(ANTIMEDIA) Chelsea Clinton has gone full anti-science — in a big way.
At a town hall event at Youngstown State University in Ohio, the Democratic presidential candidate’s daughter told a crowd full of students about the “anecdotal evidence … from Colorado,” showing “some of the people who were taking marijuana for those purposes, the coroner believes, after they died, there was drug interactions with other things they were taking.”
To many, Chelsea Clinton’s comments are dangerous. After all, her mother could soon be the president of the United States. As states begin to rapidly embrace the push for marijuana legalization, prompting support for the federal reclassification of weed to grow, a member of one of the most powerful and influential political dynasties in America is allegedly “suggesting marijuana is killing people.”
Despite the absence of cases of marijuana overdoses (even the DEA acknowledges cannabis doesn’t kill), Chelsea Clinton seemed to suggest otherwise. Her statements concerned “advocates [who] worry that her daughter’s comments can have unintended effect on public perceptions of cannabis,” ATTN: reported.
Despite her daughter’s misinformed comments, presidential candidate Clinton “has made a point of respecting state laws that permit marijuana for medical and recreational purposes,” according to ATTN:. She’s “even vowed to reschedule marijuana under federal law, downgrading it to a less restrictive category that would legally require greater access to the substance for researchers.”
However, it should be noted that Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign was a recipient of funding from the private prison industry, which is one of the largest anti-marijuana legalization lobbies in the United States. After an exposé by The Intercept revealed her private prison funding, Clinton reversed course and vowed to put an end private prisons while donating the campaign contributions to charity. The private prison industry remains steadfast in its belief that Hillary Clinton will not hurt its profits.
Tom Angell, the founder of Marijuana Majority, addressed the issue, claiming“[a]nyone who has experience with marijuana or is even vaguely familiar with the research knows that cannabis has never [led] to an overdose death in recorded history.” Due to “Chelsea Clinton[’s] huge platform,” Angell is concerned this mistake could have broad ramifications.
Urging Chelsea Clinton to correct her comments, Angell said he “hope[s] that she will take the opportunity to quickly correct the record.” Chelsea Clinton heeded this recommendation, promptly issuing a statement through a spokesperson who argued the former first daughter “misspoke.”
She also added:
“While discussing her and her mother’s support for rescheduling marijuana to allow for further study of both its medical benefits and possible interactions with other medications, Chelsea misspoke about marijuana’s interaction with other drugs contributing to specific deaths.”
Though she issued a correction, the possible future first daughter’s comments have already left a deep mark. As Angell predicted, nothing about her alleged correction echoed through the media. What we were left with was the impression that the country’s former first daughter prefers to put conspiracy theories before sound judgement, parroting a myth long put to rest while campaigning for her mother.
This article (Chelsea Clinton Just Went Full Anti-Science) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Alice Salles and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11 pm Eastern/8 pm Pacific. Image credit: Kyle Cassidy. If you spot a typo, please email the error and name of the article to email@example.com.
Since you’re here…
…We have a small favor to ask. Fewer and fewer people are seeing Anti-Media articles as social media sites crack down on us, and advertising revenues across the board are quickly declining. However, unlike many news organizations, we haven’t put up a paywall because we value open and accessible journalism over profit — but at this point, we’re barely even breaking even. Hopefully, you can see why we need to ask for your help. Anti-Media’s independent journalism and analysis takes substantial time, resources, and effort to produce, but we do it because we believe in our message and hope you do, too.
If everyone who reads our reporting and finds value in it helps fund it, our future can be much more secure. For as little as $1 and a minute of your time, you can support Anti-Media. Thank you. Click here to support us