Quote:
Quote by: Praxius  Which is why I bolded that section originally, to show that I did not over look that part.
And from that article:
They test on rats and other animals which have similar traits as our bodies, and the fact that they tested on Human Lung Cancer Cells rather then rat cancer cells and it worked on them, would suggest that there is a great chance this does indeed work.
Putting these results into practice with my own life and experiences in this topic of which I have personally encountered through my life matches their results they have reported, plus the countless people I have talked to about this drug for the last 10 years all seem to match closer to these results as opposed to the age old argument that weed has more tar and cancerous materials in it compared to ciggs, which never added up. |
It doesn't matter that they did the testing by injecting human lung cancer cells into rats because rats are not humans. Until they show
in live humans that this substance does what they claim, I'm not buying it. Humans are not animals (and I don't give a rat's behind what some atheist in a lab coat claims).
For the record, it doesn't matter to me one way or another whether the substance is harmful: it's my position that the government does not have the constitutional authority to pass laws either legalizing such substances or making them illegal (merely refraining from passing a law against something does not make that something "legal") and it is my position that the government does not have the constitutional authority to try to protect people from themselves.