Home
Gallery
Search
Register
Log in
About Us & RulesElephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
+2
Victorismyhero
eddie
6 posters
Page 3 of 3
Page 3 of 3 • 
1, 2, 3
Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Guest Sat Jan 28, 2017 3:56 pm
First topic message reminder :
SALT LAKE CITY — Researchers at the Huntsman Cancer Institute say a protein discovered in elephants appears to attack and destroy cancer cells found in humans. Dr. Joshua Schiffman and a team of researchers have spent the last few years searching for a cure for cancer in what might seem like an unusual place: elephant blood.
"The elephants have had 55 million years of research and development to really design the perfect cancer-fighting protein," Schiffman explained. "Nature has already solved the problem."
Due to their size and the number of cells their bodies generate, Schiffman said statistically, nearly all elephants should get cancer, yet in reality that rarely ever happens. "Elephants almost never get cancer," Schiffman said. "And we think the reason why is they have extra copies of this cancer-fighting protein." After synthesizing that protein called P-53 in a lab, Schiffman and his team unleashed it onto human cancer cells in petri dishes.
He said the results were astonishing.
"What we've found is that the cancer cells are all dying very quickly when they're exposed to this elephant cancer protein," Schiffman said. "It is remarkable. The lab is so excited."
For the next phase of the study, The Hunstman Cancer Institute is working with a lab in Israel to synthetically produce more of the protein, which would then be tested on mice and eventually dogs.
https://www.ksl.com/?sid=42909188&nid=148
SALT LAKE CITY — Researchers at the Huntsman Cancer Institute say a protein discovered in elephants appears to attack and destroy cancer cells found in humans. Dr. Joshua Schiffman and a team of researchers have spent the last few years searching for a cure for cancer in what might seem like an unusual place: elephant blood.
"The elephants have had 55 million years of research and development to really design the perfect cancer-fighting protein," Schiffman explained. "Nature has already solved the problem."
Due to their size and the number of cells their bodies generate, Schiffman said statistically, nearly all elephants should get cancer, yet in reality that rarely ever happens. "Elephants almost never get cancer," Schiffman said. "And we think the reason why is they have extra copies of this cancer-fighting protein." After synthesizing that protein called P-53 in a lab, Schiffman and his team unleashed it onto human cancer cells in petri dishes.
He said the results were astonishing.
"What we've found is that the cancer cells are all dying very quickly when they're exposed to this elephant cancer protein," Schiffman said. "It is remarkable. The lab is so excited."
For the next phase of the study, The Hunstman Cancer Institute is working with a lab in Israel to synthetically produce more of the protein, which would then be tested on mice and eventually dogs.
https://www.ksl.com/?sid=42909188&nid=148
Guest- Guest
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Victorismyhero Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:03 pm
nope I didnt say that
what I SAID...if you choose to read correctly, is that your point was irrelevant to the subject being discussed..
IF we were discussing your motive for feeling as you do it WOULD be relevant obviously.
what I SAID...if you choose to read correctly, is that your point was irrelevant to the subject being discussed..
IF we were discussing your motive for feeling as you do it WOULD be relevant obviously.
Victorismyhero- INTERNAL SECURITY DIRECTOR
- Posts : 11441
Join date : 2015-11-06
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Victorismyhero Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:05 pm
Thorin wrote:Lord Foul wrote:Thorin wrote:
Did they?
Where is the evidence for that?
FROM https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/may/25/distillers-knew-risk-of-thalidomide-six-months-before-it-was-pulled-says-book
Company knew risk of thalidomide six months before it was pulled, says book
A new book by the lawyer for Australian victims says that executives sat on warnings by doctors that the drug was connected to deformities in babies
Thalidomide australia
Thalidomide survivors outside the supreme court in Melbourne in December 2013 after winning a class action against legacy owner Diageo. Lynette Rowe is second from the right. Photograph: Julian Smith/AAP
Gay Alcorn
Sunday 24 May 2015 15.01 BST
Last modified on Thursday 27 October 2016 00.19 BST
This article is 1 year old
Shares
659
Comments
95
The British company that distributed and sold the drug thalidomide knew almost six months before it was pulled from the market that there were credible claims it caused terrible deformities and the deaths of infants, a new book reveals.
If Distillers had heeded warnings it received in June and July 1961, as many as 1,000 babies would not have been born with severe injuries such as missing limbs, and another 1,000 would not have died shortly after birth, the book says.
FROM http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/12082527/Thalidomide-50-years-on-Justice-has-never-been-done-and-it-burns-away.html
The Sunday Times had meanwhile obtained thousands of documents showing how Grünenthal and Distillers had failed to test the drug adequately and ignored warnings about its dangers, but because of the ongoing legal battle it could not publish them without being in contempt of court.
A book?
Where is the criminal or legal cases on this?
read te rest of the article I posted
read the second, then google talidomide scandle and see how the parent company got it all whitewashed.....
dirty dirty dealings indeed.....
Victorismyhero- INTERNAL SECURITY DIRECTOR
- Posts : 11441
Join date : 2015-11-06
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Guest Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:07 pm
Lord Foul wrote:nope I didnt say that
what I SAID...if you choose to read correctly, is that your point was irrelevant to the subject being discussed..
IF we were discussing your motive for feeling as you do it WOULD be relevant obviously.
You said
"so the above is largely irrelevant....."
What is relevant is your piss poor defense of someone irresponsible
Its not even noble
Like I said, go back and read the threads on this.
In my view she is incompetent to discuss the matter and is ill advising people on their bodies and diets, as if as she claims this cures you.
You are defending that tripe
Guest- Guest
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Guest Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:07 pm
Lord Foul wrote:Thorin wrote:
A book?
Where is the criminal or legal cases on this?
read te rest of the article I posted
read the second, then google talidomide scandle and see how the parent company got it all whitewashed.....
dirty dirty dealings indeed.....
Where is the court cases?
Otherwise it is no more than a claim
Guest- Guest
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Victorismyhero Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:09 pm
YOU go do te googling...its all out there
lets just say...IF there was no evidence why did tey end up paying out so much compo
why did a newspaper have to go to the ECHR to get reporting restrictions lifted
lets just say...IF there was no evidence why did tey end up paying out so much compo
why did a newspaper have to go to the ECHR to get reporting restrictions lifted
Victorismyhero- INTERNAL SECURITY DIRECTOR
- Posts : 11441
Join date : 2015-11-06
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Guest Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:12 pm
Lord Foul wrote:YOU go do te googling...its all out there
lets just say...IF there was no evidence why did tey end up paying out so much compo
why did a newspaper have to go to the ECHR to get reporting restrictions lifted
I am asking you a simple question
If you believe criminality has happened, why is there no convictions?
I am rightly saying, your evidence is a book and media artciles
Guest- Guest
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Victorismyhero Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:56 pm
go and read the many many articles about it all
then consider the law
then understand the law (hint....they didnt break any existing law at the time(apparantly)....but what they did was unlawful...that leads to liability in tort but not criminal conviction)
unlawful is NOT the same as illegal
hence no copnvictions (not to mention the cover up)
then consider the law
then understand the law (hint....they didnt break any existing law at the time(apparantly)....but what they did was unlawful...that leads to liability in tort but not criminal conviction)
unlawful is NOT the same as illegal
hence no copnvictions (not to mention the cover up)
Victorismyhero- INTERNAL SECURITY DIRECTOR
- Posts : 11441
Join date : 2015-11-06
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Guest Sun Jan 29, 2017 7:00 pm
Lord Foul wrote:go and read the many many articles about it all
then consider the law
then understand the law (hint....they didnt break any existing law at the time(apparantly)....but what they did was unlawful...that leads to liability in tort but not criminal conviction)
unlawful is NOT the same as illegal
hence no copnvictions (not to mention the cover up)
So you can offer up nothing then
Just more bullshit, no criminality, but something you are basing on your subjective view.
Guest- Guest
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Guest Sun Jan 29, 2017 7:06 pm
Has it sunk in yet what I am doing Victor to you now, to prove why you are being naive about the two who are brainwashed, trying to peddle their poor claims?
How annoying is it, when you have evidence to refute someone, and they simply are not listening?
Like I am doing now to you?
I mean I even saw the absurd conspiracy being claimed on the Royal family today with cancer, another clue for you, what they both buy into. I even then posted up that the Royal family has had members have cancer and die of cancer. To then incredible Dibs claim Eddie was right, after I just proved Eddie was wrong.
Now stop your poor defense, its not even commendable, you are just encouraging two brainwashed naive people, who are peddling their poor claims.
How annoying is it, when you have evidence to refute someone, and they simply are not listening?
Like I am doing now to you?
I mean I even saw the absurd conspiracy being claimed on the Royal family today with cancer, another clue for you, what they both buy into. I even then posted up that the Royal family has had members have cancer and die of cancer. To then incredible Dibs claim Eddie was right, after I just proved Eddie was wrong.
Now stop your poor defense, its not even commendable, you are just encouraging two brainwashed naive people, who are peddling their poor claims.
