PDA

View Full Version : New study shows marijuana may fight cancer



DolFan31
01-21-2008, 04:18 PM
http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t...%3D55357&cid=0 (http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct=us/1-0&fp=4794e5943eaeefa9&ei=Gv2UR4avCo66ygS18LT3CA&url=http%3A//www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx%3FMenuID%3D158%26ContentID%3D55357&cid=0)

Dr Robert Ramer and Dr Burkhard Hinz of the University of Rostock in Germany investigated whether and by what mechanism cannabinoids inhibit tumour cell invasion.
Cannabinoids did suppress tumour cell invasion and stimulated the expression of TIMP-1, an inhibitor of a group of enzymes that are involved in tumour cell invasion.
“To our knowledge, this is the first report of TIMP-1-dependent anti-invasive effects of cannabinoids,” the two researchers said in a joint statement.
“This signalling pathway may play an important role in the anti- metastatic action of cannabinoids, whose potential therapeutic benefit in the treatment of highly invasive cancers should be addressed in clinical trials,” the authors said.


It seems Marijuana has anti-cancer effects-- yet the US Government still says it has "no medicinal value". Another benefit of Marijuana, when will we legalize it? What will it take for the FDA to at least recommend Marijuana for fighting cancer?

Celtkin
01-21-2008, 04:45 PM
I'd have to read the manuscript but I'll bet that they didn't have cancer patients smoke marijuana to observe the effects on tumor cells. My guess is that cannabinoids were used to treat cells in culture.

Celtkin
01-21-2008, 04:49 PM
I'd have to read the manuscript but I'll bet that they didn't have cancer patients smoke marijuana to observe the effects on tumor cells. My guess is that cannabinoids were used to treat cells in culture.

Yep:


METHODS: Matrigel-coated and uncoated Boyden chambers were used to quantify invasiveness and migration, respectively, of human cervical cancer (HeLa) cells that had been treated with cannabinoids (the stable anandamide analog R(+)-methanandamide [MA] and the phytocannabinoid delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol [THC]) in the presence or absence of antagonists of the CB1 or CB2 cannabinoid receptors or of transient receptor potential vanilloid 1 (TRPV1) or inhibitors of p38 or p42/44 mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathways.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18159069?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

DolFan31
01-21-2008, 04:52 PM
Yea, and there are ways to ingest MJ without smoking it. That is the problem with opponents of any kind of MJ legalization for either health or recreational is that they fail to understand that you dont need to smoke MJ for the desired effects.

DolFan31
01-21-2008, 04:54 PM
Also, they did another study on this over the summer using rats who had enlarged tumors. When they injected the rats with THC, the tumors shrank.

http://www.healthday.com/Article.asp?AID=603764
http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/4946.html(links another article from HealthDay).

Celtkin
01-21-2008, 04:57 PM
Yea, and there are ways to ingest MJ without smoking it. That is the problem with opponents of any kind of MJ legalization for either health or recreational is that they fail to understand that you dont need to smoke MJ for the desired effects.

Just because a drug has medicinal uses as does marijuana, it doesn't follow that it should be legalized for recreational use. For example, heroin is a strong analgesic but it remains illegal for non-medical uses.

I believe that marijuana will be legalized for medicinal uses in the near future but legalization for recreational use is probably not going to happen any time soon.

Dolphan7
01-21-2008, 05:23 PM
Just because a drug has medicinal uses as does marijuana, it doesn't follow that it should be legalized for recreational use. For example, heroin is a strong analgesic but it remains illegal for non-medical uses.

I believe that marijuana will be legalized for medicinal uses in the near future but legalization for recreational use is probably not going to happen any time soon.
For all you legalization proponents - theres still Booze!

SkapePhin
01-21-2008, 08:24 PM
For all you legalization proponents - theres still Booze!

booze and weed function in completely different ways.. Marijuana, in essence, is nothing more than an anti-anxiety medication.. Booze is much more debilitating and dangerous.

