Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Drug Policy

saras

(6,670 posts)

3. I've been following maps.org for a long time. Good research is HARD

Reply to Skip_In_Boulder (Reply #2)

Sat Apr 7, 2012, 02:55 AM

Apr 2012

https://www.maps.org/

I can't say enough good stuff about them and their work (funding research and routing it through the bureaucracy)

The obviously bogus way to do it is do dose a bunch of people who don't use the stuff with synthetic THC and test their driving. That'll get a nice low number, especially if you choose the most annoying THC variant or mixture.

One thing is that I would NOT expect to find a simple bell curve. There should be separate populations of smokers and nonusers, who I'd expect to test quite differently.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

3 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Medical marijuana: THC driving limits sponsor voted for one standard, prefers different one [View all] Skip_In_Boulder Apr 2012 OP

Is there any science at all supporting that number? or any number? saras Apr 2012 #1

I don't know but that is what I am currently researching Skip_In_Boulder Apr 2012 #2

I've been following maps.org for a long time. Good research is HARD saras Apr 2012 #3