Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

RainDog

(28,784 posts)
Fri Jun 27, 2014, 07:01 PM Jun 2014

x-p: Regular Cannabis Smoking not associated with lung cancer

Last edited Fri Jun 27, 2014, 07:58 PM - Edit history (1)

More than 2000 controls and nearly 3000 subjects were included in the study from 4 different English-speaking nations.

Their findings are similar to those of a 2013 review published in the journal Annals of the American Thoracic Society, which concluded: "...Habitual use of marijuana alone does not appear to lead to significant abnormalities in lung function. ... Overall, the risks of pulmonary complications of regular use of marijuana appear to be relatively small and far lower than those of tobacco smoking."

An accompanying commentary appearing in the same journal affirmed, "...Cannabis smoking does not seem to increase risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or airway cancers. In fact, there is even a suggestion that at low doses cannabis may be protective for both conditions."

Preclinical studies have documented that cannabinoids possess potent anti-cancer properties, including the inhibition of lung cancer cell growth. To date, however, scientists have yet to conduct controlled clinical trials replicating these results in human subjects.
http://norml.org/news/2014/06/26/study-habitual-marijuana-smoking-not-associated-with-increased-risk-of-lung-cancer


http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.29036/abstract

Abstract

To investigate the association between cannabis smoking and lung cancer risk, data on 2159 lung cancer cases and 2985 controls were pooled from 6 case-control studies in the US, Canada, UK and New Zealand within the International Lung Cancer Consortium. Study-specific associations between cannabis smoking and lung cancer were estimated using unconditional logistic regression adjusting for sociodemographic factors, tobacco smoking status and pack-years; odds-ratio estimates were pooled using random effects models. Sub-group analyses were done for sex, histology, and tobacco smoking status. The shapes of dose-response associations were examined using restricted cubic spline regression. The overall pooled OR for habitual vs. non-habitual or never users was 0.96 (95% CI: 0.66-1.38). Compared to non-habitual or never users, the summary OR was 0.88 (95%CI: 0.63-1.24) for individuals who smoked 1 or more joint-equivalents of cannabis per day and 0.94 (95%CI: 0.67-1.32) for those consumed at least 10 joint-years. For adenocarcinoma cases the ORs were 1.73 (95%CI: 0.75-4.00) and 1.74 (95%CI: 0.85-3.55), respectively. However, no association was found for the squamous cell carcinoma based on small numbers. Weak associations between cannabis smoking and lung cancer were observed in never tobacco smokers. Spline modeling indicated a weak positive monotonic association between cumulative cannabis use and lung cancer, but precision was low at high exposure levels. Results from our pooled analyses provide little evidence for an increased risk of lung cancer among habitual or long-term cannabis smokers, although the possibility of potential adverse effect for heavy consumption cannot be excluded.


A 2008 study concluded: ?9-Tetrahydrocannabinol inhibits epithelial growth factor-induced lung cancer cell migration in vitro as well as its growth and metastasis in vivo

