‘Survivor’ Didn’t Break Them. Real Life Did. Then They Found Weed.

‘Survivor’ Didn’t Break Them. Real Life Did. Then They Found Weed.


‘Survivor’ Didn’t Break Them. Real Life Did. Then They Found Weed.

Nobody grows up thinking, “One day I’ll win a million dollars on TV… and then get really into cannabis.”

But life has a funny way of rerouting even the cleanest, most straight-edge trajectories. Just ask Ethan Zohn and Tyson Apostol, two Survivor champions whose journeys into cannabis didn’t start in college dorm rooms or at music festivals, but much later.

They weren’t even casual adult users.

But somewhere between Survivor, real life, and a few thousand curveballs, both men ended up discovering that cannabis can be a companion in times of hardship.

This is the story of how two reality-TV icons became unexpected cannabis advocates, and why they’re far from alone.

The OG Survivor who discovered weed the hard way

Ethan Zohn didn’t smoke pot in high school, college, or his early professional years. As a serious athlete, he had a prejudice against the plant (and we now know there are cases where cannabis can actually improve performance).

“I never touched the stuff,” he says. “I was a pro athlete. I went to Vassar. All my friends smoked, just not me.”

Then life detonated.

At 35, the Survivor: Africa winner was diagnosed with a rare form of blood cancer. The symptoms were full-body itching, night sweats, a swollen lymph node in his neck the size of a jawbreaker. A real nightmare.

When treatment began, the pharmaceutical list got large: Ativan for anxiety, Zofran for nausea, Percocet for pain, Ambien for sleep, “every pill imaginable,” he says.

“And it just wasn’t good for me,” Ethan explains. “None of it made me feel human.”

That’s when someone said the obvious: you should try weed. It wasn’t a doctor or a nurse.

But this was 2009 in New York, and there were no legal dispensaries, almost no physician guidance, and no dosing charts.

“So there I was,” he says, “bald, on chemo, wearing gloves and a mask, talking to a drug dealer who sold coke and ecstasy. I was buying weed just to feel better.”

That’s the moment a future cannabis advocate is born, standing on a sidewalk, planning chemotherapy.

“There wasn’t one oncologist, nurse, or doctor who could tell me how to use cannabis while going through cancer,” he says.

“So it was a guessing game.”

He hired a cannabis educator he found online, and learned tinctures, oils, dosages, safety, vaporizing. “Don’t smoke it” was the only official guidance he got. He figured out how to incorporate cannabis into the daily storm of cancer treatment, and he noticed something:

Cannabis didn’t cure anything.
But it made everything else survivable.

“I couldn’t control the disease,” Ethan says. “But I could control my food, my exercise, my sleep, my cannabis. It tricked my brain into thinking I had a little bit of control.”

And sometimes a little control is the difference between surviving and giving up.

In his cancer support group, nine people, all in their late 20s and 30s, were being treated the exact same way.

“Out of the nine of us,” Ethan says quietly, “there’s only two left. Me and another girl. And she uses cannabis too. I’m not saying it’s science. But it makes you think.”

Ethan used cannabis as a gateway to a better life, and that helped him in his treatment and during the recurrence.

The first publicly medicated Boston Marathon runner

The Ethan of today isn’t an underground patient sneaking product through TSA.

He’s a public advocate. He works with Trulieve. He’s involved with EO Care, which provides physician-guided cannabis plans for patients who don’t want to play the guessing game he did. He uses tinctures, live rosin products (“least processed, that’s important to me”), and occasionally a vape when anxiety spikes.

“I became the first publicly medicated person to run the Boston Marathon,” he says, grinning.
That was 2022, ten years into remission, with a few carefully timed 5 mg gummies powering the final miles.

He laughs. “I’m not a ‘stoner culture’ guy. I’m a health-nerd-with-weed guy.”

The Mormon pickleballer

If Ethan is the OG Survivor stoner, Tyson Apostol is the late bloomer.

“I grew up Mormon in Utah,” he says. “So yeah, weed wasn’t exactly part of the program.”

Tyson didn’t touch cannabis until he was well into adulthood, after appearing on Survivor four times, after winning Blood vs. Water, finishing his pro-cycling years, and learning firsthand that fatherhood is basically a full-contact sport.

“The worst thing for a man’s back is pulling babies out of cribs,” he laughs. “After two kids, my back gave out.”

