Legalizing Weed

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
681

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

Just one example

" Not surprisingly, evidence suggests that, compared with their nonsmoking peers, students who smoke marijuana tend to get lower grades and are more likely " says the article

Evidence (SUGGESTS) could it be that poor students were more likely to smoke MJ ? the article is full of bullshit like this .[/quote]

It also said this:

‘Despite similar education and income backgrounds, significant differences were found in educational attainment…’[/quote]

your point is what , that the is no variation between grades in certain income levels ???
[/quote]

Put the bong down for five minutes pitbull. Your point was that maybe the poor students were more likely to smoke marijuana. My point is that the sample of students all came from similar education and income backgrounds. Therefore, your theory that maybe the poor students were more likely to smoke marijuana doesn’t hold up.[/quote]

Your point of all students come from the same economic back ground is nonexistent . So what grades vary big time in economic groups . Another point is just because a kid is bored does not mean he is less intelligent

682

[quote]Professor X wrote:

It is important when looking at studies to remember that correlation does not equal causation.

If I were to look at people who tested positive for marijuana during postal admittance, it makes me first question the type of person who would apply for a postal job within 1 month of smoking pot considering they knew they would be drug tested.

Doing a study on stupid people and then claiming their stupid action is caused by something they took…immediately eliminates the possibility that they were JUST REALLY STUPID.
[/quote]

Logical but a bit of a stretch.

683

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

Your point of all students come from the same economic back ground is nonexistent . So what grades vary big time in economic groups .

[/quote]

?

?

684

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

Your point of all students come from the same economic back ground is nonexistent . So what grades vary big time in economic groups .

[/quote]

?

?[/quote]

how can you argue with that

685

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

It is important when looking at studies to remember that correlation does not equal causation.

If I were to look at people who tested positive for marijuana during postal admittance, it makes me first question the type of person who would apply for a postal job within 1 month of smoking pot considering they knew they would be drug tested.

Doing a study on stupid people and then claiming their stupid action is caused by something they took…immediately eliminates the possibility that they were JUST REALLY STUPID.
[/quote]

Logical but a bit of a stretch.[/quote]

Impossible logic. It is a BIT of a stretch to imply that the people who went into apply for POSTAL JOBS and who smoked less than one month before might not be the best field to pick intelligent people from?

How so?

That makes perfect sense. That is why you need to be the one questioning the study…not blindly believing everything you read. That is the difference between a professional learned in how to read studies…and a guy with a good Google search.

686

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

It is important when looking at studies to remember that correlation does not equal causation.

If I were to look at people who tested positive for marijuana during postal admittance, it makes me first question the type of person who would apply for a postal job within 1 month of smoking pot considering they knew they would be drug tested.

Doing a study on stupid people and then claiming their stupid action is caused by something they took…immediately eliminates the possibility that they were JUST REALLY STUPID.
[/quote]

Logical but a bit of a stretch.[/quote]

Impossible logic. It is a BIT of a stretch to imply that the people who went into apply for POSTAL JOBS and who smoked less than one month before might not be the best field to pick intelligent people from?

How so?

That makes perfect sense. That is why you need to be the one questioning the study…not blindly believing everything you read. That is the difference between a professional learned in how to read studies…and a guy with a good Google search.[/quote]

Firstly, the study ‘was a “blind study,” which means employees, hiring officials, medical personnel and management officials were not informed of the results of the urine drug screens and the test results had no effect on hiring decisions. The Postal Service has since instituted a national policy of pre-employment screening.’

So it was done at a time when applicants did not need to abstain from marijuana use in order to be employed. In fact, 7.8% of all applicants tested showed positive for marijuana use.

Secondly, you’ve stated outright that the author of the study had an agenda without knowing the facts. The opposite is actually true. See this article about the study in question:

The author of the study is criticising previous studies showing exaggerated stats of “200% to 300% more industrial accidents…400% more compensable injuries and use 1,500% more sick leave than workers who do not use drugs.”

