Bad ass, been hearing and reading more about this kind of stuff.

Aren't a lot people gonna look like dumb asses when it is determined cannabis can kill cancer...

I handed someone a syringe with Rick Simpson oil and an AC/DC teen yesterday. She has lost an arm, a lung, and part of her diaphragm to cancer. I hope that I just gave her the tools to beat it. I'm on a mission now. Watching the tears stream down her face and the hug she gave me CHANGED ME deep inside.

GP73LPC said:

Bad ass, been hearing and reading more about this kind of stuff.

Aren't a lot people gonna look like dumb asses when it is determined cannabis can kill cancer...

Click to expand...

Like all those people who parrot, "ANYTHING smoked is going to give you cancer!"

CelticEBE said:

I handed someone a syringe with Rick Simpson oil and an AC/DC teen yesterday. She has lost an arm, a lung, and part of her diaphragm to cancer. I hope that I just gave her the tools to beat it. I'm on a mission now. Watching the tears stream down her face and the hug she gave me CHANGED ME deep inside.

Click to expand...

BIG hugs for you, brother!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Le article.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In recent years, there has been a growing interest in the use of cannabinoids, such as THC and cannabidiol (CBD), as potential anticancer agents. They have yielded promising results in both in vitro (cells in a dish) and in vivo (animal) studies, demonstrating a plethora of antitumor effects such as promoting cell death and decreasing cell migration and invasion. While they may look great on paper, support for their efficacy in clinical settings is lacking as no human cancer trials have so far been published. Furthermore, scientists actually know little about how they exert their effects on cancer cells.

A few weeks ago, light was shed on one mechanism of action thanks to a UK study that identified previously unknown signaling platforms that mediated the anticancer effects of THC. Some are hesitant about using THC, however, given the unwanted psychoactive side effects. CBD may therefore represent a more useful therapeutic agent.

In a recent study, published in Biochemical Pharmacology, scientists set out to unpick CBD’s antitumor properties in the lab. Previous work had found that cannabinoids increase the levels of a sticky protein called intercellular adhesion molecule 1 (ICAM-1) on lung cancer cells which decreases their invasiveness and ability to spread (metastasize). However, how they promote cancer cell death was unknown.

To address this gap in our knowledge, scientists used lung cancer cell lines and cells derived from a lung cancer patient and looked at how CBD-induced ICAM-1 affects adhesion of the cancer cells to killer white blood cells called lymphokine-activated killer (LAK) cells.

The researchers discovered that CBD enhanced the susceptibility of these tumor cells to stick to the LAK cells, subsequently promoting their lysis (destruction). Furthermore, when the researchers blocked ICAM-1 using a neutralizing antibody, the effects of CBD were reversed. Likewise, when the researchers used molecular scissors to chop up ICAM-1 mRNA (the blueprint used to make the ICAM-1 protein), or blocked the cannabinoid receptors that CBD binds to, the compound no longer caused the increase in cancer cell destruction.

The researchers then took this one step further by demonstrating that both THC and an endocannabinoid (a cannabinoid naturally produced by the body) mimic both promoted ICAM-1-dependent tumor cell killing. None of the 3 molecules tested in the study were found to increase the killing of non-tumor cells.

Taken together, these data suggest that the cannabinoid-induced ICAM-1 boost on lung cancer cells is responsible for the increased susceptibility of these cells to destruction by LAK cells. This therefore represents a previously unknown antitumor mechanism of cannabinoids, adding to our knowledge of how these compounds exert their effects on cancer cells in the lab. Whether these effects will be induced in humans with cancer, however, remains unknown.


Read more at http://www.iflscience.com/health-an...against-lung-cancer-cells#CIU8Vgo2jcVfKhZJ.99

I'm curious why the psychoactive effects of other drugs aren't being teased out. Like with Vicodin. I would love it if I happen to have a kidney stone, take the Vicodin and could then go on to function for the rest of the day.

Why don't "they" work on that, too?

