Tag: cannabis

Cannabis Seed Oil Has ‘Superior Effectiveness’ In Healing Wounds Compared To Conventional Antibiotics, Study Shows

Cannabis seed oil can help accelerate healing of skin wounds—a promising development that authors say indicates that “hemp seed oil may serve as a promising natural and cost-effective adjunct for wound management”—according to a new study of mice.

The report, published in the journal Narra J, compared wounds treated with hempseed oil against those treated with the conventional antibiotic chloramphenicol. Another group of mice was given only a mild saline solution.

“The findings of the present study highlighted the efficacy of hemp oil in accelerating wound healing processes, particularly wound size reduction, epithelialization, granulation tissue formation, and vascularization,” authors wrote, “with results indicating superior effect compared to chloramphenicol ointment.”

The four-person research team, from Universitas Syiah Kuala in Indonesia, noted that there appeared to be specific portions of the healing process in which hemp oil outperformed treatment with chloramphenicol. During other time frames, however, it seemed “comparable” to the antibiotic.

“Hemp seed oil demonstrated superior effectiveness in accelerating wound size reduction compared to chloramphenicol ointment during days 14 and 21,” the paper says, “indicating its potential as a supportive therapy for prolonged wound healing phases. While both treatments improved epithelialization, the significant effect observed on day 14 in the present study suggested that hemp seed oil may provide particular benefits during this critical stage of wound healing, potentially accelerating the transition to tissue remodeling.”

In terms of tissue formation, “hemp seed oil treatment significantly accelerated granulation tissue formation during wound healing, particularly on day 14, where it outperformed chloramphenicol,” authors wrote. “However, its effect on day 21 was comparable to chloramphenicol.”

Keep reading

The Top 200 Cannabis-Related Studies Published in 2025

Hundreds of peer-reviewed studies on marijuana and its components have been published in the first seven months of 2025, marking a surge in new research. In this article, we break down the 200 most important of these studies.

These studies cover a wide spectrum of conditions, from autoimmune disorders and mental health issues to gastrointestinal diseases and metabolic dysfunction. In addition, researchers are increasingly turning their attention to cannabinoids beyond THC and CBD, such as CBG, THCV, and CBC. Many studies also focus on novel delivery systems—like oral dissolvable films, skin patches, and advanced emulsions—while investigating how marijuana may affect pain regulation, sleep quality, immune response, and emotional health.

What follows is a detailed roundup of more than 200 marijuana-related studies released so far this year.

Keep reading

Marijuana prohibition has been a fraud

Since its inception, efforts to criminalize marijuana and to stigmatize those who consume it have been based upon hyperbole, stereotypes and outright lies.

The initial push for cannabis criminalization, which began in earnest more than a century ago, had little to do with preserving public health or safety. Instead, the move to prosecute cannabis users was based primarily on sensationalism and xenophobia.

For instance, a July 6, 1927, story in the New York Times, headlined “Mexican Family Goes Insane,” farcically claimed: “A widow and her four children have been driven insane by eating the marihuana plant, according to doctors, who say there is no hope of saving the children’s lives and that the mother will be insane for the rest of her life.”

An academic paper titled “Marijuana,” published in 1933 in The Journal of Law and Criminology, similarly made over-the-top allegations about marijuana’s supposed dangers. The authors wrote, “The inevitable result is insanity, which those familiar with it describe as absolutely incurable, and, without exception ending in death.”

By 1937, Harry J. Anslinger — America’s first “Drug Czar” — had successfully lobbied Congress to ban cannabis nationwide. He did so through the continuous use of racist rhetoric. “There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana use,” he asserted. “This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others.”

Fast-forward to 1971. That’s when the Richard Nixon administration declared drug abuse to be “public enemy number one.” The lynchpin of this campaign was marijuana, which Congress had just classified as a Schedule I controlled substance — the strictest federal category available. Yet, privately, Nixon acknowledged that he did not think cannabis was “particularly dangerous,” and he lamented the “ridiculous” penalties faced by those arrested for possessing it.

Nonetheless, he and those in his administration publicly doubled down on the supposed marijuana threat for reasons that were almost entirely political. As his domestic policy chief, John Ehrlichman, later acknowledged, “We couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the (Vietnam) war or Black,” but we could get “the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and Blacks with heroin.”

By “criminalizing both heavily,” Ehrlichman explained, “we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news.”

“Did we know we were lying about the drugs?” he asked. “Of course we did.”

Now, 50-plus years later, marijuana remains categorized as a Schedule I controlled substance — the same classification as heroin — and various politicians still reiterate many of these same myths and mistruths. Slowly but surely, the public is turning the page. 

According to Gallup, 70% of U.S. adults think “the use of marijuana should be legal.”

Keep reading

Marijuana Users Have ‘Enhanced Cognitive Abilities,’ Large Federally Funded Study Shows

Marijuana users have “superior performance across multiple cognitive domains,” according to a new large-scale study funded by the U.S. federal government, with the effects of cannabis on cognition “presented concurrently across a range of brain systems.”

The research, published this month as a preprint by Nature Portfolio, analyzed brain imaging and cognitive data from 37,929 participants in the United Kingdom aged between 44 and 81 years old. The team found that cannabis consumers consistently outperformed non-users on a range of cognitive tests—suggesting that marijuana use may be linked to brain network patterns typically observed in younger individuals.

“These findings suggest that cannabis use may be associated with a deceleration of neural aging processes and the preservation of cognitive function in older adults,” the paper says.

“We speculate that cannabinoids and endocannabinoids may exert neuroprotective effects during aging by preserving an optimal balance between functional segregation and integration—an essential feature for maintaining specialized processing and efficient information transfer across brain networks,” wrote the researchers, who are from the Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University, Georgia State University, University of Colorado, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences and Tri-Institutional Center for Translational Research in Neuroimaging and Data Science.

The authors of the study, which was supported by National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health grants, noted that as marijuana laws evolve and societal attitudes shift, researchers are uncovering a more complex picture of the drug’s effects, particularly among older adults.

Legalization, increased permissiveness, and recognition of therapeutic potential have contributed to a marked rise in marijuana consumption among the study population, the authors said. They pointed out that older adults now represent the fastest-growing group of cannabis users, increasingly using it to manage chronic physical and mental health conditions.

Keep reading

Trump DOJ Asks Supreme Court To Uphold Ban On Marijuana Users Owning Guns

Amid a series of legal challenges, the Trump administration is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to take up a case on the federal government’s ban on users of marijuana and other illegal drugs from owning firearms and uphold the prohibition, saying it is consistent with the 2nd Amendment.

To that end, the DOJ solicitor general is urging SCOTUS to hear one of five relevant cases to resolve conflicting lower court decisions on gun rights for cannabis consumers.

With the multiple competing legal cases resulting in differing rulings in federal appeals courts across the country, DOJ last week requested that SCOTUS review one in particular that it described as “archetypal” of the issue related to federal code 922(g)(3), which precludes users of unlawful drugs from having guns or ammo.

The case “presents an important Second Amendment issue that affects hundreds of prosecutions every year: whether the government may disarm individuals who habitually use unlawful drugs but are not necessarily under the influence while possessing a firearm,” U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer, an appointee of President Donald Trump, said.

The solicitor general reiterated his position that, despite recent appeals court decisions calling into question the constitutionality of the firearms ban for people who use cannabis—even in compliance with state law—the restriction is nevertheless lawful.

Some lower courts have said the government’s blanket ban on gun and ammunition possession infringes on the Second Amendment—at least as applied to certain individual cases—because there’s no historical justification for such a broad restriction on an entire category of people.

But over recent years, various federal district and appeals courts have take differing approaches to the issue. As DOJ argued in its latest filing in the case, “the question presented is the subject of a multi-sided and growing circuit conflict.”

“The petition for a writ of certiorari [filed by Sauer in June] identified three sides of that conflict: The Seventh Circuit has upheld Section 922(g)(3); the Eighth Circuit has held it violates the Second Amendment unless the government can make a case-by-case showing justifying the drug user’s disarmament; and the Fifth Circuit has held that it generally violates the Second Amendment unless the drug user was intoxicated while possessing the firearm.”

“Since then, the conflict has deepened,” it said, referring to several other cases on the issue that are pending before the high court. And DOJ wants SCOTUS to focus on one case in particular to resolve what it called a “four-way circuit conflict”: U.S. v. Hemani.

One reason DOJ could be focused on the justices taking up Hemani in particular is that the defendant in that case is not only a cannabis user but also a user of cocaine who’s sold drugs in the past, according to court findings, which could make him less sympathetic in the eyes of the court. Defendants in the other cases were merely found in possession of both a firearm and marijuana.

