What if Cannabis Cured Cancer ?

[HeadingNorth]

So far as the actual question posed goes; if cannabis cured cancer, someone would long ago have isolated the chemical responsible and be manufacturing it.

[57Varieties]

Dont worry mate, the fields round these parts are gonna be full of it very soon!

 

The Illuminati will be rounded up this week!!!

 

FREEDOM AT LAST!!!!!!

 

:banana::banana:

 

Bustin Loose!

[Phanerothyme]

So far as the actual question posed goes; if cannabis cured cancer, someone would long ago have isolated the chemical responsible and be manufacturing it.

 

Why "long ago"? - considering the difficulty doing any research with cannabinoids until relatively recently, it's unsurprising that there are only twenty or thirty major studies on the anti-cancer properties of cannabis so far. (although there are many times that number in the pipeline now, because of what is outlined below)

 

Don't fall for the fallacy that there's a single cure for cancer, it's not a single disease.

 

But research, which started in 1975, is now starting to mount up enough to suggest cancer treatments and more clinical trials (only one so far, for brain cancer).

 

Here's a section from a recent review of the literature on cannabinoids.

However, the first study to show that cannabinoids had anti-tumor effects was reported by Munson et al. in 1975 [15]. They demonstrated that administration of D9-THC, D8-THC and cannabinol inhibited the growth of Lewis lung adenocarcinoma cell growth in vitro, and in vivo after oral administration to mice. Since then, cannabinoids have been shown to have anti-proliferative, anti-metastatic, anti-angiogenic and pro-apoptotic effects in various cancer types (lung, glioma, thyroid, lymphoma, skin, pancreas,

uterus, breast and prostate carcinoma) using both in vitro and in vivo models

 

Your argument, (if it is a cure for cancer, it would have been discovered and isolated by now) is a specious one at best, as a moment's consideration would reveal.

[biotechpete]

Oh, and it's pretty good for cancer, so far as anyone can tell. And bizarrely spliff smokers have a lower incidence of COPD than normal tobacco smokers, given similar rates of tobacco consumption.

 

That's before you get on to the prophylactic neurological benefits.

 

That's a rather misleading assertion. At best the data are inconclusive but the effects of cannabis smoking are generally found to be as damaging as tobacco smoking if not more so, causing increased upper airway damage and bronchitis, rather than the lower airway obstruction seen in COPD. That said, most cannabis smokers in the studies are young (in one study 18-32) and the first effects of COPD are rarely seen before 40.

 

From the literature:

Several studies have documented that smokers of marijuana, even in the absence of tobacco smoking, show a higher prevalence of symptoms of chronic bronchitis than nonsmokers 4–7. However, the association between marijuana smoking and airflow obstruction is less clear....

...marijuana use appears to lead to a modest degree of hyperinflation neither the mechanism nor the clinical significance of which is clear. It is possible, however, that the hyperinflation may have played a role in some of the instances of spontaneous pneumothorax and/or pneumomediastinum and of the peripheral apical lung bullae that have been reported in isolated cases of marijuana smokers....

....Since lung cancer, like COPD, is largely attributable to tobacco smoking and marijuana tar contains more of some carcinogens, including the highly carcinogenic aromatic polycyclic hydrocarbon, benzo[a]pyrene, than does the tar from tobacco 2, 3, a related question with important public health implications is whether marijuana, like tobacco, is a risk factor for lung cancer....Although the latter authors concluded that marijuana smoking was associated with an increased risk of lung cancer (8% increased risk for each joint-yr of marijuana smoking, equivalent to only 365 lifetime joints, compared to 7% increased risk for each pack-yr of tobacco smoking, equivalent to 7,300 lifetime tobacco cigarettes)...Thus the possible relationship between marijuana use and lung cancer remains unclear.

Tashkin, D. P. 2010 European Respiratory Journal, 35(1);pp3-5.

[Phanerothyme]

That's a rather misleading assertion. At best the data are inconclusive but the effects of cannabis smoking are generally found to be as damaging as tobacco smoking if not more so, causing increased upper airway damage and bronchitis, rather than the lower airway obstruction seen in COPD. That said, most cannabis smokers in the studies are young (in one study 18-32) and the first effects of COPD are rarely seen before 40.

 

From the literature:

 

Tashkin, D. P. 2010 European Respiratory Journal, 35(1);pp3-5.

 

Fair enough.

 

I think we can both agree that pyrolysis is probably the worst adminstration method of all, especially combined with tobacco.

 

Additionally, combining tobacco with cannabis in smoking spliffs, the psychologically addictive characteristics of the cannabis are amplified.

[fake]

That's a rather misleading assertion. At best the data are inconclusive but the effects of cannabis smoking are generally found to be as damaging as tobacco smoking if not more so, causing increased upper airway damage and bronchitis, rather than the lower airway obstruction seen in COPD. That said, most cannabis smokers in the studies are young (in one study 18-32) and the first effects of COPD are rarely seen before 40.

