Marijuana compound shows promise in fighting breast cancer

[callous taoboy]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/11/071123211703.htm

[tridim]

1. Ahh, another promising study that will be ignored because it doesn't boost profit and dividends.

Capitalism is cancer's worst enemy.

And the article is wrong about CBD not being available in raw cannabis. We already have many strains that are very high in CBD and low in THC. The fact that CBD is also a schedule I drug is simply insane.

[Fumesucker]

3. I disagree..

Capitalism is cancer's best friend, not its worst enemy.

[tridim]

4. You're right, but I think you know what I meant. :)

[Fly by night]

21. At the NORML convention, one presenter discussed 60+ cannabis strains with 5+% CBD are now known.

Since the article in the OP is four years old, the inaccuracy about CBD is probably not the only thing out-of-date in it.

[drokhole]

2. What If Cannabis Cured Cancer?

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/what-if-cannabis-cured-cancer/

The film is a bit dry, but highly informative and definitely worth the watch. This story was also recently in the news:

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2011-05-05/news/29530229_1_medical-marijuana-medicinal-marijuana-cancer-treatments

Here, it wasn't only the cannabis, but the fact that it allowed the child a healthy appetite that helped his body recover. But, you know, it's a Schedule I - not arbitrarily at all - so it has no medical benefits...

[tridim]

6. What if Cannabis PREVENTED cancer?

That's an equally interesting question.

I know for a fact that it prevents stress in very low dosages, which I discovered when I used to live in a state that didn't arrest you for caring enough about yourself to seek natural, non-toxic treatment.

I have always believed that stress is a major cause of disease, and I wouldn't be surprised if it also caused cancer.

[shanti]

16. jury still out on that

i know of several heavy cannabis consumers who died from cancer, so it didn't help them. don't forget that bob marley also died from metastasized cancer of his big toe.

[tridim]

18. Most current research says it seems to work on chest, neck, mouth and brain tumors

Not surprised that it didn't help with Bob's big toe. It also depends on the CBD/THC ratio of the strains he was smoking in mass quantities.

[Fly by night]

19. Single examples don't prove much. Large case-control studies, however, are pretty convincing.

Feds' Top Pot Researcher Says Marijuana Does Not Cause Lung Cancer:

A U of California researcher who has performed US-government sponsored studies of marijuana and lung function for over 30 years says that pot does not cause lung cancer. Dr. Donald Tashkin said that, when he began his work thirty years ago, he "opposed ... legalization because thought it would lead to increased use and that would lead to increased health effects." However, he now admits that his decades' worth of scientific research revealed an opposite conclusion.

In 2006, Tashkin led the largest population case-control study ever to assess the use of marijuana and lung cancer risk. The study, which included more than 2,200 subjects (1,212 cases and 1,040 controls), reported that marijuana smoking was not positively associated with cancers of the lung or upper aerodigestive tract – even among individuals who reported smoking more than 22,000 joints during their lifetime.

"What we found instead was no association and even a suggestion of some protective effect," Tashkin told the newspaper chain, noting that cannabinoids cause "cells die ... before they age enough to develop mutations that might lead to cancer." For more information on marijuana smoke and cancer risk, please see: http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=6891.

A literature review of cannabinoids' anti-cancer properties is available at: http://www.norml.org//index.cfm?Group_ID=7008.

"We hypothesized that there would be a positive association between marijuana use and lung cancer, and that the association would be more positive with heavier use," he said. "What we found instead was no association at all, and even a suggestion of some protective effect."
---

Marijuana May Reduce Risk of Certain Cancers, Study Says
August 27, 2009

A new study finds that long-term marijuana users have a lower risk of certain head and neck cancers, Reuters reported Aug. 25.

Researchers from Brown University studied patients with head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and a control group and found that subjects who had smoked marijuana for 10 to 20 years had a 62-percent reduced risk of getting HNSCC. Those who smoked marijuana 0.5 to 1.5 times per week had a 48-percent reduction in risk.

The study authors, led by Karl T. Kelsey, said that the findings may be linked to the known anti-tumor action of cannabinoids. However, they cautioned that larger studies are needed to confirm the findings and that the risks of marijuana use may outweigh any health benefits.

The study was published in the August 2009 issue of the journal Cancer Prevention Research.
---------

As with the four year old research covered in the OP, we have discussed the Tashkin and Kelsey studies here innumerable times. I guess repetition never hurts, just as long as the reader knows this is nothing new.

[shanti]

24. sorry if i was misunderstood

i didn't mean to suggest that cannabis CAUSED cancer, just that it didn't help it. both of the people i knew, died from brain cancer.

