Daily Archives: January 4, 2020

For all the flak the pharmaceutical industry has taken for its exorbitant pricing practices, theres no getting around the fact that its been a pretty stunning decade for medical progress.

Multiple new categories of medicines have moved from dreams and lab benches into the market and peoples lives, and investors who came along for the ride often reaped extraordinary profits. The Nasdaq Biotech Index is up 360% over the last 10 years to the S&P 500s 190%. And thats without mentioning the hundreds of billions of dollars in takeovers that rewarded shareholders with windfalls.

As 2020 approaches, its worth highlighting how far weve come in the last decade in developing new therapies and approaches to treating disease, even as politicians grapple with how to rein in healthcare costs without breaking an ecosystem that incentivizes the search for new discoveries. Here are some of the decades biggest medical breakthroughs:

First approved in the U.S. two years ago, these treatments still sound like science fiction. Drugmakers harvest immune cells from patients, engineer them to hunt tumors, grow them by the millions into a living drug, and reinfuse them. Yescarta from Gilead Sciences Inc. and Novartiss Kymriah the two treatments approved so far can put patients with deadly blood cancers into remission in some cases. At the beginning of the decade, academics were just beginning early patient tests.

Its still in the early days for the technology, and some issues are holding these drugs back. There are significant side effects, and the bespoke manufacturing process is expensive and time-consuming. That has contributed to a bruising price tag: Both of the approved medicines cost over $350,000 for a single treatment. And for now, cell therapy is mostly limited to very sick patients who have exhausted all other alternatives.

Luckily, more options are on their way. Some drugmakers are focused on different types of blood cancers. Others hope to mitigate side effects or create treatments that can be grown from donor cells to reduce expenses and speed up treatment. In the longer run, companies are targeting trickier solid tumors. Scientists wouldnt be looking so far into the future without this decades extraordinary progress.

Researchers have spent years trying to figure out how to replace faulty DNA to cure genetic diseases, potentially with as little as one treatment. Scientific slip-ups and safety issues derailed a wave of initial excitement about these therapies starting in the 1990s; the first two such treatments to be approved in Europe turned out to be commercial flops.

This decade, the technology has come of age. Luxturna, a treatment developed by Spark Therapeutics Inc. for a rare eye disease, became the first gene therapy to get U.S. approval in late 2017. Then in May came the approval of Novartiss Zolgensma for a deadly muscle-wasting disease. The drugs have the potential to stave off blindness and death or significant disability with a single dose, and, unsurprisingly, Big Pharma has given them a substantial financial endorsement. Roche Holding paid $4.7 billion to acquire Spark this year, while Novartis spent $8.7 billion in 2018 to buy Zolgensma developer Avexis Inc.

Dozens of additional therapies are in development for a variety of other conditions and should hit the market in the next few years. They offer the tantalizing potential not just to cure diseases, but to replace years of wildly expensive alternative treatment. If drugmakers can resist the temptation to squeeze out every ounce of value by doing things like charging $2.1 million for Zolgensma, theres potential for these treatments to save both lives and money.

The above treatments modify DNA; this group uses the bodys messaging system to turn a patients cells into a drug factory or interrupt a harmful process. Two scientists won a Nobel Prize in 2006 for discoveries related to RNA interference, or RNAi, one approach to making this type of drug, showing its potential to treat difficult diseases. That prompted an enormous amount of hype and investment, but a series of clinical failures and safety issues led large drugmakers to give up on the approach. Sticking with it into this decade paid off.

Alnylam Inc. has been working since 2002 to figure out the thorny problems plaguing this class of treatments. It brought two RNAi drugs for rare diseases to the market in the last two years and has more on the way. The technology is also moving from small markets to larger ones: Novartis just paid $9.7 billion to acquire Medicines Co. for its Alnylam-developed drug that can substantially lower cholesterol with two annual treatments.

Ionis Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Biogen Inc. collaborated on Spinraza, a so-called antisense drug that became the first effective treatment for a deadly rare disease. It was approved in late 2016 and had one of the most impressive drug launches of the decade. And Moderna Therapeutics rode a wave of promising messenger RNA-based medicines to the most lucrative biotechnology initial public offering of all time in 2018. From pharma abandonment to multiple approvals and blockbuster sales potential in under 10 years. Not bad!

Scientists had been working on ways to unleash the human immune system on cancers well before the 2010s without much luck. Checkpoint inhibitors drugs that release the brakes on the bodys defense mechanisms have since produced outstanding results in a variety of cancers and are the decades most lucrative turnaround story.

Merck got Keytruda via its 2009 acquisition of Schering-Plough, but it was far from the focus of that deal. Once Bristol-Myers Squibb & Co. produced promising results for its similar drug, Opdivo, Merck started a smart development plan that has turned Keytruda into the worlds most valuable cancer medicine. Its now available to treat more than 10 types of the disease, and has five direct competitors in the U.S. alone. Analysts expect the category to exceed $25 billion in sales next year.

If anything, the drugs may have been too successful. Copycat efforts are pulling money that could fund more innovative research. There are thousands of trials underway attempting to extend the reach of these medicines by combining them with other drugs. Some are based more on wishful thinking than firm scientific footing. Still, the ability to shrink some previously intractable tumors is a considerable advance. If drugmakers finally figure out the right combinations and competition creates pricing pressure that boosts access, these medicines will do even more in the years to come.

From a combined economic and public-health standpoint, a new group of highly effective hepatitis C medicines may outstrip just about anything else on this list so far. Cure rates for earlier treatments werent especially high; they took some time to work and had nasty side effects. The approval of Gileads Sovaldi in 2013, followed in time by successor drugs such as AbbVie Inc.s Mavyret, have made hepatitis C pretty easily curable in a matter of weeks. For Gilead, getting to market rapidly with its drug proved enormously profitable; it raked in over $40 billion in revenue in just three years.

Hepatitis C causes liver damage over time that can lead to transplants or cancer. The existence of a rapid cure is a significant long-term boon even if the initial pricing on the drugs made them, in some cases, prohibitively expensive. Sovaldi notoriously cost $1,000 per pill at launch and over $80,000 for a course of treatment. The good news is that treatments have become a lot more affordable, which should allow this class of drugs to have a broad and lasting positive health effect.

Hepatitis C is one of the relatively few markets where the drug-pricing system has worked well. As competing medicines hit the market, the effective cost of these treatments plummeted. That, in turn, made the drugs more accessible to state Medicaid programs and prison systems, which operate on tight budgets and care for populations with higher rates of hepatitis C infection. Louisiana has pioneered the use of a Netflix model, under which the state paid an upfront fee for unlimited access to the drug. Its an arrangement that will help cure thousands of patients, and other states are expected to follow its lead.

Many of the medicines highlighted in this column have list prices in the six figures, a trend thats helped drive up Americas drug spending by more than $100 billion since 2009. Building on this decades medical advances is going to lead to even more effective medicines that will probably come with steeper prices.

Id like to hope that policymakers will come up with a solution that better balances the need to reward innovation with the need to keep medicines accessible.

That would really be a breakthrough.

Read the original:

The 2010s were a decade of medical breakthroughs - Los Angeles Times

It expects a recovery in vape sales to boost its fortunes, while it gains from expanded cannabis production in Nevada and licensing deals

1933 Industries Inc () (OTCMKTS:TGIFF) CEO Chris Rebentisch said Monday that the company anticipates a recoveryin vape sales as it reported first quarter financial results for fiscal year 2020.

In a statement accompanying the Vancouver, British Columbia companys latest numbers, Rebentisch said: Company revenues for first quarter 2020 were impacted by lower than expected sales from vape products, largely attributed to the rampant use of vitamin E acetate in black market products.

Despite weakness in this segment, we anticipate a recovery in vape sales across both our Alternative Medicine Association (AMA) and Infused MFG subsidiaries as well as the demand in the supply chain for distillate normalizing in Nevada in early 2020.

The 1933 Industries boss said that with over 100+ SKUs across 5 product lines, and 8 licensing partners, the companys diversified product portfolio and product mix will help to boost future growth.

Over the last two years of operations we have built AMA and Canna Hemp into valuable and respected brands, said Rebentisch.

We have attracted the top brand names in the industry as our partners in Nevada, and we are expanding our physical footprint to build a sustainable foundation for growth, he added.

The companys cultivation arm, Alternative Medicine Association, recently received the exclusive rights to cultivate flower, manufacture pre-rolls, live resin vape pens and cartridges under the Blonde brand for distribution to licensed dispensaries in Nevada. The subsidiary has another licensing agreement with California-based PLUGplay which allows AMA to make distillate and vape pens under the PLUGplay brand for dispensaries across Nevada.

Rebentisch said that cannabis sales continue to remain strong in Nevada, touching $639 million in the fiscal year ended June 30. Interestingly, 80% of the sales came from Clark County, according to Nevada tax numbers.

For the fiscal first quarter 2020 period which ended on October 31, the company posted revenue of $3.9 million, down 26% from the previous quarter, mainly due to the decline in market share for vape and distillate sales in the recreational market in Nevada.

Vaping accounts for 25% of cannabis sales in Nevada, and according to economic analysis firm New Frontier while the nationwide decline was 15% during the first week of September, at the state level, Nevada saw a drop of 32% in vape sales.

Meanwhile, the companys CBD wellness products made through its subsidiary Infused MFG continued to gain traction and contributed $2.1 million in revenue during the quarter. The rest of the $1.8 million in revenue came from Alternative Medicine Association.

The companys cash position in the fiscal first quarter stood at $14.9 million, compared to $17.6 million on July 31. The company had $21.4 million in working capital during the quarter.

1993 Industries has total assets estimated at $61.4 million during the fiscal first quarter, compared to $56 million in the same quarter in fiscal year 2019.

Our current cash position allows us to continue our operations, service debenture interest obligations and fund our capital needs, said Rebentisch.

We are confident that we will achieve significant growth in 2020, driven by our expanded cannabis production in Nevada, our near-term entry into the California market, increased distribution into new markets for our Canna Hemp line and the development of products in support of our licensing agreements, he added.

1993 Industries completed the first harvest at its new facility inLas Vegas, Nevada.Two zones were harvested yielding 450 pounds of flower and trim, as well as 250 pounds of fresh frozen flower, which will be used to produce oils, bulk distillate, and live resin for its premium products. The next growth cycle will start in mid-January and be harvested in March. At full production, the company expects to harvest every 10 to 14 days. AMA is growing 26 strain varieties as well as 12 Cannabis Cup winning strains from the company's licensing partner, OG DNA Genetics.

Rebentisch noted:"We learned a lot from our first harvest in the new facility, taking the time to adjust and perfect our automated systems, calibrating the optimal water and nutrient distribution to our plants, and ensuring the ideal drying process in order to promote the genetic potential of the flowers."

"Our craft cannabis processes of hand trimming and curing, with no chemical protection utilized in our indoor grow, differentiates our products in the market and provides our consumers with premium quality, safe cannabis products," he added.

1933 Industries, based in Chilliwack, British Columbia, owns licensed medical and adult-use cannabis cultivation and production assets, proprietary hemp-based, CBD-infused branded products, CBD extraction services and a specialized cannabis advisory firm.

Updates with harvest details

Contact the author Uttara Choudhury at[emailprotected]

Follow her onTwitter:@UttaraProactive

Continue reading here:

1933 Industries expects growth in vape sales in 2020 as it posts fiscal 1Q numbers - Proactive Investors USA & Canada

Timothy Caulfield is a Canada Research Chair in Health Law and Policy at the University of Alberta and host of the documentary series A Users Guide to Cheating Death.

While pseudoscience and quackery have been around a long time, the 2010s were truly the decade of bunk. The reach and influence of misinformation has intensified to the point that it feels near impossible to find the truth in the churning sea of falsehoods, exaggerated claims and fear mongering.

Social media advertising pushes anti-vaccine myths, celebrity health brands aggressively sell rubbish ideas and products, health-care providers and research institutions hype unproven therapies and there are wild conspiracy theories about everything from GMOs to fluoride to milk. And the media reporting on all these topics often adds more confusion than clarity.

Story continues below advertisement

As someone who studies the public representations of science, the decade was both exhausting and a bit depressing. But there is good news. More and more entities including governments, universities and professional organizations are recognizing the importance of this issue. This year, the World Health Organization declared the spread of vaccine misinformation one of the top threats to public health.

The 2010s have been called the post-truth decade. What can we do to make the next decade more, if only a little, about the truth? What can we do to create a cultural shift that allows science and critical thinking to rise above the noise of nonsense? While this is obviously a complicated issue that will require us to deploy a host of strategies, here are a few to get us started.

Correcting misinformation is a complex and increasingly difficult endeavour. Falsehoods and exaggerated claims are injected into an information environment that is already clouded by a tangle of values, ideological agendas and preconceived ideas about what is healthy and what is not. As such, merely making the science-informed facts publicly available be it about the value of vaccines or the uselessness of detox diets will often have little impact.

A body of evidence suggests that just correcting misinformation (debunking) will not change minds and may even cause some to become more entrenched in their misplaced views. While the influence and prevalence of this backfire effect is frequently overstated, its existence highlights how challenging the battle against misinformation can be.

In addition, because of our strong tendency to consume information that confirms our beliefs a psychological phenomenon called the confirmation bias we often do not even see, read or consider alternative views.

But despite these and many other psychological barriers that can make us less than receptive to evidence that might correct misinformation, presenting people with the facts can still make a difference. A 2015 study, for example, found that emphasizing the strength and breadth of the scientific consensus on a topic is an effective strategy, perhaps because this helps to correct perceptions of false balance (that is, the perception that the evidence on either side of an issue is more balanced or contested than it actually is). A 2019 study found that not responding publicly to science deniers on topics such as vaccination can have a negative effect on public beliefs and actions. The silence leaves inaccuracies unchecked. But the researchers also found that a fact-filled rebuttal that corrects specific inaccuracies can make a difference. The study found that not engaging on the issue that is, silence from the experts results in "the worst effect.

So, yes, while facts alone will often not be enough, facts still matter. We should not shy away from battling bunk with the good science. But how we provide that science also matters.

Story continues below advertisement

There is some evidence that humans are biologically predisposed (thanks, evolution) to respond to stories and anecdotes. This is one reason misinformation can have such a persuasive punch: it is often wrapped in a compelling narrative. And, unfortunately, those pushing bunk health products and ideas are particularly adept with anecdotes. They are used to hawk all sorts of science-free hokum, such as miracle cures for debilitating diseases, celebrity diets and anti-vaccine fear mongering.

In many ways, social media are platforms for sharing personal narratives. Even if you dont want to, it is easy to come across a post reflecting on a personal experience that, intentionally or not, pushes a science-free position. For example, a recent study found that even though Instagram has more pro-vaccine posts, the anti-vaccine ones have more engagement. And this is because, at least in part, the opponents of vaccines are more likely to use powerful narratives, usually about harm.

These kinds of health-related anecdotes leverage several of our hardwired psychological tendencies: the negativity effect (we respond more strongly to negative than positive information); the availability bias (dramatic examples that are easy to recall can be more influential); and our natural attraction to a relatable story.

Anecdotes are also often used as the primary rationale for science-free health-care services. A study I did with my colleague Alessandro Marcon found that those arguing for alternative medicine in this case, chiropractic services most often support their position with anecdotes, rather than science. Unfortunately, despite the fact that anecdotes should not be considered good evidence, they can be very convincing, as they can interfere with our ability to think scientifically.

Given this reality, the battle against health misinformation will require science advocates to use a variety of engaging and creative communication strategies, including stories, images and art, and shareable messages that are social-media friendly (remember MediaSmarts House Hippo campaign?). Science needs to be inserted into the broader conversation in a way that will allow it to compete with the narrative-filled misinformation circulating in popular culture. Absorbing and entertaining science stories are everywhere. Lets use them.

While correcting misinformation is essential, the best way to stop it from having an adverse impact on public health is to encourage the application of critical thinking. Studies have consistently found that it is possible to teach such skills, even to the relatively young, and that this can help to inoculate individuals from the sway of health bunk. This should include providing basic tools to evaluate claims of efficacy, such as the reality that an anecdote or a testimonial is not good evidence, no matter how compelling.

Story continues below advertisement

Lets encourage a culture of fact-checking and a reverence for accuracy. We need to constantly remind ourselves (and others) to think before sharing. In most situations, people do not intentionally spread misinformation because they have some malevolent agenda (although this certainly happens). In the kerfuffle of our daily lives, we are simply too distracted to pause and consider, for instance, the veracity of that post that claimed tanning your bum is health-enhancing (an actual story, and, no, its not a good health strategy). However, a recent study found that simply reminding people to think about the concept of accuracy can increase the quality of the news they share (please consider this a reminder).

