More Than 100 Peer-Reviewed Studies Conclude: Cannabis Cures Cancer

One of the advantages of cannabinoids is that they target, specifically, the tumor cells. They don’t have any toxic effect on normal non-tumor cells.


Cannabis has been making a lot of noise lately. In November 2016, Australia became the first entire continent to legalize cannabis (the first country to fully legalize cannabis is Uruguay). In January 2017, Germany legalized medical cannabis allowing patients with “exceptional cases” to get a cannabis prescription from their doctor as well as a refund for the upfront cost of cannabis from their health insurance. This spring, Canada is set to legalize the personal use of cannabis.

In recent years, support for cannabis legalization in the United States has reached a tipping point. According to surveys from Gallup, support for legalization has risen from 31% in 2000 to 60% in 2016. 28 states and Washington D.C. allow cannabis for medical purposes.

There is evidence that cannabis oil destroys cancer, cures severe epilepsy, treats muscle spasms caused by multiple sclerosis, and saves lives. The National Cancer Institute has admitted cannabis oil kills cancer cells. Likewise, the National Institute on Drug Abuse has also admitted cannabis kills cancer cells and shrinks brain tumors.

As it stands, cannabis is classified as a Schedule I drug by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) because it is considered to have “no medicinal value” to the public. Last December, the DEA clarified that all marijuana extracts, including CBD, are Schedule I controlled substances alongside heroin and LSD.

No medicinal value? Seriously?

There are over a 100 peer-reviewed studies, prominent medical organizations, and major government reports, which all combine to prove that marijuana is safe and effective in treating many serious ailments, including cancer. In fact, they claim, eating raw cannabis can help prevent health issues from arising altogether — without psychoactive effect.

Then why does Big Pharma lobby against cannabis legalization? Because eating raw cannabis helps prevent health issues from arising altogether — without psychoactive effect. Because at least five prescription drugs could be replaced by cannabis — which will immediately render obsolete the gamut of pharmaceuticals that make the drug barons (and lawmakers) filthy rich.

Here’s the list of more than 100 peer-reviewed studies for you to peruse at your leisure:

Cannabis kills tumor cells

Uterine, testicular, and pancreatic cancers

Brain cancer

Mouth and throat cancer

Breast cancer

Lung cancer

Prostate cancer

Blood cancer

Skin cancer

Liver cancer

Cannabis cancer cures (general)

Cancers of the head and neck

Cholangiocarcinoma cancer


Cannabis partially/fully induced cancer cell death

Translocation-positive rhabdomyosarcoma


Cannabis kills cancer cells


Thyroid carcinoma

Colon cancer

Intestinal inflammation and cancer

Cannabinoids in health and disease

Cannabis inhibits cancer cell invasion


Cannabis Cures Diseases: Here’s Why Medical Marijuana Should Be Made Legal
50-Year-Old Man Cures Lung Cancer With Cannabis Oil, Stuns CBS News
More Evidence: Marijuana Causes Cancer Cells To Commit Suicide

This article (More Than 100 Peer-Reviewed Studies Conclude: Cannabis Cures Cancer) is a free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to the author and


Get Your Anonymous T-Shirt / Sweatshirt / Hoodie / Tanktop, Smartphone or Tablet Cover or Mug In Our Spreadshirt Shop! Click Here



  1. Yo I’m Australian, and I can tell you that Cannabis is NOT LEGAL in Australia. Our Government has NEVER been that cool. Medicinal cannabis is legal, however. But it ‘aint like Cali man! haha

    • Unfortunately not even medicinal cannabis is legal in Australia – the phonies in government here have said it is, but that’s far from the reality of the obstacles they have put in place to ensure nobody can actually access it. They intend to give pharmaceutical companies (their rich and influential buddies) the right to make some sort of cannabis derived concoctions available on prescription at some vague point in the future, but only after they have ignored all the above research and supposedly conducted their own trials. It’s all a fraud, and meanwhile people caught supplying cannabis to the sick continue to be arrested and persecuted (or “prosecuted” if you like) – it’s all a sick joke on the people.

  2. One of the first persons that started to inform the public was Rick Simpson, and for that he was prosecuted by Canadian laws. 90% of world governments are hypocrites that protect the big pharma industries against the people wellbeing!

    • Marc Emery once stated the following: “Whenever I asked Rick Simpson to write about his work, or engaged other journalists and writers to write about Rick Simpson, and finally when I tried to do it myself, Simpson never co-operated. I could never get actual names and phone numbers of patients who were allegedly “cured.” I never could see any so-called sworn affidavits. I could never interview any patients. I could never get the formula used, or the strain, or anything specific whatsoever. That is why no journalist has been able to write about Simpson, he is unverifiable, in his claims, his patients, his documentation, everything, really. No solid paperwork either.

      Secondly, its cowardice to stay in Europe when Simpson should, to me, obviously come back and prove his claims in court. Lets have the “cured” patients in court, lets see the affidavits, lets have the science and the evidence submitted in court. If Simpson’s claims are true, he stands a good chance of making a great case of historical precedents.

