Hashish And Pancreatic Most cancers: Botanical Drug Kills 100% Of Cancer Cells, Exploration On The Mobile Design Reveals

Cannabis And Pancreatic Most cancers: Botanical Drug Kills 100% Of Cancer Cells, Exploration On The Cell Product Reveals

View Reddit by je97Check out Supply

41 replies on “Hashish And Pancreatic Most cancers: Botanical Drug Kills 100% Of Cancer Cells, Exploration On The Mobile Design Reveals”

Truly extraordinary if the feasibility study is successful. Pancreatic cancer is notoriously hard to diagnose and treat in timely fashion.

Take that Pancreatic Cancer! Now I’ll be on my way with my Grateful Dead record collection and some light emphysema.

Anyone got a link to the actual research article that hasn’t gone through the press release/journalist filter?

This is one of those stories where the truth is that some study found that the cancer cells only die in extremely specific circumstances that are near impossible to reproduce in actual cancer patients, right?

“Cannabotech (CNTC.TA), which is involved in the development of a botanical drug based on an extract of the Cyathus striatus fungus and a cannabinoid extract from the cannabis plant, reports that in experiments conducted on a cell model, the fungus extract eliminated 100% of pancreatic cancer cells relatively selectively and without damaging normal cells.”

A company which would economically benefit from the success of their drug finds that their drug is successful. If this was anything other than cannabis, people would be talking about that point.

I hope this is something which ultimately works, but this is in vitro, not in vivo. Since pancreatic cancer is one of the most devastating diseases, it would be amazing if this panned out. However, this isn’t the same as smoking weed and not getting cancer. This is a drug developed from cannabis.

As a pancreatic cancer survivor, I hope this is true. In the meantime, I’m gonna get a lil high.

Hoping this research can bring some results to those diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. I watched my childhood best friend battle for 2.5 years. She was 32. I don’t ever want to watch someone go through that again. Stranger or family.

I don’t like to take my news about Cannabis from sources promoting investing in the Cannabis.

It was most likely in vitro, which in general is much easier to kill cancer cells in than in vivo.

This is junk.

My mom started having symptoms in early October, was diagnosed with stage four pancreatic cancer at the end of October. She just passed away last Sunday. We tried to get her to try cannabis but she was scared of her insurance dropping her if she tested positive for it. This makes me so sad, but truly hope this helps others in the future. ❤️

BS click bait. No substance can ‘only kill cancer cells’ except for extremely specialized cases. Cancer is hard to kill because you have to be able to differentiate healthy cells from cancerous ones. On top of that ever type of cancer can vary slightly based on the mutation that has occurred.

Personalized immune therapy is the best weapon we have and we should focus our research there.

One of my best friends died last november from pancreatic cancer. Never smoked did not drink hardly at all worked out for 40 plus years was on the bike doing 20 miles or running 5 almost every day super healthy eater. Absolutely shredded at 62 years old.
When the doc told him early last year and said it was too advanced and he had 3 months at best he laughed and said we’ll see. He made 10-1/2 months tuffest muther fucker I have ever known. Through all that he never stopped smiling.


I want weed to be completely legalised and am always in support. But this type of headline always worries me. 100%?? **really?**

Want proof this is less than sound?

How would they know it kills 100% of all Cancer cells?

There are a lot of chemo treatments that can virtually eradicate cancer on the first outing. I had an “All Clear” or “No Evidence of Disease” result after 8 months of the grueling Folfox regimen. (2014)

MrCC. Stage 4. Colon with Liver Mets.

It came back in 2017.

From there it was:

2nd year of Folfox (2017)
1st year of Folfori (2018)
Ostomy (2019)
2nd year of Folfori (2019)
Erbitux (2020)
Stivarga (2021)

Currently hanging on with the Stivarga. We can no longer “get rid” of the cancer, so we have to settle for slowing it down.

This comment may sound “depressing,” but don’t take it that way. My disease, statically kills people *very fast.* I’m very happy with my survival to this point.

In the past 8 years, I’ve watched my daughter grow from a second grader to a wonderful young woman.

