Skip navigation
This discussion is locked
42,462 Views 13 Replies Last post: Jun 1, 2012 11:45 AM by telemando RSS
1 posts since
Jan 12, 2011
Currently Being Moderated

Jan 14, 2011 1:40 PM

Rick Simpson's Hemp Oil... Cancer cure?

Best wishes to everyone suffering, and also to those grieving.

 

I've  been trying to get hold of a treatment for a form of Luekemia for a  friend who lives in a country where they don't have it. You can only get  it on prescription in the UK, and her prescription won't work, and UK  doctors won't rewrite it, and she can't get a visa to come here and pay  for treatment/diagnosis. It's a very frustrating situation, and in my  search for this I came across a Canadian guy called Rick Simpson and  wanted to know other's thoughts on his claims.

 

In  his documentary 'Run from the Cure', which I saw on youtube, claims are  made that a highly concentrated oil made from the cannabis plant  reduces cancerous cells and cures varying varieties of cancer.

 

You're  probably thinking, as I thought, that this all sounded a bit fishy, but  after looking on the web at various scientific reports such as:

 

"The  team - based at Queen Mary’s School of Medicine and Dentistry in London  – have followed up on their previous findings that the main active  ingredient in cannabis, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) has the potential to  be used effectively against some forms of cancer."

 

"The  New Drug Study Group in London discovered that Δ9-THC, the active   ingredient in marijuana, works to kill leukemia cells by affecting the   gene, MKP3"

 

There's  much more and anyone is welcome to email me for the links.  Unfortunately there is no study where they've tested this on anything  other that animals and petri dishes, which is crazy and sad considering  how many have tried everything else and now run out of options.

 

Of  course, I'm no doctor or scientist so please someone who is maybe can  you put me straight on why people shouldn't be trying this, and able to  do so legally? And, has anyone tried this yet? I've seen statements on various forums saying it works, but being it illegal people are being very cagey!

 

Also, more related information from the Cancer Research people:

 

http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/?s=cannabinoids 

telemando 161 posts since
Jan 12, 2011
Currently Being Moderated
1. Jan 19, 2011 8:25 AM in response to: MJ_UK
Re: Rick Simpson's Hemp Oil... Cancer cure?

Similar unproven claims are also made for hydrogen peroxide.  I dare say these people mean well, and maybe they believe in their panaceas, but in the absence of solid evidence in the form of clinical trials, one has to assume that it's simply wishful thinking.  Can anyone remember Laetrile?  Once hailed as the wonder cancer cure, but now proven to be completely ineffective. 

 

The wide range of diseases allegedly addressed by these snake oils make me highly suspicious. In the real world, one medicine usually addresses a very limited range of diseases. Even cancer drugs which have been proven effective and are used clinically only work on a limited range of cancers.

 

Personally, I remember the old adage: if something appears too good to be true...

Moderator_Sarah 411 posts since
Sep 1, 2010
Currently Being Moderated
2. Jan 19, 2011 11:46 AM in response to: MJ_UK
Re: Rick Simpson's Hemp Oil... Cancer cure?

Hi MJ_UK    

Thanks for posting on Cancer Chat.    

This article about the science of cannabinoids for treating cancer might answer some of your questions: http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2009/08/19/cannabinoids-for-treating-cancer/   

I hope it is helpful.

Best wishes    

Sarah   

Cancer Chat

JohnMillbrook 213 posts since
Jan 15, 2011
Currently Being Moderated
3. Jan 25, 2011 10:50 PM in response to: Moderator_Sarah
Re: Rick Simpson's Hemp Oil... Cancer cure?

Very interesting reading, I wonder if any clinical trials are going to be offered soon.  I also read the linked article on red wine, I had believed also that this was good for you, hmm that's disappointing! So what about the power of positive thinking? If we believe that what we are reading is doing us good, and using the adage "all things in moderation", then surely it will do us good. And possibly reading articles telling us otherwise could be counterproductive.

telemando 161 posts since
Jan 12, 2011
Currently Being Moderated
4. Jan 26, 2011 1:32 AM in response to: JohnMillbrook
Re: Rick Simpson's Hemp Oil... Cancer cure?

It's hard to believe, but within living memory the UK was ravaged by serious and often fatal diseases, such as Polio, Diptheria, Measles, etc.  I recall my mother telling me the feeling of terror she felt as a child when one of her best friends suddenly fell ill with Diptheria, the day after they'd been playing together. These diseases were beaten by the application of science, and now they are just fading memories.

