Tesla’s “Investor Day” Reveals that Opportunities Exist in Ancillary EV Businesses
Investors may have absorbed more ideas from Elon Musk at Tesla’s Investor Day about related opportunities outside of Telsa (TSLA) than in the company itself. The founder was not as forthcoming as expected; however, he did confirm Tesla’s plans to build a fifth car assembly plant in Mexico. He also made reference to a next-gen vehicle and rolled out a $ 1-a-day subscription for owners in some regions for unlimited charging. Autonomous driving updates along with safety numbers were revealed, and how and why Tesla is going to solidify its supply chain and provide itself uninterrupted battery-grade lithium was of particular interest to investors in the metals and mining industries.
Musk on Metals and Mines
It was thought that both those attending in person and those streaming would be treated to a Tesla plan to acquire a mining operation in North or South America amid rampant demand for the material crucial to battery EVs. To respond to the speculation, Musk said the EV manufacturer is “mulling” the takeover of a miner. The miner most often discussed in relation to Tesla is Sigma Lithium Corp. (SGML).
What was more concrete on the battery manufacturing supply chain issue, is it was made clear Tesla is more focused on refining lithium than on mining it. The CEO of the most valuable car company in the world said the “limiting factor” is refining lithium, not actually finding it, as no country has a monopoly on deposits.
Not all investors and analysts can make it to the PDAC Mineral Exploration and Mining Conference in Toronto. In order for our subscribers to stay in the loop, Noble Capital Markets will be attending PDAC conference meetings and then interviewing select executives. This will be captured on video for the exclusive benefit of Channelchek subscribers (no cost). Learn more about the Channelchek Takeaway Series at PDAC.
Tesla has already broken ground on what will be a lithium refinery in Texas, it plans to start output within 12 months. According to a presentation by Drew Baglino, SVP of Tesla’s Powertrain and Energy Engineering department, the EV giant wants to process lithium concentrates into battery-grade lithium chemicals at the refinery in Texas.
As for the EV battery metal nickel, it’s only needed for “aircraft, long-range cars or trucks,” Musk said. “The vast majority of heavy lifting” of EV batteries will be iron-based batteries, and there’s plenty of iron in the world, he said.
The EV Industry Unfolding
Automakers are increasingly pushing into partnerships and ownership of the mining of commodities needed for their end product. Those that vertically integrate early will have their pick among the miners that are a better fit – and potentially priced before demand accelerates. Recently the car company Stellantis took a 14% stake in a subsidiary of McEwen Mining (MUX) that produces copper. And General Motors is said to be negotiating a stake in Vale SA’s base metals unit. In January, GM conditionally okayed a $650-million pact with Lithium Americas (LACCA) to develop a US lithium deposit.
Take Away
Telsa’s Investor Day included updates on autonomous cars and presentations that showed off the company executives, but it didn’t leave a buzz in the EV industry.
It was confirmed that EV manufacturers are eying companies that produce the ingredients they need for their cars to have power. Investors may want to explore producers of lithium, copper, cobalt, and nickel. Especially those closest to EV battery manufacturing facilities.
Most vaccines, from measles to Covid-19, require a series of multiple shots before the recipient is considered fully vaccinated. To make that easier to achieve, MIT researchers have developed microparticles that can be tuned to deliver their payload at different time points, which could be used to create “self-boosting” vaccines.
In a new study, the researchers describe how these particles degrade over time, and how they can be tuned to release their contents at different time points. The study also offers insights into how the contents can be protected from losing their stability as they wait to be released.
Using these particles, which resemble tiny coffee cups sealed with a lid, researchers could design vaccines that would need to be given just once, and would then “self-boost” at a specified point in the future. The particles can remain under the skin until the vaccine is released and then break down, just like resorbable sutures.
This type of vaccine delivery could be particularly useful for administering childhood vaccinations in regions where people don’t have frequent access to medical care, the researchers say.
“This is a platform that can be broadly applicable to all types of vaccines, including recombinant protein-based vaccines, DNA-based vaccines, even RNA-based vaccines,” says Ana Jaklenec, a research scientist at MIT’s Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research. “Understanding the process of how the vaccines are released, which is what we described in this paper, has allowed us to work on formulations that address some of the instability that could be induced over time.”
This approach could also be used to deliver a range of other therapeutics, including cancer drugs, hormone therapy, and biologic drugs, the researchers say.
Jaklenec and Robert Langer, the David H. Koch Institute Professor at MIT and a member of the Koch Institute, are the senior authors of the new study, which appears today in Science Advances. Morteza Sarmadi, a research specialist at the Koch Institute and recent MIT PhD recipient, is the lead author of the paper.
Staggered Drug Release
The researchers first described their new microfabrication technique for making these hollow microparticles in a 2017 Science paper. The particles are made from PLGA, a biocompatible polymer that has already been approved for use in medical devices such as implants, sutures, and prosthetic devices.
To create cup-shaped particles, the researchers create arrays of silicon molds that are used to shape the PLGA cups and lids. Once the array of polymer cups has been formed, the researchers employed a custom-built, automated dispensing system to fill each cup with a drug or vaccine. After the cups are filled, the lids are aligned and lowered onto each cup, and the system is heated slightly until the cup and lid fuse together, sealing the drug inside.
This technique, called SEAL (StampEd Assembly of polymer Layers), can be used to produce particles of any shape or size. In a paper recently published in the journal Small Methods, lead author Ilin Sadeghi, an MIT postdoc, and others created a new version of the technique that allows for simplified and larger-scale manufacturing of the particles.
In the new Science Advances study, the researchers wanted to learn more about how the particles degrade over time, what causes the particles to release their contents, and whether it might be possible to enhance the stability of the drugs or vaccines carried within the particles.
“We wanted to understand mechanistically what’s happening, and how that information can be used to help stabilize drugs and vaccines and optimize their kinetics,” Jaklenec says.
Their studies of the release mechanism revealed that the PLGA polymers that make up the particles are gradually cleaved by water, and when enough of these polymers have broken down, the lid becomes very porous. Very soon after these pores appear, the lid breaks apart, spilling out the contents.
“We realized that sudden pore formation prior to the release time point is the key that leads to this pulsatile release,” Sarmadi says. “We see no pores for a long period of time, and then all of a sudden we see a significant increase in the porosity of the system.”
The researchers then set out to analyze how a variety of design parameters, include the size and shape of the particles and the composition of the polymers used to make them, affect the timing of drug release.
