So your argument is that because research gets done and gets done often means that it should be legal?
No, that is the strawman you made up to make your incredibly
wrong claim on the illegality of marijuana research sound less ridiculous.
So just because research was done doesn't mean it was done legally. And the research that does get done has huge government restrictions.
Hahaha, what? So now you're downgrading it to "huge government restrictions". Well, I guess that's a step down from "technically illegal". Look buddy, here's the myth:
"Marijuana research is technically illegal".
Here is fact #1:
Marijuana research is not technically illegal in the US.
Welcome to CMCR
Welcome to the University of California's Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research (CMCR). The purpose of the Center is to coordinate rigorous scientific studies to assess the safety and efficacy of cannabis and cannabis compounds for treating medical conditions. The funding of the CMCR is the result of SB 847 (Vasconcellos), passed by the State Legislature and signed into law by Governor Gray Davis. The legislation calls for a three year program overseeing objective, high quality medical research that will "enhance understanding of the efficacy and adverse effects of marijuana as a pharmacological agent," stressing that the project "should not be construed as encouraging or sanctioning the social or recreational use of marijuana" (SB 847).
Read More
That begs the question: Where is it illegal? Afghanistan? Fiji? Cayman Islands? Where are these pharmacological powerhouses where marijuana research is technically illegal? It's certainly not Europe or the US.
Here is fact #2:
Marijuana is the subject of a large amount of scientific research:
https://www.google.ca/search?num=10...source=og&sa=N&tab=wp&ei=jkbyUdIwgdb1BNi4gbgB
Which also puts a dent in your "there isn't enough research" and "it's technically illegal" argument.
Here is fact #3:
Medicinal marijuana is largely a myth:
http://www.maps.org/media/vaporizer_epub.pdf
Although cannabis may have potential therapeutic value, inhalation of a combustion product is an undesirable delivery
system. The aim of the study was to investigate vaporization using the Volcano device as an alternative means of delivery of inhaled Cannabis sativa.
------------
Now, if you want to sit around here and pretend you have a case for why marijuana should be used as a pain reliever? Sure. Go for it. But it doesn't fit the criteria of a medicine to begin with. It's not a medicine but that's not because it's not made available to the small island nation of Fiji for studying. It's not a medicine but that's not because there isn't research on it; that's proven blatantly false. It's simply doesn't fit the description of a medicine even by layman standards.
As a matter of fact; marijuana if anything has been discredited for being
crude and ineffective in its most basic form of consumption. Even if it were to be legalized, it has already been shown many a time that simply smoking it won't bring you the cancer curing miracle you're hoping for.
This is something I've done a lot of research on. As a matter of fact, I'm pretty well known in this forum for my support of legalizing it. However, basing your argument for legalization on it being a
medicine is simply
bunk science. It's a pain reliever. That's more than enough to make it legal.