Cannibidiol CBD - what's up with this stuff?

[brothers]

Not hallucinogenic, and it seems to be all over the place. Made from hemp. Not illegal in most jurisdictions. I'd like to read some educated opinions of this fad. Some folks (internet marketers) claim the results are miraculous. Yeah, right.

[ShadowsDad]

Gary, I have very little information regarding it, so I'm not the person to answer your question in depth.

My limited understanding is that it's the "medical" portion of the active substances in medical marijuana. THC would be the high that's associated with the plant. I haven't tried it yet and if it shows up in a piss test I probably never will since Maine now has recreational MJ on the books but the piss test shows MJ weeks after smoking it. While I can't smoke it even if I wanted to (I don't), I don't need the hassle should I ever need to have my pee or blood tested. Until I have more information I simply won't try it. At this time another plant is working fine as a pain reliever for me.

I did a quick 'net search and it turned up all sorts of info regarding it.

[CMur12]

Gary, building on what Brian said, CBD is the component of hemp/marijuana that is showing an ability to combat seizure disorders and (I believe) pain. I understand they are also making topical creams with CBD for joint and muscle pain.

Like Brian, I have no experience of my own with this. I can only report what I have read.

- Murray

[drmoss_ca]

Our problem is that the trials done have been with small numbers or are of poor quality. There is a JAMA review of published trials, and it's pretty disappointing. Some evidence for pain relief, and for reduction of spasticity, but little else. On the other hand, there are many unsupported claims of miraculous effects from people who want to sell you something. Conspiracy theorists will tell you that it can't be patented so no one wants to make the effort to study it properly. Judging by the way everyone is falling over themselves in Canada to win some portion of the huge profits that are going to be made here after legalisation, I'd say there is enormous incentive to prove something, but maybe they think that a claim which costs nothing to make will be better business. I have been very uncomfortable with the idea that doctors must be the gatekeepers of medical mariuana, after all, without information about safety and efficacy how can we take responsibility for what happens to a patient if we prescribe it? Now it is going to be legalised, there is a strong lobby of medical users who want to keep their supply separate from the recreational supply, presumably to get it covered by drug plans. This is particularly true among ex-servicemen who use it for PTSD and get it paid for by Veterans Affairs - but it turns out there is no evidence it treats PTSD: it may be that being high is preferable to experiencing PTSD sober, but it's doing nothing to alleviate the underlying cause of the distress.
Sadly, it seems our federal government is doing it for the votes, and the provinces are licking their chops at the thought of the profits they will make, which are expected to outstrip the profits from the sale of hard liquor - another government monopoly here - within two years. Given the known risks associated with chronic use (dependence, a huge increase in psychotic illnesses especially for young users, and cognitive impairment - there's a good reason why we all recognise a stoner pretty quickly! We don't even know if smoking it raises the risk of lung cancer.) I have to conclude that the tiers of government are doing this simply for cynical reasons without too much regard for safety.
So for cannabidiol, nabiximols, nabilone, and dronabinol it might be possible to gain a benefit without a high, but before jumping into any of them I'd ask to see some large double-blind trials showing the benefit exists.

C.

[CMur12]

Large scale studies of cannabis would be helpful to determine if there are true medical benefits to be derived from the substance and to better define the dangers of its misuse. I believe the Israeli government is studying it, and other countries may be doing so, as well, but it's not happening here. Unfortunately, in the US, the classification assigned to cannabis by the federal government prevents any official study of cannabis for medical purposes, so sound scientific knowledge on the matter is unlikely to increase in these parts.

I might note that I am not a user of cannabis in any form or for any purpose.

- Murray

[drmoss_ca]

I had a breakfast FaceTime with the boss who is on her monthly session up in Sydney, NS this morning. She mentioned that she had been getting a lot of pressure from the local autism association to approve the use of cannabidiol (she's a child psychiatrist), so while we chatted I did some googling. Searching for marijuana+autism or cannabis+autism, or even cannbidiol+autism dod not produce any serious links on the first page. I recognised USA Today and Newsweek, both of whom published 'it's a miracle' stories, but all the rest were domains like leafly, maryjanemedical, coloradopot, cbdproject and so on. No scientific or medical journals. So next I went to the Cochrane database. Nothing for the above three combinations.
It seems there is much hype and zero evidence for cannabinoids in autism. I suspect she will be re-using the consensus opinion for their use in ADHD - yes, a stoned kid is a lot easier to cope with than one who is climbing up the curtains, but you are not treating the condition and you are causing cognitive damage. In other words it has the same treatment value as a large dose of chlorpromazine, a mug of whisky or a tap on the noggin with a dead-blow hammer.

