrated that here it is the 21st century and people who lived fifty years ago had it better off re pain control than we have now. It’s the government feeling it would be sending the wrong message to allow MM. What message? People HURTHURTHURT!!!

Yeah it is really expensive.

If anti-MM ppl were told they have cancer,HIV/AIDS etc and MM would help them better than anything I seriously doubt they would turn it down.

If they would experience your pain for 1 day they’d change their mind.

God put M here for a reason…I don’t think that reason was to throw ppl in jail for using it

Good luck and God Bless…

 

[LittleSoldier]

Ya know what?

I don’t think Petergee has any intention of posting any research to back up his assertions. I’ve been waiting quite a long time.

I therefore conclude that Petergee’s assertions are baseless and unfounded.

People really shouldn’t say they’re going to post research findings and then never bother to do so. It’s kinda rude, really.

*Holy Mother, please keep
all unborn children safe tonight.

St. Francis, please pray for all unwanted and hurt animals.*

 

[presidentjlh]

My opinion on marijuana is:

If it’s cool with the Church, whatever. If not, then don’t do it.

End.

 

[LittleSoldier]

I’ve read legal documents and have been involved in business deals where the meanings of words and phrases get twisted to the point where their obvious meaning is not their actual meaning. I’ve encountered that.

In this case, Church teaching must be the guide along with common sense. What I’m seeing here is the usual, Hey. What’s the big deal? argument, followed by: Ya know. Lot’s of people smoke dope. What are you Katliks worried about? Marijuana don’t kill nobody. Besides, people in pain can use it ta relieve their pain. So what’s yer problem?

People who want medical marijuana can get Marinol. People who think the US government should be a dope pusher need to be honest about that.

Well that really simplifies things! I can get Marinol. Are you going to buy it for me? Are you going to pay for it? I’m disabled. I can’t work. My medical insurance has a $5,000 a year deductible and prescriptions don’t count.

I’m living on disability retirement. My COLA for this year is -1%. Let me repeat that - it’s NEGATIVE ONE PERCENT, even though prices have skyrocketed. I can’t keep up with inflation. I will lose my home in a couple of years if I don’t manage to move to a house with a lower mortgage payment.

Now, on top of that, you tell me I can get Marinol.

With all due respect, you are wrong. I *can’t *get Marinol and frankly, I am getting very tired of and frustrated with people who cannot comprehend the problems of those of us who struggle with chronic severe pain.

And your imitation of the language used by those of us who honestly hope that MM may alleviate our pain is not charitable. What was your point in writing that? We are not all uneducated people who don’t know how to use grammar and who speak in the insulting dialect you portray. I have a B.A., a B.S., an M.A. and was offered a place in a respected medical school (UC Irvine). My injury cut my education short. There is no way I could ever complete medical school or manage to obtain my Ph.D.

And even if we were poorly educated, so what? Don’t poor, poorly educated people get sick? Don’t they get injured? Your sarcastic imitation of people who may not have been as blessed or as lucky as you strikes me as rude. Catholics are supposed to have compassion for everyone. I wonder where your compassion is. I’m sorry, but I don’t see it. Your little parody is an insult to my family. My grandfather had a fourth grade education; my grandmother made it through sixth grade. My grandfather was a plumber, as was my father. I come from people who were considered to be lower class, yet both my grandfather and father were honest, hard-working men who provided for their families. My parents had four children. Every one of us graduated from college, one became a teacher, two became CPAs and then there was me.

Sooooo…are you going to pay for my Marinol?

I’d really like to know because I’d like to try it to see if it would help to alleviate this awful pain I have been in for the last 16 years - pain that is literally driving me into psychotic depression with thoughts of suicide because ** I can’t take this pain much longer. I HURT! **

 

[LittleSoldier]

Independent corporations would get the money and not pay taxes as they do now.

justice.gov/dea/demand/speakout/index.html

The dope dealers will be standing just outside the Dope Store, telling customers:

“Hey. Marijuana’s nothing. I’ve got the good stuff.”

The “Dope Store?” Do you have any idea how uncharitable your language is? At this point I don’t care if independent corporations would “get the money and not pay taxes as they do now.” So what? What does that have to do with the possibility that MM may aid in alleviating my pain?

