Cannabidiol Impairs Brain Mitochondrial Metabolism and Neuronal Integrity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The mechanisms underlying the clinical effects of CBD remain poorly understood. Given the increasing evidence for CBD's effects on mitochondria, we sought to examine in more detail whether CBD impacts mitochondrial function and neuronal integrity. Methods: We utilized BE(2)-M17 neuroblastoma cells or acutely isolated brain mitochondria from rodents using a Seahorse extracellular flux analyzer and a fluorescent spectrofluorophotometer assay. Mitochondrial ion channel activity and hippocampal long-term potentiation were measured using standard cellular electrophysiological methods. Spatial learning/memory function was evaluated using the Morris water maze task. Plasma concentrations of CBD were assessed with liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry, and cellular viability was evaluated using the 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) reduction neuronal injury assay. Results: At low micromolar concentrations, CBD reduced mitochondrial respiration, the threshold for mitochondrial permeability transition, and calcium uptake, blocked a novel mitochondrial chloride channel, and reduced the viability of hippocampal cells. These effects were paralleled by in vitro and in vivo learning/memory deficits. We further found that these effects were independent of cannabinoid receptor 1 and mitochondrial G-protein-coupled receptor 55. Conclusion: Our results provide evidence for concentration- and dose-dependent toxicological effects of CBD, findings that may bear potential relevance to clinical populations.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".