NIDA And WHO Defend CBD against the FDA — SMPLSTC CBD

SAN DIEGO – Jan. 3, 2020 – PRLog — NIDA And WHO Defend CBD against the FDA

CBD oil is a trending product in the mass media. Recently, this controversial (but highly popular) plant derivative has been making more headlines while some federal government research institutes increasingly voice their support for its potential therapeutic advantages. Despite the increasingly positive regards for CBD, the FDA recently issued an announcement laced with cryptic and cautious tones.

The Federal Drug Administration does not necessarily agree with the recent CBD boom in its latest revised statement (https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/what-you-need-know-and-what-were-working-find-out-about-products-containing-cannabis-or-cannabis) on this infamously non-intoxicating plant medicine. Of course, CBD is legal, but there are still limited studies on its effectiveness. Although its safety is well-regarded by most research agencies, the FDA still writes in its statement that “CBD has the potential to harm you, and harm can happen even before you become aware of it.”

In its article about the FDA’s disapproval of CBD oil and its suppliers (https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeadams/2019/12/04/fda-cla…), Forbes magazine writes that the government organizations statement “was seemingly intended to horrify the average consumer to its core.” Forbes also touches on what’s “fishy” about the United State’s negative position on CBD oil. The FDA “claims CBD is evil”, Forbes says.

From liver damage to diarrhea, the FDA doesn’t skip a single chance in its statement to mention the possible ill effects of CBD.

When mentioning the possibility of liver damage by Epidiolex, one cannabidiol medication approved for the treatment of seizures, the FDA especially doesn’t appear to hold back: “During its review of the marketing application for Epidiolox — a purified form of CBD that the FDA approved in 2018 for use in the treatment of two rare and severe seizure disorders — the FDA identified certain safety risks, including the potential for liver injury.”

The FDA does not mention the inactive ingredients and preservatives that are also in Epidiolex, such as Ethanol (dehydrated alcohol)- nor their possible side effects.

Large media outlets ate up the administration’s statement, spreading a wave of worry around the United States on the dangers of CBD oil. However, other renowned research organizations couldn’t disagree more with the FDA’s stance on CBD.

For example, in a 27-page report (https://www.who.int/medicines/access/controlled-substance…) on CBD oil’s safety, the World Health Organization suggests that it’s an ultimately harmless substance that has the potential to treat several chronic, stressful ailments. From psychosis to Crohn’s disease, CBD may be able to help. Even the director of the National Institute of Drug Abuse, Nora Volkow, deems CBD oil to be “a safe drug with no side effects”.

Other reputable government research organizations’ beliefs inherently disagree with the FDA’s criticism in their studies and statements, however. Whose word stands taller, many wonder: the FDA, or WHO and NIDA?

The FDA’s release could perhaps intend to assert grave warning, and it is evident in their writing that they place CBD oil’s risks somewhat parallel with harder narcotics – a stance that many Americans disapprove of. The FDA believes that the risks of CBD outweigh its benefits – and the general public feels otherwise. In fact, one in seven Americans are now using CBD, according to one publication (http://www.alternative-therapies.com/index.cfm/fuseaction…).

So far, not enough research has been done to shed thorough light on CBD products. Some studies have indeed shown that certain CBD brands’ ingredients are somewhat inconsistent and ought to be carefully avoided. Yet, many of these inconsistencies may indirectly stem from insufficient FDA regulations placed upon CBD companies selling Cannabidiol products, thus allowing for looser industry standards. Hopefully, ongoing pressure for more definite conclusions of CBD products will drive more and more research on its effectiveness and safety, as well as encourage improvement on current CBD oil regulations.

To ensure more safety when shopping for cannabis-derived plant remedies, consumers are encouraged to seek reputable CBD brands and ask their suppliers the proper questions (https://smplstcbd.com/6-questions-for-your-cbd-brand/). Although a massive scare doesn’t seem necessary, it’s always smart to be a critical consumer – no matter the market one is browsing.