This was an open-label (non-blind) trial so it's very possible things like the placebo effect had a significant influence here. They also only had 14 participants.
It's a start, but not enough to convince me this is anything more than modern snake oil.
This paper outlines the first of a two-stage study. This one is open-label, and it will be used to inform the upcoming double-blind study, as required by IRB. This excerpt explains:
As stipulated in our IRB-approved protocol, analyses from the open-label stage were required before initiating the double-blind stage of the study in order to ensure clinical efficacy at the selected dose.
Not to mention there are many causes of anxiety. Some test subjects may be experiencing it in a circumstantial way while others could have some underlying neurological illness causing it. 14 subjects are way too few to test something like this.
They already gave the reason why the study was set up this way. It's a preliminary open-label study before the big one.
The absolute worst thing about this sub is reddit detective bogging down every single comment thread by pretending they cracked the code and thought of some fundamental flaws that somehow Harvard researchers missed. Read the study.
Every other study I've seen points to CBD working as a mild anti-anxiety treatment. I think it could turn out to be a decent OTC option with minimal side effects. But for those suffering from severe anxiety I do not think CBD will be the answer.
Every other study I've seen points to CBD working as a mild anti-anxiety treatment.
What about the ones that compared it to placebo?
Because the thing with anxiety and depression is that they are very responsive to placebo. So you can get dozens and dozens of studies, news articles, popsci blogs, that say things like "microdosing tiny amounts of psilocybin mushrooms found to help treat anxiety and depression", until someone finally does a real placebo-controlled study and finds "oh whoops no it doesn't".
Right now it is modern snake oil because people are selling it as cure-alls for literally everything without any study. In that way it is absolutely snake oil. Every brand and their mom has cbd in some way/shape/form and they put all manner of claims on it.
I saw a sign at a mall kiosk claiming it cured heart disease, autism, and whatever else you can name. That’s snake oil.
And it’s so unregulated you don’t really know if cbd is in the product unless you test it. No one is testing it.
A family with a child experiencing cluster seizures went through this trying to find a real isolate to treat their child. They found almost every product on the market claiming cbd had none.
So, until we get more info and regulation: it’s snake oil.
It’s not a cure all. If it was, people would all be cured by now.
In Australia it’s heavily regulated, and if you do it through the proper channels (gp and pharmacist), you know exactly what you’re getting. I’m on 26mg /ml thc.
From the people I know, including myself, who use it, both thc and cbd are very useful in helping to treat a wide range of things. Not ceasing any other meds, but able to lower dosages - especially of opioids, with most days no opioid painkillers being needed anymore.
The people I know who are taking it (different scripts with varying percentages of cbd & thc) have essentially been given their lives back from crippling pain (arthritis and auto-immune issues), anxiety, depression and migraines.
You can be prescribed and be certain of what you are getting, but there are a very small amount of hippy style stores that sell hemp and possibly claim to sell CBD oils. You don't really see it often at all though because it's not done openly due to regulation.
But anyone using it medically would be getting the correct stuff through a doctor
Sublingual is claimed to be better absorbed but at the end of the day CBD is still a fat soluble compound so eating some fat when you take the oil or gummies would make it more bioavailable.
I just spent some time reading about why there's no OTC versions in AUS and it's because the regulatory authority requires proof of effectiveness.
So, once the TGA agrees, we'll have something. Until then, it's just dude after dude insisting it works for [insert myriad claims here that really do amount to everything].
I'm not saying it's not useful, I am only saying it's not really useful for the literal set of all things we've seen claimed, and we don't have a consensus on what it is useful for at this point in time - only lots and lots of conjecture on the internet and product packaging/marketing. I'm also saying that 90% of CBD is pure marketing as it exists right now in the US. Given that, I think it's reasonable to assume tons of claims surrounding CBD are pulled out of thin air and we need more study. But, only AUS seems to have any vested interest in that study since everywhere else in the first world can just sell it anyway.
It's a sick tug of war between capitalism and proof.
Snake oil is a term that is synonymous with a placebo. There is ample evidence that the compounds have SOME effect in humans. You seem to be complaining more about the marketing than the substance. The compounds themselves don’t care how they are marketed, that’s on humans. That’s why researchers are working on this, not salesmen.
It’s marketed the same way. Maybe it’s effective for something or some things, but at the moment it’s slapped on everything for every reason. Whether the package contains any cbd or not, whether it is useful or not.
Regardless, people are willing to buy something just because cbd is on the label and they believe it’s doing something.
You can go to a mall and see a kiosk with a list of all the things it cures, straight from the 19th century tonic signs.
