What Parameters Define A Reliable Warranty for Preowned Lab Equipment?

 Image designed by Tim Sandle

Pharmaceutical labs depend on certified lab equipment to maintain precise protocols and meet regulatory standards. When capital constraints or supply chain delays make new purchases impractical, used lab equipment offers a cost-effective alternative. The warranty directly impacts reliability and long-term confidence in the asset. For centrifuges, where rotor integrity is critical, the warranty indicates supplier credibility. What should experts look for in a warranty for used lab equipment?

By Emily Newton 

The Dealer's Pre-Sale Verification and Testing Process

A credible dealer tests every instrument before sale, documenting functional performance and identifying components that require replacement or calibration. According to New Life Scientific, evaluating what to look for in a used lab equipment dealer helps establish which suppliers take verification seriously and which skip essential steps. This coverage reflects the supplier's confidence in the quality and performance of the equipment it sells.

The warranty codifies the testing process, converting technical diligence into a contractual commitment. When you evaluate benchtop centrifuges with a warranty, you're purchasing the dealer's accountability for pre-sale verification. New Life Scientific states, “One of the most difficult parts of buying used is ensuring the product works. A warranty helps reduce risk by providing a promise to repair or refund the instrument if something stops working within a certain time frame.”

The Length and Time Frame of Coverage

Warranty duration varies widely across the used equipment market, ranging from 30 days to 180 days, depending on the supplier's refurbishment depth and risk tolerance. Some dealers offer minimal 30-day coverage — just enough time to unpack the centrifuge and realize the motor sounds like a distressed appliance, hardly sufficient for meaningful validation. Established suppliers extend coverage to 90 or 120 days, providing a window to identify latent defects under operating conditions.

As mLab Supply explains the key differences between new and refurbished systems, “New OEM systems provide standardized warranty terms. Certified refurbished systems include supplier-backed warranties and performance guarantees, which can reduce risk when sourced from an established provider.” Longer time frames signal that the dealer has invested in thorough refurbishment and stands behind the remaining service life.

Understanding Full vs. Limited Terms and the Scope of Coverage

Not all warranties offer the same protection. Full warranties cover parts, labor and shipping for the entire duration. Limited warranties don't. They exclude certain components or impose cost-sharing requirements. The fine print explains what the warranty protects. Some suppliers cover mechanical failures but exclude consumables like rotor buckets or gaskets.

Others provide base-level coverage, such as 90 days standard, with options to extend protection. American Laboratory Trading offers extended warranties up to three years and covers parts and labor throughout the time frame, ensuring “your equipment is repaired, replaced or refunded.” The distinction between full and limited coverage can mean the difference between an inexpensive repair and a budget-breaking replacement, so clarity on scope is essential.

The Availability of After-Sale and Technical Support

Warranty support during the coverage period reveals how dependable the supplier remains after the transaction closes. Some suppliers like Copia Scientific provide access to additional services including “preventive maintenance, emergency repairs, calibration, validation, embedded service models and support for legacy or OEM-obsolete systems.”

This post-sale engagement demonstrates commitment to long-term customer relationships. Do they maintain in-house technicians who can troubleshoot issues remotely or dispatch service quickly? Suppliers who offer dedicated support divisions have the infrastructure to honor warranty claims efficiently, reducing downtime and maintaining lab productivity.

The Reputation and Track Record of the Supplier

The warranty is only as reliable as the company backing it. A dealer with a strong reputation and an established track record signals that warranty claims will be processed fairly and promptly. Reputable suppliers view warranties as reflections of brand integrity and customer commitment.

They commit to sustainability by refurbishing equipment to extend operational life, reducing waste and offering cost-effective alternatives. They also remain committed to compliance frameworks, ensuring used equipment meets the same safety and performance standards as new instruments.

Customer reviews, references and verifying how long the supplier has been operating help confirm reputation. A dealer with 10 years of consistent service and transparent warranty processes offers far more security than a six-month-old operation with no service history and warranty terms buried in fine print.

Frequently Asked Questions About Used Equipment Warranties

Understanding warranty nuances helps businesses make informed decisions when sourcing used lab instruments.

What is a standard warranty period for used lab instruments?

Standard warranty periods for used lab instruments range from 90 to 180 days, though some suppliers offer as little as 30 days, while others extend beyond six months. Many dealers also offer extended warranty options.

How does a warranty differ from a return policy?

