Cannabis News

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

Published

1 month ago

April 17, 2024

admin

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 SLOW COGNITIVE DECLINE AND DEMENTIA, READ THIS STUDY!

Source link

Cannabis News

How to Use CBD Isolate to Create Personalized Wellness Solutions

Published

47 mins ago

May 21, 2024

admin

cbd isloate

Unlike full-spectrum or broad-spectrum CBD products, CBD isolate contains no other cannabinoids, terpenes, or flavonoids from the cannabis plant. This allows users to experience the effects of CBD without any potential interference from other compounds.

Of course, do not confuse CBD isolate, a raw material, with CBD isolate-based oil. CBD isolate-based oils are created by adding CBD isolate to the career oil, terpenes, and other bioactive compounds.

There are various ways to enjoy CBD isolate. Why? Because it is CBD in its purest and safest form. Pure CBD isolate can be used to create different CBD products for different needs, making it quite a versatile product yet very safe.

What is CBD Isolate?

CBD isolate is the purest form of CBD available, usually comprising over 99% cannabidiol. It comes in a crystalline powder or solid form, which is odourless and tasteless.

The extraction process involves isolating CBD from the cannabis plant and removing all other compounds, including THC (tetrahydrocannabinol), the psychoactive component of cannabis. This makes CBD isolate an ideal choice for those who want to avoid any THC content altogether.

Benefits of CBD Isolate

CBD isolate is good for beginners and experienced users alike. It has all the health benefits of CBD. Thus, it is good for reducing stress and pain relief, enhancing sleep quality, reducing anxiety, countering inflammation, boosting brain health, and more.

Since isolate is CBD in its purest form, beginners are least likely to experience any side effects. Thus, CBD isolate is one of the best ways to get started with CBD use.

However, CBD isolate is also good for advanced users. This is because it allows the creation of different CBD products. Here, options are endless and limited by one’s imagination. One can add CBD isolate to foods, oils, topicals, and more. One can create different personalized CBD solutions.

How to Use CBD Isolate

Methods of Consumption

CBD isolate is incredibly versatile and can be consumed in several ways, depending on your preferences and desired effects.

Sublingual Use

One of the simplest and most effective methods of consuming CBD isolate is to place it directly under your tongue. This method, known as sublingual administration, allows the CBD to be absorbed quickly into the bloodstream through the mucous membranes in the mouth.

Steps:

Measure the desired amount of CBD isolate using a milligram scale.

Place the isolate under your tongue.

Hold it there for about 60-90 seconds before swallowing.

One of the issues with the above method could be that not everyone may find dosing CBD isolate easy. In such a case, consider taking CBD oil, as mentioned later in the article.

Mixing with Food and Beverages

CBD isolate can be easily incorporated into your daily diet by mixing it with food and drinks. It’s a convenient way to enjoy the benefits of CBD without altering your routine significantly.

Ideas:

Smoothies: Add CBD isolate to your morning smoothie for a wellness boost.

Baked Goods: Incorporate CBD isolate into your favourite baking recipes.

Coffee and Tea: Stir CBD isolate into your coffee or tea.

Creating CBD Oil

You can create your CBD oil at home by dissolving CBD isolate in a carrier oil like MCT, olive, or hemp seed oil. This DIY method allows you to customize the concentration and use the oil in various applications.

Here is a pro tip to create a more potent and personalized solution. When creating CBD oil, you can also mix terpenes into it. This may help boost its health benefits. Alternatively, for different health benefits, consider adding essential oils to CBD oil, like lavender, peppermint, tea tree oil, and eucalyptus.

Topical Application

CBD isolate can be mixed with lotions, creams, or balms to create topical products that can be applied directly to the skin. This method is particularly effective for localized relief of pain and inflammation. Topical CBD is also sebostatic, which means it is good for managing oily skin and preventing infections and acne.

Steps:

Measure the desired amount of CBD isolate.

Mix it thoroughly with your preferred lotion or cream.

Apply to the affected area as needed.

Determining the Right Dosage

Finding the right dosage of CBD isolate can be a personal journey, as it varies based on factors like body weight, metabolism, and the specific condition being treated. It’s generally recommended to start with a low dose and gradually increase until you achieve the desired effects.

Tips:

Start Small: Begin with a dose of 5-10 mg of CBD isolate.

Monitor Effects: Keep track of how you feel after each dose.

Adjust Gradually: Increase the dosage in small increments until you find what works best for you.

Creating Personalized Wellness Solutions

Yet another way to create personalized wellness solutions is to identify wellness goals. For one person, it may be skin health; for another, stress reduction. For others, it may be pain relief. One can create personalized solutions based on the requirements.

Thus, if the issue is skin health, like acne, then one may make a topical cream or solution and also use CBD isolate sublingually for a sebostatic effect.

However, if the purpose is relaxation or anxiety reduction, one may use a higher CBD dosage and may combine it with essential oils like lavender for greater anxiolytic impact.

