5 ms·
why isn't the longevity of sustained use a possible and, in my opinion, a more likely causal explanation?
by logical42 14y ago
why isn't the longevity of sustained use a possible and, in my opinion, a more likely causal explanation?
- lutusp 14y ago> why isn't the longevity of sustained use a possible and, in my opinion, a more likely causal explanation? Because the experimental subjects aren't being told to smoke pot, they are being asked whether they do. This means there is no control in the study -- it's not science, it's stamp collecting. An obvious explanation for the study outcome is that people who smoke pot might avoid intellectually stimulating activities, which would change their measured IQ. And is that possible -- do our choices affect our IQ? In a word, yes: http://www.nais.org/publications/ismagazinearticle.cfm?ItemNumber=150439 http://www.nais.org/publications/ismagazinearticle.cfm?ItemN... The only way to control for this factor would be to control the subjects' drug-use behavior, but that is unethical and has never been done. The linked study is typical of "psychological science" -- that is, science in name only.