Josh Hawley 2011-
While the world momentarily breathes a sigh of relief at the death of the world's worst terrorist Osama bin Laden, there appears on the horizon a greater terror not yet realized. The prospect of World War III now looms even more imminent.
The greatest saint in modern living history A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, in the 1970's extensively spoke about and predicted, that world war three would ultimately foment between Pakistan and India, at the behest of the Americans.
With the apparently glaring and supposed deliberate ISI intelligence breakdown regarding the whereabouts of Osama Bin Laden, it markedly appears, that Pakistan was at some level or another supporting Bin Ladin. Bin Laden appears to have been hiding in plain sight just 90 miles from Islamabad in an affluent area of Abbottabad under the unofficial protection of Pakistan.
This smacks hard in the face of American-Pakistan relations, and no doubt will lead to a major reassessment in the public sphere of just exactly who The United States' real enemies are. After the celebrations and jubilation dies down you can bet American intelligence agencies, and American official policy in relation to Pakistan is going to take a major turn.
Pakistan has long been the bastion of radical Islamic extremism in the region and perhaps the world. India has suffered long at the numerous terrorist attacks that have originated in Pakistan. And Pakistanis are themselves subject to far too many civilian terrorist attacks from extremist elements within Pakistan. Pakistan in fact could be said to be much more dangerous than Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria, and especially Afghanistan, for unlike these nations Pakistan is a confirmed nuclear state. Pakistan does posses a nuclear bomb. Perhaps this is the deterrent keeping the Americans from invading Pakistan for so long. And perhaps this is the real reason for the buildup in Afghanistan. Afghanistan with its newly built American bases will serve as an excellent launching point for the inevitable full scale war against Pakistan that looms.
India has long been pointing the finger at Pakistan, and released the following statement just after the death of Bin Laden was announced: "The killing of Osama bin Laden near Islamabad is proof that "terrorists belonging to different organisations find sanctuary in Pakistan", -Indian Home Minister P Chidambaram says.
According to the Indian government, 19 terrorists wanted by India currently reside in Pakistan. India squarely blames the Pakistani based terror group Lashkar-e-Taiba for the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks. United States intelligence was for a long time lacking in this region of the world. The United States was admittedly caught off guard in 1998 when India made its second nuclear test since 1972 "Operation Shakti" and Pakistan followed a few months later with five nuclear devices code-named "Chagai-I".
The US CIA admitted at the time that it did not have intelligence on either of these nuclear operations either by Pakistan or India.
This must have sent shivers down the spines of senior American military and intelligence leadership.
It now appears that destabilization of the region starting first with Iraq, and Afghanistan was a long standing plan to make the potential war with Pakistan a less consuming affair. Iraq with its former leadership would have most likely joined Pakistan against the United States, as would Syria, Libya, and Iran. So the military and intelligence actions in the region serve the United States long term interest of taking out the Pakistani nuclear state. At this point Iran remains the only link in the cog to be taken out before the United States allied with India launches full scale, 'all options' war on Pakistan.
As details emerge about the United States knowledge of the whereabouts of Bin Laden going back as far as 2002, it appears that the operation to take him out was selected on the basis of a much larger plan leading up to full scale war with Pakistan. Or perhaps those old world tactics (couriers) are still much more effective than all of the modern gadgetry that billions and trillions of dollars can buy. In which case the United States is hugely underestimating the kind of war it will be getting itself into. It won't work to simply 'bomb them back into the stoneage'. In order to effectively bomb them back into the ston-eage, huge civilian population centers will have to be devastated. This will not sit well with public opinion anywhere in the world. Once the US makes the choice to go nuclear the whole thing will spin out of control.
Unfortunately for the world this war with Pakistan will be the ultimate undoing of modern civilization as we currently know it. For this will undoubtedly lead to World War III. We know that the US has been building its new alliances for many years, and no doubt the Europeans will come out in full support of the United States and India. This war will without a doubt go nuclear and India (the second most populous nation on Earth) will suffer massive losses. Russia and China will not be able to avoid being drawn in and will most likely go the side of Pakistan and the other Middle Eastern countries. The regional instabilities of Southeast Asia as well as the Korean peninsula will quickly spill over and erupt into the larger scale conflict. The same will be true for the long standing conflicts already erupting in the former European colonies of Africa and the Sub-Suhara. The United States has long been undermined from within, and is practically on the brink of internal collapse, a possible civil war may emerge within the American States further adding to the chaos.
