The Royal Pharmaceutical Society (RPS) has written to the home secretary calling for “clear guidance” on the permissable level of psychoactive tetrahydrocannabidol (THC) in cannabidiol (CBD) oils.
In the letter to Sajid Javid, Ash Soni and Gino Martini, president and chief scientist of the RPS, respectively, wrote that the Society “is keen to advise its members on the steps they should take” to ensure that they do not inadvertently breach the law when handling CBD oil products.
A report published on 26 June 2019 by industry trade body the Centre for Medicinal Cannabis (CMC) found that almost half of the commercially-available CBD oil it tested contained detectable amounts of THC, making them “technically illegal within the UK”.
The CMC commissioned analytical company PhytoVista to test 30 CBD oil products available in the UK market, both online and on the high street. In a summary of the findings, the CMC said that 45% of products tested had “measurable levels of THC”, with a mean content 0.04%.
There has been confusion around the legality of trace levels of THC in CBD oil products.
CBD is not psychoactive and so is not a controlled substance. It may be sold through retail outlets as long as no medical claims are made for a product.
But the RPS letter raised the issue of reports that suggest CBD oil products with THC content of less than 0.2% would be legal.
A drug licensing factsheet published by the Home Office states that licences may be issued for the cultivation of plants from approved seed types with a THC content not exceeding 0.2%. But this permitted limit of 0.2% in plant matter does not relate to the THC content of the final product to be consumed, explained Martini.
The RPS letter says pharmacists in hospitals and the community want clear guidance on the legal position when handling CBD oil products that contain trace levels of THC.
In its report, the CMC also called on the government to clarify the law around CBD oils, and amend what it calls “ambiguous, out-dated” legislation.
Citation: The Pharmaceutical Journal DOI: 10.1211/PJ.2019.20206419