Huge heart attack risk linked to dirty habit that MILLIONS of Americans are doing daily
Regularly smoking weed or consuming edibles may raise the risk of suffering a heart attack, a study suggests.
The team from the University of California San Francisco who made the find warns it is 'more evidence cannabis use is not benign.'
It also comes amid an alarming rise in unexplained heart attacks in young Americans, which experts are still trying to unpack.
In the new study, researchers found people who smoked marijuana or took edibles at least three times a week had up to 52 percent reduced blood vessel function compared to those who never used cannabis.
And endothelial cells, which line the blood vessels, were less able to regulate blood flow and deliver crucial oxygen throughout the body.
This causes blood vessels to constrict, raising the risk of blood clots, which can lead to coronary artery disease, heart attacks and stroke.
While recent studies have linked cannabis smoking to heart disease, the new report is one of the first to show heart damage from edibles containing THC, the psychoactive component of cannabis.
Matthew Springer, study co-author and professor of medicine at UCSF, told CNN: 'We're looking at a window in the future, showing the early changes that may explain why smoking marijuana has been linked to later heart disease.'
About 18million Americans use marijuana daily or nearly every day.
Cannabis use is also on the rise, largely due to recent decriminalization across the US. From 1992 to 2022, for example, daily and near-daily use has seen a 15-fold rise.
The study, published this week in JAMA Cardiology, recruited 55 healthy adults ages 18 to 50 who neither smoked tobacco nor vaped. They also were not regularly exposed to secondhand smoke.
They were then sorted into three groups based on chronic cannabis use: using marijuana three times per week for at least a year, consuming at least three THC edibles a week for a year or not using cannabis at all.
Cannabis users were 30 years old on average while nonusers were 28.
None of the participants had pre-existing heart conditions.
They found people who smoked marijuana or used edibles at least three times a week performed worse on tests measuring blood vessel function.
Marijuana smokers had a 42 percent reduction in vascular function than controls, while THC edible users had a 52 percent reduction compared to those who never used cannabis.
This was determined through heart scans.
Endothelial cells, which line the blood vessels and regulate blood flow, released less nitric oxide in people who regularly smoked marijuana or took edibles.
Nitric oxide helps blood vessels dilate and deliver vital oxygen throughout the body.
This impaired function causes blood vessels to constrict, increasing the risk of inflammation and blood clots, which can lead to heart disease and increase the risk of a heart attack.
Nearly 1million Americans every year die of cardiovascular disease, a group of conditions including coronary artery disease, heart attack and stroke.
It's America's leading cause of death, with cancer and accidental injuries following closest behind.
Because the average participant in the new study was 30 years old, the study could help explain why young Americans are increasingly suffering heart attacks.
Previous research has suggested the use of drugs like marijuana, as well as conditions like Covid and type 2 diabetes, may be to blame.
However, the researchers cautioned the study only shows an association between cannabis and heart function and can't prove direct causation.
There were several limitations, including the study's small sample size and the lack of comparison between different strains of cannabis.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
As the first born, am I the smartest? Maybe – but siblings shape us in far more interesting ways
A new book about sibling relationships, The Family Dynamic by Susan Dominus, examines how things like birth order and the specific achievements of your siblings affect a person's life trajectory. As such, some of my favourite research is back in the public eye: the studies that suggest that I, as the eldest of three children, am the cleverest. I'm kidding. I don't actually think this is true in my own sibling group, but sure, I'll take it, and say so in the national press: I'm smarter than you guys, science confirms. I am very interested in siblings and their influences, though. So much so that I wrote my first novel about a brother-sister relationship. Siblings shape you in ways that are less deliberate than parents, which means their influence is less discussed, though just as important. That said, birth order has remained a public fascination, with parents agonising over whether a middle child is overlooked or eldest is overburdened. I definitely have classic 'eldest daughter syndrome': the tendency for the oldest girl in a family to take on roles of responsibility. Planning of family matters has generally fallen to me in the past, and I remain a planner. I like control to the freakish degree that I eat the same breakfast and lunch every single weekday and run my to-do list with the iron fist of a navy Seal commander. Still, I have often thought that some of the well-worn sibling birth order archetypes – the type-A eldest daughter, the laid-back middle sibling, the rebellious youngest child – must be too simple. They sat in my mind alongside things like star signs: fun but ultimately baseless ways to parse the eternal puzzle of why people are the way that they are. But it seems, as Dominus found, that the studies do bear this stuff out. Eldest children apparently outstrip their younger counterparts in cognitive tests by as early as their first birthday, probably due to the increased parental attention they receive during the however-brief period they are an only