Polfarmex and Hemp Flower: What the Register Confirms and What It Lacks

• Scale. 1 strain in the list, in 8 pharmaceutical positions.
• Interchangeability. Each of these strains is also supplied by someone else, so a supply break does not have to mean a lack of the name.
• Portfolio profile. Led by nerolidol, in 1 of 1 strains.
• What is missing. For 1 of 1 strains, the pedigree remains unestablished and we do not assign it by similarity of name.

Who is Polfarmex and where does its hemp flower come from?

Polfarmex is a Polish pharmaceutical company from Kutno, operating since 1989, for which hemp flower is a marginal part of the offer. The company is responsible in the national register of pharmaceutical raw materials for one position with hemp flowers. The public register does not disclose where the raw material itself comes from, as there is no column for the manufacturer.

The company was established in 1989 under the name Polfa-Farmex and started with trading in medicines and imported raw materials. The plant in Kutno began construction in 1994, at which time the current name was adopted, and in 1999 the entity was transformed into a joint-stock company. Today’s offer includes prescription drugs, over-the-counter preparations, dietary supplements, and cosmetics, with an employment of around six hundred thirty people. The company’s timeline on its website runs from 1989 to the relocation of the biotechnology laboratory in 2023 and does not mention hemp even once.

The role that this company plays with respect to the flower is explicitly named in the document: responsible entity. The permit number 30075 is valid until September 7, 2027, and since such a permit is generally issued for five years, the decision was most likely made in the fall of 2022, which aligns with the year of registration reported by the industry press. The issuance date itself is not stated in the register. Being a responsible entity does not mean cultivation or processing. Domestic cultivation of hemp for pharmaceutical raw material became legally possible in 2022, but the first Polish harvests are only expected in 2027, so the flower currently dispensed in pharmacies comes from imports. There is no trace of a private plantation in the company’s materials.

Which strains from Polfarmex reach Polish pharmacies?

One. The pharmacy inventory of this service is linked to Polfarmex exclusively with Pink Kush, a strain with a profile led by nerolidol. However, the same trade name is associated with four other responsible entities, so the label with the strain does not yet indicate whose flower the patient will receive at the pharmacy.

The register of pharmaceutical raw materials does not recognize strain names. Of the 56 positions with hemp flowers, only one carries the designation of cultivar in its name, and its permit expired in 2023. The rest, including the position described here, is described solely by the declared content of ingredients. Therefore, the assignment of a strain to a position comes from pharmacy catalogs and sales descriptions, not from a decision of the office. The registered name carries a declared value, so we quote it without that clause, and the value itself is described separately as a range.

The currency of such a summary is fragile. The permit expires after five years, the entity can withdraw the position from circulation without announcement, and the pharmacy orders what the wholesaler currently has. We maintain the current state separately in an available strains summary, and changes in the assortment go there. The store category flower includes products available without a prescription and does not overlap with the pharmaceutical raw material described here. The terpene profile, pedigree, and pharmacy versions of this strain are discussed in a separate entry about Pink Kush.

What is the difference between the responsible entity and the raw material manufacturer?

In terms of responsibility. The responsible entity is accountable for the position approved for circulation and for its quality to the office, while the manufacturer physically cultivates or processes the plant material. The public register of pharmaceutical raw materials lists only the former, so the reader has nothing to look for in it when asking about the origin of the flower.

The register has ten columns: ordinal number, position name, common name, potency, form, permit number, expiration date, responsible entity, packaging, and active substance. At the time of writing, it lists 56 positions with hemp flowers, distributed among 20 responsible entities. The most positions are held by Canopy Growth, while the fewest are held by those entities that registered a single flower, and Polfarmex belongs to this second group.

There are no columns for the manufacturer, the country of cultivation, or the strain name in this document. This is not an editorial oversight: the register serves to identify positions in circulation, not to describe the supply chain. The consequence for the reader is, however, concrete. Two positions with the same declared value, led by two different entities, may come from one cultivation or from two distant ones, and the register itself cannot resolve this. Those who want to know more must refer to the approval decision or the batch documentation, and neither of these things is published online.

What distinguishes Polfarmex’s raw material from that of other entities?

Declared content and nothing more that could be verified in a public document. The permit links the position to one nominal THC value, from which manufacturers are allowed to deviate by one-tenth, so the acceptable range is 16.2-19.8%. The rest of the differences are commercial declarations, not official records.

The declared value itself does not distinguish this position either. The register lists five positions with hemp flowers of the same nominal potency: alongside Polfarmex are S-LAB, Tilray, Synoptis Pharma, and Tarchomińskie Zakłady Farmaceutyczne Polfa. Four of them are led by entities registered in Poland, one is led by a Portuguese company.

What truly distinguishes the series is the certificate of analysis attached to the batch. It goes to the wholesaler and to the pharmacy, not to the packaging dispensed to the patient, and contains the results of content determination and purity testing. The official register, however, says nothing about the drying method, nothing about decontamination, and nothing about the composition of oils. When a store writes about careful cultivation or exceptional quality of a batch, it does not refer to any record that could be verified. The separation of these two layers is more important with this raw material than with an ordinary drug, because the patient compares store descriptions, not medicinal product characteristics, which are not prepared for raw materials.

Does Polfarmex’s flower come from the same facility as Tilray and S-LAB?

