Cancer is a bitch Now that we've met, first more about me. A large chunk of my career has been in cancer research and drug development. Let’s get two things straight, right here and right now. One, there is no cure for cancer that the big bad Pharma wolf is hiding from us to keep making money off treatments. Two, there will never be a cure for “cancer.” Don’t believe me on either? Well, let’s chat about that, shall we?
Well, thank you, but I still don't understand. I read the link from Carlos. THC shrinks tumors but in some cases makes them grow really fast. That might be the kind of thing Carlos S was referring to.
If you think Big Pharma is hiding ANY cures, then you don't understand anything about how drugs are approved. We've "cured" lots of diseases in animal models. To actually show something cures something in people you need studies in people. How exactly are these secret studies being done? On the movie set from the fake moon landing?
Sometimes, yes, an approved and marketed drug will show an adverse event ("medicines that harm us") that isn't worth the risk over the benefit the drug provides (Vioxx), then the drug is pulled from the market. All the other examples (proton pump inhibitors linked to dementia) are either bullshit (see my first article about cell phones being linked to cancer...unless you think I'm also a shill for Big Cell Phone!) or have inconclusive data.
Yeah, the pharma industry is for profit. If it wasn't there would be almost no new drugs and you could enjoy aspirin and a Band Aid next time you get sick with just about anything.
I'm sorry abt your friend. I don't recall the exact quote in Sagan's article referring to THC. Interesting that it has both a " shrinking " and also an " expanding " effect on other types of cancer cells.
Point. Maybe not so much "battle" as "that jumps out at me and kind of sticks in my craw." If I say anything I usually stop at something like "begging the question doesn't mean what you think it means and is more complicated than that but go on . . ."
I agree. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle - that it has certain medical properties that are valuable in treating certain health issues. I'm happy to see it treated as a medical issue. I'm very unhappy at all the agendas people bring to the discussion.
I'm not talking about anecdotal evidence, I'm talking about research treating cancerous tumors with CBD that was done at National Institutes of Health.
There are lots of compounds that shrink and even make tumors disappear in mice. Promising ones move up the research chain and the best ones into the clinic. Here's a good journal article summarizing the state of the research.
In a nutshell, they shrink tumors in mice and there are several scientific rationales for why. This is for THC derived compounds, though, not just the oil you mention. Clinical trials to come (or may already be ongoing).
This was a very good article, and I do hope the promise of better screening is fulfilled. Unhappily, it won't come soon enough to save my uncle. My mom read about something promising in a recent Reader's Digest article, it sounded legit/non-quacky, but for reasons I don't understand, his wife and daughters seem resistant to taking the chance.
Well, thank you, but I still don't understand. I read the link from Carlos. THC shrinks tumors but in some cases makes them grow really fast. That might be the kind of thing Carlos S was referring to.
How to make them stop saying it? But the real meaning is so complicated.
If you think Big Pharma is hiding ANY cures, then you don't understand anything about how drugs are approved. We've "cured" lots of diseases in animal models. To actually show something cures something in people you need studies in people. How exactly are these secret studies being done? On the movie set from the fake moon landing?
Sometimes, yes, an approved and marketed drug will show an adverse event ("medicines that harm us") that isn't worth the risk over the benefit the drug provides (Vioxx), then the drug is pulled from the market. All the other examples (proton pump inhibitors linked to dementia) are either bullshit (see my first article about cell phones being linked to cancer...unless you think I'm also a shill for Big Cell Phone!) or have inconclusive data.
Yeah, the pharma industry is for profit. If it wasn't there would be almost no new drugs and you could enjoy aspirin and a Band Aid next time you get sick with just about anything.
I'm sorry abt your friend. I don't recall the exact quote in Sagan's article referring to THC. Interesting that it has both a " shrinking " and also an " expanding " effect on other types of cancer cells.
I don't think it should be used as a Trojan 🐎, is not a panacea, also not snake oil.
Point. Maybe not so much "battle" as "that jumps out at me and kind of sticks in my craw." If I say anything I usually stop at something like "begging the question doesn't mean what you think it means and is more complicated than that but go on . . ."
I agree. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle - that it has certain medical properties that are valuable in treating certain health issues. I'm happy to see it treated as a medical issue. I'm very unhappy at all the agendas people bring to the discussion.
I'm not talking about anecdotal evidence, I'm talking about research treating cancerous tumors with CBD that was done at National Institutes of Health.
There are many aspects to Trump voters but it seems to me that the primary driver is stupidstition and willful ignorance.
Thoughts and comments on this will be appreciated.
There are lots of compounds that shrink and even make tumors disappear in mice. Promising ones move up the research chain and the best ones into the clinic. Here's a good journal article summarizing the state of the research.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.go...
In a nutshell, they shrink tumors in mice and there are several scientific rationales for why. This is for THC derived compounds, though, not just the oil you mention. Clinical trials to come (or may already be ongoing).
Great. I hope so. Thanks.
This was a very good article, and I do hope the promise of better screening is fulfilled. Unhappily, it won't come soon enough to save my uncle. My mom read about something promising in a recent Reader's Digest article, it sounded legit/non-quacky, but for reasons I don't understand, his wife and daughters seem resistant to taking the chance.
Not familiar with those. Do you have a link, please?
I have cancer. You're my FAVORITE.
Thanks for the informative article. Keep us posted.
OT: This is why positive feedback isn't always a good thing. We're well and truly fucked.
https://www.ndtv.com/world-...