Report Calls Out Dangers of Cannabis Branding Practices

By | December 5, 2019

  • December 5, 2019 at 6:55 pm
    Jon says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 5
    Thumb down 4

    It seems like an oddly misleading headline, but the article brings several good points to the table regarding a shift in focus to the known positive effects of the plant.

  • December 5, 2019 at 8:18 pm
    Craig Cornell says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 5
    Thumb down 13

    Apparently, you read a different article. This article talked about all the lying going on about the SUPPOSED good benefits that are not true. Hello? From the article:

    “I do think there is a mismatch between what consumers know about cannabis and what is being touted and promoted about cannabis,” Murphy said.

    He addressed wide-ranging health claims about cannabis, some of them as far-fetched as positing it as a potential cure for cancer, saying such claims may be doing cannabis more harm than good.

    “It is damaging the credibility of cannabis to a certain degree,” he said. “Claiming that it’s the savior to all things and all manners is wrong.”

    • December 6, 2019 at 8:44 am
      Rosenblatt says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 12
      Thumb down 1

      There are 18 paragraphs in the article.

      The “lying” piece took up 3 paragraphs.

      Less than 17% of the article had to do with “lying”

      The other 83% of the article is “weigh[ted] heavily on the branding”

      I would agree you must have read a different article.

      • December 6, 2019 at 12:11 pm
        Craig Cornell says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 3
        Thumb down 11

        You are truly funny. The “branding” problem is ONLY because of the lying.

        Man, you are one strange dude. Please tell me the scientifically-verified medical uses for CBD.
        (THC has zero medical value, according to science.)

        • December 6, 2019 at 1:29 pm
          Rosenblatt says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 6
          Thumb down 2

          Craig – once again you’re asking for information that’s been previously provided to you. A few people on here have already did this research and you apparently don’t remember it. Why would I bother repeating that exercise when it’s again going to fall on deaf ears?

          The definition of idiocy is doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting a different result. I’m sure you disagree, but I’m no idiot.

          • December 6, 2019 at 3:46 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 5

            Is this like when you said you answered my question in one of your answers to someone else and I had to play hide and seek?

            Link the science. HA HA HA! Will NEVER happen. Because you can’t.

          • December 6, 2019 at 4:53 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 0

            This comment proves your lack of retention.

            I did that in ONE article ONCE, and after you complained, I re-posted it DIRECTLY in line with the conversation we were having.

            What’s the problem?

            I said “please look at another comment in the same comment section” — you said “no” — and I said “okay, let me post it again right here for you.”

            Why keep pretending I never posted the reply in-line?

            Is it because you have no argument to make so you’re deflecting and trolling? That’s the only reason I see why you would say that again, knowing full well you’re not being honest with what transpired (since this isn’t the first time you’ve tried to use this nonsense as a reply).

            Also, here’s a link to what Planet brought up so you can stop complaining about that now: htt p://nationalacademies.org/hmd/reports/2017/health-effects-of-cannabis-and-cannabinoids.aspx

          • December 6, 2019 at 6:10 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 5

            See below, directly from the link. What is wrong with you guys? Your links back ME up! (P.S. It is two years old; LOTS of bad news since then.)

            “A lack of definitive evidence has resulted in insufficient information on the health implications of cannabis use, causing a significant public health concern for vulnerable populations such as adolescents, pregnant women, and others.

            Unlike with substances such as alcohol or tobacco, no accepted standards exist to help guide individuals as they make choices regarding if, when, where, and how to use cannabis safely and, in regard to therapeutic uses, effectively.”

          • December 11, 2019 at 10:42 am
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 1

            LOL no matter how you try to twist the truth the facts aren’t on your side Craig

    • December 6, 2019 at 9:03 am
      Captain Planet says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 7
      Thumb down 2

      Let’s Paul Harvey Craig’s selective copying:

      “As cannabis and CBD is normalised, we may see a return of the leaf on packaging to reclaim credibility and differentiate the legitimate from the snake oil…What we’re trying to get through (to people) is that cannabis isn’t just a novelty factor,”

      Murphy said that cannabis should be promoted for its known qualities, including as a way to reduce anxiety and pain, help with sleep, improve appetite and mood, and limit inflammation.

      “There’s a lot of qualities of cannabis that brands can gain from and apply to their product and as a point of differentiation for consumers,” Murphy said.

      • December 6, 2019 at 9:25 am
        Captain Planet says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 8
        Thumb down 2

        Don’t you just hate it when full context gets in the way of your narrative? (end sarcasm)

        • December 6, 2019 at 12:13 pm
          Craig Cornell says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 2
          Thumb down 8

          There is NO science to back up those claims. It is ALL anecdotal and there are other, medically-proven options for every single medical issue mentioned.

          Now please show you are an honest Christian and list all of the phony claims for CBD.

