Cannabidiol (CBD) can help treat seizures, can reduce anxiety and paranoia, There are no studies in people of the effects of marijuana oil or hemp oil. . Last Medical Review: March 4, Last Revised: March 16, Contact Us · Local Offices · Employment · Become a Supplier · Report Fraud or Abuse · Global . Rick Simpson decided to try cannabis oil after reading the results of a study that tested the use of cannabinoids in mice with lung cancer. Medical Cannabis in the Cancer & Palliative Care Setting. Sir Charles Gairdner 19 October treatment for cancer over last 20 years cannabis oil known composition, likely effects (and side effects), activity in the body, patterns of.
hoax results 2017 hemp oil cure cancer
Another possibility is that cannabinoids effects on immune cells are at least partially induced indirectly via other suppressive mechanisms such as release of cortisone The effects on the Th17 cells subsets have not been fully described to date.
Interestingly, CB receptors seem to take part in the modulation of those phenomena Indeed, there are reports indicating the suppression of anticancer immune response by THC. It has been demonstrated that THC suppresses host immune reactivity against cancer in murine lung cancer model Lewis lung carcinoma, 3LL and line 1 alveolar cell carcinoma L1C2 , leading to the increase in the tumor growth CB2 receptors antagonists also blocked the effects of THC administration.
Similar results were obtained in the study of mouse mammary carcinoma. It has been demonstrated that THC exposure leads to the significant increase in the 4T1 carcinoma growth and metastasis due to the inhibition of the specific antitumor immune response Observed effects were mediated by CB2 receptors It is possible that tumors originating from tissues of low CB receptors expression would be significantly less sensitive to cannabinoids anticancer action and, eventually, due to THC immunosuppressive properties, such tumors may find a favorable environment for growth and development.
It is also possible that anticancer properties of cannabinoids may be compensated by their immunosuppressive action, finally leading to promotion of the tumor growth. Chronic inflammation has been associated with the development of neoplasia; therefore, reducing inflammation may, to some extent, contribute to the prevention of carcinogenesis. Viability of noncancerous cells seems to remain unchanged or sometimes even elevated by cannabinoids 34 , 35 , 36 , 39 , On the other hand, cannabinoids can trigger apoptotic cell death in some types of nontransformed cells, especially those of high proliferative properties such as endothelial cells The cellular response to cannabinoids relies on different mechanisms in cancerous and noncancerous cells.
It has been demonstrated in vitro that cannabinoids can exhibit a stimulatory activity in nanomolar concentration and an inhibitory activity in micromolar concentration biphasic response , which significantly exceeds concentrations usually detected in blood of marijuana smokers Concentration of THC used in described experiment corresponded to its serum concentration obtained by smoking or oral administration of THC Besides the above described proapoptotic effect in cancer cells, cannabinoids exhibit some other important and potentially valuable properties.
It has been demonstrated that they can inhibit angiogenesis by blocking an activation of the vascular endothelial growth factor VEGF pathway. Cannabinoids have also been shown to reduce spontaneous and induced metastases in animal models and to inhibit an invasiveness of cancer cells in vitro breast, lung, cervical cancer, and glioma 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 , These effects are partially connected with a modulation of the activity of extracellular proteases and their inhibitors 86 , The pharmacological inhibition of ceramide biosynthesis and the expression of p8 protein lead to the prevention of the mentioned effects The studies conducted to date indicate that antiangiogenic and antimetastatic characteristics of CB receptor agonists, similar to their antiproliferative effects, rely on the stimulation of ceramide biosynthesis and a modulation of pathways involving p8 protein.
Cannabinoids that are not agonists of CB receptors CBD , have also been shown to exhibit such properties. Increased levels of FAAH substrates e. Data collected to date regarding anticancer effects of cannabinoids are almost completely limited to preclinical studies conducted on cell lines and animal models. The first experiment that was conducted on human subjects was a pilot clinical study on nine terminal patients with recurrent glioblastoma who were resistant to the standard therapy Patients received THC intratumorally.
