Weed cuts lung cancer tumors in half



Hey buddy.

Congradulations on being your governments ideal citizen.

I'm going to tell you how your "government" works.

Politicians are the same as anyone else, many haven't gotten degrees or gone to university. They don't know shit, they just know people.

The government said weed was illegal way back in the day, and they've kept it the same since then.

So think of all the generations that have grown up in society, they've all been taught that doing illegal stuff is bad. Weed is illegal. So, weed is "bad".

So why are all your politicians afraid of being pro-marijuana? Because as of right now, it's illegal. So if they try to change the law, and make it legal, tons of non weed smokers will get pissed as hell because they just think its a horrible horrible drug. The average joe is very narrow minded towards the subject of weed. Espically the older average joe, (ie. 50+).

Now if you get this huge group of citizens, angry at a politicion for trying to make this "drug" legal, the politician would face the fear of loosing a huge number of votes. This is what politicians fear, loosing votes. They need votes. They need votes to keep their job.

Legalizing will make them loose votes, so they might as well support the non-smoking side right now. This will make it way less complicated for them, and they'll keep getting the same votes every year.

 
dude of course brown sucks, you can pass/fail your entire education there if you want. Its a total joke. duke is 10 times the school brown is.

But why do you keep saying that it was

"some random guys from Harvard churn out a weed study, people definitely need to take a second look at it. It was probably just some stoner PhD guys' pet side project for the last couple years, and it actually yielded some results. Wait and see if it gets replicated."

you have no idea what the fuck your talking about, people dont do fucking pet sideprojects. You didnt even read the fucking article. This paper probly took about 3 years of experiments by highly payed assistant professors and professors and cost total maybe half a million dollars or more in research funding. So honestley why you gotta keep being so fucking stupid and call it "some stoners pet project" i fucking guaruntee you that most of those researchers probly dont smoke pot at all.

your so fucking obtuse
 
no, you should probably reformulate an arguement so people actually listen to you instead of just mostly passing you over for being a hyper little kid- chugging monster, not getting his homework done, and posting unfunny links to youtube vids.

go study.
 
close! but seriously i know how long these studies take, so i said this study "probly" took the same length of time, especially because animal studies take a shitlong length of time. And i said "maybe" because its pretty sure the fucking indian PHD doesnt smoke pot.

and you think your some sort of newschoolers "gandolf the wizard" like your older than everybody and you think you can just own everybody by being mature and scholarly. but if you honestly disagreed with me, than your just as fucking stupid as the guy who thinks that studies done at east buttfuck community college the same the ones at done harvard princeton cambridge or stanford. so yeah gandolf, you got me, hit me right on the head, just dont forget gandolf is a faggot in real life
 
OMGZ you fag azz faggot dont even know im gonna kcik you ass omg im comming to find you. me and the fag ass community college kid are going to google earth you house and come beat your ass. seriously flagpole at 3 be there or me and my crew are going tyo roll up on you.

-if you dont know a fact, dont speculate.

-if you arent even in college, dont knock it. you could end up not even in one.

-you quoted lord of the rings. im sorry, you win sir.

"but if you honestly disagreed with me, than your just as fucking stupid as..." that should get golden wheelchair. yes i disagreed with you. and you call me "all knowing"...
 
Hey buddy.

Congratulations on spelling Congratulations right, good job showing your intelligence.

If being an Ideal citizen is realizing that they make something illegal because it's potentionally dangerous, then call me an Ideal citizen.

If you knew anything, you'd know that people smoked weed freely and it was this large spike in people smoking reefer when parents (NOTICE: PARENTS, NOT GOVERNMENT) became concerned and wanted something done.

Chances are, this "Average Joe" You speak of at one time toked up weed, and if you knew anything you'd know that a majority of people in the US have smoked weed.

Stop being an ignorant, naive little bitch and start understanding that people do shit for the good of the community, which is WHY Big Tabacco can't sell weed (a market which would SURELY make tons of money).
 
Bring it shitbag, Ill try not to rip your custom fit pants. Your the one who is speculating. I know what im talking about. You think that because your maybe smarter than 90% of newschoolers that your smart, but your not. Oh you go to college so you think newschoolers is a bunch of peasants you can just talk down to. Like oh lets listen to skogen for the scholarly answer! your so fucking fake.
 
actually its pretty much you im talking down to. actually only you. you really need to go study. and stop day drinking alone. little bro.
 
Sorry a misspelled a word wrong. But congratulations on picking that one up quick. I wish I could spell like you, so I could be looked upon by the whole ski community in ENVY OF MY SPELLING!?

But anyways, I have to resort back to being an ignorant, naive little bitch.

There is a way lower percentile of weed smokers who were born before the 50's. All these citizens are still voting today. And that's a huge amount of votes for politicians.

And where'd you get this "people smoked weed freely" bullshit from? It's been federally illegal since 1937....

You're government simply, for a huge part of their reasoning, will not legalize weed because they will loose such a huge number of votes. It's basically like... throwing their jobs away. This is why they have to keep supporting not smoking it... keep making biased websites, commercials, bending lab results in studies. All just to try and scare the youth out of ever trying it.

But if stuff like that keeps going on, all these back and forth studies about weed, we'll never fully learn the truth.

I believe that 50 years from now, maybe even more, it'll be different. There will have been a massive amount of studies by then, the older anti-weed politicians will die off, and usage will probably increase.

But hey, only time will tell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top