This guy claims that hemp oil can cure cancer.
An article about him:
http://ezinearticles.com/?The-Cure-For-Cancer---Hemp-Oil&id=2216524
No, probably not. Listen to your doctor.
“Cancer” isn’t a single disease. So, the chances of a “magic bullet” is pretty slim.
Look
you’re the one thats not informed.
Hemp oil works for any condition involving mutating cells. Cancer is due to mutating cells. Also, hemp oil was widely used around the world 85 years ago. It is a from a plant not a drug thus it cant be patent. Drug companies cant profit from it. Go figure.
The article you cite rings just about every bell for bogus there is, set out paragraph by paragraph. It is truly a masterpiece of the genre.
I will only quote the first:
HUGE benefit promised. Conspiratorial claims explaining why only Initiates to the Secret know about it. And “a new age of peace and prosperity”? With the moon in the 7th house and Jupiter aligned with Mars? Standard stoner boilerplate.
Really. Naivete does not come more touching than this.
The rest of the article is in much the same vein. Lone amateur makes brilliant discovery from personal adversity. (See, this proves how genuine and honest he is!) Evil corporate/medical culture refuses to accept The Truth out of grubby financial self-interest. Discoverer motivated only by selfless concern to the point where he used to give the product (hemp-oil) away free to friends (hmmm…)
Note how impressed the author is by purely anecdotal evidence? (We don’t need no steeenking controlled double blind trials…)
Then there is the claim that there is nothing hemp oil cannot cure - diabetes, MS, mental disorders, etc. As the rule of thumb goes, the more things a medical product claims to be able to do, the less likely it is that it does any of them.
There’s even the pitch that acknowledges how all the other cancer cures are frauds (so the reader is supposed to be impressed by the frankness of the writer), but that this one is the real deal.
And there’s the claims of “huge amounts of support” without any actual proof of said support, even from “cannabis activists”.
This is just hilarious. Thank you, tgan3 for drawing it to my attention.
This is the second time somebody has posted this in the last week. It is pure bullshit. Plants, and chemicals made from plants, get patented. To name a few drugs I’m familiar with, etoposide is derived from a compound in mayapples, and several other chemotherapy drugs are derived from mustard-related compounds.
Plenty of drugs are made from Plants.
The key is not to patent it but to mass market it and make a profit.
To get around a patent, all you have to do is add an extra ingredient, and you can get around it to market the drug under a new name. (see *Abraxane *example above).
Here are some more drugs from plants.
Try Again?
Yes. Just yes.
Btw, isn’t hemp oil just purified weed? Then definitely. It will cure everything. “I was gonna go to chemo, but then I got high… Trala lala la”
Of course, THC strongly affects the glucocorticoid system, and that has all sort of control over inflammation and the immune system. But let that be neither for nor against any wild-assed claim.
Heck, you only have to read the first phrase to see a falsehood!
Cancer is mainly a disease of the developed world. The rest of the world, and the majority of the worlds population, is pretty unconcerned with cancer; they are far too concerned with dying from such more basic diseases as dysentery, malaria, tuberculosis, and just plain starvation to worry about cancer.
Medical archievements get published on pubmed, not on youtube.
From the link in the first post:
So you mean that everyone in the biomedical research knows that it works and that no one seems to care ? This is absolutely ridiculous. Have you ever met people who work on cancer or cell biology ? There are tenths of thousands of them. Doesn’t it occur to you that they are moslty normal people ? How do you think that they would be forced to silence ?
And this patenting issue… as mentioned above, you can patent a drug derived from plants. Anyway, only a small fraction of cancer researchers is payed by pharmaceutical compagnies and, and so most of them don’t give a damn about patenting !
And going from the conspiracy angle, there is a group of large, influential corporations that have a strong fiscal reason to look for cheap cures for chronic diseases - the health insurance companies. Long, drawn out diseases are hard to estimate the cost of; if there was a relatively simple & cheap cure for cancer, it would make the health insurance companies job much easier, allowing them to make a lot more money.
