Pot Shows Promise as Cancer Cure

[luaneryder]

At the one year mark for being cancer free after surgery and 33 radiation treatments I'm glad to see this. Now I just have to fiure out where to get my hands on the treatment.

snip:
Clinical research touted by the journal of the American Association for Cancer Research that shows marijuana's components can inhibit the growth of cancerous brain tumors is the latest in a long line of studies demonstrating the drug's potential as an anti-cancer agent. Not familiar with it? You're not alone.

Despite the value of these studies, both in terms of the treatment of life-threatening illnesses and as items of news – the latest being that performed by researchers at Madrid's Complutense University that found cannabis restricts the blood supply to glioblastoma multiforme tumors, an aggressive brain tumor that kills some 7,000 people in the United States per year – U.S. media coverage of them has been almost non-existent.

Why the blackout? For starters, all of these medical cannabis studies were conducted overseas. Secondly, not one of them has been acknowledged by the" U.S. government.

This wasn't always the case. In fact, the first experiment documenting pot's anti-tumor effects took place in 1974 at the Medical College of Virginia at the behest of the U.S. government. The results of that study, reported in an Aug. 18, 1974, Washington Post newspaper feature, were that marijuana's psychoactive component, THC, "slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers and a virus-induced leukemia in laboratory mice, and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent."

www.alternet.org/drugreporter/20008/

[enigami]

1. Thank God !

I have been hoping that was the case for years now

[H2O Man]

2. "an ounce of prevention"

takes on new meaning. I suspect that the treatment and cures for most of our illnesses are to be found in the natural world. It's a shame that our culture is destroying that natural world at so rapid a pace.

[Barney Rocks]

3. as a cure?

I can see it as a way to alleviate pain, but smoke is full of carcinogens which are known to cause cancer. I cannot imagine that smoking pot would CURE cancer. Although I have no problem with people using it to relieve their pain it if works for them.

[luaneryder]

4. I suppose it's like the

radiation I had for breast cancer. The radiation was to mop up any undetected cancer cells that were still in the duct, but it can cause certain types of lymphoma and other cancers. Personally, I'd much rather roll a bone than go thru those 6 weeks of radiation hell again.

[H2O Man]

7. It doesn't have to be smoked.

You raise a good point: smoking isn't good for us. But it's the pot, not the smoking, that shows promise in slowing the rate of growth for some tumors. If a person eats pot, they will get the benefits without the potential problems from smoking.

[sffreeways]

8. Pot

can be consumed in other ways. It's easier to smoke it especially in cases where the stomach and digestive tract are compromised by treatment or illness.

I have MS and marijuana has practically saved my life. I probably would have tried to end it if I hadn't found some relief from the symptoms. It really helps with the pain and it relieves that feeling you get with MS that you want to rip your skin off. It helps with concentration and with appetite too and anxiety that comes from being ill. If you ask me it's a miracle drug. It's much better than the other option which is narcotics and they are hard on the body. When I can avoid using them I do.

There is no good reason for this government to continue with this prohibition. It serves no good purpose but to keep the jails filled with people that would otherwise never have a criminal record. And the stigma criminalization creates sucks for those of us using pot medically. I think people should be able to consume marijuana whether or not they need it.

In SF it's decriminalized and there wasn't a problem when they relaxed the drug laws.

[dogman]

5. No!

It will have to be more expensive and controlled by a Corporate interest first.

[HawkerHurricane]

6. Simple Fact:

Want to do a study showing that any prohibited drug is harmful in some way? The U.S. Government will supply you with the drug, it will be legal for your test subjects, and your test can run for years on the Government dime.
Of course, if your test comes out that the drug is not harmful, you will not be allowed to publish.

Do a study that shows that any prohibited drug does anything beneficial? You will be denied permission to do the study; if you do it anyway you and your subjects will be arrested and your data siezed.

Can't allow them scientists to study things unsupervised, don't you know, you might discover that the war on (some) drugs is a scam.

Three groups benefit from the war on drugs.

1. Cops
2. Preachers
3. Smugglers

[Lars39]

9. At $8000 to $13,000 per toxotere IV session,

pharma's making a killing.