Cannabis Does Not Cure Cancer

[Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith)]

Think it does?  Then Prove it. 

I'd like to see links to reputable medical journals showing evidence of the extraordinary claim the cannabis cures cancer.

Youtube clips of people with Parkinsons are not germane and will not be considered relevant to this discussion on whether or not cannabis cures cancer.

Start another thread if you want to talk about all of the other good stuff that cannabis can provide society, there is a lot, and most of it is firmly proven.  This thread is only about cannabis and cancer, and providing the evidence that one can cure the other.



This was deleted from the intellectually dishonest magical faith healer "AngryHateMusic"'s thread

The first link is not from a reputable medical journal, although it is written and prepared very well.  One thing I do not like at all about it, is that it  does not discuss the methods in detail anywhere.  That's a big no-no in scientific studies, and probably why the article was not published in a medical journal instead of "Nature".  Besides the fact that it does not focus on any one issue, and appears to be a scientifically styled "virtues of pot" propaganda piece.  I agree that cannabis has a great deal of positive uses, but so far there is no evidence that shows that it cures cancer.

The Parkinsons video shows a guy get relief from Parkinsons, not any evidence of tumors shrinking or of cancer being cured.  Why you thought that was anywhere near relevent to the discussion of marijuana curing cancer is beyond me.


Basically, I'm sick of pseudoscience that is so pervasive in our ignorant culture today.

Quote from: AngryHateMusic on Today at 08:49:04 PM

Do what you like. Stop requesting an education while ignorantly denying it. I am not here to educate you.

Quote

I would very much like to find more people that have experienced positive results.

If you cannot provide examples then don't post here. Stick to the positive results of hemp usage. Because that is all that is out there so far as I can find. Be it for cancer or some other condition.

What?  If I can't show evidence that Cannabis cures cancer I should not post here?  You're the one making an extraordinary claim.  It's your job to back it up.  So far you have not provided any firm evidence from any reputable source that Cannabis can cure cancer.  You're a joke.  Obviously you have no education in science, otherwise you would laugh at the "evidence" that you're posting.

If I ask for evidence from a reputable source that shows that cannabis cures cancer, and you post a video of some guy with Parkinsons and say that that is proof, how does that make any sense?  Stop requesting an education while ignorantly denying it?  Are you kidding me?  I'm the one that's getting ready to graduate with a bachelors in Biochemistry who recognizes that cannabis has a number of great uses.  I'm also not the one making ridiculous claims about healing powers that do not exist.

Anyways, I hear dehydrated water can cure cancer.  There's even a video of it on youtube.  In other news, praying to God can cure blindness and shamans in the Congo can steal a man's virility.  I've got proof: http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/christchurch/2746441/Faith-healers-attack-cancer-with-prayer

[AngryHateMusic]

LOL!

[One two three]

It may not cure but it has been shown to maybe slow it down.  I've also heard that it reverses damage to the lungs.  Additionally, it reduces the damage which alcohol does to the brain.

[Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith)]

Lets see some actual proof that cannabis cures cancer.  Like from an actual medical journal.

The lungs and alcohol and potential benefits of marijuana in regards to non-cancer related topics are not germane to this thread.

This thread isn't about debating the wonders of hemp, of which there are many, this is a single issue thread related only to showing proof from a reputable medical journal on cannabis curing cancer.

[One two three]

Lets see some actual proof that cannabis cures cancer.  Like from an actual medical journal.

The lungs and alcohol and potential benefits of marijuana in regards to non-cancer related topics are not germane to this thread.

This thread isn't about debating the wonders of hemp, of which there are many, this is a single issue thread related only to showing proof from a reputable medical journal on cannabis curing cancer.

You are not my mommy.  THC has been shown to kill cancer cells.  This thread isn't about reputable medical journals.  I don't trust reputable medical companies without exception.  Look at the AMA, it is a big government lobby.  It's about increase the size of government, truth be damned.

[Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith)]

Lets see some actual proof that cannabis cures cancer.  Like from an actual medical journal.

The lungs and alcohol and potential benefits of marijuana in regards to non-cancer related topics are not germane to this thread.

This thread isn't about debating the wonders of hemp, of which there are many, this is a single issue thread related only to showing proof from a reputable medical journal on cannabis curing cancer.

You are not my mommy.  THC has been show to kill cancer cells.  This thread isn't about reputable medical journals.  I don't trust reputable medical companies without exception.  Look at the AMA, it is a big government lobby.  It's about increase the size of government, truth be damned.

I never said I was Keith.  

Where has THC been shown to kill cancer cells?  That's what this thread is about.  There are hundreds of thousands of cancer researchers across the world who would love to find a cure, and if THC was anywhere near it, don't you think that ONE of them would have written an scientific article that was published in a reputable scientific journal?  There are a veritable shitload of journals out there, and any one of them would LOVE to publish a cure for cancer.  Yet nobody has been able to find me a link to one of these articles.  All they can provide are unrelated youtube videos and links to articles about cannabinoids killing bacterial cells, which have nothing to do with cannabis curing cancer and typically only offer nonsensical pseudo-science and/or rumors.

Hemp is an awesome plant with many important uses.  Big Government sucks.  But those two combined != cannabis curing cancer.

[Bill Brasky]

And since when did "The Show" forum allow people to delete others' posts?  How did he delete several of my posts anyways? 

Because he's an amper, I think he can edit his own threads board-wide.  Don't quote me on that. 

[Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith)]

And since when did "The Show" forum allow people to delete others' posts?  How did he delete several of my posts anyways? 