It is unknown, and no public document resolves this. The claim of common origin circulates in industry services, but it is based on a relationship, not on a registration record. The register of pharmaceutical raw materials does not mention the manufacturer, so it cannot confirm or refute this thesis.

What is documented is this: both Polish positions of the Tilray brand belong to Tilray Portugal Unipessoal Lda., and the producer states on its own website that its facility in Cantanhede, Portugal, has a good manufacturing practice certificate. The S-LAB position belongs to a company registered in Poland, while the Polfarmex position belongs to a joint-stock company from Kutno. The name of the manufacturer does not appear in either of these two.

The thesis itself comes from articles on an industry portal from May 2025. Their author writes that Tilray is the manufacturer of hemp flowers for several Polish entities, including the company described here, and that its registration is related to Tilray. None of these articles provide a source, and the author note describes him as an employee of the sales department of a competing entity from the same market. This does not mean that the thesis is false. It only means that we have a relationship from an interested party, and it should be read as such until someone shows a decision or a contract.

The thesis is supported by the coincidence of dates. Three permits for hemp flowers of the same nominal potency expire on July 1, July 28, and September 7, 2027, so they were issued within ten weeks in the summer of 2022. However, calendar coincidence is not proof of common cultivation.

What is known and what is not known about Polfarmex’s raw material?

What is known fits in the register column: permit number, expiration date, form, package size, and name of the active substance. It is unknown who cultivated the plant, what its essential oil composition is, and whether subsequent batches come from the same cultivation. The company itself publishes nothing on this topic.

On the documentation side, there is a certificate of analysis for each batch. It is this, not the description in the catalog, that states how much was actually measured in a given package. The declarations of positions under which the same strain is dispensed in Polish pharmacies cover a range of 16.2-24.2% THC, as they consist of separate registration positions of several entities, not the range of one of them.

On the marketing material side, there is everything that stores and portals write about this flower: aroma description, assigned effects, suggested indications. The described company does not endorse these contents. Its website lists prescription drugs, over-the-counter preparations, supplements, and cosmetics, and does not mention hemp at all, even in the company timeline leading to 2023. An entity that does not say anything about the product also leaves nothing to verify, and patient reports circulating on forums describe experiences with a specific package, not the entire registration.

What adverse effects have been reported after using Polfarmex’s raw material?

None that could be attributed specifically to this entity. Public summaries do not separate reports by registration positions, and for hemp flower, they do not even separate them by manufacturers. This does not mean that there have been no reports. It only means that no one publishes them in such a breakdown.

The reason is systemic. A response from the Deputy Minister of Health cited in March 2025 states that pharmaceutical raw material from hemp flowers is not subject to direct supervision by the President of the Registration Office, and entities conducting its circulation are not required to report to the Integrated Monitoring System for Medicinal Products. Supervision over imports operates quantitatively. A report is assigned to a medicinal product with a specific batch number, not to the name of the entity appearing on the packaging.

Reports of adverse effects are collected for a medicinal product with a batch number, not for a strain name, so the following pertains to hemp flower as a group of raw materials. The most frequently reported effects are dry mouth, red eyes, and increased heart rate. Less frequently described are dizziness upon rapid standing, daytime drowsiness, and temporary worsening of short-term memory, as well as anxiety increasing with dosage. A separate issue is medications taken concurrently, especially sedatives and those affecting coagulation: their assessment requires knowledge of the entire list of preparations, not just the description of the plant. We do not provide the frequency of these symptoms numerically, as public summaries for hemp flower in Poland do not separate them by individual products.

Frequently Asked Questions about Polfarmex’s Hemp Flower

Does Polfarmex cultivate hemp in Poland?

Nothing indicates that. The register of pharmaceutical raw materials lists the company solely as the responsible entity for a position approved for circulation, and there are simply no columns for the manufacturer or the country of cultivation in this register. The company’s own materials do not mention hemp.

How many strains from Polfarmex are available in Polish pharmacies?

One registered position, linked in pharmacy catalogs to the Pink Kush strain. We maintain the current availability in a separate summary, as the position can disappear from circulation without announcement and return after several months.

Is Polfarmex’s flower the same as that of Tilray?

It is unknown. The claim of a common manufacturer comes from industry journalism without a cited source, and the public register does not contain data that would allow it to be verified one way or the other.

Until when is the permit for Polfarmex’s flower valid?

Until September 7, 2027, according to the register of pharmaceutical raw materials. Permits for pharmaceutical raw materials are issued for five years, so after this date, the position will either be extended or disappear from circulation.

Why do we not provide a single number describing the potency of this flower?

Because the declared value has a ten percent tolerance, and a single number would suggest an accuracy that does not exist. For the Polfarmex position, the acceptable range is 16.2-19.8% THC, and it describes what can realistically end up in the package.

Where can I find the terpene profile of the strain issued under this position?

In a separate entry about Pink Kush, as the profile describes the strain, not the responsible entity. The register of pharmaceutical raw materials does not contain the profile of any position, so data on composition always comes from outside the official document.

Hemp flower is a pharmaceutical raw material dispensed by prescription in the Rpw category, and advertising of medicinal products dispensed by prescription to the public remains prohibited. The material is informational in nature and does not replace a conversation with the attending physician. The editorial text was prepared by the editorial team of ubucha.pl.