Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
greaterclare

Rso And Cancer Debate Forum

Recommended Posts

So it isn't a cure. 

 

By the standards you seem to be applying, one single failure is proof that something is not a "cure." I think. Just trying to understand what you mean by that statement.

 

If the exact same standards are applied to any chemotherapy, not one single one of them would be a cure also. Correct?

 

I think your statement is designed to undermine the impact that cannabis extracts have on cancer.

Edited by peanutbutter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the standards you seem to be applying, one single failure is proof that something is not a "cure." I think. Just trying to understand what you mean by that statement.

 

If the exact same standards are applied to any chemotherapy, not one single one of them would be a cure also. Correct?

 

I think your statement is designed to undermine the impact that cannabis extracts have on cancer.

let me say something before Bob reply's, I dont think it is the cure all for all, Im possitive it makes life a lil more bearable for cancer pts reciving chemo and radiation, it helps them eat for the most part which helps keep their immune system going and protecting them, (just a common sense thought) Im possitive it helps me with asthma and cpd, either way i use it, but the best way it helps me is if I vape it, but it most def helps in pipe and joint form also, I have the medical records to prove it!

 

In fact I went to my dr. yesterday lol, Ive gained a few lbs over the winter, enought to where im gonna have to starve my self for a month or two, she knows i use mm, she cant renew me or write a rec, she works for st. marys up here, they dont allow thier dr.s to do mm recs, but she did say to me, well your mm use has made you obese bawahahahahahaha, I had to laugh my butt off! Im far from obese but I do need to lose over 20 lbs this spring and summer, Just so I can be comfortable in my own skin.

 

Plus I dont think Dr. Bob would be going around to people who cant get to him and renewing and rec'ing pt's, I dont think he would do anything intentionaly to hurt our law or cause!  But that is just my opinion, me and Bob have had our differences,, water under the bridge, p.b you of all people should know better than that, he travles around making sure mm is available to those who qualify, and you do your best to make sure people get your oil (which ive tried and will continue to) ive not found anyone I can help yet with it, but im not gonna give up, because I know that all meds dont help all people!

 

Peace

Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More than two-thirds of cancer patients who were prescribed medical marijuana to combat pain are reportedly satisfied with the treatment, according to a comprehensive study conducted for the first time in Israel.


The study - conducted recently at Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, in conjunction with the Israel Cancer Association - involved 264 cancer patients who were treated with medical marijuana for a full year.


Some 61 percent of the respondents reported a significant improvement in their quality of life as a result of the medical marijuana, while 56 percent noted an improvement in their ability to manage pain. In general, 67 percent were in favor of the treatment, while 65 percent said they would recommend it to other patients.


The findings were presented earlier this month at an Israeli Oncologists Union conference in Eilat. The study was led by Dr. Ido Wolf, the director of oncology at the Sheba Cancer Center, with the assistance of researchers Yasmin Leshem, Damien Urbach, Adato Berliz, Tamar Ben Ephraim and Meital Gerty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/cannabis/healthprofessional/page4

 

 

Antitumor Effects

One study in mice and rats suggested that cannabinoids may have a protective effect against the development of certain types of tumors.[3] During this 2-year study, groups of mice and rats were given various doses of THC by gavage. A dose-related decrease in the incidence of hepatic adenoma tumors and hepatocellular carcinoma was observed in the mice. Decreased incidences of benign tumors(polyps and adenomas) in other organs (mammary glanduterus, pituitary, testis, and pancreas) were also noted in the rats. In another study, delta-9-THC, delta-8-THC, and cannabinol were found to inhibit the growth of Lewis lung adenocarcinoma cells in vitro and in vivo .[4] In addition, other tumors have been shown to be sensitive to cannabinoid-induced growth inhibition.[5-8]

Cannabinoids may cause antitumor effects by various mechanisms, including induction of cell death, inhibition of cell growth, and inhibition of tumor angiogenesis invasion and metastasis.[9-12] One review summarizes the molecular mechanisms of action of cannabinoids as antitumor agents.[13] Cannabinoids appear to kill tumor cells but do not affect their nontransformed counterparts and may even protect them from cell death. These compounds have been shown to induce apoptosis in gliomacells in culture and induce regression of glioma tumors in mice and rats. Cannabinoids protect normal glial cells of astroglial and oligodendroglial lineages from apoptosis mediated by the CB1 receptor.[14]

