‘Beneficial’ UK Medical Hashish Information to be Revealed After A 4 Yr Delay

by | Jul 18, 2025 | Business, Cannabis, Industrial Hemp | 0 comments

‘Beneficial’ UK Medical Hashish Information to be Revealed After A 4 Yr Delay


Over 4 years after its slated launch, the NHS Hashish Affected person Registry is ready to publish its first knowledge.

The years of obfuscation and delay prompted a Freedom of Info request by Enterprise of Hashish, which has established that the NHS will publish knowledge from its ‘registry’ by the ‘finish of the 12 months’.

Nonetheless, from our trade soundings – and regardless of its four-year gestation – it’s nonetheless unclear whether or not the UK registry, at present, even exists in a usable type.

And, there may be hypothesis as as to if the six-month window will permit the NHS time to assimilate the related knowledge.

Throughout our investigations into the workings of the registry it turned clear that the 2 organisations tasked with its supply have been extra involved with back-heeling duty to the opposite, than supporting sufferers.

These with information of the workings of the NHS say that even now, 4 years down the road, the overwhelming majority of prescribing medical hashish consultants are unaware of the registry’s existence.

However, for the NHS to ultimately settle for that it must fulfil the mandate it was given by the UK Authorities and acknowledge and monitor the position hashish can play in a clinician’s toolkit is, in itself, a welcome improvement.

Does a register but exist?

Professor Mike Barnes, Chairman of the Medical Hashish Clinicians Society, believes the registry, because it was envisaged on the time of its 2021 launch, in all probability doesn’t exist.

He stated: “There are round 170 prescribing clinicians; I do know most of them, and it’s by no means talked about or mentioned.

“Hopefully, they may inform us, brazenly by the top of 12 months, what has occurred, what number of sufferers have been handled, and what they intend to do about making it a significant and useful registry.

“By making it extra accessible and out there to clinicians it will likely be a extra significant useful resource. However this has been a missed alternative to file some actually useful knowledge over the previous few years.”

Disappointingly, the registry will solely cowl the 1,000-or-so sufferers receiving the three NHS licensed medicines – Sativex, Epidyolex and Nabilone – and the six UK sufferers at present receiving ‘specials’, i.e. whole-plant formulations.

Pierre van Weperen, Managing Director of main business hashish provider Develop Group UK, highlighted this flaw and careworn the necessity for the registry to incorporate the private-prescription market within the UK, which provides round 60,000 sufferers.

He stated: “The registry solely picks up NHS sufferers in order that’s epilepsy and A number of Sclerosis with Epidyolex and Sativex. I’m not optimistic about the long run knowledge for epilepsy as a result of we all know that sooner or later these youngsters want not less than a touch of THC.

“Sativex is prescribed off-label for ache and I might hope that they’ve captured this knowledge.

“Extra importantly although, and that is probably the most fascinating level, the NHS ought to open the registry for all sufferers who’re utilizing prescription medical hashish.

“It will be the perfect strategy to seize knowledge nationally and drive insights. I’m certain that the clinics and sufferers can be glad to co-operate for the larger good.”

Clark French, Founder, of the United Sufferers Alliance, a UK patient-led organisation advocating for protected and inexpensive entry to medical hashish, slammed the NHS for as soon as once more ‘failing sufferers’.

He stated: “Hashish considerably improves high quality of life for many individuals; we see it first-hand within the experiences of hundreds of our members.

“Proscribing the registry to solely these prescribed hashish by means of the NHS, whereas excluding sufferers with authorized non-public prescriptions, is a flawed strategy that undermines its goal from the beginning.”

 

Sal Aziz, of PatientsCann UK, a medical hashish affected person community, who works within the NHS says lots of the 200-plus NHS trusts are nonetheless not conscious they will prescribe hashish.

“I’ve spoken to many administrators, at senior ranges, in lots of trusts and so they nonetheless say the NHS doesn’t prescribe medical hashish and we can’t discuss it because it exposes us to a reputational threat.

“My greatest fear with this register is that it’s going to present that not lots of the trusts have used it, and those who’ve is not going to have been excellent at recording their prescribing actions.”

Mike Morgan-Giles, CEO of the UK Hashish Business Council welcomed the event, with caveats, saying: “It’s optimistic that NHS England is transferring ahead with the Hashish Affected person Registry.

He added: ”Although the Hashish Business Council want to see the registry expanded to incorporate unlicensed CBPMs prescribed by non-public clinics.

“Alongside enabling e-prescribing, such a step would construct an proof base for the NHS, defend affected person knowledge and assist be sure that sufferers are capable of entry the medicines they want.”

Prof Barnes mirrored on the missed alternative of the previous few years and questioned the veracity of the NHS’ strategy to hashish, saying: “If they’d mandated a registry or perhaps a extra primary, observational assortment of knowledge which included the non-public sector, they might have accrued plenty of fascinating and fascinating knowledge for future prescribing.

“To make the registry helpful it must consider the non-public sector which accounts for 99% of prescriptions. So, as presently constructed the registry can be subsequent to ineffective.

“And, sadly, this as soon as once more illustrates the full lack of curiosity by NHS England on this beneficial drugs. They’ve by no means had any curiosity, nonetheless don’t have curiosity, and the farce of this registry demonstrates this.”

