Weed is woo too

[Lancero]

"Woo" is generally anything that has not gone through rigorous scientific testing and stringent peer reviewed studies.

Given the federal ban on marijuana, it hasn't gone through rigorous scientific testing and peer review. And while people have reported good results for medical conditions while using marijuana, people have also reported the same on other treatments what people here consider woo.

[TeeYiYi]

1. No, weed is wow.

TYY

[Lancero]

4. People say the same of woo too.

[Niceguy1]

2. you had to go

there. I was wondering when someone was going to do it

[Demo_Chris]

3. It's perhaps "woo" as a medical treatment, perhaps, but it has another use. nt

[icymist]

5. But it was tested on animals!

http://www.wooskincareandcosmetics.com/

[lob1]

6. You're absolutely wrong. I've thoroughly tested it myself for decades.

[Lancero]

7. Same for any woo user :)

[solarhydrocan]

8. for the 8,543 time the FEDS have patented the use

of the main ingredient in Cannabis. So even the Feds don't think it's "woo" unless they are coughing up one of their canned statements as they raid the latest dispensary

United States Patent 6,630,507
Hampson , et al. October 7, 2003
Assignee: The United States of America as represented by the Department of Health and Human Services (Washington, DC)

Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants

Abstract

Cannabinoids have been found to have antioxidant properties, unrelated to NMDA receptor antagonism. This new found property makes cannabinoids useful in the treatment and prophylaxis of wide variety of oxidation associated diseases, such as ischemic, age-related, inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. The cannabinoids are found to have particular application as neuroprotectants, for example in limiting neurological damage following ischemic insults, such as stroke and trauma, or in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and HIV dementia....

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6630507.PN.&OS=PN/6630507&RS=PN/6630507

Kannalife is selling medicine protected by this patent

Cancer.gov admits it kills cancer cells



Have any preclinical (laboratory or animal) studies been conducted using Cannabis or cannabinoids?

Preclinical studies of cannabinoids have investigated the following activities:

Antitumor activity
Studies in mice and rats have shown that cannabinoids may inhibit tumor growth by causing cell death, blocking cell growth, and blocking the development of blood vessels needed by tumors to grow. Laboratory and animal studies have shown that cannabinoids may be able to kill cancer cells while protecting normal cells...
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/cannabis/patient/page2

Weed WAS Woo. Now it's big bucks. The stoners were right all along.

[Lancero]

9. Yes and no...

A specific ingredient, yes. As a whole, no.

Get some water, bleach, and gasoline. Mix it all up. Is it safe to drink? Not really - While water is safe, the concoction as a whole isn't.

It's the same for a lot of natural substances actually - Some types of spider and snake venoms have parts with medical uses, but this doesn't mean you should stick out your arm and let the spider or snake give you a dose of it. While one part is good, the rest isn't. So the good portion needs to be carefully extracted, or synthesized.

[Ms. Toad]

21. You seriously misunderstand patents.

Granting a patent doesn't mean the patented product is safe or effective - it means it was not previously described or obvious from other prior descriptions before you invented it. (That's a little bit of a simplification of a few relatively arcane provisions - but that is the gist of it.)

Abstracts are written by the inventor/patent owner and mean nothing more than whatever their imagination came up with. Abstracts will be objected to (and required to be rewritten) if they are too long, or if they sound too much like claim language - and they are supposed to provide a brief description of the invention (but I've never seen one challenged for that reason).

[solarhydrocan]

23. Tell Kannalife, and the US Gov that granted them part of the patent

Don't tell me what I understand and what I don't.

Cannabinoid Patent Exclusivity Only Applies To One Condition
December 19, 2011

(The Company Just Awarded An Exclusive Cannabinoid License By The Federal Government)

The exclusive rights to apply the cannabinoids found in marijuana as therapeutic agents awarded by the U.S. federal government to the firm KannaLife only apply to one specific medical condition, KannaLife's CEO told Toke of the Town Monday night.