A return policy allows customers to return equipment for any reason within a short window, typically seven to 30 days, while a warranty is a longer-term commitment to repair or replace equipment that develops defects during the coverage period. Return policies address buyer's remorse, while warranties address functional failures over time.

Is it possible to purchase extended warranties?

Yes, many dealers offer extended warranties that cover parts and labor for up to three years beyond the standard coverage period.

How to verify the quality of a used centrifuge before buying?

Verifying quality requires requesting documentation of the dealer's testing process, including rotor inspection reports, motor diagnostics and calibration records. Reputable suppliers provide transparent details about refurbishment work performed and any components replaced. Clients can confirm whether the dealer's technicians conducted functional testing under load conditions and if the warranty covers both mechanical and electrical failures.

Selecting a Warranty That Ensures Long-Term Confidence

A reliable warranty for used lab centrifuges depends on pre-sale verification processes, adequate coverage time frames, clear scope definitions, responsive after-sale support and supplier reputation. Certified lab equipment offers cost savings, faster availability during supply chain disruptions and proven technology at a fraction of new pricing. Teams can embrace the value of used equipment by following expert advice and prioritizing dealers with transparent testing protocols and comprehensive warranty terms.

 

Posted by Dr. Tim Sandle, Pharmaceutical Microbiology Resources (http://www.pharmamicroresources.com/)

Advances in Water-Soluble Cannabinoid Formulations: Opportunities and Challenges

 Cannabis indica. Image: hexthat - Own work, CC3.0

Interest in cannabinoid therapeutics has expanded considerably over the past decade, driven by advances in understanding the endocannabinoid system, growing preclinical and clinical evidence, and the regulatory approval of cannabinoid-based medicines such as cannabidiol (CBD) oral solution (Epidyolex) for treatment-resistant epilepsy, nabiximols (Sativex) oromucosal spray for spasticity, and dronabinol and nabilone capsules for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.^[1-3,5] Despite these approvals, formulation scientists continue to struggle with a fundamental physicochemical property shared by nearly all phytocannabinoids: their extreme hydrophobicity. This single characteristic gives rise to a series of downstream pharmaceutical problems, including inconsistent absorption, unpredictable dosing, and limited options for developing alternative drug delivery systems. ^[1,2]

Cannabinoids and Their Pharmaceutical Limitations

CBD and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) are highly lipophilic diterpenoid-derived molecules with reported log P values generally exceeding 6, rendering them practically insoluble in aqueous biological fluids. ^[1—3] This poor aqueous solubility limits dissolution in gastrointestinal fluid, which in turn restricts the fraction of drug available for membrane permeation and systemic absorption. Oral bioavailability of unformulated CBD is reported to be both low and highly variable, compounded by extensive hepatic first-pass metabolism that generates numerous metabolites before the parent compound reaches systemic circulation. ^[1,2]

The pharmacokinetic limitations associated with poor aqueous solubility translate directly into clinical and manufacturing consequences:

·         Inter-patient and intra-patient variability in plasma concentrations complicates dose titration and therapeutic monitoring ^[1,2]

·         Food effects are pronounced, as lipophilic cannabinoids show markedly increased absorption when co-administered with high-fat meals, resulting in considerable variability in systemic exposure and reducing dosing reproducibility ^[2,22]

·         Formulators are constrained to oil-based suspensions, ethanol co-solvent systems, or emulsifier-laden vehicles, which increase formulation complexity, and may compromise long-term physical and chemical stability ^[9,12,15]

·         Poor solubility restricts the feasibility of developing oral routes, making parenteral, inhalable, or aqueous-based sublingual formulations without substantial formulation engineering or the incorporation of advanced drug delivery technologies ^[12,15—17]

Current Pharmaceutical Strategies to Improve Cannabinoid Delivery

A range of established and emerging pharmaceutical technologies has been investigated to address cannabinoid hydrophobicity, each with distinct mechanisms, advantages, and trade-offs. ^[9,12—17]

Nanoemulsions and Lipid-Based Systems

Nanoemulsions reduce oil droplet size to increase interfacial surface area and improve dissolution kinetics, and self-nanoemulsifying drug delivery systems (SNEDDS) have demonstrated improved dissolution, faster absorption, and higher peak plasma concentrations of cannabinoids compared with conventional oil-based formulations. ^{[9,12,14,17,23]}