I thank my oncologist, the nursing staff at the oncology center, my wife, my relatives, my friends.

If you want an upbeat takeaway: When you turn 50, get a colorectal exam, and you will get to avoid everything I’ve gone through.

I have a ms degree in biotechnology, which is just a qualifier that I know my way ‘round a lab. I had a professor that would often lament that things like this would win the “Mickey mouse” Nobel prize: that it is easy to get results in vitro or in mice but translating to humans was another issue and challenge entirely.

Just like how it lowers the chance of lung cancer

Its because it kills off a bunch of cells.

Which means its indiscriminately killing a bunch of cells. Even when you dont have cancer

A LOT of things kill cancer cells–in the lab. And even in mice. It’s a very different story in the human body, for various reasons (frequently toxicity). As always, I hope this works out, but any time you see a headline that “X kills cancer,” it doesn’t mean “hey, we found the cure.”

Not seeing a link to a published peer-reviewed article here.

Let’s see if I understand this correctly,…
A possible cure has been found for a disease that science has been working on for decades, no I should have said centuries, using a compound derived from a drug that is seen as controversial, but has a loyal following. But the researchers/scientists/marketers don’t want to be confined to all the rules and regulations of something like the US FDA. Instead, they would rather release a statement that could attract investment in their company before any pesky “peer reviewed study” might shoot holes into their findings.

Did I get it right?

This is a very early stage, pre-clinical candidate. The researcher seems to be raising funding for a startup, Cannabotech, and releasing PR to generate buzz. The actual scientific paper is here from 2021:

The challenge with many of these types of compounds that inhibit cancer cell growth is that they can also interfere with normal cell proliferation — such as the lining of the intestines, hair, and other cells that regularly divide and replenish themselves over time without turning cancerous.

The fungus in question is Cyathus striatus. The extract is known to contain chemicals known as terpenes. Terpenes — found in many plants — can not only disrupt cancer cells, but they can also be toxic to regular healthy cells too. But terpenes have been known to treat cancer. A terpene called paclitaxel was isolated from the bark of Yew trees, and is a common treatment for many types of cancers now including certain lung, breast and ovarian cancers. But not all terpenes work this way at all.

A lot of stuff kills cancer cells in culture. Alcohol, bleach, water, beer, acid, base, pee, mouse pee, interns, undergrads, grad students, etc etc etc

Mom had it in her 50’s. Lasted about a year and a half after diagnosis. She was a fucking trooper.

Fuck cancer.

Pharmaceutical companies stay trying to figure out how to out weed ‘weed’ to get a monopolistic patent. Money is the root of all cancers.

This is super interesting from science and marketing perspective. Here is what I’ve found after some digging:

1. An early 2021 paper published by Fares et al. and partially funded by Cannabitech showed that the fungus Cyathus striatus showed highly potent antitumour activity in pancreatic tumour in vitro and in vivo in mouse (

2. Cannabotech gains exclusive rights to the patent associated with this fungus treatment.

3. Cannabotech develops a product based on above fungus plus cannabinoid extract. They conduct an in vitro trial and the addition of cannabinoid extract results in “5 times higher anti-tumour efficacy” than the fungus treatment alone. This finding has only emerged in press release to date, and I guess may or may not be published in peer review lit, which is not out of the ordinary for pharma companies.

4. Profit? Yes, almost certainly why they rushed out this press release.

Generally, I would say don’t be so hasty dismissing this kind of work. Amazing things are happening in cancer drug discovery these days, and particularly relevant here is the ‘rediscovery’ in the West of medicines derived from botanical or fungal sources that have been used in traditional medicines for a long while. Don’t forget that currently established cancer drugs may also have similar origins – such as the workhorse paclitaxel, which is derived from the Pacific Yew tree. I would agree that there is a lot of unscientific fluff around cannabis in particular, and there’s a lot of politics mixed up with it, so it’s difficult to separate the wood from the trees. On the whole I am a lot more comfortable looking at peer-reviewed data and… well… not press releases, even though in this case they should have already gone through data monitoring and stuff… but you never know.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *