This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What Delta-8-Tetrahydrocannabinol does in the body
Nothing approved. It is a legal-in-most-states intoxicant made by chemically converting CBD, and children under six accounted for 30.1% of the poison-centre cases
Delta-8 and delta-9 THC differ by where one double bond sits in the ring. Both activate the CB1 cannabinoid receptor; delta-8 does it less potently, so the intoxication is milder at the same dose. Almost none of it occurs naturally in the plant, so commercial delta-8 is made by treating hemp-derived CBD with acid, which rearranges the molecule. That reaction is not clean: it produces delta-9, other isomers and reaction by-products alongside the intended product, and none of it is manufactured to a pharmaceutical standard.
What happened in people
The text of 21 CFR 1308.11(d)(31): tetrahydrocannabinol isomers in Schedule I in (i), with a hemp exclusion in (ii) written in terms of delta-9 content alone
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The recorded finding that sits closest to something a person would notice. Written into the record, not signed off, and it carries no population or interval.
Its recorded molecular formula is C21H30O2, weighing 314.5.
PubChem record · 638026 · read 2026-08-29
Where each sentence above came from
The recorded explanation is written in label language rather than for a beginner. The page opens with what it is taken for instead, and the recorded explanation follows below.
Shown as the opening line on this page.
A limit recorded against this substance. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The four opening statements run to 140 words.
Words this page uses
Four words worth knowing first
Chosen from what this page shows, with each one explained before the word it depends on.
Absolute difference
An absolute difference is how many more people in a hundred were affected.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like counting heads in two rooms of a hundred.
Where that stops being true. Heads are easy to count. Study results carry a margin of error too.
What people get wrong. It is confused with a percentage change, which can look far larger.
The arithmetic difference in event rates between arms.
Confidence interval
A confidence interval is the range the true answer is likely to sit in.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like a weather forecast giving a range rather than one number.
Where that stops being true. A forecast range covers tomorrow. This one covers what the study could resolve.
What people get wrong. The middle number is read as the answer. A range crossing zero means no change is still possible.
An interval estimate that would contain the true parameter in a stated proportion of repeated studies.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What happened in people
Each card is one study: the exact question it asked, who was in it, and whether it showed what it set out to show.
Prevention of vomiting during antineoplastic treatment
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
Abrahamov et al. 1995 paediatric oncology antiemetic series
How many people
8
Study design
Open-label clinical series
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Vomiting completely prevented across 480 treatments at 18 mg/m² orally; side effects described as negligible
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. Eight children, no control arm, no randomisation, no blinding, and no replication in the thirty years since. The complete absence of vomiting across 480 episodes is reported without a comparator rate.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Vape cartridges, gummies, tinctures and edibles sold in general retail
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
Characteristics and outcomes of delta-8, delta-10 and THC-O-acetate exposures
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
Burgess et al. 2024 National Poison Data System analysis, 2021-2022
How many people
5022
Study design
National surveillance analysis
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Rate rose 89.1% from 0.55 to 1.04 per 100,000; serious medical outcome in 38.4%; children under 6 were 30.1% of cases
Repeated elsewhere
Replicated
What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. Passive surveillance: counts reported cases, not exposures. Product content was not analytically verified, so the substance recorded is the substance on the label.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Vape cartridges, gummies, tinctures and edibles sold in general retail
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
Relationship between body-weight-adjusted ingested dose and severe or prolonged toxicity in children under 6
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
Garay et al. 2025 paediatric dose-response analysis
How many people
232
Study design
Surveillance dose-response analysis
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Top quartile (>17.0 mg/kg) versus lowest (<2.4 mg/kg): severe toxicity OR 3.43 (95% CI 1.44-8.14), prolonged toxicity OR 5.02 (95% CI 2.05-12.29)
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. ROC areas under the curve of 0.62 to 0.64 are modest, and the proposed 1.7 mg/kg triage cutoff has 98% sensitivity but 28% specificity — a high false-positive rate the authors state plainly.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Vape cartridges, gummies, tinctures and edibles sold in general retail
Interval reported. 95% CI 1
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
RNAWiki holds 3 written-up human studies for this substance, each with the question it asked.
