Study by Manuel Guzmán of Madrid Spain

“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.

New Zealand's cannabis clubs

New Zealand's first cannabis connoisseurs' club will celebrate its second birthday next month as several other "pot" clubs look set to open across the country.

Since opening in November 2008, the Daktory in West Auckland's New Lynn has gained more than 2000 fee-paying members who have got together to spark up within the Daktory's expansive kitted-out warehouse space.

"I think it's achieved everything we've set out to achieve, ranging from drawing attention to the plight of the people within the cannabis culture, creating a rallying point for people who want to change this evil law and a cool place to hang out," said Daktory founder, Dakta Green.

It has come at a personal cost to Green, however.

The Daktory was raided by police in January following a Sunday News story on expansion plans, and Green was charged with four cannabis-related charges, including cultivation and possession for supply.

The matter is to go to trial next month.

Cannabis smokers in both Invercargill and the Hawke's Bay are finalising Daktory venues and New Plymouth has an informal club underway, Green said.

The 59-year-old has been completing an Armistice Tour of the country gaining signatures calling for marijuana law changes.

As of Wednesday, he had about 3000 signatures.

Green plans to present the agreement along with an "excess of several thousand" supporters to Parliament on November 11.

Nigel Kennedy admits smoking cannabis at drugs raid party

The award-winning violinist suggested he was a regular user of the drug and that he could not work without it.

He is understood to be one of two people facing charges after police raided the hotel, in the Bavarian town of Bad Wörishofen, following complaints of a raucous late night celebration.

Kennedy, 53, told Germany's Bild newspaper: "I smoked a little grass.

"I can't do this job without it, I need it to relax."

The self-proclaimed "bad boy of classical music"was among 20 people questioned after the raid at the Steigenberger Sonnenhof hotel at 3.15am on September 26.

Two were reported to the public prosecutor on suspicion of having used either marijuana or heroin.

Kennedy, however, denied any knowledge of the presence of heroin.

Officers are understood to have found equipment used to smoke illegal drugs in rooms rented out by other guests at the party.

Police have said they believe traces of heroin were on the paraphernalia they took away.

Johan Kreuzpointer, the local prosecutor, is awaiting the results of toxicology reports on the drugs found in the pipes, expected this week, before he decides on charges.

While neither he nor local police will confirm whether Kennedy is in line for prosecution, the Augsburger Allgemeine newspaper said its sources state he is one of the two who may be charged.

Kennedy, widely considered one of Britain's finest ever musicians, has previously admitted using drugs. The Birmingham-born star, whose interpretation of Vivaldi's Four Seasons remains the best selling classical record of all time, has told how he occasionally smokes marijuana to help him unwind after concerts.

But he is believed to have calmed down since the wild days of the 1980s and early 1990s when he was famed for conducting interviews whilst swigging champagne.

Charles Hynes Mindless bigot ?

"Medical marijuana? You must be high!    Marijuana may provide relief to patients with serious diseases as well as chronic pain sufferers, but the plant contains THC, a psychoactive chemical substance.      Each year, my office — along with the NYPD — seizes large quantities of marijuana that originate from multiple states and even other countries. THC levels vary widely among marijuana depending on the source, and at high levels may adversely affect people with pre-existing health and psychiatric issues.    
Only a licensed physician should be prescribing marijuana with specificity in dosage, just like any other prescription drug. In addition, pesticides, chemicals, and other illegal substances like PCP are found in marijuana, often far beyond dangerous levels."
This article appeared in the yournabe.com on the 7/9/10   it was written by charles j. hynes, brooklyn, district attorney I I have never read in all my life, anything with as many untruths as this except perhaps The Cat in the Hat, How did this raveing loony become anything to do with the law. This is what we are up against, Mindless bigots who only care about there own agenda.

Marijuana-Tumor Research hidden by U.S. Government

A Spanish medical team’s study released in Madrid in February 2000 has shown that tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the active chemical in marijuana, destroys tumors in lab rats. These findings, however, are not news to the U.S. government. A study in Virginia in 1974 yielded similar results but was suppressed by the DEA, and in 1983 the Reagan/Bush administration tried to persuade U.S. universities and researchers to destroy all cannabis research work done between 1966 and 1976, including compendiums in libraries.

The research was conducted by a medical team led by Dr. Manuel Guzman of Complutence University in Madrid. In the study, brains of 45 lab rats were injected with a cancer cell, which produced tumors. On the twelfth day of the experiment, 15 of the rats were injected with THC and 15 with Win-55, 212-2, a synthetic compound similar to THC. The untreated rats died 12-18 days after the development of the tumors. THC treated rats lived significantly longer than the control group. Although three were unaffected by the THC, nine lived 19-35 days, while tumors were completely eradicated in three others. The rats treated with Win-55,212-2 showed similar results.

