Connect with us

Cannabis News

Cannabis Research Fraud? – Over Half of the $1.5 Billion Spent on Marijuana Research Was to Find Harmful and Adverse Effects

Published

on


cannabis research fraud

A Tale of Two Studies

Exploring the nature of cannabis science

 

The pursuit of scientific truth is a noble endeavor, but it is not without its complexities and contradictions. Even as researchers strive for objectivity, the realities of funding, politics, and preconceived notions can influence the direction and interpretation of scientific inquiry. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the contentious field of cannabis research.

 

A 2020 analysis published in Science magazine revealed a striking disparity in cannabis research funding. Of the $1.56 billion directed to the topic between 2000 and 2018 in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom, roughly half was spent on investigating the potential harms and adverse effects of recreational cannabis use. The U.S. National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), the largest funder, allocated more money to studying cannabis misuse and its negative consequences than to exploring the therapeutic potential of cannabis and its derived compounds.

 

This imbalance underscores a troubling reality: not all scientific research is created equal. Just as the tobacco industry once enlisted medical professionals to promote smoking, some cannabis research may be steered toward finding and emphasizing negative outcomes. Studies that dare to suggest therapeutic benefits or challenge prevailing narratives often face bureaucratic hurdles and skepticism from agencies like the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).

 

Against this backdrop, today we’ll examine two cannabis studies published just months apart. Though similar in design, these studies arrived at markedly different conclusions about the cognitive impacts of cannabis use. By juxtaposing their findings, we’ll shed light on the contradictory nature of cannabis research and the importance of critical thinking when interpreting scientific results.

 

As we delve into these studies, it’s crucial to remember that science is an ongoing process of discovery, not a collection of immutable truths. While some research may be tainted by agendas or biases, other studies earnestly seek to expand our understanding of this complex plant and its effects on the human body and mind. Only by approaching each study with a discerning eye and a willingness to question assumptions can we hope to navigate the murky waters of cannabis science and emerge with a clearer picture of the truth.

 

In the coming paragraphs, we’ll take a closer look at these two divergent studies, their methodologies, and their implications. By doing so, we aim to equip readers with the tools to critically evaluate cannabis research and make informed decisions in the face of conflicting scientific narratives.

 

 

 

The first study we’ll examine is titled “Regular cannabis use alters the neural dynamics serving complex motor control,” published in the journal NeuroImage in 2023. This study aimed to investigate the effects of regular cannabis use on the brain mechanisms underlying motor planning and execution. The researchers used magnetoencephalographic (MEG) imaging and time series analysis to compare the neural oscillatory dynamics of 18 regular cannabis users and 23 demographically matched nonuser controls during a motor sequencing task.

 

At first glance, the study appears to be well-designed and comprehensive. The researchers controlled for age, sex, race, and alcohol use, and participants underwent detailed interviews and screenings to assess their substance use patterns and overall health. MEG data were carefully processed and analyzed, and the results were presented with statistical rigor.

 

However, upon closer inspection, several inconsistencies and potential biases emerge. First and foremost, the study’s conclusion that regular cannabis use negatively impacts cognitive function seems to overreach the actual findings. While the researchers did observe differences in neural oscillatory patterns between cannabis users and nonusers, these differences did not translate into any significant impairments in task performance. In fact, the study explicitly states that “there were no group differences in task performance (e.g., reaction time, accuracy, etc.).”

 

This discrepancy raises questions about the researchers’ interpretation of their data. If cannabis users performed just as well as nonusers on the motor sequencing task, can we really conclude that their neural differences reflect a negative impact on cognitive function? It’s possible that the observed neural alterations represent compensatory mechanisms or adaptations that allow cannabis users to maintain normal performance despite chronic exposure to the drug.

