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?