What We Actually Know About CBG

A customer named Alissa Wolf wrote to us recently. She tours as a musician for a living, which turns out to be a lot more physical than most people imagine.

The performance is only part of the job. There's the van, the load-in, an amplifier carried up two flights of stairs, hours of driving with your shoulders locked in the same position, a different mattress every night, and then two hours on stage before doing it all again tomorrow.

Alissa told us she'd started using Max Relief after those long days. Her description was simple:

“I can actually feel it relax my neck.”

— Alissa Wolf, touring musician

I believe her. I also can't use her experience to tell you what Max Relief will do for you.

That difference matters, especially in a category where customer stories have always moved much faster than controlled research. How someone responds to a product is real information about that person. It isn't yet evidence that the product caused the response, and it's certainly not evidence that someone else will have the same experience.

The interesting part is what comes next. We ask whether there's a biological reason the effect might make sense, and then we design studies that can separate the product from expectation, natural recovery, changes in behavior and everything else going on at the same time. With CBG, researchers have finally started doing that. The results are interesting enough to hold my attention and limited enough that we should be careful with them. That's a good place for science to be.

What exactly is CBG?

CBG stands for cannabigerol. It's one of many cannabinoids made by the hemp plant, though mature plants usually contain much less CBG than CBD or THC.

You'll often hear CBG called the "mother cannabinoid." That's catchy, but the chemistry is a bit more precise. The real starting point is CBGA, or cannabigerolic acid. As the plant grows, enzymes convert CBGA into the building blocks that eventually become CBD, THC and other cannabinoids. CBG itself forms when CBGA is heated or aged. So there's a real botanical reason for the nickname.

There's also a limit to what the nickname tells you. Being "upstream" in the plant doesn't make CBG more powerful in your body. It tells us how the plant makes cannabinoids, not what happens when a person swallows one. Reviews describe CBG acting on cannabinoid receptors, TRP channels (which help sense pain and temperature), adrenaline-related receptors, serotonin-related pathways and more. But much of that evidence has come from lab and animal studies. That's the gap researchers have only recently started closing.

Why CBG caught researchers' attention for pain and recovery

CBG attracted interest long before good human trials existed. Lab and animal studies suggested it can interact with pathways involved in inflammation, pain perception, nervous system activity and the body's own cannabinoid system. And unlike THC, CBG doesn't usually cause a high at normal supplement doses, which makes it especially interesting for people who want cannabinoid effects without feeling intoxicated.

That sounds promising, and it's exactly where wellness marketing tends to get ahead of itself. A molecule affecting inflammation in a mouse or a dish of cells doesn't prove that a person with a stiff shoulder will feel better after taking it. A mechanism gives us a reason to study something. It doesn't finish the study.

For years, that described CBG research: a growing list of plausible mechanisms and very little controlled human evidence. That's started to change.

What the human studies have found

The 2023 recovery study is worth reading, but it isn't a CBG trial

One of the studies most relevant to Max Relief was published in 2023 in the Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition. Researchers enrolled 40 people who exercise regularly and deliberately gave them delayed onset muscle soreness, or DOMS: the familiar stiffness and aching that often peaks a day or two after new or demanding exercise.

Participants were randomly assigned to a placebo or an active drink powder, taken twice a day for three and a half days. Here's what was in each serving of the active drink:

Researchers then followed people for 72 hours, measuring soreness, how much it got in the way of normal activities, range of motion, muscle size, sensitivity to pressure, sleep, mood and other recovery measures.

There was a signal worth noticing. At 72 hours, people taking the active drink reported less average soreness than those on placebo. At 48 hours, they also said soreness and stiffness got in the way less at work or at home.

That second result especially interests me. When someone tells me their body hurts less, I care. When they tell me the discomfort gets in the way of what they need to do less, I care even more. That's why most people want relief in the first place.

But there's a big catch: this wasn't a study of CBG. It wasn't even a clean study of CBD plus CBG. Five active ingredients were given together. If the active group does better, the study tells us something about that formula. It can't tell us which ingredient did it, whether two worked together, or whether the cannabinoids mattered at all. BCAAs and magnesium have their own history in sports nutrition, and beta-caryophyllene is biologically active too.

The honest conclusion is that the combination produced some encouraging results in how people felt. Anything more specific is a guess.

The statistics deserve a closer look

This was a pilot study, meaning its job wasn't to give a final answer. It was partly meant to estimate how big and how variable the effects might be, so researchers could design larger studies.

That matters for reading the numbers. Studies usually report a confidence interval, a range that likely contains the true effect. The standard is a 95% confidence interval. If that range includes zero, the study can't rule out that the product did nothing.

For soreness at 72 hours, the estimated improvement cleared zero only when the researchers used a looser 85% interval. At the standard 95% level, it crossed zero. The researchers were completely open about this; they reported 75%, 85% and 95% intervals because the study was exploratory. There's nothing improper about that. It just means the result is preliminary.

The result for interference with daily activities was a bit stronger:

The authors called that potentially clinically important. It's a real finding. It also sits right at the statistical edge. Both things should be said.

