The author of the article ‘Medical Marijuana is a dangerous fraud focuses on the potential damages of the use of marijuana in medicinal applications due to the potential harm it poses on the human body as seen in many instances. He focuses his argument on the correctness of the act with regard to ethical measures and potential impact upon the brain and its functions. He explores the fact that the media coverage on the issue has greatly contributed towards the promotion of misplaced notion that the use of marijuana can actually lead to any medical gains. This Lowry states, “…the family of compounds known as cannabinoids, found in marijuana, may be useful for future drug development – the only conclusion to be played up, and distorted by the media” (Lowry 16).
Lowry primarily aims at establishing his claims through conducting medical assessments on the components found in Marijuana, which are called ‘cannabinoids’ and conducts an analysis of their effects on the functionality of different brain components. Lowry approach is therefore based on an experimental perspective through which he aims at establishing real facts on the ground versus claims on the media regarding the efficacy of marijuana in medical treatment.
Lowry uses official language presentation in his paper focusing on correct grammar and language components. He uses medical terms constructively to establish his claims and avoids through application of scientific terms of marijuana, which he refers to as ‘cannabinoids.’ However, there are instances where his language gives an element of speculation as opposed to facts, for instance, where he objects that “…the most ballyhooed uses of marijuana is to treat nausea and weight loss…” (Lowry 17). This language is recommended when one aims at contrasting an ethical idea.
The evidence used by Lowry is experimental evidence from previous experiments conducted on the subjected and contained in official reports. In many instances of his critical analysis he relies upon findings of the 10M report. The evidence presented is accurate in most instances and sufficient enough to support the relative medical claims regarding the controversial subject. However, despite his reliance on the report he appears to oppose its elements at some point, for instance, when he objects “What the 10M report should have , is that attempts are nothing but propaganda for drug legalization” (Lowry 17)
Lowry portrays a negative influence on the relative accuracy of the application of marijuana as an alternative medicine. Lowry also has the perception that marijuana is entirely not a feasible medicinal substance, and that attempts top propagate it as accurate are merely misplaced notions. This has a positive impact on his knowledge structure in that he elementally aims examines the correctness of existing information.
Clark in his article ‘the ethics of medical marijuana: government restrictions vs. medical necessity’ aims at conducting a comparison on the government restrictions on the use of marijuana and the medical applications on the same. In his article he analyses various government restrictions, for instance, its application as a feasible alternative medicinal option and its efficacy in treating the suggested conditions.
Clark essentially relies upon a comparative approach in which he conducts an analysis on the misconceptions existing on each opposing divide. This he pursues by examining the base on which both proponents support their claims and perspectives. This enables his to come up with a conclusion regarding the applicability of the final deliberations after which he takes a personal stand.
Clark uses official language with proper focus on the correct use and application of grammar and English language structures. His language is direct and persuasive to the reader due to the different perspectives he portrays throughout his analysis. In order to elevate this Clark avoids the potential use of any forms of slang and primarily relies upon scientific terms and jargons as seen in “...Marijuana comes from leaves and flowering tops of the hemp plant, Cannabis sativa…”(Clark 42). This use of language is recommended in presenting positive aspects on a subject.
The evidence used by Clark is elementally factual since it is derived from existing proven information on the substance. This he succeeds by beginning on the theoretical aspects which strives to support with factual evidence from experimental reports. Fro instance, we see this when he objects, “Clinical findings have documented marijuana’s efficacy in treating pain, neurological and movement disorders, nausea of patients undergoing chemotherapy for cancer, loss of appetite and weight …”(Clark 42)
Clark’s notions presented in the paper have a positive feel on the relative correctness in the use of marijuana as medical alternative. He therefore appears to support the fact that marijuana can be used in certain medical conditions taking into account the presentation of proof and efficacy. Clark’s perception of the topic therefore appears to be elementally supportive and fits well with the deep understanding he portrays on the subject.