CBD: Expensive, Very Expensive- or Free?

[danut]

I read a few months ago about research that found that humans and dogs experience the oxytocin release when dogs are being petted.

I recently saw someone comment on TV about men seek sex while women seek oxytocin. aka the "love and trust" hormone. Yes .. petting does produce a release of it.

Thinking back over the last four years, I guess I had something of an unfair advantage in a lot of situations. "Here, smell this!"

The reason I did this is that I'd noticed that Crohns patients sometimes responded to just the smell.

It produces a relaxation, when applied topically. I always called it the "full body sigh." I considered it a mild effect.

When combined with cannabis, it seems to produce some dramatic effects.

I don't know if they will allow me to start a thread here about it or not. But I gotta stop robbing this one.

 

[village green]

I recently saw someone comment on TV about men seek sex while women seek oxytocin. aka the "love and trust" hormone. Yes .. petting does produce a release of it.

While there are gender differences involved in brain chemistry and intercourse, the bigger difference has to do with time. Young or early relationships get a lot of their buzz from dopamine. As the relationship settles (if it lasts that long) oxytocin replaces "the Divine Madness" as old Willy Shakes would call it.

 

[Olifant]

I know you did not write this but the author is mixed up.
Do you understand the difference between endocannabinoids and Cannabinoids? Receptors are for the endocannbinoids found in humans, the Cannabinoids just fit into the receptors. Cannabinoids are not found in breast milk unless the mom was exposed to Cannabis.
Cannabinoids are not found in anything besides Cannabis.

-SamS

I wholeheartedly disagree with your statement that only cannabis produces cannabinoids even if one makes the assumption that endocannabinoid and cannabinoids are mutually exclusive.

CBD was recently discovered as what is believed to be a surprisingly major component in a transgenic flax by some polish researchers. The transgenic traits of the plant involved the phenylpropanoid pathway and not the terpenoid pathway suggesting that nontransgenic flax may produce CBD as well; see Cell Mol Bio Lett 2012 Sep;17(3):479-99

The radula genus of liverwort has a few members known to produce perrottetinenic acid which is the result of in part the geranyl phosphate/olivetolic acid pathway and the bibenzyl pathway but like THCA undergoes decarboxylation resulting in perrottetinene a compound which has some affinity for at least CB2 and probably some marginal affinity as a cb1 agonist. CBG is not just produced in Cannabis, as Helichrysum umbraculigerum has been known as a producer of it for over 30 years, see Phytochemistry 1979 18(8);1371-1374. Voacanga Africana which produces ibogaine like alkaloids also produces cannabinoids.

The echinacea genus have also been discovered as a cannabinoid producer albeit somewhat different in structure to those found in cannabis.


I of course could be incorrect, but I believe the terms endocannabinoid and cannabinoid are not mutually exclusive, while endocannabinoids and phytocannabinoids are indeed mutually exclusive. A similar comparison would be the term opioid and opiate. Opioids are anything that binds to opioid receptors while opiates are opioids produced by the poppy genus. I always thought, perhaps incorrectly that anything that bound to the cannabinoid receptors to be a cannabinoid whether phytocannabinoid, endocannabinoid or synthetic in origin. Surely those cannabinoids which are fatty acid amides but are not known to be produced endogenously could not be classed as endocannabinoids and couldn't be classed as phytocannabinoids, so how would you class them if the term cannabinoid only applies to compounds found in cannabis?


That said the author does seem to be either confused or willfully ignorant for the sake of sensationalism or reinforcing Tim Leary's wishful hypothesis that our nervous system had evolved around psychoactive plants, which is at best the other way around but more likely either the result of coincidence or evolutionary mechanics.

The author does state things like "cannabinoids like those found in marijuana" or "cannabinoid receptors that are specifically designed to process cannabinoids such as THC". Specifically the latter statement really bothers me, as use of the phrase "specifically designed" in the context of biology has religious implications. To statement that THC played a significant role in human evolution is at best an unproven hypothesis which has no real evidence to support it, since there's no evidence to suggest that man used cannabis as a psychoactive more than 7,000 years ago.

