When you look for information on the Internet about CBD oil, you will notice that the terms cannabis oil and CBD oil are often used interchangeably. It is not justified, because they are two different types of oils with different properties. In this article, we try to clarify these differences for you.

In addition to using different terms, we have noticed that many websites provide incorrect information. We want to inform you, so if you are looking for reliable information, you can forget about other websites. We guarantee the accuracy of our information.

The most crucial difference between cannabis oil and CBD oil, according to the website Ganja Times, is due to the substances present in these oils. CBD oil contains a high percentage of CBD; it is the abbreviation for cannabidiol.

Cannabis oil (also known as THC oil) contains a high percentage of THC, which is short for tetrahydrocannabinol. Both CBD and THC are derived from the cannabis plant. However, two types of cannabis plants can be distinguished: the cannabis plant and the hemp plant. Unfortunately, these two plants are often confused, but in reality, they are two very different plants.

The most significant difference between hemp and cannabis is the concentration of THC. Cannabis plants generally contain relatively high levels of THC, while hemp plants contain practically none.

THC gives a high feeling; CBD does not have this property. THC oil generally contains between 1% and 8% THC, CBD oil sometimes contains negligible traces of THC (less than 0.2%). It is due to the fact that CBD oil is usually extracted from the hemp plant. Hemp contains deficient concentrations of THC. The hemp plant is therefore legal and is also used for all kinds of industrial uses. As CBD oil contains negligible amounts of THC, it is not subject to the Opium Act and can be legally marketed in many countries in the world. It does not apply to THC oil, due to its high percentage of THC.

Active substances in cannabis oil

The cannabis plant has tiny hairs. These hairs are responsible for the secretion of a liquid containing the active substances. Cannabinoids are the most important active substances in this liquid. The most well-known cannabinoids of the cannabis plant are tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD). The THC substance is known to cause a sensation of “high” or “stoned.” The CDB, on the other hand, has no psychoactive effect.

There are currently about 70 cannabinoids known to the cannabis plant. All these substances are very similar to THC, but they all have different properties. There is growing evidence that other cannabinoids can also be very interesting to use in medicine. Cannabidiol, or CBD, is one example. Examples of other cannabinoids found in the cannabis plant include CBG, CBN, THC, CBC, and 8-THC. When an oil contains several cannabinoids, we speak of a surrounding effect. It means that the substances become stronger.

In addition to about 70 cannabinoids, the cannabis plant also contains many other active substances. The so-called “terpenes” are the most important for their medicinal properties. Terpenes not only have their own therapeutic properties, but they also have a positive influence on the effectiveness of the medicinal properties of other active substances of the cannabis plant. There are many other active substances in cannabis oil, but they are present in such small quantities that very little research has been done on them.

Cannabis oil or CBD oil?

The cannabis plant contains various substances that are used for medicinal purposes. These substances are extracted from the plant and dissolved in the oil. This is how therapeutic cannabis oil is produced. Medicinal cannabis oil contains various cannabinoids, including THC and CBD. Since the exact amount of cannabinoids in the oil depends on the type of cannabis the oil is made of, this amount often differs slightly. Not all plants contain the same amount of active ingredients.

As cannabis oil contains significant amounts of THC, this oil is not legal. CBD oil contains minimal THC and a lot of CBD, which is legal. It is why CBD oil is legally available.

As always, while some universalists struggle to explain that all racisms are worth in horror, others struggle to prove that anti-white racism does not exist.

These others are the activists. According to their ideology, past colonization or slavery still has negative effects on the descendants of oppressed peoples. They call “racialized” (as opposed to white). Following this logic, they define racism as a system of domination that is part of history. Also, it inflicts concrete consequences on the racists who suffer it today (discrimination in housing or employment, police controls, etc.). This vision of racism as a system of domination is called “systemic racism” or “state racism.”

According to this definition, whites cannot be subjected to this type of systemic oppression today, because they have not historically been oppressed and colonized. On the contrary, they have historically been oppressors and settlers. Thus, the system of domination established in the days of colonization and slavery cannot be unfavorable to them today.

A racist definition of racism

The intellectual fraud of these activists goes even further, ignoring the very definition of racism, as it is widely accepted, and reinventing it to suit militant purposes.

Thus, racism is no longer defined by militants as the unfounded belief in the existence of human races and their hierarchy, but as a system of oppression resulting from a History, which has negative consequences for the racialized of today.

This redefinition of racism is carried out in such a way as to expressly exclude whites from it, by placing itself in the particular context of the West, and by obscuring historical facts that do not support this vision.

Facts ignored

For example, the fourteen centuries of the Arab-Muslim slave trade and the very high mortality rate during slave castrations are overlooked. (What Tidiane N’Diaye calls the “veiled genocide”). Also obscured the nine centuries of the intra-African slave trade.

These oppressions, although systemic, clearly do not interest activists. According to what logic would the Western slave trade generate a system of domination today, while the intra-African and Arab-Muslim slave trade would not? And what happens in the case of oppression between racialized people?

The colonization in Indochina, whose causes are supposed to be the same for oppressed peoples, but whose consequences in terms of discrimination seem very different, is also hidden. According to which logic do the same causes give different results?

As we can see, the allegedly historical approach of these activists takes a turn for the worse. But we think about all the historical facts that are deliberately ignored because they do not fit their theory.

The Chevron oil company was ordered by the Ecuadorian courts in 2012 to pay compensation of 9.5 billion dollars for pollution generated by one of its subsidiaries in the Amazon.

A private commercial court has just overturned this court decision taken in favor of the inhabitants and communities affected by the pollution. A commercial court based in the Netherlands, the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, merely voided this compensation.

The Court of Arbitration considers that the Ecuadorian fine – although confirmed a few weeks earlier by the country’s Constitutional Court – is tainted by corruption, and shows that signing a very partial compensation agreement released Chevron from any liability.

International commercial arbitration, a highly controversial system

These procedures are a way for multinationals to impose their will on recalcitrant governments.

It is the first time that a private arbitral tribunal has been used to overturn a court decision confirmed by all the judicial authorities of a country against a multinational company. The conclusion therefore openly reinforces the primacy of the commercial law of companies, and their private courts, over national courts.

Oil and toxic sludge discharged into the environment

Exploiting oil from the Amazon region of Ecuador since the 1960s, the oil company Texaco, since acquired by Chevron, had dumped crude oil and toxic sludge into the environment and contaminated several hundred thousand hectares of forest.

The legal proceedings, initiated by an association representing several thousand affected people, were launched in the 1990s. It has been marked by successes, which have seen the powerful multinational recognized as responsible in Ecuador for the environmental liabilities of its subsidiary Texaco and condemned to real compensation.

The fight was then carried out on other fronts, from Argentina to Canada, to enforce the sentence. Other legal avenues have been considered, such as referral to the International Criminal Court.

This battle also saw the oil major and her allies bypass national jurisdictions by taking its assets out of Ecuador and advocating legal separation between its various subsidiaries. Chevron also succeeded in convincing an American judge that the search for compensation by the affected Ecuadorians amounted to an attempt at extortion.

Rebalancing international law

The decision was taken when a UN working group is in charge of drafting a binding international treaty concerning the legal liability of multinationals. This working group is going to meet in October at the Palais des Nations in Geneva to begin its work.

Proponents of such a treaty believe it is necessary to counterbalance the excessive power given to multinationals by international trade law and arbitration tribunals and to rebalance the requirements of investment protection with those of human rights and the environment.

Following the wave of criticism of the draft Tafta Free Trade Agreement in Europe and the United States, as well as the growing reluctance of many countries towards investor-state dispute settlement procedures, timid proposals for reform of arbitration tribunals was put on the table, such as the Multilateral Court on Investment invented by the European Commission.

According to critics, these proposals only marginally modify the existing system, which is biased in favor of multinationals.