To their surprise, the researchers found that particle size and shape had little effect on drug release kinetics. This sets the particles apart from most other types of drug delivery particles, whose size plays a significant role in the timing of drug release. Instead, the PLGA particles release their payload at different times based on differences in the composition of the polymer and the chemical groups attached the ends of the polymers.
“If you want the particle to release after six months for a certain application, we use the corresponding polymer, or if we want it to release after two days, we use another polymer,” Sarmadi says. “A broad range of applications can benefit from this observation.”
Stabilizing the Payload
The researchers also investigated how changes in environmental pH affect the particles. When water breaks down the PLGA polymers, the byproducts include lactic acid and glycolic acid, which make the overall environment more acidic. This can damage the drugs carried within the particles, which are usually proteins or nucleic acids that are sensitive to pH.
In an ongoing study, the researchers are now working on ways to counteract this increase in acidity, which they hope will improve the stability of the payload carried within the particles.
To help with future particle design, the researchers also developed a computational model that can take many different design parameters into account and predict how a particular particle will degrade in the body. This type of model could be used to guide the development of the type of PLGA particles that the researchers focused on in this study, or other types of microfabricated or 3D-printed particles or medical devices.
The research team has already used this strategy to design a self-boosting polio vaccine, which is now being tested in animals. Usually, the polio vaccine has to be given as a series of two to four separate injections.
“We believe these core shell particles have the potential to create a safe, single-injection, self-boosting vaccine in which a cocktail of particles with different release times can be created by changing the composition. Such a single injection approach has the potential to not only improve patient compliance but also increase cellular and humoral immune responses to the vaccine,” Langer says.
This type of drug delivery could also be useful for treating diseases such as cancer. In a 2020 Science Translational Medicine study, the researchers published a paper in which they showed that they could deliver drugs that stimulate the STING pathway, which promotes immune responses in the environment surrounding a tumor, in several mouse models of cancer. After being injected into tumors, the particles delivered several doses of the drug over several months, which inhibited tumor growth and reduced metastasis in the treated animals.
Stock Market Performance – Looking Back at February, Forward to March
The months seem to go by quickly. And as satisfying as January was for most stock market investors, February left people with 2022 flashbacks. High inflation, or what more inflation could mean for monetary policy, again was the culprit weighing on investors’ minds and account values. One consideration is that investors are now entering March and are faced with very negative sentiment. This could actually be bullish and may lead the major indexes on a wave upward.
The next scheduled FOMC meeting is March 21-22. By then, we will have seen another round of inflation numbers as CPI (March 14) and the PCE index (March 15) are both released during the same week, otherwise known as the ides of March. While the Fed is wrestling with stubborn inflation, it is keeping an eye on the strong labor markets. Although low unemployment is desirable, tight labor markets are helping to drive prices up. The Fed is looking to find a better balance.
The three broad stock market indices (S&P 500, Nasdaq 100, and Russell 2000) are positive on the year, the Dow went negative on the 21st of February. The Nasdaq 100 and Russell 2000 have gained 9.70% and 8.22% respectively year-to-date, while the S&P is a positive 3.21% and the Dow Industrials is a negative 1.45%.
Each of the four closely watched indexes shown above began falling off as soon as January ended. It has only totalled a partial reversal, but the overall negative sentiment rose through February.
Viewing the indices from a year-to-date perspective, all but the Dow are well above their historical average pace.
Of the 11 S&P market sectors (SPDRs) only one was in positive territory for the month. This is Technology (XLK) and was barely positive at .08%. That is followed by Industrials (XLI), which fell a mere .07%. This demonstrates the flaw in using the Dow 30 Industrials (declined 4.07%) which is not as broad of an index or a great gauge of stock market direction. The third top performer was Financials (XLF) which returned a negative 2.26%. Financial firms tend to benefit from higher yields, especially if the yield curev steepens, the curve currently has negative spreads out longer.
Of the worst performers are Utilities (XLU), down 7.45%. Many investors in utilities these stocks for dividend yield; as US government bonds pay more interest, they make utility stocks less attractive. Real Estate is also affected by higher rates as underlying assets (properties) decline and the attractiveness of its dividends diminish with high rates available elsewhere. The Energy sector (XLE) was the third worst. Energy is taking its lead from what is happening between Russia and the rest of Europe.
Looking Forward
Income and consumer spending have held strong in early 2023. This would seem to put off any chance of a recession beginning this quarter or next. Earnings reported for the fourth quarter have been mixed. Public companies are dealing with their own increased costs of doing business.
The Fed raising rates one, two, or three more times in 2023 is fully expected. What became less certain is whether they will continue to rely on 25bp increments or if another 50bp is on tap in March or beyond. The Fed began raising rates last March, a large impact has yet to be felt, and it is not expected to take a wait-and-see approach soon.
February’s small decline after a large January run-up is not unusual activity. In fact the short month has typically been one of the worst of the year for the U.S. stock market. Historically, the S&P 500 has performed better in March and April. How much better? Since 1928, the S&P 500 has averaged a 0.5% gain in March and a 1.4% gain in April.
Take-Away
The market was given a lot to think about in February. Inflation stopped trending down, earnings were not exciting, and participants had amassed better gains than they had in previous months. It was time for some to take some chips off the table and look for an opportunity to get back in.
March, which historically has been positive, will allow investors to see if the tick-up in inflation is a trend or an aberration and whether negative sentiment, with money on the sidelines, makes the current market more of a buy than a sell.
Money Supply Numbers Show the Fed is Making Headway
Money Supply, as reported by the Federal Reserve, fell by the largest amount ever recorded. This significant year-on-year drop shows the Fed’s tight monetary policy at work. However, despite the dramatic decline of cash available to consumers, the pace of increase that led up to the twelve-month period was even more dramatic. This indicates the Fed is not even close to finished draining liquidity from the economy, which serves to push up the cost of money (interest rates).
What is M2, how does it impact spending, and how much lower can the money supply go to reach “normal”? Let’s explore.
The M2 Report
Data for January, released on February 28th, showed a negative growth rate of 1.7% versus a year ago. This is both the biggest yearly decline and also the first time ever it has contracted in consecutive months. The monthly rate of change has been falling consistently since mid-2021. As indicated on the chart below, it follows a historic peak of 27% growth in February 2021.
Money Supply is a measure of household liquidity, it includes household cash on hand, savings and checking deposits, and money market mutual funds. The level had been growing slowly, keeping pace with low inflation until 2020. In response to pandemic-related economic risks, the economy was then flooded with cash by the Fed. Like any other oversupply, this oversupply causes money’s value to decline – a recipe for inflation.
