THC initiates brain cancer cells to destroy themselves

[HeartCore]

THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, causes brain cancer cells to undergo a process called autophagy in which cells feed upon themselves, according to a study conducted by Guillermo Velasco and colleagues at Complutense University in Spain. Using mice designed to carry human brain cancer tumors, the researchers found that the growth of the tumors shrank when the animals received THC. The study also involved two patients with glioblastoma multiforme, a highly aggressive form of brain cancer. Both patients had been enrolled in a clinical trial designed to test THC's potential as a cancer therapy. The researchers used electron microscopes to analyze brain tissue taken before and after a 26- to 30-day THC treatment regimen. They found that THC eliminated the cancer cells while leaving healthy cells intact. In addition, in what they described as a "novel discovery," the specific signalling route by which the autophagy process unfolds was isolated.

http://www.worldhealth.net/news/thc_initiates_brain_cancer_cells_to_dest

 

[restin]

cool. What I wonder about is, how such a therapy looks like. I mean, is a vaporizer already good enough? How often does one need to take it? etc.

 

[HeartCore]

cool. What I wonder about is, how such a therapy looks like. I mean, is a vaporizer already good enough? How often does one need to take it? etc.

Ingesting hash oil seems to be the best way. Here's a nice docu reg. hash oil and medicinal qualities.

http://www.phoenixtears.ca/

 

[restin]

thanks. I indeed heard about hash oil. What I am wondering though is, if I am also doing something for my body when I vaporize or take weed orally. :wink:

 

[GOD]

Who can say ? but your definately not doing any significant harm to it .

 

[HeartCore]

thanks. I indeed heard about hash oil. What I am wondering though is, if I am also doing something for my body when I vaporize or take weed orally.

Yes it supposedly does, check that documentary of Rick Simpson. There is a part that is exactly about that. The difference between methods of ingesting and how these methods work in relation to eacother.

 

[GOD]

Are you saying that useing cannabis is good for a person ? If so please supply some information . Proof .

 

[restin]

Yes it supposedly does, check that documentary of Rick Simpson. There is a part that is exactly about that. The difference between methods of ingesting and how these methods work in relation to eacother.

Thanks.

Are you saying that useing cannabis is good for a person ? If so please supply some information . Proof .

I think that in reasonable (haha define reasonable) boundaries, it is indeed good. At least in the long-term (alzheimer etc.)

 

[GOD]

Proof .

 

[restin]

No, that's proofless optimism :lol:

 

[Dantediv86]

Go look for it GOD, it's out there there's all the documents from studies made from various universities you can go and get them yourself, make a call, pay a bit and they send you a copy of their documents, that are peer reviewed and repeated plus times, now stop asking for it will you? since you won't take into account personal experiences, then i won't bother you.
have a nice day.

 

[GOD]

I`ve already done that thats why i asked for proof that useing canabis is good for you . Saying its good for you is a massive leap from saying that it can help in some situations . Quantify it , when , where , for who , in what situation ?

Knowing that you go to university i`ll say if you think and talk like you just did in your last post when you do your exams your going to fuck up .

 

[HeartCore]

I`ve already done that thats why i asked for proof that useing canabis is good for you . Saying its good for you is a massive leap from saying that it can help in some situations . Quantify it , when , where , for who , in what situation ?

If it would be bad:

I would feel like it was crack cocaine everytime I rolled a joint and smoked.

I would have this guilt trip letting me know that I am destroying my body and mind everytime I would go get some weed.

My non smoking girlfriend would tell me once in a while to cut back or quit.

I would have to get ritalin or some similar crap to keep focus while working.

The plants would not be so fucking beautiful.

The taste wouldn't be THAT great.

Music would not sound as deep

My art wouldn't be Art

Etc...


Why don't you find us some proof that it's bad for us.

 

[GOD]

Such irelevant , subjective personal views dont help us , you or it . In end effect they only harm the cause . I didnt make any claims , the people who make claims should proove them .