How we know it
Each card names the study, the number of people and what the study set out to measure.
What this does not prove
These summaries were written by a person and have not been signed off as reviewed claims.
Why it matters
A study that failed is as informative as one that worked, and both are here.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim exists, so no exact population, effect size or interval is published yet.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How close this is to real life
The top step is something a person would feel or care about. The bottom is a guess from software. Filled steps are where evidence exists for this substance.
□Living longer, or avoiding a major eventNo evidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.No registered study measures this.
□What a body can do day to dayNo evidence recorded. Walking, dressing, breathing, recovering.No registered study measures this.
□Measured performanceNo evidence recorded. How much was lifted, how far was run, how fast.No registered study measures this.
□Symptoms and quality of lifeNo evidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.No registered study measures this.
□A number that stands in for healthNo evidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.No registered study measures this.
■A step measured inside a personEvidence recorded. Something measured in human tissue or human cells.A human record sits on the stored organism ladder.
□AnimalsNo evidence recorded. Mice, rats, dogs. Useful for ideas, not proof about people.No animal record is stored.
□Cells in a dishNo evidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.No cell or bench record is stored.
□A guess from softwareNo evidence recorded. Nobody measured it. RNAWiki never publishes one as a finding.RNAWiki stores no prediction for this record. Software can suggest a link. RNAWiki does not publish one as a finding.
Higher on these steps means closer to something a person would feel. It does not mean better done.
What it changes in the body◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
The path through the body
From what a person takes to what changes. A solid line is a step measured in people. A dashed line is a step nobody has measured that way.
Start
Delta-8-Tetrahydrocannabinol
What a person takes: Vape cartridges, gummies, tinctures and edibles sold in general retail.
The measurement behind this step
Products are manufactured from converted CBD and sold without age verification in many jurisdictions, in packaging that in the poison-centre series was frequently indistinguishable from confectionery. 95.9% of reported exposures occurred in a residence and 94.2% were ingestions, which describes the delivery system as much as any pharmacological statement does.
Getting in
Made by rearranging CBD with acid
The starting material is cheap hemp-derived CBD. Acid moves a bond and turns it into delta-8, along with a mixture of other things.
──Measured in people. Written by a person from the study named beside the step. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The measurement behind this step
Acid-catalysed cyclisation and isomerisation of cannabidiol, yielding delta-8-THC together with delta-9, delta-10, iso-THC and other by-products, plus residual acid, solvent and catalyst. Not a pharmaceutical process and not subject to pharmaceutical manufacturing controls.
Vape cartridges act within minutes; gummies take an hour or more, which is how a child can eat several before anything happens.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Vaporised inhalation gives rapid pulmonary absorption; oral ingestion gives delayed onset with hepatic first-pass metabolism. In the poison-centre series 94.2% of exposures were ingestions, and 95.1% among children under six.
The same receptor delta-9-THC works through, activated less strongly by the same amount of drug.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
CB1 partial agonism with lower psychotropic potency than delta-9-THC, plus CB2 activity. The lower potency was the stated reason for selecting delta-8 rather than delta-9 for the 1995 paediatric antiemetic study.
Adults describe a milder cannabis-like effect. In young children the picture is sleepiness and unresponsiveness that scales with the dose per kilogram.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Across 5,022 exposures: mild CNS depression 25.0%, tachycardia 23.0%, agitation 15.6%. In 232 single-substance paediatric ingestions, CNS depression in 75.5% with a dose-response relationship for severity; top-quartile doses above 17.0 mg/kg carried 3.43 times the odds of severe toxicity.
More than a third of the reported exposures met the definition of a serious medical outcome, and one in nineteen went to intensive care.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Serious medical outcome in 38.4% of 5,022 cases, non-critical care admission 10.3%, critical care 5.3%. The exposure rate per 100,000 population rose 89.1% between 2021 and 2022. Passive surveillance means these are reported cases, not incidence.
