The rise of the cannabis cult: don’t believe the hype about medical marijuana

There are few substances that excite discussion quite as potently as cannabis. Explosive claims about its curative power circulate wildly online, often cited by proponents of medical marijuana. A quick Google search for ‘cannabis cures’ yields anecdotes of miraculous efficacy for every illness imaginable, and particularly for cancer. But, despite the gushing testimonials, this persistent narrative of cannabis as a universal panacea is distinctly at odds with the evidence.

In a review earlier this year of over 10,000 studies, researchers found reliable evidence for three distinct applications of cannabis. First, there is strong evidence that tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the main psychoactive ingredient in cannabis, can reduce nausea and vomiting associated with cancer treatments. These anti-emetic properties have been exploited for decades in the clinical management of cancer symptoms.

However, there is a caveat to this. THC is not uniformly well-tolerated and in many instances can exacerbate rather than placate vomiting. As safer and more efficient medications exist, THC-derived clinical compounds tend only to be used for this purpose when other interventions have failed.

The review also found good evidence to support the use of medicinal cannabis in chronic pain, and in managing spasms associated with multiple sclerosis.

Such benefits are comparatively modest but certainly not negligible. But what of the other breathless claims of curative potency made by cannabis advocates? The same review found that, despite the hyperbole, the evidence for the efficacy of cannabis in other conditions was minimal and unconvincing.

In particular, there was no strong evidence that cannabis was useful for the treatment of epilepsy, appetite regulation for Aids patients, ADHD, Parkinson’s disease or irritable bowel syndrome. As Dr Sean Hennessy, one of the study’s authors, said: ‘Most of the therapeutic reasons people use medical marijuana aren’t substantiated beneficial effects of the plant.’

Yet, despite this, miracle stories abound. Autism is particular is often targeted by those selling bunkum elixirs, and cannabis is regularly touted as a treatment despite the lack of evidence of benefit.

Nowhere are these claims so dangerous as when they’re made in relation to cancer. Cancer sufferers are frequently hawked dubious cure-alls, with cannabis perhaps the most common. There is absolutely no evidence that cannabis has any curative impact on cancers, as organisations like Cancer Research UK and the National Cancer Institute point out. This tends to go entirely unheeded. One recent meme tells a wondrous tale of a man who cured his cancer with cannabis oil. This has been shared widely by cannabis enthusiasts, seemingly unaware that the man named in fact succumbed to his cancer months before.

It is common for such miraculous anecdotes to be shared and hailed as proof with little concern about their veracity. Another frequent claim is that high-dose THC can kill cancer cells in a petri dish, which is true — but irrelevant. The astute reader will note that humans are not petri dishes, and killing cells can be achieved by many other agents, from heat to acid to bleach. Killing cells is easy — an effective anti-cancer agent has to discriminately target cancer cells while sparing healthy ones, and there is no evidence that cannabis can do anything of the sort. At best it’s cargo-cult science, a superficial veneer of credibility for views incongruent with the evidence.

This is damaging for several reasons. For one, it fosters a mistrust of the medical and scientific community. To preserve their faith, true believers dismiss the lack of evidence for their position as the machinations of Big Pharma. This casts researchers and medics as pantomime villains and makes them targets of abuse (as I can attest). Worse than that, the message is delivered so fervently that it persuades many patients to cease their conventional therapies. This has, and will, cost lives.

Cannabis advocates are less keen to entertain the notion that it might have any adverse effects. As a general rule of thumb, anything that has a biological impact is likely to have some potential ill effect, and cannabis is no exception. While relatively safe, regular users have an elevated chance of mental health disorders, including schizophrenia. For children and adolescents, these effects are much more pronounced, with negative implications for educational and social attainment. Contrary to popular misconception, addiction and problem usage are common, and more likely to manifest in heavy users and those who begin at a younger age.

None of this is to take away from the effectiveness of cannabis products for certain conditions, nor is it a discussion on legalisation. There may be good arguments for legalising cannabis — but exaggerating its potential use in medicine is not one of them.

If medicinal use is the true aim, then regulation of cannabis as a health product should not be controversial. That some activists lobby for ‘medicinal’ usage while denigrating regulation suggests their true motives are recreational. The related mantra that cannabis is natural and ergo harmless is textbook naturalistic fallacy. Cyanide and plutonium are also naturally occurring, but unrestrained ingestion would be unwise.

The reality is that most of the health claims made about cannabis are wrong-headed and devoid of evidence. They risk endangering the lives of the very patients they are supposed to help.

Dr David Robert Grimes is a physicist, cancer researcher and science writer and was the joint recipient of the 2014 Nature / Sense About Science Maddox Prize. On Twitter he is @drg1985


  • malcolmkyle

    Study: Cannabis/Marijuana Use Not Predictive Of Lower IQ, Poorer Educational Performance

    “… to test the relationships between cumulative cannabis use and IQ at the age of 15 and educational performance at the age of 16. After full adjustment, those who had used cannabis more than 50 times did not differ from never-users on either IQ or educational performance. Adjusting for group differences in cigarette smoking dramatically attenuated the associations between cannabis use and both outcomes, and further analyses demonstrated robust associations between cigarette use and educational outcomes, even with cannabis users excluded. These findings suggest that adolescent cannabis use is not associated with IQ or educational performance once adjustment is made for potential confounds, in particular adolescent cigarette use.”

    Source: C Mokrysz, et al. Clinical Psychopharmacology Unit, University College London. Published January 6, 2016 in Journal of Psychopharmacology.

  • malcolmkyle

    Health concerns regarding marijuana tend to come from a self-fueling group of discredited scientists funded by the pharmaceutical, prison, tobacco, and alcohol industries, pushing non-peer-reviewed papers while relying upon reports issued by others in their own group to further support their own grossly misleading research and clearly biased agendas.

    According to “Epidemiology of Schizophrenia” on Wikipedia, most countries with high cannabis use have some of the lowest rates of schizophrenia -The Netherlands are 173rd, Canada 177th, USA 181st, UK 185th, Iceland 191st and Australia last 192nd (Iceland is said to have the highest rate of marijuana/cannabis use in the world). The country with the lowest rate of marijuana/cannabis use in the world, Singapore, is said to have the 7th highest rate of schizophrenia.

    A Harvard University study, published Dec 4th, 2013 in the journal Schizophrenia Research, adds support to the role of genetic factors in schizophrenia, and states that cannabis/marijuana use alone does not increase the risk of developing the disorder. The latest findings provide enough evidence for Dr. DeLisi and her team to conclude that “Cannabis is unlikely to be the cause of this illness.”

    Source: PII: S0920-9964(13)00610-5 doi:10.1016/j.schres.2013.11.014 —Published by Elsevier Inc.

    Association is not Causation:

    Schizophrenia affects approximately one percent of the population. That percentage has held steady since the disease was identified, while the percentage of people who have smoked marijuana has varied from about 5% to around 40% of the general population.

    Despite a massive increase in the number of Australians consuming the drug since the 1960s, Wayne Hall of the University of Queensland found no increase in the number of cases of schizophrenia in Australia. Mitch Earleywine of the University of Southern California similarly found the same with regard to the US population and Oxford’s Leslie Iversen found the same regard to the population in the UK. According to Dr. Alan Brown, a professor of psychiatry and epidemiology at Columbia University, “If anything, the studies seem to show a possible decline in schizophrenia from the ’40s and the ‘50s”.

    • Ronan McManus

      I think you are missing the main point. The article is not primarily about cannabis being a harmful, poisonous drug. It is much more harmful when it is peddled as a cure-all.
      This can lead to the more easily-suggestible in the population dumping a medicine that actually works for their condition, in favour of an ineffective drug someone on the internet told them was a miracle cure.