What started as occasional pain became constant.

“I was taking 800 milligrams of Tylenol a day,” he says.

Then he tried a cannabis gummy and everything clicked.

“A gummy did the same thing and didn’t wreck my liver.”

That’s how the second Survivor winner began his cannabis chapter.

These days, Tyson uses cannabis “a couple times a week,” mostly for sleep, stiffness, and something he calls “functional flow.”

“If I’m up at five to play pickleball, a couple milligrams helps me loosen up. It’s not about getting high. It’s about getting moving,” he says.

He’s honest about how it affects his game.

“If you use the right amount,” he says, “it helps you not be so much in your head. You stop overthinking. You just play.”

Tyson also works with Trulieve, where Ethan helped bring him in. “He’s late to the weed game,” Ethan jokes. “But he’s learning.”

The show’s weed policy

“I asked if I could bring my medical cannabis… They said I was the first to ask.”

Both men agree that cannabis would have changed Survivor in hilarious ways.

When Ethan returned for Survivor: Winners at War, he asked production if he could bring his medical cannabis.

“They ran it up the ladder,” he says.

“They told me, ‘It’s not legal in Fiji, so you can’t take it. But you’re the first person to ask.’”

And Ethan and Tyson? They’re part of that wave of real people with real bodies who have nothing to prove anymore.

Why are athletes suddenly so open about weed? Because the culture caught up to them.

Elite athletes across sports now publicly embrace cannabis: Ricky Williams (NFL), founded Highsman, a cannabis brand; Megan Rapinoe (USWNT), partner in CBD brand Mendi; Conor McGregor, partnered with TIDL, a THC-free cannabis recovery product; Calvin Johnson (NFL), co-founder of cannabis company Primitiv. Ultramarathoners and endurance athletes increasingly use cannabis for recovery, sleep, and anxiety management.

A Men’s Health article notes that many athletes who use cannabis “notice improvements in recovery and enjoyment.” A Frontiers in Public Health study found that 80% of cannabis users who exercise say it enhances recovery. A University of Colorado study found that cannabis makes workouts more enjoyable, even if it doesn’t enhance performance.

The secret stoner Survivor tribe

Tyson offers his own take on what a weed-friendly season might look like:

“I’d use it to sleep,” he says. “You never sleep out there. Maybe there’d be fewer arguments about how to build the shelter. The blindsides would still happen, they’d just be friendlier.”

Ethan hints at something bigger: “Within the Survivor community, a lot of people smoke weed,” he says. “Most are very open about it.”

There are players who are cannabis farmers, trainers who use cannabis with their clients, musicians, artists.

“It’s not even a big deal anymore,” Ethan says.

<p>The post ‘Survivor’ Didn’t Break Them. Real Life Did. Then They Found Weed. first appeared on High Times.</p>

Source link

Oregon Cannabis: State Of The State (2025)

Oregon Cannabis: State Of The State (2025)

Oregon Cannabis: State Of The State (2025)

Welcome to the 10th annual “State of the State” post on Oregon cannabis. A great many things have changed over the years, and I’m planning to write another lookback post soon. For now, though, let’s cover everything that happened in 2025—which is a lot.

Sales and market data

According to OLCC data, total sales from January 1 through November 30 were $848 million. That’s a 3.7% dip from the same period in 2024, where we saw $881 million in total sales. Does this mean that Oregon cannabis retailers are selling less product? No, it doesn’t. They may be selling more, in fact, at discount model pricing.

The dismal retail price trendline continued to fall throughout 2025. Within that trendline, the extracts/concentrates category hit a nadir of $15.00/gram (median) in the extracts/concentrates category in April; it again shows $15.00/gram for November. The “usable marijuana” category also dropped to a ghastly $3.33/gram (median) in April, and all but flatlined from that point. (Usable marijuana is essentially flower, in the OLCC milieu.)

There is no foreseeable end to the price depression: in fact, it may only get worse. Croptober 2025 was Oregon’s largest METRC harvest ever, with 6,289,890 pounds reported. This was a significant and unwelcome 8.9% increase from the October 2024 harvest, which itself was a record high. As I wrote last year:

“I’m sure the illicit market had a bumper year too; weather is the same for everyone and the enforcement paradigm is static… Consumers may benefit, but that can’t be great for pricing.”

