scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

What has research over the past two decades revealed about the adverse health effects of recreational cannabis use

01 Jan 2015-Addiction (Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd)-Vol. 110, Iss: 1, pp 19-35
TL;DR: The epidemiological literature in the past 20 years shows that cannabis use increases the risk of accidents and can produce dependence, and that there are consistent associations between regular cannabis use and poor psychosocial outcomes and mental health in adulthood.
Abstract: Aims To examine changes in the evidence on the adverse health effects of cannabis since 1993 Methods A comparison of the evidence in 1993 with the evidence and interpretation of the same health outcomes in 2013 Results Research in the past 20 years has shown that driving while cannabis-impaired approximately doubles car crash risk and that around one in 10 regular cannabis users develop dependence Regular cannabis use in adolescence approximately doubles the risks of early school-leaving and of cognitive impairment and psychoses in adulthood Regular cannabis use in adolescence is also associated strongly with the use of other illicit drugs These associations persist after controlling for plausible confounding variables in longitudinal studies This suggests that cannabis use is a contributory cause of these outcomes but some researchers still argue that these relationships are explained by shared causes or risk factors Cannabis smoking probably increases cardiovascular disease risk in middle-aged adults but its effects on respiratory function and respiratory cancer remain unclear, because most cannabis smokers have smoked or still smoke tobacco Conclusions The epidemiological literature in the past 20 years shows that cannabis use increases the risk of accidents and can produce dependence, and that there are consistent associations between regular cannabis use and poor psychosocial outcomes and mental health in adulthood

Summary (1 min read)

Jump to:  and [Conclusions:]

Conclusions:

  • The epidemiological literature in the past 20 years has confirmed that cannabis use increases the risk of accidents, can produce dependence and that there are consistent associations between regular cannabis use and poor psychosocial outcomes and mental health in adulthood that warrant efforts to discourage adolescent cannabis use.
  • The effects sought by cannabis users -euphoria and increased sociability -seem to be primarily produced by delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) [3] .
  • THC content has also increased in the Netherlands and probably in other developed countries [5].
  • Cannabis is usually smoked in a "joint" or with a water pipe (sometimes with tobacco added) because smoking is the most efficient way to achieve the desired psychoactive effects [3] .
  • This pattern, when continued over years and decades, predicts increased risks of many of the adverse health effects attributed to cannabis that are reviewed below [6] .

Did you find this useful? Give us your feedback

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

1
Author postprint of Hall, W. What has research over the past two decades revealed about the
adverse health effects of recreational cannabis use? Addiction 110, 19-35. 10.1111/add.12703
What has research over the past two decades revealed about the adverse
health effects of recreational cannabis use?
Wayne Hall
1,2,3
1. The University of Queensland Centre for Youth Substance Abuse Research,
The University of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research,
2. The National Addiction Centre, Kings College London
3. National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales
Paper presented at Through the Maze: Cannabis and Health International Drug Policy
Symposium Auckland, New Zealand, November 2013
Word count: 14,926 total; 9558 text

2
Author postprint of Hall, W. What has research over the past two decades revealed about the
adverse health effects of recreational cannabis use? Addiction 110, 19-35. 10.1111/add.12703
Abstract
Background and Aims: To examine changes in the evidence on the adverse health effects of
cannabis since publishing an influential review of the literature in 1993.
Method: A comparison of the epidemiological evidence and conclusions reached in a 1993
literature review with the evidence and interpretation of the same health outcomes in 2013.
Results: Epidemiological research in the past 20 years has clearly shown that driving while
cannabis-impaired approximately doubles car crash risk and that around in 10 regular
cannabis users develop a dependence syndrome. Regular cannabis use in adolescence and
young adulthood predicts approximately double the risks of: early school leaving and welfare
dependence in adulthood, and of cognitive impairment, psychoses, depression and anxiety
disorders in adulthood. Regular cannabis use in adolescence is strongly associated with the
use of other illicit drugs (50 fold in better controlled studies). These associations between
regular use and poor outcomes have persisted after controlling for plausible confounding
variables in longitudinal studies. This suggests that cannabis use plays a contributory cause in
producing these outcomes but some researchers still argue that these relationships are
explained by the effects of shared causes or risk factors. Cannabis smoking probably
increases cardiovascular disease risk in middle aged adults but its effects on respiratory
function and respiratory cancer remain unclear because most cannabis smokers have smoked
or still smoke tobacco. More research is needed to understand the effects that increases in the
THC content of cannabis products may have had on their adverse health effects.
Conclusions: The epidemiological literature in the past 20 years has confirmed that cannabis
use increases the risk of accidents, can produce dependence and that there are consistent
associations between regular cannabis use and poor psychosocial outcomes and mental health
in adulthood that warrant efforts to discourage adolescent cannabis use.

