The Effects of Cannabidiol Oil on Noninvasive Measures of Muscle Damage in Men

Kristen C. Cochrane-Snyman; Candelaria Cruz; Jacobo Morales; Michael Coles

Disclosures

Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2021;53(7):1460-1472. 

In This Article

Results

Subject descriptive characteristics can be found in Table 1. For perceived soreness, there were no significant interactions between the experimental factors (condition × time; F(4,48) = 0.053, P > 0.05) or significant main effect for condition (F(1,12) = 0.003, P > 0.05; Table 2). However, there was a main effect for time (F(4,48) = 29.487, P = 0.000, = 0.71). Post hoc pairwise comparison revealed that perceived soreness measures were significantly less at PRE (0.04 ± 0.24 cm) compared with POST, 24, 48, and 72 h posttest (4.07 ± 0.61, d = 3.585; 4.97 ± 0.48, d = 4.908; 4.79 ± 0.39, d = 5.225; 3.94 ± 0.57 cm, d = 3.57; P = 0.000; Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Recovery of perceived soreness. A, Data presented are marginal means for time for perceived soreness in both the CBD and PLC groups assessed before and after exercise and 24, 48, 72 h after exercise. B, Data presented are means ± SD of the mean for perceived soreness in the supplement (solid line; CBD) and placebo (dotted line; PLC) groups assessed before and after exercise and 24, 48, 72 h after exercise. *Denotes a value that was significantly greater than pretest for the main effect of time (P < 0.05).

For arm circumference, baseline arm circumference for CBD condition was 31.8 ± 2.8 cm and PLC was 31.4 ± 2.6 cm (P > 0.35). There were no significant interactions between the experimental factors (condition × time; F(4,48) = 0.998, P > 0.05), significant main effect for condition (F(1,12) = 0.00, P > 0.05) or significant main effect for time (F(4,48) = 2.157, P > 0.05; Table 2, Figure 3). For JA, there were no significant interactions between the experimental factors (condition × time; F(4,48) = 0.234, P > 0.05) or significant main effect for condition (F(1,12) = 1.068, P > 0.05; Table 2). However, there were main effects for time (F(4,48) = 6.443, P = 0.006, = 0.35). The post hoc pairwise comparison revealed that PRE measures were significantly greater (165.42° ± 1.52°) compared with POST and 24 h posttest, respectively (160.12° ± 2.25° and 158.92° ± 2.51°; (P < 0.05, d = 0.379; P = 0.006, d = 0.37; Figure 4).

Figure 3.

Recovery of arm circumference. A, Data presented are the marginal means for time for arm circumference (in centimeters) for both the CBD and PLC groups assessed before and after exercise and 24, 48, 72 h after exercise. B, Data presented are means ± SD of the mean for arm circumference (in centimeters) in the supplement (solid line; CBD) and placebo (dotted line; PLC) groups assessed before and after exercise and 24, 48, 72 h after exercise.

Figure 4.

Recovery for JA. A, Data presented are the marginal means for time for JA (in degrees) for both CBD and PLC groups assessed before and after exercise and 24, 48, 72 h after exercise. B, Data presented are means ± SD of the mean for JA (in degrees) in the supplement (solid line; CBD) and placebo (dotted line; PLC) groups assessed before and after exercise and 24, 48, 72 h after exercise. *Denotes a value that was significantly greater than posttest, and 24 h posttest for the main effect of time (P < 0.05).

For PT, there were no significant interactions between the experimental factors (condition × time; F(4,48) = 0.055, P > 0.05) or significant main effect for condition (F(1,12) = 0.412, P > 0.05; Table 2). There was no main effect for time (F(4,48) = 1.869, P > 0.05; Figure 5). For RPE, there were no significant interactions between the experimental factors (condition–time; F(4,48) = 0.466, P > 0.05) or significant main effect for condition (F(1,12) = 0.474, P > 0.05; Table 2). However, there was a significant main effect for time (F(4,48) = 4.374, P = 0.004, = 0.27). Post hoc pairwise comparison revealed that when collapsed across condition, RPE was significantly less (P = 0.027, D = 2.97) at PRE (14.77 ± 0.54) compared with measures at 72 h posttest (16.04 ± 0.66; Figure 6).

Figure 5.

Recovery for PT. A, Data presented are marginal means for time for PT in both the CBD and PLC groups assessed before and after exercise and 24, 48, 72 h after exercise. B, Data presented are means ± SD of the mean for PT (newton-meters) in the supplement (solid line; CBD) and placebo (dotted line; PLC) groups assessed before and after exercise and 24, 48, 72 h after exercise.

Figure 6.

Recovery for RPE. A, Data presented are marginal means for RPE for condition groups (CBD and PLC) assessed before and after exercise and 24, 48, 72 h after exercise. B, Data presented are means ± SD of the mean for RPE in the supplement (solid line; CBD) and placebo (dotted line; PLC) groups assessed before and after exercise and 24, 48, 72 h after exercise. *Denotes a value that was significantly less than 72 h posttest for the main effect of time (P < 0.05).

processing....