Buying and Selling Cannabis in the Metaverse

Numerous companies are utilizing the metaverse as a new, barely-regulated way to promote their products. Although major brands like Miller Lite, Estee Lauder, Wendy’s and JPMorgan Chase & Co are already setting up shop in the digital realm, there seems to be some keen advantages to advertising this way for those who work in the cannabis industry as well.  

Because the metaverse operates on a Web3 decentralized platform, there is no corporate control or censorship, leaving cannabis companies freer to market their products in ways they would not be able to do on say, Facebook or Instagram. According to Lisa Buffo, founder and chief executive of the Cannabis Marketing Association, “It is a wide-open space in Web3… regulators haven’t wrapped their heads around it yet.” 

To stay current on everything important happening in the cannabis and psychedelics industries, subscribe to The Cannadelics Weekly Newsletter. Also, it’ll get you premium access to deals on cannabis flowers, vapes, edibles, and much more! We’ve also got standout offers on cannabinoids, like HHC-O, Delta 8Delta 9 THCDelta-10 THCTHCOTHCVTHCP HHC, which won’t kill your bank account. Head over to our “Best-of” lists to get these deals, and remember to enjoy responsibly!


What is the Metaverse? 

By now most people have, at the very least, heard the word “Metaverse” – whether in the context of Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook rebrand, or when NFTs briefly had their moment in the limelight, digital art galleries, and so on. But what exactly is the metaverse? Different explanations have been offered up, from the metaverse being a basically just a virtual universe where we use an avatar to navigate a fake world, to it being simply a way to categorize various extended reality technologies.  

Actually, the term “metaverse” was first coined in a sci-fi novel written by Neal Stephenson in 1992, titled Snow Crash. In the book, Stephenson describes the metaverse as a type of digital parallel universe. Today’s metaverse bears some similar concepts, but overall is based on the idea of Web3, or third generation internet in which everything is operated on decentralized blockchain technology.   

“The metaverse is a 3D version of the Internet and computing at large,” Mathew Ball, a venture capitalist and angel investor who’s written a series of essays about the potential and structures of the metaverse, told VICE. “There are two ways to place this in the current context,” Ball added. “When these two technologies (internet and computing) first emerged, all interactions were primarily text-based (emails, messages, usernames, email addresses). Then they slowly became more media-based (photos, videos, livestreams). The next elevation of user interface and user experience is into 3D. Secondly, if we think of [a] mobile [phone] as placing a computer in our pocket and the internet being available at all times, think of the metaverse as always being within a computer and inside the internet.” 

Many experts and Web3 stakeholders view the metaverse as a 3D version of the internet, where you a digital life through your avatar and interact with others through their avatars. A way to be social, more so than typing on a keyboard on some social media platform, but minus any true, real-life interactions.  

Others, like cybersecurity expert and founding director of the Connecticut Institute of Technology at the University of New Haven, Ibrahim Baggili, don’t believe a true metaverse actually exists yet. “It’s not real at this stage, and won’t become real until people have a single location they can go to to get into in a virtual world they could live in,” Baggili claims.  

Cannabis transactions in Decentraland  

What is most appealing to cannabis companies about selling products in the metaverse, for the time being anyway, are the very lax advertising regulations compared other internet platforms. So far, only a handful of weed companies are buying up digital space, and only of these companies sells THC products. 

For example, Higher Life CBD Dispesnary LLC, who partnered with partnered with Saucey Farms & Extracts LLC earlier this year, opened a store in Voxels last December. Voxels is a metaverse-style universe that used to be called Cryptovoxels until they rebranded last month. Although you can’t buy anything directly from their virtual store, you can click a cash register button in the meta dispensary which will redirect you to their website where you can make a purchase. According to Higher Life chief executive, Brandon Howard, roughly 1000 people visit the virtual dispensary every day.  

Florida-based Kandy Girl, owed by Alina Boyce, is the first cannabis company that sells THC products to purchase virtual property in Decentraland. Her metaverse store is located at -55, -129. Every “parcel” that exists in the metaverse has its own coordinates/location so people can “teleport” there immediately. 

However, according to chief marketing officer and owner of Boyce Capital LLC, Ben Boyce, there aren’t enough users yet to generate the necessary investor interest to take things to the next level. “When there’s a million people logged into a metaverse at any given time, that’s when it is going to make sense to staff [a virtual] dispensary with a real live human being,” Mr. Boyce said.

But until then, basically all the cannabis brands can do is take advantage of the advertising freedom they have in the metaverse compared to traditional advertising platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and Google. Metaverse platforms are different in that they have varying rules for how and what you can promote, depending on what world you’re in. For example, Roblox, Meta Horizon WOrlds, and Sandbox have banned cannabis companies, but Decentraland and Voxels support them.

“We have supported various NFT cannabis communities—as long as they meet the terms and conditions,” said Adam de Cata, head of partnerships at Decentraland. “Cannabis companies that open in Decentraland need to observe legal regulations, including not serving users in countries where the product is prohibited,” said Sam Hamilton, creative director of Decentraland Foundation, which builds tools for the platform and handles its marketing.  

The consumer experience  

The basics of shopping for pot products in the Decentraland metaverse go a little something like this: First, you launch the program on a desktop computer, create an avatar, and move through the virtual dispensary world where you can interact with other people’s avatars and buy products with your crypto wallet by scanning a QR code that takes you to the checkout site. There are multiple floors in the meta Kandy Girl store for customers to explore, including a large NFT gallery and a virtual rooftop party held earlier this year (yes, a party for avatars).  

Founder Alina Boyce says, “A lot of these NFT projects people are investing in, either don’t end up delivering on their promises, or it just takes so long for the promises of these projects to be executed. It scares investors when they see the floor price of a NFT project start dropping. We’ve created a reason to stay.” 

To get a better idea of the whole experience, I did a bit of exploring in Decentraland myself. The concept was interesting. First, I made an avatar and launched Decentraland, where I started off inside the Kandy Girl dispensary. There was an upper level but I did not have access because I entered the game as a guest. It was very rudimentary – which is understandable considering how new this digital world is. 

After looking around a bit, I went outside and wandered where there was an array of different NFT artwork to look at, walked some more and exited the app shortly after. I do find it extremely forward thinking of Kandy Girl to pursue this marketing avenue, as they are the first company to establish a digital metaverse dispensary that sells THC products. However, it will certainly need to be more entertaining if business owners wish to create an experience that’s worth repeating.  

Final thoughts  

As strange as it all sounds, the metaverse is trending so it’s no surprise that cannabis companies (an industry which has also been trending for the last few years), are eyeing these virtual business opportunities. An added bonus is that, in some of these digital worlds, they are free to advertise with much more leniency than they are in the real world. And although shopping and activities are still somewhat abysmal in decentraland and voxels, it will be interesting to see what the future holds.

Welcome to the site! Thanks for making it to CBDtesters.co / Cannadelics.com, the top internet spot offering up fully-rounded independent news covering the growing cannabis and psychedelics industries. Stop by frequently to stay up-to-date on these dynamic industries, and make sure to sign up to The THC Weekly Newsletter, to ensure you’re never late on getting the news. 

The post Buying and Selling Cannabis in the Metaverse appeared first on Cannadelics.

Does Vaping Cause Cancer Like Cigarettes?

There’s a lot of contradictory information spewed at us on a regular basis, and its hard to know the truth of things, especially when big corporations have reasons to want you to buy their products, and when governments take money from these entities. When it comes to vaping, tons of smear campaigns are out there, but are they saying anything useful? Unless vaping is tantamount to smoking, isn’t it automatically a better option? Let’s get into it, does vaping cause cancer or heart disease like smoking?

Does vaping cause cancer like cigarettes? While the obvious answer is no, there seems to be plenty of confusion on this matter. This publication covers news stories in the emerging cannabis and psychedelics spaces. Follow along by signing up for the THC Weekly Newsletter, which also nets you access to tons of deals on products like vapes, edibles, and other devices, as well as cannabinoids, like HHC-O, Delta 8Delta 9 THCDelta-10 THCTHCOTHCVTHCP HHC. We do remind, no one should ever buy or use a product they are uncomfortable with.


The detriments of smoking

First off, let’s take a look at standard smoking, and the issues that go with it. The first thing to understand on this topic, is that it’s not actually about cigarettes. Or more specifically, it’s not actually about tobacco. Tobacco can be used medicinally when not smoked, and has been for millennia. No one was dying from it before the use of cigarettes. The term ‘smoke inhalation’ refers to breathing in too much smoke, and the detrimental effects this can have. This refers to anything lit on fire and breathed in, whether its trees, plants, plastics, or tobacco.

Cigarette smoking is simply constant smoke inhalation. It makes the idea of buying organic tobacco, or switching to herbal smokable concoctions, a bit of a joke in the end. Sure, it might get a person away from some of the chemicals of standard processed tobacco, but it won’t get anyone away from the dangers that come from lighting something on fire, and breathing it in. Smoking cigarettes, as constant smoke inhalation, comes with a myriad of health problems, particularly for long-time users.

The bottom-line numbers tell a compelling story when looking at the generals of smoking damage. Every year, approximately 480,000 people die from smoking-related causes. A massive 41,000 of these are from secondhand smoke. As in, 41,000 people a year die from someone else’s smoking habit. In comparison, the US is up-in-arms over the growing drug overdose issue and the rising number of opioid deaths. These deaths account for just over 100,000 a year according to new CDC numbers, which make even opioids pale in comparison to the dangers of smoking.

What about a comparison to vaping? Though vaping hasn’t been around as long as smoking, starting mainly in the early 2000’s, it simply isn’t linked to a large death toll. As of 2020, the CDC could only come up with 68 related deaths, and all deaths were attributable to additives in vape liquid, and not to whatever compound was meant to be vaped, or the vaping itself. It bears mentioning here, that a dry herb vape is not included in this, and that this issue is specifically related to the use of vape cartridges.

