From PsychonautWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Cannabis Withdrawal Syndrome

This is documented in numerous papers as a legitimate syndrome. Graham (talk) 21:57, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Potentially useful papers

Structure of an allosteric modulator bound to the CB1 cannabinoid receptor

There is an attentional bias towards cannabis cues (meta-analysis) potentially useful for cannabis use disorder.

Cannabis and the Developing Brain: Insights into Its Long-Lasting Effects


Cannabinoids for the treatment of mental disorders and symptoms of mental disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Cannabidiol Counteracts the Psychotropic Side-Effects of {Delta}-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol in the Ventral Hippocampus through Bidirectional Control of ERK1-2 Phosphorylation

Cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome

@Clarity: Do you think Cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome should be documented at --David Hedlund (talk) 15:19, 13 August 2018 (CEST)

Yes I do it’s a very real thing that happens in the long term and needs to be warned or at least said in some way Austingjj (talk) 08:41, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

The Medical Use section is misleading

The "Medical Use" section is misleading. The section cites the information sheet for Marinol (Dronabinol) to support the misleading claims about the medicinal use of cannabis. Dronabinol is a completely synthetic delta-9-THC made in a lab. The molecular structure of the dronabinol is different than the structure of delta-9-THC, and dronabinol isn't found naturally in the cannabis plant. Dronabinol doesn't have any cannabis-based cannabinoids in it. The article for cannabis appears to have a focus on the different chemical compounds found directly in the cannabis plant, and not on synthetic cannabinoids like dronabinol. The section insinuates that dronabinol and cannabis are the same and the two terms can be used interchangeably which is incorrect and misleading.

The citations themselves in the Medical Use section do not support the claims they're being cited for. I think the Medical Use section should be removed temporarily and/or find better citations for said claims. Do others have thoughts?


I hear many stories and they all are very different in feeling so I’m curious on how everyone else feels Austingjj (talk) 08:39, 27 August 2023 (UTC)