Cannabis Science: What to Think?


Alan was disoriented and his words have been not producing sense. His wife believed he may possibly be obtaining a stroke, so she took him to the emergency area exactly where he was observed by the on-contact neurologist. When asked, Alan admitted to employing cannabis on a frequent basis for a lot of years. The neurologist then brought him a printout with the title: “Marijuana Use Related with Enhanced Threat of Stroke, Heart Failure.” That was when I got the contact asking me if this was for real.

I have not observed this hazardous trend in my clinical practice, but a lot of of my sufferers have utilized cannabis for a lot of years so I was motivated to track down the referenced short article and critique it. If this was a valid concern, I wanted to know so I could inform sufferers about the risk.


A valid study can inform, enrich, and save lives. Poor research can develop worry and ignorance. The bias can lean either pro or con. Either way detracts from our understanding of cannabis and our capability to give sufferers with the ideal care. I obtained a copy of the original short article and reviewed it carefully.

The 1st paragraph gave me a clue. “…cannabis is…the most extensively cultivated, trafficked, and abused drug…” (emphasis added)

I had study equivalent statements in other scientific articles:

  • Cannabis remains a single of the world’s most extensively utilized substances of abuse amongst pregnant females.” (emphasis added)
  • “Despite rising public overall health issues, cannabis remains the most frequently utilized illicit drug…” (emphasis added)

What do all these 1st paragraphs in published scientific articles have in prevalent? Every single a single reveals a prejudice that tends to make the rest of the information that follows significantly less trustworthy. For the reason that cannabis has been illegal and vilified for so a lot of years, a lot of publications assume harm even just before they are written.

Individuals ARE Searching FOR ANSWERS

The scientific literature is teeming with new publications just about every week reporting on cannabis, cannabinoids, and other medicinal utilizes for the plant. Some of these research are properly performed, but how do you know which are worthwhile and which are faulty? Scary headlines like “Cannabis Use Predicts Threat of Heart Failure” are dramatic, and usually circulate extensively in the press and on social media.

Most overall health care providers know tiny about the health-related use of cannabis they are not taught the endocannabinoid technique in health-related schools and a lot of steer clear of this sensitive subject altogether. Individuals are educating themselves the ideal they can by reading news articles and reviewing scientific research produced obtainable on the internet, but not every thing we study is precise and not just about every study is properly-created. Right here are a couple of suggestions to enable you inform the distinction among valid data and that which need to be taken with a grain of salt.

ANIMAL vs. HUMAN Research

A study of worth to true individuals reports on a sample that is representative of most human beings. Humans are not mice, so valid conclusions shaping clinical care can’t be reliably primarily based on how mice respond to cannabis. This does not imply that data derived from mice, rats, pigs or other animals is not beneficial, but the ideal we can say about animal research is that additional study could be indicated.


“Associations among frequent cannabis use and each mental illness and lung cancer have been properly established.” [1] This is an untrue statement. Dr. Donald Tashkin at UCLA created a study intending to prove that smoking cannabis was related with enhanced circumstances of lung cancer.

To his terrific surprise he identified that this was not correct, and ultimately published an short article that indicated just the opposite. [2]  False statements primarily based on poorly created research are from time to time referenced as truth, major to additional poor conclusions. Supporting a hypothesis with weak science is usually an indication of prejudgment.


“Mortality post [myocardial infarction] could also be enhanced in cannabis users…” [1] This statement was utilized in a scientific short article reporting on the damaging effects of cannabis in the cardiovascular technique. The use of the word ‘may’ right here tends to make this an opinion, not a fact.

It is also contradicted by other information. Appear out for words like “may” or “could” as they indicate a guess, assumption, or opinion rather than a truth backed by observation. The accuracy of the above statement is questionable. In 2018 Johnson-Sasso [3] published a properly-performed study concluding: “(Our) benefits recommend that, contrary to our hypothesis, marijuana use was not related with enhanced danger of adverse brief-term outcomes following AMI. In addition, marijuana use was related with decreased in-hospital mortality post-acute myocardial infarction.”