      • Cannabis is completely benign for at least 98% of the population. True, it may not achieve some of the overblown, snake oil claims but it will do no harm. It is less risky than eating peanuts.

        No one should ever discontinue conventional medical treatment if they choose to try cannabis. Anyone who advises this is a foolish, irresponsible extremist, just as Dr Grimes has demonstrated that he is at the opposite extreme.

        • Night of the Lepus

          You forgot to add your racist and/or homophobic slurs

    • Night of the Lepus

      As so a conspiracy as usual. Yes that must be it

  • Dicky Sumner

    Dr Grimes

    Your attempt at discrediting the growing (rediscovered) medical cannabis industry will need to be improved to be taken seriously. You clamber around your points without making any direct reference to any peer reviewed study – comparing the way bleach and cannabis work on cancer cells is shameful and shambolic coming from a DR who’s duty of care should always be the patient. The 10,000 Studies you mention, 95% of the time, were commissioned to show the problems caused by cannabis, mainly funded by sectors with vested interests e.g Alcohol & opoid manufacturers, only to find no direct link to anything bad other than laziness’

    Were you aware the USA Government holds a Patent for the use of cannabinoids to help treat cancer? I presume not. Again due to research restrictions cannabis cannot be researched freely and openly in this country. Only last week, researchers in Berlin (where medical cannabis is legal) proved the amazing effect cannabis can have on people with dementia and Alzheimer’s, with myself and my close family being directly affected by such a terrible condition you argument falls into irrelevance. But again we are limited at exploring the treatment further due to legal restrictions.

    The scaremongering you are displaying is pathetic.

    Your own university is doing a £10 Million study into the use of Medical cannabis (link below…. Did you miss out on some funding for you south of France holiday home?

    https://www.rt.com/uk/381031-cannabis-medical-use-drugs/

    Ask Professor Nutt. You could learn a few things from him.

    • Ronan McManus

      “You clamber around your points without making any direct reference to any peer reviewed study”
      Correct, this is a standard news article. If you want the peer-reviewed stuff, click on the links in the article.

      “Only last week, researchers in Berlin (where medical cannabis is legal) proved the amazing effect cannabis can have on people with dementia and Alzheimer’s,”
      I cant find any reference to this. I did find a study like this in Bonn though.
      https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/05/170508112400.htm
      However, this was on mice. Mice are not people. There is no “amazing effect on people with dementia” demonstrated as-yet.

      For someone who feels they are competent enough to criticise an experienced cancer-researcher, your criticism is sloppy and completely inaccurate.
      Maybe it is something in the chemtrails.

      • Dicky Sumner

        ‘Experienced cancer researcher’ so how was chemotherapy found? By mistake did you say!! No other alternative treatment since, so why not push for cannabis to researched more thoroughly – what is to loose i ask you? As a Dr you should purely focus on the medicinal side of cannabis to help promote the research of a Safe medicine which can be used for many health benefits but no you prefer to push on the small negative sides & ignore strong evidence throughout the world of cannabis being used effectivley and safely as a medicine for a number of treatments. Not once does any of the article reference the Endocannabinoid system – i wonder why?

        You were also aware the USA Government has a patent for the treatment of tumours with cannabis?

        P.S. What’s a chemtrail btw?

        • Ronan McManus

          Is your Google broken?
          https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/types

          I don’t see anyone saying there should be no research into cannabis. Do you?

          I do see one person saying that it is a bad idea to just make stuff up about cannabis and some others jumping on him as a blasphemer.

          Which branch of the US government took out that patent, and when? What were its primary claims? Do you have a patent number for it?

          • Dicky Sumner

            Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants
            US 6630507 B1.

            The fact remains that articles like these do not help the cause for access to medicinal cannabis for those who would benefit now, and with further research those who would benefit later. I for one welcome any potential treatments into dementia and the treatment of cancers such as Leukaemia having been closely affected by both.

            So please – if you haven’t got anything good to say just don’t say it. The people of the world have been lied to for too long.

          • Ronan McManus

            Right, so there is a patent on a cannabis drug. How does that fit in with the usual claim that it is being suppressed because big pharma cant make money from it? If it is patentable, then you can make money off it.
            How well does the drug work?

            This article is not intended to help people access cannabis now (as far as I can see). It is intended to give people some facts about the actual real evidence that is available.
            The people of the world are being lied to by many of the proponents of cannabis treatments, including you earlier in this discussion. This article addresses some of that disinformation.

          • Dicky Sumner

            The people of the world are being lied to and have been for 80 years as too why cannabis is illegal. As stated before it remains extremely difficult for research to take place whilst something is illegal. I don;t know how they actually got a patent for just know one existed?

          • Ronan McManus

            Well, what do you feel is the significance or relevance of that patent to this discussion then?
            I don’t think anyone is saying that a lot of BS has not been spread about cannabis and its negative effects, but that does not justify a load more BS about cannabis and its positive/medicinal effects.

            Bullshit you like is just as much bullshit as bullshit you dont like.

          • James Peters

            Back in 2011, the company Kannalife Sciences https://www.kannalife.com/ was granted an exclusive license by the US National Institutes of Health – Office of Technology Transfer (NIH-OTT) for the commercialization of patent US 6630507.

            They have a target drug candidate, KLS-13019 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4834656/ which is a structural analog of CBD and plan to conduct trials in patients with chronic traumatic encephalopathy and hepatic encephalopathy.

          • Night of the Lepus

            Do you think the earth is flat?

          • James Peters

            That patent has nothing to do with cancer and none are relevant as they don’t prove something works.

  • Nominalis

    “Cyanide and plutonium are also naturally occurring, but unrestrained ingestion would be unwise.”

    Comparing cannabis with plutonium for any reason is more of a political stunt than a scientific analogy. I’d love to challenge the good doctor to a race, I’ll grow a pound of cannabis while he gathers a pound of that naturally occuring plutonium.

    I’ll need a couple pots of dirt, some light, water and a few seeds. He’ll need the resources of a wealthy first-world nation and a tin-foil hat.

    • CharleeR

      He isn’t a Medical Doctor, he has a Doctorate in Physics.

  • Kaabi

    What a terrible, lazy, misguided, arrogant, stupid article. The author shows how very, very little he knows about this critical subject. The fact he says that cannabis has no efficacy for epilepsy shows his ignorance right there. As for cancer, cannabinoids in most cancer-related studies are shown to only kill cancer cells while sparing healthy ones. He also seems to imply that most chemotherapies can do that, which they can’t – they kill everything, which is why the side effects are so horrendous. The science goes so much deeper than cannabis simply killing cancer cells. They do so through similar mechanisms as our own self-made endocannabinoids, and numerous studies with humans have shown these anti-cancer effects translate to us. He also completely diminishes the overwhelming anecdotal evidence and the immense detail of it. You can read a summary of this evidence at http://freecannabiscancerbook.com.

    That said, it is true that cannabis is not a cure-all and not everyone responds, whether it be cancer, epilepsy, or a number of other diseases. People should not forego conventional treatment as there is no way to tell who will respond and who won’t. However, in so many cases it makes the difference between life or death, and that’s what matters.

    • James Peters

      The antitumour effects are modest at best and some of the preclinical studies found evidence that cannabinoids, under some circumstances, can actually stimulate cancer cell growth and contribute to tumour progression (PMID: 15749859, 10861074, 15026328 & 9858061). Furthermore, cancer cells can develop resistance (PMID: 21233844).

      The only human study that has been published to date was back in 2006. It was a cohort of nine patients all with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme (PMID: 16804518). All had their tumours resected and a catheter was placed in the cavity after surgery. Then every day doctors would directly infuse a very pure THC solution at a high concentration directly into the cavity where the tumour had been, in the hope of killing off any remaining cancer cells. The median survival of the group was just 6 months which is what is generally expected with patients who have rGBM (PMID: 19822869 & 24193082). As for the two patients who survived the longest (yet still died), the effects could be attributable to spontaneous (but temporary) regression of the disease (PMID: 11296017 & 28011886) which happens, amount of surgical resection (PMID: 26869588, 24535317, 23039151 & 24484232) or a number of other factors.

