This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cannabis, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cannabis on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.
Could this act as an electron acceptor in much the same way as ubiquinone does in the canadian organic solar cell invented in 1979? Zaphraud (talk) 04:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
No, it is not a quinone and the double bonds will hard work as electron acceptors.Panoramix303 (talk) 21:01, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
It's ridiculous to use the term "non-psychoactive" and then describe cannabigerol as a high affinity agonist for alpha-2 receptors and a medium affinity antagonist at the 5-HT1a receptor. By definition then, it is psychoactive. If the term is meant to mean "not considered to contribute to marijuana's subjective effects" then okay, but we need a new word. I've seen this usage at places other than wikipedia, but it just looks silly and contradictory. 74.80.58.186 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:07, 25 November 2010 (UTC).
My thoughts exactly. I tried to come up with a good way to phrase it, but failed. Shadowblade (talk) 16:15, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
