Cannabis In, Cancer Out

82  2013-01-10 by [deleted]

“The time has come for America to hear the truth about this tragic war.”1

This 1967 declaration by Martin Luther King Jr. regarding America's involvement in Vietnam, I feel most could agree is a potent indictment of all presently-raging wars—not merely those tied directly to military conflict—say the war within and between our selves, or the gradual (but accelerating) war waged on true freedom by certain elite interests, or finally that which is a specific, pervasive rendering of each: the war on drugs.

In early 2011, after being caught by small-town police officers with a comically miniscule amount of cannabis on my person (really it was a slight dusting in a metal container that had formerly held curiously strong mints), and thrown in jail overnight, I decided to reveal to my family that I had been supplementing my lifestyle with the good herb for some time and no longer wished to be secretive in doing so.

This minor revelation was met with a variety of reactions from my immediate family members, but most notable to me was my big sister's statement that,

“Nothing I could say would make her say it is okay.”

I immediately quipped,

“Well...what if it...cured cancer?”

But my elder sibling was resolute,

“You're not going to change my mind.”

At the time, this stance appalled me, but I did not actually believe there was any association between cannabis and cancer treatment, outside of its anti-nausea properties. It simply sprang to mind as a vivid hypothetical for the purposes of argumentation. I even felt on some level that it could very likely cause lung cancer when smoked regularly over long periods of time. My reasons for using “Da Buddha” (as I had come to affectionately refer to the plant) were psychological--because it enhanced my ability to stay positive and focused on what was important to me--not physiological.

What I did not know then was that my impulse to pose this what-I-thought-was-a-fantastical scenario to my sister was the first in an unfolding of synchronicity linking cannabis, cancer, and my life.

Fast forward a little under a year to late 2011, I'm still using cannabis regularly, living in New York City--making pocket change as a film actor and freelance writer/photographer, participating to some extent in the protests bubbling up in the region, and just generally trying to maintain a solid foundation for my life and those that I cared about. Then, around October 2011, a friend curiously directs me to a number of research papers which are mutually reaching the conclusion that cannabis and its extracts can actually kill cancer cells and help to prevent cancer—in a multiplicity of forms.

I was certainly skeptical at the outset. I have a degree in Biomedical Sciences—and my scientific brain was seeking initially to refute this claim. I expected this to be somewhat easy. Rather I found it was not even possible to do so. It was, on the other hand, surprisingly easy to highlight bias, prohibitively small sample sizes, unaccounted for confounding variables, and/or insignificant confidence intervals (for those not inclined to the study of statistics, this essentially means the data was poor and inconclusive) in all of the studies purporting to demonstrate cannabis use causing cancer.2,3,18

When it comes to biological research, the term in vivo refers to studies that manipulated the actual biology of living systems, such as humans and animals. Often the non-human animal models used in cannabis studies have been rats or hamsters. Alternatively, in vitro refers to studies in which human cancer cells were isolated and placed in a Petri dish or similar non-biological milieu, after which they were manipulated and observed.

Some of the discoveries I've made during my time looking into the research on cannabis and cancer:

In vitro: Cannabis extracts kills glioma (brain cancer)4, breast5,6,7,8,9, prostate10, pancreatic11, colon cancer12 cell lines.

In vivo: Cannabis extracts suppress or halt the growth of leukemia13, ovarian cancer14, lung cancer15, glioma16, and based on anecdotal reports that appear genuine (see Rick Simpson's “Phoenix Tears” organization and the documentary Run from the Cure)—potentially a lot more.

The long term smoking of cannabis even demonstrated a possible protective effect against lung cancer when smoked regularly over a long period of time17--This based on the results of a UCLA study by Donald Tashkin and associates that was and is the largest case-control study of its kind. Though existence of an inverse protective effect was statistically insignificant, what was significant about the data was the complete absence of a direct correlation between smoking cannabis and the lifetime risk of developing head, neck, or lung cancers. Furthermore, a review of nineteen studies which included this study in its analysis also concluded that regularly smoking cannabis was not associated with an increased risk of lung cancer3.

I do not bring this up to encourage adults to smoke a dozen joints a day or anything. In terms of overall health impact, I would actually discourage the frequent intake of cannabis in that form, unless raw hemp papers are always used, and even then it might be less than ideal relative to other options. If cannabis is smoked, it seems intuitive that smoking only the plant material out of a glass, quartz, or ceramic piece is most likely to maximize potential benefits while avoiding generating an excess of toxic combustion byproducts. Of course, vaporizing, baking edibles, and extracting the active components into an oil or tincture are all options that remove combustion from the equation entirely.

I moved to Madison shortly after initiating the process of information-acquisition regarding cannabis and cancer. Upon arriving here I felt a sense that my motivation to disseminate these newly uncovered facts had been reignited. So, I started telling a lot of people!

After a short time I realized that, as with New Yorkers (and also myself at the start) Madisonians were highly skeptical of what most were hearing as baseless claims by a uninformed hippy with ulterior motives. Put another way, it appeared as if I was being regarded as a stoner with selfish “pipe”-dreams about legalization for my own recreational use of the plant. And, while this would be a nice secondary consequence of full legalization, it was frustrating to think this was how the information was typically received. So, I started peppering my statements with a weighty prediction: Cannabis would be fully legalized in the United States by the end of 2012—or widespread protests/riots would ensue. People simply wanting to get high is not a logically sufficient reason for such an event to take place. A common response was that 5-20 years seemed like a more likely time frame for this to occur. Thus, I vocalized this prediction not in the hope of being viewed as more objective and reasonable in that present moment—indeed many probably thought I had to be high to believe such a thing—but rather with a view to a future state of things: if/when such legalization happened according to my estimated time line, those I had spoken to would perhaps look back and realize such an event may have been, on some level, driven by those cancer-killing properties alluded to by some dude on the street several months earlier. Basically, down the line, I had hoped to induce an opening of floodgates in the minds of those I had spoken to.

Shortly thereafter, in August of this year, my mother was diagnosed with Stage III ovarian cancer. This floored me, for a while. However, I stood again, and again felt a revitalization of my sense of purpose. Seeking at that point to reinforce my knowledge of the potential effects of cannabinoids (and other natural treatments—such as high-dose intravenous Vitamin C therapy) on ovarian cancer specifically, I delved again into the available research—and came upon another element of synchronicity that I found incredible: A comprehensive study demonstrating the ability of activated cannabinoid receptors to markedly decrease ovarian cancer cell expression in the bodies of hamsters with implanted human tumors14...was conducted at UW-Madison in 2006! I was both thrilled and slightly vexed that this study had not been more publicized, at the very least in the Madison area or state of Wisconsin at large—where medical marijuana legislation has consistently met with red tape. Cancer patients in Wisconsin, and everywhere, deserved to know.

At this juncture, my prediction regarding legalization has all but come totally true, as Washington and Colorado have fully legalized. In Colorado, the legislation actually received more votes than those for Obama's reelection. This is not surprising, the president has avoided cannabis legalization like an annoying relative and may soon be teaming up with the federal government to attempt to impose international sanctions against the passed legislation in these two states. Given what we now know, this is not okay! As I firmly believe in the power of the human spirit—I think any such efforts will prove futile--and what we will instead see is a continuing acceleration toward full legalization in every state leading up to the end of 2013.

I am writing this both to inform and inspire action. Sure, we can presently jump through legal and not-so-legal hoops to get cannabis for whatever the use, but we, as complex sentient creatures with infinite potential to make this life beautiful for all—should not have to resort to such tactics. Cannabis grows in the ground and has never in and of itself harmed us as a species. Only the futile and now seemingly sinister efforts to suppress it have. Furthermore, for the treatment of cancer, smoking or vaporization, while likely efficacious, are intuitively not ideal. Cancer patients, naturopathic, and allopathic physicians alike must be given unrestricted access to large quantities of the plant in order to produce small amounts of the potent extracts—which are saturated with all the components found scientifically to help heal and prevent disease.