For almost a year, the Fed has been draining liquidity from the US economy. This includes the well-publicized retargeting of overnight bank lending rates which are accomplished by contracting the aggregate amount of cash banks hold in reserves. Draining liquidity also includes quantitative tightening by the Fed, not repurchasing maturing securities.
The Fed’s tightening is having an impact on savings and cash available to households. Although the consumer is still spending, the decline in savings makes the spending pace unsustainable. Unrelated to M2, but as important, is that consumer borrowing is up, and this, too, can not stay on an upward trajectory forever. The Fed’s actions have a lag time, but it is becoming obvious that there will come a point when consumers will need to change their spending habits downward. This is how inflation is expected to be reeled in, but it isn’t certain whether it is being reeled in at a pace where the Fed can succeed at reaching the 2% inflation rate goal – particularly in light of the last inflation number actually being higher than the previous month.
Where We Are Now
Although M2 growth rates declined at a pace shattering all records, levels are still abnormally high. To put numbers on it, Money Supply remains 39% higher than it was before the Covid-19 pandemic, just three years ago. In other words, the amount of liquidity in the economy is still significant, and too much money chasing too few goods and services lead to rising prices.
The current M2 of $21.27 trillion is nearly $6 trillion higher than the pre-pandemic level. At this point, money in the economy has surpassed real gross domestic product levels, a momentous shift that first happened in 2020 when the Fed flooded the economy with cash as the pandemic hit.
All of this indicates the Fed is actually being patient despite the dramatic tightening over the past year. It also makes it clear that they are not done mopping up the Covid-19 monetary mess. And investors shouldn’t be surprised to see their resolve continue until balances are more in-line with moderate inflation rates.
Take Away
The still elevated M2, despite its record yearly decline, is feeding inflation. The Fed is making headway removing fuel to the inflation fire.
However, consumers that historically have continued to spend at near unchanged levels, even when their disposable income no longer supports it, do eventually adjust. When this adjustment occurs, economic activity will slow. That’s when the Fed will be on the path to winning its inflation fight. Then perhaps we may actually get a pivot in monetary policy.
Stellantis Invests in Mine to Satisfy Increasing Demand for Copper
Stellantis is the latest car company to invest in a mining company to help avoid any hiccups on its road to being carbon-free by 2038. The company just announced it acquired a 14.2% stake in McEwen Copper. Partnering with or securing a large stake in a mining company or projects has been a growing trend among car companies as they secure raw materials needed to assemble the next generation of vehicles. Stellantis, the world’s third-largest automaker, owns brands such as Chrysler, Jeep, Fiat, and Peugeot. It says it wants 100% of its European cars and 50% of its US cars and light trucks to be battery electric by 2030.
As automakers move to expand EV production, access to an uninterrupted source of raw materials such as lithium, cobalt, nickel, and copper is a concern that needs to be planned for. Some car companies have developed strategies to to directly sourcing raw materials from mines. And others are likely to follow. This year, Tesla (TSLA), Ford (F), and General Motors (GM) are all expected to be better represented than in the past at the top mining conferences being held over the next two weeks. These include the Global Metals and Mining Conference in South Florida (Feb. 27 – Mar. 1) and the Mineral Exploration & Mining Convention in Toronto (Mar. 5 – Mar. 8).
Because not all investors can make it to Toronto, analysts from Noble Capital Markets will be attending PDAC conference meetings and then interviewing select executives. This will be captured on video for the exclusive benefit of Channelchek subscribers (no cost). Learn more about the Channelchek Takeaway Series at PDAC.
The Stellantis Purchase
The $155 million investment in a project located in Argentina, is expected to make what the press release called, “a major contribution to the company’s plan to become carbon net zero by 2038.” It represents a 14.2% equity stake in McEwen Copper, a subsidiary of Canadian mining company McEwen Mining (MUX), which owns the Los Azules project in Argentina and the Elder Creek project in Nevada.
The large stake makes Stellantis McEwen Copper’s second-largest shareholder, along with Rio Tinto, through its copper leaching technology venture, Nuton. Los Azules plans to produce 100,000 tons per year of cathode copper at 99.9% purity starting in 2027 and the resources can secure the operation for at least 33 years.
“Stellantis intends to lead the industry with the commitment to be carbon net zero by 2038 – a goal that requires innovation and a complete redefinition of the entire business,” said Carlos Tavares, Stellantis CEO. “We are taking important steps in Argentina and Brazil, with the aim of decarbonizing mobility and ensuring strategic supplies of raw materials necessary for the success of the Company’s global electrification plans,” he said.
“Copper is a strategic raw material for the future of electric mobility, and it is estimated that global demand for the conductive metal will triple in the coming years. By making an investment in one of the top 10 international projects in the development of this commodity, Stellantis should be able to supply some of the projected copper demand starting in 2027,” said Carlos Tavares.
Take Away
The move to electric cars presents a number of opportunities to investors beyond picking which car company perform best, or even survive. Looking forward to areas of increased demand from the EV business, lithium is the mineral spoken about most. But copper is not only important in its use throughout the vehicle, it is also critical to distribute electricity to charging stations. It wouldn’t be a surprise to hear announcements by other car companies that they are also enhancing their vertical integration by partnering with or purchasing mining operations.
Channelchek is a great resource for information on small and microcap mining companies. For an extensive listing of companies involved in copper mining, including description, data, and stock price history, click here.
Will Tesla Investors be Inspired or Disappointed on March 1 (Investor Day)?
Tesla’s Investor Day is March 1st. The lead-up to these events is usually filled with speculation of how the founder, Elon Musk, may surprise EV fans and the investment community. Tesla’s (TSLA) innovations and unique marketing and distribution have made it the most valuable car company in the world. Part of that marketing is the mystique and confidence Musk brings whenever he has an audience. The company is also inspiring as it is less than 20 years in the making and is leading a revolution in how automobiles are built, driven, and fueled.
As plans are kept under wraps, most of the rumors as to what to expect fall in the category of speculation. Below are some of the most likely ideas from past announcements from Tesla and across the internet since the meeting date was announced.
Battery Production
Sourcing raw materials for batteries to make certain new EVs have all the needed components is becoming a concern among car manufacturers.
News has leaked of a proposed $3.6 billion Giga factory to produce up to 100 Gwh of batteries. The factory is expected to be in Nevada and eventually be used to assemble the Tesla semi when production eventually starts.
Tesla is expected to build a processing facility to make lithium hydroxide from spodumene concentrate in Corpus Christie, Texas. The location is good for shipping, and it is close to sources of sulfuric acid from the oil industry. This would be the first lithium hydroxide production facility in the U.S. If true, it would help Tesla fulfill the raw material sourcing requirements of the Inflation Reduction Act to qualify its cars for the $7,500 federal tax credit.
