Cannabis Extracts Kills Cancer Cells in Cancer Sufferers - Polidicks

[QUOTE=lemongrapes;28327835]They say its their special extract that makes it work, when in reality cannabis is far more effective left alone as a plant with the full mix of over 60 cannabinoids, but big pharma can't patent a plant.[/QUOTE] Or you know, we could not stick with herbal medicine, and stick with modern medicine, isolate the active compounds and then concentrate it.

[QUOTE=lemongrapes;28327835]They say its their special extract that makes it work, when in reality cannabis is far more effective left alone as a plant with the full mix of over 60 cannabinoids, but big pharma can't patent a plant.[/QUOTE] If you'd like to give me a reason why the chemicals left alone in the plant are better than them extracted and purified, i'd like to hear it.

[QUOTE=desertsniper;28325359]The real issue with it being leaglized is that the US cant figure out a way to place a tax on it. Canada cant legalize it because then the US wont trade with them. It all comes down to the US being greedy, ignorant, and stubbourn[/QUOTE] Americans seem to think we rely on them... That's fucking horseshit and only dumbasses think that. We give you power. We give you water. We give you lumber. Without us, you'd be a lot worse off than you are. But no, americans think they're doing us a favour by trading with us.

[QUOTE=Micr0;28325312]Sorry bro but you're wrong about the schizophrenia. It can only make [i]already existing[/i] mental conditions worsen, meaning that you can't "get" schizophrenia from cannabis. Only if you actually have schizophrenia in the first place can it do damage to you.[/QUOTE] true say. my bad on that one. you have to think though - what are the odds that someone might have an undiagnosed case? and the 10% that'll get addicted? cannabis, as great as it is, should be monitored heavily and treated like alcohol (especially with the DUIs - have you even seen a stoner drive?)

Marijuana could easily be put into a gel capsule. People already do it. Basically, cook it in fat, let it cool, and then put it in the capsule. It's supposed to get you really high and I can imagine that figuring out the manufacturing process for this would be really easy. On the site I was reading about this, two would get your super high, and three would get you way way too high. It can be assumed they could figure out the right concentrations and would be able to breed to plants to give a good blend of cannabinoids. They may not want a high amount of THC. [QUOTE=Xen Tricks;28328349]If you'd like to give me a reason why the chemicals left alone in the plant are better than them extracted and purified, i'd like to hear it.[/QUOTE] Because selling it as just bud would be far cheaper. There really aren't many negatives to vaporization and edibles. I see what your point is, but there isn't any real specific reason for extraction for general purpose.

How the fuck did they figure this one out!?

[QUOTE=Pepin;28329034]Marijuana could easily be put into a gel capsule. People already do it. Basically, cook it in fat, let it cool, and then put it in the capsule. It's supposed to get you really high and I can imagine that figuring out the manufacturing process for this would be really easy. On the site I was reading about this, two would get your super high, and three would get you way way too high. It can be assumed they could figure out the right concentrations and would be able to breed to plants to give a good blend of cannabinoids. They may not want a high amount of THC. Because selling it as just bud would be far cheaper. There really aren't many negatives to vaporization and edibles. I see what your point is, but there isn't any real specific reason for extraction for general purpose.[/QUOTE] His point was that for medical uses the active compounds should be extracted, not just using grass as is, it's too inefficient then. [editline]27th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=MasterFen007;28329061]How the fuck did they figure this one out!?[/QUOTE] ...by getting cancer cells in a Petri dish, culturing them then introducing chemicals present in weed to the cultures and seeing the effects they had on the cultures. Not a difficult one to work out man.

I honestly don't understand why anyone would want cannabis to be illegal. Saying it should be illegal because it can promote earlier symptoms of schizophrenia is pointless. You may as well ban most of the medication out there because it can promote heart attacks or liver problems. Yet those are still perfectly legal, along with tobacco and alcohol. Think before you try and argue about something because most things today have some sort of damaging properties and people think everything causes cancer nowadays. I do it and I have yet to see any negative side-effects apart from extremely minor memory loss that occurs [b]while[/b] I am under the influence. Heck, it makes me more concentrated and I've definitely noticed that it has helped my breathing.

