The UK’s Medical Cannabis Framework Under Review: What the Data Reveals — and How GCS Is Building the Solutions

By Global Cannabinoid Solutions | October 2025

Executive Summary

The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) has closed its most significant call for evidence since the UK legalised medical cannabis in 2018. This three-year review will reassess whether the current system for prescribing, supplying, and researching cannabis-based products for medicinal use (CBPMs) is fit for purpose.

At the same time, the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC)’s 2025 Themed Review provides a rare window into how CBPMs are being dispensed and managed across UK pharmacies — exposing persistent issues in governance, clinical oversight, and education.

Together, these findings signal a critical opportunity for reform — one that demands science-led education, governance literacy, and endocannabinoid system (ECS) awareness across the medical cannabis ecosystem.

The ACMD Review: Reassessing the 2018 Framework

Commissioned by the Home Office in June 2025, the ACMD’s three-year review will evaluate whether the UK’s medical cannabis framework has delivered its intended outcomes (Home Office, 2025).

Since cannabis-based medicines were rescheduled from Schedule 1 to Schedule 2 in 2018, only a small fraction of eligible patients have accessed prescriptions through regulated channels (ACMD, 2024). NHS uptake remains limited, with most CBPM access occurring through private clinics.

The ACMD has been instructed to assess three key issues:

• The real-world impact of the 2018 rescheduling on patients and clinicians

• Unintended regulatory consequences inhibiting access or research

• The compatibility of the UK’s system with emerging international evidence

For UK stakeholders, the review represents both risk and opportunity: risk of overregulation, and opportunity to create a science-led, education-driven system.

The GPhC 2025 Review: A Snapshot of UK CBPM Governance

The GPhC’s Registered Pharmacies Providing Cannabis-Based Products for Medicinal Use: Themed Review offers the most comprehensive analysis of CBPM dispensing practices to date.
Inspecting 25 pharmacies (24 operational), the GPhC identified 68 concerns relating to governance, safeguarding, and training (GPhC, 2025).

1. Governance

Governance was the most inconsistent area of compliance, with seven pharmacies failing to meet standards due to incomplete risk assessments and weak oversight of third-party prescribers.

“Some pharmacies had no formal risk assessments in place and failed to address CBPM-specific issues, such as setting limits on the supply quantities of unlicensed controlled drugs.”
(GPhC, 2025, p. 15)

These findings reveal a structural deficit in cannabinoid-specific governance literacy — a gap that continues to undermine patient safety and operational compliance.

2. Safeguarding and Patient Protection

Safeguarding standards varied widely. While most pharmacies provided Level 2 or 3 training, several lacked audit trails or effective response systems.

“CBPMs are often prescribed to individuals with complex medical needs… robust safeguarding measures are essential.”
(GPhC, 2025, p. 18)

This underscores a broader systemic need: embedding cannabinoid pharmacology within safeguarding frameworks to ensure appropriate prescribing and risk assessment.

3. Training and Competence

Training quality was another area of concern. Three pharmacies failed to meet competence standards, with many relying on unverified or non-accredited training sources.

“Training sources were not always clearly specified… making it difficult to assess the credibility of some learning packages.”
(GPhC, 2025, p. 21)

Educational Insight

The Endocannabinoid System (ECS) is a core physiological regulator influencing immune balance, neural signalling, and homeostasis. Dysregulation of the ECS is implicated in over 17 chronic disease pathways including pain, anxiety, and neurodegenerative disorders (Lu & Mackie, 2021; Maccarrone et al., 2015). Yet formal education on ECS function remains largely absent from UK medical and pharmacy curricula.

4. Clinical Oversight and Record Access

A recurring theme across the GPhC report was limited access to patient clinical records, restricting pharmacists’ ability to verify safety or efficacy before dispensing.

“One pharmacist had limited ability to carry out meaningful clinical checks… as they had no access to the patient’s medical history or consultation notes.”
(GPhC, 2025, p. 24)

This barrier directly undermines clinical oversight — a critical risk in cannabinoid medicine, where dose–response variability and drug–drug interactions are common.

Scientific Context

Cannabinoids such as Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) interact with more than 50 known molecular targets, including CB1, CB2, TRPV1, and 5-HT1A receptors (Pertwee, 2008; ElSohly & Gul, 2014). Without integrated clinical data access and ECS-informed understanding, pharmacists and clinicians cannot reliably interpret patient outcomes or mitigate safety risks.

5. Dispensing and Operational Risks

Dispensing and communication errors accounted for a large proportion of identified issues — 44 formal concerns, around 60% due to prescription delays and miscommunication between prescribers and pharmacies (GPhC, 2025, p. 23).

In one severe case, a patient was hospitalised following a treatment interruption caused by delayed prescription transfer.

These incidents demonstrate that CBPM errors often stem from systemic process failures, not individual negligence — preventable risks that could be mitigated through structured training, governance, and communication systems.

Policy Implications and the Path Ahead

The GPhC’s findings will form part of the evidence base for the ACMD’s 2025–2028 review, alongside submissions from leading professional bodies and patient groups.

“Existing drug laws continue to inhibit scientific testing and stifle clinical progress.”
(ACMD, 2024)

As other countries adopt progressive reforms, the UK faces a choice: maintain a risk-averse posture or embrace science-led innovation.

Bridging the Gaps: How GCS Is Solving the Cannabis Competence Crisis

The ACMD and GPhC reviews collectively highlight one fundamental truth: the UK’s cannabis ecosystem is struggling not because of intent, but because of information asymmetry — the gap between policy, clinical practice, and cannabinoid science.

At Global Cannabinoid Solutions (GCS), we built our Custom CPD Training Ecosystem precisely to close this gap. Our system transforms tens of thousands of cannabinoid studies into practical, compliant education tailored to clinics, pharmacies, and decision-makers.

The GCS Custom CPD Training Ecosystem

Our end-to-end training model embeds scientific confidence into cannabis operations — without requiring clinics to hire full-time science teams.

How it works:

1. Assessment: Identify staff knowledge gaps and compliance blind spots.

2. Customisation: Build a bespoke CPD ecosystem aligned with clinical workflows.

3. Integration: Deliver continuous monthly updates, video modules and data insights via the GCS digital platform.

4. Advisory Support: On-demand access to cannabinoid experts through the Virtual Scientific Advisory Board.

5. Automation: Seamless governance reporting, CPD tracking and 24/7 SCI Bot access.

The Result:
✅ Reduced compliance risk
✅ Consistent ECS literacy
✅ Enhanced patient outcomes
✅ Higher retention of healthcare professionals
✅ Stronger operational confidence

“When science informs governance, confidence follows. When confidence grows, so does access.”
— GCS Scientific Advisory Statement, 2025

A Call to the Sector

The GPhC has shown where the gaps are. The ACMD is mapping what needs to change. GCS exists to translate those findings into action — building a safer, smarter, and scientifically grounded medical cannabis system.

If your organisation is ready to:

• Strengthen clinical governance

• Build internal cannabinoid literacy

• And lead confidently into the next phase of medical cannabis reform

Speak to the GCS Team here: Calendly - Global Cannabinoid Solutions

Learn more about our Enterprise solutions in this video: https://youtu.be/TFlhanPd38U

References

• Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD). (2024). Barriers to Research Part 2. Home Office Publications.

• Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD). (2025). Commissioning Letter: Review of Cannabis-Based Products for Medicinal Use. Home Office.

• ElSohly, M. A., & Gul, W. (2014). Constituents of Cannabis sativa. In Handbook of Cannabis (pp. 3–22). Oxford University Press.

• General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC). (2025). Registered Pharmacies Providing Cannabis-Based Products for Medicinal Use: Themed Review. London.

• Home Office. (2025). Commissioning of ACMD Review into CBPMs. UK Government.

• Lu, H. C., & Mackie, K. (2021). An Introduction to the Endocannabinoid System. Biological Psychiatry, 79(7), 516–525.

• Maccarrone, M., Bab, I., Bíró, T., Cabral, G. A., Dey, S. K., Di Marzo, V., ... & Zimmer, A. (2015). Endocannabinoid signaling at the periphery: 50 years after THC. Trends in Pharmacological Sciences, 36(5), 277–296.

• Pertwee, R. G. (2008). The diverse CB1 and CB2 receptor pharmacology of three plant cannabinoids: Δ9-THC, CBD and Δ9-THCV. British Journal of Pharmacology, 153(2), 199–215.

• National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). (2019). Cannabis-Based Medicinal Products: Clinical Guideline [NG144]. NICE Publications.