No suggested links are held for this record, so nothing is hidden from this path.
What we know
The record describes 5 steps from taking it to an effect in a person.
How we know it
Each step names the study behind it in the technical detail beside it.
What this does not prove
A change inside the body is a reason to look. It is not a result in a person.
Why it matters
A reader can see exactly where the chain stops being measured in people.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim binds any of these steps to a named population.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Were people like you studied?
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it, and where the result stops carrying.
Who was studied
People similar to this profile were included.
Adults buying it as a legal cannabis substitute, and — in 30.1% of poison-centre cases — children under six who found an edible at home.
Who is missing from the studies
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
Where the result stopped carrying
DEA's 2020 interim final rule asserted that synthetically derived tetrahydrocannabinols remain Schedule I, and a federal appellate court read the same statute the other way in 2022
The 2018 Farm Bill defined hemp by delta-9 content alone, which created the market this record describes
This is a scope explorer, not a diagnosis engine.
It shows who was studied so you can see whether people similar to you were included.
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Why it might seem to do nothing
A real effect and a noticed effect are different things. These are the recorded reasons the two come apart.
It was studied in different people
The people in the studies were not much like the reader.
On this record: Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
The evidence may simply be wrong
Small early studies often do not hold up.
On this record: RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Other reasons RNAWiki checked and found nothing for (11)
It was studied for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
A different form was studied
The studied form is not the form on the shelf. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
There was nothing to correct
Where a level is already normal, topping it up may change nothing. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else had to happen too
In the studies it was paired with training, a diet or another treatment. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The change is too small to feel
A real change can still sit below what a person notices. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Day-to-day swing hides it
Sleep, food, stress and time of day move most numbers more than this would. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Not enough time yet
The studies ran longer than the person has waited. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
It was not taken as studied
Missed days change the result, and studies count them. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else changed at the same time
Two changes at once cannot be told apart afterwards. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The product may not be what it says
Contents of a sold product are not always what the label states. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
No recorded reason
RNAWiki has nothing stored that would explain it. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
None of these is a reason to take more. Taking more is not a step this page ever suggests.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What taking it involves
The recorded facts about getting hold of it and using it. Nothing here is a suggestion about what you should do.
How it is supplied
Not available
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Read from the recorded approval status.
No source is stored against this line.
Form and route
Vape cartridges, gummies, tinctures and edibles sold in general retail
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form and route recorded on this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
Who oversees it
RNAWiki has not recorded a supervision or regulatory status for this substance.
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
No register row and no identity class settled the question.
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
Products are manufactured from converted CBD and sold without age verification in many jurisdictions, in packaging that in the poison-centre series was frequently indistinguishable from confectionery. 2% were ingestions, which describes the delivery system as much as any pharmacological statement does.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on how this is sold and what that means for what is in the pack.
No source is stored against this line.
Where it is registered
Regulatory records are listed in the technical disclosure at the foot of this page.
# Counted from records
Where this came from
A count of rows RNAWiki holds. It describes our records, not your body.
Register entries are stored per jurisdiction and shown with their dates.
No source is stored against this line.
Why people stop
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No record of why people stopped taking it is stored for this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What can go wrong
Sorted by where each line came from. A regulator's label and a report somebody sent in are not the same kind of fact.
·Worth asking a clinician aboutWritten into the record from the studies named on this page
Reported clinical effects across 5,022 exposures were mild CNS depression 25.0%, tachycardia 23.0% and agitation 15.6%, with a serious medical outcome in 38.4%, non-critical admission in 10.3% and critical care in 5.3%. In children under six, CNS depression occurred in 75.5% of single-substance ingestions with severity scaling with dose per kilogram. The product-level hazards are separate from the pharmacological ones: unverified potency labelling, reaction by-products including delta-9 and other isomers, and residual acid, solvent or catalyst from the conversion. No manufacturing standard applies.