The United States and Russia have long been the equalizing agents in staying off a nuclear war. Once the United States goes nuclear their will be virtually no reason for the other eight nuclear powers (including Israel) to refrain from nuclear action. This will result in unprecedented devastation and loss of life all over the planet.
So rejoice while you can, because this is nothing more than a brief respite in an increasingly escalating war that will wipe out huge numbers of population all over the planet.
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Journey of Self Discovery 6.5
Slaughterhouse Civilization
Jyotirmayi-devi dasi: That priest who visited was telling you that he was asking all his parishioners to follow God's law. So you asked him if he was going to get them to follow the fifth commandment, the law against killing--including animal-killing and especially cow-killing.
Srila Prabhupada: Yes, this is our proposal: "Why should you kill the cow? Let the cow be protected." You can take the cow's milk and use this milk for making so many nutritious, delicious preparations. Aside from that, as far as meat-eating is concerned, every cow will die--so you just wait a while, and there will be so many dead cows. Then you can take all the dead cows and eat. So how is this a bad proposal? If you say, "You are restraining us from meat-eating"--no, we don't restrain you. We simply ask you, "Don't kill. When the cow is dead, you can eat it."
Yogesvara dasa: You've pointed out that the cow is just like a mother.
Srila Prabhupada: Yes. She gives us her milk.
Yogesvara dasa: But in the West now, when their parents grow old the people generally send them away to old age homes. So if people have no compassion even toward their own parents, how can we educate them to protect the cow?
Srila Prabhupada: They don't have to protect the cow. We shall protect the cow. Simply we ask them, "Don't purchase meat from the slaughterhouse. We shall supply you the cow after her death." Where is the difficulty?
Satsvarupa dasa Gosvami: Not enough meat fast enough--they're eating so much meat.
Srila Prabhupada: "Not enough"? By killing the cows, how will you get any more meat? The total number of cows will remain the same. Simply wait for their natural death. That is the only restriction. You have got a limited number of cows. Either you wait for their death or you kill them at once--the number of cows is the same. So we simply ask you, "Don't kill them. Wait for their natural death and then take the meat." What is the difficulty? And we simply ask you, "As long as they're alive, let us take the cow's milk and prepare delicious foods for the whole human society."
Yogesvara dasa: If people don't kill the cows they will have even more meat, because that way the cows will have more time to reproduce more cows. If they don't kill the cows right away, there will be even more cows.
Srila Prabhupada: More cows, yes. They'll have more cows. We simply request, "Don't kill. Don't maintain slaughterhouses." That is very sinful. It brings down very severe karmic reactions upon society. Stop these slaughterhouses. We don't say, "Stop eating meat." You can eat meat, but don't take it from the slaughterhouse, by killing. Simply wait, and you'll get the carcasses.
After all, how long will the cows live? Their maximum age is twenty years, and there are many cows who live only eighteen, sixteen, or ten years. So wait that much time; then regularly get dead cows and eat. What is the difficulty?
For the first few years you may not get quite as much as now. During that time you can eat some dogs and cats. [Laughter.] Yes. In Korea they eat dogs. What is the difference between here and Korea? You can also eat dogs for the time being. Or hogs. Eat hogs. We don't prohibit the killing of these less important animals. We neither sanction nor prohibit. But especially we request cow protection, because it is ordered by Lord Krsna. Go-raksya: "Protect the cows." That is our duty.
And economically, also, it is very useful. Krsna has not recommended this for nothing; it is not like that. Krsna's order has meaning. The cows on our Hare Krsna farms are giving more milk than other cows--because they are confident, "We will not be killed here." It is not like these rascals, these so-called Christians, say: "They have no soul; they have no intelligence." They have intelligence. In other places they do not give so much milk. But on our farms they are very jolly. As soon as the devotees call, they'll come. Yes--just like friends. And they are confident, "We'll not be killed." So they are jubilant, and they are giving much milk. Yes.
