Cannabis Extracts for the Primary Treatment of Cancer, Epilepsy, and More

[JKander]

There’s a lot to address here but I’m going going to address the calls for substantive cases, the ones I feel best represent this movement. Except I’m going to give more than three.

1. Dr. Courtney eliminating a brain tumor in an 8-month old with a 3.8% high-CBD oil. No surgery, no chemotherapy, no radiation. In the extened HuffPost Live segment, he describes a patient with terminal brain cancer who eliminated it by merely juicing the leaves of the cannabis plant.

2. Corrie Yelland eliminating terminal anal canal cancer. I followed her case while she was still in treatment and she is a friend of mine. Besides the cancer, other problems she overcame with the oil are remarkable.

3. Jack, a patient of River Rock in Colorado, eliminating a decades-long history of skin cancer with internal and topical cannabis oil treatment.

4. My friend Dennis Hill, who actually worked in cancer research for 10 years and chose to use cannabis oil instead, eliminating prostate cancer. No chemotherapy, radiation, or surgery. His medical biopsies confirmed aggressive prostate cancer and then complete remission are in my report. No misdiagnosis there.

5. Cannabis Science providing physician’s documentation of basal cell carcinoma being eliminating with a cannabis extract. That’s a picture and is in my report in the Corporate and Dispensary Operations section.

6. Joanne Crowther overcoming terminal lymphoma. She battled cancer on and off for years until the chemotherapy almost killed her. When she had to stop chemotherapy because of the complications, doctors said she would die and only palliative medicine was prescribed. She began using oil and went into remission. To say that the chemotherapy eliminated the cancer completely contradicts the doctor’s prognoses for what would happen, along with the state Joanne was in. I have very specific details about her case, including the medical documentation, in my report.

7. The Facebook testimonials. Sounds crazy, but look at those in my report. So many amazing cases being reported, and I know most of the people posting there and have followed up. There are lots of before-and-after pictures there too.

8. Josh, another patient from River Rock, and Bechet’s disease. His case is a great example of cannabis extract medicine working for even the rarest and most terrible diseases.

9. Two trigeminal neuralgia cases. Trigeminal neuralgia is literally called suicide’s disease because it produces one of the most painful sensations imaginable. I was surprised in my research to find two cases of this rare condition, one from River Rock, and one from my friend Aamann Degarth.

10. All of the following Realm of Caring cases for epilepsy. If you read them… it’s just overwhelming. This is what I’m talking about when I say it’s miraculous and not coincidences.

11. Charlotte Figi [Dravet Syndrome]

12. Zaki Jackson (also there was a recent article reporting he’s now seizure-free for a year) [Doose Syndrome]

13. Emily [Infantile spasms]

14. Jacob [Unspecified Severe Seizure Condition]

15. The Med Joint, a dispensary in Michigan, and their results with topical cannabis oil, including skin cancer, arthritis, a diabetic wound, and more.

I’d say this is pretty good, but I’m leaving out so much. I figured since I was initially limited to 1-3 by BPC this is enough for now.

[running_coach]

Dr. Courtney.

Dr. William L. Courtney has an extensive medical education that began with a Bachelor of Science in Microbiology from the University of Michigan. He also received his Doctor of Medicine from Wayne State University, and Interned for Residency in Psychiatry at California Pacific Medical Center and went on to earned his Post Doctorate in Forensic Examination and Forensic Medicine. Dr. Courtney is currently a member of American Academy of Cannabinoid Medicine, the International Cannabinoid Research Society, the International Association of Cannabis as Medicine, and the Society of Clinical Cannabis. Dr. Courtney has also been teaching Continuing Medical Education (CME) courses in clinical cannabis.

I see nothing about Oncology.
And he’s obviously pre-disposed toward cannabis based treatment.

And that Huffington Post article fails to identify the type of cancer the baby had. You do realize there are non-cancerous tumors?

[Mr.Miskatonic]

Yeah, serious lack of details on all of these. Lots of self-reporting. Lots of advocacy doctors reporting. Nothing resembling a case study.

