The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
I've said it before, I'll say it again, BM is overpaid and has consistently underperformed. He needs to go.
... reported an open short of 0.71% adding to those by Oxford and Partner Fund according to today's FCA update. That highly negative 'report' over the Easter weekend in combination with the short selling yesterday has all the hallmarks of a more co-ordinated short attack than those previously opened on GWP. We'll see over the next few weeks I guess. All IMO of course.
Mechoulam is now also a R&D Collaborator for GWP: http://www.gwpharm.com/r-and-d-collaborations.aspx
It's interesting that Zynerba make reference to the following publication about CBD as an potential anti-epileptic compound: Consroe P, Wolkin A. Cannabidiol–antiepileptic drug comparisons and interactions in experimentally induced seizures in rats. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1977 Apr;201(1):26-32. Note the date: 1977. CBD as an anti-epileptic has been known for years. Here we are 40 years later and this is only now finally been confirmed/acknowledged and acted upon. Having cannabis on the Schedule 1 has clearly caused immeasurable and unnecessary human suffering, all because of the politics involved.
Those miscreants who drug drive have been known to temporarily reduce the pollution levels by using chlorhexydine (Corsodyl) or some other mouthwash. Some even carry a bottle in their glove compartment so that if they're stopped they can have a quick swig to clean the mucosal surface and stimulate saliva production before being tested. Chewing gum can stimulate saliva production of course. Some people always chew when they drive to reduce contamination. The use of alcohol reduces oral contamination as well, especially if stronger alcohol is used. This is because THC is soluble in alcohol. Cannabis users who drink alcohol have less contamination than those who don't drink. The police are supposed to wait 15 minutes before taking a roadside drug test, in case someone's been chewing gum/ eating or drinking, therefore temporarily reducing the level of contamination. It's said that Corsodyl/mouthwashes reduce contamination for up to 30 minutes.
This depends on several factors. As a general guide the manufacturers of oral testing kits claim to detect ACTIVE THC for up to 12 hours in the mucosal cavity after smoking/vaporising a single joint/bowl/balloon. However, what's less clear is the cumulative pollution caused by smoking on a regular basis, which leads to a build up of THC in the oral cavity which over time can exceed the limit days after initial ingestion. This means that a regular smoker will always exceed to 2ng/ltr drig driving limit. Other factors include oral hygiene, in that those who use chlorohexydene, mouth washes and brush their teeth more regularly can reduce oral contamination (at least on a temporary basis). These activities stimulate saliva production which temporarily reduces the concentration per litre Transdermal patches and suppositories bypass the oral cavity, and so wouldn't be detectable in a saliva test at all (because THC isn't soluble in water. Pollution by edibles would vary depending on how long the edible stays in the mouth during mastication, whether it's extracted in butter or coconut oil, or 'bombed' without the contents touching the mouth (concentrated solidified cannacoco oil wrapped in rizzlas for example). So the answer to your question is if its regularly ingested in such a way that it comes in direct contact with the oral cavity then it will be perpetually polluted and will fail a drug driving test. So, having a level that exceeds the current drug driving laws does not necessarily mean that you need to have smoked within the preceding 24 hours. With a very heavy smoker the level could exceed the limit for over a week later even with complete abstinence. The drug driving limit bears no relationship with actual impairment of course. The Wolff review on behalf of the Government recommended 5ng/ltr as a minimum, but the Government overruled Wollf's 'expert' advice and opted for a limit that was well below the agreed impairment level instead (effectively zero tolerance).
Even if it were true, they wouldn't fail an initial roadside drug driving test here in the UK because the oral saliva test doesn't measure THC in the system, but only measures THC contamination/pollution in the oral cavity itself. If they've only taken CBD then the oral cavity can't be polluted with THC, so they'll pass the test.
PPS: If cannabinoids are extracted using coconut oil (as opposed to say butter) they can be eaten and and more effectively absorbed because coconut oil bypasses the liver. There is, however, still some loss in the gut itself. Of all the edible routes, coconut oil is the best for this reason.
PS: although the suppository route improves dosage efficiency it's been reported that for some reason the psychoactive effects (of THC) are reduced by this route. People who have problems with the psychoactive dimension of cannabis oils are often advised to take suppositories instead.
Absorption through the skin, like through the lungs, oral mucosa or rectum, means that CBD (or THC) can be absorbed into the system without having to go through the gastric route and then on through the liver - which results in a marked loss/reduced dosage and so is more inefficient than the other methods of delivery. That's why GWP have gone down the oral mucosa delivery route, Zynerba transdermal patches, because the gastrointestinal route can't offer the kind of 'precise' dosage parameters demanded by the regulatory authorities. That's why Sativex is formulated as a oral buccal spray - to avoid dosage loss In the medical marijuana community precise dosage isn't an issue, so cannabis oil extracts are usually taken orally, the sheer quantity of cannabinoids overcoming the inefficiencies of absorption through the GI and liver. People who use the same cannabis oil in the form of suppositories get a much higher proportion of the dose than those who simply swallow it. I don't think that CBD is secretly psychoactive, so I don't think you have anything to worry about there.
Today's FCA update indicate that they reduced to 0.48% as of Monday 21st and are now below the reporting threshold.
Not quite sure what you mean in that first question. I've not come across the CBD/THC conversion in the gut theory before, so I've no idea about that tbh king.
Given that GWP and other regulators have been emphasising that CBD is non-psychoactive, it would be difficult for the UK authorities to turn around and say that it is psychoactive after all. And given that CBD is a naturally-occurring compound in all hemp food products, it would be hard to see how they could stop its production and use here in the UK. The police, customs and judiciary will have enough problems trying to police the ludicrously bad Psychoactive Substance Act (2016) as it is, without trying to add to their difficulties by trying to include an acknowledged non-psychoactive substance within that definition. Hemp products aren't banned in the UK in the same way they are in many US states. That might give GWP some protection in the US but not here and in much of the rest of the world.
Oxford Asset's short is up to 0.92% as of 17th March, and has now been joined by Partner Fund Management LP who were 0.57% on the same date (all this according to today's FCA short update). Trading range for that day was 405-435. Like Oxford Asset, Partner Fund probably began increasing their short on the day before the 17th (judging from the volumes on those two days) when the range was wider (411-515). With their combined hft skills I reckon they'll churn this one up and down a bit over the next few weeks, trying to push this gradually lower. Given the price that Oxford Asset initially opened their short was c.282 and below, they're going to need to push quite a bit if they're to recover that one. All IMO of course.
... reduced their short slightly from 0.71% down to 0.68% on newsday Monday, but have since increased the short again up to 0.83% on Wednesday (according to today's FCA update). I suspect that over the past couple of days they've been increasing it further.. They'll be churning this like crazy, selling, dropping the price, buying back, re-selling, over and over, skimming profit all the time using the hf trading. All IMHO of course.
PS: sorry that should have read 'down from 0.68% to 0.51%'.
Today's FCA update indicates that they decreased their short on Blinkx, as of the 10th of March, down from 0.61% to 0.51%.
At least they haven't released a negative interim trading update this time. Not yet anyway...
If the large trades today were JP Morgan covering, then I reckon we'll see the price go back down to 20p next week so they can do it all over again until they're finally gone. You get by with a little help from your friends as the song says...
Looks like JPMorgan might still be unwinding their short today. We'll see Wednesday/Thursday time I guess.