Drug Legalization Image Gallery
Last 30 Uploads
InCharge
7 y
1,617
† C †
(Natural News) A recent study published in International Journal of Oncology revealed that cannabinoids, the active chemical in cannabis, can destroy leukemia cells either alone or in combination with other cancer treatments. The scientific community has long-established that cannabinoids may show potential in cancer treatment, with certain varieties known to promote cell death, curb cell growth, and inhibit tumor-inducing blood vessel development. In order to evaluate the compound’s efficacy against leukemia, a team of researchers at the St George’s, University of London studied cancer cells in a laboratory and tested various combinations of cannabinoids and chemotherapy drugs such as cytarabine and vincristine.
The study revealed that the cannabiniod varieties cannabidiol and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) eliminated leukemia cells when used alone. The research team also found that combining the two cannabiniod variants resulted in increased treatment potency. In addition, the study revealed that adding cannabinoids following an initial dose of chemotherapy lead to better overall outcomes against the blood cancer. This means that a similar effect can be achieved by using lower chemotherapy doses, the researchers said. Lower doses of chemotherapy may equate to lower risk of treatment-related side-effects in patients, the experts added.
According to the research team, combining chemotherapy with cannabinoid treatment fared better than either chemotherapy alone or cannabidiol/THC combination. However, the experts noted that greater treatment potency was observed only when cannabinoid treatment was added after the initial chemotherapy, but not the other way around.
“We have shown for the first time that the order in which cannabinoids and chemotherapy are used is crucial in determining the overall effectiveness of this treatment. These extracts are highly concentrated and purified, so smoking marijuana will not have a similar effect. But cannabinoids are a very exciting prospect in oncology, and studies such as ours serve to establish the best ways that they should be used to maximise a therapeutic effect,” lead researcher Dr. Wai Liu said in ScienceDaily.com.
The current findings were reflective of a 2013 study, also carried out by Dr. Liu, which demonstrated the compound’s potential in combating leukemia. As part or research, the oncologist tested six cannabinoid variants, either independently or in conjunction with each other, against leukemia cells. The researcher found that the compounds spurred significant declines in cancer cell viability and simultaneously inhibited all phases of the cell cycle.
“There’s quite a lot of cancers that should respond quite nicely to these cannabis agents. If you talk about a drug company that spent billions of pounds trying to develop these new drugs that target these pathways, cannabis does exactly the same thing – or certain elements of cannabis compounds do exactly the same thing – so you have something that is naturally produced which impacts the same pathways that these fantastic drugs that cost billions also work on. By using these drugs in combination with each other we can actually get an enhanced effect, and what that means is that we can – after doing some further studies – take this into the clinic and hopefully get the medication that can be used in patients in the next 12 to 18 months,” study author Wai Liu said in USNews.com.
However, the health expert cautioned that the compounds may not work on all types of cancer. According to Dr. Liu, it is currently unclear whether smoking marijuana will produce similar benefits in patients. He also noted that he will not recommend smoking marijuana to treat leukemia as it remains uncertain how various chemicals interacts inside a patient’s body. (Related: Cannabis oils found to naturally treat certain types of cancer)
Sources include:
InCharge
8 y
541
† C †
befurther
8 y
575
There is nothing quite so horrendous and heartbreaking as a baby with a malignant brain tumor, especially for parents and family. But at the same time, there is little as joyous and uplifting as seeing those tumors go away – and without the costly "assistance" of the corporate medical industry.
Recently, the father of an eight-month-old baby decided he would shun traditional radiation treatment and chemotherapy and instead push for an alternative treatment using cannabis oil. The baby's physician, Dr. William Courtner, who was initially skeptical earlier in his career about medical cannabis, has since seen such impressive results with it that he's not a big believer and a staunch advocate.
And the baby, by the way, was a huge reason for his conversion.
"They were putting cannabinoid oil on the baby's pacifier twice a day, increasing the dose... And within two months there was a dramatic reduction, enough that the pediatric oncologist allowed them to go ahead with not pursuing traditional therapy," Courtney said in an interview with The Huffington Post.
At four months the tumor had completely disappeared, and after eight months of treatment, the brain architecture and tissues were completely normal, making the toddler a "miracle baby" in Courtney's words.
The physician further noted that successful application of cannabis in this case means that "this child, because of that, is not going to have the long-term side effects that would come from a very high dose of chemotherapy or radiation... currently the child's being called a miracle baby, and I would have to agree that this is the perfect response that we should be insisting is frontline therapy for all children before they launch off on all medications that have horrific long term side effects."