http://www.nature.com/onc/journal/v27/n3/abs/1210641a.html

Abstract

?9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the primary cannabinoid of marijuana and has been shown to either potentiate or inhibit tumor growth, depending on the type of cancer and its pathogenesis. Little is known about the activity of cannabinoids like THC on epidermal growth factor receptor-overexpressing lung cancers, which are often highly aggressive and resistant to chemotherapy. In this study, we characterized the effects of THC on the EGF-induced growth and metastasis of human non-small cell lung cancer using the cell lines A549 and SW-1573 as in vitro models. We found that these cells express the cannabinoid receptors CB1 and CB2, known targets for THC action, and that THC inhibited EGF-induced growth, chemotaxis and chemoinvasion. Moreover, signaling studies indicated that THC may act by inhibiting the EGF-induced phosphorylation of ERK1/2, JNK1/2 and AKT. THC also induced the phosphorylation of focal adhesion kinase at tyrosine 397. Additionally, in in vivo studies in severe combined immunodeficient mice, there was significant inhibition of the subcutaneous tumor growth and lung metastasis of A549 cells in THC-treated animals as compared to vehicle-treated controls. Tumor samples from THC-treated animals revealed antiproliferative and antiangiogenic effects of THC. Our study suggests that cannabinoids like THC should be explored as novel therapeutic molecules in controlling the growth and metastasis of certain lung cancers.
36 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
x-p: Regular Cannabis Smoking not associated with lung cancer (Original Post) RainDog Jun 2014 OP
Sounds promising Rosa Luxemburg Jun 2014 #1
I think it's counter intuitive to many people RainDog Jun 2014 #2
I like sleeping and napping bahrbearian Jun 2014 #4
I read up on this last year RainDog Jun 2014 #6
Agreed! CorporatistNation Jun 2014 #28
A Lot of Good Scientific Info MagickMuffin Jun 2014 #3
That wouldn't be me.. Cha Jun 2014 #32
Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Jun 2014 #5
Thanks for the kick! RainDog Jun 2014 #7
Thank you, RainDog, I just listened to the entire 33+ minutes and that is some most excellent Uncle Joe Jun 2014 #8
how sweet - and it's not even a jam! RainDog Jun 2014 #10
Very interesting ailsagirl Jun 2014 #9
I smoked a lot of pot. Warren Stupidity Jun 2014 #11
Inhaling smoke effects more than just the lungs. And I don't trust the source. randome Jun 2014 #12
LOL. It's actually three sources RainDog Jun 2014 #13
Also cures male pattern baldness whistler162 Jun 2014 #14
It's funny when people dispute refereed science journals RainDog Jun 2014 #15
Reminds me of "scientific" studies in the whistler162 Jun 2014 #18
LOL RainDog Jun 2014 #19
people are unnatural agreed undergroundpanther Jun 2014 #30
Inhalation is part of the earliest forms of religion RainDog Jun 2014 #31
Maybe not milk but Ants do drink honeydew from aphids, that seems pretty natural. Uncle Joe Jun 2014 #34
Can pot really get any more awesome? JaneyVee Jun 2014 #16
Yes: my employer could stop testing for it. TransitJohn Jun 2014 #17
I believe so, I believe they're just scratching the surface of cannabis' uses. n/t Uncle Joe Jun 2014 #20
Here's the "thought experiment" RainDog Jun 2014 #22
Willow Tree Bark/aspirin is a perfect example and the inherent advantage enjoyed by that product Uncle Joe Jun 2014 #25
The herd doesn't create change RainDog Jun 2014 #27
If the herd didn't have the Internet, I would agree with you, but when you combine Uncle Joe Jun 2014 #29
Can President Obama write one of his famous mandates and totally decriminalise marijuana.? Sunlei Jun 2014 #21
Progress is in the works RainDog Jun 2014 #23
It's an herbal pain killer. Recreational use is its own thing. n/t UTUSN Jun 2014 #24
It's a recreational pain killer. immoderate Jun 2014 #26
agreed RainDog Jun 2014 #35
Mahalo to you for the OP, RainDog! Cha Jun 2014 #33
Thanks for the kind words, Cha! n/t RainDog Jun 2014 #36

RainDog

(28,784 posts)
2. I think it's counter intuitive to many people
Fri Jun 27, 2014, 07:49 PM
Jun 2014

And we've all been through years of hearing about the dangers of tobacco smoke, so people naturally extrapolate this message. I think it's interesting because of the recent medical marijuana legalization laws that have excluded smoking.

This puts a burden upon an ill person to purchase an expensive vaporizer, to have the benefit of inhaled cannabinoids.

It seems, thus far, that there are quite a few differences for people, in terms of the experience, between inhaled and ingested marijuana. Inhaled is a far less potent way to dose and is easier to titrate, which is its value to people who only want to use enough cannabis to offset the nausea, etc. but not put them to sleep.

bahrbearian

(13,466 posts)
4. I like sleeping and napping
Fri Jun 27, 2014, 08:28 PM
Jun 2014

My Doctors seem more concerned with Tobacco use more than my MM use and I haven't used Tobacco in 25 years

RainDog

(28,784 posts)
6. I read up on this last year
Fri Jun 27, 2014, 09:05 PM
Jun 2014

The work done by Donald Tashkin, a pulmonary specialist. His work confirms this work as well.

I like sleeping and napping, too, but I also like to be awake. Depends on, you know... lol.

MagickMuffin

(15,893 posts)
3. A Lot of Good Scientific Info
Fri Jun 27, 2014, 07:56 PM
Jun 2014

I say this because there are those among us who are constantly dissing herbal remedies. Hopefully this info will be accepted as good scientifically conducted research.

# 5 REC: Off to the Greatest



Cha

(295,926 posts)
32. That wouldn't be me..
Sun Jun 29, 2014, 02:06 AM
Jun 2014
Herbals remedies including Pot~



JUST IN TIME HERBAL REMEDIES

https://weedmaps.com/dispensaries/california/east-la/herbal-remedies-3

I would think Marijuana doesn't cause lung cancer because it doesn't have any of those deadly addictive carcinogens like the tobacco co add.

MM

RainDog

(28,784 posts)
7. Thanks for the kick!
Fri Jun 27, 2014, 10:11 PM
Jun 2014

since you like these guys, here ya go. Thirty minutes of Mountain peach jam.

The lock upon my garden gate's a snail, that's what it is
(first there is a mountain, then there is no mountain, then there is)
The caterpillar sheds his skin to find a butterfly within
(first there is a mountain, then there is no mountain, then there is)


Uncle Joe

(58,112 posts)
8. Thank you, RainDog, I just listened to the entire 33+ minutes and that is some most excellent
Fri Jun 27, 2014, 11:40 PM
Jun 2014

Last edited Sat Jun 28, 2014, 02:03 AM - Edit history (1)

classical jam.

Here is another great jam song that I love which kind of goes in sinc with the OP.




and here's a non-jam song dedicated to you friend.












ailsagirl

(22,840 posts)
9. Very interesting
Fri Jun 27, 2014, 11:44 PM
Jun 2014

Marijuana can literally burn the throat when inhaled (someone told me).
So it would seem that it's a lot harsher, hence more injurious to throat & lungs, than
tobacco. But what do I know?

I'll have to go back and read the post more closely.


 

Warren Stupidity

(48,181 posts)
11. I smoked a lot of pot.
Sat Jun 28, 2014, 07:15 AM
Jun 2014

I never once encountered this. " throat burn" you speak of. I did burn the roof of my mouth once accidentally sucking in a roach too small to handle.

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
12. Inhaling smoke effects more than just the lungs. And I don't trust the source.
Sat Jun 28, 2014, 07:27 AM
Jun 2014

I'm still not buying into the notion that filling your body with smoke is harmless. And this source touts cannabis as a cure-all for a wide range of maladies. Ambrosia for the 21st century.

Regular smoke inhalation will constrict your arteries. You will have smoker's breath and smoker's skin. Yuck.

I don't understand the need to tout 'benefits' of smoke inhalation. Unless it's to counter the entirely intuitive notion that you are harming your lungs.

There is nothing natural about sticking a weed between your lips and setting it afire.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]The night is always young. It's never too late.[/center][/font][hr]

RainDog

(28,784 posts)
13. LOL. It's actually three sources
Sat Jun 28, 2014, 07:08 PM
Jun 2014

All of them from refereed science journals.

The first is the International Journal of Cancer.

The second is Nature's online journal Oncogene. Nature was founded in 1869 and is also the publisher of Scientific American.

One mentioned, but the work was not linked here is the Annals of the American Thoracic Society. But here's the link to that one: http://www.atsjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1513/AnnalsATS.201212-127FR#.U69IBo1dXnw

The abstract is from an article by Donald Tashkin, who, I mentioned above, is the top pulmonary specialist on the effects of marijuana in the U.S.

I'm not "touting" the benefits - I'm noting that for someone who is ill, the impact of smoked marijuana is not the same as tobacco, and if smoking benefits the patient, the benefit seems to outweigh the cost if they cannot afford to purchase an expensive vaporizer. Yes, I noted it was counter intuitive to us because the anti-smoking campaigns of the last few decades have led to "all or nothing" thinking. But if someone receives an immediate benefit of cessation of, say, nausea from smoking, the harm is less than the harm of someone who cannot keep medicine or food down when they're dealing with cancer, etc.

The source you don't like is Norml - which is making these studies known to people, while mainstream news outlets have relied upon lies from the DEA for decades and have denied information to the public. Norml has a better track record than any news organization in the U.S. for telling the truth about marijuana to the American people. You trust those who lie more than you do those who tell the truth because those who are lying obscure their bias, while the ones telling the truth are also honest about their bias.

There's nothing natural about a lot of the things we do. This doesn't stop us from doing them when they're part of a medical regime that might improve chances of survival or quality of life for someone with cancer, etc.

I thought you might show up on this thread... LOL.

My need is to talk about the result of research that indicates simplistic notions aren't always truths.

 

whistler162

(11,155 posts)
14. Also cures male pattern baldness
Sat Jun 28, 2014, 07:19 PM
Jun 2014

excessive hair, vampire bites and much much more. Today's snake oil!

RainDog

(28,784 posts)
15. It's funny when people dispute refereed science journals
Sat Jun 28, 2014, 07:21 PM
Jun 2014

because they don't like the results.

Reminds me of creationists.

 

whistler162

(11,155 posts)
18. Reminds me of "scientific" studies in the
Sat Jun 28, 2014, 08:02 PM
Jun 2014

19th and early 20th century about intelligence and race. Or more recently on political views and intelligence. But, then the suckers gotta get taken and boy are they getting taken on this subject!

RainDog

(28,784 posts)
19. LOL
Sat Jun 28, 2014, 08:10 PM
Jun 2014

Please continue to explain how this research is anything like the research you talk about. Do you dismiss all scientific research? I would assume this is the case since you cite things entirely unrelated to this subject to bolster your ignorance.

Please, tho, to be consistent, do not take antibiotics or aspirin, etc. to maintain some logical consistency.

Otherwise, you are just demonstrating your culturally-derived bias.

undergroundpanther

(11,925 posts)
30. people are unnatural agreed
Sun Jun 29, 2014, 01:26 AM
Jun 2014

pot smoking is as unnatural as humans drinking other animals milk(cows,goats etc).Humans are the the only animal that drinks other amimals milk as adults....
yet nobody calls out anyone on it,and there are.people who reject milk drinking. And some cannot drink it(lactose intolerance).

RainDog

(28,784 posts)
31. Inhalation is part of the earliest forms of religion
Sun Jun 29, 2014, 01:47 AM
Jun 2014

Incense - which we associate with non-psychotropic materials - also included psychotropic materials for some cultures. One example from the past is the use of a tent, rather than a direct method.

Native Americans use tobacco sacramentally, not habitually.

The expectation of the use of something has much to do with how people approach an issue, as well.

I won't call out anyone for milk drinking... but those yogurt eaters... (j/k)

I seem to remember that milk drinking came about for some adults because of a genetic mutation about 3000 years after the development of agriculture - and even then milk was used for yogurt or cheese, not drink, for the most part.

Uncle Joe

(58,112 posts)
34. Maybe not milk but Ants do drink honeydew from aphids, that seems pretty natural.
Sun Jun 29, 2014, 02:14 AM
Jun 2014


and some animals like to catch a buzz.



Having said that cannabis is natural and humans are natural so humans smoking, vaping, eating or drinking cannabis is not only natural, it can be organic.

