The effects of a brand-specific, hemp-derived cannabidiol product on physiological, biochemical, and psychometric outcomes in healthy adults: a double-blind, randomized clinical trial

J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2024 Dec;21(1):2370430. doi: 10.1080/15502783.2024.2370430. Epub 2024 Jun 21.


BACKGROUND: Cannabidiol (CBD) is a non-psychoactive phyto-cannabinoid derived from the Cannabis sativa plant. CBD exhibits various interactions at receptor sites, prompting the research of its potential anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, psychological, and pain-relieving effects. This study aimed to investigate the physiological, biochemical, and psychometric effects of a brand-specific, hemp-derived CBD product in healthy adults over a 12-week observation period.

METHODS: 54 healthy males and females (age = 25 ± 7y; BMI = 24.82 ± 3.25 kg/m2) recruited from a large Southeastern University completed the study. Participants arrived at the laboratory after > 8 h of fasting, and > 48 h without alcohol consumption and vigorous exercise. Following baseline measurements (height, weight, blood pressure, electrocardiogram (ECG), and blood work), participants were stratified by sex and randomized to either CBD or placebo groups. Products were administered double-blinded, with both given in liquid form containing medium-chain triglyceride oil, while the CBD product specifically contained 50 mg/mL of CBD. Participants were instructed to consume 1 mL of their product twice daily and were given enough product to last until their next laboratory visit. Data were collected at baseline and on days 30 ± 3, 60 ± 3, and 90 ± 3. Blood was drawn for analysis of immune and inflammatory biomarkers. Chronic pain among participants was calculated using urine samples according to the foundational pain index (FPI). Self-reported psychometric questionnaires were utilized (Cohen’s Perceived Stress Scale, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, Profile of Mood States,10-item Likert scale for perceived pain) to assess stress, sleep quality, mood state, and body discomfort. To determine overall wellbeing, participants completed a daily survey indicating if they missed work or school due to illness. Change from baseline was calculated for each measure, and mixed effects models were used to determine differences between groups over time while adjusting for baseline values (α = 0.05). Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation.

RESULTS: There were no Group-by-Time interactions or Group or Time main effects for immune or inflammatory biomarkers (p > 0.05). Analyses revealed no Group-by-Time interactions or main effects observed for perceived stress, sleep quality, overall mood disturbance, and all the profile of mood state subscales (p > 0.05), except “vigor-activity.” A Time main effect was found for the sub-score for “vigor-activity” (p = 0.007; Pre CBD = 19.5 ± 5.2, Post CBD = 17.3 ± 5.3; Pre PL = 19.0 ± 5.7, Post PL = 17.9 ± 7.1), which decreased from Visit 3 to Visit 4 (p = 0.025) and from Visit 3 to Visit 5 (p = 0.014). There was a Group main effect for FPI (p = 0.028; Pre CBD = 11.9 ± 14.4, Post CBD = 8.8 ± 10.9; Pre PL = 9.0 ± 14.2, Post PL = 12.9 ± 11.5), indicating that the placebo group had greater increases in pain over the intervention compared to the CBD group. No significant differences were found between groups in the incidence and prevalence of “colds or flus” (p > 0.05).

DISCUSSION: CBD was safe and well tolerated in healthy adults. These findings show pain was lower in the CBD group, suggesting a potentially positive effect for consumption of CBD. “Vigor-activity” decreased across the intervention, which may be a confounding effect of the academic semester. While the dosage chosen was safe, more research may be warranted using higher doses as these may be needed to observe further therapeutic effects in healthy populations.

PMID:38904150 | DOI:10.1080/15502783.2024.2370430