Monthly Archives: October 2012
Established and potential therapeutic applications of cannabinoids in oncology.
Abstract
“Cannabis occurs naturally in the dried flowering or fruiting tops of the Cannabis sativa plant. Cannabis is most often consumed by smoking marihuana. Cannabinoids are the active compounds extracted from cannabis. Recently, there has been renewed interest in cannabinoids for medicinal purposes. The two proven indications for the use of the synthetic cannabinoid (dronabinol) are chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and AIDS-related anorexia. Other possible effects that may prove beneficial in the oncology population include analgesia, antitumor effect, mood elevation, muscle relaxation, and relief of insomnia. Two types of cannabinoid receptors, CB1 and CB2, have been detected. CB1 receptors are expressed mainly in the central and peripheral nervous system. CB2 receptors are found in certain nonneuronal tissues, particularly in the immune cells. Recent discovery of both the cannabinoid receptors and endocannabinoids has opened a new era in research on the pharmaceutical applications of cannabinoids. The use of cannabinoids should be continued in the areas indicated, and further studies are needed to evaluate other potential uses in clinical oncology.”
Cannabinoid receptor ligands as potential anticancer agents–high hopes for new therapies?
“OBJECTIVES:
The endocannabinoid system is an endogenous lipid signalling network comprising arachidonic-acid-derived ligands, cannabinoid (CB) receptors, transporters and endocannabinoid degrading enzymes. The CB(1) receptor is predominantly expressed in neurons but is also co-expressed with the CB(2) receptor in peripheral tissues. In recent years, CB receptor ligands, including Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol, have been proposed as potential anticancer agents.
KEY FINDINGS:
This review critically discusses the pharmacology of CB receptor activation as a novel therapeutic anticancer strategy in terms of ligand selectivity, tissue specificity and potency. Intriguingly, antitumour effects mediated by cannabinoids are not confined to inhibition of cancer cell proliferation; cannabinoids also reduce angiogenesis, cell migration and metastasis, inhibit carcinogenesis and attenuate inflammatory processes. In the last decade several new selective CB(1) and CB(2) receptor agents have been described, but most studies in the area of cancer research have used non-selective CB ligands. Moreover, many of these ligands exert prominent CB receptor-independent pharmacological effects, such as activation of the G-protein-coupled receptor GPR55, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma and the transient receptor potential vanilloid channels.
SUMMARY:
The role of the endocannabinoid system in tumourigenesis is still poorly understood and the molecular mechanisms of cannabinoid anticancer action need to be elucidated. The development of CB(2)-selective anticancer agents could be advantageous in light of the unwanted central effects exerted by CB(1) receptor ligands. Probably the most interesting question is whether cannabinoids could be useful in chemoprevention or in combination with established chemotherapeutic agents.”
Cannabinoids: potential anticancer agents.
Abstract
“Cannabinoids – the active components of Cannabis sativa and their derivatives – exert palliative effects in cancer patients by preventing nausea, vomiting and pain and by stimulating appetite. In addition, these compounds have been shown to inhibit the growth of tumour cells in culture and animal models by modulating key cell-signalling pathways. Cannabinoids are usually well tolerated, and do not produce the generalized toxic effects of conventional chemotherapies. So, could cannabinoids be used to develop new anticancer therapies?”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14570037
Therapeutic potential of cannabinoid receptor ligands: current status.
Abstract
“There are at least two types of cannabinoid receptors, CB1 also named CNR1 and CB2 also named CNR2, both coupled to G proteins. CB1 receptors exist primarily on central and peripheral neurons. CB2 receptors are present mainly on immune cells. Endogenous agonists for cannabinoid receptors (endocannabinoids) have also been discovered, the most important being arachidonoyl ethanolamide (anandamide), 2-arachidonoyl glycerol (2-AG), and 2-archidonyl glyceryl ether. Following their release, endocannabinoids are removed from the extracellular space and then degraded by intracellular enzymic hydrolysis. CB1/CB2 agonists are already used clinically as antiemetic or to stimulate appetite. Potential therapeutic uses of cannabinoid receptor agonists include the management of multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injury, pain, inflammatory disorders, glaucoma, bronchial asthma, vasodilatation that accompanies advanced cirrhosis, and cancer.”
Is The NFL’s Campaign For Breast Cancer Awareness Really A Scam?
“October is breast cancer awareness month, and with that, the NFL has decided to pitch in to raise both money and awareness for breast cancer research.
But how much of that money is actually going to find a cure for breast cancer? According to a report, not very much.
