Dad cures son's brain cancer illegally... - Page 2

goof2 · 05-05-2011, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaneman

Its absolute BS because....?

You know what is known, not just likely, to fight cancer and shrink tumors? Chemotherapy like the kid received.

According to the article even the kid's father doesn't believe the cannabis oil cured his son. It states "He credits the cannabis oil with helping his son get through the chemo". Overselling is much more likely to hurt your cause than help it. That is coming from someone who has no real objections to legalizing marijuana for medical or recreational purposes.

Avatard · 05-05-2011, 04:45 PM

In this case, I can't say the anti-cancer properties didn't help...but I agree that in the eyes of those with lingering doubts about this herb, after all the negative propaganda, it may be a bit of an over-sell.

Do recall the largest lung cancer research on the matter, however:

3 groups: Non smokers, Cigarette smokers, Heavy Cannabis users.

Cancer ranking:

1) Cigarette smokers (shocker)
2) Non-Smokers
3) Heavy Cannabis smokers (the real shocker for some)

fasternyou929 · 05-05-2011, 04:58 PM

What a terribly written article (grammar errors aside):

Quote:

A desperate father whose son was suffering from a life-threatening brain tumour has revealed he gave him cannabis oil to ease his pain. And he has now apparently made a full recovery.

Misleading first line... off to a great start. Pops gave him cannabis and now he's all better!

The true angle the article should have focused is finally highlighted after 12 paragraphs of misdirection:

Quote:

He credits the cannabis oil with helping his son get through the chemo, and say Cash has now been declared cancer free by doctors.

^That's an important comma right there, separating two DISTINCT facts. One is not related to the other as the first paragraph implies.

Nice spin doctoring, though. You ever notice the harder someone tries to sell you something, the less appealing it becomes?

Avatard · 05-05-2011, 05:18 PM

Hard to find people that will write without bias. You have to remember: In order to wanna write about it, you probably are motivated at least in part by personal opinion.

Also remember that the victor writes the history, and so far the history has been a monologue almost entirely biased the other way by the US government and press.

I'm not saying there isn't a bias here...that's pretty clear. Just keep in mind that the previous, and rather constant media bias blitz the other way may not have been quite so obvious to many

goof2 · 05-05-2011, 05:39 PM

The oversell has nothing to do with people who have lingering doubts. It has everything to do with nobody in the article making no claim the cannabis oil cured this kid, yet a few here spinning it like that is what happened.

We can certainly talk about bias though. This kid was receiving cannabis oil, a substance that a limited number of studies indicate may help treat cancer. At the same time he was receiving chemotherapy, a regimen that for the last few generations has proven itself to be one of the most successful methods for treating and "curing" cancer ever found. Science is assuming the "cure" was the chemo; bias is assuming it was the oil.

Kaneman · 05-05-2011, 05:41 PM

I wonder how well the chemo would've worked if he starved to death while on it?

Avatard · 05-05-2011, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goof2

The oversell has nothing to do with people who have lingering doubts. It has everything to do with nobody in the article making no claim the cannabis oil cured this kid, yet a few here spinning it like that is what happened.

We can certainly talk about bias though. This kid was receiving cannabis oil, a substance that a limited number of studies indicate may help treat cancer. At the same time he was receiving chemotherapy, a regimen that for the last few generations has proven itself to be one of the most successful methods for treating and "curing" cancer ever found. Science is assuming the "cure" was the chemo; bias is assuming it was the oil.

I think if you ask a lot of people, at least some would say that chemo killed someone they loved. You need to be a little less convinced you have all the answers.

Tmall · 05-05-2011, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaneman

I wonder how well the chemo would've worked if he starved to death while on it?

As horrible as it is, the article states he was being tube fed.

shmike · 05-05-2011, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avatard

I think if you ask a lot of people, at least some would say that chemo killed someone they loved. You need to be a little less convinced you have all the answers.

If you ask a lot of people, at least some would say they have been probed by aliens.

Avatard · 05-05-2011, 08:38 PM

Got me there.

05-05-2011, 04:45 PM	#12
Avatard Crotch Rocket Curmudgeon Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Here to integrity Moto: Li'l red baby Ninja Posts: 7,482	In this case, I can't say the anti-cancer properties didn't help...but I agree that in the eyes of those with lingering doubts about this herb, after all the negative propaganda, it may be a bit of an over-sell. Do recall the largest lung cancer research on the matter, however: 3 groups: Non smokers, Cigarette smokers, Heavy Cannabis users. Cancer ranking: 1) Cigarette smokers (shocker) 2) Non-Smokers 3) Heavy Cannabis smokers (the real shocker for some) __________________ Insert free thought here. Last edited by Avatard; 05-05-2011 at 04:47 PM..

05-05-2011, 05:18 PM	#14
Avatard Crotch Rocket Curmudgeon Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Here to integrity Moto: Li'l red baby Ninja Posts: 7,482	Hard to find people that will write without bias. You have to remember: In order to wanna write about it, you probably are motivated at least in part by personal opinion. Also remember that the victor writes the history, and so far the history has been a monologue almost entirely biased the other way by the US government and press. I'm not saying there isn't a bias here...that's pretty clear. Just keep in mind that the previous, and rather constant media bias blitz the other way may not have been quite so obvious to many __________________ Insert free thought here.

05-05-2011, 05:41 PM	#16
Kaneman AMA Supersport Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Odessa, TX Moto: 2000 Honda CBR1100XX Blackbird Posts: 4,931	I wonder how well the chemo would've worked if he starved to death while on it? __________________ 1982 Honda XR80 - blown motor, 1993 Kawasaki ZX6D - sold, 2001 Suzuki Bandit 1200S - sold, 1984 Honda Magna - sold, 2001 Kawasaki ZRX1200R - blown motor, 2007 Suzuki DL1000 V-Strom - totalled, 2003 Yamaha FZ1 - sold, 1994 Honda Magna - sold, 2001 Honda CBR600F4i - sold, 1998 Suzuki DR350 - stolen, 1989 Honda Super Magna - sold, 2007 Yamaha Stratoliner, 2000 Honda CBR 1100XX Blackbird

05-05-2011, 08:38 PM	#20
Avatard Crotch Rocket Curmudgeon Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Here to integrity Moto: Li'l red baby Ninja Posts: 7,482	Got me there. __________________ Insert free thought here.

05-05-2011, 05:39 PM	#15
goof2 AMA Supersport Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 4,756	The oversell has nothing to do with people who have lingering doubts. It has everything to do with nobody in the article making no claim the cannabis oil cured this kid, yet a few here spinning it like that is what happened. We can certainly talk about bias though. This kid was receiving cannabis oil, a substance that a limited number of studies indicate may help treat cancer. At the same time he was receiving chemotherapy, a regimen that for the last few generations has proven itself to be one of the most successful methods for treating and "curing" cancer ever found. Science is assuming the "cure" was the chemo; bias is assuming it was the oil.