That proved true in 2025, unfortunately, and it will happen again in 2026. As far as what people are actually buying at all of these OLCC stores, I compiled this table:

2025 2024 Change +/-
Usable marijuana 43.6% 46.2% -2.6
Concentrate/extract 26% 25% +1.0
Edible/tincture 14.2% 13.7% +0.5
Inhalable w/non-canna additives 10.7% 9.1% +1.6
“Other” 4.9% 5.4% -0.5
Industrial hemp 0% (?) 0.6% -o.6 (?)

Check out that drop in the usable marijuana category. In both 2023 and 2024 I noted a “years-long trend of usable marijuana sales decreasing per capita in favor of other categories.” We are not just seeing these SKU shifts in the data—we’ve had a series of farm clients lament that retailers are pulling back orders for flower, in response to consumer preference for vape and cartridge products.

Bottom line: People are buying more Oregon cannabis than ever, at lower prices than ever. There is also more cannabis in the OLCC market than ever. Surveying this abundance, customers aren’t burning flower like they used to, opting instead for packaged products. All of this makes for an extremely challenging business environment—especially for small farms, which continue to falter and fail.

Oregon cannabis licenses and licensing

Oregon’s years-long OLCC licensing moratorium was ratified by the legislature in 2024. We still have a “one-in, one-out” policy where outgoing licensees are allowed to surrender (sell) their licenses in favor of new market entrants, who acquire (buy) replacement licenses. Outside of this buy/sell paradigm, OLCC is “prohibited from accepting new license applications pretty much forever, due to restrictive, ratio-based formulas tied to population,” as I explained back when HB 4121 passed.

In 2025, license numbers declined marginally across the board as predicted. This was also the case in 2024 and 2023 due to the years-long moratorium, in concert with business failures. Here’s a table showing current license numbers as compared to this time last year:

2025 2024 Change +/-
Producers 1,351 1,375 -24
Processors 275 288 -13
Wholesalers 243 257 -14
Retailers 769 789 -20
Labs 10 13 -3
Research 1 1 none

Numbers continue to fall at the slow drip we’ve seen for a couple of years, which is healthy. Most would agree that we have too many licenses across all categories—except perhaps for labs and research. Unfortunately, we lost a couple of labs this year, possibly tied to fallout from the October 2024 crackdown on THC inflation.

As far as pricing, we helped people buy and sell producer licenses at prices between $60K and $85K throughout the year, with prices rising in the last month or two. Most of these transactions are change-of-location and change-in-ownership scenarios, and most of the buyers are Chinese. Wholesale and processor licenses trade less frequently, and for lower prices; retail pricing is its own animal, largely dependent on store performance. That said, we did help sell a couple of change-in-location retail licenses in the $100K range.

OLCC has emphasized moving applications through the system quickly, which is welcome news. I met with a few OLCC staff last week, who articulated their goal of a “zero wait” time for change-in-ownership applications, their plans to enforce new rules requiring polished submissions, and requirements that applicants move quickly through the process.

New Oregon cannabis rules

Marijuana

The licensing protocol rules mentioned above come online on January 1, 2026, alongside rules that make some technical updates and implement the 2025 marijuana legislation. I covered these rules in a recent post, and I won’t summarize them further here.

Earlier this year, rules banning sales of most CBN products also took effect. I explained:

Beginning July 1, 2025, products containing artificially derived CBN can no longer be sold in Oregon, either in the OLCC system or in the general (hemp-derived) market, unless the manufacturer has made a “Generally Recognized as Safe” (GRAS) determination, or submitted a New Dietary Ingredient Notification to the FDA and received a “no objections” response.

To my knowledge, no one has acquired GRAS status or submitted a qualifying NDI notification. That’s not unexpected, and it’s also too bad.

Hemp

The comprehensive hemp registry rules will take effect on January 1. These rules apply to hemp flower pre-rolls, as well as hemp beverages and tinctures containing cannabinoids like THC, CBD and others. The rules don’t apply to hemp items that are: a) sold at OLCC licensed stores, b) lacking cannabinoids, c) intended only for topical use, d) industrial or commercial feed products, or e) merely passing through the state.

A host of labeling and “claims” requirements for hemp products sold in Oregon also take effect next year. It remains to be seen if or how any of these new rules will interact with the recent federal ban on intoxicating hemp products, although I’m not expecting much friction. If the federal ban holds, we’ll likely just have fewer out-of-state registrants, and fewer inbound products beyond what is carved out in the CBD space.

For what it’s worth, earlier this year OLCC and other agencies published a report detailing that most hemp products in Oregon run hot. It wasn’t a great look, but it was no surprise.

Oregon cannabis litigation

Oregon cannabis matters found their way to the courts in 2025. Our office handled a series of business and investor disputes, and there were some public skirmishes as well. Here is my short list:

  • Friend of the firm Andrew DeWeese filed a notable dormant commerce clause challenge to the federal prohibition of interstate marijuana sales. We are cheering him on.
  • Ballot Measure 119 was defeated in Oregon District Court. That measure required most Oregon cannabis businesses to enter into labor peace agreements with approved unions, in order to renew or obtain licensure. The miserable case is now on appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.
  • The Oregon Court of Appeals ruled against retailer applicants that didn’t want to pay their taxes, as a condition precedent to license renewal. No appeal was filed.
  • Cannabis receiverships continued apace, with the largest being the Tumalo Industries matter. The market remained soft, with the buyers once again Chalice insiders.

Federal developments

I should include a bit on President Trump’s Executive Order of December 18, directing marijuana rescheduling. We’ve covered it comprehensively already, but Oregon cannabis businesses should be pleased.

Depending on the path Pam Bondi chooses, and the measure of resistance, marijuana could go to Schedule III in 2026. If so, many of our clients will realize better margins overnight. These businesses could also see less competition from out-of-state hemp operators, due to the federal ban mentioned earlier.

Odds and ends

  • The hemp industry continued to limp along. We finally saw an increase in planted acreage, despite a dwindling number of farmers. Licensed “vendors” continued to pile into the ODA program, following the 2024 registration requirement.
  • We continue to struggle to fix and to complete cannabis industry transactions structured by brokers. At least one prominent broker in the Oregon cannabis space has no license whatsoever, and a few others continue to make messes. There are also competent brokers, to be sure—our advice is to never use legal agreements offered by brokers regardless.
  • OLCC appeared to be less punitive and to pivot back toward teaching compliance, particularly for smaller operators (including the labs). I’d like to think we had something to do with that approach, and I hope it sticks—but who knows in either case.
  • The Cannabis Industry Alliance of Oregon (CIAO) played a central role in 2025 legislative negotiations. CIAO successfully lobbied for producer transfer rights, trade sample expansions, and more realistic enforcement timelines for CBN compliance rules mentioned above.
  • Initiative Petition 39, which aimed to legalize cannabis cafes, was submitted in February but withdrawn last month, in the face of logistical issues.
  • Emerge Law Group, the Measure 91 law firm and first Oregon cannabis law boutique, announced it would wind down after a stellar 10-year run. Its remaining attorneys are joining Denver-based Vicente LLP.

Source: Canna Law Blog

The post Oregon Cannabis: State Of The State (2025) appeared first on Marijuana Retail Report – News and Information for Cannabis Retailers.

Source link

More Americans Want To Quit Using Alcohol And Tobacco Than Marijuana In 2026, New Year's Resolution Poll Finds

More Americans Want To Quit Using Alcohol And Tobacco Than Marijuana In 2026, New Year's Resolution Poll Finds

It’s the season of New Year’s resolutions again, and Americans are apparently more inclined to quit or reduce their use of alcohol and tobacco than to abstain from marijuana, according to a new poll.

The survey from Censuswide, which was commissioned by Northerner.com, asked 1,003 U.S. adults about their resolutions for 2026. Among the 15 options, respondents were least inclined to curb their cannabis use.

Just 8 percent of Americans said they wanted to reduce or cease their marijuana consumption. By contrast, 10 percent said they wanted to limit alcohol use, 12 percent said the same about tobacco, and 16 percent wanted to limit their social media use.

The most common New Year’s resolution commitment was to improve physical health, at 35 percent.

Young people aged 21-24 were most likely (13 percent) to say they wanted to lower or quit their marijuana use, followed by those 25-34 (12 percent), 45-54 (5 percent), and 55+ (4 percent).

Men were twice as likely (12 percent) to say they wanted to cut out cannabis compared to women (6 percent). And among those who said they wanted to reduce marijuana use in 2026, 40 percent said they’ve tried and failed in the past.

Asked about the reasons they resolved to limit marijuana consumption, more than 50 percent said they feel it would “improve their independence and flexibility.” Forty-seven percent said they felt it would “make them feel more accomplished.” And 40 percent said they believe it “will help them lead a more active lifestyle and improve their mental and emotional well-being.”