[running_coach]

Bechet’s Disease.

The exact cause of Behcet’s is unknown, but it may be an autoimmune disorder, which means the body’s immune system mistakenly attacks some of its own healthy cells. Both genetic and environmental factors may be responsible for Behcet’s disease.

Behcet’s disease symptoms vary from person to person. Behcet’s disease may disappear and recur on its own. The signs and symptoms that you may experience depend on which parts of your body are affected by the inflammation of Behcet’s disease.

[Budget_Player_Cadet]

Ugh. I’m going to address the first three. Like I said I would. Because you see, examining case files takes time. If you want to do it right, you need to know a lot about the patient, pore through a lot of information, and most importantly, understand it all. You clearly don’t get this, as you give me crap like the #1 on your list, which has literally none of the details I asked for. But okay, here goes.

#1 states neither the exact type nor stage of the disease. It does however say that the baby was also simultaneously on traditional therapies of one type or another. Nice one. This is a complete and utter failure on your part. Do you understand why? Please answer this - yes or no.

#2 actually has some details. The exact type of the cancer is known, although what phase it’s in is not. This makes any independent examination exceedingly difficult. Assuming everything she says is true - I see no reason why she personally would lie and her statements are backed up by the statements of actual experts in the field - this is a promising result. Whether or not its a statistical outlier (much like the Burzynski patients who survived his clearly non-functional treatment) remains to be seen. What’s more, this type of activity within the 1-2 year mark is not uncommon. There’s a reason most cancer cures need to wait a few years to demonstrate their effectiveness; because all too often, the diagnosis is faulty or the cancer comes back. This happens even to the best oncologists using the best chemotherapies. I’d wait a year or two, and if things continue to look this good, then there’s one strong case for the viability of this medicine, and perhaps an excuse to get it fast-tracked, as many treatments that have potential to be very valuable are.

#3 has the same common problems that these anecdotes far too often have - we have no solid evidence for any claims made. We don’t have the preliminary diagnostics, we don’t know what treatment (if any) he has gone through in the past, we don’t have any actual diagnosis from an oncologist talking about the cancer, and we’ve got a very short-term post-examination. If I were not to take this patient at his word, there’s absolutely no evidence you offered me that would give me any reason to believe otherwise. And given that this man has no qualifications in dermatology or oncology, I’m not going to take his word for it. I need actual documented evidence. See, this is the kind of data a clinical trial would gather - it would examine the cases and get massive amounts information that is absolutely necessary to determine the veracity of the case. The kind of information which is partially present in case #2 and not even remotely present in cases 1 and 3.

Now you know what I’m asking for. Would you like to revise your list?

[Kolga]

It is interesting how pot advocates are completely unwilling to subject their pet plant to actual, scientifically controlled trials, and rely almost 100% on case studies and anecdotes. If it’s a cure, then bring us the studies. Not individual cases - STUDIES, with valid sample sizes and controls, and a valid experimental design.

[Budget_Player_Cadet]

@Kolga

It is interesting how pot advocates are completely unwilling to subject their pet plant to actual, scientifically controlled trials, and rely almost 100% on case studies and anecdotes. If it’s a cure, then bring us the studies. Not individual cases - STUDIES, with valid sample sizes and controls, and a valid experimental design.

Baby steps. At least this way he’s slowly stepping away from “inundate them with a pile of bullshit 100 pages long then complain when nobody reads it” strategy. :rolleyes: You want debate JKander? Okay, I’ll claim that your third source has so much information lacking that saying literally anything about his case is a complete non-starter.

[JKander]

@Budget_Player_Cadet

Ugh. I’m going to address the first three. Like I said I would. Because you see, examining case files takes time. If you want to do it right, you need to know a lot about the patient, pore through a lot of information, and most importantly, understand it all. You clearly don’t get this, as you give me crap like the #1 on your list, which has literally none of the details I asked for. But okay, here goes.

