211–220 of 381 posts
> "We have been terribly and systematically misled for nearly 70 years in the United States, and I apologize for my own role in that." It takes a large soul to admit, in public, that you've been wrong about something that has to do with your profession. And he's right, Americans have been misled about hemp and its products: http://cannabis.neocities.org/
As an aside, I love how neocities has emerged as simple, anonymous hosting.
The same is actually true of alcohol. Unfortunately, the discussion has become so black and white (legalization vs. prohibition) that no one is even pausing to consider what is actually optimal.
I wish I could get this message through clearly: the crowd on Reddit could benefit from learning the actual risks. Yes, I am in favor of legalization or decriminalization. No, young people should not use pot or alcohol often.
It's hard not to scream at kids as I pass them in a part of the city where they - some of them not even old enough to drive - are burning away up to 10 IQ points. Perhaps if their teachers and parents taught them the real risks rather than fear-mongering nonsense, we would see fewer kids throwing away precious intelligence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>You seem to be equating osteopathy (a completely accepted medical science) No, osteopathy is not completely accepted by medical science. Osteopathy is absolute pseudoscience. Please do your research. Yes, I realize that DOs undergo actual medical training in addition to the quackery that gives their field its name, but they are still taught the pseudoscience on which the practice was originally based. That they beli…
And some MDs were educated at Georgetown, which is a Jesuit school, so you can't trust any Georgetown grads because they believe in sky faires. Let's also remember that "MDs" work in a field founded by bloodletters who believed in the four humors. The important thing is whether the field is progressing via scientific method, not what its founded believed long ago.
Also, by no means should you take this to mean that I am giving MDs any special immunity. The only leg up they have is that I can't tell just by looking at the letters at the end of their name that their model of science in medicine has been poisoned by bullshit.
I'm glad that Gupta has made this public apology. It takes a lot of courage to make that statement especially for someone with great public influence. I'm just curious as to why it took him this long. Medical marijuana has been prescribed in hospitals for some time with great benefit. I mean, just from a clinical standpoint, he should've seen the great upsides and limited downsides to using the drug. Patients, typica…
This is a great article, but how can you mitigate the abuse of the system by people who just want to smoke weed and complain of headaches or glaucoma? I'm all for easing the pain of people who have real pain issues, but it's abundantly clear people are abusing the system.
There is obvious harm in preventing people from having access to a drug which mitigates their symptoms. There is obvious harm when you imprison someone for a drug related crime. There is obvious harm when you prevent a business from legally existing and profiting from the sale of the substance.
Where is the obvious harm when a user recreationally uses a substance, whether they got it under the false pretext of migraines, or not?
After I saw Gupta in Japan talking about protection against gamma radiation ( http://blog.jgc.org/2011/03/cnn-sounding-authorative-while-t... ) I stopped listening to him at all.
He's a practicing neurosurgeon with published research, but, like half of HN, doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to radiological safety; therefore, his opinions on pharmacology are irrelevant to you? That seems like a surprisingly dumb argument for you, John, but maybe I just misunderstood it. At any rate, the importance of the piece isn't Gupta's authority on the subject. After all, vis a vis cannabi…