      • Kaabi

        You just commented on my post on another thread as well… do you purposely follow me around to counter what I say at every turn? I do appreciate skepticism though, it is critical and none of these grandiose claims should be taken without serious inquiry. The bottom line is this is working though. There are thousands of patients who have reported anticancer effects with cannabis, and I personally have watched three close family friends start-to-finish beat their cancers with cannabis oil. To say it is not working at this point is extremely dangerous because it takes away a real source of hope. That’s not to say it works in every case, but in most cases there is some level of efficacy.

        By the way, here is the first placebo-controlled trial of THC/CBD along with chemotherapy (vs. placebo and chemotherapy) for glioblastoma. Those in the THC/CBD group lived SIX MONTHS longer than those on the placebo, and the only possible explanation for this is the cannabinoids synergized with the chemo to fight the cancer. And this at a remarkably low dose, FAR lower than what people are using to achieve remission. So we have massive scientific, anecdotal, and now clinical evidence this works. The time for skepticism is over, we need to start saving patients. Read my book if you want to see how deep this goes on the human side. If you don’t believe the extremely detailed stories that’s your problem.

        • Ronan McManus

          Sorry, but that is not the “only possible explanation”.
          A 21 patient trial (I am assuming you mean the GW Pharma one), has very low statistical value. It is a good sign, but it could just as easily be a statistical error.

          When the phase III comes out, then we will have a better idea.

          We are still at the skepticism stage, at least until real evidence is produced.

          • Kaabi

            The problem with this line of thinking is that people are dying of cancer every few seconds. They need treatments NOW, and waiting for years because people refuse to connect the dots results in millions of deaths. This trial is in the context of thousands of anecdotal cases of cannabis killing cancer. There is also other scientific evidence showing preclinical effects have translated to humans, such as the decrease of MMP-2 and VEGF shown in cells, animals, and humans. Furthermore, other radical preclinical evidence, such as CBD for epilepsy, has translated to humans better than the preclinical evidence would suggest, since those studies use simple chemical-induced seizures vs. the complex genetically-driven seizures in humans. THC kills cancer cells by activating CB1 receptors. Anandamide kills cancer cells by activating CB1 receptors. The evidence is absolutely enormous and this medicine must be made available now. I absolutely hate how people have no sense of urgency about this and refuse to think more deeply.

            That said, this is not a cure-all and it doesn’t work for everyone. People should not forego conventional therapy and we still have a lot to learn. But there is absolutely no doubt cannabis has an anticancer effect in humans and it is time to take action on that knowledge. If you think every single case in http://freecannabiscancerbook.com is a lie or a gross misinterpretation of the facts, that’s on you. But this is real, it’s happening and we need to help others with this incredibly safe medicine.

          • Ronan McManus

            So you are making the claim that cannabis cures cancer? Just so we are clear here.

          • Kaabi

            No, I do not use the “C” word. However I absolutely claim that in many cases cannabis extracts can directly treat cancer and can put cancers, even those terminally diagnosed, into remission, both alone and in conjunction with conventional treatment. Most people with cancer who use a significant dose of THC and CBD, at least 100mg total, see some kind of anticancer effect, even if it is simply slowing the rate of growth. However some patients do not respond at all, even at exceptionally high doses reaching 1000mg, which is why conventional therapy should never be foregone.

            The reason phytocannabinoids seem so effective against a wide range of cancers, despite the hundred of potential factors which can drive them, is because our endocannabinoid systems appear to have a role in preventing cancer cell proliferation. Ultimately, cancer is abnormal cells rapidly dividing, and there are some common mechanisms that drive these which cannabinoids can halt. For example, overactivity of the MAPK and Akt/mTor pathways comes up across many kinds of diverse cancers, and cannabinoids can dephosphorylate those proteins and lead to cancer cell apoptosis. I know this because I’ve read the full publications of dozens of cannabis-cancer papers, not just the abstracts. And for certain cancers with unique mechanisms of growth, cannabinoids often are effective against those. For example, gliomas are so resistant to chemotherapy and radiation largely because of glioma stem cells which don’t respond to those treatments. CBD has been shown to promote the differentiation of those cells which makes them more responsive to conventional treatment. This goes far deeper than a cannabinoid killing cancer in the same way bleach would.

            Again, I urge you to look at the cases in my book. If you think every single one is a lie or a gross misinterpretation of the facts, all I can say is I disagree. Those cases are also a mere fraction of the reported anticancer successes, and they come from doctors, dispensaries, corporations, caregivers, from all over the world across a significant period of time. To think this is all coincidence and nothing is going on here, especially in the face of a placebo-controlled trial published three months ago and more emerging case reports in the literature, is absurd.

          • Night of the Lepus

            Cannabis doesn’t cure cancer, that’s why no one who uses it has been cured by it’s use. It’s rather simple really

          • Mc

            You’re engaging with a true believer, who is marshalling the same logic and arguments found amongst all woo believers, whether they be alt-medicine types, astrologers, alchemists, etc.

        • James Peters

          The trial was sponsored by GW Pharma who used their drug sativex (a standardized whole plant oral mucosal spray). During the Q1 2017 earnings call the CEO Justin Gover dodged stating it’s hard to image CNS tumours but the results were consistent with survival and that the OS data hasn’t yet matured. Which in my view is another way of saying that there weren’t any objective responses seen under RANO criteria https://radiopaedia.org/articles/rano-criteria-for-glioblastoma They are sitting on the DDI data until the adcom docs are released, the p-value was close between the two groups and the sample size in the treatment arm was small (N = 12). All this randomized study confirms is the treatment is generally well tolerated and the feasibility of individualized dosing when used as an adjunct to dose-intense temozolomide.

          What GW should be doing is conducting a much larger Phase IIb trial using biomarkers to predict which patients will likely respond to the treatment and then going from there.

          • Kaabi

            The bottom line is this trial strongly confirms what is being seen in the real world. It’s not a coincidence that phytocannabinoids and endocannabinoids kill cancer cells through similar mechanisms and that thousands of people who have actually used high doses to treat cancer are seeing results. Six months life extension is a big deal. The only way that happens is if the cancer is being suppressed, just feeling good doesn’t stop one of the most aggressive cancers in existence. While the trial was small, the chances their significantly extended survival was due to pure chance is absurd in the face of the massive scientific, anecdotal, and logical evidence. I’m tired of watching people die because others refuse to connect the dots, at this point it is so obvious you have to be cold, callous, and willfully ignorant to not see what’s going on.

  • Jason Toby

    That’s funny, I seem to recall that medical marijuana was composed of more than just THC… Good Doctor, why have you not mentioned cannabidiol, or CBD? You know, the chemical that when isolated and given to epileptic children, they stop having seizures that they would have previously had hundreds of times per week?

    Ironically, the very same 10,000 study review you cite DOES mention CBD. Here’s a snapshot that I found on page 47: http://imgur.com/a/LgzBV from source: https://www.nap.edu/download/24625

    It says “Irrespective of the mechanism of action, there is evidence that CBD could potentially be exploited in the treatment and symptom relief of various neurological disorders such as epilepsy and seizures (Hofmann and Frazier, 2013; Jones et al., 2010)

    You can’t talk about medical marijuana and just talk about THC. THC is one of just many cannabinoids, terpenes, and other molecules, which work together to provide different medical effects. For example, the terpene pinene has been suggested to help counter THC’s short-term memory impairment (source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3165946/)

    I definitely see where you are coming from on your main point, that one should not exaggerate science to make a point, but you shouldn’t ignore it either. Research on cannabis has a LONG way to go before you can make the broad, sweeping claims you do here. Furthermore, you’re actually distorting the facts.