This way of administration was safe and patients did not exhibit any overt psychoactive effects. In some patients the tumor growth rate decreased.
Changes observed upon THC administration in two patients can be connected with anticancer effect of THC according to previous preclinical studies decreased cell proliferation, occurrence of apoptosis Despite these interesting observations, it is not possible to draw significant conclusions from the study on a group of nine.
This shows a need for further clinical trials, which could help to assess the dosage and the potential interaction of cannabinoids with other substances. These studies are currently ongoing or have ended recently, but the results have not been published to date.
Cannabis plants produce a substantial amount of cannabinoids and other secondary metabolites. It has been demonstrated that extracts of Cannabis exhibit stronger effects on the subjects with spasticity than pure THC Some cannabinoids have been demonstrated to attenuate psychoactive effects of THC or smoked marijuana 13 , Pure cannabinoids are more convenient for study and to a subsequent standardization as a medical preparation, but still Cannabis extracts with specified amounts of cannabinoids seem to be valuable aim for further studies, also as potential anticancer agents.
An interesting idea is a combination of cannabinoids with conventional anticancer drugs, which can exhibit synergistic potential. The promising results from studies on animal models of glioblastoma treated with THC and temozolomide have led to, mentioned above, clinical trial of this chemotherapeutic agent and Sativex 94 , Similar observations from the study on pancreatic adenocarcinoma showed that gemcitabine administered with cannabinoids synergistically inhibited cancer cell growth To date, Cannabis or its preparations have found an application in a palliative medicine due to its analgesic and antiemetic effects, an attenuation of the side effects of chemotherapy or a capacity to treat spasticity in multiple sclerosis.
We are still initial stages of incorporating Cannabis products in the clinical care. There is still a lack of profound safety and efficacy clinical trials and it is very difficult or even impossible to assess the potential benefits and risk of using cannabinoids in many cases.
Many aspects wait for an elucidation: The most common way of using recreational marijuana is smoking, which is unsuitable way of an administration from a medical point of view. Another important issue is the lack of easy accessible biomarkers showing the responsiveness of patients to a cannabinoid treatment.
Moreover, antitumor effects of cannabinoids have to overcome their known immunosuppressive effects which can be potentially protumorigenic. The interactions between cannabinoids and classical cytotoxic agents have to be precisely defined. These observations lead us to the conclusion, that further profound studies are doubtlessly needed to verify the idea of introducing cannabinoids into the cancer treatment.
National Center for Biotechnology Information , U. Journal List Cancer Med v. Published online Feb Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
This article has been corrected. This article has been cited by other articles in PMC. Abstract To date, cannabinoids have been allowed in the palliative medicine due to their analgesic and antiemetic effects, but increasing number of preclinical studies indicates their anticancer properties.
Introduction Nowadays, we observe an increasing public and scientific interest in the medical applications of Cannabis plants. Endocannabinoid system and cancer Despite numerous studies conducted during the last decade, there are still inconsistent data regarding the exact role of cannabinoid system in cancer development. Try the Mammoth strain. We are in this together.
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. Memory loss and speech loss for about the same amount of time. People suffering from a variety of conditions report that cannabis provides them with relief that no other drug provides. As for recreational, what business is of yours what other adults choose to use?
If so watch were you shove it or it might get cut off. 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.
Some reading for you. Being an idiot is hurting your life — try to adjust. You really do believe deep down that you have a panacea here for everything… which is what you would expect of a drug of this nature when it enmeshes with the human mind.
The second link is a review of over 22, published and peer-reviewed studies by an internationally renowned neurologist. Nice Peter Reynolds with the save!! Thank you for your work. 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.
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. 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. 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.
Furthermore, the evidence is conclusive that cannabis offers great benefits as a palliative medicine for cancer and many other conditions. 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:.
Your link is to a rather biased site. Want to appear credible, cite something impartial and with facts. 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.
