Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: More on Cannabis cures cancer..... [View all]AZ Progressive
(3,411 posts)40. For any of the doubters...
https://patients4medicalmarijuana.wordpress.com/2010/01/04/marijuana-cures-cancer-us-government-has-known-since-1974/
"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."
And link to the 1974 Virginia Study (cost money to get the article but its proof that it exists):
http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/washingtonpost_historical/access/120945617.html?FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:AI&type=historic&date=Aug+18%2C+1974&author=By+Victor+Cohn+Washington+Post+Staff+Writer&desc=Cancer+Curb+Is+Studied
"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."
And link to the 1974 Virginia Study (cost money to get the article but its proof that it exists):
http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/washingtonpost_historical/access/120945617.html?FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:AI&type=historic&date=Aug+18%2C+1974&author=By+Victor+Cohn+Washington+Post+Staff+Writer&desc=Cancer+Curb+Is+Studied
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
110 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
What's really interesting is this particular anti-pot DUer admits to having some success with
kestrel91316
Aug 2013
#42
You obviously didn't bother to read the hundreds of published, peer-reviewed articles
kestrel91316
Aug 2013
#41
you clearly haven't read them and don't begin to know how to read even an abstract,
cali
Aug 2013
#51
oh for pity's sake. The U.S. is not the only country that conducts medical research
cali
Aug 2013
#81
that's the author of the article in the op. this thread is about the claims he makes
cali
Aug 2013
#85
If you did your homework you would know that the THC isn't the most beneficial
kestrel91316
Aug 2013
#44
Which is about as keen and as informed a query as asking for a peer-reviewed study concluding that C
LanternWaste
Aug 2013
#29
Who's the one here with the anti-science mind frame? Seems like you are, since you are ignoring my
kestrel91316
Aug 2013
#45
Reminds me of all the 'cancer cured' claims.. when you read the fine print, it's in mice (again.)
X_Digger
Aug 2013
#90
We medical people don't use the word "cure" but rarely when it comes to cancer or any other
kestrel91316
Aug 2013
#46
no shit sherlock. of course medical personnel and scientists rarely use the word cure re cancer.
cali
Aug 2013
#65
You use pot but yet you are anti-pot. Sounds like typical RW "I got mine, screw you" BS.
kestrel91316
Aug 2013
#73
I'm just quoting you. In this thread you proclaimed that you were anti-pot.
kestrel91316
Aug 2013
#93
more making stuff up. FAIL. where in this thread do I say anything about being anti-pot?
cali
Aug 2013
#94
Yeah, but that's not from the active ingredients that have been studied or are being used
cali
Aug 2013
#35
So much for my critical thinking skills ... as if I'm going to believe hemp oil cures cancer ..>
YOHABLO
Aug 2013
#39
I'm familiar with those studies: yes there are preliminary studies indicating that cannibinoids may
cali
Aug 2013
#55
The Federal Government has discouraged studies of Marijuana because of the war on drugs
AZ Progressive
Aug 2013
#59
I think pro-legalization people are extremely disingenuous about medicinal properties
Dreamer Tatum
Aug 2013
#48
"This alone should reduce the number of cancer cases." - Probably one of the dumber claims in here.
Gravitycollapse
Aug 2013
#60
I don't believe that. I think there are any number of people who actually buy into quackery
cali
Aug 2013
#78
honestly, I find it truly disturbing that people here are calling this a great article
cali
Aug 2013
#71
"Dr. Mark Sircus, Ac., OMD, DM (P) (acupuncturist, doctor of oriental and pastoral medicine)"
sagat
Aug 2013
#74
i know. i find it's peddled most by the "i wanna be able to smoke a joint walking down the street"
dionysus
Aug 2013
#86
Synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists inhibit tumor growth and metastasis of breast cancer.
wildbilln864
Aug 2013
#89