[Fly by night]

25. Cannabis has been shown to kill at least a half dozen cancer cell types, including ...

... gliomas, a type of brain cancer that is very hard to treat. Once again, single examples (or two examples) are just that. But well-controlled in vitro, in vivo and case-control studies have shown that cannabinoids can play a powerful role in our efforts to prevent and treat cancer, if and when we are allowed to use it.

We've known that cannabis kills cancer since at least the mid-70s, when the Medical College of Virginia reported that finding (and promptly had their research funds cut off by the DEA and NIDA.)

As I mentioned to someone else, you might want to search the DU/GD archives for "marijuana cancer". You will be amazed how much good (and timely) information we have presented and discussed here.

[drokhole]

23. Great point! Stress plays a HUGE factor on human health...

And we are a nation in constant stress. Not only on our bodies (through the release of the hormone cortisol), but on our brains as well:

http://www.brainrules.net/stress?scene=
(love the 'sabertooth' analogy...also, great book, highly recommended)

The detrimental effects of stress on health are becoming more and more well documented. So, too, the effects on pregnant mothers and their developing child, and how that can negatively effect their development/health for the rest of their lives.

[Mnemosyne]

5. Good, Mom had three different types when she died. Guess I'm

going to have to research this much, much, much more...

[defendandprotect]

7. kr -- Plants are our medicines -- there are no medicines/drugs without plants -- !!

[Desertrose]

10. +1 So true!!!

[Fly by night]

8. Gee. We knew that four years ago (and discussed it here at DU) when this article was published.

Since then, we've discussed the anti-tumor properties of cannabis here on numerous occasions as many of the other 650 peer-reviewed medical journals that document these properties have been published. (Search "marijuana cancer" in the GD archives for some of those discussions.)

Try to keep up. Or not.

[callous taoboy]

11. Seriously.

"Try to keep up. Or not." Was the snark necessary?

[Fly by night]

20. The snark was extra. Pointing out that your OP was four year old "news" probably wasn't.

There are many exciting breakthroughs in medical cannabis and cannabinoid research (most of it done outside this country) that would be of great interest here at DU. I welcome your posting anything on that new research.

I am curious -- what prompted you to post a four year old study here, and now? It would be like me posting "President Bush says finding OBL is unimportant" in GD-Presidential and expecting people to think that this is 2007.

[callous taoboy]

26. I did not know it was four years old.

And if you look at the other, positive, comments here it would seem that several other people had not heard of this before either. You'll also notice that I didn't post it in Latest Breaking either, assuming that the news may be dated.

And who are you anyway, the "Latest pot research only" nazi? This forum is called Democratic Underground becasue it belongs to us all and I'll post whatever the fuck I want to post. I beg you, put me on ignore.

[callous taoboy]

27. Hah! And 26 recs to boot!

[Fly by night]

28. Happy to oblige.

I was curious why you would post such dated research that was discussed here when it was first posted (four years ago) and has been referenced in cannabis-related discussions here ever since. Since I've never once seen you contribute before to any medical cannabis-related discussions here (I would have remembered your nickname -- it is catchy), that is what prompted my question and comment.

But you're right. If you had ever participated in medical cannabis discussions here, you'd know who I am. Rather than discuss this with you any more, I've posted more recent studies in response to others in this thread and, in a second or two, will hit the "ignore" button. That should put both of us out of our misery. Thanks for the suggestion.

Hope you keep up from this point forward. (Or not.)

[BlueIris]

9. Now all the people who hate those of us who don't like pot can scream, "IF YOU HAD BREAST CANCER,

YOU WOULDN'T BE SO NEGATIVE!! PURITAN!!"

I despise people who use these kinds of scare tactics to try to bully those of us who don't think legalization is a great thing or that medical marijuana isn't being horribly absued by many patients. Some of us are allergic to that shit. Wouldn't likely be an option for me even if I did get cancer. And I voted in support of all those who are desperate to have their medicinal pot to have it if it helps them so damn much.

This study will just give these fanatics more ammo to act like cruel animals. Can't wait.

:sarcasm:

[callous taoboy]

12. Wha?

[eShirl]

14. It's perfectly normal (and logical) not to like something one is allergic to.

When our neighbor moved in, she let everyone in the building know she is highly allergic to pot, to the point of having to call an ambulance when she went into anaphylactic (sp?) shock. She won't have to worry about anything wafting to her from our apartment, at least.

[devilgrrl]

13. But I thought marijuana had no medicinal value.

:sarcasm:

[tridim]

22. It doesn't if you're not allowed to use it.

[eShirl]

15. It begs the question, isn't it way past time for the government to reschedule cannabis?

[mountainlion55]

17. You can argue

all the different aspects of Cannabis efficiency all you want. But the fact is people are put in cages and denied freedom for long periods of time for using a plant! Thats just fuckin evil!:smoke: :smoke: :smoke: Overgrow the government!