Tracking Progress and Adjusting

Monitoring your progress is crucial in creating an effective and personalized CBD wellness plan. Keep a journal to record your dosages, methods of consumption, and the affects you experience. This will help you fine-tune your approach and adjust as needed.

To enjoy CBD, isolate safely, stick to the routine, be consistent in its use, and do not overdose. However, it is fine to correct the dosage or increase it based on personal experience.

The Bottom Line

CBD isolate offers a pure, versatile, and customizable way to incorporate the benefits of CBD into your wellness routine. By understanding your wellness goals, selecting the correct consumption methods, and personalizing your approach, you can create effective and tailored solutions to enhance your health and well-being.

Remember to source high-quality CBD isolate, monitor your progress, and adjust as needed to achieve the best results. With thoughtful integration, CBD isolate can become a powerful tool in your personalized wellness toolkit.

ISOLATE OR FULL SPECTRUM, READ ON…

ISOLATE OR FULL SPECTRUM CBD, WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE?

Source link

Cannabis News

What is Cannabis Poisoning? – CNN Makes Up a New Reefer Madness Term

Published

2 hours ago

May 21, 2024

admin

cannabis poisoning

What is Cannabis Poisoning? – CNN Makes Up a New Reefer Madness Term No One Ever Heard of Before!

What is a poison? According to Dictionary.com:

a substance that is capable of causing the illness or death of a living organism when introduced or absorbed.

“he killed himself with poison”.

The Mayo Clinic defines poisoning as:

Poisoning is injury or death due to swallowing, inhaling, touching or injecting various drugs, chemicals, venoms or gases. Many substances — such as drugs and carbon monoxide — are poisonous only in higher concentrations or dosages. And others — such as cleaners — are dangerous only if ingested. Children are particularly sensitive to even small amounts of certain drugs and chemicals.

CNN recently upped their anti-pot rhetoric by claiming a new term, “cannabis poisoning”, have tripled in older adults, in this case, in Canada.

Since no one has ever died from cannabis, as in an overdose or ingesting too much, CNN must be referring to the “injury” part of the poisoning definition that the Mayo Clinic describes.

What injuries has cannabis caused in the human body to be classified as poisoning. Greening Out, a common term for ingesting too much THC that leads to paranoia, possible hallucinating, and a great night sleep, is as far a stretch from “poisoning” as the cannabis industry gets. Yes, people using cannabis can do acts under the aspis of being “high”, walking into walls, falling down stairs, etc. that can cause injury, but that would be injuries under the influence, not poisoning injuries.

CHS, or cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome, is a longer-term reaction that a small percentage of habitual cannabis users can develop when their bodies have large amounts of THC in their liver and kidneys to flush. Usually taking a 10-day break, or up to a month, can solve most CHS issues.

These would be considered a toxicity problem, not a poison problem.

CNN, notoriously famous for anti-cannabis, clickbait headlines and brash statements about the “dangers” of cannabis, hit a new low with creating a new term, “cannabis poisoning”. It is a misleading term medically to say the least, let alone the implication that a serious poisoning of weed could lead to death or serious injury. Neither of which has ever happened in 5,000 years of humans using the cannabis plant.

REEFER MADNESS IS ALIVE AND WELL AT CNN, READ ON…

FACT CHECKING CNN’S CLAIM ABOUT 90% THC LEVELS IN WEED!

Source link

Cannabis News

The 3 Biggest Winners from Rescheduling Cannabis?

Published

1 day ago

May 20, 2024

admin

tax money weed

President Joe Biden’s support of the administration’s decision to reschedule cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III is likely to result in considerable financial benefits for large, legal cannabis businesses and the illicit market. This action may lessen the restrictions imposed by IRS tax regulation 280E, which has banned cannabis businesses from deducting standard business expenditures. Which cannabis firms will gain the most from this change?

The illicit market will get a huge boost by removing the punshiments associated with getting caught dealing or transporting a Schedule 1 drug. Now that the fines, prison sentences, and desire to enforce Schedule 3 crimes is lessened, look for the illicit market to boom across America. It is estimated that the illegal cannabis market is 3x the size of the legal US market as of 2024, so look for that multiple to expand if Schedule 3 is enacted. Removing a negative incentive in economics always leads to predictable action.

In the legal market, the largest MSOS, or those that paid the most taxes, have the most to gain by a repeal of the 280E tax code and future tax credit or refunds coming their way

Industry Leaders in Tax Payments

Rescheduling cannabis will abolish the onerous 280E tax law, potentially freeing up more than a billion dollars in tax savings for the business. Curaleaf (OTC: CURLF) and Trulieve (OTC: TCNNF), both of which make considerable tax payments, are among the firms most likely to profit. Repealing 280E limits would allow these businesses to deduct typical business costs, greatly improving their financial situation.

Truelive alone stands to get $113,000,000 in tax refunds and savings!

