Dad cures son's brain cancer illegally...

[Avatard]

Not as sure as you about it being just an appetite stimulant.

It must be great to know everything with such confidence. I wish I could say this. Right now, it (and OTC pain pills) are the only things keeping me walking...but then you type stupid things into a browser, and then I think differently.

No wait, I don't. I think you're an asshole.

[tallywacker]

Originally Posted by Avatard

Not as sure as you about it being just an appetite stimulant.

It must be great to know everything with such confidence. I wish I could say this. Right now, it (and OTC pain pills) are the only things keeping me walking...but then you type stupid things into a browser, and then I think differently.

No wait, I don't. I think you're an asshole.

This fucking guy

[goof2]

Originally Posted by tallywacker

This fucking thread. Weed curing cancer is a joke. It was an appetite stimulant and that's all.

Fucking curing cancer LOL

You never know, maybe it does. I say run large studies and see what happens. Of course the unacknowledged problem still remains. You need to find a large group of cancer stricken dumbasses stupid enough to risk their lives by forgoing chemo and radiation in favor of getting treated by weed to see how they compare. You also need a large group of cancer stricken dumbasses stupid enough to risk their lives by agreeing to having their cancer treated by either weed or a placebo to see how weed compares to nothing.

Maybe some on here would take their giant cancer ridden balls and risk dying in the name of scientific discovery, but if I ever get cancer I'm going with the chemo/radiation option and scientific discovery can go screw.

[Particle Man]

Originally Posted by Avatard

but then you type stupid things into a browser, and then I think differently.

No wait, I don't. I think you're an asshole.

[tommymac]

Originally Posted by goof2

You never know, maybe it does. I say run large studies and see what happens. Of course the unacknowledged problem still remains. You need to find a large group of cancer stricken dumbasses stupid enough to risk their lives by forgoing chemo and radiation in favor of getting treated by weed to see how they compare. You also need a large group of cancer stricken dumbasses stupid enough to risk their lives by agreeing to having their cancer treated by either weed or a placebo to see how weed compares to nothing.

Maybe some on here would take their giant cancer ridden balls and risk dying in the name of scientific discovery, but if I ever get cancer I'm going with the chemo/radiation option and scientific discovery can go screw.

When people are told theyre going to die in a few weeks or months they will sometimes try/do anything to find a cure. Sometimes these people help find new discoveries, other times they fall prey to scammers and their snake oil.

Thge problem here is the big drug companies, they dont want to loose their profits of selling glorified rat poison ( thats about all chemo is) to something that grows in the ground.

[Kaneman]

Originally Posted by tallywacker

This fucking thread. Weed curing cancer is a joke. It was an appetite stimulant and that's all.

Fucking curing cancer LOL

Google is your friend, fren.

Who should I trust...the American Medical Association....or tallywacker?

[Kaneman]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0417193338.htm

ScienceDaily: Your source for the latest research news and science breakthroughs -- updated daily

Marijuana Cuts Lung Cancer Tumor Growth In Half, Study Shows

ScienceDaily (Apr. 17, 2007) — The active ingredient in marijuana cuts tumor growth in common lung cancer in half and significantly reduces the ability of the cancer to spread, say researchers at Harvard University who tested the chemical in both lab and mouse studies.

They say this is the first set of experiments to show that the compound, Delta-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), inhibits EGF-induced growth and migration in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) expressing non-small cell lung cancer cell lines. Lung cancers that over-express EGFR are usually highly aggressive and resistant to chemotherapy.

THC that targets cannabinoid receptors CB1 and CB2 is similar in function to endocannabinoids, which are cannabinoids that are naturally produced in the body and activate these receptors. The researchers suggest that THC or other designer agents that activate these receptors might be used in a targeted fashion to treat lung cancer.

"The beauty of this study is that we are showing that a substance of abuse, if used prudently, may offer a new road to therapy against lung cancer," said Anju Preet, Ph.D., a researcher in the Division of Experimental Medicine.

Acting through cannabinoid receptors CB1 and CB2, endocannabinoids (as well as THC) are thought to play a role in variety of biological functions, including pain and anxiety control, and inflammation. Although a medical derivative of THC, known as Marinol, has been approved for use as an appetite stimulant for cancer patients, and a small number of U.S. states allow use of medical marijuana to treat the same side effect, few studies have shown that THC might have anti-tumor activity, Preet says. The only clinical trial testing THC as a treatment against cancer growth was a recently completed British pilot study in human glioblastoma.

In the present study, the researchers first demonstrated that two different lung cancer cell lines as well as patient lung tumor samples express CB1 and CB2, and that non-toxic doses of THC inhibited growth and spread in the cell lines. "When the cells are pretreated with THC, they have less EGFR stimulated invasion as measured by various in-vitro assays," Preet said.

