Research establishes antibiotic potential for cannabis molecule | Hacker News Reader

Research establishes antibiotic potential for cannabis molecule

uq.edu.au

68 pointstechinvestor27 comments

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmcpl/articles/PMC7052834/

Layperson here. I wonder if there's any unintentional antimicrobial side effects with both medical and recreational use. For example, undesirable effects upon the gut flora that then potentially adversely affect neurochemistry. Especially if the route of administration is ingestion.

The research collaboration between The University of Queensland and Botanix Pharmaceuticals Limited could lead to the first new class of antibiotics for resistant bacteria in 60 years.

Yep, the livestock industry is going to abuse this until it no longer works.

Happy cows ==> Happier cows!!

Reefer mewness?

Hm. How much antibiotics does a unit of vat-grown meat need relative to old-fashioned meat?

"Synthetic cannabidiol, better known as CBD, has been shown for the first time to kill the bacteria responsible for gonorrhoea, meningitis and legionnaires disease."

CBD != Synthetic cannabidiol

Cannabidiol==CBD

Synthetic cannabidiol == synthetic CBD (i.e. just CBD)

What are you on about? adding a word in front another word doses not mean you can just reduce it back donw to the original word. These are not fractions.

The word synthetic has a defined meaning: made by a chemical synthesis; especially to imitate a natural product.

No. CBD is a compound. Whether that is made syntheically or not is not relevant

We'll I'm going to politely disagree with you on whether synthetic is relevant or not. BigPhrama has mad an industry of making synthetic versions of naturally occurring compounds that they now own the patents on while keeping the naturally occurring compounds scheduled so they get all the monies. Being able to isolate and extract specific compounds from naturally occurring compounds does not mean you get to patent it. There's a huge difference.

the original language was ambiguous.

e.g.:

"A synthetic form of the molecule cannabidiol, a molecule which is also known as CBD" is structurally the same but less ambiguous because of the addition of additional words..

Synthetic (cannabidiol, better known as CBD)

not

(Synthetic cannabidiol), better known as CBD

Cannabidiol, specifically THC, also kills cancer cells. People using cannabis oil have managed to cure various forms of cancer.

I wonder if they meant CBG instead of CBD, as there were similar articles in 2020 for antibacterial properties, possibly work against mrsa

Unless they meant full spectrum cbd which includes cbg, CBN, minor THC, and other properties besides just cbd itself

While marketing may tell you otherwise, there is no such thing as ‘full spectrum CBD’. CBG, CBD, CBN, THC, etc., are molecules found in the cannabis plant. One cannot make a molecule of CBD (C21H30O2) ‘full spectrum’. On the other hand, one can get ‘broad spectrum’ or ‘full spectrum’ cannabis oil that is supposed to contain multiple or all naturally occurring cannabinoids, plus possibly other compounds like terpenes (eg. limonene).

Thanks, you are correct.

Could someone explain the mechanics of how this insight would be turned into a therapeutic?

There’s no way this is correct. The government says it has no medicinal value. Who do you trust? A bunch of hippies in their lab coats?

(/s...)

I don't know about you, but where I live the government provides reasonably coherent and researched information on the therapeutic value of cannabinoids [0]. There are also government grants available for legitimate research in the field. Not to mention several subjurisdictions in which the governments hold the legal monopoly on sales and distribution of cannabis product.

It was edifying to read in senate committee reports, during the run-up to full nationwide legalization a few years ago, that no better treatment for anorexia and nausea due to anti-cancer chemotherapy has been found than THC, that CBD has clinically significant effects on certain kinds of epilepsy, that a combination of the two has been clinically demonstrated to slow the growth of certain neuromas, and that use of cannabis as an anti-anxiety drug is strongly contraindicated because of a marked rebound effect. All of these facts, and many others (like cannabis use with MS: no published study has shown any effect), footnoted and linked to published, peer-reviewed literature. Unfortunately I can no longer find the original report to the committee but I did find the official government communication (see [0]).

[0] https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-medica...

I was referring to the fact that it’s still schedule 1 in the states. Sorry for the assumption eh

It saddens me that it is 2021, and we are having to re-learn the value of hemp. We are also learning how to extract the various isolates from the plant with today's technology, so advancements are coming thick and fast. It's really sad the affect that Reefer Madness had stymieing nearly a century of advancement.

...given the near constant fixation here of various recreational drugs as wonder cures, I increasingly do not trust articles from "hippies in lab coats." The turning point for me was an article about using LSD for couples therapy.

I feel increasingly like slipping in a parody article about scientists discovering "cannabis whitens teeth!" to see what would happen.

TFH actually claims CBD can break down biofilms and mentions the bacteria that deposits the plaque deposited on teeth.

There you go, cannabis toothpaste. Fabulously Freaky mint taste.

I don’t think the world has changed that much. I think MDMA and psilocybin are looked down upon similarly despite the mountains of research of their potential. As a thought experiment, how would you feel about relaxing cocaine restrictions? Do you still feel that way even though there are entire cultures in South America that use it on an hourly basis in a non destructive way?

I’m all for coca being allowed. Currently in South America (working at an ayahuasca retreat...my opinion on “drugs” may differ a bit :)) and enjoying coca tea almost daily. It’s allegedly a fairly nutrient-dense plant in its non-freebase form. I think it’s a huge misuse/abuse of it as cocaine, and unfortunately I don’t know where that leaves us. People should be allowed the freedom to use any plant as they wish, it should all be decriminalized at the minimum. It’s a dangerous and slippery slope and I feel blessed never to have used it as cocaine personally.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com