Those deals are at market prices; Tesla would reap the profits from processing the spodumene concentrate into hydroxide, but the bulk of the profit from the material supply accrues to the mining company. Tesla has hinted previously of plans to enter the lithium mining business.
The $25,000 EV
First mentioned in 2020, Tesla’s proposed $25,000 car earned the nickname “fluffy pillow” after Musk showed a picture of an object covered by a blanket that many thought resembled a large pillow. The project was put on hold in early 2022 when Musk said Tesla had too much on its plate.
Tesla’s existing best sellers, the Model 3 and Model Y, have been around for a while, a new model, whether it is the truck or an affordable entry level car would freshen up the line-up.
New Factory
Tesla’s production goals put it at or near capacity. The current factory capacity is listed as 1.9 million vehicles per year. The current goal is six million cars a year by 2026. This would require the expansion of existing plants and then some. A new factory takes three years to design, construct, and get rolling. So planning would have to start now. Musk is more likely to build a new plant than change his production goals.
Thoughts from across the internet suggest this could be in Indonesia or Mexico. Cars built in Mexico could qualify for the $7500 tax credit to purchasers.
Capital Raise
To accomplish the above requires money. Currently, there is construction in progress building out Tesla’s German and Texas factories. Billions more would be needed to implement other plans.
There is as of recent reporting, $22 billion in cash on Tesla’s balance sheet. This is a snapshot of quarter-end and not an accurate representation of the company’s finances. Offsetting this large number is $15 billion in trade payables and $7 billion in accrued payables, much of which is due soon.
Tesla may have to go to the market to raise cash for projects that will be presented on March 1st.
About Tesla Day
The investor event will be live-streamed from Tesla’s Gigafactory in Texas, with some of the company’s institutional and retail investors attending in person. According to Tesla’s press release, investors will be able to see its most advanced production line as well as discuss long-term expansion plans, the generation 3 platform, and capital allocation.
Old School Versus New School are your Investments Inline with the Changing Investor Makeup?
Investing tastes and strategies vary by generation. And as technologies advance and provide self-directed investors with new methodologies, all investors should pay attention to shifts in the marketplace. According to a report by APEX Fintech Solutions, millennials, and Gen Z are gaining wealth at a rate of 25%, while all generations increased at only 16%. There are major implications for market moves as trillions are controlled by those that may have different risk tolerance, different holding periods, or a broadly different knowledge base about many companies and their products.
What Was Measured
The data compiled in the APEX report analyzed more than 1.3 million Gen Z accounts, in addition to
over 4.0 million millennial accounts, 2.0 million held by Gen X, and over half a million baby boomers. The numbers are calculated as of December 31, 2022. It also compared managed accounts to self-directed investments.
The four generations were defined in this way:
Z: Born 1997-2012 (25 and younger) – Generation Z
M: Born 1981-1996 (26-41 years old) – Millenials
X: Born 1965-1980 (42-57 years old) – Generation X
B: Born 1946-1964 (58-76 years old) – Baby Boomers
Notable Investment Trends and Differences
Sifting through the stats (Q1 2020 – Q2 2022) and comparing self-directed investors with professionally managed accounts, self-directed, as a whole, did comparatively little selling at the lows of the stock market during the pandemic-inspired sell-off (early 2020). Instead, the peak in selling (the low for the hold rate) for self-directed accounts came at the height of meme stock and market run-up in Q1 2021. Over the period, including when selling was at its peak, managed accounts consistently were more active, changing and adding to positions at a much higher rate. Self-directed portfolios were more likely to enter a position, hold it and at times add to current positions.
During the last quarter of 2022, the most popular stocks held by all generations remained the same while the companies positioned in the remainder of the account holdings were in flux and altered quite a bit. The top stocks held were Tesla (TSLA), Apple Inc. (AAPL), Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) and Microsoft Corp (MSFT); these were core holdings that were barely traded by any generational grouping.
Below these holdings, each generation had different sets of significant shifts, with real estate investment trusts growing for all four generational groups. Industrials and Energy Sectors were also favored across generations, while holdings in service-related industries were reduced. The two strongest performing sectors in Q4, across the generational rankings, were industrials and energy.
Across all generational holdings, industrials were led by General Electric (GE), Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT), Raytheon Technologies Corp (RTX), Boeing Co (BA), and Delta Air Lines, Inc. (DAL), while energy stocks were led by namely Chevron Corporation (CVX) and Exxon Mobil Corp (XOM), and followed closely by BP plc (BP), Energy Transfer LP Unit (ET), and Enterprise Products Partners LP (EPD).
The tickers that dropped the most on the APEX top 100 list included Rivian (RIVN), which dipped an average of 27.8 spots across all generations, followed by AMC, which slipped 11.8 spots lower. For Gen Z, millennials and Gen X they also reduced holdings in TTD , DKNG and RBLX which dropped between 18 to 27 positions lower in the top 100 holdings.
Tesla (TSLA) which had been in the number one position for Gen X and Gen Z, dropped to number two last quarter as Apple (AAPL) regained popularity. TSLA spent nine consecutive quarters in the top spot, all for Gen Z, TSLA had a four-quarter streak. At number two, TSLA is still a popular stock, especially with Millennials and Gen Z, they chose to hold at the highest rates, even as the price plummeted.
For self-directed investors of all ages, the TSLA hold rate is significantly higher (93%) than for investors who use managed brokerage services (84%).
Throughout the fourth quarter of 2022, retail investors displayed a risk-managed approach to trading and strategic investing as they measured recession risks and a changed monetary policy. Millennials were the most active traders in the fourth quarter, the numbers indicate they were engaged and paid attention as market conditions evolved.
Take Away
There are two big takeaways from the study, the first is that retail investors are gaining power and have become savvier and in tune with smart investing.
The second takeaway is related to the first. Since the start of 2020, combined assets for all generations have risen 16% to $52.4 trillion. Two age groupings, millennials and Gen Z, are gaining wealth at a much higher 25% pace. The massive shift in market power is unfolding and has major implications for how, when, and why investments are transacted.
The markets are mostly up on the year, with stocks around 5.5% higher, bonds and the $ U.S. dollar near 1%, and bitcoin near 46.5% above the December 31st level. Last week there was concern that the positive start most asset classes had at the beginning of the year is going to give a sizeable portion back, perhaps all and then some. This concern was heightened by a measure that shows that inflation’s decline may be tacking higher. There are no inflation reports scheduled in the upcoming week to worry about, and few Fed President addresses to be concerned with.