Guest- Guest
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Victorismyhero Sun Jan 29, 2017 7:17 pm
Thorin wrote:Has it sunk in yet what I am doing Victor to you now,
and failing, since the evidence is out there in bucket loads....
see what YOU are failing to grasp is I am dealing in verifiable facts here....hard evidence
re eddies post what you are doing is trying to argue the point by delegitimising and abusing the poster and trying to use the facts of the argument as ammunition in THAT....
I have said several time I dont think what eddie claims is acceptable fact, though by the same token there are instances of people seemingly being vastly improved if not cleared of cancer from the use of cannabis....
to ME that means, given that these instances are over and above what you would expect of mere "natural remission", which as we know does occur, albeit rarely, clearly, whilst NOT a cure (for the many reasons we have already discussed) SOMETHING is going on. merely dismissing this as "fantasy" is poor methodology even (or perhaps most importantly) if it is due to some sort of "placebo" effect
to prove why you are being naive about the two who are brainwashed, trying to peddle their poor claims?
How annoying is it, when you have evidence to refute someone, and they simply are not listening?
Like I am doing now?
I mean I even saw the absurd conspiracy being claimed on the Royal family today with cancer, another clue for you, what they both buy into. I even then posted up that the Royal family has had members have cancer and die of cancer. To then incredible Dibs claim Eddie was right, after I just proved Eddie was wrong.
Now stop your poor defense, its not even commendable, you are just encouraging two brainwashed naive people, who are peddling their poor claims.
Victorismyhero- INTERNAL SECURITY DIRECTOR
- Posts : 11441
Join date : 2015-11-06
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Guest Sun Jan 29, 2017 7:22 pm
Lord Foul wrote:
and failing, since the evidence is out there in bucket loads....
see what YOU are failing to grasp is I am dealing in verifiable facts here....hard evidence
re eddies post what you are doing is trying to argue the point by delegitimising and abusing the poster and trying to use the facts of the argument as ammunition in THAT....
I have said several time I dont think what eddie claims is acceptable fact, though by the same token there are instances of people seemingly being vastly improved if not cleared of cancer from the use of cannabis....
to ME that means, given that these instances are over and above what you would expect of mere "natural remission", which as we know does occur, albeit rarely, clearly, whilst NOT a cure (for the many reasons we have already discussed) SOMETHING is going on. merely dismissing this as "fantasy" is poor methodology even (or perhaps most importantly) if it is due to some sort of "placebo" effect
1) What evidence in bucket loads?
That shows you have not read the numerous threads and where she has argued claiming she knows better than GP's to then advised they are not needed anymore
Get your head out of the sand and stop defending bullshit.
2) OMG, so now you take hearsay stories, that they have been cured by cannabis
That has just made me lose 90% respect for you, when there is no way to prove cannabis cured them
For fuck sake, I forgot you believe in druid crap, so its no surprise you take bullshit on faith
3) So are you seriously telling me people have been cured of cancer due to cannabis oil
Get a fucking grip of yourself
Guest- Guest
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Guest Sun Jan 29, 2017 7:39 pm
A follower sent me this meme in a message and since I have seen it getting around a fair bit; I decided a debunk of this steaming pile of bull intestinal leavings was necessary. There are certain things in the wooniverse that really grind my gears to the point of being unable to peacefully sleep at night. One of those things is bleach enemas as an autism “cure”; and tied for first place on the list of woo that makes me stabby has got to be people who promote fake cancer cures and invent conspiracy stories about doctors wanting to keep people sick because Big Pharma something something. This meme from the No Master No Slave (1) Facebook page (dress code: foil hat essential), bundles several “cures” together with an unhealthy dose of fear mongering about modern allopathic medicine; as well as an accusation that research foundations are nothing but BS. Ready to destroy this?
Claim 1: Cannabis Cures Cancer!
A big claim, no? Grouped in here is the statement: “Anyone interested should look up Rick Simpson Oil and Phoenix Tears. Also check out The Virginia Study and watch Run From the Cure”. So, what we have here is essentially a website that includes a sales pitch and a video, and a 30 year old study. I can hear the cries of the RSO defendants from here. “Oh, but Rick Simpson isn’t selling anything! He is telling people how to make the oil for free.” This may be true; however, it is also certainly true that he is making some money. A quick visit to his website will show you that he is selling books and there is also a button you can use to make a donation. Anyhow, regardless of whether Rick Simpson stands to profit from his statements or he is just a really nice guy (I actually do think it is more that he passionately believes in the power of cannabis oil; I don’t think he is out to make huge amounts of money – but please correct me if I am wrong), they are still fraught with intellectual dishonesty.
I would draw your attention to this statement (2).* An extensive list of claims about cannabis oil and accusations about modern medicine are made, interspersed with comments like “studies show” (no studies are actually given), and statements that show a lack of understanding of basic chemistry, such as this one:
Whilst it is very true that Marinol, (trademark name for synthetic dronabinol), may not have the same effectiveness as the plant due to the complex mixture of other cannabinoids and compounds present in the plant; this doesn’t change the fact that the two molecules are exactly the same. Certainly, research into the effectiveness of the different components of the cannabis plant is important, since dronabinol does have psychoactive side effects which not all patients will enjoy. There is a certainly a possibility that different compounds will have stronger anti cancer properties than others and synergistic effects could also be a factor to consider. Identification of active ingredients and their chemical properties or physiological effects is a positive step of research, not one to be written off as “so-called scientific studies”.
Another highlight of Rick’s statement is the point at which he goes full tin foil and begins to rave about fluoride, including this incredible observation:
Let me rearrange that sentence for you, Rick. Hitler did not use fluoride in his death camps to keep the inmates calm so they would not try to escape or revolt. This ridiculous, full Godwin statement, shows you the level of tin foil we are talking here. Even anti fluoride spokespeople have criticised the use of this urban myth (4) to discourage fluoridation, since they feel it damages their position. You don’t say!
I could go on and on about Rick Simpson, however, dismantling the entirety of his claims that cannabis oil is a panacea or miracle cure for not just cancer, but a host of other ailments, is a blog post in itself. For the time being, I will stick to the evidence on cannabis oil and breast cancer. Whilst still on the topic of Rick Simpson, I’d like to note that he doesn’t provide any evidence other than a bunch of testimonials – which is sweet, but widely known to be completely meaningless and often cherry picked. Anecdotes do not equal evidence nor a clinical trial do they make. While there are likewise testimonials of cancer survivors who opted for conventional treatment, there is actual scientific research to support their nice stories.
A final note on testimonials – it is important to be wary of testimonials from those who claim to have been cured from alternative methods, as many of these people have also undergone conventional treatment, either concurrently or previously. Let’s take the case of Stefanie LaRue, described here (5) by David Gorski on Science Based Medicine. LaRue underwent conventional treatment for 8 years before she started taking cannabis oil, yet still attributes her very positive survival time to cannabis oil, rather than the conventional treatments.
In any case, Simpson covers his bases by claiming that anyone who isn’t cured by his oil has been too damaged by conventional medicine and it is the treatment that kills them, as opposed to cancer (6). This negation of the possible benefits of chemotherapy is an intellectually dishonest approach and you can read about the tactics used by alternative medicine proponents to deter people from taking life saving or prolonging measures on Science Based
Medicine here (7). And another SBM article here (
, discusses specifically how a meta-analysis has shown that chemotherapy has cut breast cancer mortality by a third. This is a huge number of lives saved. I don’t want to downplay the side effects of chemotherapy; or over inflate its effectiveness, it’s absolutely true that not all cancers respond in the same way to chemotherapy, but this just highlights the importance of research and more individualised treatment regimes. I ask myself here, what mechanism would Simpson propose that all cancers would respond in the same way to cannabis oil, using the same dose of crude compound, with an unknown amount of active ingredients present?
Apart from anecdotal evidence and the movie “Run From the Cure” (which I won’t address here; since movies aren’t exactly high on the list of scientific evidence); Rick Simpson and the meme above focus on one particular study for their proof that cannabis cures cancer – The Virginia Study (9).
This study, published 41 years ago now, reported the following in the abstract:
“Lewis lung adenocarcinoma growth was retarded by the oral administration of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, delta-8-tetrahydrocannabinol, and cannabinol (CBN), but not cannabidiol (CBD). Animals treated for 10 consecutive days with delta-9-THC, beginning the day after tumor implantation, demonstrated a dose-dependent action of retarded tumor growth. Mice treated for 20 consecutive days with delta-8-THC and CBN had reduced primary tumor size. CBD showed no inhibitory effect on tumor growth at 14, 21, or 28 days. Delta-9-THC, delta-8-THC, and CBN increased the mean survival time (36% at 100 mg/kg, 25% at 200 mg/kg, and 27% at 50 mg/kg;, respectively), whereas CBD did not. Delta-9-THC administered orally daily until death in doses of 50, 100, or 200 mg/kg did not increase the life-spans of (C57BL/6 X DBA/2) F (BDF) mice hosting the L1210 murine leukemia. However, delta-9-THC administered daily for 10 days significantly inhibited Friend leukemia virus-induced splenomegaly by 71% at 200 mg/kg as compared to 90.2% for actinomycin D.”