3
Author postprint of Hall, W. What has research over the past two decades revealed about the
adverse health effects of recreational cannabis use? Addiction 110, 19-35. 10.1111/add.12703
Why are we concerned about recreational cannabis use?
Over the past half century recreational cannabis use has become almost as common as
tobacco use among adolescents and young adults. Since its use was first reported over 40
years ago in the US, recreational cannabis use has spread globally to other developed
countries, and more recently, low and middle income countries [1,2].
The effects sought by cannabis users – euphoria and increased sociability - seem to be
primarily produced by delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) [3]. These effects may be
modulated by cannabidiol (CBD), a nonpsychoactive cannabinoid found in many cannabis
products [3]. The THC content is highest in the flowering tops of the female cannabis plant.
The THC content of cannabis has increased over the past 30 years, in the USA from < 2% in
1980 to 8·5% in 2006 [4]. THC content has also increased in the Netherlands and probably in
other developed countries [5]
Cannabis is usually smoked in a “joint” or with a water pipe (sometimes with tobacco added)
because smoking is the most efficient way to achieve the desired psychoactive effects [3]. A
dose of 2 to 3 mg of THC will produce a “high” in occasional users who typically share a
single joint with others. Regular users may smoke up to three to five joints of potent cannabis
a day [6].
In epidemiological studies “heavy” or “regular” cannabis use is usually defined as daily or
near daily use [6]. This pattern, when continued over years and decades, predicts increased
risks of many of the adverse health effects attributed to cannabis that are reviewed below [6].
Unless otherwise stated, the remainder of this article deals with the adverse effects of
cannabis smoking, especially the adverse health effects of regular, typically daily, cannabis
smoking.
Our approach to the literature in 1993
In 1993 there were very few epidemiological studies of the health effects of cannabis. The
literature was dominated by (1) animal studies from the 1970s on the toxicity, teratogenicity
and carcinogenicity of cannabis and THC; and (2) human laboratory studies from the late
1970s and early 1980s on the effects of sustained cannabis use over 7 to 35 days on the health

4
Author postprint of Hall, W. What has research over the past two decades revealed about the
adverse health effects of recreational cannabis use? Addiction 110, 19-35. 10.1111/add.12703
of college students. There were a small number of clinical studies of adverse health effects in
heavy cannabis users from the same period [7,8].
In the early 1990s in Australia (as elsewhere) there were strongly polarised views on the
health effects of cannabis. The published appraisals of the limited evidence were refracted
through the prism of the appraisers’ preferred policies towards cannabis (decriminalisation or
legalisation of personal use vs. intensified public education and law enforcement campaigns
to discourage use). We adopted the following approaches to maximise the chances that our
review would be seen as credible by advocates of these very different competing public
policies towards cannabis use.
First, Nadia Solowij, Jim Lemon and I applied the standard rules for making causal
inferences about the health effects of any drug to cannabis. That is, we looked for: (1)
epidemiological evidence of an association between cannabis use and the health outcome in
case-control and prospective studies; (2) evidence that reverse causation was an implausible
explanation (e.g. evidence from prospective studies that cannabis use preceded the outcome);
(3) evidence from prospective studies that had controlled for potential confounding variables
(such as other drug use and characteristics on which cannabis users differed from non-users);
and (4) clinical and experimental evidence which supported the biological plausibility of a
causal relationship [9].
Second, we specified the standard of proof that we would use in inferring that cannabis was a
probable cause of an adverse health effect, namely, evidence that made it more likely than not
that cannabis was a cause of the adverse health effect. As we pointed out, very few
conclusions could be drawn if we demanded proof beyond reasonable doubt. We also
identified possible adverse health effects that required further investigation e.g. if animal
and/or human evidence indicated an association between cannabis use and an adverse health
effect which was biologically plausible.
Third, we were prepared to infer that cannabis could have adverse health effects when it:
shared a route of administration with cigarette smoking e.g. respiratory disease, or produced
similar acute effects to those of alcohol e.g. on driving and crash risk; and had similar
pharmacological effects to other long-acting CNS depressant drugs e.g. benzodiazepines.

