Australia: Lawyer Teresa Nicoletti Partner at Mills Oakley…”It would be remiss of me to not say something about the latest bashing of medicinal cannabis in the media.”

Nicoletti writes on Linked In

It would be remiss of me to not say something about the latest bashing of medicinal cannabis in the media. The issue I have is not just about the headline itself, but the way it completely misunderstands how evidence works.

The narrative takes a systematic review and meta-analysis that simply says “we don’t have enough high-quality RCTs yet” and inflates it into a sweeping claim that cannabis “may be doing more harm than good”. That leap is not supported by the study or the data, or even the researchers’ own comments. The information in the news article is presented in a way that leads readers to a conclusion that the evidence itself does not support.

The study itself is actually pretty standard: it is a cautious summary of limited, inconsistent RCTs. No issue there. But the news article ignores the entire real-world landscape of medicinal cannabis use in Australia and the benefits that countless patients derive from its use. It is notable that the study didn’t actually measure harm, and it didn’t track patient outcomes. Nor did it compare medicinal cannabis to the medications it often replaces, or reflect current prescribing patterns.

The news article extrapolates far beyond what the data actually support. This is how misinformation spreads – it’s not through outright falsehoods, but through misplaced certainty. When a dramatic headline is paired with a study that doesn’t actually support it (and which many readers will not actually review for themselves), it creates a sense of alarm that isn’t grounded in evidence.

The real problem here isn’t medicinal cannabis – it is what is being conveyed to the public about science. It is teaching the public that “no RCT evidence yet” means “it doesn’t work”, that observational data are meaningless and that patient experience does not matter.

That is not how evidence works, and it’s not how responsible reporting should work either. The truth is simple: the study highlights a research gap, not a failure of the therapy. The news article turns that gap into a condemnation of medicinal cannabis. And that is where the real harm lies – it is harming the people who rely on accurate reporting to make informed decisions about their health.

Nicoletti references Channel 9 (TV News) report as her example

https://www.9news.com.au/national/medicinal-cannabis-not-effective-for-depression-anxiety-ptsd/0d89e50d-2753-4e5b-9a5c-33b62179e60e#:~:text=Medicinal%20cannabis%20may%20not%20be,rarely%20justified%2C%22%20he%20said

 

Here is the Sydney Uni report published 17 March 2026

No evidence to suggest medicinal cannabis is effective for depression, anxiety or PTSD

Sydney researchers have led the largest-ever review of the safety and efficacy of medicinal cannabis across a range of mental health conditions, finding no evidence that it is effective in treating anxiety, depression or PTSD.

https://www.sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2026/03/17/no-evidence-to-suggest-medicinal-cannabis-is-effective-for-depre.html?utm_source=HEMP+Headlines&utm_campaign=5bdbbe4266-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2025_687_25_12_25__COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_-67d9ec7ee8-659495489&mc_cid=5bdbbe4266

 

The Lancet

The efficacy and safety of cannabinoids for the treatment of mental disorders and substance use disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

a jack.wilson@sydney.edu.au ∙ a ∙ a ∙ a ∙ a ∙ b ∙ et al. Show more
Affiliations & Notes
Publication History:
Published March 16, 2026
DOI: 10.1016/S2215-0366(26)00015-5 External LinkAlso available on ScienceDirect External Link
Copyright: © 2026 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.
User License: Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) | Elsevier’s open access license policy

Summary

Background

Mental disorders and substance use disorders (SUDs) are among the leading reasons for which the medical use of cannabinoids has been approved, but their efficacy and safety in treating these conditions is yet to be established. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) testing the efficacy and safety of cannabinoids as the primary treatment for mental disorders or SUDs.

Methods

We searched Ovid MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Embase for peer-reviewed articles published between Jan 1, 1980, and May 13, 2025, evaluating the efficacy of cannabinoids in reducing or treating mental disorders and SUDs as the primary indication. Primary outcomes were remission of disorder or reduction in disorder symptoms. Safety was assessed via synthesis of all-cause and serious adverse events, which was used to calculate the number needed to treat to harm (NNTH). Two independent reviewers screened all studies and performed data extraction. Evidence was synthesised as odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous measures and standardised mean differences (SMDs) for continuous measures, via random-effects meta-analysis in Review Manager, version 5.4. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. We evaluated the quality of the primary outcomes using the GRADE framework. The study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023392718).