The fact that fewer people intend to quit cannabis over alcohol and tobacco in the new year isn’t especially surprising. While half of Americans report that they’ve tried marijuana, it’s still not as commonly used as alcohol or tobacco. Public education campaigns have also proven effective at deterring some, particularly young people, from drinking or using tobacco products that are legal and regulated for adults at the federal level, unlike cannabis.

Recent polling shows that younger Americans are increasingly using cannabis-infused beverages as a substitute for alcohol — with one in three millennials and Gen Z workers choosing THC drinks over booze for after-work activities like happy hours.

Another survey released in October found that a majority of Americans believe marijuana represents a “healthier option” than alcohol — and most also expect cannabis to be legal in all 50 states within the next five years.

Smoking marijuana is also associated with “significantly” reduced rates of alcohol consumption, according to a recent federally funded study that involved adults smoking joints in a makeshift bar.

A study published last year found that adults who drink cannabis-infused beverages has found more evidence of a “substitution effect,” with a significant majority of participants reporting reduced alcohol use after incorporating cannabinoid drinks into their routines.

Another survey released last year also showed that four in five adults who drink cannabis-infused beverages say they’ve reduced their alcohol intake — and more than a fifth have quit drinking alcohol altogether.


Written by Kyle Jaeger for Marijuana Moment | Featured image by Gina Coleman/Weedmaps

The post More Americans Want To Quit Using Alcohol And Tobacco Than Marijuana In 2026, New Year's Resolution Poll Finds appeared first on Weedmaps News.

Source link

Rare Cannabinoid Company

Beyond Dry January: Rare Cannabinoid Company’s hemp THC is your all-season alternative to alcohol

Beyond Dry January: Rare Cannabinoid Company’s hemp THC is your all-season alternative to alcohol

Dry January has become an annual reset for anyone rethinking how alcohol fits into their life. The trend is part of a larger shift: only 54 percent of US adults say they drink alcohol, a record low, according to a 2025 Gallup poll. People are choosing to drink less all year long. They want better […]

The post Beyond Dry January: Rare Cannabinoid Company’s hemp THC is your all-season alternative to alcohol appeared first on Leafly.

Source link

Seven Years for Progress, Four Days to Undermine It: The UK’s Cannabis Media Storm 

Seven Years for Progress, Four Days to Undermine It: The UK’s Cannabis Media Storm 

Seven Years for Progress, Four Days to Undermine It: The UK’s Cannabis Media Storm 

On 6 January 2026, the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) approved the first official guidance on medical cannabis for officers in England and Wales, news that UK patients have been waiting since 2018 to receive. 

Patients, industry and the police all celebrated this as an imperfect, but overwhelmingly positive step in the right direction for all concerned, recognising the complexity of the issue and the central tenet that law enforcement should approach interactions with a ‘patients first, suspects second’ mindset. 

Its author Richard List QPM, a retired veteran police officer who used to lead the UK’s drugs squad, said himself: “In a liberal democracy, if you’re a patient and you’ve had a controlled drug that’s legitimately prescribed by a doctor, you shouldn’t have to worry about any interference from the police.”

Despite this, it took just days before multiple mainstream media outlets had either mischaracterised the guidance, or ignored it entirely in favour of sensationalist stories painting medical cannabis patients as ‘benefits claimants’ using ‘shocking loopholes’ to obtain ‘super strength cannabis’. 

While cannabis stigmatisation in the mainstream press is nothing new, a number of patients reached out to our sister publication Cannabis Health to share concerns about this coverage, especially in the wake of long-awaited recognition from law enforcement. 

Rupa Shah, Chief Legal and Compliance Officer at UK medical cannabis clinic Releaf, told Business of Cannabis: “It’s frustrating for us… that narrative needs to change. 

“We obviously want to promote our services, but when trying to educate and remove stigma, that’s difficult for us because of the unique restrictions on advertising. We are a commercial company, and by virtue of that, it makes it slightly more difficult. Ideally, trade bodies should be working with government and policy makers, but it’s something we’re still waiting on.”

“We’re in a unique position where I can have access to the people who might be able to change the narrative. But we’re still working within a system that is very, very heavily regulated.”