          I won’t wait for you to get back from church on that one.

          • December 6, 2019 at 12:24 pm
            Captain Planet says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 2

            Craig wrote, “…and there are other, medically-proven options for every single medical issue mentioned.”

            And, if I have a headache, I can use ibuprofen, aspirin, or acetaminophen.

          • December 6, 2019 at 1:15 pm
            Captain Planet says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 2

            Craig wrote, “There is NO science to back up those claims.”

            From Medical News Today:
            “The National Academies of Science, Enginerring, and Medicine assessed more than 10,000 scientific studies on the medical benefits and adverse effects of marijuana. One area that the report looked closely at was the use of medical marijuana to treat chronic pain. The review found that marijuana, or products containing cannabinoids, are effective at relieving chronic pain.”

            Craig, the scientific research goes on to talk about treating alcohol and drug addiction, depression/PTSD/anxiety, nausea in cancer patients, and epilepsy, especially in children.

          • December 6, 2019 at 3:00 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 5

            Right. “Somebody else has the evidence. But I won’t show it to you.”

            Because it does not exist. Disengenuous answer number 735 from Rosenblatt.

          • December 6, 2019 at 3:05 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 1

            Wrong. I said you have already been given the evidence multiple times and you’ve ignored it and/or not retained it.

            Case in point: see Planet’s post from 1:15PM today, directly above your comment claiming nobody is showing you the information you’re asking for which is clearly already in this thread.

          • December 6, 2019 at 3:06 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 4

            Where is your link? Let’s discuss the facts. Pain relief is the ONLY proven use and there are lots of other alternatives, as you point out.

            Then you go on to make false claims for depression, anxiety, blah blah blah.

            In the words of the American Psychiatry Association, “there is no medically recognized treatment for marijuana to address psychiatric illnesses”.

            The nausea evidence is ALL anecdotal, as I said. (And who cares if cancer patients try marijuana if it helps, even if it might only be in their imaginations?)

            It shocks me that you are so unwilling to be honest on this subject. Okay, not really, I’m used to it with you.

          • December 6, 2019 at 3:26 pm
            Captain Planet says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 1

            I cited my source, Google it if you don’t believe me. I don’t care. Your opinion does not truth make. Also, according to your beloved American Psychiatry Assoc:

            “Minton was diagnosed with gender dysphoria, a medical condition where a person experiences deep discomfort with the gender assigned them at birth, according to the American Psychiatric Association.”

            Something tells me you won’t believe gender dysphoria, though.

          • December 6, 2019 at 3:41 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 3

            What does gender dysphoria have to do with pot? Nothing. The dumbest argument I have seen from Planet and that is saying a lot.

          • December 6, 2019 at 3:47 pm
            Captain Planet says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 1

            Just seeing if you truly believe the source you cite constantly out here. Because it’s the same source who has identified gender dysphoria. So, are you going to crusade for those individuals as well?

          • December 6, 2019 at 4:31 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 4

            Dumbest Argument EVER.

          • December 10, 2019 at 7:53 pm
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 1

            I think most of us agree but not in the way you think LOL

    • December 6, 2019 at 10:58 am
      Jon says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 3
      Thumb down 3

      Also literally from the article, from the same person:

      Murphy said that cannabis should be promoted for its known qualities, including as a way to reduce anxiety and pain, help with sleep, improve appetite and mood, and limit inflammation.

      LOL Once again the boomer generation showcases it’s ability to completely avoid any information it doesn’t like. Why does your generation have such a lack of self awareness? Your paragraph quotes aren’t even particularly damning, just a sad angry man grasping at straws.

      • December 6, 2019 at 3:39 pm
        Craig Cornell says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 1
        Thumb down 4

        See below. All of those claims are BS except for pain relief. But you keep pushing pot!

        • December 6, 2019 at 5:00 pm
          Rosenblatt says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 5
          Thumb down 1

          The claim that marijuana helps improve appetite is BS? Clearly you’ve never heard of “the munchies” before.

          • December 6, 2019 at 5:19 pm
            Captain Planet says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 1

            Right? It’s the oldest pot joke ever. Even Fast Times had Spicolli ordering a pizza to his classroom. “Learning about Cuba, having some food!”

          • December 9, 2019 at 6:58 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 5

            Andrew deletes comments from people he disagrees with so here goes again.. Clearly, you’ve never heard of “scrommitting” before?

            Many regular users of THC products find they can’t eat food without becoming nauseous unless they consume THC before eating. That is one sign of dependency.

            The ONLY people who should be triggering appetite with THC are people undergoing chemotherapy. Period.

            Your desperate attempts to defend THC are really pathetic now.

          • December 10, 2019 at 8:36 am
            Andrew G. Simpson says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 0

            Give it a rest, Craig. I am an equal opportunity deleter. It has nothing to do with whether I agree or disagree. If I deleted all the comments I disagree with, there wouldn’t be many left:) You also have no way of knowing which comments are deleted as many are axed before they are even visible.