Science research humans when probable, but choice of subjects is hard, particularly when studying the effects of cannabis. As lengthy as the plant is federally illegal and socially suspect, most men and women will be apprehensive about disclosing data associated to their use.

In a lot of research, data is gathered by asking sufferers if they use cannabis, or any illicit substances (self-reporting). The substances are usually listed: “Have you utilized any of the following: amphetamine, marijuana, methadone, heroin, LSD, PCP, cocaine, other?” Not every person is going to admit to employing a substance integrated in that list. Would you?

This challenge was clearly illustrated in a study performed in 1995. [4] This study collected information from each self-reports and blood tests. When tested, 585 females tested optimistic for THC, but only 31% of these females had self-reported use of cannabis. As anticipated, self-reporting clearly carries the danger of beneath-reporting. If information is collected only on these who disclose the individual use of an illegal substance, that information will be skewed.

Lab testing to pick subjects has limitations as properly. Serum drug tests could underestimate the use of cannabis simply because the THC metabolite they test for is only present for a brief period of time. A study topic could have utilized cannabis final week, or a couple of days ago, and no longer test positive.

Choice skewing leads to statements like, “Compared with non-cannabis customers, cannabis customers have been older and predominantly males [and]…had an enhanced prevalence of most danger things which includes hypertension, tobacco use, and alcohol use.” [1]  This is most probably correct for that study’s choice, but not precise for the general population.


Several, but absolutely not all, who use cannabis also use other substances that incorporate tobacco and alcohol. Separating out the subjects who are only impacted by cannabis is hard but will have to be performed accurately for excellent information on the effects of cannabis alone. For the reason that this process is so difficult, a lot of study benefits are weakened by confusing the effects of a lot more than one substance.


WE Require DetailsProperlyCOLLECTED AND ProperlySTATED

It is vital to critique scientific publications meticulously and look at any weaknesses stated or implied. The dangers and advantages of cannabis as medicine need to have to be recognized so the plant can be utilized safely to everyone’s ideal benefit. Worry and social attitudes have no spot in properly-performed scientific research. Unscientific enthusiasm for a extensively utilized herb has no spot in the science either. For cannabis to be trusted and appropriately utilized as medicine, we need to have impartial facts–well-collected and well-stated.

Fortunately, Alan had not had a stroke. It appeared he had a ‘TIA,’ which is a transient loss of blood flow to the brain with no lengthy-term harm performed. But they kept him overnight for tests and to make confident he was protected to discharge. He went house the subsequent day and continued to use cannabis, understanding that the data shared with him by a properly-which means neurologist was not necessarily valid. For him, the individual advantages have been worth the possible risks.

Stacey Kerr, M.D. is a teacher, doctor, and author living and operating in Northern California. Just after a number of years operating with the Society of Cannabis Clinicians, and co-establishing the 1st complete on the internet course in cannabinoid medicine, she now serves as Healthcare Director for Hawaiian Ethos. Dr. Kerr is a Project CBD contributing writer. This short article was initially published by Hawaiian Ethos.


1.    Kalla et al. Cannabis use predicts dangers of heart failure and cerebrovascular accidents. J Cardiovasc Med, 2018, 19:000-000 doi:10.2459/JCM.0000000000000681

two.    Tashkin. Effects of Marijuana Smoking on the Lung. Ann Am Thorac Soc Vol 10, No three, pp 239–247, Jun 2013

three.    Johnson-Sasso CP et al. Marijuana use and brief-term outcomes in sufferers hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction. PLoS 1 13(7): e0199705. 2018.

four.    Shiono et al. The Effect of cocaine and marijuana use on low birth weight and preterm birth: A multicenter study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995 Jan172(1 Pt 1):19-27.


Latest posts