Dataset Information

Comment on Lachenmeier et al (2020) "Are side effects of cannabidiol (CBD) products caused by tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) contamination?": disputation on various points in the publication.

ABSTRACT: This Correspondence article is a counterstatement to a Brief Report published by Lachenmeier and co-workers on 17th February 2020 in F1000Research: "Are side effects of cannabidiol (CBD) products caused by tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) contamination?". This counterstatement proposes that the authors of that article neither present proof or evidence for the alleged side effects of CBD products (no case reports presented with utilisable data), nor do they show that side effects are due to the presence of THC. Primarily, there is no clear definition of THC because the authors do not explain whether they mean Delta9-THC only (without its precursor tetrahydrocannabinolic acid (THCA)) or total-THC (the sum of Delta9-THC and its precursor THCA, normalised to THC); indeed EU Recommendation 2016/2115 on the monitoring of cannabinoids in food requires the measurement and documentation of the precursor acids complementary to the decarboxylated cannabinoids. The key part of the authors' work - Table 2 with the assessment of the CBD products - leaves the reader in the dark about the nature of "THC". This is all the more concerning because acid-free Delta9-THC is psychotropic but THCA is not. Additionally, the classification of the CBD products ("toxicity assessment") presented is based on the assignment of the quantitative relation to the LOAEL (lowest observed adverse effect level) of THC (2.5 mg of acid-free Delta9-THC per adult and day as assigned by EFSA, 2015). However, many assumptions by Lachenmeier et al. on daily intake of CBD products are questionable, in particular food supplements, where the recommended daily consumption was missing on the label. Finally, the authors of the paper also compare their findings with the German recommendations on maximum levels of total-THC in food, ignoring that those limits refer to total-THC and the ready-to-eat products, and not to the food ingredient itself - in particular hemp tea products.

SUBMITTER: Kruse D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7445557 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comment on Lachenmeier <i>et al</i> (2020) "Are side effects of cannabidiol (CBD) products caused by tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) contamination?": disputation on various points in the publication.

Kruse Daniel D Beitzke Bernhard B

F1000Research 20200804

This Correspondence article is a counterstatement to a Brief Report published by Lachenmeier and co-workers on 17th February 2020 in F1000Research: "Are side effects of cannabidiol (CBD) products caused by tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) contamination?". This counterstatement proposes that the authors of that article neither present proof or evidence for the alleged side effects of CBD products (no case reports presented with utilisable data), nor do they show that side effects are due to the presenc ...[more]

PMID: 32864108

Similar Datasets

Project description:Cannabidiol (CBD)-containing products are widely marketed as over the counter products, mostly as food supplements, to avoid the strict rules of medicinal products. Side-effects reported in anecdotal consumer reports or during clinical studies were first assumed to be due to hydrolytic conversion of CBD to psychotropic ? 9-tetrahydrocannabinol (? 9-THC) in the stomach after oral consumption. However, research of pure CBD solutions stored in simulated gastric juice or subjected to various storage conditions such as heat and light with specific liquid chromatographic/tandem mass spectrometric (LC/MS/MS) and ultra-high pressure liquid chromatographic/quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometric (UPLC-QTOF) analyses was unable to confirm THC formation. Another hypothesis for the side-effects of CBD products may be residual ? 9-THC concentrations in the products as contamination, because most of them are based on crude hemp extracts containing the full spectrum of cannabinoids besides CBD. Analyses of 67 food products of the German market (mostly CBD oils) confirmed this hypothesis: 17 products (25%) contained ? 9-THC above the lowest observed adverse effects level (2.5 mg/day). Inversely, CBD was present in the products below the no observed adverse effect level. Hence, it may be assumed that the adverse effects of some commercial CBD products are based on a low-dose effect of ? 9-THC and not due to effects of CBD itself. The safety, efficacy and purity of commercial CBD products is highly questionable, and all of the products in our sample collection showed various non-conformities to European food law such as unsafe ? 9-THC levels, full-spectrum hemp extracts as non-approved novel food ingredients, non-approved health claims, and deficits in mandatory food labelling requirements. In view of the growing market for such lifestyle products, the effectiveness of the instrument of food business operators' own responsibility for product safety must obviously be challenged.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Significant interest has emerged in the therapeutic and interactive effects of different cannabinoids. Cannabidiol (CBD) has been shown to have anxiolytic and antipsychotic effects with high doses administered orally. We report a series of studies conducted to determine the vaporisation efficiency of high doses of CBD, alone and in combination with ?9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), to achieve faster onset effects in experimental and clinical trials and emulate smoked cannabis. METHODS: Purified THC and CBD (40 mg/ml and 100 mg/ml respectively) were loaded onto a liquid absorbing pad in a Volcano vaporiser, vaporised and the vapours quantitatively analysed. Preliminary studies determined 200 mg CBD to be the highest dose effectively vaporised at 230 ° C, yielding an availability of approximately 40% in the vapour phase. Six confirmatory studies examined the quantity of each compound delivered when 200 mg or 4 mg CBD was loaded together with 8 mg of THC. RESULTS: THC showed 55% availability when vaporised alone or with low dose CBD, while large variation in the availability of high dose CBD impacted upon the availability of THC when co-administered, with each compound affecting the vaporisation efficiency of the other in a dynamic and dose-dependent manner. We describe optimised protocols that enable delivery of 160 mg CBD through vaporisation. CONCLUSIONS: While THC administration by vaporisation is increasingly adopted in experimental studies, often with oral predosing with CBD to examine interactive effects, no studies to date have reported the administration of CBD by vaporisation. We report the detailed methodology aimed at optimising the efficiency of delivery of therapeutic doses of CBD, alone and in combination with THC, by vaporisation. These protocols provide a technical advance that may inform methodology for clinical trials in humans, especially for examining interactions between THC and CBD and for therapeutic applications of CBD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN24109245.

