good evening, everyone. tonight, breaking news in the scandal involving america's busiest bridge. the gop's brightest presidential hope right now, chris christie, and evidence that his administration played the kind of bare-knuckle partisan politics that he criticizes in others. we're keeping him honest tonight. also ahead in the program, her brain-dead body is being kept alive against her wishes, against her family's wishes because she's pregnant. we'll look at another hard case at the intersection of life and death and the law. and later, medical marijuana, we know it helps some people tolerate cancer treatment. the question is, can it also be a cancer treatment by itself?

tonight's installment of our week-long series "gone to pot," the parents who want to take their child off chemo because they believe marijuana is curing their child's cancer. we'll look at the medical evidence. we begin tonight keeping them honest with the breaking news. what started as a local traffic story became a statewide scandal and now has gone national. at the center of it all, the world's busiest bridge and the man seen by many as the republican party's leading hope to win the white house in 2016. the bridge in question is the george washington. the man is chris christie. the governor the new jersey. the scandal involves lane closings from the city of ft. lee, new jersey, on to the bridge that tied up traffic so badly, ambulance crews were complaining about being able to respond to emergencies and school buses were delayed for hours. now, the allegations that christie's office and potentially, potentially the governor himself, ordered those lane closings to snarl traffic as political payback because ft. lee's mayor, a democrat, refused to join other statewide democrats who were endorsing the governor. the implication that governor

christi is not the bipartisan man his re-election victory suggested and that he himself claimed to be. >> as your governor, it has never mattered to me where someone was from, whether they voted for me or not, what the color of their skin was or their political party. for me, being governor has always been about getting the job done first. >> that was governor christi on election night, promising to be governor of all of the state of new jersey, everyone, whether they voted for him or not. here he is slamming washington for not being more like himself. >> we watch a congress at war with itself because they're unwilling to leave campaign-style politics at the capitol's door. >> and all along, critics have accused the governor of doing just that, preaching tolerance but practicing behind-the-scenes, bare-knuckle politics. well, today, e-mails and text messages obtained by cnn implicate some of his top staffers and appointees on precisely those grounds. about a month before the lane closings that locked down parts

of new jersey, the manhattan bridge, ann kelly, one of three disputes on christie's senior staff whiz the following e-mail to christie appointee dan willstein at the authority that controls the bridge. "time for some traffic problems on the bridge," the reply "got it." many of the messages were redacted, so we don't know who texted this to willstein. "is it wrong i'm smiling?" "i feel badly about the kids," talking about the kids going to school stuck on school buses. "i guess." "they are the children of buono voters," meaning christie's 2013 opponent. wilstein has resigned since then. christie since then has dodged the question or openly mocked it. >> i was actually the guy working the cones out there. you really are not serious with that question. >> well, this evening, he issued a statement blaming others that reads "i am outraged and deeply

saddened to learn that not only was i misled by a member of my staff, but this completely inappropriate and unsanctioned conduct was made without my knowledge." the statement goes on, "this behavior is not representative of me or my administration in any way, and people will be held responsible for their actions." now, he does not in that statement include himself, even though the people now implicated are some of his top staffers and appointees. keeping them honest, when it comes to accountability, the governor has high standards for others. >> when you make a mistake, you should own up to it and apologize for it. >> that's the governor treading president obama for what he saw as an incomplete apology for his broken health care promise. ft. lee's mayor for one isn't satisfied and spoke with wolf blitzer earlier this evening. >> wouldn't you expect him to start making some phone calls to apologize even if he had nothing to do with it, but his senior aides did? >> wolf, don't call me. do me a favor, don't call me, but call the families who are waiting three, four times longer for emergency service agencies

when their loved ones were having heart palpitations or when their loved ones had extreme chest pains and are waiting for our ambulance corps to arrive. do me a favor, call and apologize to thousands of families whose kids were late for the first day of school and the three or four days that it took after. call our police department and call our administrators in the school system that had to deal with this, call the folks that had to deal with traffic a.m. gedion that week. you don't have to call me. i give you a pass. don't call me, but call those families, call those kids and call everybody else, because ft. lee didn't deserve it. >> lots to talk about tonight with david gergen, john king and gloria borger. david, do you believe it's possible, first of all, that christie did not know about this, that all these people around him -- >> i think it's possible, but in my experience going back to the nixon days, and i hesitate to make the comparison, is that sometimes the boss does not order something, but people

who -- i don't know whether nixon ordered watergate, but i can guarantee you that the people who carried out watergate thought that's what he would have wanted. sometimes there's an environment where if you're on staff, things don't have to be said, you sort of know. >> so, even if he didn't know about it, the fact that everybody around him thought this was the kind of thing he would want says something about him and his leadership. >> i think there's bearish reporting on that subject, because it has all -- there's something about this that's so petty and so vindictive, and it feeds into this narrative that has been building up that he's a bully, and i think he's now, you know, he's on the defensive. he's going to have to find some way to defuse this, and i hope his candidacy does not rise or fall on this issue. i'd rather see it on more substantive issues. >> john, it's one thing to be seen as a bully for things that are right. i mean, a bully for trying to do things right for the people of new jersey, as many people would

traditionally have seen him, but to be bullied on something so petty and vindictive in an election where he was going to win anyway, that's a whole other matter. >> and now you have the suggestion that perhaps first responders were delayed, perhaps they were late getting an ambulance to a 91-year-old woman having a heart attack. and so, you have petty, you hav mean. these a the words being thrown around, anderson, and not just by democrats, but by republicans who don't like or don't trustri. so, he's at a defining moment. how he handles this in terms of firing those responsible because he said he would, and then as the investigation unfolds, he'd better be damn sure that there's nothing that ties him to this. if he handles it decisively and calmly answers questions and doesn't berate the reporters who ask them, then he's a leader who can move on, but if the perception sticks in, that's not a presidential temperament and that's bad for him nationally in his perspective, it's bad for him as he starts a new term in new jersey and it's bad for him

with the audience he needs to care about most politically long term at the moment, the republican base, that he then wants to make him their nominee. >> gloria, you're looking at the ems responses. what are you seeing? >> four ems responses were delayed considerably as a result of all this traffic. and as john mentioned, there was a death of a 91-year-old woman who had a heart attack. now, we do not know whether the delays really contributed to that outcome or not, but this is a very direct letter from the head of ems saying, essentially, what is going on here? our paramedics can't get to the people that they need to help. >> and david, i mean, to echo john's point, how he handles this in the next 24-48 hours will be critical. i mean, who's going to be fired, who's going to be held responsible. >> yeah, his problem is, is proving a negative, that i didn't know anything. to some considerable extent,

this will depend on the people who were in his office who did apparently order this, having some kind of interviews, have lie detectors involved and other things. if a woman died, if a woman died here, he's in deep, deep trouble. >> right. >> i don't care what he does. >> even if it was the staff? >> the buck stops at his desk. he knows that happen. he's a big boy. if a woman dies, he's in deep, deep trouble. >> you know, anderson, there's an investigation now by the legislature which started all of this, and i called up the former republican governor of the state of new jersey, tom kean today, and asked what should they do? and he said look, there are partisan democrats out to get chris christie, but this story makes absolutely no sense. he said that chris christie -- i'm quoting the former republican governor here -- said he's not accepting responsibility, he didn't answer the questions, and what he suggested, in order to get it all out there, is to have a bipartisan investigation in the state legislature in new jersey, let christie go and answer

questions, let his staff go and answer questions, because don't forget, as the mayor of ft. lee told wolf blitzer earlier today, there could be criminal issues here. >> and john, if, i mean, if there are investigations looking into corruption or whatever it is, in terms of presidential chances, i mean, it certainly takes kind of the shine off chris christie for many. >> again, every governor who runs for national office has to deal with something, and how he deals with it is critical. if there's any connection to him or any gray in the idea of did he know about it, well, then he's in trouble. but consider there's the policy, which is this investigation, why did they do this, who did it, who was responsible, how does the governor respond and hold them accountable, what do the investigators ultimately find, then there's the politics. remember, he's starting his second term. this is already going to make it harder for him to be the governor of new jersey. he's also supposed to go to 30-some states this year raising money and helping candidates for governor and at every stop, the

local press will want to talk to him. he's going to try to be raising money and the democrats will make him a lightning rod to make him baggage to hurt his political viability not only in 2014, but in the long term in 2016, so he needs to find a way to end this chapter and that depends on him and how he handles it. >> david gergen, gloria berger, john king, thanks. let me know what you think. do you believe the governor didn't know what his staff was up to? follow me on twitter, #ac360. up next, a tough story no matter how you look at it. the question -- does the state have the right to keep a brain-dead woman, this woman, alive against her wishes, against her family's wishes as well, if that woman is pregnant? she was pregnant, the hospital refuses to take her off life support as her family wishes, as her family says she would have wanted because she is pregnant. later, the video itself is troubling enough, a toddler with grown-ups egging him on. it was posted by a local police

organization to educate the public, they say. the question is who's looking out for the child?

hey, welcome back. so, you've been watching "360" recently, you know we've been following the story of jahi mcmath, a teenager declared brain-dead but remains on life support because that's what her parents want. well, tonight, a somewhat similar story, brain-dead texas woman being kept live, but this time in spite of what she or her husband ever wanted. ed lavandera explains why this is so important in texas and other states nationwide. listen. >> reporter: she was a 33-year-old mother of a young baby boy, a paramedic married to another paramedic, the couple expecting their second child when it happens. marlise munoz collapsed in her home of an apparent blood clot in her lung. her family got the devastating news shortly after.

they say doctors told them she was brain-dead and would never recover. her body is now connected to a ventilator inside this ft. worth, texas, hospital, despite her family's wishes. >> we reached the point where, you know, you wish that your wife's body would stop. >> reporter: the hospital refuses to unplug the ventilators because munoz is pregnant, and texas is 1 of about 30 states that restrict a woman's ability to be disconnected from life support if they are pregnant, regardless of the patient or the family's directive. erick munoz and his wife are paramedics and end-of-life issues is something they talked about often. >> we've seen things out in the field, and you know, we both knew that we didn't want to be on life support. >> reporter: officials at john peter smith hospital here in ft. worth will not say if marlise munoz is brain-dead, but in a statement, hospital officials said that the hospital will follow the law as it applies to health care in the state of texas and that every day, "we have patients and families who

must make difficult decisions. our position remains the same, we will follow the law." >> i think they got it wrong. >> reporter: tom mayo was one of the advisers who helped write this law 15 years ago and which was signed by then texas governor george w. bush. the southern methodist university law professor says if munoz is indeed brain-dead, like her family says, then the hospital has the law all wrong. >> if she is brain-dead, she's already dead, so letting her die isn't really the concept, but can he say take her off the ventilator? i believe he can. surrogate decision-makers make those kinds of decisions with their doctors every day. >> reporter: marlise munoz was 14 weeks pregnant when she collapsed. the fetus is now almost 20 weeks. the family says the fetus still has a heart beat, but it's not clear if it can even survive. in the meantime, erick munoz has to stand by and watch his wife trapped in a position he says she never wanted to be in.

>> i can't say enough about her. i mean, anything i do will always be part of what she was. i can't do her justice. she's a great woman. >> ed lavandera joins us now from ft. worth. what's next for the family? where do they go from here? >> reporter: we've learned today that erick munoz now has two lawyers that he's working with in this case. i had a chance to speak with those attorneys this afternoon. they say they're researching the law and that they're trying to figure out the legal strategy that they want to take to have erick's wishes complied with here, but that they're still researching that and they're not exactly sure what path they will take legally, but i think one thing is clear, this will end up in the courts, anderson. >> looks like it. ed lavandera, thank you. ed kaplan is head of medical ethics at new york city's langone medical center, and sunny hostin, former prosecutor, mark geragos, criminal defense attorney. you believe not only is the hospital making the wrong decision, but the law is ethically wrong. >> i think the law is completely wrong, anderson. it basically is saying an

individual who has clear-cut values and choices, a paramedic, made it obvious that she didn't want to be on life support. her husband agrees with this. the fact that their family backs them up. the state of texas is basically saying, you know, we're going to treat her as an incubator. if she was awake, she certainly wouldn't have this happening to her. she could actually have an abortion at the age of this fetus. asleep, she's being ignored. it's unethical. the law also says anybody who's pregnant from one day pregnant all the way out to where she was when she had the incident at 14 weeks, today we're at 20, that law is just too broad. it's out of control. >> has your opinion changed now that the fetus is at 20 weeks and will be even older when the decision's made? >> it's a great question, but 20 weeks isn't viable yet. this is going to have to go on to something like probably 26 weeks to get viability. even then, the child would be very premature. and remember, this woman went without oxygen for a long time, resulting in her death. the fetus was probably harmed

then, too. i'm sure the husband is thinking that's part of the reason we don't want to proceed here. we could have a very damaged fetus. >> sunny, you actually think the hospital's made the right decision. >> yeah, i do, and i think, you know, we're all working on the wrong premise here. and i'd like to know that all men are sitting here discussing this, and in the piece, all men sitting and discussing this. since i'm the only one here with a uterus on this panel, i think i've got it right. bottom line is, i am certain, anderson, that this woman may have had these discussions about not wanting to be on life support, but i am also certain that the discussion was never had that if she were carrying a baby, should she be placed on life support? and as a mother of two, as a woman, i am certain that this is something that this woman would likely have wanted. >> so, you're not rooting from an ethical standpoint. you're simply projecting into what this woman -- >> she's not reading from an ethical standpoint -- >> i'm talking about the woman's right to self-determine -- [ everyone talking at once ] >> mark, make your point.

>> let me just say something here. i do not have a uterus, so i'll say that at the outset. >> that's right. >> however, as the professor's just said, ethically, this law makes no sense. i'll go a step further. anybody who reads this law, and if they get this into a courtroom, they're going to -- the hospital's going to lose. she is dead. clearly, under the law, under any state in the united states, she is dead. they cannot torture this law into saying that you're going to keep her alive, because you can't bring her back to life. >> look -- >> so, this is going to end up in, my guess will be, a federal courtroom. there is going to be a federal judge who's going to say, are you guys smoking something? unplug it. it's a done deal. >> no. >> sunny, brain-dead is dead. i mean, you can't be brought back from brain-dead. >> look, anderson, when you have a situation where you are unclear about a woman's choices -- >> but the family's not unclear. >> i think we are unclear as to her choices, because again, while the discussion may have been had about life support, i'm certain that this particular

scenario wasn't discussed. >> i wouldn't be so certain about that. she's a paramedic. >> she was a paramedic. >> but if that is the case, then you know, when there is this murky area, then the law should -- >> there is nothing murky. she's dead. >> one at a time. art. >> then the law should, i think, step in, and let's -- >> the law -- >> and as a medical ethicist, i think you can agree, right, that most times, families want to keep the child. >> sometimes. >> and that is why the law is the way it is written. >> sometimes, but they don't want -- if the fetus is damaged, she went without oxygen -- >> and that's a real problem. >> hold on, let him answer. >> and they don't necessarily want it if the fetus is going to be born premature. do you think texas would ever pass a law that said, you know, a man has a living will, and if his wife is pregnant, do you think we'll void it because he has to be a dad? i think there's sexism and i think it's basically going to women and saying we're taking your rights away. >> that is absolutely false. >> the problem is that you have

confused -- >> i'm not confused at all. >> and i think you have confused the vegetative state, a comba, from death. >> the right is self-determined. >> she's not body! this is not invasion of the body snatchers. she's not an incubator -- >> it's about the right to self-determination -- >> she did have a self-determination, she said don't do this. >> and this is where we disagree. >> this is about your disability to determine for her -- >> that's where we agree. this is a murky issue -- >> there's nothing murky about it. >> i think most women want to keep their babies. most women want to make sure that their babies are protected. we know that this is a woman that had a 2-year-old son that she loved very dearly -- >> why do you just refuse to -- >> i don't think she would want her baby to be killed. >> this is what drives me crazy about sunny. she is dead. she was somebody who was a paramedic. she dealt with end-of-life issues on a daily basis -- >> and the husband is a paramedic, too. >> her husband is a paramedic -- >> so, she would want her baby

to die. >> she is dead -- >> under these circumstances, there are a lot of people who might step forward and say a damaged fetus -- >> that's what's troubling. >> premature, i don't think i want to take that chance. and further, the husband may be thinking i'm a single dad, i have another child. they do, they have a 1-year-old. i'm not sure my wife would want to have a child under these conditions. it's not so -- >> the baby may not be perfect. the baby may not be perfect. >> it's not a baby, it's a fetus. >> the baby may not be perfect. >> it's a fetus that's not viable. >> texas is saying you take your chances, we know better than you do how to interpret these risks. i don't buy that. >> i don't think they'll get -- >> mark, do you make any distinction between the age of the fetus -- >> absolutely. i mean, you're at a point right now, it's not viable. it's tissue. it's a fetus -- >> that's ridiculous! >> it's not viable. you can't keep -- well, then you could make an argument -- >> when you have a 20-week-old uterus in your fetus, then you speak to me. >> one at a time.

>> that is not a logical argument. >> yes, it is. >> that is just an attack that men can't argue. there's no logical basis -- >> so, you're saying if it was a 26-week-old or 27 -- >> you have issues and if it's viable, you have completely different issues. >> it would change the ethical equation if you had a viable fetus, but again, we're back to that situation -- i want to stress this. think about the husband. does he want to be a single dad? does he think his wife -- >> does he want a child brought in this way? >> and are we in a situation where the risk of a harmed, damaged fetus is so great -- and i think it's very great -- that he says, in my view, she wouldn't want that, i don't want that -- >> it's no longer a woman's right to choose, it's the state's right. >> the state of texas is choosing. >> let's talk about twitter because we have to take a break here. @andersoncooper, #ac360. difficult issue. thank you. up next, a disturbing video that's all over the internet involving adults, a toddler and obscene language and what these adults are telling this toddler to say. >> you a bitch [ bleep ].

>> you throwin a fit right now? >> a lot of you saw the video last night, are asking where is child protective services in all this? should they step in? can they step in? we'll have the latest on that. and the weirdness of the dennis rodman road show in north korea. he now leads a stadium full of people in a happy birthday serenade for that country's dictator. that's not all he did. we'll explain, ahead.

disturbing video's gone viral on the internet showing a toddler, a little boy in a diaper, trading insults and profanity with two adults who seem to be encouraging him.

the video's not easy to watch. here's part of casey wian's report. >> you a bitch [ bleep ]. >> you a bitch "new york post." >> you throwing a fit right now, little [ bleep ]? [ bleep ] you. [ bleep ] you. >> you ain't talking that [ bleep ] now. >> the child then flips his middle finger at the camera. >> [ bleep ] you, too. >> reporter: the toddler, whose face was shown in the original video, but cnn has obscured, exchanges at least 35 swear words with the adults in the 1-minute, 23-second video. >> say bitch. say [ bleep ] my [ bleep ]. >> that's right, you can't fight. >> you a bitch. bitch. >> reporter: they discuss sexual matters, even apparent gang affiliations. >> what hood you from, blood? >> say [ bleep ] i'm from -- >> what hood you from? say [ bleep ] my name three times.

[ bleep ] >> you a ho. >> you a ho. >> you a ho, bitch. >> what's up, then? >> the video's posted on the website of the omaha, nebraska, police officers association, which says it got a tip that it was uploaded to the public facebook page that a person refers to as a "local thug" and that posted the video because it wants to educate the public about what it calls the "terrible cycle of violence and thuggery." one african-american leader accuses the union of crossing the line and using racially charged language. omaha's police chief says they strongly disagree with web postings that can divide the community, however, the police department confirms to cnn that it's contacted child protective services to investigate the video and its child victims unit is looking into it as well. reeva martin is a child's attorney and advocate. great to have you on the program again. obviously, what the adults are doing in the video is appalling. no one should ever talk like that to a child, get a child to say those things. i'm curious, what do you think? can child protective services

actually intervene based on one video? >> absolutely, anderson. we know that child protective services get involved in cases a lot of different ways. there are some individuals who are mandatory reporters, such as teachers and police officers and doctors, but also, anyone, a neighbor, you know, can make a report to child protective services, and they can do an investigation. they can talk to the parents, they can talk to the adults in this video, the school, if this child attends schools, medical providers, anyone that's involved in this child's life can be a part of this investigation for them to determine, is this child being abused or is there a possibility of abuse? and abuse is widely defined, not just physical abuse. it can be both mental and emotional abuse as well. >> but i mean, the adults in the video are not the child's parents. the man apparently is the child's uncle. cps can still intervene? they can intervene just in cases of bad parenting? >> absolutely. they can order the parents to go to parenting classes. they can order that the child not be in the presence or not be

cared for by this particular uncle if they believe the uncle is not providing a safe environment for the child or is subjecting this child to harm. child protective services has a great deal of latitude, anderson, in keeping children safe. that's its mandate. and in this case, it is clear that the adults need help. looks like a family in crisis. it looks like someone needs to step in to make sure this child is safe. >> so, how would that work? cps would visit the child's home, then launch an investigation? >> visit the home, visit the home, talk to all the adults that are in this child's life and try to find out what's behind this video. is this an aberration? is this, you know, a one-time situation or is this the environment that this child is in on a regular and daily basis? clearly not healthy, not developmentally appropriate for this child to be using this kind of language, to be around adults using this kind of language, and they can step in and mandate that this child be cared for in a completely different manner and that this child be kept

safe. >> from the people from the police union who posted this video, do you think they should have posted the video? should they have just called the police? do you think it was inappropriate for them to label this, you know, thuggery? >> this video and the posting of this video, anderson, is just reprehensible. i can't see any value in the police union in posting it. absolutely, if they saw it, call child protective services. if your real goal was to help this child, then do something that's going to directly impact the child. it looks like this was a vindictive act on the part of this police union, maybe done to divide this community. we know that there has been issues with african-americans in this community, lawsuits that have been filed, so i can't help but think that there's some animous involved in the posting of this, because clearly, it's not going to help the child or the parents. >> areva martin, appreciate you being on as always. there is a lot more happening

tonight. susan00 ricks has a "360 bulletin." three years ago today, gabrielle givers was seriously wounded in a shooting that killed six others. giffords has regained movement in her right arm and vows to keep fighting for stricter gun control laws. former nba star dennis rodman publicly sang "happy birthday" to north korean leader kim jong-un at a basketball arena in pyongyang today. then it appears that he bows before kim, a man rodman calls a friend and a good guy, despite his brutal reputation. and setting aside vatican protocol yet again, pope francis gave a ride today in the popemobile to a priest he knows from back home in buenos aires. the priest got a front-row view of the faithful gathered in st. peters square. anderson? >> quite a ride there. susan, thanks very much. just ahead, a mom that says that marijuana put her young son's cancer into remission. now she's actually fighting to stop the chemotherapy that his doctors say he needs. dr. sanjay gupta has their story and looks at the medical facts. plus, the government is

cracking down on weight loss products. it says these products lure customers with ridiculously misleading claims. four companies have been charged. details on them ahead.

in a week-long series "gone to pot," we're taking a close look at what's happening in colorado, the first state to legalize recreational marijuana. retail pot shops are new, but medical marijuana has been legal in colorado for more than a decade. pot for medical purposes has wide support. in a new cnn/orc poll we commissioned, 88% said it should be legal. here's how far attitudes have shifted. 88% today support the use of medical marijuana compared with 80% in 2002.

some families desperate to get access to medical marijuana actually moved to colorado from other states. the riddle family is one example. they say medical marijuana saved their little boy's life and now they're fighting to stop the chemotherapy that they say nearly killed their child. chief medical correspondent dr. sanjay gupta has their story. >> go, landon! go, landon! >> reporter: back in september of 2012, 3-year-old landon riddle developed a sore throat and swollen lymph nodes one night. it was likely just a virus, his doctors thought, but the reality ended up being much worse, acute lymphocitic leukemia, it's one of the most common cancers in children and also one of the most treatable, but the therapy was going to be tough. >> they started him on chemo but told us that he probably wasn't going to make it, that he only had like an 8% chance to live 24 to 48 hours. >> reporter: the chemo made the little boy very sick, nauseated, vomiting, barely able to walk or

talk. >> good job. >> reporter: his mother, sierra, wanted to try anything to help and eventually found medical marijuana. now, again, landon is just 3 years old. they had come from utah, where medical marijuana was not legal, to colorado, where it was. and for landon, it seemed to work. he rebounded, able to eat, sleep, just be a kid. but sierra told us something else, something surprising. she believed that the marijuana was healing him, not just from the ravages of chemo but from his cancer as well. >> i think that chemo in combination with cannabis did put him into remission, and now cannabis will keep him there. >> reporter: to be clear, a.l.l. is one of the most curable cancers. more than 95% of children go into remission with existing therapies. but still, sierra was so sure of marijuana's healing properties that six months after her son started the treatments, she decided to stop his chemotherapy

altogether. her argument, the chemo was too toxic and the cannabis was not. she said the doctors were stunned at her decision. >> the options were to either, you know, voluntarily agree to the chemo and steroid plan for the next three years or to refuse it, in which they would take us to court and have it court ordered anyways and the possibility of them removelandon from my care would come into play at that point. >> how's it going, landon? >> reporter: so, riddle found a lawyer willing to take on the case. attorney warren edson -- >> it didn't appear she was doing anything wrong other than just being a mom and trying to do what's in the best interests of her kid. >> reporter: in an effort to avoid a court battle, riddle, her mother, wendy, and edson, met with landon's doctors and child protective services. >> they said they were willing to work with us. they said they were willing to alter the chemo plan, and they're not. they did not do that at all. >> reporter: and that's not

surprising. while many mainstream doctors do support the use of cannabis to offset the side effects of chemotherapy, as things stand now, no doctor would recommend cannabis instead of chemo, myself included. but there is a growing body of promising research. dr. julie holland is the editor of "the pot book." >> it turns out that it actually fights the cancer itself. >> reporter: you're a doc. you've studied this, you've talked to the researchers. >> right. >> reporter: you're saying marijuana can kill cancer cells? >> i'm saying that and there are many other researchers who are saying that, too. >> we've got lung samples from our treated mice -- >> reporter: like san francisco researchers pierre desprez and shawn mcallister, who say they have seen firsthand what the cannabis compound cbd can do. in their lab, they used cbd to kill mice and human cancer cells. we asked the american cancer society what they thought about all of this, and in a statement to cnn, they said, "there is no

available scientific evidence from controlled studies in humans that cannabinoids can cure or treat cancer." even landon's doctor, who prescribed his marijuana and is a firm believer in medical cannabis, is cautious about this. >> sierra has decided to stop the chemotherapy from landon. i mean, as a doctor, and as a doctor who's seen his progress, is that something you would be on board with, that you'd recommend? >> as a physician, again, i'm not sure that i could recommend that to a parent, to say, you know -- i can't say to them i know that the cbd is a treatment that can work and you don't need the chemotherapy. >> reporter: for the time being, sierra riddle is afraid of as o losing her son, so she is allowing chemotherapy once a month. she is also still trying to find an oncologist willing to take landon off the chemo. so far, she's had no luck. >> faster! >> faster? >> reporter: but sierra and her mother aren't giving up. >> i want landon to know that we

did everything in our power to be compassionate in his care and to protect him. i want him to know that we were willing to go to bat. he's a 3-year-old child. >> we did reach out to children's hospital a number of times, and so far, they've declined to discuss landon's care. meanwhile, riddle says she and his doctors are still at odds over his treatment but they point out it's been nine months since he's had significant chemotherapy treatments and he remains cancer-free. anderson? >> so, i've heard a lot of people treating chemo-induced nausea with marijuana. that's not what we're talking about, right? i mean, these people are saying that pot actually cured cancer. >> in this little boy's case, that's how it started was this idea that medical marijuana could be used to help alleviate some of the ravages of the chemotherapy, but then, that's where sierra, his mother, and the lawyer took it a step further, saying they believe it can actually treat the cancer itself, and they should forego

chemo for this cannabis. now, nobody agrees with them. i think most doctors, myself included, don't think that's the right idea, because there is good treatments that exist, but you're right, that is where a lot of this research is headed. could cannabis actually treat the cancer? >> the american cancer society, though, says there's no evidence of this at all. >> yeah, they want the evidence, they want the actual clinical trials where you look at patients who have cannabis treatments and those who don't and compare them. those types of trials don't exist. and again, with a.l.l., this particular type of cancer, you know, the treatments, anderson, 95% of the kids go into remission. so, you wouldn't probably treat something against a gold-standard therapy like what already exists. >> and in your documentary, "weed," cannabis was used to treat epilepsy. is there more of a scientific consensus behind that? >> around the world, many countries, there's pretty good consensus. you know, there are studies that have looked at this, and the idea of using cannabis to treat epilepsy, that idea's been around for a long time. i will share with you, anderson,

in the united states now, within the next few weeks, a clinical trial's going to start in this country using essentially a marijuana plant extract to treat the type of epilepsy like you saw in our documentary. so, that's going to be a first in this country. and remember, part of the difficulty is that we still think of cannabis, marijuana in this country as a schedule 1 substance, meaning it's highly addictive and has no medicinal applications. so, to test something medicin medicinally, that's an important step here. >> all right, we'll watch. sanjay, thanks. >> thank you. up next, the fda cracks down on some popular diet companies it says are making promises it can't keep. we'll tell you which diets simply don't deliver. also, the cold-weather trick that blew my mind inspired some copycats.

well, if you're one of the millions of people who's resolved to lose weight this year, you should know about this. the federal trade commission has charged for companies with deceptive advertising related to their weight loss products. just how bold are some of the claims? one commercial for a product called sensa tells viewers to "simply sprinkle sensa on, eat all the foods you love and watch the pounds come off." a lot of people apparently swallowed that line. court documents show sensa raked in nearly $364 million in profits between 2008 and 2012. senior medical correspondent elizabeth cohen joins me tonight. so, what are these products claiming to do? >> these products in many ways, anderson, were claiming to do magic. for example, one of them, sense sensa was saying that if you sprinkled this product on your

food, you would feel fuller faster and therefore lose weight. another product said if you rubbed this lotion, this cream over your body, you would lose inches. so, the ftc said there are no evidence behind this. >> how is it these products have been on the market for years before they caught up with them? i feel like i go into the vitamin and nutrition stores and see all these supplements. is anybody regulating this stuff? >> the ftc does regulate them, but as you said, they are everywhere, so the ftc can't keep up with every single product that's making a crazy weight loss claim. so, that's one reason. the other reason is that let's say they pick a product they're going to go after like they did today. it takes years of legal back-and-forth before they can actually find them. so, while they're doing this legal back-and-forth with the company, they can still make these claims on their products. >> it's crazy to me how many, like, supplements are out there making all these claims. i mean, i don't know, why can't the ftc hire more people? what happens to them now? >> what happens to them now is that they've been fined, and these fines are huge, millions

and millions of dollars. and what's interesting is they can still sell the products, they just now can't make the claims that they can give you this incredible weight loss. >> all right. elizabeth, thanks very much. >> thanks. >> huge profits, though, they've already made, no matter what the fine is. let's get caught up with the other stories and susan hendricks. a montana judge widely condemned for sentencing a former high school teacher for a month behind bars for raping a 14-year-old girl says he will retire at the end of this year. j. toddbaugh, who is 72, says he is not leaving the bench because of that controversy. the utah's governors office says it will not recognize hundreds of same-sex marriages that were allowed by a federal judge's ruling last month. the supreme court blocked that ruling on monday to allow the state to appeal. officials say more than 1,000 marriage licenses were issued before the injunction. as many as 22 deaths in five states are blamed on that brutal storm that turned much of the country into frigid misery. today millions of americans woke up to slightly warmer weather.

by saturday across the country, most highs will be at or above average temperatures. and winter storms in europe are giving surfers a gift. check it out. created giant waves off the coast of ireland, spain, france, also portugal. world-class athletes are flocking to the hotspots to chase the so-called black swell. very talented surfers there. >> amazing. susan, thanks. coming up, record-breaking cold can bring out some strange behavior. the "ridiculist" is next.

time now for the "ridiculist," and tonight i want to draw your attention to some of the neat stuff that can happen when it gets super cold, for instance, the thing cnn's stephanie elam showed us earlier this week. >> reporter: i saw this last night for the first time, blew my mind. we have hot water for us, anderson, live tv. here we go. >> that's crazy! >> reporter: all right, it has to be really, really hot, and if you do that, then you get the mist out there. >> that is crazy!

>> unbelievable little science project. >> and we had to repeat it about 20 times. i was obsessed with it. now, i've learned that for every cool science project, there is always one guy that thinks, but what would happen if i took a wiz right now? the following gentleman took that idea straight ahead. >> peeing in arizona when it's cold out, like negative 17. >> oh, my god! >> okay. [ laughter ] >> oh, my god. ahh! >> dude, it's turning into fog. >> ow, ow! [ laughter ] >> look at this pee, it's yellow! [ laughter ] >> oh, my god! that is so weird. >> what the [ bleep ]. >> did you see it, like, fogging? >> i don't believe that's real. i just frankly don't believe that's real. i think he had a water bottle, yellow colored water. look, i'm no expert in how urine behaves in extreme cold. in the video, there was snowy

fog, but a lot of liquid seemed to hit the ground, so we turned to a particle physics professor at columbia university, professor brian cole explains that when hot water is thrown, the fog results from water that has evaporated freezing in the air. but not all of the water evaporates and much of it reaches the ground because the larger drops take much longer to freeze, so, he would conclude that the same thing could happen with the gentleman doing that, some water vapor that has evaporated from the stream, which is at body temperature, and therefore, quite hot, will freeze producing the fog, while the remainder of the stream will hit the snow. this was after professor cole politely noted that this is a bit outside his area of expertise as a physicist. now, we looked at his website, which states that one of the goals of his research is "experimental manifestation of the qcd phase transition from ordinary hydronic matter to a form of matter in which gluons become deconfined." we would like to sincerely thank

him for taking a break from whatever that is to answer our ridiculous question of what happens when you go wee-wee in the cold. at the end of the day, whether the video is real or not, and i'm on record saying i do not believe it is real, i think we all learned something tonight on the "ridiculist." what, i'm not exactly sure. that's it for us. thanks for watching. "early start" begins right now. "early start" begins right now. have a good day. -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com scandal over a traffic jam creating some trouble for chris christie. the new jersey governor accused of abusing his power for political revenge. could his 2016 white house run be affected by this? breaking overnight, the new shocker from dennis rodman, now apologizing for his angry, bizarre, "twilight zone" interview with cnn. what he's now saying about an american held prisoner in north korea. we're live. the people have spoken. the big winners and the big moments from the "people's choice awards." >> can't wait