[QUOTE=Archy;28328931]true say. my bad on that one. you have to think though - what are the odds that someone might have an undiagnosed case? and the 10% that'll get addicted? cannabis, as great as it is, should be monitored heavily and treated like alcohol (especially with the DUIs - have you even seen a stoner drive?)[/QUOTE] Schizophrenia is usually diagnosed when the symptoms are present. It's very difficult to diagnose without the symptoms. Doctors may be able to inform you that you are at risk for a number of reasons, but they can't tell you that you are crazy before you go crazy. 10% of people will get addicted to anything. Gambling, computer, sex, coffee, collected vintage light bulbs, whatever. It is because they have an addictive personality. Marijuana has no physical addiction, which puts it a huge step up above caffeine, alcohol, tobacco, and a ton of pharmaceuticals. I don't really know what you mean by being monitored. If you mean regulated, yeah sure. It should be treated just like alcohol. The users shouldn't receive any attention though unless the seek it, just like with alcohol. If you get caught driving stoned, you will get a DUI. There is an issue with proving that the user was under the influence of marijuana at the time of driving because there aren't really any accurate on site tests. Also, there are a number of studies that show people drive better under the influence of marijuana. Whether you want to believe that or not, there is no evidence to show the driving under the influence of marijuana is dangerous. If you're going to quote the study that show's x% of intoxicated drivers who crashed had marijuana in their system, you are also going to have to state that they also had alcohol in their system. It's one of those widely misused statistics.

[QUOTE=Archy;28328931]true say. my bad on that one. you have to think though - what are the odds that someone might have an undiagnosed case? and the 10% that'll get addicted? cannabis, as great as it is, should be monitored heavily and treated like alcohol (especially with the DUIs - have you even seen a stoner drive?)[/QUOTE] I also believe it should be treated like alcohol, regarding DUIs and ID requirement and such.

[QUOTE=bravehat;28329203]His point was that for medical uses the active compounds should be extracted, not just using grass as is, it's too inefficient then.[/QUOTE] What is there to indicate that there is too low of a concentration of cannabinoids in normal marijuana? I don't think there is anything to indicate that. If there is, please point me to a source. As far as I'm aware, most medical treatments using cannabis have not needed any sort of a large dose. There are some people who do well enough with the second hand smoke. Am I not understanding something? Is it that it's be easier to know the amount you're getting if it was extracted? And are we talking about a more thorough extraction than the basic fat extraction? Either way, I don't see a reason to do it for general treatments. Also, a big part of the effectiveness of smoking marijuana is the quickness. If you have to digest it, it may take 30-60 minutes to start feeling any relief, as opposed to smoking it would only take at the most 5 minutes for relief. If it being suggested that we should separate all the different cannabinoids out, well I'm not sure how plausible that would be as far as cost effectiveness. Of course all of the cannabinoids are of similar structure, that is a given, and because of this, it would be incredible difficult to separate them out. I'm not saying it can't be done especially since it has been done, but I am saying that it certainly wouldn't be cost effective. And after doing some research I am right. It is very difficult and costly to separate all the different cannabinoids out from the plant. The process would be costly and pointless for general treatments.

[QUOTE=Xen Tricks;28328349]If you'd like to give me a reason why the chemicals left alone in the plant are better than them extracted and purified, i'd like to hear it.[/QUOTE] I'll tell you exactly why. The pharmaceutical companies have tried to replicate the medicinal effects of THC by, literally, taking only THC and making it into a pill form. What the previous poster tried to explain and what you do not understand is that there are a plethora of chemicals that work with THC [I]in symphony[/I] to allow for its complex variety of symptom alleviation. Patients who tried the 'thc pill' noted that it did not replicate the same effects as the real thing. It literally lacked the other cannabinoids naturally found in cannabis.

Weed is like the anti-tobacco.

[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;28329915]I'll tell you exactly why. The pharmaceutical companies have tried to replicate the medicinal effects of THC by, literally, taking only THC and making it into a pill form. What the previous poster tried to explain and what you do not understand is that there are a plethora of chemicals that work with THC [I]in symphony[/I] to allow for its complex variety of symptom alleviation. Patients who tried the 'thc pill' noted that it did not replicate the same effects as the real thing. It literally lacked the other cannabinoids naturally found in cannabis.[/QUOTE] Well seeing as how I didn't make an argument for extracting only THC, that's not a reason.

[QUOTE=Xen Tricks;28330141]Well seeing as how I didn't make an argument for extracting only THC, that's not a reason.[/QUOTE] Seriously there's your reason. It doesn't matter if you made that argument or not. That's the way it is. Look up Marinol and that's exactly what it is. A THC pill. You have no argument anymore.

