Botched drugs trial leaves volunteer brain-dead in France

a reply to: MrMasterMinder

Just because a drug is derived from a plant that can not be patented doesn't mean the drug cant be patented. For example : GW Pharmaceuticals is a British biopharmaceutical company known for its multiple sclerosis treatment product Sativex®. Stop with the pro weed propaganda.

Well... duh!!! Hence the need for Big Pharma to twist, tweak and taint nature's wonders for their own gain, with no thought or consideration of the best interests for the people, which is -- of course -- the plant used as a whole, with all of its cannabinoids and terpenes working in synergy. Nope.

If Big Pharma knows there are healing qualities in cannabis, then they should be the ones yelling from the rooftops the loudest, and demanding it be removed from the "no medicinal value" drug schedule.

I suggest you stop with the Big Pharma propaganda. It's not working any more... but I bet you know that already.

Take the following with a grain of salt, but I've read and heard that tobacco doesn't cause lung cancer either, that the original studies were flawed and/or compromised for a political result, and that these studies on cannabis may prove the same about tobacco. Or that the tobacco itself doesn't cause lung cancer, but the many chemicals added to cigarettes cause the lung cancer.

a reply to: Boadicea

That it was....now they are starting on vaping . The smoking part was proven with rhesus monkeys and an average of 20 packs/day pumped into their lungs via tubes taped in their throats.


For the truth you spoke

Latest news:

It seems that the test-trial involved 90 participants of which 5 persons are now hospitalized. 4 persons show neurological disorders and 1 patient brain dead.

On the side of cannabis; the drug doesn't contain cannabis or any derivative.
The drug was designed to fight against mood disorders and as a painkiller by acting on the endo-cannabinoid system.

www.ouest-france.fr...

The term "trial" says it all. A trial is conducted to make sure the drug is safe to use, and in this case it was not. That is what drug trials are all about. You dont really want to prescribe a drug to millions of people only to discover later the side effects. That has happened in the past. If you enter yourself for a medical/drug trial you need to be aware of the fact that things can (and sometimes will) go wrong, but that data is needed. Heck, some people that need a life-saving drug are given placebo's (without them or the doctors knowing it) just to get valid data. Everybody entering a drugs -trial should know all about this.
I myself is on a clinical drug-trial at the moment. I knew all the risks before I entered the trial. The drug might kill me, or if I am receiving the sham treatment, my condition will kill me, but if the researchers can learn from it, maybe it will save some other lifes in the future.

From: www.bbc.com...

Reports that the drug is a cannabis-based painkiller have been denied by the health ministry.

originally posted by: intergalactic fire
a reply to: TrueBrit

Also thought about that yes. In a couple hours there will be a new press release, let's wait and see.

On another note.
Shouldn't there be any previous tests, like non-human related? They talk about the different phases but not about preliminary animal trials. Well i'm against animals testing btw (that's another topic) but isn't this a standard procedure?

Usually there will have been, but I do know from what my husband says that the rage in EU protocals lately has been to reduce animal testing and trials as much as possible. He works in animal pharma and they do sales in the EU as one of their markets, so a lot of their time and energy is spent figuring out how to eliminate as many of the animal tests as possible. As far as pharma is concerned, that's not entirely bad because animal trials and the animals that are needed are actually very expensive for the companies for various reasons and believe it or not, the techs don't like doing them anymore than anyone else like thinking about it.

However, you are right that it is necessary to some degree.

But, just because you test a drug in animals doesn't mean you have any real good idea what a drug will do in humans which is why they still have all the human trials. Even the best human analogs aren't human in the end.

a reply to: ketsuko

Yeah there is a huge amount of effort to reduce animal testing.
The paper work here is extensive.

To do any testing on anything over than mice that could lead to suffering, you have to jump through lots of hurdles.

Also tecs for Animal testing is not exactly a popular job as you said so its hard finding the staff.

i read that story as well in european media, it seems it s spun to make it an anti cannabis thing.

Cannabis is used since thousands of years, so far i ve never heard of any direct death over cannabis.

