Clinical Debate Intensifies Around CBD Use

Evidence of CBD and THC is revised, and pharmacists are in search of more straightforward advice in the face of an increased number of patients and a growing and new clinical demand.

The clinical discourse on cannabis is rapidly changing, and pharmacists are torn between escalating and unbalanced demands of patients and an unbalanced evidence base. Although the scientific community is still lagging behind popular opinion, healthcare practitioners are endeavoring to base their choices on sound facts. The core topic of this debate is CBD.

In certain circumstances, CBD does provide clinical clarity, which is unique. CBD-based therapies have been approved by the FDA to treat severe childhood epilepsies, and this is backed by trial rigors that have shown significant reduction in seizures. Such evidence gives clinicians some level of confidence that is hard to find in the discourse in general with regard to medical cannabis.

THC, in its turn, has a more limited but established medical application, namely, the nausea and appetite stimulation in cancer and AIDS patients as a result of chemotherapy. However, scientists are eager to close the knowledge gap regarding its effectiveness in pain management.

The mainstream medical organizations, such as the American Heart Association, and the continuous review of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality set out to chart the new information on cannabinoids, particularly in acute or chronic pain.

Other researchers, like Mark Garofoli at West Virginia University, advocate that pharmacists should create open and stigma-free dialogue with the patients. In the lack of disclosure on actual cannabis or CBD use, he cautions that clinical judgment will be lost.