From Bitcoin to local and regional non-cryptographic currencies, alternatives to traditional banking services are increasingly numerous. According to some experts, they would even be on the verge of ending the banks’ monopoly.

Five-point demonstration.

At a time when the Bitcoin’s price is collapsing to approach $200, its defenders do not admit defeat. For quite a few experts now, the transaction system in Bitcoin has the potential to compete with traditional banking services.

Many experts even insisted on the organic development of new payment systems that are simple, accessible and competitive. An offer that is increasingly successful on the platforms of traditional banks.

Catching up with the lag in banks’ presence in emerging countries

In 2011, 50% of the world’s adults did not have a bank account, according to the latest World Bank figures. In sub-Saharan Africa, 80% of adults are affected.

Open a low-cost deposit account.

That’s when the Bitcoin comes in handy. Transfer, payment, currency exchange.

Make transfers for free and instantly.

To avoid excessive bank charges when transferring money, several alternative systems to traditional bank transfers have also been developed. With the Bitcoin, users can make transfers all over the world. If these operations are irreversible, they are free and instantaneous. You will need to use a Bitcoin wallet in order to make payments. Read more on this post related to portemonnaies hardware pour bitcoin!

Freeing oneself from interbank commissions.

More than consumers, it is mainly merchants who can largely benefit from Bitcoin payments.

The adoption of the Bitcoin is therefore partly based on its use by merchants, particularly in countries where banking services are still favored by a large majority of inhabitants.

Reduce the risk of bank failure

But it is the lack of control of Bitcoin and its volatility that arouses mistrust. With the collapse of the Japanese platform MtGox in February 2014 and the August flash crash, currency prices fell by 56% over the year, according to Bloomberg. In January 2015, the piracy of the Bitstamp marketplace further contributed to the impairment of the Bitcoin.

Endocrine disruptors are chemicals of natural or artificial origin foreign to the body. They may interfere with the functioning of the endocrine system and cause adverse effects on the body or an individual’s descent.

These substances can interfere with “the production, secretion, transport, metabolism, binding, action or elimination of natural hormones.”

Endocrine disrupters can act in different ways:

Imitating the action of a natural hormone;

• By binding to the receptors of natural hormones;
• By hindering or blocking the mechanism of production or regulation of hormones or receptors, thus altering the levels of hormones present in the body.

Some endocrine disruptors are compounds that are soluble in fatty substances (lipophilic), that is to say, they bind to fat tissue and can quickly accumulate in the fats of different species and thus contaminate a large part of the food chain. Thus, it is possible to determine PE in blood, adipose tissue, breast milk, amniotic fluid, cord blood or urine.

In-vitro studies have helped to demonstrate the interaction between these compounds and hormone receptors and to understand some of their mechanisms of action.

The effects of endocrine disruptors on human health are controversial, including their low-dose effect. Nevertheless, some conditions are now suspected to be the consequence of exposure to endocrine disruptors: decreased sperm quality, increased frequency of anomalies in genital tract development, reproductive function. The role of PE is also suspected for cancers whose development is influenced by hormonal mechanisms (hormone-dependent cancers).

Endocrine disruptors in the environment

We can distinguish :

• Substances produced intentionally for their hormonal effect (synthetic hormones). It is the case, for example, with contraceptives or molecules used in the treatment of infertility;
• Synthetic chemicals manufactured with various objectives, without the effect on the hormonal system being sought. It applies to organochlorine pesticides, herbicides, certain plasticizers (bisphenol A, certain phthalates), dioxins or related compounds (polychlorinated biphenyls, PCBs), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), flame retardants and the like.
• Natural compounds such as phytoestrogens present in a wide variety of plants (soybean genistein, mycotoxin present in cereal silos (zearalenone)…

Exposure to endocrine disruptors

In the general population, water and food (migration of substances from packaging, contamination of crop soils, hormonal residues in meat), but also air and cosmetics, are the primary sources of exposure to endocrine disruptors.

However, apart from accidents (explosion of a pesticide plant in Sevéso, for example), exposure to endocrine disruptors in the general population is low on a continuous basis.