Monday 2/27
8:30 AM ET, Durable Goods Orders are expected to have dropped off by 4% in January. They had surged in December primarily because of aircraft orders. When transportation is removed to reveal the core Durable Goods reading, it is expected to be flat with no change from the prior month’s volume of orders.
10:00 AM ET, The National Association of Realtors is expected to report that Pending Home Sales rose 1% in January from the prior month. This level increase would be at a slower pace than the 2.5% increase in the prior period.
10:30 AM ET, The Dallas Fed Manufacturing Survey is expected to have declined for the ninth consecutive month. The consensus among economists is down 9.0 versus down 8.4.
Tuesday 2/28
8:30 AM ET, International Trade in Goods is expected to widen as economists expect exports to have fallen off. The expectation of a $91 billion trade deficit for the U.S. in January is $1.3 billion wider than December’s measurements.
9:45 PM ET, The Institute for Supply Management uses a survey to create a composite of business conditions in the Chicago area. The leading indicator is expected to come in at 45 for February, which would be an uptick from January’s 44.3.
10:00 AM ET, Consumer Confidence has been falling; the report released on Tuesday is expected to show a rise of 1.3 points to 108.4.
1:00 PM ET, Money Supply (M1 and M2) are measures of liquidity, it includes household savings, savings and checking deposits, and money market mutual funds. Over the past few years, money supply measures weren’t getting much attention. As households are dealing with rising prices, it may be interesting for investors to see if amounts immediately available to households are declining at a pace that may begin to hamper spending and economic growth.
Wednesday 3/01
10:00 PM ET, The ISM Manufacturing Index surveys business nationally to get the pulse on expected business levels. The forward-looking indicator is expected to have improved to 47.9 versus 47.4 the prior month.
Thursday 3/02
8:30 AM ET, Jobless Claims have been a nail-biter number recently, often well off of expectations. For the week ending February 25th, claims are supposed to show an increase in claims to 200,000.
Friday 3/03
10:00 AM ET, ISM Services Index had a strong January at 55.2, it is expected to trail off some and have a February reading of 54.5.
12:00 PM, Atlanta Federal Reserve President Raphael Bostic has been rattling markets with his ongoing and perhaps heightened hawkish rhetoric. FOMC member Bostic is not a voting member, but his words have the power to move markets.
4:15 PM, Thomas Barkin is the Richmond Federal Reserve President. He is scheduled to speak after the market closes. If the Fed is looking to adjust expectations before its late March meeting, FOMC member Barkin may be one that carries that message.
What Else
Earnings reports will continue with some of the most watched being Occidental Petroleum (OXY), and Zoom (Z.M.) on Monday. Retailer Target (TGT) reports on Tuesday, Salesforce (CRM), and NIO (NIO) on Wednesday , and Anheiser Busch (BUD) on Thursday.
The U.S. Supreme Court will begin hearing two cases on student loan debt forgiveness beginning on Tuesday. Expect some non-market-moving discourse on this subject during the week.
Use of Psychedelics to Treat PTSD, OCD, Depression and Chronic Pain – a Researcher Discusses Recent Trials, Possible Risks
New research is exploring whether psychedelic drugs, taken under strict medical supervision, might help in treating post-traumatic stress disorder, chronic pain, depression and obsessive-compulsive disorder. Dr. Jennifer Mitchell – a professor in the Departments of Neurology and Psychiatry & Behavioral Science in the School of Medicine at the University of California, San Francisco was interviewed by SciLine. She discusses what scientists have found to date about the effectiveness of these drugs in treating these disorders and how best for them to be administered. Highlights and key excerpts of the interview have been transcribed and published below.
What are psychedelic drugs and how do they work?
Dr. Jennifer Mitchell: Psychedelic basically means “mind manifesting,” suggesting that the compound assists one in uncovering subject matter that perhaps is otherwise deeply hidden from the conscious mind.
It’s a slightly different term from hallucinogen, which you see used almost interchangeably at times with the term psychedelic.
A hallucinogen by definition is something that makes you see, hear, smell something that isn’t otherwise there, so you can imagine there’s a lot of overlap between psychedelics and hallucinogens.
Which types of psychedelic drugs are being studied by researchers for potential therapeutic use?
Dr. Jennifer Mitchell: The two most well studied drugs at this point are MDMA and psilocybin.
MDMA is being evaluated mainly for treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder treatments, and psilocybin mainly for treatment of resistant depression and major depressive disorder.
MDMA is the furthest along because there’s phase 3 data (data from late-stage research) and the possibility that a new drug application would be submitted to the FDA sometime later this year.
LSD is also being evaluated for a number of different indications, most notably obsessive-compulsive disorder.
And then a couple of sort of heavier hitters are now being tested in primarily healthy control populations, including drugs like mescaline and ayahuasca.
What have scientists discovered about whether these drugs are effective in treating health problems like PTSD or chronic pain?
Dr. Jennifer Mitchell: The drugs so far appear to be quite effective. I think one key, though, is that they’re typically being administered in conjunction with some form of psychotherapy.
So it’s important to keep that in mind when we look at the results from some of these recent trials that these are not drugs that are being administered in isolation. You are not taking home a bottle of pills and taking those twice a day as you would, say, an antidepressant. These are administered in a very particular way.
What is involved in therapeutic treatment using these drugs?
Dr. Jennifer Mitchell: Typically, prior to taking the drug at all, subjects participate in a number of preparatory sessions so that they understand a little bit about what is going to happen on an experimental session day.
And then subjects come into a room that looks very much like a comfortable living room, and they spend all day there. The drug is administered typically in the morning. For psilocybin, you’re looking at a six-hour dosing session, and for MDMA, an eight-hour dosing session.
You are in the company of a group of trained providers: therapists, psychedelic facilitators, psychiatrists and clinical research coordinators.
What are the potential risks of using psychedelic drugs for therapeutic purposes?
Dr. Jennifer Mitchell: One concern we’ve had is cardiovascular risk, and so we are taking great care in some of the clinical trials at present to evaluate cardiovascular burden, including heart attack risk, during and after the experiment. This evaluation includes tracking the heart rate and blood pressure of the participants.
In addition, researchers are worried about suicidality, in part because these are treatment-resistant populations that we’re starting off with, and so there’s a concern that perhaps, if they’re destabilized – either by the psychedelic, or just by tapering off their other meds in order to be part of a psychedelic trial – that we could run the risk of suicidality.
Lastly, I think the FDA has been concerned about the possibility that psychedelics are addictive, and so we’ve been following up with study participants to ensure that they aren’t engaging in drug seeking or drug taking outside of the study.
