Furthermore maybe this cost will be the problem in North America...because of cheaper "unregulated" competition
There are numerous Hemp growing operations springing up especially in Canada and Colorado where the possession/growing is becoming accepted.
Unlike pharma cartels, there is market competition apparently going on and the cost of medicinal pot is tumbling.
Add to this the lack of requirement to demonstrate real efficacy for medicinal purposes,like other nutricienticals, then real pharma is going to have their work cut out to get their foot in to the medicinal cannabis market.
The number of pot growers stating that they know it works because they use it themselves (say no more) and the effects are always remarkable....Much of it sounds however frankly unbelievable. There are millions of people using cannabis and if cannabis could really reverse (I am not saying their is no benefit..but cures?) disease conditions...the proof would be there or easy to come by. They sound like (bad) used car salesmen, who would sell their gran for a quick buck.
The failures of academic neuros to show benefits from THC in progression (CUPID) may have probably killed off interest in research in this area room a pharmaceutical perspective.
However because of the wide availability and use of marijuana, outside of pharma, suggests that it would be worth further investigating the effects on progression, where the majority of research suggests a neuroprotective potential.
It is clear that some components of cannabis can compete to stop this benefit being realised. Would you want to know which mix of components offer benefit...This needs real data not the hear say from pot shops.
What is the merit say of a 1:1 mix of Cannabidiol over tetrahydrocannabinol say compared to 20:1 or no cannadidiol. It is claimed that CBD reduces the side effects of THC...so why therefore would it not reduce the therapeutic effects? Where's the data, where's the biology.
CoI: We are developing in a competing product.