Dolphan7
01-21-2008, 10:14 PM
booze and weed function in completely different ways.. Marijuana, in essence, is nothing more than an anti-anxiety medication.. Booze is much more debilitating and dangerous.Not to be argumentative but I guess it depends on the type of pot you are smoking. There are some blends that will knock you on your keester, and debilitates just as effectively as booze. Now I could be speaking from experience, but I don't know I can't remember. :lol:

Eshlemon
01-22-2008, 12:14 AM
THC research is really still just in it's infancy of research for future medicinal benefits:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/08/070801112156.htm
Marijuana Component Opens The Door For Virus That Causes Kaposi's Sarcoma

ScienceDaily (Aug. 2, 2007) — The major active component of marijuana could enhance the ability of the virus that causes Kaposi's sarcoma to infect cells and multiply, according to a team of researchers at Harvard Medical School. According to the researchers, low doses of Ä-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), equivalent to that in the bloodstream of an average marijuana smoker, could be enough to facilitate infection of skin cells and could even coax these cells into malignancy.


While most people are not at risk from Kaposi's sarcoma herpes virus (KSHV), researchers say those with lowered immune systems, such as AIDS patients or transplant recipients, are more susceptible to developing the sarcoma as a result of infection. Their findings, reported in the August 1 issue of Cancer Research, a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, offer cautionary evidence that those with weakened immune systems should speak with their doctors before using marijuana medicinally or recreationally.

"These findings raise some serious questions about using marijuana, in any form, if you have a weakened immune system," said lead study author Jerome E. Groopman, M.D., professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School. "While THC is best known as the main psychotropic part of marijuana, an analog of THC is the active ingredient of marinol, a drug frequently given to AIDS patients, among others, for increasing appetite and limiting chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting."

While previous studies indicated that marijuana smoking was associated with Kaposi's sarcoma, this is the first to demonstrate that THC itself can assist the virus in entering endothelial cells, which comprise skin and related tissue.


"Here we see both infection and malignancy going on in the presence of THC, offering some serious concerns about the safety of THC among those at risk," Dr. Groopman said. "Of course, we still do not know the exact molecular events that are occurring here, but these results are just the first part of our ongoing research."

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health

Mike13
01-22-2008, 11:56 AM
They should just use Ricky as a guniea pig.

DolFan31
01-22-2008, 12:13 PM
THC research is really still just in it's infancy of research for future medicinal benefits:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/08/070801112156.htm


Ya...but how often do people get infected with Kaposi's virus? I never even heard of it. What provoked them to do this study anyway?

Eshlemon
01-22-2008, 02:51 PM
Ya...but how often do people get infected with Kaposi's virus? I never even heard of it. What provoked them to do this study anyway?

It's not just the herpes virus, but fact a THC weakened immune system causes increased susceptibility to virus shows there is cautionary evidence regarding THC.

It was in the article and is part of ongoing cancer search:


According to Dr. Groopman, the study illustrates the complicated role marijuana and other cannabinoids play in human health. Numerous types of cells display cannabinoid receptors on their outer surfaces, which act as switches that control cellular processes. Dr. Groopman's laboratory had previously demonstrated that THC could have a protective effect against a certain form of invasive, drug-resistant lung cancer.

By altering the cytoskeleton, THC effectively opens the door for KSHV, allowing the virus to more easily enter and infect the cell. "We can take away that effect by using antagonists that block the two cannabinoid receptors, which adds evidence that THC is the culprit," Dr. Groopman said.

Once a cell is infected, the presence of THC may also promote the cellular events that turn it cancerous, the researchers say.

Dr. Groopman should really just have stopped the cancer research after his previous initial demonstrations. Clearly now though his research is tainted because no way could he find any possible detriments to THC without being "provoked".:refuse:

Dol-Fan Dupree
01-22-2008, 04:24 PM
I watched the history of drugs and why they are illegal. It just makes me angry. Pot is pretty much illegal to help get rid of mexicans.