          • December 10, 2019 at 1:04 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 7

            Your standards are virtually impossible to figure out. People routinely make obviously false statements that are almost certainly lies in an effort to discredit me and others and those statements are allowed to stand.

            helpingout’s every comment includes some reference to how dishonest I am without evidence (see below). Can I call people a liar now?

            And when I responded to helpingout’s slander, you deleted it.

            Truly. You encourage this cess pool. If your enforcement were strict and applied to everyone, civility would rise.

  • December 6, 2019 at 9:57 am
    Captain Planet says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 4
    Thumb down 2

    Craig,
    Were you hoping the header simply read, “Report Calls Out Dangers of Cannabis”?

    • December 6, 2019 at 12:13 pm
      Craig Cornell says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 2
      Thumb down 5

      Of course not! a This is INSURANCE JOURNAL! HA HA HA!

      • December 6, 2019 at 3:31 pm
        Jon says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 3
        Thumb down 4

        So as is the usual response to insurance journal, the boomer generation will ignore what they want in the article and when confronted by their own dishonesty slink away with their tail between their legs until the next vaping article where they can rinse repeat. Aren’t you tired of being called out for hypocritical behavior? There’s literally another vaping article in the top commented links right now where we did this already. You spout lies, you’re called on them, you ghost the conversation. Can’t we skip right to you ghosting? Do you really get something out of lying over and over and trying to incite arguments here?

  • December 6, 2019 at 3:38 pm
    Craig Cornell says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 1
    Thumb down 4

    Since Captain Planet is not honest enough to answer the question, I went ahead and did it for him. (Don’t read this Pot Fans! Keep telling your friends it’s a Miracle Drug so they keep buying it for no reason what so ever regardless of what it does. That’s what friends are for!)

    “Got arthritis? Dry skin? Menstrual cramps? Trouble sleeping or feeling stressed? The CBD industry claims it has the cure for you.

    Such assertions are becoming increasingly common — and brazen — as the cannabis compound commonly known as CBD proliferates in drinks, baked goods, tinctures, body lotions and even bath salts. To some, the hype echoes 19th-century snake oil advertisements that promised to cure “all aches and pains!”

    While CBD is generally believed to be safe, scant research has been conducted on its medical and health benefits because cannabis has long been prohibited at the federal level. The only clinically proven remedy is a treatment for two rare forms of childhood epilepsy. All other claims are anecdotal.”

    https://www.denverpost.com/2019/02/23/cbd-cannabis-boom-in-america/

    • December 6, 2019 at 3:44 pm
      Captain Planet says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 4
      Thumb down 2

      More than 10,000 scientific studies by The National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine disagree with the Denver Post. Certainly, CBD has some echoes of snake oil ads, this article even states that. Duh! It doesn’t stand alone. Literally thousands of products are on the market today with similar echoes. So don’t purchase it. Free market at work, right?

      • December 6, 2019 at 4:28 pm
        Craig Cornell says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 2
        Thumb down 4

        Exactly. Except that any large company making false claims has to post warnings that they are making claims not approved by the FDA or any other reputable source.

        Not so with CBD snake oil sales people. And you STILL won’t answer my question about what lies are being told, and you STILL can’t defend marijuana as useful for anything other than pain relief and some rare form of child epilepsy.

        And you STILL lie about the effectiveness of marijuana for use for depression.

        Exactly like a Snake Oil salesman.

        • December 6, 2019 at 4:40 pm
          Captain Planet says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 3
          Thumb down 1

          Take that up with The National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine. They are the ones who did over 10,000 scientific studies evidencing the benefits they identified. Not me. They must be the snake oil salesmen.

          Show me the CBD label(s) you are referring to. I’d like to see the language used. I’m looking at one right now that clearly shows it is FDA approved. It’s on http://www.tatihealth.com. Bioplow hemop oil, 40,000 mg of hemp extract. Pain, anxiety, and better sleep, mood, and stress are all noted. And, here’s another by Artizan, 1,000 mg – FDA approved hemp see oil for pain relief, stress, and sleep. In fact, I’m having a hard time finding one that isn’t backed by the FDA or another reputable source.

          • December 6, 2019 at 6:16 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 3

            From the National Academies of Science link below.

            Truly, Planet, I am putting you in the Jon-camp now. Just too dishonest to respond to anymore. No shame at all; your link backs up what I have been saying and it is two years old. Ridiculous.

            “A lack of definitive evidence has resulted in insufficient information on the healthimplications of cannabis use, causing a significant public health concern for vulnerable populations such as adolescents, pregnant women, and others.

            Unlike with substances such as alcohol or tobacco, no accepted standards exist to help guide individuals as they make choices regarding if, when, where, and how to use cannabis safely and, in regard to therapeutic uses, effectively.”

