"Cognitive impairment" is not shorthand for "neurotoxicity"

>Have you ever experienced an extremely bad hangover? Would you say that was obviously neurotoxic or not?

It has already been proven that alcohol kills brain cells. The hangover is caused by the direct effects of ethanol and acetaldehyde (its primary metabolite).

There is no evidence that cannabis kills brain cells. In fact, there is evidence to the contrary.

You are claiming there is evidence of cannabis neurotoxicity, that cannabis kills brain cells. Where is the evidence for that? Despite what you may believe, being stoned is not a type of brain damage.

Schizophrenia and psychosis in general is not "getting stoned". That outcome strongly indicates neurotoxicity.

Apologies for the harsh confrontational tone in my previous comments.

Here's a point I was trying to make earlier:

The statement: "Led Zeppelin is better than the Beatles" is subjective because it expresses an opinion that is open to interpretation.

The statement: "I have a preference for Led Zeppelin versus the Beatles" is objective, because it is a statement of fact about your personal experience, and is not subject to interpretation or debate. It also doesn't require "data" or cited research.

Search on Google Scholar for "neurotoxicity of cannabis". There is evidence for and against. It is debatable.