Cure for Cancer in THC???

Torakx

First of all they make an absolute ton of money building prisons in america.
You will notice many American films with weed being pushed out there in a positive light.This in my opinion is to create more need to build more prisons.
Also the government or people in it make alot of money off drugs becasue the price is so high on the streets compared to if it was legal.Also the money does not get taxed like it would if it was legal.

Ps. i am also interested in the coloidal silver aswell as another system a guy came up with that pulses a small amount of electricity through the blood stream detaching harmful bacteria etc.Never got round to testing them or looking deeper into that.

SugarHigh

It is possible to patent a plant but probably not marijuana.

Pixel8

Torakx wrote: »

Ps. i am also interested in the coloidal silver aswell as another system a guy came up with that pulses a small amount of electricity through the blood stream detaching harmful bacteria etc.Never got round to testing them or looking deeper into that.

Yep that's called Blood Electrification which uses a machine called a Blood Zapper. It was rediscovered in 1991 by Dr. Robert C. Beck who gave away all the device specs on how to build your own for free, you can download his PDF and find lots of info about this and Colloidal Silver from www.electrobiotics.com.

Bob Beck came up with a protocol called the Beck Protocol which includes 4 steps:

1. Blood Electrification (for blood stream)
2. Magnetic Pulsing (for organs)
3. Colloidal Silver
4. Ozonated Water.

More info on The Beck Protocol:
http://www.electrobiotics.com/page.html?chapter=10&id=5

bonkey

Folks - this is not the Medical forum, and there is a site-wide prohibition on offering medical advice.

This conversation seems to be heading away from the notion of conspiracy, and in the direction of making medical claims and/or offering medical advice (albeit somewhat indirectly).

If this continues, the thread will be closed.

bonkey

Pixel8 wrote: »

Then explain prohibition?

I'd lean towards the theory that hemp was targetted in the 30s because it was about to make a resurgence as a multi-purpose crop that threatened, amongst others, the paper industry of the day.

It is worth noting that the ban targetted hemp as a narcotic, ignoring the reality that most industrial hemp contains virtually no THC (and today, there are 0-THC strains). In other words, hemp with neglibably-low THC content was unreasonably and unfairly targetted as part of the progibition, and this gives a strong hint as to what the underlying reasons were.

They are afraid of making it legal because of something else and i think its to do with its medicinal values and its evolutionary properties.

The medicinal properties being associuated to the Conspiracy Theory here are to do with THC, not with industrial hemp. As a reason, this explains the "all hemp, and not just THC-rich strains" ban no better then the notion that it is banned because it is a narcotic...in other words, it fails to explain why the prohibition is on hemp and not on THC.

As a parallel, we don't see all poppy plants banned, because one strain is the opium poppy. But with hemp....it doesn't matter even if its a 0-THC strain. Its still verboten.

It always come back to money and dumbing down with big corporations and Big Pharma is no different than any other big corporate cartel.

If it always comes back to money, then the more conventional conspiracy theory for the banning of hemp holds up. It was banned because it was a threat to (amongst others) the paper and chemical industries of Randolph Hearst and Lammont duPont, who had close business and personal ties with Andrew Mellon, the Treasury Ssecretary. It was Mellon who spearheaded the campaign to have it banned.

Since then, there has been no reason to unban it, especially because to ever do so could be cast as a tacit admission that the original grounds were less then honest.

Wibbs

Yep and the cotton industry in a big way and even the timber industry as its a far cheaper and faster growing source for fibreboard type products(as well as paper), which were taking off in the 20's. The cotton angle is interesting too as the southern states where hemp would grow like crazy had a large proportion of its cash crop monies tied up in cotton. That and tobacco.

The food industry both human and animal feed would beneift from hemp. Hemp oil makes most other veggie oils look positively lacking in nutrients. It has more balanced nutrients and again is easier to grow. Hell you can even make plastics from the thing and biofuel.

There were a lot of good reasons it would be targeted by other industries. The fact that one sub species of it can be used as an intoxicant was manna from heaven for them. Especially in the US which seems to have puritanical issues with that anyway. You even see this in their cultural icons. Johhny appleseed who went around planting apple trees along the frontier, wasnt doing it to make apple pie. Apples dont stay true from seed. They have to be grafted to get specific varieties. He was doing it to ensure a ready supply of cider. That gets airbrushed out...