Then there are all the large corporations not in the medical field, but still shell out large amounts of money to insure their employees. Don’t Exxon Mobil, Wal-Mart or Microsoft have a least as much influence as the pharmaceutical companies? I bet Wal-Mart would love to sell hemp-oil derived cancer cures for $4 per months supply.
And then there are foreign governments where the large pharmaceutical companies have little or no influence. If hemp-oil cures cancer, then why do people in Cuba still die from cancer? Or for that matter, there are plenty of first-world countries whose socialized medical systems have no problem fixing the prices of the drugs pharmaceutical companies already sell. So why would they be afraid to use medicines the big pharm companies don’t sell?
So there are hundreds of them?
How? What markers are recognized? What is the method of action? How does oil induce cancerous cells to apoptose? Does it interfere with angiogenesis? Does it work through the immune system? How does it manage to be effective against all the hundreds of different cancers out there? What about metastasized tumors? What’s the most efficacious dosage? Don’t you think some of these questions should be addressed before it’s announced as a cure?
I don’t buy this argument. Many plant products are ingredients in patented products. Hence, if this really worked, it could be enveloped in a mix of inert ingredients (probably needed to make ingesting more palletable) and voila! Besides, the patent attorneys of the major drug cos know how to get over the patenting hurtles.
Now, could such a secret be drug be saving millions of medical jobs and university research grants? That is a different matter… :dubious:
Hey, industry couldn’t bury those long-live lightbulbs forever, ya know! Just some food for thought that some conspiracy theories are on-target.
- Jinx
There is essentially no THC in hemp oil; it’s on the order of .01% or less. The active substance in question, as far as I can tell, is cannabidiol.
I don’t know about the other guy, but I’ve met many cancer researchers. There is no mass conspiracy, but the overwhelming majority of researchers in any field are at the mercy of their PI and have little to no say in what they investigate.
Hemp oil is not a magic bullet and it’s not going to cure cancer, but there appear to be quantifiable benefits for people suffering from a variety of ailments.
Ha ha ha. Ok, fine, we French people don’t know how to write English correctly. But at least we have a socialized health care system and public research system, both of which make us immune to such pharmaceutical lobby conspiration theories. 
Well, this are indeed acceptable sources and a reasonnable statement about the potential of cannabinol.
(keeping on the topic of legitimate research, y’know, with data and peer review and all that)
Of course, like just about everything in cancer research, there’s a lot of contradictory evidence:
However, THC enhances growth of at least one kind of breast cancer.
The best anyone can say is that perhaps cannabinoids might be useful for treating some subset of cancers in some people, but it might make other cancers worse. Far more promising treatments have turned out to be completely useless once human trials have started.
Having done a thesis on another plant-derived compound (digoxin) and lung cancer, I can tell you that what happens in carefully controlled cells in a lab shows proof of principle only. Success in the lab is no guarantee that the same effects will be seen in a patient trial. I saw a modest increase in lung cancer cell death when they were exposed to digoxin in my experiments. Preliminary results from a patient trial where digoxin is part of lung cancer chemotherapy indicates that digoxin has little or no beneficial effect.
The hemp oil video is a slick snake oil pitch that relies on emotional reaction to judge the veracity of the claims rather than scientific evidence. When the OP has the desire to actually learn about how normal cells mutate into cancer cells, and perhaps gains some hands-on experience, then we might have something to discuss. Otherwise, I don’t give any time or credence to survivor stories as proof of anything beyond being bait for a hucksters sharp hooks.
Vlad/Igor
You’re mistaken. Cannabidiol (CBD) has been bred out of modern plants to make the intoxication more punchy. Need a High CBD low THC strain, any suggestions? | International Cannagraphic Magazine Forums
EDIT: Actually, you may be correct that “hemp” oil would primarily contain CBD if it were made from hemp, although it would be uneconomical to do this vs making it from marijuana. I would be surprised if anyone does it.