The effects of delta-9-THC and a synthetic agonist of the CB2 receptor were investigated in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).[15] Both agents reduced the viability of hepatocellular carcinoma cellsin vitro and demonstrated antitumor effects in hepatocellular carcinoma subcutaneous xenografts in nude mice. The investigations documented that the anti-HCC effects are mediated by way of the CB2 receptor. Similar to findings in glioma cells, the cannabinoids were shown to trigger cell death through stimulation of an endoplasmic reticulum stress pathway that activates autophagy and promotes apoptosis. Other investigations have confirmed that CB1 and CB2 receptors may be potential targets innon-small cell lung carcinoma [16] and breast cancer.[17]

An in vitro study of the effect of CBD on programmed cell death in breast cancer cell lines found that CBD induced programmed cell death, independent of the CB1, CB2, or vanilloid receptors. CBD inhibited the survival of both estrogen receptor–positive and estrogen receptor–negative breast cancercell lines, inducing apoptosis in a concentration-dependent manner while having little effect on nontumorigenic, mammary cells.[18]

CBD has also been demonstrated to exert a chemopreventive effect in a mouse model of colon cancer.[19] In the experimental system, azoxymethane increased premalignant and malignant lesions in the mouse colon. Animals treated with azoxymethane and CBD concurrently were protected from developing premalignant and malignant lesions. In in vitro experiments involving colorectal cancer cell lines, the investigators found that CBD protected DNA from oxidative damage, increased endocannabinoid levels, and reduced cell proliferation.

Another investigation into the antitumor effects of CBD examined the role of intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1).[12] ICAM-1 expression has been reported to be negatively correlated with cancermetastasis. In lung cancer cell lines, CBD upregulated ICAM-1, leading to decreased cancer cell invasiveness.

In an in vivo model using severe combined immunodeficient mice, subcutaneous tumors were generated by inoculating the animals with cells from human non-small cell lung carcinoma cell lines.[20] Tumor growth was inhibited by 60% in THC-treated mice compared with vehicle-treated control mice. Tumor specimens revealed that THC had antiangiogenic and antiproliferative effects. However, research with immunocompetent murine tumor models has demonstrated immunosuppression and enhanced tumor growth in mice treated with THC.[21,22]

In addition, both plant-derived and endogenous cannabinoids have been studied for anti-inflammatoryeffects. A mouse study demonstrated that endogenous cannabinoid system signaling is likely to provide intrinsic protection against colonic inflammation.[23] As a result, a hypothesis that phytocannabinoids and endocannabinoids may be useful in the risk reduction and treatment of colorectal cancer has been developed.[24-27]

Edited by cristinew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/cannabis/healthprofessional/page4

 

 

Antitumor Effects

One study in mice and rats suggested that cannabinoids may have a protective effect against the development of certain types of tumors.[3] During this 2-year study, groups of mice and rats were given various doses of THC by gavage. A dose-related decrease in the incidence of hepatic adenoma tumors and hepatocellular carcinoma was observed in the mice. Decreased incidences of benign tumors(polyps and adenomas) in other organs (mammary glanduterus, pituitary, testis, and pancreas) were also noted in the rats. In another study, delta-9-THC, delta-8-THC, and cannabinol were found to inhibit the growth of Lewis lung adenocarcinoma cells in vitro and in vivo .[4] In addition, other tumors have been shown to be sensitive to cannabinoid-induced growth inhibition.[5-8]

Cannabinoids may cause antitumor effects by various mechanisms, including induction of cell death, inhibition of cell growth, and inhibition of tumor angiogenesis invasion and metastasis.[9-12] One review summarizes the molecular mechanisms of action of cannabinoids as antitumor agents.[13] Cannabinoids appear to kill tumor cells but do not affect their nontransformed counterparts and may even protect them from cell death. These compounds have been shown to induce apoptosis in gliomacells in culture and induce regression of glioma tumors in mice and rats. Cannabinoids protect normal glial cells of astroglial and oligodendroglial lineages from apoptosis mediated by the CB1 receptor.[14]

