More on Cannabis cures cancer.....

[cali]

94. more making stuff up. FAIL. where in this thread do I say anything about being anti-pot?

pull it and post it.

You surely are making it up and everyone can see it.

I've posted facts and evidence, not flamebait. YOU are the one doing that. What in dog's name is wrong with you that you keep doing it??? Chew on this- and no matter how long you do, you still won't be able to find ANYTHING I wrote that's anti-pot.

Here are my posts from this thread. Please point out where anything I said can remotely be construed as anti-pot. Not that you will. You'll ignore my proof that I didn't post anything anti-pot- just as you ignored my posts with evidence that pot isn't a "cure" for pot- as the op claims.

more bullshit. Really fucking irresponsible bullshit at that.

it's disgusting that you're posting that hemp oil cures cancer.

that article even with its selective way of playing up benefits, say nothing about curing cancer.

Marijuana and associated marijuana products is effective medicine for some conditions.

IT DOES NOT FUCKING CURE CANCER


First of all, as I said, marijuana and related products like hemp oil

are effective medicine for some conditions, so obviously I don't think that the DEA line is valid at all.

However, there is NO evidence that it's a cure for cancer. And even in the article posted- and it's a bad article from a scientific pov- none of the cited studies makes that claim.

I'm glad that your application of hemp oil on a PRE-cancerous skin lesion, was effective, but that's still not evidence.

A claim that hemp oil or marijuana cures cancer is wholly bogus.

First of all, I hope things go well for you with the protocol

and wish you the very best.

but the op headline claiming that it cures cancer should disturb you even more. It's misleading at best. There is no evidence at all for that claim. I don't have a problem with people saying that there are some encouraging signs that should spur more research, but claiming it cures cancer is just not accurate and none of the studies cited actually makes anything close to that claim.

I personally think cannabis can be very helpful for quite a few conditions, and I've had some limited help from it with the pain I wrestle with from Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy.

Regarding cancer, from what I've read, THC may have some therapeutic potential targeting specific cancers, but touting hemp oil as a cure all for cancer- all cancers- as Simpson does, is not helpful. And he actually touts it as a cure all for pretty much all disease, from diabetes to thyroid conditions to RSD to cancer.


so you're claiming that people who point out that there is no scientific evidence

that cannabis in any form cures cancer, are just doing so because they're anti-cannabis and in the grips of big pharma? I've posted plenty of links in this thread that establish that none of those conducting studies of cannabis on cancer, claim that it's a cure. The people claiming that are those with an agenda. It may be out of good intentions or because they have something to sell, but it's cruel to make that claim.

One thing I'm not is ant-pot in any way shape or form. Nor am I a fan of big pharma let alone being held in thrall by either it, the MSM or alleopathic medicine, for that matter. As I said, I've used pot for the severe pain associated with CRPS/RSD. I've smoked recreationally. I believe that it should be legal and I think it's a powerful and wonderful medicine deserving of much more research funding. So stop already with the silly horseshit about how I'm brainwashed against it by big Pharma.

oh, ffs. I am not anti-pot. I use it medicinally for RSD

I'm all for more funding for better studies. What I am is pro the scientific method.

It's absurd to insinuate that I'm anti-pot or that I've been conditioned by the media.


I didn't say there wasn't something to it. Worthy of more research

but there is NO clinical evidence at all that it cures cancer.

A close friend died of cancer almost 2 years ago. She went on a hemp oil protocol. It didn't help Because of her battle with cancer, I did a fair amount of research..

I suggest reading this:

http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2012/07/25/cannabis-cannabinoids-and-cancer-the-evidence-so-far/

I'm so sorry about your husband.



I want to add, that the article in the op isn't a scientific one. It's a piece that pushes the use of hemp oil and the author's book- that's fine, but that's what it is and it doesn't address Guzman's study. Hell, the guy even claims that it was a hemp oil study, but that's not the case with any of Guzman's work.

Far more research needs to be conducted. It's funny, how here on DU we scoff at wingnuts who eschew science but quite often there are those who here who do the same. My point in this thread is that there is no evidence at all that hemp oil or THC or any of the other properties of cannabis, cure cancer. There's a slight body of encouraging research, and there are anecdotal accounts often in the form of testimonials. The latter is not, of course, falsifiable.


t's a fact. And I'm offended by snake oil claims that purport to cure cancer

I don't need to be an expert. All anyone needs is a minimum of knowledge about the scientific method and a willingness to do some research. You will readily find that no one who's conducted the limited studies on treating cancer with cannabis, claims to have found a cure for it. And anyone who lies about those studies (and only one has been done with humans) and claims they demonstrate that its a cure for cancer, is contemptible.

There have been some studies that demonstrate that cannabinoids may have an inhibiting effect on the growth of tumors in mice and rats, though what that mechanism is, has not been established.

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

I'm gobsmacked by the anti-science mind frame. The only way to find out how to most effectively employ cannabinoids in the treatment of cancers is through studies and clinical trials. And by the way, I'm not saying that first person account testimonials can't be of some use, just that neither they or people lying about studies that have been conducted, are evidence for a cure.


Why am I angry? The same reason that all wingnut science deniers make me angry

now why don't you respond to my post about Guzman's study (post 18) and to the science cited in post 5.

What I'm saying and what every credible researcher in the field says, is that there is no evidence that cannabinoids cure cancer. There is some very preliminary research that points to potential treatments. That is not to say that there isn't evidence that it has some effectiveness on pain, appetite, etc. but the scientific evidence for a cure does not exist.

Ignoring science: Not just for wingnuts.

There's plenty of it here and when confronted with facts, all you get is big pharma, MSM, etc from the science deniers.

I'll say it again: THERE IS NO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE THAT MARIJUANA CURES CANCER. It may help with some symptoms. It may have potential for treatments, but there isn't a scrap of evidence that it's a cure.

. right. I'm anti-pot. so false.

It's not a scientific article and it doesn't even get Guzman's work right. I've posted links to the actual trial conducted by Guzman.

What do you find in that article that is great?



lol. you're careening from ridiculous to absurd

but it is funny considering how many times I've stated in this thread that I support more research and more funding for it as well as stating that I'm flat out pro-legalization.

You do know that putting words in someone's mouth that you simply made up is mendacious right? It's prevarication and nothing but.

Carry on with making stuff up. It's what you do.

don't believe that. I think there are any number of people who actually buy into quackery

and I'm pro-legalization, but recognize that the claims re cannabinoids and cancer are overblown by many.



It's completely irresponsible and cruel to claim that hemp oil is a cure for cancer.