The article you linked has the same text, but a better title. "Secondhand marijuana smoke damages blood vessels more than tobacco smoke"
The title by sciencebulletin is more linkbaity. There is no evidence of permanent damage, or any damage, only some temporally problem. They conveniently use "may" in the title, but with the same method they can claim that marijuana smoke may summon UFOs.
I don't like first or second had smoke, but I also don't like clickbait and fake science.
2 comments
[ 4.5 ms ] story [ 10.9 ms ] threadhttp://news.heart.org/secondhand-marijuana-smoke-damages-blo...
The title by sciencebulletin is more linkbaity. There is no evidence of permanent damage, or any damage, only some temporally problem. They conveniently use "may" in the title, but with the same method they can claim that marijuana smoke may summon UFOs.
I don't like first or second had smoke, but I also don't like clickbait and fake science.
PS: "Somewhat related We Used Terrible Science to Justify Smoking Bans" http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_exa... HN discussion https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13759947 (27 points, 11 days ago, 30 comments)