Cannabis Cures Cancer

[MightyMightyMezz]

Here mezz, take a look at this. The 5 year survival rate, for all cancers combined, in the US in 2007 was 68%. Now, granted some cancers are not treated with chemo so if you took those out of the result it would be lower than 68%. But it sure as heck isn't 3%.

 

http://www.google.co...QNp_XSSMCvaQtVQ

 

The question isn't the survival rate, it's the contribution of chemotherapy to the survival rate, estimated in a 2004 Australian study to be 2.1%. That means chemo is responsible for only 2.1% of the surviving cancer patients.

Edited February 28, 2013 by MightyMightyMezz

[MightyMightyMezz]

Last time you apologized and took it back. To be expected. You just want to insult and be hateful.

 

That's funny considering your first post in this thread. You should be banned for chronic personal attacks.

[Restorium2]

The question isn't the survival rate, it's the contribution of chemotherapy to the survival rate, estimated in a 2004 Australian study to be 2.1%. That means chemo is responsible for only 2.1% of the surviving cancer patients.

We can argue the percentages but we have to agree they have proven chemotherapy cures cancer, to some extent.

[CaveatLector]

The question isn't the survival rate, it's the contribution of chemotherapy to the survival rate, estimated in a 2004 Australian study to be 2.1%. That means chemo only helped 2.1% of the surviving cancer patients.

NO KIDDING! The chemo from the clinical trials only helped 2.1%. How do you not get this? The patients in this study were already at least 1 time losers with chemo so they were put into a clinical trial. Then the chemo given for the clinical trial only saved 2.1% to, and beyond, the 5 year mark. So the people for whom first line chemo treatment didn't work were given a 2nd chance at a new chemo to participate in a clinical trial. Of the 1 time losers 2.1% survived to 5 years.

 

Excuse me while I bang my head against the wall.

[MightyMightyMezz]

We can argue the percentages but we have to agree they have proven chemotherapy cures cancer, to some extent.

 

I don't agree. It might increase survival rate significantly in Hodgkins and testicular cancer, but not so much in most cancers.

[CaveatLector]

I don't agree. It might increase survival rate significantly in Hodgkins and testicular cancer, but not so much in most cancers.

You don't agree? ROFLMAO. You really should take this discussion to a conspiracy thread.

[MightyMightyMezz]

NO KIDDING! The chemo from the clinical trials only helped 2.1%. How do you not get this? The patients in this study were already at least 1 time losers with chemo so they were put into a clinical trial. Then the chemo given for the clinical trial only saved 2.1% to, and beyond, the 5 year mark. So the people for whom first line chemo treatment didn't work were given a 2nd chance at a new chemo to participate in a clinical trial. Of the 1 time losers 2.1% survived to 5 years.

 

Excuse me while I bang my head against the wall.

 

If that is true, how much does chemo contribute in "first-line" treatment to five-year survival?

[Restorium2]

That's exactly why I posted something that a rational mind could not argue with.

[MightyMightyMezz]

You don't agree? ROFLMAO. You really should take this discussion to a conspiracy thread.

 

I wouldn't say a 2 percent overall contribution is anywhere close to a cure. You really would?

[Restorium2]

I wouldn't say a 2 percent overall contribution is anywhere close to a cure. You really would?

To some extent. Take a nap.

[MightyMightyMezz]

To some extent. Take a nap.

 

You can think that that statement applies to a 2 percent overall contribution. I would just call it a 2 percent overall contribution with a lot of pain attached. Eat s**t.

[Restorium2]

You can think that that statement applies to a 2 percent overall contribution. I would just call it a 2 percent overall contribution with a lot of pain attached. Eat s**t.

I've taken chemo. Have you?

[CaveatLector]

I wouldn't say a 2 percent overall contribution is anywhere close to a cure. You really would?