          • December 6, 2019 at 7:25 pm
            Captain Planet says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 1

            Craig,
            Still not one of us disputing kids, pregnant women, etc. And none of us just realized this 2 years ago. We’ve known for decades.

            Now, onto the point of citing the evidence – seems like you lied again. There is scientific proof of medical uses after all.

          • December 7, 2019 at 3:36 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 4

            Can you even read your own links? Hello?

            ” . . . no accepted standards exist to help guide individuals as they make choices regarding if, when, where, and how to use cannabis safely and, in regard to therapeutic uses, effectively.”

            In other words, we don’t know what is going to happen to people who consume THC. It is all a gigantic leap into the dark. We have NOT known the dangers of THC for decades. Your lies are pathetic.

  • December 6, 2019 at 3:44 pm
    Craig Cornell says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 3
    Thumb down 4

    Awesome Lack of Self-Awareness: the article clearly links the “branding” problem to promises about marijuana that aren’t true.

    And sure enough, the Pot Defenders on Insurance Journal defend . . . promises that aren’t true!

    You guys are just hilarious.

    • December 6, 2019 at 3:52 pm
      helpingout says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 5
      Thumb down 4

      Maybe you should learn to comprehend the studies or link your sources? You have been proven to be dishonest almost on a daily basis with cannabis articles.

      Are you just going to ignore all of the links people have already given you? What about the links you have shared that disprove your point when you read the studies behind them?

      Oh right, you don’t care because you have pushed this same false narrative regardless of the truth.

      Happy ignorance Craig!

      • December 6, 2019 at 4:29 pm
        Craig Cornell says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 3
        Thumb down 4

        Boring.

  • December 6, 2019 at 3:53 pm
    Angela Iseli says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 2
    Thumb down 1

    Look! Actual peer-reviewed scientific papers on cannabis:
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6843725/
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28349316 (subscription needed)
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5569602/

    Read at the risk of your own ignorance. Some scientific education required. Your mileage may vary.

    • December 6, 2019 at 8:34 pm
      PolarBeaRepeal says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 2
      Thumb down 3

      I read a few sections and offer these three extracts from the three links you provides:

      1. THC and CBD have been shown to have opposite effects on regional brain activation across a variety of cognitive tasks in healthy individuals.24

      2. Research on cannabis and sleep is in its infancy and has yielded mixed results.

      3. Conclusion: This review also illustrates that some important toxicological parameters are yet to be studied, for example, if CBD has an effect on hormones. Additionally, more clinical trials with a greater number of participants and longer chronic CBD administration are still lacking.

      My Replies:

      1. THC is theorized to yield adverse effects; e.g. psychosis, while CBD is said to potentially ‘heal’ psychosis. The overall conclusion is that there is no conclusion because ‘more study is needed’. So, this tease article is meant to propel further studies, thus more grant money.

      2. Mixed results are NOT worthy of a report. The analysts should not have published preliminary findings, but rather, should have continued their study, or abandoned it if the results were inconclusive with credible data and proper application of the scientific method.

      3. Inconclusive conclusion, again. A waste of cyberbytes.

      @Angela Iseli; the least you could have done would be to make comments on the links you provided. You should now realize that your ‘YMMV’ comment is a sign that you don’t want to study the issue, but suggest others do so. In the end, the links were worthless, and you should realize that ‘YMMV’ is incorrect. A proper comment would have been “theories are being tested, and that’s about all these links provide.”.

  • December 6, 2019 at 4:35 pm
    Nellie Wilson says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 2
    Thumb down 3

    I think I may not have quit smoking dope soon enough. I can’t sing a lick anymore, and wheeze all the time.

    • December 6, 2019 at 4:37 pm
      Nellie Wilson says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 2
      Thumb down 3

      Mamas; don’t let yer babies grow up to be cowb…. stoners!

      • December 6, 2019 at 4:48 pm
        Captain Planet says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 3
        Thumb down 1

        Hi Yogi!

  • December 6, 2019 at 6:23 pm
    Craig Cornell says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 2
    Thumb down 4

    Your “studies” are a joke. They are the most basic, exploratory kind of research with no conclusions whatsoever, leaving open the possibility that nothing will come of them ever. The one “study” says CBD doesn’t seem to do anything. Awesome! See below from your links:

    “Questions remain regarding the full side-effect profile of CBD, with reports of increased liver enzymes and potential for hepatic toxicity, but the most commonly reported side effects (such as diarrhoea and sedation) are likely to be both mild and benign. A more substantial body of evidence, including larger studies with longer-term CBD administration (e.g. up to 2 years), is required to accurately estimate the risk-benefit profile of CBD.”

    “Research on cannabis and sleep is in its infancy and has yielded mixed results. Additional controlled and longitudinal research is critical to advance our understanding of research and clinical implications.”