    For example, you state that “In particular, there was no strong evidence that cannabis was useful for the treatment of epilepsy”, which is partially true, but if you actually read the review, it says on page 101 that “there is insufficient evidence to support OR REFUTE the conclusion that cannabinoids are an effective treatment for epilepsy.” Meaning, we need more research. Their main criticism was the lack of control groups and placebos, even though many of the studies they cite show incredible results, for example Tzadok et al. in 2016 on page 100.

    I also agree with you that stating that marijuana is ‘harmless’ is potentially damaging to the arguments that it can be used medically. However, if you compare marijuana to the drugs that are commonly used to treat these conditions, the difference is staggering. Thus, another point you fail to mention, is that you can’t simply look at treatment using marijuana in isolation- many patients replace other medication with marijuana and experience drastically fewer side effects.

    • James Peters

      GW Pharma’s Epidiolex (a proprietary oral solution of pure plant-derived CBD) has been shown to work for patients with Dravet syndrome and Lennox-Gastaut syndrome. It should be approved for these indications by the FDA and EMA sometime this year. Other Phase III trials are ongoing in Tuberous
      Sclerosis Complex and Infantile Spasms.

      • Ronan McManus

        The Epidiolex clinicals are quite interesting. They did show a clinically-significant improvement when compared to placebo, but they also showed a significant number of treatment-related serious adverse events. These serious adverse events increased with the concentration of CBD in the drug.

        While side-effects are to be expected with any drug, particularly one intended to treat a serious debilitating disease, these results do pour a bucket of cold water on the claims that CBD drugs have no harmful side-effects (another myth promoted by the cannabis cult).

        • Michael Tucker

          What side effects were present in these patients?

    • Michael Tucker

      Do you happen to know if these were ever tested on non- epileptic seizures?

  • Tom Gregorius Lauten

    Personally I have used marijuana with success to decrease the amount of grand mal epileptic seizures happening to me. I did that about one year before I started on pharmaceuticals. I had no seizures after I started to smoke marijuana, though i was smoking hashish before that without the seizures going away. Marijuana does also help me with my anxiety, depression and sleep disorder. It seems like not every strain helps equally much, hashish does work in some degree, but I wish I still had access to fine and cheap marijuana. Another thing that happened after I started smoking cannabis was strangely enough that I got cured from my asthma. A couple of weeks after I as a youth started to use cannabis in the weekends, my lung capacity drastically improved, and I no longer needed to use an inhalator. My chronic broncitus, which I got diagnosed with as a child, did not improve, however, I do not believe it got any worse either.

    Also, I have supplied a senior citizen, a female, with marijuana because she had heard it could relieve her Chroms disease. And that it did. She actually managed to get outside for the first time in years because she could stop using several of the pharmaceuticals she had been taking. I also gave marijuana to a cancer pation, and he finally got to eat and live without feeling nauseous all the time. I also gave cannabis to my alcoholic father with great success. He’s a changed, healthier and better man now. He’s actually going to be studied by doctors soon, because they do not understand how he could have experienced such an improvement on his health in such a short time. He can’t tell them how he did it, because then they’ll have to report him and he’ll probably lose his driving license (even though he never drives the same evening that he uses cannabis).

    Cannabis did not cure any of these diseases, but it helped relieve them and made our lives better. I would probably be dead and buried if I hadn’t started to use cannabis 18 years ago.

    • Jason Forehand

      CBD works best in conjunction with THC. Try the Mammoth strain. The 2.8% CBD and 14-20% THC has really done wonders for my Epilepsy and the pain associated with muscle tears. We are in this together. #Cheers

    • Jason Forehand

      Speaking of pharmacy drugs. I stopped taking them 4 years ago because they did absolutely nothing to stop my Grand Mals. In fact, they led to me having more seizures. I had 2 Grand Mals back to back and it royally fucked me up for about 6 months. Almost died. Memory loss and speech loss for about the same amount of time. After my last $20,000 stay in Texas Presbyterian, I made a decision to never take prescription drugs ever again.

  • Richard Lutz

    People suffering from a variety of conditions report that cannabis provides them with relief that no other drug provides. Ditto for LSD, cocaine, ice, ecstasy, heroin and PCP. As for recreational, what business is of yours what other adults choose to use? Are you a fascist pr*ick? If so watch were you shove it or it might get cut off.

  • “The reality is that most of the health claims made about cannabis are wrong-headed and devoid of evidence.”

    Dr Grimes, if this really is your conclusion then you should be struck off for professional incompetence.

    Your assertions are absurd and fly in the face of the massive amount of high quality evidence which you seem determined to ignore. You’re a fool and unfit to practise medicine.

    Some reading for you. It’s all published, peer-reviewed research which completely destroys the gibberish you have published above. :

    https://www.clear-uk.org/wp-content/uploads/medicinal-cannabis-the-evidence-190416.pdf

    http://www.clear-uk.org/wp-content/uploads/Cannabis.-The-Evidence-for-Medical-Use.pdf

    http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/Reports/2017/health-effects-of-cannabis-and-cannabinoids.aspx

    • Lightbox9

      Only one source there is credible.

      • Axiom Seer

        as opposed to your zero credible sources

      • The first link lists 88 sources which are published and peer-reviewed.

        The second link is a review of over 22,000 published and peer-reviewed studies by an internationally renowned neurologist.

        The third link is to a report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

    • Kaabi

      Nice Peter Reynolds with the save!! We’re usually at odds on these kinds of posts but it’s nice when we match up. We’re ultimately on the same side so this is encouraging to see. Thank you for your work.

  • “The reality is that most of the health claims made about cannabis are wrong-headed and devoid of evidence.”

    Dr Grimes, if this really is your conclusion then you should be struck off for professional incompetence.

    Your assertions are absurd and fly in the face of the massive amount of high quality evidence which you seem determined to ignore. You’re a fool and unfit to practise medicine.

    Some reading for you. It’s all published, peer-reviewed research which completely destroys the gibberish you have published above. :

    https://www.clear-uk.org/wp-content/uploads/medicinal-cannabis-the-evidence-190416.pdf

    http://www.clear-uk.org/wp-content/uploads/Cannabis.-The-Evidence-for-Medical-Use.pdf

    http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/Reports/2017/health-effects-of-cannabis-and-cannabinoids.aspx

  • Stop telling lies . The cat is out of the bag and there is no putting him back in. Try telling this to the thousands of people who have now been helped by cannabis. Type in Pubmed with keywords like cannabis and “your condition” to see the latest clinical trials.
    Listen to what this retired judge, who has put hundreds away for marijuana has to say now that he has found the help of cannabis in reversing his COPD. https://cannabishealthradio.com/2017/05/episode-142-as-a-judge-he-put-people-in-jail-for-cannabis-use-but-cannabis-cured-his-copd/

  • Those reading this article should be aware that Dr Grimes is not a medical doctor.

    It seems that when writing on the subject of medicine he should have made this clear. Instead he sought to endow his opinions with fake expertise.

    He is a doctor of physics.

    • Lightbox9

      And you’re a pot-head, which disqualifies you from any such discussion; most discussions, in fact.

      • Ronan McManus

        I don’t think that’s true, but anyone who thinks other sciences have no place in cancer research should probably be a little more cautious when expressing an opinion on a subject on which they are evidently ignorant.

        • Dr Grimes’ imprudent, politically-aggressive and ill-judged attack on the extensive high quality evidence on the medical use of cannabis extends far wider than cancer.