 

From the literature:

 

Tashkin, D. P. 2010 European Respiratory Journal, 35(1);pp3-5.

 

If that is true then we will should now be seeing lots of people who were smoking cannabis in the late 1960's - 70's suffering from cannabis related COPD. I would have thought that the above would be fairly easy to compile data from as it was a common pass-time with the hippies of that era.

 

In reality no reports or studies can give any figures to back up the claims as very little in the way of clinical studies have been done. Even in the report you have cited and the bits you have put in bold is undermined by the bits not in bold;

"However, the association between marijuana smoking and airflow obstruction is less clear....", "Thus the possible relationship between marijuana use and lung cancer remains unclear."

 

Cannabis tar may have more harmful carcinogens than tobacco but the amount of tar in tobacco is far greater. The cannabis plat seen as a whole contains tar but the product that is generally smoked, the bud or flower contains very little tar.

 

If you have the equipment and the substances you can easily do an experiment. Soak the contents of a cigarette in acetone and then do the same for the same weight in cannabis bud and again for the leaf. Strain the contents and let it evaporate and see what is left. The tobacco comes out tops for tar content, the cannabis leaf is less and the bud hardly any.

 

And yes I have done the experiment. Its a pity those so called experts out there didn't and don't seem to differentiate between the different types and strains of cannabis or cite what they used. They should also state the original tar contents of the tobacco used as well.

 

PS As far as a cure for cancer is concerned I don't believe the hype.

Edited June 29, 2012 by fake

[57Varieties]

Dr Otto Warburg discovered one of the causes to cancer in the 1930's and won a nobel peace prize for his effort.

 

Cancer cells thrive in an anaerobic environment.

 

cancer fighting strategies

 

Unfortunatly he was a Nazi and a Freemason. The freemasons run this planet for profit and as such this discovery was suppressed as it would affect the profits of the giant drug cartels such as IG farben.

 

What a wonderful world we live in!

 

So eat FRESH healthy fruit and vegetables to reduce your risk.

 

Cancer is also caused by pollution, Sorry i cant do anything about that.

 

Pity that the car powered by hydrogen in the 1950's that finished the Indy 500 was hushed up as well.

 

 

Or the other poor guy that got bumped off by the Masons for inventing this

 

Too bad, we could all be driving

and breathing fresh air, but dang them freemasons own all the oil companies and that would affect there profits.

 

Also if we had free energy the government wouldnt be able to control us, so dang your defo not having that!

 

and you guessed it, the Government it controlled by freemasonry!

 

Whoooopyy Doooo!!

 

On a happy note: Life is a fractal multi-dimensional, holographic dream and there is no such thing as death!

 

Peace x

Edited June 29, 2012 by 57Varieties

[Longcol]

Dr Otto Warburg discovered one of the causes to cancer in the 1930's and won a nobel peace prize for his effort.

 

Cancer cells thrive in an anaerobic envirment.

 

Unfortunatly he was a Nazi and a Freemason. The freemasons run this planet for profit and as such this discovery was suppressed as it would affect the profits of the giant drug cartels such as IG farben.

 

What a wonderful world we live in!

 

So eat FRESH healthy fruit and vegetables to reduce your risk.

 

Cancer is also caused by pollution, Sorry i cant do anything about that.

 

Pity that the car powered by hydrogen in the 1950's that finished the Indy 500 was hushed up as well.

 

 

Or the other poor guy that got bumped off by the Masons for inventing this

 

Too bad, we could all be driving

and breathing fresh air, but dang them freemasons own all the oil companies and that would affect there profits.

 

Also if we had free energy the government wouldnt be able to control us, so dang your defo not having that!

 

You do believe some drivel.

 

The first bloke - how do you supress the knowledge about a nobel prizewinner and his work (btw he discovered causes not a cure),

 

As for the "perpetual motion" water powered machines - you do know that it takes more energy to turn water into hydrogen (and oxygen) than the power generated by the hydrogen. And the Japanese one was obviously a joke.

 

I think you've had too many spliffs.

[Phanerothyme]

You do believe some drivel.

 

The first bloke - how do you supress the knowledge about a nobel prizewinner and his work (btw he discovered causes not a cure),

 

As for the "perpetual motion" water powered machines - you do know that it takes more energy to turn water into hydrogen (and oxygen) than the power generated by the hydrogen. And the Japanese one was obviously a joke.

 

I think you've had too many spliffs.

 

I could probably smoke them under the table, but like you I don't buy this horsehit either.

 

I don't think cannabis is the problem here, its credulousness.

[57Varieties]

All cancer cures are natural and occur naturally in the environment and therefor cant be patented.

 

So suppress them!

 

You never see the papers talking about natural cures, Oh shucks maybe because they are controlled by the freemasons aswell.

 

No patent means no cash.

 

check out H2O2 therapy also.

 

 

Oh hi there, buddy i was wondering when you would pop into one of my threads, seems like you follow me around, are you a fan?