Cannabis Cures Cancer

stop quoting the huffington post ffs. it's just a blog and takes any media from any source ffs.

On December 02 2012 20:44 mnj wrote: stop quoting the huffington post ffs. it's just a blog and takes any media from any source ffs.

How about watching the video of the doctor telling the story and judge for yourself? Why are you so obsessed with the name of the site bringing you the info? Do you not believe you are capable of knowing truth when you see it? Why limit yourself so much?

No offense but this is fucking retarded mate.

A) The doctor is human
B) Humans are susceptible to coming up with bullshit conclusions

A single child says nothing. Absolutely nothing.

Furthermore: Saying "X cures cancer" is retarded from a medical stand-point in every single case because of the nature of cancer.
There will never be a cure for cancer.

Not even the craziest of marijuana enthusiasts dare say marijuana does more in treating cancer than give the patient the appetite they lost from the radiation treatment.

You are annoying with the constant weed related shit. And this is someone who loves mary jane. Not sure what you are trying to accomplish.

Once enough doctors agree that it cures cancer, then you guys will agree with me. This is one of those people y'all want to have convinced. I'll keep bringing you more as they wake up (Taco, you can look at my previous posts to find other instances than just that 1 kid, or just that 1 doctor)

lol

dude stop. No it doesn't.

since we're on the topic of weed curing cancer, is it a big tell that a girl has cancer if she wears a head bandana?

Cures cancers / gives you schizophrenia

I wonder if you realize that what you do here is pretty counterproductive to your cause.

On December 03 2012 02:37 Babs wrote: Cures cancers / gives you schizophrenia

does neither. helps sooth the pain of both illnesses though.

On December 03 2012 06:15 uiCk wrote: Show nested quote + On December 03 2012 02:37 Babs wrote: Cures cancers / gives you schizophrenia does neither. helps sooth the pain of both illnesses though.

heavily increases the probability of getting serious mental illness , if started before 18 and was frequently used

On December 03 2012 06:51 HiyAfOu wrote: Show nested quote + On December 03 2012 06:15 uiCk wrote:   On December 03 2012 02:37 Babs wrote: Cures cancers / gives you schizophrenia does neither. helps sooth the pain of both illnesses though. heavily increases the probability of getting serious mental illness , if started before 18 and was frequently used

depends. old studies tend to point towards weed being a causation of mental illness, while new research seems to make it more of a simple correlation, where people with mental illnesses tend to go towards weed and such; too "sooth" the pains. Which makes sense, more then just case studies that don't show real causation of weed/thc onto causing serious mental illness. Not to say drugs might accelerate the inevitable.

Weed is not addictive, and doubt a mentally healthy person would abuse it. People who do abuse, usually have some varying form of ADD, OCD, hypersensitivity, depressive and such. Like me. nothing serious, but i can understand why me and others tend to abuse it, while others don't. And usually the ones that don't, are much healthier mentally then myself and other fellow pot smokers. And i can case study and say that my mental health has been on par prior to when i started smoking. That being known, by descriptions of my behavior by family members of when i was younger.


unless you can point me to a study where the correlation is strong enough to be a causation; as in observable sever changes in the brain caused by THC.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18332661

On December 02 2012 21:36 k2o4 wrote: Once enough doctors agree that it cures cancer, then you guys will agree with me. This is one of those people y'all want to have convinced. I'll keep bringing you more as they wake up (Taco, you can look at my previous posts to find other instances than just that 1 kid, or just that 1 doctor)

Once there is data (or evidence as we call it sometimes) to support that hypothesis that contradicts
the absolutely motherfuckingloadedly overwhelming data that exists already, which is that people who smoke cannabis do die
of cancer just as often as every other human, I will concede to your point.

But as of right now you just look like a complete and utter nut job, I won't sugar coat this, you look like a nut job.