Again, it isn't a 2% contribution. I suggest you reread the exchange here because I'm not going to continue banging my head against the wall. I could say the same things 20 times and you still won't get it. This isn't me spinning anything. This isn't me making things up. I read the same journal article that you did and I have no clue how you walked away with the conclusion you did unless you just don't understand what you are reading. Which, apparently you don't. If you did then you would have understood from the beginning what a clinical trial is and how it impacts the research done for the article.

 

I think most people can understand things here and for the few (or you) who don't I no longer see it as my job to spoon feed. At first I thought you were being obtuse but it has become apparent that you don't understand basic things in that article. I'm not going to teach you.

[MightyMightyMezz]

I've taken chemo. Have you?

 

No pain then?

[MightyMightyMezz]

Again, it isn't a 2% contribution. I suggest you reread the exchange here because I'm not going to continue banging my head against the wall. I could say the same things 20 times and you still won't get it. This isn't me spinning anything. This isn't me making things up. I read the same journal article that you did and I have no clue how you walked away with the conclusion you did unless you just don't understand what you are reading. Which, apparently you don't. If you did then you would have understood from the beginning what a clinical trial is and how it impacts the research done for the article.

 

I think most people can understand things here and for the few (or you) who don't I no longer see it as my job to spoon feed. At first I thought you were being obtuse but it has become apparent that you don't understand basic things in that article. I'm not going to teach you.

 

Answer my question then, XXXXXXX What's the overall contribution to survival of first line treatment?

Edited March 1, 2013 by mibrains
removed personal attack

[Restorium2]

No pain then?

Is that what we are talking about, chemo pain?

[MightyMightyMezz]

Apparently, the answer to this question is yes.

 

What do you take out of it, ZU?

[MightyMightyMezz]

Is that what we are talking about, chemo pain?

 

I don't know. What is the relevance of you having had it?

[CaveatLector]

Answer my question then, fool. What's the overall contribution to survival of first line treatment?

I don't need to answer your question. All I need to do is point out that the theory you were pushing is complete bunk.

 

Parenthetically, you are hardly in a position to be calling anyone a fool here.

 

As for your question, can you anser it? No. Does your referenced article answer it? No. Is there really anyway for anyone to answer it? Not without a control group of patients that are not given the standard of care treatment. What we can answer is how many people make the 5 year mark now as opposed to pre 1950 before the development of the cytotoxic drugs. Furthermore we can point to CT scans that show tumor shrinkage and elimination during chemo. That doesn't answer the question but then neither does your study. Chemo drugs are approved by the FDA once they can prove effectiveness. That means they eliminated or reduced a cancer in a clinical trial and patients were better off than their counterparts who did not take part in the clinical trial. So that is a partial answer to you as well. But there is absolute answer. So what?

[Restorium2]

I don't know. What is the relevance of you having had it?

None in this thread. You brought up 'the pain' like you knew it personally. I felt more like I had the flu than pain. Sickly, wanting to vomit. There's a lot of different kinds of drugs used for chemo.

[MightyMightyMezz]

I take out of it that the contribution of chemotherapy to 5-year survival rate is higher than 2.1%.

 

Can you explain why?

[MightyMightyMezz]

None in this thread. You brought up 'the pain' like you knew it personally. I felt more like I had the flu than pain. Sickly, wanting to vomit. There's a lot of different kinds of drugs used for chemo.

 

I knew someone who had chemotherapy and it sure wasn't pleasant.

[Restorium2]

I knew someone who had chemotherapy and it sure wasn't pleasant.

There are thousands of different ways to have 'chemo'. Not just one. It's changing every day too. The treatments are getting better. I had old school chemo.

[MightyMightyMezz]

It seems clear from that report that survival rates have gone up radically since the 70s due to advances in detection and treatment, and declines in smoking. You are right that it is not directly correlating this improvement to chemotherapy.

 

Thank you, ZU.

[Restorium2]

Chemo helps people survive cancer every day. Cannabis helps people survive chemo every day.