In my state people grow their own marijuana. I’ve never seen or even heard of a “Dope Store.” I’m assuming your comment about the “dope dealers” standing outside the “Dope Store” is implying that those of us who successfully use MM will go onto to stronger drugs. Is that what you’re implying?

If so, there is a problem with your logic. I’m already on the stronger drugs! I’ve taken morphine, oxycodone, oxycontin, methadone, and nubain. One of the reasons people who have chronic pain want to use MM is that it would allow us to lead somewhat normal lives - not the pathetic imitation of life that people who take those stronger drugs lead.

Would you prefer that I have a morphine pump installed? I’m curious about that, not that I could ever afford to have that procedure done and then pay for the morphine every month or so. I have a feeling you would actually prefer that I use morphine even though it’s a much stronger drug than marijuana.

You are not making any sense. I don’t think you have thought this through.

 

[John89]

Regular use of “Weed” causes damage to the brain. It is a sin.

Actually studies have shown that marijuana does not kill brain cells, it actually stimulates them and is helpful in preventing alzheimers, The truth is, no study has ever demonstrated cellular damage, stupidity, mental impairment, or insanity brought on specifically by marijuana use.

 

[Dan_Grelinger]

Actually studies have shown that marijuana does not kill brain cells, it actually stimulates them and is helpful in preventing alzheimers, The truth is, no study has ever demonstrated cellular damage, stupidity, mental impairment, or insanity brought on specifically by marijuana use.

Saying ‘no study’ seems to be very bold.

I did a very quick search and found this.

druglibrary.org/schaffer/misc/driving/driving.htm

Seems the research community has repeatedly documented impairment brought on by marijuana use.

I guess the impact on a user’s ability to stay centered in a driving lane must really be brought on by ‘stimulated’ brain cells.

I’ll take my fellow drivers without marijuana usage, thank you very much.

Dan Grelinger

 

[stringbeanduck]

Saying ‘no study’ seems to be very bold.

I did a very quick search and found this.

druglibrary.org/schaffer/misc/driving/driving.htm

Seems the research community has repeatedly documented impairment brought on by marijuana use.

I guess the impact on a user’s ability to stay centered in a driving lane must really be brought on by ‘stimulated’ brain cells.

I’ll take my fellow drivers without marijuana usage, thank you very much.

Dan Grelinger

I think you misunderstood what John was saying; that there is no study that prooves marijuana use kills brain cells. This has nothing do with people smoking marijuana and then getting behind the wheel or any other impairment while on the marijuana. I think it’s a widely known fact that marijuana hinders a person’s ability to drive. But that doesn’t say anything as far as killing brain cells.

 

[JohnPaul24]

I’m happy to have stumbled upon a thread about medical marijuana on a catholic message board. I have been thinking about pot a lot lately, mainly because I have struggled with it for a few years and to this day I find myself fighting the occasional urge to get high. I am also rediscovering the Catholic faith and am putting effort into being a better person, though I still need to understand many other things before I can call myself a practicing Catholic.

I have been a medical marijuana patient for ten months. My license will expire in June and I do not plan on renewing my recommendation. I am 19 years old as of yesterday, 4-20. I first started using marijuana recreationally when I was 14 years old. Since then, my marijuana use has fluctuated quite drastically; I’ve gone through month-phases of using every single day and also month-phases of not touching it. This is mainly due to my conscience and the necessity of having a job.

I live in California. Pot is everywhere. Most of my peers smoke. I decided to get a medical marijuana license while in the midst of one of my pot phases. A buddy of mine was doing it, and I hated buying through dealers. In the past, I have been diagnosed with social anxiety disorder and depression. This made acquiring the card simpler than renewing a driver’s license. My parents were fine with it, and it did not interfere with my grades in school.

Before I go further, I need to explain a few things about the system out here, in case you all haven’t figured it out. It is laughable. None of my healthy friends who wanted to get club cards couldn’t. No doubt there are some people that benefit medically from marijuana, but holy smokes (tehe). I’ve been to enough dispensaries and have known enough pot heads to know that the mass majority of the people picking up “medicine” do not benefit medicinally. I am one of them. I am ashamed to admit that I have abused the system. The clinics are full of healthy-looking teenagers picking up pot to smoke recreationally. I have found that many patients I have spoken to are able to convince themselves that they are getting some form of healing out of weed, though in reality they are not truly seeking them. It’s like a bonus. They’ll say, “Yea, I mainly use it to get high, but it REALLY helps me fall asleep at night.” Or, “I love getting baked, but it REALLY helps relieve my stress. It keeps me sane, bro.” The worst part for me is, well, I’m one of them. Or was one of them.

I started thinking more. I started questioning myself, my routines. I could’t bring myself to accept marijuana as a good thing. For me, even occasional use is not good. But not for reasons I have heard on this thread. I’ll be the first to say that I care little about my health. I don’t need to get the munchies to want to eat massive amounts of chocolate. I really enjoy redbulls also. Maybe I should try that whole “temperance” thing I have been hearing about lately. But to me, the harm of marijuana use is not its physical effects, but rather its spiritual, integral effects on its users.

The key factor that I doubt any stoner could deny is the change it brings. You are very different when you are faded. Not necessarily in regard to coordination or even behavior. But you think differently. You feel differently. You want different things. Most importantly, it makes things seem better than they really are. It makes bad movies decent. It makes good movies incredible. It makes your TV dinner taste like it was prepared especially for you. It makes it difficult to become bored. I could write thousands more, but I think you’ll get the point. This is my problem with marijuana. Some would think I’m crazy to dismiss these effects as destructive, but I have come to believe so after much reflection. To me, there seems to be a lack of virtue in changing yourself to enjoy yourself. I want to be able to enjoy being me. I don’t think it is acceptable to physically inflate your mind to the point where everything around you becomes more than it really is. I’m going to be as honest with myself as I can be. I don’t think I can do that while smoking pot. I don’t think anyone can. I think as human beings we should strive to maximize our lives with things we know to be genuine in and of themselves. I think drugs in general seem to cheat that way of thinking. To a certain degree, they take the weight out of living.

Thats all I have to say. I don’t think it was entirely suitable for this thread, but I don’t care. take it easy everyone. God Bless.

 

[aball1035]

Aside from medical marijuana, if used simply for recreational uses, is it a sin, and how serious? (I mean smoking once in a while, not all the time)

 

[Dan_Grelinger]

I think you misunderstood what John was saying; that there is no study that prooves marijuana use kills brain cells. This has nothing do with people smoking marijuana and then getting behind the wheel or any other impairment while on the marijuana. I think it’s a widely known fact that marijuana hinders a person’s ability to drive. But that doesn’t say anything as far as killing brain cells.

No, I did not misunderstand THIS statement from John.

“The truth is, no study has ever demonstrated cellular damage, stupidity, mental impairment, or insanity brought on specifically by marijuana use.”

All of my comments were clearly directed at this statement, (I quoted ‘no study’) not his first one about dead brain cells.

Dan Grelinger

 

[LittleSoldier]

Saying ‘no study’ seems to be very bold.

I did a very quick search and found this.

druglibrary.org/schaffer/misc/driving/driving.htm

Seems the research community has repeatedly documented impairment brought on by marijuana use.

I guess the impact on a user’s ability to stay centered in a driving lane must really be brought on by ‘stimulated’ brain cells.

I’ll take my fellow drivers without marijuana usage, thank you very much.

Dan Grelinger

Dan, did you look up any of the references I provided? I have posted reference after reference in this thread.

Also, are you aware the subjects used in *every *research project described using your link was a *recreational user *of marijauna?

This is off-topic. This thread is about medical marijuana, not marijuana used for recreational purposes.

 

[LittleSoldier]

Marinol:

In post #176 the following comment was made:

People who want medical marijuana can get Marinol. People who think the US government should be a dope pusher need to be honest about that.

My response was posted yesterday.

After I’d responded I decided to do a little research on Marinol.

This is what I have found out (so far)

Marinol is an anti-emetic. I did not find any reference to pain control on any of the sites I checked.

