Do you guys just all have PMS or something?
Tadaa didn't read the footnotes to begin with; therefore he made a few dumb posts. Eventually he provided what looked to be a few study results, so shut up about it. I've said this before but I guess it wasn't read: negative is an opinion; therefore it can't be proven that there are negative side effects of smoking; but obviously there are some effects that people would rather not get, like bronchitis.
Anyone who says there are no negative side effects either loves bronchitis or is a dumbass. Anyone who refuses to read footnotes then refuses to read posts saying to read footnotes is a dumbass. Anyone who demands links incessantly is a dumbass. Anyone who refuses to give any links is a dumbass. Anyone who thinks marijuana is physically addictive (litterally addictive) or thinks marijuana is any more psychologically addictive (the bs addiction) than chocolate is either misinformed or a dumbass, respectively.
Finally, anyone who says the pamphlet would be better if it were less biased... shut the hell up already! I admit it is to an extent biased, but it is no less biased than presenting any random list of facts. Just because it shows both sides of marijuana doesn't make it more biased, even though it looks more pro-legalization, because it is closer to being unbiased. I can understand how simple-minded fools would immediately call it biased because it is much more balanced than what is put out by the Gov't, but I can't understand how an intelligent person could call it more biased just because it also lists the positive things of marijuana.