cannabisnews.com: Cannabis May Help Combat Cancer





Cannabis May Help Combat Cancer
Posted by CN Staff on September 15, 2004 at 08:30:11 PT
Cannabis has several medical applications 
Source: BBC News UK
The chemical in cannabis that produces a high may help to combat the spread of cancer, research suggests. Scientists have discovered the active ingredient, delta-9-tetrahydrocannibol can block the spread of gamma herpes viruses. The viruses are linked to an increased risk of the cancers Kaposis sarcoma, Burkitts lymphoma and Hodgkins disease. The research, by the University of South Florida, is published in the online journal BMC Medicine.
Gamma herpes viruses are different from the herpes simplex viruses responsible for cold sores and genital herpes. Among those that have been associated with an increased risk of cancer is Kaposis Sarcoma Associated Herpes Virus. Once infected, it is almost impossible to get rid of the virus as it lies dormant for long periods within white blood cells. However, the virus can snap back into action, and suddenly begin to replicate itself, bursting out of the cells to infect others. Once a cell has been infected the chances that it will become cancerous are increased. The South Florida team found that this sudden reactivation was prevented if infected cells were grown in the presence of THC.  Spread Blocked Cells infected with a mouse gamma herpes virus normally died when the virus reactivated. But they survived when cultured with the cannabinoid compound, and thus the spread of the virus - and the potential spread of cancer - was blocked. The researchers were able to show that THC specifically blocked the gamma herpes viruses - it had no impact at all on the cold sore virus herpes simplex-1. They hope their findings will lead to the development of new drugs to neutralise the threat of the viruses. However, lead researcher Dr Peter Medveczky said more work was needed, and stressed that it would not be sensible for people with cancers associated with gamma herpes viruses to start smoking cannabis. He said THC was known to suppress the immune system - which could do more harm than good to patients whose immune system was often already weakened. Dr Medveczky believes THC blocks replication of the gamma herpes viruses by targeting a gene they all carry called ORF50. A spokesperson for Cancer Research UK warned that the results should be treated with caution. "These are very preliminary results and it is far too early to say whether the findings will lead to practical strategies for preventing and treating cancer." Source: BBC News (UK Web) Published: September 15, 2004Copyright: 2004 BBC Contact: newsonline bbc.co.ukWebsite: http://news.bbc.co.uk/ Related Articles:Marijuana May Yield Cancer-Fighting Drugshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19489.shtmlMarijuana May Stall Brain Tumor Growthhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19339.shtmlCannabis Hope for Brain Cancer http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19338.shtmlMarijuana Ingredient Inhibits VEGF Pathway http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19337.shtml 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #20 posted by FoM on September 21, 2004 at 22:17:49 PT
Related Article from Indo-Asian News Service
US Politics Harming Research on Marijuana's Anti-Cancer Properties? Indo-Asian News Service September 22, 2004 US News, Washington, Sep 22 (IANS) Even as research findings confirm marijuana's anti-cancerous properties, a stoic disinterest on the part of the US government to fund further research raises questions about its priorities, UPI reports. Results of clinical research at Madrid's Complutense University showing components in marijuana derived from the cannabis plant inhibits the growth of cancerous brain tumours have been published by the journal of American Association of Cancer Research. The finding that cannabis restricts the blood supply to Gliobastoma multiforme tumours, an aggressive brain tumour that kills some 7,000 people in the US every year, has been released in the backdrop of scant media coverage of the topic in the US as its government has not acknowledged the research abroad. That is despite the fact that the first experiment documenting pot's anti-tumour effects took place in 1974 at the Medical College of Virginia at the behest of the US government. The results of that study, reported in August 1974, were that marijuana's psychoactive component "THC slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers and a virus-induced leukaemia in laboratory mice and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent". Despite the early success, US officials banished the study and refused to fund follow up research until conducting a similar -- though secret -- clinical trial in the mid-1990s. That $2 million study, conducted by the US National Toxicology Programme, concluded that mice and rats administered high doses