Am I the only person that already knew this? Anyways, why do you guys have such a problem with weed? If you don't like it, so be it. But don't bitch at the people who do, it's not cool. We don't give you shit for what you like, what if we hate anime but you love it, what if we hate a genre of music but you love it, we don't give you shit, don't give us shit. Don't argue with me "ooooohhh it's illegal" that's not what i'm talking about. We are all brothers, after all.

[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;28330150][B]Seriously there's your reason. It doesn't matter if you made that argument or not. [/B]That's the way it is. Look up Marinol and that's exactly what it is. A THC pill. You have no argument anymore.[/QUOTE] Lololol "I don't care if it's not what you said, i'm still right" I meant an extract of all the important active chemicals, not just some THC pill. But ok bud, whatever you say. e: "A current medicine on the market isn't too great, thus we shouldn't ever use any medicine like that again"

@Xen [QUOTE]They say its their special extract that makes it work, when in reality cannabis is far more effective left alone as a plant with the full mix of over 60 cannabinoids, but big pharma can't patent a plant.[/QUOTE]You rated this quote dumb obviously out of ignorance to the fact that what he is saying is true. He was referring to Marinol and so was I. What I stated are facts, whether you agree with them or not by throwing around boxes to whomever doesn't fit your skewed perspective of what is truth. [QUOTE=Xen Tricks;28330234] I meant an extract of all the important active chemicals, not just some THC pill. But ok bud, whatever you say. [/QUOTE] Apparently you have no idea what a cannabis extract is or how the extraction process works. Neither do the pharma corporations that make this extract we're arguing about. Are you really this ignorant or are you trolling, just curious?

[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;28330445]@Xen You rated this quote dumb obviously out of ignorance to the fact that what he is saying is true. He was referring to Marinol and so was I. What I stated are facts, whether you agree with them or not by throwing around boxes to whomever doesn't fit your skewed perspective of what is truth. Apparently you have no idea what a cannabis extract is or how the extraction process works. Neither do the pharma corporations that make this extract we're arguing about. Are you really this ignorant or are you trolling, just curious?[/QUOTE] I don't give a shit about how effective Marinol is or is not, i'm talking about the concept of extracting and synthesizing/purifying the active cannabinoid compounds that contribute to pot's effects. I'd like a reason why this would somehow not be better than the plant, like every single other herbal extract out there. And stop talking about "evil pharma companies", it doesn't add credence to your argument. Seriously, any time you say "big pharma" it makes you look stupid. e: And here's a tip: Pot isn't magic. It's not made of fairy dust and mystical chemicals we can't understand. Far harder has been synthesized before, i'm pretty sure we could artificially make the active chemicals in it.

[QUOTE=Xen Tricks;28330540]I don't give a shit about how effective Marinol is or is not, i'm talking about the concept of extracting and synthesizing/purifying the active cannabinoid compounds that contribute to pot's effects. I'd like a reason why this would somehow not be better than the plant, like every single other herbal extract out there.[/QUOTE] Your question is answered from within the article itself. They use powerful extract to do what they do in this article. Unequivocally I would say that you should use concentrates (extract in the form of hashish, oil, etc.) as they are much more powerful and would absolutely contribute more strongly to the positive effects they are finding to be had.

[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;28330637]Your question is answered from within the article itself. They use powerful extract to do what they do in this article. Unequivocally I would say that you should use concentrates (extract in the form of hashish, oil, etc.) as they are much more powerful and would absolutely contribute more strongly to the positive effects they are finding to be had.[/QUOTE] What they used doesn't matter, i'm talking about what could have been used. You can make a far stronger concentration artificially than you can get naturally. Also the article is a worthless piece of trash that doesn't even come close to being actual science. Forget about it.

[QUOTE=Xen Tricks;28330671]What they used doesn't matter, i'm talking about what could have been used. You can make a far stronger concentration artificially than you can get naturally.[/QUOTE] That, at the present moment, is not possible as most places are outlawed from performing cannabis related science to that end. I've never heard of any efforts to make such a concentration other than when they made Marinol in the 80's. This is likely due to Cannabis' federal Schedule 1 Drug standing which, for a drug to be Schedule 1, must be recognized to have no medicinal value. Obviously this is false and the Government knows this, as they actively sought to see Marinol remove the medicinal value from the legalization argument. So [I]because of Prohibition [/I]science is hindered from making progress such as the way you suggest.