The objective measures told a different story

People reported less soreness and less interference, but the researchers found no significant differences in the measured signs of recovery, sleep quality or mood.

That doesn't make the soreness results meaningless. Soreness is something you feel. There's no machine that can tell you exactly how uncomfortable your legs feel walking downstairs the day after a workout. But it does change what we can claim. The study didn't show that muscle repaired faster. It didn't show that range of motion came back sooner. It didn't show the drink sped up biological recovery. It showed that people taking it said the soreness bothered them less. That may turn out to be useful. It's not the same conclusion.

Who paid for it

The trial was funded by Canopy Growth Corporation, a cannabis company. Several authors worked there at the time and received stock options through their jobs. The paper discloses all of this clearly.

Industry funding doesn't invalidate research. Drug companies fund drug trials, device companies fund device trials, and cannabinoid companies will inevitably fund some cannabinoid research while public funding stays limited. The right response isn't to throw the study out. It's to know who paid for it, look closely at the methods, and look for independent studies that repeat the result. That's what the field still needs.

What we know about CBG on its own

Since the recovery pilot came out, we've started getting controlled human studies of CBG without four other active ingredients mixed in.

A 2024 study found less stress, with no impairment

One of the first was published in Scientific Reports in 2024. In a double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial, 34 healthy adults each did one session after taking a placebo and another after taking 20 mg of hemp-derived CBG.

Compared with placebo, CBG was linked to lower self-reported anxiety and stress during the experiment. People also did somewhat better on a verbal memory task. Just as important, the researchers found no signs of intoxication or meaningful impairment in movement or thinking.

That's fascinating, but it isn't evidence that CBG relieves muscle soreness. The study looked at anxiety, stress, mood, memory and impairment in healthy adults: a different question, different people, different outcomes. What it does show is that CBG taken by mouth can produce measurable effects in people at a modest dose without acting like THC. That moves CBG from "interesting animal compound" into a real conversation about how it works in humans.

A larger trial showed what CBG didn't do

Negative studies are often more useful than marketers admit. A randomized, triple-blind, placebo-controlled study published in late 2025 tested CBG in U.S. veterans with sleep problems. Sixty-three people got either a placebo or CBG: 25 mg a day for two weeks, then 50 mg a day for two more.

Both groups said their sleep improved over the study. CBG did not do significantly better than placebo. It also showed no real advantage for quality of life, PTSD symptoms or sleep patterns measured by a wrist monitor. It was generally well tolerated.

This study belongs in any serious discussion of CBG for the same reason the positive anxiety study does. If we're going to take the molecule seriously, we have to take the negative results seriously too. CBG didn't become a sleep treatment just because lab research made it sound plausible. That's how science is supposed to work.

In 2026, researchers asked an even more basic question

There's something almost funny about how cannabinoid markets develop: products often become popular before anyone has answered basic questions about the molecules inside them.

In July 2026, researchers published a lab study of how CBG behaves in healthy adults across several common doses. Twelve people received a placebo and single doses of 25, 50, 100 and 200 mg of CBG in separate sessions. Researchers measured blood levels, how people felt, thinking and physical responses, side effects and liver enzymes.

CBG was generally well tolerated at all of those single doses. There were no drug-related side effects, liver tests stayed normal after the highest doses, and people reported few consistent effects. Blood levels rose with dose, but varied a lot from person to person. The researchers' conclusion was refreshingly restrained: CBG appeared well tolerated under the conditions tested, but larger and longer studies are needed.

That's less exciting than calling CBG the next miracle cannabinoid. I find it much more useful. Before deciding what a molecule treats, it helps to know how people absorb it and what happens as the dose changes. We're only now building that foundation.

What all this tells us about pain: surprisingly little

This is the part I think deserves the most emphasis. CBG is widely marketed for pain. The direct human evidence for that is still very limited.

We have compelling lab and animal research pointing to mechanisms relevant to pain and inflammation. We have the 2023 recovery trial, in which a five-ingredient formula containing CBD and CBG improved how sore people felt. And we now have human studies of CBG alone showing it's absorbed, doesn't seem to be intoxicating at the doses tested, and may affect stress and anxiety.

What we don't have yet is a large, repeated randomized trial showing that CBG on its own reliably reduces long-term muscle or joint pain. That doesn't mean CBG is useless. It means the claims have gotten ahead of the evidence.

Where Max Relief fits

That brings us back to our own formula. Each Max Relief Gel contains 30 mg of CBD and 15 mg of CBG. The current directions are two gels by mouth twice a day, adjusted as needed.

Those numbers don't match the 2023 study. Max Relief has more CBD and less CBG relative to CBD, and it doesn't contain the other recovery ingredients. So I wouldn't point to that paper and say, "This proves Max Relief works." It doesn't.

The comparison is useful for a narrower reason. It shows that researchers think a meaningful combination of CBD and CBG is worth testing in people, rather than just sprinkling a trace of CBG into a product for the label. Our approach is similar in philosophy. It isn't the same product.

So why put CBG in Max Relief?

There are three reasons.