Here is another article on the study:

Clearly the author does not have a strong bias or agenda as you suggest.

687

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]Xav wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
NO complications and illegal ,I can’t understand the logic [/quote]

‘Research has shown that marijuana’s negative effects on attention, memory, and learning can last for days or weeks after the acute effects of the drug wear off. Consequently, someone who smokes marijuana daily may be functioning at a reduced intellectual level most or all of the time…Not surprisingly, evidence suggests that, compared with their nonsmoking peers, students who smoke marijuana tend to get lower grades and are more likely to drop out of high school. A meta-analysis of 48 relevant studiesÃ???Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢??one of the most thorough performed to dateÃ???Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢??found cannabis use to be associated consistently with reduced educational attainment (e.g., grades and chances of graduating)…several studies have linked workers’ marijuana smoking with increased absences, tardiness, accidents, workers’ compensation claims, and job turnover. For example, a study among postal workers found that employees who tested positive for marijuana on a pre-employment urine drug test had 55 percent more industrial accidents, 85 percent more injuries, and a 75-percent increase in absenteeism compared with those who tested negative for marijuana use.’

Source: How does marijuana use affect school, work, and social life? | National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) [/quote]

Just one example

" Not surprisingly, evidence suggests that, compared with their nonsmoking peers, students who smoke marijuana tend to get lower grades and are more likely " says the article

Evidence (SUGGESTS) could it be that poor students were more likely to smoke MJ ? the article is full of bullshit like this .[/quote]

It’s a meta-analysis on a credible site with a shitload of references. You probably didn’t read the article. In what line of work are you to so quickly and confidently say this article is bullshit?
In case you didn’t know, in the health field evidence usually SUGGESTS (your “argument” for saying it’s a bullshit article) and doesn’t prove anything.

However I don’t see why this article would be an argument against legislation. Cannabis is correlated with certain negative effects & social factors. No shit. So is alcohol.

[/quote]

I am truly blue collar , I have been reading articles like this for years . Articles that have an agenda and write the article to promote said agenda . True journalism would take scientific data and report it fairly , To work on all possibilities and distinguish the variables [/quote]

That’s quite impressive of you, reading those articles without schooling how to do so. I’d recommend reading a book about study design and very basic statistics, you’ll be able to gauge quality way better.
You’re absolutely right about agendas and bias, however it’s quite a stretch to classify an article as bullshit because you believe there’s a certain degree of bias.

EDIT: And the biggest challenge is to know your own bias! Most of us read studies to confirm our opinions, instead of challenging them. When the conclusions don’t strengthen our opinions, we tend to disregard the article due to it being biased.

688

NEVER quote the LA Times, one of the most Leftist leaning newspapers in the nation.

No credibility at all.

689

[quote]Xav wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]Xav wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
NO complications and illegal ,I can’t understand the logic [/quote]

‘Research has shown that marijuana’s negative effects on attention, memory, and learning can last for days or weeks after the acute effects of the drug wear off. Consequently, someone who smokes marijuana daily may be functioning at a reduced intellectual level most or all of the time…Not surprisingly, evidence suggests that, compared with their nonsmoking peers, students who smoke marijuana tend to get lower grades and are more likely to drop out of high school. A meta-analysis of 48 relevant studiesÃ???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢??one of the most thorough performed to dateÃ???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢??found cannabis use to be associated consistently with reduced educational attainment (e.g., grades and chances of graduating)…several studies have linked workers’ marijuana smoking with increased absences, tardiness, accidents, workers’ compensation claims, and job turnover. For example, a study among postal workers found that employees who tested positive for marijuana on a pre-employment urine drug test had 55 percent more industrial accidents, 85 percent more injuries, and a 75-percent increase in absenteeism compared with those who tested negative for marijuana use.’