of THC over long periods had greater protection against malignant tumours than untreated controls. However, government researchers shelved the results, which only became public after the findings were leaked in 1997 to a medical journal, which in turn forwarded the story to the national media. Since the completion of that trial, the US government has yet to fund a single additional study examining the drug's potential anti-cancer properties leaving room for conjecture whether federal bureaucrats were putting politics over health and safety of patients. Scientists overseas picked up where US researchers abruptly left off. In 1998, a research team at Complutense's Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology discovered that THC could selectively induce programme cell death in brain tumours without affecting healthy cells. In 2000, they reported in the journal Nature Medicine that injections of synthetic THC eradicated malignant gliomas (brain tumours) in one-third of treated rats and prolonged life in another third by six weeks. Last year, researchers at the University of Milan in Naples reported that non-psychoactive compounds in marijuana inhibited the growth of glioma cells in a dose-dependent manner and selectively targeted and killed malignant cells through a process known as apoptosis. Researchers reported earlier this month that marijuana's constituents inhibited the spread of brain cancer in human tumour biopsies from patients who had failed standard cancer therapies. 
http://www.keralanext.com/news/index.asp?id=49904&pg=1
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #19 posted by kaptinemo on September 16, 2004 at 05:17:43 PT:
The sharp and jagged edge of paradigm shift
Prior to Louis Pasteur's germ theory, few physicians washed their hands prior to attending the sick, or sanitized their instruments. Many physicians were privately in agreement with Pasteur, but because the medical paradigm (and the social one) of the day didn't acknowledge the possibility of microorganisms causing disease, the prevailing view was that Pasteur and his adherents were 'full of it'. But as time wore on, the reality began to become so plain, the nature of medicine changed to accommodate the 'new paradigm'.A favorite theme of mine is that History does, indeed, repeat itself; the names may change, but the social dynamics are often shockingly, clearly, identifiably repetitive. We, today, stand on the knife's edge of the same kind of paradigm shift regarding the medicinal properties of cannabis and their acceptance by society. Those who refuse, despite the ever higher mountain of evidence to the contrary, to concede that cannabis has *any* medicinal usage are in the same position of those nay-sayers of Pasteur. And those who have been quietly gathering evidence - and in nations not so headblind to prohibit experimentation, conducting clinical trials - have brought to just below the public's awareness the facts regarding medicinal efficacy have been subjected to the same unwarranted censure that Pasteur and his colleagues experienced so long ago.But the 'tipping point' is fast approaching; the moment where medicinal usage can no longer be denied. The antis have already conceded to this, albeit in a surly, grudging manner, that the (artificial!) THC in Marinol has usefulness, while refusing to admit the obvious source of (natural) THC has even more useful properties. Their one admission opens the door to further questioning regarding the scientific basis for prohibition (namely, that it has none) and the need for its maintenance in light of the facts.So, just like Pasteur's opponents, those studying those same medicinal qualities are often subjected to threat and ridicule focusing upon their personal lives, not the basis for their studies. Again, drearily predictable from a historical viewpoint. And like Pasteur, those who have stood their ground shall be vindicated. And their nay-sayers shown to be the shamefully ignorant arses they truly are.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #18 posted by Jose Melendez on September 15, 2004 at 17:11:06 PT
does this help?
I get the impression that no one really understands completely how neurotransmitters work, it all seems to be theory, at least where cannabinoids are concerned. I'm trying my best to learn everything I can from biochemistry and other books as well as the credible web sites and search engines, like PubMed. Does this page help?http://www.lacbc.org/brain.html
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #17 posted by FoM on September 15, 2004 at 14:34:27 PT
Thanks Jose
Some articles don't register very well with me. The above article made lots of sense though. I understand the connection about how cannabis can help protect against cancer but I don't understand neurons.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #16 posted by Jose Melendez on September 15, 2004 at 14:16:22 PT
It means drug war is crime.
