"what your government knows about cancer and isnt telling you"

i wonder how long until this is closed because of "legalities" or some other excuse that is not applicable at all to the subject at hand

the following thread involves the topic that is: medical information the government possesses and does not involve any type of legality, OR personal use

so im sure its only a matter of minutes until a new policy is enacted to close this thread





i just recently came across the following huffington post article while doing some research

the article is old, it is from june 2008, but i feel it contains important information

the title i posted for this thread, is the same title from the story that was written in the following link, i did that so there is no "confusion" or "misleading" thread titles


www.huffingtonpost.com...



it involves research done by the writer Paul Armentano who works for the huffington

In 2007, I reviewed over 150 published preclinical and clinical studies assessing the therapeutic potential of marijuana and several of its active compounds, known as cannabinoids. I summarized these numerous studies in a book, now in its third edition, entitled Emerging Clinical Applications for Cannabis and Cannabinoids: A Review of the Scientific Literature. (NORML Foundation, 2008) One chapter in this book, which summarized the findings of more than 30 separate trials and literature reviews, was dedicated to the use of cannabinoids as potential anti-cancer agents, particularly in the treatment of gliomas.

Not familiar with this scientific research? Your government is.

In fact, the first experiment documenting pot's potent anti-cancer effects took place in 1974 at the Medical College of Virginia at the behest federal bureaucrats. The results of that study, reported in an Aug. 18, 1974, Washington Post newspaper feature, were that marijuana's primary 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."

the most important part of this story in my opinion is the fact that results of medical marijuana studies have been suppressed rather then shared unbiasedly with the medical community

i also find it intriguing that even though medical benefits have been found, they have not been fully pursued no matter what the opposition will surely try to state

there are other things about this article obviously that are interesting, but we cant talk about them here, so lets stick to what we can

Despite these favorable preliminary findings (eventually published the following year in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute), U.S. government officials refused to authorize any follow-up research until conducting a similar -- though secret -- preclinical trial 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, the U.S. government shelved the results, which only became public after a draft copy of its findings were leaked to the medical journal AIDS Treatment News, which in turn forwarded the story to the national media.

www.huffingtonpost.com...


so in its own government studies, they have found benefits, yet do their best not to tell us or do anything about it

Ya I have done a massive amount of research on cannabis and you are absolutely right that the government knows it can cure cancer but still suppresses it. Not to mention cannabis can help for so many other diseases its ridiculous. But the reason its illegal is because of the pharmaceutical industry which is almost a 1 trillion dollar a year industry. So lets think about it a lot of there money comes from cancer therapy and kemo which all the stuff they do to cancer patients ends up killing them in the end and not even the cancer it self. Also I would like to point out that probably nearly half of the money they make comes from the millions of americans who are prescribed to anti-depressants, anti-anxiety and pain medications all of which cannabis can relieve symptoms better than any drug on the market is all natural and anyone can grow it in there backyard. Thus they have no way to make a profit on something that they cant control and manufacture sooo almost all their profit suddenly will go away. Thats only the pharmeceutical industry because the oil industry wouldn't do as well as they are becasue you can produce a lot more of ethanol from hemp instead of corn. Its all once again government bull # so they can take advantage of ignorant people and make enormous amounts of profit while they're at it.

reply to post by xSe7eNx


Yep. It's all about profit. The sole purpose of governments these days is to do everything possible to maximize the profit potential of the corps that pay for the campaigns.

We the people, are completely out of the equation; except as consumers of the manufactured stuff. We are so beholden to and regulated by the system that we will soon be in the position of not being allowed to grow or make anything for ourselves.

At least that is what they want. What concerns me is that so few people seem to have even a minimal awareness of this. They accept death induced or caused by the medical industrial complex as if it was natural.

The cure for Cancer has been out since the 1950s but only a few hand full of people has gotten it, i.e major CEOs, high ranking generals ect. They won't release the cure because Cancer generates billions of dollars each year, so why make it public when all of this money is at state?

Baking soda is an alternative to treat cancer. Cancer cells hate oxygen. That is from what I hear. Make sure you get (Aluminum free) baking soda

Just like oxygen buring off fat tissue.

I'm thinking that I will use those particular alternatives made from natural herbs instead of artifical chemical compounded crap.



[edit on 12-3-2010 by Shrukin89]

If i am diagnosed with cancer, i will use all methods available. i will not limit myself to anything, choosing life instead of ideology.

Chemotherapy sucks, but it has a proven cure rate in many forms of cancer (my mom is still with me because of R-CHOP).

Is there likely something better? Absolutely. It isn't just about money, it is about population control. If people keep having kids like chinchilla's, and start living to 120, how will we ensure adequate quality of life?

Such are the grim choices that our "leaders" make. Resource allocation is a primary function of government, whether we like it or not.