In Europe and America the cows are very good, but the cow-killing system is also very good. So you stop this. You simply request them, "You'll get the cow's flesh. As soon as she is dead, we shall supply you free of charge. You haven't got to pay so much money. You can get the flesh free and eat it then. Why are you killing? Stop these slaughterhouses." What is wrong with this proposal?
We don't want to stop trade or the production of grains and vegetables and fruit. But we want to stop these killing houses. It is very, very sinful. That is why all over the world they have so many wars. Every ten or fifteen years there is a big war--a wholesale slaughterhouse for humankind. But these rascals--they do not see it, that by the law of karma, every action must have its reaction.
You are killing innocent cows and other animals--nature will take revenge. Just wait. As soon as the time is right, nature will gather all these rascals and slaughter them. Finished. They'll fight amongst themselves--Protestants and Catholics, Russia and America, this one and that one. It is going on. Why? That is nature's law. Tit for tat. "You have killed. Now you kill yourselves."
They are sending animals to the slaughterhouse, and now they'll create their own slaughterhouse. [Imitating gunfire:] Tung! Tung! Kill! Kill! You see? Just take Belfast, for example. The Roman Catholics are killing the Protestants, and the Protestants are killing the Catholics. This is nature's law. It's not necessary that you be sent to the ordinary slaughterhouse. You'll make a slaughterhouse at home. You'll kill your own child--abortion. This is nature's law. Who are these children being killed? They are these meat-eaters. They enjoyed themselves when so many animals were killed, and now they're being killed by their mothers. People do not know how nature is working. If you kill, you must be killed. If you kill the cow, who is your mother, then in some future lifetime your mother will kill you. Yes. The mother becomes the child, and the child becomes the mother.Mam sa khadatiti mamsah. The Sanskrit word is mamsa. Mam means "me," and sa means "he." I am killing this animal; I am eating him. And in my next lifetime he'll kill me and eat me. When the animal is sacrificed, this mantra is recited into the ear of the animal--"You are giving your life, so in your next life you will get the opportunity of becoming a human being. And I who am now killing you will become an animal, and you will kill me." So after understanding this mantra, who will be ready to kill an animal?
Jyotirmayi-devi dasi: That priest who visited was telling you that he was asking all his parishioners to follow God's law. So you asked him if he was going to get them to follow the fifth commandment, the law against killing--including animal-killing and especially cow-killing.
Srila Prabhupada: Yes, this is our proposal: "Why should you kill the cow? Let the cow be protected." You can take the cow's milk and use this milk for making so many nutritious, delicious preparations. Aside from that, as far as meat-eating is concerned, every cow will die--so you just wait a while, and there will be so many dead cows. Then you can take all the dead cows and eat. So how is this a bad proposal? If you say, "You are restraining us from meat-eating"--no, we don't restrain you. We simply ask you, "Don't kill. When the cow is dead, you can eat it."
Yogesvara dasa: You've pointed out that the cow is just like a mother.
Srila Prabhupada: Yes. She gives us her milk.
Yogesvara dasa: But in the West now, when their parents grow old the people generally send them away to old age homes. So if people have no compassion even toward their own parents, how can we educate them to protect the cow?
Srila Prabhupada: They don't have to protect the cow. We shall protect the cow. Simply we ask them, "Don't purchase meat from the slaughterhouse. We shall supply you the cow after her death." Where is the difficulty?
Satsvarupa dasa Gosvami: Not enough meat fast enough--they're eating so much meat.
Srila Prabhupada: "Not enough"? By killing the cows, how will you get any more meat? The total number of cows will remain the same. Simply wait for their natural death. That is the only restriction. You have got a limited number of cows. Either you wait for their death or you kill them at once--the number of cows is the same. So we simply ask you, "Don't kill them. Wait for their natural death and then take the meat." What is the difficulty? And we simply ask you, "As long as they're alive, let us take the cow's milk and prepare delicious foods for the whole human society."