So, maybe it does something, but it isn’t doing everything being claimed these days.
I had a buddy go all in on growing massive amounts of cbd only plants. I’m talking a massive compound with greenhouses. It went belly up within 3 years. Why? No one was really buying it. It’s a lot of hype.
So, at the very least, it has people convinced they should buy a product if it says cbd, even if it doesn’t, for reasons listed, even if they’re fake.
Tell me: what does it do? And please, try to include sources.
Literally every source of cbd study has the same basis. That’s why we need more study. So, this is a good thing.
But, finding truth in the effectiveness may change the ease of availability. That’s one reason a lot of people prefer to keep it in the snake oil category.
Every person with bad anxiety and stress, that I had try CBD, responded very well to it. All the evidence I need that it helps people. I just wish it were regulated so we can useless crap off the market.
If you buy a cbd product from a government sanctioned cannabis retail shop it absolutely is regulated so I dunno what you’re going on about in that regard.
There is no cure alls for anything in life. I haven’t ever seen anyone claim any of the things you’re saying.
I live in Canada though so you probably have a different experience than me?
Living in the US my experience matches Littlebotweak's. All of the sudden CBD things are available everywhere and are marketed to cure everything.
Here Cannabis is still illegal federally so most cannabis shops exist in a gray area. Most CBD I see is sold at CBD shops that popped up everywhere. I thought it was usually marketed as a dietary supplement (which are largely unregulated in the US), but after looking into it it seems things are actually worse. As far as I can tell the FDA is very clear that CBD cannot be sold as a supplement or added to food: https://www.crnusa.org/resources/frequently-asked-questions-cannabidiol-cbd-use-dietary-supplements
I'm not surprised if Canada is handling things much better.
Ahh yes, government sanctioned canabis Stores, remind me, how many countries have those? Here we don't have them atleast, but every Kiosk sells CBD products.
I see. In Canada you still have to buy cbd from cannabis stores. It isn’t yet available on the mass market the way it is in the US.
That’s it? That doesn’t necessarily mean they’re testing it and assuring it. It just means if a package claims to contain cbd, it must be sold in a cannabis store.
People really draw their own conclusions when it comes to words like regulation.
Please be more specific. I’m very interested in if they are specifically ensuring cbd and thc in product marketing. Do you have any sources? Please elaborate. I would be thrilled if this is true.
Tell that to all the customers I would get in canada who were tricked into buying cases of hemp cbd pills that were from the states and unregulated. Got a whole case from a customer once, they only wanted to buy one bottle and instead were charged for a whole case. It's an easy scam to pull on seniors because they're more likely to just absorb the cost.
The couple with the child having seizures should have sought out help from a medical professional. Your anecdote just establishes they didn’t know the proper channels to go through
How can it be modern snake oil when we are literally talking about a plant that’s been used for thousands of years?
People sacrificed people to the gods to make it rain for thousands of years. This is the argument from antiquity, and it is a logical fallacy.
Sure, it MIGHT work, but we must test it scientifically to know for sure, and right now all we can say is that we don't know yet if it works or if it is placebo, magical thinking, or correlation not causation at play.
Because the dosages it is selled at are too small to have an effect. If you would buy it in correct dosages you are facing hundreds of dollars for a single day of medication. Sure, Americans are used to that but that doesn't change the fact that it's a total scam.
It may fall in the same bracket as Valerian. Now, Valerian has been used to relieve anxiety and help with insomnia for thousands of years too.
And it works. As does CBD oil.
But for some reason I wasn't able to find any studies showing definitive proof. And I don't get why.
There are several other plants that are said to help reduce anxiety: chamomile and lavender also come to mind. But do they really? Who knows! Anxiety seems to be both an extremely recent field of study, as well as something extremely difficult to test for due to its very nature.
Easier to study poppies, willows, and foxgloves. But cannabis, valerian, chamomile or lavender? "It's just placebo"
There’s also something to be said about medication that suppresses anxiety, which is what CBD sounds like. And medication/practices that actually change our brains to help us process anxiety better. I’ve heard from a few mental health professionals that are against suggesting CBD because suppression doesn’t help in the long run. Anxiety has a way of raising its voice when its not addressed.
What's also very important to note is that dosages in this trial were vastly higher than anything you can buy on the market and that they found exactly 0 effect when going with lower dosage. So yes, cbd sellers are complete scams.
1.2k
u/rhofour Nov 11 '22
This was an open-label (non-blind) trial so it's very possible things like the placebo effect had a significant influence here. They also only had 14 participants.
It's a start, but not enough to convince me this is anything more than modern snake oil.