The effects of delta-9-THC and a synthetic agonist of the CB2 receptor were investigated in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).[15] Both agents reduced the viability of hepatocellular carcinoma cellsin vitro and demonstrated antitumor effects in hepatocellular carcinoma subcutaneous xenografts in nude mice. The investigations documented that the anti-HCC effects are mediated by way of the CB2 receptor. Similar to findings in glioma cells, the cannabinoids were shown to trigger cell death through stimulation of an endoplasmic reticulum stress pathway that activates autophagy and promotes apoptosis. Other investigations have confirmed that CB1 and CB2 receptors may be potential targets innon-small cell lung carcinoma [16] and breast cancer.[17]

An in vitro study of the effect of CBD on programmed cell death in breast cancer cell lines found that CBD induced programmed cell death, independent of the CB1, CB2, or vanilloid receptors. CBD inhibited the survival of both estrogen receptor–positive and estrogen receptor–negative breast cancercell lines, inducing apoptosis in a concentration-dependent manner while having little effect on nontumorigenic, mammary cells.[18]

CBD has also been demonstrated to exert a chemopreventive effect in a mouse model of colon cancer.[19] In the experimental system, azoxymethane increased premalignant and malignant lesions in the mouse colon. Animals treated with azoxymethane and CBD concurrently were protected from developing premalignant and malignant lesions. In in vitro experiments involving colorectal cancer cell lines, the investigators found that CBD protected DNA from oxidative damage, increased endocannabinoid levels, and reduced cell proliferation.

Another investigation into the antitumor effects of CBD examined the role of intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1).[12] ICAM-1 expression has been reported to be negatively correlated with cancermetastasis. In lung cancer cell lines, CBD upregulated ICAM-1, leading to decreased cancer cell invasiveness.

In an in vivo model using severe combined immunodeficient mice, subcutaneous tumors were generated by inoculating the animals with cells from human non-small cell lung carcinoma cell lines.[20] Tumor growth was inhibited by 60% in THC-treated mice compared with vehicle-treated control mice. Tumor specimens revealed that THC had antiangiogenic and antiproliferative effects. However, research with immunocompetent murine tumor models has demonstrated immunosuppression and enhanced tumor growth in mice treated with THC.[21,22]

In addition, both plant-derived and endogenous cannabinoids have been studied for anti-inflammatoryeffects. A mouse study demonstrated that endogenous cannabinoid system signaling is likely to provide intrinsic protection against colonic inflammation.[23] As a result, a hypothesis that phytocannabinoids and endocannabinoids may be useful in the risk reduction and treatment of colorectal cancer has been developed.[24-27]

 

Issuing a conclusion statement like "it isn't a cure" is rash in light of information such as this.

 

Someone can say "I'm not convinced yet" or the old party line "it hasn't been proven in humans" .. fair enough.

 

However "it isn't a cure" is a conclusion that has not been proven. In fact, considering the above only, "cannabis cures cancer" is likely to be found to have some truth. And THAT is if you only consider that statement and the supporting documentation listed.

 

There is enough information to strongly support the likelihood that some, if not all, of these things will be seen in humans.

 

The only thing left is for someone to start applying these materials in humans and see what takes place. Does the expected take place when these materials are applied to humans?

 

It seems to me that they do.

 

If the Doctor is not convinced .. doesn't bother me. To publicly tell people his unfounded, untested conclusion as if it were fact bothers me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not really going to bother with this thread other than to re-post what I already said about your comments above...

 

-------

 

 

Again, this is an example of the 'attack tactic'.  You attribute a statement I never made to me and then try and 'refute' the statement.  I never said it didn't work, had you read what I wrote.  I said I had no evidence that it worked in this or any other case, but was inclined to believe that it MAYBE was helpful.  It isn't a cure and by claiming chemo doesn't work (another falsehood) you come to the unfounded conclusion that it was the oil.  That isn't a valid argument.  Then you take my position (there isn't proof) as your own, while making me appear as stating outright that it doesn't work.  Here the strategy is to try and show I am very concrete and unjustified in my position while you are the 'new voice of reason and fairness'.  Again, not a valid argument as it is based on a false premise.

 

I've never said that it doesn't work.  I've stated repeatedly that I've not seen any evidence that it does other than incidental stories of isolated good outcomes that could be explained in other equally valid ways.  Including spontaneous remission and placebo effects.

 

Dr. Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Doctor is not convinced .. doesn't bother me. To publicly tell people his unfounded, untested conclusion as if it were fact bothers me.

 

How cute.  

