> That is a non-argument. You're right, but it's still a good idea to maintain a healthy dose of skepticism when something comes out that would benefit a indu

> That is a non-argument. You're right, but it's still a good idea to maintain a healthy dose of skepticism when something comes out that would benefit a industry/special interest group. There's a lot of activity/attention in the cannabis industry right now and a lot of money at stake. I'd agree that it's not a real argument against any particular study or paper, but it is a pretty good reason to be cautious and pay a little extra attention since there's a long and continuing trend of using research (often very flawed research) in order to promote a product or an industry. It's unfortunate, but until there are adequate protections against those kinds of abuses it's not unreasonable to be a bit pessimistic/skeptical initially.