I think you’ve misunderstood me and misunderstood what the Alfie Dingley case tells us. I didn’t say it was useless. See my follow up reply:

There’s evidence of both anticonvulsant effects and proconvulsant effects of THC, but quality of evidence for both in humans is low, and the tentative anticonvulsant effects were mostly produced in preclinical trials by dosages substantially below the strength typical of contemporary street-bought strains. It’s not impossible that it could help some epilepsy sufferers, but the evidence base for saying it’s effective doesn’t currently exist.

Alfie Dingley is an individual with epilepsy due to the rare genetic mutation PCDH19 which was responsive to bedrolite. The primary active ingredient of bedrolite is CBD. It contains THC at sub-psychoactive dosage (<1%). THC isn’t providing a profound benefit, the CBD is, the THC complements it. This one case is not enough to tell us much at all about the efficacy, which is why I didn’t say it doesn’t work, but that the evidence base to say it does work is insufficient. That’s why more research is being conducted, that’s why THC containing products remain unlicensed, and that’s why NHS prescriptions for these products are vanishingly rare.

And we are talking here about bedrolite, which contains THC at sub-psychoactive concentrations, for a specific and rare form of epilepsy. Even THAT lacks sufficient randomly controlled trials for us to say it has a good evidence base. The much broader claim that “cannabis is good for epilepsy”, as in someone without the PCDH19 mutation who has uncontrolled seizures should start smoking weed because someone on Reddit’s friend says it worked for them, is even further removed from an being a justifiable, evidence-based claim.