Cannabis Users Face Substantially Higher Risk of Heart Attack (2025)
85 points by RickJWagner 4 hours ago | 104 comments

embedding-shape 3 hours ago
> researchers were unable to account for several potential confounding factors including the duration and amount of cannabis use or the use of tobacco or other drugs.

Personally I'd wager a bet it's the tobacco and/or smoking that is the harmful part, but it kind of dumbfounds me they failed to account for "details" like "duration and amount of cannabis use", that feels like a very vital thing to control for. Nothing is good for you in too great amounts, even water, so not taking that into account seems to not really give reliable and trustworthy results.

reply
kranner 2 hours ago
Edible forms of cannabis raise heart rate and blood pressure substantially as well.
reply
johnisgood 48 minutes ago
I think this is making the assumption that temporally elevated HR and BP is bad.
reply
goodroot 26 minutes ago
Right, the rationale for why saunas and heat stress is good for you is specifically because it raises the heart rate.
reply
retrac 19 minutes ago
Hot sauna is often cautioned against for those with existing cardiac or vascular problems, with some reason.
reply
hallole 32 minutes ago
Indeed, as that also happens during exercise. But, the effects of exercise are quite different from the effects of being a lazy pothead, and so it may be that the former is overall beneficial, and the latter detrimental.
reply
swed420 23 minutes ago
> lazy pothead

But not all potheads are lazy, and many non-potheads are.

Media tropes sure are great at propagating myths and generating false stigma, which creates a chilling effect for ever correcting the former.

https://thereitis.org/mr-x-by-carl-sagan

reply
Teever 9 minutes ago
I find it interesting how many people come out of the wood work to make disparaging comments about people who use cannabis whenever the subject of cannabis use comes up on HN.

Having lived in a country where cannabis has been legal for about a decade now it's quaint seeing this kind of casual disrespect levelled by a stranger.

I wonder if this kind of mindset is still common here and people just don't vocalize it anymore, or if it's the kind of mentality that continued criminalization perpetuates.

reply
westurner 4 minutes ago
Stamp them out!

Stamp tax it

You should get on some kind of program for your heart though

reply
zooming 16 minutes ago
Weed (as prescribed) gets me and many others moving and active.

There was a deliberate effort to demonize weed in the US as it's associated with mexicans, black people, and counterculture, and it's difficult to monetize if it's legal (anyone can just grow it).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uy_lCjA6poo

Also, there are alternatives to smoking it: use a dry herb vaporizer with no tobacco and you avoid the vast majority of the negative health effects.

reply
kranner 37 minutes ago
It's a fair assumption being a known potential cause of death. Of course I'm now assuming death is bad.
reply
kataklasm 32 minutes ago
By that argumentation sport is bad and a potential death risk factor, it also elevates heart rate and blood pressure!
reply
brookst 23 minutes ago
Not to mention art, sex, walking, etc, etc
reply
dempedempe 28 minutes ago
Yeah it raises heart rate and blood pressure bc it dilates your blood vessels. The raised HR/BP are to counter that so you keep pushing the same amount of O2 per unit time.
reply
Dan_- 3 hours ago
Exactly. Being unable to account for this covariate (tobacco use) pretty much invalidates this analysis. The odds ratio for tobacco use is basically the same (3x).

Also, title needs a 2025.

reply
mil22 3 hours ago
This article refers to two studies. The retrospective study of 4.6 million people did account for tobacco use.

> The findings are from a retrospective study of over 4.6 million people published in JACC Advances and a meta-analysis of 12 previously published studies being presented at the American College of Cardiology's Annual Scientific Session (ACC.25).

