The feds will still go after it as an illegal drug when presented as recreational and the will keep the stigma going on forever. Furthermore it will keep a lot of talented people out of good job opportunities for smoking a joint after work instead of having a glass of wine.

  • zacher_glachl@lemmy.world
    2·
    1 year ago

    A better job at what, getting you high? Pretty sure they already have that, and while it doesn’t net them 10k per dose the Sacklers would have liked that very much no doubt.

      • jasory@programming.dev
        1·
        10 months ago

        I think people need to actually research THC and cannabinoids. The handful of studies that have been done on them show that it’s no better than OTC medication in all but the very rarest cases.

        Medical marijuana is a complete hoax, it was always about making money and getting high.

          • jasory@programming.dev
            1·
            10 months ago

            Nope. It’s been 2-3 years, but I read every single research paper on the subject.

            You’re confusing blog posts with actual academic papers. Just a heads up the the effects of medicines are no where near as clearcut as people think. Cannabiniods have fairly weak evidence for efficacy.

            Imagine thinking that journalists have the capacity to analyze papers. Try getting a degree or atleast taking some classes on biostatistics.

              • jasory@programming.dev
                1·
                10 months ago

                No there is not. There is a few hundred, and most of then don’t even cover efficacy in vivo which is the subject matter.

                Keep LARPing as an academic, lets see how stupid you really are.

                  • jasory@programming.dev
                    1·
                    10 months ago

                    You’ve had plenty of time to prove your claim that marijuana is an important medicine and anyone who disagrees must be citing Fox news, and yet all you have been able to do is act incredulous that there might be a more effective methodology for finding relevant research than a keyword search. The amount of relevant high-quality papers is not in the thousands, it’s not even in the hundreds. You arrived at your conclusion by the most useless and sophmoric methodology and are acting smug because you (supposedly) teach an introductory class to highschool graduates. Guess what dipshit? We don’t use your shitty lessons.

                    “Then we can talk”

                    You already admitted that you don’t understand pharmacology so what exactly do you think you’re going to talk about? How you still don’t understand how to perform graph traversal to find related studies?