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

Great Debates
121

Lots of new things to address, here we go.

I understand the contradiction of the claim “There are few failures” and “I don’t know how many failures there are.” The evidence suggests there are not many failures, and the few failures I’ve seen pale in comparison to all the successes. So while I don’t know the total, the evidence suggests they are low, or at least relative to the successes.

The vast majority of the research I cite in my report is along those lines. Either THC, CBD, anandamide, or synthetic cannabinoids inducing apoptosis in a single or multiple cancer cell lines. I also talk extensively about studies for other diseases, like one where prediabetic mice given CBD had a 32% incidence of diabetes compared with 100% in the control group. And indeed, humans are also having success with diabetes. This is only one yet further example of a study suggesting this might work in humans, and then a case of it actually working in humans.

As for Cash Hyde, I mentioned he was a case that used chemotherapy and I make it very clear in the report. I’m not hiding anything. He also used proton therapy for his second bout with brain cancer. In both cases, with the chemotherapy and proton therapy, the prognoses were still very poor, and in the first case Cash was truly on the verge of death. There are many cases of people overcoming cancer without traditional cancer treatment, like Dennis Hill, Corrie Yelland, David Triplett, Dr. Courtney’s and Dr. Melamede’s patients, several of the patients at River Rock, etc. And Joanne Crowther, while enduring chemotherapy which caused acute renal failure and hepatitis still got a terminal diagnosis and then recovered with cannabis oil.

The bottom line is that even if I turn out to be partially wrong, I’m not entirely wrong. Cannabis extracts have eliminated cancer in humans. To say that every single case is a coincidence or some other confounding factor is more absurd than any claim I’ve made.

There are some scientific studies that present conflicting information, like one study which showed cannabis use could increase testicular cancer. I don’t know why such studies would reveal such things in the face of so much contrary evidence, and many people have pointed out problems with the negative studies. But perhaps for some reason there is a case where cannabis for some reason could increase cancer, I just don’t see it.

In terms of epilepsy, cannabis extracts have shown remarkable effectiveness against Dravet syndrome, Doose syndrome, cortical dysplasia, infantile spasms, CDKL5 disorder, and other unidentified forms. It’s amazing! I’m not sure if people actually read the links I posted earlier, but they are incredible stories. Zaki Jackson, who had Doose syndrome, was suffering literally thousands of seizures a day. He’d had over 500,000 in his life, and they started at 4 months old. His family recently celebrated one year seizure free, with the use of high-CBD oil. No pharmaceuticals had worked. Nothing had worked. Except that.

It’s stories like that which can’t be dismissed. How do you go from thousands of seizures a day to nothing? You’re telling me you honestly believe it was a confounding variable and not the medicine which scientific studies have indicated have potential to stop seizures? That makes no sense.

In this case, the seizures were very short, lasting only a few seconds each seizure. That’s why in Zaki’s case he’s had so many more than people like Charlotte Figi or Zander Welton.

122

No it doesn’t. If you HAD actual evidence, that would include exactly how many failures there were. What you actually have is incomplete data, which tells you nothing.

And with that, it has become undeniable that you’re not in the least bit interested in learning about the actual scientific objections to what you are saying. You are here to witness. You are here to raise the flag, rally round the troops, and fire them up with words, rather than make an effort to establish scientific truth.

Have fun. I suspect you won’t make much headway here.

123

They also cannot be used to draw conclusions. They have no scientific value.

124

Indeed, none of you should believe me based on my experience or my personal appeals. You’re right that I cannot absolutely know how many failures there are in comparison to successes. I understood before I even wrote my paper that technically, scientifically, it is indeed worthless. Completely so. But, if this makes any sense, that doesn’t make it valueless. It already has informed thousands of people about this issue and shown them these higher-level achievements. It has been of use to patients and caregivers alike, and has given me a way to more adequately converse with leaders in this movement.