> Kamel and his team conducted the retrospective study using data from TriNetX, a global health research network that provides access to electronic medical records. Their findings indicate that over an average follow-up of over three years, cannabis users had more than a sixfold increased risk of heart attack, fourfold increased risk of ischemic stroke, twofold increased risk of heart failure and threefold increased risk of cardiovascular death, heart attack or stroke. All study participants were younger than age 50 and free of significant cardiovascular comorbidities at baseline, with blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels within a healthy range and no diabetes, tobacco use or prior coronary artery disease.

reply
chuckadams 2 hours ago
I know you can't judge a study by its abstract, but they don't even mention the dosing mechanism, it's just "cannabis use".
reply
mil22 48 minutes ago
That's not really a fair standard by which to judge the study, abstract or not. The dosing mechanism information was not present in the underlying dataset available to them:

> This retrospective cohort study utilized the TriNetX health research network, which aggregates deidentified electronic medical records from health care organizations worldwide.

> 1) The cannabis-user group with cannabis use diagnoses (International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision: F12.1, F12.9, F12.90).

You can't expect them to work miracles and come up with data they didn't have. They produced a valuable piece of research furthering our understanding of the cardiovascular risks of cannabis use based on a very large existing dataset that was available to them.

Of course they would love to be able to answer the question of whether smoking is worse for your heart than edibles and so on, and they stated they would like to do this in a future study. But that costs time and money to create an entirely new dataset, and you know what funding for science is like these days.

reply
brookst 18 minutes ago
Did they though? Not accounting for confounding factors like “other drugs” seems to indicate it’s not about the risks of cannabis use so much as the risks from all sources that the average cannabis user faces. Using only cannabis might have zero impact or even be beneficial based on this evidence (if you hypothesize that most of the negative outcomes were cannabis+cocaine users, for instance).

Still good data, but I don’t think it’s predictive for what cannabis use leads to (unless you assume that taking up cannabis makes you proportionately more likely to also take up whatever the confounding factors were).

reply
mil22 5 minutes ago
They didn't find that cannabis use leads to cardiovascular disease. They found a strong association between cannabis use and cardiovascular disease in a very large study. Correlation isn't causation. The study itself acknowledges that. That doesn't mean it's an invalid or useless study that didn't add to the body of scientific knowledge and evidence about the relationship between cannabis use and cardiovascular disease. That's how science works. Observational studies do not definitely prove causality.

After reading the study, do I update the posterior on the hypothesis that cannabis use causes cardiovascular disease to nudge it in the direction that it does? Yes - that's just Bayes' theorem. Does the probability go to 95%+? No, of course not. I'm not claiming otherwise, and it's still useful research.

reply
detourdog 2 hours ago
Not to mention cocaine.
reply
xprnio 42 minutes ago
The cannabis to cocaine pipeline sadly is real, whether we want to or not. As long as the same people we buy our weed from also have a chance of being the people that have cocaine for you to buy, all that’s left to figure out is the money and the willingness to buy some.

(Sadly speaking from experience)

reply
bushwart 37 minutes ago
Legal cannabis sends its greetings, if you're lucky enough to live in a country where you can acquire it without having make any shady acquaintances.
reply
calmworm 28 minutes ago
This is odd to me. The X to Y pipeline is real if A, B, and C also align. It’s a weak correlation that sounds a lot like the “gateway drug” propaganda.
reply
goodroot 23 minutes ago
That's interesting and probably an argument for pro-legalization.

Were I to pick a gateway drug into cocaine, it would be alcohol. It becomes a way to infuse more energy in a later night, which is usually one of alcoholic revelry.

When cannabis is just in a store and it's the only thing there, many potheads just stay in the pothead bubble.

reply
sscaryterry 17 minutes ago
Exactly, alcohol IMHO affects judgment significantly worse than cannabis.
reply
nephihaha 35 minutes ago
I am aware of someone who does both, because I overheard someone discussing it with him. Cannabis will retain a black market when it becomes a government cash cow.
reply
xattt 3 hours ago
I tried to look up the source article, but there doesn’t seem to be any mention of consumption of edibles versus smoking.
reply
honeycrispy 3 hours ago
Do you smoke?
reply
embedding-shape 3 hours ago
Literally just wrote about that: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48794178

> I've smoked cannabis daily for maybe 15 years [...] Visited a cardiologist like two months ago and have perfectly fine heart despite the smoking.

reply
Noaidi 2 hours ago
Many people have had cardiologists say they have perfectly fine hearts go on to have heart attacks months later. My brother was one of these people. He was going in for spinal surgery, cardio said his heart was fine. Two weeks after surgery he was short of breath. Turns out he needed a triple bypass.