      That Simpson wouldn’t want to return to Canada is suspicious to me. You don’t get “hero” status or folk legend or pioneer accolades by running away. He is not being sought by US authorities, its a local raid, its his third raid/charge, but it by no means is an undesirable situation. Putting Simpson in jail for cultivation still seems very unlikely, especially since Bill C-15 is not yet law. There is a great potential for a medical necessity defence. There are all sorts of opportunities to educate the entire nation in an extensive defence, bringing in the “cured” as witnesses, all of them will be compelling….if all the claims made by Simpson are true.

      I find Simpson a bit of an odd fellow. When he was raising money to travel across North America to promote his “oil”, they claimed to need $300,000 to do the tour, and they raised only $3,000, so it was called off. I couldn’t believe this $300,000 figure they claimed to be trying to raise. Jodie & I travelled to 30 Canadian cities across Canada for about $17,000 over 2 months from St. John’s to Victoria, and I told them this amount of money they claimed to need was outlandish for a tour, and absurd to try to get this amount raised for what would be a simple speech at the public library in ”selected cities.”

  3. The preclinical studies show modest antitumour effects at best. Also some of these studies found evidence that cannabinoids, under some circumstances, can actually stimulate cancer cell growth and contribute to tumour progression Furthermore, cancer cells can develop resistance to cannabinoids and start growing again

    The only human study that has been published to date was back in 2006. It was a cohort of nine patients all with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme (a rare type of primary brain cancer) All had their tumours resected and a catheter was placed in the cavity after surgery. Then every day doctors would directly infuse a very pure THC solution at a high concentration directly into the cavity where the tumour had been, in the hope of killing off any remaining cancer cells. The median survival of the group was just 6 months which is what is generally expected with patients who have rGBM As for the two patients who survived the longest (yet still died), the effects could be attributable to spontaneous (but temporary) regression of the disease which happens, amount of surgical resection or a number of other factors.

  4. I am a advocate for cannabis, but in none of those peer review studies are you going to read the word “cure”. You will see statements like “inhibit the migration of tumoral cells”. There are hundreds of different types of cancers, it is irresponsible to use the blanket phrase “cannabis CURES cancer”, because it does not. It can inhibits the growth of certain types of cancers.

  5. I am an oncology nurse navigator and have worked with hundreds who integrate medicinal cannabis into their treatment protocols, many for symptom relief but also those who have decided they want to try to see what effects higher doses may bring. I am familiar with most of the research done so far and it is clear that some of the *subtypes* of many different types of cancers are super-responders to THC and others are definitely not. Further research is needed and many questions remain. But there are some really promising results being seen that appear to correlate with what the preclinical evidence indicates *may* happen. Especially for some really are neuroendocrine tumor/cancer cases, where conventional options are pretty dismal. Not *all* types/subtypes of various cancer are showing as much promise. But leukemia with lymphoid characteristics, neuroendocrine tumors, HER2+ and Triple-negative breast cancer as well as some with ER+PR-HER2+ are also reporting some pretty impressive results with combinations of CBD and THC in varying amounts. A little 3 y.o. girl in So. Calif. just acheived 100% remission with 100% donor marrow response only 3 months after being sent home to hospice on Aug. 1st, 2017 with relapsed AML/ALL and moderate to severe graft-vs-host disease. Cannabis medicines were carefully dosed with lab-tested cannabis medicines and she had complete physician supervision throughout this time. We have no idea how durable some of these beautiful results will turn out to be but it is very encouraging. I am seeing about 25% of patients with all sorts of advanced cancers seeing some profoundly encouraging results and they are appearing to get a second chance, at least for a while. Of course, carefully continuing coventional treatments, especially hormone therapies if tumors are hormone-sensitive, any targeted therapies that are applicable, diet and lifestyle adjustments are all desirable. But there is something really promising happening here. If the THC is *not* showing signs of slowing tumor or causing actual shrinkage within about 6 weeks, then people *must* realize they need to *stop* what they were trying as cannabinoids *will* somewhat suppress immune system, particularly T-cell proliferation, and scientists warn that this could allow for faster tumor growth in that setting. This only really is appearing to happen at dosing most would consider very high — I have witnessed on a patient who had been choosing to self-treat with 85 mg THC orally per day. When she reduced to just under 50 mg per day, her immune system appeared to begin more fully responding to the immunotherapy she had been on for several months without response (Tecentric.) I had informed them that at least high doses of cannabinoids did not seem compatible with immunotherapies which depend on T-cell response. So, she chose to reduce. Because we do not have enough research done, by far, to answer all of these questions, people need to know that there are potential risks and benefits that really need to be considered, including potential for drug interactions and adverse effects. Just wanted to add this information to the conversation. Please do not consider any of this as medical advice but rather information being shared for others to consider reviewing with their healthcare team. Wishing everyone all the best!


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here