It' s quite telling about Big pharma, that as soon they touch the subject there are people dying!

iT's probably like this "Spice" which is labeled lab-cannabis or artifical cannabis, but has nothing to do with the real cannabis.

a reply to: svetlana84

No, it works on the same system that cannabis does, not necessarily that it is derived from cannabis. There is a difference.

But even so, if they are using something they derived from cannabis, it wouldn't necessarily have anything to do with how cannabis itself acts in any direct fashion. If they noticed that weed helps people deal with the pain, they might have been seeking the reasons why, either by discovering what systems in the body weed acts on or by studying what compounds in weed act to produce the effect.

They might have been looking to strengthen the effect to make a better painkiller one way or another or to isolate it. Not everyone wants to kill pain while also getting high. I used to hate the side effects of opiates for example.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: svetlana84

No, it works on the same system that cannabis does, not necessarily that it is derived from cannabis. There is a difference.

But even so, if they are using something they derived from cannabis, it wouldn't necessarily have anything to do with how cannabis itself acts in any direct fashion. If they noticed that weed helps people deal with the pain, they might have been seeking the reasons why, either by discovering what systems in the body weed acts on or by studying what compounds in weed act to produce the effect.

They might have been looking to strengthen the effect to make a better painkiller one way or another or to isolate it. Not everyone wants to kill pain while also getting high. I used to hate the side effects of opiates for example.

^^^
This

They were likely as you said experimenting with chemicals like cannabis that act on the same receptors.


There a good number of research chemicals under study as well as more than a few on the recreational drug market sold as "legal" hights. And a few of these have put kids in hospital and even killed a few.

a reply to: intergalactic fire

Side effect may include, but are not limited to:

depressed mood, trouble concentrating, sleep problems, crying spells, aggression or agitation, changes in behavior, hallucinations, thoughts of suicide or hurting yourself sudden numbness or weakness, especially on one side of the body blurred vision, sudden and severe headache or pain behind your eyes, sometimes with vomiting hearing problems, hearing loss, or ringing in your ears seizure (convulsions), severe pain in your upper stomach spreading to your back, nausea and vomiting, fast heart rate, loss of appetite, dark urine, clay-colored stools, jaundice (yellowing of the skin or eyes), severe diarrhea, rectal bleeding, black, bloody, or tarry stools, fever, chills, body aches, flu symptoms, purple spots under your skin, easy bruising or bleeding, joint stiffness, bone pain or fracture, or brain damage.

Consult your physician before using.

originally posted by: Nexttimemaybe
The government has said it wasn't a cannabis based pain killer, so enough said on that matter.

As far as I'm aware, apart from lung cancer from smoking, cannabis has never killed anyone.

Nah just turns people into zombie idiots after prolonged use.

a reply to: TrueBrit

I THOUGHT SO!! Thank you!

Yeah, even analogues of THC aren't especially dangerous...but...analogues in K2 have been known to cause brain damage in some susceptible individuals. But that's really rare. And the K2 that caused those tragedies probably wasn't tested on animals first. Which makes me think that this isn't a THC analogue but something else entirely. When you mess with chemicals, they become unstable and the effects become more and more uncertain. That's why you should never take shady RC's.

Anyway, my psychology teacher in high school warned us to NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER take part in research studies or drug trials. It was sound advice

I can't believe the UK doesn't pay people for doing the trials. That seems criminal. I know they "compensate" people--but with what? Are the families of these victims going to be able to file a lawsuit, I wonder? Or did the poor men sign away their rights?

a reply to: Nexttimemaybethe lung cancer was probably caused by tobacco a lot of people wrap cannabis in tobacco wraps and pack them into cigars

Sad news on the matter

Man dies in Rennes hospital after drug trial left him brain dead

A man who was left brain dead after suffering serious side effects during a drug trial in north-west France has died, according to the hospital that had been treating him.

Five other volunteers, hospitalised a week ago when the drug trial went wrong, were in a stable condition, the Rennes hospital said in a statement on Sunday.

What's interesting in this report is that there is no word on cannabis.
But another news source states as title

Rennes 'cannabis-based' drugs trial man dies after taking experimental painkiller

although the French health ministry denied that the drug was a cannabis-based painkiller.

Something tells me we haven't seen the end of it yet

This is the drug:

en.wikipedia.org...