I am answering what feels like a calling here, and hope that after encountering this article more will do the same.

After all—according to the good Doctor King, “There comes a time when silence is betrayal.”1 I truly feel that, as when these words were originally spoken, that proverbial “time” is now. Now's all we have—all we've ever had—after all.

1 noncorporatenews (2007, Jaunary 11). Martin Luther King, “Why I am Opposed to the War in Vietnam.” Retrieved December 1, 2012, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b80Bsw0UG-U.

2S.Aldington, et al. Cannabis Use and the Risk of Lung Cancer: A Case-Control Study. http://erj.ersjournals.com/content/31/2/280.full. Accessed December 1, 2012.

3Reena Mehra, MD, MS; Brent A. Moore, PhD; Kristina Crothers, MD; Jeanette Tetrault, MD; David A. Fiellin, MD. The Association Between Marijuana Smoking and Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review. http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=410634. Accessed December 1, 2012.

4G. Velasco, et al. Cannabinoid action induces autophagy-mediated cell death through stimulation of ER stress in human glioma cells. Journal of Clinical Investigation 2009;119(5):1359–1372.

5Caffarel MM, et al. Cannabinoids: A New Hope for Breast Cancer Therapy? Cancer Treat Rev. 2012 Nov;38(7):911-8.

6Sean D. McAllister, et al. Cannabidiol as a novel inhibitor of Id-1 gene expression in aggressive breast cancer cells. Mol Cancer Ther November 2007 6; 2921.

7Luciano De Petrocellis, et al. The Endogenous Cannabinoid Anandamide Inhibits Human Breast Cancer Cell Proliferation. PNAS July 7, 1998 vol. 95 no. 14.

8María M Caffarel, et al. Cannabinoids reduce ErbB2-driven breast cancer progression through Akt inhibition. Molecular Cancer 2010, 9:196.

9Shrivastava A, et al. Cannabidiol induces programmed cell death in breast cancer cells by coordinating the cross-talk between apoptosis and autophagy. Mol Cancer Ther. 2011 Jul;10(7):1161-72. Epub 2011 May 12.

10Juan A. Ramos and Fernando J. Bianco. The role of cannabinoids in prostate cancer: Basic science perspective and potential clinical applications. Indian J Urol. 2012 Jan-Mar; 28(1): 9–14.

11Arkaitz Carracedo, et al. Cannabinoids Induce Apoptosis of Pancreatic Tumor Cells via Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress–Related Genes. Cancer Res July 1, 2006 66; 6748.

12Aviello G., et al. Chemopreventive effect of the non-psychotropic phytocannabinoid cannabidiol on experimental colon cancer. J Mol Med (Berl). 2012 Aug;90(8):925-34. Epub 2012 Jan 10.

13Jia W, et al. Delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol-induced apoptosis in Jurkat leukemia T cells is regulated by translocation of Bad to mitochondria. Mol Cancer Res. 2006 Aug;4(8):549-62.

14Farrukh Afaq, et al. Cannabinoid receptors as a target for therapy of ovarian cancer. Proc Amer Assoc Cancer Res, Volume 47, 200

15American Association for Cancer Research (2007, April 17). Marijuana Cuts Lung Cancer Tumor Growth In Half, Study Shows. ScienceDaily. Retrieved December 2, 2012, from http://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2007/04/070417193338.htm

16Sánchez C, de Ceballos ML, Gomez del Pulgar T, et al.: Inhibition of glioma growth in vivo by selective activation of the CB(2) cannabinoid receptor. Cancer Res 61 (15): 5784-9, 2001. 