I know cannabis can reliably eliminate cancer in humans and control disease. I don’t expect you to believe me based on this, of course, but you need to understand that I know this is true. The only way anybody can truly know anything is by experience. Even scientific studies that definitively prove the nature of physics, can we truly know that? We can be 99.99999999% sure, but do we know? Now pain on the other hand, that is an experience, something we are 100% sure on. Pain is a state of truth - you can’t argue your way out of it, say it doesn’t exist, say it’s just imagination. It is real, it is overwhelming, it is truth. And my experience in this movement for a large part of my life has shown me this is true.

So, hypothetically, if you were in my shoes and knew this was true, what would you do? Would you wait years for clinical trials to prove what you already know? Would you go through the traditional routes? For one, the traditional routes are already in motion, and Dr. Sean McAllister has agreed with me in that “we are here now” for clinical trials, and he’s going through the proper motions to study CBD and breast cancer. So that’s already happening, no matter what. I’m trying to take the revolutionary route. To show people the connections are already so strong and overwhelming, that we shouldn’t wait. We shouldn’t let millions of people die when the evidence is this strong. And to prove it once and for all, we can just use it in a hospice center, where patients are taking no risks by doing it - they have nothing to lose. And when massive success is seen, “ludicrously” massive success, then people will know this works, and revolution will come.

125

“It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.” ~~Mark Twain

126

To, in other words, ignore facts, reality, and data, and attempt to get people to act on emotion and hyperbole. People like you are the reason we had to invent science in the first place.

127

(snipped the rest)

You don’t know this - you have not shown any evidence that this is true. at best, you have a few anecdotes where you presume it to be true.

In order to prove this, you would need to do the research and the studies.

Otherwise, all you have is little more than “faith” - and that is less than useless.

128

Experience (documented by relatively unbiased observers) is valuable. Experience alone (especially when it signifies poorly documented and unverifiable anecdotes) is not a sufficient basis with which to conduct massive experiments on humans, in the absence of proper clinical trials.

I suspect that by “revolution” JKander means that “Pot will be legalized everywhere and it’ll be a lot easier for me to get high”.

129

This is a great quote, so true. People’s false beliefs in false things have caused the most damage to society. But when one knows the truth for certain, that is where real power emerges, and there is no better place to see it than in this movement.

I do not want people to act on emotion. Emotion plays a role in this, but one must place the mind first. That’s why it’s fitting for the science section to come first in the paper, before the experiential results. When one analyzes the facts present, weighs the contrary evidence, and takes time to listen to and speak with patients, this gets very real very fast. This is not some disconnected, arbitrary issue. This is about people dying and suffering in unimaginable ways every day, going through issues that clearly can be helped with cannabis. Thankfully, it doesn’t matter if the majority of people don’t see the truth initially, because this will come out soon. Nothing can stop it. And then we will have gold-standard, double-blind trials to find the best ways to use cannabis. I’m all for the full-on clinical trials, just not for proving simply that it works, because that can be done much more efficiently and effectively through the treatment of a large number of hospice patients.

I can’t express how satisfied I am with how this has gone. Believe it or not, you have all given me a new confidence. It may sound odd given that essentially everyone here vehemently disagrees with me, but I have what I need.

However I still desire to continue debating this as long as people continue to respond, so I will. Someone mentioned that the 9 out of 11 successful cases for epilepsy was promising and enough to warrant grant money for research. Indeed, Dr. Margeret Gedde will be presenting these results at a national epilepsy conference in Washington, D.C., and I hope something comes of it. But it’s important to see the grander issue here. Such success for intractable forms of epilepsy isn’t just promising, it’s miraculous. These cases are overwhelming in the nature of their successes. Every individual case is special, and no case exemplifies that truth greater than Charlotte Figi, who alone has sparked a mini-revolution in the epilepsy community. What I’m saying is that these successes have been replicated in the past! People were already having these massive successes before Dr. Sanjay Gupta came along and told everyone about it. They are going to keep coming, and it’s going to keep becoming more apparent that this isn’t snake oil. If anything, it’s dragon oil. Strong, effective, complete. If anybody takes the time to read the actual cases, regardless of what you think of anecdotal testimonies, they are amazing. And so far the only substantial challenge I’ve gotten in regards to any patient testimony is that of Cash Hyde, in which someone simply pointed out he used chemotherapy, a fact which is plainly evident in his case report. His whole case revolves around the fact that traditional treatment was failing, as do many others. That’s just how they worked out.

