Drug Science response to ACMD call for evidence on cannabis-based products for medicinal use
- Isabel Faulkner
- Oct 16
- 3 min read
Updated: Oct 21
By Isabel Faulkner
Drug Science has responded to the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drug’s (ACMD’s) call for evidence related to cannabis-based products for medicinal use (CBPMs). We hope that our evidence will inform future policy decisions, develop rational debate, and support further research into these compounds.
In November 2018, changes were made to the Misuse of Drugs act so that, legally, CBPMs can be prescribed, but only by doctors on the specialist register of the General Medical Council (GMC). Now, 7 years on, the ACMD are calling for evidence to assess how these changes have impacted patients, prescribers, and the general populations perception.
Currently, most CBPMs are not licenced for specific medical conditions, but are used off licence for conditions such as chronic pain, spasticity related to multiple sclerosis (MS), epilepsy, persistent nausea and vomiting, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and insomnia to name but a few.
What benefits have arisen from the 2018 changes to law?
In 2018 the legal status of CBPMs was changed from schedule 1 to schedule 2 making them once again legal to prescribe, however, since 2018 there have only been 6 NHS prescriptions of full spectrum products. Despite this, there have been over 80,000 patients prescribed CBPMs in the private sector. Our response highlights how patient benefit could improve further, outlining an improved patient access pathway, and the need to increase educational resources for healthcare providers..
The lifting of restrictions has also helped research to develop. Notably, Drug Science’s T21 project remains the biggest non-profit patient registry on CBPMs, completed between 2020-2024. We hope this real-world data will help further research and change the licencing pathways for CBPMs to enable future NHS access.
What barriers are still in place?
Changing the legal status of CBPMs brought hope that public attitudes towards cannabis would change; less people would turn to the illicit drug market; and, importantly, patients who were not responding to current treatments would finally have an effective option. However, not all these changes have been forthcoming.
Firstly, it remains difficult for clinicians to prescribe these products. The NICE guidelines, which doctors tend to follow for treatment pathways, are too restricted both in terms of products that are recommended to be prescribed, and the conditions included. Additionally, there is little education surrounding these products in the medical curriculum, therefore doctors may feel apprehensive in prescribing to patients.
Secondly, a specialist doctor must prescribe full spectrum CBMPs in the first instance, which is a timely process for patients. Many turn to the private sector, which creates a disparity in access and makes cost one of the main barriers to obtaining a CBPM. Easier prescribing pathways are needed, and more public education surrounding what is available is required. Many members of the public are still unaware that CBPMs are legal. The stigma surrounding their use remains apparent.
Finally, to address the low public awareness of CBPMs, more funding support is needed for research. Physicians are hesitant to prescribe, patients are unaware of all their options, and it is virtually impossible to obtain a full spectrum prescription on the NHS. Projects such as T21 collect real world data and allow us to monitor patient outcomes for a broad range of conditions longitudinally, strengthening the scientific evidence based on medical cannabis.
