93 replies to this topic

[Grasi]

Unlocking a Cure for Cancer – With Pot
by Paul Armentano


Who could imagine that cannabis might one day offer hope as a cure for cancer? The United States government, that’s who.

For the past 30 years, U.S. officials have willfully ignored clinical research indicating that marijuana can inhibit the growth of certain type of malignant tumors. However, the recent publication of a trio of clinical studies and a pair of scientific reviews have effectively blown the lid off "Cancergate," and revealed that pot’s medical value may be far greater than ever presumed.

THE EMERGING EVIDENCE

Last year, five scientific journals published prominent articles trumpeting cannabinoids (compounds in marijuana) as potential anti-cancer agents.

These include:

Clinical trial data published in January 2003 issue of the Journal of the American Society of Clinical Investigation that found cannabinoids significantly inhibit skin tumor growth in mice. Investigators of the study concluded, "The present data indicate that local cannabinoids administration may constitute an alternative therapeutic approach for the treatment of non-melanoma skin cancer."
Clinical trial data published in the March 2003 issue of The FASEB Journal that found that the "local administration of a non-psychoactive cannabinoid inhibits angiogenesis (tissue growth) of malignant gliomas (brain tumors)."
A clinical review in the October 2003 issue of the prestigious journal Nature Reviews Cancer that concluded that cannabinoids’ "favorable drug safety profile" and proven ability to inhibit tumor growth make them desirable agents in the treatment of cancer. According to the review’s author, tumors inhibited by cannabinoids include: lung carcinoma, glioma, thyroid epithelioma, lymphoma/leukemia, skin carcinoma, uterus carcinoma, breast carcinoma, prostate carcinoma, and neuroblastoma (a malignant tumor originating in the autonomic nervous system or the adrenal medulla and occurring chiefly in infants and young children).

Clinical trial data published in the November 2003 issue of the Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics that found the administration of the cannabinoid cannabidiol (CBD) inhibits the growth of human glioma cells both in vitro (e.g., a petri dish) and in animals in a dose-dependent manner. Investigators concluded, "Non-psychoactive CBD produce[s] a significant antitumor activity both in vitro and in vivo, thus suggesting a possible application of CBD as an antineoplastic agent (something which prevents the growth of malignant cells.)"
And finally, a clinical review in the December 2003 issue of the journal Expert Opinion on Therapeutic Targets that summarized "the demonstrated antitumor actions of cannabinoids," and elaborated on "possible avenues for the future development of cannabinoids as antitumor agents."

AND SUBSEQUENT MEDIA BLACKOUT

Despite these stunning findings, media coverage of them in North America has been virtually non-existent. As noted by Richard Cowan, editor of the website MarijuanaNews.com, "The New York Times, The Washington Post and Los Angeles Times all ignored this story, even though its newsworthiness is indisputable: a benign substance occurring in nature destroys deadly brain tumors."

Why the media blackout? For starters, all of these studies were conducted overseas. And secondly, not one of them has been acknowledged by the U.S. government.

U.S. KNEW IN ’74... AND AGAIN IN ’96!

This wasn’t always the case. In fact, the first ever 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, immortalized in an August 18, 1974 Washington Post newspaper feature, were that "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."

Despite these favorable preliminary findings, U.S. government officials banished the study, and refused to fund any follow up research until conducting a similar – though secret – study in the mid-1990s. That study, conducted by the U.S. National Toxicology Program to the tune of $2 million concluded that mice and rats administered high doses of THC over long periods had greater protection against malignant tumors than untreated controls. However, rather than publicize their findings, government researchers shelved the results – which only became public one year later after a draft copy of its findings were leaked in 1997 to the journal AIDS Treatment News, which in turn forwarded the story to the national media.

Nevertheless, in the nearly eight years since the completion of the National Toxicology trial, the U.S. government has yet to fund a single additional study examining pot’s potential as an anti-cancer agent.

SCIENCE IGNORED NO MORE

Fortunately, researchers at Madrid, Spain’s Complutense University, School of Biology have generously picked up where U.S. researchers so abruptly left off. In 1998, the research team – led by investigator Manuel Guzman – discovered that THC can selectively induce program cell death in brain tumor cells without negatively impacting the surrounding healthy cells. Then in 2000, Guzman’s team reported in the journal Nature Medicine that injections of synthetic THC eradicated malignant gliomas (brain tumors) in one-third of treated rats, and prolonged life in another third by six weeks. A commentary to the study noted that the results were the first to convincingly demonstrate that cannabis-based treatments may successfully combat cancer.