Nobody counted how many people took this and were fine, so this cannot be turned into a rate.
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction.
Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing.
The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete.
News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report.
A count is not a rate and not a risk.
Delta-8-Tetrahydrocannabinol appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 5 most-reported reaction terms, 16 reaction mentions were counted. One report can name several reactions.
The recorded terms (5)
toxicity to various agents — 8 reaction mentions
drug abuse — 3 reaction mentions
substance abuse — 2 reaction mentions
unresponsive to stimuli — 2 reaction mentions
creatinine urine decreased — 1 reaction mentions
open-targets-adr · recorded 2026-06-24 · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Over a long time. No completed tested study window is recorded, so long-term effects are not established by the registry record.
Groups the studies covered thinly. Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Does the exact form matter?
Evidence belongs to the exact thing that was tested. A different salt, a different mixture or a different preparation is a different question.
The form that was studied
Vape cartridges, gummies, tinctures and edibles sold in general retail
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form used in the studies cited on this page.
No source is stored against this line.
What is sold
2% were ingestions, which describes the delivery system as much as any pharmacological statement does.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on which forms are sold and how they compare.
No source is stored against this line.
What is recorded as being sold
4 marketed supplement labels list this ingredient, classed as other combinations.
Those labels carry all other, nutrient and structure/function claims. A claim of that kind is written by the manufacturer and is not assessed by any regulator, so its presence says nothing about whether it is true.
Evidence carries across two names for one substance. It does not carry across a salt, a mirror form or a mixture.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What you could measure
This one is decided with a clinician, so this section holds questions to ask rather than a plan to run.
RNAWiki could not confidently classify this substance, so no self-experiment plan is offered.
Questions worth asking
Which of the trials of Delta-8-Tetrahydrocannabinol studied people like me?
What was measured, and for how long?
Was the result a laboratory value or a health outcome?
What would we watch for, and when would we stop?
Tracking can show whether something changed for you. It cannot show what caused it.
RNAWiki records evidence. It does not say whether this substance is right for you.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Claims that go past the evidence
Things said about this substance that sound reasonable, and the exact step that is missing between the evidence and the claim.
✗Goes past the evidence
That lower CB1 potency per milligram makes a delta-8 product milder or safer than a delta-9 product
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That legality implies any safety or manufacturing standard — the material is produced by an uncontrolled chemical conversion of CBD
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That the 1995 antiemetic result supports therapeutic use today; it is eight open-label patients, unreplicated for thirty years
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That a product's label describes its contents, when the isomers share a formula and a mass and separation quality decides the answer
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What nobody knows yet
Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.
How much did people take in the studies?
The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.
Why it matters. A result belongs to an amount. Without the amount the result floats free.
What would answer it
A stored source that records it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
How fast does the body clear it?
The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.
Why it matters. Without this, nothing on this page can say how long anything lasts.
What would answer it
A stored source that records it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing populations
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing long-term data
No completed tested study window is recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
No reviewed conclusion
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing interaction studies
No interaction was found in the registers checked. Not finding one is not the same as showing there is none.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Formulation uncertainty
Several salts, forms or products of Delta-8-Tetrahydrocannabinol are recorded. Results from one form may not transfer to another.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Mechanism not reviewed
No reviewed mechanism story exists for this substance.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Check any of this yourself
Every line above traced back to the study it came from. This is the technical layer, and the vocabulary changes here.
Every line above can be traced to the study named beside it. Follow the link and read it.
Schedule I and lawful hemp, in adjacent sub-paragraphs
In plain words
The federal drug schedule lists tetrahydrocannabinols including every isomer — and then, in the next sub-paragraph, excludes anything that meets the legal definition of hemp. Delta-8 made from hemp falls into that exclusion, and a federal appeals court agreed.
