I was recently diagnosed with Lupus and am anxiously awaiting my Rheumatology appointment. While I have been waiting I have been in a lot of pain when I have my flares, so I have put in a request to see a pain management specialist. I told my husband AND my father this and they BOTH suggested I try CBD oil. What the what??? I have told my husband and father several times that since CBD/marijuana is federally ILLEGAL if I take a drug test and pop positive for it I could lose my license or have to report to TPAPN, I don't know which one is worse.
They both told me since I am not working that I should try the CBD oil. Uh, no. I am applying for telecommuting positions. What if I get an interview on Monday and they want me to take a drug test the same day? But I've been using the CBD oil so I have to reject the interview/job/etc all because I couldn't wait to get a legal prescription from a provider.
My husband, I will give him a pass. He is not the brightest crayon in the box. Never was and never will be. But my father, he has a bachelor's degree and has common sense. So I don't know why he doesn't understand this.
As I said in previous post, it's certainly reasonable to avoid these products all together out of worry for one's job, but it's also not as though it's not possible to make a reasoned decision on this based on measurable data rather than the more hysteria based rationale that seems to dominate this topic.
That certainly is a fair and valid point.
As someone who has to pee in a cup around twice a week for 4 more years, I shy away from anything that is not FDA approved, however. I live in fear of the herbal supplements I used to take prior to monitoring because they aren't regulated federally and I'm paranoid about illicit fillers or other contamination I've read that has happened. A miniscule risk is still too much of a risk for me, unfortunately. I can only speak about me personally and my choices.
In my head, I know that a mega brand name herbal supplement is most likely completely safe and as advertised. I know I'm being hysterical. I am most certainly paranoid. It is what it is.
But, again, having faced the Board and watched 8 hours of other nurses facing the Board in front of me for a variety of reasons, including testing positive for THC, I have made the personal choice to steer clear until more widespread regulations are in place. It's probably the same reason why I prefer to get my meds from my local pharmacy rather than getting them shipped cheaper from India. The comfort of guaranteed ingredient quality control without me having to put in any investigational effort.
I'm glad to hear the research you bring to the table though. I'm glad to hear that there are safer options for people who could clearly benefit. Marijuana has a hugely medicinal market and I do hope that our country comes around. I like the evidence you discuss and I appreciate it's contribution to the discussion. I learn from seeing another perspective.
CBD is one of the compounds of the cannabis plant. There is no apparent psychoactivity from this substance. It is hard to find genuine CBD oil as THC is found in many of the oil products, vaping products, etc. There have also been reports of synthetic cannabinoids ("spice") in these oils/edibles. I can't speak to the effectiveness, some patients of mine swear by it, and I don't tell anyone to actively avoid it, I do tell them to keep marijuana products, especially oils, away from kiddos. I do warn them that it is possible that even though you think there is no THC in the oil, it's possible it's there. We have found it even it pts here in Oregon where it is legal, they have brought in the product and still tested positive. An eye opener sometimes. Just be careful. Also, I do tell patients...even snake venom is 100% natural and organic.
Specializes in M/S, LTC, Corrections, PDN & drug rehab.
SpankedInPittsburgh said:
Yeah here's a message from a nurse in the land of Nazi Monitored Nurses,
Don't do it. It's not worth the risk!!! Maybe they don't test for whatever the active ingredient in this latest wonder snake oil. However, just about any nurse in a monitoring program will tell you one of our great fears in life is that of the false positive pee test. So unless this wonder-product from the land of zero-proof of efficacy actually cures cancer and makes the blind see and you happen to be a blind cancer patient stay away from it. A false positive is treated exactly the same as a positive by these BONs and you will be given an offer you can't refuse of either your nursing license or monitoring for years and years.
Personally I could care less if a nurse smokes dope so long as they are not impaired at work but that is NOT the reality of the situation. For those who choose to take this wonder supplement & pop a false positive I'll be saving a seat at the required nurse support meeting. Start saving now cause you will need lots of cash
Exactly!!! I wish I could like this post so many times. I agree with this post so much!!!!
Specializes in M/S, LTC, Corrections, PDN & drug rehab.
MunoRN said:
The residual THC content of CBD products is actually highly regulated in a number of states, with each batch-lot undergoing laboratory GS testing for residual THC levels, in which case there isn't actually any mystery about how much THC is in the product, and from that the amount required to exceed the 50ng/ml testing threshold can be calculated. The Upper end limit is 0.3%, in which case you would still need to take about 4 times the typical amount to exceed the testing threshold, however better quality CBD isolates are widely available and have less than 0.02% THC, which would require really going out of your way to consume massive amounts. You would also need to consider the testing used that your job and license would be subject to since employers and BONs are increasingly deferring to active THC levels rather than metabolite levels.
As I said in previous post, it's certainly reasonable to avoid these products all together out of worry for one's job, but it's also not as though it's not possible to make a reasoned decision on this based on measurable data rather than the more hysteria based rationale that seems to dominate this topic.