          It is true that there are many ridiculous snake oil claims made about cannabis curing cancer, although it would be foolish to write off all the anecdotal reports. They demonstrate an urgent need to advance research into the proven pre-clinical anti-cancer properties of cannabinoids.

          Most of these claims are made by people who are very sick, desperate or are relatives of people suffering from cancer. Dr Grimes’ vicious, unrestrained and unbalanced criticism of the evidence amounts to bullying and he is shamed by it.

          Furthermore, the evidence is conclusive that cannabis offers great benefits as a palliative medicine for cancer and many other conditions. Dr Grimes’ failure to acknowledge this, indeed to seek to denigrate it, is yet more bullying and abuse of people who have experienced these benefits and who have put up with years of government, the media and the medical establishment denying what is now proven.

          This is a summary of the evidence on cannabis and cancer which is balanced and warns of the snake oil claims but substantiates the proven benefits:

          https://www.clear-uk.org/there-is-no-scientific-evidence-that-cannabis-cures-cancer-in-humans-yet/

          • Night of the Lepus

            Your link is to a rather biased site. Want to appear credible, cite something impartial and with facts.

          • Stephan Williams

            First your earlier attack on me after I calmly laid out my own case of being cured of cancer by using cannabis and now this rather weak-kneed attack on another intelligent commenter for his reasoned rebuttal to Dr. Grimes’ “imprudent, politically-aggressive and ill-judged attack on the extensive high quality evidence on the medical use of cannabis”.

            How can you be anything other than a troll?

            My advice to you? Get back to the adults in the room when you have something constructive to add to the conversation.

          • Night of the Lepus

            Ah and now your defending the racist homophobe because he shares your deluded views. Now your just looking like a stalker. Well, apply your stalking skills to googling Peter Reynolds and check out his various court cases

        • Obviously other sciences have a part to play in all sorts of medical research but Dr Grimes clearly knew that his title of doctor would endow his opinions with purported medical expertise. This is unethical and he should have made his qualifications clear and not allow readers to be misled. This is inexcusable.

          • Jeanette Maris Bellagamba Dena

            Any doctor or scientist know that cancer is not one disease but has a myriad of different manifestations, and any one treatment that is claimed to be a cure all has to be suspicious.

            Also it takes years of in depth study to gain a PhD. Perhaps we shouldn’t make sweeping and arrogant generalisations that a doctor of medicine knows more about cancer research than anybody else that may have studied a subject in probably more in depth than a doctor of general medicine; for example of course.

            Equally the author is simply stating that the evidence around cannabis curing cancer, as far as the evidence hierarchy goes, is not at the very top and that further research is needed before the gushing claims.

          • Jeanette Maris Bellagamba Dena

            Furthermore, what exactly is unethical about the title Dr when used for a Dr of physics? Perfectly legitimate title.

          • You’re complicit in the deception now. It’s quite obvious what inference anyone would draw when someone with the title ‘doctor’ writes about medicine.

            And this dreadfully poorly informed physicist’s rant is not just about cancer. You and Dr Grimes need to educate yourselves about the endocannabinoid system before you wade in clumsily demonstrating your ignorance.

          • Jeanette Maris Bellagamba Dena

            Deception? Oh dear.

            Can I ask as a Dr, you do understand:

            1. Evidence based medicine?
            2. The evidence hierarchy?
            3. How we work out the difference between reproducible results of trials and those that may show promise and need further trials before they can have a place in medicine?
            4. That we can’t promote treatments that may encourage patients to eschew proven treatments because this is actually what is unethical?
            5. Anecdotal evidence (very low in the evidence hierarchy I agree), two words: Bob Marley.

          • Jeanette Maris Bellagamba Dena

            Just to help you review your evidence: https://goo.gl/images/9GUSl0

          • Jeanette Maris Bellagamba Dena

            Oh and maybe educate yourself on this: PhDs are the original ‘doctors’ and all MD’s were once considered PhDs until it was determined that their knowledge (although considerable) was not equivalent to that awarded by a PhD (the highest degree that a university can grant). Thus the MD was born. Many PhDs are working extremely to hard to cure disease.

          • Which has what relevance to the fact that in describing himself as a doctor and writing about medicine it is inevitable that readers will infer he is a medical doctor?

          • Jeanette Maris Bellagamba Dena

            You are the only one thinking that the term dr is confined to your good self.

            Oh and Peter, any chance you could present a coherent rebuttal and classify your evidence according to the evidence hierarchy rather than your childish ad hominem attacks. *says other people are bringing mean and repetitive, can only reply with ad finitum ad hominem attacks rather than having a healthy discussion*

            Not like you to be nasty and mean is it, or to rampant sexism or stoop to homophobic and other attacks is it? Oh hang on, look what I found: http://www.sarahmcculloch.com/opinion/2012/peter-reynolds-vs-everyon/

            Waits for an adult in depth evidence rebuttal/polite debate….

          • I think any observer has only to look back at your comments to see very clearly who is behaving in childish fashion.

            You’re a waste of space and time Jeanette, hypocrisy exemplified and totally irrelevant to the substance of this discussion. I won’t be engaging with you any further.

          • Jeanette Maris Bellagamba Dena

            Lol. More ad nauseum ad hominem.

            Good evening Peter. Can’t resist a Parthian shot though:

            Projection: A way to blame others for your own negative thoughts by repressing them and then attributing them to someone else. Due to the sorrowful nature of delusion and denial it is very difficult for the target to be able to clarify the reality of the situation.

          • Tangibulla

            If you’re sincerely trying to engage people in discussion, you might want to re-read some of your own comments in this thread before accusing others of hypocrisy and irrelevance.

          • Clever Jake

            There are a lot of scientific studies for the medical benefits of cannabis, including for treating cancer and psychosis. The title of the article has distasteful and demeaning with “cannabis cult”. The article does not mention cannabis scientific studies at all and simply dismisses everything with facile generalisations.

            Governments have delibritly blocked cannabis research for decades and we do know if cannabis can cure cancer, but early studies are promising, with more studies/clinical trials are needed. We might already know if cannabis cures cancer, but our fatuous dunderhead reprehensible politicians have malevolently delayed/blocked the progress of science, so that they can use the same modus operandi as Nixon/Reagan with the war on drugs mantra. So that they can simply garner votes from some of their citizens who are suffering from mass delusional hysteria 🙁

            https://www.gwpharm.com/about-us/news/gw-pharmaceuticals-achieves-positive-results-phase-2-proof-concept-study-glioma
            https://merryjane.com/health/gw-pharmaceuticals-is-proving-cannabis-helps-cure-cancer
            http://ir.gwpharm.com/releasedetail.cfm?releaseid=931686

          • Clever Jake

            I should have proofread my post, “and we do not know”

          • Jeanette Maris Bellagamba Dena

            Thanks jake. The first study has 21 pts (not powered) the 2nd link is a discussion about the first study, couldn’t open the 3rd link but it looks like it links to the same site as the first 2.

            I think you are taking the article too personally for there surely is a cult of people saying that cannabis is a panacea for all ills. Like me the article is claiming this panacea effect isn’t true. Trying to talk about hard evidence for THIS claim (panacea) for which there isn’t. Of course everybody who thinks it’s a cure all gets their hurt on. Can’t be bothered trying to have a healthy debate as not possible. Au revoir and good evening.

          • Fred Bell

            thanks Jeanette for the link…….makes good reading

          • You’re repeating yourself and repetition does not enhance or add to whatever point you are trying to make. Yes, I say again, I understand the hierarchy of evidence

          • Night of the Lepus

            Oh wait, you’re that Peter Reynolds, the racist homophobe, good day to you child

          • Jeanette Maris Bellagamba Dena
          • More repetition

          • Oh dear, you have a serious problem with an uncontrolled patronising attitude. Maybe try reining that in a bit? It might enhance your ability to communicate

            Yes, I fully understand each of your five issues but what is your point? Other than trying to quibble over issues that are not about Dr Grimes’ dreadful article and manifestly unscientific rant about the evidence for medical use of cannabis, what point are you trying to make?