And that was a physical change. Heart attacks happen because of electrocardiac issues as well.

reply
tyjen 40 minutes ago
Information asymmetries are a bane in the medical doctor market.

Trust doctors with a grain of salt. There are many bad doctors that market themselves as good doctors, but are in reality terrible providers.

I recently had a scare, where I was encouraged by two separate general practitioners to seek immediate care with an ophthalmologist. I visited the ophthalmologist who I was referred to and they said everything was great, then booked my next appointment for a year out. Four days later, I started losing vision in my right eye.

After visiting a competent ophthalmologist, they were flabbergasted by what the other did. Ten appointments within 2 weeks later with the new specialist and we're undoing the damage that was easily preventable.

In short, some doctors are borderline DANGEROUS, but it's difficult to distinguish them with the ample legal protections they receive.

Anyhow, hope your brother recovered well.

reply
ngvrnd 29 minutes ago
this is so true. There's huge variability in competence. and many doctors have fled to boutique medical care, or whatever it's called, since the recent changes in healthcare.
reply
Noaidi 30 minutes ago
> After visiting a competent ophthalmologist, they were flabbergasted by what the other did. Ten appointments within 2 weeks later with the new specialist and we're undoing the damage that was easily preventable.

Eeesh...sorry about that. Been there my whole life. It too ten years to get an appointment with a Hematologist and was finally diagnosed with Erythrocytosis which I told them I had but always said my HCT levels were "not really that high". The Hematologist looked at my records and wondered why they did not send me in twenty years ago. I am on Medicare which makes it much more difficult.

> Anyhow, hope your brother recovered well.

My whole family disowned me for no other reason than me having a serious mental illness so I do not care. But thanks.

reply
pipes 2 hours ago
Did you brother have a Coronary Artery Calcium score scan?
reply
Noaidi 41 minutes ago
No. This was about ten years ago. But not much has changed as I cannot get CAC score on Medicare even though they wanted to put me on statins. Cardiologist says I am fine. :/
reply
ses1984 11 minutes ago
They only cost about $100.
reply
embedding-shape 45 minutes ago
Yeah, but I mean what can you do really? Many people have CAT scans then it turns out the technician/whoever missed something, or a surgeon forgets an instrument inside of the patients body, shit happens.
reply
yehosef 2 hours ago
[flagged]
reply
swed420 17 minutes ago
If people are this concerned about heart health, they'd be wise to continue a zero-covid lifestyle into 2026 and beyond, since each re-infection (which vaccines don't prevent) increases the risk of severe health outcomes, including heart-related issues among lots of others.

Yet I only see about .5-1% of the population in my area these days wearing any kind of mask/N95 respirator in public.

reply
basisword 3 minutes ago
Doesn't this apply to colds and flus too?
reply
latexr 3 hours ago
> Nothing is good for you in too great amounts, even water

https://youtube.com/watch?v=XewVicFzRxw&t=152s

reply
ngvrnd 32 minutes ago
cf. paracelsus on the dose and the toxin
reply
teekert 2 hours ago
I wonder about all the confounding effects. In my country (famous for cannabis to be easy to come by (for decades already), and I saw many smoke from age 16 up as I grew up in 90's, 00's). I have always felt that the heavy cannabis smokers had something to compensate; stress, unrest, impending depression, friction with parents. It was never the healthy sporty types with fulfilling relationships, good grades or a nice career that smoke cannabis heavily (like daily). Sure, some of those smoked, but more occasionally.
reply
randsorex 49 minutes ago
I have largely stopped smoking because when I smoke regularly I end up weighing 20-30lbs more from eating everything.

Going on an actual calorie restricted diet while consuming cannabis is basically impossible for me.

Then instead of walking 60 minutes I end up sitting and listening to music.

There is really not anything for me that correlates with healthy behavior when I smoke.

reply
Obscurity4340 30 minutes ago
You ever taken a hike or nature something and try it in that different context?

