Cannabinoids Block Cellular Entry of SARS-CoV-2 and variants

[Tom.G]

At least in the lab.

Abstract:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35007072/

Full article:
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jnatprod.1c00946

 

[BillTre]

Interesting. Pot processing seems to be a big business in Oregon. They use a lot of new techniques now for making extracts which were not done when I was in younger. Now there are lots of products foro sale in the pot shops in town.
There's also CBD which is sold as a heath thing.
Anyway, the more ways it can be sold, the happier the producers will be.

I could not tell from the paper where their funding came from. It would not surprise me if some of it were from some kind of growers group.
Some companies have made investments in being able to generate and use genomic data.

When breeding sexes together, by choosing who gets to mate you can direct which organisms generate the next generation. By using molecular data, a breeder can speed this process up a lot, by choosing which animals (those molecularly scored as most genetically advantageous to your cause) make the next generation. Because it is so well directed, the approach can be applied to many individuals each generation, to reduce inbreeding.

 

[Fervent Freyja]

I could not tell from the paper where their funding came from. It would not surprise me if some of it were from some kind of growers group.
Some companies have made investments in being able to generate and use genomic data.

I suspect that you are correct. The author has published a variety of work including on dietary supplements and herbs.

I still think the general claim may be legitimate, but there are other compounds that can block receptors just the same.

 

[Oldman too]

At least in the lab.

Abstract:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35007072/

Full article:
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jnatprod.1c00946

Hi Tom, (and everyone else)
I'm reading the links you've posted, a particular aspect of the uses and benefits in the study have me confused. That being, how do the researchers sort out the differences between Endo and Exo Cannabinoids and their relation to the study results ?

I'm usually marginally okay at searching things for myself but this question gets consistently marginal results, could you or anyone else make a suggestion on finding a credible source or "search parameter" that might be useful ?

Thanks, Scott

 

[Tom.G]

could you or anyone else make a suggestion on finding a credible source or "search parameter" that might be useful ?

Since you indicate that you have done some initial research, perhaps contacting the Author(s) directly would get results.

If they don't respond appropriately, or at all, I would be highly suspicious of the article (and any other articles by them).

Please let us know any results, or non-results, that you get... that would help all of us and also future readers of this thread.

Thanks,
Tom

 

[Ygggdrasil]

Hi Tom, (and everyone else)
I'm reading the links you've posted, a particular aspect of the uses and benefits in the study have me confused. That being, how do the researchers sort out the differences between Endo and Exo Cannabinoids and their relation to the study results ?

I'm usually marginally okay at searching things for myself but this question gets consistently marginal results, could you or anyone else make a suggestion on finding a credible source or "search parameter" that might be useful ?

Thanks, Scott

From quickly browsing the article, it looks like the researchers studied only exocannabinoids (specifically only cannabinoids from hemp). The article does not even mention endocannabinoids.

 

[Oldman too]

From quickly browsing the article, it looks like the researchers studied only exocannabinoids (specifically only cannabinoids from hemp). The article does not even mention endocannabinoids.

Thanks, that helps me frame my question to the Author a little clearer. It's nearly impossible, from a layman's perspective to read these papers and get more than the basic idea... very basic.

It seems to me that with all the research going on concerning the therapeutic aspects of Cannabis, there isn't much focus on the Exo-Endo aspect, leaving me wondering if there aren't "Hidden Variables" not getting considered.

I'm wouldn't for a moment be surprised if Cannabis in some form or another doesn't prove therapeutically beneficial, particularly in certain Neurological conditions and a few other niche areas. I'd also be surprised (stunned actually) if the paper cited in the thread actually got translated into a clinical trial let alone an actual treatment. (Pretty sure that if Cannabinoids prevented Covid, there would have been a lot fewer cases) Medical cannabis is tainted with so many fringe concepts it's going to be a while just getting the benefits realized, let alone put into practice, in the meantime there's going to be a lot of "Sorta Science" getting sold. [Contacting the Author Update]
First attempt at Emailing the Author was blocked when Cloudflare claimed (they were correct) that my Institution's Ray ID wasn't recognized, so no emailing. I'm considering a phone call to his office as an initial contact or a more analogue method, Snail Mail.
Cheers

 

[TeethWhitener]

I could not tell from the paper where their funding came from.

The acknowledgments have sparse details but no funding info. This is weird for an ACS paper nowadays. Not trying to accuse them of anything untoward, but something to keep in mind. FTA:
“The authors thank Shimadzu Scientific Instruments for mass spectrometry support, the Global Hemp Innovation Center for supplying hemp extracts, and the EmerTher company for providing the Ni-NTA magnetic microbeads used in this investigation”

 

[Mike S.]

This should not be interpreted as a treatment, but as pharmaceutical research. A structure in some cannabinoids was identified to bind with energy -6.5 kcal/mol, and "The Kd values for CBGA and CBDA were 19.8 ± 2.7 and 5.6 ± 2.2 μM, respectively. Because THCA-A is a controlled substance, insufficient quantities were available for determination of binding affinity or antiviral activity." Cannabidiol is 314 g/mol, so you need to have a couple of milligrams for every liter of relevant bodily fluid for this binding to be relevant - using in vitro affinities that don't count anything else it might bind to. For comparison, this dog study got concentrations of 400 ng/mL = 0.4 mg/L by feeding the dogs 0.4 mL of oil or 10 milligrams of CBDA (I think, from a quick look). Now even taking into account the size difference of humans, that almost seems doable ... except the dogs only had that concentration two hours after their dose, and it dropped by 50% about every two hours after that.

However, as a lead compound this is great stuff. A derivative might be potent enough to make a lot of money, and the possibility can help drive further useful cannabinoid research.

 

[Oldman too]

These are a little closer to what I'm looking for.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7352399/

https://www.pnas.org/content/114/19/5005

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27133395/