Cancer and heart disease from smoking

Smoking is related to a huge number of problems, but the main two which lead to premature death, are cardiovascular issues, and cancer. Just how much damage do cigarettes do in these arenas? The CDC put out information detailing yearly death numbers from examining the years 2005-2009. As smoking has been around well over a hundred years, and reached higher levels of popularity in previous decades to this one, these dates are perfectly fine for understanding the situation today.

In terms of smoking related cancer deaths, approximately 163,700 people die of cancer yearly from smoking. When looking at cardiovascular disease, which includes heart disease, diabetes, and vascular disease, there are 160,000 deaths a year from smoking. There is however, another major class of deaths from smoking, and its related to respiratory diseases like pneumonia, influenza, and COPD. From this grouping there are about 113,100 deaths per year.

Now, let’s make this worse. Remember how 41,000 people die a year just from sitting in the same room as smokers? Well, about 7,333 of these deaths are from lung cancer, and 33,951 are from heart disease. There are that many cancer and heart-related issues, even when the afflicted person isn’t the one with the bad habit.

Does vaping cause cancer?

There is a lot of weird, seemingly nonsensical, information out there trying to tell you vaping is bad. However, when it comes to the actual questions of how to measure this, the answer just leaves more questions. Like why are we being told vaping is dangerous when no statistics back this up? I mean, if it was true, it would be attached to some pretty bad death numbers, right? Well, not exactly…

To be fair, vaping hasn’t been around for as long as smoking. The main surge of e-cigarettes and cannabis vape carts started in the 2010’s. However, as someone with asthma, I can personally attest to the fact that smoking causes damage in me pretty fast, whereas vaping does not. And I know this from how my lungs feel, and how I breathe. Perhaps it is possible to tell if vaping can cause something like cancer or heart disease early on, or at the very least, if it starts to cause the damage that leads in these directions.

cancer

According to the site Cancer Research UK, the answer to the question, does vaping cause cancer, is no. While the organization certainly doesn’t rule out that there could be negative side effects, it specifically states that vaping related deaths so far are only attributable to additives, and are not related to the act of vaping in general. The organization says this:

“You may have heard about vaping causing an outbreak of lung illness in 2019 in the United States. An investigation found the cases were linked to contaminated illegal products. It was not linked to vaping regularly or in the long term. There was no similar outbreak in the UK, and the chemicals of concern are banned in e-cigarettes here. There is no good evidence that e-cigarettes bought from legal places cause lung disease.”

What about secondhand vaping damage, does that exist? According to the same organization, “There is no good evidence that second-hand vapour from e-cigarettes is harmful. As vapes are still relatively new, we can’t be sure there aren’t any long-term effects to people who breathe in someone else’s vapour. But this is unlikely to be harmful.”

The site does, however, go on to repeat the oft mentioned incorrect assertion that, “Passive vaping is not the same as passive smoking. This is because e-cigarettes do not contain tobacco.” E-cigarettes, of course, often do have tobacco, and tobacco was never seen as deadly until it was used in cigarettes. The line that tobacco itself is bad has been repeated so much, that the idea of what smoke inhalation is, is often bypassed, even by the organizations that should really know the difference. Even with this misunderstanding, the site does make clear that there is no link between vaping and cancer.

Does vaping cause cardiovascular disease?

So, does vaping cause cancer? Well, even a cancer organization doesn’t think so, but what about cardiovascular disease? When searching for vaping and cardiovascular issues, a lot of negative sounding articles come up. But what doesn’t, is literally any statistic that backs up an issue. Again, as vaping is a relatively new phenomenon, this doesn’t mean that vaping isn’t associated with cardiovascular issues in the long term. However, there isn’t one statistic right now that says it does. In this review, the most that can be said, is that:

“There are no long-term outcome studies on the cardiovascular risk of vaping electronic cigarettes, but the effects of electronic cigarettes on known risk factors for cardiovascular disease, including neurohumoural activation, oxidative stress and inflammation, endothelial function and thrombosis, have been studied.” It didn’t, however, offer anything more conclusive than saying that risk factors have been studied.

vaping

What’s incredibly troubling, is that the 2019 study that initially made the claim that vaping e-cigarettes leads to a higher risk of heart attacks, was retracted eight months later! Sounds like it was a smear campaign that couldn’t take the heat in the end, and sadly, that article is still referenced all over the internet. No one ever said vaping would be 100% risk-free, but if it requires putting out research so bad it must be retracted to make the point, it says a lot for the lack of real information available to confirm this point. There is currently no statistic that exists about vaping and increased risk of cardiovascular disease.

To take it one step further, this longitudinal analysis E-Cigarette Use and Risk of Cardiovascular Disease: A Longitudinal Analysis of the PATH Study (2013–2019), reported that “Two large cross-sectional studies reported no significant association between exclusive e-cigarette use and cardiovascular disease (CVD).”

Conclusion

Does vaping cause cancer or cardiovascular disease? Well, the jury is technically out until more time goes by and research for long-term use can be collected. What has been made pretty clear on nearly every level, is that vaping is considerably healthier than smoking cigarettes when it comes to both cancer and cardiovascular issues, both of which are increased by smoke inhalation, which vaping is not.

So why is there so much out there screaming about the dangers of vaping? And doing so while hiding or ignoring the incredible death rate of smoking? Perhaps it has more to do with what groups are funneling money into government representative pockets, and less to do with the facts.

Thanks for joining us! We appreciate you stopping by CBDtesters.co / Cannadelics.com, a top internet offering for independent news covering the growing cannabis and psychedelics industries. Read-thru the site frequently to stay informed on everything going on, and subscribe to The THC Weekly Newsletter, so you never miss an important story or awesome product deal.

The post Does Vaping Cause Cancer Like Cigarettes? appeared first on CBD Testers.

Biden Wants to Reduce Nicotine in Cigarettes – Will This Help?

Smoking is pretty bad, that’s for sure. So bad that the number of smoking deaths a year eclipses the number of opioid deaths, and that’s saying a lot. In a recent report, Biden stated that he wants to reduce the nicotine level in cigarettes, as a way to reduce smoking in general. Can this help though? And why is the research on this topic so conflicting?

The new thing of the Biden administration is that it wants to reduce the nicotine level allowable in cigarettes, but this seems like a strange move when vaping already provides a safer answer. This news site focuses on stories covering the expanding cannabis and psychedelics industries of today. Keep up with everything by signing up for THC Weekly Newsletter, and also get access to a range of deals on tons of products including cannabinoid compounds like HHC-O, Delta 8Delta 9 THCDelta-10 THCTHCOTHCVTHCP HHC. As always, we only advice consumers purchase products they are fully comfortable using.


The damage of smoking

Smoking anything is bad. This is the first thing to really know about smoking. Though tobacco often gets a bad rap, it’s merely a plant. A plant which has been used medicinally for thousands of years, and without a huge death count. Truth is, there are plenty of substances in life which are safe to take one way, and unsafe to take in others. Mushrooms for example are eaten, but they aren’t smoked. So it’s not that weird to say tobacco doesn’t have to be bad, if not used in a bad way.

The real culprit is the act of lighting something on fire, and breathing it in. Smoke inhalation – what smoking is – is the term used to describe the health issue of inhaling too much smoke. Smoke of any kind is a carcinogen by nature, so it matters less what is burning, than that something is burning and inhaled. Some things are worse to breathe in than others, this is also true. Breathing in burning metal or plastic is way worse than tobacco smoke could ever be. However, having said that, processed tobacco is full of chemicals that make the whole smoking experience that must more dangerous.

In terms of how dangerous it is, according to the CDC, approximately 480,000 people die from cigarettes a year, with 41,000 of those attributed to second-hand smoke. This means over 40,000 people a year die from someone else’s bad habit. When broken down, over 160,000 deaths are from cancer, and another 160,000 are from cardiovascular diseases including heart disease, vascular disease, and diabetes. A third grouping of 113,000+ deaths are from respiratory illnesses like influenza, pneumonia, and COPD.

How does secondhand smoke actually effect people? Of the secondhand smoke deaths per year, over 7,000 are due to cancer, and another 34,000 are from heart disease. Simply sitting in the same room as a smoker causes the same deadly conditions to the secondhand consumer, as it does to the person lighting up.

Biden wants to reduce nicotine in cigarettes

It should be remembered that for many years after it was technically known that cigarettes cause dangerous health concerns, they were not only openly marketed, but with lies attached to their safety issues. And they were promoted by the likes of doctors. Though the US government likes to separate itself from its shady activities in the past, it has continually taken money from big tobacco, and for years failed to regulate the industry. Though big tobacco gives less money to congressional representatives than it did in the past, the US government still makes billions of dollars from cigarette taxes.

When it did start to regulate the industry, it changed tack on big tobacco outwardly (while still accepting its money), and began pointing the finger at the entity, while ignoring its own part in everything. But it was involved, just as much as its involved in helping to keep people on opioids by refusing to better regulate the industry; by accepting money from, and promoting policy in favor of, the pharma companies that produce them; and by downplaying better options like the use of ketamine instead. So perhaps this recent rumor from the Biden administration, should be taken with a grain of salt.

A recent report by the Wall Street Journal on the 10th of June, says that Biden wants to reduce the allowable limit of nicotine in cigarettes. The publication stated that though the US government might announce new policy this week, any policy would take several years to craft, and wouldn’t go into effect for quite some time.

The idea of the Biden administration is to reduce nicotine levels until cigarettes are no longer addictive, though how many steps this may take, what levels will be allowed, and what exact end goal there is, have not been stated. As nothing was formally announced yet, this news comes from unidentified white house sources who supposedly spoke directly with the Wall Street Journal.

What happens when nicotine is reduced in cigarettes?

Biden wants to reduce nicotine in cigarettes to make them less addictive, but can this really work? A piece of oft cited research from 2015 points to reduced nicotine cigarettes helping people smoke less and quit, but everything else from before, essentially says that reducing nicotine simply promotes the smoker to smoke more. Which statement is correct? Let’s examine the evidence.