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

Yes, GOD isn't saying cannabis is bad for you, just that you can't make generalized statements that "cannabis is good for a person". It may be good, but it isn't inherently good for everyone. I'm quite certain GOD is correct in pointing out that there are no studies that prove cannabis is good for everyone.

 

[HeartCore]

Yes, GOD isn't saying cannabis is bad for you, just that you can't make generalized statements that "cannabis is good for a person". It may be good, but it isn't inherently good for everyone. I'm quite certain GOD is correct in pointing out that there are no studies that prove cannabis is good for everyone.

I will look if I can dive up that research, it was posted on Alternet about 18 months ago and if I remember correctly, it was copied here as well. The research was about:

- people smoking only cannabis
- people smoking not at all
- people smoking tobacco and cannabis

In a nutshell the outcome was that people using only cannabis where on the top of the social and creative scale compared to the other groups whereas the people smoking tobacco and cannabis in general had a stronger tendency to addictions and have their lives fucked up.

What does this prove? People who have a tendency to get addicted sometimes smoke cannabis and, using just cannabis has a tendency to improve your life (not talking about crap that can happen to you legally in some countries ;)) .


btw:

Whereas most "social drugs" such as alcohol, heroin, cocaine and nicotine suppress growth of new brain cells, the researchers found that cannabinoids promoted generation of new neurons in rats' hippocampi. The study held true for either plant-derived or synthetic versions of cannabinoids.

and

THC has been found to reduce tumor growth in common lung cancer by 50 percent and to significantly reduce the ability of the cancer to spread, say researchers at Harvard University, who tested the chemical in both lab and mouse studies. The researchers suggest that THC might be used in a targeted fashion to treat lung cancer.

Which suggests that in current situation for example in the Netherlands where lungcancer starts to surface more as a non-smoking related disease, smoking cannabis could actually prevent getting lungcancer (I'm saying suggests, I'm in no way a doctor and saying it does)


More

According to a 2007 study by scientists at the California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute, a compound found in cannabis may stop breast cancer from spreading throughout the body.

And

A study by Complutense University of Madrid found the active chemical in marijuana promotes the death of brain cancer cells by essentially helping them feed upon themselves in a process called autophagy. The research team discovered that cannabinoids such as THC had anticancer effects in mice with human brain cancer cells and in people with brain tumors. When mice with the human brain cancer cells received the THC, the tumor shrank.

I mean come on guys, we live in a society where cancer is the number 1 cause of death. And since the seventies it is suggested, time and time again, that THC does something to fight cancer. We are told to take vitamins to stay healthy, I say it's healthy to use cannabis as well since it seems to be preventive of the number 1 cause of death in our society.

 

[GOD]

Thanks Caduceus .

HC , you and that study are still only saying its got a beneficial effects in some cases / some people / some circumstances ..

I remember reading about research that said / sugested that people who take drugs sensibly are more mentaly healthy than people who dont .

I also remember reading that in some tests people that have smoked cannabis are better drivers than people who havent , and much better than people who have drunk alcohol .

Please dont take my words there as undesputable fact , i`m just saying what i read in my own words .

Another thing to remember / think about is that a lot of the studys that were pro or con cannabis were carryed out on animals or tisue cultures in labs and might not have the same results in liveing humans .

I want to know the facts , get the definitions clear and then we can use them to prove things / to prove that cannabis is relatively not as harmefull as very many things that are alowed and are realy dangerous . Like shakeing ones head , tobaco and alcahol for instance .

Guys claiming that hemp seed oil cures cancer and because they are nuts getting thrown out of courts dont help us . A positive and seperate negative data base would . Most of the "studys" that were negative that i have seen had no scientific base .

 

[HeartCore]

Guys claiming that hemp seed oil cures cancer and because they are nuts getting thrown out of courts dont help us . A positive and seperate negative data base would . Most of the "studys" that were negative that i have seen had no scientific base .

That's your problem, you read something, you think you understood, you bash away and then it turns out you got the facts wrong.

