Anticancer activity of cannabinoids Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 55, No. 3,

[wildbilln864]

from 1975.
"Summary --- Lewis lung adenocarcinoma growth was retarded by the oral administration of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, delta-8-tetrahydrocannabinol, and cannabinol (CBN), but not cannabidiol (CBD). Animals treated for 10 consecutive days with delta-9-THC, beginning the day after tumor implantation, demonstrated a dose-dependent action of retarded tumor growth. Mice treated for 20 consecutive days with delta-8-THC and CBN had reduced primary tumor size. CBD showed no inhibitory effect on tumor growth at 14, 21, or 28 days. Delta-9-THC, delta-8-THC, and CBN increased the mean survival time (36% at 100 mg/kg, 25% at 200 mg/kg, and 27% at 50 mg/kg;, respectively), whereas CBD did not. Delta-9-THC administered orally daily until death in doses of 50, 100, or 200 mg/kg did not increase the life-spans of (C57BL/6 X DBA/2) F (BDF) mice hosting the L1210 murine leukemia. However, delta-9-THC administered daily for 10 days significantly inhibited Friend leukemia virus-induced splenomegaly by 71% at 200 mg/kg as compared to 90.2% for actinomycin D. Experiments with bone marrow and isolated Lewis lung cells incubated in vitro with delta-8-THC and delta-9-THC showed a dose-dependent (10 -4 10 -7) inhibition (80-20%, respectively) of tritiated thymidine and 14C -uridine uptake into these cells. CBD was active only in high concentrations (10 -4). ----J Natl Cancer Inst 55: 597-602, 1975. "
http://www.drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/cancer/THC_cancer_sep_1975.htm

[tridim]

1. You should probably be posting these in the "Drug Policy" group. nt

[wildbilln864]

2. perhaps but this forum seems appropriate also.

maybe someone else will?

[lunasun]

3. I thought CBD (not the get you high part) was the part that was good for tumor supression

Now this reads THC .
I don't have cancer or tumor but thanks very interesting that this was under prohibition and turns out to be a natural medicine .
Guess I was confused I always see these talks about CBD oil. But maybe that is what they are referring to as CBD in high concentrations

[wildbilln864]

5. I think the CBD is more

effective for epilepsy and seizures. Look up Charlottes Web.

[lunasun]

9. You are getting locked so I just wanted to add this info which was for your locked thread where I

Posted
Not only university research dollar but fed gov too
2014
Research funded by the NIH is actively investigating the possible therapeutic uses of THC, CBD, and other cannabinoids to treat autoimmune diseases, cancer, inflammation, pain, seizures, substance use disorders, and other psychiatric disorders.

[wildbilln864]

11. Thanks. Watch this:

[nationalize the fed]

7. You might find this link interesting, from the US Institutes of Medicine

Cancer.gov:

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.

A study in mice showed that cannabinoids may protect against inflammation of the colon and may have potential in reducing the risk of colon cancer, and possibly in its treatment.

A laboratory study of delta-9-THC in hepatocellular carcinoma (liver cancer) cells showed that it damaged or killed the cancer cells. The same study of delta-9-THC in mouse models of liver cancer showed that it had antitumor effects. Delta-9-THC has been shown to cause these effects by acting on molecules that may also be found in non-small cell lung cancer cells and breast cancer cells.

A laboratory study of cannabidiol (CBD) in estrogen receptor positive and estrogen receptor negative breast cancer cells showed that it caused cancer cell death while having little effect on normal breast cells. Studies in mouse models of metastatic breast cancer showed that cannabinoids may lessen the growth, number, and spread of tumors.

A laboratory study of cannabidiol (CBD) in human glioma cells showed that when given along with chemotherapy, CBD may make chemotherapy more effective and increase cancer cell death without harming normal cells. Studies in mouse models of cancer showed that CBD together with delta-9-THC may make chemotherapy such as temozolomide more effective...
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/cannabis/patient/page2

Did you know that the US Gov holds a patent on the use of Cannabinoids?


#6630507 LINK to US PATENT AT USPTO.GOV
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..

Awarded in 2003 and assigned to the US DHHS

A company called Kannalife (http://kannalife.com) has been awarded part of this patent

[uppityperson]

4. DU has a health forum

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1142

[wildbilln864]

6. you are correct! congrats! n/t

[snooper2]

60. DU also has a Groupe Francophone

But I think that is reserved for just one poster LOL

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1164

[uppityperson]

61. you conflated the point between not posting on the appropriate forum to having a

group with little use. 2 different things.