Someone else said it better than me so quoting:

For the naysayers too lazy to use Google: Yes, cannabis cures cancer. Yes, there is a lot of evidence supporting it: studies, lab experiments, and even a few really good clinical trials, all published in peer-reviewed journals. YES, this story is one (of many) anecdotal examples of "dope" saving someone's life. NO, it doesn't stand up by itself as proof of the cancer-fighting efficacy. Thank goodness science isn't swayed by all you "armchair-oncologists" posting on this thread. Here some of my favorite bits of evidence. Feel free to validate them, yourselves. A 2005 UCLA study by Dr Don Tashkin found that cannabis smokers had fewer respiratory cancers than cigarette smokers and shockingly, fewer cancers than people who smoke nothing at all. Many different studies show how CBD (cannabidiol), a chemical constituent of cannabis prevents the spread of cancer (anti-metastatic effects). Use google scholar to search for "Cannabidiol antimetastatic effects" to see a list of studies and clinical trials. Experiments by Guzmán's group in Spain have shown (most notably in their 2004 study) the antiangiogenic effects cannabinoids have. The chemical constituents of cannabis cause cancerous tumors to literally starve themselves by preventing the tumor from forming new blood vessels to support it. Cannabinoid stimulation in the 2008 Cianchi paper shows how stimulating the CB1 and CB2 cannabinoid receptors induces apoptosis through tumor necrosis. LOTS of these studies out there, only a Google search away, but some folks shamefully stick to baseless assumptions. Who's the "dope" now?

On December 03 2012 10:05 taco wrote: Show nested quote + On December 02 2012 21:36 k2o4 wrote: Once enough doctors agree that it cures cancer, then you guys will agree with me. This is one of those people y'all want to have convinced. I'll keep bringing you more as they wake up (Taco, you can look at my previous posts to find other instances than just that 1 kid, or just that 1 doctor) Once there is data (or evidence as we call it sometimes) to support that hypothesis that contradicts the absolutely motherfuckingloadedly overwhelming data that exists already, which is that people who smoke cannabis do die of cancer just as often as every other human, I will concede to your point. But as of right now you just look like a complete and utter nut job, I won't sugar coat this, you look like a nut job.

Actually they've been found to die slightly less. And smoking it isn't going to cure cancer. There are other methods of administration, usually some form of high concentrate oil, which work for destroying tumors, which is what I mean when I say cures cancer.

There's plenty of data showing just that. And there's more coming all the time. This post was just the latest data point in a coming swell of information as the stigma's fall apart. I look like a nutjob cause I'm on the front line of telling a truth which people have been tricked into dismissing out of hand. I'm ok with sounding crazy in that situation, kind of a badge of honor you could say.

On December 03 2012 08:05 uiCk wrote: Show nested quote + On December 03 2012 06:51 HiyAfOu wrote:   On December 03 2012 06:15 uiCk wrote:   On December 03 2012 02:37 Babs wrote: Cures cancers / gives you schizophrenia does neither. helps sooth the pain of both illnesses though. heavily increases the probability of getting serious mental illness , if started before 18 and was frequently used depends. old studies tend to point towards weed being a causation of mental illness, while new research seems to make it more of a simple correlation, where people with mental illnesses tend to go towards weed and such; too "sooth" the pains. Which makes sense, more then just case studies that don't show real causation of weed/thc onto causing serious mental illness. Not to say drugs might accelerate the inevitable. Weed is not addictive, and doubt a mentally healthy person would abuse it. People who do abuse, usually have some varying form of ADD, OCD, hypersensitivity, depressive and such. Like me. nothing serious, but i can understand why me and others tend to abuse it, while others don't. And usually the ones that don't, are much healthier mentally then myself and other fellow pot smokers. And i can case study and say that my mental health has been on par prior to when i started smoking. That being known, by descriptions of my behavior by family members of when i was younger. unless you can point me to a study where the correlation is strong enough to be a causation; as in observable sever changes in the brain caused by THC.

uiCk knows his stuff and hit all the main points on why the schizophrenia link is an exaggeration, which in my opinion is just the latest in a string of exaggerations from anti-cannabis advocates which have been used as a scare tactics, and always proven to be nothing more than inaccurate exaggerations when science is applied. This is one of the areas where what I was told to me by society, government, school, etc, about cannabis turned out to be completely opposite of the truth. Amazingly they keep using the same tactics over and over, just switching the details, what the specific "scary" thing will be, and people keep falling for it, cause in this country we're taught to obey authority, not do our own research.