Its main use is to treat nausea and vomiting. There are other uses (appetite stimulant, etc.) but nothing about controlling pain.

I have to admit this surprised me.

Then I tried to find out how much Marinol costs.

Thirty 10 mg. Marinol (the smallest dose I could find the price for) is over $800.00*

If I took one Marinol a day, I would be paying over $800.00 a month. I live on a fixed income (disability retirement). Where would I ever get ahold of $800 a month? I don’t have it. I can’t get it unless I resort to theft and/or robbery or become a drug pusher.

Marinol is not indicated for pain relief and the cost is prohibitively high.

It’s not an option.

*There is a generic form of Marinol. The lowest price I could find for 30 5 mg. was well over $300. Remember - this is half the strength of 10 mg. Marinol. The price for a daily intake of 2 5 mg. generic Marinol is approximately $680.00 a month.

That is an improvement, but the cost is (again) prohibitively high.

It’s not an option.

I’ve had problems finding much online about Marinol or generic Marinol. I would have had to lie to gain access to an online PDR. I don’t lie, so this isn’t an option either. At this point I can’t find out the proper dosage, assuming the drug is being prescribed as a pain reliever.

I have an appointment with my pcp early next month and I will ask him about this.

I will provide links to the websites I used to find this information when I can. I decided to start a new thread yesterday and had the links in the OP, but I started hurting a lot and couldn’t procede. I deleted the post. I don’t have the links anymore.

I’m happy to see this thread is once again active.

 

[stringbeanduck]

No, I did not misunderstand THIS statement from John.

“The truth is, no study has ever demonstrated cellular damage, stupidity, mental impairment, or insanity brought on specifically by marijuana use.”

All of my comments were clearly directed at this statement, (I quoted ‘no study’) not his first one about dead brain cells.

Dan Grelinger

Well you sure didn’t indicate that, because that statement seemed to be in close relation with the one about dead brain cells. And even so I’m sure John89 is well aware of the temporary mental effects from marijuana, which leads me to believe he was refering to long term affects.

 

[Dan_Grelinger]

Dan, did you look up any of the references I provided? I have posted reference after reference in this thread.

No, as I was not referencing any post of yours. I only referenced what appeared to be a very incorrect statement by another poster.

Also, are you aware the subjects used in *every *research project described using your link was a *recreational user *of marijauna?

No, I was not aware that marijauna would know the motivations of the user who had just ingested it, and would then be able to tailor it’s effects accordingly.

This is off-topic. This thread is about medical marijuana, not marijuana used for recreational purposes.

I could accept that, if I could accept the proposition that the effects of marijuana differ depending on the intent of the user. Believing that marijuana is very likely not able to tailor its ill effects based upon the intent of the user, I would suggest that it is on topic. And following that, I would suggest that wherever the use of marijuana is allowed for any reason (medical, recreational, or otherwise) that operation of any equipment (e.g. automobiles) be prohibited during the time such user is stoned.

Dan Grelinger

 

[Dan_Grelinger]

And even so I’m sure John89 is well aware of the temporary mental effects from marijuana, which leads me to believe he was refering to long term affects.

I did not assume he meant long term effects as you chose to do. I can’t say that he didn’t mean that. Only that he did not mention it in that post.

Dan Grelinger

 

[LittleSoldier]

Saying ‘no study’ seems to be very bold.

I did a very quick search and found this.

druglibrary.org/schaffer/misc/driving/driving.htm

Seems the research community has repeatedly documented impairment brought on by marijuana use.

I guess the impact on a user’s ability to stay centered in a driving lane must really be brought on by ‘stimulated’ brain cells.

I’ll take my fellow drivers without marijuana usage, thank you very much.

Dan Grelinger

Did you read this report? I’d like to comment on it.

This research was conducted by the U.S. Department of Transportation,
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

This research consists of a group of three studies, examining impairment in driving of subjects, both male and female. All were healthy.

Results of Study 1:

Figure 1 demonstrates that marijuana impairs driving performance as measured by an increase in lateral position variability…impairment after marijuana was the same in both trials…Other driving performance measures were not significantly affected by THC. Plasma concentrations of the drug were clearly related to the administered dose and time of blood sampling but unrelated to driving performance impairment.

