ChiefsPlanet
Page 13 of 15 « First 39101112 13 1415
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Science Cannabis oil has been shrinking tumors in woman's brain (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=271669)

Mr. Laz 10-25-2015 04:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valiant (Post 11835661)
But if it works, how will pharmaceuticals make billions?
Just like oil and energy companies, instead of fighting just jump on board and making money from it. Both pharma and energy companies have the infrastructure to dominate the markets if they would just stop being dicks and move forward.

DenverChief 10-25-2015 04:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cunning Linguist (Post 11835792)
Any information or studies on the component you are referring to?
Not that I have personally researched. The CBD compound has been mentioned in several documentaries for it's medical value for seizures - and I'm pretty sure for tumor reduction. I have a friend of the family that used CBD oil for a tumor in the colon and combined with chemo the Dr's were surprised by the amount of reduction.

EDIT: I should mention it was ingested orally

DenverChief 10-25-2015 04:38 PM
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20053780

Quote:
Recently, cannabinoids (CBs) have been shown to possess antitumor properties. Because the psychoactivity of cannabinoid compounds limits their medicinal usage, we undertook the present study to evaluate the in vitro antiproliferative ability of cannabidiol (CBD), a nonpsychoactive cannabinoid compound, on U87 and U373 human glioma cell lines. The addition of CBD to the culture medium led to a dramatic drop of mitochondrial oxidative metabolism [3-(4,5-dimethyl-2-thiazolyl)-2,5-diphenyl-2H tetrazolium bromide test] and viability in glioma cells, in a concentration-dependent manner that was already evident 24 h after CBD exposure, with an apparent IC(50) of 25 microM. The antiproliferative effect of CBD was partially prevented by the CB2 receptor antagonist N-[(1S)-endo-1,3,3-trimethylbicyclo[2,2,1]heptan-2-yl]-5-(4-chloro-3-methylphenyl)-1-(4-methylbenzyl)-pyrazole-3-carboxamide (SR144528; SR2) and alpha-tocopherol. By contrast, the CB1 cannabinoid receptor antagonist N-(piperidin-1-yl)-5-(4-chlorophenyl)-1-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)-4-methyl-1H-pyrazole-3-carboximide hydrochloride (SR141716; SR1), capsazepine (vanilloid receptor antagonist), the inhibitors of ceramide generation, or pertussis toxin did not counteract CBD effects. We also show, for the first time, that the antiproliferative effect of CBD was correlated to induction of apoptosis, as determined by cytofluorimetric analysis and single-strand DNA staining, which was not reverted by cannabinoid antagonists. Finally, CBD, administered s.c. to nude mice at the dose of 0.5 mg/mouse, significantly inhibited the growth of subcutaneously implanted U87 human glioma cells. In conclusion, the nonpsychoactive CBD was able to produce a significant antitumor activity both in vitro and in vivo, thus suggesting a possible application of CBD as an antineoplastic agent.

Don Corlemahomes 10-25-2015 04:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverChief (Post 11835834)
Not that I have personally researched. The CBD compound has been mentioned in several documentaries for it's medical value for seizures - and I'm pretty sure for tumor reduction. I have a friend of the family that used CBD oil for a tumor in the colon and combined with chemo the Dr's were surprised by the amount of reduction.
I'm just going to tap out here.

We could talk about anecdotal evidence vs. actual trials, colon and GBM being completely different tumors made up of completely different tissue and governed by completely different mediators of tumor cell growth, dosages, delivery to the colon (delivered directly to the colon by ingestion) vs. the brain (must be taken up into the bloodstream, metabolized by the liver, traverse the Blood-brain barrier, and delivered to the site of the tumor in high enough concentrations) etc etc, but I don't think we will agree.

Donger 10-25-2015 04:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Laz (Post 11835825)
Just like oil and energy companies, instead of fighting just jump on board and making money from it. Both pharma and energy companies have the infrastructure to dominate the markets if they would just stop being dicks and move forward.
What about the energy companies? What should they move forward with, burning pot to produce energy?

DenverChief 10-25-2015 04:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cunning Linguist (Post 11835866)
I'm just going to tap out here.

