Is CBD a Food, a Medicine or a Cosmetic? What Danish Law Means for an Influencer Promoting It

Short answer

No, CBD can almost never legally be sold as a food or dietary supplement in Denmark — the EU's Novel Food rules block it, because no CBD extract has yet been authorised. That's why CBD products are typically sold as topical cosmetics instead, where health claims are banned, while one prescription CBD medicine (Epidyolex) exists for two rare forms of epilepsy. Which of the three categories the specific product is actually registered under decides what an influencer may say about it.

Three rulebooks, one plant — and confusing them is the mistake itself

The hemp plant (Cannabis sativa) contains a range of cannabinoids, including CBD (cannabidiol) and THC (tetrahydrocannabinol). A CBD product can legally land in at least three completely different categories depending on how it's made and presented — and each category has its own regulator, its own rulebook, and its own limits on what can be said about it in marketing:

• Food or dietary supplement — regulated by Fødevarestyrelsen (the Danish Food Authority) under the EU's Novel Food rules.
• Cosmetic — regulated under the EU Cosmetics Regulation (1223/2009), with Miljøstyrelsen (the Danish EPA) as the Danish market-surveillance authority.
• Medicine — regulated by Lægemiddelstyrelsen (the Danish Medicines Agency) if the product falls under the medicine definition by its presentation or function.

On top of these three sits a fourth, independent layer: regardless of category, a product with too high a THC content can fall under narcotics law (the executive order on euphoric substances) — a question decided separately from whether the product is a lawful food, cosmetic or medicine. The four rulebooks don't automatically overlap, and a product can easily pass one test and fail another.

Why CBD can almost never legally be sold as a food or dietary supplement in Denmark

Fødevarestyrelsen's own guidance on tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is unambiguous on one central point: "Hemp seeds and hemp-leaf tea are not Novel Food. Other products from the hemp plant that are to be marketed as a food (including dietary supplements) are Novel Food." That means ordinary hemp seeds and hemp tea can be sold as food without prior EU authorisation, while almost everything else from the plant — including CBD extracts, oils and capsules — requires Novel Food authorisation before the product may be marketed as a food in the EU at all.

No CBD-containing food has, as of this article, received such an authorisation. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) published an updated statement in 2026 setting a provisional safe intake level of 0.0275 mg per kg of body weight per day (roughly 2 mg per day for a 70 kg adult) — but that is a provisional safety benchmark to support the ongoing authorisation process, not an authorisation in itself. EFSA attaches its own limitations to the assessment: it applies only to supplement formulations with CBD purity of at least 98%, without nanoparticles, and EFSA explicitly concludes that no safe level can be established for people under 25, pregnant or breastfeeding women, or people on concurrent medication. Until a specific application is fully authorised, CBD extract remains an unauthorised Novel Food in the EU — and therefore unlawful to sell as a food or dietary supplement, regardless of THC content.

The practical consequence: Fødevarestyrelsen's own recommendation to a company wanting to register a CBD-containing product as a dietary supplement is to first contact Lægemiddelstyrelsen to clarify that the product isn't a medicine — but the Novel Food question itself effectively closes the route to a lawful dietary supplement for a genuine CBD extract today.

The 0.2% THC threshold — and why it isn't the food-safety limit most people think it is

The most common assumption about CBD in Denmark is that a product is lawful as long as its THC content is under 0.2%. That's only half true, and the confusion creates real risk for an influencer who relies on it blindly. Lægemiddelstyrelsen introduced a 0.2% THC threshold in 2018 for when a hemp product is considered subject to the executive order on euphoric substances — the limit has applied since 1 July 2018, and it decides a narcotics-law question, not a food-safety question.

Fødevarestyrelsen's own guidance draws the crucial distinction clearly: the real food-safety limits for THC in hemp products are far stricter, and stated in a completely different unit — mg/kg, not a percentage. Concretely: 0.2% is the same as 2,000 mg/kg — that's a plain unit conversion, not an estimate — while the EU's food-safety limit for hemp seed oil is 7.5 mg/kg. That makes the food-safety limit more than 260 times stricter than the narcotics-law 0.2% figure most people know. A product comfortably under 0.2% THC, and therefore not subject to narcotics law, can easily exceed the far stricter food-safety limit if it were (hypothetically) sold as a food — which, as the previous section shows, it can't lawfully be anyway, unless it's made exclusively from hemp seed.