Findings

54 trials were identified for inclusion (2477 participants; 1713 [69%] males, 764 [31%] females; median age 33·3 years [IQR 28·1–38·05; ethnicity data not available). 24 (44%) of these trials had a high risk of bias, and the certainty of evidence for most outcomes was low. Our meta-analysis revealed that a combination of cannabidiol and delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol reduced cannabis withdrawal symptoms (SMD –0·29, 95% CI –0·57 to –0·02) and weekly grams of cannabis use (–1·00, –1·69 to –0·30) among those with cannabis use disorder, and a reduction in tic severity among those with tic or Tourette’s Syndrome (–0·68, –1·03 to –0·34) compared with placebo. Any cannabinoid type led to an increase in sleep time as recorded by an electronic device (0·54, 0·14 to 0·95) and sleep diary (0·55, 0·01 to 1·09) among those with insomnia. There was a reduction in autistic traits (–0·36, –0·66 to –0·07) among those with autism spectrum disorder. Cannabinoids led to an increase in cocaine craving among those with cocaine use disorder (0·69, 0·22 to 1·15) compared with placebo. There were no significant effects on outcomes associated with anxiety, anorexia nervosa, psychotic disorders, post-traumatic stress disorder, and opioid use disorder. There were insufficient data to meta-analyse studies of ADHD, bipolar disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and tobacco use disorder. There was an absence of RCT evidence for the treatment of depression. Meta-analysis revealed higher odds of all-cause adverse events (OR 1·75, 95% CI 1·25 to 2·46) among those using cannabis versus control group (NNTH=7) but no higher odds of serious adverse events or study withdrawal.

Interpretation

There was some evidence that cannabinoids can reduce symptoms of cannabis use disorder, insomnia, tic or Tourette’s syndrome, and autism spectrum disorder, but the quality of this evidence was generally low. Cannabinoids were associated with a greater risk of any adverse events but not of serious adverse events. Overall, there is a crucial need for more high-quality research. Given the scarcity of evidence, the routine use of cannabinoids for the treatment of mental disorders and SUDs is currently rarely justified.

Funding

The National Health and Medical Research Council.

Introduction

Mental disorders and substance use disorders (SUDs) are among the top contributors to the global burden of disease because of their high prevalence and inaccessibility of effective treatments. Cannabis products are increasingly becoming available for medical use and gaining attention as alternative treatments for mental disorders and SUDs. Phytocannabinoids, such as delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol, are potential therapeutic agents as they have been shown to modulate the endocannabinoid system, non-endocannabinoid receptors, and neurotransmitters that play a role in mental disorders and SUDs. Consequently, cannabinoid medicines are now authorised for the treatment of mental disorders and SUDs in the USA, Canada, and Australia. 27% of the estimated population aged 16–65 years in the USA and Canada reported ever using cannabis for medical purposes, half of which were for managing their mental health. In Australian markets, where cannabinoid medicines have been legalised more recently, over one million applications have been approved for the use of these medicines and mental disorders make up six of the top ten most common indications for which they are prescribed.

OTHER REPORTING

 

Nimbin Hemp Embassy Weekly Newsletter – Editorial

Conspiracists have been getting a smidgeon more respect I notice, largely thanks to Epstein, I guess. So the timing of the appalling and ridiculous story coming out of Sydney Uni this week was highly suspicious for many of the million or more people in New South Wales waiting for Premier Minns to work out how to let us drive with a prescription.

Screaming headlines, “Cannabis of little help for mental health. There is no evidence medical cannabis is effective for treating anxiety, depression and PTSD”, etc, etc. A big list of scientists in the review with our old friend (not), Wayne Hall, who’s never found anything good to say about weed in thirty years.

“There was no benefit of cannabinoids for the treatment of anxiety, anorexia nervosa, psychotic disorders, post-traumatic stress disorder and opioid use disorder. There was insufficient data for ADHD, bipolar disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder and tobacco use disorder”… on it went. They must wonder why on earth we like the stuff?

The story came from the now largely discredited Lancet, funded by our National Health and Medical Research Council (Wayne’s warhorse for decades). They did not do any actual research. They reviewed previously published papers and even state in the paper there are conflicts of interest and funding-related bias in almost half the papers examined! “24 (44%) of these trials had a high risk of bias, and the certainty of evidence for most outcomes was low”. Yet mainstream media lapped it up.

 

 

Take Your Pick of Verbatim Reporting

 

Landmark study finds no evidence medical cannabis treats depression, anxiety or PTSD

 

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2026-03-evidence-medicinal-cannabis-effective-depression.html

https://www1.racgp.org.au/newsgp/clinical/no-evidence-cannabis-works-for-most-mental-health

Journalists or Publications That Actually Read The Report

 

Medicinal cannabis may not help your anxiety or depression, study suggests

 

‘Quite alarmed’: The study that might change your mind about medicinal cannabis

https://www.afr.com/policy/health-and-education/landmark-study-finds-cannabis-not-effective-for-depression-anxiety-20260313-p5oab4

 

Politically Motivated Reporting

 

Medicinal cannabis ‘ineffective’ for anxiety, depression, PTSD as scripts skyrocket

There is no proof medicinal cannabis improves anxiety, depression or PTSD for patients, the Lancet has found, suggesting six of the 10 most common causes for prescription are misguided.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/health/mental-health/medicinal-cannabis-fails-to-treat-anxiety-depression-ptsd/news-story/a28eb8acbbe4bed52e40155862777f88

Medical cannabis does ‘more harm than good’ to mental health

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/healthcare/article/medical-cannabis-harmful-anxiety-depression-fgpgfkwqr

Get Connected

Subscribe to Our RSS

Karma Koala Podcast

Top Marijuana Blog