502mania,
You have said quite a few things on here that are completely false. You put up that link from Harvard about the lung cancer 'cure'. You stated that pot worked better than (kimo) - it is CHEMO for the record. There are other things said by posters besides you that are also not accurate. I was going to just keep my mouth shut, after making my initial post about the drug test - even the reply about that was not in the ballpark because I am very sure that whatever test that poster had done was NOT anything more than the simplest, cheapest one available, so it didn't show anything, but that is NOT the norm either. But after reading more and more in this, I need to speak up. Marijuana does have vital uses for different health issues such as chronic pain and many other things. I am NOT completely against it's use in certain instances. It would be plain stupid on my part to even think like that, but I cannot just keep my mouth shut when I am seeing blatant BS being put up here. My main practice specialty is oncology and I am willing to bet I know just a 'bit more' than you or anyone on here does about cancer!
I will start with your 'lung cancer cured' post. The study was NOT done on humans. It was done using mice that had been implanted with human lung cancer cells, and found that tumors were reduced in size and weight by about 50 percent in treated animals compared to a control group. Big deal - that is NOT conclusive evidence of anything and since the study you linked was done back in 2007 and nothing more has been put out as far as any further testing. You think by putting one study up here, you have shown 'proof' of a cure. Well, boolah for you. It did NOT cure the cancer and it was not tested using humans.
Science has NO idea what the pathway is as far as how the THC functions. That is a crucial void - without knowing that, it is flying blind. Many animal studies have also shown that THC can stimulate some cancers and at a very rapid rate.
There has been another study using THC on glioblastoma, what we call GBM. It is the most aggressive of all brain cancers. This study was published in 2009 by a doctor in Madrid, Spain and again, done using mice injected with tumors/cancerous cells from 2 patients. In this study there were also 2 human patients who had been in this doctor's clinical trial. They did in fact show some improvement, but the cancer was NOT eradicated. So, what do we have? A total of 2 things that any of you could find via the internet - a very reliable source? No, they are there to see, but would you actually be able to comprehend even a millionth of a written compilation of the total study/clinical/parameters/results data and see all the important variables within them in order to fully understand what they mean?
Everyone knows about THC. The other most abundant compound in pot is Cannabidiol or CBD. There are more than 70 cannabinoids found in the cannabis plant. 502mania, the findings in your report from 2007 and the other done on brain tumor cells were not actually that surprising. There have been previous reports over the years to this effect as well. So this is yet another indication that THC can possibly have an anti-cancer effect, which means it's certainly worth further study and testing. If ingredients found in marijuana are proven in longterm and wide ranging studies and testing to cure cancer, it will be one of the greatest things ever found. I can only hope to be alive when it happens.
Many have compared cigarettes to pot as far as all the added chemicals in cigarettes. I won't argue as far as that ie chemicals/additives in cigs, but when you smoke a joint, you are inhaling a minimum of 5 times more tar than in a cigarette! Why do you think longterm and heavy users of marijuana have such high instances of pneumonia, bronchitis, COPD, and yes, even lung cancers? No one is going to convince me that smoking pot does not impair your reaction time while doing things such as driving or anything else. If it doesn't, then you are smoking 'skank' weed that you wasted your $$ on or oregano.