Its fairly apparent in the way they write and structure the article too. It starts from an assumption, "marijuana = bad". Although they honestly may not be aw

Its fairly apparent in the way they write and structure the article too. It starts from an assumption, "marijuana = bad". Although they honestly may not be aware of it. They make sentences like: "Marijuana use is often associated with motivation, attention, learning, and memory impairments. Previous studies exposing animals to THC show that repeated exposure to the drug causes structural changes in brain regions involved with these functions" Which implies, but doesn't actually state, that marijuana use makes you "less motivated, less attentive, unable to learn, and memory impaired" in the long term (ie, not just when smoking) and then finish with: "This study raises a strong challenge to the idea that casual marijuana use isn’t associated with bad consequences" Without actually showing "bad" in any of the results, just "change". Admittedly, anecdotal evidence of the "stoner" stereotype from most folks on the street might say that (while smoking) those are probably true. I'm all for folks knowing the risks of things they choose to ingest. But I'd rather we can choose, and most of the people smoking might also say they don't mind.