 

Another potential issue lies in the study’s premise and framing. The researchers seem to approach the topic with the preconceived notion that cannabis use is inherently harmful, as evidenced by their emphasis on identifying “deficits” and “impairments” in the cannabis-using group. This bias may have influenced their interpretation of the neural data and led them to overstate the significance of the observed differences.

 

Furthermore, the study’s sample size of 41 participants (18 users and 23 nonusers) is relatively small, which limits the generalizability of the findings. The researchers also acknowledge that they could not control for the type, dose, or frequency of cannabis use among their participants, introducing additional variability that could confound the results.

 

Despite these limitations, the study’s authors assert that their findings “demonstrate that regular cannabis use is associated with alterations across multiple brain regions involved in motor control” and that these alterations “may be precursors of behavioral deficits that may emerge in the future.” While these statements are presented as definitive conclusions, they seem to rely more on speculation than on the actual evidence presented in the study.

 

Now, let’s take a look at another study on a similar subject matter and how they concluded…

 

 

The second study we’ll explore is titled “Medical cannabis does not impair cognitive function when used as prescribed,” published in the journal Drug Science, Policy and Law in 2022. This study took a different approach to investigating the cognitive effects of cannabis use, focusing specifically on patients using prescribed medical cannabis to manage various health conditions.

 

In this open-label trial, 40 participants (22 females) with a mean age of 41.38 years attended a single laboratory session where they self-administered their prescribed medical cannabis under supervision.

 

The researchers assessed cognitive performance using the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB) and Druid application (app) before and after cannabis administration. They also measured subjective drug effects using visual analog scales at multiple time points.

 

The study’s methodology has several strengths. By focusing on medical cannabis users following their prescribed regimens, the researchers captured a more realistic picture of how cannabis affects cognitive function in a clinical context. The use of validated cognitive assessment tools like CANTAB and Druid adds credibility to the findings, as does the inclusion of subjective measures to gauge participants’ experiences.

 

However, the study is not without limitations. The open-label design and lack of a placebo control group may introduce bias, as participants’ expectations could influence their performance and subjective ratings. The single-session format also provides only a snapshot of the acute effects of medical cannabis, leaving questions about long-term cognitive impacts unanswered.

 

Despite these caveats, the study’s results paint a strikingly different picture than the previous study on regular cannabis users. Participants’ performance on the CANTAB Multitasking Test and Rapid Visual Information Processing test actually improved over time, while all other cognitive measures showed no significant changes. These findings suggest that, when used as prescribed, medical cannabis may have minimal acute impact on cognitive function in patients with chronic health conditions.

 

The stark contrast between the conclusions of these two studies highlights the complex and often contradictory nature of cannabis research.

 

While the first study found neural alterations in regular cannabis users that were interpreted as potentially harmful, the second study found no evidence of cognitive impairment in medical cannabis patients following their prescribed regimens.

 

These divergent findings underscore the importance of context and nuance in interpreting scientific results. Factors such as the reason for cannabis use (recreational vs. medical), the specific products and doses consumed, and individual differences in health status and other variables can all influence the observed outcomes.

 

Moreover, these studies remind us that science is not a monolith but an ongoing process of inquiry and discovery. As new evidence emerges, our understanding of complex topics like cannabis and cognition evolves, sometimes in unexpected directions. While it’s natural to seek definitive answers and clear-cut conclusions, the reality is often messier and more ambiguous.

 

As consumers of scientific information, it’s crucial that we approach research findings with a critical eye, considering the strengths and limitations of each study and the broader context in which they exist. Only by embracing the inherent uncertainty and variability of scientific inquiry can we hope to make informed decisions and policies around contentious issues like cannabis use.

 

 

 

As we’ve seen through the examination of these two studies, the relationship between scientific research and public policy is far from straightforward. While science should ideally inform policy decisions, the reality is often more complex and politically charged.

 

The classification of cannabis as a Schedule I substance in the United States is a prime example of how scientific evidence can be overshadowed by historical, cultural, and political factors. Despite a growing body of research suggesting that cannabis has medical value and a lower potential for abuse than other Schedule I drugs, federal law continues to prohibit its use and severely restrict research efforts.

