3 Ways to Get Better Research on Cannabis for Anxiety
A new study has claimed that THC and CBD do not improve depressive disorders, questioning their effectiveness in alleviating the symptoms of depression and anxiety. The research concluded that the quality of evidence linking THC (whether used on its own or with CBD) to reduce anxiety was low; that THC came with an increased risk of suffering unwanted side effects and withdrawal; and that there was “little evidence for the effectiveness of pharmaceutical CBD or medicinal cannabis for the treatment of any of these mental health disorders.”
There’s certainly a lesson to be learned from the study’s findings. The industry needs to stop focusing so heavily on single cannabinoids like THC and CBD and shift the dialogue towards full-spectrum cannabis products.
But in other areas it lacked depth. There’s no evidence to suggest researchers considered different dosages, yet other studies on THC and anxiety have shown THC’s potential to provide relief at low doses and increase anxiety at higher ones.
The study is also limited by its use of just three preparations of cannabis; THC isolate, CBD isolate and a specific THC-CBD blend. These are the only three cannabis compounds approved by the FDA for use in clinical trials, but they don’t adequately reflect the huge variety of cannabinoid mixes, each with their own potential benefits, that may also hold merit as anxiety treatments.
Examples of the need to study the cannabis plant as a whole can be seen in trials on its effectiveness as a cancer treatment. Preclinical research has not only shown that cannabinoids “trigger antitumor responses in different models of cancer,” but also that a botanical drug preparation (made from whole cannabis plant extract) caused more cancerous cells to die than pure THC.
The cannabis plant has over 100 cannabinoids and other compounds, each with their own characteristics and possible therapeutic benefits. Studies have also pointed to the potential for these compounds to work synergistically and produce even greater benefits when combined, in what has been termed the “entourage effect.” This is overlooked entirely by studying just three combinations of two isolated cannabinoids.
Why Can’t Researchers Paint a More Complete Picture?
Again, clinical researchers are hampered by an inability to use anything but the pure CBD, THC and CBD-THC blends approved by the FDA.
In some respects this is good. Isolating a variable and analyzing the way it affects a given outcome is still a laudable scientific practice which provides useful information. But it severely limits the ability to understand the cannabis plant in its entirety.
In the case of clinical trials, you must either test something that is being prepared for use as a pharmaceutical, or test a pharmaceutical which is already FDA-approved with a view to identifying a new application for it. These rules are highly restrictive for researchers studying the medicinal impact of cannabis.
How Does Faulty Language Harm the Industry?
Another problem here is that some researchers study isolated cannabinoids and then make generalizations about the entire cannabis plant. We’ve already seen studies isolate a variable like THC, decide that it’s the “active compound” in cannabis and then attribute their findings to the cannabis plant as a whole.
But, as mentioned, cannabis has over 100 active cannabinoids plus terpenes and flavonoids, each with their own properties and therapeutic potential. To claim that cannabis is merely THC is both reductive and counterproductive.
Research like this causes uninformed consumers to believe that cannabis cannot treat certain conditions when it is actually THC alone (or another cannabinoid) that is an ineffective treatment. This can be seen in the dialogue around cannabis and anxiety. THC isolate might not be a great treatment, but there is still potential for it to be beneficial when consumed alongside other elements of the cannabis plant.
Ultimately, the problem is the way in which research is interpreted. Saying that cannabis works in a certain way based upon a study conducted using an isolate of a single cannabinoid is wrong, and creates an inaccurate perception of cannabis.
How to Present More Accurate Conclusions
Facing barriers to more in-depth cannabinoid research, and occurrences of scientific studies being erroneously interpreted, we’re left with the question of how to conduct and present research on cannabis more accurately.
As things stand, there are three obvious avenues for improvement:
Reduce federal restrictions. It should be noted that many researchers are respected intellectuals who are equally mindful of the limitations of studying cannabis under such narrow parameters.
But as long as cannabis is a federally controlled substance they have little room to maneuver. The most important step to improving cannabis research is to reschedule cannabis and make a wider range of chemical preparations available to be studied at a clinical level.Understand the multivariate nature of cannabis. People researching cannabis need to be mindful of the “entourage effect” and how important it is.
Most doctors don’t have an in-depth knowledge of the endocannabinoid system (ECS) or how different it is to other signaling pathways in the body, yet understanding the ECS is key to comprehending how cannabis affects us. The fundamental understanding of cannabis by people in the medical profession needs to improve.Contextualize scientific conclusions. Firstly, this is a case of correctly recognizing the significance of each study’s findings; if your research was based upon THC isolate, don’t use its results to present conclusions about cannabis.
Secondly, remember that any individual compound could still have a different effect when combined with other cannabinoids or terpenes. For example, THC isolate may not work if you have anxiety, but the synergistic effect produced by THC and other components of the cannabis plant may prove beneficial.
So when it comes to properly assessing the merits of cannabis for anxiety, we must first wait for laws that will permit a greater depth of research, then explore the multivariate nature of cannabis by running clinical trials on new cannabinoids in combination, not just in isolation. In the meantime it is important to accurately interpret the results of existing studies and not draw wrongful conclusions about the cannabis plant. After all, it probably possesses therapeutic benefits we are yet to understand.