RainDog

(28,784 posts)
22. Here's the "thought experiment"
Sat Jun 28, 2014, 09:19 PM
Jun 2014

If someone could take themselves out of their time and place and imagine that scientists decided to look at a plant that indigenous cultures have used for centuries based upon their claims it is useful for this or that illness, I doubt we would see the reactions cannabis as medicine gets - because they wouldn't have to deal with 70-plus years of lies about something.

We do have an example of this - willow tree bark.

Willow tree bark is, in fact, one of the most amazing plant-based medicines known. It's used to treat a variety of symptoms of different diseases (fever, aches and pains, swelling of joints, and is even recommended as a daily supplement for people with heart disease in small amounts because it thins the blood.)

Here's the list of uses. May treat: Pain, Stroke, Inflammation, Fever, Gout, Osteoarthritis, Rheumatoid arthritis, Rheumatic fever. May prevent: Pain, Heart attack, Pre-eclampsia, Transient ischemic attack, Cerebral infarction.

Not only that... but at least one doctor has talked about the use of this medicine for things like removing sweat stains from fabrics... really. To add to shampoo to treat dandruff, as a paste on skin inflammations, including bug bites. Strangely, people have also noted it can be used to help car batteries in an emergency, and can even be used as drywall filler! crazy stuff. outrageous.

Of course, willow tree bark is not recommended for hemophiliacs because of its blood thinning properties... and it's no longer actually used in the form of willow tree bark by most people- its medically efficacious component - acetylsalicylic acid, has been extracted from the plant and is available over-the-counter as aspirin.

Yet it has all these properties ascribed to it and is considered a "wonder drug" by the New York Times... that notes its potential use as a preventive medication for cancer.

The 2,000-Year-Old Wonder Drug

New reports about aspirin’s benefits in cancer prevention are just as convincing. In 2011, British researchers, analyzing data from some 25,000 patients in eight long-term studies, found that a small, 75-milligram dose of aspirin taken daily for at least five years reduced the risk of dying from common cancers by 21 percent.

In March, The Lancet published two more papers bolstering the case for this ancient drug. The first, reviewing five long-term studies involving more than 17,000 patients, found that a daily low-dose aspirin lowered the risk of getting adenocarcinomas — common malignant cancers that develop in the lungs, colon and prostate — by an average of 46 percent.

In the second, researchers at Oxford and other centers compared patients who took aspirin with those who didn’t in 51 different studies. Investigators found that the risk of dying from cancer was 37 percent lower among those taking aspirin for at least five years. In a subsection of the study group, three years of daily aspirin use reduced the risk of developing cancer by almost 25 percent when compared with the aspirin-free control group.

The data are screaming out to us. Aspirin, one of the oldest remedies on the planet, helps prevent heart disease through what is likely to be a variety of mechanisms, including keeping blood clots from forming. And experts believe it helps prevent cancer, in part, by dampening an immune response called inflammation.


Yet, write these same things about cannabis, and suddenly you are talking about snake oil, to some. Cannabis, too, is one of the oldest remedies on the planet, like aspirin. Why don't people attack articles about the medical uses of aspirin, I wonder? The Mayo Clinic notes there is good scientific evidence for some uses for cannabis, while others need more studies - but it doesn't discount those uses - it just says we need more data. This, I guess, makes the Mayo Clinic a purveyor of snake oil, as well.

People believe propaganda and they resist opposing information because it forces them to consider that they have been "bamboozled" by the agencies in this nation that were supposed to exist to protect people rather than lie to them to maintain a bigger lie.

If cannabis did not have this history associated with the repression of minorities in this nation (Latin Americans and African Americans, first and foremost), if it had not been adopted by students in the 1960s as a demonstration of the lies from the govt. (following their "beat" ancestry), who were then singled out by Nixon... people would read information about this plant and go... interesting. A medicine that has been used for thousands of years also has these uses...