          • Stephan Williams

            Bob Marley was murdered. “Cancer” was the weapon, as it has been with more than a few political and socially active figures who have refused to tow the party line. Cannabis couldn’t cure what they gave him. To use him to discredit cannabis as an herbal cure is as irresponsible as “Dr” Grimes’ false claims of it inefficiency. I have to suspect your motivations. Surly you’re as interested in finding a cure for cancers as much as I am. So why would you dismiss the “anecdotal evidence” from thousands of people who claim to have been cured of cancer by following the RSO protocol found online? Look it up.

            It saved my life, Jeanette Maris Bellagamba Dena.

            And someday it might save yours.

      • Estproph

        And you’re a jerk, which disqualifies you from not being a jerk.

      • Marnie Culotta

        I’m a medical marijuana patient.
        Tell me that my opinion or input is “disqualified” because I am a user and you get cyber kicked into oblivion.

    • Craig

      This Doctor of physics is also crap at his own sphere of so called expertise. Plutonium is not a naturally occurring substance. What an idiot!

      • Craig

        Cyanide is found in most fruits some nuts like Almonds, but nowhere in nature does it occurs in sufficient quantities to be toxic! Just go’s to show how wrong some so called experts can be.

        • Ed Goss

          Not strictly the point he was making, which was that natural does not mean benign. But, there have been cases of cider drinking alcoholics who have suffered from cyanide toxicity from apple pips. Admittedly very very rare, but not totally impossible. TBH, the volumes they were drinking meant that the cyanide was probably the last of their worries…

      • Night of the Lepus

        Yes it is you fucking idiot. Research better next time

        • Craig

          Please show where plutonium is naturally occurring with a half life long enough to be consumed. Uranium is natural but is enriched to make plutonium. And abuse shows your ignorance!

          • Night of the Lepus

            Ah changing the goalposts now. Typical. Sorry bubs, Plutonium is naturally occurring

      • Mark Gommer

        You might want to check the periodic table. Trace amounts of plutonium occur naturally in uranium.

    • Graeme Harrison

      Can you point we’re he claims to be a medical doctor? And while we’re talking medical qualifications, care to tell us yours?

  • This article spouts a lot of nonsense. It is obvious to anyone who has met a person, child or adult, who successfully utilizes marijuana medically that the drug has medicinal value, if only as a painkiller. Meanwhile, we prescribe much more toxic and dangerous substances every day. Stop with the scaremongering and let people use medicine that is clearly working for them. Legalization and regulation can only make things better by ensuring people can find out the right strains of marijuana for them and have consistent access to them.

    • Night of the Lepus

      Might help if you read the article next time

      • I did, hence the comment. Cannabis is proven to be medically effective in some circumstances. The author uses THC, which is one of many compounds within cannabis. Without legalization, those who believe cannabis to be the best remedy for their conditions are forced into an illegal black market where quality is unknown. Legalization and regulation allows for patients to find marijuana that created for their specific problems.

  • Richard Baranov

    I doubt very much if Dr David Grimes has inquired into the history of why Marijuana is illegal. Like most people he simply believes that it is a dangerous drug and that has always been the case. In fact it was made illegal by J Edger Hoover, the crossdressing queen of the FBI. His motivation was, quite simply, racism. It upset him that “filthy Mexicans” were coming across the border to sell dope or that Americans were going to Mexico to buy weed. The corruption of wholesome American youth and all that. He and his cohorts cooked up the idea that it would be named a dangerous drug and be made illegal. It was entirely a fiction but with all the resources of the FBI at his disposal he managed to pull it off and, as a result absurdly, Marijuana was put in the same category as Heroin and other really lethal drugs.
    There is a film “Reefer Madness” which supposedly depicts the lives of “Marijuana addicts” which demonstrates how propagandized the issue was and is. People can watch the movie on You Tube, if they wish. It becomes obvious within 5 minutes that it is an absurd parody of reality to the point that it is laughable to any rational person. It is against this background, the deliberate lie taken as fact, that all anti-marijuana propaganda should be seen. If you take nonsense as fact as an initial premise then it is going to color all that you do. “Garbage in, garbage out” and all that.
    In the meantime I concur with all those who have already written that the use of Marijuana has all sorts of health benefits but, since I would be simply repeating what others have already said on here I will forgo that.

    • Ronan McManus

      So J Edgar Hoover hated Mexicans and that is why the UK and New Zealand banned cannabis in the 20s?
      Fascinating stuff.

      • Axiom Seer

        well they are lapdogs

        • Ronan McManus

          Bwahahahaha!

          • Richard Baranov

            And, as above. You need to get your facts straight!

          • Ronan McManus

            See above, physician heal thyself

      • Richard Baranov

        Get your facts straight. Hoover was the Director of the Bureau of Investigation, the forerunner of the FBI from 1924. If you read the history you will find that the USA at his behest started pressuring foreign governments to make it illegal under threat of sanctions as soon as the USA made it illegal. “One source of tensions in the western and southwestern states was the influx of Mexicans to the U.S. following the 1910 Mexican Revolution.[21] Many Mexicans also smoked marijuana to relax after working in the fields…… Because of that, the passage of the initial laws is often described as a product of racism…..” You can find the information on Wikepedia if you feel like it.

        • Ronan McManus

          So what you are saying is that Hoover was able to force a country on the other side of the world to introduce the ban, but couldn’t do it in his own country for another decade?

          I could buy that Hoover was that influential in the USA, but why would the UK (bearing in mind that this was pre-war, where the UK was still a major global power and the USA wasn’t yet flexing its muscles globally) just go along with his personal desires?

          BTW, quoting a law from 1906 doesn’t help your argument much, Hoover was 11 in 1906.

          I agree that the propaganda was preposterous, but so is your line of reasoning.

          • Richard Baranov

            The US used threats of sanctions etc against other countries if they did not comply. But really, if you want to continue your irrational prejudice against Marijuana, feel free. But I prefer knowledge to fiction so, perhaps, of your own bat you might bother to research rather than criticise because it is perfectly obvious that you are approaching the subject from that unique perspective of ignorance that those who want to defend the indefensible so often do.
            Like others who have written here I know that Marijuana provides benefits in truly dire circumstances when all else fails. Perhaps you should research that instead of nitpicking. One example. A patient suffering from throat cancer. it was the only way he could eat and hold the food down. Another, a suffer of severe arthritis. Again it was Marijuana that provided relief. Another victim of grand mal seizures who was able to cut down on the seizures by the use of Marijuana. All people I have known, anecdotal with regards to science, but so what, the fact is Marijuana worked and frankly I find the sort of arguments that people like you put forward pretty feeble and almost always from people who have little or no experience of Marijuana and its uses. One has to ask what is it that people like you are so afraid of? Or is it you prefer authoritarianism and an adherence to the pronouncements of “experts” who are often wrong. In short I find the mentality of people like you hard to fathom, it seems to be distinctly lacking in compassion or concern for the suffering of others or its alleviation.

          • Ronan McManus

            But whether they did or did not threaten sanctions is beside the point
            As you have said, movement towards prohibition had started while Hoover was still a child. This is at odds with your original claim that it was made illegal because of Hoover’s racism (although that may have played a part).

            I have had a look at the actual scientific evidence for THC & CBD treatments. The evidence supports limited benefits for a number of ailments.
            Your ability to accept anecdotal evidence over real evidence is your business. It has no bearing on whether cannabis actually works for those people, even though they might think it does.

            It has nothing to do with compassion either. Do you think that all drugs should be legal, because some of them may help people who are ill?