Didnt know the links with the paper industry Bonkey. Interesting one indeed. All I understood about hemp paper is that its far more stable than paper from wood pulp. Its naturally acid free.

It's as close to a "wonder crop" as you can get. I actually cant think of another more useful, more financially viable and more green one, yet its illegal? Hmmmm indeed.

bonkey

Wibbs wrote: »

It's as close to a "wonder crop" as you can get. I actually cant think of another more useful, more financially viable and more green one, yet its illegal? Hmmmm indeed.

Its worth pointing out that its not illegal everywhere. A number of European companies allow industrial hemp to be grown. IIRC, Canada does too.

As has also been (indirectly) pointed out already, there is also research still being done on Canabis and THC, including research in the US.

These notions, for me, also tend to contradict the notion of some "Big Pharma" suppression of a wonder-drug and/or the notion that this is why its banned in the first place.

Truthrevolution

Pixel8 wrote: »

They are afraid of making it legal because of something else and i think its to do with its medicinal values and its evolutionary properties. It always come back to money and dumbing down with big corporations and Big Pharma is no different than any other big corporate cartel. They must think they can make more money with their patentable drugs than with natural alternatives like Weed which would lose them billions in income every year if people were to find out it worked better than their ****ty drugs (which generally make people worse, not better). Also, it's argued that Weed smokers are thinkers and governments don't like people who think, especially critical thinkers.

The first health thing i ever came across which was out of the ordinary but which had a very interesting history was Vitamin B17 through a G. Edward Griffin documentary, apricot kernels taste nasty though. Then i came across Colloidal Silver which is much easier to take and more effective against a lot more things from your every day flu's, colds, warts and veruccas to cancer, aids, malaria, lupus, chrone's, MS, arthritis plus many many more. I'd really recommend you research colloidal silver at this point because it is definitely an almost unknown substance to a lot of people. Some excellent info on this site about it with videos and comprehensives articles about it: www.electrobiotics.com

Pixel you have hit the nail on the head there.With big Corp and big Pharma its all about profit before people.Making money comes first, saving lives comes second.....

Thanks for the info about colloidal silver, have heard about it before but never really looked into it.If everything you are saying about it is correct then this stuff really is the dogs b*****ks.Will be doing some research into this now

Wibbs

bonkey wrote: »

Its worth pointing out that its not illegal everywhere. A number of European companies allow industrial hemp to be grown. IIRC, Canada does too.

As has also been (indirectly) pointed out already, there is also research still being done on Canabis and THC, including research in the US.

These notions, for me, also tend to contradict the notion of some "Big Pharma" suppression of a wonder-drug and/or the notion that this is why its banned in the first place.

Oh I agree on the drug front. I would say though that the reason for its grey area legality today is down to a historical suppression of the plant by a few vested interests.

Yes you can grow hemp in many countries, but it still requires a licence. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp#Industrial_growth_under_license I can plant a stand of hops in my back garden, a close relative of hemp and I dont require a licence to do so. All a holdover from from the original prohibition in the US. And like you say the industrial hemp subspecies sativa has very very low concentrations of THC compared to the "pot plant" subspecies indica. Glad to see even some US states are copping on. The green revolution has helped in this I reckon.

Pixel8

Two good weed documentaries which discuss all of these issues:

How Weed Won The West
(Link coming soon...)
The Magic Weed - The History of Marijuana
http://www.theopensource.tv/la-septarte-theopresse/the-magic-weed-the-history-of-marijuana-video_39c77ed09.html

Only available on docs4you.org currently. Soon to be up on theopensource.tv

ordinarywoman

Z.O.D!!! wrote: »

First time posting on Boards, so apologies if its already been mentioned.
My friend sent me this link on how concentrated THC kills cancer cells but the reason its not been used is down to pharmaceutical companies not been able to patent a plant and therefore can't make any profit from it.

Its about an hour long but bare with it, some very interesting points are raised!

Let us know what ya's think!
Cheers!

Z.O.D!!!