As far as I can tell, they mean that despite carefully worded official statements to the contrary, cannabinoids may play a very important medical role in ameliorating symptoms of depression, anxiety and stress associated with various diseases, trauma, and recovery from addiction to far more harmful, albeit legal substances:from: http://www.gwpharm.com/research_withdrawel.asp   In contrast to contemporary concerns that cannabis itself may have addictive potential, Indian hemp was used in the 19th century to treat dependencies on other substances. O'Shaughnessy observed benefit of cannabis extracts for delirium tremens in alcoholics (1), Clendinning shortly thereafter in morphine withdrawal (2), and Mattison in cocaine and chloral hydrate addiction (3). In fact, in an early 20th century text on addiction, the only mentions of cannabis were in relation to its therapeutic benefits (4). The LaGuardia Commission Report (5) contained an account of a group of 56 morphine and heroin addicts. Those who were cannabis-treated had less severe withdrawal symptoms and left the hospital earlier and in better shape than those receiving standard therapy. Modern anecdotal support for utilisation of cannabis for addiction withdrawal continues to accrue (6-8). A formal study in Brazil (9) demonstrated that 17/25 subjects (68%) were successful in abrogating ‘crack' cocaine habits over the course of nine months through the use of cannabis, and claimed it able to allay cravings and induce other subjective benefits. Dreher in Jamaica has documented cannabis as the most effective treatment in stopping crack cocaine use in 33 women (10). Cannabinoid interactions with the dopamine system have been offered as a possible mechanism for some of the beneficial effects of cannabis in opiate withdrawal (11). A recent study provides objective evidence of the ability of THC to mitigate opiate-withdrawal symptoms, and block the formation of physical dependency (12). Clinical trials of cannabis based medicine extracts in the treatment of opiate addiction seem amply justified. - - -I submit this is evidence that cannabis is unethically, and likely unlawfully prohibited. Dr. Russo might be officially precluded from taking quite so combative of a position, but I wonder if he and many other professionals in harm reduction do not at least privately concur?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #15 posted by FoM on September 15, 2004 at 13:04:53 PT
Thanks Jose
I'm not sure what these articles mean.Brain Chemicals Suggest Marijuana's Effects: 
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19496.shtmlMarijuana-Like Chemicals in Brain Calm Neurons: 
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19495.shtml
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #14 posted by Jose Melendez on September 15, 2004 at 12:50:54 PT
marijuana proven medical
http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20040915005205&newsLang=en September 15, 2004 01:00 PM US Eastern Timezone                          Marijuana-Like Chemicals in the Brain Calm Neurons, Say Stanford Researchers                                STANFORD, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sept. 15, 2004--From the munchies to the giggles to paranoia, smoking marijuana causes widespread changes in the brain. Now researchers at Stanford University School of Medicine are a step closer to understanding how the drug's active ingredients -- tetrahydrocannabinol and related compounds, called cannabinoids -- may exert their effects. David Prince, MD, the Edward F. and Irene Thiele Pimley Professor of Neurology and Neurological Sciences, and his colleagues found that a group of neurons that act as information gatekeepers in the brain's major information processing center, called the cerebral cortex, release cannabinoids that quiet their own activity. This form of self-inhibition is a novel way for neurons to regulate their own ability to send messages to their neighbors. Tetrahydrocannabinol from marijuana may work its brain-altering magic by binding to these same cells. see also: http://www.a1b2c3.com/drugs/brn005.htm and: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12560108&dopt=Abstract
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by FoM on September 15, 2004 at 11:14:34 PT
Related News Article from Medical News Today
Cannabis May Have Cancer Busting Properties 
 September 15, 2004
 