Dean Petkanas, chief executive officer at KannaLife Sciences, told us that the exclusivity applies only for the development and sale of cannabinoid based therapeutics as antioxidants and neuroprotectants for use in the treatment of hepatic encephalopathy.

"It is narrowly defined exclusivity, in that field," Petkanas told us. "Our exclusivity is narrowly focused."

Asked if KannaLife planned to get exclusive rights to develop cannabinoids to treat other conditions, Petkanas answered, "At the present time, we have no desire to do that." >>>MORE



http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2011/12/cannabinoid_patent_exclusivity_only_applies_to_one.php

There's more than one patent related to Cannabis:

US Patent 4189491 - Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in a method of treating glaucoma 1980
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/4189491.html

Process for preparing cannabichromene (full - 1982)
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/4315862/description.html

US Patent 5389375 - Stable suppository formulations effecting bioavailability of Ɗ9 -thc (full - 1995)
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5389375/fulltext.html

US Patent 5508037 - Stable suppository formulations effecting bioavailability of Ɗ9 -THC (full - 1996)
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5508037/fulltext.html

US Patent 6132762 - Transcutaneous application of marijuana (full - 2000)
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6132762/fulltext.html

US Patent 6328992 - Cannabinoid patch and method for cannabis transdermal delivery (full - 2001)
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6328992/fulltext.html

US Patent 6383513 - Compositions comprising cannabinoids (nasal spray)
(full - 2002)
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6383513/fulltext.html

US Patent Application 20050042172 - Administration of medicaments by vaporisation (full - 2002)
http://www.patentstorm.us/applications/20050042172/fulltext.html

US Patent 6630507 - Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants
(full - 2003) (Assignee (owner)- the US GOVERNMENT!)
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6630507/fulltext.html

20070151149 - Methods for altering the level of phytochemicals in plant cells by applying wave lengths of light from 400 nm to 700 nm and apparatus therefore
(full - 2004)
http://www.patentstorm.us/applications/20070151149/fulltext.html

US Patent Application 2004004905 - Method for producing an extract from cannabis plant matter, containing a tetrahydrocannabinol and a cannabidiol and cannabis extracts (full - 2004)
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2004/0049059.html

US Patent 6713048 - Δ9 tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9 THC) solution metered dose inhalers and methods of use (full - 2004)
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6713048/fulltext.html

US Patent 6974568 - Treatment for cough (full - 2005)
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6974568/fulltext.html

US Patent Application 20050266108 - Methods of purifying cannabinoids from plant material (full - 2005)
http://www.patentstorm.us/applications/20050266108/fulltext.html

US Patent 6949582 - Method of relieving analgesia and reducing inflamation using a cannabinoid delivery topical liniment (full - 2005)
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6949582/fulltext.html

20050070596 - Methods for treatment of inflammatory diseases using CT-3 or analogs thereof (full - 2005)
http://www.patentstorm.us/applications/20050070596/fulltext.html

Method of relieving analgesia and reducing inflamation using a cannabinoid delivery topical liniment (full - 2005)
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6949582/fulltext.html

US Patent 7088914 - Device, method and resistive element for vaporizing a medicament (full - 2006)
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7088914/fulltext.html

US Patent 7025992 - Pharmaceutical formulations (full - 2006)
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7025992/fulltext.html

US Patent Application 20060242899 - Method of cultivating plants
(full - 2006)
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2006/0242899.html

US Patent 7109245 - Vasoconstrictor cannabinoid analogs (full - 2006)
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7109245/fulltext.html

20080057117 - PHARMACEUTICAL COMPOSITION MADE UP OF CANNIBAS EXTRACTS (full - 2007)
http://www.patentstorm.us/applications/20080057117/fulltext.html

US Patent 7344736 - Extraction of pharmaceutically active components from plant materials (full - 2008)
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7344736/fulltext.html

US Patent 7402686 - Cannabinoid crystalline derivatives and process of cannabinoid purification (full - 2008)
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7402686/fulltext.html