Today, Guzman believes that enough favorable clinical evidence exists supporting pot’s anti-cancer properties to warrant clinical trials in humans. "The scientific community has gained substantial knowledge of the palliative and anti-tumor actions of cannabinoids during the past few years," Guzman wrote in the October 2003 issue of Nature Reviews Cancer. "Anti-tumor compounds should selectively affect tumor cells [and] it seems that cannabinoids can do this, as they kill [malignant] tumor cells but do not affect their non-transformed counterparts and might even protect them from cell death. ... As cannabinoids are relatively safe compounds, it would be desirable that clinical trials using cannabinoids ... could accompany [ongoing] laboratory studies to allow us to use these compounds in the treatment of cancer." Guzman concludes the article by noting that the Spanish Ministry of Health recently approved a human clinical trial – the first ever – aimed at investigating the effects of intracranially administered THC on the life expectancy of volunteers suffering from malignant brain tumors.

"Cannabinoid research continues to show tremendous potential in the treatment of cancer," summarizes University of Southern California professor Mitch Earleywine, author of the book Understanding Marijuana: A New Look at the Scientific Evidence. However, he laments that the "vast majority of this work originates outside the United States, often in countries that lack our economic and scientific advantages. Let’s hope that our drug policy won’t stymie the battle against the second leading cause of death in America."

Indeed. Let’s not add a potential treatment for cancer to the ever-growing list of victims of pot prohibition.
http://www.lewrockwe...mentano-p1.html




Cannabis extract makes brain tumors shrink, halts growth of blood vessels
15 Aug 2004



Researchers in Spain have discovered that a cannabis extract makes brain tumors shrink by halting the growth of blood vessels that supply the tumors with life. Cannabis has chemicals called cannabinoids, these are the chemicals that could effectively starve tumors to death, say the researchers.

The study was carried out at the Complutense University, Madrid, Spain.

The team used mice to demonstrate that the cannabinoids block vessel growth.

You can read about this latest research in the journal Cancer Research.

Apparently, the procedure is also effective in humans.

The Spanish team, led by Dr Manuel Guzmán, wanted to see whether they could prevent glioblastoma multiforme cancer from growing by cutting off its blood supply. Glioblastoma multiforme is one of the most difficult cancers to treat – it seldom responds to any medical intervention, such as radiotherapy, chemotherapy and surgery.

The scientists knew that cannabinoids will block the growth of blood vessels (to tumors) in mice – they wanted to find out whether the same thing would happen with humans.

The mice were given a cancer similar to the human brain cancer (glioblastoma multiforme). The mice were then given cannabinoids and the genes examined.

The genes associated with blood vessel growth in tumors through the production of a chemical called vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) had their activity reduced.

Cannabinoids halt VEGF production by producing Ceramide. Ceramide controls cell death.

Dr Guzmán said: "As far as we know, this is the first report showing that ceramide depresses VEGF pathway by interfering with VEGF production."

They then wanted to see if this would also happen with humans.

They selected two patients who had glioblastoma multiforme and had not responded to chemotherapy, radiotherapy or surgery. The scientists took samples from them before and after treating them with a cannabinoids solution – this was administered directly into the tumor.

Amazingly, both patients experienced reduced VEGF levels in the tumor as a result of treatment with cannabinoids.

The researchers said that the results were encouraging. In order to be sure about their findings they need to carry out a larger study, they said.

Dr Guzmán said "The present findings provide a novel pharmacological target for cannabinoid-based therapies."

http://www.medicalne...hp?newsid=12088

[Grasi]

LD50 of THC

LD50 is a value of partial fatality; IE 50% of test subjects die at said dose.

The LD50 value for THC, or Tetrahydrocannabinol, is a controversial subject, as it's intravenous dose for a rat is typically used, and can be found quoted specifically as such in the Merck index. However, THC is somewhat of a lipid, IE it is completey soluble in fat and insoluble in water. This statement would readily explain its significant fluctuation in value between injection and oral administration.

It should be noted that the highest animal that oral LD50 values are available for, the Domestic Dog, would have to consume roughly one third of a pound (150 g) of pure THC in order to experience fatality. This data supports the theory that marijuana can not cause overdose.

TETRAHYDROCANNABINOL TOXICITY DATA:
666 mg/kg ORAL-RAT LD50;
482 mg/kg ORAL-MOUSE LD50;
525 mg/kg ORAL-DOG LD5O;
29 mg/kg INTRAVENOUS-RAT LD50;
42 mg/kg INTRAVENOUS-MOUSE LD50;
128 mg/kg INTRAVENOUS-MONKEY LDLO;
373 mg/kg INTRAPERITONEAL-RAT LD50;
168 mg/kg INTRAPERITONEAL-MOUSE LD50;

http://www.answers.com/topic/ld50-of-thc?m...LD50%20of%20THC

Ekki hægt að deyja af völdum THC,, algerlega ómögulegt að innbyrða slíkt magn.

[Grasi]

Nú hefur borið á að ákveðnir aðilar hafa komið hér fram og fullyrt
að Cannabis "lækni" ekki neitt, heldur sé bara "pain relief"

Hér að ofan er nokkuð ljóst að TCH, sérstaklega ef það er uppfullt af CBD
þá vinnur það gegn krabbameinsmyndun og drepur jafnvel illkynja æxli.