Then, for three weeks, researchers injected standard doses of THC into mice that had been implanted with human lung cancer cells, and found that tumors were reduced in size and weight by about 50 percent in treated animals compared to a control group. There was also about a 60 percent reduction in cancer lesions on the lungs in these mice as well as a significant reduction in protein markers associated with cancer progression, Preet says.

Although the researchers do not know why THC inhibits tumor growth, they say the substance could be activating molecules that arrest the cell cycle. They speculate that THC may also interfere with angiogenesis and vascularization, which promotes cancer growth.

Preet says much work is needed to clarify the pathway by which THC functions, and cautions that some animal studies have shown that THC can stimulate some cancers. "THC offers some promise, but we have a long way to go before we know what its potential is," she said.

[Kaneman]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,542941,00.html

FOXNews.com
Smoking Marijuana Regularly May Reduce Risk of Some Neck, Head Cancers

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

You've heard about using marijuana and drugs derived from it to keep some of the side effects of toxic cancer chemotherapy in check. But what if smoking marijuana for 10 to 20 years could actually protect against certain tumors?

In a study, researchers have found that long-term pot smokers were roughly 62 percent less likely to develop head and neck cancers than people who did not smoke pot.

The new study featured 434 patients with head and neck cancers, which include tumors in the mouth, tongue, nose, sinuses, throat and lymph nodes in the neck, and 547 individuals without these cancers seen in the Greater Boston area from December 1999 to December 2003.

After factoring out the impact of smoking, drinking, and other factors that might influence the results, smoking marijuana from once every two weeks to three times every two weeks, on average, was associated with about half the risk of head and neck cancer, compared with less frequent use.

Those who took up pot smoking at an older age appeared to have less risk of these cancers than those who started it at a younger age.

Compared to people who never smoked pot, those who began smoking marijuana between the ages of 15 and 19 years were 47 percent less likely to develop head and neck cancer, while users who began at age 20 or older had a 61 percent reduced risk, Kelsey and colleagues found.

It's unclear why marijuana would prevent cancer, if in fact the study is borne out by others, but the authors note that chemicals in pot called cannabinoids have been shown to have potential antitumor effects. Other studies have linked marijuana use to a reduced risk of some cancers, such as cancer of the prostate, and now head and neck cancer.

It's also been suggested that smoking pot may help stave off Alzheimer's disease and help combat weight loss associated with AIDS, and nausea and vomiting associated with chemotherapy in cancer patients.

Overall, however, research on the effects of marijuana on human health is mixed. Some studies have suggested the drug can increase a person's risk of heart attack or stroke and cause some cancers such as lung cancer.

In the journal Cancer Prevention Research, the researchers emphasize that further research from larger studies is needed to verify this link. Moreover, even if marijuana use were found to protect against these cancers, the risks of use may still outweigh this benefit, they say.

"Marijuana is an entry-level drug and can be associated with later use of more serious addictive drugs, as well as other risk behaviors," warn Dr. Karl T. Kelsey, from Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, and colleagues.

Any policy regarding marijuana use should take this into consideration "and should not be made based on one study's results," they note.

© Associated Press. All rights reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Copyright 2011 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.
All market data delayed 20 minutes.

[Kaneman]

BTW, this is not ground breaking research that we didn't know about. We've always known, but the information is easily suppressed so you can go out and spend thousands of dollars on "professionally" manufactured drugs to cure what ails you.

The term medical marijuana took on dramatic new meaning in February, 2000 when researchers in Madrid announced they had destroyed incurable brain tumors in rats by injecting them with THC, the active ingredient in cannabis.

The Madrid study marks only the second time that THC has been administered to tumor-bearing animals; the first was a Virginia investigation 26 years ago. In both studies, the THC shrank or destroyed tumors in a majority of the test subjects.

Most Americans don't know anything about the Madrid discovery. Virtually no major U.S. newspapers carried the story, which ran only once on the AP and UPI news wires, on Feb. 29, 2000.

The ominous part is that this isn't the first time scientists have discovered that THC shrinks tumors. In 1974 researchers at the Medical College of Virginia, who had been funded by the National Institute of Health to find evidence that marijuana damages the immune system, found instead that THC slowed the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice - lung and breast cancer, and a virus-induced leukemia.

The DEA quickly shut down the Virginia study and all further cannabis/tumor research, according to Jack Herer, who reports on the events in his book, "The Emperor Wears No Clothes." In 1976 President Gerald Ford put an end to all public cannabis research and granted exclusive research rights to major pharmaceutical companies, who set out - unsuccessfully - to develop synthetic forms of THC that would deliver all the medical benefits without the "high."