Source: How does marijuana use affect school, work, and social life? | National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) [/quote]

Just one example

" Not surprisingly, evidence suggests that, compared with their nonsmoking peers, students who smoke marijuana tend to get lower grades and are more likely " says the article

Evidence (SUGGESTS) could it be that poor students were more likely to smoke MJ ? the article is full of bullshit like this .[/quote]

It’s a meta-analysis on a credible site with a shitload of references. You probably didn’t read the article. In what line of work are you to so quickly and confidently say this article is bullshit?
In case you didn’t know, in the health field evidence usually SUGGESTS (your “argument” for saying it’s a bullshit article) and doesn’t prove anything.

However I don’t see why this article would be an argument against legislation. Cannabis is correlated with certain negative effects & social factors. No shit. So is alcohol.

[/quote]

I am truly blue collar , I have been reading articles like this for years . Articles that have an agenda and write the article to promote said agenda . True journalism would take scientific data and report it fairly , To work on all possibilities and distinguish the variables [/quote]

That’s quite impressive of you, reading those articles without schooling how to do so. I’d recommend reading a book about study design and very basic statistics, you’ll be able to gauge quality way better.
You’re absolutely right about agendas and bias, however it’s quite a stretch to classify an article as bullshit because you believe there’s a certain degree of bias.

EDIT: And the biggest challenge is to know your own bias! Most of us read studies to confirm our opinions, instead of challenging them. When the conclusions don’t strengthen our opinions, we tend to disregard the article due to it being biased.

[/quote]

Oh I am in AWE of your great and powerful intellect , please tell me more about your esteemed credentials . Sex Machine (NOT:) posted an article about some study with some foot notes . I do not have time to study the foot notes but I am quite capable of analyzing the article

http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/marijuana-abuse/how-does-marijuana-use-affect-school-work-social-life

690

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]Xav wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]Xav wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
NO complications and illegal ,I can’t understand the logic [/quote]

‘Research has shown that marijuana’s negative effects on attention, memory, and learning can last for days or weeks after the acute effects of the drug wear off. Consequently, someone who smokes marijuana daily may be functioning at a reduced intellectual level most or all of the time…Not surprisingly, evidence suggests that, compared with their nonsmoking peers, students who smoke marijuana tend to get lower grades and are more likely to drop out of high school. A meta-analysis of 48 relevant studiesÃ???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢??one of the most thorough performed to dateÃ???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢??found cannabis use to be associated consistently with reduced educational attainment (e.g., grades and chances of graduating)…several studies have linked workers’ marijuana smoking with increased absences, tardiness, accidents, workers’ compensation claims, and job turnover. For example, a study among postal workers found that employees who tested positive for marijuana on a pre-employment urine drug test had 55 percent more industrial accidents, 85 percent more injuries, and a 75-percent increase in absenteeism compared with those who tested negative for marijuana use.’

Source: How does marijuana use affect school, work, and social life? | National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) [/quote]

Just one example

" Not surprisingly, evidence suggests that, compared with their nonsmoking peers, students who smoke marijuana tend to get lower grades and are more likely " says the article

Evidence (SUGGESTS) could it be that poor students were more likely to smoke MJ ? the article is full of bullshit like this .[/quote]

It’s a meta-analysis on a credible site with a shitload of references. You probably didn’t read the article. In what line of work are you to so quickly and confidently say this article is bullshit?
In case you didn’t know, in the health field evidence usually SUGGESTS (your “argument” for saying it’s a bullshit article) and doesn’t prove anything.

However I don’t see why this article would be an argument against legislation. Cannabis is correlated with certain negative effects & social factors. No shit. So is alcohol.

[/quote]

I am truly blue collar , I have been reading articles like this for years . Articles that have an agenda and write the article to promote said agenda . True journalism would take scientific data and report it fairly , To work on all possibilities and distinguish the variables [/quote]

That’s quite impressive of you, reading those articles without schooling how to do so. I’d recommend reading a book about study design and very basic statistics, you’ll be able to gauge quality way better.
You’re absolutely right about agendas and bias, however it’s quite a stretch to classify an article as bullshit because you believe there’s a certain degree of bias.