Dolphan7
01-22-2008, 05:37 PM
I watched the history of drugs and why they are illegal. It just makes me angry. Pot is pretty much illegal to help get rid of mexicans.:link:

Eshlemon
01-22-2008, 10:11 PM
I watched the history of drugs and why they are illegal. It just makes me angry. Pot is pretty much illegal to help get rid of mexicans.

:err:

DonShula84
01-23-2008, 03:45 AM
:link:

All I could find was several different places telling similar stories to this. This thread was the first I've heard of this argument so I dont know nearly enough about it to support, or deny it.


uring the Great Depression of the 1930s, lawmakers in the Southwestern states including Texas were in a pickle. During the preceding decades of prosperity, Mexican immigrants were welcomed to the Southwest as a needed source of labor.
By the time the Depression set in, however, this same immigrant population was now viewed with suspicion and fear, seen as a threat to remaining American jobs. The problem, of course, was what to do or, plainly, how to get rid of them. Pot was the key. Mexicans were known to grow and smoke pot, lawmakers reasoned; making pot illegal demonizing it, linking its use to violence would certainly help move those Mexicans back south across the border or, just as good, lock 'em up in jail. Either way, problem solved!


http://www.november.org/stayinfo/breaking07/BrainOnDrugs.html


The anti-marihuana law of 1937 was largely the federal government's response to political pressure from enforcement agencies and other alarmed groups who feared the use and spread of marihuana by "Mexicans." Recent evidence also suggests that the Federal Bureau of Narcotics resisted the enforcement burden of the antimarihuana law until mounting pressure on the Treasury Department led to a departmental decision, probably in 1935, to appease this fear, mostly in the Southwest and West, by federal legislation.

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/history/mustomj1.html

2nd link has some pretty compelling stuff imo.

DolFan31
01-23-2008, 01:57 PM
A lot of that is true, because cocaine was used as a PR scare tactic against poor blacks living ghetto in the early 20th century. Most of us are too young to think of our world being a very hateful, ignorant place with regaurds to people of color. But back then, all you had to say was "ok, marijuana is making these mexicans crazy and theyll rape your women!" Most people back then didnt even know what marijuana was. It wasnt until the 60s that marijuana was commonplace.

Dolphan7
01-23-2008, 02:08 PM
All I could find was several different places telling similar stories to this. This thread was the first I've heard of this argument so I dont know nearly enough about it to support, or deny it.



http://www.november.org/stayinfo/breaking07/BrainOnDrugs.html



http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/history/mustomj1.html

2nd link has some pretty compelling stuff imo.And here I thought it was the competition of hemp against paper and man-made fibers.


By the early twentieth century, the advent of the steam engine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam_engine) and the diesel engine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_engine) ended the reign of the sailing ship (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sailing_ship). The advent of iron and steel for cable and ships' hulls further eliminated natural fibers in marine use, although hemp had long since fallen out of favour in the sailing industry in prefernce to manilla hemp. The invention of artificial fibers in the late thirties by DuPont (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DuPont) further put strain on the market.


The decision of the United States Congress (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congress) to pass the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1937_Marijuana_Tax_Act) was based in part on testimony derived from articles in newspapers owned by William Randolph Hearst (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Randolph_Hearst), who had significant financial interests in the timber industry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logging), which manufactured his newsprint. The background material also included that from 1880 to 1933 the hemp grown in the United States had declined from 15,000 to 1,200 acres, and that the price of line hemp had dropped from $12.50 per pound in 1914 to $9.00 per pound in 1933.[14] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp#_note-12) [15] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp#_note-News) As a result of the act, the production and use of hemp discontinued.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp

SpurzN703
01-23-2008, 03:24 PM
Not to be argumentative but I guess it depends on the type of pot you are smoking. There are some blends that will knock you on your keester, and debilitates just as effectively as booze. Now I could be speaking from experience, but I don't know I can't remember. :lol:

:lol:

Something along the lines of Maui Wowie?