In an e-mail interview for this story, the Madrid researcher said he had heard of the Virginia study, but had never been able to locate literature on it. “I am aware of the existence of that research. In fact I have attempted many times to obtain the journal article on the original investigation by theses people, but it has proven impossible,” Guzman said. His response wasn’t surprising, considering that in 1983 the Reagan/Bush administration tried to persuade American universities and researchers to destroy all 1966/76 cannabis research work, including compendiums in libraries, reports Jack Herer. “We know that large amounts of information have since disappeared,” he says.

Guzman provided the title of the work-”Antineoplastic Activity of Cannabinoids,” an article in a 1975 Journal of the National Cancer Institute-and author Raymond Cushing obtained a copy at the UC Medical School Library in Davis, California, and faxed it to Madrid. The 1975 article does not mention breast cancer tumors, which were featured in the only newspaper story ever to appear about the 1974 study in the local section of the Washington Post on August 18, 1974. The headline read, “Cancer Curb Is Studied,” and was followed in part by, “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.”

Drug Enforcement Agency officials shut down the Virginia study and all further cannabis research, according to Jack Herer, who reports on these events in his book, The Emperor Wears No Clothes. In 1976, President Gerald Ford put an end to all public cannabis research and granted exclusive research rights to major pharmaceutical companies. These companies set out-unsuccessfully-to develop synthetic forms of THC that would deliver all the medical benefits without the “high.”

Update by Raymond Cushing

Update by Raymond Cushing

When I was a cub reporter twenty-eight years ago at the daily Advocate in Stamford, Connecticut, my first city editor-a white-haired veteran of the International Herald Tribune named Marian Campbell-told me that the cure for cancer was the holy grail of all news stories.

“Unless they discover the cure for cancer,” she would say over the clackety-clack of the manual typewriters, “this paper goes to press on time.”

What I found out a quarter-century later is that not even the cure for cancer is a big enough story to crack the Berlin Wall of media censorship in this country. Toss in the facts that the cure appears to be a benign substance that has been illegal for 63 years, and that the government knowingly suppressed evidence of its curative powers 25 years, and you get twice the storyæand twice the censorship.

I won’t name the “investigative journalists” who didn’t respond when I sent them this story. I won’t list the numerous “progressive” publications that ignored it. I won’t describe the forbidding sense of professional isolation I endured in the months I tried to place the story.

Suffice it to say that it’s what one would expect in a society that has criminalized its own young for two generations around the cannabis issue simply because we were told to do so.

Thousands of innocent people who are in U.S. prisons for possessing or selling “the cure for cancer” await liberation and reparations. Someday our grandchildren will look back and ask, “What did you do to set the cannabis prisoners free?”

Here’s what any responsible journalist should be doing:

Go to primary sources when evaluating cannabis research. The AP and other news organizations love to elevate “bad science” and suppress “good science” when it comes to cannabis. You have to read the original research articles yourself and make your own judgments.

Investigate and report on the war on children that is a major component of the war on drugs. The marijuana laws are the main tool the police use to persecute minors. No other policy affects more families in more insidious and devastating ways than cannabis prohibition.

Learn about the history of cannabis prohibition and about the pharmaceutical, liquor, and tobacco giants that are behind it. If you don’t know the history of cannabis and hemp prohibition, you’re too ignorant to justifiably call yourself a journalist.

If it turns out-as my story would seem to indicate-that cannabis is the cure for cancer and the government suppressed this information for 25 years (and continues to suppress it), then the body count alone will make this the biggest holocaust in recorded history. Virtually all federal drug policy makers of both parties since 1975-including legislators, presidents and the DEA-will be complicit and criminally liable.

That’s why they don’t want this story covered.

To learn the history of cannabis prohibition, read http://www.jackherer.com. 

What is the TRUTH.

With over 100 million Americans having  tried it at least once, and now 13 states there,have legalized medical Marijuana. What is the TRUTH.

Mounting evidence has shown it is far less dangerous than alcohol and cigarettes, legal medicines, and even caffeine. All have a lethal dose, cannabis’s lethal dose is 1500 Pounds consumed in 15 minutes (impossible) No person has ever overdosed on cannabis ever, not once in the history of the world. It is simply not toxic enough. 450000+ die each year from tobacco cigarettes, while a good 50000+ die from alcohol overdose.

