You do realize that your case has as much evidence that passage of time fixed your problem (or anything else that transpired) as it does for cannabis? And that is why people do randomized trials.

It feels too dismissive.

While I do agree, that:

- there is a chance of something other causing the instant relief AND matching the moment of cannabis use

- health policy for population, should be made based on studies of population

At the same time, we must accept also some limitations of medical trials.

Models that interpret gathered results always includes a random part. Why? World is quite deterministic, why the randomness? Because one can’t make all possible measurements (money, sample size, time), one must choose the most promising practical setup.

Imagine hypothetical situation:

- there are 30 genotypes in population

- drug is highly effective only for 1 of those

- study doesn’t make genetic testing (also, it’s a parallel group study)

Such setup inflates required sample size to get statistically significant results. And even if significance is found, it will say that effectiveness is only 1/30, so not that good of a drug.

(30 is not the limit, think of a case with 300 types or 3000 types)

Human body is amazingly complex. It is not a solved problem.

If OP experienced instant relief of pain after smoking cannabis, it would be a logical action for OP to try it second time if pain reappears. (Given that cost/risk of such personal experiment is relatively low)

No it doesn’t. One second I was in unbearable pain and about to go to the ER, and the next second I felt no pain. I am not the only person who has had success using cannabis for pain either.