When the govt. lifts the restrictions on the study of cannabis, we'll be able to get more information about medical uses, we'll have more studies - but one thing is clear - and this is that cannabis has been used as an analgesic, like aspirin, and as an antiemetic for centuries.

Uncle Joe

(58,112 posts)
25. Willow Tree Bark/aspirin is a perfect example and the inherent advantage enjoyed by that product
Sat Jun 28, 2014, 11:55 PM
Jun 2014

is in never having being demonized for 70 plus years by the press, self-serving politicians, greedy corporate interests and religious dogma.

No doubt overcoming long held programmed beliefs instilled by government, church and then society in general is an extremely difficult emotional and psychological hurdle for many to overcome.

We all want to believe in the things we believe in, but we must keep in mind, that no matter how great the leader; political or religious, they're nothing but human, subject to the same human frailties of ambition, bigotry, fear, greed, inertia and narrow minded thinking as is present to some degree in every other member of our species.

In fact their positions of power may in some ways make them more vulnerable to some of those maladies, for they have used the status quo and it has served them well. Too many of them believe self-serving ambition, demagoguery, fear of rocking the boat, greed, leading by division and inertia are their friends.

That's why this long overdue change in regards to cannabis attitudes originally promoted by top down lies and mass brainwashing is being rectified from the bottom up.

RainDog

(28,784 posts)
27. The herd doesn't create change
Sun Jun 29, 2014, 12:43 AM
Jun 2014

but they follow it... and, frankly, I am very glad Obama is president at this time. He's shown he can resist the herd mentality of D.C. many times.

I could very well be wrong - many things can change between now and then - but I think that, if Congress has not acted by the end of Obama's term, his justice dept. will decriminalize, at the least. This won't solve the problem of the reality that most arrests are done at state and local levels - but if law enforcement does not receive any money from the federal govt. to pursue criminal penalties for possession - those arrests will drop.

If LEOs aren't incentivized to arrest to fluff their stats for funding - which is now the case - they'll have to focus on other things to serve as metrics for performance.

Just a big guess on my part, but I think the things the DoJ has done regarding bias in criminal justice, along with Obama's statements noting the bias in marijuana usage/arrests in the U.S., make me think they will remove this right wing weapon - which is what it's been since its existence, and most especially since Nixon.

Uncle Joe

(58,112 posts)
29. If the herd didn't have the Internet, I would agree with you, but when you combine
Sun Jun 29, 2014, 01:08 AM
Jun 2014

the power of ideas and the power of free speech, I don't believe anything can or will stand in its way for a sustained period of time, when those ideas and speech have obvious merit.

"There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and that is an idea whose time has come." - Victor Hugo

"To suppress free speech is a double wrong. It violates the rights of the hearer as well as those of the speaker." - Frederick Douglass

Nothing combines the powers of idea and speech like the Internet, this is the equivalent of stealing fire from heaven.

I give President Obama credit for the words and actions he has taken, but even he has been very cautious in moving or using the bully pulpit on this issue.

If we didn't have the Internet, I doubt the relatively rapid fire changes that are occurring via the grassroots, cities and states level would've transpired or manifested in the way they have. The corporate media would be doing everything in its' power to nip this in the bud and they would be unchecked.

RainDog

(28,784 posts)
23. Progress is in the works
Sat Jun 28, 2014, 09:57 PM
Jun 2014

in the meantime, if I had an illness and had had a benefit from cannabis, I wouldn't wait for the govt. I mean, by this, uses for nausea/vomiting, pain (including migraine pain and neuropathic pain), for use to help with spasticity for people with MS and CP, for seizure control for various forms of epilepsy - because the benefits, thus far, are much greater than the cost, apart from the societal cost of imprisonment.

But, again, the glacial pace of D.C. may be experiencing some global melting as more people are demanding changes.

