Cannabinoids for skin diseases and hair regrowth
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of cannabis for skin diseases and hair regrowth is at the preliminary stage. LEGALIZATION: Many countries have approved cannabis for medical use; however, four countries Canada, Uruguay, South Africa, and Georgia have legalized it for both medical and recreational purposes. THE ENDOCANNABINOID SYSTEM: The endocannabinoid system may maintain skin homeostasis; two notable endocannabinoids include 2-Arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG) and N-arachidonoylethanolamine (AEA). ROUTES OF ADMINISTRATION AND PHARMACOKINETICS: Topical cannabinoids can avoid the first-pass metabolism and reduce respiratory side effects; however, the high hydrophobicity of cannabinoids may hinder percutaneous absorption. SKIN DISORDERS AND HAIR GROWTH: Human clinical studies suggest that cannabinoids may be used in eczema, acne, pruritus, and systemic sclerosis treatment. Cannabidiol (CBD) may enhance hair growth via multiple mechanisms. SAFETY: Topical cannabis may cause mild side effects such as pruritus, burning, erythema, and stinging; they are relatively safer than inhalation and oral cannabis. Cannabis use may be associated with allergic symptoms and reduced immune response to live vaccination. CANNABINOIDS IN PRACTICE: Despite growing interest, dermatologists should be cautious prescribing cannabinoids due to insufficient clinical data on both efficacy and safety.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it