In 2015 a study came out called Reduced Nicotine Cigarettes: Smoking Behavior and Biomarkers of Exposure among Smokers Not Intending to Quit.  The aim of the study was to examined how consumer behavior changes in response to reduced nicotine cigarettes. Seventy-two adult smokers were used for the study. Participants went through a trial period where nicotine levels were gradually reduced by week. It went from 0.6 to 0.3 to 0.05mg emissions, and everyone smoked Quest cigarettes.

According to study results, there was a reduction in nicotine intake when going from 0.3 to 0.05 mg, but not when going from 0.6 to 0.3mg. According to the study, there were “no increases in exhaled breath carbon monoxide levels, smoking intensity, or levels of 1-hydroxypyrene across study periods. No significant differences were observed for smoking urges or measures of nicotine dependence.” This all indicates that reducing nicotine in cigarettes, leads to consuming less nicotine.

This study comes with a myriad of problems though. For one thing, the study lasted for three weeks, and we don’t know what happened to smoking behavior after that. People who smoke, often smoke more or less at different times, but this doesn’t indicate overall behavioral changes. Plus, the study participants were completely aware of everything, as this was not a blind study. This means they knew they were getting less and less nicotine, so their behavioral responses came with that understanding.

Last, this study was funded by an anti-smoking group (Health Canada Tobacco Control Program), has an author who was an expert witness for the FDA, and clearly states “The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.” These are massive conflicts of interest, and show a possible informational slant which can call into question the results of this study.

The other story…

Prior to this, research told a different story. In 1984 the study came out Does switching to an ultra-low nicotine cigarette induce nicotine withdrawal effects? In the study, 26 participants were randomly assigned to either a control group or an experimental group. The former group continued smoking as usual, and the latter group was switched to an ultra-low nicotine cigarette instead. Both subjective rating, and plasma nicotine concentration levels, were examined.

Results did find a substantial drop in plasma nicotine levels of 60%, but this was lower than the 90% that it should have been in accordance with the reduction in nicotine levels in the cigarettes. This shows that smokers were compensating by smoking more cigarettes, even if the total nicotine they received, was less.

Another study from 2004 shows a similar thing. In this study, Smoking cigarettes of low nicotine yield does not reduce nicotine intake as expected: a study of nicotine dependency in Japanese males, 458 Japanese men with an average age of 51, participated. A questionnaire was used, along with urine nicotine measurements. Study results showed a nearly halved decrease in urine nicotine concentration from the highest nicotine level to the lowest. However, in reality, it should have been an 11-fold difference, as the nicotine level decreased by 11X. In fact, the study investigators found that “cotinine concentration in heavily dependent smokers was consistently high regardless of the nicotine yield of brands.”

This once again indicates that lowering nicotine levels doesn’t mean smoking less, and instead points to smoking more. When looking at only nicotine decreases in plasma and urine, it’s misleading when not considering the level the nicotine decreased in cigarettes, and if they match up. This is a tactic meant to make it appear that smoking levels went down, when in fact, only nicotine went down, while smoking increased.

The two should match, and if there’s a lesser decrease of nicotine in urine or blood than the decrease of nicotine in the cigarettes, this implies the person smoked more cigarettes to get to whatever level of nicotine they achieved in between. Since the issue is really smoke inhalation, any increase in cigarettes smoked indicates a problem, and a reason for concern over increased rates of damage in the future.

What makes this more confounding, is that there already is an alternative in the form of vapes. Vaping has virtually no death toll, and isn’t associated with cancer or cardiovascular disease. It’s possible in the future we’ll find some issue associated with vaping, but as of right now, this information doesn’t exist. And it doesn’t exist regardless of nicotine content of what’s vaped. Instead of promoting vaping, the government wages fear campaigns against it, and constantly tries to block or dissuade the public from doing it, even though no direct deaths come from vaping, and all issues reported have been related to additives.

This brings up a lot of questions, like why is the government continually talking down the safer option, and instead offering weak measures that have many issues attached? And why are we still talking about nicotine or tobacco at all, when the real thing to be wary of, is smoke inhalation in general?

Conclusion

Biden might want to reduce nicotine levels in cigarettes, but the only indication from both life and research, is that this will increase the amount of cigarettes smoked. Insisting on lowering nicotine levels as a way to combat cancer, cardiovascular disease, or respiratory disease is so backwards in the first place, that expecting anything decent to come out of this, is like ignoring the massive role the government played in getting people hooked in the first place.

Welcome to the site! We appreciate you stopping by CBDtesters.co / Cannadelics.com, a top web offering for comprehensive news stories involving the cannabis and psychedelics fields. Come by frequently to stay updated on everything going on in these dynamic industries, and check out The THC Weekly Newsletter, to ensure you’re up on everything important going down.

The post Biden Wants to Reduce Nicotine in Cigarettes – Will This Help? appeared first on CBD Testers.

Does Vaping Cause Cancer Like Cigarettes?

There’s a lot of contradictory information spewed at us on a regular basis, and its hard to know the truth of things, especially when big corporations have reasons to want you to buy their products, and when governments take money from these entities. When it comes to vaping, tons of smear campaigns are out there, but are they saying anything useful? Unless vaping is tantamount to smoking, isn’t it automatically a better option? Let’s get into it, does vaping cause cancer or heart disease like smoking?

Does vaping cause cancer like cigarettes? While the obvious answer is no, there seems to be plenty of confusion on this matter. This publication covers news stories in the emerging cannabis and psychedelics spaces. Follow along by signing up for the THC Weekly Newsletter, which also nets you access to tons of deals on products like vapes, edibles, and other devices, as well as cannabinoids, like HHC-O, Delta 8Delta 9 THCDelta-10 THCTHCOTHCVTHCP HHC. We do remind, no one should ever buy or use a product they are uncomfortable with.


The detriments of smoking

First off, let’s take a look at standard smoking, and the issues that go with it. The first thing to understand on this topic, is that it’s not actually about cigarettes. Or more specifically, it’s not actually about tobacco. Tobacco can be used medicinally when not smoked, and has been for millennia. No one was dying from it before the use of cigarettes. The term ‘smoke inhalation’ refers to breathing in too much smoke, and the detrimental effects this can have. This refers to anything lit on fire and breathed in, whether its trees, plants, plastics, or tobacco.

Cigarette smoking is simply constant smoke inhalation. It makes the idea of buying organic tobacco, or switching to herbal smokable concoctions, a bit of a joke in the end. Sure, it might get a person away from some of the chemicals of standard processed tobacco, but it won’t get anyone away from the dangers that come from lighting something on fire, and breathing it in. Smoking cigarettes, as constant smoke inhalation, comes with a myriad of health problems, particularly for long-time users.

The bottom-line numbers tell a compelling story when looking at the generals of smoking damage. Every year, approximately 480,000 people die from smoking-related causes. A massive 41,000 of these are from secondhand smoke. As in, 41,000 people a year die from someone else’s smoking habit. In comparison, the US is up-in-arms over the growing drug overdose issue and the rising number of opioid deaths. These deaths account for just over 100,000 a year according to new CDC numbers, which make even opioids pale in comparison to the dangers of smoking.

What about a comparison to vaping? Though vaping hasn’t been around as long as smoking, starting mainly in the early 2000’s, it simply isn’t linked to a large death toll. As of 2020, the CDC could only come up with 68 related deaths, and all deaths were attributable to additives in vape liquid, and not to whatever compound was meant to be vaped, or the vaping itself. It bears mentioning here, that a dry herb vape is not included in this, and that this issue is specifically related to the use of vape cartridges.

Cancer and heart disease from smoking

Smoking is related to a huge number of problems, but the main two which lead to premature death, are cardiovascular issues, and cancer. Just how much damage do cigarettes do in these arenas? The CDC put out information detailing yearly death numbers from examining the years 2005-2009. As smoking has been around well over a hundred years, and reached higher levels of popularity in previous decades to this one, these dates are perfectly fine for understanding the situation today.

In terms of smoking related cancer deaths, approximately 163,700 people die of cancer yearly from smoking. When looking at cardiovascular disease, which includes heart disease, diabetes, and vascular disease, there are 160,000 deaths a year from smoking. There is however, another major class of deaths from smoking, and its related to respiratory diseases like pneumonia, influenza, and COPD. From this grouping there are about 113,100 deaths per year.

Now, let’s make this worse. Remember how 41,000 people die a year just from sitting in the same room as smokers? Well, about 7,333 of these deaths are from lung cancer, and 33,951 are from heart disease. There are that many cancer and heart-related issues, even when the afflicted person isn’t the one with the bad habit.

Does vaping cause cancer?

There is a lot of weird, seemingly nonsensical, information out there trying to tell you vaping is bad. However, when it comes to the actual questions of how to measure this, the answer just leaves more questions. Like why are we being told vaping is dangerous when no statistics back this up? I mean, if it was true, it would be attached to some pretty bad death numbers, right? Well, not exactly…

To be fair, vaping hasn’t been around for as long as smoking. The main surge of e-cigarettes and cannabis vape carts started in the 2010’s. However, as someone with asthma, I can personally attest to the fact that smoking causes damage in me pretty fast, whereas vaping does not. And I know this from how my lungs feel, and how I breathe. Perhaps it is possible to tell if vaping can cause something like cancer or heart disease early on, or at the very least, if it starts to cause the damage that leads in these directions.

cancer

According to the site Cancer Research UK, the answer to the question, does vaping cause cancer, is no. While the organization certainly doesn’t rule out that there could be negative side effects, it specifically states that vaping related deaths so far are only attributable to additives, and are not related to the act of vaping in general. The organization says this:

“You may have heard about vaping causing an outbreak of lung illness in 2019 in the United States. An investigation found the cases were linked to contaminated illegal products. It was not linked to vaping regularly or in the long term. There was no similar outbreak in the UK, and the chemicals of concern are banned in e-cigarettes here. There is no good evidence that e-cigarettes bought from legal places cause lung disease.”