Jesus posted this. But here's the original link: http://www.mainstreet.com/article/family/family-health/dea-asks-fda-consider-rescheduling-marijuana-schedule-i-drug?page=1

NEW YORK (MainStreet) — In another sign that the 2014 is turning out to be a watershed year for marijuana drug reform, the federal Department of Drug Enforcement (DEA) has sent up the first of what undoubtedly will be the first of many white flags.

After a historic House vote to defund the DEA's operating budget for marijuana enforcement in the states earlier in the month passed (with a similar one now in the Senate), the government agency has now asked the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to consider removing marijuana from the list of Schedule I drugs as defined by the Controlled Substances Act.

...That said, as marijuana is rapidly turning into the medical story of the year, it is doubtful that the issue will stall for long. Ultimately in a departmental overview such as this, which is highly politicized, impetus comes from the White House.


In April, Holder told the DEA he's interested in talking about cannabis scheduling. The DEA, of course, is under Holder's administrative purview. The Department of Justice administers the DEA.

In January, Obama stated his opinion that marijuana is no more dangerous than alcohol or cigarettes (both substances that are not scheduled in any way). He also noted he supported legalization in Colorado and Washington State.

“It’s important for it to go forward because it’s important for society not to have a situation in which a large portion of people have at one time or another broken the law and only a select few get punished.”

Last September, Attorney General Eric Holder said the Justice Department would work with the states to implement the law, even though federal law continues to prohibit possession or use of the drug.


Jared Polis, D-CO, has stated he does not think Congress will do the right thing - and that is to pass legislation to remove cannabis from the controlled substances act and have it regulated like alcohol for recreational use. Any medical use would fall under the same restrictions any other plant-based substance faces when used for clinical trials. The difference would be that the NIDA and the DEA could not actively work to prevent medical research.

It's easy to elide the two subjects - recreational and medical cannabis - because the distinctions are still connected - the only reason it is so difficult to study potential medical benefits is because of the illegality stemming from its use as a recreational intoxicant. The analogy would be studying the medical uses of coffee. If coffee were illegal (and it was, at one point in western history) medical studies would be impeded by those who didn't want others to drink coffee for pleasure.

RainDog

(28,784 posts)
35. agreed
Sun Jun 29, 2014, 02:27 AM
Jun 2014

so far, its greatest benefit is for palliative uses.

when the government no longer prevents research, scientists will be able to investigate other claims.

although, even Sabet, the anti-legalization guy (with Patrick Kennedy and David Frum) admits that Sativex will soon be on the American market. Sativex is already available in 10 other nations, last time I checked, and maybe more by now, to reduce spasticity in people with MS. Sabet tries to pretend Sativex isn't cannabis because the makers of the inhalant created a mix of cannabis that prevents the effects of THC on mood - elevating mood, according to the drug warriors, is a terrible thing... especially if someone is ill...

This use for MS goes beyond the known uses as an antiemitic or analgesic.

Since the FDA fast tracked a study on epilepsy, and they've also allowed another product made by GW Pharma (the co. that makes Sativex), to be used an an "orphan drug" (whose initial use did not go forward). Current information shows it's useful for another condition (epileptic seizures). GW Pharma looks like it's sitting in the cat bird seat for the moment. I explained this to one of my rich relatives, but who knows if he'll pay attention to what's happening. That was last year and his wife was put off b/c of the scare word "cannabis" with medicine, even tho I know she inhaled in the past. LOL. Can't say I didn't tell them, long ago, what was coming.

The study, last year, that showed mj caused remission in Crohn's disease was a small human study - but if that study is replicated - there's no other medicine known that causes remission of Crohn's disease. Some people even have portions of their intestines removed! - and this still doesn't stop the disease. So, that's another biggie.

If the govt. tries to keep cannabis illegal, while allowing pharma cos to sell cannabis in the U.S. - that's when you can expect that anyone who votes for this will find they are out of a job sooner rather than later, if activists have anything to say about it - and when you have family members who are ill, or retirees on limited incomes - all I have to say is, watch out, Congress.




Latest Discussions»General Discussion»x-p: Regular Cannabis Smo...