Long before voters in some states have approved ballot measures legalizing marijuana for recreational use (it is still against federal law, by the way), many states permitted the use of pot to treat various medical conditions – from cancers and asthma to neurodegenerative diseases and autoimmune disorders.
This makes sense, because numerous studies have shown that cannabis has incredible healing qualities, and that is particularly true for cancers. Indeed, as we have reported, the National Cancer Institute has documented more than two dozen studies on how incredible the healing power of cannabis is.
In animal tests, for instance, researchers have found that cannabis is effective in treating two forms of highly lethal liver cancer – hepatic adenoma tumors and hepatocellular carcinoma.
We reported further:
Benign tumors in other organs, such as the pancreas, testes, uterus and mammary and pituitary glands, were diminished as well. Several reviews also found that cannabinoids appear to encourage cancer cell death (apoptosis), while preserving normal cells. Moreover, cannabis induces programmed cell death in breast cancer cell lines and offers protection against both colorectal and lung cancer.
And, as the Free Thought Project has noted, even the mainstream media appears to be admitting to the fact that cannabis has wonderful medical qualities. As CNN has reported, there are at least 10 medical conditions cannabis appears to relieve.
Also, the network's chief medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, says it's time for a "medical marijuana revolution." What's more, he said based on his research for a series of documentaries on medical marijuana, there is growing support among varied political constituencies and the medical community for Congress to reschedule marijuana from Class 1 (narcotic) to something much more benign (and fitting).
Dr. Gupta is right – there is so much that is truly revolutionary about cannabis and marijuana, especially when it comes to treating cancer, so much that you'd be simply amazed.
In the two years since recreational marijuana sales became legal in Colorado, the state has seen economic growth two times greater than the U.S. national average, according to a new in-depth analysis.
"The Economic Impact of Marijuana Legalization in Colorado," released by the Marijuana Policy Group in October 2016, was created using a new "Marijuana Impact Model" designed to accurately measure the cannabis industry's economic impact on the state.
As it turns out, the positive impact has been enormous. The state saw nearly $1 billion in marijuana sales in 2015, with legal cannabis activities generating a combined output of $2.39 billion. Sales increased 42.4 percent over 2014.
From the report:
"Because the industry is wholly confined within Colorado, spending on marijuana creates more output and employment per dollar spent than 90 percent of Colorado industries ... Legal marijuana demand is projected to grow by 11.3 percent per year through 2020."
In just two years, the marijuana industry has become a major economic force in Colorado, outperforming many other sectors.
From The Daily Sheeple::
"Cannabis now ranks number six in terms of product sales, following closely behind cigarette sales. It beats gold mining by a large margin, and even performing arts and sports venues as well as all non-grain crop farming.
"However, the real impact is seen when put in terms of 'output and employment per dollar spent,' where spending in the cannabis industry outperforms all private industries in Colorado – including coal and other mining, oil and gas, casinos, business services, general manufacturing and retail trade (incl. alcohol)."
Every retail cannabis sales dollar represents $2.40 in state output, and the combined impact of retail sales, cultivation and manufacturing is greater than that of any other entity, including federal government spending in the state.
There's also good news regarding employment: The cannabis industry created more than 18,000 full-time equivalent jobs in 2015 – more than two-thirds of them directly related to the marijuana industry, the rest generated by spending on goods and services by the marijuana industry, and through "general spending by marijuana industry employees and proprietors."
The boost in tax revenues for the state has also been astounding. Colorado raked in more than $63 million in 2014, and over $121 million in 2015. The near-doubling of cannabis tax revenues in one year was attributed partly to the skyrocketing increase in sales during the period, and also to higher tax rates for recreational marijuana sales compared to medical cannabis.
"Marijuana tourism" – in which people visit Colorado primarily to sample legal cannabis products – has also fueled the increase in sales.
Unfortunately, the rapid growth of the cannabis industry in the state has produced a negative impact for smaller "cannabusinesses," as larger companies have begun to dominate the marketplace.
Certainly, this is partly attributable to natural market forces and competition, but one of the main challenges for the smaller players in the market has been to remain in compliance with the labyrinthine regulatory system put in place by the state. The cost and complexity of compliance has forced many to simply shut down.
The lessons learned from this report could help other states – such as the four that passed recreational marijuana initiatives in the recent election – in forging workable policy strategies regarding regulation, taxation and other areas of concern. The glowing economic growth statistics should also encourage state leaders to embrace this new industry and take advantage of its potential benefits.
