|
In Reply to: Re: you mean for medicinal puposes only? posted by goth88 on August 20, 2002 at 10:26:40:
after reading it again, I see you posted incorrectly, there is no cure for aids, and pot does not cure glacuma:
"POT AND GLAUCOMA
One argument used this year in the successful campaign to legalize the medical use of marijuana held that Measure 67 would encourge scientists to scrutinize the effects of pot on the human body. Presumably, such studies would back up abundant anecdotal evidence that pot-- but only in its natural, smokeable form-- is a miricale drug, effective in treating a number of disorders from chronic pain to nausea and glaucoma.
Ultimately, supporters hoped, such incontrivertible evidence would force the federal government to see the error of its prohibitionist ways and allow doctors to prescribe pot as they now prescribe pills.
Well the results of one such study are in, and they appear in the issue of the American Medical Association journal Archives of Ophtalmology published last week. According to the studies author, Keith Green at the Medical College of Georgia, it is a " fallacy that marijuana is of any value at all in the treatment of glaucoma." Green discovered you'd have to smoke 12 joints a day to derive any medical benefit from them. "
Although you may be correct to say that there are "natural and effective" use to it, you have not listed any.
