If it Cures Cancer AND Herpes Can We Legalize It???

Discussion in 'The Drug War Headline News' started by Bellatrix, Sep 28, 2004.

  1. Bellatrix Bellatrix

    • Jr. Activist
    • Since: Sep 27, 2003
    • Posts: 414
    Marijuana May Fight Cancer-causing Herpes

    (Ivanhoe Newswire)
    | Reported September 28th, 2004

    -- A new study shows the compound in Marijuana that produces a high may help block the spread of several forms of a herpes virus that causes cancer.

    The compound is delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC. The findings, reported by University of South Florida researchers in Tampa, may lead to the creation of antiviral drugs based on non-psychoactive derivatives of THC.

    Bellatrix; call me crazy, but I don't think that THIS will be reported on Faux News - they're too busy raising hell over statues in Nelson and the Satanic Democrats/Catholics that are trying to ban/burn/violate the Bible.

    Results of the study show small concentrations of the compound were actually more potent and selective against gamma herpes viruses than the commonly used antiviral drugs acyclovir (Zovirax), gancicyclovir and foscamet.

    THC specifically acts on gamma herpes viruses such as Kaposi’s Sarcoma-Associated Herpes and Epstein-Barr virus. The chemical had no effect on another related virus, herpes simplex-1, which causes cold sores and genital herpes.

    Once a person is infected, these viruses can remain dormant within white blood cells for long periods before they burst out and replicate. This reactivation of the virus boosts the number of cells infected and, thus, increases the chance the cells will become cancerous.

    Kaposi Sarcoma-Associated Herpes virus is associated with an increased risk of cancer that is particularly prevalent in AIDS sufferers. The Epstein-Barr virus predisposes infected people to cancers such as Burkitt’s lymphoma and Hodgkin’s disease.

    Investigators caution that more studies are needed, and they do not recommend people start using “pot” to prevent or treat cancers.

    Bellatrix; I love this little disclaimer at the bottom, with the word "pot" in quotes as if it's some sort of joke. We have a plant here that can save lives and improve the quality of life for the sick and dying. How much more friggin' "research" do they need to do before they can admit that it's legitimate, effective medicine? Anyways, check out BioMed Central for
    the orginal study that was actually published for the first time on September 15th.
  2. Suetaz Suetaz

    • Seasoned Activist
    • Since: Jan 28, 2004
    • Posts: 2,158
    Or check out the article that Bellatrix posted on the 15th. :laugh:

    I'd personally like it if they had research coming out their wazoos. I'm guessing it has to do with the tobacco scare. All those people sueing the tobacco industry scares them away from legalizing something that is smoked. Just because it doesn't have to be smoked, doesn't mean people won't and they are probably worried about getting sued by someone years down the road for legalizing something even remotely harmful.

    I don't think we'll ever convince some people that it is harmless, but we need a ton more proof to convince them. It doesn't make any sense to us not to legalize something that people are already using anyway and have been for thousands of years, but in this day and age of LIABILITY, they are covering their butts. I think all those lawsuits are what is really holding this back. We have to cover our roaches while they cover their collective butts. :rolleyes:
  3. SinsemilaStreet SinsemilaStreet

    • New Member
    • Since: Mar 3, 2004
    • Posts: 222
    Why Non-Psychoactive Alternatives?

    Have any of these pharacutical companies ever stopped to consider that some of us enjoy the 'psychoactive' properties of tetrahydrocannabinol?

    After a long, hard, stressful day at work I can tell you I immensely enjoy the soothing and calming effects a nice fat bowl of cannabis has on me.

    Instead of being stressed out I am actually in a much calmer mood and am more easily able to transisition from stressed-out grad school and working full time mode to making and having dinner, and spending time with the family mode.

    It's also nice to go to a party and chill out with a joint or two, have decent conversation, get mildly stoned and enjoy my entire night while watching my alcohol-drinking brethren get real sick and vomit all over the place and end up regretting how much they drank. I do not have that problem.

    Oh well, to each thier own.
  4. brownie brownie

    • New Member
    • Since: May 30, 2004
    • Posts: 82
    yeah, heaven forbin that people would have a relatively inexpensive medicine (especially if they grow their own!) that wouldn't benefit big corporations, and they'd actually have some fun with too?

    (Sarcasm) No, we need to make it expenisive, without any mind-altering properties and in pill form. can't let them take something natural.

    dirty ****ers

  5. Suetaz Suetaz

    • Seasoned Activist
    • Since: Jan 28, 2004
    • Posts: 2,158
    Pot Shows Promise as Cancer Cure

    By Paul Armentano | AlterNet | September 28, 2004

    Not familiar with clinical research about Marijuana's potential anti-cancer properties? You're not alone.

    Clinical research touted by the journal of the American Association for Cancer Research that shows Marijuana's components can inhibit the growth of cancerous brain tumors is the latest in a long line of studies demonstrating the drug's potential as an anti-cancer agent. Not familiar with it? You're not alone.

    Despite the value of these studies, both in terms of the treatment of life-threatening illnesses and as items of news – the latest being that performed by researchers at Madrid's Complutense University that found cannabis restricts the blood supply to glioblastoma multiforme tumors, an aggressive brain tumor that kills some 7,000 people in the United States per year – U.S. media coverage of them has been almost non-existent.

    Why the blackout? For starters, all of these medical cannabis studies were conducted overseas. Secondly, not one of them has been acknowledged by the U.S. government.

    This wasn't always the case. In fact, the first experiment documenting pot's anti-tumor effects took place in 1974 at the Medical College of Virginia at the behest of the U.S. government. The results of that study, reported in an Aug. 18, 1974, Washington Post newspaper feature, were that Marijuana's psychoactive component, THC, "slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers and a virus-induced leukemia in laboratory mice, and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent."

    Despite these favorable preliminary findings, U.S. government officials banished the study, and refused to fund any follow-up research until conducting a similar – though secret – clinical trial in the mid-1990s. That study, conducted by the U.S. National Toxicology Program to the tune of $2 million concluded that mice and rats administered high doses of THC over long periods had greater protection against malignant tumors than untreated controls.

    However, rather than publicize their findings, government researchers shelved the results, which only became public after a draft copy of its findings were leaked in 1997 to a medical journal which in turn forwarded the story to the national media.

    However, in the eight years since the completion of the National Toxicology trial, the U.S. government has yet to fund a single additional study examining the drug's potential anti-cancer properties. Is this a case of federal bureaucrats putting politics over the health and safety of patients? You be the judge.

    Fortunately, scientists overseas have generously picked up where U.S. researchers so abruptly left off. In 1998, a research team at Complutense's Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology discovered that THC can selectively induce program cell death in brain tumor cells without negatively impacting the surrounding healthy cells. Then in 2000, they reported in the journal Nature Medicine that injections of synthetic THC eradicated malignant gliomas (brain tumors) in one-third of treated rats, and prolonged life in another third by six weeks.

    Last year, researchers at the University of Milan in Naples, Italy, reported in the Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics that non-psychoactive compounds in Marijuana inhibited the growth of glioma cells in a dose dependent manner, and selectively targeted and killed malignant cells through a process known as apoptosis.

    And finally, this month, researchers reported that Marijuana's constituents inhibited the spread of brain cancer in human tumor biopsies from patients who had failed standard cancer therapies.

    Nevertheless, federal officials in this country have refused to express any interest in funding – or even acknowledging – this clinical research. By doing so, they are doing a disservice not only to the scientific process, but also to the health and well being of America's citizenry.

    Paul Armentano is the senior policy analyst for the NORML Foundation in Washington, DC.

Share This Page