Nora Volkow from the National Institute on Drug Abuse reiterated the decision of (then) two dozen states to allow medical marijuana to be used in one way or another in their jurisdictions. This should open everyone’s eyes to the sanctioning of a non-addictive, non-psychoactive substance which has been linked to benefits for patients suffering from seizure disorders, quite a few neurodegenerative disorders or pain resulting from cancer.

All this means that scientists can still only obtain marijuana-derived CBD from farms licensed by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (which until this year meant only one farm owned by the University of Mississippi). As for whether you should have a preference for CBD that comes from hemp, marijuana, or a pure synthetically produced version, there are some theories that THC—and even the smell and taste of cannabis—might make CBD more effective, but Bonn-Miller says these ideas have yet to be proven.
So am I to assume, due to no response/deleted comment that my simple question was too difficult to answer? With all the technical & correct information you have on you GREAT website, can someone (?) not simply correct or acknowledge the FACT the your NOT using nano-particle size product? I am truly interesting (for my wife) in CBD, have done my research, and I love working with numbers which is why if found this discrepancy. Comments welcome, but avoidance is disturbing.
×