Nanostructured lipid carriers and solid lipid nanoparticles similarly enhance intestinal bioaccessibility. However, long-term physical stability and manufacturing scale-up remain challenges for these colloidal systems. ^{[6,12,15—17]}

Liposomes and Phospholipid Complexes

Liposomal encapsulation embeds cannabinoids within a phospholipid bilayer, improving aqueous dispersibility and potentially facilitating lymphatic transport, thereby partially bypassing hepatic first-pass metabolism, depending on the formulation characteristics. ^[15,16] Phospholipid complexation (phytosome-type technology) similarly improves membrane permeability However, batch-to-batch reproducibility and cost of GMP-grade phospholipids can limit large-scale adoption. ^[15,16]

Cyclodextrin Complexation

Cyclodextrins form inclusion complexes in which the hydrophobic cannabinoid molecule is encapsulated within the cyclic oligosaccharide’s non-polar cavity, exposing a hydrophilic exterior to the aqueous environment. This strategy has been widely used in pharmaceutical development to improve the aqueous solubility of poorly soluble drugs and offers the advantage of well-established regulatory familiarity. Hydroxypropyl-b-cyclodextrin, in particular, has been extensively employed as a pharmaceutical solubilizing excipient. However, complexation efficiency, stability, and drug-loading capacity vary considerably depending on the cannabinoid structure and the cyclodextrin derivative used.

Solid Dispersions and Amorphous Systems

Dispersing cannabinoids in a hydrophilic polymer matrix in the amorphous state can increase apparent solubility and dissolution rate relative to the crystalline drug form. ^[18] These systems are attractive for solid oral dosage forms but require careful control of physical stability, as amorphous cannabinoids may recrystallize during storage, resulting in reduced dissolution performance over time. ^[18]

Polymeric and Lipid Nanoparticles

Polymer-based nanoparticles allow surface functionalization for site-specific or sustained release, or both, and have been investigated for targeted delivery of cannabinoids, including applications involving the central nervous system and oncology. ^[4,15,16] Surface charge modulation can further promote mucoadhesion for buccal or nasal applications. ^[15,16]

Micellar Systems

Amphiphilic polymeric or surfactant micelles solubilize cannabinoids within a hydrophobic core while presenting a hydrophilic corona to the surrounding medium. This provides an alternative colloidal delivery strategy with generally lower formulation complexity and simpler manufacturing processes than liposomes. However, micellar systems may become unstable following dilution in biological fluids, potentially resulting in premature drug release before absorption. ^[12,15,16]

Glycosylated Cannabinoids as an Emerging Platform

Glycosylation, defined as the enzymatic or chemical attachment of one of more sugar moieties to a parent molecule, represents a structurally distinct approach to improving cannabinoid aqueous solubility compared with the encapsulation-based techniques discussed above. Rather than physically shielding the hydrophobic molecule within a carrier, glycosylation covalently modifies the cannabinoid itself, producing a more hydrophilic conjugate with altered physicochemical properties. ^[19—21]

Recent enzymatic studies have identified UDP-glycosyltransferases (UGTs) capable of glycosylating cannabinoids and their biosynthetic intermediates. For example, UGTs from Catharanthus roseus have demonstrated catalytic activity toward CBD and related cannabinoids, while engineered glycosyltransferases have been developed to improve substrate specificity and glycosylation efficiency. ^[20,21]

In parallel, engineered yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) expression systems have been used to biosynthesize glycosylated CBD derivatives bearing multiple glucose residues, demonstrating feasibility of microbial production platforms for cannabinoid glycosides. ^[20] Researchers have noted that enhancing cannabinoid water solubility through glycosylation holds potential for pharmaceutical and cosmetic formulations. However, current studies also emphasize challenges related to enzyme engineering, metabolic flux optimization, product purification, and scalable manufacturing, indicating that the technology remains in an early stage of development. ^[20,21]

One example of industrial translation is a proprietary enzymatic and chemical synthesis platform, which reportedly generates a “chemically defined, single molecule” glycosylated CBD ingredient that is claimed to be compatible with sterile filtration and multiple delivery formats. ^[8] These claims originate from company communications rather than peer-reviewed clinical investigations and should therefore be interpreted cautiously until independently validated through pharmacokinetic, stability, and clinical efficacy studies.