Also of note, from the conclusion of the study:
This study is touted far and wide by the cannabis cures cancer crowd as irrefutable proof that cannabis cures cancer and the government/Big Pharma has been suppressing it all this time. I’m going to spend a little bit of time in part 4 of this blog post talking about the illogical idea that there are cancer cures being suppressed by the government/Big Pharma; but for now I’d just like to point out the glaringly obvious: study in mice, not breast cancer, and very high doses needed to see the effects. Really, the No Master No Slave meme would be far better off referencing other studies that are more recent or have more relevance. So, what does the evidence have to say about breast cancer and cannabis?
When David Gorski analysed Arjun Walia’s web page: 20 Medical Studies That Prove Cannabis Can Cure Cancer (10); he identified 4 studies that were related to breast cancer. Gorski discusses the results of the studies and you can read about it here (6); but I’ll give you a spoiler. None were studies in humans, they are on cell lines or mouse models. Almost always, a purified compound such as cannabidiol (CBD) or delta-9-THC is used. One of the studies was not even on a cannabinoid found in the plant. Although some potential for anti-cancer activity has been identified, this is nowhere near enough evidence that cannabis cures breast cancer in an impure form and it is simply intellectually dishonest to claim so. Gorski concludes:
Other science bloggers have also written about cannabis and cancer, such as Skeptical Raptor (11), who includes some discussion of the nature of cancer and the fact that it is a very complex disease, with many, many different types and subtypes. Claiming that there is a one-cure-for-all-cancers should ring your skeptical bells if you know even the slightest bit about cancer. Robert Todd Carroll of The Skeptic’s Dictionary also discusses it here (12). The Ohara Tree blog has a post titled Cannabis, Cannabinoids and Medicine (13), outlining some of the studies done and also addressing the point that animals are thought to be more sensitive to cannabinoids. This highlights one of the reasons that animal studies are low on the hierarchy of scientific evidence (discussed by Skeptical Raptor here (14)).
The Compound Interest Rough Guide To Types of Scientific Evidence (15)
Cancer Research U.K. has also looked at many of the studies and written about the ongoing research into cannabis and cannabinoids (16):
I’ve tried to be as thorough as possible, but another place that keeps updated information on cannabis oil cancer cure claims and other alternative medicine cancer cure claims is The New Horsemen group on Facebook.
That brings me to the end of Part 1 of No Science, No Evidence, No Clue. In Part 2, I will address the claim “Alkalinity can cure cancer”.
*N.B. When I first began writing this article, this statement was found on Simpson’s website. However when I went back later to check the year of publication for the citation list, it had been removed and replaced with a statement about “superoils”. I found the transcript of his statement on another website, which I linked instead.
http://themindrestrained.com/2016/01/26/no-science-no-evidence-no-clue-part-1/
Claim 1: Cannabis Cures Cancer!
A big claim, no? Grouped in here is the statement: “Anyone interested should look up Rick Simpson Oil and Phoenix Tears. Also check out The Virginia Study and watch Run From the Cure”. So, what we have here is essentially a website that includes a sales pitch and a video, and a 30 year old study. I can hear the cries of the RSO defendants from here. “Oh, but Rick Simpson isn’t selling anything! He is telling people how to make the oil for free.” This may be true; however, it is also certainly true that he is making some money. A quick visit to his website will show you that he is selling books and there is also a button you can use to make a donation. Anyhow, regardless of whether Rick Simpson stands to profit from his statements or he is just a really nice guy (I actually do think it is more that he passionately believes in the power of cannabis oil; I don’t think he is out to make huge amounts of money – but please correct me if I am wrong), they are still fraught with intellectual dishonesty.
I would draw your attention to this statement (2).* An extensive list of claims about cannabis oil and accusations about modern medicine are made, interspersed with comments like “studies show” (no studies are actually given), and statements that show a lack of understanding of basic chemistry, such as this one:
Little resemblance? Synthetic (-)-trans-delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (dronabinol) is the same molecule as is found in the cannabis plant. There isn’t just a little resemblance, the chemical structures are exactly the same (3).“Myself and many others have gone through realms of so-called scientific studies which I found to be mostly double-talk and most of these studies were about synthetic THC which bears little resemblance to natural THC and its associated cannabinoids found in the hemp plant.”
Whilst it is very true that Marinol, (trademark name for synthetic dronabinol), may not have the same effectiveness as the plant due to the complex mixture of other cannabinoids and compounds present in the plant; this doesn’t change the fact that the two molecules are exactly the same. Certainly, research into the effectiveness of the different components of the cannabis plant is important, since dronabinol does have psychoactive side effects which not all patients will enjoy. There is a certainly a possibility that different compounds will have stronger anti cancer properties than others and synergistic effects could also be a factor to consider. Identification of active ingredients and their chemical properties or physiological effects is a positive step of research, not one to be written off as “so-called scientific studies”.
Another highlight of Rick’s statement is the point at which he goes full tin foil and begins to rave about fluoride, including this incredible observation:
“Did Hitler not use fluoride in his death camps to keep the inmates calm so they would not try to escape or revolt?”
Let me rearrange that sentence for you, Rick. Hitler did not use fluoride in his death camps to keep the inmates calm so they would not try to escape or revolt. This ridiculous, full Godwin statement, shows you the level of tin foil we are talking here. Even anti fluoride spokespeople have criticised the use of this urban myth (4) to discourage fluoridation, since they feel it damages their position. You don’t say!
I could go on and on about Rick Simpson, however, dismantling the entirety of his claims that cannabis oil is a panacea or miracle cure for not just cancer, but a host of other ailments, is a blog post in itself. For the time being, I will stick to the evidence on cannabis oil and breast cancer. Whilst still on the topic of Rick Simpson, I’d like to note that he doesn’t provide any evidence other than a bunch of testimonials – which is sweet, but widely known to be completely meaningless and often cherry picked. Anecdotes do not equal evidence nor a clinical trial do they make. While there are likewise testimonials of cancer survivors who opted for conventional treatment, there is actual scientific research to support their nice stories.
A final note on testimonials – it is important to be wary of testimonials from those who claim to have been cured from alternative methods, as many of these people have also undergone conventional treatment, either concurrently or previously. Let’s take the case of Stefanie LaRue, described here (5) by David Gorski on Science Based Medicine. LaRue underwent conventional treatment for 8 years before she started taking cannabis oil, yet still attributes her very positive survival time to cannabis oil, rather than the conventional treatments.
In any case, Simpson covers his bases by claiming that anyone who isn’t cured by his oil has been too damaged by conventional medicine and it is the treatment that kills them, as opposed to cancer (6). This negation of the possible benefits of chemotherapy is an intellectually dishonest approach and you can read about the tactics used by alternative medicine proponents to deter people from taking life saving or prolonging measures on Science Based
Medicine here (7). And another SBM article here (
, discusses specifically how a meta-analysis has shown that chemotherapy has cut breast cancer mortality by a third. This is a huge number of lives saved. I don’t want to downplay the side effects of chemotherapy; or over inflate its effectiveness, it’s absolutely true that not all cancers respond in the same way to chemotherapy, but this just highlights the importance of research and more individualised treatment regimes. I ask myself here, what mechanism would Simpson propose that all cancers would respond in the same way to cannabis oil, using the same dose of crude compound, with an unknown amount of active ingredients present?Apart from anecdotal evidence and the movie “Run From the Cure” (which I won’t address here; since movies aren’t exactly high on the list of scientific evidence); Rick Simpson and the meme above focus on one particular study for their proof that cannabis cures cancer – The Virginia Study (9).
This study, published 41 years ago now, reported the following in the abstract:
“Lewis lung adenocarcinoma growth was retarded by the oral administration of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, delta-8-tetrahydrocannabinol, and cannabinol (CBN), but not cannabidiol (CBD). Animals treated for 10 consecutive days with delta-9-THC, beginning the day after tumor implantation, demonstrated a dose-dependent action of retarded tumor growth. Mice treated for 20 consecutive days with delta-8-THC and CBN had reduced primary tumor size. CBD showed no inhibitory effect on tumor growth at 14, 21, or 28 days. Delta-9-THC, delta-8-THC, and CBN increased the mean survival time (36% at 100 mg/kg, 25% at 200 mg/kg, and 27% at 50 mg/kg;, respectively), whereas CBD did not. Delta-9-THC administered orally daily until death in doses of 50, 100, or 200 mg/kg did not increase the life-spans of (C57BL/6 X DBA/2) F (BDF) mice hosting the L1210 murine leukemia. However, delta-9-THC administered daily for 10 days significantly inhibited Friend leukemia virus-induced splenomegaly by 71% at 200 mg/kg as compared to 90.2% for actinomycin D.”
