Our blogs about
America's Wars
War on Iraq
War on Drugs
War on Afghanistan
War on Columbia
War on Philippines
War on Venezuela

More
Matrix Masters
Blogs
World Events
US News
Science & Health
Earth News
Free Speech
News from Africa
News from Palestine
Bill of Rights Under Attack

Matrix Masters'
SUPPORTERS

Lorenzo's
Random Musings
. . . about Chaos,
Reason, and Hope

 

Large Study Finds Marijuana may be a Possible Anti-Cancer Agent
(David Biello, Scientific American, 24 May 2006)
The smoke from burning marijuana leaves contains several known carcinogens and the tar it creates contains 50 percent more of some of the chemicals linked to lung cancer than tobacco smoke. A marijuana cigarette also deposits four times as much of that tar as an equivalent tobacco one. Scientists were therefore surprised to learn that a study of more than 2,000 people found no increase in the risk of developing lung cancer for marijuana smokers. . . . "We expected that we would find that a history of heavy marijuana use--more than 500 to 1,000 uses--would increase the risk of cancer from several years to decades after exposure to marijuana," explains physician Donald Tashkin of the University of California, Los Angeles, and lead researcher on the project. But looking at residents of Los Angeles County, the scientists found that even those who smoked more than 20,000 joints in their life did not have an increased risk of lung cancer. . . . The researchers interviewed 611 lung cancer patients and 1,040 healthy controls as well as 601 patients with cancer in the head or neck region under the age of 60 to create the statistical analysis. They found that 80 percent of those with lung cancer and 70 percent of those with other cancers had smoked tobacco while only roughly half of both groups had smoked marijuana. The more tobacco a person smoked, the greater the risk of developing cancer, as other studies have shown. . . . But after controlling for tobacco, alcohol and other drug use as well as matching patients and controls by age, gender and neighborhood, marijuana did not seem to have an effect, despite its unhealthy aspects. "Marijuana is packed more loosely than tobacco, so there's less filtration through the rod of the cigarette, so more particles will be inhaled," Tashkin says. "And marijuana smokers typically smoke differently than tobacco smokers; they hold their breath about four times longer allowing more time for extra fine particles to deposit in the lungs." . . . The study does not reveal how marijuana avoids causing cancer. Tashkin speculates that perhaps the THC chemical in marijuana smoke prompts aging cells to die before becoming cancerous. Tashkin and his colleagues presented the findings yesterday at a meeting of the American Thoracic Society in San Diego.

[NOTE: As you will see from the letter below, this story misses a very important point. This letter was sent to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer in response to their story about this study.]

LETTER TO THE EDITOR of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer:

Your article on May 24th titled "Pot's Low Cancer Risk..." missed an important point. It said, "people who smoke marijuana may be at less risk of developing lung cancer than tobacco smokers..." This statement at the beginning of the article misconstrues the important results of the study. The most surprising finding in the study was that marijuana smokers, even in a sub-group of heavy daily lifetime smokers of marijuana, had less risk of developing cancer than the control group of participants who had never smoked anything. This suggests a protective effect. Even Dr. Tashkin had to speculate that, "THC (the most prominent cannabinoid of many in marijuana)...may inhibit tumor growth".

It is surprising indeed that a government funded researcher whose career has focused on trying to prove the connection between marijuana and lung diseases has come up empty-handed here, and perhaps shown that marijuana has anti-cancer effects. But, this should not be surprising. Earlier studies that attempted to link marijuana use with lung cancer also came up blank. This study was designed to answer this question once and for all. Then there is the confounding link between marijuana and cancer inhibition. This too is not new. Several studies in Europe also came to the same conclusion.

While a mountain of research clearly proves that marijuana has medically beneficial effects for many ailments, more research should be conducted. But, Dr. Tashkin's findings have to be considered a "block buster". But, don't expect our government to willingly support any more research that results in such inconvenient facts during their War on Marijuana. The FDA's recent public statement that "marijuana has no medical benefits" is another shameful example of politics over science by this administration in Washington.

C. Little; RN, MPH
San Diego, CA

Note: I otherwise compliment you for running this story. There is a deep vein of information and public interest in this subject. I am a retired Nurse Practitioner and on the Medical Advisory Board of Americans for Safe Access. I hope that the above will be printed in your "Letters to the Editor" section.

[NOTE from Lorenzo: For more information about how the U.S. government continues to block research into the medical effects of cannabis, you can listen to Dr. Rick Doblin's presentation at the National Press Club while he was in Washington pursuing the MAPS lawsuit to force the government to supply the cannabis required for studies that have long been approved. That talk is on my podcast #014 from the Psychedelic Salon.]

posted by LoZo 6:13 PM