 

This disconnect between science and policy has far-reaching consequences. It perpetuates stigma and misinformation around cannabis use, hinders patients’ access to potentially beneficial treatments, and stifles scientific progress in understanding the plant’s complex effects on the human body and mind.

 

Moreover, it underscores the need for a more nuanced and evidence-based approach to drug policy. Rather than relying on simplistic categories and blanket prohibitions, policymakers should engage with the scientific community to develop regulations that prioritize public health, harm reduction, and social justice.

 

However, as the contrasting findings of the two studies we examined demonstrate, scientific evidence is rarely unequivocal or immune to bias. Researchers’ assumptions, methods, and interpretations can all shape the narrative around a particular topic, leading to conflicting conclusions and public confusion.

 

This is why it’s crucial for both policymakers and the general public to approach scientific findings with a critical eye. Rather than taking sensationalized headlines or cherry-picked results at face value, we must dig deeper into the methodology, sample sizes, limitations, and potential conflicts of interest behind each study.

 

We must also recognize that science is an iterative process, and that our understanding of complex issues like cannabis and cognition will continue to evolve as new evidence emerges. This means embracing uncertainty and nuance, rather than clinging to simplistic narratives or entrenched positions.

 

Ultimately, the sticky bottom line is that science and public policy are inextricably linked, but the relationship between them is often messy and contentious. As responsible consumers of scientific information and engaged citizens, we have a duty to approach research findings with a critical eye, to demand evidence-based policies from our leaders, and to advocate for a more transparent and accountable scientific enterprise.

 

Only by fostering a culture of informed skepticism and open-minded inquiry can we hope to untangle the complex web of science, politics, and public opinion surrounding issues like cannabis use. It’s a daunting task, but one that is essential for creating a more just, healthy, and evidence-based society.

 

THE CANNABIS COGNITIVE FUNCTION STUDY, READ ON…

CANNABIS STOP COGNITIVE DELCINE ALS

CANNABIS SLOW COGNITIVE DECLINE AND DEMENTIA, READ THIS STUDY!



Source link

Cannabis News

How Do You Stop Lab-Shopping for the Highest THC Results?

Published

on

By


single lab test for cannabis THC results

In a decisive move aimed at bolstering consumer safety and ensuring the integrity of cannabis products, Massachusetts regulators have mandated that all cannabis products must undergo testing at a single, licensed laboratory. This new regulation comes in response to the growing issue of “lab shopping,” where cannabis producers seek favorable testing results by sending their products to multiple laboratories. The Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission (CCC) announced this significant regulatory change after extensive consultations with industry stakeholders, public health officials, and consumer advocates.

 

This article explores the implications of this regulation for the cannabis industry, consumers, and public health. It also examines the broader context of cannabis regulation in Massachusetts and the potential impact of this decision on the future of the state’s cannabis market.

 

Understanding Lab Shopping

 

 What is Lab Shopping?

 

Lab shopping refers to the practice where cannabis producers send their products to various testing laboratories in search of the most favorable results. Producers may choose labs based on their reputation for leniency or their history of providing positive results. This behavior can lead to significant discrepancies in product safety assessments and quality assurance.

 

The Risks Associated with Lab Shopping

 

1. Consumer Health Risks: The primary concern surrounding lab shopping is the potential risk it poses to consumer health. Inconsistent testing results mean that products containing harmful contaminants—such as pesticides, heavy metals, or mold—may be sold without proper scrutiny. This can lead to serious health issues for consumers who unknowingly purchase tainted products.

 

2. Market Integrity: Lab shopping undermines the integrity of the legal cannabis market. When consumers cannot trust that products have been tested rigorously and uniformly, it erodes confidence in legal cannabis sales and can drive customers back to illicit markets where safety standards are nonexistent.

 

3. Regulatory Challenges: For regulators like the CCC, lab shopping complicates enforcement efforts. It becomes increasingly difficult to monitor compliance when producers can easily switch labs to obtain favorable results, making it challenging to ensure that all products meet established safety standards.

 

The Regulatory Response

 

The Role of the Cannabis Control Commission (CCC)

 

The Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission is tasked with regulating the state’s cannabis industry. As part of its mandate, the CCC has worked diligently to establish a comprehensive regulatory framework that governs various aspects of cannabis production and sale. However, as the industry has evolved, so too have the challenges associated with ensuring product safety and quality.

 

In light of growing concerns about lab shopping and its implications for public health and safety, the CCC recognized the need for a more robust regulatory framework. After extensive discussions with industry stakeholders and public health officials, the commission concluded that a single-lab testing requirement was necessary to address these issues effectively.

 

Implementation of Single-Lab Testing

 

In late 2023, following thorough deliberation and stakeholder engagement, the CCC announced its new regulation mandating that all cannabis products must be tested by a single licensed laboratory before they can be sold to consumers. This decision aims to achieve several key objectives:

 

  • Standardize Testing Protocols: By requiring that all products be tested by a single lab, regulators can ensure that all products are subject to consistent testing standards. This uniformity is crucial for maintaining product quality and safety across the market.

 

  • Enhance Accountability: A single-lab requirement makes it easier for regulators to hold laboratories accountable for their testing practices. If discrepancies arise in testing results, it will be clear which laboratory conducted the tests, facilitating more straightforward investigations.

 

  • Improve Consumer Confidence: With consistent testing results across all products, consumers can feel more secure in their purchases. This increased confidence is vital for fostering a healthy legal cannabis market in Massachusetts.

 

 Implications of Single-Lab Testing

 

For Producers

 

1. Increased Accountability: Producers will need to establish relationships with specific laboratories and ensure that their products meet stringent quality standards before submission for testing. This shift will require producers to invest more in quality control measures throughout their production processes.

 

2. Potential Cost Implications: While single-lab testing may streamline processes for some producers, it could also lead to increased costs if producers are required to pay higher fees for comprehensive testing services. Smaller producers may find it particularly challenging to absorb these costs.

 

3. Adaptation Period: Producers will need time to adjust their operations and supply chains to comply with this new regulation. This may involve reevaluating partnerships with existing labs or investing in new quality control measures.

 

4. Impact on Product Development: The requirement for single-lab testing may also influence how producers develop new products. With fewer laboratories available for testing, producers may need to plan their product launches more carefully and allow additional time for testing processes.

 

For Laboratories

 

1. Increased Demand for Services: Licensed laboratories may experience an increase in demand as producers consolidate their testing needs with fewer facilities. This could lead to higher revenues for labs but also increased pressure on them to maintain high-quality standards amidst growing workloads.

 

2. Need for Enhanced Capabilities: Laboratories will need to ensure they have the capacity and technology necessary to handle increased volumes of samples while maintaining rigorous quality control measures. This may require investments in new equipment or hiring additional staff.

 

3. Regulatory Compliance: Laboratories will face heightened scrutiny from regulators as they become key players in ensuring product safety. They will need to demonstrate compliance with all relevant regulations and maintain transparent practices regarding their testing methodologies.

 

 For Consumers

 

1. Improved Product Safety: The primary benefit for consumers is enhanced safety assurance. With standardized testing protocols in place, consumers can trust that cannabis products have been thoroughly vetted for contaminants and potency before reaching store shelves.

 

2. Greater Transparency: As part of this regulatory shift, there may be increased transparency regarding testing results and laboratory practices. Consumers will have access to clearer information about what goes into their cannabis products, empowering them to make informed choices.

 

3. Potential Price Increases: While improved safety is paramount, there is a possibility that compliance costs could be passed on to consumers through higher prices for cannabis products. Producers may need to adjust their pricing structures in response to increased operational costs associated with single-lab testing.

 

Cannabis Regulation in Massachusetts

 

 Historical Overview

 

Massachusetts was one of the first states in New England to legalize recreational cannabis use following the passage of Question 4 in 2016. The legalization marked a significant shift in public policy and opened up a new economic sector within the state. However, as with any emerging industry, challenges quickly arose—particularly concerning product safety and quality assurance.

 

Existing Regulatory Framework

 

Prior to the introduction of single-lab testing regulations, Massachusetts had established a comprehensive regulatory framework governing various aspects of cannabis production and sale:

 

 

 

 

Despite these measures, lab shopping highlighted gaps in enforcement and compliance that necessitated further action from regulators.

 

 Industry Reactions

 

Support from Public Health Advocates

 

Public health advocates have largely welcomed the CCC’s decision to implement single-lab testing as a crucial step toward safeguarding public health by ensuring that all cannabis products meet consistent safety standards. Many believe this regulation will help prevent contaminated or substandard products from reaching consumers while bolstering trust in legal cannabis sales.

 

Dr. Emily Thompson, a public health expert at Harvard University, stated, “This regulation is essential for protecting consumers from potential health risks associated with contaminated cannabis products.”

 

Concerns from Industry Stakeholders

 

Conversely, some industry stakeholders have expressed concerns about potential drawbacks:

 

1. Operational Challenges: Smaller producers may find it difficult to navigate relationships with larger laboratories or face delays in getting their products tested due to increased demand at those facilities.

  

2. Innovation Stifling: Critics argue that requiring single-lab testing could stifle innovation within the industry by limiting producers’ options for exploring different testing methodologies or technologies offered by various labs.

 

3. Market Dynamics: There are worries that this regulation could create monopolistic tendencies within laboratory services if only a few labs dominate the market due to increased demand from producers seeking reliable test results.

 

4. Impact on Small Businesses: Small-scale cultivators might struggle more than larger companies due to limited resources and access to high-quality labs capable of meeting stringent requirements without significantly raising costs.

 

 Future Outlook

 

As Massachusetts implements this new regulation mandating single-lab testing for all cannabis products sold within its borders, it sets an important precedent that other states may consider as they navigate similar challenges within their own burgeoning cannabis markets.

 

Potential National Implications

 

The decision by Massachusetts regulators could influence national discussions around cannabis regulation as other states look toward creating frameworks that prioritize consumer safety while fostering industry growth:

 

  1. Increased Interest from Other States: States grappling with similar issues related to lab shopping may look closely at Massachusetts’ approach as they develop their own regulations.

 

  1. Collaboration Among States: As states continue legalizing recreational marijuana use across the country, there may be opportunities for collaboration on best practices regarding product safety standards and laboratory oversight.

 

  1. Federal Considerations: With ongoing discussions about federal legalization of marijuana gaining traction nationally—especially amid shifting political landscapes—regulatory models like those emerging from Massachusetts could serve as templates for future federal guidelines governing cannabis production and sale across state lines.

 

 Conclusion

 

The Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission’s mandate for single-lab testing represents a pivotal shift in evaluating cannabis products for safety and quality assurance within one of the nation’s most dynamic legal marijuana markets. By targeting the issue of lab shopping, this regulation prioritizes consumer protection, aiming to enhance public health outcomes and rebuild confidence in the safety of legalized cannabis products. While the transition poses challenges for producers adapting operational processes and laboratories scaling their capabilities, the regulation seeks to balance fostering innovation in an evolving industry with rigorous oversight mechanisms. As Massachusetts refines its regulatory framework, balancing the interests of regulators and profit-driven stakeholders, collaboration will be essential to thriving under these new guidelines. This change not only advances the state’s cannabis sector but also sets a potential standard for other states to ensure safe consumption and responsible business practices in the growing marijuana industry.

 

LAB SHOPPING FOR HIGH THC RESULTS? READ ON…

CANNABIS LAB SHOPPING FOR THC

LAB SHOPPING FOR THC RESULTS- THE DIRTY SECRET IN CANNABIS!



Source link

Continue Reading

Cannabis News

Happy Holidays from The Canna Law Blog

Published

on

By


Wishing all of our readers, along with friends and families, the very best this holiday season.

Whether you celebrate Hanukkah, Christmas, Kwanzaa, Winter Solstice, Festivus, or something else, we hope you can kick back and enjoy this wonderful time of the year.

The post Happy Holidays from The Canna Law Blog appeared first on Harris Sliwoski LLP.



Source link

Continue Reading

Cannabis News

5 Cannabis Christmas Recipes to Try This Holiday Season at Home or the Office Party!

Published

on

By


cannabis christmas recipes

Ah yes, it’s that magical time of year again when Ganja Clause slides down the chimney to visit all the good little stoners. The lights are twinkling, the fire is crackling, and the sweet aroma of cannabis-infused treats fills the air. As someone who’s spent years experimenting with cannabis cuisine, I’ve learned that the holidays present the perfect opportunity to elevate traditional recipes to new heights.

To help make your holidaze more “dazey,” I’ve crafted five festive recipes that combine seasonal favorites with our favorite herb. These dishes aren’t just about getting high – they’re about creating memorable experiences and new traditions. But before we dive in, I need to emphasize something crucial: dosing is always important, and you should NEVER give these recipes to anyone without their explicit consent. While sharing is caring, tricking someone into consuming cannabis is not only unethical but potentially illegal. Always clearly label your infused treats and keep them safely away from children and unsuspecting guests.

With those important notes out of the way, let’s get into these magical recipes that will make your holiday season extra special.

Look, we all know eggnog is a holiday staple, but why not kick it up a notch? This cannabis-infused version will have you feeling jolly in no time. Just remember – this isn’t your grandma’s recipe (unless your grandma is really cool).

What You’ll Need:

  • 4 cups milk (or non-dairy alternative if that’s your jam)

  • 1 cup heavy cream (or coconut cream for you plant-based folks)

  • 6 egg yolks (fresh is best, trust me)

  • 1/2 cup sugar

  • 1 tsp vanilla extract

  • 1/2 tsp ground nutmeg

  • 1 tbsp cannabis tincture or cannabis-infused syrup

The Magic Process:

  1. Start by heating your milk and cream in a saucepan. You want it hot but not boiling – we’re making eggnog, not scrambled eggs.

  2. In a separate bowl, whisk those egg yolks, sugar, and vanilla until they’re well combined and looking smooth.

  3. Here’s the tricky part: slowly (and I mean SLOWLY) add the hot milk mixture to your egg mixture while whisking constantly. If you dump it all in at once, you’ll end up with sweet scrambled eggs, and nobody wants that.

  4. Pour everything back into your saucepan and cook over medium heat, stirring constantly until it thickens enough to coat the back of a spoon.

  5. Remove from heat, stir in that nutmeg, and let it cool a bit before adding your cannabis tincture or syrup.

  6. Chill thoroughly before serving.

Pro tip: Start with a small serving – this stuff can creep up on you!

Want to elevate your holiday meal? This gravy will take your feast to new heights. It’s perfect for drowning those mashed potatoes or smothering that turkey.

The Goods:

  • 2 cups chicken or vegetable stock

  • 1/4 cup all-purpose flour

  • 1/4 cup cannabis butter (cannabutter)

  • 1/2 tsp salt

  • 1/4 tsp black pepper

  • 1 tbsp chopped fresh herbs (thyme or rosemary work great)

The How-To:

  1. Melt your cannabutter over medium heat in a saucepan. Watch it carefully – burnt butter is not the vibe we’re going for.

  2. Whisk in the flour to create your roux. Cook it for about 1-2 minutes to get rid of that raw flour taste.

  3. Now, slowly pour in your stock while whisking like your life depends on it. No lumps allowed!

  4. Add your seasonings and herbs.

  5. Keep stirring and simmering until it reaches your desired thickness.

  6. Taste and adjust seasonings if needed (before you get too lifted).

Remember: Label this clearly! You don’t want Aunt Martha accidentally pouring this all over her plate without knowing what’s up.

Forget that canned stuff – this homemade cranberry sauce with a special twist will have everyone at the table asking for seconds (though you might want to limit them to just one serving).

The Ingredients:

Getting Saucy:

  1. Toss your cranberries, OJ, and sugar into a saucepan over medium heat.

  2. Let it cook until those cranberries start popping like tiny little fireworks (about 10 minutes).

  3. Once it’s thickened up nicely, remove from heat.

  4. Here comes the fun part – stir in your cannabis-infused honey or tincture.

  5. Let it cool completely before serving.

Pro tip: Make two batches – one regular and one infused. Just make sure to label them clearly!

These aren’t your regular sweet potatoes – they’re elevated sweet potatoes. Perfect for getting baked while getting baked.

What You Need:

  • 4 large sweet potatoes

  • 1/2 cup cannabis butter (cannabutter)

  • 1/4 cup brown sugar

  • 1 tsp ground cinnamon

  • 1/2 tsp ground nutmeg

  • Salt to taste

  • Marshmallows (optional, but highly recommended)

The Method:

  1. Preheat your oven to 375°F (190°C).

  2. Bake those sweet potatoes until they’re tender (about an hour).

  3. Once they’re cool enough to handle, peel and mash them up.

  4. Mix in your cannabutter, brown sugar, and spices.

  5. Transfer to a baking dish.

  6. If you’re feeling extra, top with marshmallows.

  7. Bake for another 20-30 minutes until everything’s golden brown and gorgeous.

Warning: These are dangerously delicious – pace yourself!

This warm, spicy cider will lift your spirits in more ways than one. Perfect for those chilly winter nights.

The Essentials:

The Process:

  1. Pour your cider into a large pot.

  2. Add your cinnamon sticks, cloves, and orange slices.

  3. Heat until it just starts to bubble, then reduce to a simmer.

  4. Add your cannabis-infused maple syrup (or add tincture to individual cups for controlled dosing).

  5. Let everything mingle and get cozy for about 20 minutes.

  6. Serve it up warm with an orange slice or cinnamon stick garnish.

Pro tip: Keep a non-infused batch warming for designated drivers and non-partaking guests.

Remember folks, the key to a successful Dankmas feast is clear labeling and careful dosing. Nothing ruins a holiday gathering quite like someone getting unexpectedly zooted. Happy cooking, and may your holidays be dank and delightful!

There you have it, folks – five unique ways to spice up your Dankmas traditions and make the season truly memorable. As someone who’s hosted many cannabis-friendly holiday gatherings, I can’t stress enough the importance of starting slow with these recipes. Edibles can take anywhere from 30 minutes to two hours to fully kick in, and you definitely don’t want to overdo it during family dinner. I strongly recommend doing a test run with different dosages before the big day to find your sweet spot.

What I love most about these recipes is that they offer a fantastic alternative for those looking to skip the traditional alcohol-heavy holiday celebrations. Cannabis provides a more natural way to unwind and connect with loved ones during this special time of year. Plus, you won’t have to worry about a hangover the next morning!

Remember to celebrate responsibly, be open about what’s infused and what isn’t, and most importantly, enjoy the magic of the season. Happy Dankmas to all, and to all a good height!

 

MORE DANKMAS STORIES, READ ON…

GANJA CLAUSE

THE NIGHT BEFORE CHRISTMAS BY GANJA CLAUSE!



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2021 The Art of MaryJane Media