What was measured
Text of the scheduling provision and its hemp exclusion, against the federal appellate holding on the same statute
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
21 CFR 1308.11(d)(31)(i) places tetrahydrocannabinols in Schedule I, covering synthetic substances, derivatives and isomers "with similar chemical structure and pharmacological activity" and stating that because nomenclature is not internationally standardised, "compounds of these structures, regardless of numerical designation of atomic positions" are covered. Sub-paragraph (ii) then reads: "Tetrahydrocannabinols does not include any material, compound, mixture, or preparation that falls within the definition of hemp set forth in 7 U.S.C. 1639o." That definition, from the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018, is written in terms of delta-9-THC concentration not exceeding 0.3% on a dry-weight basis — it says nothing about delta-8. DEA's interim final rule implementing the Act (85 FR 51639, 21 August 2020) took the position that synthetically derived tetrahydrocannabinols remain Schedule I. In AK Futures LLC v. Boyd Street Distro LLC (9th Cir., No. 21-56133, filed 19 May 2022) the panel held that "the plain and unambiguous text of the Farm Act compels the conclusion" that the delta-8 THC products at issue were lawful. The conflict is unresolved, and the market has grown inside it.
Source
21 CFR 1308.11(d)(31)(i) and (ii); DEA interim final rule 85 FR 51639 (21 August 2020); AK Futures LLC v. Boyd Street Distro LLC, 9th Cir. No. 21-56133 (19 May 2022)
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
contested
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
5,022 poison-centre exposures in two years, 30.1% in children under six
In plain words
Across 2021 and 2022, US poison centres logged just over five thousand delta-8-type exposures. The rate almost doubled between the two years, and nearly a third of cases were children under six, most commonly two-year-olds.
What was measured
Exposure counts, population rates, age distribution, clinical effects and medical outcomes across 5,022 cases, 2021-2022
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Burgess et al. analysed National Poison Data System records for 1 January 2021 to 31 December 2022 with delta-8-THC, delta-10-THC or THC-O-acetate as the primary substance: 5,022 cases. The population rate rose 89.1%, from 0.55 to 1.04 per 100,000. Delta-8 accounted for 98.1% of cases. Children under six were 30.1% of all cases, with a mode at age 2 (8.9% of cases). 94.3% were single-substance exposures, 95.9% occurred in a residence and 94.2% were ingestions, rising to 95.1% among children under six. The leading reason was unintentional-general (40.2%), followed by abuse (33.1%). Commonest effects were mild CNS depression 25.0%, tachycardia 23.0% and agitation 15.6%. A serious medical outcome occurred in 38.4% of cases; 10.3% were admitted to a non-critical care unit and 5.3% to critical care. The National Poison Data System is passive surveillance, which the authors state, so these are reported cases rather than an incidence.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
A dose-response curve in 232 children under six
In plain words
In young children who swallowed delta-8 alone, the median dose was 6.7 mg per kilogram of body weight. Those in the highest quarter of doses were three times as likely to have severe toxicity and five times as likely for it to be prolonged.
What was measured
Body-weight-adjusted ingested dose against severe and prolonged toxicity, with ROC analysis, n=232
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Garay et al. analysed 232 single-substance delta-8-THC ingestions in children under six reported to US poison centres (median age 3.0 years, 51.7% female). Median ingested dose was 6.7 mg/kg. CNS depression was the commonest effect at 75.5%, with a dose-response relationship between dose and its severity. Children in the top dose quartile (>17.0 mg/kg) had 3.43 times the odds of severe toxicity (95% CI 1.44-8.14) and 5.02 times the odds of prolonged toxicity (95% CI 2.05-12.29) compared with the lowest quartile (<2.4 mg/kg). ROC analysis gave a 2.3 mg/kg cutoff with 91% sensitivity and 31% specificity for severe toxicity (AUC 0.64), and a 1.7 mg/kg cutoff with 98% sensitivity and 28% specificity. The authors note the AUC values are modest and the cutoffs generate many false positives, and that the findings resemble what is already described for delta-9-THC ingestion in this age group. Dose reconstruction relies on product labels, which for this product category are not independently verified.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The only controlled therapeutic use: eight children, 480 chemotherapy treatments
In plain words
In 1995, eight children with blood cancers received delta-8-THC before and after chemotherapy. Across 480 treatments, vomiting was completely prevented, and side effects were described as negligible.
