Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Pot smokers don't puff away lung health: study [View all]caseymoz
(5,763 posts)So, all three are scientifically invalid due to the small sample groups. This means you can't draw any accurate conclusion from them at all. The first is more than forty years old, meaning the accuracy of the equipment used to measure relief of asthma might be questionable. The use of the control groups in the first and second also look dubious, no pun intended.
These are, at most, preliminary studies, and that's being charitable. The kind of thing you do to try to get money for the real study you want to do. These are so bad, apparently so poorly funded, that if these experiments weren't staged to give marijuana advocates something to quote, they might be more reputable if they were.
As for pot's medicinal use for asthma in the 19th century: it's odd any scientific article would begin by citing that as the source of its curiosity, because in that age, they were also using mercury and tobacco for indigestion. You'd do better trusting random chance than start with that age's popular medical observations.
That's not off topic. It's because of that level self-deception about medicine throughout human history that I'm skeptical about marijuana.
I agree you could put it in vaporizers. That would be better than smoking it.