    In the immortal words of Einstein: whatever.

  • December 6, 2019 at 6:49 pm
    Craig Cornell says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 4
    Thumb down 2

    Everyone should read Captain Planet’s source for information on marijuana. Here is the link:

    http://nationalacademies.org/hmd/reports/2017/health-effects-of-cannabis-and-cannabinoids.aspxyone

    Among other things, it confirms that marijuana can cause schizophrenia and that marijuana is a gateway drug to other drugs. It has a whole list of bad things pot does, confirming almost everything that I have been saying (while getting attacked by geniuses. Ho hum.)

    Watch out, Planet. If Jon reads the link, he will start calling you names.

    • December 6, 2019 at 8:15 pm
      PolarBeaRepeal says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 3
      Thumb down 4

      That’s the danger of cherry-picking facts, study results, or opinions from a large set of facts, studies, & opinions.

    • December 6, 2019 at 8:55 pm
      Rosenblatt says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 4
      Thumb down 1

      Where EXACTLY does it say marijuana CAUSES schizophrenia (please remember a statistical association does not mean IT CAUSES IT. These terms have different meanings in scientific studies. Words matter.)

      Here’s what I read. Again, nothing about CAUSING schizophrenia here.

      “There is substantial evidence of a statistical association between cannabis use and:
      • The development of schizophrenia or other psychoses, with the highest risk among the most frequent users (12-1)

      There is moderate evidence of a statistical association between cannabis use and:
      • Better cognitive performance among individuals with psychotic disorders and a history of cannabis use (12-2a)
      • Increased symptoms of mania and hypomania in individuals diagnosed with bipolar disorders (regular cannabis use) (12-4)
      • A small increased risk for the development of depressive disorders (12-5)
      • Increased incidence of suicidal ideation and suicide attempts with a higher incidence among heavier users (12-7a)
      • Increased incidence of suicide completion (12-7b)
      • Increased incidence of social anxiety disorder (regular cannabis use) (12-8b)

      There is moderate evidence of no statistical association between cannabis use and:
      • Worsening of negative symptoms of schizophrenia (e.g., blunted affect) among individuals with psychotic disorders (12-2c)

      There is limited evidence of a statistical association between cannabis use and:
      • An increase in positive symptoms of schizophrenia (e.g., hallucinations) among individuals with psychotic disorders (12-2b)
      • The likelihood of developing bipolar disorder, particularly among regular or daily users (12-3)
      • The development of any type of anxiety disorder, except social anxiety disorder (12-8a)
      • Increased symptoms of anxiety (near daily cannabis use) (12-9)
      • Increased severity of posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms among individuals with posttraumatic stress disorder (12-11)

      There is no evidence to support or refute a statistical association between cannabis use and:
      • Changes in the course or symptoms of depressive disorders (12-6)
      • The development of posttraumatic stress disorder (12-10)”

    • December 6, 2019 at 9:01 pm
      Rosenblatt says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 3
      Thumb down 1

      Note 2 – if marijuana CAUSED schizophrenia, the report would have said there was CONCLUSIVE evidence, because that’s defined in the report in this way: “For this level of evidence, there are many supportive findings from good-quality studies with no credible opposing findings. A firm conclusion can be made, and the limitations to the evidence, including chance, bias, and confounding factors, can be ruled out with reasonable confidence.”

      • December 7, 2019 at 9:43 pm
        Randy says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 0

        Ok Boomer

      • December 9, 2019 at 6:52 pm
        Craig Cornell says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 4

        Man, you are really desperate to defend your THC love child.

        “A firm conclusion can be made, and the limitations to the evidence . . . can be RULED OUT with reasonable confidence.”

        What more do you need? Based on the extremely high confidence of the National Acadamies of SCIENCE, would you warn your family and friends? Of COURSE you would.

        What are you arguing anyway? Lung cancer can happen to people who don’t smoke. Not everyone who smokes gets lung cancer? Does that rule out smoking as a cause of lung cancer? You are being ridiculous.

        • December 10, 2019 at 1:48 pm
          Rosenblatt says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 5
          Thumb down 0

          I’m glad we agree.

          If this study found that marijuana causes psychosis, the “A firm conclusion can be made, and the limitations to the evidence . . . can be RULED OUT with reasonable confidence” standard would you quoted would be enough to sway me.

          However, as I cited, that phrase is defined as CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE in the study and they never said there was conclusive evidence to support that claim.

          Had they written there was conclusive evidence marijuana causes psychosis, I’d agree with you.

          But since they didn’t use that phrase, that standard was not met. Hence the study did not determine marijuana causes psychosis.

          • December 10, 2019 at 2:02 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 4

            What is the standard for “Substantial Evidence” Mr. Honesty?