Set and Setting are also relevant too. If you do it a soecfic way with other soecific tools and activities while on it, that all gets packaged and reinforced.

reply
KellyCriterion 2 hours ago
> stress, unrest, impending depression, friction with parents

Well, Id guess these are reasons for any case of substance missuse?

reply
hx8 2 hours ago
Wouldn't they also be potential causes that lead to worse heath outcomes that were not measured in the study?
reply
detourdog 59 minutes ago
I believe it’s an “artificial” reward mechanism for some people. The ability to control one’s own rewards is an easy habit to take up. If the rewards aren’t coming from externalities one needs to get them from somewhere.
reply
derektank 42 minutes ago
If I had to guess, this is also the appeal of many video games.
reply
galangalalgol 29 minutes ago
Absolutely. I have abused games this way, and the only way I can play them responsibly is physically present multiplayer.
reply
teekert 54 minutes ago
True.
reply
uwagar 25 minutes ago
It was never the healthy sporty types with fulfilling relationships, good grades or a nice career that smoke cannabis heavily (like daily)

^^ many of those are boring people.

reply
teekert 8 minutes ago
That is an opinion. I for one prefer talking to a happy, healthy mind, healthy body-type over someone with a life riddled with substance experiments. In fact, it was why I hardly talked to some of my family for a long time. Every weekend was the same, they were always angry and in the end they nearly killed themselves. I'm happy they got out of it and we have a much better relation now.
reply
e584 49 minutes ago
[dead]
reply
dvduval 3 hours ago
For me, cannabis causes anxiety, and it’s pretty well established that anybody with anxiety or bipolar or schizophrenia should not be using cannabis because it can make these much worse. I don’t suffer anxiety anymore, but there’s plenty of scientific evidence about the relationship between anxiety and cannabis use.
reply
dbspin 2 hours ago
That's a very blanket statement, lots of people are in fact prescribed low dose cannabis for anxiety.
reply
bushwart 27 minutes ago
What strains have you tried?
reply
AppAttestationz 2 hours ago
The term “cannabis” stems from the Greek kánnabis and earlier Scythian and Akkadian references such as qunubu.
reply
gchamonlive 3 hours ago
Would be nice to know how much of a role a sedentary lifestyle plays in it or if it puts everyone at risk regardless of other habits. Maybe this just means you need to do cardio several times a week to keep using THC.
reply
embedding-shape 3 hours ago
FWIW, I've smoked cannabis daily for maybe 15 years, I'm not exactly sedentary (have dogs, a partner and like to (lazily) swim in the sea) but generally don't exercise. Visited a cardiologist like two months ago and have perfectly fine heart despite the smoking.

Anecdotal of course, many could probably bring up counter-stories too, but I do think you bring up a good point, it seems to me a completely sedentary lifestyle seems to be way more destructive to your health than moderate usage of various drugs and/or eating habits. People who just walk a bit daily already seem way healthier and happier than peers in their same age.

reply
kovacs_x 2 hours ago
6x sounds too clickbaity.

but sure, still lets make to account by other "legal" substances (alco, tobacco, cocaine, pharmaceutics and other "lifestyle choices" infecting cardiovascular system) and way they are consumed(smoked, ingested, pure or with say tobacco)

would love see data for a group who consumes cannabis by ingestion and especially not via smoking!

also- do they differ different thc/cbd grades used (high/low thc, "medical")?

im regards "research demonstrates something does this.." for many years alcohol was considered "healthier" over non consumption, just becauses non-drinkers were together with those of abstinent ex-alcholics.. thus average score was lower than for those who drunk minimal amounts and were considered "healthier".

reply
SoftTalker 29 minutes ago
Is there something that can help a habitual cannabis user stop? GLP1s maybe?
reply
beezle 43 minutes ago
for the anxiety crowd: don't buy street weed and avoid sativas

about the 'study': I do not trust anything that comes out of meta studies given how many base studies are found to be either garbage or very lacking in controls. And without knowing an accurate life history it is hard to rule out or quantify damages done much earlier in life.

reply
warumdarum 33 minutes ago
He who attacks the munchies..
reply
ear7h 3 hours ago
Some commenters here talking about anxiety, but I think the bigger cause, which many people don't know, is that THC significantly increases your heart rate despite it's usual characterization as a depressant. If I recall correctly (big "if" considering the circumstances hah) my heart rate after smoking would go up by 10-20 BPM (from 65-70 to 80-90) while still feeling relaxed; ~~finding some numbers on this from a reputable source is difficult right now and this symptom is suspiciously missing from the wikipedia page~~.