Here's another low volume one.http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1070

[wildbilln864]

8. well if they can treat you til you die...

the cash keeps coming in, but if you're cured it stops! And if you could grow your own cure in your own back yard....well...They'd lose billions. And many industries have much to lose if cannabis become legal nation wide.

[lunasun]

13. Pharma is present here so good luck !

[wildbilln864]

14. yep! thanks again. exposure and education and the truth will win out in the end.

At least I hope so.

[lunasun]

16. Uh not on DU & forget the Health forums . Heavily patrolled

Truth will win out somewhere else and when synthesized and sold by Bayer or J & J maybe you can post without lock

[truedelphi]

54. i tried several years back to get the Admins

To give us our own forum, the way some here have a religion forum.

I thought "Alternative health" would be a great thing. (This was before several others here have given up in total and carry their ideas about health to Facebook and other forums rather than here.) I thought it would be good if people I knew on DU that had the same views I did could express them without the trolls showing up and locking and jeering and being derisive.

The Admins response was that any of us who had alternative ideas about health could go to the Astrology and spirituality forum.

Which is why ninety percent of my blogging is now over at FBook.

[Rex]

10. Won't matter, the swarm found a friend to lock your threads.

You could post a reply from Dr. phd and it wouldn't make any difference...GD has gatekeepers that will not tolerate anything out of what they want to see here. Their behavior is why we don't have a meta forum anymore, so now all they can do is sulk and pounce in GD and sadly they picked you.

[wildbilln864]

12. Thank you again. n/t

[Rex]

17. FWIW, had a friend

that died from stage 4 pancreatic cancer. A few months before she passed away, she told me that MJ was the ONLY thing that made the 'tightness' as she called it inside her loosen up and relax and take some of the pain away. NOT morphine or any other drug.

She never smoked or did any kind of illegal drug up until that point, yet she was a lifetime smoker of cigarettes...which are of course totally legal.

[wildbilln864]

18. yes...

the two most deadly drugs in the world(alcohol & nicotine) are legal yet cannabis which you cannot even OD on and has never been proven to harm anyone is illegal. Strange that.

[Rex]

19. Not any stranger then all the people that demand the conversation be shutdown

when it comes to just talking about the possible positive health effects from THC. Something one would expect from Big Pharma bootlickers.

[wildbilln864]

22. well said! n/t

[DisgustipatedinCA]

21. Why was the OP's other thread locked?

I'd really like to know who has decided that cannabis isn't an effective medicine, because the research that keeps coming out says otherwise. Is someone trying to turn this into "woo"? If so, they may need a patented Skittles ass-kicking.

[Rex]

23. Because a jury result ended up not working in their favor

so they went to a higher power and demanded the thread be locked. Just my guess. Seems to be the pattern over the years. Don't like something in GD? Label it as 'woo' and start a campaign to get it locked.

[wildbilln864]

15. more! spread the word before the corporations shut down the conversation!

[truedelphi]

53. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^n/t

[wildbilln864]

20. and:

[wildbilln864]

24. And a kick for the ill-informed. n/t

[NuclearDem]

25. Stop pushing this snake oil bullshit.

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

“Have you seen this video? This guy says cannabis cures cancer!”

There is a strong and persistent presence on the internet arguing that cannabis can cure cancer. For example, there are numerous videos and unverified anecdotes claiming that people have been completely cured of cancer with cannabis, hemp/cannabis oil or other cannabis derivatives.

Despite what the supporters of these sources may claim, videos and stories are not scientific evidence for the effectiveness of any cancer treatment. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence – YouTube videos are emphatically not scientific evidence, and we are not convinced by them.

Based on the arguments presented on these kinds of websites, it’s impossible to tell whether these patients have been ‘cured’ by cannabis or not. We know nothing about their medical diagnosis, stage of disease or outlook. We don’t know what other cancer treatments they had. We don’t know about the chemical composition of the treatment they got. And we only hear about the success stories – what about the people who have tried cannabis and not been cured? People who make these bold claims for cannabis only pick their best cases, without presenting the full picture.