Arachidonic acid the fatty acid biosynthetic precursors to anadamide is not only found in breast milk but also more complete baby formulas, so its not terribly surprising if anandamide is what they found. However, because the half lives of most fatty acid amide class endocannabinoids is so short, i'd guess it would be almost as effective to consume the fatty acid for cb receptor agonism.

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

I wholeheartedly disagree with your statement that only cannabis produces cannabinoids even if one makes the assumption that endocannabinoid and cannabinoids are mutually exclusive.

CBD was recently discovered as what is believed to be a surprisingly major component in a transgenic flax by some polish researchers. The transgenic traits of the plant involved the phenylpropanoid pathway and not the terpenoid pathway suggesting that nontransgenic flax may produce CBD as well; see Cell Mol Bio Lett 2012 Sep;17(3):479-99

The radula genus of liverwort has a few members known to produce perrottetinenic acid which is the result of in part the geranyl phosphate/olivetolic acid pathway and the bibenzyl pathway but like THCA undergoes decarboxylation resulting in perrottetinene a compound which has some affinity for at least CB2 and probably some marginal affinity as a cb1 agonist. CBG is not just produced in Cannabis, as Helichrysum umbraculigerum has been known as a producer of it for over 30 years, see Phytochemistry 1979 18(8);1371-1374. Voacanga Africana which produces ibogaine like alkaloids also produces cannabinoids.


The echinacea genus have also been discovered as a cannabinoid producer albeit somewhat different in structure to those found in cannabis.


I of course could be incorrect, but I believe the terms endocannabinoid and cannabinoid are not mutually exclusive, while endocannabinoids and phytocannabinoids are indeed mutually exclusive. A similar comparison would be the term opioid and opiate. Opioids are anything that binds to opioid receptors while opiates are opioids produced by the poppy genus. I always thought, perhaps incorrectly that anything that bound to the cannabinoid receptors to be a cannabinoid whether phytocannabinoid, endocannabinoid or synthetic in origin. Surely those cannabinoids which are fatty acid amides but are not known to be produced endogenously could not be classed as endocannabinoids and couldn't be classed as phytocannabinoids, so how would you class them if the term cannabinoid only applies to compounds found in cannabis?


That said the author does seem to be either confused or willfully ignorant for the sake of sensationalism or reinforcing Tim Leary's wishful hypothesis that our nervous system had evolved around psychoactive plants, which is at best the other way around but more likely either the result of coincidence or evolutionary mechanics.

The author does state things like "cannabinoids like those found in marijuana" or "cannabinoid receptors that are specifically designed to process cannabinoids such as THC". Specifically the latter statement really bothers me, as use of the phrase "specifically designed" in the context of biology has religious implications. To statement that THC played a significant role in human evolution is at best an unproven hypothesis which has no real evidence to support it, since there's no evidence to suggest that man used cannabis as a psychoactive more than 7,000 years ago.

Arachidonic acid the fatty acid biosynthetic precursors to anadamide is not only found in breast milk but also more complete baby formulas, so its not terribly surprising if anandamide is what they found. However, because the half lives of most fatty acid amide class endocannabinoids is so short, i'd guess it would be almost as effective to consume the fatty acid for cb receptor agonism.

This is from the CBD paper:
"In the course of analysis of fibers extract from previously generated transgenic plants overproducing phenylpropanoids a new terpenoid compound was discovered.The UV spectra and the retention time in UPLC analysis of this new compound reveal similarity to a cannabinoid-like compound, probably cannabidiol (CBD). This was confirmed by finding two ions at m/z 174.1 and 231.2 in mass spectra analysis. Further confirmation of the nature of the compound was based on a biological activity assay. It was found that the compound affects the expression of genes involved in inflammatory processes in mouse and human fibroblasts and likely the CBD from Cannabis sativa activates the specific peripheral cannabinoid receptor 2 (CB2) gene expression. Besides fibers, the compound was also found in all other flax tissues. It should be pointed out that the industrial process of fabric production does not affect CBD activity.The presented data suggest for the first time that flax products can be a source of biologically active cannabinoid-like compounds that are able to influence the cell immunological response."

They are discussing CBD like compounds not CBD. Also transgenic plants are not what I meant when I said not found in other plants, I meant a plant where the CBD was not put into the plant by man with GM.
"suggesting that nontransgenic flax may produce CBD as well"
Ok, then find it.

This if from the CBG paper:
"The investigation of a further South African Helichrysum species afforded eleven resorcinol derivatives, most of them closely related to cannabigerol and the corresponding acid, both also being present in the aerial parts of H. umbraculigerum. Furthermore a new geranyl chalcone is present. The structures are elucidated by spectroscopic methods and some chemical transformations. The occurrence of the cannabigerol-like compounds in a composite is surprising. Probably, some of these compounds are formed by the combination of three different biogenetic pathways."

They are discussing CBG like compounds not CBG.

As for:"The echinacea genus have also been discovered as a cannabinoid producer albeit somewhat different in structure to those found in cannabis."
They are not the same as Cannabinoids found in Cannabis.

-SamS


About Cannabinoids vs PhytoCannabinoids vs Endocannabinoids, I am old school, meaning when I learned about Cannabinoids the Endocannabinoids had not yet been discovered, so the Cannabinoids came from the Cannabis plant, or were synthesized.
But I do not care anymore either way...

-SamS

 

[Olifant]

This is from the CBD paper:
"The UV spectra and the retention time in UPLC analysis of this new compound reveal similarity to a cannabinoid-like compound, probably cannabidiol (CBD). This was confirmed by finding two ions at m/z 174.1 and 231.2 in mass spectra analysis. Further confirmation of the nature of the compound was based on a biological activity assay.

I interpret the first sentence of the quote as saying the compound is likely to be CBD, but I suppose it could be interpreted as the compound is likely to be similar to CBD.

"suggesting that nontransgenic flax may produce CBD as well"
Ok, then find it.

It's right here in table II of the link below. They plainly list quantification of CBD as a component in an extract of Linola, a flax variety. Linola is not transgenic although iirc there was a mutagen involved in its breeding. They also plainly list CBD as a component of one of the transgenic varieties.

http://www.formatex.info/microbiology3/book/1216-1224.pdf

As for:"The echinacea genus have also been discovered as a cannabinoid producer albeit somewhat different in structure to those found in cannabis."
They are not the same as Cannabinoids found in Cannabis.

If you read what you quoted from me you will see I said they were different from those found in cannabis, and we are in agreement there.

About Cannabinoids vs PhytoCannabinoids vs Endocannabinoids, I am old school, meaning when I learned about Cannabinoids the Endocannabinoids had not yet been discovered, so the Cannabinoids came from the Cannabis plant, or were synthesized.
But I do not care anymore either way...

-SamS

Yeah, it's an argument about industry jargon and really quite inconsequential. I do feel however that if you use the term cannabinoid to only refer to cannabimimetic agents in cannabis, then you are left with a gap in the terminology to describe cannabimimetic agents of synthetic origins or plants outside of cannabis.

 

[Olifant]

This if from the CBG paper:
"The investigation of a further South African Helichrysum species afforded eleven resorcinol derivatives, most of them closely related to cannabigerol and the corresponding acid, both also being present in the aerial parts of H. umbraculigerum. Furthermore a new geranyl chalcone is present. The structures are elucidated by spectroscopic methods and some chemical transformations. The occurrence of the cannabigerol-like compounds in a composite is surprising. Probably, some of these compounds are formed by the combination of three different biogenetic pathways."


-SamS

Also, I forgot to address part of your post. in the above quote you should reread what you posted.

most of them closely related to cannabigerol and the corresponding acid, both also being present in the aerial parts of H. umbraculigerum.

This means that not just " CBG like compounds" but also CBG and CBGA

 

[yetagain]

How we wish for more posts like those!

 

[Bongstar420]

So you're going to force me to not grow GE Cannabis the same way I was forced to not grow non-GE Cannabis. That's rich

I say GE because Genetic Engineering is much different than a Genetically Modified Organism. All breeding produces GMO's, but Genetic Engineering produces organisms breeding cannot. You know, like a pig that glows green vs a pig that is pink and slow. Neither exist in "nature" and both are modified organisms. One is engineered by splicing unrelated organisms in a lab and the other is bred from existing related populations.