My advice to you? Get back to the adults in the room when you have something constructive to add to the conversation. 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. 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.
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. Furthermore, what exactly is unethical about the title Dr when used for a Dr of physics?
You and Dr Grimes need to educate yourselves about the endocannabinoid system before you wade in clumsily demonstrating your ignorance. 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? Anecdotal evidence very low in the evidence hierarchy I agree , two words: Just to help you review your evidence: Oh and maybe educate yourself on this: 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? 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.
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: I think any observer has only to look back at your comments to see very clearly who is behaving in childish fashion. 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.
Jeanette, one of the most delightful if not THE most delightful aspects of this whole page has been listening to the sound of you intellectually and vigorously wiping the floor with dear old addicted Peter.
Bravo, and thank you. There are a lot of scientific studies for the medical benefits of cannabis, including for treating cancer and psychosis. The article does not mention cannabis scientific studies at all and simply dismisses everything with facile generalisations. 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. Au revoir and good evening. Yes, I say again, I understand the hierarchy of evidence.
Oh and a good article from the BMJ: 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? Bob Marley was murdered. I have to suspect your motivations. Because anecdotal evidence can be biased.
Also if I wanted life saving treatment I would opt for tried and tested treatment. Do you know what they call alternative medicine that works? He IS a doctor, nobody gives a crap about your ethical point of view. Get a job, sort out some proper medication, and start things moving again. You might even become mildly interesting, given enough time. I would like to try mmj for the chronic pain I suffer from. The problem is with the state I reside in.
It has taken it almost four 4 years to get its program up and running. So I still must use the effective, yet very addictive, opioids. America, once again, has elected the worst candidate for cannabis.
Reagan was Nixon on steroids. Now we get get President Forty-five. This Doctor of physics is also crap at his own sphere of so called expertise. Plutonium is not a naturally occurring substance. Cyanide is found in most fruits some nuts like Almonds, but nowhere in nature does it occurs in sufficient quantities to be toxic! 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…. 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!
You might want to check the periodic table. Trace amounts of plutonium occur naturally in uranium. 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. 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.
Here is the original book this article claims to be citing. I stopped reading when he claimed it has no benefits for Eipelpsy i couldnt take it seriously after that. I agree with the author. Its scheduled and very little research is done. Placebo is a very powerful thing. Not saying that to be cliche. What we need, is for controlled groups and test that showed yes there was a decrease in inflammation markers. Anxiety has been proven to be reduced from users thinking they are getting a anxiety med but was just a sugar pill.
Although, you basically denied any type of evidence that it has happened. Speaking from personal experience I could not see how that could be the case considering epilepsy is not something your brain function has any control over as it is a misfire of the electrical currents that basically make the brain work.
Personally I have found cannabis to be very beneficial in the treatment of my epilepsy where no other medication had previously worked. Everybody is different but from my experience as somebody who had very poorly controlled epilepsy it worked for me.
Cannabis uses cannabinoids to help protect against the sun.. 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. His motivation was, quite simply, racism. 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.
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. 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.
Get your facts straight. 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. 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. A patient suffering from throat cancer. 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? 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.
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. 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? You need to look at my profile on Disqus.
If recreational activities were not medicinal we would not spread seratonine when we laugh. 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. At last a sane article about the hype and its cultlike followers.
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. Put aside your patronising, offensive and arrogant attitude and educate yourself about the endocannabinoid system.
The hate-filled bigotry which you demonstrate demeans you but it will not stop this journey of discovery. There is no desire to increase the level of high, unless you intake faster than normal like an idiot. Grimes is a skilled propagandist. All those years of struggling for funding, writing to be awarded funds to legitimize his research have paid off.
The trouble is Dr. Grimes has NEVER had cancer or used cannabis oil made from the herb without any chemical interference. 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.
