It's not my claim.
It was Anti, that posted:
Right, or wrong, that's the figure we've got so far.
Even if it's wrong, I doubt it's more dangerous that tobacco, or ethanol.
Thus keeping marijuana illegal while keeping tobacco and ethanol legal seems to me an obvious hypocrisy.

And I believe the U.S. would benefit substantially from a healthy, market driven hemp industry.
It certainly has in the past.

Well, one sorce reported that in 2002 in the united states there were 2 overdoses from marijuana only. The report didn't go into detail about the overdoses but it listed a total of 157 marijuana only deaths. That would include accidents and sucides while on the drug. The report also states while it focuses on marijuana only deaths in some cases alcohol may have been involved. I'll try to do a little more research but right now it seems marshmellows are more dangerous than marijauna is.

Actually, there is no known directly measured-or measurable-lethal dosage for marijuana as there are for most other drugs/medications (even foods).

And, marijuana has various extremely low lethal dosage toxicity estimates, one such estimate being 40,000 to 1...meaning that it would take 40,000 average joints smoked in 15 minutes to cause an overdose.

(These toxicity estimates are derived from toxicity studies using pure THC rather than marijuana. And, a person would likely die from lack of oxygen before dying from marijuana...if it were even possible for someone to smoke 40,000 joints in 15 minutes.)

So, if these 2000 deaths in 2002 were true, they shouldn't be considered as "overdoses"...they should be listed as deaths with causes that are indirectly linked to marijuana use.

The article didn't specifically mention if other factors were involved in the 2 supposed overdoses. It said alcohol may have been consumed in some cases. It could have also been some spiked dope. But the other 155 deaths were not in any way related to overdoses.

You didn't know my college roommate

I'd add that there is a growing body of evidence that suggests that smoking marijuana isn't likely to cause lung cancer...despite the fact that marijuana smoke carries with it a substantial amount of carcinogens.

And a hypothesized reason for this likelihood is the growing number of studies that are beginning to suggest that cannabinoids can effectively help trigger cancerous cell death in various parts of the human body.

It's just a shame that the US government is so dead-set against basic cannabinoid research in the US whereas other countries are aggressively pursuing this research.

I'd be willing to bet that the overwhelming majority of those supposed deaths were from doing risky things while high, such as driving.

You went to college with Tommy Chong?

If it's safer than aspirin (which it appears to be if these & other similar figures are ~correct) why should it be any more restricted than aspirin?
The U.S. Drug War has counterproductively criminalized a significant segment of the U.S. population.
Who benefits?
Drug Warriors.
Really.
If the government wanted to restrict commodities for the health benefit of U.S. citizens, they should probably decriminalize marijuana, and ban cheeseburgers.

The original reason for the war on drugs was to opress the mexican population and their culture. Some racist congressman wanted to ban a harmless plant because it was considered taboo because of its mexican affiliation.