What was measured
Emesis prevention across 480 antineoplastic treatment episodes in 8 children at 18 mg/m² oral delta-8-THC
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Abrahamov, Abrahamov and Mechoulam gave delta-8-THC at 18 mg/m² in edible oil orally to eight children aged 3 to 13 with various haematologic cancers, on different antineoplastic regimens, for up to eight months. Dosing began two hours before each antineoplastic treatment and continued every six hours for 24 hours. Across 480 treatments, vomiting was completely prevented and the observed side effects were negligible. The paper explicitly identifies delta-8-THC as a cannabinoid with lower psychotropic potency than delta-9-THC, which was the rationale for choosing it in children. This is an open-label series of eight patients with no control arm and no randomisation, and it has not been repeated in thirty years — but a complete absence of vomiting across 480 treatment episodes is an unusually clean observation, and it is the only human efficacy datum this compound has.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
It is manufactured from CBD, not extracted from the plant
In plain words
Cannabis contains almost no delta-8. Commercial delta-8 is made by treating hemp-derived CBD with acid, which rearranges it — a reaction that also produces other cannabinoids and leaves residues behind.
What was measured
Production route of commercial delta-8-THC and its regulatory characterisation
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Delta-8-THC occurs in Cannabis at concentrations far too low to extract commercially. The material sold is produced by acid-catalysed isomerisation of cannabidiol, which is abundant in hemp and inexpensive. The reaction yields delta-8 as the intended product alongside delta-9-THC, other positional isomers such as delta-10 and iso-THC, and further by-products, and can leave residual acid, solvent and catalyst in the finished article. Nothing in the process is subject to pharmaceutical manufacturing standards, and the finished products in the poison-centre series include gummies and vape cartridges sold in general retail. DEA's position in the 2020 interim final rule that synthetically derived tetrahydrocannabinols remain Schedule I turns precisely on this manufacturing route; the Ninth Circuit's reading of the statute does not.
Source
DEA interim final rule 85 FR 51639 (21 August 2020), discussion of synthetically derived tetrahydrocannabinols; 21 CFR 1308.11(d)(31)
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
verified
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
"Lower potency" is a per-milligram statement, not a per-product one
In plain words
Delta-8 is genuinely a weaker CB1 agonist than delta-9. That says nothing about how intoxicating a given gummy is, because the amount per serving is set by the manufacturer.
What was measured
That lower CB1 potency per milligram makes delta-8 products less intoxicating or safer than delta-9 products
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The pharmacological claim — that delta-8-THC has lower psychotropic potency than delta-9-THC — is well founded and is why it was chosen for the 1995 paediatric antiemetic study. The inference commonly drawn from it, that delta-8 products are correspondingly milder, does not follow: potency per milligram and dose per product are independent, and a lower-potency cannabinoid at a higher dose delivers a larger effect. The poison-centre data are the relevant check, and they show a serious medical outcome in 38.4% of 5,022 cases and critical-care admission in 5.3%. A weaker molecule with an unverified label in a general-retail product is not a milder exposure.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The isomers cannot be distinguished by mass
In plain words
Delta-8, delta-9 and delta-10 all have the same chemical formula and the same molecular weight. Only a chromatographic separation can tell which one is in a product.
What was measured
Identity of molecular formula and mass across THC positional isomers, requiring chromatographic rather than mass-based discrimination
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
All positional isomers of tetrahydrocannabinol share the formula C21H30O2 and a molecular weight of 314.5 g/mol. Mass spectrometry, including high-resolution mass spectrometry, cannot distinguish them; separation must be chromatographic and validated against certified reference standards for each isomer. This has two consequences. Analytically, a product's compliance with the 0.3% delta-9 limit that defines hemp depends entirely on the quality of that separation. Forensically, the same limitation applies to biological samples, so a positive result for "THC" does not identify which isomer was taken. The CFR anticipates part of the problem in the text of 1308.11(d)(31)(i), which covers compounds of these structures "regardless of numerical designation of atomic positions" — a nomenclature-proofing clause that the hemp exclusion in (ii) then partly reopens.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
7 questions this page could not answer
These sections were prepared and left out because there was nothing to put in them. They are listed rather than hidden, so the gaps in this record are visible.
