CBD causes liver damage

Can CBD Oil Cause Liver Damage?

Even though we are already nearing the end of 2019, incredible things are still possible. For example, a little research on mice that is carried out with questionable methodology and published in a subordinate magazine can trigger a panic storm in the media.

But one after anonther. As you may have seen, Forbes recently published an article entitled “Marijuana Research Finds: CBD Can Cause Liver Damage”. The report was about research by the Medical University of Arkansas (USA).

The investigation came to worrying results. The researchers discovered that mice given higher doses of CBD showed signs of liver damage after just 24 hours. Within a few days, 75% of the animals died or were close to death.

Project CBD takes a closer look

The Project CBD website took a closer look at the research and discovered many errors in the Forbes article. Errors can already be found in the summary of the results. It is said that "75% of the mice that received 615 mg / kg" of CBD were in a state of dying after a few days. However, only 6 mice received this dose. You don't have to have studied mathematics to see that something is wrong here. 75 percent of 6 is 4.5. What might the "half" doomed mouse have looked like?

Project CBD also showed that some of the amounts administered were astronomical. The scientists gave the mice individual doses of CBD. These ranged from supposedly “low” amounts of 246 mg / kg to mega doses of 2,460 mg / kg of CBD. The maximum recommended dose for humans for the CBD isolate Epidiolex is 20 mg per kilogram of body weight. That is (measured against the maximum dose) less than a hundredth of what the researchers gave their mice.

Have the mice been given too much CBD?

The researchers justified the high gift with the allometric scaling model. Put simply, it is a series of rules for estimating an equally potent dose of a substance in humans and animals.

Project CBD, on the other hand, argued that allometric scaling was a rule of thumb at best. In addition, it is unsuitable for cannabinoids, as the high doses immediately saturate the body's own system.

Overall, Project CBD described the researchers' investigation as an attempt to defame CBD, not as a scientific piece of work. To back it up, Project CBD showed that the researchers only picked certain other research results. They also downplayed the benefits of CBD and exaggerated the side effects.

Here is an example: The researchers cited nine sources that are supposed to show that "numerous reports show neurological, cardiovascular and reproductive toxicities after CBD use". Of the nine sources, however, only one deals with people - and it is precisely this source that denies toxicity.

The trade journal is dubious

The (chemical) journal “Molecules”, which published the research, is also faced with doubts. The publishing house MDPI, in which Molecules appears, has already been described as "ruthless" and is also supposed to publish unacceptable articles. That may not apply to all 213 magazines under the MDPI umbrella, but it does throw a bad light on the publisher.

What could be behind it?

But why would someone want to raise the mood against CBD? An article published in Leafly may provide information on this. It describes a hearing before the American Food and Drug Administration (FDA) last May. Alice Mead was heard as the representative of the large British pharmaceutical company "GW Pharmaceuticals". About GW Pharmaceuticals you have to know that the company is dedicated to the development of medicinal extracts from the hemp plant and has also developed the drug Epidiolex.

When big drug companies talk to the FDA, they usually paint the rustiest picture imaginable. In this case, however, Mead stated that CBD may "damage the liver" and have "strong drug-drug interactions."

It was particularly revealing when she spoke of a “strong regulatory framework”. Nightingale, ick hear you trap! Leafly had previously reported on the company's attempt to build a monopoly on CBD. High regulatory hurdles would deter smaller competitors and ensure that only GW Pharmaceuticals can skip them.

Conclusion

You see, the urge for clicks and the greed of some companies can produce the wildest flowers today. It is all the more important that you do your research and think for yourself. For example, what is more plausible: That hundreds of thousands of users on the Internet are convinced of CBD and have praised the various advantages over the years? Or that a large pharmaceutical company that builds on CBD itself warns of the dangers? The answer should be clear.

So don't let yourself be driven crazy and trust your own judgment. There is still a need for research in the area of ​​CBD, but the results so far are more than positive. In addition, CBD is a natural active ingredient and therefore has a high probability of tolerance. It is to be expected that more recent research will uncover more benefits of CBD. CBD's triumphant advance is too obvious to stop.

- Display -