Where Legal, 25% of Cancer Patients Use Marijuana

[nicholas]

That’s a higher percentage than I would have guessed:

Where Legal, 25% of Cancer Patients Use Marijuana

[Hunter]

For anybody who wants to read the survey directly:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cncr.30879/full

Important bits:

Active users inhaled (153 of 220 [70%]) or consumed edibles (154 of 220 [70%]); 89 (40%) used both modalities. Cannabis was used primarily for physical (165 of 219 [75%]) and neuropsychiatric symptoms (139 of 219 [63%]). Legalization significantly increased the likelihood of use in more than half of the respondents.

This study of cancer patients in a state with legalized cannabis found high rates of active use across broad subgroups, and legalization was reported to be important in patients’ decision to use. Cancer patients desire but are not receiving information about cannabis use during their treatment from oncology providers.

[highsupplyjohn]

One must always remember that doctors are highly trained in very narrow fields. Due to the total ban on study of this plant/product, they have not been informed at all about the medicinal qualities of cannabis. My doctor tried to tell me that due to the “tars and nicotine” in joints, I should not smoke weed. I informed him that there were no “tars and nicotine” in weed. His opinion was that any smoke inhaled is bad. Until studies are conducted legally and subjected to peer review and publication, the medical profession will stay in their ivory towers. When my late wife had cancer and requested her doctor prescribe marijuana for her, she was presented with a sample of “marinol”, big pharma’s answer that will kill you.

Since that time, I have heard and discussed with so many people how cannabis saved them when they had cancer and so many are now in remission or cancer free. Neither I nor they will say that cannabis “cured” them, but it certainly allowed them to sleep, then to regain their appetites, and finally relax during and after chemotherapy. I’m now a little tier 1 producer/processor in Washington and firmly convinced I am on a mission for this plant.

[nicholas]

There is some evidence of increased lung cancer risk from smoking, but it appears to be way less than cigarettes. But like you say, you have to weight that against the benefits, like any other treatment regimen. And it isn’t like other medications don’t have their own side effects and downsides, especially when it comes to chemo and radiation.

What You Should Know About Marijuana and Lung Cancer Risks

[Hunter]

@highsupplyjohn

His opinion was that any smoke inhaled is bad. Until studies are conducted legally and subjected to peer review and publication, the medical profession will stay in their ivory towers.

Well, in general, burned things aren’t good for your lungs. That’s not to say that cannabis is equal to cigarettes, but almost any kind of smoke is bad for your lungs. Even wood smoke.

[Taima]

I’m not a fan of this article Nicolas. It seems awfully biased and the links provided for reference in the article go to other articles published by them and not research articles that they’re attempting to reference. I specifically don’t like this

“Although marijuana and tobacco are two entirely different substances, smoking either has similar effects on the lungs. These can be more severe for pot smokers because they tend to inhale more deeply. What’s more, in order to bring about a high, they tend to hold the smoke in their lungs for as long as possible. This increases the amount of smoke the lungs are exposed to, putting them at even greater risk of certain respiratory problems than tobacco smokers”. This is a blatant stereotype and I don’t like it.