We could talk about anecdotal evidence vs. actual trials, colon and GBM being completely different tumors made up of completely different tissue and governed by completely different mediators of tumor cell growth, dosages, delivery to the colon (delivered directly to the colon by ingestion) vs. the brain (must be taken up into the bloodstream, metabolized by the liver, traverse the Blood-brain barrier, and delivered to the site of the tumor in high enough concentrations) etc etc, but I don't think we will agree.

Oh I don't doubt there are complications - but the body has natural CBD receptors in the brain - so to get that chemical to the brain is not as much of a stretch (and it's non-psychoactive) - check out the link I posted in my last post

Don Corlemahomes 10-25-2015 04:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverChief (Post 11835863)
That's one of the studies cited in the article I posted. When you see culture medium and administered to nude rats, that should be your tip that those are preclinical research studies. And they administered very high doses to get the modest effect.

Bewbies 10-25-2015 04:44 PM
When my brother was up at Mayo in 2012/2013 they asked his oncologist about CBD, weed etc as treatment for his stage 4 GBM.

The doc said it was showing to kill the tumor, but the only way it'd been tested was direct injection into the tumor.

Which led to the two problems with that. One, not every tumor can be reached, and two, nobody was making the stuff in a way a doctor would ever approve as clean enough to inject directly into someone's brain.

Weed and the polio virus currently look like the best hopes, which is great!

Don Corlemahomes 10-25-2015 04:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverChief (Post 11835879)
Oh I don't doubt there are complications - but the body has natural CBD receptors in the brain - so to get that chemical to the brain is not as much of a stretch (and it's non-psychoactive) - check out the link I posted in my last post
I'm not talking about complications. I'm talking about sufficient concentrations after ingesting the oil, it being metabolized, and it traversing an anatomic barrier in the brain that filters substances. That is much more complicated than simply ingesting something and having a portion of it mechanically delivered unchanged to your colon.

DenverChief 10-25-2015 04:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cunning Linguist (Post 11835882)
That's one of the studies cited in the article I posted. When you see culture medium and administered to nude rats, that should be your tip that those are preclinical research studies. And they administered very high doses to get the modest effect.

0.5 mg per mouse is a high dose?

It's also a non-psychoactive ingredient, so there is room to really amp up the dose without much if any negative side effects

Don Corlemahomes 10-25-2015 04:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bewbies (Post 11835889)
When my brother was up at Mayo in 2012/2013 they asked his oncologist about CBD, weed etc as treatment for his stage 4 GBM.

The doc said it was showing to kill the tumor, but the only way it'd been tested was direct injection into the tumor.

Which led to the two problems with that. One, not every tumor can be reached, and two, nobody was making the stuff in a way a doctor would ever approve as clean enough to inject directly into someone's brain.

Weed and the polio virus currently look like the best hopes, which is great!
Right. That is in the article as well. They resected the tumor (took it out surgically), then administered cannabinoid oil directly into the residual tumor, which is much different than just ingesting it.

DenverChief 10-25-2015 04:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cunning Linguist (Post 11835891)
I'm not talking about complications. I'm talking about sufficient concentrations after ingesting the oil, it being metabolized, and it traversing an anatomic barrier in the brain that filters substances. That is much more complicated than simply ingesting something and having a portion of it mechanically delivered unchanged to your colon.

:spock: I'm not attacking you - we are having a discussion - you obviously know more than I do about the chemical properties - I'm just trying to traverse the landscape as a lay person with a little bit of anecdotal evidence

Don Corlemahomes 10-25-2015 04:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverChief (Post 11835893)
0.5 mg per mouse is a high dose?

It's also a non-psychoactive ingredient, so there is room to really amp up the dose without much if any negative side effects
Yes, it is. 0.5 mg in a 20 gram mouse translates to 25 mg/kg in the mouse. 25 mg/kg in a 160 pound man is 1750 mg per dose.

Don Corlemahomes 10-25-2015 04:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverChief (Post 11835903)
:spock: I'm not attacking you - we are having a discussion - you obviously know more than I do about the chemical properties - I'm just trying to traverse the landscape as a lay person with a little bit of anecdotal evidence
I don't understand the bolding.
Complications=side effects
I was using complicated the second time to state that the mode of delivery is complex.

Don Corlemahomes 10-25-2015 04:56 PM
I'm sorry if I personally attacked you, Denver. That was not my intention. I got a little worked up.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:33 AM.
Page 13 of 15 « First 39101112 13 1415
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.