This is now my NS pet peeve. Everyone is posting ncbi links to abstracts where the last sentence, which is usually the results, supports whatever they want to say and bam, there's a scientific paper behind it therefore they're right. For one, most NS'ers can't decipher a paper other than the last part of the abstract. I hope if anybody had math classes they at least get the P values and confidence intervals. Not only that, but you can't even access that paper unless you have access through some other method like your school.
At that, if I'm reading it correctly all you can get out of the abstract is the following - out of 446 people who fit the criteria, 82 of them pulled a positive thc test. 44 people died, 42 of those people were HTC- and 2 were THC+. So out of the 82 THC+ people, only two died. Just based on what I can see in the abstract, I'm not inclined to believe that 42/44 peoples deaths were somehow related to their lack of THC or that the THC protected the 80/82 in the THC+ group.
Things I want to know before I agree with the way they did it or not:
How exactly did they detect THC, what was 'positive'
the exact nature of the injuries
was everyone treated equally? did some go on to rehab, use other drugs, do other shit? there's loads of things they could have left out or purposefully not included.
cause of death?
I might change my mind if I could see the data but like most people I can't, and most people aren't capable of arguing over the data anyway. Truth is I could get the paper if I wanted to but meh.
interested in skating? go here. PM me with questions if you have them!