Also of note, from the conclusion of the study:
“The high doses of delta-9-THC (i.e., 200 mg/kg) are not tolerable in humans. On a body-surface basis, this would be about 17 mg/m(2) for mice. Extrapolation to a 60-kg man would require 1,020 mg for comparable dosage. The highest doses administered to man have been 250-300 mg.”
This study is touted far and wide by the cannabis cures cancer crowd as irrefutable proof that cannabis cures cancer and the government/Big Pharma has been suppressing it all this time. I’m going to spend a little bit of time in part 4 of this blog post talking about the illogical idea that there are cancer cures being suppressed by the government/Big Pharma; but for now I’d just like to point out the glaringly obvious: study in mice, not breast cancer, and very high doses needed to see the effects. Really, the No Master No Slave meme would be far better off referencing other studies that are more recent or have more relevance. So, what does the evidence have to say about breast cancer and cannabis?
When David Gorski analysed Arjun Walia’s web page: 20 Medical Studies That Prove Cannabis Can Cure Cancer (10); he identified 4 studies that were related to breast cancer. Gorski discusses the results of the studies and you can read about it here (6); but I’ll give you a spoiler. None were studies in humans, they are on cell lines or mouse models. Almost always, a purified compound such as cannabidiol (CBD) or delta-9-THC is used. One of the studies was not even on a cannabinoid found in the plant. Although some potential for anti-cancer activity has been identified, this is nowhere near enough evidence that cannabis cures breast cancer in an impure form and it is simply intellectually dishonest to claim so. Gorski concludes:
“Even in purified form, naturally-derived or synthetic cannabinoid agonists show relatively modest anti tumour activity in preclinical models, which means that they will have to be combined with existing chemotherapeutic regimens. If they do find their way into the routine clinical treatment of cancer, it will be through rigorous pharmacological studies and rigorous clinical trials, the latter of which, in particular, are painfully lacking…It’s not a lot, and suggests that there is not much interest in even synthetic cannabinoids as a treatment for cancer. After all, there are so many other promising avenues that a class of drugs that show the modest effects that the cannabinoids I’ve discussed do, just don’t excite researchers that much.”
Other science bloggers have also written about cannabis and cancer, such as Skeptical Raptor (11), who includes some discussion of the nature of cancer and the fact that it is a very complex disease, with many, many different types and subtypes. Claiming that there is a one-cure-for-all-cancers should ring your skeptical bells if you know even the slightest bit about cancer. Robert Todd Carroll of The Skeptic’s Dictionary also discusses it here (12). The Ohara Tree blog has a post titled Cannabis, Cannabinoids and Medicine (13), outlining some of the studies done and also addressing the point that animals are thought to be more sensitive to cannabinoids. This highlights one of the reasons that animal studies are low on the hierarchy of scientific evidence (discussed by Skeptical Raptor here (14)).
The Compound Interest Rough Guide To Types of Scientific Evidence (15)
Cancer Research U.K. has also looked at many of the studies and written about the ongoing research into cannabis and cannabinoids (16):
And finally, from the American Cancer Society (17):“We often see websites with long lists of scientific papers claiming that cannabis is a “cure” for various cancers. However, when we look at the detail of the data and the experimental detail of the research, it becomes clear that although they may be interesting and build evidence to show that cannabinoids may one day bring benefits for cancer patients, they are far from being a cure. . .It’s also important to think about what’s being claimed when people use the word “cure”. To most people, including us, this means that a cancer is completely treated and does not come back. When we look at the data in the papers listed below, none of them come close to showing these kinds of results. For the experiments involving cells grown in the lab, a proportion of the cells are killed or stop growing, but some of them carry on. Similarly in animal experiments, there is no data that shows a 100 per cent success rate for cannabinoids. For example, most mice treated with cannabinoids will still have tumours, although the cancers may be growing more slowly and spread less in some of them.”
For me, this is the biggest concern I have. While it is certainly a person’s right to choose if they wish to forgo conventional medicine in favour of an unproven treatment; it shouldn’t be because they have been given misleading or false information about that treatments potential. There has been some anti cancer activity shown in pre clinical models for certain cannabinoids, they may one day be used in treatment of certain cancers- but so far, cannabis has not been shown to cure cancer. And, when and if it does, you know what they will call it? Chemotherapy.“There have been some early clinical trials of cannabinoids in treating cancer in humans and more studies are planned. While the studies so far have shown that cannabinoids can be safe in treating cancer, they do not show that they help control or cure the disease. Relying on marijuana alone as treatment while avoiding or delaying conventional medical care for cancer may have serious health consequences.”
I’ve tried to be as thorough as possible, but another place that keeps updated information on cannabis oil cancer cure claims and other alternative medicine cancer cure claims is The New Horsemen group on Facebook.
That brings me to the end of Part 1 of No Science, No Evidence, No Clue. In Part 2, I will address the claim “Alkalinity can cure cancer”.
*N.B. When I first began writing this article, this statement was found on Simpson’s website. However when I went back later to check the year of publication for the citation list, it had been removed and replaced with a statement about “superoils”. I found the transcript of his statement on another website, which I linked instead.
http://themindrestrained.com/2016/01/26/no-science-no-evidence-no-clue-part-1/
Guest- Guest
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Victorismyhero Sun Jan 29, 2017 7:52 pm
Thorin wrote:Lord Foul wrote:
and failing, since the evidence is out there in bucket loads....
see what YOU are failing to grasp is I am dealing in verifiable facts here....hard evidence
re eddies post what you are doing is trying to argue the point by delegitimising and abusing the poster and trying to use the facts of the argument as ammunition in THAT....
I have said several time I dont think what eddie claims is acceptable fact, though by the same token there are instances of people seemingly being vastly improved if not cleared of cancer from the use of cannabis....
to ME that means, given that these instances are over and above what you would expect of mere "natural remission", which as we know does occur, albeit rarely, clearly, whilst NOT a cure (for the many reasons we have already discussed) SOMETHING is going on. merely dismissing this as "fantasy" is poor methodology even (or perhaps most importantly) if it is due to some sort of "placebo" effect
1) What evidence in bucket loads?
That shows you have not read the numerous threads and where she has argued claiming she knows better than GP's to then advised they are not needed anymore
Get your head out of the sand and stop defending bullshit.
that was in reply to your attempt at being clever ...not eddies posts
2) OMG, so now you take hearsay stories, that they have been cured by cannabis
That has just made me lose 90% respect for you, when there is no way to prove cannabis cured them
For fuck sake, I forgot you believe in druid crap, so its no surprise you take bullshit on faith
3) So are you seriously telling me people have been cured of cancer due to cannabis oil
Get a fucking grip of yourself
2 & 3 ...
I have said several time I dont think what eddie claims is acceptable fact, though by the same token there are instances of people seemingly being vastly improved even if not cleared of cancer from the use of cannabis....(added the blue "even" to make it clear to you
to ME that means, given that these instances are over and above what you would expect of mere "natural remission", which as we know does occur, albeit rarely, clearly, whilst NOT a cure (for the many reasons we have already discussed) SOMETHING is going on. merely dismissing this as "fantasy" is poor methodology even (or perhaps most importantly) if it is due to some sort of "placebo" effect [/color]
Victorismyhero- INTERNAL SECURITY DIRECTOR
- Posts : 11441
Join date : 2015-11-06
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Guest Sun Jan 29, 2017 7:54 pm
“Have you seen this video? This guy says cannabis cures cancer!”
There is a strong and persistent presence on the internet arguing that cannabis can cure cancer. For example, there are numerous videos and unverified anecdotes claiming that people have been completely cured of cancer with cannabis, hemp/cannabis oil or other cannabis derivatives.
YouTube videos are not scientific evidence.
Despite what the supporters of these sources may claim, videos and stories are not scientific evidence for the effectiveness of any cancer treatment. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence – YouTube videos are emphatically not scientific evidence, and we are not convinced by them.
Based on the arguments presented on these kinds of websites, it’s impossible to tell whether these patients have been ‘cured’ by cannabis or not. We know nothing about their medical diagnosis, stage of disease or outlook. We don’t know what other cancer treatments they had. We don’t know about the chemical composition of the treatment they got. And we only hear about the success stories – what about the people who have tried cannabis and not been cured? People who make these bold claims for cannabis only pick their best cases, without presenting the full picture.
This highlights the importance of publishing data from scientifically rigorous lab research and clinical trials. Firstly because conducting proper clinical studies enables researchers to prove that a prospective cancer treatment is safe and effective. And secondly because publishing this data allows doctors around the world to judge for themselves and use it for the benefit of their patients.
This is the standard to which all cancer treatments are held, and it’s one that cannabinoids should be held to too. Internet anecdotes and videos prove nothing and benefit no-one – we need reliable, scientific research, which (as discussed above) is exactly what is going on.
http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2012/07/25/cannabis-cannabinoids-and-cancer-the-evidence-so-far/#video
I also posted this to show how unscientific you are being making unfounded claims off hearsay
http://themindrestrained.com/2016/01/26/no-science-no-evidence-no-clue-part-1/
So Victor, as seen you are telling me to take hearsay, as Eddie demanded of me as fact.
