This is an awesome argument for the legalization of weed

[kelpdiver 2]

cryptocoin

The US government already tested THC on cancer cells in the 1970's and found it to reduce the growth and move subjects into remission...

If you actually looked at the links I posted instead of grasping at straws to remain correct you might actually learn something.

when your argument is a rehash of 'evil US government conspiracy' there is a tendency to tune out. It can and has controlled medical research in the US in this regard, but if it had such efficacy, shouldn't there be extensive European use?

[cryptocoin 0]

Quote

when your argument is a rehash of 'evil US government conspiracy' there is a tendency to tune out. It can and has controlled medical research in the US in this regard, but if it had such efficacy, shouldn't there be extensive European use?

My intentions was to point out that it could be studied and has been using a credible source. There were no suggestions of conspiracy.

When we consider cannabis prohibition is worldwide and this is common knowledge we can assume you are trying to change the subject.

I will not fall for such tricks.

The fact remains that cannabis has proven through clinical studies and personal experiences to have many benefits for the sick and this includes children and infants.

If a girl that has advanced leukaemia and has not eaten for a month can show immediate improvements in energy and appetite after taking concentrated doses of THC oil then I am inclined the believe the story at the beginning of this thread is somewhat sensationalised.

I am not saying she was not wasted out of her mind, as I have also had the pleasure of this sensation . Suggesting her life was in danger is somehow uncalled for when there is no precedent set for anyone ever overdosing from cannabis in any form in all of history. There is also a (or a number of) clinical study(s) showing the human body actually has a mechanism to ensure this does not happen.

This time I will allow you the pleasure of doing the research...[whisper] google it [/whisper]

The cannabinoid receptor system in our bodies is more extensive than most will be aware of. It was actually discovered while doing clinical studies on cannabis.

[freethefly 6]

Quote

seems to be a pandantic pattern here....it will be impossible to ethically do such a study with THC until someone can actually identify how it can achieve the objective...iow, how do the THC molecules interact. You can't just wave your hands and say - it seems to work for for this friend of a friend I knew, so let's commit 100 people to a blind trial!

The fact that it has not yet happened leads me to believe it does not have any clear interaction, that instead we're seeing a coincidental factor in some of the numerous patients who are using pot to better endure the chemo. While getting funding in the US for any sort of research that might show pot to be used is virtually impossible, that's not true elsewhere.

You are wrong

http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/

Then there is the famous Donald Tashkin study where he set out to prove, once and for all, that smoking marijuana led to cancer. What he found amazed him.

http://www.webmd.com/lung-cancer/news/20060523/pot-smoking-not-linked-to-lung-cancer

I agree that more studies need to be conducted (to find out what else this amazing plant can do for us all.)

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[cryptocoin 0]

Quote

a notion that THC can force remission - very difficult to establish cause versus correlation, and impossible to conduct an ethical study. But bear in mind that 'a lot' of people pray to God and are also cured.

Quote

Hi Rick and associates about 6 months ago my mum was diagnosed with terminal cancer matisitc melanoma with 6 tumors on both her lungs. The doctors told us that chemo and radiation wouldnt do anything and said they had a new treatment that they had that had been succesful in stopping tumors from growing and maybe expanding her life for a couple more years. We started the new treatment and the side effects were horrible so we stopped. About a week later a friend of mine mentioned your documentry on youtube run from the cure. After watching this i decided what harm could come from trying hey if it dosent work she is going to die anyway. To cut a long story short mum has been ingesting the oil for about 3 months and she had scans 2 days ago and 5 of the 6 tumors are COMPLETLY gone and the last one is half the size it was. I cant express in words the gratitude i have for your information and saving my mums life. Its horrible to think of all the people and children in the world that are suffering and dying when a simple plant can fix all this. I am now determined to spread the word and maybe grow some of my own and make oil for people i know that need help. Thanks again and good luck in the future with everything...

[davjohns 1]

freethefly

Quote

seems to be a pandantic pattern here....it will be impossible to ethically do such a study with THC until someone can actually identify how it can achieve the objective...iow, how do the THC molecules interact. You can't just wave your hands and say - it seems to work for for this friend of a friend I knew, so let's commit 100 people to a blind trial!

The fact that it has not yet happened leads me to believe it does not have any clear interaction, that instead we're seeing a coincidental factor in some of the numerous patients who are using pot to better endure the chemo. While getting funding in the US for any sort of research that might show pot to be used is virtually impossible, that's not true elsewhere.

You are wrong

http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/

Then there is the famous Donald Tashkin study where he set out to prove, once and for all, that smoking marijuana led to cancer. What he found amazed him.

http://www.webmd.com/lung-cancer/news/20060523/pot-smoking-not-linked-to-lung-cancer

I agree that more studies need to be conducted (to find out what else this amazing plant can do for us all.)

Before taking up pipe smoking, I did some research. Turns out the only study that differentiated between pipe, cigar, and cigarette smokers found that pipe smokers had lower than average rates of cancer. The proposed reason was that it is a stress reducing hobby and pipe smokers do not ordinarily inhale the smoke.

So, it does not surprise me if another relaxing hobby (dope) might reduce chances of cancer.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[jakee 1,255]

Quote

Before taking up pipe smoking, I did some research. Turns out the only study that differentiated between pipe, cigar, and cigarette smokers found that pipe smokers had lower than average rates of cancer. The proposed reason was that it is a stress reducing hobby and pipe smokers do not ordinarily inhale the smoke.

Sorry to burst your bubble dude, but you're wrong.

Association Between Exclusive Pipe Smoking and Mortality From Cancer and Other Diseases

Results: Current pipe smoking, compared with never use of tobacco, was associated with an increased risk of death from cancers of the lung, oropharynx, esophagus, colorectum, pancreas, and larynx, and from coronary heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. These risks were generally smaller than those associated with cigarette smoking and similar to or larger than those associated with cigar smoking. Relative risks of lung cancer showed statistically significant increases with number of pipes smoked per day, years of smoking, and depth of inhalation and decreases with years since quitting. Conclusion: Results from this large prospective study suggest that pipe smoking confers a risk of tobacco-associated disease similar to cigar smoking.

Note that it includes cancers of the oropharynx, esophagus and larynx, so "I don't inhale" wouldn't exclude you from the risks.

(Have you posted about this before? I'm pretty sure I remember having had this conversation already.)

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[cryptocoin 0]

I think it is important to note that smoking cannabis is not a method suggested to cure ones ailments.

Ingesting refined oil, vaporizing and eating food prepared with cannabis is however.

[davjohns 1]

Thanks for sharing that link. I read the entire thing. I don't recall seeing it before.

I tried to find where they differentiated current exclusive use of a pipe between those who never smoked cigarettes and those who formerly smoked cigarettes. The study I read before did that and found that the increased cancer risk lay with former cigarette smokers. It also found that those were the ones who inhaled the pipe smoke. This study specifically asked how deeply subjects inhaled, but i couldn't find where they reported those results. I'm a bit put off by the ending where they clearly stated a bias and an intent to prove smokeing a pipe was bad. It makes me question their objectivity. So, I am not throwing out their research. I'm just saying I would be much more convinced if they 1) didn't start out with an agenda; 2) showed the results when only examining pipe smokers who did not inhale. They clearly had the data, but chose not to discuss it.

The study I read before did note an increased risk of mouth cancer due to having a stem in the mouth for prolonged periods. Not necessarily related to the tobacco itself. Considering I smoke a pipe every few months or so, I'm not going to get too wound up about it.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.