On 30 Oct 2017, at 20:44, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 10/30/2017 9:54 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 30 Oct 2017, at 07:15, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 10/29/2017 10:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 27 Oct 2017, at 21:04, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 10/27/2017 9:02 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Then the discovery that THC (cannabis main cannabinoid, the
psycho-tropic one) shrink cerebral rumor of mice was dismissed
and stopped, and remain largely ignored. It is a total inhuman
shame!
I looked at that paper. It was statistically bogus.
Nobody has ever found that paper easily. One guy found one of the
author and got a manuscript draft, then later, someone found an
old print of it, but I think it is a hell of difficulty to find
the paper.
I guess you talk about something else. That paper was written by
people paid by the US Government to prove that cannabis causes
cancer, but they found the opposite: it cures cancer (at least on
mice for a collection of cerebral tumor). You may look at:
http://www.mapinc.org/newstcl/v01/n572/a11.html
You should look at the original paper, not breathless second-hand
reports.
http://sci-hub.ac/10.1038/nrc1188
I can't access this. I see also russian text asking I register, I
guess. Could you send me a copy please, perhaps?
Anyway, that precise discovery,
It was anything but "precise".
and its extension on humans cells has been done again 20 years
later by a spanish Team, and belongs to the "mainstream":
http://www.jci.org/articles/view/37948
It refers to cannabis inhibiting autophagy which may lead to cell
death, but not necessarily.
Some cannabinoids induce autophagy of the cancerous cells (in vitro).
That is not bogus, and has been verified, and followed by many
papers showing that cannabis is indeed an excellent medication
for many diseases---you can look at:
http://www.collective-evolution.com/2013/08/23/20-medical-studies-that-prove-cannabis-can-cure-cancer/
Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol inhibited tumour-cell proliferation in
vitro
Yes. But then you have the testimony. And the point I refer
initially are the lies. Even if cannabis cannot been used for human
cancer, the hiding of the discovery described above, and the
stopping of the research on something promising,
Where is the evidence that the discovery is hidden (it's published)
and that further research was stopped for some nefarious reason?
Published? Can you give me the exact references. And some working
link?, Or a copy? I am still not sure we talk about the same paper.
The evidence comes from the fact that nobody knew it until it was
rediscovered 20 years later. But even the new evidences have not made
the headline in the news, and also, cannabis is still schedule one.
Even if cannabis did not have any medical use, the papers showing its
danger have all been shown to be gross frauds, all the times.
even if only promising, is the bad attitude I deplore. We are not
here to debate on cannabis.
I did verify some of those papers (some are bogus indeed, but
many are not).
As I said, the team of Mechoulam, in Jerusalem, have understood
the basic general mechanism, by discovering the anandamide, which
is the name they gave to the agonist of THC, and by unraveling
the endo-cannabinoid system in all enough high animals (which
means all, except for some primitive sea non-vertebrates). Google
on endo-cannabinoid system.
Also, it is a false secret that the reason to forbid cannabis was
brought by a set-up. There has never been any reason to make
cannabis illegal. There are many good videos and books on the
subject. I will not develop this here. I can give references,
including to the thousand of papers which add evidence that
cannabis can cure many disease and cancers. Of course such
research are not permitted in the land of the free, and it is not
yet that simple in Europa too.
There are plenty of pharmacological research labs outside the
U.S. Are you claiming there's a worldwide conspiracy to prevent
curing cancer?
Cannabis has been made illegal world-wide, rather rapidly. Only the
Russians took a bit more time. yes, I find plausible there has been
a worldwide multi-corporatist conspiracy to hide the medical and
industrial virtue of Hemp to sell as much Petrol as possible.
I find it hilariously implausible. Corn->ethanol barely breaks even
on the energy-return-on-investment. Hemp would require even more
extraction processing.
But as Henri Ford already seem to have said: it is renewable, and does
not pollute.
Bruno
Brent
That hypothesis explains a lot of things, notably that despite the
success of the cannabis medical, and the continuing lack of
evidences of problem with hemp, cannabis is still in schedule one.
Even under Obama, the schedule one of cannabis has been renewed,
despite many hope for putting it at least in schedule 2. But no:
research