EDIT: And the biggest challenge is to know your own bias! Most of us read studies to confirm our opinions, instead of challenging them. When the conclusions don’t strengthen our opinions, we tend to disregard the article due to it being biased.

[/quote]

Oh I am in AWE of your great and powerful intellect , please tell me more about your esteemed credentials . Sex Machine (NOT:) posted an article about some study with some foot notes . I do not have time to study the foot notes but I am quite capable of analyzing the article

http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/marijuana-abuse/how-does-marijuana-use-affect-school-work-social-life[/quote]

Sadly enough I am far from having a great intellect. My post seems to have the wrong effect, I was actually giving you a compliment.

Analyzing an article without taking a look at the footnotes isn’t analyzing but whatever.
Also, how did you analyze his article? As far as I remember your only argument for its supposedly low quality was the fact they said “Evidence SUGGESTS”.

691

[quote]Xav wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]Xav wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]Xav wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
NO complications and illegal ,I can’t understand the logic [/quote]

‘Research has shown that marijuana’s negative effects on attention, memory, and learning can last for days or weeks after the acute effects of the drug wear off. Consequently, someone who smokes marijuana daily may be functioning at a reduced intellectual level most or all of the time…Not surprisingly, evidence suggests that, compared with their nonsmoking peers, students who smoke marijuana tend to get lower grades and are more likely to drop out of high school. A meta-analysis of 48 relevant studiesÃ???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢??one of the most thorough performed to dateÃ???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢??found cannabis use to be associated consistently with reduced educational attainment (e.g., grades and chances of graduating)…several studies have linked workers’ marijuana smoking with increased absences, tardiness, accidents, workers’ compensation claims, and job turnover. For example, a study among postal workers found that employees who tested positive for marijuana on a pre-employment urine drug test had 55 percent more industrial accidents, 85 percent more injuries, and a 75-percent increase in absenteeism compared with those who tested negative for marijuana use.’

Source: How does marijuana use affect school, work, and social life? | National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) [/quote]

Just one example

" Not surprisingly, evidence suggests that, compared with their nonsmoking peers, students who smoke marijuana tend to get lower grades and are more likely " says the article

Evidence (SUGGESTS) could it be that poor students were more likely to smoke MJ ? the article is full of bullshit like this .[/quote]

It’s a meta-analysis on a credible site with a shitload of references. You probably didn’t read the article. In what line of work are you to so quickly and confidently say this article is bullshit?
In case you didn’t know, in the health field evidence usually SUGGESTS (your “argument” for saying it’s a bullshit article) and doesn’t prove anything.

However I don’t see why this article would be an argument against legislation. Cannabis is correlated with certain negative effects & social factors. No shit. So is alcohol.

[/quote]

I am truly blue collar , I have been reading articles like this for years . Articles that have an agenda and write the article to promote said agenda . True journalism would take scientific data and report it fairly , To work on all possibilities and distinguish the variables [/quote]

That’s quite impressive of you, reading those articles without schooling how to do so. I’d recommend reading a book about study design and very basic statistics, you’ll be able to gauge quality way better.
You’re absolutely right about agendas and bias, however it’s quite a stretch to classify an article as bullshit because you believe there’s a certain degree of bias.

EDIT: And the biggest challenge is to know your own bias! Most of us read studies to confirm our opinions, instead of challenging them. When the conclusions don’t strengthen our opinions, we tend to disregard the article due to it being biased.

[/quote]

Oh I am in AWE of your great and powerful intellect , please tell me more about your esteemed credentials . Sex Machine (NOT:) posted an article about some study with some foot notes . I do not have time to study the foot notes but I am quite capable of analyzing the article

http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/marijuana-abuse/how-does-marijuana-use-affect-school-work-social-life[/quote]

Sadly enough I am far from having a great intellect. My post seems to have the wrong effect, I was actually giving you a compliment.

