Pot Shrinks Tumors; Government Knew in '74 (Reposted from Drug Policy Forum)

[WhoIsNumberNone]

http://www.alternet.org/story/9257

In 1974 researchers learned that THC, the active chemical in marijuana, shrank or destroyed brain tumors in test mice. But the DEA quickly shut down the study and destroyed its results, which were never replicated -- until now.


The most mind-blowing part of this story is in paragraph 4- The government actually funded the 1974 study, but it didn't yield the results they were looking for. Guess what happened next?

[Rex]

1. The government doesn't want the serfs able to grow a herb outside

in their yard that could have health benefits! NO MONEY TO BE MADE THERE, NO SIR! Better to declare a 'war on drugs' so we can waste billions on creating the largest enforcemnt agency in US history! And don't forget commercial penal institutions! They need money too...and without non-violent drug offenders, well, they would be broke!

Just say no to drugs...unless we say yes, then you can say yes...but only if WE say so.

[ThomWV]

2. ^ because it cost nothing and would ease their pain ... no profit to be made

[Uben]

3. Proof positive!

I have no brain tumors!










(I hope)

[indepat]

4. Just another of the joys of living in a rw-dominated society wherein Dems are deathly afraid of

soiling their pants if labeled soft on: communism, crime, drugs, terra, or weak on national defense. :shrug:

[Fly by night]

5. This is truly old news, in the cannabis policy arena and here at DU

The Alternet author gives himself too much credit for "discovering" the suppression of the UVA research on the cancer-fighting properties of cannabis and releasing that information "for the first time." That suppression has been well-known (and widely discussed) for some time now. Doesn't make it any more right though.

Here's a DU thread from last year on the same topic, based on a major review of the cancer-fighting properties of cannabis released by NORML in June '09 that also discussed the UVA research.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5831628

[nashville_brook]

6. i remember this story...but i never tire of it -- :)

[nashville_brook]

7. delete - dupe-de-doo

[Rex]

8. Wow, one post for two days in a year with 20 replies...

It is always good to rehash things people don't want to talk about, especially when very little posting goes on about the subject.

[Fly by night]

9. My criticism was about the Alternet author claiming to be exposing something for the first time ...

... that most of us who follow cannabis policy have been well aware of for years. I posted my earlier thread to document that.

BTW, I believe DU is (and has been) an excellent place to stay informed on cannabis policy-related topics. I just Googled "marijuana cancer" using DU's search function and found over 200 threads that include a discussion of this topic here.

I agree that repetition is a good thing. Claiming to be revealing something for the first time (when you haven't) isn't especially.

[scipan]

10. I wonder if Teddy Kennedy knew

It sounds like most doctors would not be aware of this. I also had a friend who died of brain cancer and my mother died of lung cancer (adenocarcinoma - the same kind of cancer that was tested).

This lack of knowledge is keeping people with terminal diseases from trying this and either getting a longer life or even a complete cure (3 out of 15 mice). That's criminal.

[kimmerspixelated]

16. Bingo! Truth is, there are many things that doctors could push but can't

because by law they are not allowed to say anything will cure cancer, however they are allowed to say that chemo and radiation and so forth might cure and control cancer, because it is part of the big profit machine for the cancer industry!

[mr clean]

11. k&r

[704wipes]

12. +1 I wonder if this is why it is so difficult to get it for pain...

Because eventually a lot people taking it for cancer pain would be testifying that their tumor was in remission?

[laughingliberal]

13. As I understand it, the results were duplicated by researchers in Madrid in 2000.

One small piece by AP appeared here at the time.

[WhoIsNumberNone]

14. The article mentions the Madrid study

Paragraph 2

[laughingliberal]

17. Cool! Didn't read the article as I am familiar with both of these studies.

I think the decided lack of awareness in the public domain is very interesting. Shall we play a game of counting how many industries and government agencies would have a vested interest in keeping this quiet?

[RainDog]

15. they also lie about the problem of driving under the influence of cannabis

http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/05/18/how-pot-prohibition-promotes-bad-science-and-bad-policies/

another example of right-wing stupidity driven politics. Obama shouldn't buy into this b.s. It really makes him look bad. and stupid.