I suppose people have not learned their lesson from prohibition yet. Oui vey

CBD: Expensive, Very Expensive – or Free?
By David Malmo-Levine, Cannabis Culture - Friday, September 14 2012
Follow: cannabidiol CBD David Malmo-Levine GROWING Medical Marijuana Tikkun Olam

http://youtu.be/QoM8cQX1cj4
CANNABIS CULTURE - A company in Israel announced recently that it is the first to develop a strain of cannabis low in THC and high in cannabidiol (CBD) using the natural breeding process with no unnatural genetic modifications.

While this claim is misleading regarding the novelty of such a strain, I believe it was truthful regarding the process by which such a strain was created. But is the origin of high-CBD strains genetic, or is it a factor of the environment? Probably both.

The Announcement

From Public Radio International:

[A]n Israeli company claims it is the first to develop a strain of the cannabis plant that contains almost no THC at all. ... The new cannabis strain took about 3 years to develop through cross-breeding, according to Zach Klein of Tikkun Olam. There was no genetic engineering involved, he said. The new strain is all natural. "Avidekel" is the nickname for the CBD strain, Klein said."


I don't believe this company is the "first to develop a strain of the cannabis plant that contains almost no THC at all." This 2005 article from Cannabis Culture mentions GW Pharmaceutical growing "virtually mono-cannabinoidic plants that produce high percentages of these target cannabinoids: THC, CBD, THC-V, CBC, CBD-V, CBG or CBN."

This lab report indicates that "cannatonic #6" was high in CBD with hardly any THC, perhaps also indicating that the "cannatonic" strain is either unstable, genetically producing different cannabinoid results with each plant, or getting different results under different growing conditions.

17% of Harborside Healthcenter's tested cannabis rated at or above 1% CBD, with three strains in the 14 to 16% range of CBD.

Not to mention that nearly every single industrial hemp variety ever created contains almost no THC at all. For example, this paper written in 1996 lists many industrial hemp varieties with next to no THC and 4% to 5% CBD.

Though Tikkun Olam's claims of originality are false, I believe the company was correct in describing the breeding process as the method of designing high-CBD strains, but there is some debate as to whether the plant's characteristics are due to genetics or the environment. I think it is probably both.

Famous breeder David Watson (AKA "Sam Skunkman") said he doesn't "believe that soil or light or anything else will increase the CBD level. CBD is controlled by the genetics of the plant, period." Perhaps what he means to say is that the maximum levels of CBD are controlled by genetics, but according to Hillig and Mahlberg, the levels can dip when all kinds of factors are increased or decreased.

It's possible these factors are also at play during the selection process, and have subtle or not-so-subtle effects on the breeding process itself. I'm not a geneticist, but what I do know is that there's ample evidence of low-THC, high-CBD strains all over the place, some that have existed before the invention of genetic modification. That means, obviously, genetically modification is not required to produce these strains. It is as easy as grabbing some industrial hemp seeds, growing them out and selecting for high CBD.

Dr. Frankel

Dr. Allan Frankel, a Santa Monica MD who works with Green Bridge Medical, wrote a series of blogs blasting activists concerned about GM cannabis, as a response to a discussion (including myself, Dr. Frankel, and lawyer Letitia Pepper) on an email list:

http://www.greenbridgemed.com/2012/07/07/highless-marijuana-or-rich-cbd/
http://www.greenbridgemed.com/2012/07/08/there-is-no-gmo-cannabis/
http://www.greenbridgemed.com/2012/07/08/highless-and-gmo-marijuana-nope...
http://www.greenbridgemed.com/2012/07/08/please-get-our-facts-straight-t...

In his posts, Dr. Frankel argues that there "is no GMO cannabis", and seems to confuse my opinion with Letitia Pepper's. As stated above, I believe you can get low-THC, high-CBD from normal, non-GMO breeding methods, or from most industrial hemp. I do not think these strains are a threat or a conspiracy, or ineffective medicinally, and I don't have a problem with what's going on in Israel.

Though I don't believe that GMO cannabis currently exists (as Letitia does), I believe there may be such a creation in the works, and that a ban on genetically modified cannabis would be a good thing.

Right now, there are projects ongoing to genetically modify all useful drug plants, and evidence that cannabis is a likely candidate – for proprietary reasons.