What do we know about the safety of taking psychedelics outside the clinical context?
Dr. Jennifer Mitchell: I think we’ve all heard stories from the ‘60s and ’70s of people taking psychedelics and having very bad experiences. What we know now is that the environment in which you take the psychedelic is of the utmost importance. It’s not appropriate at this point to try to take some of these substances or replicate some of these protocols on your own without oversight.
Watch the full interview to hear more about psychedelic medicine.
SciLine is a free service based at the nonprofit American Association for the Advancement of Science that helps journalists include scientific evidence and experts in their news stories.
What Sectors Outperformed the Market after the PCE Inflation Shock?
When an investor inquires, “What stocks do well with high inflation?” they are often asking, “What sectors do well with rising interest rates?,” because inflation expectations often drive rate moves. The text book response usually given are: consumer staples, banks and financials, and commodities. The PCE indexes are considered the Fed’s preferred indicator of inflation trends. The PCE surprised markets on the high side when released on February 24th. What can investors now expect from higher-than-forecast inflation?
Rather than look at old information on what outperforms the overall market when inflation expectations rise, I thought it would be informative and more useful to see what is outperforming under current 2023 conditions and climate. The chart below and the remainder of this simple study is a snapshot three hours after the news settled in among investors (11:30am ET, February 24th).
There were five S&P sectors that outperformed the S&P 500 a few hours after the inflation number showed an almost across-the-board acceleration in price increases. At this point, the S&P 500 had already fallen 1.31%.
Beating the S&P larger index, but the worst of the five outperformers was Health Care (XLV). The Health sector is considered to be a necessity that consumers find a means to pay for regardless of cost. Within the sector there are companies providing goods and services that are more embraced by investors than others. Within the XLV, many stocks were green after the report.
Outperforming the Health Care sector were stocks making up the Industrial Sector (XLI). This includes large industrial manufacturers like John Deere, General Electric, and Caterpillar. Many of these companies have contracts well out into the future that assures business. What is not ordinarily assured is the cost of manufacturing which can go up with inflation. A number of the top holdings in XLI barely budged on the morning – GE was up .08%, Honeywell was down .18%, and UPS was down just .20%.
Almost even with the Industrial Sector was Consumer Staples (XLP). As with Health Care and to a lesser degree Industrials this sector is where money moves to during inflationary periods. Consumers may be postpone a new car purchase, but they’ll keep their buying habits unchanged for products produced by Colgate, Coca-Cola, Proctor and Gamble, or cigarette manufacturers.
Performing second best after the inflation numbers was the Utility sector (XLU). Again this follows the mindset that consumers can only cutback on water, electricity, and natural gas so much. It is more likely that cutbacks would come in other areas like entertainment, or technology. Technology was the worst performing sector.
The top performer, although still modestly negative, was the Financial sector. This includes insurance, banks and credit card companies, as well as investment firms. Banks, particularly those with a higher percentage of traditional banking business, benefit from a steepening yield curve. Banks use cash as their product line. They borrow short from customers, and lend longer term. As the yield curve steepens, their net income can be expected to rise. This may explain why two of the top three holdings were positive after the report, JP Morgan (JPM), and Wells Fargo (WFC). Brokerage firms also may benefit as accounts uninvested balances can be a source of revenue as financial firms earn interest on them. Rising rates means every balance they can earn on creates additional income.
Larger Index Observations
As indicated earlier, technology was the worst-performing sector. This causes the tech heavy Nasdaq to far underperform the other major indexes. The best performing a few hour after the open was the Dow Industrials, which is comprised of just 30 industrial stocks, many paying consistent dividends. The second best performer, beating both the Dow and S&P 500 was the Russell 2000 Small-Cap index. Small-cap stocks tend to be less affected when borrowing costs change, and tend to have more of their end customers located domestically. The U.S.-based customers is an advantage to smaller stocks when rising rates cause rising dollar values. A rising dollar makes goods or services from the U.S. more expensive overseas.
Take Away
The textbook reply to questions related to rising rates, inflation, and sector rotation in stocks held up after the surprise PCE index increase. Banks, and necessities like heat and consumer goods outperformed. Also small-cap stocks did not disappoint, they also held up better than the overall large cap universe.
One difficulty small and even microcap investors face is that information is less available on many of these companies. And there are a lot of them, including in the sectors that outperform with inflation. One easy way to find which smaller companies are rising to the top is Channelchek’s Market Movers tab. This can be viewed throughout the trading day by clicking here for the link.
No two hearts beat alike. The size and shape of the heart can vary from one person to the next. These differences can be particularly pronounced for people living with heart disease, as their hearts and major vessels work harder to overcome any compromised function.
MIT engineers are hoping to help doctors tailor treatments to patients’ specific heart form and function, with a custom robotic heart. The team has developed a procedure to 3D print a soft and flexible replica of a patient’s heart. They can then control the replica’s action to mimic that patient’s blood-pumping ability.
The procedure involves first converting medical images of a patient’s heart into a three-dimensional computer model, which the researchers can then 3D print using a polymer-based ink. The result is a soft, flexible shell in the exact shape of the patient’s own heart. The team can also use this approach to print a patient’s aorta — the major artery that carries blood out of the heart to the rest of the body.
To mimic the heart’s pumping action, the team has fabricated sleeves similar to blood pressure cuffs that wrap around a printed heart and aorta. The underside of each sleeve resembles precisely patterned bubble wrap. When the sleeve is connected to a pneumatic system, researchers can tune the outflowing air to rhythmically inflate the sleeve’s bubbles and contract the heart, mimicking its pumping action.
The researchers can also inflate a separate sleeve surrounding a printed aorta to constrict the vessel. This constriction, they say, can be tuned to mimic aortic stenosis — a condition in which the aortic valve narrows, causing the heart to work harder to force blood through the body.
Doctors commonly treat aortic stenosis by surgically implanting a synthetic valve designed to widen the aorta’s natural valve. In the future, the team says that doctors could potentially use their new procedure to first print a patient’s heart and aorta, then implant a variety of valves into the printed model to see which design results in the best function and fit for that particular patient. The heart replicas could also be used by research labs and the medical device industry as realistic platforms for testing therapies for various types of heart disease.
“All hearts are different,” says Luca Rosalia, a graduate student in the MIT-Harvard Program in Health Sciences and Technology. “There are massive variations, especially when patients are sick. The advantage of our system is that we can recreate not just the form of a patient’s heart, but also its function in both physiology and disease.”
