Cannabis use could double risk of heart deaths, study suggests
Cannabis use may double the risk of dying from heart disease and increase the risk of stroke by 20%, according to a global review of data.
The number of people using cannabis and cannabinoids has soared over the past decade. While previous studies have linked cannabis use to cardiovascular problems, the scale of the risk has until now not been clear.
This is an important gap in light of major changes in consumption, researchers at the University of Toulouse in France said.
Related: Sadiq Khan calls for partial decriminalisation of cannabis possession
To strengthen the evidence base, they searched databases looking for large observational studies, published between 2016 and 2023, which explored cannabis use and cardiovascular outcomes.
Twenty-four studies, involving about 200 million people, were included in a pooled data analysis of the results: 17 cross-sectional studies, six cohort studies, and one case-control study.
Study participants were mostly aged between 19 and 59. And in those studies where sex was recorded, cannabis users tended to be mostly male and younger than non-users.
The analysis revealed heightened risks for cannabis use: 29% higher for acute coronary syndrome; 20% higher for stroke; and a doubling in the risk of dying from cardiovascular disease. The findings were published in the journal Heart.
The researchers acknowledged several limitations to their systematic review and meta analysis. There was a moderate to high risk of bias in most of the included studies, largely because of lack of information on missing data and imprecise measures of cannabis exposure. Most of them were observational and several used the same data.
Related: Tracking low-level cannabis use wastes police time, former London chief says
With these caveats, the researchers said their work was an exhaustive analysis of published data on the potential association between cannabis use and major cardiovascular disease and provided new insights from real-world data. 'The findings outlined by this meta analysis should enhance the general awareness of the potential of cannabis to cause cardiovascular harm.'
In a linked editorial, Prof Stanton Glantz and Dr Lynn Silver of the University of California at San Francisco said the analysis 'raises serious questions about the assumption that cannabis imposes little cardiovascular risk'.
More research is needed to clarify whether cardiovascular risks are limited to inhaled products or extend to other forms of cannabis exposure, they said. Cannabis is now generally more potent and has diversified into a wide array of inhaled high potency cannabis concentrates, synthetic psychoactive cannabinoids, and edibles, they added.
They wrote: 'How these changes affect cardiovascular risk requires clarification, as does the proportion of risk attributable to cannabinoids themselves versus particulate matter, terpenes or other components of the exposure.
'Cannabis needs to be incorporated into the framework for prevention of clinical cardiovascular disease. So too must cardiovascular disease prevention be incorporated into the regulation of cannabis markets. Effective product warnings and education on risks must be developed, required, and implemented.
'Cardiovascular and other health risks must be considered in the regulation of allowable product and marketing design as the evidence base grows. Today that regulation is focused on establishing the legal market with woeful neglect of minimising health risks.
'Specifically, cannabis should be treated like tobacco: not criminalised, but discouraged, with protection of bystanders from secondhand exposure.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Medscape
44 minutes ago
- Medscape
Head Position Matters in Stroke Care Before Thrombectomy
A flat 0° head positioning before thrombectomy was associated with a significantly less risk for early neurologic deterioration and all-cause mortality than a conventional 30° head elevation in adults with large vessel occlusion (LVO) stroke, a new study showed. METHODOLOGY: Researchers conducted the prospective, multicenter ZODIAC trial from 2018 to 2023 with 92 patients (mean age, 67 years; 52% men). All had LVO stroke confirmed on CT angiography and a viable penumbra and were eligible for thrombectomy within 24 hours of stroke. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either 0° (n = 45) or 30° (n = 47) head-of-bed positioning before thrombectomy. National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores were assessed every 10 minutes until thrombectomy began. The primary endpoint was early neurologic deterioration, defined as a worsening of ≥ 2 NIHSS points before thrombectomy. Additional outcomes were severe neurologic deterioration (worsening of ≥ 4 NIHSS points) before thrombectomy, hospital-acquired pneumonia, and all-cause death within 3 months. TAKEAWAY: Early neurologic deterioration was more common in the 30° group than in the 0° group (55% vs 2%; hazard ratio [HR], 34.4; P < .001), as was severe neurologic deterioration (n = 20 vs n = 1; HR, 23.6; P = .002). < .001), as was severe neurologic deterioration (n = 20 vs n = 1; HR, 23.6; = .002). The all-cause mortality rate at 90 days was significantly lower in the 0° group than in the 30° group (4% vs 22%; P = .03). = .03). A greater proportion of patients in the 0° group than in the 30° group showed neurologic improvement at 24 hours post-thrombectomy (87% vs 60%; odds ratio, 0.2; P = .01). = .01). No participant in either group developed hospital-acquired pneumonia. IN PRACTICE: 'Results suggest that patients awaiting thrombectomy treatment for LVO stroke should be positioned with the head at 0° to ensure clinical stability and prevent worsening,' the investigators wrote. 'We posit that 0° head positioning is a bridging maneuver to thrombectomy, protecting ischemic tissue and possibly reducing infarct progression before definitive treatment,' they added. SOURCE: This study was led by Anne W. Alexandrov, PhD, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tennessee. It was published online on June 04 in JAMA Neurology . LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its small sample size and early termination, the lack of blinding to head position, and the exclusion of data on thrombectomy decisions. Additionally, patients transferred between facilities were excluded, which may have affected the 3-month outcomes. DISCLOSURES: Funding was provided by the NIH. Several investigators reported receiving a grant or per-patient payment from NIH during the study. One also reported being a paid co-investigator on the NIH grant for imaging core lab services. Full details are listed in the original article.


Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Beyond Obesity: Eli Lilly's Genetic Medicine Bet On Verve Therapeutics
Cambridge, MA - July 11: Verve CEO and cofounder Sekar Kathiresan. Cambridge company Verve ... More Therapeutics announced on Tuesday morning that it has dosed the first patient with its new CRISPR gene editing technology called base editing, which changes a single letter of DNA into another letter to treat genetic disease. (Photo by Suzanne Kreiter/The Boston Globe via Getty Images) Eli Lilly's $1.3 billion acquisition of Verve Therapeutics represents a strategic move into cardiovascular genetic medicine. The pharmaceutical behemoth paid a substantial premium of approximately 113% above Verve's 30-day volume-weighted average trading price, triggering an 80% surge in Verve's stock price on June 17, 2025. The acquisition aligns with Eli Lilly's broader diversification strategy beyond its core diabetes and obesity treatment portfolio. Verve's innovative gene-editing technology, which permanently deactivates the PCSK9 gene to address high cholesterol, represents a breakthrough approach to cardiovascular disease treatment. This move positions Lilly to capture value in the high-impact cardiovascular therapeutics market while expanding its genetic medicine capabilities. On a separate note, see – SoundHound AI: Buy, Sell Or Hold SOUN Stock At $10? Despite the premium paid for Verve, Eli Lilly's core valuation metrics suggest reasonable positioning relative to historical norms. Trading at 57 times trailing adjusted earnings of $13.76 per share, the company's current valuation sits below its three-year average P/E ratio of 66 times. This suggests that while the stock commands a premium, it remains within established valuation parameters given the company's strong financial and operational performance as seen in Buy or Sell Eli Lilly Stock dashboard. Several key risks warrant attention in evaluating Eli Lilly stock: The Verve Therapeutics acquisition reinforces Eli Lilly's position as an attractive investment opportunity, supported by strong demand for its obesity treatments and successful diversification into high-potential therapeutic areas. That said, there always remains a meaningful risk when investing in a single, or just a handful, of stocks. Consider Trefis High Quality (HQ) Portfolio which, with a collection of 30 stocks, has a track record of comfortably outperforming the S&P 500 over the last 4-year period. Why is that? As a group, HQ Portfolio stocks provided better returns with less risk versus the benchmark index; less of a roller-coaster ride as evident in HQ Portfolio performance metrics.


Medscape
2 hours ago
- Medscape
Metabolic Dysbiosis Score Predicts Mortality Risk in ICU
A fecal metabolic dysbiosis score (MDS) predicted 30-day mortality in critically ill patients and may help identify fecal metabolites as a potential treatable trait to improve survival in these patients. METHODOLOGY: Researchers prospectively collected fecal specimens from 196 critically ill patients (median age, 64 years; about half men) admitted to the medical intensive care unit (MICU) for non-COVID-19 respiratory failure or shock. They analyzed the specimens, defined microbiome compositions by shotgun metagenomic sequencing, and quantified microbiota-derived fecal metabolites by mass spectrometry. They then correlated microbiota features and metabolites with 30-day mortality. TAKEAWAY: Overall, 30-day mortality was 30.6%. There was no significant difference between survivors and nonsurvivors regarding age, sex, race, and comorbidity burden. Microbiota compositions of the first fecal sample after MICU admission did not independently associate with 30-day mortality, nor were there associations between single metabolites and 30-day mortality. However, by integrating the fecal metabolite concentrations of 13 microbiota-derived metabolites, the team developed an MDS that predicted 30-day mortality independent of known confounders. The MDS may complement existing tools to identify patients at high risk for mortality by incorporating potentially modifiable, microbiome-related, independent contributors to host resilience. IN PRACTICE: 'Fecal metabolic dysbiosis, determined by quantitation of 13 fecal metabolites, is independently associated with 30-day mortality after MICU admission in our cohort,' the study authors wrote. 'Therefore, fecal metabolic dysbiosis represents a potentially treatable trait to improve survival in heterogeneous critically ill patients,' and the MDS may serve as a biomarker to identify patients who might benefit from such treatment. SOURCE: The study was led by Alexander P. de Porto, PhD, University of Chicago, Chicago, and was published online in Science Advances . LIMITATIONS: The study had limitations. Patients were recruited at a single tertiary academic center and needed respiratory support or a vasopressor, and thus, the results might not be representative of the entire medical ICU population. Also, patients who did not produce a fecal sample or gave a sample that was not analyzable for metagenomics and metabolomics were excluded. DISCLOSURES: The study was funded by the Duchossois Family Institute. de Porto was funded by the Niels Stensen Fellowship. The Center for Research Informatics is funded by the Biological Sciences Division at the University of Chicago, with additional funding provided by the Institute for Translational Medicine and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). One co-author was funded by the NIH/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. The authors declared having no competing interests.