Science is amazing and has delivered the most incredible breakthroughs in history. It will continue to do so and is the path to the future. But a side effect is that it has blinded people to their own power, their own abilities, and the abilities of their fellow humans. When science and nature are fully integrated, that is when we’ll see dramatic change in this world. And it’s coming sooner than anyone expects.

130

Translation: “I know what I have is utter crap, but it fools people so it’s still useful!”

:rolleyes:

Go shill elsewhere.

YES.

I would recognize that I have biases, and that my interpretation may be misguided. I would especially do this if I realized that my method of gathering data was essentially incapable of measuring any failures present in the method. And I would do the rational thing and fight hard. Not for the unproven cure to be mass marketed. Rather, I would fight hard to get actual research done. To get those peer-reviewed trials that remove my own personal experience and biases from the picture. You don’t understand this because you don’t have any background in science. You’re scientifically illiterate and are trying to talk about medicine. Don’t. Save us all the trouble, and either learn what you’re talking about, or go find somewhere else to shill.

(Really SDMB? That’s your largest font size?)

131

I don’t think you understood what I meant by “to know this is true.” I mean it literally - that you know it is truth. If you did know it, you wouldn’t wait years for the trials. To do so is to watch millions of people die needlessly. I choose to take what I know is true and act in the way I feel is fastest to bring it forward. I can’t say for certain the hospice trial is the best route forward, but I strongly believe that if people saw such a trial be successful, it would be enough. Years of profound experience has given me that belief, and that’s what I act on.

I may not have background in science, but people who do agree with me. People are taking action right now to prove this to the world with whatever means they have. Unfortunately, the traditional paths of clinical trials are blocked off for at least a year because of regulations, at least that’s what Dr. McAllister seems to imply in his article. We can’t wait that long, and we won’t. I can see that I won’t convince people here, but like I said, I have what I needed. And I’ll continue to debate as long as people will let me. Man, this is going to be a great story…

132

But, Smeghead, he is trying to reveal the truth.

[My emphasis]

Unfortunately, there’s a conflict between JKander’s marketing report that says cannabis eliminates cancer, and a recent review article (link posted above) that concludes its abstract with “Overall, there is still a great deal of conflicting evidence around the future utility of the cannabinoids, natural or synthetic, as therapeutic agents.”

It would be great if it worked, but prove it scientifically and not with stories. Where are all these cases in the literature?

See any parallels if you replace “cannabis” with “Jesus” and “cancer” with “soul from hell” with regard to how you are trying to convince us?

On the other hand: C’mon everyone, we need to have some faith in his science.

133

You clearly don’t understand the difference between “know” and “really really really strongly believe”.

Look, if you want to go have this little crusade of yours, have at it. It’s relatively harmless as crusades go. But have the balls to call it what it is - faith in something that hasn’t been proven. Dressing it up in the language and vocabulary of science is misleading and dishonest. And precisely what every charlatan peddling miracle cures has done since the dawn of science.

134

But your “truth” is based on partial information at best.

Let me ask you, how do you distinguish between truth and fantasy in other subjects beside cannabis? Do you believe in UFOs? Do you believe in Bigfoot? Because millions of people do, and multitudes are certain they have witnessed flying saucers and Sasquatch. Are you compelled to believe in these things also, simply because they are certain they know the truth?

“Believe those who seek the truth; doubt those who find it.” ~~Andre Gide

135

At some point, someone has to find the truth. If people doubted all those who found truth, we wouldn’t be using computers right now. I’m not sure why one article said there was a great deal of conflicting evidence surrounding future use of cannabinoids, as most other articles make it clear in their conclusions that there is likely great potential future use for cannabinoids. I have dozens of peer-reviewed scientific articles in my journal making those claims. This is not pseudoscience, there is legitimate, serious scientific evidence supporting the experiential results. I haven’t done the research so I can’t confirm this, but I just can’t imagine that there is this much science supporting any other alternative therapy.