On December 03 2012 10:11 k2o4 wrote: Show nested quote + On December 03 2012 10:05 taco wrote:   On December 02 2012 21:36 k2o4 wrote: Once enough doctors agree that it cures cancer, then you guys will agree with me. This is one of those people y'all want to have convinced. I'll keep bringing you more as they wake up (Taco, you can look at my previous posts to find other instances than just that 1 kid, or just that 1 doctor) Once there is data (or evidence as we call it sometimes) to support that hypothesis that contradicts the absolutely motherfuckingloadedly overwhelming data that exists already, which is that people who smoke cannabis do die of cancer just as often as every other human, I will concede to your point. But as of right now you just look like a complete and utter nut job, I won't sugar coat this, you look like a nut job. Actually they've been found to die slightly less. And smoking it isn't going to cure cancer. There are other methods of administration, usually some form of high concentrate oil, which work for destroying tumors, which is what I mean when I say cures cancer. There's plenty of data showing just that. And there's more coming all the time. This post was just the latest data point in a coming swell of information as the stigma's fall apart. I look like a nutjob cause I'm on the front line of telling a truth which people have been tricked into dismissing out of hand. I'm ok with sounding crazy in that situation, kind of a badge of honor you could say.

On December 03 2012 10:07 k2o4 wrote: A 2005 UCLA study by Dr Don Tashkin found that cannabis smokers had fewer respiratory cancers than cigarette smokers and shockingly, fewer cancers than people who smoke nothing at all.

And I am absolutely aware of this study. It demonstrated that long term marijuana smokers seem not to be
at increased risk of developing lung cancer because of it.

Which. is. not. fucking. curing. cancer.

On December 03 2012 10:07 k2o4 wrote: Cannabinoid stimulation in the 2008 Cianchi paper shows how stimulating the CB1 and CB2 cannabinoid receptors induces apoptosis through tumor necrosis.

I've been completely unable to find any 2008 study by any Cianci, Cianchi or Cianhi.

I did find this 2005 study with no similarly named authors
that found that CBD can inhibit the growth of tumors (not cancer) in vitro and references the results of two other studies that
state that CBD can inhibit the viability of various types of cancer cells in vitro which themselves state that more research needs to be done.
This was in 2005, 2003 and 2002 respectively.

None of these studies demonstrate any incident of an actual cancer shrinking, much less dying off.

I state again and will continue to state:
If a substance found in marijuana had the properties you claim we would see an absolutely enormous difference
in cancer statistics between non-users and marijuana users. This has not been demonstrated.

On December 03 2012 10:07 k2o4 wrote: LOTS of these studies out there, only a Google search away, but some folks shamefully stick to baseless assumptions.

LOTS of these studies that... don't support your hypothesis? LOTS of studies with data that directly contradicts it?

On December 03 2012 10:07 k2o4 wrote: Experiments by Guzmán's group in Spain have shown (most notably in their 2004 study) the antiangiogenic effects cannabinoids have. The chemical constituents of cannabis cause cancerous tumors to literally starve themselves by preventing the tumor from forming new blood vessels to support it.

This is the most hilariously misleading and irrelevant of them all, know why? Read why.

Both tumors were diagnosed by the Pathology Department of Tenerife University Hospital as glioblastoma multiforme and showed the hallmarks of this type of tumor (high vascularization, necrotic areas, abundant palisading and mitotic cells, and so on). The tumors were removed extensively by surgery, biopsies were taken, and the tip (∼5 cm) of a silastic infusion cathether (9.6 French; 3.2 mm diameter) was placed into the resection cavity. The infusion cathether was connected to a Nuport subclavicular s.c. reservoir. Each day 0.5–1.5 (median 1.0) mg of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (100 μg/μl in ethanol solution) were dissolved in 30 ml of physiological saline solution supplemented with 0.5% (w/v) human serum albumin, and the resulting solution was filtered and subsequently administered at a rate of 0.3 ml/min with a syringe pump connected to the s.c. reservoir. Patient 1 started the treatment 4 days after the surgery and received a total amount of 24.5 mg of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol for 19 days. The posttreatment biopsy was taken 19 days after the cessation of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol administration. Patient 2 started the treatment 4 days after the surgery and received a total amount of 13.5 mg of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol for 16 days. The posttreatment biopsy was taken 43 days after the cessation of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol administration. Samples were either transferred to DMEM containing 15% FCS and 1 mM glutamine (for tumor-cell isolation, see above; Fig. 2B ⇓ ) and frozen (for VEGF determination, Patients 1 and 2; and for VEGFR-2 Western blotting, Patient 1; Fig. 6, A and C ⇓ ) or fixed in formalin and embedded in paraffin (for VEGFR-2 confocal microscopy, Patients 1 and 2; Fig. 6B ⇓ ).

1

Did anyone else spot that part?

That part where they extensively removed the tumor? There's also this part:
They were doing the experiment in vitro and in vivo with mice.
Not always relevant to the real life application on humans as we know from history.