Overall, glycosylation represents a promising chemical strategy for improving cannabinoid aqueous compatibility. Nevertheless, the current evidence base is derived predominantly from enzymology, metabolic engineering, and preclinical proof-of-concept studies, with limited human pharmacokinetic or clinical outcome data available to support therapeutic advantages over established formulation technologies. ^[19—21]

Implications for Pharmaceutical Development

Improved aqueous solubility, whether achieved through nanocarriers, complexation, or covalent modification, has the potential to broaden the range of feasible dosage forms, improve formulation flexibility, and facilitate pharmaceutical manufacturing. ^{[12—17,19—21]}

·         Oral dosage forms. Water-soluble or solubilized cannabinoids may be formulated into tablets, capsules, oral liquids, and functional beverages with reduced reliance on lipid vehicles or high concentrations of surfactants, potentially improving formulation consistency, and simplifying excipient selection. ^[9,12—18]

·         Topical and Transdermal Delivery. Improved aqueous compatibility may facilitate incorporation into hydrogels, creams, and transdermal patch systems while reducing phase-separation challenges associated with oil-based formulations. However, enhanced water solubility alone does not guarantee improved transdermal drug delivery, as permeation across the stratum corneum remains a major barrier and often requires additional formulation strategies. ^[12,15,16]

·         Injectable formulations. Compatibility with sterile filtration is a prerequisite for parenteral development. Water-compatible cannabinoid formulations and glycosylated derivatives are therefore being investigated for intravenous, subcutaneous, and intraperitoneal administration. However, these applications remain largely preclinical and require comprehensive evaluation of sterility assurance, physicochemical stability, pharmacokinetics, and safety before clinical translation. ^[4,8,15,16]

·         Inhalation and transmucosal systems. Improved aqueous solubility may facilitate the development of nebulized formulations, dry powder inhalers, and buccal or sublingual dosage forms by reducing dependence on lipid-based excipients. Nevertheless, each route presents unique formulation, device, and absorption challenges that extend beyond aqueous solubility alone. ^[12—17]

·         Veterinary applications. Preliminary preclinical and observational data have explored cannabinoid use in companion animals, including topical formulations. However, evidence remains limited, and controlled veterinary pharmacokinetic and efficacy studies are required before broad therapeutic conclusions can be drawn. ^[5,10,11]

From a manufacturing and quality perspective, any cannabinoid solubilization technology must satisfy established pharmaceutical quality standards including GMP-compliant synthesis or purification, well-defined critical quality attributes (e.g., potency, impurity profile, residual solvents), robust analytical methods such as HPLC coupled with mass spectrometry for identity and purity confirmation, and demonstrated shelf-life stability under defined storage conditions.

Remaining Scientific Challenges

Despite encouraging preclinical progress across nanotechnology and glycosylation platforms, several gaps must be addressed before these technologies can be considered clinically validated. ^[12—21]

·         Most glycosylation, as well as many investigations of nanocarrier-based cannabinoid formulations, remain at the in vitro or preclinical animal stage. Well-designed human pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, safety, and efficacy studies are required to establish their translational value. ^[12—21]

·         Novel cannabinoid conjugates and certain nanoformulations may be regulated as new chemical entities or novel drug products, potentially requiring comprehensive nonclinical and clinical development programs rather than relying solely on existing cannabinoid safety data. ^[19—21]

·         Chronic toxicology, immunogenicity, biodistribution, metabolism, and metabolite safety profiles of glycosylated or nanoparticle-based cannabinoid formulations remain incompletely characterized in the peer-reviewed literature. ^{[15,16,19—21]}

·         Even formulations with improved aqueous solubility continue to exhibit interindividual variability in absorption with systemic exposure, highlighting the need for population pharmacokinetic modeling and exposure-response analyses to support dose optimization. ^{[1,2,12—17]}

·         Enzymatic glycosylation and nanoemulsion processes each face challenges scaling from bench to commercial GMP production while maintaining product quality, process robustness, and batch-to-batch consistency. ^[12—21]

·         Validated analytical methods capable of distinguishing glycosylated cannabinoid isomers, detecting degradation products, and confirming the absence of hydrolysis back to the parent cannabinoid during storage will be essential for quality control and regulatory approval. ^[19—21]