This highlights the importance of publishing data from scientifically rigorous lab research and clinical trials. Firstly because conducting proper clinical studies enables researchers to prove that a prospective cancer treatment is safe and effective. And secondly because publishing this data allows doctors around the world to judge for themselves and use it for the benefit of their patients.

This is the standard to which all cancer treatments are held, and it’s one that cannabinoids should be held to too. Internet anecdotes and videos prove nothing and benefit no-one – we need reliable, scientific research, which (as discussed above) is exactly what is going on.

“It’s all a big conspiracy – you don’t want people to be cured!”

As we’ve previously said, accusations that we are somehow part of a global conspiracy to suppress cancer cures are as absurd as they are offensive. Not only to the thousands of our scientists, doctors and nurses who are working as hard as they can to find more effective treatments for the complex set of challenging diseases we call cancer, but also the hundreds of thousands of people in the UK and beyond who support this life-saving work through generous donations of money, energy and time.


Our aim is to beat cancer through research

Our aim is to beat cancer, and we believe that the best way to do this through rigorous scientific research aimed at understanding cancer on a biological level and working out how to prevent, detect and treat it more effectively. This approach has helped to change the face of cancer prevention, diagnosis, treatment, leading to a doubling in survival rates over the past 40 years.

As a research-based organisation, we want to see reliable scientific evidence to support claims made about any cancer treatment, be it conventional or alternative. The claims made for many alternative cancer therapies still require solid evidence to support them, and it often turns out that these ‘miracle cures’ simply don’t work when they’re put to the test.

This doesn’t mean there’s a conspiracy to suppress the “True Cure for Cancer” – it means that doctors and researchers want to see solid evidence that the claims made by people peddling these treatments are true.

This is vital because lives are at stake. Some people may think that a cancer patient has nothing to lose by trying an alternative treatment, but there are big risks.

“What’s the harm? There’s nothing to lose.”

If someone chooses to reject conventional cancer treatment in favour of unproven alternatives, including cannabis, they may miss out on treatment that could save or significantly lengthen their life. They may also miss out on effective symptom relief to control their pain and suffering, or the chance to spend precious time with their loved ones.

Furthermore, many of these unproven therapies come at a high price, and are not covered by the NHS or medical insurance. And, in the worst cases, an alternative therapy may even hasten death. Cannabis is also an illegal (class B) drug in the UK.

Although centuries of human experimentation tells us that naturally-occurring cannabinoids are broadly safe, they are not without risks. They can increase the heart rate, which may cause problems for patients with pre-existing or undiagnosed heart conditions. They can also interact with other drugs in the body, including antidepressants and antihistamines. And they may also affect how the body processes certain chemotherapy drugs, which could cause serious side effects.

There is also a reported case where a Dutch lung cancer patient took cannabis extract that had been bought from a street source. Within a matter of hours she was in hospital in a coma. This highlights the risks of taking ‘street’ cannabis extracts of unknown concentration and quality in an uncontrolled way, and accentuates the need for careful research into how best to use cannabinoids for treating patients.

Furthermore, there are other risks associated with using black market or home-made preparations of cannabis, particularly cannabis oil. For example, there may be toxic chemicals left from the solvents used in the preparation process. There is also a risk that pesticides found in cannabis crops may be concentrated in these preparations – recent research from California suggests high rates of such contaminants in samples from a range of different sources.

Finally, we are also aware of internet scams by people offering to sell cannabis preparations. As well as the risk of getting something with completely unknown chemical or medicinal properties and unknown effectiveness, there is a strong chance of receiving nothing at all.

It is a sad fact that although huge progress has been made over recent years, many thousands of people in the UK lose their lives to cancer every year – a situation that we urgently want to change through research. But when conventional treatment fails, there is little chance that turning to an unproven alternative touted on the internet will provide a cure.

People who prey on cancer patients, whether they work for pharmaceutical companies or push bullshit cannabis "cures" on the internet are the lowest forms of scum on this earth.

[wildbilln864]

26. you ain't the boss of me!

deal! If you don't like it don't read it.

[NuclearDem]

27. No, fuck that.

You're pushing bullshit and giving false hope to people suffering with cancer and their families. That is utterly fucking despicable and you need to be called out on it.

Every dollar someone spends on one of these crank cannabis "cures" is a dollar they can't spend on a legitimate treatment. People who push this bullshit are going to get people killed, if they haven't already.

You should be utterly ashamed of yourself, but I doubt that's possible.