What about secondhand vaping damage, does that exist? According to the same organization, “There is no good evidence that second-hand vapour from e-cigarettes is harmful. As vapes are still relatively new, we can’t be sure there aren’t any long-term effects to people who breathe in someone else’s vapour. But this is unlikely to be harmful.”

The site does, however, go on to repeat the oft mentioned incorrect assertion that, “Passive vaping is not the same as passive smoking. This is because e-cigarettes do not contain tobacco.” E-cigarettes, of course, often do have tobacco, and tobacco was never seen as deadly until it was used in cigarettes. The line that tobacco itself is bad has been repeated so much, that the idea of what smoke inhalation is, is often bypassed, even by the organizations that should really know the difference. Even with this misunderstanding, the site does make clear that there is no link between vaping and cancer.

Does vaping cause cardiovascular disease?

So, does vaping cause cancer? Well, even a cancer organization doesn’t think so, but what about cardiovascular disease? When searching for vaping and cardiovascular issues, a lot of negative sounding articles come up. But what doesn’t, is literally any statistic that backs up an issue. Again, as vaping is a relatively new phenomenon, this doesn’t mean that vaping isn’t associated with cardiovascular issues in the long term. However, there isn’t one statistic right now that says it does. In this review, the most that can be said, is that:

“There are no long-term outcome studies on the cardiovascular risk of vaping electronic cigarettes, but the effects of electronic cigarettes on known risk factors for cardiovascular disease, including neurohumoural activation, oxidative stress and inflammation, endothelial function and thrombosis, have been studied.” It didn’t, however, offer anything more conclusive than saying that risk factors have been studied.

vaping

What’s incredibly troubling, is that the 2019 study that initially made the claim that vaping e-cigarettes leads to a higher risk of heart attacks, was retracted eight months later! Sounds like it was a smear campaign that couldn’t take the heat in the end, and sadly, that article is still referenced all over the internet. No one ever said vaping would be 100% risk-free, but if it requires putting out research so bad it must be retracted to make the point, it says a lot for the lack of real information available to confirm this point. There is currently no statistic that exists about vaping and increased risk of cardiovascular disease.

To take it one step further, this longitudinal analysis E-Cigarette Use and Risk of Cardiovascular Disease: A Longitudinal Analysis of the PATH Study (2013–2019), reported that “Two large cross-sectional studies reported no significant association between exclusive e-cigarette use and cardiovascular disease (CVD).”

Conclusion

Does vaping cause cancer or cardiovascular disease? Well, the jury is technically out until more time goes by and research for long-term use can be collected. What has been made pretty clear on nearly every level, is that vaping is considerably healthier than smoking cigarettes when it comes to both cancer and cardiovascular issues, both of which are increased by smoke inhalation, which vaping is not.

So why is there so much out there screaming about the dangers of vaping? And doing so while hiding or ignoring the incredible death rate of smoking? Perhaps it has more to do with what groups are funneling money into government representative pockets, and less to do with the facts.

Thanks for joining us! We appreciate you stopping by CBDtesters.co / Cannadelics.com, a top internet offering for independent news covering the growing cannabis and psychedelics industries. Read-thru the site frequently to stay informed on everything going on, and subscribe to The THC Weekly Newsletter, so you never miss an important story or awesome product deal.

The post Does Vaping Cause Cancer Like Cigarettes? appeared first on CBD Testers.

Biden Wants to Reduce Nicotine in Cigarettes – Will This Help?

Smoking is pretty bad, that’s for sure. So bad that the number of smoking deaths a year eclipses the number of opioid deaths, and that’s saying a lot. In a recent report, Biden stated that he wants to reduce the nicotine level in cigarettes, as a way to reduce smoking in general. Can this help though? And why is the research on this topic so conflicting?

The new thing of the Biden administration is that it wants to reduce the nicotine level allowable in cigarettes, but this seems like a strange move when vaping already provides a safer answer. This news site focuses on stories covering the expanding cannabis and psychedelics industries of today. Keep up with everything by signing up for THC Weekly Newsletter, and also get access to a range of deals on tons of products including cannabinoid compounds like HHC-O, Delta 8Delta 9 THCDelta-10 THCTHCOTHCVTHCP HHC. As always, we only advice consumers purchase products they are fully comfortable using.


The damage of smoking

Smoking anything is bad. This is the first thing to really know about smoking. Though tobacco often gets a bad rap, it’s merely a plant. A plant which has been used medicinally for thousands of years, and without a huge death count. Truth is, there are plenty of substances in life which are safe to take one way, and unsafe to take in others. Mushrooms for example are eaten, but they aren’t smoked. So it’s not that weird to say tobacco doesn’t have to be bad, if not used in a bad way.

The real culprit is the act of lighting something on fire, and breathing it in. Smoke inhalation – what smoking is – is the term used to describe the health issue of inhaling too much smoke. Smoke of any kind is a carcinogen by nature, so it matters less what is burning, than that something is burning and inhaled. Some things are worse to breathe in than others, this is also true. Breathing in burning metal or plastic is way worse than tobacco smoke could ever be. However, having said that, processed tobacco is full of chemicals that make the whole smoking experience that must more dangerous.

In terms of how dangerous it is, according to the CDC, approximately 480,000 people die from cigarettes a year, with 41,000 of those attributed to second-hand smoke. This means over 40,000 people a year die from someone else’s bad habit. When broken down, over 160,000 deaths are from cancer, and another 160,000 are from cardiovascular diseases including heart disease, vascular disease, and diabetes. A third grouping of 113,000+ deaths are from respiratory illnesses like influenza, pneumonia, and COPD.

How does secondhand smoke actually effect people? Of the secondhand smoke deaths per year, over 7,000 are due to cancer, and another 34,000 are from heart disease. Simply sitting in the same room as a smoker causes the same deadly conditions to the secondhand consumer, as it does to the person lighting up.

Biden wants to reduce nicotine in cigarettes

It should be remembered that for many years after it was technically known that cigarettes cause dangerous health concerns, they were not only openly marketed, but with lies attached to their safety issues. And they were promoted by the likes of doctors. Though the US government likes to separate itself from its shady activities in the past, it has continually taken money from big tobacco, and for years failed to regulate the industry. Though big tobacco gives less money to congressional representatives than it did in the past, the US government still makes billions of dollars from cigarette taxes.

When it did start to regulate the industry, it changed tack on big tobacco outwardly (while still accepting its money), and began pointing the finger at the entity, while ignoring its own part in everything. But it was involved, just as much as its involved in helping to keep people on opioids by refusing to better regulate the industry; by accepting money from, and promoting policy in favor of, the pharma companies that produce them; and by downplaying better options like the use of ketamine instead. So perhaps this recent rumor from the Biden administration, should be taken with a grain of salt.

A recent report by the Wall Street Journal on the 10th of June, says that Biden wants to reduce the allowable limit of nicotine in cigarettes. The publication stated that though the US government might announce new policy this week, any policy would take several years to craft, and wouldn’t go into effect for quite some time.

The idea of the Biden administration is to reduce nicotine levels until cigarettes are no longer addictive, though how many steps this may take, what levels will be allowed, and what exact end goal there is, have not been stated. As nothing was formally announced yet, this news comes from unidentified white house sources who supposedly spoke directly with the Wall Street Journal.

What happens when nicotine is reduced in cigarettes?

Biden wants to reduce nicotine in cigarettes to make them less addictive, but can this really work? A piece of oft cited research from 2015 points to reduced nicotine cigarettes helping people smoke less and quit, but everything else from before, essentially says that reducing nicotine simply promotes the smoker to smoke more. Which statement is correct? Let’s examine the evidence.

In 2015 a study came out called Reduced Nicotine Cigarettes: Smoking Behavior and Biomarkers of Exposure among Smokers Not Intending to Quit.  The aim of the study was to examined how consumer behavior changes in response to reduced nicotine cigarettes. Seventy-two adult smokers were used for the study. Participants went through a trial period where nicotine levels were gradually reduced by week. It went from 0.6 to 0.3 to 0.05mg emissions, and everyone smoked Quest cigarettes.

According to study results, there was a reduction in nicotine intake when going from 0.3 to 0.05 mg, but not when going from 0.6 to 0.3mg. According to the study, there were “no increases in exhaled breath carbon monoxide levels, smoking intensity, or levels of 1-hydroxypyrene across study periods. No significant differences were observed for smoking urges or measures of nicotine dependence.” This all indicates that reducing nicotine in cigarettes, leads to consuming less nicotine.

This study comes with a myriad of problems though. For one thing, the study lasted for three weeks, and we don’t know what happened to smoking behavior after that. People who smoke, often smoke more or less at different times, but this doesn’t indicate overall behavioral changes. Plus, the study participants were completely aware of everything, as this was not a blind study. This means they knew they were getting less and less nicotine, so their behavioral responses came with that understanding.

Last, this study was funded by an anti-smoking group (Health Canada Tobacco Control Program), has an author who was an expert witness for the FDA, and clearly states “The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.” These are massive conflicts of interest, and show a possible informational slant which can call into question the results of this study.

The other story…

Prior to this, research told a different story. In 1984 the study came out Does switching to an ultra-low nicotine cigarette induce nicotine withdrawal effects? In the study, 26 participants were randomly assigned to either a control group or an experimental group. The former group continued smoking as usual, and the latter group was switched to an ultra-low nicotine cigarette instead. Both subjective rating, and plasma nicotine concentration levels, were examined.

Results did find a substantial drop in plasma nicotine levels of 60%, but this was lower than the 90% that it should have been in accordance with the reduction in nicotine levels in the cigarettes. This shows that smokers were compensating by smoking more cigarettes, even if the total nicotine they received, was less.

Another study from 2004 shows a similar thing. In this study, Smoking cigarettes of low nicotine yield does not reduce nicotine intake as expected: a study of nicotine dependency in Japanese males, 458 Japanese men with an average age of 51, participated. A questionnaire was used, along with urine nicotine measurements. Study results showed a nearly halved decrease in urine nicotine concentration from the highest nicotine level to the lowest. However, in reality, it should have been an 11-fold difference, as the nicotine level decreased by 11X. In fact, the study investigators found that “cotinine concentration in heavily dependent smokers was consistently high regardless of the nicotine yield of brands.”