Lawyers for the defendant in Hemani argued in a brief last month that the high court should decline the case.

But in its reply brief submitted to SCOTUS this week, the Justice Department said that “this case is the best vehicle available.”

Keep reading

Government-Backed Study From Japan Finds No Evidence That Marijuana Is A ‘Gateway Drug’

A new study looking into patterns of drug use in Japan casts further doubt on the notion that marijuana is a gateway drug, concluding that cannabis use in the country usually comes after people first use alcohol and tobacco, and that they rarely go on to use other substances.

Published this month in the journal Neuropsychopharmacology Reports, the research—which authors describe as “one of the largest and most significant studies on community-based cannabis users in Japan to date”—also found that nearly half of respondents who reported marijuana as their third drug “did not go on to use other substances afterward.”

“Cannabis use in Japan typically follows alcohol and tobacco, and rarely leads to further drug use,” concludes the report, which was supported by the Japanese Clinical Association of Cannabinoids and the government’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. “These findings challenge the gateway hypothesis in the Japanese context.”

The research acknowledges that cannabis “is often labeled a ‘gateway drug,’” but it notes that “strong causal evidence for progression to other substances is limited.”

Its findings suggest that rather than cannabis use itself leading to other drug use, “shared vulnerabilities”—involving factors like age, educational background and socioeconomic status—”and strict drug policies may shape these patterns.”

The study consisted of an anonymous survey conducted in January 2021, asking 3,900 people in Japan who had used cannabis in their lifetimes about other substance use. Researchers then analyzed the data to assess the chances of people using other drugs after trying marijuana.

“Rather than implying a causal gateway effect of cannabis use,” authors wrote, “results highlight the importance of considering the broader life context in which substance use occurs. Social determinants such as age cohort, educational background, and socioeconomic position appear to shape patterns of substance progression independently of the pharmacological properties of cannabis.”

Authors’ assessment of the responses found that “Odds for subsequent use of alcohol, tobacco, methamphetamine, and other illicit drugs after cannabis use were 1.25, 0.77, 0.08, and 0.78, respectively, suggesting low probabilities of progression.”

Keep reading

This Saturday Marks 88 Years of Federal Marijuana Prohibition — It’s Time To End It

Saturday, August 2nd, marks the 88th anniversary of the signing of the Marihuana Tax Act, the first federal marijuana prohibition law.

Since its inception, the criminalization of the marijuana plant and the stigmatization of those who consume it has been predicated almost entirely upon the promotion of gross exaggerations, racial stereotypes, and outright lies.

For instance, a July 6, 1927 story in the New York Times, headlined “Mexican Family Goes Insane,” farcically claimed: “A widow and her four children have been driven insane by eating the marihuana plant, according to doctors, who say there is no hope of saving the children’s lives and that the mother will be insane for the rest of her life.”

An academic paper titled “Marijuana,” published in 1933 in The Journal of Law and Criminology, similarly made over-the-top allegations about the plant’s supposed dangers. The authors wrote, “The inevitable result [of consuming cannabis] is insanity, which those familiar with it describe as absolutely incurable, and, without exception ending in death.”

In 1937, Harry J. Anslinger — America’s first ‘Drug Czar’ — lobbied Congress to ban cannabis nationwide. He did so over the staunch objections of the American Medical Association, which disputed the government’s false claims that cannabis use invariably induced violence, insanity, and death. Undeterred by the AMA’s opposition, Anslinger relied almost entirely upon racist rhetoric to persuade lawmakers. “There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana use,” he asserted. “This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others.”

Fast-forward to 1971. That’s when the Nixon administration declared drug abuse to be “public enemy number one.” The lynchpin of this campaign was stamping out the use marijuana, which Congress had just classified as a Schedule I controlled substance — the strictest federal category available. Yet, privately, Nixon acknowledged that he did not think cannabis was “particularly dangerous,” and he lamented the “ridiculous” penalties faced by those arrested for possessing it.

Nonetheless, his administration publicly doubled down on the mythical marijuana threat for its own political gain. As his domestic policy chief, John Ehrlichman, later acknowledged, “We couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the (Vietnam) war or Black,” but we could get “the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and Blacks with heroin.”

By “criminalizing both heavily,” Ehrlichman explained, “we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news.”

“Did we know we were lying about the drugs?” he asked. “Of course we did.”

