Thread: The terrible truth about cannabis: Expert's devastating 20-year study

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Oh and I am not a pot head. I actually know a chap who was sectioned to a mental health institute in the UK (by his parents suggestion) who went from A Grade student and all round nice guy to dribbling idiot through use of strong cannabis.

Cannabis Psychosis.

An old mate of mine's son was the first in Kilburn to officially claim that title - 14 at the time.

Much better to smoke regular natural "bush" weed. All the hybrid chemically enhanced bud is what's doing it mostly.

Originally Posted by Tarquin Chucklefucc

glaxo smithkline

British company.

Originally Posted by Tarquin Chucklefucc

No one outside the US gives a fvck what the corrupt US gov legislate about any more.

As it is also registered with the World Intellectual Property Organisation, along with 600 others, it does matter, as these patents are enforceable world wide. This is the primary purpose of the world trade organisation to protect big corporation patents on a global basis.

Here's a article of interest for you

It's Incredibly Difficult To Study Medical Marijuana

Sanjay Gupta, neurosurgeon and CNN's chief medical correspondent, is officially down with weed. In an article for CNN, the well-known medical personality apologized for dismissing the scientific value of medical marijuana research.

"It doesn't have a high potential for abuse, and there are very legitimate medical applications. In fact, sometimes marijuana is the only thing that works," he wrote. "We have been terribly and systematically misled for nearly 70 years in the United States, and I apologize for my own role in that."

Gupta, who changed his mind while in the process of making documentary on the subject, "WEED," found in a search of medical studies from the past year that only 6 percent investigated potential benefits of the drug, rather than its harms.

What he failed to mention is that it's impressive that there are even that many, since scientists who study marijuana's potential medicinal properties have to wade through an enormous amount of federal red tape to do so, and they're not always successful.

Marijuana is currently classified as a Schedule I substance by the federal government, meaning according to the government, it has no medical value. That makes in quite difficult for scientists to study any potential medical uses, since human medical trials require permissions from federal agencies like the Department of Health and Human Services, the FDA, and, when it comes to illegal substances, the DEA.

"With 20 states already approving it, I think advocacy has already been demonstrated," Lyle Craker, a horticulturist who directs the Medicinal Plant Program at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, told PopularScience.com. He didn't seem particularly fazed by Gupta's announcement.

That's because Craker has been trying for more than a decade to establish a research farm to grow marijuana for medical researchers, only to be denied repeatedly by federal authorities. He petitioned for a review of the DEA's rejection of his application for a license to start the farm, but was denied in April.

Craker was working in association with the Multidisciplinary Association For Psychedelic Studies (MAPS), a nonprofit that sponsors medical research into the therapeutic properties of psychedelics and marijuana. Brad Burge, the association's communications director, said of Gupta's announcement, "He's one of the smartest rats on a sinking ship of medical marijuana science deniers-first one to the lifeboats."

He lauded Gupta for being willing to switch positions, and expressed hope that others might follow suit. "When well-known, respected doctors have the courage to change their minds about medical marijuana, it makes it easier for others in positions of power to follow suit," he told me via email. "If patients are lucky Dr. Gupta's gutsy admission will show regulators that even after decades of denial, it's never too late to change their tune."

"Of course, any real research is still restricted," Craker says. Even if marijuana is approved on the state level, the fact that it's illegal federally puts a huge damper on research. "As far as federally approved research, nothing is going on that I'm aware of, except for Mississippi [where the National Institute on Drug Abuse grows marijuana for its research] and a study going on in California."

For a period of 11 years, the state of California funded clinical research into medical marijuana through the Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research at the University of California, San Diego. A series of small human trials found cannabis to be effective in treating pain in patients with multiple sclerosis and HIV. Their final study ended last year. Unfortunately, the state's financial woes mean that the research isn't likely to be funded in the near future.

"Obviously it can be done," says Igor Grant, a professor at UCSD and the center's director. "We've conducted the studies, but I think an ordinary researcher without the support of the state would be hard pressed to do it. It's just a difficult and cumbersome process."

For now, the Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research has put its experimental work on hold indefinitely. "We would like to in the future seek federal support," Grant says, "but at this time I think the federal position is not really supportive of this kind of endeavor."