This once again indicates that lowering nicotine levels doesn’t mean smoking less, and instead points to smoking more. When looking at only nicotine decreases in plasma and urine, it’s misleading when not considering the level the nicotine decreased in cigarettes, and if they match up. This is a tactic meant to make it appear that smoking levels went down, when in fact, only nicotine went down, while smoking increased.

The two should match, and if there’s a lesser decrease of nicotine in urine or blood than the decrease of nicotine in the cigarettes, this implies the person smoked more cigarettes to get to whatever level of nicotine they achieved in between. Since the issue is really smoke inhalation, any increase in cigarettes smoked indicates a problem, and a reason for concern over increased rates of damage in the future.

What makes this more confounding, is that there already is an alternative in the form of vapes. Vaping has virtually no death toll, and isn’t associated with cancer or cardiovascular disease. It’s possible in the future we’ll find some issue associated with vaping, but as of right now, this information doesn’t exist. And it doesn’t exist regardless of nicotine content of what’s vaped. Instead of promoting vaping, the government wages fear campaigns against it, and constantly tries to block or dissuade the public from doing it, even though no direct deaths come from vaping, and all issues reported have been related to additives.

This brings up a lot of questions, like why is the government continually talking down the safer option, and instead offering weak measures that have many issues attached? And why are we still talking about nicotine or tobacco at all, when the real thing to be wary of, is smoke inhalation in general?

Conclusion

Biden might want to reduce nicotine levels in cigarettes, but the only indication from both life and research, is that this will increase the amount of cigarettes smoked. Insisting on lowering nicotine levels as a way to combat cancer, cardiovascular disease, or respiratory disease is so backwards in the first place, that expecting anything decent to come out of this, is like ignoring the massive role the government played in getting people hooked in the first place.

Welcome to the site! We appreciate you stopping by CBDtesters.co / Cannadelics.com, a top web offering for comprehensive news stories involving the cannabis and psychedelics fields. Come by frequently to stay updated on everything going on in these dynamic industries, and check out The THC Weekly Newsletter, to ensure you’re up on everything important going down.

The post Biden Wants to Reduce Nicotine in Cigarettes – Will This Help? appeared first on CBD Testers.

Ketamine Safety Issues, And How to Avoid Them

Ketamine is in the process of exploding out into one of the most popular pharmaceutical drugs, but the ketamine industry is not like the rest of the pharma world. As a gray market it operates outside of specific regulation, and as such, there are a few ketamine safety issues to be aware of, and ways to avoid them for a safe experience.

Ketamine safety issues are something to be aware of when getting into ketamine treatment. This should not dissuade those looking for better treatment options, however. We are an independent publication reporting on the expanding cannabis and psychedelics fields of today. Play along by subscribing to The Cannadelics Weekly Newsletter, and receive your daily dose of industry news, while being first in line for new product promotions.


Why are we talking about ketamine?

This is a great question, and the answer creates a complicated framework, for which new and unexpected problems have arisen. Ketamine is a synthetically-made dissociative hallucinogen, not to be confused with ‘psychedelics’ which are simply a different genus within the classing of hallucinogens. Dissociative hallucinogens, which also include PCP and DXM, can often be used as anesthetics, and the high they produce is akin to being under anesthesia. In fact, take too much ketamine and you’ll k-hole yourself, essentially putting yourself under anesthesia.

The reason the aspect of anesthesia is important, is because anesthetics keep people from feeling pain, which means by nature, ketamine is associated with pain control. The reason the aspect of a hallucinogen is important, is because much like other hallucinogens (MDMA, psilocybin…), ketamine has shown the ability to change the way a person thinks, essentially allowing for new thought processes to be made, which is incredibly important for dealing with psychological issues. This has been exemplified in a study with eating disorder patients, whereby the thought is that ketamine actively blocked the circular thinking behavior related to excitement of the hippocampus by glutamate-NMDA receptors leading to strengthened thinking patterns. After ketamine treatment, the majority of patients decreased or ceased their compulsive thoughts.

As such, ketamine works on two fronts, providing a measure for depression, postpartum depression, eating disorders and other similar issues, as well as a way to control pain issues. Whereas monoamine antidepressants repeatedly fall short, ketamine seems to give better results, and whereas opioids cause mass addiction and overdose issues, ketamine is not related to either of these things. Both official research, and the existence and proliferation of the ketamine industry, both point to ketamine providing a better answer to these two issues.

The thing is, ketamine was never approved for these things. It’s half-brother esketamine was legalized only for treatment-resistant depression, but ketamine remains officially approved as just an anesthetic. The way it exists in the growing number of clinics providing ketamine treatment, is as an off-label medication, legally prescribed by a doctor for uses not officially approved by the FDA. This ability for off-label prescribing is the basis for the ketamine loophole, and the existence of this growing ketamine industry.

Is ketamine safe?

There are different ways to measure safety, and different concerns that can cause safety issues. One of the best measures is in death and injury. For all the government does to ignore it, ketamine has no real death toll. This isn’t to say that there has never been a problem, but these problems are so few and far between, that they don’t really register. Go ahead…do a search for ketamine death numbers. You won’t find any. In fact, the most you’ll find, are numbers of deaths where ketamine was involved, but the problem here, is that these are cases where other things were also involved, like opioids, or cocaine.

Even if you buy into the fear of it, you’re still going to have a difficult time finding those overdose death numbers. But where you won’t have that problem, is with opioids, the main medications used to treat pain issues. In fact, the numbers are so grossly huge, we now call it an ‘opioid epidemic’. Recent CDC numbers approximated 2021 overdoses at over 100,000, and this insanely large number owes most of its growth to the ballooning opioids industry. In 2020, for example, out of around 93,000 overdose deaths, nearly 70,000 were from opioids.

So is ketamine safe? Yes, especially in comparison to any of the drugs that make up that overdose list, because ketamine isn’t one of them. But it’s also not a drug pushed by the companies in the ‘Big Pharma’ grouping, which make up the largest and most powerful pharmaceutical companies, and the ones that pay out big bucks to government representatives.

Ketamine can be made by any pharma company, and in plenty of random basements, and this means Big Pharma companies don’t make money off it, and therefore aren’t going to put money in representatives’ pockets for it. Where do they make their money? Opioids. How nice for them that these drugs are so addictive, and that the government is so partial to anyone willing to pay out.

So, who has died from ketamine?

While some publications like to spout the oft said line that we don’t have much information on long-term use, or that we don’t know about certain effects, these lines are completely untrue. In terms of pain, it was established in the 1960’s during prisoner studies, that ketamine was especially good for pain, so much so that it was consequently used for soldiers in the Vietnam war. It’s also been a big player in the recreational game since the 1980’s, so there is plenty that can be gathered from users going back to that time. If nothing much is said about damage from long term use, its likely because there’s nothing to report on. When looking at opioids, cocaine, or methamphetamine, for example, health issues from long-term use are easily found.

drug safety issues

This is all exemplified by China, where there are plenty of articles shouting about a ketamine issue, but a reality of literally no direct death count, with the very few deaths (out of over a billion, let’s remember) also being associated with other drugs. It sounds like ketamine has grown in popularity in China, but anyone clamoring on about it causing mass safety issues, isn’t looking at the facts. There are a couple other things written about bladder issues with extreme use, but not only is extreme use of anything generally related to something uncomfortable, but the existence of this complaint is so sparse, and the examples so few, that it starts to sound more like a smear campaign than anything else.

This study from Australia is also harping on ketamine as unsafe, but when looking more closely, this is nothing but a farce. 95% of deaths spoken of, involved other drugs, nearly 60% of which were opioids. Hypnosedatives were in the blood of 57.6%, psychostimulants were also used by 50.0%, and alcohol was present for 27.3%. Almost 29% had regular antidepressants in their system as well. Also worth mentioning, over 82% had pulmonary edema, and almost 27% had pneumonia. So it’s not really about ketamine in the end, and the idea that the title of the study is headlined Characteristics and circumstances of death related to the self-administration of ketamine, is a joke at best.

Ketamine safety issues

So, sure, ketamine is technically safe. But it doesn’t mean that ketamine doesn’t have safety issues to consider, especially considering the industry itself. And it’s the tactics of the industry, where prospective users should be careful.

  • One of the biggest ketamine safety issues is that as a growing industry, everyone wants to get in on it. As a medical provider, any clinic that wants to prescribe and dispense it, must follow certain medical protocols. However, as ketamine itself isn’t regulated for these uses, there are no specific protocols that must be followed in how its dispensed and used. This opens the door for misuse and confusion, as well as sub-par products.
  • For example, some clinics don’t require the patient to be in the clinic, and will actually send the medicine to the home of the patient, or prescribe it for them to pick up at a pharmacy. In these cases, no doctor is present when the medication is taken. Some do a session via a video call, or require a babysitter to be there, but the latter can’t be guaranteed, and there isn’t necessarily a way to protect a patient from unsafe surroundings. Allowing a person to go into such an uncontrolled state, without assuring their safety, is incredibly dangerous. Ketamine, it should be remembered, is one of the drugs often used for date rape.
  • The other issue with sending someone home with the medicine, rather than administering it in a medical setting, is that it means its not going to be used by injection, but rather by oral ingestion. As oral ingestion provides for much lower and inconsistent bioavailability (the ability of the body to actually absorb and use it), dosing is much less precise, and is generally given in much larger amounts to account for the lessened bioavailability. This means users and their prescribing doctors have no idea how strong the dose will actually end up being, and this could be the difference between a light dose, and giving way too much.
oral ketamine

How to avoid ketamine safety issues

The best way to avoid these issues, is to only use a service that requires in-patient treatment. In-patient treatment means that the ketamine is given via IV injection, so the dose is much more refined for the specific patient, and there is less of an issue with giving too much. Plus, as it doesn’t require going through the body, it means that dosing is consistent across treatments, without worrying about other factors changing how much gets absorbed.

Going to in-patient treatment facilities also gets rid of the fear of danger when being put in a state of lessened response. If a person is made high to the point of a k-hole, they cannot control what happens to them, or who could hurt them. Even though many people take the oral dosage in their home, this doesn’t always rule out danger. Being in a medical setting gives an extra layer of protection to ensure that nothing bad happens to a patient when under the influence. As with any drug, there can be adverse effects, or unexpected circumstances. Being in a medical setting means having trained professionals right there that can assist.

While there are plenty of decent clinics to choose from, examples like Pasithea represent the highest level of care offered, the most adherence to safety policies, and a general lack of the behavior seen by unscrupulous companies that promote these safety issues. Prospective patients should do their homework and only use a clinic that values their personal safety.

As with any industry that has a seedy side, it’s important for customers to know who they’re dealing with. Clinics that cut corners represent the shadier side of this industry, and show a greater level of apathy towards their clientele. Clinics that adhere to as many general safety practices as possible – even if they’re not technically required to, represent the higher end, and are the safer companies to work with.

These treatments can be expensive, so it’s no wonder that consumers often head toward a cheaper option. Hopefully costs will come down eventually, so that those who want this treatment, but can’t afford a better clinic, won’t be pushed to using unsafe practitioners. Ketamine holds a lot of value, but like anything else, it should be administered and used responsibly.

Conclusion

Ketamine might provide a safe answer for dealing with psychological disorders and pain, but it doesn’t mean that it doesn’t come without issues. There are plenty of ketamine safety issues to consider, but luckily, simply using the right provider can dispel the majority.

Hello, thanks for stopping by! Welcome to CBDtesters.co / Cannadelics.com, a #1 offering for wide-ranging news covering the cannabis and psychedelics fields. Join us whenever you can to stay current on all goings on, and subscribe to The Cannadelics Weekly Newsletter, for daily updates on everything important happening now.

The post Ketamine Safety Issues, And How to Avoid Them appeared first on CBD Testers.

Record High Opioid Deaths For a Record Low in America

We’ve been talking about it for a while. About the addictions, and the misuse, and the overdoses, and the death. We’ve been talking about it for years now, and the only thing to happen, is for numbers to go up. A recent report points to record high opioid deaths in the US, and a record low in dealing with them.

Opioid deaths are on the rise, fueling the enormous drug overdose rate in America. What will be done to end this epidemic, and where does ketamine fit in? We report on the growing cannabis and psychedelics industries. You can keep up with everything by subscribing to The Cannadelics Weekly Newsletter, which will also put you in first place to receive promotions for psychedelic products, as they become available to the general public.


What’s the latest?

On May 11th, 2022, the CDC released preliminary data about overdose death rates for the previous year. In 2021, according to the CDC, there were approximately 107,622 overdose deaths, which is a 15% increase from 2020. 2020 set its own record that year, going up 30% from the year before. The overdose death number for 2020, was over 93,000. To be clear, these are only overdose deaths, not specifically opioid deaths. But opioid deaths most certainly drive these numbers, accounting for over 68,000 of the 2020 deaths. So it suffices to say that a quickly rising death rate, is spurred on greatly by opioids.

This is called ‘provisional’ data in that it’s not final numbers, but rather, a first peak into the numbers for the year. Though it’s possible these numbers could change by the time of official release, they are not likely to change in a way that brings the numbers down to acceptable levels. So whether they’re the final and official numbers is inconsequential in this matter, as they show well the scope of the opioid issue in America.

What was the official response to these numbers? White House Office of National Drug Control Policy Director Dr. Rahul Gupta stated how it was not acceptable to lose so many lives (at the rate of one every five minutes). He went on to say, “That is why President Biden’s new National Drug Control Strategy signals a new era of drug policy centered on individuals and communities, focusing specifically on the actions we must take right now to reduce overdoses and save lives.”

In April, Biden did send a strategy to Congress for dealing with national drug control, which involves dealing with the overdose epidemic. What that means has not been discussed. But other things have happened in the recent past to indicate that not only is the government not going to do anything useful, but that it actually intends to make the problem worse. Keep reading.

Lower prescribing guidelines?

If the whole idea is to try it actually minimize the opioid deaths issue, the government has made only moves in the opposite direction, and this is more than concerning. In 2016, the CDC issued guidelines for prescribing opioids, which were meant to limit their unnecessary prescription. These guidelines were not legal requirements, but they did set a certain standard for doctors writing prescriptions.

In the midst of this growing issue, what did the CDC do? In February 2022, as in, about three months before these new numbers came out, the CDC proposed loosening these guidelines, which clearly haven’t worked to begin with. The backwards reasoning used relates to doctor’s having to cut off patients prematurely who need their opioids. As the issue has only deepened, this doesn’t make a lot of sense, and signals that its quite the other way around.

To add to the confusion, the CDC doesn’t regulate these things anyway, that’s mainly for the FDA and DEA. And since they therefore aren’t legal regulatory changes, why they exist, or are the basis for news stories, is even more confounding. Loosening guidelines that technically never existed as anything more than illusion, therefore, isn’t a huge thing. But the more fear-inducing aspect is that in the midst of the rising death toll, that this story is the story to come out at all. It shows a lack of understanding of government bodies, and a lack of desire to make real changes that can improve the situation.

What about the lawsuits?

If there’s any question outside the horrifyingly high OD numbers that there’s a substantial and preventable issue – especially concerning opioid deaths, just look at the massive lawsuits against the pharmaceutical companies that make them. Just these lawsuits should indicate an immediate need to remove these medications, but even with this information in our faces, the government continues to not only allow these medications, but to promote their use by accepting money from the companies that make them, and not changing regulation for using them.

One of the big lawsuit stories involves the Native American community, which has been hit particularly hard by this epidemic. In February 2022, Johnson & Johnson, along with AmerisourceBergen, Cardinal Health, and McKesson, offered a settlement of $590 million to members of any of the federally recognized tribes that are a part of the suit. This means tribes that did not initiate this lawsuit, can still take part in the settlement. It says quite a bit about understanding their own wrongdoing, that these companies offered such a high settlement. Obviously they didn’t want to go to court.

opioid settlement

And maybe that’s because these same companies have already agreed to pay out another $26 billion globally for their actions. Funny enough, this statement was made by Johnson & Johnson upon agreeing to this deal in February 2022: “This settlement is not an admission of any liability or wrongdoing and the company will continue to defend against any litigation that the final agreement does not resolve.”

Really? Agreeing to settle global suits for an enormous $26 billion…because they feel like it? Imagine what the amount would have been if they had lost in court. Settlements aren’t made by parties that think they’re right, they’re made by parties who are afraid of the worse punishment they’ll incur by going to trial. However, all that aside, just the sheer amount is a clear indication of a mass amount of damage done.

But that’s not the end of it for these Big Pharma companies. Last week, officials in Idaho announced a $119 million settlement against J&J and the other three companies related to the Native American settlement. This settlement is also to help recoup some of the damage done by these drugs to the community, which has suffered a huge amount of opioid deaths. What if every state did this?

According to Governor Brad Little, “Idaho has made significant strides in recent years in combating the opioid crisis, and the culmination of our legal action against opioid manufacturers – led by Attorney General Wasden and his team – now offers additional resources. Altogether, our investments and activities will turn the tide on the opioid crisis.”

Of course, what should be noted, is that Idaho did not ban these drugs from its state. No specific place has made such a move. And this says quite a bit. While everyone wants to capitalize on the blame aspect, and take money from these companies, none want to institute an actual policy (like banning opioids) that could help solve it. Which means even as these settlements happen, the drugs remain available, making for a striking contradiction.

What about ketamine?

If you’ll notice, I implied that these drugs should be removed entirely. Let’s be realistic for a second, the world and its population survived without opioids in the past, so this idea that we need them so badly, is unrealistic at best. We never needed them, we just got used to them.

pain management

Now, the idea of removing a drug from someone that they are addicted to, is obviously not the answer either, as this can cause more trauma to the user, and possibly cause their death. So when I say the drugs should be removed, I certainly don’t mean without having another measure in place. And this is where ketamine comes in, as the obvious and practical answer to the opioid epidemic, which is roundly being ignored by the government.

The reason ketamine is so important is because it’s a dissociative hallucinogen which is tightly associated with two things: the ability to help with a range of psychological issues – including addiction, as well as the ability to help with pain management. Both of these aspects are incredibly important right now. Ketamine doesn’t cause addictions, and is known to help people with them, so the idea of replacing one with the other, actually makes sense. Ketamine can help ease the addiction issue, which is a huge part of this crisis. Add onto that that ketamine can then control the pain issues without causing the addictions and death rates of opioids, and its more than obvious. It becomes criminal that its not being used properly to end this.

If you’re asking yourself how that could be. That an answer could exist, and be known to the government, but ignored and not used in favor of more people dying, it’s actually not that far out. The government promotes plenty of bad things when money is put in representative’s pockets. Ketamine is easily created and exists as a wide gray market, unregulated by the US government. Ketamine is a synthetic product, so its pharmaceutical automatically. So why would the government care if one pharma product is used over another, if its main goal is to prop up pharma companies that give it money?

Ketamine is made everywhere by everyone, and doesn’t rely on Big Pharma specifically to produce it. Which means the big pharmaceutical companies that work in tandem with the government (this can be said due to the large amount of money the government takes from these organizations), can’t control the industry. The US legalized esketamine in 2019 as a showing of this understanding, in an effort to divert from the ketamine market. But even then, it left pain treatment out, even though its now the most important aspect considering the opioid crisis.

How long has it been known that ketamine is a great drug for pain which doesn’t cause the same issues of death and addiction? Since studies done on prisoners in the 1960’s. That means for almost 60 years this information has been known, and yet even now when its needed the most, its being suppressed in order to keep doling out the very drugs that are killing people. The very drugs that bring money into Big Pharma and therefore the US government.