#1 states neither the exact type nor stage of the disease. It does however say that the baby was also simultaneously on traditional therapies of one type or another. Nice one. This is a complete and utter failure on your part. Do you understand why? Please answer this - yes or no.

#2 actually has some details. The exact type of the cancer is known, although what phase it’s in is not. This makes any independent examination exceedingly difficult. Assuming everything she says is true - I see no reason why she personally would lie and her statements are backed up by the statements of actual experts in the field - this is a promising result. Whether or not its a statistical outlier (much like the Burzynski patients who survived his clearly non-functional treatment) remains to be seen. What’s more, this type of activity within the 1-2 year mark is not uncommon. There’s a reason most cancer cures need to wait a few years to demonstrate their effectiveness; because all too often, the diagnosis is faulty or the cancer comes back. This happens even to the best oncologists using the best chemotherapies. I’d wait a year or two, and if things continue to look this good, then there’s one strong case for the viability of this medicine, and perhaps an excuse to get it fast-tracked, as many treatments that have potential to be very valuable are.

#3 has the same common problems that these anecdotes far too often have - we have no solid evidence for any claims made. We don’t have the preliminary diagnostics, we don’t know what treatment (if any) he has gone through in the past, we don’t have any actual diagnosis from an oncologist talking about the cancer, and we’ve got a very short-term post-examination. If I were not to take this patient at his word, there’s absolutely no evidence you offered me that would give me any reason to believe otherwise. And given that this man has no qualifications in dermatology or oncology, I’m not going to take his word for it. I need actual documented evidence. See, this is the kind of data a clinical trial would gather - it would examine the cases and get massive amounts information that is absolutely necessary to determine the veracity of the case. The kind of information which is partially present in case #2 and not even remotely present in cases 1 and 3.

Now you know what I’m asking for. Would you like to revise your list?

Where does it say the baby was on traditional other therapies? It says the baby was able to avoid traditional therapies because of the oil. It heavily implies that the tumor is cancerous because the pediatric oncologist was considering chemotherapy and radiation, and regardless having a huge tumor in the middle of an infant’s brain is dangerous. While no documentation is provided, if one accepts the realities as presented, it’s clear the cannabis oil is shrinking the tumor. To think it’s going away on its own makes no sense.

Your refutation of Corrie Yelland is simply weak… to say “this type of activity within the 1-2 year mark is not uncommon.” It’s not uncommon for someone with a terminally diagnosed cancer to go into full remission not taking standard treatments? That’s ridiculous. Her experience eliminating chronic pain and skin cancer conditions is also remarkable.

As for Jack, you are making it out to sound like his case is cloudier than it is. “Saying literally anything about his case is a complete non-starter.” That’s crazy… he had been going to the doctor for decades having skin cancers removed. For the last 10 years, every three months he had to have multiple lesions removed or froze off. Then he takes the cannabis therapy, and for the first time the doctor has nothing to remove. And when spots of the cancer reappear, he just puts the oil on and it goes away. To say this case is worthless is just denying reality.

So your explanations for these cases are weak. If you accept them at their word, then I am right, and you have to jump through hoops to obscure the truth. There’s not enough detail, it’s not cancer, etc. The evidence strongly suggests it is. Like with Dr. Courtney, to say the tumor isn’t cancer. Based on the context, I would be extremely surprised if that was just a benign mass, and even if it was, for it to go away completely so quickly is remarkable.

The other cases are of this caliber. Just because many aren’t documented doesn’t mean they aren’t happening in reality. Just because you can’t see something doesn’t mean it’s not happening. If you continue to actually analyze these cases, you’ll see there is substance, as you started to admit with Corrie Yelland.

[running_coach]

Spontaneous remission.

[Ethilrist]

@JKander

While no documentation is provided, if one accepts the realities as presented, it’s clear the cannabis oil is shrinking the tumor.

Okay, I’m curious. Why exactly do you think this will fly here? Don’t tell us why you believe it. Why do you think anybody else here will believe it?

[running_coach]

Two more articles on spontaneous remission.

Immunity over inability: The spontaneous regression of cancer

http://discovermagazine.com/2007/sep/the-body-can-stave-off-terminal-cancer-sometimes

[Budget_Player_Cadet]

@JKander

Where does it say the baby was on traditional other therapies?

Misread that, I thought they meant to discontinue traditional therapies. But even then, this is incredibly weak. We don’t know what kind of disease, if any, the baby had. We have no statements from any doctors. We have an opinion piece in HuffPo with no relevant details.

It heavily implies that the tumor is cancerous because the pediatric oncologist was considering chemotherapy and radiation

This is not stated anywhere in the article. Hell, it’s not even stated who the pediatric oncologist is. It sure as hell ain’t Dr. William Courtney - as pointed out upthread, he has degrees in psychology and forensics. He is not by any stretch of the imagination an oncologist, and no other doctor is mentioned in the article.

and regardless having a huge tumor in the middle of an infant’s brain is dangerous.

But is it cancer? If so, which cancer? What phase? Is this the type of tumor prone to spontaneous remission? Is this likely to go away on its own? This is all relevant information that is not present and that you cannot provide.

While no documentation is provided, if one accepts the realities as presented, it’s clear the cannabis oil is shrinking the tumor. To think it’s going away on its own makes no sense.

No, what doesn’t make sense is assuming details. You don’t get to do that, and you’re not getting away with that bullshit. I’m sorry that you don’t understand how basic standards of scientific evidence work, but this shit ain’t gonna fly here. You don’t even know what kind of tumor it is! You don’t know whether or not it’s dangerous, or anything about it. You have no information to work with. For all we know, it could be a type of tumor that naturally goes away on its own. Who the fuck knows? You don’t!

Your refutation of Corrie Yelland

Did you read my post? Here, let me bold it again, so that this time you don’t miss it:

I’d wait a year or two, and if things continue to look this good, then there’s one strong case for the viability of this medicine, and perhaps an excuse to get it fast-tracked, as many treatments that have potential to be very valuable are.

If you want a debate, try reading what the other people have to say.

is simply weak… to say “this type of activity within the 1-2 year mark is not uncommon.” It’s not uncommon for someone with a terminally diagnosed cancer to go into full remission not taking standard treatments? That’s ridiculous.

It happened to Burzynski patients. Why do you think we have all these things in place? Why do you think medical scientists have so many things they look at? It’s to make sure we’re right. Because this shit ain’t easy! And it is incredibly easy to misdiagnose, or to miss part of the cancer, or to generally have bizarre results that only become clear after a year or two. This case is pretty convincing. But don’t treat it like silver-bullet proof of cannabis oil. Because it ain’t.

As for Jack, you are making it out to sound like his case is cloudier than it is. “Saying literally anything about his case is a complete non-starter.” That’s crazy… he had been going to the doctor for decades having skin cancers removed.

Then let’s see some transcripts from the doctor. Some letters of diagnosis. Something other than this man’s word. This case isn’t even comparable to people who survived with Burzynski’s treatment. This case is comparable to the testimonials on the MMS website. I have no reason to believe this man is telling the truth.

For the last 10 years, every three months he had to have multiple lesions removed or froze off. Then he takes the cannabis therapy, and for the first time the doctor has nothing to remove. And when spots of the cancer reappear, he just puts the oil on and it goes away. To say this case is worthless is just denying reality.

No. I have standards of evidence. Corrie had the actual documents from her doctor documenting her case and showing us what’s going on. That’s reason enough to believe what she has to say. But how many things can we verify about Jack? For all we know, he invented this story out of whole cloth. This is the problem here. You’ll find this shit for every alt-med quack. It’s not good enough for them, it’s not good enough for you.

So your explanations for these cases are weak. If you accept them at their word,

That’s a pretty big if. I accept Corrie’s case at her word, because she provides pertinent evidence and details, and I accept that this is cause for further study. I reject both of the others I examined out of a complete lack of tangible evidence beyond the say-so of a complete layman, and even if you take them on their word, there are so many pertinent details missing that it is impossible to say anything with any reasonable degree of certainty. That is not good enough for me, and it should not be good enough for you. In science, we don’t work on “hunches”. We don’t work on “To think it’s going away on its own makes no sense”. Dude, for you to say what does and does not make sense in medicine at this point, after saying shit like this, and admitting that you have no medical degree and no formal medical training… Well, no. Your idea of what makes sense in human biology is completely worthless. Almost hilariously so.

The other cases are of this caliber. Just because many aren’t documented doesn’t mean they aren’t happening in reality. Just because you can’t see something doesn’t mean it’s not happening. If you continue to actually analyze these cases, you’ll see there is substance, as you started to admit with Corrie Yelland.

Well then, show them to me. I’m open. I’ll hear any case with actual evidence backing it up - if you’d read my response to Corrie’s case, you’d have noticed that. It’s not good enough - a single case, or even a handful of cases is particularly weak evidence, even when well-documented, especially when dealing with multiple very different diseases. You know what is good enough? Phase II or III clinical trials. And I await them with high hopes that you’re right to blindly put your faith in this. If I was a medical professional, I would vouch for such trials, and put the process underway - the sooner it happens, the sooner this cure can start saving more lives than ever before. Because in the end, all you have here in the very best case scenario is prior plausibility. All you have in the best case scenario is a list of patients who took the treatment and survived. That’s nice, but is it a statistically representative sample? Probably not. And that’s what we need - to determine if this actually works better than a fucking placebo.

[Smeghead]

@JKander

There’s a lot to address here but I’m going going to address the calls for substantive cases, the ones I feel best represent this movement.

Wow. At what point during this discussion did you come away thinking, “You know what will change these pigheaded peoples’ minds? MORE ANECDOTES!!!”?

Just out of idle curiosity, have you read anything anyone other than yourself has posted in this thread at all?

[JKander]

BPC, you say that Corrie Yelland’s case, this is cause for further study. You accept that her case is remarkable because she has the documentation. But what if she had no documentation? Absolutely nothing other than her word? While you wouldn’t believe it for a second, it would be completely worthless to you with no meaning, she still would have been cured. It doesn’t change the reality of it. When you see the documentation, it’s not like that person magically went into remission as your perception of it came to be.

Corrie Yelland is not the exception. These people’s cancers have been confirmed with tests and have been confirmed as going into remission with tests. Also in my report is Joanne Crowther, whose story is equally amazing to Corrie’s.

All your problems have to do with not having enough information. From having been in this movement for five and a half years, and having this information, I’m telling you that this trend of cancers going into remission with cannabis oil is not uncommon. You’ve accepted the fact that it could happen to Corrie because of the documents - why not others? You think everybody else is just making it up?

You can try to find problems with every single case in my report, but after awhile, it gets tedious. You have to keep trying to find ways to explain away these miraculous healing results. Your arguments in regards to the cases have not exceeded my expectations.

[running_coach]

@JKander

BPC, you say that Corrie Yelland’s case, this is cause for further study. You accept that her case is remarkable because she has the documentation. But what if she had no documentation? Absolutely nothing other than her word?

Why do you find a need for documentation so remarkable?

When you get pulled over, do you just tell the officer you have a license and insurance and he accepts that? No, he requires you to produce the cards.

When you want a loan from the bank, you have to provide proof you have a job and income. you have to prove who you are. And how do you do this? Documents.

Documentation is needed because otherwise no one can know all the factors involved.

You claimed a success for Scott but it turns out the documentation says different.

You claimed Cash was cured by cannabis alone until it was revealed he was receiving chemo at the same time. And you’re still trying to claim him even though he’s dead.

[Smeghead]

@JKander

You can try to find problems with every single case in my report, but after awhile, it gets tedious. You have to keep trying to find ways to explain away these miraculous healing results. Your arguments in regards to the cases have not exceeded my expectations.

