Inhaling any burnt organic matter is known to be bad for peoples health. Theres a mechanistic explanation for it too: smoking causes incomplete combustion of organic matter creating a soup of volatile organics and slew of carbon particulates, many with activated surfaces. CO, formaldehyde, CN, etc. even CO2 which is toxic at high concentrations (its not merely an asphyxiant like it is for a fire).

Smoke is bad. Full stop. exposure to smoke, cigarettes, diesel fumes, interstate, etc while pregnant is harmful to the baby. This has been known for decades.

So the answer should have been: "we don't know the effects specifically of pot on pregnancy, but we know smoking is bad while pregnant. So, while we don't know about pot-cookies, joints are bad."

It does seem like a weak reply to me - it's too equivocal. "We don't know" implies that it's anybody's guess, and that it should be avoided only out of an abundance of caution. Some people will interpret that response as "there's no evidence it's bad, so it's probably fine."

In fact there's plenty of evidence it's bad, both direct (the linked study is not the only one) and indirect (we know that smoking in pregnancy is bad, and that drugs affect the fetus, and that fetuses are sensitive). If you polled medical professionals, they would all say it's probably bad. The likelihood that it's perfectly fine is small.

Thing is, so much cannabis consumption today is through vapor or edibles.

I'm not saying it's safe to vape or eat cannabis when you're pregnant. But you if you say:

> you shouldn't consume cannabis when pregnant because bringing particles in your lungs is bad

then you open yourself up to the immediate response of:

> OK, so I can do edibles when I'm pregnant then, right?