Cannabis and Small Cell Lung Cancer: Case Report

[spurr]

haha

 

[CannabisBotany]

.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

... alcohol and cirrhosis of the liver.

Moderation is cool so I bong-out during waking hours and take a break when I sleep.

 

[spurr]

This is the result of one person and from the looks of it they sure went through a lot of trouble to document this one case and attempt to tie it to Cannabis. I wonder if these same Dr's would put the same effort into testing Cannabis oil to see if it would heal cancer? My guess is they will not.

If one patient is enough to conclude results, than pharmacy meds are highly dangerous as people die all the time, vaccines are highly dangerous as many have died, and GMO food causes cancer. So which way do these Doctors wish to go? I'm willing to admit pot causes cancer if they'll admit the above. But of course it's always different when talking about stuff they profit from as opposed to stuff they won't profit from.

Did any place in this study show the type of cannabis he was consuming? Was it swagg sprayed with roundup and other chemicals? Did he lie about smoking cigarettes? What kind of food did he eat? Why did he only have chest pains for 3 months and not years before? Did they drug test him to see the levels of cannabinoids? If so, what were they? How is this not in the report? Did this patient do other drugs? If so, what were they, and what were the levels in his system at the time?

The file in my thread starting post is not a study using the scientific method, it's a case report; and it's not meant to be definitive (re: "If one patient is enough to conclude results"). Those are far form the same thing, a study and a case report, that is. Did you read the whole thread? Your concers have been mentioned already, multiple times.

You can use the results on this site alone to prove there is people who have smoked longer than this guy, yet don't show similar cancer, why?

Because they haven't been thoroughly tested, or because their genetic code precludes such cancer, or etc., or etc., and et al. That is the problem with the anecdotal evidence you are trying to use ... it's not factual nor provides any provable data.

I'm not impressed nor would any rational person take this for anything more than what it is, one persons experience, and not even a well documented one at that.

In this thread there are many studies posted. The way science works is by amassing a large volume of evidence and data. From which conclusions and scientific theories (not the same thing as "theory" to a layperson) can be formed. Thus, the case report has value, however limited it may be, in the broader scope of scientific evidence and possibly eventually a scientific theory.

 

[CannabisBotany]

.

 

[dagnabit]

it's been said but WTH..

inhaling smoke from burning carbon based anything is bad.
inhaling smoke from plant matter does cause irritation to the bronchioles. The type of soft tissues that make up the bronchioles responds to injury with mutation in new growth. most times the mutation takes the benign form of scar tissue. sometimes the mutation takes the form of malignant carcinoma.
in the case of the former it is less deadly than the latter but still quite detrimental to ones respiratory health.
the latter...well no bueno'

all that said
i rip bongs,burn doobies and smoke bowls way more than i vape.

 

[dagnabit]

If you mix bleach and ammonia you make mustard gas and will kill yourself. If you use only one product at a time you can clean your house to a sparkling shine.

The potentially carcinogenic elements you fear MUST be neutralized by cannabis and the human body OR cannabis smokers would contract cancer.

SINCE cannabis smokers are NOT contracting cancer; smoking cannabis DOES NOT cause cancer.

now that's science!!!!

notice the use of the sarcasm font?

we should all use the sarcasm font.

 

[spurr]

Did you go through these studies?

Yes I have, and I realize there is not sufficiently large body of data to form a definitive claim yet. You should realize the same

This is pretty funny. This is your evidence after thousands of years of use, millions of users, and countless tax payer sponsored grants to literally try to "pin" something on Cannabis and this is the best studies available?

No, it's not my evidence because I don't have a fixed opinion at this time. Cannabis could cause no cancer, or it could cause cancer. There isn't enough data to provide a factual answer yet.

Anecdotal evidence will never give us a definitive answer, never ever.

I'd bet if you contacted every single one of these Doctors and asked probing questions, you'd quickly find out these are not relevant to anything but those reaching for a reason to justify trillion spent on a failed drug war and a billion dollar pharmaceutical industry.

