[bregma]

I'm just not convinced we have adequate information to formulate an educated opinion either way. More, better, validated research would help, but like nutrition and much in medecine, the nature of the problem precludes ever gaining a rigourous scientifically robust result.

Not only that, I lack the confidence we as a society can make adequate decisions on restrictions to freedoms based on the sorts of numbers and correlations that are currently being published. Does the expected reduction in harm justify the restrictions of personal freedoms imposed in its name? Does it help more than, say, banning high school sports would?