Look him up online. He has personally been credited by thousands of people for saving their lives despite Dr. Grimes is being extremely selective in his pointed criticisms and discrediting information about cannabis. 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. You should try and emphasise proven even more.
How do you know it was cannabis which cured the cancer ffs. Eating zero sugar sure af is more anti cancer than this bs. And I also think that chemo is a bad choise. 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.
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. This dumb shit takes the cake.
I have epilepsy you moronic taint. 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! Could you please go away and leave the conversation to the adults in the room? Your infantile ad hominums are exhausting. The 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.
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. 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?
This article is a load of CRAP! Seems like there are a lot of pot-heads on here trying desperately to promote their brain-destroying, home-wrecking pastime! People should be able to use it if they want regardless of medical benefits.
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? Much of what he said is accurate, but most researchers I know say that more studies need to be done. 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…. On the person, on what pathway is causing the nausea. For some, cannabis exceeds the other medications in reducing nausea….. Here again is where more research is needed. The only thing that will end this is if we actually invest in quality research and testing. This article is a load of bunk. So again, it must have passed clinical trials for those purposes. I thought they were supposed to be all mellow? 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! In multiple studies , homeopathy has been shown to have no effect beyond placebo.
In fact, its central tenets are completely at odds with known physics and are demonstrably wrong. Yet homeopathy remains popular. While the preparations might be in themselves biologically inert , there is a serious danger that patients will cling to the false hope offered by them and reject medical intervention that could be beneficial, which can have fatal consequences.
There are certain things we do know contribute to cancer. Yet cancer often arises in individuals with no obvious risk factors, giving it a seemingly capricious nature and leaving people struggling to find an explanation. In lieu of a clear villain, suspicion can turn on all manner of common household chemicals. Deodorants, for example, are frequently an object of concern, given their proximity to sensitive areas of our skin.
In particular, the idea that antiperspirants might cause breast cancer gained traction throughout the s. Alarming as such rumours are, numerous studies have shown this supposed link to be entirely fictitious.
Artificial sweeteners too have a long history of being the target of dubious claims. Over a decade later, such rumours persist — sustained pressure by activists in even led Pepsi to remove aspartame from its products — a decision quietly reversed in Inevitably, it was only a matter of time before a link to cancer was alleged.
However, numerous studies on sweeteners including saccharin, aspartame, acesulfame potassium, sucralose and neotame show no evidence of such a link. The finger of blame is often pointed in the direction of powerlines, microwave ovens and cell phones. The microwave energy at which most domestic appliances operate completely lacks the ability to ionize DNA and damage cells, a fact confirmed by years of experiments and observations.
Readers of my original article on cancer myths might notice this one was tackled there too, but the repetition here is not accidental. The idea that big pharmaceutical companies are secretly suppressing a cure for cancer is a zombie myth, refusing to die no matter how many times it is killed by the sheer force of evidence against it. Firstly, cancer is not a single monolithic entity, but rather an entire family of diseases with wildly differing characteristics.
Even if such a cure did exist, it seems highly unlikely that if profit is the motive that pharmaceutical companies would sit on such a goldmine rather than exploit it.
The rise of the cannabis cult: don’t believe the hype about medical marijuana
27 Aug in response to Moderator Steph This question comes up a lot - both Manuka honey and Cannabis oil are pretty This recent Huffington Post article about Cannabis oil as a cancer cure is pretty well balanced . extremely low levels of THC in it so doesn't have any mind-altering effects. Cannabidiol (CBD) oil is essentially a concentrated solvent extract natural or synthetic – can effectively and safely treat cancer in actual humans . .. “Fake pot” causing zombielike effects is 85 times more potent than marijuana (Inter net). International Cannabis and Cannabinoids Institute, Tue 24 Jan EST Last modified on Wed 20 Sep EDT This consumption of glucose (a process called glycolysis) results in acidic waste Homeopathy, cannabis oil and natural remedies can treat cancer A now infamous e-mail hoax falsely claimed they were neurotoxic poison.