For an influencer, that means: a seller's claim that a product "complies with the 0.2% limit" says something about whether the product is a controlled substance under narcotics law — it says nothing about whether the product can lawfully be sold as a food, and nothing at all about which of the three main categories (food, cosmetic, medicine) the product actually belongs to.

Cosmetics: the most common lawful channel for CBD in Denmark today

Because the food route is effectively closed, most CBD products lawfully sold in Denmark end up in the cosmetics category. Lægemiddelstyrelsen's own guidance on cannabis-containing products confirms this directly: products applied to the skin — "such as lotion, cream and shampoo for care and beautification" — can be classified as cosmetics under the EU Cosmetics Regulation (1223/2009), with Miljøstyrelsen as the Danish authority overseeing cosmetic products.

The central condition is that a cosmetic product may only carry cosmetic claims — about appearance, care and beautification — not health or medical claims. An influencer discussing a CBD cream can therefore talk about how the skin feels or looks, but not about the product "relieving anxiety," "reducing inflammation in the body," or "helping with pain" — that kind of statement pulls the product toward either an unlawful health claim (if it's genuinely sold as a food) or a medicinal claim (which can trigger the medicine definition, see the next section), regardless of what the product is officially registered as.

Medicine: when does a CBD product become a medicine?

Lægemiddelstyrelsen's own guidance states that "products containing CBD may be medicines under the medicine definition" — depending on the specific product's composition and marketing. Oral CBD products in particular can trigger the so-called functional criterion in the medicine definition, because CBD has a demonstrated pharmacological effect on receptors in the central nervous system — so it isn't only what the company itself writes on the packaging that decides the classification, but also the product's actual pharmacological properties.

The one concrete example of an approved CBD medicine in Denmark is Epidyolex, an oral CBD solution approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and marketed in Denmark since 29 June 2020, according to Lægemiddelstyrelsen's own news item on the approval. Epidyolex is approved for two rare, serious forms of epilepsy — Lennox-Gastaut syndrome and Dravet syndrome — as well as seizures associated with tuberous sclerosis complex, and may only be dispensed on prescription from a specialist in neurology or paediatrics, or from a hospital physician. Because Epidyolex is prescription-only medicine, it falls under the same total ban on advertising prescription medicine to the public that this Academy has already documented for Ozempic and Wegovy and for Botox — an influencer campaign that names and recommends Epidyolex to the public would therefore be banned, regardless of payment.

For an ordinary, unapproved CBD product (say, an oral CBD oil not registered as a medicine), the risk runs the other way: if the marketing — including an influencer's choice of words — creates the impression of a medicinal effect (for example, that the product "treats" anxiety, insomnia or pain), the product risks being assessed as an unregistered, unlawful medicine by its presentation, regardless of whether it's officially sold as a cosmetic or not registered at all. Lægemiddelstyrelsen decides the classification case by case.

Decision framework for an influencer offered a CBD partnership

IF the product is marketed or sold as a dietary supplement or other food → most likely unlawful, regardless of THC content, because no CBD extract is Novel Food-authorised — ask for proof of a valid Novel Food authorisation before agreeing to anything.

IF the product is a topical cosmetic (cream, lotion, oil for the skin) with no health or medical claims → generally the safest category, but avoid words like "relieves," "treats," "heals" or "cures" — stick to cosmetic claims about appearance and care.

IF the product is a registered, prescription-only medicine (e.g. Epidyolex) → advertising to the public is totally banned, regardless of payment, exactly as for Ozempic, Wegovy and Botox.

IF the THC content exceeds 0.2% → the product may fall under narcotics law, regardless of which of the other three categories it otherwise belongs to — and a THC content under 0.2% is on its own no guarantee the product can lawfully be sold as a food.

