Cannabinoid Content and Label Accuracy of Various Hemp-Derived Haircare, Cosmetic, and Edible Products Available at Retail Stores and Online in the United States.

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research Pub Date : 2024-07-19 DOI:10.1089/can.2024.0039
Ashley N Dowd, C Austin Zamarripa, Dennis J Sholler, Edward J Cone, Timothy P Murphy, Mahmoud ElSohly, Kareem ElSohly, Waseem Gul, Iram Shahzadi, Lawrance D Mullen, Ruth E Winecker, Ronald R Flegel, Ryan Vandrey, Tory R Spindle
{"title":"Cannabinoid Content and Label Accuracy of Various Hemp-Derived Haircare, Cosmetic, and Edible Products Available at Retail Stores and Online in the United States.","authors":"Ashley N Dowd, C Austin Zamarripa, Dennis J Sholler, Edward J Cone, Timothy P Murphy, Mahmoud ElSohly, Kareem ElSohly, Waseem Gul, Iram Shahzadi, Lawrance D Mullen, Ruth E Winecker, Ronald R Flegel, Ryan Vandrey, Tory R Spindle","doi":"10.1089/can.2024.0039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Aim:</b> To evaluate the label accuracy and content of various hemp-derived cannabidiol (CBD) products (cannabinoid products with ≤0.3% Δ<sup>9</sup>-tetrahydrocannabinol [THC]), as well as evaluate advertised claims on product labels. <b>Methods:</b> Hemp haircare, cosmetics, and food/drink products that were advertised to contain CBD were purchased from retail stores in the Baltimore, Maryland area (purchased in July 2020) and online (purchased in August 2020). Cannabinoid concentrations were measured using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Percent deviations between labeled and actual CBD concentrations were determined. Label information such as references to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), external testing claims, and other claims (i.e., cosmetic or beauty, therapeutic, health halo effect, or \"other\") were quantified. <b>Results:</b> Ninety-seven products were purchased (35 in-store, 62 online). Of the 71 products with a specific total CBD amount on the label, 35 (49%) were underlabeled (>10% more CBD than advertised), 27 (38%) were overlabeled (>10% less CBD than advertised), and 9 (12.7%) were accurately labeled (within ±10% of labeled CBD). The median (range) percentage deviations were -53% (-100%-76%) for haircare products, +18% (-100%-1076%) for cosmetics, and -1% (-100%-4468%) for food/drinks. CBD label accuracy did not differ significantly between products with external testing claims versus those without (<i>t</i><sub>40</sub> = 0.23, <i>p</i> = 0.82). Overall, 24% of the 97 (total) products made a cosmetic or beauty claim (e.g., \"skin looks more youthful\"), 40% made a therapeutic claim (e.g., \"pain relief\"), and 86% made a health halo effect claim (e.g., \"paraben-free,\" \"dye-free,\" etc.). Most products (63%) did not include a disclaimer that claims had not been evaluated by the FDA. <b>Conclusions:</b> Most of the products included in this sample were inaccurately labeled for CBD content, including those claiming to have been tested by third party laboratories. A notable finding was that 10 products did not contain any CBD. Many products made therapeutic claims or used marketing tactics to seemingly convey they were safe/healthy, but only about one-third included disclaimers that these statements had not been evaluated by the FDA. These findings highlight the need for proper regulatory oversight of cannabinoid-containing products to ensure quality assurance and deter misleading or unfounded health claims in product marketing.