17Tashkin  DPZhang  ZFGreenland  SCozen  WMack  TMMorgenstern  H Marijuana use and lung cancer: results of a case-control study. American Thoracic Society web site. http://www.abstracts2view.com/ats06/. Accessed May 30, 2006

18 John Charles A. Lacson MS, et al. Population-based case-control study of recreational drug use and testis cancer risk confirms an association between marijuana use and nonseminoma risk. Cancer Volume 118, Issue 21, pages 5374–5383, 1 November 2012

22 comments

First of all, /r/conspiracy needs more self posts like this. Sourced, informative, and easy to read.

Second, I agree that the research into the medical benefits of cannabis is being hindered specifically by a Corporate-led agenda that profits from a fix(not cure) based treatment model. There's no profit in curing people, but if you can get them hooked on the fix... It's just more Hegelian minded oppression, and I think there's potential for cannabis to be part of the path to breaking out of that cycle.

There's a lot of talk about how people need to be protected from what is an alleged "sure thing" endemic of use after legalization, but there's nothing that demonstrates this reaction to be a historically accurate one. The truth is that the drug war is very profitable for a powerful segment of the profit structure that underpins the Real American Economy. And that is a terrible reason to deny the suffering treatment and infringe on the rights of sovereign citizens and the states to make decisions for themselves.

The American people are learning at an exponential rate that the government doesn't know what's best for them, and are beginning to fight back. I think that once the instructional period with gun control legislation is won, marijuana legalization will be the next big test of how far Americans are willing to go to protect their rights.

You don't have to be someone who 'needs' or 'enjoys' cannabis to see the ramifications of outcome in this debate between the power structure and the will of the people.

Great thread. I sincerely hope it doesn't get buried. Keep posting in this sub, we need more minds and less bots.

Thanks--your insights are greatly appreciated

great post

Long read but worth it.

thanks

[deleted]

That is a great idea, I should do the same. Particularly if I spread the information to more professors at UW. The juxtaposition with alcohol prohibition is certainly a very compelling one. It's impossible not to see clearly once it is pointed out.

Excellent post. Thanks for sharing.

Thanks for your feedback :)

Great post, good to see people wake up and be pro-active about their new knowledge. This really is a BFD and people need to be exposed to this information.

I like to drop this bomb on people- the US government patented cannabinoids, patent #6630507: www.google.com/patents?id=0pcNAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4&source=gbs_overview_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

From the patent, "“Cannabinoids have been found to have antioxidant properties,unrelated to NDMA receptor antagonism. This new found property makes cannabinoids useful in treatment and prophylaxis of a wide variety of oxidation associated diseases, such as ischemic, age related, inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. The cannabinoids are found to have particular application as neuroprotectants…”

The hypocrisy of their dual stance is amazing.

antioxidant properties

Which means nothing. Antioxidant supplements do nothing whatsoever at all.

Apparently the government differs in opinion- regardless, surely you see the hypocrisy.

I don't agree with your country's (and therefore mine, we just copy you, ya jerks) drug policy in the least, but this isn't hypocrisy. The patent office is an entirely different entity from those who pass drug legislation. The government is not a cohesive, single entity.

Original Assignee: The United States of America as represented by the Department of Health and Human Services

Yes indeed, among other things the antioxidant properties have been found to be quite potent...there is seemingly nothing this plant cannot do...

Yes--that patent! I have to remember that for the future...

Fo Shizle

my nizzle

haha nice!

Smoking cannabis will destroy most of the beneficial effects due to the burning.

So I would recommend eating it! From my experiences of eating cannabis, the effects gently kick in and eventually get stronger. You can make tea or blend it into soup, whatever you prefer.

From eating resin, I was actually hallucinating for some time. It was fucking amazing watching cars race on rainbows on my ceiling. But you have to eat a lot of resin for that to happen :)

I agree, eating/vaporizing is ideal. I don't know that smoking will destroy most of the beneficial effects though--in my experience this has not been true. However, I do agree that smoking the least beneficial.

I don't agree with your country's (and therefore mine, we just copy you, ya jerks) drug policy in the least, but this isn't hypocrisy. The patent office is an entirely different entity from those who pass drug legislation. The government is not a cohesive, single entity.