US Patent 7399872 - Conversion of CBD to Δ-THC and Δ-THC
(full - 2008)
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7399872/fulltext.html

US Patent 7622140 - Processes and apparatus for extraction of active substances and enriched extracts from natural products (full - 2009)
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7622140/fulltext.html

NEW USE FOR CANNABINOID-CONTAINING PLANT EXTRACTS
Patent application number: 20100249223 (full - 2010)
http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20100249223

CANNABINOID-CONTAINING PLANT EXTRACTS AS NEUROPROTECTIVE AGENTS Patent application number: 20100239693
(full - 2010)
http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20100239693

So many arrogant know it alls, who really don't know it all

[Ms. Toad]

30. I was responding to YOUR commentary

"So even the Feds don't think it's "woo" unless they are coughing up one of their canned statements as they raid the latest dispensary"

To put it more bluntly: All of the words in the patent are written by the inventor (or its agent) - not the government - all the government cares about is whether the invention is new.

You could link to a million patents issued by the government - and it still wouldn't support your commentary that "the Feds don't think it is "woo" - because when the government grants a patent it doesn't ask, or care, if the invention being patented is safe and effective - or even that it works.

Here - go search for homeopathy (or anything else you categorize as woo) - you'll almost certainly find a bunch. There are, for example, 117 patents on homeopathic remedies.

ETA: Since I now see the first patent you cited has been assigned to the US government - Even having an employee of the US govt invent something isn't evidence that it believes anything other than that they were the first to invent it. I've written patent applications as outside counsel to a government agency. All it means is that the inventor thought it was new & the agency decided it was work a few thousand dollars to pay someone to draft a patent application. The inventor (employee) likely provided the bare bones information to the patent attorney who filled in the rest. Although the work I did no govt. patents wasn't in the medical field - there were no working models for the invention (there aren't required to be any). It was all theory.

[Comrade Grumpy]

10. 19,419 studies listed on PubMed for "marijuana."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=marijuana

And 12,419 more for "cannabis"

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=cannabis

[dionysus]

12. yeah, OP fail.

[Lancero]

16. Lets have a look at the first 5 shall we?

Pregnenolone can protect the brain from cannabis intoxication.
Parental THC Exposure Leads to Compulsive Heroin-Seeking and Altered Striatal Synaptic Plasticity in the Subsequent Generation.
Stress-Induced Dopamine Response in Subjects at Clinical High Risk for Schizophrenia with and Without Concurrent Cannabis Use.
Marijuana and lung diseases.
Comorbidity of Severe Psychotic Disorders With Measures of Substance Use.


The first one relates to protection fron cannabis intoxication - Poisoning if you will. Not a study proving weed to be healthy.
The second? Well... "Parental THC Exposure Leads to Compulsive Heroin-Seeking" says everything we need to know about that one.
The third I'm not so sure about. But since it's researching both use and non use, lets just put that one as neutral.
The fourth, well... From the summary - "There is unequivocal evidence that habitual or regular marijuana smoking is not harmless."
And number five. Last sentance? The use of tobacco, alochol, and other controlled sustances, is higher in those with mild mental illnesses then shown by recent estimations.

These are only the first five studies, but it doesn't paint that good of a picture.

[Comrade Grumpy]

24. How about the next 15,000?

The point is that, contrary to the OP, there is a significant (and growing) body of scientific and medical literature around marijuana.

Some studies find good things about marijuana, some studies find bad things.

And some studies beggar belief, like the "Parental THC Exposure Leads to Compulsive Heroin-Seeking" one. I'm a-gonna have to check that one out.

[Lancero]

25. I just pulled that definition from another topic...

So it's not entirely accurate.

A more accurate defenition would be "Passing off a treatment as safe, or superior to others, despite evidence showing it is non-effective or harmful"

Most of the woo topics seem to be running on diffrient definitions anyway. But most generally speak against passing off harmful, all-natural, treatments as better for certian conditions then what medical science would provide. aka, using herbal remedies to treat cancer patients.