Conclusion

Formulation science remains central to unlocking the therapeutic potential of cannabinoids, as the clinical utility of these compounds depends not only on their pharmacological activity but also on the ability to deliver them in formulations that are bioavailable, stable, reproducible, and manufacturable. ^{[1,2,12—17]} Nanoemulsions, liposomes, cyclodextrin complexes, solid dispersions, polymeric nanoparticles, micelles, and glycosylation each offer complementary approaches to improving aqueous compatibility, with distinct advantages and limitations related to solubility enhancement, manufacturing complexity, scalability, and regulatory considerations. ^[9,12—21]

Among these approaches, the enzymatic glycosylation represents a particularly intriguing emerging strategy because it chemically modifies the cannabinoid molecule rather than relying solely on carrier-based delivery systems. Although early academic studies and industry-led platforms have demonstrated proof of concept, current evidence remains largely preclinical and claims regarding enhanced bioavailability or expanded formulation flexibility require independent validation through rigorously designed pharmacokinetic and clinical studies. ^[8,19—21]

Ultimately, progress in cannabinoid formulation science will depend on comparative pharmacokinetic investigations, standardized analytical characterization, scalable GMP-compliant manufacturing processes, and transparent reporting of clinical outcomes. Addressing these challenges will be essential to translating promising solubilization technologies from experimental concepts into safe, effective, and regulatory-approved pharmaceutical products. ^{[1,2,12—21]}

References:

1. 1.    Millar, S. A., Stone, N. L., Yates, A. S., & O’Sullivan, S. E. (2018). A Systematic Review on the Pharmacokinetics of Cannabidiol in Humans. Frontiers in Pharmacology, 9(1365). https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2018.01365
2. 2.    Perucca, E., & Bialer, M. (2020). Critical Aspects Affecting Cannabidiol Oral Bioavailability and Metabolic Elimination, and Related Clinical Implications. CNS Drugs, 34(8), 795–800. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40263-020-00741-5
3. 3.    Almeida, D. L., & Devi, L. A. (2020). Diversity of Molecular Targets and Signaling Pathways for CBD. Pharmacology Research & Perspectives, 8(6). https://doi.org/10.1002/prp2.682
4. 4.    Fraguas-Sánchez, A. I., Torres-Suárez, A. I., Cohen, M., Delie, F., Bastida-Ruiz, D., Yart, L., Martin-Sabroso, C., & Fernández-Carballido, A. (2020). PLGA Nanoparticles for the Intraperitoneal Administration of CBD in the Treatment of Ovarian Cancer: In Vitro and In Ovo Assessment. Pharmaceutics, 12(5), 439. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics12050439
5. 5.    Machado Bergamaschi, M., Helena Costa Queiroz, R., Waldo Zuardi, A., & Alexandre S. Crippa, J. (2011). Safety and Side Effects of Cannabidiol, a Cannabis sativa Constituent. Current Drug Safety, 6(4), 237–249. https://doi.org/10.2174/157488611798280924
6. 6.    Grifoni, L., Vanti, G., & Bilia, A. R. (2023). Nanostructured Lipid Carriers Loaded with Cannabidiol Enhance Its Bioaccessibility to the Small Intestine. Nutraceuticals, 3(2), 210–221. https://doi.org/10.3390/nutraceuticals3020016
7. 7.    Fraguas-Sánchez, A. I., Fernández-Carballido, A., Simancas-Herbada, R., Martin-Sabroso, C., & Torres-Suárez, A. I. (2020). CBD loaded microparticles as a potential formulation to improve paclitaxel and doxorubicin-based chemotherapy in breast cancer. International Journal of Pharmaceutics, 574, 118916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2019.118916
8. 8.    Trait Biosciences. (2026, April 24). Water-Soluble CBD: Unlocking Pharmaceutical Bioavailability. Trait Biosciences. https://traitbio.com/water-soluble-cbd-unlocking-pharmeceutical-biovailibility/
9. 9.    Cherniakov, I., Domb, A. J., & Hoffman, A. (2015). Self-nano-emulsifying drug delivery systems: an update of the biopharmaceutical aspects. Expert Opinion on Drug Delivery, 12(7), 1121–1133. https://doi.org/10.1517/17425247.2015.999038
10. 10. Peres, F. F., Lima, A. C., Hallak, J. E. C., Crippa, J. A., Silva, R. H., & Abílio, V. C. (2018). Cannabidiol as a Promising Strategy to Treat and Prevent Movement Disorders? Frontiers in Pharmacology, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2018.00482
11. 11. Zlatanova-Tenisheva, H., Georgieva-Kotetarova, M., Vilmosh, N., Kandilarov, I., Delev, D., Dermendzhiev, T., & Kostadinov, I. D. (2025). Exploring the Anxiolytic, Antidepressant, and Immunomodulatory Effects of Cannabidiol in Acute Stress Rat Models. Applied Biosciences, 4(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/applbiosci4010004
12. 12. Paczkowska-Walendowska, M., Trzaskoma, P., Dziopa, A., Moeini, A., Soczawa, M., Krasiński, Z., & Cielecka-Piontek, J. (2025). Innovative Strategies to Enhance the Bioavailability of Cannabidiol: Nanotechnology and Advanced Delivery Systems. Pharmaceuticals, 18(11), 1637. https://doi.org/10.3390/ph18111637
13. 13. Freire, D. T., Dourado, D., Miranda, J. A., Pereira, D. T., Freire, D. P., Alencar, E. N., & Egito, E. (2026). Unraveling approaches for cannabidiol delivery nanosystems: A patent review. Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy, 199, 119509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopha.2026.119509
14. 14. Vered Hermush, Mizrahi, N., Tal Brodezky, & Ezra, R. (2025). Enhancing cannabinoid bioavailability: a crossover study comparing a novel self-nanoemulsifying drug delivery system and a commercial oil-based formulation. Journal of Cannabis Research, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s42238-025-00294-8
15. 15. Assadpour, E., Rezaei, A., Das, S. S., Krishna Rao, B. V., Singh, S. K., Kharazmi, M. S., Jha, N. K., Jha, S. K., Prieto, M. A., & Jafari, S. M. (2023). Cannabidiol-Loaded Nanocarriers and Their Therapeutic Applications. Pharmaceuticals, 16(4), 487. https://doi.org/10.3390/ph16040487
16. 16. Lazzarotto Rebelatto, E. R., Rauber, G. S., & Caon, T. (2023). An update of nano-based drug delivery systems for cannabinoids: Biopharmaceutical aspects & therapeutic applications. International Journal of Pharmaceutics, 635, 122727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2023.122727
17. 17. ElSohly, M. A., Shahzadi, I., & Gul, W. (2023). Absorption and Bioavailability of Novel UltraShear Nanoemulsion of Cannabidiol in Rats. Medical Cannabis and Cannabinoids, 6(1), 148–159. https://doi.org/10.1159/000534473
18. 18. Eisa, A. M., El-Megrab, N. A., & El-Nahas, H. M. (2022). Formulation and evaluation of fast dissolving tablets of haloperidol solid dispersion. Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal, 30(11), 1589–1602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsps.2022.09.002
19. 19. Hardman, J. M., Brooke, R. T., & Zipp, B. J. (2017). Cannabinoid glycosides: In vitro production of a new class of cannabinoids with improved physicochemical properties. https://doi.org/10.1101/104349
20. 20. Pinkas, Z., Khersonsky, O., Berman, P., Kuzmich, N., Rogachev, I., Fleishman, S. J., & Aharoni, A. (2025). Glycosylated cannabinoids in Cannabis sativa and enzyme design to modulate their synthesis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 122(39), e2515688122. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2515688122
21. 21. Schmidt, C., Imann, A. M., Vasilev, N., & Kayser, O. (2025). Approaches for Cannabinoid Glycosylation Catalyzed by CrUGT74AN3 and BlCGTase. Biotechnology Journal, 20(5). https://doi.org/10.1002/biot.70007
22. 22. Atheer Zgair, Wong, J. C., Lee, J. B., Mistry, J., Sivak, O., Wasan, K. M., Hennig, I. M., Barrett, D. A., Constantinescu, C. S., Fischer, P. M., & Gershkovich, P. (2016). Dietary fats and pharmaceutical lipid excipients increase systemic exposure to orally administered cannabis and cannabis-based medicines. American Journal of Translational Research, 8(8), 3448. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5009397/
23. Atsmon, J., Cherniakov, I., Izgelov, D., Hoffman, A., Domb, A. J., Deutsch, L., Deutsch, F., Heffetz, D., & Sacks, H. (2018). PTL401, a New Formulation Based on Pro-Nano Dispersion Technology, Improves Oral Cannabinoids Bioavailability in Healthy Volunteers. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 107(5), 1423–1429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xphs.2017.12.020 

Pharmaceutical Microbiology Resources (http://www.pharmamicroresources.com/)