Cannabis Effects on Cancer - Page 2

On August 23 2013 10:37 Graisseux wrote: Show nested quote + On August 23 2013 02:25 k2o4 wrote:   On August 21 2013 22:54 Carthac wrote: You really need to stop writing exaggerated and generalized titles to your posts. It greatly degrades any content you post in them. The title of my post was Cannabis Effects on Cancer. I can't seem to find the exaggeration in it. Effect on "Cancer" like it would work on all of the different types of cancers will always be a generalization imo..

It seems to me that you're not understanding what the title means. I'm not saying that the effect is to cure cancer, I'm just saying that this blog post will have information about the effects that cannabis has had on cancer. No scientist will argue against the fact that cannabis has been shown to have the effect of shrinking cancerous tumors in mice. That's well established. A good scientist also knows that this effect on mice is not the same as curing cancer in a human. Because I want to honor the very scientific minded people on this site and stop driving them crazy by proclaiming my belief that cannabis cures cancer, I've changed the blog title name to reflect that the posts will only be giving you information on the effects that have been recorded. You can decide if they equal a cure or not.

On August 23 2013 02:24 k2o4 wrote: Show nested quote + On August 22 2013 02:43 Smuft wrote:OP, to be fair though saying "looks like a cure" as first line is not accurate. Even the research scientists said it's too early to be excited and plenty of cancer treatments make it to this stage and there isn't enough data yet to say anything for near certain. I've seen enough people curing cancer on their own with only cannabis that I believe it, but I know the proper societal request before saying "is a cure" currently requires more than I can offer. (I've edited the OP to reflect that it's just my POV)

instead of saying "proper societal request" and acting like marijuana can't be called a cure yet due to some inconvenient formality, you could just say it can't be called a cure yet because of common sense.

On August 23 2013 10:37 Graisseux wrote: Show nested quote + On August 23 2013 02:25 k2o4 wrote:   On August 21 2013 22:54 Carthac wrote: You really need to stop writing exaggerated and generalized titles to your posts. It greatly degrades any content you post in them. The title of my post was Cannabis Effects on Cancer. I can't seem to find the exaggeration in it. Effect on "Cancer" like it would work on all of the different types of cancers will always be a generalization imo. The time of the all-in-one "Cure for Cancer" research has passed a long time ago.

What seems to be the source of your butt pain? Honestly, why does this bother you? lol

On August 23 2013 12:18 k2o4 wrote: Show nested quote + On August 23 2013 10:37 Graisseux wrote:   On August 23 2013 02:25 k2o4 wrote:   On August 21 2013 22:54 Carthac wrote: You really need to stop writing exaggerated and generalized titles to your posts. It greatly degrades any content you post in them. The title of my post was Cannabis Effects on Cancer. I can't seem to find the exaggeration in it. Effect on "Cancer" like it would work on all of the different types of cancers will always be a generalization imo.. It seems to me that you're not understanding what the title means. I'm not saying that the effect is to cure cancer, I'm just saying that this blog post will have information about the effects that cannabis has had on cancer. No scientist will argue against the fact that cannabis has been shown to have the effect of shrinking cancerous tumors in mice. That's well established. A good scientist also knows that this effect on mice is not the same as curing cancer in a human. Because I want to honor the very scientific minded people on this site and stop driving them crazy by proclaiming my belief that cannabis cures cancer, I've changed the blog title name to reflect that the posts will only be giving you information on the effects that have been recorded. You can decide if they equal a cure or not.

Fair enough, I guess I got influenced by your previous blog post titled "Canabis Cures Cancer".

The scarcity of data on the subject keeps me skeptical (we probably disagree on our evaluation of the quantity and quality of scientific data on cannabis effects). Research almost always goes wrong and false statements are made all the time, but usually these bad hypotheses only known to a few experts. If it wasn't about the hot topic that cannabis is, we wouldn't even hear about this yet (on no other scientific subject you'd find more youtube videos than actual articles). On a positive note, I think that the spreading of legalization will help as scientist won't fear stigmatization anymore.

On August 23 2013 12:56 Gnarly wrote: Show nested quote + On August 23 2013 10:37 Graisseux wrote:   On August 23 2013 02:25 k2o4 wrote:   On August 21 2013 22:54 Carthac wrote: You really need to stop writing exaggerated and generalized titles to your posts. It greatly degrades any content you post in them. The title of my post was Cannabis Effects on Cancer. I can't seem to find the exaggeration in it. Effect on "Cancer" like it would work on all of the different types of cancers will always be a generalization imo. The time of the all-in-one "Cure for Cancer" research has passed a long time ago. What seems to be the source of your butt pain? Honestly, why does this bother you? lol

Isn't "butt pain" a new exaggeration?

I just like scientific subjects and vulgarization, and also I'm doing a Ph.D. in a chemistry lab specialized in drug delivery for cancer treatment. I find the debate on the accuracy of the posted information to be very interesting.