The biology. CBG works differently from CBD. Reviews describe it acting on cannabinoid receptors, TRP channels, a type of adrenaline receptor called alpha-2, serotonin-related pathways and other targets that overlap with how the body senses pain and handles inflammation. That doesn't prove the two work better together. It gives us a sound reason to explore the combination.

The human studies. CBG is now producing measurable effects in controlled human research. Those studies aren't proving pain relief, but they tell us CBG isn't an inert ingredient added just because its name looks good next to CBD.

What customers tell us. People keep choosing Max Relief and tell us they notice a difference with the CBD+CBG formula compared with CBD alone. Alissa is one of them. That matters to me as a formulator. It still isn't the same as randomized evidence, and I'd rather keep those two things separate than pretend one proves the other.

The dose question is still wide open

It's tempting to look at these studies and try to work backward to the perfect CBG dose. I'd resist that.

Twenty milligrams produced measurable effects in the 2024 stress study. The veterans' sleep study used 25 and then 50 mg without beating placebo. The 2026 safety study tested 25 to 200 mg and found big differences in how CBG showed up in people's blood. The 2023 recovery drink had 50 mg per serving, twice a day, but CBG was one of five active ingredients.

Those aren't four studies converging on one effective dose. They're four different experiments asking different questions. There's no well-established CBG dose yet for soreness, long-term pain or recovery. That's the honest answer.

What matters more than the supplement

There's another risk in talking about recovery products: we can spend so much time debating cannabinoids that recovery starts to sound like it comes from a capsule. It doesn't.

And sometimes pain isn't ordinary soreness at all. No cannabinoid changes that.

How I think about the Max Relief formulas

For soreness you can point to, a topical is often the simplest place to start. Max Relief Balm combines CBD and CBG and is made to apply directly to a specific area. For something more spread out, or if you'd rather take something by mouth, Max Relief Gels give you a set amount of both cannabinoids in each capsule.

I'm less interested in telling someone one format is stronger than in asking what problem they're actually trying to solve. A sore shoulder after yard work is different from ongoing pain in several joints. Post-workout soreness is different from nerve pain. A stiff back after ten hours of sitting is different from a fresh injury. A product shouldn't replace figuring out which of those you're dealing with. And whatever you use, using it consistently tells you more than chasing symptoms with random amounts on random days.

Know when soreness isn't a supplement question

Ordinary soreness is common. Ongoing or unexplained pain deserves more respect. See a healthcare professional if your pain:

• Is severe or getting worse
• Comes with significant swelling
• Follows a major injury
• Comes with weakness, numbness, fever or other symptoms elsewhere in the body
• Simply doesn't make sense

A supplement shouldn't be used to put off finding out what's wrong. That's especially important because several conditions that look like routine aches at first can benefit from early diagnosis and treatment.

CBG safety looks encouraging, but the data are still thin

The early human safety data are reassuring. In the 2024 study, 20 mg of CBG didn't cause meaningful intoxication or measurable impairment. The veterans' study found CBG generally well tolerated. The 2026 study reported no drug-related side effects at single doses up to 200 mg and normal liver tests after the highest doses.

That's useful. It isn't the same as proving long-term safety for everyone. The 2026 study involved twelve healthy adults taking single doses. That's a foundation, not a finished safety record.

We also know much less about how CBG interacts with medications than we do for CBD. If you take prescription medication, especially one where small changes in blood levels matter or one processed by the liver, talk to your doctor or pharmacist rather than assuming a cannabinoid is interaction-free because it doesn't make you high. Not intoxicating doesn't mean biologically inactive.

Back to Alissa

This is why I still like starting with her story. She used a CBD+CBG product after the physical grind of touring and told us her neck felt different. That's meaningful to her. It's meaningful to us too, because repeated reports like hers help raise questions worth studying.

But the useful scientific response isn't to turn her sentence into an ad and stop there. It's to ask what might explain it. Was it the CBD? The CBG? The combination? Was the effect mostly a matter of sensation? Would her neck have improved anyway? Did expectation play a part? The answer may involve several of those. That uncertainty doesn't make her experience less real. It just means personal experience and scientific evidence answer different questions.

Where the evidence actually stands

CBG research has moved a lot in a short time. We know more about how it works in people than we did when the 2023 recovery study came out. A controlled trial found measurable effects on stress and anxiety from CBG alone. A larger placebo-controlled trial found CBG didn't beat placebo for sleep. A new dosing study suggests single doses from 25 to 200 mg are generally well tolerated in healthy adults, with big person-to-person differences in absorption. And one small recovery trial found encouraging drops in reported soreness and interference after a formula containing CBD, CBG, beta-caryophyllene, BCAAs and magnesium.

That's real progress. It isn't evidence that CBG has been proven to relieve chronic pain. It isn't evidence that CBD and CBG work better together. And it isn't evidence that Max Relief has been clinically proven by somebody else's formula. The science isn't there yet.

What the evidence does give us is a plausible molecule, increasingly solid human safety data, a few meaningful signals, and enough reason to keep investigating. That's why CBG is in Max Relief. Not because the science has settled the question, but because the science has finally started asking it properly.

Eric Dorninger, ND
Director of Research & Development, Blue Sky CBD