[wildbilln864]

28. quit whining already!

you offer only your opinion!

[NuclearDem]

30. Oh are you fucking kidding me?

That's the opinion of thousands of researchers who are actively working on finding a cure for cancer and who are sick to death of people pushing this bullshit.

This "cannabis cures cancer" nonsense is just a sick tactic of a very awful fringe of the legalization movement to paint cannabis as a cure for just about fucking everything. There's no broad scientific evidence that shows cannabis cures cancer.

Fuck, this is utterly disgusting.

[Jesus Malverde]

56. You tell him wildbill

Some people are like a broken record, all pops and crackle, no music at all.

Keep playing my brother!

[truedelphi]

52. Even the Naitonal Health Institute has weighed in on the issue.

Cannabis has the ability to help a mammalian body release enzymes that attack cancer cells. It is that easy.

[Go Vols]

29. This vid?

[NuclearDem]

31. And countless others like it.

Those videos are not scientific evidence.

[wildbilln864]

32. how bout this one?

[wildbilln864]

34. or these?

> > http://www.fuoriluogo.it/medicalcannabis/documenti/cancertherapy.pdf
> >
> > http://files.iowamedicalmarijuana.org/science/cancer/Massi%202004.pdf
> >
> > http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.334.2420&rep=rep1&type=pdf
> >
> > http://www.atsjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1164/ajrccm.156.5.9704146#.VMl_Tizp0SU
> >
> > http://www.fasebj.org/content/15/14/2745.short
> >

[Go Vols]

35. I tend to agree that its "not scientific evidence" yet

but it hurts no one to try it unlike other drugs.

The more that say it works makes me think they may be on to something.

It is definitely a mood altering substance per my experience,as I am pretty happy right now.

[wildbilln864]

36. lol!

me too bro, lol...

[NuclearDem]

38. Spending money on something that's not backed up by scientific evidence

does fucking hurt people, because it means they're not spending money on effective treatments.

[wildbilln864]

41. what effective treatments would that be?

are you saying the Journal of the American Cancer Institute isn't scientific? Really!?

[Go Vols]

43. I cant grow copper on my place

that all the late night commercials promote to get better health.

I can grow MJ and the cost is minimal.

[Bandit]

63. Sounds like you have a financial interest in keeping people on stuff like Chemo drugs and

other EXTREMELY expensive drugs. Pot is not only fairly cheap, comparatively, but it also helps restore appetite, and attitude.. Your drugs not so much..

[NuclearDem]

64. Yeah, not being in favor of comparatively untested drugs

is obviously evidence of being a Big Pharma shill.

You got me, champ.

[wildbilln864]

68. but it is tested!

deny all you want. It's been around for at least 8000 years and hasn't harmed anyone yet. And the science finds it may be very beneficial in a great many ways.

[NuclearDem]

71. I'm guessing you apparently don't know how the testing process works.

Because you need a hell of a lot more evidence, not to mention more clinical trials, to even begin to try to back up claims that marijuana cures cancer.

It's a huge damn leap from "hasn't hurt anyone yet" (vague enough statement that it can't really be challenged, by the way, nice work) to "cures cancer."

[wildbilln864]

72. I know how it works.

so let's legalize cannabis and test the claims.

[NuclearDem]

73. And I am fully in favor of that.

And if it turns out cannibinoids can "cure cancer", then I will spin on a dime and accept that. But right now, you have absolutely zero basis to be pushing those claims.

[NuclearDem]

75. Stanislaw Burzynski? That fucking scam artist?

You've got to be fucking kidding me.

[wildbilln864]

76. wrong link, sorry...n/t

[wildbilln864]

77. ok

[NuclearDem]

78. DONE

This is like talking to a brick wall.

[wildbilln864]

79. again?

have a great night!

[Politicalboi]

33. It's not snake oil bullshit

Just because MJ isn't taken seriously in the medical profession doesn't mean it doesn't work. Studies done in 1974 have proven MJ shrinks cancerous tumors, but I guess those snake oil studies were bullshit too. Our government has lied to us about MJ for decades, gate way drug, loss of brain cells bullshit. They're the snake oil people. If I had cancer I would see a real MJ doctor and use MJ for treatment. If I needed other treatment I would do that too if it helped. Your post here would deter someone who might even think of using MJ. Full of What if's bullshit. If you have cancer, don't go looking on the street or internet for treatment. Go to Ca, Co, or any other state where medical MJ is accepted and works.