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3762985810189983367&ei=A_aQS7PXHdCr-AaU17m-Ag&q=thc+cures+cancer&hl=en#

thats not all it can do medicinally...

here is a list of current reserch on medicinal mj in regards to many conditions, https://www.greenpassion.org/index.php?/topic/23575-new-420-page-grannys-mmj-list-july-2010/

and apparenty Mary Harney is inclined to agree that medicinal mj sould be legalised in ireland http://pr.cannazine.co.uk/201009121340/green/eco-news/medical-cannabis-common-sense-in-ireland.html

Torakx

Wow thats really good news for alot of sick people i would imagine.
Think of all the depressed alcoholics who could be medicating themselves with a non lethal substance as a better of two evils in the worst case scenario.
Although i admit it is still a gateway to tobacco smoking which is dangerous.But maybe that is because of it being illegal indirectly.

The best case scenario i saw on a documentary once.There was a guy who had some illness that effected his movements.So he had constant spasms of twitching and movement he had no control over.
Then they watched him take a hit of some medicinal weed and he just relaxed and stopped twitching.Can you imagine the relief that is for that guy.

ordinarywoman

Torakx wrote: »

Wow thats really good news for alot of sick people i would imagine.
Think of all the depressed alcoholics who could be medicating themselves with a non lethal substance as a better of two evils in the worst case scenario.
Although i admit it is still a gateway to tobacco smoking which is dangerous.But maybe that is because of it being illegal indirectly.

If smoked in a joint with tobacco...but if you want to help yourself you dont want tobacco....
If your going to smoke canabis to be medicinally benificial you would be using a vaporiser, or eating the THC oil..
or just smoke a joint with no tobacco...

Hemp can cure our failing economy as well...but that has been dicussed in other threads.

My name is URL

Imagine the money that there is to be made out of easing restrictions at least.. open up a bit of a tourist trade in a few places. Feck medicinal use!..

I'd much rather spend a few euro on a bag of weed than a feed of drink, and I'd rest assured that it's a lot safer for me too

ordinarywoman

My name is URL wrote: »

Imagine the money that there is to be made out of easing restrictions at least.. open up a bit of a tourist trade in a few places. Feck medicinal use!..

I'd much rather spend a few euro on a bag of weed than a feed of drink, and I'd rest assured that it's a lot safer for me too

shows you how safe mj is in comparrison to other substances...its safer than paracetamol....

uprising2

I just watched a good documentary about it lastnight, "Stoned in Surburbia", interesting video, a pot growing/cooking grandmother and her OAP group who enjoyed her baking. Also info about the crap added to hash.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ug98TKkWKy0

Hemp has so many great qualities and uses. It doesn't make sense not to grow it commercially.
Drink causes more bollox and trouble than anything else, yet it's sold so freely.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLLLTntnqjk

Mahatma coat

Tis madness alright, The Paper and Cotton angle is very true.

What would it take for governments to wiseup and decrimanlise the Hemp industry, I had a pair of Jeans made from hemp a few years ago, I have to say they were the comfiest I've had for a long time.

Wibbs

Like bonkey said earlier in the thread if they did make it legal again then they would be tacitly admitting it was BS to ban it in the first place. Especially in the US. Then you have the Americans schizoid attitude to any intoxicants. They're a strange mix of libertarian and puritan. Coffee and tobacco were traditionally fine as they were stimulants that kept you working and didnt make you high.

Europe could and should show more leadership in this though. Especially with industrial hemp growing. It would make a serious dent in green issues that surround other crops. Again those other crops and the companies that sell them might have something to say. The hold the likes of monsanto have over our staple crops is mad. To the degree that they tailor their pesticides to their genetic strains and make the resulting crop sterile so the farmers have to keep coming back. They even have toll free phone line in the US so that people can inform on other farmers who may have some of their seed stock on their lands. They're attempting to consolidate their hold over the food we eat. Now they're attempting to do the same with third world farmers. They're a bloody disgrace.

IMHO some of the biggest CT stuff is actively happening in the production of our food.

ordinarywoman

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n31Nuj_AvTg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZI2VT2kOfnM

Pixel8

Totally agree with you Wibbs!

Must see food based documentaries: "Food Matters" and "Healing Cancer From Inside Out" both full versions available at theopensource.tv

Amazing information about our food and the business of sustaining sickness. Our medical industry is a sham, "good health makes sense but it doesn't make a lot of dollars".

ordinarywoman

Pixel8 wrote: »

Totally agree with you Wibbs!

Must see food based documentaries: "Food Matters" and "Healing Cancer From Inside Out" both full versions available at theopensource.tv

Amazing information about our food and the business of sustaining sickness. Our medical industry is a sham, "good health makes sense but it doesn't make a lot of dollars".