            That is what the NAS cites as the evidence for THC CAUSING schizophrenia. (They also ignore your silly “statistics isn’t causation” argument.)

            And keep in mind, in nearly every case, the evidence is building in a negative light for THC. Give it a few years. The evidence is NOT going to get better. The American Psychiatry Association went from recommending THC for schizophrenia patients 15 years ago to concluding THC causes schizophrenia today.

            Pray tell. What is the description of Substantial Evidence? And then tell me this: would you warn your family about schizophrenia if they were regular users of pot?

            Prediction: Dodge. The usual Rosenblatt response.

          • December 10, 2019 at 2:24 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 1

            Come on Craig … if you want to know how the study defines something, you’re more than capable of opening the link you posted and getting the answer yourself.

            Do your own homework. Just do me a favor if you post a reply with what the study says — COPY AND PASTE THE TEXT DIRECTLY FROM THE LINK and don’t just post your summation of what you think it says.

            As for your question, which I’ve already answered many times in other threads: I will tell my family that marijuana is a drug and an intoxicant, all drugs and intoxicants come with risk (even over the counter medication), and it is up to them to make up their own mind if they want to use it because they’re adults.

            Disclaimer: There are no pregnant women in my family and nobody is underage. What I would tell those groups of people about marijuana (don’t use it at all) is not the same approach I’d take when talking to the adults in my family.

          • December 10, 2019 at 5:14 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 4

            And another dodge from Rosenblatt, his specialty.

            I asked about warning about schizophrenia. You talk about kids and pregnant women.

            (What’s that stupid cliche I see all the time? Goal post something?)

          • December 11, 2019 at 12:28 pm
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 0

            Technically, you asked him to define the standard for “Substantial evidence”. You’re just goalpost shifting every time someone comes back with a legitimate argument against the nonsense you’re spouting. You literally try to argue that that “correlation isn’t causation” is not a valid arugment, which is false. You don’t have the evidence on your side, you have nothing but loud trolling anger at marijuana. The facts are against you, the data is against you, you have nothing as usual, Craig. Sit down when grown folks are talking maybe.

  • December 10, 2019 at 2:20 pm
    Craig Cornell says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 4

    Does THC cause schizophrenia? The National Academies of Science conclude there is “subtantial evidence” that it does. How do they define “substantial evidence”? In part this way:

    “For this level of evidence, there are several supportive findings from good-quality studies with very few or no credible opposing findings.”

    That’s right. NO opposing findings. (But Rosenblatt wouldn’t warn his family. Not enough evidence.) What percentage of THC consumers know this, Rosenblatt? Based on the attacks on me whenever I have stated same, what would you think? 10%? 2%?

    How many SHOULD know about this? (Despite the nonsense from Planet, this is NOT something we have known for decades.)

    • December 10, 2019 at 2:27 pm
      Rosenblatt says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 5
      Thumb down 0

      So you’re going to ignore the “very few” part of that phrase and just claim it says there are NO opposing findings? You’re also going to ignore the 2nd part of the definition which stated “…limitations, including chance, bias, and confounding factors, cannot be ruled out with reasonable confidence”?

      • December 10, 2019 at 5:15 pm
        Craig Cornell says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 4

        You misrepresented the second part. Why am I not surprised? Print the the entire thing. Man up.

    • December 10, 2019 at 4:33 pm
      helpingout says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 5
      Thumb down 0

      In other news:

      Craig claims that “helpingout’s every comment includes some reference to how dishonest I am without evidence (see below). ” which turns out to be not true (This one is, but again you are not being honest about studies and what is happening in reality).

      Rosenblatt points out the numerous misleading statements Craig makes which Craig attempts to pass off as nothing, which is very incorrect.

      Craig there are many times where you do not lie, but you misrepresent links and you selectively post quotes, but then the issue is you paraphrase things in your own interpretation which at times is contrary to the article itself. Again, learn to comprehend the studies and the intricacies of each. I advise everyone to do this, and that is the important part about being self-aware to understand one’s own shortcomings. There is a huge lack of knowledge for interpreting studies, you just seem to have these issues, but you haven’t tried to fix them yet.

      Wishing you the best, but again please turn yourself around and stop with the constant political, off topic, and misleading rants. People will correct you because misleading and false information (whether intentional or not) causes real damages to finding meaningful solution and understanding.

      • December 10, 2019 at 4:56 pm
        Rosenblatt says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 3
        Thumb down 0

        I don’t understand how Craig can think “very few or no credible opposing findings” means there are “NO opposing findings”

        I also don’t understand why Craig left out the part where they say limitations of their findings can not be ruled out with reasonable confidence.

        These two things are very important when trying to understand what the study is expressing they found. I wouldn’t say he’s willfully cherry-picking text from the definitions, but I would say his understanding of the phrases used is hindering his ability to properly comprehend what the results actually state.