The first mention of the possibility of cannabis being genetically modified I could find was cited in a document leaked to Cannabis Culture back in 2000, which read, in part:

Cannabis seeds from Monsanto are almost definitely genetically engineered. Genetically engineered plants can be patented, and it is in Monsanto's best interest to hold a patent on any seed they sell. Seed patents ensure that companies like Monsanto can continue to profit from seeds from year to year, as farmers are legally bound to buy patented seeds from the patent holder rather than simply store them from the last year's crop.

In 2009, the University of Minnesota issued a news release suggesting that researchers were close to "engineering" a "recognizable, drug-free Cannabis plant":

In a first step toward engineering a drug-free Cannabis plant for hemp fiber and oil, University of Minnesota researchers have identified genes producing tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the psychoactive substance in marijuana. Studying the genes could also lead to new and better drugs for pain, nausea and other conditions.

And in 2010, one of the USA's leading farming organizations "passed a bizarre new policy statement in support of industrial hemp farming, but only if it is genetically modified (GMO) and retains cannabis prohibition with very heavy law enforcement." The National Grange of the Order of Patron of Husbandry, known simply as "The Grange", stated:

The National Grange supports research, production, processing and marketing of industrial hemp as a viable agricultural activity. We do not in any way support or condone the growth or use of marijuana as a hallucinogen.

"We support strict enforcement of all laws that currently ban the production and sale of marijuana or that classify all species of cannabis as a Class 1 controlled substance in the US. We oppose amending these laws as the primary means of promoting industrial hemp production.
Instead we urge further research and application of existing biotechnology techniques to develop genetically modified industrial hemp that will be biologically incompatible with all other forms of cannabis or marijuana.

We further urge that genetically modified industrial hemp contain distinct chemical markers that will quickly and easily identify industrial hemp varieties using low cost and accurate on-site testing methods for the purpose of contract compliance, law enforcement and as evidence in court."

While none of this is proof that GM cannabis exists, the fact that other drug plants are routinely subjected to GM, that cannabis is a major – if not the major – cash crop on planet earth, and that GM cannabis is being discussed repeatedly, is evidence that GM cannabis is likely in the future.

What Does CBD Do?

What exactly does CBD do? According to this paper from the International Hemp Association:

CBD shows no psychotropic effects, but some clinically relevant effects have been found. Among them are anticonvulsant effects in epileptics (Cunha 1980) and antidystonic effects in movement disorder patients (Consroe 1986). Some properties resemble those of THC, e.g., some effects on the immune system (Watzl 1991), other properties differ from THC, e.g., the electrophysiological properties (Turkanis 1981), others show distinct contrary effects, e.g. some effects on the heart (Nahas 1985). Of interest in this context is the action of CBD on the psyche. There are sleep-inducing (Carlini 1981), anxiolytic and anti-psychotic effects, as well as an antagonism of the psychotropic effects of THC. High doses of THC can induce anxiety, panic reactions and functional psychotic states. Zuardi et al. (1997) found a significant reduction of anxiety in a model of speech simulation, with 300 mg CBD comparable to 10 mg of the sedative diazepam. The same working group treated a young schizophrenic man who was admitted to a hospital because of aggressive behavior, self-injury, incoherent thoughts and hallucinations, for four weeks with doses up to 1,500 mg CBD. All symptoms improved impressively with CBD, so that the improvement could not solely be attributed to an anxiolytic effect. ... In a study of Zuardi et al. (1982), eight volunteers received high oral doses of THC (0.5 mg THC per kg body weight, about 35 mg), or this dose plus twice the dose of CBD in a double-blind design. The study demonstrated that CBD blocked the anxiety produced by THC. This inhibition was extended to the marijuana-like effects and other alterations caused by THC.

There is also data showing CBD's effectiveness in helping those suffering from schizophrenia, though it may not be good for glaucoma patients.

Apparently CBD can be given in massive doses with no side effects and becomes very effective as an anti-psychotic when given in these doses.

Last, but certainly not least, CBD appears to shrink tumors.

It is of great value to have low-THC, high-CBD medicine, since many people don't want to get high (or don't want to get too high) but want to consume cannabinoids, so my hat is off to the Israelis of Tikkun Olam. Good job! Well done!