    • Night of the Lepus

      You might want to get yourself a globe, there’s a whole big world outside of the U.S.

      • Richard Baranov

        You need to look at my profile on Disqus. I think you will find I have considerably more awareness of “the big world” than you.

        • Night of the Lepus

          Your post says otherwise

          • Richard Baranov

            Take it as you please. But your refusal to look tells me that you prefer your bigotry to fact.

  • Joel Torrão

    If recreational activities were not medicinal we would not spread seratonine when we laugh.
    Don’t tell me recreational marijuana is not medicinal just because i use it that way. To avoid doctors like you, thirsty for wallets full, i sit surrounded by trees (my real doctors), and vaporize it. The trees are there giving me what i need to survive, while i am vaporizing it. This should be a great lesson for you because trees are not trying to make me stop doing it, and yet they are sharing the sacred silence with me. This new cannabis cult as you call it is just a tentative of re-connection with the spirit within each one of us. This cult is just a consequence of the exosrcism of the spirit that took place in the last century in order to science do business. In my personal opinion i guess everywere there’s people who show you Truth, and other ones will show you Lie, so yeah there is pantomime villains who are doctors, but there are also angel doctors if it please you to know, but you are not one of them.

  • John Hunter

    At last a sane article about the hype and its cultlike followers . They are quick to wheel out some unfortunate sufferer in a wheelchair and claim marijuana is the only cure yet if one scratch deep enough it’s not surprising that it’s true motives are recreational.

    Pharmaceutical scientists may examine thousands of molecular compounds before they find one that effectively fights disease without harming the patient. Alternatively, hundreds of molecular pathways are evaluated to determine if a protein or compound can alter the signaling in a beneficial way.

    For those suffering a real medical malady please get proper medication. There are qualified pharmaceutical scientists and manufacturers that are expertly trained to discover, develop, test and manufacture new medications to high standards. A few grams of an “herbal” substance can contain an unknown quantity and quality of active ingredients and it is difficult to ascertain with certainty the precise contents,  even with laboratory equipment you have problems with preservation and isolating extractions.

    It would not be surprising that many so called activists are in the pocket of “big bucks marijuana” which is evident as soon as it becomes legal they step in and open so called “dispensaries” providing a variety of so called medical & recreational marijuana, extracts, infused products, paraphernalia and more.

    I don’t care if someone wants to smoke themselves into a coma in their mother’s basement but don’t pretend it’s a miracle cure all for everything and everyone.

    • Put aside your patronising, offensive and arrogant attitude and educate yourself about the endocannabinoid system. if you are capable of absorbing such information you will learn that while there are presently many overblown claims, cannabis does indeed offer the potential to be a very effective medicine for almost all disease.

      The hate-filled bigotry which you demonstrate demeans you but it will not stop this journey of discovery. A few hundred years ago you’d have been warning about falling of the edge of the world.

      • Night of the Lepus

        hate-filled bigotry? Says the hate-filled bigot.

  • Bill Kratzer

    the
    old lower dosed pot took more puffs to reach the same level we reach
    with only a few now. There is no desire to increase the level of high,
    unless you intake faster than normal like an idiot. kind of a self
    curing problem.

  • Bill Kratzer

    My eyes glazed over, did it say anywhere as to the funding source for his drivel

  • Bill Kratzer

    ‘as a general rule of thumb’ is his foundation ‘on probable ill effects of cannabis use’ ?????
    .

  • Kristi Sadler

    Who paid for this “research”? Wait there was not any here….

  • Axiom Seer

    BOTTOM LINE : MY BODY MY CHOICE

  • Stephan Williams

    “Dr David Robert Grimes is a physicist, cancer researcher and science
    writer and was the joint recipient of the 2014 Nature / Sense About
    Science Maddox Prize.”

    Dr. Grimes is a skilled propagandist. All those years of struggling for funding, writing to be awarded funds to legitimize his research have paid off. Now he’s writing nonsense for a major newspaper for big bucks.

    The trouble is Dr. Grimes has NEVER had cancer or used cannabis oil made from the herb without any chemical interference.

    I have.

    I was diagnosed with lung cancer and decided to forgo chemo and radiation after watching family and friends succumb to those poisons. I was fortunate enough to live in Canada and was allowed to purchase cannabis legally. I used Rick Simpson’s directions to prepare my medicine. Look him up online. He has personally been credited by thousands of people for saving their lives despite Dr. Grimes’ badly researched claims to the contrary.

    The bottom line? It’s 5 1/2 years later and I’m still cancer-free.

    Dr. Grimes is being extremely selective in his pointed criticisms and discrediting information about cannabis.

    But why wouldn’t he be? He doesn’t make any money when potential customers (who used to be called patients), choose to use a natural herb to cure their illness with chemotherapy and radiation. He makes his money flogging poisons, not promoting natural health – Poisons that even their pushers admit are only successful in 3% of cases after 5 years.

    The really sad thing about this article is the fact that so many members of the medical fraternity appear to be willing to sell their souls to the devil to secure funding for their own pet projects – all these supposed medical professionals salivating at the opportunity to enthusiastically take over from where Dr. Grimes has left off in his ridiculous and demonstrably ignorant assault on cannabis as a legitimate medicine proven to cure all kinds of physical ailments.

    Shameful. That’s what this article is: It’s shameful.

    • CharleeR

      This article is full of bullcrap. Your post, however, is full of FACTS and TRUTH.

    • Night of the Lepus

      You sir are a liar

      • Stephan Williams

        …and you sir, have just proven yourself to be an unimaginative, low-IQ troll with your idiotic response to my comments on Dr. Grimes’ base inventions and dishonest misrepresentations of the positive and PROVEN effects of natural cannabis.

        Please have a better day. It must suck to be you.

        • Night of the Lepus

          You should try and emphasise proven even more. No, you haven’t proved anything. You’re proof is anecdotal and can’t be replicated. Here’s a fact for you, cannabis doesn’t cure cancer, that’s why people who use it as a cure die of cancer.

  • Craig Chant

    Please show me evidence that it affects the brain the same way on those with a mental disability as those without, I use cannabis to treat my autism, I have dyspraxia and my brain is wired differently, and so it affects me differently to others. Which is why when some scum bag on an ex-mates stag do spiked my drink with cocaine, I was found unconscious in the gutter by the fantastic paramedics in Barcelona. Why? because for my brain chemistry cocaine is not a party stimulant when mixed with alcohol, it’s a tranquiliser. I wish people would stop making bullshit claims about something they clearly know nothing about, where as I do, because I have the disability I treat. Can I claim it will do the same for others or even those with the same disability, no of course I can’t, but don’t you dare think you can take away the medicinal effects it affords me arsehole!

  • Jason Forehand

    It is no wonder Doctor’s are looked at like idiot drug pushers for Big Pharma. This dumb shit takes the cake. I have epilepsy you moronic taint. I have used cannabis 3x a day for the last 4 years and I’ve had ZERO seizures since then. I won’t ever listen to a doctor tell me what they think I need. It’s pretty easy to call them out on their bullshit.

    • CharleeR

      And he is NOT a Medical Doctor. He has a Doctorate in physics.

  • Bethsheba Ashe

    This page is owned by the Telegraph Newspaper, which is owned by the Barclay Brothers, and who also own Trigen Laboratory outright – a company btw that markets products for Parkinsons disease and an anti-emetic for people who are vomiting due to Chemotherapy treatments for Cancer.

    Dr David Robert Grimes is a paid for shill that is misrepresenting the evidence! Don’t believe the hype? Ha! More like – don’t believe the media spin!

    • Night of the Lepus

      Get your tinfoil hats on. Flat earther above

      • Stephan Williams

        There are times when some people just need to shut up. This might be one of those times for you.

