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.

I dont think anyone is trying to say that SMOKING cannabis helps with cancer. even if it does in some way, smoking is inherently bad for your lungs and can lead to tumors, cancer bla bla.

The point is that cannabis can be a useful tool in medicine. Not THE tool, but the more tools in your kit the better, right?

The widespread use is of SMOKED marijuana. Like I said, I don't think smoked cures cancer (though it may have a protective effect). That doesn't mean that cannabis doesn't cure cancer, just means that a method of administration is not suitable to do so. Other methods appear to work, mostly high potency oils when trying it on humans.

Here's some more studies for you to have fun with from an article titled Top 10 Cannabis Studies the Government Wished it Had Never Funded:

5) OOPS, MARIJUANA MAY PREVENT CANCER (PART I): Federal researchers implanted several types of cancer, including leukemia and lung cancers, in mice, then treated them with cannabinoids (unique, active components found in marijuana). THC and other cannabinoids shrank tumors and increased the mice’s lifespans. Munson, AE et al. Antineoplastic Activity of Cannabinoids. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Sept. 1975. p. 597-602. 4) OOPS, MARIJUANA MAY PREVENT CANCER, (PART II): In a 1994 study the government tried to suppress, federal researchers gave mice and rats massive doses of THC, looking for cancers or other signs of toxicity. The rodents given THC lived longer and had fewer cancers, “in a dose-dependent manner” (i.e. the more THC they got, the fewer tumors). NTP Technical Report On The Toxicology And Carcinogenesis Studies Of 1-Trans- Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol, CAS No. 1972-08-3, In F344/N Rats And B6C3F Mice, Gavage Studies. See also, “Medical Marijuana: Unpublished Federal Study Found THC-Treated Rats Lived Longer, Had Less Cancer,” AIDS Treatment News no. 263, Jan. 17, 1997. 3) OOPS, MARIJUANA MAY PREVENT CANCER (PART III): Researchers at the Kaiser-Permanente HMO, funded by NIDA, followed 65,000 patients for nearly a decade, comparing cancer rates among non-smokers, tobacco smokers, and marijuana smokers. Tobacco smokers had massively higher rates of lung cancer and other cancers. Marijuana smokers who didn’t also use tobacco had no increase in risk of tobacco-related cancers or of cancer risk overall. In fact their rates of lung and most other cancers were slightly lower than non-smokers, though the difference did not reach statistical significance. Sidney, S. et al. Marijuana Use and Cancer Incidence (California, United States). Cancer Causes and Control. Vol. 8. Sept. 1997, p. 722-728. 2) OOPS, MARIJUANA MAY PREVENT CANCER (PART IV): Donald Tashkin, a UCLA researcher whose work is funded by NIDA, did a case-control study comparing 1,200 patients with lung, head and neck cancers to a matched group with no cancer. Even the heaviest marijuana smokers had no increased risk of cancer, and had somewhat lower cancer risk than non-smokers (tobacco smokers had a 20-fold increased lung cancer risk). Tashkin D. Marijuana Use and Lung Cancer: Results of a Case-Control Study. American Thoracic Society International Conference. May 23, 2006.

dude you are the .0001% of people who's out to convince the world that the sky is actually green and our eyes just can't process it correctly.

And for the fun of it:

http://scholar.qsensei.com/content/y05d9

http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v95/n2/abs/6603236a.html

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18025276

http://patients4medicalmarijuana.word...h-cannabis-oil-explains-how-it-works/

The science in this area has been held back, but pioneers are pushing forward as the social landscape is changing. I know I'm ahead of the wave here, but I'm certain that as the science catches up I'll no longer look crazy to y'all

pretty sure if cannabis was a 100% sure fire cure for cancer then you wouldn't be having thousands of scientists and researchers still looking for a cure.

More links for ya:

http://collapsereport.com/2012/10/10/...il-cures-cancer-without-side-effects/

http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2007/12/25/jnci.djm268.short

Cheddar we're in the early phase of science waking up. It's not as simple as "cure found, cure accepted". Should be, sadly it's not in this current insane system that we have (and people keep fighting to keep for some reason). There's a lot of politics in the mix. But the scientific community IS waking up, and I'll keep posting the details as more stuff comes out.

On December 02 2012 21:30 YouGoTGoT wrote: 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.

This. Times a million.

