3 ms·
That's an example, I was asking how you know it's a majority. I'm not saying it is or it isn't, but you stated it as an obvious fact so I'm just asking how you
by playpause 5y ago
That's an example, I was asking how you know it's a majority. I'm not saying it is or it isn't, but you stated it as an obvious fact so I'm just asking how you know.
- eurasiantiger 5y agoI’m extrapolating this advanced hunch from the fact that cannabis-related studies have for a long time been funded primarily by the century-old anti-cannabis lobby. The relatively young pro-cannabis lobby has much less prestige, money and power behind it, and thus the incentives to intentionally produce bunk science lay mostly on the anti-cannabis side. Then there’s the matter of public perception: even obvious falsehoods against cannabis are tolerated in the press when the source is ”scientists”. This is likely due to the falsehoods being in support of opinions entrenched by decades of similar falsehoods being passed as shocking truths. Obviously, pro-cannabis publications suffer the reverse: any falsehoods would get picked apart by the public; hell, even the truths regarding cannabis often get trainwrecked by people who just know better because someone told them a story. It is absolutely implausible that falsified pro-cannabis articles would outnumber falsified anti-cannabis articles. The monetary incentives and intellectual lenience are not there.
- playpause 5y agoI suspect there probably have been more falsified anti-cannabis articles than pro- ones. But you referenced this as a hard statistic, and you don’t seem to have any evidence, just lots of theory and “it’s obvious” rhetoric. I’m not convinced you would be open to changing your mind even if you were presented evidence to the contrary.
- adminscoffee 5y agoAnyone who is old enough has seen the misinformation surrounding cannabis and the damage that has caused against people of color.