This isn’t bullshit. This is real. These are real people coming out of real pain with extracts, and it is the combination of the proven miraculous effectiveness of cannabis extracts and the desperation of pain which calls for such drastic action.
I haven’t lost here. Things didn’t work out as well as I’d hoped, in terms of potentially finding someone to help, but things have gone great in terms of the debate. You think I’ve lost, but nobody addressed anything of true substance. I got what I came for - I now know if this was an actual debate, where the points were truly hammered out, I would win, and it feels so good to know that. It doesn’t matter to me what any of you think, I know I have won. I don’t believe there are any people out there who are stronger than you guys or who could possibly bring it harder. None of you have held back and I appreciate it, this is exactly what I needed.
Although I’ve gotten what I needed, I’ll continue to respond to this thread as long as people continue to post. I’m certainly not leaving. But I can’t respond as quickly as I have so far because I have admittedly put off more important things I could’ve been doing to dedicate more time than expected to this thread. But I don’t regret it - engaging in such a debate was absolutely necessary in several ways. You all don’t even realize how much you have helped me.
Why, out of all the 100s or 1000s, do they only appear on pro cannabis websites or Youtube? Not a single doctor who can verify all this has written an article (or even a letter) in a medical journal.
Where’s the verification that all those cancer cures were cancer to begin with? Surely, if there were mass curings with no other therapy at the same time, someone would notice.
Yet not a peep from their doctors.
“Out of context” my ass. You’ve dismissed every bit of feedback. Your beliefs are immune to logic and the feedback of those much more educated than you in the area you dabble in here, Marketing. The quest for intellectual integrity would suggest you step back and wonder why the divide is you on the one side, and a whole lot of educated and informed persons on the other. But you won’t. You came in with your beliefs, and you’ll leave with them, hand-waving away all of the contrary feedback as you go. It’s a pity, really, there probably is a lot more good you could do for your cause if you reflected for a bit.
But on the other hand, he’s also probably immune to virtually every disease known to man.
I know a guy who uses cannabis and he’s never taken a sick day in his life. Coincidence? I think not. It’s anecdotal evidence. And if I learn of another person, it’ll double the strength of my case.
Your post became more and more frustrating in your typing that is … you obviously feel very strong about your cause to help those that have a need.
If you are right and win say in a medical case in a state court, you still have to go the distance in a Federal court. I’ve asked myself before why isn’t marijuana legal and the answers don’t come easy.
Young people under 21 aren’t ready for the experience and will hinder them in the long run. Sure they already use it illegally, parties, back seats, dorms, backyard barbecue’s, but that is no where the use if it is legalized. Teenagers have already been tested and found that pot expands the unfinished mind, swells it so to speak and learning abilities are hampered. People won’t stop driving when they are high in Washington state or in Colorado and the accident ratio will go up starting in December for Washington when it will be legal to purchase marijuana for 21 and over.
If you can’t stop the younger generation from smoking pot or consuming consumable pot … your not going to stop it after it becomes legalized. Their are no regulations for what you call the extract (Israel does have some interesting studies and you should check out their THC pills without the high). Colorado for example even lets THC be put into energy drinks.
I don’t know what rich people do on marijuana, but I do know what poor people do. They give up, they let go, it is their crutch, it becomes their escape clause so to speak to bear another day of poverty and feel good while they wait for the big chance to make the big bucks.
How are you going to regulate the use for just medical patients which is what I see this thread is mostly about, but between the lines it is also for, “I want to feel good and I want to feel good now”
Proof! Look in anyone’s medicine cabinet and count how many drugs are available on the street that young people purchase in the tens of thousands of dollars everyday.
Marijuana is a problem and legalizing it won’t work in the long run. I do feel sorry for the numbers game of blacks incarcerated for smoking pot, holding pot, selling pot vs the numbers game of how many whites are incarcerated. I would have to go look it up, but it is staggering and I would like to see that taken care of, but making pot legal even just for a few will take more study, more time, I hate to say it more of a younger generation that use to smoke pot taking over the legal system.
I smoked marijuana everyday for ten years and kicked the habit in just five days (with the help of no money left lol) I have gone a long time now without smoking it. If they ever do a survey … I feel better and I feel sorry for people that can’t think clearly enough to stop smoking or consuming marijuana.
I know your talking about helping people and I am talking about everyone in general.
Slow down or your frustration JKander when you get angry you lose your power.
Good luck on reaching your goal and no your not a loser.
As someone with a bachelors degree in marketing, your advocacy is completely without merit. If this doctor means anything other (in your italicized sentence) than “we need to get as quickly as possible in our research to human trials so that those in need can participate and possibly benefit from this as-yet experimental treatment”, then yes, this is unequivocally the incorrect approach according to the standards we have established for ourselves at the societal level for the practice of science (and medical research in particular).