UK Medical Hashish Registry – A Story Of Ineptitude And Neglect

A 2019 NHS England and NHS Enchancment report entitled ‘Limitations to accessing cannabis-based merchandise for medicinal use on NHS prescription’ made plenty of suggestions to assist affected person entry.

Considered one of these advisable that NHS England ‘ought to work with trade and academia to scope the event of a nationwide UK affected person registry to gather a uniform knowledge set’.

The registry was launched in March 2021 with one of many UK’s largest well being our bodies, the NHS Arden and Better East Midlands Commissioning Help Unit (CSU), chosen to ‘handle and host the affected person registry’.

On the time of the launch Muhammed Vohra, challenge lead on the Arden & GEM, stated: “By enabling the standardised assortment of knowledge for all sufferers being prescribed cannabis-based merchandise our intention is to enhance affected person care by means of sturdy monitoring and analysis.

“The registry helps scientific selections to be taken, primarily based on the newest steering, in order that we are able to preserve sufferers protected whereas gaining higher scientific proof concerning the potential influence of those pretty just lately rescheduled merchandise.”

Nonetheless, by late 2022 it turned clear that the registry was not functioning as supposed thus prompting the pinnacle of the NHS to put in writing to all of its 200-plus trusts.

In a broadcast letter Chief Professor Stephen Powis, Nationwide Medical Director of NHS England, and David Webb, NHS Chief Pharmaceutical Officer wrote to all trusts requesting that clinicians start contributing to the registry.

It stated: “NHS trusts ought to be sure that…all prescribers issuing prescriptions for CBPMs (Hashish-based merchandise for medicinal use) make related register entries and preserve them updated as quickly as attainable after prescriptions are issued.”

Overlaying Their Backs

Initially of Might this 12 months Enterprise of Hashish requested each NHS England and NHS Arden and Better East Midlands for particulars on the efficiency of the registry.

They handed the buck, back-and-forth, with Arden & GEM persistent in saying that because the ‘knowledge controller’ it’s the duty of NHS England.

While the NHS England press workplace repeatedly stated that as the info is held at NHS Arden and Gem, it’s its duty.

Nonetheless NHS England – following a Freedom of Info request – has backtracked from its place telling Enterprise of Hashish it ‘‘commits to publish(ing) data on the NHS England web site associated to this query in the end by the top of 2025’ see beneath.

 

 

Beneath is a full transcript of our inquiries, and NHS England’s responses: 

1. Are you able to inform as to how lots of the 200-plus NHS Trusts are recording this knowledge on the registry?

– NHS England is withholding this data beneath Part 22 of the FOIA. NHS England is at present reviewing NHS Arden and GEM Commissioning Help Unit’s administration of the platform and commits to publish data on the NHS England web site associated to this query in the end by the top of 2025.

2. What number of sufferers are recorded on the register?

– NHS England is withholding this data beneath Part 22 of the FOIA. NHS England is at present reviewing NHS Arden and GEM Commissioning Help Unit’s administration of the platform and commits to publish data associated to this query on the NHS England web site by the top of 2025.

3. Does the NHS collate this knowledge right into a nationwide affected person registry and assimilate the info to find out the effectiveness of the prescribed therapies after which disseminate this data to different trusts?

 – No.

4. What number of instances has it been accessed by clinicians to assist their work?

– NHS England shouldn’t be conscious as as to if NHS Arden and GEM Commissioning Help Unit, who handle the registry, screens this.

5. Are clinicians capable of entry the registry as an entire, or simply their very own belief’s information?

– NHS England’s advice to NHS Arden and GEM Commissioning Help Unit is that the platform ought to allow clinicians to entry data throughout all NHS Trusts, and never simply their very own.

6. Does this registry embrace data from non-public sector sufferers, and is it out there to researchers or journalists who could also be desirous about seeing how medical hashish is benefiting sufferers?

– No.

Part 22 (why some data was not disclosed)

The data you’ve requested is exempt from disclosure beneath Part 22 of the Freedom of Info Act (FOIA). There’s a clear intention to publish the data at a future date and in step with part 22 it’s thought-about cheap in all of the circumstances that the data needs to be withheld from disclosure till the date of publication. Additional data on part 22 might be discovered on the following hyperlink: 

 https://www.laws.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/36/part/22 

Public Curiosity Take a look at  

To make use of this exemption, we’re required to undertake a public curiosity check. The issues which have been thought-about in making use of the general public curiosity check are as follows:   

Components in favour of disclosure:  

Disclosure of the data helps most of the people curiosity within the transparency, accountability and normal understanding of the supply of public providers.  

Components in favour of withholding:   

The information requires analysing and formatting alongside different components of the report, earlier than it’s prepared for wider reporting.  

Early disclosure of unvalidated data will result in confusion and potential allegations of lack of transparency if the printed knowledge varies to the unvalidated data launched in response to an FOI

Early publication or launch can be prone to outcome within the inclusion of errors, inaccurate and incomplete data. This is able to make the data of much less worth to these taking a look at it

Untimely disclosure would result in NHS England, and the broader well being sector, to divert its present assets in addressing queries which isn’t useful as there may be already a plan in place to publish this data in the end.

Releasing data supposed for publication forward of its deliberate publication date may result in disruption of the communications plan and put duplicated or inaccurate data throughout the public area. This is able to or is prone to be deceptive to these viewing the data.

 



Submit a Comment

Skip to content