Wait ... let me give you my tin foil hat!

I have written many of these Doctors regarding their studies and will report back to see if they have any scientific evidence that these patients used Cannabis at all. If you wish to say someone smoked from 14 to 26, I suggest you have one of the many drug testing methods available for proof of such a claim. Taking someones word is not scientific.

Sorry, but I don't hold your understanding of "scientific evidence" in high regard. Nothing personal against you, I just don't know you, and you haven't built up a rep as someone who knows about science, yet.

FWIW, you may want to read a thread I just wrote about over use of capitalization of the word cannabis:

"Capitalization of the word cannabis (grrr...)"
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=218368
​

 

[spurr]

Taking someones word is not scientific.

You can't be serious! How do you think case histories are qualified and quantified?

By your reasoning, testing for cannabis should tell how long (years) and how much (pounds) of cannabis has been used by a person (not merely testing to see if the person has smoked cannabis in the past two weeks). Too bad such a test does not exist ...

 

[Haps]

We should all be clear on this - cannabis helps prevent cancer, it does not cause it. I take cannabis every day to prevent cancer, I smoke it to counteract the cigars I smoke. I eat it to prevent stomach and colon cancers. I can not prove this.

But a one person study does not prove anything either and is so weak, it makes me question the motivations of the op.

Vaping is much harder on my lungs than properly cooled smoke. Reckon results vary.
H

 

[spurr]

@ Haps,

Did you read this whole thread, well? I only ask because the accusation that I have ulterior motives, due to the case report (it's not a study) in my first post, has been addressed multiple times. Please see this post I made not even a couple of hours ago, due to the exact same accusation: https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=4595367&postcount=84

I agree that you cannot prove your claim in a way that would pass scientific scrutiny. The reason being, you are using anecdotal evidence, and real scientific evidence is lacking in volume, clarity and agreement. No one knows the answer(s), yet.

 

[budlover123]

...real scientific evidence is lacking in volume, clarity and agreement. No one knows the answer(s), yet.

use your analytical mind

everyone knows about the countless rigged "scientific" studies made to make marijuana look like some deadly super drug.

Everyone knows that Sativex is coming out next year (pharmaceutical marijuana plant extracts) for a bunch of different uses.

 

[spurr]

@ OGmolton,

I think you need to make sure you know what analytical means ...

FWIW, Sativex has been out for some time, and it's merly 50% THC and 50% CBD, IIRC. Nothing new under the sun, except you don't get all the other potentating secondary metabolites like some terpens/terpenoids and flavonoids, etc., or other cannabinoids that may be present (even in very low quantity) like CBG, THCV, etc.

Sativex is an evil joke. It's an attempt to wrest control of our own medication, from us, just so a few people (HortaPharm, G.W., and Bayer Drugs) can make lots of money. In fact, Dr. Guy actively tried (and succeeded) to limit a person's ability to grow cannabis in the UK, for their own meds. That asshole Dr. Guy did so, to make sure people are FORCED to buy his product, which he developed, and used seeds from HortaPhram and is marketed by Bayer Drugs worldwide.

Here is a short list, part of the (at least) 28 countries where Sativex is already allowed to be sold, or soon will be sold:

• UK
• Canada
• Germany
• Denmark
• the US soon
• etc.

http://www.gwpharm.com/faqs.aspx

GW is a UK-based company but its research network and operations stretches around the world. To date, GW has exported Sativex and other cannabinoid research materials to a total of 28 countries. The export of Sativex has been both for the purposes of supplying prescriptions as well as for use in clinical trials. The list of countries includes much of Europe, as well as the US and Canada, Australasia, South Africa and parts of Latin America

HortaPharm was going bankrupt because no one needed their shitty plants/seeds. They are triploid seeds so they can't reproduce and are of inferior quality [1]. At that time Dr. Guy stepped in and saved HortaPharm in return for access to their (shitty) seed stock and (considerable) knowledge (ex., thanks to De Mejur (sp?) and R.C.Clark). After a while, Dr. Guy had money problems trying to bring Sativex to world-wide markets, so Beyer Drugs stepped in and infused cash and world-wide distribution possibilities.