It doesn’t matter that you’ve “addressed” that list of criticisms elsewhere in the thread. If you haven’t addressed them by responding with either: 1. “Oh wait, here is a whole stack of peer reviewed researched published in reputable science journals that supports what I’ve been arguing”
OR 2. “yes, you’re right, we need to get the scientific community to take notice and research this thoroughly and correctly so that the many out there who are suffering may benefit as soon as possible”, then you haven’t addressed our criticisms to anyone’s satisfaction.
It’s not helpful to think in terms of winning or losing this “debate”. And again, if you’re right, that would be awesome! Do you have any idea how happy I would be if you were? (especially considering I have close people in my life suffering from a number of the diseases you’ve claimed can be treated by this wonder drug). But again (and again and again…) IT DOES NOT MATTER IF YOU ARE RIGHT. Please take that thought in. It reminds me of this scene in My Cousin Vinny
Listen, it’s very simple. There is no “debate” here. It’s not about who can argue their points better (at least not at this point). You either have high quality studies, or you don’t. I can assure you there’s absolutely nothing you can say here that would be of any interest to any of the very scientifically literate people here (or anywhere else for that matter) in arguing your case other than that. Nothing.
Please notice, I’m not saying at any point that you are wrong. Admittedly I have my doubts, but that’s because, believe it or not, based on all I’ve read from you and about this topic, you are no different from many previous examples of people with passionate beliefs about various miracle cures that didn’t quite pan out as expected. But you could be different (and that should not be read with a shred of sarcasm - I mean that very genuinely). Science is the ONLY way I can ever know. There’s nothing different about your report, testimonials, passion, or anything you’ve said in this thread.
Please, stop thinking of this as a debate to win, and put your passion towards advancing the scientific process so that we may all benefit from the results.
I just have to respond to this because this made me giggle. Do you have any idea how much pseudoscientific nonsense is totally accepted in mainstream culture that has been around for hundreds of years? I live in Germany where nearly every single doctor’s office also offers homeopathy as part of their practice, and many insurances even cover it. Here’s a very incomplete list of pseudosciences that have come a lot farther and been around for heckuva lot longer than 5 or 6 years.
What is “this far”? To repeat my point again, “this far” is only as good as the quality and quantity of good scientific research.
I’m sincerely having doubts over whether or not JKander actually has a degree in marketing. I hope everyone understands why.
Well shit, why didn’t you say this 5 pages ago? Could have saved everyone involved a whole lot of time.
Not idiot. True believer. There’s a difference: the idiot is simply underinformed; the true believer has far deeper problems to work out. The idiot believes something which is incorrect because of lacking or incomplete evidence, or because they don’t understand the methodology, and this can be corrected. The true believer believes something which is incorrect not out of ignorance, but because they don’t care about the evidence (“It doesn’t matter what any of you think”) - rather, they are emotionally invested in the issue to a point where they cannot see past their own noses. They know about the correct methodology, but ignore it to further their belief. They are the Kent Hovinds and Ken Hams; the Jenny McCarthys and Gary Nulls. You have every hallmark of an alt-med “true believer”.
Yep, that basically sums it up, although 6 is more just adding insult to injury - if your highest qualification is a Bachelor of Arts, and that BA is in a field that directly incentivizes obscuring the truth, then I don’t know how you consider yourself qualified to interpret scientific results and relay those correctly to us.
One thing you forgot: incomplete data and details on your cases. This one’s really important - we have very little actual information about the cases of any of your anecdotes. We don’t have access to their medical files. We often don’t even know exactly what medical treatment they underwent to begin with. Why is this so important? Lemme tell you a story about Chris Wark. Chris Wark opted out of adjuvant chemotherapy in treating his cancer. He took a whole mess of supplements, followed a quack diet, and when the cancer cleared up, he thanked his woo for the recovery. Seems like a pretty convincing anecdote, right? Except that when you dig a little deeper and actually look at the information, it turns out he had surgery to remove the tumor, and his particular type and phase of cancer had about a 60% chance to not relapse after qualified surgical removal.
Why is this important? Well, in your report, you don’t offer a lot of details. In many of the cases you present, you don’t go into detail about what kind of cancer we’re dealing with. What phase the cancer is in. What conventional treatment, if any, the patient has undergone prior to or during treatment with cannabinoids. These are crucially important details! And skimming the first handful of cases, you just don’t have them! Why not? Is it because you didn’t think they were important? That’s completely wrong - they are massively important. Is it because you didn’t have them? Then your report is irresponsibly misleading, as this is the type of information needed to draw any conclusion whatsoever.