</p>","PeriodicalId":9386,"journal":{"name":"Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/can.2024.0039","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: To evaluate the label accuracy and content of various hemp-derived cannabidiol (CBD) products (cannabinoid products with ≤0.3% Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol [THC]), as well as evaluate advertised claims on product labels. Methods: Hemp haircare, cosmetics, and food/drink products that were advertised to contain CBD were purchased from retail stores in the Baltimore, Maryland area (purchased in July 2020) and online (purchased in August 2020). Cannabinoid concentrations were measured using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Percent deviations between labeled and actual CBD concentrations were determined. Label information such as references to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), external testing claims, and other claims (i.e., cosmetic or beauty, therapeutic, health halo effect, or "other") were quantified. Results: Ninety-seven products were purchased (35 in-store, 62 online). Of the 71 products with a specific total CBD amount on the label, 35 (49%) were underlabeled (>10% more CBD than advertised), 27 (38%) were overlabeled (>10% less CBD than advertised), and 9 (12.7%) were accurately labeled (within ±10% of labeled CBD). The median (range) percentage deviations were -53% (-100%-76%) for haircare products, +18% (-100%-1076%) for cosmetics, and -1% (-100%-4468%) for food/drinks. CBD label accuracy did not differ significantly between products with external testing claims versus those without (t40 = 0.23, p = 0.82). Overall, 24% of the 97 (total) products made a cosmetic or beauty claim (e.g., "skin looks more youthful"), 40% made a therapeutic claim (e.g., "pain relief"), and 86% made a health halo effect claim (e.g., "paraben-free," "dye-free," etc.). Most products (63%) did not include a disclaimer that claims had not been evaluated by the FDA. Conclusions: Most of the products included in this sample were inaccurately labeled for CBD content, including those claiming to have been tested by third party laboratories. A notable finding was that 10 products did not contain any CBD. Many products made therapeutic claims or used marketing tactics to seemingly convey they were safe/healthy, but only about one-third included disclaimers that these statements had not been evaluated by the FDA. These findings highlight the need for proper regulatory oversight of cannabinoid-containing products to ensure quality assurance and deter misleading or unfounded health claims in product marketing.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国零售店和网上销售的各种大麻衍生护发、化妆品和食用产品的大麻素含量和标签准确性。
目的:评估各种大麻衍生大麻二酚 (CBD) 产品(Δ9-四氢大麻酚 [THC]≤0.3%的大麻产品)的标签准确性和含量,并评估产品标签上的广告声称。方法:从马里兰州巴尔的摩地区的零售店(2020 年 7 月购买)和网上(2020 年 8 月购买)购买宣传含有 CBD 的大麻护发、化妆品和食品/饮料产品。使用气相色谱-质谱法测量大麻素浓度。确定了标签和实际 CBD 浓度之间的百分比偏差。对标签信息进行了量化,如食品药品管理局(FDA)的引用、外部测试声明和其他声明(即化妆品或美容、治疗、健康光环效应或 "其他")。结果:共购买了 97 种产品(店内 35 种,网上 62 种)。在 71 种标签上标注了 CBD 具体总量的产品中,有 35 种(49%)标签标注不足(CBD 含量比广告中标注的多 10%),27 种(38%)标签标注过多(CBD 含量比广告中标注的少 10%),9 种(12.7%)标签标注准确(CBD 含量在标签标注的 ±10% 以内)。护发产品的百分比偏差中值(范围)为-53%(-100%-76%),化妆品为+18%(-100%-1076%),食品/饮料为-1%(-100%-4468%)。有外部测试声明的产品与没有外部测试声明的产品在 CBD 标签准确性方面没有明显差异(t40 = 0.23,p = 0.82)。总体而言,在 97 种产品中,有 24% 的产品(总计)声称具有化妆品或美容功效(如 "皮肤看起来更年轻"),40% 的产品声称具有治疗功效(如 "缓解疼痛"),86% 的产品声称具有健康光环效应(如 "不含防腐剂"、"不含染料 "等)。大多数产品(63%)没有包括免责声明,即声称未经食品及药物管理局评估。结论本次抽样调查的大多数产品都没有准确标注 CBD 含量,包括那些声称已通过第三方实验室检测的产品。一个值得注意的发现是,有 10 种产品不含任何 CBD。许多产品声称具有治疗作用,或使用营销手段似乎在传达它们是安全/健康的,但只有约三分之一的产品包含免责声明,说明这些声明未经美国食品及药物管理局评估。这些发现凸显了对含大麻素产品进行适当监管的必要性,以确保质量保证并阻止产品营销中的误导或毫无根据的健康声明。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
7.90%
发文量
164
期刊最新文献
Drug Interactions in People on Cannabidiol: Is There Cause for Concern? Federal Courts Will No Longer Need to Follow the DEA's Interpretation of Cannabis-Related Law. Minor Cannabinoid Profile of Unregulated Cannabidiol Products. Technology-Based Psychotherapeutic Interventions for Decreasing Cannabis Use in People with Psychosis: A Systematic Review Update. Biological Response after 14-Day Cannabidiol and Propylene Glycol Inhalation in Sprague-Dawley Rats.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1