Why accurate coverage matters

Recently published (November 2025) peer-reviewed research from Lindsey Metcalf McGrath and Helen Beckett Wilson, paints a clear picture of the impact both a lack of police education and the continued stigmatisation in the mainstream press have on patients.  

The study, ‘Training the police on legalised medical cannabis: lessons in building public trust, reducing harm, and avoiding reputational damage’, found that of the 94 police constable apprentices, all around 18-months into operational duties, 9 in 10 (88%) said they knew ‘little or nothing about prescribed cannabis, with many having been misinformed during training. 

The research, which used data from clinics including Releaf, documented cases where untrained officers caused serious harm to patients: one was reported to social services with her fitness as a parent questioned, despite her legal cannabis prescription helping control epileptic seizures to the point where she no longer needed family support to care for her child. 

Black patients expressed particular anxiety about police encounters, given differential stop-and-search rates. 

“Situations where police handle things incorrectly and insensitively are particularly harmful given the high proportion of people being prescribed cannabis for anxiety disorders,” the researchers noted.

The study also revealed the deeply entrenched prohibitionist attitudes officers bring to cannabis encounters. Before training, when asked to write the first three words that came to mind about ‘cannabis users,’ officers’ responses included ‘baghead’ (pejorative UK slang for a drug user), ‘addict,’ ‘young,’ and ‘illegal.’

The researchers found that officers held ‘prohibitionist beliefs that cannabis possession is always synonymous with criminality’, beliefs they traced directly to their training. One officer stated bluntly: ‘Anyone is getting locked up. It is illegal to possess.’

“Prohibitionist narratives and stereotypes are correlated with pejorative beliefs which result in the stigmatisation of patients,” the study found.

As a prime example of this dynamic, Shah points to a recent case which ended in a formal complaint being brought against a senior police officer over comments linking the smell of cannabis to criminality. 

In response, advocacy group PatientsCann UK submitted a formal complaint against senior policing figures, arguing that such statements ignore the legal status of prescribed medical cannabis and could influence frontline policing attitudes. 

“If that’s what police officers are bringing to their interactions [with] patients, [that’s a] massive problem,” Shah said. 

The encouraging finding was that evidence-based training dramatically shifted both knowledge and attitudes. After a three-hour workshop covering the 2018 regulations, patient experiences, and proper verification procedures, 67% of officers said they knew “a lot” about prescribed cannabis, while use of the term ‘baghead’ dropped from 10 mentions to zero. References to ‘medical’ rose from three to 39. 

The November 2025 research concluded that ‘the updating of police training and procedures are crucial step in the implementation of legal reforms’ and that this remains ‘overdue in the UK’, with its absence ‘causing harm to patients and damaging the reputation of the police.’

Misleading media coverage adds another layer of confusion to an already complex implementation challenge, one that will play out across 43 police forces over months and years.

The media storm

One of the only mainstream publications to cover the news directly was the Telegraph, which ran a story titled ‘Police told not to arrest cannabis users if they say it’s medicinal’.

While in relative terms, this story was the most factually accurate, its framing still suggested police were being instructed to be lenient, rather than being given a new multi-stage verification protocol.

Just days later (January 09), the Daily Mail ran a 2000+ word story focused more broadly on the UK’s medical cannabis market, moving well beyond questionable framing into full misrepresentation.

The article, titled ‘Thousands of Britons prescribed super-strength CANNABIS for mental health conditions including anxiety and depression – with benefits claimants offered free consultations and discounts on their monthly weed prescription’, pointed to the ‘de facto legalisation of the drug’, and suggested police were now  being instructed ‘not to arrest users… if there are “justifiable grounds” for believing it could be for medical use.’

‘De facto legalisation’

Medical cannabis was legalised on 1 November 2018 under the Misuse of Drugs (Amendments) (Cannabis and Licence Fees) (England, Wales, and Scotland) Regulations 2018 with cross-party support, and operates within one of the most heavily regulated frameworks in the UK.

Cannabis-based products for medicinal use can only be prescribed by specialist consultants on the General Medical Council’s Specialist Register, GPs cannot prescribe them. All prescribing clinics must be registered with and regulated by the Care Quality Commission, using identical standards to NHS services.

Products must be approved by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, with import licenses granted by the Home Office. Prescriptions are recorded and tracked through the NHS Business Services Authority.

‘Police told not to arrest’

The guidance establishes verification protocols to distinguish lawful prescriptions from illegal possession. It explicitly states officers should take action if they have justifiable grounds to believe possession is not lawful.