People keep telling me to prove it scientifically, do the clinical trials, etc. I can’t do that. The only things anybody on this Earth has to make these claims with are what I have in this report. There’s definitely additional evidence I could’ve included, but it would’ve been more of the same. With this evidence, I stake my reputation on claiming that cannabis extracts can reliably eliminate cancer and control other diseases. I don’t think it works 100% of the time for 100% of people, but I believe it works for a number damn close, and I believe that with proper adjunct therapies we will see 100% cure rates for every disease. That’s probably far off, but I believe it can eventually be done. Cannabis can certainly take us most of the way.

Where are the cases in the literature? There just haven’t been studies of cannabis extracts and cancer on humans, at least not peer-reviewed ones. I don’t know why. There are tons of studies on the effectiveness of smoked cannabis and some on isolated cannabinoids like THC, but no direct trial for what I’m claiming. What I’m saying is that it’s abundantly apparent that if a double-blind study was run, it would be successful. All of the experiential results suggest that nothing would change if this was done in a clinical setting, and in fact should work even better because the medicine provided would be of higher quality than what people are using now. Even improperly made cannabis oil is still effective, so products derived from the highest quality source material and best scientific extraction processes will be far better. If you think the claims I’ve made so far are crazy, they will be nothing compared to what will be happening when actual scientists and researchers are running this.

I am on your side about the science, I really am. There’s only a few things I disagree with. First, that double-blind studies are needed to prove this works in humans. I think that if this was tracked by a doctor treating a large number of terminal cancer patients, and the majority of them were cured, that would be enough. I also believe that the experiential evidence is far more significant and substantiates such a hospice trial. Other than that, we are all on the same page.

136

Is there any research correlating cannabis usage and the Dunning Kruger effect?

137

Here’s a list of “alternative” cancer remedies. It’s by no means exhaustive and it comes from a pro-quackery site, but notice in addition to the outright garbage (essiac tea, Hulda Clark’s zap-the-parasites method etc.) there are numerous compounds and “natural” substances touted for their allegedly proven cancer-fighting abilities or “great promise”.

Every single one of those remedies has enthusiastic adherents and testimonials galore. They’re all convinced that they have a magic bullet, and plenty of excuses for why their favorite remedy hasn’t hit mainstream oncology. But they know, they just know they’ll be vindicated one day and all those skeptics will have to eat crow. Some of these remedies are decades or even centuries old, have long been discarded by serious researchers as quackery, but it doesn’t matter to the devout woo-worshippers.

Add in many, many other agents, “natural” or man-made that have been, are being or will be legitimately investigated in cell cultures and case reports with preliminary results showing promise in anti-cancer activity. A tiny fraction of those will go on to clinical trials and a small fraction of those trials eventually will lead to drugs which could prolong life, relieve symptoms and or help cure cancer in some individuals. The odds of any of those drugs being a magic bullet against even one type of cancer are extremely slim. The odds that any of them will be a cure for multiple different diseases approaches zero.

Now tell us again why we should share your faith in cannabinoids.

138

That’s a good one. I don’t think I’m superior to anyone, however, I only happen to have relevant experience in this movement which gave me the ability to produce this report. I honestly wouldn’t be surprised if high-CBD medicine instilled feelings of equality too.

139

Well then I can’t really put myself in your shoes, because I work very hard to avoid your type of “truth”. Because your “truth” is simply “true belief”. You know this works, and nothing in the world will ever convince you that your beliefs are unfounded. It doesn’t matter how many people point out that your methodology is flawed (again, I ask: what method did you use to select the stories you included?), or how many point out why anecdotes just aren’t good enough. It doesn’t matter to you. You know, and that’s good enough. And I work to avoid that kind of “truth” because it blinds you to reality. Because if something is actually true, this is unnecessary, and if it isn’t true, this is harmful. Because there is no reason to be like this. You really, really, really want this to be true. I understand. I also will continue to point out that your reasons for believing this are terribly flawed, regardless of how much this bothers you.

It would certainly be a hell of a lot more than what you’ve offered.

140

I’m not sure whether to laugh or cry at this.