Which puts you right around the end of the orange dot at the start on this graph. Lovely, you have a potential pathway how the drug could work. That’s not nothing, but it’s not anywhere near enough for any drug whatsoever. It’s only ever enough for quacks; for alt-med hucksters who want a story which is convincing for those with no idea what they’re talking about. And this has literally nothing to do with the criticism that your report had no selection methodology and was incredibly biased. You you have a resolution for this problem, yes or no? Because if not, I would request that out of human decency, you take your report down. Because someone might read it and use it as a basis for incredibly flawed, dangerous medical decisions.
And this does nothing to address the problem that your study completely fails even the most rudimentary checks of rigor.
No. They don’t. Perhaps a certain variety of diseases, but “virtually any disease”? That is not true. There are no such studies. In fact, if you knew anything about medicine, you would understand that this claim is the kind of thing that immediately marks you as a quack. It’s like claiming that water has memory. I’m sorry, but you’re not just wrong, you’re so wrong that nothing else you say is worth listening to.
And we’ve already had trained medical biologists in here explaining that this is pure technobabble crap that makes zero sense.
I’m sorry, I was under the impression that most diseases were caused by germs. If you’re not meaning to deny the germ theory of disease, then choose your words more carefully. If you are… Wow.
Well then, you have a very real moral duty to bring this to the masses in a way that actually confirms the validity of the cure. What the fuck are you doing wasting your time on studies with no patient methodology, no attempt to quantify confounding factors, and absolutely no scientific value? Why are you not spending the time you spent conjuring that scientific turd into the world publishing actual scientific research? Why are you shirking this duty?
First you complain about being taken out of context, then you craft this gigantic strawman argument. Nice. The testimonies of these patients are not inherently worthless. When gathered and analyzed correctly, they are very valuable - as data. But they need to be gathered and analyzed correctly, because if they aren’t, then our dataset is incomplete and flawed. Without a representative sample or monitoring a group of patients before they take the remedy, our dataset is incomplete. Without full knowledge of the conditions and treatments these people had, our dataset is incomplete. See how this works?
Except that “lack of compassion” has nothing to do with it. You’ve simply given us data we can do nothing with. The stories of these people are fascinating. So is the story of Chris Wark. So is the story of Jenny McCarthy. Get the picture? There’s a reason we try to decouple data from the people attached to them. It’s because emotional biases lead to true belief, and true belief is the opposite of science. You’re a true believer, though, so I doubt you’ll understand that. “If this didn’t work, it wouldn’t have come this far…” BURZYNSKI AND MERCOLA HAVE BECOME INCREDIBLY RICH SELLING BOGUS TREATMENT FOR THE LAST 30-ODD YEARS. Homeopathy still exists, despite being literally 100% water, and this being known for ages. The antivaccine movement actually succeeded in causing a resurgence of measles and pertussis. Your weed advocacy ain’t got nothing on that.
There have never been any peer-reviewed clinical trials for cannabis extract medicine for the direct treatment of cancer, although there are several in the works now because of the promising anecdotal evidence.
I absolutely agree this should be studied scientifically, and it would be great if the families receiving the medicine were tracked. Indeed, several of them are by Dr. Margaret Gedde. There needs to be an immense amount of scientific scrutiny and effort put towards analyzing this. However, because of the dramatic need for this medicine, people need access to it right now. I’m not saying it doesn’t need to be researched, it absolutely must. But just because the official research hasn’t come out isn’t an excuse for prohibiting this medicine.
The existing evidence that cannabis extracts can eliminate cancer has been enough for many people to put their lives on the line with it. And time and time again, it works. Every minute, someone dies from a disease that could be significantly alleviated or completely eliminated with cannabis extracts. Every minute. That’s why anybody in the world who wants this right now should have the right to have it. There’s absolutely no excuse. Even before clinical trials are carried out, which I think they should, people need access.
Interestingly enough, we seem to agree on mostly everything except the timetable. Like I said, I agree full-on clinical trials are needed. Just that people should have access before because the existing evidence is enough to warrant they have that access. I don’t think that’s too much to ask.
Either you provide a valid scientific cite for that specific claim, or I will tell you where exactly I think it comes from. This is exactly the bullshit-bravado that has turned people off in this forum, and all the smilies and marketing lingo in the world isn’t going to change that. Also, please spare us that “I’m happy with the results I got from this thread-Rillllly!” routine of yours-it just sounds pathetic at this point.
You’ve been pointed toward the horrific tragedy that was thalidomide. It’s a classic case of why there is no full access to any new drug without the full protocol of testing behind it.
The whole purpose of clinical trials is to make sure that the drug not only works but to evaluate the side effects.
So you all disagree that people should not have access to this medicine immediately? That’s what my argument really comes down to. People have the right to have this medicine, but it’s taken away because cannabis is illegal. It’s ridiculous. The effects I claim will undoubtedly be proven in trials, but until then, people need it now.
