rethinkTHC Search
Menu
Study breakdown

Most Online Cannabis Health Information Accessed by Thai Breast Cancer Survivors Is Poor Quality

QualitativePreliminary evidence
The takeaway

Two-thirds of cannabis-related health content accessed by Thai breast cancer survivors was generic or promotional, with alternative medicine providers and news channels producing the poorest quality content that romanticized cannabis as a cure-all.

Cancer patients researching cannabis, oncologists, and public health communicators.

64% of cannabis health content was generic news or promotional material

What the researchers found

Of 62 Thai-language cannabis content items, 64% were news-related or generic advertisements. Content from alternative medicine providers and news channels was significantly poorer quality than from healthcare providers or government sources. Two concerning discourse patterns emerged: cannabis use normalization and cannabis romanticization as a panacea, both neglecting contraindications and side effects.

Why it matters

Following Thailand's 2019 medical cannabis legalization, patients are seeking information online, but most of what they find is misleading. For cancer patients, acting on poor-quality cannabis information could lead to treatment delays or harmful interactions.

The numbers in context

62 content items evaluated; 48% on YouTube; 64% news-related/generic ads; 13% had no identifiable date; QUEST score cutoff of 15 (sensitivity 81%, specificity 98%); content creator was only significant quality predictor

How the study worked

Mixed methods study evaluating cannabis health content quality using the QUEST scoring tool (0-28 scale). 62 items from internet sources and social media were assessed by four researchers. Fairclough Critical Discourse Analysis examined poor-quality content themes.

What this study cannot tell us

Limited to Thai-language content. Small sample of 62 items. Breast cancer survivors' search behavior may not represent all cancer patients. Quality assessment tools have inherent subjectivity.

How to read the evidence

Mixed methods quality assessment of a small sample of online content. Novel findings but limited generalizability.

When this study was published

Published in 2024.

The bigger picture

This problem extends far beyond Thailand. As cannabis legalization spreads globally, the gap between evidence and online health information grows, particularly for vulnerable populations like cancer patients seeking alternatives.

Questions still open

  • Could platform-level content moderation improve cannabis health information quality?
  • Do patients who consume poor-quality cannabis content actually change their treatment decisions?

Common questions

Is online cannabis health information reliable?
This study found most was not. Only content from healthcare providers and government sources consistently met quality standards, while alternative medicine providers and news channels produced misleading content.
What was wrong with the poor-quality content?
It normalized and romanticized cannabis use without discussing contraindications or side effects, often promoting it as a cure-all for cancer.

Read the original research

Evaluating Online Cannabis Health Information for Thai Breast Cancer Survivors Using the Quality Evaluation Scoring Tool (QUEST): Mixed Method Study.

JMIR cancer, 10, e55300

Citation

Peerawong, Thanarpan; Phenwan, Tharin; Makita, Meiko; Supanichwatana, Sojirat; Puttarak, Panupong; Siammai, Naowanit; Sunthorn, Prakaidao. (2024). Evaluating Online Cannabis Health Information for Thai Breast Cancer Survivors Using the Quality Evaluation Scoring Tool (QUEST): Mixed Method Study.. JMIR cancer, 10, e55300. https://doi.org/10.2196/55300

Explore the wider topic