Analyzing an article without taking a look at the footnotes isn’t analyzing but whatever.
Also, how did you analyze his article? As far as I remember your only argument for its supposedly low quality was the fact they said “Evidence SUGGESTS”.
[/quote]

I read the article and considered it’s points that is how I analyzed it . The article has an agenda . Go all the way back and look at the disinformation the Federal Government put out about marijuana. Science is the farthest consideration from this discussion . I think the best evidence of the effects of MJ are millions of smokers some with 70 years experience . If you met them you could not tell them from nonsmokers .

Yes I know there are young kids that have a rebellious agenda and you can spot them immediately

692

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

Firstly, the study ‘was a “blind study,” which means employees, hiring officials, medical personnel and management officials were not informed of the results of the urine drug screens and the test results had no effect on hiring decisions. The Postal Service has since instituted a national policy of pre-employment screening.’[/quote]

This doesn’t matter. There were double blind tests showing that steroids did NOT help in muscle gains in the 60’s.

[quote]

So it was done at a time when applicants did not need to abstain from marijuana use in order to be employed. In fact, 7.8% of all applicants tested showed positive for marijuana use.[/quote]

?? If you are asked to pee in a cup, you know why. That means if they got caught, unless this was a surprise test, it stills seems sketchy.

The author of the study? Do You mean ARTICLE? If he didn’t conduct the study, who cares?

[quote]
The author of the study is criticising previous studies showing exaggerated stats of “200% to 300% more industrial accidents…400% more compensable injuries and use 1,500% more sick leave than workers who do not use drugs.”

Here is another article on the study:

Clearly the author does not have a strong bias or agenda as you suggest.[/quote]

Again, this isn’t about the author.

693

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]Xav wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]Xav wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]Xav wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
NO complications and illegal ,I can’t understand the logic [/quote]

‘Research has shown that marijuana’s negative effects on attention, memory, and learning can last for days or weeks after the acute effects of the drug wear off. Consequently, someone who smokes marijuana daily may be functioning at a reduced intellectual level most or all of the time…Not surprisingly, evidence suggests that, compared with their nonsmoking peers, students who smoke marijuana tend to get lower grades and are more likely to drop out of high school. A meta-analysis of 48 relevant studiesÃ???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢??one of the most thorough performed to dateÃ???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?¢??found cannabis use to be associated consistently with reduced educational attainment (e.g., grades and chances of graduating)…several studies have linked workers’ marijuana smoking with increased absences, tardiness, accidents, workers’ compensation claims, and job turnover. For example, a study among postal workers found that employees who tested positive for marijuana on a pre-employment urine drug test had 55 percent more industrial accidents, 85 percent more injuries, and a 75-percent increase in absenteeism compared with those who tested negative for marijuana use.’

Source: How does marijuana use affect school, work, and social life? | National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) [/quote]

Just one example

" Not surprisingly, evidence suggests that, compared with their nonsmoking peers, students who smoke marijuana tend to get lower grades and are more likely " says the article

Evidence (SUGGESTS) could it be that poor students were more likely to smoke MJ ? the article is full of bullshit like this .[/quote]

It’s a meta-analysis on a credible site with a shitload of references. You probably didn’t read the article. In what line of work are you to so quickly and confidently say this article is bullshit?
In case you didn’t know, in the health field evidence usually SUGGESTS (your “argument” for saying it’s a bullshit article) and doesn’t prove anything.

However I don’t see why this article would be an argument against legislation. Cannabis is correlated with certain negative effects & social factors. No shit. So is alcohol.

[/quote]

I am truly blue collar , I have been reading articles like this for years . Articles that have an agenda and write the article to promote said agenda . True journalism would take scientific data and report it fairly , To work on all possibilities and distinguish the variables [/quote]

That’s quite impressive of you, reading those articles without schooling how to do so. I’d recommend reading a book about study design and very basic statistics, you’ll be able to gauge quality way better.
You’re absolutely right about agendas and bias, however it’s quite a stretch to classify an article as bullshit because you believe there’s a certain degree of bias.

EDIT: And the biggest challenge is to know your own bias! Most of us read studies to confirm our opinions, instead of challenging them. When the conclusions don’t strengthen our opinions, we tend to disregard the article due to it being biased.

