How we grade the evidence.
CBG is one of the most heavily marketed cannabinoids and one of the least studied, so the distance between what a label says and what a paper shows can be wide. A grade measures the strength of the evidence behind a claim. Every claim on the site carries one, and where the research runs out the claim reads catalogue in progress and the gap stays open.
What do the six evidence grades mean?
Six rungs run from the settled to the tested-and-failed. Where a claim sits depends on the strength of the evidence behind it, however promising the result sounds.
| Rung | Wording a claim may use | One claim at this rung |
|---|---|---|
| grade: Established | is shown to | The plant builds the other cannabinoid acids from CBGA. |
| grade: Demonstrated | has been shown to | CBG's receptor interactions, as measured in binding and functional assays. |
| grade: Emerging | may · early evidence suggests | no CBG claim in our registry currently sits at Emerging; the rung is for a first human signal or agreeing animal work from independent groups. |
| grade: Low | limited evidence · unclear | CBG for anxiety and stress |
| grade: Hypothesized | proposed mechanism | CBG and blood pressure |
| grade: Not supported | evidence does not support | CBG for sleep |
Two states that are not grades.
The ladder has an edge, and two kinds of entry sit just past it. One is true but silent about people; the other is a blank. Each gets its own label, because forcing either onto a rung would misrepresent it.
A receptor interaction measured in a dish is a real, reproducible finding. It shows how a molecule behaves at a target, and is not evidence that anything happens in a person, so we label it mechanism and stop there.
Our registry is empty on the question, in both directions, which puts the claim somewhere quite different from Not-supported: “Not-supported” means the evidence weighs against a claim; “no primary evidence” means we have none. Mix them up and you invent a negative finding. A compound with a thin catalogue gets a short page, and its gaps stay gaps instead of borrowing data from a better-studied cousin.
How a claim earns its grade, and keeps it.
A grade is only as good as the machinery behind it. Each one follows written rules and is tied to a dated snapshot of the evidence that anyone can check.
- A gated publish. Every registry gate has to pass before anything ships, and a single red gate blocks the publish outright. One of them, a concordance gate, rejects any authored grade set above the ceiling its evidence supports.
- Hash-chained provenance. The evidence set carries a version fingerprint (a SHA-256 hash of the whole set) and an append-only audit chain. What you read traces to an exact, tamper-evident snapshot rather than to “our latest draft”.
- Bound citations. Every graded claim links to a real study in the registry, so every citation points at a paper that exists. Where the registry lacks a qualifying study, the claim is marked catalogue in progress instead of guessed at.
- Only up on evidence. Evidence is the only thing that lifts a grade. A retraction, or a contradicting study of equal or stronger standing, can lower it automatically.
Where our claims stop.
Statements about effects, benefits, or uses reflect claims made by third parties — manufacturers, media, traditional use, or preliminary research. CBG Atlas does not make, adopt, endorse, or affirm them, and does not present them as fact. Nothing here is medical advice, and nothing here is intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease. Binding constants and other researcher-level detail stay off consumer pages. Report a safety event.
Funding. Peregrine Biopharma funds the platform and holds no editorial authority. Grades, citations and the gates that enforce them all sit beyond the funder’s review.
Grades are half the story. The Research Library holds the evidence itself, and the Gap-Map shows where it runs out.