        I can’t decide if you were dropped on your head too many times as a baby or if your are paid to spew your bile over those of us who want to exchange ideas rather than invective.

        Could you please go away and leave the conversation to the adults in the room? Your infantile ad hominums are exhausting.

        • Night of the Lepus

          Still stalking….
          Rather pathetic

  • Daymon Faulkner

    I expected there to be evidence. There is none. You take your nature, and I will take mine.

  • Conor Saunders

    This is such a poor article it’s hard to know where to start :

    So let’s just bounce of some of the more egregious howlers …

    The 101 of cannabis use medically involves distinguishing between cannabidiol or CBD and its psychoactive cousin, THC. These 2 are very different and in some respects, opposite in effects. Grimes appears entirely unaware of CBD. This alone makes it abundantly clear this is not a topic Grimes has any real familiarity with whatsoever.

    Next: arguably the most widespread and best accepted medical use in recent times is in attenuating epilepsy, especially severe forms like Dravet’s. Again, Mr Grimes shows his ignorance of this reality.

    As the whole plant is illegal most places and Pharm Cos are busy worldwide simultaneously spending lobby bucks making sure cannabis stays illegal whilst busying themselves with patenting their own Franken lookalike molecules, of course research into whole plant cannabis use is modest. But there are still hundreds of papers last time I checked. Even the relatively new extract CBD has dozens of papers for cancer use alone.

    The guff about killing other cells shows again that Grimes is ignorant of perhaps the most well agreed and exciting thing about cannabis namely that it is not at all toxic to our own cells. Each of us, even our poorly educated journo, have a functioning endocannabinoid system.

    I could go on. This article is sub schoolboy standard. Fail.

  • Jd Carter

    LMAO so its the 1930s again, 1st off THC is NOT NOT NOT cannabis, second of all there is well over 300 studys on various cannabinoids and cancer, lab, animal AND human studys, there is also a correlative link between cannabis and psychosis, poor social and educational outcomes and when other factors such as reason of use, education and self medication are controlled this link goes away hence NOT causation, it should also be noted the reason cannabis is toted as a cure all is it is the closest thing Ive ever seen to one for one reason the endocannabinoid system, while this is fairly cutting edge knowledge ANYONE that claims to know about the subject should know this, anyone that still uses cannabis and thc interchangeably is automatically discredited on the subject of cannabis regardless of any other factor this includes experiences with cannabis, education about cannabis or education about drug use thus rendering this whole article nothing more than propaganda it should also be known this is not my opinion, my answer as a expert, user, ect this is a logical deduction that on any other subject would NOT be argued

  • CharleeR

    So, how do you explain my 14 yr old cat being totally cured of Squamous Cell Carcinoma by eating small amounts of Cannabis Oil daily? It is clearly not a placebo and actually has major curative properties and it is able to KILL CANCER cells while leaving healthy cells untouched. This article is a load of CRAP!

  • James Cannon

    Seems like there are a lot of pot-heads on here trying desperately to promote their brain-destroying, home-wrecking pastime!

  • Fraziel

    People should be able to use it if they want regardless of medical benefits. Its a plant growing on earth and I fail to see why any government should be able to tell you people what they can or can’t put in their own bodies, especially when alcohol, a far more harmful drug when abused is legal. Legalise it and apply the same rules to work, driving etc as are applied to alcohol. Of course since when did conservatives care about evidence or logic?

  • Bart Wilson

    But since the legal barriers exist, there still hasn’t been the research needed to show the results this author is looking for. Much of what he said is accurate, but most researchers I know say that more studies need to be done. We don’t even know what all the active ingredients in cannabis do, or how they do it.
    And I know of very few people who take cannabis as a cure for anything (other than pain and nausea). And to clarify something the author stated…. he mentioned that there were other meds for nausea that were better. It depends. On the person, on what pathway is causing the nausea. For some, cannabis exceeds the other medications in reducing nausea…..for those people, cannabis works better than the medical alternatives. Just like with all meds/side effects, it works for some and not for others. Here again is where more research is needed.
    I find this articles tone to be dismissive and some of its statements of fact to be twisted like the anti-vaxxers do with their ‘facts’ — leaving information out.
    The only thing that will end this is if we actually invest in quality research and testing.

  • Draz J Ekiel

    This article is a load of bunk. While I do agree with the statement that cannabis isn’t a magical cure all, and that it’s dangerous to hype it up as such, I feel the author has gone in the exact opposite direction and is under selling its uses.
    If cannabis wasn’t helpful for epilepsy then GW wouldn’t have managed to get epidiolex through clinical trials and approved for market in several nations; including FDA approval in the US.
    Cannabis is very effective for treating pain, it was used in many medicines prior to the 1970’s. So again, it must have passed clinical trials for those purposes.
    It’s been used for the treatment of opiate addicts, to aleviate pain in the legs and cramps during withdrawal. It’s a very good painkiller for other types of pain as well. I also fail to see how it can be said it doesnt increase appetite, that’s something cannabis is pretty famous for..Lol

  • Diprotodon

    Let’s hope for more articles like this so we can read the furious responses of all the outraged stoners! I thought they were supposed to be all mellow?

  • Liz McCauley

    Except PubMed and National Acadamies of Science and Technion and UPenn and UVT and UW and many others have published studies that refute the broad brush of inefficacy and danger of mecical marijuana by this articles author. Unethical to pluck data and opinions that support your view and use those out of context to paint a negative, quite obviously biased picture of marijuana’s medical value. Medical Marijuana when used as an adjunctive therapy with the right cannabinoid and terpene ratios for the targeted disease/disorder has been proven to be highly successful.

  • Hannah

    Totally understandable to be irritated by idiots promoting cannibus as the only treatment for cancer. It is a complete joke, however to take issue with poor journalism and scientific review through more poor journalism and scientific review!

    What kind of scientist sites a correlation of mental illness and cannibus as though it could be a causation. Any schmo with a schizophrenic buddy knows they use it to manage anxiety just like the rest of us.

    I find it difficult to believe someone who cares about scientific integrity, more than some other agenda wrote this article. I know DEA profiteers are probably super apprehensive about legalization because it means they lose a huge cash cow, but do better on choosing shills, C+ students – or you might actually have to work for a living rather than be legal drug dealers. Lol. 😂 😂 😂

  • CharleeR

    I cured my 14 yr old cat of Squamous Cell Carcinoma, by only feeding him tiny amounts of Cannabis Oil extract. It can cure cancer completely. I watched it work! It has also shown to stop epilepsy, particularly young children with Dravets syndrome that normally would not make it to their teen years due to the damage the 100’s of seizures cause to their brain. This article is full of lies, and the author writing this opinion piece is not a medical Dr, he merely has a Doctorate in Physics, so he knows not of what he speaks.

  • Tiffany Saunders

    I`m vaping cannabis every week and feel myself really great with that. I`ve even found an article about the advantages of smoking marijuana on this site https://vapingdaily.com/

  • Michael Tucker

    “In particular, there was no strong evidence that cannabis was useful for
    the treatment of epilepsy, appetite regulation for Aids patients, ADHD,
    Parkinson’s disease or irritable bowel syndrome. As Dr Sean Hennessy,
    one of the study’s authors, said: ‘Most of the therapeutic reasons people use medical marijuana aren’t substantiated beneficial effects of the plant.’” Has it been tested on non- epileptic seizure sufferers? I am neutral on the subject of legalization, except where it is medically benificial. I am aware that not all non- epileptic seizures occur for the same reasons, but a good cross- section study might prove useful– one way or the other.

  • Adrian Zelski

    How about letting people study it instead of throwing them in jail? How about opening the door to science to truly understand it? This article is terrible in the fact that it doesn’t ask that very simple question. If you really want to discuss this, how about an article asking for research to be allowed instead of being criminal activity?