It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

After Decades of Denial National Cancer Institute Finally Admits that “Cannabis Kills Cancer”

page: 6
96
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 07:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Agartha


Have you ever considered doing a course? (instead of self studying).


That's funny you should say that... my son made the same suggestion to me at Sunday dinner! I never thought about it before, probably because I do it for my own pleasure, not for career purposes. But as my son pointed out, more colleges are offering free courses online, and I could probably learn more faster if I wasn't trying to figure it out the hard way.

I may have to check into it now...




posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 07:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

Do it, it will open the doors to a different world, believe me. I am 45, I have three children and I am always studying, one thing or another, and I love it! Listen to your son....



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 07:56 AM
link   
If there was some chemical component of Cannabis that truly treated cancer, then Big Pharma would have isolated that compound, tweaked it, patented it, and released it as a super mega cure-all for cancer.

They've not done that, so I'm going to go out on a limb here and say the science is not compelling.



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 08:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Agartha
a reply to: Boadicea

Do it, it will open the doors to a different world, believe me. I am 45, I have three children and I am always studying, one thing or another, and I love it! Listen to your son....


Thank you... I will. I have a few commitments that are going to keep me busy for a couple months, but I'm going make it my next priority. I love to learn and explore, and the opportunities have never been greater. The internet offers so many realms to explore! And before the internet, the library was my second home...



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 08:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Painterz
If there was some chemical component of Cannabis that truly treated cancer, then Big Pharma would have isolated that compound, tweaked it, patented it, and released it as a super mega cure-all for cancer.

They've not done that, so I'm going to go out on a limb here and say the science is not compelling.


They're definitely trying! But as you seem to understand, they cannot patent and maximize profits without synthesizing the whole for the parts, and that seems to be a challenge. Probably in large part because single compounds are not proving as effective and/or efficient as the synergy of multi-compounds.

The science is actually quite compelling. But I believe cannabis is shining a spotlight on some of the flaws in our current medical/medicinal paradigm, and we are going to have to shift our thinking and reasoning to fit the reality -- not vice versa.



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 08:53 AM
link   
This!!
Great news!



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 09:01 AM
link   
a reply to: LarryExplores

It sure is!

Welcome to ATS!!!



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 09:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: pyramid head


Most of these studies are intended for people within the field to scrutinize, so when you just post them without understanding them you do everyone a disservice.


Then good thing you are here to make the record you want to make, eh?

I obviously did not conduct the study, and I obviously did not come to the conclusions of this study... others with far more knowledge than I did all that.



No, but you used it as evidence to support your argument. I'm not making any "record", just pointing out that the study you posted is garbage.

You don't have to conduct a study to understand it, but you don't understand it and posted it, that was my point.

It's fine to post studies as long as you understand them, but most people do not because they're intended for people in the field.



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 10:32 AM
link   
Can you imagine the advertising deluge if
Budweiser found out beer kills cancer cells?
It may become mandatory.



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: pyramid head


...but you used it as evidence to support your argument.


Hmmmm.... somewhere lines got crossed.

When I presented the link to Dr. Tashkin's research and conclusions, it was in direct response to a specific comment, and was only indirectly related to the subject of the OP. It was not presented as an argument so much as to inform.

If you think you know better than a pulmonologist who has been studying the matter for 30 years and conducted the largest study to date on the matter, okay. Feel free to tell the whole world the flaws you perceive, post links, make your record. I won't argue with either of you.



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 11:39 AM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I have two aunts who smoked weed their whole lives and died in their 60's due to complications caused by emphysema. The doctors all agreed it was due to their daily use of marijuana and medical studies agree with those doctors.

So while your observations are anecdotal, mine are backed by science as has been proven and discussed in other threads.



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 11:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: pyramid head


...but you used it as evidence to support your argument.


Hmmmm.... somewhere lines got crossed.

When I presented the link to Dr. Tashkin's research and conclusions, it was in direct response to a specific comment, and was only indirectly related to the subject of the OP. It was not presented as an argument so much as to inform.

If you think you know better than a pulmonologist who has been studying the matter for 30 years and conducted the largest study to date on the matter, okay. Feel free to tell the whole world the flaws you perceive, post links, make your record. I won't argue with either of you.


Same thing. "Inform" ,support, you used it. Being a pulmonologist or practicing for thirty years doesn't make you infoulable and is irrelevant to what I was saying.

I don't care about his credentials, there are lots of garbage studies done by doctors, any time spent in a graduate level program will show you that through journal club.

I was educating you and anyone else reading that "study". It's garbage, and you can't argue the merits of the study because you don't understand it. Just pointing out you should understand what you link to.

If you would like to argue the reasoning for the study making no reference to squamous changes being present in the patients in the study, I'd be happy to listen.



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 12:08 PM
link   
a reply to: pyramid head


If you would like to argue the reasoning for the study making no reference to squamous changes being present in the patients in the study, I'd be happy to listen.


That's very generous of you, but no, I have no desire or intention to argue the matter with you. I appreciate what you have already shared, and you are welcome to add to it.



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 12:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: rigel4


Sorry if this sounds glib...but it didn't work for Bob Marley
who was a rastafarian!!


RIP Bob Marley.

Unfortunately, smoking weed does not have the medicinal effects Mr. Marley needed, which is an effective means of delivery for THC, but not the cannabinoids which activate the immune system response. Mr. Marley did not have the opportunity to treat himself with the cannabis products we have today. He chose another natural diet-based method of treatment available at the time.



Watch this www.youtube.com... and read these www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
edit on 26-1-2016 by jondoeuk because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 12:50 PM
link   
See this page from the same section of the NIH website on cannabis and cannabinoids from 2011 web.archive.org...://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/cannabis/healthprofessional/page4

Also when taken by mouth, cannabinoid entry into the body is erratic. As little as 4% of an oral dose reaches the bloodstream — too little to be reproducibly and therapeutically useful www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
edit on 26-1-2016 by jondoeuk because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-1-2016 by jondoeuk because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 05:22 PM
link   
I believe they are talking of Cannabis Oil...not smoking it.



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 05:22 PM
link   
I believe they are talking of Cannabis Oil...not smoking it.



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 05:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: jondoeuk

Thank you for the study links. For easy reference for everyone, here are the linked titles:

Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol enhances breast cancer growth and metastasis by suppression of the antitumor immune response.

Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol inhibits antitumor immunity by a CB2 receptor-mediated, cytokine-dependent pathway.

Human Cannabinoid Pharmacokinetics



There are more studies found evidence that cannabinoids, under some circumstances, actually stimulate cancer cell growth and possibly contribute to tumor progression www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... Furthermore, cancer cells can develop resistance to cannabinoids and start growing again www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 05:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: daveinats
I believe they are talking of Cannabis Oil...not smoking it.



I highly doubt it. It's likely they are referring to highly purified canabinoid agonists (i.e., THC, CBD and so on) and discuss the preclinical data. There have been very few studies in humans in regards to treating cancer www.nature.com... but this is now changing and a number are either planned or ongoing www.cancerresearchuk.org... clinicaltrials.gov... clinicaltrials.gov... clinicaltrials.gov...
edit on 26-1-2016 by jondoeuk because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
96
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join