Every October, NFL teams sport pink shoes, gloves, towels, hats and shirts, all designed to raise money and awareness. The NFL’s fundraising effort is multifaceted: There’s the off-field auction of autographed NFL paraphernalia and there’s the NFL online store that entices shoppers to purchase officially licensed NFL breast cancer gear.
A report from Business Insider revealed that 5% of purchases of officially licensed gear go back to the American Cancer Society. The rest of the cash goes directly into the NFL’s pockets.
Through four seasons of this pink initiative, the NFL has raised just $3 million for breast cancer research. To put that into perspective, the NFL made $9.5 billion last year.”
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/10/11/is-the-nfls-campaign-against-breast-cancer-really-a-scam/
The NFL’s Campaign Against Breast Cancer Is a Total Scam
“Have you noticed that during the month of October, the NFL suddenly becomes intensely concerned with making sure you’re aware of breast cancer? Pink jerseys! Huge Ass Pink Ribbons at midfield! Pink motherfucking cleats! Fans interested in aware-ing on their own can even click on over to the NFL’s store and purchase ugly pink crap of their own under the assumption that their good intentions will actually contribute to the fight against cancer. Well, I hate to burst your Pepto Bismo Pink bubble, wearers of dangly earrings that contain both ribbons and tiny footballs, but you’ve been had — the NFL’s Breast Cancer Awareness Month campaign does raise itsy bitsy amounts of money for the fight against cancer, but the amount of money it raises pales in comparison to the amount of money it raises for billionaire NFL owners.
The NFL claims that its pink philanthropy efforts “support the fight against breast cancer” by “promoting awareness” and providing funds to the American Cancer Society. But what they’re mostly promoting is, uh, buying NFL gear, the profits from which are overwhelmingly pocketed by the NFL.
According to Business Insider, the NFL’s October Breast Cancer Awareness Month fundraising effort is multi-pronged. There’s the on-field onslaught of pink (AWARENESS), the off-field auction of autographed or otherwise noteworthy NFL paraphernalia (MONEY FOR THE CURE!), and the part of the NFL store that entices shoppers to purchase officially licensed NFL breast cancer gear, a portion of which goes to FINDING A CURE. According to the League, 100% of the proceeds from the specialty auction go to the American Cancer Society, but the total percentage of purchases of officially licensed gear that actually goes to FINDING A CURE is actually kind of pathetic — 5%. If you want to look at this cynically, in a way, the on-field wearin’ o’ the pink serves as an ad to direct consumers to purchase pink fan items.
BUT WAIT, you might say, AT LEAST THEY’RE DOING SOMETHING. And 5% is still something! Well, kind of. As BI pointed out, if NFL products are sold at a 100% markup and only 5% of sale proceeds go to the American Cancer Society, then the NFL is pocketing 90% of sales of Breast Cancer Awareness products, many of which would not be purchased if they didn’t come with a promise that consumers were “helping.” And, more perspective: while the American Cancer Society isn’t, say, Komen, they still don’t use 100% of the money they receive to “fight” breast cancer. Only 70% of donations taken in by the organization go toward cancer research. So, if you spend $10 on pink stink from the NFL, only about 35 cents is going to finding a cure for breast cancer. And $4.50 goes right back to the NFL, where I like to imagine that it’s spent on gas for a Lake Minnetonka pleasure cruise. For the cure.
But what about awareness?! Surely the NFL is helping keep people aware and alert and vigilant that at any moment, breast cancer could be lurking around a corner in a dark alley waiting with a hot pink switchblade to steal your purse and boobs. The thing about awareness is that it’s all but impossible to quantify — and everyone knows about breast cancer. If you asked 100 people if they’re aware that breast cancer is a thing and that it’s almost impossible to predict and most often affects women, I’d bet that most of them would nod before slowly backing away from you. Breast cancer awareness is so ubiquitous that if deadly diseases attended the same high school, breast cancer would probably be voted prom queen. The “awareness” that comes from the NFL’s sales of pink branded items doesn’t justify the extent to which the league is taking advantage of consumers’ good intentions to pad their wallets. Even if no NFL player ever touched another pink thing again, Americans would go right on being aware of the disease. Unless the Buffalo Jills or New Orleans Saintsations cheerleaders are holding up signs that show women how to give themselves breast self-exams or tickets come with 5 page printouts of places low income women can obtain breast health screening for low or no cost, the type of awareness the NFL is providing is useless, vague garbage.
