The aims were:1.       To show commercially available OTC...

The aims were:

1.       To show commercially available OTC topical products that contain CBD, fail to live up to the claimed content of CBD
2.       To show commercially available OTC topical products that contain CBD, fail to deliver a therapeutically effective amount of CBD to the skin layers involved in the pathogenesis of common skin diseases

Did they succeed? Yes. But to what end?

I am slightly disappointed with this move for several reasons:

1.       None of those OTC products were FDA approved I am assuming. If you are going to compete, go out and compete against topical products that have been approved.
2.       One must question the quality of such OTC products when they all contain not even 20% concentration in the whole bottle, which could mean even the concentration that was in there was so badly diluted or spoiled, it was a no contest.
3.       The Permetrex technology used needs to stand up against other products that are used for treating Acne, Derma, and Psoriasis. Not some ointment or some cream people use for pain or repair.
4.       This was a test against OTC products, not pharmaceutical products. Does anyone else see something wrong here? Has he changed his mind about going pharmaceutical? If he believes in the technology, why not compare to other pharmaceutical products?

We all know the technology works Matt!
But we still don’t really know to what end against world class products.

I am Just being critical.