CBD in Industrial Hemp

According Tikkun Olam's website, they do not charge for those who cannot afford their cannabis. Unfortunately, those in Canada and the United States who wish to buy high-CBD cannabis products are faced with high prices for the dried herb or the seeds. One eighth of "Cannatonic" can run as high as $60 and the seeds can cost around $94 per 10 seeds ($157 for feminized seeds), if they're available at all.

Lucky for us Canadians, there is another option. Industrial hemp is growing all over Canada:

In 2003, over 2700 hectares (6700 acres) were grown across Canada , mostly concentrated on the Prairies. In 2010 it was estimated that 25,000 were grown. Hemp has been grown with success from coast–to–coast.

(See more here.)

And this hemp is all rich in CBD, according to every source I can find. Industrial hemp THC to CBD ratios are usually 1/20.

More here:

In industrial hemp, CBD is the predominant cannabinoid and often occurs in a CBD/THC ratio of more than 8:1.

And here:

Dr. Mahlberg went on to point out that an extraction from industrial hemp using a deceptive procedure found on the Internet will result in a sludge containing many noxious elements and very little THC. Of course the preponderant cannabinoid in this sludge will be CBD.

Canadian aren't forced to order any special "cannatonic" high-CBD seeds to get lots of CBD medicine, they just have to wander into any industrial hemp field in the fall before harvest with some ice and some buckets and some water and walk out with a ball of high CBD hash the size of your head. Illegal? Yes. But free. There are even fallow hemp fields from the year before that the farmer probably wouldn't mind (or wouldn't notice) you doing this with. It matters not that industrial hemp is only 6% CBD and these Israeli strains (or the California high-CBD strains) are 15% or 20% CBD. You can only grow a few of those "medicinal" plants but you can get access to acres of industrial hemp, so you end up getting much more CBD with industrial hemp over-all. Like I said before, industrial hemp CBD is a waste product which is being thrown-out by the tonne every year when it could be harvested for tumor-shrinking (in this post Fukushima world). That's the real story nobody is talking about, but everyone should be talking about.

If people wish to experiment with crossing their high THC varieties with viable high-CBD industrial hemp seeds, there are some available here for a very reasonable cost: $5 for what appears to be over 20 seeds.

This research paper says you can cross high-THC strains with high-CBD strains to get a mixture of both together.

Whatever you do, remember that even low-THC industrial hemp is illegal to grow in the US under almost all circumstances, and illegal to grow in Canada unless you have ten acres, no criminal record, and you fill out a whack of forms. If they catch you, the authorities will still treat you as if you were growing that nasty THC stuff.

http://www.cannabisculture.com/content/2012/09/14/CBD-Expensive-Very-Expensive-or-Free

 

[Bongstar420]

Cannabinoids should refer to chemicals exclusive to the Cannabis genus. I didn't think it was appropriate to name our receptors which respond to THC as "cannabinoid" receptors. I didn't think it was appropriate to name a class of chemicals independent of the genus as such either. It really confuses the nature of both the receptors and the chemicals involved in these systems. Our receptors should be named, "anandamide and 2-arachidonoylglycerol" receptors or what ever stuff we find and name which are endogenous to the receptor system.

I interpret the first sentence of the quote as saying the compound is likely to be CBD, but I suppose it could be interpreted as the compound is likely to be similar to CBD.

It's right here in table II of the link below. They plainly list quantification of CBD as a component in an extract of Linola, a flax variety. Linola is not transgenic although iirc there was a mutagen involved in its breeding. They also plainly list CBD as a component of one of the transgenic varieties.

http://www.formatex.info/microbiology3/book/1216-1224.pdf




If you read what you quoted from me you will see I said they were different from those found in cannabis, and we are in agreement there.





Yeah, it's an argument about industry jargon and really quite inconsequential. I do feel however that if you use the term cannabinoid to only refer to cannabimimetic agents in cannabis, then you are left with a gap in the terminology to describe cannabimimetic agents of synthetic origins or plants outside of cannabis.

 

[stoned-trout]

finally ditch weed has a use...

 

[RetroGrow]

finally ditch weed has a use...

I always hear about these ditches, but never actually seen one. Where are they hiding?

 

[RetroGrow]

Duplicate post....I wish there was a way to delete those...

 

[barnyard]

this package gives the breakdown of cbd...

this package gives the breakdown of cbd...

cbd lozenges