What was measured, goal by goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
Felt, measured, or meaningful — found nothing in the sources checked.
How long anything takes — found nothing in the sources checked.
What it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
Other ways to the same goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
How this medicine reached us — found nothing in the sources checked.
What changed on this page — found nothing in the sources checked.
The record as stored
The full record, for auditing
Everything above is built from what is below. This layer keeps the technical vocabulary, record identifiers and every stored row, so a reader who wants to check the page can.
The older medicine-wide conclusion held in this record
Written for a clinical reader, and about the medicine as a whole rather than about one indication, population and set of trials. RNAWiki does not treat it as a programme conclusion and no reviewer has signed it off in that form. It is here word for word because it is what the record holds.
A CB1 partial agonist that is Schedule I as an isomer of tetrahydrocannabinol and simultaneously lawful as hemp, sold nationwide since 2018, with 5,022 poison-centre exposures across 2021 and 2022, a 30.1% share in children under six, and a serious medical outcome in 38.4% of cases.
Recorded evidence blocks (5)
Q1
What did Delta-8-Tetrahydrocannabinol's largest trial (0 people) and its longest (16 months) measure?
0 people in Delta-8-Tetrahydrocannabinol's largest registered study, 16 months in its longest registered window, measuring Difference in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group (FACT/GOG)-Neurotoxicity (Ntx) subscale scores. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
1 early phase1; NCT05672342; 2025-10-31; no ageing endpoint recorded
These counts include studies where Delta-8-Tetrahydrocannabinol was a comparison treatment, a background treatment or an exposure in an observational study, and the longest window may be a planned end date. Trial roles have not yet been classified for this record.
Show the evidence
early phase1
1
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q2
Delta-8-Tetrahydrocannabinol was tested only in human — what did it show?
Interpretation Difference in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group (FACT/GOG)-Neurotoxicity (Ntx) subscale scores — the recorded outcome words.
Show the evidence
humanNCT05672342
mechanism-only; Difference in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group (FACT/GOG)-Neurotoxicity (Ntx) subscale scores; 1
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q3
Why did Delta-8-Tetrahydrocannabinol's trial NCT05672342 stop?
At the median, Delta-8-Tetrahydrocannabinol's trials enrolled 0 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
0
Largest enrolment
0
Registered trials counted
1
Q5
What do 16 spontaneous reports say about Delta-8-Tetrahydrocannabinol — and not say?
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction. Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing. The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete. News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report. A count is not a rate and not a risk.
Delta-8-Tetrahydrocannabinol appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 5 most-reported reaction terms, 16 reaction mentions were counted: toxicity to various agents 8; drug abuse 3; substance abuse 2; unresponsive to stimuli 2. open-targets-adr · CHEMBL267227 · 2026-06-24
Show the evidence
toxicity to various agents
8
drug abuse
3
substance abuse
2
unresponsive to stimuli
2
creatinine urine decreased
1
recorded 2026-06-24 · last checked 2026-09-04
Where it is registeredIdentifiers, relations and other names
ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Europe PMC — metadata only, under the recorded legal gate · Open Targets 26.06 — CC0 · derived from this page's own recorded fields; no external licence
✗ required summary fields resolved: 5 required field(s) not terminal: Why people use it, Best-supported result, Most important common problem, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
✓ public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
✓ source coverage passed: 5 source rows
✓ no critical contamination: no quarantine open
✓ canonical metadata passed: slug and display name present
✓ no raw internal fields: enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
This is a record of evidence. It is not medical advice, and it does not say this substance suits you. Nothing here says any substance on RNAWiki is appropriate for a child.