In specific cases it is favourable: [quote]medical review found a preponderance of favourable controlled trials for treatment of a range of conditions including spasticity resulting from disseminated sclerosis (nine favourable, three unfavourable), chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (40 favourable, one unfavourable), HIV/AIDS-related cachexia (seven favourable, none unfavourable), cancer-related cachexia (three favourable, one unfavourable), chronic neuropathic pain (12 favourable, two unfavourable) and other chronic (cancer, rheumatism, fibromyalgia) pain (11 favourable, two unfavourable).1[/quote] Once again quoted straight from medical journal. You are arguing against science, and obviously didn't pay attention to that one particular article about medics science versus political ideology, which describes uneducated individuals such as yourself to a fine T.

Do you even understand that quote? I don't think you do? Lmfao try again, kiddo.

What you are doing is called deflection. Because you don't understand how medical trials are conducted and their findings are recorded you are trying to claim others don't understand them. I'm sorry medical terminology overwhelms you. But this is exactly why you flip burgers for a living rather than work in the medical field.