Rosalia and his colleagues report their results in a study appearing today in Science Robotics. MIT co-authors include Caglar Ozturk, Debkalpa Goswami, Jean Bonnemain, Sophie Wang, and Ellen Roche, along with Benjamin Bonner of Massachusetts General Hospital, James Weaver of Harvard University, and Christopher Nguyen, Rishi Puri, and Samir Kapadia at the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio.
Print and Pump
In January 2020, team members, led by mechanical engineering professor Ellen Roche, developed a “biorobotic hybrid heart” — a general replica of a heart, made from synthetic muscle containing small, inflatable cylinders, which they could control to mimic the contractions of a real beating heart.
Shortly after those efforts, the Covid-19 pandemic forced Roche’s lab, along with most others on campus, to temporarily close. Undeterred, Rosalia continued tweaking the heart-pumping design at home.
“I recreated the whole system in my dorm room that March,” Rosalia recalls.
Months later, the lab reopened, and the team continued where it left off, working to improve the control of the heart-pumping sleeve, which they tested in animal and computational models. They then expanded their approach to develop sleeves and heart replicas that are specific to individual patients. For this, they turned to 3D printing.
“There is a lot of interest in the medical field in using 3D printing technology to accurately recreate patient anatomy for use in preprocedural planning and training,” notes Wang, who is a vascular surgery resident at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston.
An Inclusive Design
In the new study, the team took advantage of 3D printing to produce custom replicas of actual patients’ hearts. They used a polymer-based ink that, once printed and cured, can squeeze and stretch, similarly to a real beating heart.
As their source material, the researchers used medical scans of 15 patients diagnosed with aortic stenosis. The team converted each patient’s images into a three-dimensional computer model of the patient’s left ventricle (the main pumping chamber of the heart) and aorta. They fed this model into a 3D printer to generate a soft, anatomically accurate shell of both the ventricle and vessel.
The team also fabricated sleeves to wrap around the printed forms. They tailored each sleeve’s pockets such that, when wrapped around their respective forms and connected to a small air pumping system, the sleeves could be tuned separately to realistically contract and constrict the printed models.
The researchers showed that for each model heart, they could accurately recreate the same heart-pumping pressures and flows that were previously measured in each respective patient.
“Being able to match the patients’ flows and pressures was very encouraging,” Roche says. “We’re not only printing the heart’s anatomy, but also replicating its mechanics and physiology. That’s the part that we get excited about.”
Going a step further, the team aimed to replicate some of the interventions that a handful of the patients underwent, to see whether the printed heart and vessel responded in the same way. Some patients had received valve implants designed to widen the aorta. Roche and her colleagues implanted similar valves in the printed aortas modeled after each patient. When they activated the printed heart to pump, they observed that the implanted valve produced similarly improved flows as in actual patients following their surgical implants.
Finally, the team used an actuated printed heart to compare implants of different sizes, to see which would result in the best fit and flow — something they envision clinicians could potentially do for their patients in the future.
“Patients would get their imaging done, which they do anyway, and we would use that to make this system, ideally within the day,” says co-author Nguyen. “Once it’s up and running, clinicians could test different valve types and sizes and see which works best, then use that to implant.”
Ultimately, Roche says the patient-specific replicas could help develop and identify ideal treatments for individuals with unique and challenging cardiac geometries.
“Designing inclusively for a large range of anatomies, and testing interventions across this range, may increase the addressable target population for minimally invasive procedures,” Roche says.
This research was supported, in part, by the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, and the National Heart Lung Blood Institute.
The Statement on Crypto Vulnerabilities by Regulators
A joint statement to banking organizations on “crypto-asset vulnerabilities” was just released by three bank regulatory agencies. Most banks in the U.S. fall under these three federal institutions overseeing them in a regulatory capacity. So when a statement regarding the health and stability of banks is made, it is often a joint statement from the three. At a minimum, statements include the Federal Reserve Bank (FRB), Office of the Controller of the Currency (OCC), and Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC).
About the Statement
Issued on February 23rd, the multiple agencies felt a need to highlight liquidity risks presented by some “sources of funding” from crypto-asset-related entities, and practices they should be using to manage the risks.
The regulators remind banks that they are neither prohibited nor discouraged from offering banking services to this class of customer, but if they do, much of the existing risk management principles should be applied.
Related Liquidity Risks
Highlighted in the statement by the three bank regulatory bodies are key liquidity risks associated with crypto asset participants and crypto-asset organizations involved in banking and what they should be aware of.
This includes some sources of funding from crypto-asset-related entities that may pose heightened liquidity risks to those involved in banking due to the unpredictability of the scale and timing of deposit inflows and outflows, including, for example:
Deposits placed by a crypto-asset-related entity that is for the benefit of thecrypto-asset-related entity’s customers. The stability of the deposits, according to the statement, may be driven by the behavior of the end customer or asset sector dynamics, and not solely by the crypto-asset-related entity itself, which is the banking organization’s direct counterparty. The concern is the stability of the deposits may be influenced by, for example, periods of stress, market volatility, and related vulnerabilities in the crypto-asset sector, which may or may not be specific to the crypto-asset-related entity. Such deposits can be susceptible to large and rapid inflows as well as outflows when end customers react to crypto-asset-sector-related market events, media reports, and uncertainty. This uncertainty and resulting deposit volatility can be exacerbated by end customer confusion related to inaccurate or misleading representations of deposit insurance by a crypto-assetrelated entity.
Deposits that constitute stablecoin-related reserves. The stability of this type of deposit may be linked to demand for stablecoins according to the agencies, along with the confidence of stablecoin holders in the coin arrangement, and the stablecoin issuer’s reserve management practices. These deposits can be susceptible to large and rapid outflows stemming from, for unanticipated stablecoin redemptions or dislocations in crypto-asset markets.
More broadly, when a banking organization’s deposit funding base is concentrated in crypto-asset-related entities that are highly interconnected or share similar risk profiles, deposit fluctuations may also be correlated, and liquidity risk therefore may be further heightened, according to the statement.
Effective Risk Management Practices
In light of these hightened risks, agencies think it is critical for banks that use certain sources of funding from crypto-asset-related entities, as described earlier, to actively monitor the liquidity risks inherent in these sources of funding and to establish and maintain effective risk management and controls commensurate with the level of liquidity risks from these funding sources. Effective practices for these banking organizations could include:
Understanding the direct and indirect drivers of the potential behavior of deposits from crypto-asset-related entities and the extent to which those deposits are susceptible to unpredictible vulnerability.
Assessing potential concentration or interconnectedness across deposits from crypto-asset-related entities and the associated liquidity risks.