Since the program’s inception four years ago, the NFL has raised $3 million for breast cancer. In 2009, the League made $8.5 billion. Last year, they made $9.5 billion. Commissioner Roger Goodell has set a revenue goal of $25 billion per year by the year 2027. A million per year out of between $8.5 and $9.5 billion in revenues? Pardon me while I don’t slobber all over the NFL’s pink-drenched marketing campaign.
Want to cure breast cancer? Give directly to an organization that cures breast cancer, or to an advocacy group that seeks actual cures, not marketing and corporate profits. Besides, wearing those horrid pink NFL breast cancer rain boots actually causes cancer. Of the eyes.”
http://jezebel.com/5950971/the-nfls-campaign-against-breast-cancer-is-a-total-scam
Is the pink ribbon campaign a scam?
“The pink ribbon has become synonymous with solidarity for women who battle breast cancer. After all, a diagnosis of breast cancer changes the life of the diagnosed and the lives of all those involved — many times for the worse.
But, did you ever stop to think about what the pink ribbon campaign is all about? Is it really meant to bring “awareness” to breast cancer? Hasn’t everyone heard of breast cancer? Some have questioned the motives of those who stand behind those pretty pink ribbons.
Some have suggested that Breast Cancer Awareness month can be seen as a push for women to be corralled into the mammography suite so they can await their breast cancer diagnosis when the mammography is complete.
The science behind mammography is clear. Mammography does more harm than good.
Yes, the concept seems harsh. After all, most people who wear pink ribbons are innocent. They just go along with the rest. It’s a chance to show that they support the cause, whatever that is.
The pink ribbon campaign, however, is not completely innocent. Take for example this questionable involvement in the pink ribbon campaign. In October 2010, KFC filled and sold the “Bucket for the Cure,” donating 50 cents to breast cancer for each bucket sold. If KFC had a real interest for preventing breast cancer or for finding its cure, wouldn’t they close their doors forever? After all, the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) sued KFC for not disclosing to its customers that the chicken sold at KFC contained a dangerous carcinogen. “KFC should post warnings because its aggressively marketed new product harbors a chemical that increases the risk of breast cancer, prostate cancer, and other forms of this lethal disease,” commented Dr. Neal Barnard, of PCRM.
While some participants in the pink ribbon campaign do send raised funds to breast cancer charities, such as Komen for the Cure, others do not follow through with contributions. The Better Business Bureau has issued warnings to consumers regarding this shell game.
Pink Ribbons have hope. On the other hand, the entire breast cancer awareness initiative would be worthwhile if we continued to raise money to advertise the information that we already have about breast cancer prevention: diet, exercise, stress management prevent breast cancer. Why is it that people do not know that eating a low-fat whole plant foods diet is the single most important thing you can do to prevent breast cancer? Why don’t breast cancer organizations teach what we already know instead of continuing to look for a cure that comes in an expensive pill, treatment, or surgery?
Who’s benefiting here, anyway?”
Search: Study says marijuana fights cancer
“Researchers in Madrid say the main psychoactive ingredient in marijuana (what is it?) and other “cannabinoids” (what are those?) could help slow cancer growth, as well as manage many cancer symptoms (like what?). Scientists studied cancer cells (which type?) that grow faster than normal cells, and discovered that the cancer cells died whenever they were exposed to the pot ingredient.”
http://specials.msn.com/a-list/healthyliving/marijuana-fights-cancer-popular-pages
Marijuana compound could help fight breast cancer – ABC News
“There may be a new weapon in the fight against aggressive forms of breast cancer in the future, and it comes from an unlikely source: Marijuana. Researchers at California Pacific Medical Center in San Francisco believe a compound in marijuana may help.
The research funded by the California Breast Cancer Research Program builds on more than a decade of studies involving the genes responsible for the spread of cancer. Now scientists have found at the cellular level, a compound in cannabis inhibits the gene that controls the spread of cancer.
“The problem is not the cancer itself, the problem is the spread of the cancer,” said cancer researcher Yvez Desprez, Ph.D.
Cancer researcher Pierre Desprez points to the gene ID-1 as the trigger.
“When this type of gene is expressed, the cells basically go crazy and they’re very aggressive and they metastasize everywhere in the body,” said Desprez.
“We could expect that if we create really effective inhibitors against it, we could potentially treat many types of aggressive cancers,” said cancer researcher Sean McAllister, Ph.D.
Their research in breast cancer cell lines focused on using a non-toxic compound in cannabis to target the ID-1 gene.
“What we found was cannabidiol is a particularly good inhibitor of this gene that’s responsible for the ability of cancer cells to become very aggressive,” said McAllister.”
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/health&id=5771385