Finally, the era of marijuana prohibition appears to be drawing to a close – and that's good news for everyone.
Sources:
TheDailySheeple.com
MJPolicyGroup.com[PDF]
NativeHempSolutions.com
Last week, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Edith Ramirez, chair of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), requesting that the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the FTC look into some makers of prescription drugs and how they price insulin.
Sanders and Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) wrote that though the original insulin patent expired 75 years ago, “three drugmakers who make different versions of insulin have continuously raised prices.”
In “numerous instances,” the letter continued, “price increases have reportedly mirrored one another precisely.”
Citing concerns over rising insulin prices and their continued impact on federal spending, the two Democrats accused the companies of taking part in “anti-competitive” conduct and urged the DOJ to investigate. The companies accused of colluding to inflate the price insulin are Eli Lilly, Merck & Co., and Sanofi.
Sanders’ theory that the companies are coordinating to ensure insulin prices remain high across the board partly explains the increasing prices. But a study recently published by the Journal of the American Medical Association(JAMA) shows the high cost of prescription drugs might be caused primarily by government granted monopolies.
According to the paper’s findings, researchers learned that manufacturers are allowed to set high drug prices due to market exclusivity, which is “protected by monopoly rights awarded upon Food and Drug Administration [or FDA] approval and by patents.” This is a finding that coincides with the assessment of many Austrian economists, who often argue the FDA causes “death and suffering” when it keeps drugs off the market due to heavy regulations.
In the United States, individuals spend more on prescription drugs than those in all other countries. The JAMA study noted that in 2013, “per capita spending on prescription drugs was $858,” a much higher cost to consumers than those in “19 other industrialized nations.” In those countries, people spent roughly $400 on prescription drugs. And with prices for prescription drugs in the U.S. jumping more than 10 percent in 2015, things are only getting worse for Americans.
Recently, former presidential contender and congressman Ron Paul wrote that “[m]onopolies and cartels are creations of government, not markets.” If the JAMA-published study on the high costs of prescription drugs arrived at the right conclusions, Paul’s explanation seems to point out a reason why.
“Government taxes and regulations,” the retired physician said, “are effective means of limiting competition in an industry.” When large corporations, like the three insulin makers Sen. Sanders is urging the DOJ to investigate, want to eliminate competition, they go to agencies like the FDA.
Since “[l]arge companies can afford the costs of complying with government regulations,” Paul added, smaller competitors are crushed by the high costs of doing business. What’s left? A small group of powerful entities that are ready to do anything to stay afloat. They might even collaborate with one another — as Sanders implies they have — after pushing all other competitors out of the picture with the aid of the FDA’s protectionist policies. After all, Paul explains, “[b]ig business can also afford to hire lobbyists to ensure that new laws and regulations favor big business.”
Examining the lobbying practices of Sanders’ three offenders, we find that Eli Lilly spent $5,470,000 on lobbying efforts in 2016 alone. Merck & Co. went beyond that, spending $5,500,000 on lobbying in 2016. Sanofi isn’t far behind, either; the company has spent $4,390,000 so far in 2016.
In the study published by JAMA, researchers concluded that the “approach the United States has taken to granting government-protected monopolies to drug manufacturers, combined with coverage requirements imposed on government-funded drug benefits” are pushing the prices up, creating an artificial scarcity that hurts those who cannot afford the life-saving drugs they require due to conditions such as diabetes.
Instead of more regulation, the solution is to allow companies to operate without being picked as winners by agencies like the FDA.
“Any businesses that charge high prices or offer substandard products” in a market environment free from government intervention, Paul wrote, “will soon face competition from businesses offering consumers lower prices and/or higher quality.” To put an end to high prices for prescription drugs, then, we must first put an end to monopoly-creating schemes — and yes, that includes terminating agencies like the FDA.
This article (We Finally Know Why Americans Spend More on Prescription Drugs Than Other Nations) via NB is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Alice Salles and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11 pm Eastern/8 pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, please email the error and name of the article to edits@theantimedia.org.
Add This Forum To Your Favorites!
Challenge the message and not the messenger!
The first person to resort to name calling and personal attacks automatically loses the debate!
Personal attack is often the best indication that the writer knows his logic is flawed and therefore tries to deflect attention by attacking the opponent, instead of attacking the arguments of the opponent.
Forum Stats:
forum viewed 914,360 times
2,461 messages
1,919 topics
topics per page limited to: 8
average number of messages per page: 10
240 pages
CureZone Newsletter is distributed in partnership with www.netatlantic.com
Copyright 1999 - 2024 www.curezone.org