Those high on cannabis are less likely to commit violent acts, Fact,

 IT DOES NOT LEAD TO LUNG CANCER. See studies No, in fact, long-term pot smokers have lower incidence of head, neck, and lung cancers than non-smokers.  Previous preclinical studies assessing the anticancer properties of cannabinoids have shown that they inhibit the proliferation of a wide range of cancers, including brain cancer, prostate cancer, oral cancers, lung cancer, skin cancer,pancreatic cancer, biliary tract cancers, and lymphoma.

 It does not kill brain cells. In fact, studies are showing that it may in fact STIMULATE brain cells. Read about it http://knowyourcannabis.blogspot.com/2010/09/cannabis-and-cognition-claim.html

It is about as addictive as a peanut, and there are no withdrawal symptoms.

The gateway theory is false. Numerous studies have shown that alcohol and cigarettes are far more likely to lead to hard drugs.

Why not watch Penn & Tellers bullshit  http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3025396475247394113#

Cannabis And Cognition Claim

Washington, DC: Research published this week in the journal Neurology speculating that marijuana's effects on the cerebrovascular system may bring about residual cognitive deficits in longtime users is not supported by the majority of available clinical evidence.

Numerous prior reviews of marijuana's potential impact on neurocognitive performance include:

A 2003 meta-analysis published in the Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society that "failed to reveal a substantial, systematic effect of long-term, regular cannabis consumption on the neurocognitive functioning of users who were not acutely intoxicated;"

A 2002 clinical trial published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal that determined, "Marijuana does not have a long-term negative impact on global intelligence;"

A 2001 study published in the journal Archives of General Psychiatry that found that long-term cannabis smokers who abstained from the drug for one week "showed virtually no significant differences from control subjects (those who had smoked marijuana less than 50 times in their lives) on a battery of 10 neuropsychological tests." Researchers added, "Former heavy users, who had consumed little or no cannabis in the three months before testing, [also] showed no significant differences from control subjects on any of these tests on any of the testing days;"

A 1999 clinical trial published in the American Journal of Epidemiology that found "no significant differences in cognitive decline between heavy users, light users, and nonusers of cannabis" over a 15-year period.

More recently, a study published last fall in the journal Psychological Medicineexamining the potential long-term residual effects of cannabis on cognition in monozygotic male twins reported "an absence of marked long-term residual effects of marijuana use on cognitive abilities."

In addition, a scientific review published earlier this month in the journalCurrent Opinion in Pharmacology concluded, "There is little evidence ... that long-term cannabis uses causes permanent cognitive impairment. ... Overall, by comparison with other drugs used mainly for 'recreational' purposes, cannabis could be rated a relatively safe drug."

For more information, please contact, Shimon , using the box below,or Email knowyourcannabis@gmail.com  or Allen St. Pierre or Paul Armentano of National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Law 

Long-Term Cannabis Smoking Doesn't Impact Cognition, "Study"

Long-term use of cannabis does not lead to a decline in mental function, according to the results of a large-scale John Hopkins University study.

"There is no convincing evidence that [even] heavy long-term cannabis use impairs memory or other cognitive functions," said Dr. John P. Morgan of City University of New York (CUNY) Medical School. "During the past 30 years, researchers have found, at most, minor cognitive differences between chronic cannabis users and nonusers, and the results differ substantially from one study to another."

The  John Hopkins study examined cannabis's effects on cognition on 1,318 participants over a 15 year period. Researchers gave subjects specialized tests, called Mini-Mental State Examinations (MMSE), in 1981 and 1982. Subjects took follow-up MMSE tests 12 to 15 years later and scientists measured rates of cognitive decline among cannabis smokers and nonsmokers.

Researchers reported "no significant differences in cognitive decline between heavy users, light users, and nonusers of cannabis." They also found "no male-female differences in cognitive decline in relation to cannabis.

"These results ... seem to provide strong evidence of the absence of a long-term residual effect of cannabis use on cognition," they concluded.

The study is the first to investigate the long term effects of cannabis on cognition in a large epidemiological sample.

Researchers did conclude that cognition declines over long time periods in all age groups, but found this decline "closely associated with aging and educational level, [and] ... not ... associated with cannabis use."

The study appears in the American Journal of Epidemiology.

For more information, please contact John P. Morgan of CUNY Medical School @ (212) 650-8255 or Allen St. Pierre @ (202) 483-8751. To read an abstract of this study online, please visit: www.jhsph.edu/Publications/JEPI/may199/may1con.htm

Some Truths Behind Cannabis, Marijuana

Cannabis kills brain cells? NO It doesn’t!

