4 ms·
After reading through that paper, it's pretty clear the authors were thorough in their research. They're referencing many of dozens of studies with many thousan
by joenot443 2y ago
After reading through that paper, it's pretty clear the authors were thorough in their research. They're referencing many of dozens of studies with many thousands of participants.
You mention that "results will change", but given that it's a lit review, I'm not sure which results you're talking about. I'm sure you read the contents of the link, so I'll ask directly - which study in particular did you find issue with? What do you think they did wrong?
- ineedaj0b 2y agoI am friends with a researcher at a drug and alcohol lab at a major state university. Obviously alcohol is bad but he's pretty clear: marijuana absolutely impairs. The functional difference is marijuana users will drive slower and be more cautious but they are still not 100%. He said if you gave drunk drivers more practice drunk driving they'd also improve! Not enough to make them safe however. There's also the two different strains - they have an effect on why marijuana studies have conflicting results. The researchers source bad weed because the IRB has made it impossible. I understand it all 'looks' solid but the sourced weed, the difficulty of finding quality participants before legalization, and the IRB has led to some interesting data. I think it will take more time, society is not there yet. Alcohol studies get tons of funding, and have been studied for years and years. nearly 40ish? Weed didn't earnestly get looked at until the 2010s. Mushrooms have conflicting results according to him, and he's seen Kratom fail every study he's tried, and he tried a great deal to find some proof with that.