The Madrid researchers reported in the March issue of "Nature Medicine" that they injected the brains of 45 rats with cancer cells, producing tumors whose presence they confirmed through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). On the 12th day they injected 15 of the rats with THC and 15 with Win-55,212-2 a synthetic compound similar to THC. "All the rats left untreated uniformly died 12-18 days after glioma (brain cancer) cell inoculation ... Cannabinoid (THC)-treated rats survived significantly longer than control rats. THC administration was ineffective in three rats, which died by days 16-18. Nine of the THC-treated rats surpassed the time of death of untreated rats, and survived up to 19-35 days. Moreover, the tumor was completely eradicated in three of the treated rats." The rats treated with Win-55,212-2 showed similar results.

The Spanish researchers, led by Dr. Manuel Guzman of Complutense University, also irrigated healthy rats' brains with large doses of THC for seven days, to test for harmful biochemical or neurological effects. They found none.

"Careful MRI analysis of all those tumor-free rats showed no sign of damage related to necrosis, edema, infection or trauma ... We also examined other potential side effects of cannabinoid administration. In both tumor-free and tumor-bearing rats, cannabinoid administration induced no substantial change in behavioral parameters such as motor coordination or physical activity. Food and water intake as well as body weight gain were unaffected during and after cannabinoid delivery. Likewise, the general hematological profiles of cannabinoid-treated rats were normal. Thus, neither biochemical parameters nor markers of tissue damage changed substantially during the 7-day delivery period or for at least 2 months after cannabinoid treatment ended."

Guzman's investigation is the only time since the 1974 Virginia study that THC has been administered to live tumor-bearing animals. (The Spanish researchers cite a 1998 study in which cannabinoids inhibited breast cancer cell proliferation, but that was a "petri dish" experiment that didn't involve live subjects.)

In an email interview for this story, the Madrid researcher said he had heard of the Virginia study, but had never been able to locate literature on it. Hence, the Nature Medicine article characterizes the new study as the first on tumor-laden animals and doesn't cite the 1974 Virginia investigation.

"I am aware of the existence of that research. In fact I have attempted many times to obtain the journal article on the original investigation by these people, but it has proven impossible." Guzman said.

In 1983 the Reagan/Bush Administration tried to persuade American universities and researchers to destroy all 1966-76 cannabis research work, including compendiums in libraries, reports Jack Herer, who states, "We know that large amounts of information have since disappeared."

Guzman provided the title of the work - "Antineoplastic activity of cannabinoids," an article in a 1975 Journal of the National Cancer Institute - and this writer obtained a copy at the University of California medical school library in Davis and faxed it to Madrid.

The summary of the Virginia study begins, "Lewis lung adenocarcinoma growth was retarded by the oral administration of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabinol (CBN)" - two types of cannabinoids, a family of active components in marijuana. "Mice treated for 20 consecutive days with THC and CBN had reduced primary tumor size."

The 1975 journal article doesn't mention breast cancer tumors, which featured in the only newspaper story ever to appear about the 1974 study - in the Local section of the Washington Post on August 18, 1974. Under the headline, "Cancer Curb Is Studied," it read in part:

"The active chemical agent in marijuana curbs the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice and may also suppress the immunity reaction that causes rejection of organ transplants, a Medical College of Virginia team has discovered." The researchers "found that THC slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers and a virus-induced leukemia in laboratory mice, and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent."

Guzman, writing from Madrid, was eloquent in his response after this writer faxed him the clipping from the Washington Post of a quarter century ago. In translation, he wrote:

"It is extremely interesting to me, the hope that the project seemed to awaken at that moment, and the sad evolution of events during the years following the discovery, until now we once again Îdraw back the veilâ over the anti-tumoral power of THC, twenty-five years later. Unfortunately, the world bumps along between such moments of hope and long periods of intellectual castration."

News coverage of the Madrid discovery has been virtually nonexistent in this country. The news broke quietly on Feb. 29, 2000 with a story that ran once on the UPI wire about the Nature Medicine article. This writer stumbled on it through a link that appeared briefly on the Drudge Report web page. The New York Times, Washington Post and Los Angeles Times all ignored the story, even though its newsworthiness is indisputable: a benign substance occurring in nature destroys deadly brain tumors.

Raymond Cushing is a journalist, musician and filmmaker. This article was named by Project Censored as a "Top Censored Story of 2000."

[Avatard]

Listen closely, and you can hear the sound of Tallywacker choking on his words.

Ignorance itself isn't so bad...it's when it's coupled with arrogance...