The Cannabis Knowledge Foundation
A patient-governed, evidence-first organisation that stewards the cannabis industry's most rigorous knowledge base. We exist to ensure that the science behind cannabis is accurate, transparent, independent and accessible to everyone who needs it.
Why We Exist
The cannabis industry has a knowledge problem. Patients make decisions based on marketing claims. Clinics prescribe without standardised evidence. AI chatbots hallucinate dosing advice. Product labels use unsubstantiated therapeutic language.
The Cannabis Knowledge Foundation was created to fix this. We maintain a curated, evidence-graded knowledge base covering cannabinoid mechanisms, clinical protocols, safety data, drug interactions, product formulations and regulatory frameworks — all reviewed by a named editorial board with real expertise and lived experience.
Through the Cannavec API, this knowledge becomes infrastructure that any clinic, platform, brand or researcher can build on. The result is an industry where every piece of cannabis information traces back to evidence.
Constitutional Principles
Evidence Before Opinion
Every record in the knowledge base is graded by evidence level. RCTs and meta-analyses carry more weight than expert opinion.
Transparency Before Speed
We'd rather be slow and right than fast and wrong. Sources are cited, contradictions are acknowledged, limitations are stated.
Patient Safety Above Everything
Contraindications, drug interactions and adverse effects are always documented. Compliance-safe language throughout.
Independence From Commercial Influence
No product marketing, no payment for favourable coverage, no hidden conflicts of interest. The knowledge serves patients, not shareholders.
Knowledge as a Public Good
The Foundation owns the knowledge as a community asset. Upon dissolution, the entire knowledge base is preserved in a public archive.
Patient Governance
The editorial board includes patients, advocates and researchers — not pharmaceutical companies. Decisions are evidence-based, not popularity-based.
Editorial Board
The people who ensure every record in the knowledge base meets our evidence standards. Named, accountable, and committed to accuracy.
Chris Hobday
Head of Ops & External Projects, UPA
One of three patients instrumental in changing UK medical cannabis laws in 2018. First patient prescribed Cannabis Based Products for Medicinal use (CBPMs) by the Medical Cannabis Clinics (MCC). Brings direct lived experience and deep regulatory knowledge to the Foundation.
Alt Spoonie
Patient Advocate & Cannabis Educator
Medical cannabis patient of four years with a focus on cannabis education, harm reduction and patient advocacy. Ambassador for Blazy Susan, King Palm and Loud Box. Bridges the gap between patient communities and the clinical evidence base.
Medcannadiaries
Independent Reviewer & Educator
Plantz community member, criminology student and Alternaleaf_uk patient with 17 years of cannabis knowledge. Produces independent reviews and educational content, bringing rigorous analytical perspective to product and evidence evaluation.
Yasha Khan
Entrepreneur & Data Scientist
Nine years in the cannabis industry spanning marketing, data science and technology. Background in AI surveillance systems, with non-profit work supporting at-risk youth. Brings technical and commercial expertise to the Foundation's operations.
MV (Duma)
Research Contributor & Patient Scientist
Long-standing Plantz community member and fibromyalgia sufferer. An exploratory cannabis scientist who researches high-potency consumption methods, extraction techniques and novel delivery systems. Ensures the knowledge base reflects real-world patient experience.
Governance Structure
Trustees
Legal and fiduciary oversight, licence enforcement, protection of the Foundation's charitable purpose. Trustees do not intervene in editorial decisions.
Editorial Council
Approves canonical content, sets evidence standards, resolves disputes between conflicting evidence, and issues versioned releases of the knowledge base. Decisions are evidence-based, not popularity-based.
Contributors
Submit content and evidence, flag inaccuracies, propose corrections. Contributors cannot approve canonical content or override editorial decisions.
Evidence Grading System
Strong Evidence
Randomised controlled trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses. The highest confidence level.
Moderate Evidence
Observational studies, cohort studies, clinical registries, well-designed case-control studies.
Limited Evidence
Expert opinion, case reports, traditional use, preclinical studies. Included for completeness, always flagged.