Some of the cannabis researchers interviewed for the article have legitimate complaints about facts that he is claiming; but in other cases it’s about use of la

Some of the cannabis researchers interviewed for the article have legitimate complaints about facts that he is claiming; but in other cases it’s about use of language that could be construed inaccurately. The latter is a risk of popularizing science, so the complaints are a mixed bag. Overall, I take his recommendations for ingestion of any substance with skepticism. He often bundles his health recommendations into “protocols” or combinations of interventions which may have been studied in isolation but likely not in combination. Yet the term “protocol” carries a weight, that suggests that the bundle of interventions is better studied than they are. But maybe that’s just me. And one can make what one will about his financial association with supplement suppliers. Of course, it’s all disclosed; so listeners can decide for themselves whether or to what extent bias may enter the picture.