This study brought to you by Frito Lay.
Why are they testing for it?
Does the patient have to know that is in the screen, or can the hospital test it for whatever they want?
I was just wondering about the correlation with IHOP utilization.
Is the message here that marijuana users are no more likely to use the health care system (i.e. marijuana isn't physically harmful), or that medical marijuana users are no healthier than the rest of us (i.e. marijuana is medically ineffective)?
Oh no no... IHOP is for drunks out too late and sober people up too early.
since the study wasn't targeted toward medicinal cannabis patients, i would say it's the former
I thought that was Waffle House.
It is that marijuana-users do not go to the ER more frequently than non-marijuana users, i.e. users are no more likely to go the ER than non-users.
In any case, evidence that 'medical marijuana users are no healthier than the rest of us' would not be evidence that 'marijuana is medically ineffective'. Medical marijuana is not supposed to make its users healthier than your average non-user. That doesn't make sense. Are you familiar with the medical uses of marijuana? This is like finding evidence that 'ibuprofen users are no healthier than the rest of us' and concluding that 'ibuprofen is medically ineffective'.
You're missing the political point:
"We have found no medical costs to society resulting from chronic marijuana use."
Use your words, dude..............
That's disappointing ... I would have thought the MJ users would be much more healthy. Was Tommy Chong lying to me??
I'm all for legalization but let's not be disingenuous. Do you really think that smoking pot daily is not bad for you? Let's keep it at least as socially unacceptable as tobacco.
What's more important is that is says that users aren't /less/ healthy than everyone else.
Why? They aren't at all comparable. Lets do exactly not what you just said.
another glaring omission from this study is method of ingestion, which has a huge bearing on health effects of cannabis. smoking = bad (tar, carcinogens, etc), vaporizing (much better), topical/edible (best)
heheh, you said chronic
Now do the same study for legal non-prescription drugs, such as tobacco and alcohol, and legal prescription drugs.
There are three routes to take - base legality on harm done to individuals and society, which would result in banning tobacco and alcohol; admit that legality is based on whether the people paying off legislators can make money off the substance or not (and whether the government can, through taxation); or finally, let adults make their own decisions.
I'm left wondering what proportion of Bostonian potheads are vegan hippies who make all their own food, offsetting the effect of a few joints...
Chronic bong-smokers are probably more than matched by smokers and drinkers, but a lot of them would smoke and drink too...
"...use of the emergency room, in hospitalizations, medical diagnoses or their health status" - does this include Mental Health as well? hmm...
The flipside of which is admitting that illegality allows for a thriving black market that provides most of the cash in the global economy, which is happily laundered by multinational banks while everybody looks the other way.