Keep reading

Marijuana Prohibition Is And Always Has Been A Sham

Since its inception, efforts to criminalize the marijuana plant and stigmatize those who consume it have been predicated almost entirely upon gross exaggerations, racial stereotypes, and outright lies.

The initial push for cannabis criminalization, which began in earnest more than a century ago, had little to do with promoting public health or safety. Instead, the decision to target and prosecute cannabis users was fueled by xenophobia and media sensationalism.

For instance, a July 6, 1927 story in the New York Times, headlined “Mexican Family Goes Insane,” farcically claimed: “A widow and her four children have been driven insane by eating the marihuana plant, according to doctors, who say there is no hope of saving the children’s lives and that the mother will be insane for the rest of her life.”

An academic paper titled “Marijuana,” published in 1933 in The Journal of Law and Criminology, similarly made over-the-top allegations about the plant’s supposed dangers. The authors wrote, “The inevitable result [of consuming cannabis] is insanity, which those familiar with it describe as absolutely incurable, and, without exception, ending in death.”

In 1937, Harry J. Anslinger — America’s first ‘Drug Czar’ — successfully lobbied Congress to ban cannabis nationwide. He did so through the continuous use of racist rhetoric. “There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana use,” he asserted. “This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others.”

Fast-forward to 1971. That’s when the Nixon administration declared drug abuse to be “public enemy number one.” The lynchpin of this campaign was stamping out the use of marijuana, which Congress had just classified as a Schedule I controlled substance — the strictest federal category available. Yet, privately, Nixon acknowledged that he did not think cannabis was “particularly dangerous,” and he lamented the “ridiculous” penalties faced by those arrested for possessing it.

Keep reading

Pew Poll: Few Americans Support Feds’ Blanket Prohibition of Marijuana

Eight-seven percent of Americans say that marijuana ought to be legal for either medical or adult use, according to nationwide polling compiled by the Pew Research Center.

The results are consistent with those of prior Pew polls finding that only about ten percent of US adults support a blanket policy of cannabis criminalization.

“The federal government’s ‘Flat Earth’ position on marijuana policy is remarkably out of step with both scientific and public consensus,” NORML’s Deputy Director Paul Armentano said. “Federally elected officials who refuse to take action to end cannabis criminalization do so at their own political peril.”

Fifty-four percent of respondents said that cannabis should be legal for both medical and adult use, while 33 percent of those surveyed supported medical marijuana legalization only. Consistent with prior polls, support for legalizing cannabis is strongest among liberal-leaning and younger voters (those ages 18 to 29), and it is weakest among more politically conservative-leaning voters and those over the age of 75.

Keep reading

Anti-Marijuana Physician Who Criticized Rescheduling Proposal Joins Trump White House’s Drug Office

The White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) is adding to its team a medical professional who has linked marijuana use to suicide, advocated against a Florida legalization measure and criticized health agencies’ move to reschedule cannabis.

She has also said it is an “insult” to refer to cannabis as “medical.”

Roneet Lev—an emergency medicine and addition physician who previously served as chief medical officer at ONDCP under the first Trump administration—announced on Monday that she’ll be rejoining the office for the chance to “save lives on a much bigger scale.”

While she didn’t mention marijuana in the announcement on her podcast “High Truths on Drugs and Addiction,” Lev has previously spoken extensively about her issues with cannabis—describing it as an understated public health risk and arguing that commercial interests are the driving force behind the legalization movement.

In one episode of her podcast from June 2024, she dedicated over an hour to a discussion with prohibitionist advocates about the marijuana rescheduling process that was initiated under the Biden administration, making clear she strongly disagrees with the top federal health agency’s recommendation to move cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).

She said that people who are accepting the scientific findings that led to the recommendation,”including some in the medical community,” are “drinking that same Kool Aid again” with marijuana as they did with prescription opioids. And she claimed that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) produced a flawed report on cannabis, with mistakes in “like every single sentence.”

“When it comes to marijuana, the harms are right in front of our eyes—but we ignore the data and follow the industry talking points just like we did in the oxycontin days,” Lev said during the segment, which featured prominent prohibitionists such as Bertha Madras, who also previously served as an ONDCP official.

The revised review process that HHS relied on to reach its Schedule III determination for marijuana posts a “threat to the entire way of approving medications and to the medical community at large,” Lev said, adding that her primary contention is the idea that cannabis possesses medical value.

Keep reading