Yogesvara dasa: If people don't kill the cows they will have even more meat, because that way the cows will have more time to reproduce more cows. If they don't kill the cows right away, there will be even more cows.
Srila Prabhupada: More cows, yes. They'll have more cows. We simply request, "Don't kill. Don't maintain slaughterhouses." That is very sinful. It brings down very severe karmic reactions upon society. Stop these slaughterhouses. We don't say, "Stop eating meat." You can eat meat, but don't take it from the slaughterhouse, by killing. Simply wait, and you'll get the carcasses.
After all, how long will the cows live? Their maximum age is twenty years, and there are many cows who live only eighteen, sixteen, or ten years. So wait that much time; then regularly get dead cows and eat. What is the difficulty?
For the first few years you may not get quite as much as now. During that time you can eat some dogs and cats. [Laughter.] Yes. In Korea they eat dogs. What is the difference between here and Korea? You can also eat dogs for the time being. Or hogs. Eat hogs. We don't prohibit the killing of these less important animals. We neither sanction nor prohibit. But especially we request cow protection, because it is ordered by Lord Krsna. Go-raksya: "Protect the cows." That is our duty.
And economically, also, it is very useful. Krsna has not recommended this for nothing; it is not like that. Krsna's order has meaning. The cows on our Hare Krsna farms are giving more milk than other cows--because they are confident, "We will not be killed here." It is not like these rascals, these so-called Christians, say: "They have no soul; they have no intelligence." They have intelligence. In other places they do not give so much milk. But on our farms they are very jolly. As soon as the devotees call, they'll come. Yes--just like friends. And they are confident, "We'll not be killed." So they are jubilant, and they are giving much milk. Yes.
In Europe and America the cows are very good, but the cow-killing system is also very good. So you stop this. You simply request them, "You'll get the cow's flesh. As soon as she is dead, we shall supply you free of charge. You haven't got to pay so much money. You can get the flesh free and eat it then. Why are you killing? Stop these slaughterhouses." What is wrong with this proposal?
We don't want to stop trade or the production of grains and vegetables and fruit. But we want to stop these killing houses. It is very, very sinful. That is why all over the world they have so many wars. Every ten or fifteen years there is a big war--a wholesale slaughterhouse for humankind. But these rascals--they do not see it, that by the law of karma, every action must have its reaction.
You are killing innocent cows and other animals--nature will take revenge. Just wait. As soon as the time is right, nature will gather all these rascals and slaughter them. Finished. They'll fight amongst themselves--Protestants and Catholics, Russia and America, this one and that one. It is going on. Why? That is nature's law. Tit for tat. "You have killed. Now you kill yourselves."
They are sending animals to the slaughterhouse, and now they'll create their own slaughterhouse. [Imitating gunfire:] Tung! Tung! Kill! Kill! You see? Just take Belfast, for example. The Roman Catholics are killing the Protestants, and the Protestants are killing the Catholics. This is nature's law. It's not necessary that you be sent to the ordinary slaughterhouse. You'll make a slaughterhouse at home. You'll kill your own child--abortion. This is nature's law. Who are these children being killed? They are these meat-eaters. They enjoyed themselves when so many animals were killed, and now they're being killed by their mothers. People do not know how nature is working. If you kill, you must be killed. If you kill the cow, who is your mother, then in some future lifetime your mother will kill you. Yes. The mother becomes the child, and the child becomes the mother.Mam sa khadatiti mamsah. The Sanskrit word is mamsa. Mam means "me," and sa means "he." I am killing this animal; I am eating him. And in my next lifetime he'll kill me and eat me. When the animal is sacrificed, this mantra is recited into the ear of the animal--"You are giving your life, so in your next life you will get the opportunity of becoming a human being. And I who am now killing you will become an animal, and you will kill me." So after understanding this mantra, who will be ready to kill an animal?
Some Hemp Facts
Here are some facts about hemp:
• Over 20,000 modern day products can be made from hemp
• Hemp produces 4 times as much ethanol per acre as corn
• Plastics made from hemp are biodegradable
• Hemp is the #1 producer of biomass per acre in the world, up to 10 tons per acre in four months
• 1 acre of hemp produces as much cellulose fiber pulp as 4 acres of trees, 2 crops of hemp can be grown annually
• The USDA states “the waste product from making canvas, rope and linen from cannabis hemp bast fiber, this waste product, the hurd fiber, is more than 4 times more productive than trees for fiber production for paper and building materials.”
• Hemp seed is the most complete food source containing all 8 essential amino acids, the essential fatty acids, as well as fibre, carbohydrates, vitamins and minerals needed to sustain human life
• Hemp produces the strongest, most durable natural soft-fiber on Earth
• Most industrialized countries legally grow hemp
• The United States imports all the hemp used in American consumed products, an industry worth over $300 million in retail sales annually
• The DEA spends over $10 million dollars annually to eradicate feral “ditchweed” in America
• The “ditchweed” growing across the farmlands of America are the strong heirloom crops of our ancestors and remnants of the crops grown for the
war effort during WWII. A film called “Hemp For Victory” was produced by the USDA to promote hemp farming during WWII, watch it below:
• These same heirloom “ditchweed” seeds were once protected by armed military guards and considered a national treasure
• Hemp was used as legal tender in America from 1631 until the early 1800s, you could pay your taxes with hemp
• The first hemp laws in America were “must grow laws” and required colonists to grow hemp
• Until the 1800′s most of the textile and paper products were made from hemp
• Humans have been cultivating and using hemp industrially for around 10,000 years
• Relatively drought-resistant and it’s high protein seed has been relied upon several times through history during drought-induced famine
• Hemp stabilizes and enriches soil, and reduces weeds without chemical applications
• Hemp was planted around Chernobyl to remove toxins and heal the soil —”Hemp is proving to be one of the best phyto-remediative plants we have
been able to find”
“Why use up the forest which were centuries in the making and the mines which required ages to lay down, if we can get the equivalent of forest and
mineral products in the annual growth of the hemp fields “
- Henry Ford
“Hemp is of the first necessity to the wealth and protection of the country “
- Thomas Jefferson
“Make the most you can of the Indian Hempseed and sow it everywhere”
- George Washington
• Over 20,000 modern day products can be made from hemp
• Hemp produces 4 times as much ethanol per acre as corn
• Plastics made from hemp are biodegradable
• Hemp is the #1 producer of biomass per acre in the world, up to 10 tons per acre in four months
• 1 acre of hemp produces as much cellulose fiber pulp as 4 acres of trees, 2 crops of hemp can be grown annually
• The USDA states “the waste product from making canvas, rope and linen from cannabis hemp bast fiber, this waste product, the hurd fiber, is more than 4 times more productive than trees for fiber production for paper and building materials.”
• Hemp seed is the most complete food source containing all 8 essential amino acids, the essential fatty acids, as well as fibre, carbohydrates, vitamins and minerals needed to sustain human life
• Hemp produces the strongest, most durable natural soft-fiber on Earth
• Most industrialized countries legally grow hemp
• The United States imports all the hemp used in American consumed products, an industry worth over $300 million in retail sales annually
• The DEA spends over $10 million dollars annually to eradicate feral “ditchweed” in America
• The “ditchweed” growing across the farmlands of America are the strong heirloom crops of our ancestors and remnants of the crops grown for the
war effort during WWII. A film called “Hemp For Victory” was produced by the USDA to promote hemp farming during WWII, watch it below:
• These same heirloom “ditchweed” seeds were once protected by armed military guards and considered a national treasure
• Hemp was used as legal tender in America from 1631 until the early 1800s, you could pay your taxes with hemp
• The first hemp laws in America were “must grow laws” and required colonists to grow hemp
• Until the 1800′s most of the textile and paper products were made from hemp
• Humans have been cultivating and using hemp industrially for around 10,000 years
• Relatively drought-resistant and it’s high protein seed has been relied upon several times through history during drought-induced famine
• Hemp stabilizes and enriches soil, and reduces weeds without chemical applications
• Hemp was planted around Chernobyl to remove toxins and heal the soil —”Hemp is proving to be one of the best phyto-remediative plants we have
been able to find”
“Why use up the forest which were centuries in the making and the mines which required ages to lay down, if we can get the equivalent of forest and
mineral products in the annual growth of the hemp fields “
- Henry Ford
“Hemp is of the first necessity to the wealth and protection of the country “
- Thomas Jefferson
“Make the most you can of the Indian Hempseed and sow it everywhere”
- George Washington
Friday, April 29, 2011
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
THC and Natural Cannabinoids Counteract Cancer!!!
by Steve Kubby, Sierra Times
November 10th, 2003
A new study published in Nature Reviews-Cancer provides an historic and detailed explanation about how THC and natural cannabinoids counteract cancer, but preserve normal cells.
The study by Manuel Guzmán of Madrid Spain found that cannabinoids, the active components of marijuana, inhibit tumor growth in laboratory animals. They do so by modulating key cell-signalling pathways, thereby inducing direct growth arrest and death of tumor cells, as well as by inhibiting the growth of blood vessels that supply the tumor.
The Guzman study is very important according to Dr. Ethan Russo , a neurologist and world authority on medical cannabis: "Cancer occurs because cells become immortalized; they fail to heed normal signals to turn off growth. A normal function of remodelling in the body requires that cells die on cue. This is called apoptosis, or programmed cell death. That process fails to work in tumors. THC promotes its reappearance so that gliomas, leukemias, melanomas and other cell types will in fact heed the signals, stop dividing, and die."
"But, that is not all," explains Dr. Russo: "The other way that tumors grow is by ensuring that they are nourished: they send out signals to promote angiogenesis, the growth of new blood vessels. Cannabinoids turn off these signals as well. It is truly incredible, and elegant."
In other words, this article explains several ways in which cannabinoids might be used to fight cancer, and, as the article says, "Cannabinoids are usually well tolerated, and do not produce the generalized toxic effects of conventional chemotherapies.
Usually, any story that even suggests the possibility of a new treatment for cancer is greeted with headlines about a "cancer cure" however remote in the future and improbable in fact it might be. But if marijuana is involved, don't expect any coverage from mainstream media, especially since mainstream editors have been quietly killing this story for the past thirty years
That's right, news about the abilility of pot to shrink tumors first surfaced, way back in 1974. Researchers at the Medical College of Virginia, who had been funded by the National Institutes of Health to find evidence that marijuana damages the immune system, found instead that THC slowed the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice - lung and breast cancer, and a virus-induced leukemia.
The Washington Post reported on the 1974 study - in the "Local" section - on Aug. 18, 1974. Under the headline, "Cancer Curb Is Studied," it read in part: "The active chemical agent in marijuana curbs the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice and may also suppress the immunity reaction that causes rejection of organ transplants, a Medical College of Virginia team has discovered." The researchers "found that THC slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers, and a virus-induced leukemia in laboratory mice, and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent."
"News coverage of the Madrid discovery has been virtually nonexistent in this country. The news broke quietly on Feb. 29, 2000 with a story that ran once on the UPI wire about the Nature Medicine article," complained MarijuanaNews.com editor Richard Cowan , who said he was only able to find the article through a link that appeared briefly on the Drudge Report Web page. "The New York Times, The Washington Post, and Los Angeles Times all ignored the story, even though its newsworthiness is indisputable: a benign substance occurring in nature destroys deadly brain tumors," added Cowan.
On March 29, 2001, the San Antonio Current printed a carefully researched, bombshell of a story by Raymond Cushing titled, "POT SHRINKS TUMORS; GOVERNMENT KNEW IN '74." Media coverage since then has been nonexistant, except for a copy of the story on Alternet.
It is hard to believe that the knowledge that cannabis can be used to fight cancer has been suppressed for almost thirty years , yet it seems likely that it will continue to be suppressed. Why?
According to Cowan, the answer is because it is a threat to cannabis prohibition . "If this article and its predecessors from 2000 and 1974 were the only evidence of the suppression of medical cannabis, then one might perhaps be able to rationalize it in some herniated way. However, there really is massive proof that the suppression of medical cannabis represents the greatest failure of the institutions of a free society, medicine, journalism, science, and our fundamental values," Cowan notes.
Millions of people have died horrible deaths and in many cases, familes exhausted their savings on dangerous, toxic and expensive drugs. Now we are just beginning to realize that while marijuana has never killed anyone, marijuana prohibition has killed millions.
November 10th, 2003
A new study published in Nature Reviews-Cancer provides an historic and detailed explanation about how THC and natural cannabinoids counteract cancer, but preserve normal cells.
The study by Manuel Guzmán of Madrid Spain found that cannabinoids, the active components of marijuana, inhibit tumor growth in laboratory animals. They do so by modulating key cell-signalling pathways, thereby inducing direct growth arrest and death of tumor cells, as well as by inhibiting the growth of blood vessels that supply the tumor.
The Guzman study is very important according to Dr. Ethan Russo , a neurologist and world authority on medical cannabis: "Cancer occurs because cells become immortalized; they fail to heed normal signals to turn off growth. A normal function of remodelling in the body requires that cells die on cue. This is called apoptosis, or programmed cell death. That process fails to work in tumors. THC promotes its reappearance so that gliomas, leukemias, melanomas and other cell types will in fact heed the signals, stop dividing, and die."
"But, that is not all," explains Dr. Russo: "The other way that tumors grow is by ensuring that they are nourished: they send out signals to promote angiogenesis, the growth of new blood vessels. Cannabinoids turn off these signals as well. It is truly incredible, and elegant."
In other words, this article explains several ways in which cannabinoids might be used to fight cancer, and, as the article says, "Cannabinoids are usually well tolerated, and do not produce the generalized toxic effects of conventional chemotherapies.
Usually, any story that even suggests the possibility of a new treatment for cancer is greeted with headlines about a "cancer cure" however remote in the future and improbable in fact it might be. But if marijuana is involved, don't expect any coverage from mainstream media, especially since mainstream editors have been quietly killing this story for the past thirty years
That's right, news about the abilility of pot to shrink tumors first surfaced, way back in 1974. Researchers at the Medical College of Virginia, who had been funded by the National Institutes of Health to find evidence that marijuana damages the immune system, found instead that THC slowed the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice - lung and breast cancer, and a virus-induced leukemia.
The Washington Post reported on the 1974 study - in the "Local" section - on Aug. 18, 1974. Under the headline, "Cancer Curb Is Studied," it read in part: "The active chemical agent in marijuana curbs the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice and may also suppress the immunity reaction that causes rejection of organ transplants, a Medical College of Virginia team has discovered." The researchers "found that THC slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers, and a virus-induced leukemia in laboratory mice, and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent."
"News coverage of the Madrid discovery has been virtually nonexistent in this country. The news broke quietly on Feb. 29, 2000 with a story that ran once on the UPI wire about the Nature Medicine article," complained MarijuanaNews.com editor Richard Cowan , who said he was only able to find the article through a link that appeared briefly on the Drudge Report Web page. "The New York Times, The Washington Post, and Los Angeles Times all ignored the story, even though its newsworthiness is indisputable: a benign substance occurring in nature destroys deadly brain tumors," added Cowan.
On March 29, 2001, the San Antonio Current printed a carefully researched, bombshell of a story by Raymond Cushing titled, "POT SHRINKS TUMORS; GOVERNMENT KNEW IN '74." Media coverage since then has been nonexistant, except for a copy of the story on Alternet.
It is hard to believe that the knowledge that cannabis can be used to fight cancer has been suppressed for almost thirty years , yet it seems likely that it will continue to be suppressed. Why?
According to Cowan, the answer is because it is a threat to cannabis prohibition . "If this article and its predecessors from 2000 and 1974 were the only evidence of the suppression of medical cannabis, then one might perhaps be able to rationalize it in some herniated way. However, there really is massive proof that the suppression of medical cannabis represents the greatest failure of the institutions of a free society, medicine, journalism, science, and our fundamental values," Cowan notes.
Millions of people have died horrible deaths and in many cases, familes exhausted their savings on dangerous, toxic and expensive drugs. Now we are just beginning to realize that while marijuana has never killed anyone, marijuana prohibition has killed millions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