Cannabis kills brain cells is based on research done during the second Reefer Madness Movement. A study attempted to show that Cannabis smoking damaged brain structures in monkeys. However, the study was poorly performed and it was severely criticized by a medical review board. Studies done after wards failed to show any brain damage, in fact a very recent study on Rhesus monkeys used technology so sensitive that scientists could actually see the effect of learning on brain cells, and it found no damage.

No good comes from Cannabis, Wrong!

Wrong. It’s been proven to kill cancer cells. http://knowyourcannabis.com/index.php?p=1_207  (data is 7 years old).

Cannabis can kills you? No it Can’t!
No it doesn’t. There has never been one reported death FROM Cannabis ever!

WHY

I believe the governments of the world made Cannabis  illegal, for one or two reasons, Money and Racism. You see, since cannabis can be naturally grown like any other plant, it would be easy for cancer patients ext, to get their hands on a natural remedy and cure their cancer, see Cannabis Oil Cure Cancerhttp://knowyourcannabis.com/index.php?p=1_205  The Rick Simpson story  RUN FROM THE CURE . But because of this, the massive income made by the international pharmaceutical corporations would plummet, thus creating a drop in income, something No Government or corporation wants, and it's an easy way to control the minorities.  

Autophagy Therapy

 Autophagy is when cancer cells  undergo programmed cell death (apoptosis).

There is only one cure that I know, that uses autophagy, and that is THC.  Thus, THC activates a series of events within cancer cells, inhibiting tumour growth.

 By binding to certain cell-surface receptors, THC activates a cell signalling pathway that leads to cell death. Cannabinoid action induces autophagy-mediated cell death. A new study by Salazar et al. in The Journal of Clinical Investigation demonstrates that Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the main active component of marijuana, induces human glioma cell death through stimulation of autophagy. 

Our data indicate that THC induced ceramide accumulation and eukaryotic translation initiation factor 2α (eIF2α) phosphorylation and thereby activated an ER stress response that promoted autophagy via tribbles homolog 3–dependent (TRB3-dependent) inhibition of the Akt/mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1) axis. 

We also showed that autophagy is upstream of apoptosis in cannabinoid-induced human cancer cell death and that activation of this pathway was necessary for the antitumour action of cannabinoids in vivo. These findings describe a mechanism by which THC can promote the autophagic death of human cancer cells and provide evidence that cannabinoid administration may be an effective therapeutic strategy for targeting human cancers.  

Ph levels and cancer

let’s first look at how Ph level relate to cancer cells .Formation of Cancer Cells, (respiration to fermentation). The energized cell membrane creates a condition where glucose can enter the cell, and oxygen cannot. glucose undergoes fermentation to Lactic acid  cell pH drops to 6.5. Lactic acid attacks the DNA, destroying template action. Messenger RNA is changed and the control mechanism of the cell is destroyed. In the acid medium, enzymes within the cell become toxic, eventually bringing about the death of the cell. A tumour, therefore, consists of a layer of living cells with uncontrolled growth surrounding a central mass of dead cells.  

So there are a number ways to raise the PH of the body, I know of two therapies, both can target the cancer cells very well.  "Maple syrup & Baking soda" and "Cesium"
Please link with http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/group.php?gid=144406932265092&ref=mf

A Cancer Epidemic

An Answer to the Cancer   by S A Clare Aug 2010

Now in the 21^st century we face a cancer epidemic, and as I sat down to research why with all the manpower, resources and time that have been put in to it’s eradication ,the hundreds of different drugs that have been researched manufactured and sold. In most cases, killing more people than they have saved. Yet allegedly we are still no closer to that goal of a cure, or are we? Read the Whole Story http://knowyourcannabis.com/index.php?p=1_206 

A way forward

It has been suggested by Stephen Rolles, senior policy analyst  and published in the British Medical Journal   Published 13 July 2010, that the way forward is legalization and this is his idea, I totally agree with him :

Five basic models for regulating drug availability Medical prescription model or supervised venues—For highest risk drugs (injected drugs including heroin and more potent stimulants such as methamphetamine) and problematic users Specialist pharmacist retail model—combined with named/licensed user access and rationing of volume of sales for moderate risk drugs such as amphetamine, powder cocaine, and methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy) Licensed retailing—including tiers of regulation appropriate to product risk and local needs. Used for lower risk drugs and preparations such as lower strength stimulant based drinks Licensed premises for sale and consumption—similar to licensed alcohol venues and Dutch cannabis "coffee shops,"potentially also for smoking opium or poppy tea Unlicensed sales—minimal regulation for the least risky products, such as caffeine drinks and coca tea.

His Final Address the President of the Royal College of Physicians, U.K.