        Is he lying here? Probably not.

        Is he misrepresenting the findings? Absolutely.

        Is he doing it willfully? That we may never know, but is very important IMO.

        • December 10, 2019 at 5:10 pm
          Craig Cornell says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 4

          And my prediction is confirmed. A dodge from Rosenblatt.

          Okay, big talker. Link to the studies that say there is NO connection between THC and schizophrenia. Not the studies that say they ‘can’t find a link’. There are a couple of those to go along with the 7 or 8 that say there IS a connection.

          The studies that say they couldn’t find a link were simply studies that failed to come to a conclusion one way or another.

          Show me the studies that say there is NO connection.

          And then answer the real question: based on what we know today, would you warn your family members if they smoked pot regularly? Man up.

          • December 10, 2019 at 5:16 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 0

            You’re SERIOUSLY asking me that question again? I already answered you once, in line with the post where you asked me the first time, immediately after you asked me.

            How many times do I need to answer this until you stop falsely claiming I’m dodging you?

            The answer should just be one, shouldn’t it?

          • December 10, 2019 at 6:14 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 4

            So your answer is no, you wouldn’t warn your family despite the findings of the National Academies of Science that there is substantial evidence that THC causes schizophrenia.

            Glad you are not in my family.

          • December 10, 2019 at 6:16 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 4

            And where are your links to the studies that actually confirms that there is NO connection between THC and schizophrenia?

            Since we aren’t going to warn people about the danger, according to your morality, let’s reassure them with science that explains why we won’t warn them.

            Man up.

          • December 10, 2019 at 6:44 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 0

            Me: “I will tell my family that marijuana is a drug and an intoxicant, all drugs and intoxicants come with risk…”

            You: “So your answer is no, you wouldn’t warn your family despite…”

            CLEARLY that’s not what i said. In fact, you’re claiming the opposite of what I posted.

            No wonder you had problems understanding how the study was defining terms.

          • December 10, 2019 at 7:00 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 0

            This is a prime example of why I ask you to actually cite me when you claim i said something I know I didn’t say.

          • December 11, 2019 at 12:36 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 3

            So you wouldn’t warn your family about the possibility of schizophrenia despite the National Academies of Science position that there is “substantial evidence” linking the two after they reviewed all available studies.

            Got it. Rosenblatt: “Hey kids, there are risks to drugs. I’ll let you figure out what they are, even though experts already know.”

            Kids: whatever, man. Pass the bong.

          • December 11, 2019 at 1:37 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 0

            Can you not put one and one together and come up with two?

            Watch….

            (1) I’ve already told you multiple times that I would warn my family about the risks of marijuana.

            (1) I’ve already agreed here and in other articles that there’s a risk which associates schizophrenia with marijuana use

            1 + 1 = 2

            (I refuse to say marijuana CAUSES schizophrenia, because there’s no evidence it does. This is just like saying unprotected sex increases your risk of catching an STD, but I will never say that unprotected sex CAUSES STD’s based on the evidence to date. Words matter.)

            I don’t know what your end goal is here.

            Are you REALLY demanding I say “I would warn my family of the risks” and then list EVERY.SINGLE.RISK that we’ve EVER discussed?

            Can’t you just put one and one together, get two, and move on?

            Why are you constantly putting words in my mouth about what I would and would not do, especially when I’ve actually posted the complete opposite of what you’re claiming I said?

          • December 11, 2019 at 1:39 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 0

            …and why did you bring up kids as if I was talking to them? Did you already forget when I wrote:

            Disclaimer: There are no pregnant women in my family and nobody is underage. What I would tell those groups of people about marijuana (don’t use it at all) is not the same approach I’d take when talking to the adults in my family.

          • December 11, 2019 at 5:12 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 3

            Okay, hair-splitter. Change the word “kids” to Uncle Bob or Cousin Alice. Same difference. You are being ridiculous. As often happens.

            “Hey Cousin Alice, you should watch out about how much THC you consume because, um, bad things could happen . . .”

            Alice: “Thanks Cousin Rosenblatt. Whatever. I’m not stupid. I’ll smoke as much pot as I want.”

          • December 11, 2019 at 7:38 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 0

            You put 1 and 1 together and got 5 somehow. Also, what’s your problem with 75 year old Uncle Bob making a personal choice to smoke pot? I’m not his care taker. I can’t punish him for his choice.

          • December 11, 2019 at 7:50 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 2

            New euphemism: warning people about specific dangers is now “punishing” them. HA HA HA HA.

            Shh. Don’t tell anyone that THC causes schizophrenia. Wait until there are hundreds of people permanently schizophrenic for life. That’s the right thing to do. Because maybe, just maybe, all those experts connecting THC consumption to schizophrenia will someday turn out to be wrong.

            Just like the tobacco companies.

          • December 11, 2019 at 11:36 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 0

            So you now comprehend I said multiple times that I’d warn my family about marijuana risks, right? Seriously. That’s sunk in now, correct? Or do I need to list EVERY.SINGLE.RISK that we’ve EVER discussed before you stop saying BS like ‘according to rosenblatts morality, we shouldn’t warn people about pot risks’?

      • December 10, 2019 at 5:12 pm
        Craig Cornell says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 4

        helpingout’s every comment: “you are too stupid to understand the complexity of these studies. If you were like me, helpingout, a superior human being, you might be better at it. And you lie.”

        • December 11, 2019 at 9:34 am
          helpingout says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 6
          Thumb down 0

          The root of my comment is not that you are too stupid, it is that you are lacking the motivation to learn how to interpret studies. You constantly word parse, and people here have pointed out constantly how you are not using credible studies (you use a lot of opinion pieces, non-statistically significant data, and biased data), and when you do use a credible study, you often paraphrase the findings incorrectly. Again, that could be intentional or unintentional, I am hoping it is the latter, but it isn’t about being superior. I am not superior, but I admit when I am incorrect by either mixing my bias into studies (this is what you do on a daily basis), or at times I don’t grasp the subject right away.

          Craig, I really hope you turn yourself around, or you learn how to interpret those studies. You have become a person who has shown your lack of honesty, who misrepresents what others say (you just did this to Rosen above here), and who doesn’t correct when they share something incorrect, I posted the link before with all of your incorrect statements and assertions. The biggest one is the link to that one article that had PCM512A that you quoted multiple times and shared multiple times that did not correlate to what you were quoting or saying.

          Again, this is not a superiority thing, but it is good advice to understand what you do and don’t know. It really helps you grow as a person.

          Have a good day Craig!

          • December 11, 2019 at 12:39 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 3

            Oh, please help me “helpingout”.

            Teach me how to interpret the studies reviewed by the National Academies of Science, where those experts concluded among other things that there is “substantial evidence” of a link between THC and schizophrenia, and they also determined that THC was, in fact, a gateway drug.

            With your superior ability to parse these studies, where did those experts go wrong?

          • December 11, 2019 at 1:22 pm
            helpingout says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 0

            Why is it my job to teach you these things. Your overall statements are semi-true, but the studies are contrary to your broad brushes you are painting.

            I am just going to disengage with you, because I (as well as many others on here) have done this back and forth before where we try and help you understand statistics and how to interpret studies, but you have never really done that.

            Again Craig, keep your bias out of the research and don’t just read the overall conclusions, you need to read every bit of information to see bias, overall conclusions (not just the summary page I believe you read), and the concessions it makes as this study makes multiple.

            Have a good day, but I am just going to expect you to attack me again, and twist words to put yourself in a favorable light.

          • December 11, 2019 at 1:28 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 5

            Thanks for your explanation about why the National Academies of Science is wrong. You have disputed the connection between THC and schizophrenia in the past.

            And given a chance to debunk the National Academies and prove your point, you walk away.

            But I still believe you are a superior person at understanding studies. Because you say so.

          • December 11, 2019 at 1:53 pm
            helpingout says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 0

            Craig,

            I think you are confusing disagreeing with the National Institute with agreeing with their overall study, but I just read the details behind it, which you obviously did not.

            I have never disagreed about schizophrenia and THC, but I have disagreed with your opinion that it can be in anyone, while the increased risk would be for those who are predisposed. Big difference, and an important one. Stop misrepresenting things. The study from the National Institute actually agrees with that as well. It recommends studying this more, but again we fall into the moral hazard that was discussed previously.

            Again, you are saying superior. Craig, it shows that you don’t understand what you know and what you don’t. I would do some soul searching for that and I think many people have suggested this. I think it might help with figuring that stuff out.

            Happy ignorance Craig!

          • December 11, 2019 at 1:55 pm
            helpingout says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 0

            Now I am going to disengage from you. Not because I can’t help you, but because I have tried in the past, but you blatantly ignore anyone helping you including but not limited to: Smooth, Captain, Rosenblatt, Boomers,. and myself.

            Hope you turn your overall outlook around Craig and that you get your bias in check, mate.

          • December 11, 2019 at 5:15 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 3

            Aw, helpingout. Worried about MY bias. (Projection much?) Please explain how people can be certain they have no biological predisposition. (Watch: helpingout tries to stop the conversation again.)

            American Psychiatric Association Position Statement On Marijuana

            APA POSITION:

            • There is no current scientific evidence that marijuana is in any way beneficial for the treatment of any psychiatric disorder. In contrast, current evidence supports, at minimum, a strong association of cannabis use with the onset of psychiatric disorders.

          • December 11, 2019 at 5:30 pm
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 0

            There’s no conversation, there’s out of context quotes as you ignore questions and goalpost shift.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*