And that, is the true story of Sativex and the assholes that are part of it, who want to limit our freedom to cultivate our own medicines! (some folks from HortaPhram BV are members at this site ... )

[1] The asshat De Mejur (sp?) calls seeds, "clones", because of the high degree of stability for fixed traits in the triploid seed. While De Mejur is a very smart guy, he's also a jerkoff for using the word "clone" in place of "seed" ...

 

[dagnabit]

shouldn't Sativex™ be capitalized?

j/k
couldn't help myself

 

[spurr]

Oh yea,

Did I forget to say: "FUCK SATIVEX"?!

.. I won't allow money hungry assholes to take control of my medicine, away from me, just to give me a more expensive and less useful product.

 

[spurr]

shouldn't Sativex™ be capitalized?

j/k
couldn't help myself

As Homer would say: Doh!

You're correct, I must have typed too fast and not proof read well enough. I'll correct that now.

 

[dagnabit]

awww cmon dont edit...

it were just a funny

 

[spurr]

Too late, I like to try and use correct grammar whenever I can (with the obvious exception of my pseudonym )

I like it when people point out to me where I may be wrong, so I can consider their point and make corrections, if needed. I think that type of attitude needs to spread to all other ICmagers ... too many ICmagers think no one should question their posts. I don't want to be one of those rubes

 

[maxmurder]

Vaping is much harder on my lungs than properly cooled smoke. Reckon results vary.
H

my girlfriends cough/hack has been getting worse, last xmas i got her a volcano digital vape but she didn't like it as much as bongs, joints, pipes etc. 2 weeks ago she got a cold and her cough got real bad so i kinda put my foot down and told her to put the bic down for 1 month - she can vape, eat more cookies or eat oil.
we started using the volcano together and a couple times it was harsh so she played around with it and now has it dialed in, it takes some trial and error to get it just right, so saying vaping is harsher may not be the case, you just gotta fuck with a little. my 2 cents.
in the quest to make vaping more fun for her we went to a local club to get something different- i got some sour d, didn't look too hot but bought a 40 dollar 1/8th. got it home and vaped some, it tasted similar to our og but left a coating on our tongues and had a weird aftertaste. i looked closer at it and found a bunch of bananas on it and laughed, then i snuck out to my truck to fire some up in a pipe for a different test- well it tasted like shit but left a pretty grey/white ash so i guess it was flushed but it definitely had something sprayed on it. we did a second vape and this time i watched closer and the smoke was waaaaay heavier/thicker/dense that our usual meds.
ok to the point- (sorry spurr) how can anyone be sure the meds they smoke don't have avid or eagle 20 or even neem oil on them? this 26 year old who smoked a bunch of pot for years and died from lung cancer could have been smoking some shitty weed coated in chems right? honestly i think this is gonna be a big problem in the future...
pm is everywhere and clubs won't buy meds with pm, and growers who don't give a shit about the end user just the cash could easily be selling this shit to people with weak lungs and killing them.
i brought the sour d back to the club and said we won't be using this, smiled and walked out.

 

[arizona_bay]

I like it when people point out to me where I may be wrong, so I can consider their point and make corrections, if needed. I think that type of attitude needs to spread to all other ICmagers ... too many ICmagers think no one should question their posts. I don't want to be one of those rubes

plus 1 for this quote too many egos get in the way of the search for the truth around here. After reading this thread start to finish gota say Spurr interesting knee jerk reaction you got there. Look how fast so many people lost sight of objectivity (if they ever had it in the first place) in the name of defending pot. Anyway big fan of your work keep it up.