Results of Study 2:

[P]erformance in the standard test was impaired in a dose- related manner by THC and confirmed the results obtained in the previous closed highway study. After marijuana smoking, subjects drove with an average speed that was only slightly lower than after placebo and very close to the prescribed level. In the car-following test, subjects maintained a distance of 45-50 m while driving in the successive placebo conditions. Our explanation for this observation is that the subjects’ caution was greatest the first time they undertook the test under the influence of THC and progressively less thereafter. As in the previous study, plasma concentrations of the drug were not related to driving impairment.

Results of Study 3:

Neither alcohol nor marijuana significantly affected driving performance measures obtained by the molecular approach, indicating that it may be relatively insensitive to drug-induced changes. … shows that a modest dose of alcohol (bac=0.034 g%) produced a significant impairment in city driving, relative to placebo. More specifically, alcohol impaired both vehicle handling and traffic maneuvers. Marijuana, administered in a dose of 100 g/kg THC, on the other hand, did not significantly change mean driving performance as measured by this approach.

Thus, there is evidence that subjects in the marijuana group were not only aware of their intoxicated condition, but were also attempting to compensate for it. These seem to be important findings. They support both the common belief that drivers become overconfident after drinking alcohol and investigators’ suspicions that they become more cautious and self- critical after consuming low doses of THC, as smoked marijuana.
Drug plasma concentrations were neither related to absolute driving performance scores nor to the changes that occurred from placebo to drug conditions.

Summary:

In summary, this program of research has shown that marijuana, when taken alone, produces a moderate degree of driving impairment which is related to the consumed THC dose. The impairment manifests itself mainly in the ability to maintain a steady lateral position on the road, but its magnitude is not exceptional in comparison with changes produced by many medicinal drugs and alcohol. Drivers under the influence of marijuana retain insight in their performance and will compensate where they can, for example, by slowing down or increasing effort. As a consequence, THC’s adverse effects on driving performance appear relatively small…the magnitude of marijuana’s, relative to many other drugs’, effects also justify Gieringer’s (1988) conclusion that “marijuana impairment presents a real, but secondary, safety risk; and that alcohol is the leading drug-related accident risk factor”.

Of the many psychotropic drugs, licit and illicit, that are available and used by people who subsequently drive, marijuana may well be among the least harmful. Campaigns to discourage the use of marijuana by drivers are certainly warranted. But concentrating a campaign on marijuana alone may not be in proportion to the safety problem it causes.

Discussion:

The results of the studies corroborate those of previous driving simulator and closed-course tests by indicating that THC in inhaled doses up to 300 g/kg has significant, yet not dramatic, dose-related impairing effects on driving performance (cf. Smiley, 1986).

THC’s effects on road-tracking after doses up to 300 g/kg never exceeded alcohol’s at bacs of 0.08 g%; and, were in no way unusual compared to many medicinal drugs. Evidence from the present and previous studies strongly suggests that alcohol encourages risky driving whereas THC encourages greater caution, at least in experiments. Another way THC seems to differ qualitatively from many other drugs is that the former’s users seem better able to compensate for its adverse effects while driving under the influence.

…[A]n important practical implications of the study is that is not possible to conclude anything about a driver’s impairment on the basis of his/her plasma concentrations of THC and THC-COOH determined in a single sample.

[T]he results of the present studies should not be considered as the final word. They should, however, serve as the point of departure for subsequent studies that will ultimately complete the picture of THC’s effects on driving performance.

-----continued in next post-----

 

[LittleSoldier]

-----continuation of last post-----

I’m speaking as a scientist here.

I looked at this research with both eyes open. At the end of every research project there should be a serious discussion of possible confounding factors, errors in word usage, statistical procedures, etc.

That was missing here, or I couldn’t find it.

The first problem I see is the sample size was really kind of small (the first and second studies used 16 subjects each; the third 24. Sample size (n) is obviously very important. It is simple common sense that 100 subjects are better than 50. It tends to remove those confounding factors because there is more randomness.