[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;28330805]That, at the present moment, is not possible as most places are outlawed from performing cannabis related science to that end. I've never heard of any efforts to make such a concentration other than when they made Marinol in the 80's. This is likely due to Cannabis' federal Schedule 1 Drug standing which, for a drug to be Schedule 1, must be recognized to have no medicinal value. Obviously this is false and the Government knows this, as they actively sought to see Marinol remove the medicinal value from the legalization argument. So [I]because of Prohibition [/I]science is hindered from making progress such as the way you suggest.[/QUOTE] Yes, I realize this. It's a serious problem and due in large part to ideologically based efforts and not actual science. But that's still not relevant to my argument. My point is that there's no reason why the plant would be better than it's active chemicals isolated. This is a really common point among herbal medicine people, the notion that the wholeness of the plant is somehow special or something.

[QUOTE=Xen Tricks;28330886]Yes, I realize this. It's a serious problem and due in large part to ideologically based efforts and not actual science. But that's still not relevant to my argument. My point is that there's no reason why the plant would be better than it's active chemicals isolated. This is a really common point among herbal medicine people, the notion that the wholeness of the plant is somehow special or something.[/QUOTE] My point was that the symphony effect I referred to earlier cannot be achieved to that end at this moment in time because of scientific progress being held back. Do you have any idea how complex and difficult it is to replicate the hundreds of cannabinoids artificially to achieve the same result as when naturally consuming it? I would venture to say that may be the distant future of cannabis consumption, but right now the best method for patients is the natural thing.

[QUOTE=Xen Tricks;28330141]Well seeing as how I didn't make an argument for extracting only THC, that's not a reason.[/QUOTE] Ever hear of Marinol? It was marketed for a few years, it was their answer to Marijuana. But it didn't do anything. Didn't have any of the effects. They synthesized it and did their best with it, but it didn't have the same effects at all.

[QUOTE=Xen Tricks;28330540]I don't give a shit about how effective Marinol is or is not, i'm talking about the concept of extracting and synthesizing/purifying the active cannabinoid compounds that contribute to pot's effects. I'd like a reason why this would somehow not be better than the plant, like every single other herbal extract out there. And stop talking about "evil pharma companies", it doesn't add credence to your argument. Seriously, any time you say "big pharma" it makes you look stupid.[/QUOTE] I thought I explained this in an earlier post. It is really difficult to separate all the cannabinoids out. Separating them all out individually is very very difficult. If you want a basic explanation as to why it is because all of the cannabinoids are very similar in structure and mass. Thinking of it like sorting sand by slight differences color at the beach. There are a good number of synthesized cannabinoids that will get you really high, but there are a decent number of issues with them, the main being that they aren't nearly as effective. Many doctors suggest that it is the combination of all the different cannabinoids that make make the difference. Regardless of the reason, there would need to be a whole lot of money put into making a synthetic cannabinoids as effective as cannabis as a whole. Blends could work of course, but still, it would be pouring a whole ton of money to recreate something that already exists and can be grown quite easily. It would be far more cost effective to just sell the plant than going through the costly process of extraction that is likely to not be nearly as effective. There really isn't a benefit to extraction. It isn't so much that "we can't do it", it is more "it is really difficult to do and there is no pay off".

Wasn't this known a long time ago?

[QUOTE=Upgrade123;28338195]Wasn't this known a long time ago?[/QUOTE] Yes, but there are often more studies done to validate older studies. If we just stopped after one doing one study the consensus would be that marijuana is deadly. More studies are always a good thing, especially in this case because it confirms a previous result and it raises awareness about cannabis being an effective medicinal drug. There are actually a lot of people that aren't aware that there are legitimate medicinal uses.

[QUOTE=Pepin;28338345]Yes, but there are often more studies done to validate older studies. If we just stopped after one doing one study the consensus would be that marijuana is deadly. More studies are always a good thing, especially in this case because it confirms a previous result and it raises awareness about cannabis being an effective medicinal drug. There are actually a lot of people that aren't aware that there are legitimate medicinal uses.[/QUOTE] They'd all go with suffocated monkeys as the base theory, I'd be worried

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28338469]They'd all go with suffocated monkeys as the base theory, I'd be worried[/QUOTE] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQ7J7UjsRqg[/media]