Project description:BackgroundTreatment of spasticity poses a major challenge in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) patient management. Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC):cannabidiol (CBD) oromucosal spray (THC:CBD), approved for the treatment of spasticity in multiple sclerosis, serves as a complementary off-label treatment option in ALS-related spasticity. However, few structured data are available on THC:CBD in the treatment of spasticity in ALS.MethodA retrospective mono-centric cohort study was realised in 32 patients that meet the following criteria: 1) diagnosis of ALS, 2) ALS-related spasticity; 3) treatment with THC:CBD. Spasticity was rated using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). Patient's experience with THC:CBD was assessed using the net promoter score (NPS) and treatment satisfaction questionnaire for medication (TSMQ-9) as captured through telephone survey or online assessment.ResultsThe mean dose THC:CBD were 5.5 daily actuations (range?<?1 to 20). Three subgroups of patients were identified: 1) high-dose daily use (? 7 daily actuations, 34%, n?=?11), 2) low-dose daily use (<?7 daily actuations, 50%, n?=?16), 3) infrequent use (<?1 daily actuation, 16%, n?=?5). Overall NPS was +?4.9 (values above 0 express a positive recommendation to fellow patients). Remarkably, patients with moderate to severe spasticity (NRS???4) reported a high recommendation rate (NPS: +?29) in contrast to patients with mild spasticity (NRS?<?4; NPS: -?44). For the three main domains of TSQM-9 high mean satisfaction levels were found (maximum value 100): effectiveness 70.5 (±22.3), convenience 76.6 (±23.3) and global satisfaction 75.0 (±24.7).ConclusionTHC:CBD is used in a wide dose range suggesting that the drug was applied on the basis of individual patients' needs and preferences. Contributing to this notion, moderate to severe spasticity was associated with an elevated number of daily THC:CBD actuations and stronger recommendation rate (NPS) as compared to patients with mild spasticity. Overall, treatment satisfaction (TSQM-9) was high. The results suggest that THC:CBD may serve as a valuable addition in the spectrum of symptomatic therapy in ALS. However, prospective studies and head-to-head comparisons to other spasticity medications are of interest to further explore the effectiveness of THC:CBD in the management of spasticity, and other ALS-related symptoms.

Dataset Information

Comment on Lachenmeier et al (2020) "Are side effects of cannabidiol (CBD) products caused by tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) contamination?": disputation on various points in the publication.

Publications

Comment on Lachenmeier <i>et al</i> (2020) "Are side effects of cannabidiol (CBD) products caused by tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) contamination?": disputation on various points in the publication.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets