A cohort of human patients previously taking CBD had significantly lower SARSCoV-2 infection incidence of up to an order of magnitude relative to matched pairs or the general population
An order of magnitude is a SIGNIFICANT reduction yall like wow
Link is an updated study 1 from 2022, the link in the post is the original study from 2021
They immediately go on to caution against using CBD against covid but COME ON Y'ALL. Are you readin' what I'm readin'?
CBD is, to my understanding, pretty fucking benign and almost impossible to like OD on. IMO there's no reason outside of cost NOT to be juiced to the gills on CBD all the time, at least if you're worried about covid
Note: the studies note that THC actually inhibits these effects, so you can't just get high on the reefer, you need actual CBD. It also notes various methods of delivery might be more or less biologically active as CBD is very hydrophobic and easily forms clumps that get broken down in the liver
Anyway once again I am left thinking "why does nobody else talk about this"
It weirds me out, honestly, like, with all the other snake oil bullshit attributed to CBD, why not this too? And with people desperate to try literally anything to not die of covid, to the point they drink horse dewormer and their intestines fall out........ why hasn't this gotten any attention? It's like some kind of SCP-####, a blankness in people's attention. This relatively cheap, ubiquitous, non toxic drug could help cut down both covid transmission and severity of infections but nobody talks about doing CBD as a covid prophylactic except for me being a crank about it!
That is one part of what is being discussed here though, and this bit of in vitro experimentation isn't related to the statistical trends noted, where people who were on CBD had a significantly lower rate of infection
I'm high, drunk and turnt af but i'm just gonna say Im pretty sure blasting lung cells with cbd isn't something The Scientists do to prove cbd does something v covid, but rather to help understand how it does what it do by observing how it interacts with a very specific tissue in a very specific circumstance, which some people might interpret as "not having any effect outside of these narrow circumstances" which, idk, i'd say is an inaccurate view. A more accurate view would be "oh, this is how they figured out it specifically triggers these particular intracellular immune responses"
Before i log off for the night, lemme just
Huh sounds like the same thing you're quoting as "the actual study" (which is the same as my initial link btw, at least nothing i quoted is anything i haven't read before) except it literally says healthy individuals on 1500mg of an FDA approved CBD had sufficient concentrations to exhibit therapeutic effects in vivo
The "omg in vitro" argument really doesn't work when therapeutic effects are easily attainable with few side effects, it's not like they're recommending mainlining bleach
SORRY TO DEBATE BRO BUT I'M DRUNK AND FIND YOUR COMMENT WRONG AND INSUFFICIENT
Oh my bad, I only clicked the link in the text, not the main link.
If you're gonna debate bro anything, scientific studies are probably the most appropriate thing to do it with!
It's fine but nah i got too annoyed, I took "not exactly real world science" personally for some reason, lol