Marijuana Chemical May Fight Brain Cancer

Active Component In Marijuana Targets Aggressive Brain Cancer Cells, Study Says

(WebMD)  The active chemical in marijuana promotes the death of brain cancer cells by essentially helping them feed upon themselves, researchers in Spain report.

Guillermo Velasco and colleagues at Complutense University in Spain have found that the active ingredient in marijuana, THC, causes brain cancer cells to undergo a process called autophagy. Autophagy is the breakdown of a cell that occurs when the cell essentially self-digests.

The team discovered that cannabinoids such as THC had anticancer effects in mice with human brain cancer cells and people with brain tumors . When mice with the human brain cancer cells received the THC, the tumor growth shrank.

Two patients enrolled in a clinical trial received THC directly to the brain as an experimental treatment for recurrent glioblastoma multiforme , a highly aggressive brain tumor. Biopsies taken before and after treatment helped track their progress. After receiving the THC, there was evidence of increased autophagy activity.

The findings appear in the April 1 issue of the Journal of Clinical Investigation.

The patients did not have any toxic effects from the treatment. Previous studies of THC for the treatment of cancer have also found the therapy to be well tolerated, according to background information in journal article.

Study authors say their findings could lead to new strategies for preventing tumor growth.

[jkkersey]

You don't ever hear about a pot smoker killing someone on the road you hear about the person was drunk and killed someone. I would rather have pot legal then alcohol. Hey I was on antidepressants to control my PMS you want to talk about being high I felt like I was drunk and stone all in one so what drugs are legal we all questions they effect each person different. If it help someone that needs it so be it. Alcohol is not a need it's a want.

[honestabe8]

I don?t think that you are intentionally being disingenuous about this issue and again thanks for the dialogue
Posted by andie52

Same to you. Have a great day

[honestabe8]

'Neither pot nor alcohol cause aggression in fact it`s quite the opposite."

Really? I wonder what percentage of violent crime is attributable to alcohol consumption.

"If an individual is already prone to aggression alcohol and/or pot can be a trigger to perpetuate it."

In my experience (as both a user and one who sees others using), pot and alcohol have opposite effects.

"It all hinges on the amount that is used."

I have never seen violence from someone who is using only pot

"I don?t want either pot smokers or drunks on the road."

I agree.

"Pot smokers will also use wine or beer to reinforce and prolong the effect"

In my experience, alcohol does not prolong the pot high as they are quite different.

The only thing I have taken (although it seems weird using that term) that mimic the pot high is endorphin after a long intense cardio session.

"Either can be dangerous"

I have never known pot to be so. A drunk driver will barge through a stop sign whereas a stoned driver will sit there for 10 minutes waiting for it to turn green.

[jeannie1982]

Having a family member with brain cancer I am thankful that we are looking into alternate methods to improve and prolong the lives of those who are suffering. It is sad to me that soo many people are so concerned that it is a drug, what are painkillers ?...exactly

[andie52]

honestabe8
Neither pot nor alcohol cause aggression in fact it`s quite the opposite. If an individual is already prone to aggression alcohol and/or pot can be a trigger to perpetuate it.
It all hinges on the amount that is used.

I don?t want either pot smokers or drunks on the road. Pot smokers will also use wine or beer to reinforce and prolong the effect, although they resist the conclusion that marijuana and alcohol are comparable pharmacologically, Either can be dangerous.

I don?t think that you are intentionally being disingenuous about this issue and again thanks for the dialogue

[honestabe8]

andie52: i do write and i do talk to others. i am part of the norml group in my state. there is coming a change in the laws. how soon i do not know. i would have thought 20 years ago that it would have been here by now. i do believe it is largely a generational thing. one substance is given the governmental seal of approval and the other is villified and called "drugs". one is largely tied to violence (domestic and otherwise) and aggression on the road. the other is neither. is it good to drive on either one? no. is one less dangerous than the other? absolutely.

[andie52]

okay, fair enough. i also had two beers 3 weeks ago and one today at lunch. according to your logic, i am addicted to alcohol. Rather than answering my questions regarding your qualifications, why do you continue to refuse to answer my questions regarding the disparity between the laws regarding alcohol and pot? you say that you don't like pot smokers. do you dislike drinkers, too? or do you see a moral difference between the two? Posted by honestabe8 at 10:03 AM : Apr 9, 2009
------------------------------------------------------------------

If you?re an alcoholic than one drink is problematic. I don?t dislike drinkers; I dislike drunks, my choice and no explanation is necessary, I also prefer not to be around tobacco smokers; again my choice. Is there a moral difference between doing something illegal and choosing not to? You should be writing your congressman and senators to change the laws. I can?t help you out there.
Thanks for the dialogue though.

[honestabe8]

andie52: i have read your posts. you still have not answered my question. you dance around it saying it is too complicated. i suspect that you are just being evasive because you know that your answer would be criiticized

[andie52]

Also, you apparently want to deny people the right to use something that may inhibit brain cancer. Why is this?
Posted by honestabe8 at 10:37 AM : Apr 9, 2009

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also you apparently didn't read the article or my posts. Medical; yes. Legalized for recreational use; no.

[honestabe8]

Also, you apparently want to deny people the right to use something that may inhibit brain cancer. Why is this?

[honestabe8]

honestabe8
You did answer my question and it was the answer that I expected. If you are still smoking than you are addicted.
One of the biggest hurdles that any mental Health Profession has to deal with is the level of denial of addicts. I really wish you well but I am not going to answer your plethora of questions so you can confirm my knowledge or education.
Posted by andie52

okay, fair enough. i also had two beers 3 weeks ago and one today at lunch. according to your logic, i am addicted to alcohol. Rather than answering my questions regarding your qualifications, why do you continue to refuse to answer my questions regarding the disparity between the laws regarding alcohol and pot? you say that you don't like pot smokers. do you dislike drinkers, too? or do you see a moral difference between the two?

[andie52]

honestabe8
You did answer my question and it was the answer that I expected. If you are still smoking than you are addicted.
One of the biggest hurdles that any mental Health Profession has to deal with is the level of denial of addicts. I really wish you well but I am not going to answer your plethora of questions so you can confirm my knowledge or education.

[honestabe8]

andie52: your claim of credentials appears to be little more than "listen to me, i know what i'm talking about (but i won't tell you why)". do you really expect that to be a good debate technique?

[honestabe8]

andie52: you claim you have credentials, yet your logic is not that of someone who really knows what they are talking about. you say you can't answer my questions in a few sentences, yet you state your opposition to my view in a few sentences. i did not say i didn't use anymore. one of the things with illegal products is that supply is sometimes unavailable, so i have gone without for several weeks. if you feel you can back up yoru statements, do so. otherwise, you will be seen by anyone who has experience as little more than a DARE graduate. why do you refuse to answer my question? oh, that's right, you dance around it. all you say about pot applies to alcohol, and more. why the free pass for the booze pushers? why is it the business of the criminal justice system to punish people for (at worst) bad health habits?

[andie52]

honestabe8
If I remember correctly I posted that I can?t answer your questions in a few sentences on a message board.
Aside from that I also am not going to post my credentials but I do have them. So I feel I can back up my statements.
So to clarify you`re saying that you did stop cold turkey; toughed it out for a couple of days and now don?t smoke at all? I?m curious about what you substituted the pot smoking with and I will tell you that your case is not the norm.

[honestabe8]

Andie: I don't know that pot smokers are any more obnoxious than drinkers. In my experience, they are much less so. You still have not answered a simple question I have posed to you several times. Do you want to see alcohol banned? What does it's effect on teenagers have to do whether it should be legal for adults? I have met many occasional pot smokers. It is not physically addictive. I will not argue whether it is psychologically so. I have stopped smoking it cold turkey, missed it for a couple days and then I was fine. Where is your knowledge coming from? You haven't used it, but you are so knowledgeable about it (or so you think). Again, your argument seems to stem from your dislike for pot smokers. That is your right on an individual basis, but it sucks as a public policy

[andie52]

Hi honestabe8

Legalizing it only means that we will have more obnoxious people to deal with. I don?t want to be on the road with pot smokers or in any other capacity on a daily basis.

How would legalizing it help teen agers; will they be inclined to study and be motivated?

I have never met an ?occasional ?pot smoker. People who say it isn?t addictive are fooling themselves.
I would like those who subscribe to that theory to stop smoking it cold turkey and see what results.

[honestabe8]

OK..Here it is again...We shouldn't legalize MJ just because alcohol is legal...We don't need more deaths from intoxicant induced poor driving... We don't need more bronchitis / emphysema. Ok?
Posted by apple2pie

I am not after legalizing pot because alcohol is legal. I am after legalizing pot because it's prohibition is a failed policy that does more harm than good. What was the result of alcohol prohibition? Good policy?

What makes you think that the deaths would be more once pot is legalized? Perhaps rather than drinking, which tends to make people impetuous and aggressive, people will be smoking pot, which tends to make people passive and cautious. Same goes with the effect on violence, both domestic and otherwise.

Regarding the emphysema, a landmark study (UCLA, I think) has determined, after a long term study of regular pot smokers, that there is no statistical increase in the risk of emphysema. If you have other information, let me know.

[eroosevelt08]

Would the marijuana chemical decrease the chances of a cancer coming back again?

[honestabe8]

it should have the same legal standing as alcohol. i really do not understand the rationale of the opposition