Seamaiden said:

I'm curious why the psychoactive effects of other drugs aren't being teased out. Like with Vicodin. I would love it if I happen to have a kidney stone, take the Vicodin and could then go on to function for the rest of the day.

Why don't "they" work on that, too?

Click to expand...

Nothing like having to function all day after taking Vicodin or oxycodone. Ever end up at your destination without even realizing how you got there? Scary when you're the only one in the car!

Oh, yes I have. It's really the big reason why my husband pushed me to start growing my own, because he felt the difference in the wife he had was like night and day, and apparently he wants a conscious wife.

Seamaiden said:

I'm curious why the psychoactive effects of other drugs aren't being teased out. Like with Vicodin. I would love it if I happen to have a kidney stone, take the Vicodin and could then go on to function for the rest of the day.

Why don't "they" work on that, too?

Click to expand...

Totally different mechanism. Can't really coax the psychological effects of opiates out, and they actually do this Sea.

There are a ton of opiates formulated for this purpose, you just don't run into them much because very few pass the FDA and those that do are expensive and intended for specific purposes like long term pain management, not short term pain masking like from a kidney stone.

I definitely pay more for 200 Percocet 10 mg combined with apap.

Which is weak sauce. Seriously, straight from the pharmacy... 210 methadone 10 mg, and 240 oxycodone 30mg instant releases = 150$. The Percocet 10s = 200$. How is that possible. Paying more for less

I need to find the blog about American pharmaceutical gouging I read a day or two ago. The gal who wrote it was on a quest for an EpiPen.

squiggly said:

Totally different mechanism. Can't really coax the psychological effects of opiates out, and they actually do this Sea.

There are a ton of opiates formulated for this purpose, you just don't run into them much because very few pass the FDA and those that do are expensive and intended for specific purposes like long term pain management, not short term pain masking like from a kidney stone.

Click to expand...

Interesting. I'm curious why I was offered surgery and not something like this for long term pain management. I was given a drug related to Neurontin way back when, and I can't adequately emphasize how SICK it made me. It was far, far worse than the actual pain.

bongobongo said:

I definitely pay more for 200 Percocet 10 mg combined with apap.

Which is weak sauce. Seriously, straight from the pharmacy... 210 methadone 10 mg, and 240 oxycodone 30mg instant releases = 150$. The Percocet 10s = 200$. How is that possible. Paying more for less

Click to expand...

Supply and demand.

Seamaiden said:

I need to find the blog about American pharmaceutical gouging I read a day or two ago. The gal who wrote it was on a quest for an EpiPen.
Interesting. I'm curious why I was offered surgery and not something like this for long term pain management. I was given a drug related to Neurontin way back when, and I can't adequately emphasize how SICK it made me. It was far, far worse than the actual pain.

Click to expand...

Assuming we're talking back surgery--in which case that's why you were offered the surgery instead of experimental drugs. Surgery has better long term outcomes typically, treating pain with opiates is a long and winding road which has no end and results in physiological and intense psychological stress. Its just not a great medical option. Doctors might be a little script happy these days, but in general they still are intuitive enough that they see enough of these cases and know how they end.

Opiates are just bad. They really ought to be reserved for the most exceptional circumstances. Also, depending when you went through all this--these drugs may not have even been available yet.

Your neurontin description makes me think of my aunt. She has MS and is in an advanced stage. Brain lesions, the whole 9. It also makes her sick, but her pain is SO severe that the neurontin is the only thing that allows her to sleep.

Sometimes pain can be bad enough that such a drug is exactly what the doctor needs to be ordering--but bringing out the big guns early can be stressful to the patient (which defeats the purpose of pain management). I think opiates ought to be prescribed with equal specificity. They are not prescribed deliberately enough anymore, and instead have become something of an all purpose pain treatment.

Yes, back surgery, fusion to be specific. The thing is that the post-surg prognosis was exactly the same as what I was experiencing. Now, 12yrs later, I am SO GLAD I didn't have the surgery! I also don't rely on the opiates for control anymore. Much agreed with your post.