Edit:

Realized this comment sounds like fear mongering, so decided to dig up some actual sources. The wiki page I needed to find was:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_cannabis

Also, the CDC page mentions it:

https://www.cdc.gov/cannabis/health-effects/heart-health.htm...

And links to this paper (though I can't read past the abstract bc no institutional access):

https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1552-4604.2002.tb06005.x

reply
goodroot 20 minutes ago
There's more going on here than just the substance's effect.

There's a mind body connection that an altered state can throw into disarray.

Well, under the influence of cannabis, one may be a lot more aware of physical pain, dehydration, and so on. The key word is aware. Suddenly becoming aware of the fact that you are stressed out, you are carrying tension, can lead to something of a latent processing effect of some of these suppressed or physically felt emotions.

However, if you're generally not tense, ingesting cannabis itself does not always raise the heart rate. I can validate this myself right now, given I wear an Apple Watch and can vaporize cannabis. Looking at my historical data, there is no relationship, and my resting heart rate remains in the 40s.

It's anecdotal, but at the same time we need to be careful with something that acts on the physical, the mental, and dare I say it, the spiritual. If we focus too much on one dimension, we lose the important synergy from processing all dimensions.

reply
sscaryterry 9 minutes ago
This. Street weed and medical cannabis are not the same thing.
reply
sandcat_ 3 hours ago
Not really related, but the other thing I found out recently that cannabis can cause is the worst panic attack I have ever experienced: a DPDR (derealization / depersonalization) panic attack. I’ve had regular panic attacks before. I get one a year, roughly, where I get essentially heart attack symptoms. But this was something else. It felt like something was truly, irrevocably broken with my mind and I couldn’t even describe what. Utterly terrifying. I was a heavy user but dropped it the next day.
reply
reeredfdfdf 2 hours ago
I had a similar experience when I was young. Bought a vape and some Cannabis, which probably had really high THC concentration as it tends to have nowadays. Took a bit, didn't feel anything, then took a bit more, and boom, a panic attack. Might even had some hallucinations, I'm not fully sure what was real and what wasn't.

After the experience I felt kind of weird and "slow" for several days. Later I found out that there is also a genetic risk of schizophrenia in my family. No way I'm going to touch anything with THC ever again. I've tried CBD oil though and that was okay, slightly calming effect. But ultimately I prefer beer over that too.

reply
goodroot 33 minutes ago
In social systems or spiritual systems where cannabis is used, this is often called "going clear".

We (general West) have no overarching myth or support system to help people navigate this type of pure madness. We have a psychological framework, and anything that interferes with our capacity to construct an I, a me, an ego in real time is seen in the most ultimately negative terms. And the experience is terrifying, such to support these terms.

Though, if through meditation, through religious constructs, or similar, there is a learned capacity to sit with the experience, it is considered less of a breaking and more of a liberation.

Wouldn't recommend it, wouldn't prescribe it. Though this decoupling of self from experience isn't a universal ill.

reply
ifwinterco 2 hours ago
Anecdotally this isn't uncommon among heavy users, I've heard of similar things happen to a few people. You did the right thing stopping, where people really go off the deep end is when they don't listen to the warning signs and keep blazing.

I think weed should be legal and for the majority of people used in moderation it's going to be fine, but at the end of the day it's a psychoactive drug. It's probably not optimal to use it daily and in particular waking and baking every day is asking for trouble.