Rising public distrust of science institutions (44 per cent of Canadians think scientists are elitist), ideological polarization and frustration (right or not) with the health-care system has created an environment that has allowed misinformation to thrive. And, of course, the spreading of misinformation has facilitated the growth of these kinds of sentiments, making people even more distrustful and receptive to misleading health information. A destructive feedback loop is creating a science-sucking vortex that is pulling us into an all knowledge is relative and not to be trusted Dark Age.

So while we need to fight health misinformation with creative communication strategies and critical thinking, we also need to tackle the systemic issues that make the misinformation so intuitively appealing and believable. When people feel as if conventional health-care providers ignore them, or they hear about pharmaceutical scandals, it is much easier for them to believe stories about the efficacy of alternative therapies and conspiracy theories about Big Pharma. When regulated health professionals are allowed to market unproven therapies, it may seem hypocritical to condemn the pseudoscience pushed by celebrity wellness gurus.

Good research, robust oversight and scientific integrity are essential to the struggle against misinformation. Without good science and public trust in that science, Im not sure if the fight against misinformation is winnable.

Link:

To win the fight against health and wellness bunk, we must leave the post-truth era in the past - The Globe and Mail

MPs will seek greater clarity on the issue of active mobility and personal mobility devices (PMDs) when Parliament sits next Monday.

Four MPs have filed questions on cycling paths and footpaths, e-scooters and electric bicycles, as well as food delivery riders, according to the agenda for the sitting - or Order Paper - issued by the Clerk of Parliament yesterday.

These include whether there are plans to regulate electric bike use on roads, how many more kilometres of cycling paths will be built by the year's end and whether there are measures to ensure the increase in e-bike riders as a result of the PMD ban will not lead to more accidents, or road traffic and active mobility offences.

Their questions follow the implementation on New Year's Day of the Land Transport Authority's zero-tolerance stance on PMDs on footpaths.

The footpath ban kicked in on Nov 5 after a series of e-scooter-related accidents but, until New Year's Eve, the authorities had been issuing warnings to errant riders.

Under the new rules, e-scooters, which have already been banned from roads, are now confined to cycling paths.

Workers' Party Non-Constituency MP Dennis Tan noted that new e-bike users who previously rode e-scooters are used to a different piece of equipment and different set of rules.

"The willingness and ability of the delivery riders to adhere to the corresponding laws applicable to e-bikes will ensure a smooth and safe transition, and hopefully preclude new incidents of traffic or active mobility offences or accidents," he said.

Other issues MPs will raise include the application of Singapore's fake news law and the Ministry of Education's policy on withholding results slips from students who have not paid in full their school fees.

Nominated MP Anthea Ong has filed two questions for Communications and Information Minister S. Iswaran on the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (Pofma).

She wants to know how the threshold of public interest is determined and measured in the case of online falsehoods, whether the Ministry of Communications and Information will consider creating a central listing of all issued directions on the Pofma website, and what steps are being taken to maintain public trust in the light of perceptions of a partisan political bias over recent applications of the law.

Said Ms Ong: "Now that the Pofma office is set up and Pofma has been used, it's important and timely to seek further clarification regarding accountability and implementation, especially given the partisan nature of all the corrections so far."

Dr Teo Ho Pin (Bukit Panjang) and Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten) have filed questions for Education Minister Ong Ye Kung, asking how many students' results slips have been withheld by schools in the last few years and whether the Education Ministry will review the practice.

Said Mr Lim: "It is important to understand the intent of withholding the PSLE certificate. If it embarrasses the student or parent, then it should not be done. We should find another way to ensure that students or parents do their part to pay the fees. To me, the financial assistance route would be the preferred option."

Workers' Party chief Pritam Singh's (Aljunied GRC) question for Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong is whether the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee has completed its deliberations and when its report will be released to the public.

Mr Louis Ng (Nee Soon GRC) and Mr Ong Teng Koon (Marsiling-Yew Tee GRC) will raise the issue of cat ownership in Housing Board flats.

Three Bills are up for debate on Monday, including the Health Ministry's Healthcare Services Bill that would replace the Private Hospitals and Medical Clinics Act.

The new law has a wider scope that includes traditional medicine, allied healthcare such as physiotherapy, as well as complementary and alternative medicine to reflect changes in the healthcare scene.

Go here to see the original:

PMDs and Pofma among issues on MPs' agenda - The Straits Times

SINGAPORE - MPs will seek greater clarity on the issue of active mobility and personal mobility devices (PMDs) when Parliament sits on Monday (Jan 6).