C.
Unexpected side-effects also seem to include a very hard-boiled egg and burned toast.

[ShadowsDad]

When the compound CBD that was asked about is discussed with THC containing "cannibis" thrown into the mix, it's discussing apples and oranges. Maybe the CBD can be smoked (I just don't know) but that's not the way I understand it to be administered. Too, there is no high as experienced with the THC portion of the plant. They are 2 very different compounds with 2 very different results.

The following is definitely off topic since it's not about CBD. FWIW, here in Maine first they got medicinal THC containing MJ approved, then with that foot in the door they got recreational MJ approved a few years later (typical Maine incrementalism). The state looked at it with wide eyes and anticipation due to the tax revenues. Personally I'm mostly ambivalent toward it. I think people have the right to do with their bodies as they wish. But with that comes the responsibility to foot the bill for whatever follows from that. That means don't ask me to pay for the healthcare of someone who screws their body up. If I'm asked to pay then I have a say in what they can do. I also understand that it can be a gateway drug. I saw that first hand in the military. Again, don't impact me and I'm OK with however someone wishes to kill him or herself*. But drive under the influence and cause a crash, you better be ready to suffer the consequences. Too, if it works as a gateway drug to more serious drugs, or if it increases crime, the criminal had better be ready to do the time or catch the lead. It's a freedom vs responsibility issue for me. The problem is that most folks, while claiming they're responsible, have no clue what personal responsibility actually means and are in fact quite irresponsible. We've already seen accidents caused by high folks behind the wheel. But the same thing happens with state sold alcohol. Why is one OK and the other isn't as far as sales? (not accidents)

We just had a nationwide manhunt for a cop killer. It was centered in (quite literally) my backyard. A meth head killed a cop just a few miles away, stole the cops cruiser and ditched it a short distance away. Near as we can figure he made his escape through our back yard and was on the run for 4 days. That's the type of stuff that I don't like to see happen and if MJ is a gateway drug (It absolutely is for some folks) then it's a really bad idea. Yet I know of folks who use it as responsible adults. I suppose it's like anything freedom related that can be abused. Many folks get benefit and/or use it responsibly and a few folks abuse it. I'll always side with freedom over regulation.

There may come a time that I'll see a benefit to using CBD, but not at this time.

*I did intervene twice to prevent 2 folks from killing themselves. I was a paratrooper. On the way to the airbase many in the transport were smoking hashish, one gent had also been taking cilocybe (sp?) mushrooms. Fast forward... We are in the plane and all hooked up. The stick starts to exit the plane. At the last instant I saw this trooper who had done the mushrooms headed out the plane with his static line hook in his hand. I grabbed it and slapped it onto the cable just a second before he exited the plane @ 1250'. Needless to say if he had impacted the ground with his hook in his hand it would have been the last thing he would have experienced on this earth. Another time a soldier had been drinking heavily all day and doing what else? I don't know for certain. But later that evening a person came bursting into my room to tell me that the soldier had ODed (They knew I wouldn't be high). He had added heroin to the mix that was in his system. So I got the medics and they took him to the dispensary. The Dr pronounced him dead, but needed a final declaration from the hospital 40 miles away. As we were in the office discussing what had happened, the "corpse" sat up and asked what the heck was going on. Later he swore he'd never do "that stuff" anymore. Just a bit later he had the needle back in his arm. Gateway drugs really suck bigtime.

[Kyle76]

I’m just not sure I buy the “gateway drug” argument. If anything, marijuana is more an entry-level drug; i.e. the first thing you try that is different from alcohol. Does marijuana “lead to” heavier drugs? Not really, in my experience. Nearly everyone I knew growing up in the ‘70s smoked marijuana to some degree, some more, some less. Some people also did “heavier” drugs, like quaaludes, mushrooms, uppers, cocaine, etc. I know many of those people today, and they are pretty normal middle-class citizens, in or nearing retirement. Marijuana was not a “gateway” to a life of drug abuse for them, and many of us still occasionally talk about the old days of getting high with the same kind of fondness as talking about our youth in general. Marijuana might be the first step of a progression that many take in a life of drug abuse, but I’m not at all sure that it has a causative effect of pushing one further down that road.

[brothers]

Are we thinking that using the CBD causes or encourages some of the users to make the jump into smoking marijuana? Then having taken that step, are they then jumping onto the bandwagon where the dangerous chemicals move in for the kill? I saw Reefer Madness once.


Seriously, not to be making light of the hell that awaits those who gamble their brains and other organs. I believe there are a lot of people who sadly just want to jump right in and do everything pretty much simultaneously, if given the opportunity through circumstances. And peer pressure.

I once knew someone who used to smoke marijuana and ingest tar opium in dangerous amounts after which he would remain unconscious for days. Eventually he became a severe alcoholic who lost everything because of it. He once told me that as a young man someone older whom he trusted advised him to drink as much alcohol as possible in order to avoid becoming a drug addict. He heeded that advice and lived to regret it.

[ShadowsDad]

Gary, my understanding of it is that CBD doesn't need to lead to anything heavier, anymore than aspirin does. Don't confuse the high from THC with CBD which produces no high at all.

[brothers]

A good point. Seems that the recently popular CBD is a whole different animal compared to the commonly known substances that are so dangerous.

[Kyle76]

Dateline NBC tonight is about CBD and how it has been shown to help epilepsy and chronic pain patients, among others.

[Gene]

I’m just not sure I buy the “gateway drug” argument.

I wonder about this, too, sometimes.

I never tried it - not once - but had a lot of friends who did while we were growing up. We would have fun weekends, and I always drove. Kept them safe, I guess. They were my friends before I discovered that they used, and I stuck by them as friends.

I did see a couple of friends change from using pot - they got a bit duller (already mentioned in this thread), but none of them jumped to cocaine or heroin (as far as I know).

However - I think there are some folks that might be prone to addiction under almost any circumstance. Trying pot, or booze, alcohol, or porn - whatever - just throws a switch in their mind and they can be in serious trouble.

[blantyre]

It seems ironic that one of the listed ailments is "joint pain". It seem guaranteed to work for that. The big question in my mind if I bought some what would be the purity and consistency. Since it is presumably not regulated as a pharma product by the FDA then the purity and potency and any residual solvents, etc. from extraction would all be potential issues. If it really does have pharmaceutical value then the best source would be synthetic made and dosed using a standardized procedure.

[brothers]

Now that the smoke has cleared somewhat (pun intended ) our state has voted to legalize "medicinal" use of marijuana. This explains why there have been scores of new businesses related to CBD (wink - wink) opening around the state. Obviously the entrepreneurs were getting ready for the landslide of legal marijuana which will soon be cascading onto their shelves and out the door. Obviously CBD was only a trojan horse for the real thing.

[CMur12]

Gary, I don't see CBD as a Trojan horse, at all. It is a case of people having isolated a potentially beneficial part of cannabis, separate from the psycho-active element. If they just wanted to get marijuana into the state, THC and all, I would see the propagation of CBD as a hindrance to that aim.

- Murray

[drmoss_ca]

No reason at all to believe in the concept of a 'gateway' drug. That's just silly.

As for any medical claim for any constituent of marijuana, just ask for the same level of evidence that is required for any drug that comes to market (and good luck finding it!) Sans evidence, don't claim you have it.

[brothers]

Murray, the trojan horse example was my own device, and as you point out, probably not applicable in this case. My apologies. The fact is that the specific entrepreneurs admit the CBD product provided an opportunity to establish their business in advance of the statewide vote on whether or not to legalize medicinal marijuana. I am not and never have been one of those who are emotionally opposed to placing marijuana in the same regulated and taxed status as alcoholic beverages. I've always supported it and have always known it would eventually happen. Guess what!!! Virtually everyone who ever wanted to partake of marijuana (past, present, and future) for whatever reason, medicinal or recreational, has always had the ability to obtain it and use it in this state.

Regarding Gateway proponents: Marijuana is more likely to be an introduction to the use of pharmaceutical/chemical drugs for recreational purposes when there is intense social (group?) pressure applied to the vulnerable dope smoking acquaintance in the context of an euphoric scenario to move on up to the heavy stuff. My very firm position is that drugs are for sick people. Physically or emotionally sick. YMMV but I only know of what I speak from personal observations and experiences and never just by word of mouth. As in all other endeavors, there are people who use (used) drugs and people who only talk about doing drugs.

[Kyle76]

No reason at all to believe in the concept of a 'gateway' drug. That's just silly.

As for any medical claim for any constituent of marijuana, just ask for the same level of evidence that is required for any drug that comes to market (and good luck finding it!) Sans evidence, don't claim you have it.

Unfortunately, there is little incentive for studying the medicinal effects of any of the several forms of cannabis. The drug companies can’t make money off of something anyone can grow, and the government (at least here in the US) still treats it as a Schedule 1 drug, which severely limits its availability for testing.

[brothers]

Our health department passed emergency rules today in response to the new medical marijuana law, and it was quite a shock to a lot of people! I think it is hilarious! The new rules (administrative rules have the force of law) do not authorize SMOKING marijuana. Also, no buds. Ha!