This is at least the fourth time I’ve explained this, without the tiniest indication that it has sunk in at all, but here goes again. It’s not about “explaining away” your stories. Your stories are irrelevant. Even if we all believe 100% that every word you post is true, it doesn’t matter, because these stories are not statistically meaningful. They are not data; they are not evidence, because they were not collected properly. Picking and choosing any number of positive stores TELLS US NOTHING AT ALL.

[Frylock]

@JKander

BPC, you say that Corrie Yelland’s case, this is cause for further study. You accept that her case is remarkable because she has the documentation. But what if she had no documentation? Absolutely nothing other than her word? While you wouldn’t believe it for a second, it would be completely worthless to you with no meaning, she still would have been cured. It doesn’t change the reality of it.

Documentation doesn’t change reality, it changes knowledge.

You said above it’s going to be nice to say “I told you so,” but this seems to show you still don’t really understand what’s happening in this thread. Even if it turns out cannabis cures everything you say it cures, this would not mean you were right and we were wrong. Because we aren’t denying that cannabis cures anything. Rather, we’re denying that we’ve been presented with a good reason to believe Cannabis cures anything.

Even if it turns out to cure things, that doesn’t change the fact that you’ve presented no good reason to believe that it cures things. About that, you are wrong, and will always have been wrong, no matter how things turn out as far as cannabis cures are concerned.

[JKander]

When this plays out, I guarantee the last thing people are going to be saying is that these results were claimed too early. People will likely be enraged that this wasn’t explored further when Rick Simpson initially discovered this.

There is no reason to disbelieve these patients. I don’t have documentation for all of them but those I do is very compelling. Someone said a great line long ago about this whole situation. "What’s more likely, that all these sick patients are lying, or cannabis really has these effects? " It’s the latter.

People have put their lives into cannabis oil with less than what I have in my report. These cases do substantiate immediate action. The two main problems I see now are you believe the testimonials are not as great as I claim and I’m leaving out large numbers of failures. To these ends, all I can say is they are genuine and caregivers report majority success, not failures. This issue has been researched for years, just not primarily by doctors. They’ve just been regular people trying to save other lives, and their work has led to the overwhelming evidence that exists today.

[running_coach]

@JKander

There is no reason to disbelieve these patients. I don’t have documentation for all of them but those I do is very compelling. Someone said a great line long ago about this whole situation. "What’s more likely, that all these sick patients are lying, or cannabis really has these effects? " It’s the latter.

Doctors will tell you that patients lie quite frequently. And people are well known to bend or distort the truth to support something they believe in or to not face the fact they wasted time or money.

@JKander

As for Jack, you are making it out to sound like his case is cloudier than it is. “Saying literally anything about his case is a complete non-starter.” That’s crazy… he had been going to the doctor for decades having skin cancers removed. For the last 10 years, every three months he had to have multiple lesions removed or froze off. Then he takes the cannabis therapy, and for the first time the doctor has nothing to remove. And when spots of the cancer reappear, he just puts the oil on and it goes away. To say this case is worthless is just denying reality.

So why doesn’t this miracle cure keep new lesions from forming?
And freezing is only used for nonmelanoma skin cancer. If he was to develop melanoma some day, he won’t know it.

[JKander]

Jack said that it is rare a new lesion will form, but if it does, then he can easily eliminate it with topical application. That’s a lot easier than going in for surgery. I’m sure with even further improved cannabinoid therapy he wouldn’t even need to do that, but considering this man is managing his decades-long cancer without doctors, that’s pretty incredible.

I’ve seen a lot of criticisms that the people involved with this aren’t oncologists. That’s irrelevant, they are not involved in the treatment. Doctors are very useful for doing scans and confirming diagnoses, but when it comes to treatment, they in general haven’t been very involved. I wasn’t exaggerating earlier when I said a janitor can eliminate his cancer by extracting oil with Everclear. With this medicine, anyone has the power to heal themselves. Of course, it will be far better when doctors are involved because then they can administer the highest quality proper oils, but even as things stand now, even rudimentary oils have been enough to deliver miraculous results.