Regulated by whom? Anyone can make & sell CBD so you never know for certain what the percentage is.
Regulated by whom? Anyone can make & sell CBD so you never know for certain what the percentage is.
State regulations. Not every state regulates THC content in CBD products, but many do and in those states it is tightly controlled with required laboratory confirmation of residual THC levels at specified intervals of production with those levels listed on state approved labelling.
There are also federal regulations, although there are contradictory interpretations between the FDA and DEA, but the FDA requirement for something to be called a CBD requirement is that it contains less than 0.3% THC.
Specializes in M/S, LTC, Corrections, PDN & drug rehab.
MunoRN said:
State regulations. Not every state regulates THC content in CBD products, but many do and in those states it is tightly controlled with required laboratory confirmation of residual THC levels at specified intervals of production with those levels listed on state approved labelling.
There are also federal regulations, although there are contradictory interpretations between the FDA and DEA, but the FDA requirement for something to be called a CBD requirement is that it contains less than 0.3% THC.
Not every state does, exactly. I could not find any word from the FDA that the amount of THC in CBD has to be less than 0.3%.
Not every state does, exactly. I could not find any word from the FDA that the amount of THC in CBD has to be less than 0.3%.
The main point is that CBD is derived from hemp and not from cannabis and is cultivated to have less than 0.3% cannabinoid content. There's a really great article here that explains the standing of it:
Specializes in M/S, LTC, Corrections, PDN & drug rehab.
Rocknurse said:
The main point is that CBD is derived from hemp and not from cannabis and is cultivated to have less than 0.3% cannabinoid content. There's a really great article here that explains the standing of it:
According to the quest laboratories information page (the largest drug screening company for healthcare personnel in the United states), the urinalysis for THC tests for the THC metabolite THC-COOH (11-Nor-9-carboxy-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol). Marijuana Metabolites (THC 5� ng/mL)Clinical Screen with Confirmation (28722)
CBD is a different compound than THC entirely, and has a different molecular structure than that of THC (contains an additional hydroxyl group), it actually functions as an antagonist (blocks the receptor) in the cannabinoid receptors and is NON-PSYCHOTROPIC. In layman's terms, CBC will actually counteract THC in the body if a person were to consume both substances. CBD and the Psychedelic Receptor | Project CBD
Both THC-COOH and OH 7-COOH are carboxyl groups, but only one is tested in a urinalysis (They are very different chemically). Because CBD does not inherently contain THC, the THC-COOH metabolite cannot be synthesized. Even IF a CBD supplement were to contain as much as .3% THC content(this is the maximum), that is an exceedingly minuscule amount that would not indicate on the standard 50ng (or not even a 5ng test) THC screening.
I think if you use CBD topically for your rheumatism, there is an astronomically low possibly (even if you are using an absurdly high dosage of CBD oil) of popping positive on a urinalysis for THC.
Maybe your husband is a lot smarter than you think...
Rather then wonder about a substance that may or may not be benifical, I would spend my time on finding a n evidence based treatment for your disease .
Rather then wonder about a substance that may or may not be benifical I would spend my time on finding a n evidence based treatment for your disease.
There seems to be two extremes on this issue without much in-between. There are those who claim CBD is a cure-all, which it's not, and those who claim it's all a sham, which is equally incorrect. I get that in the general public the stigmatized view of marijuana derivatives tends to override the evidence, but it's disappointing that the one group you would expect to take a more informed view, nurses, seem to have a view that is at least as ignorance-fueled as that of lay-people. CBD's role in the treatment of a number of conditions is well established, and with an evidence base that is on-par with more mainstream commonly prescribed medications. In many cases it's either more effective than other commonly used medications, or carries fewer adverse effects with comparable efficacy.
Eris Discordia BSN, RN
277 Posts
That certainly is a fair and valid point.
As someone who has to pee in a cup around twice a week for 4 more years, I shy away from anything that is not FDA approved, however. I live in fear of the herbal supplements I used to take prior to monitoring because they aren't regulated federally and I'm paranoid about illicit fillers or other contamination I've read that has happened. A miniscule risk is still too much of a risk for me, unfortunately. I can only speak about me personally and my choices.
In my head, I know that a mega brand name herbal supplement is most likely completely safe and as advertised. I know I'm being hysterical. I am most certainly paranoid. It is what it is.
But, again, having faced the Board and watched 8 hours of other nurses facing the Board in front of me for a variety of reasons, including testing positive for THC, I have made the personal choice to steer clear until more widespread regulations are in place. It's probably the same reason why I prefer to get my meds from my local pharmacy rather than getting them shipped cheaper from India. The comfort of guaranteed ingredient quality control without me having to put in any investigational effort.
I'm glad to hear the research you bring to the table though. I'm glad to hear that there are safer options for people who could clearly benefit. Marijuana has a hugely medicinal market and I do hope that our country comes around. I like the evidence you discuss and I appreciate it's contribution to the discussion. I learn from seeing another perspective.
Thank you.