“Justifiable grounds for believing it could be for medical use”

The guidance requires verification of actual lawful prescriptions through documentation, including packaging, dispensing labels, prescription letters, and contacting healthcare providers if needed. This is an evidence-based verification process, not discretionary enforcement.

Images of people smoking joints

The guidance explicitly states: “The smoking of medicinal cannabis is strictly prohibited by the legislation.” Smoking is illegal; vaping is the lawful inhalation method.

“Licensed products – which do not contain the whole plant”

Sativex, the most well-known licensed medical cannabis product, is whole-plant cannabis extract containing high levels of both THC and CBD in a 1:1 ratio.

‘Super-strength’ terminology throughout

As prescribing pharmacist Navinder Singh Dhesi noted on LinkedIn: “The term ‘strength’ is meaningless without pharmacological nuance. Cannabinoid medicines are prescribed with specific cannabinoid profiles, controlled dosing, and clear titration plans.” THC percentage alone doesn’t determine therapeutic effect.

Cherry-picked expert opinion (Sir Robin Murray warning of psychiatric risks)

No mention of the 50,000+ peer-reviewed studies on cannabis therapeutics or UK Medical Cannabis Registry research showing sustained mental health improvements over 24 months in prescribed patients.

As one concerned patient told us: “The article depicts cannabis patients who are ‘signed off work with anxiety and depression’ as being ‘handed out super-strength cannabis’ by clinics, feeding into the narrative that cannabis patients are ‘lazy-stoners’ living off benefits… This is a dangerous and cruel narrative that couldn’t be further from the truth.”

JP Doran, Chief Executive Officer of Crucial Innovations Corp (CINV) and a long-standing advocate for patient-centred medical cannabis regulation, told Business of Cannabis: “Much of the coverage around police interactions and medical cannabis still blurs the line between illegal use and legally prescribed treatment, which doesn’t reflect the reality for patients.

“Medical cannabis in the UK is a regulated, clinician-prescribed therapy used by people living with serious, diagnosed conditions, not a cultural or criminal issue. When this distinction is missed, it reinforces stigma and creates unnecessary stress for patients who are simply trying to manage their health lawfully and with dignity.”

On 10 January – the same day as the Daily Mail‘s front-page story, GB News published an almost identical piece titled ‘Benefits claimants handed discounts on ‘super-strength’ Cannabis for mental health conditions’ using the same data, the same ‘super-strength’ framing, and the same focus on benefits claimants.

The coordinated nature of this coverage was highlighted by Jack Bradburn, a medical cannabis patient who works 60+ hours weekly as a Gas Emergency Engineer.

He told his MP: “On 6th January 2026, the National Police Chiefs Council approved guidance instructing officers to treat medical cannabis patients as ‘patients first, suspects second’… Four days later, on 10th January, the Daily Mail ran a front-page headline describing legitimate prescriptions as a ‘shocking loophole,’ with coordinated coverage across other outlets using identical framing and data.”

The post Seven Years for Progress, Four Days to Undermine It: The UK’s Cannabis Media Storm  appeared first on Business of Cannabis.

Source link

medical cannabis spain

The Cannabis Labyrinth in Spain: A ‘Timid’ Regulation for a Pain That Won’t Wait

The Cannabis Labyrinth in Spain: A ‘Timid’ Regulation for a Pain That Won’t Wait

medical cannabis spain

Old Continent, early 2026. The headline lands like this: “The Department of Health clears cannabis for four medical conditions.” Back in 2025, Spain joined the list of more than 40 countries that had already brought cannabis into their healthcare systems. And if that was the “first big step,” then what we’re seeing now, right at this moment, are the second ones.

So what actually changed?

The Spanish Agency for Medicines and Medical Devices (AEMPS), the public body that regulates medicines and healthcare products, published a monograph detailing which cannabis-based treatments specialist physicians are now allowed to prescribe, and under what conditions.

“It’s news that’s been received with relief, and with a certain degree of respect,” says Jesús de Santiago, coordinator of the Cannabinoids Working Group at the Spanish Pain Society. “For years, we operated in a very ambiguous space. We knew there were patients who could benefit, but there was no clear framework to do things properly.” In practical terms, AEMPS brings order. It sets rules. It demands quality. “For the scientific community, that matters. It means working with standardized medicines, with controls and traceability. That’s the only way to generate reliable data and actually protect patients,” de Santiago adds.

