Evidence Weed Cures Cancer! (1 of three)
Posted on 29 June 2012 by smokeandtoke6123
Support ME Finish MARIJUANA PROHIBITION BY RATING SHARING THESE Videos LEGALIZE CANNABIS!
So this video explains it all . For people who dont know about the subject heres some background – Cannabis targets cannabinoid receptors which are situated close to the entire body. Also we would like to broadcast and spread awareness of the following message becoming that we require to discover CURES for cancer and not just Therapies that pharmaceutical businesses enjoy to research (it generates billions in revenues for them) Anyway . Take pleasure in ! Video brought to you by theREALdrugfacts Adhere to on Twitter @realdrugfacts
Video Rating: four / 5
oh really? how many simpsons episodes have you seen? otto, the busdriver? he was a stoner, he was a loser and a bigot (rioting against homer in the movie) we have these stereotypes for a reason, people; MARIJUANA KILLS GRANDMAS!
im 15 years old, and i get high 2-3 times a week. I have been doing this for 6 months and have not yet ever recieved any side effects like paranoia etc.. will I be getting any side effects later on in life if i carry on doing this?
There is no evidence to support this statement, in fact, there is mainstream medical research evidence supporting claims that Marijuana smokers have lower rates of lung cancer than non smokers.
Not as bad as addiction to trolling videos about a herb that’s idiotically illegal. I see you’re a fan of spending your time posting negative comments about Cannabis on multiple videos discussing it’s benefits. I smell an agenda. Get a clue and learn about things properly, not just believing heresay.
References: I either google or search youtube for ECS or Endogenous Cannabinoid System or Robert Melamede. Please check out recent Dr Melamede video’s on the ECS for scientific explanation. If one sounds like a mindless voice of tradition, then you may be safe from heresy, but missing the boat. Objective independent analyses is better than passively accepting what may not be true.
Isn’t that the sad truth. As time moves on, more gov leaders will inevitably encounter cancer among family or friends who eventually use cannabis therapy/treatment and thus discover first hand improvement in quality of life and physical health. Then we finally get another righteous supporter. Slow change for the better is better than none. Your mom’s treatment is right in the eyes of the majority of mature informed people. Help keep her world safe & may she have the best chances for healing!
Enslavement to falsehood can be worse. Consider “if” marijuana truly is: less toxic than aspirin, less of a risk to society than alcohol, and more medical benefit than any other plant of the planet, including anti-cancer, anti-glaucoma, anti-inflammatory response, anti-insulin resistance, anti-gut obesity, “then” doesn’t the “downside” that it causes a calm cool sense of well being and content seem like a petty (perhaps antagonistic) point?
Heard a report of 4 kinds of smokers. Cannabis only, tobacco only, both smoker and non smoker. Both smokers are somewhat “as likely” (or was it “slightly less likely”) to get cancer than non smokers.
If this is true, then it follows that smoking marijuana is better than smoking both pot and tobacco, and may even be better than not smoking anything at all! If you have lung/throat/mouth or nose cancer, then probably best to not smoke cannabis very much.
Cannabis can cure SOME cancer cells, but any kind of smoke is capable of creating cancer in the lungs. During treatment, cannabis can help to an extent and increase your appetite, but unless you smoke with a vaporizer or anything else easier on the lungs, smoking weed will increase your risk of cancer.
pot addiction is bad.
you got it
11:20 LOL
Weed grows wild almost anywhere in the world. It is your God given right to consume or use it anyway you want. The industrial military complex wants you to work til you’re 65, then die, they take a chunk of your inhertance, and the money moves to the next slave. time for revolution is long since come people. Down with the New World Order. Land of the fee. fees
please Google Cannabis Research A to Z
even when you smoke, as an experienced smoker i learn how to control my munchies. Just like when your drunk you’re able to control yourself from doing stupid things.
Fuck dat
smoke blunts
It means that the cannabinoids, like Delta9-THC, activates certain pathways in cancer cells that causes cell death. The cannabinoids would kill the healthy cells, too, but the healthy cells have kinase checkpoints (barriers) to prevent THC from activating pro-death pathways, and the cancerous, damaged cells lose their kinases (barriers) — meaning they can’t defend themselves against THC. Hope that helps!
So has everyone written their congress reps and demanded that the barriers to this research be taken down and funding be allocated to cannabis and natural cannabinoid research? DECLASSIFY HEMP AND CANNABIS NOW. BILLS AWAIT YOUR PUSH IN CONGRESS!
OpenCongress makes it extremely easy to send letters, it does most of the work for you. None of us has an excuse not to speak up, to try to change this. Mongo only pawn in game of life, but Mongo be best pawn he can be!! (~);?)~
so what does all this mean in lay terms (community college smart level) ?
I smoke, but fuck this trial, poor little animals. Weed is not the cure it’s your nutrition and a positive frame of mind that’s gonna save you
“Proof” that something “may” do something is not proof at all. It is “evidence” towards a proof.
@ZelatorUk ya and everyone has ignored cannabis and put it in the dark for god knows how long it’s complete bull shit. Cannabis also helps lots of other pains and sicknesses not just cancer so get your head out of your ass and go eat some garlic, maybe it will stimulate your appetite and reduce any pain you may have. Look at the big picture douce and realize the truth about what is the “perfect plant” for EVERYTHING.
Is that Mr Rodgers at 0:35? Wont you be… my Doctor?
Those other natural compounds are ignored because they aren’t high in number of studies once compared to the vast research covering the cannabinoids. Don’t misunderstand, I love natural chemical compounds, and I 100% agree that they should be studied if they hold significant potential. Capsaicin, as my new friend is looking into, may be superior when it comes to empirical data. Who knows? We’ll see…
Of course there is a LOT of evidence proving that Cannabis has beneficial effects, but if only these same researchers put the same time end effort researching other plant life (most of them happen to be legal) I think they would find a thousand other plants that can “kill” cancer. This is beyond a joke, only very recently Garlic was proven to help fight Cancer, and what about Chillies? The definite prevention to bowel cancer in low doses. People seem to ignore the more readily avaiable cures.
Very good, very good. You may make an interesting discovery just yet! Since it inhibits angiogenesis and metastasis, it already appears to be a potent, diversified anti-tumoral agent. Make sure you read the abstracts, though. You can usually read the results/conclusions or the last three sentences to see if it was successful in exhibiting anti-tumoral action. I’ll get on it!
i’m already up to the 5th page and i’ve counted 22 links so far that seem to show anticancer routes of capsaicin. here is one concerning EGFR/HER 2 pathway and breast cancer: pubmed 19855437 capsaicin inhibiting metastasis: 18985006 inhibiting angiogenesis in vitro and in vivo: 14744780 also, please send me the links to the 81 studies, since you obviously already have them, so i can compare. This may take me awhile : (
80-81 studies, I have counted in my possession, so it’s definitely over 70.
Excuse me for my absolute vernacular, as I try to use ambiguous language. This does appear to be very extensive research, no question about it. Concerning which is more consistent, out of all the studies you find relating to capsaicin killing cancer cells and exhibiting anti-tumoral action, if you found capsaicin able to inhibit metastasis (at least once), inhibit tumor angiogenesis (at least once), and one human study, and these are included in more than 81* studies, then you win. Come at me!
you said there was ‘little’ empirical evidence, i was merely correcting. i don’t consider the amount of papers regarding the apoptosis inducing effects of capsaicin listed on pubmed to be ‘little’ overall, you just said the difference in number of pages (20 to 33) is irrelevant, because not all links pertain to the search. if I went through the subsequent pages and found more than 70 studies regarding capsaicin and cancer inhibition would your attention shift?