Senior analyst Pablo Zuanic of Zuanic & Associates believes that these tax reductions may result in improved cash flows, allowing these businesses to reinvest in development and growth. In the quickly changing cannabis market, having this kind of financial flexibility is essential for keeping a competitive advantage and encouraging creativity.

Zuanic has consistently highlighted the disparity between current market valuations and the potential upside, particularly if federal legalization occurs. He emphasizes that immediate cash flow improvements could lead to substantial revaluation of these companies. By enabling the deduction of ordinary business expenses, the financial statements of these companies would more accurately reflect their true profitability, attracting more investors and boosting market confidence.

The potential tax savings are a temporary relief and a game-changer for the industry. Analysts believe that the improved cash flow could result in substantial revaluations of cannabis companies. For Curaleaf and Trulieve, this change would mean their financial statements would better represent their actual profitability, leading to increased investments and further expansion opportunities.

Curaleaf’s Financial Outlook

Beacon Securities’ Russell Stanley sheds light on Curaleaf’s financial landscape, highlighting the company’s adept management of operating cash flow. This proficiency facilitated a successful debt repurchase post-quarter, significantly enhancing its financial stability. With the anticipated rescheduling of cannabis and the potential enactment of the SAFER Banking Act, Curaleaf stands to benefit from a transformed financial environment, potentially witnessing a substantial surge in its operating cash flow by up to 92% and free cash flow by 188%.

Wedbush Securities recently released a report on Curaleaf, elevating the stock’s 12-month price target from $6.00 to $7.00 while maintaining a buy recommendation. The report underscores Curaleaf’s commendable performance in key domestic markets like Connecticut, Arizona, Maryland, and New York. Projections indicate a revenue uptick to $1.50 billion by 2025, coupled with improvements in overall profitability. This optimistic forecast reflects the company’s robust financial position and its strategic market presence.

Proactive debt management techniques and well-thought-out market positioning highlight Curaleaf’s potential for long-term development and financial success in the changing cannabis industry. Curaleaf is in a strong position to benefit from the rescheduling of banking and cannabis legislation, which may lower regulatory obstacles and further establish the company’s leadership in the cannabis market.

Unlocking Trulieve’s Growth Potential

Trulieve’s Growth Trajectory

Trulieve’s growth trajectory is drawing attention, particularly from Needham’s Matt McGinley, who emphasizes the company’s operational efficiency. McGinley points out that Trulieve has achieved its highest gross margin and EBITDA rates observed in over two years, indicating strong operational performance. This efficiency positions Trulieve favorably for capitalizing on emerging opportunities in the cannabis market.

Key legislative advancements in pivotal markets such as Florida and Pennsylvania present significant growth potential for Trulieve. As these markets potentially transition to adult-use cannabis, Trulieve stands to benefit from increased demand and expanded market reach. Leveraging its operational efficiency and established market presence, Trulieve is poised to capitalize on these legislative shifts to drive revenue growth and enhance shareholder value.

Trulieve is positioned to be a major participant in the growth of the cannabis sector due to its strategic focus on operational excellence and its flexibility in responding to changing regulatory environments. Trulieve is in an excellent position to maintain its growth trajectory and establish itself as a top cannabis supplier, thanks to encouraging legislative changes and a proven track record of high performance.

Analysts’ Industry Impact Assessment

Viridian Capital Advisors offers insights into the industry impact, noting that ten MSOs exceeded EBITDA estimates by $37 million in the first quarter of 2024. This performance suggests that initial projections may have been conservative, indicating a positive trend for cannabis companies. Analysts from Viridian specifically highlight Curaleaf and Trulieve, among others, as poised to benefit from the financial changes resulting from the removal of 280E tax restrictions.

The long-term outlook for the cannabis industry remains bullish, with potential federal legalization driving substantial valuation growth. Pablo Zuanic from Zuanic & Associates suggests that the US market alone could justify over $110 billion in valuations by 2030 assuming federal legalization. The removal of tax restrictions would directly impact bottom lines, potentially leading to significant valuation increases for many cannabis stocks.

All things considered, the possible repeal of the 280E tax laws offers cannabis businesses a big chance to improve their financial standing and market value. As analysts speculate that early projections may have overestimated the sector’s potential, businesses like Curaleaf and Trulieve might gain from more cash flow and better profitability, setting them up for long-term success in the changing cannabis market environment.

Bottom Line

The impending rescheduling of cannabis and the potential repeal of IRS tax regulation 280E offer a substantial opportunity for cannabis companies to strengthen their financial positions and market appeal. Industry leaders such as Curaleaf and Trulieve stand to benefit significantly, with projected increases in cash flow and profitability paving the way for sustained growth. Analysts anticipate a positive market response, with potential valuation growth and a bullish outlook for the long-term trajectory of the cannabis industry. These regulatory changes mark a pivotal moment, allowing businesses to capitalize on newfound financial flexibility and attract investor confidence. As the sector continues to evolve, Curaleaf, Trulieve, and other key players are positioned to thrive, driving innovation and shaping the future of the cannabis market.