On Friday, April 18, 2014 5:15:24 PM UTC+1, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 18 Apr 2014, at 11:02, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > > On Friday, 18 April 2014, Bruno Marchal <[email protected] <javascript:>> > wrote: > >> >> On 18 Apr 2014, at 08:41, [email protected] wrote: >> >> >> On Friday, April 18, 2014 7:28:26 AM UTC+1, [email protected] wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Friday, April 18, 2014 7:28:02 AM UTC+1, [email protected] wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thursday, April 17, 2014 8:03:09 PM UTC+1, Bruno Marchal wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> A good sum up of the how and why cannabis might cure cancers. >>>>> >>>>> You can understand the mechanism and the probabilities. It is a pretty >>>>> >>>>> good movie. >>>>> >>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bMt83_IWkE >>>>> >>>>> We knew this since 1974. Promising research on cancer treatment were >>>>> purposefully broke down. >>>>> >>>>> How could we hope rational decisions with respect to climate when we >>>>> tolerate brainwashing, even a sort of revisionism, on cannabis/hemp, >>>>> and cancers? >>>>> >>>>> The problem is not stupid politicians, it is clever bandits. >>>>> >>>>> The prohibition of cannabis deserves truly the Nobel Prize, in Crime. >>>>> >>>>> But it might also be their fatal error, I think. >>>>> >>>>> I think the world will get closer to paradise when the humans will >>>>> stop confuse p -> q with q -> p. That confusion is exploited by the >>>>> fear sellers (pseudo-religious or not). >>>>> >>>>> Bruno >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ >>>>> >>>> >>>> It's a load of rubbish Bruno. Cannabis ha >>>> >>> >>> sorry...it >>> >> >> sorry again. It's a load of old cobblers because cannabis has been >> available to researchers throughout. >> >> >> When I read Jack Herer a long time ago, I leave the book away when I came >> to the chapter where he claimed that cannabis cures might cancer (and did >> cure some cancer for mice in 1974). I thought the hippies was going >> crackpot on this. That was to gross. >> But when in 2009 a spanish team rediscovered that fact(*), I have >> scrutinized both the allegation of cure, and the allegation that rserach on >> cannabis was discouraged. That second point is rather clear in the US where >> cannabis is schedule one, making research quite difficult from the >> administrative perspective (virtually impossible in most universities). The >> first point is now accepted in the mainstream, but the media and the >> doctors ignore it, probably because cannabis is illegal. >> You might read: >> >> (*) http://www.jci.org/articles/view/37948 (original spanish paper) >> >> http://www.mapinc.org/newstcl/v01/n572/a11.html >> >> You can find many papers on cannabis and cancer here: >> >> http://www.safeaccess.ca/research/cancer.htm >> >> >> >> >> Why would anyone want to obstruct a cure for cancer? No one would care >> what it was. olu >> >> >> Those who profits from selling expensive treatment for cancer. Those many >> who want hemp staying illegal. >> >> >> >> >> >> But it isn't a cure for cancer. Nothing is a cure for cancer in this way. >> Cancer survival rates are up on 30 years ago. Controlling for earlier >> intervention do you know how much lung cancer survival rates have changed ? >> They haven't. Nothing has changed. catch it early and you've got a chance. >> Leave it just a few more weeks and now that cancer is evolving. It's made >> up of more and more descendent cell lines...each one mutating, now >> different ancestries are fighting and destroying,. Now a week later there >> are millions more., You might kill one line but the next one is immune >> because now it's multiple mutations later and it's totally different and >> the colour is maybe green. In the firs or few weeks it's just a few >> descrendent lines..they are young, they aren't mutating like crazy yet. >> >> Nothing is going to cure cancer. Not in this scientific revolution. >> They'll fix maybe the cancerous non-encoding dna. But that'll be a >> symptom...cancerous cells are multiply disfigured...and more keep showing >> up. >> >> Smoke dope fuck the pope but it'll give you cancer before it cures >> anything. >> >> >> Those who have tried to prove this are those who discovered the benefices >> instead. I let you search on the links above. >> >> >> >> >> thi >> By the way I know at least 2 people that got institutionalised with >> schizophrenia as a direct outcome of dependent pot smoking. That's the only >> thing either of them ever did anyway >> >> >> 2 people is not a statistics, and when the statistics are done properly, >> it seems only that people with schizophrenia, or potential schizophrenia, >> tend to medicate themselves with cannabis, explaining some previous >> correlations. If you have a reference on cannabis leading to schizophrenia, >> containing serious statistics, I would be interested to know. I did not >> find any. >> > > There is some debate as to whether cannabis causes schizophrenia, but > there isn't much doubt that it can cause drug-induced psychosis (ie. which > resolves when the drug is withdrawn) > > > > OK. > We call that "the experience". > You learn how much your brain can trick you, and it asks for a good > user-manual, some ritual, like Kim said, and a notion that it is not a > banal thing to explore yourself in that way. Cannabis amplifies paranoïa > feeling. People have to be informed on that, of course. > > > > and that it can exacerbate or precipitate psychosis in patients who > already have schizophrenia. > > > I agree. I might think that this is a good thing, as it will point on the > problem and help to manage a treatment. In some case cannabis can be enough > as a treatment; in other case cannabis would be not indicated and should be > avoided. > > Personally, I don't think that cannabis, nor tobacco, should be allowed, > without medical prescription, to minors. But to make it illegal to sell it > to a minor, you have to legalize it. > > For adult, I do think that recreational cannabis is *far* safer than > alcohol, on many level (from the liver to the social problem or the car > crash). > > Bruno > and here's another report that the first one linked to Bruno. In this more serious abniormalities are found in heavy users over 3 years or more., The collapsed structures, possibly reflecting neuron depletion - in individuaols exhibitiung serious short term memory deficiencies - are similar to deformities found in schizophrenia sufferers. I do get it there are positive effects too. But it surely can't be reasonable to ignore this sort of hard evidence. It isn't conclusive I shouldn't think but it's significant and important evidence.
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
