Recent national media coverage has drawn attention to the growing number of patients prescribed medical cannabis in the UK, often focusing on headline figures and prescription volumes. This has prompted questions about access, eligibility and clinical standards.
Understanding what sits behind these figures, including how patients are assessed, how prescribing decisions are made, and how care is monitored over time, is essential.
For many patients, this kind of coverage may feel unsettling or stigmatising. When discussion focuses on numbers without context, it can overlook the realities of chronic symptoms, repeated treatment failure and the careful clinical decisions involved in prescribing.
It is important to recognise that patients who are prescribed medical cannabis appropriately are engaging with legitimate, regulated medical care, not seeking shortcuts or special treatment.
What do rising prescription numbers mean?
The number of private prescriptions for medical cannabis has risen in recent years. This has prompted questions about who can access treatment and how prescribing decisions are made.
Prescription data can help show overall trends, but numbers alone do not tell the full story.
They do not show how eligibility decisions are made or how care is delivered in practice. They also do not capture the clinical context behind individual prescribing decisions. This includes diagnosis, prior treatments and ongoing review.
As highlighted in recent national coverage in the Sunday Express, Dr Simon Erridge pointed out that the figures often referenced relate to total prescriptions, not individual patients. He estimated this represented “around 30,000 patients receiving prescriptions last year” a distinction that is critical to understanding how medical cannabis is prescribed in practice.
He added that this is “a figure that, while growing, is still very small relative to the number of people living with chronic pain, psychiatric or neurological conditions who otherwise could be eligible for medical cannabis.”
Medical cannabis has been legal in the UK since 2018. Yet access through the NHS remains extremely limited. Outside of a small number of specific indications, most patients must seek private care. This is only an option after established treatments have been tried. The patient must have found these treatments to be ineffective, poorly tolerated or unsuitable. In that context, increasing prescription numbers may reflect unmet clinical need rather than relaxed standards.
Even now, the proportion of patients receiving prescribed medical cannabis remains small when compared with the millions of people living with uncontrolled chronic pain, psychiatric or neurological conditions across the UK.
Understanding the current conversation
Recent coverage also highlights how mixed the conversation around medical cannabis remains. While understanding and acceptance have grown in some areas, stigma and scepticism persist.
This is not unusual for an emerging area of medicine. Medical cannabis sits within a landscape where the evidence is still evolving. Clinical experience is also growing and not all clinicians or institutions feel confident adopting new treatments at the same pace.
Progress does not mean everyone agrees. Careful scrutiny remains important. Ongoing debate and the demand for high-quality evidence are essential to ensuring patient safety and appropriate use.
What matters is that discussions are grounded in facts, context and an understanding of how regulated care is delivered. Patients with legitimate clinical need should not be dismissed or mischaracterised.
How is eligibility for medical cannabis assessed?
At Curaleaf Clinic, interest in medical cannabis, or previous illicit use, are never a reason to prescribe on their own. Every patient is assessed within a robust clinical framework designed to prioritise safety, proportionality and appropriate use.
Eligibility assessment includes:
- A confirmed diagnosis of a recognised medical condition
- Evidence that conventional treatments have been tried and were ineffective, not tolerated, or clinically unsuitable
- A comprehensive review of medical history and current medications
- Careful consideration of individual risk factors and relevant medical history, particularly where additional caution is required
- A shared decision-making process that clearly explains potential benefits, limitations and risks
All cases are reviewed within a multidisciplinary team (MDT). This brings together specialist clinical expertise to ensure prescribing decisions are appropriate, consistent and evidence led.
Ongoing monitoring and review ensure treatment remains suitable over time. Treatment can be adjusted or discontinued where necessary, in line with the standards applied to other controlled medicines.
Who may be eligible for medical cannabis?
Prescribing patterns further challenge some common assumptions. Medical cannabis is most commonly considered for conditions associated with chronic pain and mental health. These are conditions where symptoms can persist despite multiple treatment attempts.
There has also been increasing clinical interest in specific conditions such as attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), endometriosis and osteoarthritis.
At the same time, broader NHS data show rising diagnoses of conditions such as ADHD and autism in adulthood. This highlights improved recognition of complex neurodevelopmental and psychiatric needs.
For some patients within these groups, standard treatment pathways do not provide sufficient symptom control. This prompts careful exploration of alternative options under medical supervision.
Why does regulated access to medical cannabis matter?
Despite growing access to legal prescriptions, a significant number of people in the UK continue to self-medicate with illicit cannabis. This carries risks, including inconsistent product quality, unpredictable dosing and the absence of clinical oversight.
Regulated medical pathways exist to reduce those risks. Prescribed medical cannabis products meet pharmaceutical quality standards, with known composition and dosing.
Patients receiving prescribed medical cannabis also benefit from clinician monitoring, safeguarding and follow-up. For patients who might otherwise self-medicate, access to structured medical care can support better clinical oversight.
A more balanced conversation
Medical cannabis is not suitable for everyone. It is not a cure-all or a shortcut around standard care. It is one potential treatment option, considered when clinically appropriate and always within a regulated framework.
As public discussion continues to evolve, it is essential that conversations remain grounded in evidence, context and patient welfare.
Progress in this area depends on continued research, open dialogue and careful evidence-building. More high-quality clinical trials are needed to support clearer guidance and enable improved access via the NHS, rather than via private clinics.
Alongside this, we are sharing patient experiences and publishing our real-world evidence from the UK Medical Cannabis Registry. We believe this has an important role to play in improving understanding, challenging stigma and supporting informed decision-making.
Ultimately, what matters most is that patients are assessed carefully, treated appropriately and supported over time, regardless of how medical cannabis is discussed in the headlines.
