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.

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

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20053780

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.

What about the energy companies? What should they move forward with, burning pot to produce energy?

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

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.

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!

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.

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

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.

: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

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.

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.

I'm sorry if I personally attacked you, Denver. That was not my intention. I got a little worked up.