Your comment about that one study though points out what most people are forgetting about medical studies - Sometimes, a study is completely full of shit. Play the numbers right, and you can have a study saying whatever you want it to say.

I'm not going to look through all 15k studies though. I'll look through down to 20, just for a larger number, but that 80% of the studies I looked at stated weed to be - at least - moderately harmful then it's kind of hard to say that weed is a good thing, at least from a medical perspective.

[Shampoobra]

27. Medical Studies Involving Cannabis and Cannabis Extracts (1990-2012)

105 Peer-Reviewed Studies on Marijuana

http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000884

[dionysus]

11. more like

[zappaman]

17. Jerrrrrrrrrrrrrrry!

[progressoid]

13. No.

[blogslut]

14. Thank you. You made up my mind for me.

I will now proceed to add a new keyword to the "Trash" option.

[tkmorris]

15. Nope. Woo is what HAS been tested, and found wanting

Some may expand that to include theories which are not based on recognizable scientific principles. Pretty much all religion would fall into this category.

If you want me to believe your weed is woo you are gonna have to provide a sample for testing.

[KatyMan]

18. finally

A perfect definition. Thank you TKMorris.

[LanternWaste]

33. And politics, too.

"Pretty much all religion would fall into this category...."

And politics, too.

[cvoogt]

19. Woo is a weed

that keeps sprouting up everywhere

[icymist]

20. Woo Woo (Wait a minute, that one sounds good!)

How to make a Woo Woo
Ingredients for this popular mixed drink recipe

1 oz Vodka
1 oz Peach Schnapps
2 oz Cranberry Juice

CHEERS!

Woo Woo Instructions:
Mix all ingredients in a cocktail shaker / stirrer and pour into an unusually shaped glass. Add Crushed Ice and decorations to create a great speciality drink from an easy to make recipe!

[In_The_Wind]

34. Sounds yummy.

[on point]

22. Not. I am pretty sure smokers have empirical evidence on its effects.

What don't you get in the difference between delusion and fact?

[Lancero]

26. Could the same be said for other treatments that we are calling woo?

I'm sure that the users of those treatments have evidence on it's effects.

Doesn't stop DU from starting a witch hunt against those treatments.

The majority of things that we are labeling as woo are natural, herbal, remedies. Like the herbal remedies that some people try passing off as the cure for cancer. Care to guess what some people say marijuana can do?

[RainDog]

28. Cannabis medicine is sound science

And it's true that the NIDA is very stingy with approval for studies because of its scheduling as a class I, with no medical value.

But as a palliative treatment for side effects of chemotherapy, cannabis was so effective, based upon user surveys from doctors, it was synthesized and that's why Marinol exists. Unfortunately, Marinol, from patient reports, is much stronger because it's just THC. And further research has indicated a synergistic effect from two diff. cannabinoids, not just THC.

The AMA has recommended that cannabis be removed as a schedule I substance so that more research can occur, again, based upon physicians' views of existing research and patient reports. But they have to couch their words so that they don't offend the DEA, etc., as you see in this link: http://www.amednews.com/article/20091123/profession/311239968/7/

But cannabis is already legally prescribed as a drug for epilepsy and MS, and other conditions, depending upon the country. Sativex is made from cannabis plants, not a synthetic, and delivered as a spray. GW Pharmaceutical, in GB, grows and processes all the plants used for Sativex at this time.

Cannabis is legal as medicine in the UK (on June 21, 2010, making it the first cannabis-based prescription medicine in the world) Approved to treat spasticity caused by multiple sclerosis in Spain, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Sweden, Austria, Italy, and Switzerland, Finland, Israel, Norway, and Poland.

There has only been one human study for cancer (gliomas) and that was only allowed when tradition treatments were no longer recommended. Animal studies have shown good results and have shown the way that cannabis creates apoptosis of various cancer cells.