5
Author postprint of Hall, W. What has research over the past two decades revealed about the
adverse health effects of recreational cannabis use? Addiction 110, 19-35. 10.1111/add.12703
Fourth, we compared the probable adverse health effects of cannabis with the known adverse
health effects of alcohol and tobacco. We aimed to do so in a way that used the same
evidential standards in drawing causal inferences about the probable adverse health effects of
all three drugs.
In the following analysis I apply these criteria to the more substantial research evidence that
has accumulated over the past 20 years on the adverse health effects of cannabis. For each
type of adverse health effect, I (1) briefly summarise the conclusions drawn in 1993; (2)
explain the reasons given for these conclusions; and (3) compare the conclusions reached in
1993 with the inferences that may reasonably be drawn in 2013. The review begins with
acute adverse health effects, those that may arise from a single episode of intoxication. It then
considers the adverse health and psychological effects of regular cannabis use over periods of
years and decades.
1. Adverse acute health effects
In 1993 the evidence indicated that the risk of a fatal overdose from using cannabis was
extremely small. This remains an uncontroversial conclusion because the dose of THC that
kills rodents is extremely high. The estimated fatal dose in humans derived from animal
studies is between 15 g [10] and 70 g [3]. This is far greater amount of cannabis that even a
very heavy cannabis user could use in a day [10]. There are also no reports of fatal overdoses
in the epidemiological literature [11]. There have been case reports of cardiovascular
fatalities in seemingly otherwise healthy young men after smoking cannabis [12] that are
discussed below under cardiovascular effects of cannabis smoking.
In 1993 we identified the following adverse acute effects of cannabis use: (i) unpleasant
experiences such as anxiety, dysphoria, and paranoia, especially among naive users; (ii)
cognitive impairment, especially of attention and memory; (iii) psychomotor impairment that
could impair a person’s ability to drive a motor vehicle while intoxicated; (iv) an increased risk
of psychotic symptoms in high doses, especially among those with a personal or family history
of psychosis; and (v) an increased risk of low birth weight babies, if cannabis was used during
pregnancy.

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The findings suggest that although marijuana legalization advanced social justice goals, the small post-RML increase in risk for CUD among respondents aged 12 to 17 years and increased frequent use and Cud among adults 26 years or older in this study are a potential public health concern.
Abstract: Importance Little is known about changes in marijuana use and cannabis use disorder (CUD) after recreational marijuana legalization (RML). Objectives To examine the associations between RML enactment and changes in marijuana use, frequent use, and CUD in the United States from 2008 to 2016. Design, Setting, and Participants This survey study used repeated cross-sectional survey data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (2008-2016) conducted in the United States among participants in the age groups of 12 to 17, 18 to 25, and 26 years or older. Interventions Multilevel logistic regression models were fit to obtain estimates of before-vs-after changes in marijuana use among respondents in states enacting RML compared to changes in other states. Main Outcomes and Measures Self-reported past-month marijuana use, past-month frequent marijuana use, past-month frequent use among past-month users, past-year CUD, and past-year CUD among past-year users. Results The study included 505 796 respondents consisting of 51.51% females and 77.24% participants 26 years or older. Among the total, 65.43% were white, 11.90% black, 15.36% Hispanic, and 7.31% of other race/ethnicity. Among respondents aged 12 to 17 years, past-year CUD increased from 2.18% to 2.72% after RML enactment, a 25% higher increase than that for the same age group in states that did not enact RML (odds ratio [OR], 1.25; 95% CI, 1.01-1.55). Among past-year marijuana users in this age group, CUD increased from 22.80% to 27.20% (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.01-1.59). Unmeasured confounders would need to be more prevalent in RML states and increase the risk of cannabis use by 1.08 to 1.11 times to explain observed results, indicating results that are sensitive to omitted variables. No associations were found among the respondents aged 18 to 25 years. Among respondents 26 years or older, past-month marijuana use after RML enactment increased from 5.65% to 7.10% (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.16-1.40), past-month frequent use from 2.13% to 2.62% (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.08-1.41), and past-year CUD from 0.90% to 1.23% (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.08-1.71); these results were more robust to unmeasured confounding. Among marijuana users in this age group, past-month frequent marijuana use and past-year CUD did not increase after RML enactment. Conclusions and Relevance This study’s findings suggest that although marijuana legalization advanced social justice goals, the small post-RML increase in risk for CUD among respondents aged 12 to 17 years and increased frequent use and CUD among adults 26 years or older in this study are a potential public health concern. To undertake prevention efforts, further studies are warranted to assess how these increases occur and to identify subpopulations that may be especially vulnerable.