It's specifically claimed that not hemp seed oil but, hash oil/thc oil/resin cures cancer. I'm sceptical anyone claiming to be able to cure cancer. Then again, since I smoke (early 1985), these findings surface time and time again about how THC kills cancer cells. You should really watch that documentary on phoenixtears before you start asking for proof. Watch it, look at the people who claim they where terminal and now are cancer free. I found it amazing, everything from the personal testimonies as how the cancer institute and pharmaceutical lobby reacted. But you don't know because you never watched it or if you did, you didn't pay attention.

I don't care, really I don't. It doesn't matter anyway since I bet neither of us has cancer. What I do know is that whenever I get symptoms of skin cancer, I will visit my doctor. But at the same time, I will extract the bud I would otherwise smoke and just apply it to see. If it doesn't help, it certainly doesnt hurt either.

And any psychonaut worth his shit should be aware of the many works on cannabis, not limited to Jack Herer's book and the undeniable fact that cannabis was a major medicine for about 3000 years until it got pushed out by pharmacy.

I want to know the facts , get the definitions clear and then we can use them to prove things / to prove that cannabis is relatively not as harmefull as very many things that are alowed and are realy dangerous

More ignorance. the fact of the matter is nobody died of cannabis in the world since we recorded such things. You can search what you want, the only case you will find is a guy that they could not conclude how he died but he had THC in his blood so they said THC killed him.

Cannabis is less harmfull than sugar, that's a (current standing scientific) fact, so what exactly do you want to proof?

 

[Dantediv86]

I would LOVE to know WHO is it that CLAIMS Hemp SEED oil cures cancer in the first place to Kick their nuts up all the way to their brains to see if they start making sense.
Now! on the personal level: GOD i'm sorry i misunderstood you AGAIN as i'm forced to read your posts too quickly due to my newly found hectic lifestile.
Many others tho overreact to things, often losing focus.
indeed now reasoning upon these posts i can't but notice GOD is right.
definetly smoking cannabis can help in a heap of various conditions, but i wouldn't take just that to say that Cannabis IS good for you 100 of the times
we can say that it's neither bad nor good if you smoke it.
but if you got cancer you shouldn't really smoke it. make hemp oil out of the buds (by extracting the THC) and start applying it directly on the cancer and see IF it works...not all cancers react the same way to the same substance...even though working with my Cellbiology teacher Simon Moeller at UiS and having studied how the CB1 receptor on any cell also regulates programmed cell death...if the cells lack the CB1 receptor due to mutation the cell is not going to react to THC immediately. though i have a hunch it also interacts in the cytoplasmic level in the cascades regulating cell activity to indirectly stop cancer cell reproduction. one more thing THC blocks angiogenesis wich was one of the arguments the anti marijuana bastards were trying to use saying that you couldn't develop a proper bloodsystem of course it's bullshit because anti angiogenesis effects were active only in cancer situations.
Note that the mice indeed are mice, but they are implanted HUMAN cells:

"Then, for three weeks, researchers injected standard doses of THC into mice that had been implanted with human lung cancer cells, and found that tumors were reduced in size and weight by about 50 percent in treated animals compared to a control group. There was also about a 60 percent reduction in cancer lesions on the lungs in these mice as well as a significant reduction in protein markers associated with cancer progression, Preet says.

Although the researchers do not know why THC inhibits tumor growth, they say the substance could be activating molecules that arrest the cell cycle. They speculate that THC may also interfere with angiogenesis and vascularization, which promotes cancer growth."

http://www.aacr.org/home/public--media/ ... aspx?d=744
sorry i quote from the internet... the hardcopies are in the lab and i can't take them nor photocopy them i know you won't believe me, but you know what? the day i get cancer i'll start consuming the highest amounts of oil EVER at least i die happy, do you concede that?

 

[restin]

a major study on human beings that is scientific enough is, I think, yet to be conducted. Such a study would need to be conducted over a human lifetime, with at least 5000 participants and should exclude external sources that would disturb the result.