[NuclearDem]

37. A single study done in 1974?! Well why didn't you say so?!

Well, color me convinced! Here I was thinking such an extraordinary claim required a hell of a lot more evidence than one study, but lookie here, I've got so much egg on my face you can slap me with a frying pan and call me an omelet!

[wildbilln864]

39. don't care whether you're convinced!

and FYI there's been more than just one. But you knew that right? You didn't?

[NuclearDem]

40. Alright, fuck it, you're on ignore. I can't stand you anymore.

God have mercy on your soul.

[wildbilln864]

42. God huh!?

Now there's some woo! IMHOOC.

[Go Vols]

44. lol,no shit

[SammyWinstonJack]

51. heh.

[truedelphi]

45. Want to know something? Two and only two studies have

Last edited Wed Jan 28, 2015, 03:16 AM - Edit history (1)

"proven" that autism is not caused by vaccines. Never mind that the parameters of the two studies make them rather worthless as real science.

But "two studies" makes anyone who is part of Big Pharma Rah rah rah camp very pleased. That is all that is needed to prove the safety of something that Big Pharma needs for its profit margins -two studies.

As far as cannabis studies, the fact that marijuana has been a schedule one drug means that it has been very difficult to have anyone get the funding that is needed and also the ability to legally obtain the cannabis in order to do the study.

[wildbilln864]

46. excellent points....thanks. n/t

[truedelphi]

81. Well, thank you for yr OP. n/t

[Go Vols]

47. The anal bleeding and death part

sorta turns me off on what big pharma says about most drugs they push.

[NuclearDem]

49. Wow, now bringing anti-vaxx bullshit into it.

So full of fail I don't even know where to begin.

[Go Vols]

50. I thought the post

put to task the number of studies on drugs,not another agenda.

[longship]

58. Oh dear. The anti-vaxxers have shown up.

Last edited Wed Jan 28, 2015, 06:00 AM - Edit history (2)

Only two studies, eh?

Click through here: Vaccines and Autism. It's not nice to try to fool science. One ends up being the fool. Make sure you scroll down to the sample of the multitude of peer reviewed research that show no connection between vaccines and negative outcomes, including autism.

And by the way, one might want to peruse Brian Deer's expose of the anti-vaxxer's god, Andrew Wakefield. Exposed: Andrew Wakefield and the MMR-Autism fraud. He lost his license to practice medicine in the UK because of this. Now he is practicing his utter quackery here in quack friendly USA.

There is no alternative medicine. There is just medicine, based on science.

[Jesus Malverde]

55. That article is hilarious

[NuclearDem]

65. Yeah, what would cancer researchers know about cannabis and cancer?

I trust some random asshole on YouTube a lot more!

[Jesus Malverde]

66. Considering cannabis research and trials are banned in the united states.

Not much.

Let me know when it gets rescheduled.

[NuclearDem]

67. That's great! Now only if I had posted from a US cancer research group!

But that still doesn't make any sense, considering the Feds themselves commissioned medical marijuana studies back in the 90s.

[longship]

57. Got one thread locked, so double down, eh?

There is no alternative medicine. There is only medicine, based on science.

And one study does not make an hypothesis science. One must look at the scientific literature as a whole to determine what holds up. That's the big problem with AltMed. Their proponents do not understand this simple fact.

Plus, there is the problem that there will never, ever be a single cure for cancer because cancer is not one thing. But people generally do not understand that, so cancer quacks can get their claws into those whom need help the most.

This is disgusting and does not belong here on this forum.

[wildbilln864]

59. pssst...

you don't get to decide that! you can whine some more about it however.

[longship]

69. Science is a tough deal.

You can make shit up, but the universe is what the universe is. And there are no universal cancer cures, no matter what quacks say.

[wildbilln864]

70. just because you may not be aware of something...

does not mean it doesn't exist. Even though egos may convince you otherwise. I am not making anything up. You are. I merely pointed out research that seems to be very promising. An avenue that needs exploring. But people need to be made aware of the potential benefits in order to support legalization which will lead to more research.

[Dreamer Tatum]

62. I'm guessing that if they used it for cancer and nothing else

you'd give significantly fewer fucks about cannabinoids.

If you want to smoke pot, smoke pot. Christ.

[Go Vols]

80. k