Consider Drug Regulation In his final Bulletin, the outgoing President of the Royal College of Physicians, Professor Sir Ian Gilmore wrote:  "I feel like finishing my presidency on a controversial note. I personally back the chairman of the UK Bar Council, Nicholas Green QC, when he calls for drug laws to be reconsidered with a view to decriminalising illicit drugs use. This could drastically reduce crime and improve health. Drugs should still be regulated, and the argument for decriminalising them is clearly made by Stephen Rolles in the latest edition of the British Medical Journal ."
His comments come in the wake of a flurry of calls for reform from health professionals, in the lead up to the publication of the Vienna Declaration, an international manifesto for reform, which calls for drugs to be decriminalised in order to promote individual and public health. 
Danny Kushlick, Head of External Affairs at Transform Drug Policy Foundation said:

"Sir Ian's statement is yet another nail in the coffin of the war on drugs. The Hippocratic Oath says 'First do no harm'. Physicians are duty bound to speak out if the outcomes show that prohibition causes more harm than it reduces. Sir Ian is justly fulfilling his role by calling for consideration of the evidence for legal control and regulation."

Kushlick concluded:

"With a Prime Minster and Deputy Prime Minister both longstanding supporters of alternatives to the war on drugs, at the very least the Government must initiate an impact assessment comparing prohibition with decriminalisation and strict legal regulation."

Why are more doctors not standing up ?

I am asked time and time again if this works why are more doctors not standing up and stating it? The answer is more than clear, but for you to understand I need to tell you some medical history. Consider the case of Dr. Ignas Semmelweis: In 1847, Dr. Semmelweis, a respected Hungarian physician who was concerned about the high mortality rate of women giving birth in hospital, instituted a procedure at one hospital whereby doctors washed and disinfected their hands before delivering babies. Immediately, the mortality rate dropped from THIRTY percent to near zero. Seven other hospitals followed suit with similar results.

The European medical establishment recognized Dr. Semmelweis's achievement by blocking his applications for further research funds, vilifying and ostracising him, and, ultimately, causing him to lose his prestigious positions at maternity hospitals. In America, the newly formed American Medical Association added insult to injury by threatening to revoke the license of any doctor caught washing his hands. Dr. Semmelweis was so distressed that women continued to die that he suffered a mental breakdown that eventually led to his death in 1865. Don't expect a doctor working inside the system to buck the system. The risks are still too great! 

if you're a pensioner cannabis is good for you

CANNABIS could be used to protect older people against osteoporosis, according to researchers at a Scottish university.

Osteoporosis, caused by weakening of the bones, can lead to crippling pain, making sufferers susceptible to broken bones.

Half of all women and one in five men in the UK are likely to suffer from the condition, which leads to 200,000 fractures.Scientists investigating the effects of cannabis on bone health found its impact varies dramatically with age.

The team found that while cannabis could reduce bone strength in young people, it may protect against osteoporosis in later life.

Researchers showed a molecule found in the body which can be activated by cannabis – called the type 1 cannabinoid receptor (CB1) – is key to development of the condition.

While it was known that when CB1 comes into contact with cannabis, it has an impact on bone regeneration, it was not clear whether the drug had a positive or negative effect.

Researchers, funded by the Arthritis Research Campaign, studied mice lacking the CB1 receptor. They then used compounds, similar to those in cannabis, which activated the receptor. They found that compounds increased the rate at which bone tissue was destroyed in the young.

The study also showed that the same compounds decreased the bone loss in older mice and prevented the accumulation of fat in the bones, which is known to occur in humans with osteoporosis.

The results of the study are published in this month's Cell Metabolism.

Stuart Ralston, Arthritis Research Campaign professor of rheumatology at the University of Edinburgh, who led the research, said he was not advocating older people smoke cannabis.

"This is an exciting step forward, but we must recognise that these are early results and more tests are needed on the effects of cannabis in humans to determine how the effects differ with age in people," he said.

"I'm not saying older people should be smoking joints as these contain tobacco. We want to find a cannabis-like derivative which could target the skeleton and not affect the brain."

Debate over the health benefits of the drug has been wide-ranging.

Don Barnard, of the Legalise Cannabis Alliance, said: "People have known for hundreds if not thousands of years that cannabis can be used for medical conditions. We are very concerned that sick people are denied the use of cannabis and doctors who want to prescribe it are threatened with jail.

"Painkillers mask the pain, meaning you push more at something like gardening, then suffer for it the next day. Smoking a joint puts the pain into the background but it doesn't allow you to overstep the mark."

Dr Claire Bowring, medical policy officer at the National Osteoporosis Society, said: "This is an exciting study but we look forward to further research to see if these effects are mirrored in humans."