child. And sibling influence can be incredibly powerful. Dominus interviews families in which each child went on to achieve success in very different fields, and were spurred to do so specifically by what their siblings were doing. My brother was a quiet little boy, either naturally or because I did all his talking for him. We were very close as children – I would get my hair cut short like his, and enjoyed it if people mistook us for twins. But we grew into quite different people, and that is probably no accident. For instance, he went on to pursue Stem subjects, and I pursued the humanities: the boy whose sister spoke for him went for numbers and concepts, and I went for words. Age gaps between siblings can also complicate the effect of birth order. My sister is nearly 10 years younger than me, whereas my brother is only 18 months my junior. She told me: 'I feel like being the youngest, with two siblings quite a bit older than me, meant that I sculpted my perception of what is 'cool' on a pretty much even mix of your respective interests.' She's very into music (my brother) and also video games (me). I think she's also more emotionally robust than I am. We both wonder whether this is partly the result of getting a front-row seat to all of mine and our brother's chaotic decisions and teenage crises, and being able to take notes. By now, my siblings and I are, roughly, who we're going to be. We're all adults. Perhaps it is less that we are now honing ourselves consciously or subconsciously to resemble or differ from one another, but that we act as vivid mirrors for each other to really see ourselves in. Sometimes, in the company of my brother and sister, I have an ambient sense of something similar to not liking myself very much. Partly, it's that near-universal experience of regression in the family home: we start to occupy childish roles to befit the dynamics first built in childhood. But it's also that these are people who have seen every side of me. And they have not been afraid to challenge my less lovable attributes. That feeling of not liking myself is maybe more accurately a feeling of being truly, wholly known for my best and worst traits. My irritability, my belief that I know better than others, my melodrama. I see their flaws too, and they know that I see them. Not unexpectedly, some of these flaws are shared. I asked my brother about this, and he said: 'Seeing characteristics of yourself in people you love is quite helpful. Like, oh maybe I'm not that bad: I don't hate them for the way they are, but the opposite.' And for all that we bicker, it's a beautiful thing to be loved by people who, unlike your parents, are not hard-wired to love you unconditionally, but who know you just as well as your parents do, and for almost as long. Imogen West-Knights is a writer and journalist
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Going Nuclear by Tim Gregory review – a boosterish case for atomic energy
There is something biblical about the fraternal relationship between the atomic bomb and the nuclear reactor. Both involve bombarding uranium-235 atoms with neutrons to produce a chain reaction via nuclear fission. Both were made possible in the same instant, at 3.25pm on 2 December 1942, when the Manhattan Project's Enrico Fermi orchestrated the first human-made chain reaction in the squash court of the University of Chicago. 'The flame of nuclear fission brought us to the forked road of promise and peril,' writes Tim Gregory. The bomb came first, of course, but atomic dread coexisted with tremendous optimism about what President Eisenhower dubbed 'atoms for peace': the potential of controlled fission to generate limitless energy. As David Lilienthal of the US Atomic Energy Commission observed, atom-splitting thus inspired a pseudo-religious binary: 'It would either destroy us all or it would bring about the millennium.' Nuclear optimism was shattered by the 1986 Chornobyl disaster but, as the subtitle of his book advertises, Gregory is determined to bring it back. A nuclear chemist at Sellafield, where the Queen opened the world's first commercial nuclear reactor in 1956, he's a cheerleader for Team Millennium. Writing in a Promethean spirit of 'rational and daring optimism', this self-proclaimed 'nuclear environmentalist' believes nuclear energy is the only viable route to net zero by 2050. 'The nucleus could power the world securely, reliably, affordably, and – crucially – sustainably,' he declares. Gregory is an excellent popular science writer: clear as a bell and gently humorous. If you want to understand the workings of fission or radioactivity, he's your man. But he is also an evangelical pitchman whose chapters on the atom's myriad wonders can read rather like high-end sales brochures. Radiation? Not a problem! Less dangerous, in fact, than radiophobia, 'the irrational fear of radiation'. High-level nuclear waste? It can be buried in impregnable catacombs like Finland's state-of-the-art Onkalo or, better yet, recycled through breeder reactors. Gregory wants the reader to learn to stop worrying and love the reactor. Of course, there is a radioactive elephant in the room, which Gregory eventually confronts in the chapter We Need to Talk About Chernobyl. Like Three Mile Island (1979) and Fukushima (2011), the Soviet disaster caused reactor construction to crash. Europe built more reactors in the five years before Chornobyl than it has in the four decades since. The Fukushima meltdown spooked Germany into dismantling its entire nuclear programme. Whereas France, which has one-eighth of the planet's 441 active reactors, currently generates two-thirds of its electricity from nuclear, Germany produces none, cancelling out its gains from renewables and making it painfully reliant on Russian gas. Gregory argues that the construction of reactors like Hinkley Point C in