315 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The current state of knowledge about vulnerability factors, the variations in types of cannabis, and the relationship between these and cognition and addiction are reviewed.
Abstract: In an increasing number of states and countries, cannabis now stands poised to join alcohol and tobacco as a legal drug. Quantifying the relative adverse and beneficial effects of cannabis and its constituent cannabinoids should therefore be prioritized. Whereas newspaper headlines have focused on links between cannabis and psychosis, less attention has been paid to the much more common problem of cannabis addiction. Certain cognitive changes have also been attributed to cannabis use, although their causality and longevity are fiercely debated. Identifying why some individuals are more vulnerable than others to the adverse effects of cannabis is now of paramount importance to public health. Here, we review the current state of knowledge about such vulnerability factors, the variations in types of cannabis, and the relationship between these and cognition and addiction.

303 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors assess trends and variation in the market share of product types and potency sold in a legal cannabis retail market, and estimate how potency and purchase quantity influence price variation for cannabis flower.
Abstract: Aims To (1) assess trends and variation in the market share of product types and potency sold in a legal cannabis retail market, and (2) estimate how potency and purchase quantity influence price variation for cannabis flower Design Secondary analysis of publicly available data from Washington State's cannabis straceability system spanning July 7, 2014 to September 30, 2016 Descriptive statistics and linear regressions assessed variation and trends in cannabis product variety and potency Hedonic regressions estimated how purchase quantity and potency influence cannabis flower price variation Setting Washington State, USA Participants (1) 44,482,176 million cannabis purchases, including (2) 31,052,123 cannabis flower purchases after trimming price and quantity outliers Measurements Primary outcome measures were (1) monthly expenditures on cannabis, total delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) concentration, and cannabidiol (CBD) concentration by product type; and (2) excise-tax-inclusive price per gram of cannabis flower Key covariates for the hedonic price regressions included quantity purchased, THC, and CBD Findings Traditional cannabis flowers still account for the majority of spending (666%), but the market share of extracts for inhalation increased by 1458% between October 2014 and September 2016, now composing 212% of sales The average THC-level for cannabis extracts is more than triple that for cannabis flowers (687% compared to 206%) For flower products, there is a statistically significant relationship between price per gram and both THC [coefficient = 0012; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0011 to 0013] and CBD [coefficient = 0017; CI = 0015 to 0019] The estimated discount elasticity is -006 [CI = –007 to –005] Conclusions In the state of Washington, USA, the legal cannabis market is currently dominated by high-THC cannabis flower, and features growing expenditures on extracts For cannabis flower, both THC and CBD are associated with higher per-gram prices, and there are small but significant quantity discounts

251 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors reviewed the drug policy literature to identify plausible effects of legalizing adult recreational use on cannabis price and availability, factors that may increase or limit these effects, and indicators of cannabis use and cannabis-related harm that can be monitored to assess the effects of these policy changes.
Abstract: BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Since 2012 four US states have legalized the retail sale of cannabis for recreational use by adults and more are likely to follow. This report aimed to (1) briefly describe the regulatory regimes so far implemented; (2) outline their plausible effects on cannabis use and cannabis-related harm; and (3) suggest what research is needed to evaluate the public health impact of these policy changes. METHOD: We reviewed the drug policy literature to identify: (1) plausible effects of legalizing adult recreational use on cannabis price and availability; (2) factors that may increase or limit these effects; (3) pointers from studies of the effects of legalizing medical cannabis use; and (4) indicators of cannabis use and cannabis-related harm that can be monitored to assess the effects of these policy changes. RESULTS: Legalization of recreational use will probably increase use in the long run but the magnitude and timing of any increase is uncertain. It will be critical to monitor: cannabis use in household and high school surveys; cannabis sales; the number of cannabis plants legally produced; and the THC content of cannabis. Indicators of cannabis-related harms that should be monitored include: car crash fatalities and injuries; emergency department presentations; presentations to addiction treatment services; and the prevalence of regular cannabis use among young people in mental health services and the criminal justice system. CONCLUSIONS: Plausible effects of legalizing recreational cannabis use in the USA include substantially reducing the price of cannabis and increasing heavy use and some types of cannabis-related harm among existing users. In the longer term it may also increase the number of new users.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. Language: en