Gupta may have balked at how few medical marijuana studies he found, but it's unlikely that the number of studies of marijuana as a medical therapy will be going up anytime soon. From the standpoint of the scientists who try to deal exclusively in empirical data, that's holding us back from knowing for sure what marijuana can do, either good or bad. "We've gone down this path of damming this plant material and which from all lay evidence has helped a lot of people," Craker explains. "I think it should be investigated on real clinical trials and see what happens. It needs to be approached scientifically, not with lay evidence."

And for any studies that do make it into clinical trials, Gupta wrote that he promises "to do my part to help, genuinely and honestly, fill the remaining void in our knowledge."



Read more: Sanjay Gupta: Only 6 Percent Of Marijuana Research Considers Medical Benefits | Popular Science

Originally Posted by Tarquin Chucklefucc

Weed is EXCELLENT for curing cancer.

Not.
It just dulls the pain of cancer.

preceded (started before)

Nice how 'The Mail' includes explanations of the slightly complicated words.

Originally Posted by pseudolus

British company.

Fair point - but you get my drift.

Have to say though - UK government is really playing catch up with the US in the "we are utter kvnts" race.

Originally Posted by pseudolus

As it is also registered with the World Intellectual Property Organisation, along with 600 others, it does matter, as these patents are enforceable world wide. This is the primary purpose of the world trade organisation to protect big corporation patents on a global basis.

I think this type of stuff won't get far - although they're trying it via codex alimentarius and other schemes like that.

A fundamental requirement for the planet to flourish is that these wankers in foreign places who make rules about stuff in our front garden for their own gain are ridiculed and simply ignored.

Rome fell, British empire fell and now it's the US.

End of.

Originally Posted by Koojo

Originally Posted by Tarquin Chucklefucc

Weed is EXCELLENT for curing cancer.

Not.
It just dulls the pain of cancer.

If you do even a basic amount of research you'll find evidence.

Rick Simpson is a good name to start with.

Professor Hall's findings are pretty much in line with earlier research on marijuana's effects.

People under 18 yoa shouldn't use it IMO, neither should pregnant women, much the same as alcohol or tobacco use is detrimental to developing bodies.

BUT, juvenile delinquency is not a new problem, and those already inclined to slack off, break the rules and so on will in all likely-hood develop several co-habits such as drinking to excess (a far worse problem), smoking tobacco, hitting up on harder drugs, promiscuity, or just plain aggressive behavior which is also habit forming if peer-encouraged.

Sub-adults need more time to develop emotionally to be able to handle the effects of ganja, which tends to suppress emotions.

The developing foetus can well do without it also.

As for Hall's assertions that ganja users are twice as likely to crash while driving than non-users of the herb,....well, that all depends......I don't think that that finding takes into account the number of drivers under the influence of alcohol, who are far more likely to crash than those on ganja.

The bit that really goes OTT is where Hall reckons that over-use of ganja brings on heart attacks,...a bit of a scare story there, ganja is more likely to de-stress a user, not build up hyper-tension leading to a fatal heart attack/stroke.

I think anybody would be struggling to find evidence of folks keeling over with heart failure over a joint!

As he says,"but people can die of heart problems that may have been brought on by repeated use.

The operative word being "may".

The story's just another wowser angle.

English investigative journalist Ali G discusses marijuana with the DEA.

Originally Posted by Tarquin Chucklefucc

Originally Posted by Koojo

Originally Posted by Tarquin Chucklefucc

Weed is EXCELLENT for curing cancer.

Not.
It just dulls the pain of cancer.

If you do even a basic amount of research you'll find evidence.

Rick Simpson is a good name to start with.

If weed cured Cancer big Pharma would have cornered the market by now.

Big pharma already has a finger in the pie.

The main psychoactive ingredient in cannabis - tetrahydrocannabinol - could be used to reduce tumor growth in cancer patients, according to an international research team.

Previous studies have suggested that cannabinoids, of which tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is one, have anti-cancer properties. In 2009, researchers at Complutense University in Spain found that THC induced the death of brain cancer cells in a process known as "autophagy."

When human tumors in mice were targeted with doses of THC, the researchers found that two cell receptors were particularly associated with an anti-tumor response.