Still, not everyone is convinced.

Some voices have described the new regulation as “very timid,” among them Manuel Guzmán, Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at the Complutense University of Madrid and a member of the Royal National Academy of Pharmacy. By most accounts, he’s also one of the most authoritative voices on cannabis in Spain. “The regulation establishes fairly restrictive conditions for access to and use of these medications,” Guzmán says.

From the patient side, the response has been cautious. One such case is Carola Pérez, president of the Spanish Observatory of Medicinal Cannabis, who lives with neuropathic pain and manages her symptoms with cannabis. For years now, Pérez has been one of the most visible social voices on the issue in Spain. She’s heard by public opinion, the scientific community, social media, and, at times, by policymakers.

“We’re still very concerned about physician training,” Pérez says. “We see very little interest in learning from colleagues in other European countries. The Department of Health still hasn’t explained how a specialist can be certified or trained to prescribe cannabis to a patient.” And she adds: “On top of that, we feel the program falls short. It leaves a huge number of patients out.”

For now, cannabis will only be prescribed for four indications: chronic pain, spasticity related to multiple sclerosis, severe forms of epilepsy, and nausea and vomiting associated with chemotherapy.

Cristina Sánchez García, Associate Professor in the Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at the Complutense University of Madrid and a member of the university’s Institute for Neurochemical Research, shares that diagnosis. She also sees the framework as “poor and very limited.” “It’s an important first step,” she says, “but the design has serious shortcomings (family doctors are excluded from prescribing, product options are limited, and so are the conditions that qualify) that keep us trailing behind the rest of Europe.”

According to Araceli Manjón-Cabeza, Professor of Criminal Law at the Complutense University of Madrid, what should come next is fairly straightforward. “Dispensing needs to actually begin,” she says. “Doctors need to prescribe, and pharmacies need to be able to prepare and dispense formulations so they reach the patients who need them. We’ll have to wait a few months to see whether the system truly starts working.”

Even acknowledging the real progress that’s been made, everything suggests that the next logical step goes beyond simply expanding approved indications. It also means doing things right, on a formal level. “We need clear protocols, specific training for professionals, and above all, real-world data,” De Santiago says. “We need to know which patients it works for, which ones it doesn’t, and why. If we don’t measure outcomes, we risk creating unrealistic expectations and losing a tool that, when used properly, can genuinely help certain patients.”

“What can be improved? Everything,” Pérez fires back. As a patient, she wants the best possible scenario, and real access to her medicine. “There’s still a huge educational and training effort ahead. Someone has to take responsibility for that,” she says. “It feels like no one has taken the time to look at what’s actually working beyond our borders and bring those lessons into our own regulatory model,” Sánchez García insists.

Beyond all this, the system as approved remains restrictive. Sooner or later, it will need to be expanded in the interest of patients, by broadening the list of qualifying conditions. “We also need to see whether the legal challenge filed by pharmacists against the Royal Decree goes anywhere,” Manjón-Cabeza adds. “Limiting dispensing to hospital pharmacies while excluding community pharmacies is hard to justify, and it harms patients. Community pharmacies already dispense medications that are far more dangerous than a magistral cannabis formulation. This only makes sense if you start from a distorted view of cannabis itself.”

Patients aren’t asking for miracles, they yearn for clarity and support. They want to know which treatments are best, what they can realistically expect, what the risks are, and who will follow up on their care. They’re also calling for regulated access, and above all, an end to stigma, so they don’t have to rely on informal channels. “At the end of the day,” De Santiago says, “what patients are asking for is entirely reasonable: to be treated as patients, not as consumers.”

“There was one line that did a lot of damage,” Pérez firmly states. “When people started suggesting that patients would divert their medication to third parties. Or resell it. How does it make any sense to think a patient would risk their own medicine, especially when it’s so hard to get? At what point did we start seeing patients as ‘criminals,’ even before it even begins? How is it possible that there’s no trust in the patient?”

Until the state stops looking at patients with suspicion, cannabis will continue to be administered drop by drop. The community now waits to see what the third big step will be in a landscape that, despite undeniable progress, remains open.

 

<p>The post The Cannabis Labyrinth in Spain: A ‘Timid’ Regulation for a Pain That Won’t Wait first appeared on High Times.</p>

Source link