These are current or upcoming studies:

http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?term=%28smoked+OR+inhaled+OR+vaporized%29+AND+%28cannabis+OR+marijuana%29

Early Studies Indicate Cannabis May Shrink Tumor Cells (Studies: 1974-2010)
The link is to 5 studies that indicate cannabinoids shrink cancer cells (various cancers)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/117030

CBD cannabinoid prevents neuropathic pain from breast cancer chemo
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21737705

This is an important overview from four researchers/doctors:

As recently as a decade ago a review of the world literature on the status of the efficacy and safety of cannabinoids for pain and spasticity revealed that only nine randomized studies of acceptable quality had been conducted . All of these were single dose studies comparing oral synthetic THC (or cannabinoid analogs or congeners) to codeine or placebo...In the past decade, the scope and rigor of research has increased dramatically. This research has employed cannabis, cannabis-based extracts, and synthetic cannabinoids delivered by smoking, vaporization, oral, and sublingual or mucosal routes.

Evidence is accumulating that cannabinoids may be useful medicine for certain indications. Control of nausea and vomiting and the promotion of weight gain in chronic inanition are already licensed uses of oral THC (dronabinol capsules). Recent research indicates that cannabis may also be effective in the treatment of painful peripheral neuropathy and muscle spasticity from conditions such as multiple sclerosis . Other indications have been proposed, but adequate clinical trials have not been conducted. As these therapeutic potentials are confirmed, it will be useful if marijuana and its constituents can be prescribed, dispensed, and regulated in a manner similar to other medications that have psychotropic effects and some abuse potential. Given that we do not know precisely which cannabinoids or in which combinations achieve the best results, larger and more representative clinical trials of the plant product are warranted.

Based on evidence currently available the Schedule I classification is not tenable; it is not accurate that cannabis has no medical value, or that information on safety is lacking. It is true cannabis has some abuse potential, but its profile more closely resembles drugs in Schedule III (where codeine and dronabinol are listed). The continuing conflict between scientific evidence and political ideology will hopefully be reconciled in a judicious manner . In the meantime, the decision to recommend this treatment in jurisdictions where use of medical marijuana is already permitted needs to be based on a careful assessment

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3358713/?tool=pubmed

Based upon the patient response that was broadcast to the world via CNN, FDA Approves Investigational Trials Assessing Cannabidiol for Pediatric Epilepsy (Cannabis, as Sativex, is already legal in many countries, as noted above, for epilepsy in adults.)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/11701420

Marijuana Causes Remission in Crohn's Disease
http://www.democraticunderground.com/11701420

Uruguay, who just legalized, is in talks with Canada and research labs to supply cannabis for medical purposes. Canada would not be doing this if the govt. thought there was no medical value in the cannabis plant, not just a synthetic.
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/medicinal-marijuana-labs-eye-uruguay-law-21435613

I don't think cannabis as medicine quite fits the definition of woo.

[DefenseLawyer]

31. Did you really think there had been no scientific study of cannabis?

I understand that everyone seems obsessed with this woo foolishness, but you are so off base it would appear you didn't bother to do a cursory search on the subject before throwing that out there.

[Bluenorthwest]

32. When I was a young man, cannabis as medicine was called quackery

by the same people who claimed they had Scientific Research proving that being gay is a disease. While the FDA still insists that cannabis is quackery or worse, it is really hard to find anyone from the older established 'sciences' who will admit that they used to 'believe' that being gay was a curable disorder and that they taught this to others, and that they used their false and unproven beliefs to excuse horrific 'treatments' like lobotomy and to rationalize the large profits they made from 'treating this disease'.
So all of that 'best science' from the 70's is now considered to be laughable assumptions couched as fact.

[NCTraveler]

35. Much of what people say about weed is woo.

There are also very good qualities to is that help sick people that are not woo. Research has been done on weed and extracts from it. Marinol has been studied and has been prescribed for a long time.