- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
An increasing number of studies are showing that marijuana may not be so harmless after all.
In two new studies, to be presented later this month at the American Heart Association (AHA) Scientific Sessions 2023, researchers found that regular marijuana use increased the risk of heart attack, stroke or heart failure — even after factors like type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure and obesity were taken into account.
“Prior research shows links between marijuana use and cardiovascular disease like coronary artery disease, heart failure and atrial fibrillation, which is known to cause heart failure,” lead study author Yakubu Bene-Alhasan, M.D., MPH, a resident physician at Medstar Health in Baltimore, said in a statement. “Marijuana use isn’t without its health concerns, and our study provides more data linking its use to cardiovascular conditions.”
Just by doing a little sleuthing I found out some things that really point to this article being a bit more flawed than one might think.
From: https://themessenger.com/info/about-us
First; the news outlet breaking this story? It’s new. Brand Spanking New. So new that not even Wikipedia would recognize this site as notable.
A noble ethos; but they really haven’t been around long enough to be able to assign a lean to their content yet. I think this is telling of their goals…to publish articles on topics that they feel are getting biased coverage.
From: https://professional.heart.org/en/meetings/scientific-sessions
Hmm…
From the article: https://themessenger.com/health/marijuana-use-heart-attack-heart-failure-brain-issues
HMMMMMmmmmm…
Yeah these dates don’t match; and the author clearly did not attend this symposium to ask questions or do appropriate research on the matter.
From: https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1006523 (Emphasis added)
Hmmm. I’m beginning to suspect this study is still kind of a pre-print and it’s not yet fully finished. Not to mention the issue that this is from a news release and lots of paraphrasing is probably at play here. If I’m understanding this correctly; the primary investigation did not even consider or take into account the effects of coronary artery disease nor would it appear that the study was crafted to screen for or account with people who already have coronary artery disease or similar problems or risk factors.
Hmmmmm. Do we have a bit of an agenda maybe? It’s hard to say for certain; but it sounds like they actually do want to cast doubt on the issue with relatively weak scientific evidence.
I see. So we have an outsized number of older participants; who are far more likely to be at risk for heart problems.
Ah. Yeah. If we have been paying attention to the four year period between 2016 and 2022, we note that had a pandemic during that period too; which I suspect might also be problematic.
Yep. Older adults. It feels like they carefully selected subjects and data that would support their conclusions. Obviously this was Not a randomized controlled trial, and it should not be treated like one.