Also a case to be made that modern strains are worse. I fully believe that the risk of losing the plot is higher when you're smoking some lemon sherbet bubblegum flavours every day instead of old fashioned moroccan hash

reply
Noaidi 2 hours ago
THC increases glutamate release[1], which is most likely the source of this panic. I have psychotic episodes even with a a few big hits but then again I have schizoaffefctive disorder. Glutamate is my arch enemy.

[1] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s42238-025-00277-9

reply
joemazerino 2 hours ago
Can relate to this experience. How old were you?
reply
khalic 2 hours ago
Without a clear mechanism of action, this sure requires monitoring (like any drug), but the conclusions are terribly oversold. Correlation does not imply causation, no matter the sample size
reply
fuzzfactor 58 minutes ago
From what I've seen it's faced with a more stony resolve compared to side-effects of many USP substances.
reply
shevy-java 2 hours ago
What I find fascinating is how smokers rationalize their behaviour, e. g. "weed is harmless". When they compare it to fentanyl or heroine/cocaine, but compounds are never intrinsically harmless. But you can not get that message across most folks who are smoking weed. It's a somewhat similar issue, to some extent, when you look at sumo wrestlers. These have a significantly lower life expectancy on average than the rest of the society in Japan, but the sumo association does not acknowledge that. It's really strange how the human mind operates.
reply
goodroot 29 minutes ago
There's a saying: don't throw stones if you live in a glass house. The same human mind that rationalizes the intake of substances is the same one that rationalizes social networks, junk food, eating meat, whatever it is. I wouldn't be so quick to condescend.

At some point in time, it's important to realize that not everyone optimizes for longevity, correctness, rationalism, and so on, and they just simply do what makes them feel good within the limited life that they have.

Nothing is intrinsically harmless. Cannabis can be devastating. But I was just sitting here doing work one day, got a hemorrhage in my eye, and lost half the sight in it. Otherwise, I'm supremely healthy. The cause: a gene.

reply
dotcoma 44 minutes ago
Or alcohol, or whatever others are doing. In Italy, where I live, people on the ‘left’ side of the political spectrum (let’s say ‘progressives’) tend to think it’s perfectly ok to smoke dope, irregardless of what any scientific study may or may not say. This seems very weird to me.
reply
galleywest200 48 minutes ago
“They say coke kills but they don’t know when” is a refrain I have heard.
reply
cj 58 minutes ago
I mean let's face it, most of us reading this comment are medically obese and would probably live at least 2-3 years longer if we lost 20 pounds.

So why don't we?

reply
rglover 58 minutes ago
Have you ever smoked/ingested cannabis before?
reply
cynicalsecurity 53 minutes ago
Just a few years ago cannabis was presented online as a miracle drug that could cure all physical and psychological diseases. Any criticism of the sacred cannabis was strictly forbidden and dissenters were burned alive in the figurative fire of social media. Interesting how times are changing.
reply
amanaplanacanal 60 seconds ago
That was likely a reaction to the DARE/reefer madness propaganda many of us grew up with, which was obvious bullshit.
reply
goodroot 38 minutes ago
I'm not so sure.

There's always been a pragmatic center on cannabis, especially if you're somewhere where it's legalized.

In Canada, we have legal cannabis.

https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-medica...

When it was legalized, there was a documentation push and clear presentation of the downsides. In fact, as above, the language is mostly presented in the negative.

This matches the general sentiment of the broad population.

And let's not conflate things. The article is discussing smoked cannabis. This does not invalidate the essential substance and benefit of the experience. If we remove the ingestion method from the basket of effects, it's a different discussion.

Not all positive, yet smoking is clearly not good for you.