Checklist before an influencer says yes to a CBD partnership

• Ask for written proof of which of the three categories the product is actually registered under — food/dietary supplement, cosmetic, or medicine — and with which authority.
• If the product is claimed to be a lawful dietary supplement, ask specifically for the Novel Food authorisation. If it doesn't exist, the product is in all likelihood unlawful to sell as a food.
• Avoid any health- or disease-related wording ("relieves," "treats," "helps with") unless the company can show a specific, approved claim or approval covering that exact wording.
• Check the THC content, and keep in mind that a figure under 0.2% only answers the narcotics-law question — not the food or medicine question.
• Check whether Fødevarestyrelsen or Lægemiddelstyrelsen has previously banned or recalled the specific product or brand.

Make Influence's perspective

In our experience, CBD is one of the areas where an influencer and a brand most often assume more clarity exists than actually does. "Under 0.2% THC" is frequently used as though it were a general seal of legality — but it only answers one of at least four separate questions. Our clear recommendation is to never accept a CBD partnership on the basis of a THC percentage alone: always ask for the specific registration (food, cosmetic, or medicine) in writing, and stick strictly to cosmetic or purely descriptive wording unless the company can document an approved health claim or medicine approval for the exact wording it wants used. See also the brand safety checklist for influencer partnerships for where this kind of product risk belongs in an ordinary approval process.

FAQ

Is CBD oil even legal to sell in Denmark?

It depends on which category it's sold under. As a dietary supplement, it's in all likelihood unlawful, because no CBD extract is Novel Food-authorised. As a topical cosmetic with no health claims, it can lawfully be sold under the Cosmetics Regulation.

Does a THC content under 0.2% automatically make a CBD product a lawful supplement?

No. The 0.2% threshold only decides whether the product is subject to narcotics law (the executive order on euphoric substances). Lawful access to sell a product as a food or dietary supplement instead depends on the EU's Novel Food rules — a completely separate question, where no CBD extract has been authorised today.

Can an influencer say a CBD product "helps with anxiety" or "improves sleep"?

No, not without a specific, approved claim or medicine approval covering exactly that wording. Such a statement pulls the product toward either an unlawful disease claim (the food track) or a medicine classification (the medicine track), regardless of how the product is officially registered.

Is Epidyolex the only lawful CBD medicine in Denmark?

Epidyolex is the concrete example this article has verified — an EMA-approved, prescription-only CBD medicine marketed in Denmark since 29 June 2020, for Lennox-Gastaut syndrome, Dravet syndrome and tuberous sclerosis complex. Other CBD-based medicines could in principle be approved in future, but they'd have to go through the same EMA approval process.

How does this article differ from the article on dietary supplements and influencer marketing?

That article covers the general EU claims rules for ordinary, lawfully registered dietary supplements. This article steps back and addresses the more fundamental question for CBD specifically: whether the product can lawfully be a dietary supplement in the first place, which, as a starting point, it can't, because of the Novel Food rules. See dietary supplements and influencer marketing: what Danish food-advertising law requires for that general rulebook.

How does this article differ from the article on Botox and fillers?

That article covers two products that are both directly injected cosmetic treatments under healthcare supervision. This article covers a consumer product that can be sold freely through three different, independent legal tracks (food, cosmetic, medicine) depending on how it's formulated and marketed. See can an influencer legally promote Botox, fillers and other cosmetic procedures in Denmark? for that rulebook.

Do the same rules apply to CBD for pets?

No, that's yet another separate track. Fødevarestyrelsen has confirmed that no CBD products, including CBD oils, are approved as feed additives in the EU, meaning CBD products may not be marketed as feed or used for animal feeding. This article covers only products aimed at humans.

Has Fødevarestyrelsen published influencer-specific guidance on CBD, the way it has for ordinary dietary supplements?

No — Fødevarestyrelsen's dedicated guidance for influencers on marketing food and dietary supplements doesn't mention CBD or hemp specifically as of this article. The general claims rules described in the sibling article on dietary supplements do, however, apply in full in the (rare) case a CBD product actually secures Novel Food authorisation and is lawfully sold as a food.