Because he's an amper, I think he can edit his own threads board-wide.  Don't quote me on that. 

Apparently that is the case.  I guess I missed when that got started.  No biggy, just surprised me.

[libertylover]

http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2009/08/19/cannabinoids-for-treating-cancer/
Possibly the disconnect is in that it is certain cannabinoids in cannabis are showing promise in treating cancer.    I do find it odd that the above linked study bothers to point out in strong terms that marijuana is an illegal substance.   What exactly does that have anything to do with their research. 

This article sums up the current status of cannabinoid research or the lack of it.  The writer does site the few studies which show promise in slowing the progression of cancer or shrinking of cancer tumors with cannabinoids. 
http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=6814

If a country can fund and do the proper research on potential cancer treatments derived from cannabis and they are found to actually work.  That country would become a mecca for cancer patients and there families seeking treatment.  Do you trust the studies done in such a country or countries?  What would the USA do if a country totally decriminalized marijuana?  Would the US government go all Panama on them or would they put up travel restrictions.  Please note:  Marijuana is still illegal to grow or distribute in large amounts in Holland.  Holland licenses medical marijuana and small quantity distribution only.   

It is interesting that in my searches pharmaceutical companies are working very diligently on reproducing chemical cannabinoids but not on synthesizing them from the natural source.   If there is no benefit to cannabinoids why bother attempting to reproduce them?  Is it too difficult or unprofitable for these pharmaceutical companies to lobby government to decriminalize hemp and start using natural cannabinoids in medicines?  There certainly are a whole lot of powerful lobbies in the USA that profit by keeping hemp illegal.
   

[Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith)]

It is interesting that in my searches pharmaceutical companies are working very diligently on reproducing chemical cannabinoids but not on synthesizing them from the natural source.   If there is no benefit to cannabinoids why bother attempting to reproduce them?  Is it too difficult or unprofitable for these pharmaceutical companies to lobby government to decriminalize hemp and start using natural cannabinoids in medicines?  There certainly are a whole lot of powerful lobbies in the USA that profit by keeping hemp illegal.

Because that's what organic chemists do.  It can be hard to understand why they do what they do, but the argument is that in the end there will be extra knowledge that someone else can use to figure out something else with.

My guess, is so that they can synthesize pure cannabinoids in the lab without having to extract them from plant material.

I think that if pharma companies saw cannabis as a potential cure for cancer, we would see legal marijuana right now, at least for medical research purposes.

[libertylover]

I think that if pharma companies saw cannabis as a potential cure for cancer, we would see legal marijuana right now, at least for medical research purposes.

I would say that you are being very naive about the strength of the prohibition lobby to keep marijuana a schedule one drug.   Possibly the only lobby stronger than the pharmaceutical one.  Personally I expect any significant research in this field to come from overseas.  Especially a country that isn't so financially tied to keeping marijuana illegal.  The major thing holding most of those countries back is their small population base from which to derive funding and/or a subject pool. 

Consider the aspirin example.  Aspirin is derived from the bark of a willow tree.  If aspirin were discovered today it wouldn't make it out of the lab many contend.  It just doesn't test well due to some potentially bad side effects.  However, people love the stuff.  For many people the anti-inflammatory benefits out weigh the gastro risks and they educate themselves on taking it responsibly.  But back to our fantasy world and lets assume pharmaceuticals figured out that aspirin worked by inhibiting cyclooxegenase enzymes, they would surely try to break the vascular effects of the drug apart from its anti-inflammatory effects. They would try to find new compounds that selectively inhibited only one of the enzyme subtypes. They would, in other words, produce Vioxx.  So which is better low dose aspirin a natural compound or Vioxx as an anti-inflammatory?  Hint Vioxx was pulled from the market but go ahead better living through chemistry guess which one. 

Many things have been observable throughout history long before there were scientific studies to confirm the original  observations.   I willing to accept that it is possible that marijuana can shrink cancer tumors or inhibit their growth.  But I am also willing to acknowledge there simply hasn't been enough unfettered scientific research in this area.   

The thing I find most alarming is due to government funding and regulation scientific study has become politicized especially in this country.   And this politicizing of science has hurt the confidence in scientific research as a whole.  I honestly think the question would have been definitively answered long ago if government wasn't in the way.  That means if marijuana was decriminalized, labs were not government funded and the drug industry wasn't so heavily regulated. 

[Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith)]

I agree on all points.  Except I'd like to add that big pharma has the money to do the necessary research in other marijuana friendly countries.  It doesn't have to be done here.

[digitalfour]

When I was in eighth grade I made a poster for Health class that said "Cannabis Causes Cancer". However, no one knew cannabis by that name, so it was gladly ineffective.

[Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith)]

When I was in eighth grade I made a poster for Health class that said "Cannabis Causes Cancer". However, no one knew cannabis by that name, so it was gladly ineffective.

Honestly I'm more inclined to believe that cannabis would cause cancer than cure it.  At least by smoking it, not eating it or vaporizing it.

I would love to find a study showing that cannabis can cure cancer.  If something like that came out I'm sure that marijuana could be completely re-legalized once and for all with little argument.

[libertylover]

I agree on all points.  Except I'd like to add that big pharma has the money to do the necessary research in other marijuana friendly countries.  It doesn't have to be done here.

Then you would have to ask yourself what is the profit margin for them if they did so?  Then compare that against the profitability of current accepted chemically patented cancer treatments.   Wouldn't it be more in their interest to make a chemical compound than proving the effectiveness of a natural source whose supply is further suppressed due to prohibition?  I still expect this sort of research to come from a country which benefits more from maintaining a healthy population if there is such a place.