I have a problem with the sample size here. It’s small. This indicates to me (and this was backed up later on in the study) that this is more of a pilot study.

The second problem I see is that there are only 8 references. Eight. When I wrote my thesis I had well over 100. I’ve *rarely *seen research with so few references.

As to bringing this research into a discussion of MM, I want to point out that all subjects were healthy. This is not a study relating to people driving who happen to take MM, and it never claims to be.

Now I’m speaking and a scientist and just plain ol’ me.

This is one tiny bit of research, from a questionable source (the Federal Government). Maybe they didn’t have much money to work with. The Federal Government is well known for questionable spending; I wouldn’t be surprised if money that could have been used to conduct a much better piece of research on this very subject was used to buy $100 toilet seats or to fund a massive overhaul of a border station where 2 people a day cross the border.

It reminds me of how we can “prove” anything with statistics. This research is presented in a weird way. They write their conclusions and then provide a second set. The two don’t match! They did show impairment. They also showed that drivers who smoked marijuana were aware of their impairment and tried to correct it, which is not the case with drivers who are alcohol-impaired. They admit their research is just a beginning.

It’s easy to draw conclusions from research that aren’t valid, especially if one has no or little education in research methodology. It’s also not acceptable. They took their conclusions and used them to further their agenda IMHO. I hope I am wrong about that. And please, please don’t anyone post anything about me picking out and underlining and bolding parts of the research. I’m allowed to do that. This is not my research.

We have to be very careful. Please note (again) that this research is *not about MM and was conducted using healthy subjects. * Please also note this research does not *prove *anything. We can’t prove anything using scientific method.

Dan, you said you would take your fellow drivers without marijuana usage, thank you very much. And I thank you very much for that statement because it brings up two very important points:

It’s illegal to drive while under the influence of marijuana. If a patient using MM got behind the wheel of a car, drove, and caused an accident in which someone was killed, that would be murder in my eyes (and I believe it’s safe to assume that everyone in this thread, including you, would agree with me).

This study was conducted by an agency of the federal government. And what did they do? Dan, two of those three studies were conducted on regular roads with other drivers. They didn’t close off the roads! The third study was conducted in high-density urban traffic. These subjects, who had smoked varying amounts of marijuana, were driving right along with people who may have had children in the car, drivers who were tired, ill, or thinking about their problems, people who were lost and paying more attention to the road signs than to the road.

It is *never *appropriate to conduct research in this way. The agency that conducted this research didn’t know what the results would be, so why on earth did the researchers take this sort of chance? People could have died as a result of this!

That is my biggest problem with this research. Studies 2 and 3 should not have been conducted in the way they were. The government agency showed a huge amount of disrespect and concern for innocent human life.

I’m sure we would agree that human life is precious.

 

[Dan_Grelinger]

I agree with much of what you have written. Proof in these types of sciences is very hard to come by. From the rest of your post, it would appear that you reasonably accept a cause/effect relationship between any marijuana use and reduced driving performance (short term effect).

Increased samples sizes only serve to further reduce uncertainty. Uncertainty is never eliminated. If you are a student of statistics, then you know that sample sizes alone do not determine uncertainty. The amount of variation in the observed results have a significant influence as well. This study was not so complete as to provide statistical uncertainties. Given all that, a reasonable person would likely conclude that; proof? no. Strong indication? yes.

I’m still missing your point of the health of the subjects. In most substance effect studies, poor health tends to exacerbate the substance induced effect. If you suggest that marijuana induced driving impairment would have been even more pronounced in unhealthy subjects (supposed relationship to medical marijuana use), then I would agree. But it would seem a far reach to suggest that unhealthy subjects would respond less significantly to substance effects than healthy subjects.

Did the document indicate that the subjects were alone in the car during these tests? If so, I see your point. If an observer was in the vehicle, then your point is lost on me. Thousands of inexerienced student drivers are on our roads every day, but we pretty readily accept that risk, as long as an instructor (or mentoring adult) is in the car with them. If conducted in this way, I would suggest that this study would have been no more dangerous than allowing supervised student drivers on our public roads.

Cheers,

Dan Grelinger