The researchers found that administering THC to mice with human tumors initiated autophagy and caused the growth of the tumors to decrease. Two human patients with highly aggressive brain tumors who received intracranial administration of THC also showed similar signs of autophagy, upon analysis.

The team behind the new study - co-led by Complutense University and the University of Anglia (UEA) in the UK - claims to have discovered previously unknown "signaling platforms" that allow THC to shrink tumors.

The researchers induced tumors in mice using samples of human breast cancer cells. When the tumors were targeted with doses of THC, the researchers found that two cell receptors were particularly associated with an anti-tumor response.

"THC, the major active component of marijuana, has anti-cancer properties. This compound is known to act through a specific family of cell receptors called cannabinoid receptors," says Dr. Peter McCormick, from UEA's School of Pharmacy.

"We show that these effects are mediated via the joint interaction of CB2 and GPR55 - two members of the cannabinoid receptor family. Our findings help explain some of the well-known but still poorly understood effects of THC at low and high doses on tumor growth."

However, the team is unsure which receptor is the most responsible for the anti-tumor effects.

Dr. McCormick says that there has been a "great deal of interest" in understanding the molecular mechanisms behind how marijuana influences cancer pathology. This has been accompanied by a drive in the pharmaceutical industry to synthesize a medical version of the drug that retains the anti-cancer properties.

"By identifying the receptors involved we have provided an important step towards the future development of therapeutics that can take advantage of the interactions we have discovered to reduce tumor growth," says Dr. McCormick.
Further evidence that cannabis reduces tumor growth in new study - Medical News Today

Originally Posted by Koojo

Originally Posted by Tarquin Chucklefucc

Originally Posted by Koojo

Originally Posted by Tarquin Chucklefucc

Weed is EXCELLENT for curing cancer.

Not.
It just dulls the pain of cancer.

If you do even a basic amount of research you'll find evidence.

Rick Simpson is a good name to start with.

If weed cured Cancer big Pharma would have cornered the market by now.

That's exactly what they are trying to do. Thing is it's virtually impossible to do that. In a bag of bush weed there are maybe 5-20 seeds. Each seed can be cloned limitless times. You can make the core raw material (cannabis oil) from that and alcohol. How can big pharma patent that?

Sure they'll try - but I can't see it working.

Originally Posted by cyrille

preceded (started before)

Nice how 'The Mail' includes explanations of the slightly complicated words.

Now you're just complicating things unnecessarily.
You mean

Nice how 'The Mail' includes explanations of the big words.

^ Beautiful array of buds there, bro!!

*Not that I'd ever smoke that devil grass...

(I vaporize that shit, way more healthy innit).

Originally Posted by Koojo

Originally Posted by Tarquin Chucklefucc

Originally Posted by Koojo

Originally Posted by Tarquin Chucklefucc

Originally Posted by Koojo

Not.
It just dulls the pain of cancer.

If you do even a basic amount of research you'll find evidence.

Rick Simpson is a good name to start with.

If weed cured Cancer big Pharma would have cornered the market by now.

That's exactly what they are trying to do. Thing is it's virtually impossible to do that. In a bag of bush weed there are maybe 5-20 seeds. Each seed can be cloned limitless times. You can make the core raw material (cannabis oil) from that and alcohol. How can big pharma patent that?

Sure they'll try - but I can't see it working.

They may not be able to patent that, but they could, and would, produce it if it actually cured cancer.
You do realise a cure for cancer is the holy grail of medical research, right?

Sadly, it doesn't work like that. It's all about money.

The medical "establishment" have invested billions in chemo and radio therapy facilities worldwide. They would (and should) become redundant overnight - but obviously that would destroy all their investment. Sadly - the money is made (killing the patients) via "treatment".

As I said - if ganja cures cancer - the medical industry goes bust - unless they control the supply and legislation - which is exactly what they are trying to do now.

Monsanto are trying to patent pigs at the moment - To be fair they really are taking the piss. Whether it was millions of years of evolution, God, Buddha or something else, it definitely wasn't Monsanto who invented the fvcking pig was it?

Holy grail of medicine? nah.. curing death - now that's the holy grail of medicine.

