Cannabis

Dear Umesh, I’m worried about the recent media coverage, where the Daily Mail and other newspapers portrayed medical cannabis in a bad light. Will this have an impact on patients? Am I going to lose my prescription? Like many patients and members of the industry, I was genuinely struck by the sheer number of inaccuracies in the recent Daily Mail article (Sam Merriman, 9 January 2026). Good journalism builds trust through accuracy, fairness and transparency. This article did none of those things. Instead, it fostered fear and misunderstanding, and in doing so squandered an opportunity for a serious, adult discussion about the legal use of medical cannabis in the UK. Like the article’s author, I once believed cannabis should never be legalised. That view changed through direct professional involvement. In 2019, through my consultancy work, I obtained the first specific medical cannabis import licence in the UK. At the time, no pharmacies were dispensing these medicines, so I subsequently opened a pharmacy to do so. I have since seen first-hand the benefits that medical cannabis can provide. It is not a miracle cure, nor an “elixir of life”, but it is a legitimate treatment option that should not be ignored. There are a number of issues with the article. Firstly, no medical professional uses the terms “weed” or “marijuana”. Patients and clinicians refer to medical cannabis or, more formally, Cannabis-Based Products for Medicinal Use in Humans (CBPMs). The repeated use of outdated slang in the article evokes a 1970s police drama rather than modern clinical practice. Equally misleading was the accompanying imagery: a person smoking. Patients prescribed cannabis flower must vaporise it using a medical device. If it is smoked, it ceases to be a CBPM and becomes an unlawful use of a controlled drug. Capsules, oils and liquids are taken orally. To suggest otherwise—implicitly or explicitly—is irresponsible. The article made much of product names such as Ghost Train Haze, Dante’s Inferno and White Widow, using them to sensationalise treatment. These are cultivar names, no different in principle from those found in horticulture. Garden centres sell roses called Buxom Beauty, apples named Slack-ma-Girdle, and dahlias known as Boom Boom Purple. Names do not determine purpose or effect. Medical cannabis clinics do not operate in a regulatory vacuum. They are registered and regulated by the Care Quality Commission (CQC), the same body that oversees GP surgeries, hospitals, care homes and mental health services. These clinics are subject to scrutiny that is often more intense than that applied to many “normal” healthcare settings. Consultants prescribing CBPMs are not junior doctors dabbling in experimentation. They are highly trained specialists, often with six to eight additional years of training in their chosen fields. To suggest that they are cavalier about patient safety, or indifferent to mental health risks such as psychosis, is not only incorrect but an insult to the integrity of the UK’s 22,000 medical consultants. Medical cannabis is legal, tightly regulated, and prescribed by senior clinicians... because of these tight guardrails, it is unlikely to have an impact on patients and their prescriptions Patients are assessed against strict eligibility criteria. Prescriptions are reviewed regularly, and treatment is withdrawn if patients do not benefit or experience adverse effects. Safeguarding is built into every stage of the process. Where the article edged towards the truth was in acknowledging confusion among external agencies. The legal change in November 2018 was introduced hastily, with minimal guidance. As a result, understanding varies widely across police forces. Some are well informed; others remain unaware that medical cannabis is legal at all. Most sit somewhere in between. This inconsistency is not the fault of patients or clinicians, but of poor legislative follow-through. The real problem is political. Medical cannabis remains a “hot potato”. In 2018, legislation was changed under public pressure with little consultation, minimal guidance, and no meaningful implementation plan. Since then, the NHS, police, housing associations and others have been left to fill the gaps—often inconsistently. Medical cannabis will not work for everyone, but it is a treatment option that should not be ignored. For some patients, it can reduce pain without reliance on opioids, or help stabilise mental health enough to improve quality of life. What is important to remember is that it is legal, tightly regulated, and prescribed by senior clinicians within the same framework that governs the rest of UK healthcare. Because of these tight guardrails, it is unlikely to have an impact on patients and their prescriptions. If anything, the Daily Mail article showed that an adult discussion about improving access to medical cannabis for patients who genuinely need it is long overdue. Sensationalism helps no one. Facts, however, just might. Want to know more about the medical cannabis prescribing process in the UK? Every month, Umesh answers your questions in his leafie column, Ask The Pharmacist. Send your questions to askumesh@leafie.co.uk or use the form below. Ask Umesh Got a question about medical cannabis in the UK? Ask our resident pharmacist!