251 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Recovery of cannabis-impaired driving is associated with a statistically significant increase in motor vehicle crash risk, and the increase is of low to medium magnitude.
Abstract: AIMS: To determine whether and to what extent acute cannabis intoxication increases motor vehicle crash risk. DESIGN: Study 1 replicates two published meta-analyses, correcting for methodological shortcomings. Study 2 is an updated meta-analysis using 28 estimates from 21 observational studies. These included studies from three earlier reviews, supplemented by results from a structured search in Web of Science and Google Scholar and by the personal libraries of the research team. Risk estimates were combined using random effects models and meta-regression techniques. SETTING: Study 1 replicates the analysis of Asbridge et al., based on 9 studies from 5 countries, published 1982-2007; and Li et al., based on 9 studies from 6 countries, published 2001-10. Study 2 involves studies from 13 countries published in the period 1982-2015. PARTICIPANTS: In Study 1, total counts extracted totalled 50 877 (27 967 cases, 22 910 controls) for Asbridge et al. and 93 229 (4 236 cases and 88 993 controls) for Li et al. Study 2 used confounder-adjusted estimates where available (combined sample size of 222 511) and crude counts from the remainder (17 228 total counts), giving a combined sample count of 239 739. MEASUREMENTS: Odds-ratios were used from case-control studies and adjusted odds-ratio analogues from culpability studies. The impact of the substantial variation in confounder adjustment was explored in subsample analyses. FINDINGS: Study 1 substantially revises previous risk estimates downwards, with both the originally reported point estimates lying outside the revised confidence interval. Revised estimates were similar to those of Study 2, which found cannabis-impaired driving associated with a statistically significant risk increase of low-to-moderate magnitude (random effects model odds ratio 1.36 (1.15-1.61), meta-regression odds ratio 1.22 (1.1-1.36)). Subsample analyses found higher odds-ratio estimates for case control studies, low study quality, limited control of confounders, medium quality use data, and not controlling for alcohol intoxication. CONCLUSIONS: Acute cannabis intoxication is associated with a statistically significant increase in motor vehicle crash risk. The increase is of low to medium magnitude. Remaining selection effects in the studies used may limit causal interpretation of the pooled estimates. Language: en

228 citations

References
More filters
05 Dec 2014
TL;DR: The EMCDDA Programme 2, 'Analysis of responses', set out to identify how social reintegration is understood in each Member State and to map the availability of social reIntegration facilities in Member States according to these national perceptions.
Abstract: INTRODUCTION The issue of social rehabilitation and reintegration (hereafter social reintegration2) is mentioned under the third strategy target of the EU Action Plan 2000–2004. The third EU strategy target is to 'substantially increase the number of successfully treated addicts', and point 3.1.3.4 instructs that 'Member States [are] to ensure that adequate attention is paid to social and professional rehabilitation and reintegration of former addicts'. However, social reintegration is also linked to social exclusion, which is mentioned in chapter 2 of the EU Action Plan, where it is stated that 'the EMCDDA [is] to develop indicators on drug-related crime, the availability of illicit drugs (including at street level) and drug-related social exclusion'. For the EMCDDA, social reintegration comes under strategy target four – that is, as a response to social exclusion – however, target two is clearly also relevant. Social exclusion is often perceived as a cause of problem drug use, although many see it as a consequence of problem drug use. We will not elaborate on this further here, except to note that social exclusion and problem drug use are two phenomena that are very closely interlinked and that social reintegration is a possible response to both. The EMCDDA Programme 2, 'Analysis of responses', set out to identify how social reintegration is understood in each Member State and to map the availability of social reintegration facilities in Member States according to these national perceptions. It became evident at an early stage that this would be a complex task, involving extensive data collection, as national reports generally provided insufficient data on this specific subject. eight countries turned out to be difficult to map and so, in February 2002, the EMCDDA launched a call for tender for a project, 'Mapping social reintegration services in EU countries'. 3 The aim of this project was to describe the state of the art of social reintegration in the following eight countries: The research specifications, to investigate 'the state of the art of social reintegration', suggested that the following should be identified for each of the eight countries: 1 Other contributors will be mentioned in the respective chapters. 2 Our country studies so far have shown that the term 'rehabilitation' is used ambiguously across Europe – from low-threshold refuges, to normal treatment, to actual reintegration into society. For this reason, we shall use the term 'social reintegration' in this report, as this is used much more …

2,183 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: There is now sufficient evidence to warn young people that using cannabis could increase their risk of developing a psychotic illness later in life, although evidence for affective outcomes is less strong.