Which renders your ability on this to be impartial as redundant.
Go argue religious faith as healing, if that is your evidence, with Eddie and Dibs, I am sure they will adore you for it.
Thank you for exposing, how badly you just made a mockery of science.
Guest- Guest
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Victorismyhero Sun Jan 29, 2017 8:04 pm
please show where what I posted...I.E this
I have said several time I dont think what eddie claims is acceptable fact, though by the same token there are instances of people seemingly being vastly improved even if not cleared of cancer from the use of cannabis....(added the blue "even" to make it clear to you)
to ME that means, given that these instances are over and above what you would expect of mere "natural remission", which as we know does occur, albeit rarely, clearly, whilst NOT a cure (for the many reasons we have already discussed) SOMETHING is going on. merely dismissing this as "fantasy" is poor methodology even (or perhaps most importantly) if it is due to some sort of "placebo" effect [/color]
is incompatible with the last two posts of yours....
I have said several time I dont think what eddie claims is acceptable fact, though by the same token there are instances of people seemingly being vastly improved even if not cleared of cancer from the use of cannabis....(added the blue "even" to make it clear to you)
to ME that means, given that these instances are over and above what you would expect of mere "natural remission", which as we know does occur, albeit rarely, clearly, whilst NOT a cure (for the many reasons we have already discussed) SOMETHING is going on. merely dismissing this as "fantasy" is poor methodology even (or perhaps most importantly) if it is due to some sort of "placebo" effect [/color]
is incompatible with the last two posts of yours....
Victorismyhero- INTERNAL SECURITY DIRECTOR
- Posts : 11441
Join date : 2015-11-06
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Guest Sun Jan 29, 2017 8:11 pm
You posted this nonsense, which is based on hearsay
That is hearsay, when there is no evidence at all, they have improved or had their cancer clear due to cannabis.
You just went off this for the above views you made, which is based as seen on your "belief" it has helped people of which you can offer nothing to substantiate any of this
Based on this poor scientific reason, I have no reason to even attempt to use your so called claim on psoriasis.
I was only going to do so out of respect, but as your reasoning is based on hearsay, asking me to take your claim seriously, after arguing nonsense based on hearsay.
Thanks but no thanks
Lord Foul wrote:I have said several time I dont think what eddie claims is acceptable fact, though by the same token there are instances of people seemingly being vastly improved if not cleared of cancer from the use of cannabis....
That is hearsay, when there is no evidence at all, they have improved or had their cancer clear due to cannabis.
You just went off this for the above views you made, which is based as seen on your "belief" it has helped people of which you can offer nothing to substantiate any of this
Based on this poor scientific reason, I have no reason to even attempt to use your so called claim on psoriasis.
I was only going to do so out of respect, but as your reasoning is based on hearsay, asking me to take your claim seriously, after arguing nonsense based on hearsay.
Thanks but no thanks
Guest- Guest
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Guest Sun Jan 29, 2017 8:27 pm
A final note on testimonials – it is important to be wary of testimonials from those who claim to have been cured from alternative methods, as many of these people have also undergone conventional treatment, either concurrently or previously. Let’s take the case of Stefanie LaRue, described here (5) by David Gorski on Science Based Medicine. LaRue underwent conventional treatment for 8 years before she started taking cannabis oil, yet still attributes her very positive survival time to cannabis oil, rather than the conventional treatments.
Guest- Guest
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Victorismyhero Sun Jan 29, 2017 8:29 pm
please note the addition I made to that sentence....Thorin wrote:You posted this nonsense, which is based on hearsayLord Foul wrote:I have said several time I dont think what eddie claims is acceptable fact, though by the same token there are instances of people seemingly being vastly improved if not cleared of cancer from the use of cannabis....
That is hearsay, when there is no evidence at all, they have improved or had their cancer clear due to cannabis.
You just went off this for the above views you made, which is based as seen on your "belief" it has helped people of which you can offer nothing to substantiate any of this
Based on this poor scientific reason, I have no reason to even attempt to use your so called claim on psoriasis.
I was only going to do so out of respect, but as your reasoning is based on hearsay, asking me to take your claim seriously, after arguing nonsense based on hearsay.
Thanks but no thanks
I have said several time I dont think what eddie claims is acceptable fact, though by the same token there are instances of people seemingly being vastly improved even if not cleared of cancer from the use of cannabis....(added the blue "even" to make it clear to you)
and note the highlighted in red parts
DO try to keep up.....
Victorismyhero- INTERNAL SECURITY DIRECTOR
- Posts : 11441
Join date : 2015-11-06
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Guest Sun Jan 29, 2017 8:37 pm
Lord Foul wrote:please note the addition I made to that sentence....Thorin wrote:You posted this nonsense, which is based on hearsay
That is hearsay, when there is no evidence at all, they have improved or had their cancer clear due to cannabis.
You just went off this for the above views you made, which is based as seen on your "belief" it has helped people of which you can offer nothing to substantiate any of this
Based on this poor scientific reason, I have no reason to even attempt to use your so called claim on psoriasis.
I was only going to do so out of respect, but as your reasoning is based on hearsay, asking me to take your claim seriously, after arguing nonsense based on hearsay.
Thanks but no thanks
I have said several time I dont think what eddie claims is acceptable fact, though by the same token there are instances of people seemingly being vastly improved even if not cleared of cancer from the use of cannabis....(added the blue "even" to make it clear to you)
and note the highlighted in red parts
DO try to keep up.....
Read the part I highlight, that is two claims, one seemingly improved and two if not cleared of cancer
Stop trying to poorly wiggle out of this
What is worse is you have now even encouraged both of them to believe in unfounded claims to cures with cannabis oil
Like I say, there is no evidence that cannabis has helped anyone improve or clear the cancer, so whether you want to attempt poorly to get out of your errors is irrelevant. Seemingly still implies, that it is a probable reason, which also eludes to you taking stories as gospel, when there is no evidence that cannabis treated the cancer.
At least I know your true intentions, is you have fallen "Foul" to their bullshit also sadly.
Guest- Guest
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Victorismyhero Sun Jan 29, 2017 8:41 pm
Thorin wrote:A final note on testimonials – it is important to be wary of testimonials from those who claim to have been cured from alternative methods, as many of these people have also undergone conventional treatment, either concurrently or previously. Let’s take the case of Stefanie LaRue, described here (5) by David Gorski on Science Based Medicine. LaRue underwent conventional treatment for 8 years before she started taking cannabis oil, yet still attributes her very positive survival time to cannabis oil, rather than the conventional treatments.
undoubtably true...NOW the question needs to be asked......
did the cannabis have ANY effect in her "cure"...(in other words did her "cure" happen quicker than was expected for instance...did the disease regress quicker AFTER she took cannabis than before....we dont know
were the doctors expecting remission or not? we dont know.)
either directly (by perhaps potentiating the effects of teh conventional treatment)
or
indirectly (by reducing side effects and the inevitable "collateral damage" from conventional treatment whether this be by reducing biochemical changes (cannabis is known to reduce oxidative stress for instance, and a good appetite helps a LOT...) OR and this is perhaps even more important if you think about it...by improving her "outlook" since it is fairly well established by now that people with a positive outlook survive better than those with a miserable outlook)
how the hell you design a study to sort THAT out escapes me but since this is only one example amongst many
Victorismyhero- INTERNAL SECURITY DIRECTOR
- Posts : 11441
Join date : 2015-11-06
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Guest Sun Jan 29, 2017 8:45 pm
Lord Foul wrote:Thorin wrote:A final note on testimonials – it is important to be wary of testimonials from those who claim to have been cured from alternative methods, as many of these people have also undergone conventional treatment, either concurrently or previously. Let’s take the case of Stefanie LaRue, described here (5) by David Gorski on Science Based Medicine. LaRue underwent conventional treatment for 8 years before she started taking cannabis oil, yet still attributes her very positive survival time to cannabis oil, rather than the conventional treatments.
undoubtably true...NOW the question needs to be asked......
did the cannabis have ANY effect in her "cure"...(in other words did her "cure" happen quicker than was expected for instance...did the disease regress quicker AFTER she took cannabis than before....we dont know
were the doctors expecting remission or not? we dont know.)
either directly (by perhaps potentiating the effects of teh conventional treatment)
or
indirectly (by reducing side effects and the inevitable "collateral damage" from conventional treatment whether this be by reducing biochemical changes (cannabis is known to reduce oxidative stress for instance, and a good appetite helps a LOT...) OR and this is perhaps even more important if you think about it...by improving her "outlook" since it is fairly well established by now that people with a positive outlook survive better than those with a miserable outlook)
how the hell you design a study to sort THAT out escapes me but since this is only one example amongst many
I gave you a link, it may help reading before you post
Here is just a part from the link, of which i have posted bellow and was on the post your answered, with a link funnily enough on the word "here"
Now here’s the thing. As a patient with stage IV disease, LaRue did really well for eight years. It’s hard to find a good detailed description of what happened between November 2005 (when she was diagnosed with breast cancer) and 2013, but she didn’t start using cannabis oil until 2013, which means that conventional oncology is what got her through nearly eight out of the nine and a half years she’s survived with her stage IV cancer. It’s important to remember that when looking at a lot of the articles about LaRue, because before 2013, although she had gone all in for “integrative oncology,” she hadn’t yet discovered cannabis and was still being treated with mostly conventional medicine. So, between 2006, when she finished her initial treatment, and at least September 2013, when she posted a series of images to Instagram of her hospitalization for thoracoscopic surgery, conventional medicine is what kept LaRue alive. So when Sonja Renea of the Medical Jane website writes that “Stefanie LaRue was 30 years old when she was diagnosed with Stage 4 Metastatic Breast Cancer and given the dismal prognosis of less than a year to live” and follows it up with, “That was nine years ago,” she is being deceptive.