 A new study indicates that the chemical in cannabis that makes us stoned, delta-9-tetrahydrocannibol, might also protect us from cancer. According to researchers, delta-9-tetrahydrocannibol is able to halt the spread of gamma herpes viruses. Gamma herpes viruses have been shown to increase one’s chances of developing Kaposis Sarcoma, Burkitts lymphoma and Hodgkins disease. You can read about this latest study in the journal BMC Medicine. The study was carried out by researchers at the University of South Florida. Once a person is infected with the Gamma herpes virus, he/she has it for life – it is virtually impossible to get rid of it. The Gamma herpes viruses are completely different from the herpes simplex virus. Gamma herpes viruses lie dormant inside our white blood cells for many years. Unfortunately, the virus can suddenly become active and start reproducing. As soon as this happens it starts invading other cells, increasing the chances of cancer developing. The researchers found that delta-9-tetrahydrocannibol stopped the sudden reactivation of gamma herpes viruses. The researchers found that mice died when the virus became reactivated. However, the mice which had been injected with delta-9-tetrahydrocannibol survived and did not develop cancer. Delta-9-tetrahydrocannibol has no effect on the herpes simplex-1 virus, the one associated with cold sores. This discovery could lead to the development of new cancer busting drugs. Dr Peter Medveczky said that if a person already has cancer caused by gamma herpes viruses he/she should not start smoking cannabis. The chemical is preventative, not curative. Delta-9-tetrahydrocannibol also weakens your immune system. He also added that these are very preliminary results – much more research is needed. Copyright: 2004 Medical News Todayhttp://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=13445
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by FoM on September 15, 2004 at 10:39:34 PT
siege
Just a request. Please don't post complete articles. I have been given a list of newspapers I must snip and I don't want to get in trouble. I hope you understand.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by FoM on September 15, 2004 at 10:35:56 PT
Marijuana-Like Chemicals in the Brain Calm Neurons
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19495.shtml
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by siege on September 15, 2004 at 10:27:45 PT
off topic A medical cause for 'Bushisms'?
A medical cause for 'Bushisms'?
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/living/articles/
2004/09/14/a_medical_cause_for_bushisms/
By Alex Beam, Globe Columnist | September 14, 2004It is an article of faith with millions of Americans, most of them on the left, that George W. Bush is stupid. Many reasonable people think his policies are ill-advised, but millions more insist Bush must be a moron because he sounds stupid.
ADVERTISEMENT
	The president's tortured "Bushisms" are chronicled daily and have been collected in books. Two of the more notorious are "I know how hard it is for you to put food on your family" and "Families is where our nation finds hope, where wings take dream."But something doesn't compute. Fred Smith, the founder of Federal Express and a Yale pal of both Bush and John Kerry, says Bush is five times smarter than people think he is. Cynics deride what passes for scholarship at the Harvard Business School, but the course work for the two-year MBA isn't easy. A grading curve forces a small number of students to fail, and Bush didn't fail.So why does Bush sound stupid? One doctor thinks he shows signs of "presenile dementia," or an early onset of Alzheimer's disease.This summer, Joseph Price, a self-described "country doctor" in Carsonville, Mich., was reading a long article in The Atlantic about Bush's speaking style. Author James Fallows alluded to Bush's malapropisms and to speculation that Bush had a learning disorder or dyslexia. But those conditions generally manifest themselves in childhood. Furthermore, Fallows wrote, "through his forties Bush was perfectly articulate."Dr. Price's children happened to have given him a daily tear-off calendar of "Bushisms" for Christmas. "They are horrible, but they are also diagnostic," Price says. When he read that Bush had spoken clearly and performed well while debating Texas politician Ann Richards in 1994, Price thought: "My God, the only way you can explain that is by being Alzheimer's."In a letter to be published in The Atlantic's October issue, Price calls presenile dementia "a fairly typical Alzheimer's situation that develops significantly earlier in life. . . . President Bush's `mangled' words are a demonstration of what physicians call `confabulation' and are almost specific to the diagnosis of a true dementia." He adds that Bush should be "started on drugs that offer the possibility of retarding the slow but inexorable course of the disease."Yes, I asked for a second opinion. University of Massachusetts neurology professor Dr. Daniel Pollen thinks it is bootless to speculate about Bush's condition without a formal neuropsychological