Medical Marijuana

I will rebut the snide wikipedia remarks. I used wikipedia to show the fact of the matter, not to show any research. Encyclopedias/dictionaries/thesauruses are perfectly cite-worthy when you are using them to show just fact.I used wikipedia sources as evidence for my claim that your sources are biased. If you like, I could find the same information at pretty much any of the websites.My point was that the agency you quoted is mandated to oppose legalization at all costs, so it obviously isn't trustworthy.Also, two wrongs don't make a right. I wasn't criticizing you, I was criticizing your sources.I didn't criticize the FDA either. The article that YOU quoted was criticizing the FDA, that was my point. Your source was suggesting that the FDA was politically motivated. They aren't politically motivated to say anything about candy because candy isn't a hot button issue. It's unrealistic to think that any bureaucracy wouldn't have at least a little corruption. It isn't a consumer protection agency, it's a food and drug administration, sometimes it acts as a consumer protection agency, but that isn't the primary function.There are tons of chemicals in everything. I've already said that. "400 chemicals" is just a scare phrase. There are carcinogens, but they will only be able to affect you if you smoke it. You can ingest marijuana via food and via vaporizer. The vaporizer wipes out like 90% of the risk and eating it wipes it all out. There is no more risk from eating marijuana than there is from eating a cookie. "Why have it as medicine when you have others that will not act like this?"Like I said, there may be medicines which work better, but that's no reason to ban the ones that don't work as well. Testimonials (which aren't that valid, admittedly) show people who say marijuana worked where other drugs didn't. That's irrelevant though because it works. If it works just 10%, why would you stop someone who wants to do it? It's their choice. Why crack down on cancer-stricken stoners?If I made a list like http://www.well.com... has of morphine, do you think it would fare better or worse?I think morphine will mess you up a heck of a lot worse than marijuana, and morphine is completely medically legal. I have looked up my opponent's assertion that marijuana can cause schizophrenia. I found that the causal relationship is controversial and is still being studied (1) (2) (3).Lots of medicine can cause psychosis. X can cause psychosis ergo X is not medicine is not a valid argument. Adrenal failure can cause psychosis, so medications that can cause adrenal failure can cause psychosis. It is logically NOT the only medicine that can cause psychosis. I don't know what you meant to say, but you said "It also causes cannabis which is short term."I put harm and effectiveness in the same category. The more it harms you, the less effective it is, so my Tylenol and Advil analogy still stands unless you would say that it can harm you a lot and still remain an effective and legal drug (like chemotherapy- WAY worse than marijuana), but then you have to answer to why marijuana doesn't fit that category.I never said "only the stuff with it". I said a whole is not just the sum of it's parts. That's a fallacy. You just made it again for the second time. There is no arsenic in marijuana, but if you had a small enough amount of arsenic, then yeah the coffee wouldn't be toxic. Your analogy to coffee doesn't apply at all. Radiation causes cancer, that's common knowledge, however, radiation is also used to treat cancer. Something can cause cancer and still be legal medically. In fact, it happens all the time. Maybe I'm mistaken about what you mean, because I thought you had made a typo before. What do you mean "It causes cannabis". Cannabis is the scientific term for marijuana. One cannot cause cannabis.Cannabis does NOT cause crime. Cannabis IS crime. It is the criminalization that causes crime. We are in the same boat today as we were in the 1920's when alcohol was made illegal by the government. The mob was created because of alcohol. Al Capone was an alcohol dealer.Cannabis is the same story.On the aggressiveness and addiction, if you read it, you'll notice that it says the aggressiveness/withdrawal peaks at 1 week after they quit. It also doesn't say it causes agression is says it causes "increased agression" which could mean the equivalent of being cranky from staying up too late.That has got to be one of the shortest withdrawals around. I was just making a joke about having never seen an aggressive marijuana user, don't get so uppity. Cannabis doesn't make you aggressive, cannabis WITHDRAWAL makes you aggressive (and possibly only mildly) and you only have withdrawal if you get addicted which means that there's a 91% chance that you will never see the aggressiveness while smoking."Obviously I don't mean every pot user becomes aggressive, but many do."If you define whatever percent of 9% that quits as "many" then sure. It does appear that several people on this forum think marijuana makes them aggressive. Sources 4-6 will show legal medications which can also cause mood swings.I thank my opponent for agreeing to this debate. I have enjoyed it. I ask the readers to please vote pro.Sources:(1) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...(2) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...(3) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...;(4) http://ibdcrohns.about.com...(5) http://infertility.about.com...(6) http://i-base.info...