[/quote]

Oh I am in AWE of your great and powerful intellect , please tell me more about your esteemed credentials . Sex Machine (NOT:) posted an article about some study with some foot notes . I do not have time to study the foot notes but I am quite capable of analyzing the article

http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/marijuana-abuse/how-does-marijuana-use-affect-school-work-social-life[/quote]

Sadly enough I am far from having a great intellect. My post seems to have the wrong effect, I was actually giving you a compliment.

Analyzing an article without taking a look at the footnotes isn’t analyzing but whatever.
Also, how did you analyze his article? As far as I remember your only argument for its supposedly low quality was the fact they said “Evidence SUGGESTS”.
[/quote]

I read the article and considered it’s points that is how I analyzed it . The article has an agenda . Go all the way back and look at the disinformation the Federal Government put out about marijuana. Science is the farthest consideration from this discussion . I think the best evidence of the effects of MJ are millions of smokers some with 70 years experience . If you met them you could not tell them from nonsmokers .

Yes I know there are young kids that have a rebellious agenda and you can spot them immediately [/quote]

You still didn’t explain why the article has an agenda but whatever this is getting silly. Let’s agree to disagree.

I’m not sure I’m reading your post right but are you suggesting MJ has no negative side-effects? While I’m no expert I don’t have the arrogance to think that the whole health care sector is wrong and I that somehow know “the truth”, maybe you have this great and powerful intellect to come to this conclusion!
What difference does it make to be able to distinguish smokers from non smokers when I meet them??? How in the world is this evidence for MJ’s effects?

By the way I tend to agree with the MJ legalization, however denying it has serious side effects is a far stretch.
I believe this discussion consists of 2 important parts: the effects of the different drugs and more importantly on the logic and choice of the government.

Let’s be honest: alcohol and MJ are probably comparable. We’re not talking about crystal meth here. Even if one is a bit worse than the other does it really matter? Besides these things are basically impossible to quantify.
For the record I think MJ is safer than alcohol, for example MJ is physically almost not addictive, compared to alcohol’s delirium tremens. Sleeping pills are far more addictive than MJ.

Government should obviously take this into account, but also the costs to society? How to do this? No idea, but comparing to countries where it’s legal might be a start. What I simply can’t grasp is why alcohol is legal and MJ is illegal. If both were illegal, I’d understand this, simply another restrictive decision of the government but it would make sense. Big brother wants to look out for us (which brings us to the discussion of how much should the government protect us, while denying us certain freedoms, maybe ban food high in saturated fat?)

694

WHY the article has an agenda , I could only speculate , but I would say it is to keep MJ illegal

Yes I think MJ to be almost harmless

Have you ever seen some one hallucinate because of detoxing from Alcohol I have . I do know some MJ smokers that get a little edgy if they don’t smoke

I tried to answer line by line I do not know if I got it or not I did not get it but I tried to answer most of your questions

695

I do not know how you could compare a drug that has no detectable toxicity to a drug that gets it affect from toxicity

696

[quote]Professor X wrote:

This doesn’t matter. There were double blind tests showing that steroids did NOT help in muscle gains in the 60’s.

[/quote]

Yes I know. Is that a reason to dismiss ALL blind tests?

Of course it was a surprise test! It was a blind test so the people taking it obviously couldn’t be told a month in advance otherwise it wouldn’t be a blind test.

No I mean the chief author of the STUDY: Dr. Craig Zwerling. Try reading the article.

[quote]
Again, this isn’t about the author. [/quote]

Read the article. It’s about the STUDY by Dr. Craig Zwerling and quotes the researchers and their findings.

697

I have passed drug tests 3 days after smoking

698

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I have passed drug tests 3 days after smoking [/quote]

Niacin and a boat load of water?

Some of them do a saliva test now, I’m not sure how to beat those but I’ve only had to beat a drug test once while dirty. And yes, I succeeded.

699
700

Grey hair helps in hair testing , A fast metabolism and low body fat also help in urine tests