2,057 citations


"What has research over the past two..." refers background or methods in this paper

  • ...An attempted meta-analysis of similar studies [97] concluded that the designs of these studies and measures used were too varied to quantify risk meaningfully, and most of the studies had not excluded reverse causation or controlled adequately for confounding....

    [...]

  • ...A meta-analysis of these studies [97] reported a modest association between cannabis use and depressive disorders (OR = 1....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The aims of this review are to systematically identify and collate studies describing the prevalence of schizophrenia, to summarize the findings of these studies, and to explore selected factors that may influence prevalence estimates.
Abstract: Background Understanding the prevalence of schizophrenia has important implications for both health service planning and risk factor epidemiology. The aims of this review are to systematically identify and collate studies describing the prevalence of schizophrenia, to summarize the findings of these studies, and to explore selected factors that may influence prevalence estimates. Methods and Findings Studies with original data related to the prevalence of schizophrenia (published 1965–2002) were identified via searching electronic databases, reviewing citations, and writing to authors. These studies were divided into ‘‘core’’ studies, ‘‘migrant’’ studies, and studies based on ‘‘other special groups.’’ Between- and within-study filters were applied in order to identify discrete prevalence estimates. Cumulative plots of prevalence estimates were made and the distributions described when the underlying estimates were sorted according to prevalence type (point, period, lifetime, and lifetime morbid risk). Based on combined prevalence estimates, the influence of selected key variables was examined (sex, urbanicity, migrant status, country economic index, and study quality). A total of 1,721 prevalence estimates from 188 studies were identified. These estimates were drawn from 46 countries, and were based on an estimated 154,140 potentially overlapping prevalent cases. We identified 132 core studies, 15 migrant studies, and 41 studies based on other special groups. The median values per 1,000 persons (10%–90% quantiles) for the distributions for point, period, lifetime, and lifetime morbid risk were 4.6 (1.9–10.0), 3.3 (1.3– 8.2), 4.0 (1.6–12.1), and 7.2 (3.1–27.1), respectively. Based on combined prevalence estimates, we found no significant difference (a) between males and females, or (b) between urban, rural, and mixed sites. The prevalence of schizophrenia in migrants was higher compared to nativeborn individuals: the migrant-to-native-born ratio median (10%–90% quantile) was 1.8 (0.9–6.4). When sites were grouped by economic status, prevalence estimates from ‘‘least developed’’ countries were significantly lower than those from both ‘‘emerging’’ and ‘‘developed’’ sites (p = 0.04). Studies that scored higher on a quality score had significantly higher prevalence estimates ( p= 0.02).

1,824 citations


"What has research over the past two..." refers background in this paper

  • ...Our best estimate is that the risk of developing a psychosis doubles from approximately 7 in 1000 in nonusers [102] to 14 in 1000 among regular cannabis users....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
23 Nov 2002-BMJ
TL;DR: This is the first prospective longitudinal study of adolescent cannabis use as a risk factor for adult schizophreniform disorder, taking into account childhood psychotic symptoms, and the Dunedin multidisciplinary health and development study has a 96% follow up rate at age 26.
Abstract: Papers pp 1195, 1199 The strongest evidence that cannabis use may be a risk factor for later psychosis comes from a Swedish cohort study which found that heavy cannabis use at age 18 increased the risk of later schizophrenia sixfold. 1 2 This study could not establish whether adolescent cannabis use was a consequence of pre-existing psychotic symptoms rather than a cause. We present the first prospective longitudinal study of adolescent cannabis use as a risk factor for adult schizophreniform disorder, taking into account childhood psychotic symptoms3 antedating cannabis use. View this table: Association between cannabis use in adolescence and schizophrenia and depressive symptoms and disorders at age 26 (n=759), controlling for childhood psychotic symptoms and use of other drugs in adolescence The Dunedin multidisciplinary health and development study (a study of a general population birth cohort of 1037 individuals born in Dunedin, New Zealand, in 1972-3)4 has a 96% follow up rate at age 26. It obtained information on psychotic symptoms at age 11 and drug use at ages 15 and 18 from self reports and assessed …

1,315 citations


"What has research over the past two..." refers result in this paper

  • ...The bestdesigned and most informative of these studies have been two New Zealand birth cohort studies whose members lived through a historical period during which a large proportion used cannabis during adolescence and young adulthood; sufficient numbers of these had used cannabis often enough, and for long enough, to provide information about the adverse effects of regular and sustained cannabis use....