I had a medical card towards the end of my stay in California. Simply because it was just so much easier than dealing with retarded pot dealers who didn't know what time of day it was ever.

Correct or not, you remind me of the retards who I saw at the 'doctor's office' who looked like they had just crept out of a trash can babbling about how their 'medicine' was helping them with everything from alzheimer's to a broken nail.

In no world will weed be legalized because of claims it cures cancer. Just stop.

talking to k2o4 and trying to convince him to change his views about weed is like convincing neilly that he's a degenerate. why try?

what. again? comon dood..just smoke that sweet ganja and just accept it for what it is...a damn nice drug ;D

What I don't like about weed is that it fucks up memory...I like it a lot nevertheless.
btw. K2O4, you are better off writing about freedom and why everyone should have right to do whatever the fuck they want in their life and with their life (with respect to the human rights obv), taking drugs included.

As of now, more and more socialism is creeping into world and that's the REAL cause of weed being illegal. I don't care if it cures cancer or not. Most ppl don't care. Ppl are scared of it because of the gvnmt socialistic propaganda. They wrongly think that gvmt cares about them and is trying to help them. They don't realize that they give up on their freedom for very little help in return. Ppl massively overpay for gvnmts services every day. Everything what's privately done is done more efficently and at lower cost. When you're forced to pay, company doesn't care about being efficient and fair. That's gvnmt. They are most efficient at stealing from ppl in taxes. That's what they care about the most.

Most LP.net users don't mind weed being legal anyway. You're not helping the cause posting in here.

On December 03 2012 13:55 iakim322 wrote: I had a medical card towards the end of my stay in California. Simply because it was just so much easier than dealing with retarded pot dealers who didn't know what time of day it was ever. Correct or not, you remind me of the retards who I saw at the 'doctor's office' who looked like they had just crept out of a trash can babbling about how their 'medicine' was helping them with everything from alzheimer's to a broken nail. In no world will weed be legalized because of claims it cures cancer. Just stop.

Wait so your shitting on people who might of not had any medical problem., but didn't you do the same to get a card minus maybe the trash comment? seeing how your main reason was "dealer time bothered you". lol?

I'm not posting about this in an effort to legalize weed. I'm posting about this because there are people dying of cancer right now, and there's a medicine which they can use to safely treat themselves. Just cause the mainstream is so corrupted that this info can't get out, doesn't mean I'm going to sit back and say nothing.

Bottom line that any objective scientist will come to after looking at all the current hard data - cannabis is a very promising treatment for cancer and should be pursued with massive amounts of research. Someone like me, who isn't afraid of looking crazy, can look at all the data and say "it's almost certain that cannabis cures cancer, and while it's important to do the studies to make sure there isn't another variable to explain the results we've seen, I think they're just eliminating the very unlikely and they can do that work while I move forward and try and take some action."

So as (hopefully) a favor for all the people who seem to really be bugged by my blog titles, I've decided to change the recurring title and will retire the "Cannabis Cures Cancer" title until the mainstream finally reports the same. Till then the new title will be "Cannabis Effects on Cancer" and I'll continue doing what I've always done, blogging about every new study that comes out, be it in a lab, a case study, or anecdotal, etc. I've no doubt that there's a sea change coming in regards to the mainstream view about the affect cannabis has on cancer, and I'm going to keep documenting it as it goes down.

On December 03 2012 19:17 k2o4 wrote: I'm posting about this because there are people dying of cancer right now, and there's a medicine which they can use to safely treat themselves.

Rofl.

On December 03 2012 18:14 uiCk wrote: Show nested quote + On December 03 2012 13:55 iakim322 wrote: I had a medical card towards the end of my stay in California. Simply because it was just so much easier than dealing with retarded pot dealers who didn't know what time of day it was ever. Correct or not, you remind me of the retards who I saw at the 'doctor's office' who looked like they had just crept out of a trash can babbling about how their 'medicine' was helping them with everything from alzheimer's to a broken nail. In no world will weed be legalized because of claims it cures cancer. Just stop. Wait so your shitting on people who might of not had any medical problem., but didn't you do the same to get a card minus maybe the trash comment? seeing how your main reason was "dealer time bothered you". lol?

I don't think you actually have much in the department of reading comprehension. So I just deleted the couple sentences I wrote in response to your stupid reply. And this is it. See ya.