Full stop, no matter what it is.

reply
cj 46 minutes ago
See also: Bitcoin, Tesla/Musk, Apple
reply
IAmGraydon 3 hours ago
Literally no mention of ROA. It matters whether they smoke plant matter, vape, use it orally, etc. This, combined with their inability to account for a number of other factors such as tobacco use, makes this study literally useless. Earned a flag from me.
reply
mil22 3 hours ago
Agree on ROA, but the retrospective cohort study (one of two discussed in this article) did account for many other factors including tobacco use.
reply
ck2 3 hours ago
people just want their recreational drugs

it's as stupid as smoking/vaping and not even black box warnings will get people to stop

now if you need pain management I can respect that 100%

but you need to investigate Palmitoylethanolamide and Geraniol as alternatives

* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48700498

reply
balfirevic 7 minutes ago
> people just want their recreational drugs

Yes, people want to recreate, doing all kinds of activities with various levels of risk. They don't need to concern themselves with whether you can respect it.

reply
block_dagger 2 hours ago
Can you respect folks who are treating mental/emotional pain or just physical?
reply
gedy 55 minutes ago
The folks I know who attempt to 'treat' themselves with substances generally just get worse. That's not a judgement, just an observation.
reply
switchbak 33 minutes ago
There are (illegal) substances that are highly effective for treating these issues, PTSD, etc. Psilocybin, ibogain, etc. Obviously when administered correctly, with therapy, etc.

It seems to me that cannabis users aren’t seeing the benefits of the aforementioned group. My experience of cannabis stoners is that it’s used to numb out and for escapism, which certainly aligns with what you’re saying.

reply
ck2 2 hours ago
sure but you aren't going to help mental/emotional problems by getting stoned

there are far better, legal supplements to treat that anyway, less expensive too

dope activates AMPK in the brain/CNS and turns off AMPK in the body/heart it's an incredibly stupid thing to do to yourself (also why people get "the munchies")

literally why it's called dope (before dope meant "cool")

reply
sscaryterry 5 minutes ago
With enough tolerance, you don't get stoned anymore. This is where you want to be, side-effects gone, just the good stuff left.
reply
galleywest200 46 minutes ago
> less expensive too

Marijuana is dirt cheap compared to any prescription medication, at least in the US.

reply
switchbak 31 minutes ago
They did say “legal supplements”, not prescriptions. But I’m not sure what they’re actually suggesting.
reply
yieldcrv 3 hours ago
I’m annoyed by the bifurcated regulatory regime

Substances approved by the FDA are done based on specific treatments, with multiple trials and approval per use case

Substances declared scheduled are illegal by the substance itself, instead of per use case

paradoxically because there is no FDA approved use case and almost no way to get one

meaning that places in the US that diverge in legality and are ignored by the federal government have done so without any clinical trial, which would be some level of peer reviewed objective information by use case instead of the whole substance

we can’t even get a simple list of side effects, or a disclaimer about what kind of users shouldn’t use it

only anecdotes

that annoys me and it’s not just about weed

reply
dofm 3 hours ago
The US government is now in thrall to the Kratom industry though isn't it? No reason to expect any logical consistency from them.

(Literally the person currently responsible for the branch of government that keeps illegal drugs out of the country is an investor in a Kratom company)

reply
steveBK123 3 hours ago
Yes we are living in a kleptocracy / kakistocracy hybrid
reply
slipperybeluga 3 hours ago
The most ridiculous thing about cannabis remaining schedule 1 (high risk of abuse, no known medical use) so long is that there is both prescription THC and CBD. It should have been changed|to a higher (less strict) schedule decades ago with the release of marinol in 1985. Then we could have had a lot more studies being done. Needless to say, not easy to do studies on schedule 1 drugs.
reply
Scroll_Swe 2 hours ago
Good. This crap has been to normalized, especially online.
reply
RickJWagner 4 hours ago
It’s starting to look like THC ( found in gummies, too ) causes vascular problems.
reply
PaulHoule 4 hours ago
Before we got Ozempic there was great hope for

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rimonabant

which blocks the receptor that THC binds to and led to weight loss and further improvements of the “metabolic syndrome” beyond weight loss alone. Unfortunately it caused major depression in some people including suicide.

So looking at it that way it would be no surprise that cannabis causes weight gain and metabolic syndrome and in fact my experience is that if I am using cannabis I get a few kg. I think that is the THC and on top of that if you are smoking you are inhaling small particles that turn your blood into sludge (e.g. your blood is a “complex fluid” with cells in it that can be damaged) and doing damage to your lungs and capillaries and promoting inflammation and all that.

reply