 

I don't have to prove it is a cure.  I suggested it might have some positive effects (which is all those papers talk about, not cure).  

 

It has not been shown to be a cure, and I see no evidence it is a cure.  I'm not the one claiming it is.  I don't see any evidence that whole milk is a cure for cancer.  Does that mean it proves your contention that it is?

 

You have faith PB, I'll grant you that.  Faith does good things for people.  But don't expect everyone to share your faith in this oil over any other form of cannabis just because you sell it.

 

Dr. Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have any proof that that these spontaneous remissions and placebo effects exist at all?

 

What percent of brain cancer patients do that?

 

Take it to the logical conclusion.  Suppose there is NO SUCH THING as a spontaneous remission or placebo effect (not true, they are well documented, but no I am not going to bother looking up the studies).

 

Ok so they didn't cause the remission, does that prove your oil did?  Of course not.  A claim of cure has to stand on its own.  Why do I have to explain this to you?  Did you not read the 'Creation Science' comment on the other thread?  Go back and look.

 

Dr. Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Begin Story: A pair of scientists at San Francisco's California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute are preparing to release research data which proves cannabidiol (CBD) - a marijuana compound - has the ability to "turn off" the activity of a gene which causes cancers to metastasize.

 

"The preclinical trial data is very strong, and there's no toxicity. There's really a lot of research to move ahead with and to get people excited," said Sean McAllister, who along with scientist Pierre Desprez, has been studying the active molecules in marijuana - called cannabinoids - as potent inhibitors of metastatic disease for the past decade, according to an article in the San Francisco Chronicle.

 

Marijuana is already proven to alleviate nausea and pain related to cancer therapies, but these recent findings indicate a much more vast use for the natural plant which has been vilified by politicians and U.S. laws for decades.

 

McAllister's previous research has shown marijuana has anti-cancer properties as well.

 

The implications of further scientific research are staggering, yet severely limited, given current federal prohibition of the cannabis plant.

 

After seeing the initial results of testing cancer cells with the CBD compounds found in marijuana, Desprez and McAllister wondered if they'd made an error, so they repeated the tests again and again, each time receiving the same result: the cancer cells not only stopped acting "crazy" but reverted to a normal, healthy state.

 

"It took us about 20 years of research to figure this out, but we are very excited," said Desprez to The Huffington Post. "We want to get started with trials as soon as possible."

 

Desprez hopes the human clinical trials will start without delay.

 

In an article posted on NBC Bay Area website, "'If this plant were discovered in the Amazon today, scientists would be falling all over each other to be the first to bring it to market,' said Dr. Donald Abrams, chief of oncology at the University of California San Francisco, which has also found science behind marijuana's efficacy."

 

Marijuana advocates have suspected these truths for decades but have found themselves widely shunned or ignored by U.S. lawmakers.

 

Dr. T.G., an oncologist who wishes to remain anonymous, told Examiner.com that her practice encourages early-stage cancer patients to use marijuana in an effort to slow cancer progression.

 

"I've treated patients dealing with cancers for nearly thirty years and I am convinced even consuming cannabis-laced edibles can have a noticeable effect in reduction of cancer cell growth over the long-term. Although cannabis flowers themselves don't contain enough of the CBD component to have the same effects as those in the California study, it is clear intensive research and human trials are warranted," said Dr. T.G. "But it would be much more efficient if all cancer research laboratories could test cannabis and, with federal restrictions on cannabis cultivation, that level of research is not viable."

 

With healthcare occupying a large segment of the 2012 election focus, President Obama and GOP candidate Mitt Romney may want to consider the continued wisdom of marijuana prohibition.

 

By publicly calling for marijuana/cannabis to be rescheduled as Schedule II under the Controlled Substances Act of 1970, marijuana will be recognized as having medicinal efficacy and would then be available not only for those 17 states which already have medical marijuana laws in place, but would make the plant available for further clinical research.

 

Dr. T.G. stated, "In light of emerging evidence and millions of patients who've received benefit from cannabis, there is no logical reason to avoid a federal reversal of prohibition."

 

It may irritate politicians and prohibitionists nationwide, but it turns out the potheads of the world were right all along...

 

http://www.examiner.com/article/ca-scientists-prove-marijuana-fights-aggressive-cancers-human-trials-soon

 

Yes CL .. by the time they took it out it was only a pimple ..

Edited by peanutbutter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...