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/medical-marijuana-as-the-new-herbalism-part-3-a-cannabis-cures-cancer-testimonial/
Guest- Guest
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Victorismyhero Sun Jan 29, 2017 8:58 pm
Thorin wrote:Lord Foul wrote:please note the addition I made to that sentence....Thorin wrote:You posted this nonsense, which is based on hearsay
That is hearsay, when there is no evidence at all, they have improved or had their cancer clear due to cannabis.
You just went off this for the above views you made, which is based as seen on your "belief" it has helped people of which you can offer nothing to substantiate any of this
Based on this poor scientific reason, I have no reason to even attempt to use your so called claim on psoriasis.
I was only going to do so out of respect, but as your reasoning is based on hearsay, asking me to take your claim seriously, after arguing nonsense based on hearsay.
Thanks but no thanks
I have said several time I dont think what eddie claims is acceptable fact, though by the same token there are instances of people seemingly being vastly improved even if not cleared of cancer from the use of cannabis....(added the blue "even" to make it clear to you)
and note the highlighted in red parts
DO try to keep up.....
Read the part I highlight, that is two claims, one seemingly improved and two if not cleared of cancer
nope that is one statement "seemingly improved even if not cleared....."
seems you are having a problem with english again......
lets try re arranging it
not cleared but seemingly improved.....
how about that
they are both the same statement
so...."I have said several time I dont think what eddie claims is acceptable fact, though by the same token there are instances of people not cleared of cancer but seemingly improved from the use of cannabis....
Stop trying to poorly wiggle out of this
What is worse is you have now even encouraged both of them to believe in unfounded claims to cures with cannabis oil
some how I doubt that
Like I say, there is no evidence that cannabis has helped anyone improve or clear the cancer, so whether you want to attempt poorly to get out of your errors is irrelevant. Seemingly still implies, that it is a probable reason, which also eludes to you taking stories as gospel, when there is no evidence that cannabis treated the cancer.
nor is there evidence that it didnt...and thus the conundrum remains.....
and your reasoning thus..... "Seemingly still implies, that it is a probable reason" is flawed...seemingly in reality implies that it is a possible reason. how much weight you apply to that possibility is down to what YOU personally can deduce for yourself.
the fact remains
personally, given the sheer weight of anecdotal evidence, combined with several studies that show the existance of some beneficial effects (even IF its only "the munchies") would I take cannabis ...alongside conventional treatment....YES I DAMN WELL WOULD........even if it only added 0.5% extra chance....any help would be a good thing...and at the end of the day...if it did nothing whatsoever....at least I'd die "stoned"
oh and on a slightly different aspect....NO_ONE is in any doubt that it is an EXcellent pain killer for use in refractory pain.....so again just another side issue of not inconsiderable concern....
At least I know your true intentions, is you have fallen "Foul" to their bullshit also sadly.[/color][/color]
Victorismyhero- INTERNAL SECURITY DIRECTOR
- Posts : 11441
Join date : 2015-11-06
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Victorismyhero Sun Jan 29, 2017 9:05 pm
finally ....bloody script delimiters [.....]
Victorismyhero- INTERNAL SECURITY DIRECTOR
- Posts : 11441
Join date : 2015-11-06
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Guest Sun Jan 29, 2017 9:09 pm
1) I have no problem reading English
seemingly
so as to give the impression of having a certain quality; apparently.
Conclusive
So now we are done proving you buy in to bullshit
As seemingly implies this was the cause that helped
You say for me to understand English and you jumbled our posts as one.
I suggest you go to spec-savers
I could not give a crap whether you would take cannabis, I have smoked it many times in the past, so what? What is needed is evidence, of which you can produce zero.
I think cannabis is excellent for many mental health problems, but as seen people are peddling this as a cure. When they then play of the fear of cancer patients to stop medical treatment, this is negligence and dangerous, also with playing with their lives. This is coming from people like Dibs and Eddie, with little to no medical understanding. They are so convinced by watching videos, and take on faith alone. If they advise people it does not hurt to take alongside their medical treatment? No problem, but often people are convinced to stop chemo etc from these same people, because they are wrongly convinced to try these scam claims to cure and then end up dying.
I hope you never have to watch and be frustrated, because your own brother had succumbed to bullshit from idiots, and see him die. Then, you might even then begin to understand how I feel, when I see two naive women, peddle nonsense, which can endanger lives and fail to see that they are.
seemingly
so as to give the impression of having a certain quality; apparently.
Conclusive
So now we are done proving you buy in to bullshit
As seemingly implies this was the cause that helped
You say for me to understand English and you jumbled our posts as one.
I suggest you go to spec-savers
I could not give a crap whether you would take cannabis, I have smoked it many times in the past, so what? What is needed is evidence, of which you can produce zero.
I think cannabis is excellent for many mental health problems, but as seen people are peddling this as a cure. When they then play of the fear of cancer patients to stop medical treatment, this is negligence and dangerous, also with playing with their lives. This is coming from people like Dibs and Eddie, with little to no medical understanding. They are so convinced by watching videos, and take on faith alone. If they advise people it does not hurt to take alongside their medical treatment? No problem, but often people are convinced to stop chemo etc from these same people, because they are wrongly convinced to try these scam claims to cure and then end up dying.
I hope you never have to watch and be frustrated, because your own brother had succumbed to bullshit from idiots, and see him die. Then, you might even then begin to understand how I feel, when I see two naive women, peddle nonsense, which can endanger lives and fail to see that they are.
Guest- Guest
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Victorismyhero Sun Jan 29, 2017 9:28 pm
Thorin wrote:1) I have no problem reading English
seemingly
so as to give the impression of having a certain quality; apparently.
exactly......I dont see where that has any different "meaning" to what I posted
Conclusive
whats "conclusive"...certainly "seemingly" isnt "conclusive"
So now we are done proving you buy in to bullshit
As seemingly implies this was the cause that helped
Not to my or any one I have talked to it doesnt.....it means it is a POSSIBLE cause (just how possible is of course the essence of the case.)
You say for me to understand English and you jumbled our posts as one.
nowt to do with english that....I rubbed out one too many [color*]statements (and replaced it in the wrong place...damn I hate "script"
I suggest you go to spec-savers
pfffft...dont remind me...my diabetic eye check is due......
I could not give a crap whether you would take cannabis, I have smoked it many times in the past, so what? What is needed is evidence, of which you can produce zero.
I think cannabis is excellent for many mental health problems, but as seen people are peddling this as a cure. When they then play of the fear of cancer patients to stop medical treatment, this is negligence and dangerous, also with playing with their lives. This is coming from people like Dibs and Eddie, with little to no medical understanding. They are so convinced by watching videos, and take on faith alone. If they advise people it does not hurt to take alongside their medical treatment? No problem, but often people are convinced to stop chemo etc from these same people, because they are wrongly convinced to try these scam claims to cure and then end up dying.
I hope you never have to watch and be frustrated, because your own brother had succumbed to bullshit from idiots, and see him die. Then, you might even then begin to understand how I feel, when I see two naive women, peddle nonsense, which can endanger lives and fail to see that they are.
Victorismyhero- INTERNAL SECURITY DIRECTOR
- Posts : 11441
Join date : 2015-11-06
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Guest Sun Jan 29, 2017 9:36 pm
Holy crap on a cracker
You just did it again
You are saying its a possible cause, with zero evidence. To be a possible cause, requires at least some evidence of which you only have hearsay stories, nothing substantiated. You might as well say its possible that Jesus rose from the dead on that bases, when again there is zero evidence he did.
You are just rehashing the same thing but still failing to provide any evidence other than some cancer cells being killed in a dish. I mean anyone can claim anything is possible, but "we" deal in evidence.
I give up, the subject pisses me off no end and I will continue to ridicule anyone that posts up bullshit, that can dangerously effect peoples lives
Goodnight Victor
You just did it again
You are saying its a possible cause, with zero evidence. To be a possible cause, requires at least some evidence of which you only have hearsay stories, nothing substantiated. You might as well say its possible that Jesus rose from the dead on that bases, when again there is zero evidence he did.