The questions four MPs have filed were on cycling paths and footpaths, e-scooters and electric bicycles, as well as food delivery riders, according to the agenda for the sitting - or Order Paper - issued by the Clerk of Parliament on Friday (Jan 3).

These include whether there are plans to regulate electric bicycle use on roads, how many more kilometres of cycling paths will be built by year's end and whether there are measures to ensure the increase in electric bike riders as a result of the PMD ban will not lead to more accidents, or road traffic and active mobility offences.

Their questions follow the implementation on New Year's Day of the Land Transport Authority's zero-tolerance stance on PMDs on footpaths.

The footpath ban kicked in on Nov 5 following a series of e-scooter-related accidents but until New Year's Eve, the authorities had been issuing warnings to errant riders.

Under the new rules, e-scooters, which had been banned on roads previously, are now confined to cycling paths.

Other issues MPs will raise include the application of Singapore's fake news law and the Ministry of Education's policy on withholding results slip from students who have not paid in full their school fees.

Nominated MP Anthea Ong has filed two questions for the Communications and Information Minister S. Iswaran on the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (Pofma).

She wants to know how the threshold of public interest is determined and measured in the case of online falsehoods, whether the Ministry of Communications and Information will consider creating a central listing of all issued directions on the Pofma website, and what steps are being taken to maintain public trust in the light of perceptions of a partisan political bias over recent applications of the law.

Dr Teo Ho Pin (Bukit Panjang) and Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten) have filed questions for Education Minister Ong Ye Kung, asking how many students' results slips have been withheld by schools in the last few years and whether the Education Ministry will review the practice.

Workers' Party chief Pritam Singh's (Aljunied GRC) question for Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong is whether the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee has completed its deliberations and when its report will be released to the public.

Mr Louis Ng (Nee Soon GRC) and Mr Ong Teng Koon (Marsiling-Yew Tee GRC) will raise the issue of cat ownership in Housing Board flats.

Seven Bills will also be introduced at Monday's session.

They include the Transport Ministry's new Bill on the control and licensing of shared mobility enterprises, which may include bike- and car-sharing firms, as well as amendments to the Merchant Shipping (Maritime Labour Convention) Act and the Active Mobility Act.

The Law Ministry's new Bill is on the Singapore Convention on Mediation, an international treaty named after Singapore that was signed by 46 countries in August last year, plus an amendment to the Geographical Indications Act.

The Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources will file amendments to the Hazardous Waste (Control of Export, Import and Transit) Act and the National Environment Agency Act.

Three Bills are up for debate, including the Health Ministry's Healthcare Services Bill that would replace the Private Hospitals and Medical Clinics Act.

The new law has a wider scope that includes traditional medicine, allied healthcare such as physiotherapy, as well as complementary and alternative medicine to reflect changes in the healthcare scene.

Read the original here:

PMDs and fake news law are among issues MPs will raise in Parliament on Monday - The Straits Times

With the growing, selling, and consumption of marijuana being legalized in many states in the US, it has become a lucrative investment for those who are forward-thinking enough to get into the market early.

There are now so many more studies showing the benefits of marijuana-derived products like CBD and THC, that more people are willing to try this alternative medicine for themselves.

At first, it might seem like growing and selling marijuana products is a simple thing to do, but there is a lot to consider before you plant your first seed. We are going to go over some things that you need to know about before you start growing marijuana.

If you want to start a business growing cannabis, you need to consider the legalities before doing so. Firstly, is it legal in the state in which you reside? There are 1o states where marijuana is legal and more could follow soon.

Some states allow recreational and medical use, but they do not allow the production of commercialization. The states that allow the legal distribution of marijuana are Washington, Oregon, Nevada, Massachusetts, Maine, Colorado, California, and Alaska.

To sell legally, you need to get a license from the state authorities where you live. The basic requirements include a business format, a tax ID number, DBA filing, general business license, sales tax permit, and various other permissions particular to individual states.

Once you have all of this in order, you can start producing marijuana.

Marijuana plants, just like all other living things, need the right environment to flourish. There are many strains of cannabis that have different growing preferences, and they have different effects when smoked or ingested. Now, it is easy to order seeds online with the exact description of the product and what is required to grow it successfully.

It is also important to note that even in states where selling and growing is sanctioned there are restrictions as to where the growing can be done. There are usually restrictions about how close it is to a school, park, library, or other public areas.

