http://www.canorml.org/healthfacts/healthmyths.html
Read up on things before you post retarded posts. Pot does NOT kill brain cells, that was just stupid ass government propaganda.
[snapback]39006[/snapback]
Wait wait wait... let me get this straight...
You are essentially telling me not to believe everything I read, by disproving what I've read with something you've read? Hahaha. Thanks, I needed a good laugh.
Retarded? Wow, fantastic word choice!
Apart from that bit of hypocrisy, I am not responsible for your assumption that my post of 'relayed' information is as simple as a lack of intellectual fore-thought. Cutting out my mockery of both pieces of information in my post, you specifically address the part of my post where I post a summary of information that came from elsewhere, and then proceed to proclaim the post itself as retarded, due to a lack of 'correct' facts and pre-reading. However, the information itself was provided to mock both sets of information and point out the contradiction between the two. As for pre-reading, I clearly stated the information *I* provided was from somewhere else approximately two years prior, and NEVER said any of it was fact. There is also no way for you to know I didn't read up on it or know other information. If someone makes a post and tells you that their car stereo is broken but don't tell you that their battery is dead, that doesn't mean they don't know their battery is dead, they simply didn't provide that information. As I said, I'm not responsible for your assumptions.
Pot does NOT kill brain cells, that was just stupid ass government propaganda.
Really now? Would you be so kind as to show me your laboratory results as well as proof of the governments.. 'propaganda,' as you so humbly put it?
There are articles out there on various topics and subjects that will tell you one thing, and then other articles that will tell you that those things are not true. I'm supposed to read and agree with the same article/s you read and agreed with? It's not about facts, I have yet to see any facts on the subject. It's about what piece of persuasive writing (crap) you choose to agree with. I'm not completely persuaded that any one of them is right, and I doubt I ever will be. I don't even care enough to be, but that's what makes it fun. However, whenever I feel like it, I'm sure to point out a clear contradiction of provided 'research' (facts, opinions, what have you) between different articles and media misinformation when I see fit.
Now, with what 420 posted you'll notice how there is absolutely no mention as to HOW it slows cancer. It seems like it's about to reveal that little detail at certain points in the article, but then it just drops off and smoothes it over with more crap. They even act as if it's ability to slow cancer is in question, but then they follow that with some experiment and make it sound as though that bit of information is enough to make it true. Yet throughout the article, it notes everything is still purely a theory and not yet proven in few words.
Might cannabinoids keep dangerous tumors from spreading throughout the body? Ramer and Hinz set up an experiment in which invasive cervical and lung cancer cells had make their way through a tissue-like gel. Even at very low concentrations, the marijuana compounds THC and methanandamide (MA) significantly slowed the invading cancer cells.
Without making a clear statement outright that everything in the article is just a 'possibility' and not a certainty, so that those who do not read every detail will be fooled, the article contains several points where it says that nothing is yet certain, or proven. Just the type of thing you would see written in a newspaper to catch the eyes of readers. Studies SUGGEST.... Yet to be PROVEN... etc. etc. etc. They like to put it in a way where they can get people to be interested in it, read it and believe it, while still putting it down in a way where they don't actually say it's a fact, or that it's true.