Perhaps we should be warned about the adverse health effects of long term Vegetarianism as well- those fekkers die young. Not to mention Teetotallers, who die younger than modest drinkers. Lets not even bother with long term motorbike riders- that's just too damn scary. Added sugar- yeh, sue me. Petrol fumes, stress, weird chemical pills people take to sleep or pretend they're happy. Whatever.

Heck, I could think of way more- but don't got no weed right now.

Speak to poorfalang.

Massive consumption of alcohol cures most everything....

Quote
Nice fat long term pay check for him and his team.
Well he had to pay the bills, took them so long, to publish their results, you would think the Professor and team where stoned.
Then this story made the press.

I still feel safe <3

One more thing about America (besides our gun laws) that I'm actually proud of

Where to Buy Marijuana in Colorado
https://www.coloradopotguide.com/whe...buy-marijuana/

Recreational marijuana stores are open for business

You ARE allowed to possess up to 1 ounce of marijuana regardless of if the city or county allows or bans recreational stores, this is your right as defined in our Colorado Constitution.

Guns and pot are a strange combination.

Originally Posted by BobR

One more thing about America (besides our gun laws) that I'm actually proud of

Where to Buy Marijuana in Colorado
https://www.coloradopotguide.com/whe...buy-marijuana/

Recreational marijuana stores are open for business

You ARE allowed to possess up to 1 ounce of marijuana regardless of if the city or county allows or bans recreational stores, this is your right as defined in our Colorado Constitution.

Guns and pot are a strange combination.

But don't federal laws override state laws? So in theory the Feds could bust you.

I disagree. There are dozens of peer-reviewed papers published on the efficacy of cannabis extracts killing cancer cells in vitro.

If you search for

cannabis oil cured my cancer
(no quotes)

you come up with over 60 million hits, the majority of them are reports from patients and oncologists about their personal experience using cannabis to cure or treat cancer. There are diaries with photographs taken over the course of the treatment showing

basal cell carcinoma

lesions disappear over the course of 4-6 weeks. I'm talking deep, ugly, black, open sores that gradually vanish without a trace.

I know two people, one whose case was documented in the media, who cured prostrate cancer using Simpson's oil. It was confirmed by medical tests, in one case his PSA went from over 10 to 3 in 8 weeks. (normal PSA in men without prostate cancer is <4).

I also know many cancer survivors who used cannabis to cure their cancer and have remained cancer free.

Every day it seems there is more evidence coming forth. Just a few days ago I saw a cat scan of infant with a brain tumor who was given CBD and the tumor shrunk to nothing.

Here's a link to an article with photos showing the results of 35 days of oil on basal cell carcinoma.

Cannabis Can Cure Many Forms of CancerOrange County Medical Marijuana Delivery | 949-429-9652

Originally Posted by zygote1

Originally Posted by Yasojack

So if that's the truth why are countries legalizing and decriminalising cannabis, possibly they need to look into the pharmaceutical companies.

Cannabis has many medical properties, and we should be looking to these for alternatives to chemical based medicines.

Define medical properties, as it is not a scientific term, nor acceptable if you wish to offer the active ingredient of cannabis as a safe pharmaceutical.
If you wish to claim that there are "beneficial" applications, then you can only speculate, as the "benefits" have not been established. Sorry, but that's the truth.
Try as they might, the proponents of medical cannabis are unable to provide actual definitive evidence that supports the active ingredient of cannabis as a safe and effective pharmaceutical. Despite all the pseudo scientific claims that cannabis provides various medical benefits, not one legitimate, responsible researcher can prove the claim.

In respect to your suggesting that "alternatives" be used to chemical based medicines, your choice of words is inappropriate because you fail to recognize that it is the chemical properties of a substance that produces its effect. In ancient times, bark of the willow tree was boiled to produce salicylic acid, the active metabolite. It was used for fever reduction and pain relief. It is for all intents and purposes a chemical. Unfortunately, there would not be enough willow tree bark on earth to meet the needs of the active ingredient users in any given week today. Fortunately, Bayer was able to synthesize the compound used in the drug commonly called aspirin. Almost the entire world's source of synthesized active ingredient comes from China. There are inadequate source materials for "alternative" drugs. If one wanted to use alternative "natural" methods, one would not put a dent in the daily medication needs of humanity. it is impossible.