You have two options when thinking about where to grow, outdoor or indoor.

When considering an outdoor facility, you have to look into your local state requirements. Most states require a fence or boundary around the plantation with minimum height requirements. Also, some states limit the plant height to 10 feet tall.

With outdoor plants, you have to consider the climate. Is there enough sunlight during the average day? Is there too much rain, snow, or other extreme weather conditions? These are all things to consider when planning outdoor cultivation.

Indoor facilities are generally considered a better option because you can control the growing environment much more precisely. However, the costs of setting up an indoor grow can be prohibitive.

You must consider temperature, humidity, lighting, irrigation, growing mediums, and pest control. If you get all these things right, you can expect to produce a lot of quality cannabis and make substantial profits.

When running a business, it is important to be as efficient as possible. To attract more clients, having a reputation as an environmentally friendly grower is important, too.

It is a good idea to invest in solar panels to power lighting, watering systems, and your other production energy requirements. You should also recycle water and install a rainwater collection system to supply your plants. A few years after the initial capital outlay, your reduced energy and water bills will increase the profitability of your business.

Above is a general overview of what you need to know about growing cannabis. However, selling is another challenge. You have to consider the security of your plants, proper employee training, and background checking, packaging, transportation, product testing, and marketing.

Producing marijuana is a growing business that is set to progress further as more states legalize the production and sales of cannabis. It requires some effort and planning in the early stages, but having the first-mover advantage will ensure the best possible chance of success. Now is a great time to consider this pioneering industry.

See the article here:

Growing Marijuana: What you Need to Know - Baltimore Post-Examiner

The CBD industry is booming because of the promising health benefits that this cannabinoid compound provides. Cannabidiol or CBD has truly gained so much popularity in the world of health and wellness. It is a great pain reliever and helps reduce signs and symptoms of inflammation or infection. Is CBD a promising alternative medicine to protect and boost immunity?

In this post, youll learn more about how CBD can help ease inflammation so that you can choose the best CBD product for you and your loved ones.

CBD Has Anti-inflammatory Properties

Cannabidiol or CBD is effective for inflammation because it has natural anti-inflammatory properties. The human body is composed of an endocannabinoid system or ECS comprised of endocannabinoids, or endogenous lipid-based neurotransmitters that attach to cannabinoid receptors. The proteins of cannabinoid receptors are present in the immune system, as well as the peripheral and central nervous system, including the vertebrae and the brain.

Here are the good-to-know facts about CBDs anti-inflammatory properties:

CBD Reduces Pain and Inflammation

As CBD enters the human body, it attaches itself to CB2 receptors, which trigger the body to produce natural cannabinoids. These natural cannabinoids attach themselves to CB2 receptors to counteract pain and inflammation.

In a CBD pain management study, cannabinoids, including CBD, can help treat pain. CB2 receptors are confined to immune and lymphoid tissues, which are proven to be essential mediators for suppressing inflammation and pain. CBD promotes the signaling of adenosine receptors, a neurotransmitter or nervous system chemical, which inhibits the perception of pain and promotes relaxation and sleep.

CBD Lowers the Risk of Heart Disease

Heart disease can be caused by different reasons, such as stress, an unhealthy lifestyle, diet, and bacteria. One type of heart disease is endocarditis or inflammation of the inner lining of the heart valves and chambers. Endocarditis occurs when fungi, bacteria, or other microorganisms spread and reach the heart from other parts of your body, such as the mouth and lungs.

For your heart health, its high time to consider taking high-quality CBD. It will help reduce your risk of heart disease and stroke. You may consume CBD oil every day as a daily supplement to your heart medications.

Here are the different ways you can administer CBD for your cardiovascular health:

CBD Is Immunosuppressive

The mechanism of CBD involves the direct suppression of immune cell activation. It promotes regulatory cells to help control other immune cells, thus reducing or eliminating signs and symptoms of inflammation, such as the following:

Conclusion

Yes, CBD can help inflammation. Cannabidiol or CBD is a potent cannabinoid compound that can help reduce the signs and symptoms of inflammation, pain, stress, and anxiety. Its good for the heart, nervous system, and the immune system because CBD attaches to cannabinoid receptors to stimulate immune, nervous, and heart responses, promoting health and wellness.

Related

comments

Here is the original post:

Can CBD Help Inflammation? What To Know - Odisha Diary