The legalization of marijuana has elicited a controversial debate across the globe, especially in western countries and the USA. Proponents of marijuana legalization have based their argument on the medicinal benefits of the drugs as it is widely used as a painkiller, primarily among people with chronic diseases like cancer that are associated with chronic pain. On the contrary, opponents of the legalization have maintained that the use of marijuana results in adverse health effects. The debate has been going on for many years, and it is not likely to end soon. However, the decision by the World Health Organization (WHO) to announce scientific consensus on medical cannabis early this year received mixed reactions from common people, including scientists. According to the research finding that was released by WHO, marijuana is a safe and effective medicine, indicating that it has medicinal value ( Churgai, 2019) . Even though you do not agree with scientific consensus about medical marijuana, it is important to appreciate the fact that WHO undertook a scientific process before declaring the consensus on the controversial issues. Most scientific findings are accurate and factual, although some may have elements of inaccuracy.
First, I would like you to appreciate that scientific research or processes are largely based on scientific theories. In many cases, people use the word “theory” to refer to a guess or hypothesis. As a result, a significant number of people do not believe in theories because of the notion that they are often untrue. Although scientific theory can also be a hypothesis, the latter refers to and educated guest while the former is the scientific interpretation of the facts ( Pusic, Boutis & McGaghie, 2018) . Therefore, scientific theory has a stronger assertion than a hypothesis, and it is used to define a relationship between different facts. In other words, a scientific theory is used to offer a brief and concise explanation for a given phenomenon that has been observed scientifically over a given period ( Pusic, Boutis & McGaghie, 2018) . For instance, according to Newton's theory of gravity, every object responds to the force of gravity similarly. The theory provides a concise explanation of the movement of objects such as the moon.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Thus, scientific theories are largely based on facts and not mere assumptions or guesses. A hypothesis can only be regarded as a scientific theory if it is testable, replicable, stable, simple, and consistent. A series of scientific research should support a scientific theory, and other scientists should be able to repeat it and get similar results ( Pusic, Boutis & McGaghie, 2018) . Besides, it should be consistent with other theories. However, unlike scientific facts, a scientific theory cannot be absolutely true because it is subject to interpretations. Some scientists or researchers can develop a new way of interpreting the scientific theory. Therefore, the scientific consensus on the medicinal value of the marijuana is largely based on facts that are based on scientific theory. For instance, highly skilled cannabis experts conducted research and found that marijuana has many health benefits, and it can be used as marijuana. To confirm the findings of the experts, WHO conducted further research and ended up with a similar result ( Churgai, 2019) . Hence, the decision by WHO to declare the scientific consensus was based on consistent, reliable, and valid findings.
I know you are likely to question how scientific theories operate. Scientific theories mainly operate by providing a scientific background for a given phenomenon in the world. Scientists are using theory to study and understand trends that occur globally. Specifically, scientific theories operate by helping scientist to predict new observable events about a certain phenomenon ( Pusic, Boutis & McGaghie, 2018) . They guide researchers to make a new discovery and addressing emerging problems or issues affecting people in the contemporary world. A successful theory helps in predicting events. Thus, it is possible to replace a theory. Nonetheless, scientific theories can also end up being scientific facts, especially when there is no possibility of it changing regardless of the time. For instance, the medicinal use of marijuana was mainly based on speculations and theories. However, currently, it has become scientifically clear that marijuana can be used as a pain reliever. Scientific studies have consistently proven that marijuana can be used to relieve or treat neuropathic pain, as well as chronic pain ( Bridgeman & Abazia, 2017) . As a, scientifically, marijuana has medicinal value, and it should be treated as a medicine.
Falsifiability is one of the elements of a scientific process or theory. Based on falsifiability, a scientific theory or hypothesis cannot have any credence if it is inherently disprovable ( Veronesi, 2014) . Therefore, the concept of falsifiability is based on the notion that scientific theory has to falsifiable. Scientists, therefore, employ the idea of falsifiability to test the credibility of their hypothesis or assertion about a given issue or phenomenon. Specifically, scientists use falsifiability as a fundamental mechanism that helps in discovering the truth. Only statements or assertions that are falsifiable hold some truth because people can explore them to produce tangible and valid evidence. Also, scientists employ the idea of falsifiability because it gives them the background or framework to engage and scientifically discuss issues.
Nevertheless, falsifiability does not always mean that there is an argument against certain scientific theories or hypothesis. On the contrary, it provides an opportunity for people to imagine the possibility of an alternative or opposite view of a theory ( Veronesi, 2014) . For example, even though WHO declared scientific consensus on the medical value of marijuana, there is a possibility that marijuana has no medicinal value, especially based on its adverse effects on human health. For instance, excessive use of marijuana is associated with mental problems, as well as depression. At the same time, some studies have found that the use of marijuana suppresses the neuron and it can impair decision-making because of its adverse effects on the prefrontal cortex ( Behere, Behere & Rao, 2017) . The concept falsifiability, therefore, can help you to justify your arguments against the scientific consensus.
Therefore, to come to clear and careful assessment, I would urge you to use the scientific method. Even though bias is sometimes inevitable in any process, it can be reduced significantly through scientific methods, which are based on a lot of objectivity. One of the main reasons why scientists are always required to adhere to the scientific method is because it helps in reducing the influence of bias in any scientific process, resulting in accurate findings or decisions. Scientific methods provide scientists with objective and standardized procedures or processes, which improve the accuracy of the results significantly. Consequently, scientists end up sticking with facts. Scientific methods also ensure that scientists remain impartial and use empirical or reliable evidence to support their arguments. Hence, you need to use scientific methods to determine whether indeed marijuana has some medicinal value, which will end up shaping your opinion on the scientific consensus that was declared by the WHO ( Churgai, 2019) . You will be able to objectively analyze data and information regarding the issue and make evidence-based and informed decision or argument.
Specifically, I would request you to engage scientific, peer-reviewed sources that are largely based on facts. In many cases, peer-reviewed sources are authoritative and of higher standards than many sources because they are reviewed by a panel of experts on a given subject or topic. As a result, there are high chances that you will get evidence-based information on peer-reviewed articles or journals. Besides, you should engage peer-reviewed sources because their information and data are based on the diversity of opinions and expertise, making them more reliable than any other source. Besides, peer-reviewed sources are written by scholars who have a lot of experience in the subject matter. Currently, there are many reputable peer-reviewed sources about the medical value of marijuana that provide diverse opinion on the issue. According to Bridgeman & Abazia (2017) , many such sources have confirmed that marijuana can effectively be used as a painkiller among patients who are suffering from chronic pain.
In conclusion, there is enough scientific evidence to prove that marijuana has medicinal value as declared by the WHO. To authentic and confirm the scientific consensus, people should rely on scientific evidence and reputable scholarly sources that provide objective view and analysis of the issue. The authenticity of the argument should be subjected to rigorous scientific processes and methods. At the same time, it is important to acknowledge that scientific processes can sometimes be inaccurate or false, especially when they are based on biases. Effective use of scientific processes and methods can help in addressing some of the controversial issues in society.
References
Behere, A. P., Behere, P. B., & Rao, T. S. (2017). Cannabis: Does it have medicinal value? Indian Journal of Psychiatry , 59 (3), 262-263.
Bridgeman, M. B., & Abazia, D. T. (2017). Medicinal cannabis: history, pharmacology, and implications for the acute care setting. Pharmacy and Therapeutics , 42 (3), 180-188.
Churgai, D. (2019, February 1). WHO Announces Scientific Consensus on Medical Cannabis. Retrieved from https://www.safeaccessnow.org/who_announcement_on_cannabis
Pusic, M. V., Boutis, K., & McGaghie, W. C. (2018). Role of scientific theory in simulation education research. Simulation in Healthcare , 13 (3), 7-14.
Veronesi, C. (2014). Falsifications and scientific progress: Popper as sceptical optimist. Lettera Matematica , 1 (4), 179-184.
