Slashdot Mirror

While commercially available cannabis compounds are FDA-approved to reduce cancer treatmentâ"related side effects such as nausea and vomiting and to improve appetite, no clinical trials have shown that cannabis products can treat cancer.

Claims that cannabis oil cures cancer are anecdotal and largely unsupportable, based on scant research done in mice and in labs. Side effects can include memory and attention loss. Perhaps most important, there is evidence that cannabis compounds may inhibit enzymes that patients need to metabolize other anticancer drugs, thereby increasing their toxicity or reducing their effectiveness.

The Truth behind Three Natural Cancer ''Cures''

First link after googling 'watson medical detection':

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/ar...

"Wellpoint's Samuel Nessbaum has claimed that, in tests, Watson's successful diagnosis rate for lung cancer is 90 percent, compared to 50 percent for human doctors."

Second link, where it works every day:

https://www.mskcc.org/about/in...

Arnica is something I have used in treating broken ribs. I have had broken ribs 4 times and each time it takes about 5-6 weeks for the pain to completely subside. It takes about 3 weeks for the bruising from the bleeding to go away.
I used Arnica after a heavy board bound up and spun back out of my table saw, knocking me to the ground, and caving in my ribs. My anectote is that, in this instance, I used topical Arnica Cream and Arnica tablets. This one bled the most and yet the bruising went away after about a week. By 2 weeks I could no longer feel the pain, when I moved or breathed. It was quite astonishing. Far cheaper than the 8k the hospital charged for the ER and CT to make sure my organs weren't leaking.

Sloane Kettering has this nice link.
http://www.mskcc.org/cancer-ca...

"Sesquiterpene lactones in arnica have anti-inflammatory properties and inhibit binding of transcription factors AP-1 and NF-B to DNA (14). Using a tincture prepared from arnica flowers, this led to suppressed collagenase-1 (MMP1) and interstitial collagenase-13 (MMP13) mRNA levels in human articular chondrocytes in vitro (14). MMP13 and MMP1 enzymes are thought to play a significant role in cartilage and joint destruction and inflammation seen in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. Both arnica tinctures and sesquiterpene lactones were found to suppress NF-B activation and IL-12 production in dendritic cells at high concentrations, but can also have immunostimulatory effects when diluted (2). Another study found that sesquiterpene lactones inhibit platelet function by interacting with platelet sulfhydryl groups, probably associated with reduced phospholipase A2 activity (12). In addition to sesquiterpene lactones, the allergenic potential of arnica may be partly due to other allergens such as polyacetylenes (15)."

I have also read a double blind research paper from an Orthopedic group in South Africa which showed great benefit in using Arnica in post surgery of ankle patients.

I think Arnica is a homeopathic remedy which would also make me skeptical of anyone claiming it is "Completely Useless in Treating medical Conditions"
Perhaps they are referring to other homeopathics which they think are useless, but it seems there may be a few which are "Useful".

Though I imagine that the original poster has exhausted all his standard treatment options, it might also be worth mentioning the sort of 'precision medicine' that major cancer centres like Sloan-Kettering are now starting to do. The idea is to take a sample of the tumour and sequence all the genes in which mutations might make the cancer responsive to some specific treatment (perhaps a drug that would not normally be considered for that type of tumour). This can now be done very rapidly. If one of the genes comes up as positive for an 'actionable' mutation, then in some circumstances the patient may be offered a treatment that is intended to exploit the damaged gene to target the tumour (e.g., as part of a new type of clinical trial that runs across cancers of different types where individual cases happen to have mutations in the same gene). Further details, including contact information, are here:

http://www.mskcc.org/blog/new-...

My best wishes to the poster and his family at this very difficult time.

Just because people are doing it doesn't make it safe, it just makes them ignorant.

There is no evidence that what they are doing is dangerous. There have been thousands of cases of thyroid cancer caused by radiation from Chernobyl. But all of those surplus cancers occurred in people that were exposed to I-131 in the first few weeks after the accident. I-131 is not a significant ongoing risk. There are no other known surplus cancers. So if the people are "ignorant", please cite the information they should be aware of.

That was definitely not my only source, just the summary of it. I'm curious where you found that "the U.S. government itself claimed that those treatments were likely effective against cancer." The patent application (here) for the synthesis of what he calls A-10 only says he claims (or claims to have shown) that it is effective against cancer. And per the National Cancer Institute here:"No randomized, controlled trials showing the effectiveness of antineoplastons have been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. " and "Nonrandomized clinical trials are ongoing at Dr. Burzynski’s clinic to study the effect of antineoplastons on cancer. (See Question 6.)" Full list of answers to questions here, including a list of the fairly nasty side effects (and, BTW, if you are going to indirectly cite a source you really should have seen these things for yourself.) In other words, no proper studies have ever been performed (there where several, such as at the Mayo Clinic, one of the most respected cancer treatment centers in America: it was canceled due to ethical concerns because the treatment showed poor results after two years. Zero regressions, several deaths, and severe side effects. The Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center has a good summary here).

On the other hand, the only sources I could find praising antineoplastons where sites like this (here specifically). That was the second site for "antineoplastons" on Google too. And in any cases which they say it has been shown to work, no source is referenced. The only outside link on the blurb was to the Burzynski clinic itself. No scientific cancer institute, and especially not the National Cancer Institute, has said antineoplastons work.

"Ongoing studies" is completely meaningless. I could register a "study" on the effects of gasoline on fire. That wouldn't give my work any scientific credibility, except among ignorant hope-seeking patients.

I did my research, TYVM. I'm wondering how well you did yours. This only took me about 5 minutes.

This other article seems to suggest that all of the mice tested had their lives extended ..

Many of the animals had long-term survival, and all of them had their lives extended after asingle treatment at a low dose.

Nanodot is an okay source for people who dig this kind of stuff.