Hvar eruð þið núna elskurnar sem eruð svo sannfærð um að cannabis
hefði engan lækningamátt. og á hverju byggið þið það,,, SÁÁ?

[ikeaboy69]

Dópstríðið er Amerísk p+olitík sem Evrópulöndin hafa étið upp sem auðveld leið að komast á þing. s.b. Milljarð í forvarnir. Bah! Humbug!

[grandvar]

Það er löngu vitað og hefur verið staðfest með endurteknum rannsóknum að cannabisneyzla linar þjáningar ýmissa krabbameinssjúklinga, þótt ekki sé kunnugt um að það lækni neinn.

Það er samt nægjanleg ástæða til að leyfa notkun þess sem eftirritunarskylt lyf.

Svo mætti þar fyrir utan kanna hvort ekki væri rétt að leyfa framleiðslu þess og sölu í ríkinu. En það er önnur pólitík - og gæti verið liður í vörnum gegn vaxandi glæpum hér á landi.

[feu]

grandvar, on Sep 21 2005, 11:03, said:

Það er löngu vitað og hefur verið staðfest með endurteknum rannsóknum að cannabisneyzla linar þjáningar ýmissa krabbameinssjúklinga, þótt ekki sé kunnugt um að það lækni neinn.

Það er samt nægjanleg ástæða til að leyfa notkun þess sem eftirritunarskylt lyf.

Svo mætti þar fyrir utan kanna hvort ekki væri rétt að leyfa framleiðslu þess og sölu í ríkinu. En það er önnur pólitík - og gæti verið liður í vörnum gegn vaxandi glæpum hér á landi.

Kemur manni ekki á óvart.. karlinn er hasshaus!

Grandvar, opinber talsmaður eiturlyfjaneytenda!

[Grasi]

Grandvar said:

þótt ekki sé kunnugt um að það lækni neinn

Lastu ekki greinina Grandvar?

Það virðist nefninlega akkúrat vera málið að það er ansi margt sem bendir til þess
að cannabinoidarnir sem byggja upp THC LÆKNI krabbamein.

Ef að Krabbameins æxli í músum hverfa hjá 1/3 hluta þeirra músa sem gefnar hafa verið
Cannabinoida og lengdi líf annars þriðjungs músanna.

Þessi tegund af krabba svarar mjög illa við geislameðferðum og ýmsum krabbameinslyfjum.

Quote

Then in 2000, Guzman’s team reported in the journal Nature Medicine that injections of synthetic THC eradicated malignant gliomas (brain tumors) in one-third of treated rats, and prolonged life in another third by six weeks

Endilega lesiði greinina/greinarnar, þar sem þetta er alvarlegt mál fyrir hina ýmsu sjúklinga.
Ég vil endilega ræða þessi mál á fordómalausan hátt.

[Grasi]

feu, on Sep 21 2005, 14:02, said:

grandvar, on Sep 21 2005, 11:03, said:

Það er löngu vitað og hefur verið staðfest með endurteknum rannsóknum að cannabisneyzla linar þjáningar ýmissa krabbameinssjúklinga, þótt ekki sé kunnugt um að það lækni neinn.

Það er samt nægjanleg ástæða til að leyfa notkun þess sem eftirritunarskylt lyf.

Svo mætti þar fyrir utan kanna hvort ekki væri rétt að leyfa framleiðslu þess og sölu í ríkinu. En það er önnur pólitík - og gæti verið liður í vörnum gegn vaxandi glæpum hér á landi.

Kemur manni ekki á óvart.. karlinn er hasshaus!

Grandvar, opinber talsmaður eiturlyfjaneytenda!

Kemur þú með þína feuísku þvælu, þvælu sem er stærsti hlutinn af vandamálinu.
Um leið og einhver viðrar á þessum hlutum, þá hópast in vanvitar með
vanhugsuð fordómakomment um þá sem fjalla um málið.

Endilega sýna pínu þroska.

[Grasi]

Grandvar said:

Svo mætti þar fyrir utan kanna hvort ekki væri rétt að leyfa framleiðslu þess og sölu í ríkinu. En það er önnur pólitík - og gæti verið liður í vörnum gegn vaxandi glæpum hér á landi.

Þarna er ég þér algerlega sammála Grandvar.

Það myndi einnig draga úr fjölgun neytenda sterkra vímuefna.

[grautur]

Eins og Grasi sagði á stjórnmálaþræðinum þá er kannabis hvorki eiturlyf né fíkniefni. Eins og algengasta notkunin á því er í dag þá væri hægt að flokka það sem vímuefni.

Það er vitað fyrir víst að kannabis linar ýmsar þjáningar en áður en hægt er að segja fyrir víst að kannabis hafi lækningarmátt þá verður að gera viðameiri rannsókn. Fyrstu niðurstöður lofa þó góðu fyrir þá sem þjást af heilaæxlum.