What you say is true but if the government was to get behind THC oil for medicinal reasons can you imagine how much money that could save the health service....its very cheap to produce...California has high hopes to make billions once Prop 19 on November 2nd is passed.... it will be very interesting to see what our health minister does in the demember budget if Prop 19 is passed, and more States in the US join the 16 that allow medicinal use of marijuana...

Flaregon

Wibbs wrote: »

True enough. I'd say the biggest barrier to hemp usage on all scores is the reefer madness scare tactics.

I'm no "pot is a wonder maaaaan" type, but its certainly arguably less toxic than alcohol and far less than tobacco. So why the serious over reaction to it legally? Even if it was as toxic as both, it still doesnt explain why its illegal.

This isnt a debate on lets make it legal, Im more interested in the CT aspect of it and IMHO it was a concerted effort by interested parties that made it illegal in the first place. The US cotton industry in particular.

Cotton is a disaster from an environmental point of view. Look at what it did to lake Aral in the old soviet union http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aral_Sea#History_2 Its a very nutrient and water hungry crop. Hemp isnt. Its far more adaptable. Its very fast growing and locks nitrogen into the soil, so is great for crop rotation. And has more uses and whats left can be used as biofuel.

It should be growing all over the place, but its not. It cant be the drug aspect as the hemp Im talking about has very low levels of THC. Very low. You'd need to smoke an acre of the stuff . But the very notion of growing that version of it is tainted by the drug aspect.

IMHO because of the US cotton industry back in the early 20th century saw it as a threat to their dominance and it steamrolled from there.

I recall reading an interesting angle and similar to the hemp thing on animal fats and vegetable fats. Something along the lines that the demonisation of animal fats was kicked off by the veggie oil industry looking for a market for their product. It turns out now that it looks like veggie oils(with a couple of exceptions Olive/coconut oil) are actually worse for you. Sunflower and rapeseed oil in particular being baddies especially after being processed.

The food industry IMH has a helluva lot of conspiracy guff going on. The history of corn is an interesting one and the addition of it to so many foods. Fructose is another one(also mostly from corn). Processed sugar in general. Gets people hooked. All this "low fat" advertising going on. We eat less animal fats nowadays in the west as far as ratios go, yet we've never had more obesity or diabetes. I'd put good money that if tomorrow the world banned all processed or added sugars and removed so called "healthy" veggie fats it would have a bigger impact on health than banning tobacco. Actually an interesting aside on the tobacco industry. When the health stuff and the lawsuits started flying, many of the tobacco companies got into the processed food industry.

Weed = cheap , fuel , paper & clothing food and what not.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp

So banning it = MONEY

videos old and crap, but fits quite well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkRIbUT6u7Q

ordinarywoman

http://www.qmul.ac.uk/qmul/news/newsrelease.php?news_id=175

Cannabis destroys cancer cells... reveals research at Barts and The London, Queen Mary's School of Medicine and Dentistry



01 March 2006

Researchers investigating the role of cannabis in cancer therapy reveal it has the potential to destroy leukaemia cells, in a paper published in the March 2006 edition of Letters in Drug Design & Discovery. Led by Dr Wai Man Liu, at Barts and the London, Queen Mary’s School of Medicine and Dentistry, the team has followed up on their findings of 2005 which showed that the main active ingredient in cannabis, tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, has the potential to be used effectively against some forms of cancer. Dr Liu has since moved to the Institute of Cancer in Sutton where he continues his work into investigating the potential therapeutic benefit of new anti-cancer agents.
It has previously been acknowledged that cannabis-based medicines have merit in the treatment of cancer patients as a painkiller; appetite stimulant and in reducing nausea, but recently evidence has been growing of its potential as an anti-tumour agent. The widely reported psychoactive side effects and consequent legal status of cannabis have, however, complicated its use in this capacity. Although THC and its related compounds have been shown to attack cancer cells by interfering with important growth-processing pathways, it has not hitherto been established exactly how this is achieved.


continued in link...

sligopark

unfortunately as I know it there is no cure for cancer nor will there be - it is a consequence of poor neural - immune system function, environmental triggers, genetic predisposition (base and epi), emotional states and poor self health responsibility ,,, nor is chemotherapy a guaranteed treatment option either