    [...]

  • ...A recent meta-analysis of three Australian and New Zealand longitudinal studies [72] showed that the earlier the age of first cannabis use, the lower the chances of completing school and undertaking postsecondary training....

    [...]

  • ...For example, a New Zealand case–control study [116] of suicide attempts that resulted in hospitalization found that 16% of the 302 suicide attempters had a cannabis disorder compared with 2% of 1028 community controls....

    [...]

  • ...This study assessed changes in IQ between age 13 (before cannabis was used) and at age 38 in 1037 New Zealanders born in 1972 or 1973 [63]....

    [...]

  • ...A New Zealand case–control study of lung cancer in 79 adults under the age of 55 years and 324 community controls [145] found a dose–response relationship between frequency of cannabis use and lung cancer risk....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Basic descriptive findings from new research on the epidemiology of drug dependence syndromes are reported, conducted as part of the National Comorbidity Survey (NCS).
Abstract: Studying prevalence of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (3rd ed., rev., American Psychiatric Association, 1987) drug dependence among Americans 15-54 years old, we found about 1 in 4 (24%) had a history of tobacco dependence; about 1 in 7 (14%) had a history of alcohol dependence; and about 1 in 13 (7.5%) had a history of dependence on an inhalant or controlled drug. About one third of tobacco smokers had developed tobacco dependence and about 15% of drinkers had become alcohol dependent. Among users of the other drugs, about 15% had become dependent. Many more Americans age 15-54 have been affected by dependence on psychoactive substances than by other psychiatric disturbances now accorded a higher priority in mental health service delivery systems, prevention, and sponsored research programs. The aim of this article is to report basic descriptive findings from new research on the epidemiology of drug dependence syndromes, conducted as part of the National Comorbidity Survey (NCS). In this study, our research team secured a nationally representative sample and applied standardized diagnostic assessments in a way that allows direct comparisons across prevalence estimates and cor

1,239 citations

Frequently Asked Questions (10)
Q1. What are the contributions in "What has research over the past two decades revealed about the adverse health effects of recreational cannabis use?" ?

This suggests that cannabis use plays a contributory cause in producing these outcomes but some researchers still argue that these relationships are explained by the effects of shared causes or risk factors. 

After statistical adjustment for a personal history of psychiatric disorder by age 18 and parental divorce, those who had used cannabis 10 or more times by age 18 were 2.3 times more likely to receive a diagnosis of schizophrenia than those who had not used cannabis. 

The order of involvement with cannabis and other illicit drugs, and the increased likelihood of using other illicit drugs, are the most consistent findings in epidemiological studies of drug use in young adults. 

In summary, the epidemiological and laboratory evidence on the acute effects of cannabis strongly suggests that cannabis users who drive while intoxicated increase their risk of motor vehicle crashes 2-3 times [20] as against 6-15 times for comparable intoxicating doses of alcohol. 

The authors estimated that early use of cannabis contributed to 17% of the risk of failing to complete high school or post-secondary training. 

Conscripts who had tried cannabis by age 18 were 2.4 times more likely to be diagnosed with schizophrenia over the next 15 years than those who had not [91]. 

It was also difficult to interpret the few studies that did reported increased rates of birth defects (e.g [22]) because cannabis users were more likely to smoke tobacco, and use alcohol and other illicit drugs during pregnancy [23]. 

In the past 20 years another cohort of low income women with higher rates of regular cannabis use [31] has reported lower scores on memory and verbal scales of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale at age 3 in children born to 655 low income women (half African-American and half Caucasian) in Pittsburgh between 1990 and 1995. 

An attempted meta-analysis of similar studies [97] concluded that the designs of these studies and measures used were too varied to meaningfully quantify risk and most of the studies had not excluded reverse causation or adequately controlled for confounding. 

Cognitive impairmentIn 1993 case-control studies reported that regular cannabis users had poorer cognitive performance than non-cannabis-using controls but it was unclear whether this was because cannabis use impaired cognitive performance, persons with poorer cognitive functioning were more likely to become regular cannabis users, or some combination of the two [9].