Incorporating the liquidity risks or funding volatility associated with crypto-asset-related deposits into contingency funding planning, including liquidity stress testing and, as appropriate, other asset-liability governance and risk management processes.
Performing significant due diligence and monitoring of crypto-related-entities that establish deposit accounts, including assessing the representations made by those crypto-asset-related entities to their end customers about the accounts – if innaccurate they could lead to to unexpected or rapid outflows.
Additionally, banks and banking organizations are required to comply with applicable laws and regulations. For FDIC insured institutions, this includes compliance with rules related to brokered deposits and Call Report filing requirements.
People Produce Endocannabinoids – Similar to Compounds Found in Marijuana – Critical to Many Bodily Functions
Over the past two decades, a great deal of attention has been given to marijuana – also known as pot or weed. As of early 2023, marijuana has been legalized for recreational use in 21 states and Washington, D.C., and the use of marijuana for medical purposes has grown significantly during the last 20 or so years.
But few people know that the human body naturally produces chemicals that are very similar to delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, the psychoactive compound in marijuana, which comes from the Cannabis sativa plant. These substances are called endocannabinoids, and they’re found across all vertebrate species.
Evolutionarily, the appearance of endocannabinoids in vertebrate animals predates that of Cannabis sativa by about 575 million years.
It is as if the human body has its own version of a marijuana seedling inside, constantly producing small amounts of endocannabinoids.
The similarity of endocannabinoids to THC, and their importance in maintaining human health, have raised significant interest among scientists to further study their role in health and disease, and potentially use them as therapeutic targets to treat human diseases.
THC was first identified in 1964, and is just one of more than 100 compounds found in marijuana that are called cannabinoids.
Endocannabinoids were not discovered until 1992. Since then, research has revealed that they are critical for many important physiological functions that regulate human health. An imbalance in the production of endocannabinoids, or in the body’s responsiveness to them, can lead to major clinical disorders, including obesity as well as neurodegenerative, cardiovascular and inflammatory diseases.
This article was republished with permission from The Conversation, a news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. It represents the research-based findings and thoughts of Prakash Nagarkatti, Professor of Pathology, Microbiology and Immunology, University of South Carolina and Mitzi Nagarkatti, Professor of Pathology, Microbiology and Immunology, University of South Carolina.
We are immunologists who have been studying the effects of marijuana cannabinoids and vertebrate endocannabinoids on inflammation and cancer for more than two decades. Research in our laboratory has shown that endocannabinoids regulate inflammation and other immune functions.
What is the Endocannabinoid System?
A variety of tissues in the body, including brain, muscle, fatty tissue and immune cells, produce small quantities of endocannabinoids. There are two main types of endocannabinoids: anandamide, or AEA, and 2-arachidonoyl glycerol, known as 2-AG. Both of them can activate the body’s cannabinoid receptors, which receive and process chemical signals in cells.
One of these receptors, called CB1, is found predominantly in the brain. The other, called CB2, is found mainly in immune cells. It is primarily through the activation of these two receptors that endocannabinoids control many bodily functions.
The receptors can be compared to a “lock” and the endocannabinoids a “key” that can open the lock and gain entry into the cells. All these endocannabinoid receptors and molecules together are referred to as the endocannabinoid system.
The cannabis plant contains another compound called cannabidiol, or CBD, which has become popular for its medicinal properties. Unlike THC, CBD doesn’t have psychoactive properties because it does not activate CB1 receptors in the brain. Nor does it activate the CB2 receptors, meaning that its action on immune cells is independent of CB2 receptors.
Endocannabinoid receptors are found throughout most of the human body
Role of Endocannabinoids in the Body
The euphoric “high” feeling that people experience when using marijuana comes from THC activating the CB1 receptors in the brain.
But when endocannabinoids activate CB1 receptors, by comparison, they do not cause a marijuana high. One reason is that the body produces them in smaller quantities than the typical amount of THC in marijuana. The other is that certain enzymes break them down rapidly after they carry out their cellular functions.
However, there is growing evidence that certain activities may release mood-elevating endocannabinoids. Some research suggests that the relaxed, euphoric feeling you get after exercise, called a “runner’s high,” results from the release of endocannabinoids rather than from endorphins, as previously thought.
The endocannabinoids regulate several bodily functions such as sleep, mood, appetite, learning, memory, body temperature, pain, immune functions and fertility. They control some of these functions by regulating nerve cell signaling in the brain. Normally, nerve cells communicate with one another at junctions called synapses. The endocannabinoid system in the brain regulates this communication at synapses, which explains its ability to affect a wide array of bodily functions.
The Elixir of Endocannabinoids
Research in our laboratory has shown that certain cells of the immune system produce endocannabinoids that can regulate inflammation and other immune functions through the activation of CB2 receptors.
In addition, we have shown that endocannabinoids are highly effective in lessening the debilitating effects of autoimmune diseases. These are diseases in which the immune system goes haywire and starts destroying the body’s organs and tissues. Examples include multiple sclerosis, lupus, hepatitis and arthritis.
Recent research suggests that migraine, fibromyalgia, irritable bowel syndrome, post-traumatic stress disorder and bipolar disease are all linked to low levels of endocannabinoids.
In a 2022 study, researchers found that a defect in a gene that helps produce endocannabinoids causes early onset of Parkinson’s disease. Another 2022 study linked the same gene defect to other neurological disorders, including developmental delay, poor muscle control and vision problems.
Other research has shown that people with a defective form of CB1 receptors experience increased pain sensitivity such as migraine headaches and suffer from sleep and memory disorders and anxiety.
The endocannabinoid system – consisting of the endocannabinoids and the cannabinoid receptors – regulates nerve cell communication at the synapse, thereby playing a role in a variety of bodily functions.
The Likeness Between Marijuana and Endocannabinoids
We believe that the medicinal properties of THC may be linked to the molecule’s ability to compensate for a deficiency or defect in the production or functions of the endocannabinoids.
For example, scientists have found that people who experience certain types of chronic pain may have decreased production of endocannabinoids. People who consume marijuana for medicinal purposes report significant relief from pain. Because the THC in marijuana is the cannabinoid that reduces pain, it may be helping to compensate for the decreased production or functions of endocannabinoids in such patients.
Deciphering the role of endocannabinoids is still an emerging area of health research. Certainly much more research is needed to decipher their role in regulating different functions in the body.
In our view, it will also be important to continue to unravel the relationship between defects in the endocannabinoid system and the development of various diseases and clinical disorders. We think that the answers could hold great promise for the development of new therapies using the body’s own cannabinoids.