Conclusion

When does this end? I suppose when people smarten up enough to let it. I think it really will require a better understanding by the population at large, of what exactly is going on and why. And the sad thing is, this might not happen, or could take years longer meaning more and more opioid deaths. Luckily, with ketamine on the rise, people should be making the connection soon enough, and hopefully if the pressure builds, the US government will be forced to do the right thing…finally.

Welcome readers! We appreciate you joining us at CBDtesters.co / Cannadelics.com, the #1 internet spot for comprehensive independent news of the growing cannabis and psychedelics industries. Stop on by frequently to stay in-the-loop on these morphing landscapes, and check out The Cannadelics Weekly Newsletter, for updates on everything important going on.

The post Record High Opioid Deaths For a Record Low in America appeared first on CBD Testers.

Join Us in Berlin for the International Cannabis Business Conference (ICBC)

The International Cannabis Business Conference (ICBC) is the premier B2B event to attend for cannabis industry professionals from across the globe. Every year, ICBC is attended by executives, entrepreneurs and policymakers from over 80 nations. Scroll down to learn more about the event and get ticket discounts!  

Events are a great way to network and learn about products To stay current on everything important happening in the industry, subscribe to The THC Weekly Newsletter. Also, it’ll get you premium access to deals on cannabis flowers, vapes, edibles, and much more! We’ve also got standout offers on cannabinoids, like HHC-O, Delta 8Delta 9 THCDelta-10 THCTHCOTHCVTHCP HHC, which won’t kill your bank account. Head over to our “Best-of” lists to get these deals, and remember to enjoy responsibly!


About ICBC Berlin

Known as the largest business-oriented cannabis event in Europe, ICBC prides itself on promoting an atmosphere of professionalism and open discussion. ICBC has teamed up with numerous different organizations over the years to put on some of the biggest and best cannabis events and after parties that Europe has ever seen. They have worked with CannaTrade, Spannabis, and this year they are partnering with Mary Jane Berlin.  

This year’s event will take place from July 19th to 20th, and will be part of the larger “European Cannabis Week” which include the aforementioned events, as well as the Global Investment Forum and some other industry-related activities. Expect to engage with numerous different professionals such as distributors, brokers, equipment producers, consultants, bio-tech reps, pharmacies, investors, extractors, cultivators, processors, policy makers, politicians, and many other industry stakeholders. 

Click the image below and use the coupon code ‘CBDTESTERSVIP25’ to get 25% off the total price of your tickets!

ICBC is also known for putting on some excellent after parties. This year’s will feature reggae sensation Morgan Heritage with Rocker T. Activities will take place at the Estrel Berlin Hotel and Convention Center. Early bird special on tickets available until Wednesday, June 22nd at midnight, and you can save even more by using our coupon code.  

“We are particularly excited about European Cannabis Week given the favorable political climate for cannabis legalization in many parts of the continent. It is going to be extra special for our team to offer world-class cannabis industry and policy education, networking, and entertainment to attendees alongside Mary Jane Berlin at such a crucial juncture for Europe’s cannabis community,” says Alex Rogers, founder of the International Cannabis Business Conference. 

When and Where 

This year’s International Cannabis Business Conference will be at held at the Estrel Berlin Hotel and Convention Center from July 19th to 20th. CLICK HERE and use the coupon code ‘CBDTESTERSVIP25’ to get 25% of the total price of your ticket. The Estrel Hotel is situated in southeastern Berlin, central to many fine dining establishments, bars, and nightclubs. A wonderful city for a quick work-vacation.  

Welcome all! Thanks for dropping by CBDtesters.co / Cannadelics.com, a top offering for comprehensive news covering the burgeoning cannabis and psychedelics industries. Stop by daily for a dose of news on these dynamically changing fields, and sign up for The THC Weekly Newsletter, so you’re up on everything important going on.

The post Join Us in Berlin for the International Cannabis Business Conference (ICBC) appeared first on CBD Testers.

The Disposable Vape Problem, And Alternatives to Consider

Now that vaping is the big thing, there are certainly a lot of vapes around. In some places, you’ll see used-up batteries or cartridges lying on the street. How good is it for us or our environment to have so much vape waste? The disposable vape issue is growing and requires some better alternatives.

The disposable vape trend proposes several issues, and there aren’t as many current alternatives as there should be. In the future, more options hopefully will become available to the vaping public. This news publication specializes in reporting on the cannabis and psychedelics industries, which you can be a part of by subscribing to the THC Weekly Newsletter. Along with general updates, this will put you in first place for a range of deals on various cannabinoids, like HHC-O, Delta 8Delta 9 THCDelta-10 THCTHCOTHCVTHCP HHC, which won’t kill your bank account. Head over to our “Best-of” lists to get these deals, and remember to enjoy responsibly!


What’s a vape cart?

A vape cart is a small container that’s filled with oil, and then attached to a battery, which heats the oil to produce a vapor. The cartridges are usually made of polycarbonate plastic, but can also be made of other materials like stainless steel, ceramic, or glass. The cartridge contains a metal coil, called an atomizer, and metal solders as well. The coil heats up to heat the oil in the cartridge.

The cartridge is attached to a battery device, which usually is a 510 threaded, lithium-ion battery. Exceptions include pods, and some carts which require bigger batteries. Though not all 510 threaded batteries work with all carts made for 510 threaded, for the most part, if that’s what you buy, they’ll work together. When buying a disposable, its all one piece, and nothing has to be attached.

Many batteries are rechargeable, and simply need to be plugged in every so often before vaping again. These batteries go with individual cartridges that are bought separately, and which are generally disposable, even if the battery is not. The other option is a disposable cartridge which comes attached to a disposable battery, which all gets tossed upon completion. These are cheaper than rechargeable vapes when buying one at a time, but tend to be bought more frequently. Their main benefit is that they don’t require traveling with hardware, as they can be picked up on the go.

Obviously we are a world of trash-producers, and we know this by our streets lined with litter, and our overflowing trashcans. Despite recycling programs, our continued use of disposable products is leading to massive environmental issues in our oceans, ground soil, and air. And this isn’t helped along by the increase in tech waste that’s joined the standard papers, and plastics of life. So imagine how not helpful it is that we’re throwing away cartridges and batteries like their nothing, even considering that batteries were never supposed to go with regular trash anyway.

The disposable vape problem is growing, as vaping grows in popularity. There are, however, some alternatives, that can help bring down the waste, as well as offer healthier, and more cost-efficient options, in the long term.

Disposable vape alternatives

For one thing, the vape carts themselves propose issues. Most are made of plastic, and they often contain metal that we now know leaches into the vape oil. Generally speaking, disposable products are of lesser quality than reusable products. Product makers aren’t going to waste more expensive production materials on something not meant to have a long lifespan. So it already makes sense to consider better options for a healthier experience. There are several companies making metal-free vape carts, although it doesn’t appear that any have set up a model for re-using them, meaning they’re currently paying out more to produce a better product, which will cost more money.

Obviously, this doesn’t actually solve the waste issue, but it does start in the right direction. A more expensive, better product, is more likely to be attached to some kind of program to re-use it. How could this be done? Well, for one thing, retailers could give cashback, or a discount, to those who return a disposable vape cart or battery. I know a lot of people who bring their beer bottles back to the store to get a discount, and it probably wouldn’t be different with vape carts. This would allow them to stay disposable as well.

On the other hand, another option is refillable cartridges. So long as cartridges aren’t being thrown out, batteries aren’t either, and this would reduce waste the most. If consumers could bring their carts back to their local dispensary for reloading, it would promote the continued usage of products, plus, bring down the price for buyers, as they would only need to pay for the oil, and not the device. This can work with mail-order products as well, if the oil is shipped in a syringe, with an easy enough way to reload the cart.

Right now, most disposable carts are not easy to load with new oil, believe me, I’ve tried. I’m probably not the only person who doesn’t like plastic hits at the end, but also doesn’t want to waste that last drop. In the beginning of my vape use, I tried a couple times to take the last drops from different carts and add them together, but it was incredibly hard to both scrape out what was there, and deposit it elsewhere. If carts are specifically made for reloading, this problem can be worked out. For right now, manufacturers would probably rather have you keep buying new ones, as it’s the current sales model.

vape cart alternatives

How much of a waste issue is there?

When getting into the disposable vape issue, and why we need some good alternatives, here’s some basic information to consider. For one thing, carts and batteries produce three kinds of waste, including plastic waste, which we already know is one of the most detrimental parts of our environmental issues, making entire swaths of ocean water deadly for anything living. They also produce hazardous waste and electronic waste, because each and every battery, is a battery.

This vape waste issue comes from both weed smokers and e-cigarette smokers, as both come in disposable versions. A standard Juul, for example, offers about 200 puffs. Consider how many puffs an average smoker takes in a day, and how frequently this would have to be updated. For heavy smokers, its not uncommon to go through disposable vapes very quickly.

In terms of how high usage is, consider that in 2016, 2.2 million vape devices were sold, and that in just one year that went up to 16.2 million. Much of this growth was specifically related to disposable products. According to a CDC release in March 2021, between September 6, 2020 and March 21, 2021, there was a 96.4% increase in disposable vape sales, which accounts for a rise from 4 million to 7.8 million batteries. Prefilled carts went up 9.1% from 12.7 million to 13.8 million. That’s a lot of stuff to throw away!

What about recycling?

As of right now, carts actually can’t be recycled with other products. They contain chemical residues that make them considered ‘hazardous waste’. They’re also not standard in that they mix plastic and metal. Add onto that, that recycling programs for them literally don’t exist, and it means every cart gets thrown away, and tons of batteries too. One thing to consider for disposable vape alternatives, is recycling.

The batteries can be recycled more easily as most cities have programs for this. To be perfectly honest, in all my years alive, I’ve never found this easy to do. For as much damage as we’re told throwing batteries away causes, very few places are responsible about getting citizens to dispose of them properly.