You are just rehashing the same thing but still failing to provide any evidence other than some cancer cells being killed in a dish. I mean anyone can claim anything is possible, but "we" deal in evidence.
I give up, the subject pisses me off no end and I will continue to ridicule anyone that posts up bullshit, that can dangerously effect peoples lives
Goodnight Victor
Guest- Guest
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Victorismyhero Sun Jan 29, 2017 10:08 pm
Thorin wrote:Holy crap on a cracker
You just did it again
You are saying its a possible cause, with zero evidence. To be a possible cause, requires at least some evidence of which you only have hearsay stories, nothing substantiated.
]color=#ff0000]and thats the wonderful thing about "posibilities"......once they are substantiated they become certainties...and if refuted (evidence ALSO required) they dissappear in a puff of smoke"
You might as well say its possible that Jesus rose from the dead on that bases, when again there is zero evidence he did.
theres damn all evidence that he didnt too.....
its also possible that
aliens exist
the spirit "otherworld" exists
Untill man landed there it was "possible" that the moon was indeed made of "green cheese" for all anyone knew....
It is indeed "possible" that the abrahamic god exists
it is also possible that he/she IS indeed a kindly old loving sort of chap/ess....and we merely misunderstand him/her (imagine that ...god, the misunderstood deity)
etc etc etc
now how much weight you give the various possibilities is down to each and every one of us, and as you rightly say no one should influence another in that process. The PROBLEM is .....some folks are too easily convinced by evidence that isnt really evidence as such...and lack the wherewithall to check such proffered evidence, and then theres the "dad" syndrome...wherby my daughter would sooner beleive her dumb friends (and man ARE THEY DUMB...of the "we didnt vote in the brexit vote cos it was boring" dumb) than me in everything from budgeting to car maintenence..
a Possibility, requires evidence BOTH ways ...either in direct proof of OR in direct refutation of...ALL you can do with a possibility is weigh up its "chances" (probabilty) of being so...
You are just rehashing the same thing but still failing to provide any evidence other than some cancer cells being killed in a dish. I mean anyone can claim anything is possible, but "we" deal in evidence.
thats another matter...YOU may deal in "evidence" and nothing else.....90% of the rest of the world doesnt...they deal in evidence along with their own "weighted" possibilities...share dealing for instance...is only partially evidence based...the rest is weighted possibilities with highly possible scenarios carrying less risk but lower reward
and low possibility scenarios (generally) carrying high risk with potentially much higher rewards....
I give up, the subject pisses me off no end and I will continue to ridicule anyone that posts up bullshit, that can dangerously effect peoples lives
you would do better using considered argument and well produced refutements...just sayin
Goodnight Victor
Victorismyhero- INTERNAL SECURITY DIRECTOR
- Posts : 11441
Join date : 2015-11-06
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Guest Sun Jan 29, 2017 10:15 pm
90%?
Yet more balderdash.
Again, a possibilities relies on evidence, not hearsay
Its also not possible Jesus rose from the dead, as no evidence points to anyone raising from the dead
Like I said, anyone can claim something is possible, that does not excuse you from providing evidence to back your claim
Something of which you have fail to do throughout
Possible is speculative, its not something substantiated, which you can say just about the same with anything
Either provide evidence of cannabis curing cancer in people, or stop wasting my time with poor attempts on the play of words
I am not going to tolerate any crap like that.
Tell 90% doctors and scientist. whether they deal in evidence or not
What a crock that was from you.
Now you really have pissed me off with that load of drivel, knowing how much I am fed up of people making poor claims on this, again you stupidly give them credence
What is worse you fail to see that you do
And also no, evidence is not needed to disprove something you cannot prove yourself exist
That is just dumb to say the least
So to claim that Jesus rose from the dead requires evidence. I dont need to disprove something, that has not been proven
So a possibility does not require both ways, the onus is on the claimant.
You claim its possible than cannabis cures cancer in people
You have failed to prove any evidence of this
It thus does not require me to do anything other than point out your reasoning is wrong
Never heard so much bullshit from you
Now I have read enough of your crap, please continue two defend two brainwashed sheep, I will though ridicule their piss poor claims, that endanger peoples lives.
Yet more balderdash.
Again, a possibilities relies on evidence, not hearsay
Its also not possible Jesus rose from the dead, as no evidence points to anyone raising from the dead
Like I said, anyone can claim something is possible, that does not excuse you from providing evidence to back your claim
Something of which you have fail to do throughout
Possible is speculative, its not something substantiated, which you can say just about the same with anything
Either provide evidence of cannabis curing cancer in people, or stop wasting my time with poor attempts on the play of words
I am not going to tolerate any crap like that.
Tell 90% doctors and scientist. whether they deal in evidence or not
What a crock that was from you.
Now you really have pissed me off with that load of drivel, knowing how much I am fed up of people making poor claims on this, again you stupidly give them credence
What is worse you fail to see that you do
And also no, evidence is not needed to disprove something you cannot prove yourself exist
That is just dumb to say the least
So to claim that Jesus rose from the dead requires evidence. I dont need to disprove something, that has not been proven
So a possibility does not require both ways, the onus is on the claimant.
You claim its possible than cannabis cures cancer in people
You have failed to prove any evidence of this
It thus does not require me to do anything other than point out your reasoning is wrong
Never heard so much bullshit from you
Now I have read enough of your crap, please continue two defend two brainwashed sheep, I will though ridicule their piss poor claims, that endanger peoples lives.
Guest- Guest
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Guest Sun Jan 29, 2017 10:44 pm
Exceptional claims
See the main article on this topic: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Indeed, if one is making an exceptionally bold claim (such as with alternative medicine that claims miraculous cures) then exceptional evidence is expected in its support.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof
Let me know when you have some proof.
Night
See the main article on this topic: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Indeed, if one is making an exceptionally bold claim (such as with alternative medicine that claims miraculous cures) then exceptional evidence is expected in its support.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof
Let me know when you have some proof.
Night
Guest- Guest
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Victorismyhero Sun Jan 29, 2017 11:01 pm
Thorin wrote:90%?
Yet more balderdash.
Again, a possibilities relies on evidence, not hearsay
Its also not possible Jesus rose from the dead, as no evidence points to anyone raising from the dead
trite but true....absence of evidence is NOT evidence of abscence...strewth you should know enough about philosophy to know that its true that you cannot prove the abscence or non existance of something...merely that its probability of existance is vanishingly small....
Like I said, anyone can claim something is possible, that does not excuse you from providing evidence to back your claim
******ok ...so......claim.....it is possible that my computer and ALL elecrical things run on smoke...evidence ...when the smoke comes out they stop working....******
Something of which you have fail to do throughout
Possible is speculative, its not something substantiated, which you can say just about the same with anything
Either provide evidence of cannabis curing cancer in people, or stop wasting my time with poor attempts on the play of words
******there are reams of evidence that it does so....******
I am not going to tolerate any crap like that.
Tell 90% doctors and scientist. whether they deal in evidence or not
of course they do...but they also deal in possibilities....and probabilities...(and sometimes get these wrong too....)
What a crock that was from you.
Now you really have pissed me off with that load of drivel, knowing how much I am fed up of people making poor claims on this, again you stupidly give them credence
What is worse you fail to see that you do
And also no, evidence is not needed to disprove something you cannot prove yourself exist
the evidence I exist resides in your blood pressure matey.....
That is just dumb to say the least
So to claim that Jesus rose from the dead requires evidence. I dont need to disprove something, that has not been proven
So a possibility does not require both ways, the onus is on the claimant.
You claim its possible than cannabis cures cancer in people
You have failed to prove any evidence of this
again actually I have ...but thats kinda the point
It thus does not require me to do anything other than point out your reasoning is wrong
Never heard so much bullshit from you
Now I have read enough of your crap, please continue two defend two brainwashed sheep, I will though ridicule their piss poor claims, that endanger peoples lives.
Now you see....the problem is.....
you are asking for "evidence"...of which there is loads.....all of varying reliability, possibility and probability.....
what you SHOULD have asked for is PROOF of evidence
hence the statements marked ******....................******
see lets take a court case where there are a couple of eye witnesses....
are they "evidence" or "Proof"
well they are certainly evidence...and in times past would have been considered proof
nowadays they would likely only be "proof" in a civil action as opposed to a criminal action (where the burden of proof is higher)
IF you had asked me have I PROOF that cannabis cures cancer I would have had to hold my hand up and say no...I dont...all I have is some evidence of variable reliability and probability, which indicates that cannabis MAY have a beneficial action in some cancer cases, for unknown and unproven reasons.
I also have good reason to beleive that it is generally harmless, and does not interfere with most conventional cancer treatments.
therfore WHILST i WOULD NEVER RECOMEND ANYONE SUBSTITUTE CANNABIS FOR CONVENTIONAL TREATMENT, AND, I WOULD SAY, NEITHER SHOULD ANYONE ELSE, ESPECIALLY THOSE NOT QUALIFIED IN SUCH MATTERS.....If you wish to use it to give you a "leg up"...go for it....what have you to lose.
