Beware biased research

I believe that knowing the interests of the entity that has commissioned research quite reveals much about the research “findings.”

Re: “Meltdown of civilization is nigh – not,” Letters, Sept. 10.

One side says marijuana is much less harmful than tobacco and/or alcohol, while the other side says that such vague general claims are untrue – that cannabis is not at all so innocuous.

Plus, with a possible referendum in the near future on legalizing marijuana in the works, we’ll likely even hear/read much more of such polarized perspectives.

Although I’ve learned about pot consumption’s effect on my health the hard way, I must admit that research regarding pot’s effect on health that “reveal” a benign or, contrarily, insidious nature of cannabis consumption make me wonder: Who commissioned the research?

As cynical as it may sound, I’m one who believes that knowing the interests of the entity that has commissioned the research quite often reveal much about the research “findings.”

The research commissioner will typically propagate self-descriptive adjectives such as “independent,” but this doesn’t necessarily translate into 100-per-cent accuracy, as research methodology can be quite manipulative.

 

Frank G. Sterle, Jr.

White Rock

Surrey North Delta Leader