The idea that most people will never dispose of a battery correctly, coupled with the growing use of these batteries for disposable vape products, leads to a worrying level of hazardous waste material. Technically, we’ve encountered this before. Prior to rechargeable batteries making it big in the 90’s, we were all about standard disposable batteries, and they were thrown in the regular garbage all the time. Perhaps enough time has gone by that this issue was forgotten. Or maybe it lends more to the idea that people want a cheaper option in the immediate.

batteries

One of the biggest issues with getting people to care about this problem, is that the disposable option is generally the much cheaper option, at least when buying individual products. Until programs are started to more easily recycle these materials, or provide easy refill options which can bring down prices more, complaining about the issue is essentially useless.

On a positive note, recent statistics do point to a much bigger rechargeable market, even if its growing slower. According to Grand View Research, in 2021, over 40% of the vape market was for rechargeable products. Coming across this data is not easy though, and how accurate this is, is hard to say. As with most product categories where there are higher and lower price points, for either better or cheaper products, the cheaper disposable vapes only seem cheaper, while over time, rechargeable is shown to be the more cost-effective option.

Conclusion

Disposable vapes propose an environmental issue, as well as promoting unhealthy vaping options by using cheaper materials. As the industry trucks along, more disposable vape alternatives should be expected, like cartridge return, recycling programs, refill programs, and the use of better quality cartridges. For now, when buying a product, think about where it’ll end up when you’re done with it, and if you might be better off spending a few extra dollars, for a better overall device.

Welcome all! Thanks for joining us at CBDtesters.co / Cannadelics.com, your #1 web spot for comprehensive news covering everything going on in the burgeoning cannabis and psychedelics spaces. Come by daily for a dose of news updates, and sign up for The THC Weekly Newsletter, so you’re first to get all important stories and latest deals. Please remember, you’ve got a lot of cannabis product choices, and there’s no reason to purchase a product you’re uncomfortable with using.

The post The Disposable Vape Problem, And Alternatives to Consider appeared first on CBD Testers.

Where is the Most Expensive Gram of Cannabis in the World?

It’s usual to wonder where you can get the cheapest cannabis in the world, but it’s not normal to go out of your way to search for the most expensive. However, knowledge is power. If you’re aware of where cannabis is priced the highest, then you’ll know where to avoid. However, perhaps this weed is worth the price? Perhaps the most expensive gram in the world is so pricey because of its sheer quality. Perhaps you’ll experience the greatest high of your life. Does the price tag match the quality? Let’s see. We’re going to be finding out which country sells the most expensive gram of cannabis and why this is. 

To stay current on everything important happening in the industry, subscribe to The THC Weekly Newsletter. Also, it’ll get you premium access to deals on cannabis flowers, vapes, edibles, and much more! We’ve also got standout offers on cannabinoids, like HHC-O, Delta 8Delta 9 THCDelta-10 THCTHCOTHCVTHCP HHC, which won’t kill your bank account. Head over to our “Best-of” lists to get these deals, and remember to enjoy responsibly!


Prices

The price of any service or goods can vary from nation to nation. This is true with televisions, with meals, with accommodation and, of course, with cannabis. However, many people in the west usually believe in the ‘tens’ rule. That is, for ten pounds, euros or dollars, you should be getting around 0.8-1.2 grams of cannabis. Basically, 10 (pounds, euros or dollars) of your currency will get you 1 gram-ish. However, that isn’t how the entire world works. In fact, it’s far from it. There are certain places on Earth that will allow you to purchase cannabis for a gobsmacking amount, both good and bad. But why does this happen? Well, a Yahoo Finance survey found that there were major differences in prices between various countries when it came to certain electrical goods. The article writes:

“According to the research, if a person bought all the items it would cost him or her $1,757 in Tokyo; $1,969 in New York City; $2,012 in Dubai, United Arab Emirates; $2,450 in Copenhagen; $2,441 in Vienna; $2,540 in Cape Town, South Africa; $2,965 in Reykjavik, Iceland; and $3,387 in Sao Paulo.”

The reasons for a difference in price are multiple. Some argue that poorer countries usually have cheaper goods and services because of the standards of living there, including average wages. However, it’s all relative of course. If you are comparing a country with a strong currency, to a weaker one, then you will usually be able to afford more in the latter. For instance, in India, the price of a room is usually around 5-10 dollars per night. This is a lot cheaper than anywhere in the west. Plus, the Broke Backpacker notes the price of a month’s rent in India being around 100 dollars, which again is far less than the US. He writes:

“Thankfully, the cost of living in India is generally much lower than it is in Europe and North America. If you’re earning a similar income, it will definitely go much further.”

As you can see, it’s all relative to those living in the specific country. Perhaps someone from India would come over to the west and be horrified by the prices. But, if they were living and working in the US, then they would be being paid more relative to their currency. That is why those who live in poorer countries, but maintain their jobs in richer ones, usually end up living like a god. Date Topics writes:

“Prices of goods and services differ across countries. For example, travellers often find that the price of a product abroad can be very different from the same product back home, when using market currency exchange rate to make comparisons. Typically, prices are lower in poorer countries and higher in richer ones.”

It’s important to mention too that the price of a good or service will also be altered by other factors. These include: costs of production, legal issues and market competition. 

Costs of Production

The costs of production will dictate how much a good or service costs. If it costs $50 to make a pair of sunglasses, then the seller may price them at $100. But if those sunglasses cost $25 to produce, then perhaps they will sell them at $50. Profit is, of course, crucial to any business. But these costs of production also include the price of workers. How much does it cost to pay a worker or workers for them to make it? Minimum wages in nations are usually there to protect people from being exploited in this situation. However, it’s common for big monopoly countries to use overseas workers to do their production in order to take advantage of the cheaper wages.

Legal Issues

Another reason why goods like cannabis may be priced higher or lower is because of the legal issues surrounding them. A free and healthy market will allow for many businesses to produce one item, and therefore the buyer has more options. However, if it is hard and perhaps illegal to produce cannabis, it is likely that the market won’t be as healthy and free. This could lead to less competition, and therefore higher prices. But, ironically, sometimes the dark web and illegal drug markets can be a more competitive market than legal ones. This is because there is less regulation on who can and can’t sell drugs. The illegal market is, without a doubt, booming. 

“Cocaine, heroin and marijuana have become cheaper and stronger over the past two decades, despite increases in drug seizures by authorities fighting the global illegal drug market, a new study found…The global illegal drug industry is estimated to do about $350 billion in business annually, according to recent United Nations’ reports.”

So, with this in mind, it’s hard to guess where the most expensive cannabis gram will come from. Will it come from a country that hasn’t legalized cannabis? Or will it come from one that has? 

The Most Expensive Gram of Cannabis

It isn’t easy to state, with complete accuracy, where the most expensive gram of cannabis comes from. That is because we are comparing black markets with legal markets, as well not taking into account how some strains are more expensive than others. However, we can make a good attempt. It seems that, on average, the most expensive gram of cannabis comes from the United Emirates. 

expensive cannabis

United Arab Emirates

The United Arab Emirates is a country in Western Asia and shares borders with Oman and Saudi Arabia. It is believed that the average cost of a gram of cannabis in the UAE is 101 euros. That is about 109 dollars. Can you imagine going up to your dispensary or dealer and paying that much for a gram of weed? This price is based on the black market prices because cannabis is not legal in this country. Cannigma writes:

“Cannabis use of any kind is not tolerated in the UAE. Anyone found to be in possession of weed in Dubai – which includes having it in their system – is liable to face jail time and a hefty fine, while until recently expats faced immediate expulsion from the country.”

On the whole, UAE is not the cheapest of places for western travellers – whether you’re eating, sleeping or wanting to smoke highly illegal cannabis. However, the UAE is not the only county with high cannabis prices. 

Other Nations

Grow Barato writes about a UN Office of Drugs and Crime report that has researched the average price of cannabis around the world. Other than United Arab Emirates, the study also highlights:

“Brunei, where marijuana is still quite expensive but the price drops a bit to 68.293 euro. The third in our top 3 most expensive countries is Japan, where you can get one gram for 63.281 euro. Cyprus is the most expensive European country in which to buy marijuana, with a cost of approximately 36.729 euro per gram.”

As you can see, there does seem to be a correlation here. Japan, Brunei and UAE are all extremely wealthy nations. However, Cyprus would not be considered on the same level as them. Also, none of these countries have very open policies towards cannabis, so the cost of production would also be increased. However, saying that, the USA has also proved to sell some extremely expensive cannabis too. 

USA

Since legalizing cannabis in 18 states in America, the US has begun to dominate the cannabis market. The average price for a gram of cannabis in the USA is $7.69, which is impressively cheap. However, there’s also an alternative world of extremely expensive cannabis strains. In fact, in a Vice Youtube video, the rapper 2 chainz tried a cannabis cigar (cannagar), which sells for around $50,000. There is also an incredible strain of cannabis, known as cannabis caviar, which sells for around $1400 per ounce. Westword writes about this crazy strain:

“This isn’t stuff you are sitting around puffing all day,” says Jake, general manager of the ReLeaf Center, a Denver dispensary that’s selling caviar made in house for $60 a gram. “This is the definition of a one-hitter quitter.”

Whilst the US has a healthy cannabis market, which allows for cheap grams. It also allows for more expensive ones – like cannabis caviar. 

Conclusion

The research seems to show that the most expensive gram of cannabis comes from the United Arab Emirates. It shows that the wealthier countries seem to have the more expensive cannabis, especially if it is also illegal and hard to produce/ sell. However, it’s also important to note that even in nations with booming cannabis markets – like the US, they have also allowed space for expensive cannabis too.

Welcome to the site! Thanks for making it to CBDtesters.co / Cannadelics.com, the top internet spot offering up fully-rounded independent news covering the growing cannabis and psychedelics industries. Stop by frequently to stay up-to-date on these dynamic industries, and make sure to sign up to The THC Weekly Newsletter, to ensure you’re never late on getting the news. 

The post Where is the Most Expensive Gram of Cannabis in the World? appeared first on CBD Testers.