First Man in U.K. to Die from Cannabis Poisoning
A better reference: Cannabis death a first for Britain
the official coroner's report
I think the burden of proof should be on the medical examiner. What level of cannabis would be considered "toxic"? And was it really directly related to his death?
A better reference: Cannabis death a first for Britain
the official coroner's report
I think the burden of proof should be on the medical examiner. What level of cannabis would be considered "toxic"? And was it really directly related to his death?
(no subject)
Date: 2004-01-20 06:09 am (UTC)I would imagine the guy probably developed AVM or somesuch from tripping on THC all day every day, and had an aneurism because of it.
so says I.
The coroner shouldn't have a "probable" listed under cause of death, escpecially when no one has died due to cannabis toxicity in past.
This whole event looks like a anti-pot media scenario.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-01-20 07:17 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-01-20 07:40 am (UTC)If somebody smokes as much as that guy supposedly did, health problems are inevitable in any case.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-01-20 06:28 am (UTC)I'll say. Well i hope he passed away in a higher and happier state of mind at least..
(no subject)
Date: 2004-01-20 05:41 pm (UTC)Nonetheless, the facts remain:
- cannabis has NOT been established as a direct pharmacological cause of this man's death.
- even if it had, it should be noted that this one death means that Cannabis is notably less toxic than peanuts. FAR more people die globally from peanut ingestion than from cannabis ingestion.
Anyone who objects to the above should really provide factual basis for their objection, instead of the usual hysterical idiocy that Drug-Warmongers usually fall back on to support their position.
I should note that I don't hold the "cannabis is harmless" camp in any higher esteem. Cannabis can certainly be harmful; but its effects do not include fatality.