assessment. "I think it's unfair to say somebody has or does not have a dementia as an analysis based on his public utterances," says Pollen, who is not a Bush supporter. Noting that Bush spoke well in his debates with both Richards and Al Gore, Pollen adds that Bush's "peak performances are not in the range I would consider for anybody to have Alzheimer's disease in the near future."Suppose Price is right. What effect might his observation have on the 2004 election? Absolutely none. The White House isn't going to start speculating about an incipient medical condition that might make the president look bad. When I forwarded Price's comments to the White House, it sent me Bush's 2001 and 2003 physical exams, which show normal neurological functions. "There is nothing to suggest that there has been any change from those reports," says White House spokeswoman Erin Healy.There is ample precedent for papering over presidents' medical shortcomings. Stanford Medical School professor Herbert Abrams and others have argued that Ronald Reagan was incapacitated from the day he was shot in March of 1981 through the succeeding seven years of his presidency. In their 1988 book, "Landslide," Jane Mayer and Doyle McManus report that one White House staffer considered Reagan's condition so bad in 1987 that he suggested invoking the transfer-of-power provisions of the 25th Amendment. That idea went nowhere fast.As for the Democrats, they have no incentive to medicalize a condition they so enjoy teeing off on: Bush's seemingly goofy stupidity. Kerry suggests that Bush's bicycle has training wheels; Kerry's wife suggests that people who oppose her husband's health schemes are idiots. The Democrats would rather feel superior to their opponents than beat them, and so far they are doing a very good job.Alex Beam is a Globe columnist. His e-dress is beam globe.com. 
© Copyright 2004 Globe Newspaper Company.
© 2004 The New York Times Company
			 http://www.boston.com/news/globe/living/articles/
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by FoM on September 15, 2004 at 09:53:44 PT
Dr. Russo
Just a big thank you!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by siege on September 15, 2004 at 09:44:35 PT
Ethan Russo MD
  )1Has any one done a revue on the value of hemp food to the garbage we are force to eat by the Govt.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by Ethan Russo MD on September 15, 2004 at 09:18:12 PT
Complete Article Text
Here is a URL link to the provisional PDF of the the article:http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1741-7015-2-34.pdfVery technical, but worthwhile. This concept really should not be such a surprise, as I've written of previously, Blevins and Smith reported THC inhibition of herpes virus replication way back in 1980:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=6254859
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by FoM on September 15, 2004 at 09:17:56 PT
The Cannabis Plant
It is an honorable plant. The more we read about Cannabis helping the sick the more I don't get it why it still is a Schedule I drug.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by E_Johnson on September 15, 2004 at 09:14:00 PT
I feel humbled myself
As someone trained in science and engineering, I feel humanity has been outdone by this plant.Oh yes, we can walk and talk, and build tasll buidings and learn to fly.But this is just a plant!! And look at everything it can do.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by FoM on September 15, 2004 at 09:07:45 PT
EJ I Know What You Mean
It boggles my mind.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by E_Johnson on September 15, 2004 at 09:01:39 PT
I can see why people feel skeptical
It's hard to believe sometimes how many things this little molecular Swiss Army knife can do.I started out a believer and my mind is thoroughly boggled now.How humbling for modern society that this magic miraculous molecule didn't arise from the magnificent and all important human scientific mind.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by FoM on September 15, 2004 at 08:48:46 PT
Related Articles on Immune System and No Harm
HIV and Cannabis May Mix After All:
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17112.shtmlUCSF Study Finds No Harm to HIV+ Patients: http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17093.shtmlMarijuana Use Does Not Accelerate HIV Infection: http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17092.shtml 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by E_Johnson on September 15, 2004 at 08:42:18 PT
THC deserves a Nobel Prize
The most incredibly versatile molecule I have ever heard of next to water.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment