There Is No Conclusive Evidence That Cannabinoids Actually Cure Cancer



On the subject of cannabis:

Many healthcare providers can agree that cannabis can alleviate some symptoms associated with cancer, like pain and nausea, as well as the side effects associated with the various kinds of cancer treatments available. But there is no conclusive evidence that it targets any one of the thousands of different and unique types of cancer systemic to the human population. Cancer isn’t just a simple disease: it has multiple causes and multiple ways of causing death and bodily harm. The drugs that can treat these various cancers can be extremely diverse, and one drug that will work with one particular type of cancer won’t work with another. In addition to the many varieties of cancers, each person has unique genetic characteristics which must be taken into account when designing a treatment plan.

The study people like to cite is this one:

When you look at the actual facts, cannabis isn’t a miracle cure. The conclusion in the paper states that the  study was inconclusive and needed more research. The paper makes no mention of cancer cell destruction, either. It does talk about slowing down metastasizing factors, but not actually killing cancer cells themselves. It even acknowledged that in some cases cannaboids enhanced tumor growth:
“Furthermore, endocannabinoids- AEA and 2-AG are broken down into secondary metabolites like prostaglandin (PGE2) and epoxyeicosatetraenoic acid (EE) which enhance tumor growth and metastasis in diverse cancer types.”

Even if it was shown to have an effect on receptor sites or outright kills pancreatic cancer cells for example, without damaging the surrounding tissue, that’s still just 1 cancer out of many other varieties with multiple variables. With that being said another study even showed that cannabinoids actually had carcinogenic factors that increased the risk of pancreatic as well as other cancers for that matter:

“In contrast, Grand and Gandhi recently presented a case study of acute pancreatitis induced by cannabis smoking, indicating that cannabinoids may be a risk factor for pancreatic cancer.”

Above are test results that presents a potential link to cancer from cannabinoids. See the above citation for further information.                                 

Thinking a plant or a single chemical can cure cancer is ridiculous and shows a fundamental lack in understanding medical science. Cannabis has become the new herbalism that quacks and charlatans are using pushing without any evidence to back up their claims.

So in, conclusion, there are specific cancers that cannabinoids may have an effect on reducing metastasis in cancer cells but in others it enhances tumor growth. The current state of the research does not support cannabis as a miracle cancer cure, or even a particularly effective cancer treatment.

A typical method utilized by alternative medicine and quacks are using the plea to emotion to bolster their position rather than using empirical evidence.

Can’t we just agree that it’s simply fun to enjoy without all the nonsense attached to it?

Related Articles


  1. Correct…at present most of the evidence is anecdotal – it’s hard to get funding to study the biochemical effects of a class A substance. Perhaps a change in classification / policy would help facilitate comprehensive scientific testing…

    My understanding is that burning/smoking cannabis has NO health benefit at all, since all 80+ cannabinoids contained in a typical cannabis strain are broken down into simpler molecules and compounds by the processes of oxidation and decarboxylation…correct?

    Since pretty much all forms of smoking carry a significant level of health risk, it’s not surprising that the study you referenced reached that conclusion re acute pancreatitis…what would help would be to perform the SAME study on people that ingested cannabis in various forms, instead of smoking it…

    I’ve provided cannabis for my dad for 3 years now (in both edible form and as a tincture), to help with the side-effects of his chemotherapy (mainly to reduce post-treatment itching, stimulate his appetite and help him sleep on the night immediately after he has treatment…the steroids keep him wide awake).

    The research I undertook concurs with much of what your article concludes; that cancer-killing or cancer-retarding properties have been CLAIMED, but NOT proven in any verifiable and generally accepted scientific standard at present.

    However the short-term benefits for treatment side-effects looked very promising and it seemed worth trying. He had already tried a number of conventional treatments for the side-effects; most didn’t seem help much or even created other side-effects. We discussed it with his oncologist who had no objections and we kept our expectations realistic.

    I am a cynic and always think of the term: “Miracle Drug” as an oxymoron anyway…

    100% bullshit? maybe…probably even…but not PROVEN yet – one way of the other.

    Watch this space? 🙂

  2. I am a true skeptic, and hopefully me saying that got you interested in proving me wrong. This article provides NO evidence of science or skepticism. Just because there isn’t conclusive evidence yet doesn’t prove that it’s not possible. There is also no conclusive evidence that it doesn’t help. It’s illegal federally so there is no funding allowed for scientific research. Behaving like it’s impossible is ignorant and not something a true scientist or skeptic would stand behind. No one has anything definitive to say either way so trying to stifle people for having a hypothesis is just as psychologically fucked as what this article complains people are doing by buying into it. What the article should have done is attempt to increase support for education and scientific testing after mentioning there is not enough evidence to draw a conclusion, not striving to debunk ideas that haven’t even been tested. It’s clearly a biased article attempting to shovel the authors agenda.

  3. The earth is FLAT! How come NASA has never once shown a REAL photo of earth from space instead of CGI images? How come you can look at a building a 100 miles away thru a telescope, even through it should be under the horizon since the earth is supposed to curve 8 inches per mile? Why did an international government treaty BAN civilian exploration of the North Pole or “Antarctica”? Why were all the great “scientists” of the past 500 years who promoted the concept of a round earth globe ALL Freemasons, including Copernicus, Galileo, and Newton? WAKE UP PEOPLE! The global elite, the Illuminati, are LYING TO YOU!!! THE EARTH IS FUCKING FLAT!!!!!!

    1. OMG. We are doomed if this is in any way a representative of the “great thinkers “ of today. This is why I stay stoned.

    2. OMG. We are doomed if this is in any way a representative of the “great thinkers “ of today. This is why I stay stoned.

Comments are closed.