 

The human genome was sequenced about 10 years ago, and I firmly believe that within the next 15 years we will see a revolution in the treatment of cancer as scientists understand the underlying mechanisms which cause it. I think we might be seeing an early glimmering of hope with the announcement yesterday that researchers have discovered a gene which appears to facilitate metastasis, and that blocking this gene might stop cancer from spreading around the body.  It's too early to know for certain if this will pan out, but one thing is clear - the cure for cancer WHEN (not if) it comes will be as the result of scientific progress and research.

 

Bob

25 posts since
May 24, 2012
Currently Being Moderated
5. May 24, 2012 10:50 PM in response to: telemando
Re: Rick Simpson's Hemp Oil... Cancer cure?

Snake oils? You do realise that Rick Simpson took no money for his medical Cannabis don't you?  If his claims are unproven why were several doctors willing to testify in court for him?

sockpuppet 188 posts since
May 6, 2010
Currently Being Moderated
6. May 25, 2012 6:03 AM in response to: stukaville
Re: Rick Simpson's Hemp Oil... Cancer cure?

It isnt our job to prove him wrong. It's his to prove his claim. Hemp oil is not a cancer cure.

expat99 285 posts since
Dec 19, 2010
Currently Being Moderated
7. May 25, 2012 8:45 AM in response to: sockpuppet
Re: Rick Simpson's Hemp Oil... Cancer cure?

There's a useful book on how clinical trials and tests work called Testing Treatments.  It's available as a free download at http://www.testingtreatments.org/new-edition/

Highly recommended for people seeking to understand the process of research into medical treatments.

Expat

25 posts since
May 24, 2012
Currently Being Moderated
8. May 25, 2012 11:42 PM in response to: sockpuppet
Re: Rick Simpson's Hemp Oil... Cancer cure?

It might not be your job to prove him wrong but if your going to proclaim that Hemp oil is not a cancer cure I expect you to prove how it isnt.

telemando 161 posts since
Jan 12, 2011
Currently Being Moderated
9. May 26, 2012 12:35 AM in response to: stukaville
Re: Rick Simpson's Hemp Oil... Cancer cure?

stukaville wrote:

 

It might not be your job to prove him wrong but if your going to proclaim that Hemp oil is not a cancer cure I expect you to prove how it isnt.

Science doesn't work this way. In general, it is up to the person making a claim that some medicine is effective to provide sufficient evidence to prove that the claim is true. For example, suppose I claim that Orange and Lime Tic Tacs cure athlete's foot, and suppose Dr No disagrees.  Since I'm making the claim that Tic Tacs are effective, I have the burden of proof. I must run all the clinical trials to prove that Tic Tacs cure athlete's foot. Dr No is not required to do anything. Until my trials prove that Tic Tacs work, it is sufficient for Dr No to point out that I haven't met my burden of proof. Until then, the default position is that the claim is unproven.

 

The world is full of claims that particular medicines and supplements are effective against cancer. However, it is always up to the person who makes the claim that the supplement works to prove it by running clinical trials. Asking someone who doesn't believe the claim to prove that it is wrong is simply to misunderstand the scientific process. The burden of proof always lies with the person claiming that the medicine works, and not the other way round.

 

To put this in context: Do you think Tic Tacs cure athlete's foot? Since it's such a ridiculous claim I dare say that you don't believe it. Is it fair on you if I turn the burden of proof around and say that you must now prove that Tic Tacs don't cure athlete's foot?

25 posts since
May 24, 2012
Currently Being Moderated
10. May 30, 2012 9:23 AM in response to: telemando
Re: Rick Simpson's Hemp Oil... Cancer cure?

telemando wrote:

 

stukaville wrote:

 

It might not be your job to prove him wrong but if your going to proclaim that Hemp oil is not a cancer cure I expect you to prove how it isnt.

Science doesn't work this way. In general, it is up to the person making a claim that some medicine is effective to provide sufficient evidence to prove that the claim is true. For example, suppose I claim that Orange and Lime Tic Tacs cure athlete's foot, and suppose Dr No disagrees.  Since I'm making the claim that Tic Tacs are effective, I have the burden of proof. I must run all the clinical trials to prove that Tic Tacs cure athlete's foot. Dr No is not required to do anything. Until my trials prove that Tic Tacs work, it is sufficient for Dr No to point out that I haven't met my burden of proof. Until then, the default position is that the claim is unproven.

 

The world is full of claims that particular medicines and supplements are effective against cancer. However, it is always up to the person who makes the claim that the supplement works to prove it by running clinical trials. Asking someone who doesn't believe the claim to prove that it is wrong is simply to misunderstand the scientific process. The burden of proof always lies with the person claiming that the medicine works, and not the other way round.

 

To put this in context: Do you think Tic Tacs cure athlete's foot? Since it's such a ridiculous claim I dare say that you don't believe it. Is it fair on you if I turn the burden of proof around and say that you must now prove that Tic Tacs don't cure athlete's foot?

So you expect a retired Canadian to fund his own clinical trials into hemp oil extract to prove it works?  The only people who can afford to run massive clinical trials are drugs companies. Virtually all research is funded by drug companies, into their drugs. It is a closed shop. For decades Cannabis was demonised as a drug of abuse, now drug companies are finding it harder to ignore the benefits of cannabis, which is what led GW Pharma to aquire a license to grow 16,000 plants in Leiceister. They now market Sativex. Members of the scientific community have conducted research into THC and CBD have reported anti cancer/tumour effects.

 

What Rick Simpson is doing and what his patients are claiming cannot be dismissed as quakery just through a lack of clinical trials when there is scientific research that adds weight to their claims.  I suspect that the real issue for some in the medical establishment is that cannabis cannot be patented, which is why GW Pharma have gone to great lengths to try and convince people Sativex is somehow different from natural Cannabis.  It isnt, it contains all the same chemicals as cannabis bud.

telemando 161 posts since
Jan 12, 2011
Currently Being Moderated
11. May 30, 2012 11:30 AM in response to: stukaville
Re: Rick Simpson's Hemp Oil... Cancer cure?

stukaville wrote:

 

So you expect a retired Canadian to fund his own clinical trials into hemp oil extract to prove it works?

 

That's not it at all. YOU expected one our forum members to prove that hemp oil doesn't work. I simply explained that the process and burden of proof doesn't work this way.

 

I can't help it if you don't like the way the process works. The process exists to sort the wheat of effective medicines from the chaff of quack cures. 

 

I don't have any problem with subjecting claims for any medicines to the scrutiny of a clinical trial.  No one should be allowed to push quack cures without the evidence to back them up.  No one, not even Rick Simpson, gets a free pass.

 

How many times do I have to say that showing an anti-tumour effect in a Petrie dish does not mean that it will work in humans.  If he (or you) thinks that Hemp Oil is an effective anti cancer treatment then PROVE IT WORKS IN PEOPLE and not just in glass dishes.

 

Bob

25 posts since
May 24, 2012
Currently Being Moderated
12. Jun 1, 2012 2:47 AM in response to: telemando
Re: Rick Simpson's Hemp Oil... Cancer cure?

telemando wrote:

 

stukaville wrote:

 

So you expect a retired Canadian to fund his own clinical trials into hemp oil extract to prove it works?

 

That's not it at all. YOU expected one our forum members to prove that hemp oil doesn't work. I simply explained that the process and burden of proof doesn't work this way.

 

I can't help it if you don't like the way the process works. The process exists to sort the wheat of effective medicines from the chaff of quack cures. 

 

I don't have any problem with subjecting claims for any medicines to the scrutiny of a clinical trial.  No one should be allowed to push quack cures without the evidence to back them up.  No one, not even Rick Simpson, gets a free pass.

 

How many times do I have to say that showing an anti-tumour effect in a Petrie dish does not mean that it will work in humans.  If he (or you) thinks that Hemp Oil is an effective anti cancer treatment then PROVE IT WORKS IN PEOPLE and not just in glass dishes.

Re

Bob

 

If anyone claims that anything is quakery, I expect them to back up their claims with evidence that cannot be disputed. The burden of proof lies just as much with you, if your going to run round screaming quakery at every single alternative therapy. A lack of clinical trials is not evidence of quakery, just as clinical trials do not always equal safe effective medicines. Re Rick Simpson, he never asked for a free pass, he only ever asked for an opportunity to tell of his story, something his patients and their doctors also wanted him to have. He isnt claiming Cannabis extract works in Petrie dishes, he is claiming it works in people. Something which science suggests could be true. You and I both know that Rick Simpson cannot fund his own research, and the drugs companies certainly won't fund something that threatens their cash cow. Why doesn't Cancer Research fund a study?  All the studies I have read so far involve chemo, radio and a combination of drugs. Why?

telemando 161 posts since
Jan 12, 2011
Currently Being Moderated
13. Jun 1, 2012 11:45 AM in response to: stukaville
Re: Rick Simpson's Hemp Oil... Cancer cure?

stukaville wrote:

 

He isnt claiming Cannabis extract works in Petrie dishes, he is claiming it works in people.

Right! So he IS making a claim that his oil is effective. Fine. The burden of proof is on him to prove it.

 

Whether or not he can or can't afford it is not my problem. However, I will suggest that any university will have a supply of newly hatched PhDs who will be eager and anxious to find a research topic. A good starting point would be to try to get one of them interested in picking up this work.

 

Bob

  Contact a moderator

  Support us




More like this

  • Retrieving data ...

Looking for forum tips?

 
 
Visit Cancer Chat tips for quick help on using the forum, including FAQs and our house rules
 

Contact a specialist nurse