HumanBeing
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 13, 2013
- Messages
- 761
- Reaction score
- 358
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Well obviously it isn't legal.
So why let people vote on making it legal if it's still going to be illegal either way? And don't you think cancer patients have an inalienable right to the only natural medicine known and proven to have the ability to damage and kill cancer cells? I mean, why spend all these billions of dollars on finding a cure for cancer if it's just going to be made illegal anyway?
Because national drug laws trump state drug laws
So why let people vote on making it legal if it's still going to be illegal either way? And don't you think cancer patients have an inalienable right to the only natural medicine known and proven to have the ability to damage and kill cancer cells? I mean, why spend all these billions of dollars on finding a cure for cancer if it's just going to be made illegal anyway?
I don't think anyone claims MJ cures cancer, HB. It's for pain relief and anti-nausea.
But no one will convince me that MJ relieves cancer pain.
I have read about pot can/does reduce some effects from chemo.
Please provide the link to its natural cancer fighting properties.
No, it straight up kills certain types of cancer cells, and severely damages others. This has been proven beyond any doubt.
"Cannabinoids may cause antitumor effects by various mechanisms, including induction of cell death, inhibition of cell growth, and inhibition of tumor angiogenesis invasion and metastasis.[9-12] One review summarizes the molecular mechanisms of action of cannabinoids as antitumor agents.[13] Cannabinoids appear to kill tumor cells but do not affect their nontransformed counterparts and may even protect them from cell death. These compounds have been shown to induce apoptosis in glioma cells in culture and induce regression of glioma tumors in mice and rats. Cannabinoids protect normal glial cells of astroglial and oligodendroglial lineages from apoptosis mediated by the CB1 receptor.[14]"
Cannabis and Cannabinoids (PDQ®) - National Cancer Institute
It's hard to see how someone who is usually so reasonable would say something so absurd
So you don't believe that human beings should have a basic inalienable right to medicine? Again I ask, what's the point in spending billions upon billions of your dollars on finding a cure to cancer, when the only known natural cure has already been outlawed? Logically, if they make a new cure and find it's easily grown and can get you high, that will end up being illegal too.
Where does a nation's right to create drug laws end and a human's right to potentially life saving medicine begin?
There's some very limited work on very specific cancers that show some promise. It's over stated by the poster you're responding to. Some are too willing to accept and not question what they read.
Here's the deal. You know when I said nothing would convince me? Well, something convinced me. OMFG. I agree with YOU. That was absurd. I really had no idea.
Before I go on, see the quote I picked up here from the NCI shown as Spoiler? Why doesn't it show up in your original post? That's just plain weird. Did you edit it or something?
Anyway, thanks to your frownie face, I Googled and found the exact same thing. We probably Googled the same.
I am wrong. (I'm glad I'm wrong. Really glad.) Isn't the NCI "the government"? What? Are they nuckin' futz? Or just related to me?
Thank you, Human Being. I've learned something extremely important tonight.
You said straight up kills, suggesting a cure. That's overstating. So far, it's more a maybe than Anything else. More breeds to be done before we can be too assertive.I put it in a spoiler because some people don't like scrolling through medical jargon. I'm very glad you actually did.
To those saying it isn't proven, wake up and read again.
I didn't overstate anything. I said it kills cancer cells, it does. That makes it a viable treatment. Chemotherapy works in the same way, but with the massive difference that chemo also kills healthy cells, whereas canabinoids only attack the cancerous cells while protecting the healthy ones. Given the billions upon billions of dollars that have been spent on creating synthetic compounds that do the same thing but with far worse side effects, there is no excuse to prevent cancer patients from access to this medicine.You said straight up kills, suggesting a cure. That's overstating.
That's the second thread where you've used this as a fallback argument to counter questions of ethics. It's bad for a number of reasons. The main one is that it doesn't mean anything. I asked whether you think people should have a basic inalienable right to medicine, and your response was basically "well they don't, so that's that". That isn't really an argument or a debate, and it doesn't answer the question.Fisher said:As long as the guys with the guns are willing to kick in your door and carry you away, there is no limit to the nation's "right" to enforce its laws. It is all about power, not rights.
Apparently the feds rather let sick people suffer and die than let even one "drug" bust go. It's truly disgusting.
There are a dozen or so bills floating around the house that would stop this from happening, but they don't seem to have any real momentum. I swear, if every pot smoking hippie would just send a letter or two to congress, it'd be legal by 2014. It's the curse of a silent majority.
No, it straight up kills certain types of cancer cells, and severely damages others, all while leaving (or possibly even actively protecting) the healthy cells. This has been proven beyond any doubt.
"Cannabinoids may cause antitumor effects by various mechanisms, including induction of cell death, inhibition of cell growth, and inhibition of tumor angiogenesis invasion and metastasis.[9-12] One review summarizes the molecular mechanisms of action of cannabinoids as antitumor agents.[13] Cannabinoids appear to kill tumor cells but do not affect their nontransformed counterparts and may even protect them from cell death. These compounds have been shown to induce apoptosis in glioma cells in culture and induce regression of glioma tumors in mice and rats. Cannabinoids protect normal glial cells of astroglial and oligodendroglial lineages from apoptosis mediated by the CB1 receptor.[14]"
Cannabis and Cannabinoids (PDQ®) - National Cancer Institute
That's why people prefer it over chemotherapy, because chemo kills ALL the cells including the healthy ones. Cannabinoids only destroy the cancerous cells while actively protecting the healthy ones. Pretty cool stuff
It's hard to see how someone who is usually so reasonable would say something so absurd
I wish pot legalization people would just be honest with everyone and just admit that they support it because they want to get stoned. If medical science extracted all the anti-cancer canabanoids, concentrated them and delivered them in a pill form that doesn't get you high would it be OK to ban the smoking of marijuana? I'm pretty sure same cadre of pot smokers would still be fighting for legalization of pot smoking.
One of the dispensaries was the Bayside Collective in Olympia, the state capital, where seven government vehicles converged Wednesday morning. Agents with guns drawn seized business records and about $2,500 worth of marijuana intended for cancer patients, Casey Lee, who works at the clinic, [said]. "It's humiliating," Lee said. "They don't get to see the cancer patients."
So why let people vote on making it legal if it's still going to be illegal either way? And don't you think cancer patients have an inalienable right to the only natural medicine known and proven to have the ability to damage and kill cancer cells? I mean, why spend all these billions of dollars on finding a cure for cancer if it's just going to be made illegal anyway?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?