ON the other hand of course there are ALSO those crazy "alternative" cures which not only have a much lower probability of doing any good, and for which evidence, let alone proof is even less well established (and thus much less probable), but are positively in and of themselves dangerous. (and are positively refuteable becasue they rely on creating "impossible " conditions within the human body. i.e I can prove they are false)
Victorismyhero- INTERNAL SECURITY DIRECTOR
- Posts : 11441
Join date : 2015-11-06
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Guest Sun Jan 29, 2017 11:07 pm
So you have admitted you have no evidence even though you attempted to bore me to death with drivel.
You claimed it seemingly was possible cannabis has helped clear cancer in people
There is not reams of evidence, there is only hearsay
Exceptional claims
See the main article on this topic: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Indeed, if one is making an exceptionally bold claim (such as with alternative medicine that claims miraculous cures) then exceptional evidence is expected in its support.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof
Put up your evidence or shut up
That is the only options you have
You claimed it seemingly was possible cannabis has helped clear cancer in people
There is not reams of evidence, there is only hearsay
Exceptional claims
See the main article on this topic: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Indeed, if one is making an exceptionally bold claim (such as with alternative medicine that claims miraculous cures) then exceptional evidence is expected in its support.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof
Put up your evidence or shut up
That is the only options you have
Guest- Guest
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Victorismyhero Sun Jan 29, 2017 11:10 pm
Thorin wrote:Exceptional claims
See the main article on this topic: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Indeed, if one is making an exceptionally bold claim (such as with alternative medicine that claims miraculous cures) then exceptional evidence is expected in its support.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof
Let me know when you have some proof.
Night
where's your null hypothesis then?
Victorismyhero- INTERNAL SECURITY DIRECTOR
- Posts : 11441
Join date : 2015-11-06
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Guest Sun Jan 29, 2017 11:12 pm
Lord Foul wrote:Thorin wrote:Exceptional claims
See the main article on this topic: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Indeed, if one is making an exceptionally bold claim (such as with alternative medicine that claims miraculous cures) then exceptional evidence is expected in its support.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof
Let me know when you have some proof.
Night
where's your null hypothesis then?
I am not making the claims
That is you, claiming cannabis has helped clear cancer in people
You then even more stupidly, stated there is reams of evidence, which is of course bollocks
Put up the evidence or shut up
Last chance
Guest- Guest
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Victorismyhero Sun Jan 29, 2017 11:26 pm
Thorin wrote:So you have admitted you have no evidence even though you attempted to bore me to death with drivel.
You claimed it seemingly was possible cannabis has helped clear cancer in people
There is not reams of evidence, there is only hearsay
nope.....
there are reams of evidence (of varing reliability/probability)
I have admitted that i have no "PROOF"
a BIG difference......
Exceptional claims
See the main article on this topic: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Indeed, if one is making an exceptionally bold claim (such as with alternative medicine that claims miraculous cures) then exceptional evidence is expected in its support.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof
Put up your evidence or shut up
That is the only options you have
Victorismyhero- INTERNAL SECURITY DIRECTOR
- Posts : 11441
Join date : 2015-11-06
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Victorismyhero Sun Jan 29, 2017 11:26 pm
oh and dont get round to that demanding stage again..it doesnt wash and doesnt do you credit....
Victorismyhero- INTERNAL SECURITY DIRECTOR
- Posts : 11441
Join date : 2015-11-06
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Guest Sun Jan 29, 2017 11:31 pm
Lord Foul wrote:Thorin wrote:So you have admitted you have no evidence even though you attempted to bore me to death with drivel.
You claimed it seemingly was possible cannabis has helped clear cancer in people
There is not reams of evidence, there is only hearsay
nope.....
there are reams of evidence (of varing reliability/probability)
I have admitted that i have no "PROOF"
a BIG difference......
Exceptional claims
See the main article on this topic: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Indeed, if one is making an exceptionally bold claim (such as with alternative medicine that claims miraculous cures) then exceptional evidence is expected in its support.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof
Put up your evidence or shut up
That is the only options you have
So you basically wasted everyone's time with like I said an unfounded claim
Guessing based off stories, of which you are doing that cannabis may have helped cure their cancer fails many simple tests, of which you know why your reasoning is so poor here. You know for a start, you have to investigate each and every claim, their medical history, what treatments they have had and their medical records. Even then you are left with guessing based on a balance of risk
I will demand, and you failed
Completely failed.
One thing I wont stand for is people giving credence to irresponsible people
You attempted to do that, so you had to be brought down with them
Now please continue to to pamper the sheep
Laters
Guest- Guest
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Victorismyhero Sun Jan 29, 2017 11:45 pm
you will demand ...and I'll igonore...
and I did nothing of the sort....
and you STILL dont understand the difference between evidence and proof do you.....
ah well you have "self declared " yourself the winner again.....enjoy.....
and I did nothing of the sort....
and you STILL dont understand the difference between evidence and proof do you.....
ah well you have "self declared " yourself the winner again.....enjoy.....
Victorismyhero- INTERNAL SECURITY DIRECTOR
- Posts : 11441
Join date : 2015-11-06
Re: Elephant protein destroys human cancer cells, Utah researchers say
by Guest Mon Jan 30, 2017 3:58 am
Lord Foul wrote:you will demand ...and I'll igonore...
and I did nothing of the sort....
and you STILL dont understand the difference between evidence and proof do you.....
ah well you have "self declared " yourself the winner again.....enjoy.....
Really, because you claim again.?
You had your chance, you instead attempted to bore me with rubbish and offered no evidence
No person with a basic understanding of science would back your claims here, but like I said, pander to the sheep.
Nothing to do with winning, you have just tried to poorly claim a load of rubbish, without evidence, and its off the bases of hearsay claims.
Like I said, if they continue to be irresponsible as you are being in your claims, dont be surprised if people ridicule you.
Despite all our modern medical advances, there is still no cure for cancer. But that hasn’t stopped the rumor mill. You can find a wealth of “official” reports and Internet postings that advertise “conclusive results” that marijuana effectively cures cancer. Unfortunately, those claims aren’t true.
One recent post claims there are twenty studies out there proving weed cures cancer. The studies are real, but the conclusions drawn from them are not.
According to the National Cancer Institute, only one human study has ever returned evidence that shows marijuana’s potential therapeutic effects against cancer. That single study indicates a few compounds extracted from cannabis may have biological effects that could be useful for treating cancer. For example, some of the compounds may reduce the growth rate of certain tumor cells.
Marijuana is not a cure for cancer. It does, however, relieve a number of side effects caused by chemotherapy and, in certain situations, it even reduces symptoms of the disease itself. Cancer patients have found that marijuana is useful for reducing pain, restoring appetite, and even reducing certain forms of inflammation.
That is why I know your claims to evidence are a sham victor,. as its based on you believing the testimony of people, which is nothing more than a matter of faith
Guest- Guest
Sponsored content
Page 3 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Similar topics» Human Cells Reprogrammed To Create Insulin
» Protein linked to Alzheimer's could be spread during surgery, say researchers
» Should Human Stem Cells Be Used To Make Partly Human Chimeras?
» Soursop Destroys Cancer Cells, According To Studies
» ISRAELI RESEARCHERS DISCOVER HOW TO BOOST NATURAL CANCER-KILING CELLS
» Protein linked to Alzheimer's could be spread during surgery, say researchers
» Should Human Stem Cells Be Used To Make Partly Human Chimeras?
» Soursop Destroys Cancer Cells, According To Studies
» ISRAELI RESEARCHERS DISCOVER HOW TO BOOST NATURAL CANCER-KILING CELLS
Page 3 of 3
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
» TOTAL MADNESS Great British Railway Journeys among shows flagged by counter terror scheme ‘for encouraging far-right sympathies
» Interesting COVID figures
» HAPPY CHRISTMAS.
» The Fight Over Climate Change is Over (The Greenies Won!)
» Trump supporter murders wife, kills family dog, shoots daughter
» Quill
» Algerian Woman under investigation for torture and murder of French girl, 12, whose body was found in plastic case in Paris
» Wind turbines cool down the Earth (edited with better video link)
» Saying goodbye to our Queen.
» PHEW.
» And here's some more enrichment...
» John F Kennedy Assassination
» Where is everyone lately...?
» London violence over the weekend...
» Why should anyone believe anything that Mo Farah says...!?
» Liverpool Labour defends mayor role poll after turnout was only 3% and they say they will push ahead with the option that was least preferred!!!
» Labour leader Keir Stammer can't answer the simple question of whether a woman has a penis or not...
» More evidence of remoaners still trying to overturn Brexit... and this is a conservative MP who should be drummed out of the party and out of parliament!
» R Kelly 30 years, Ghislaine Maxwell 20 years... but here in UK...