Somerset runs behind schedule and over budget because we've lost the habit, even as China and South Korea streak ahead. To Gregory, all this is a tragic case of radiophobia. Only around 50 fatalities have been directly attributed to radiation from Chornobyl, while the official death tolls for Fukushima and Three Mile Island are one and zero respectively. Roll them all together and the same number of people are lost roughly every three minutes to air pollution caused by burning fossil fuels. No doubt, the kneejerk rejection of nuclear energy can be ignorant bordering on superstitious, but safety concerns demand more space and consideration. Oddly, Gregory doesn't mention Serhii Plokhy's 2022 book Atoms and Ashes, which explains how the Fukushima disaster could have been much worse if not for the courage and judgment of a few key officials. More offputtingly, he attacks renewable energy with roughly the same arguments used by rightwing critics of net zero, warning of 'energy scarcity, industrial wind-down, and food insecurity' if we choose wind and sun over good old uranium-235. But surely it is not a zero-sum game? After a while, Gregory's relentless boosterism begins to lose its persuasive power and he sounds rather like the blithely confident scientist in the first act of a disaster movie. Even though I'm personally convinced that anybody focused on the climate emergency would be foolish to dismiss nuclear out of hand, I suspect that sceptics may require an argument that sounds a little less like 'Calm down, dear.' Going Nuclear: How the Atom Will Save the World by Tim Gregory is published by Bodley Head (£25). To support the Guardian order your copy at Delivery charges may apply.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Jessica Alba shows off her toned and tanned physique in a patterned bikini as she enjoys sun-soaked getaway to focus on 'friendship and selfcare'
She is never shy showing off her physique when on her many holidays. And Jessica Alba was flaunting her toned and tanned physique as she enjoyed her latest sun-soaked getaway this weekend. The actress, 44, slipped into a skimpy white and beige patterned two piece as she flashed a peace sign by the pool. Jessica had her abs and toned legs on display as she accessorised with a sunhat and shades while another shot showed her cooling off in the pool. After her divorce from Cash Warren, she penned in the caption of her post: 'Channeling chill - breathwork - friendship and selfcare.' From A-list scandals and red carpet mishaps to exclusive pictures and viral moments, subscribe to the In her slew of snaps she also posed in a strapless leopard print swimsuit while spending time at a luxury spa where they were staying. Her holiday comes after she was recently spotted kissing and cozying up to a new mystery man just weeks after her divorce from Cash Warren. But recently an insider has shed light into Jessica 's life back on the market. While she seemed to have a potential new beau in London, a source insisted to Us Weekly that Jessica isn't dating anyone in particular at the moment and is merely 'embracing' the attention coming her way. '[Jessica has] gone on dates, but she isn't seeing anyone specific right now,' the source said. 'She's having a lot of fun going out with her girlfriends and being more spontaneous. She's embracing all the attention she's getting,' they added. Indeed, Jessica seems to be living it up now that she is single again. Her Instagram account shows her traveling to numerous destinations where bathing suits are a must, and she even celebrated her birthday with her gal pals in Las Vegas. 'A vegas birthday was not in the cards, but a time was definitely had,' Jessica mused on Instagram as she shared snaps from her travels to Sin City in early May. 'Grateful for the women who have been by my side through every season with nothing but love & support. No matter where we are in the world, we have the best time when we're together - te amo.' The post even included the L.E. Bowman poem 'A New Kind of Sexy', a telling clue of her post-divorce attitude. While Jessica may be an independent woman, she has had some company in recent weeks. Earlier this month Alba was spotted enjoying a very cosy-looking stroll with a man in London's Regent's Park. An onlooker told The Sun that the pair could be seen kissing on deckchairs and embracing as they strolled through the park. They said: 'They looked very intimate. They were hugging and holding hands as they walked through the park together. 'They rented out some deck chairs and they were sitting on them kissing. 'It looked very much like a new relationship.' Jessica cited 'irreconcilable differences' as the reasoning behind her separation from Cash when it was announced earlier this year, with him soon filing afterwards. During the course of their marriage, the former couple welcomed three children: Honor, 16, Haven, 13, and Hayes, seven - and both have requested for joint physical and legal custody of their kids. Eight months before it was revealed that Jessica and Cash were 'set for divorce,' the Hollywood star uploaded her final anniversary post to celebrate 16 years of marriage. At the time, Alba shared an assortment of images to her main Instagram page of the pair from over the years. She also penned a cryptic caption to accompany the snaps while reflecting on how they have gone through 'thick and thin.' '16 years of marriage, 20 years together and forever to go… Happy Anniversary @cashwarren,' the mother-of-three began. 'I'm proud of us for making it this far. There is no real set of rules or guidance that can ever prepare you for what it means to commit to another person and choose to be family.' The Honey star concluded with, 'Through thick and thin we have continually found our way back to each other and have chosen one another. Cheers to us, I love you.'
