Use the labels in the right column to find what you want. Or you can go thru them one by one, there are only 33,991 posts. Searching is done in the search box in upper left corner. I blog on anything to do with stroke. DO NOT DO ANYTHING SUGGESTED HERE AS I AM NOT MEDICALLY TRAINED, YOUR DOCTOR IS, LISTEN TO THEM. BUT I BET THEY DON'T KNOW HOW TO GET YOU 100% RECOVERED. I DON'T EITHER BUT HAVE PLENTY OF QUESTIONS FOR YOUR DOCTOR TO ANSWER.
Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain!trillions and trillions of neuronsthatDIEeach day because there areNOeffective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.
What this blog is for:
My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.
Showing posts with label not medically trained. Show all posts
Showing posts with label not medically trained. Show all posts
Don't follow me, I'm not medically trained, and I don't have a Dr. in front of my name.
An ectopic heartbeat is an extra or early heartbeat that interrupts your normal heart rhythm. It can make your heart feel like it skipped a beat, paused, or gave a strong thump. Most extra beats are harmless, very common, and do not mean you have a serious heart disease.
Lower rates of ectopic heart beats on days in which habitual users inhaled cannabis vs. days of nonuse.
Cannabis use in this cohort had no impact on daily steps, sleep duration or blood glucose.
Inhaled cannabis use was associated with acute reductions in ectopic
heart beats vs. nonuse, mainly driven by reductions in premature atrial
contractions, researchers reported.
The present study among habitual cannabis users identified certain
acute effects of the drug on cardiac function, but no impact on daily
steps count, sleep duration and glucose changes on days of use vs.
nonuse was observed, according to data published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.
“Recreational cannabis is now legal in more than half the U.S. and is
becoming more commonly used, but we know very little about the true
health effects of the drug. At the same time, there is a growing
interest in identifying modifiable risk factors that may influence risks
of common heart rhythm disturbances. Prior work related to cannabis and
arrhythmias has generally suggested harm, but has been conflicting,” Gregory M. Marcus, MD, MAS,
cardiologist and Endowed Professor of Atrial Fibrillation Research in
the division of cardiology at the University of California, San
Francisco, told Healio.
The MARY-JANE trial was a prospective, randomized study conducted at
the University of California, San Francisco. Researchers enrolled 108 habitual cannabis users
who reported inhaled cannabis use at least once in the past month and 4
or more days within a week at least once in the past year. Participants
had to be willing to abstain from cannabis use for at least 2
consecutive days over the 14-day trial period, according to the study
methods.
Participants received a continuously recording ECG patch (Zio XT
Patch, iRhythm), a Bluetooth-enabled, wrist-worn accelerometer and sleep
monitoring device (Fitbit INSPIRE devices, Fitbit) and a
Bluetooth-enabled continuous glucose monitor device (Dexcom G7, Dexcom).
The primary outcome was daily cardiac ectopy, defined as total daily
premature atrial and ventricular contractions. Mean daily steps, sleep
duration per night and daily glucose changes were also evaluated,
according to the study methods.
The researchers reported that although the mean age of study
participants was 32 years, individuals representing each decade of life
from age 21 into their 70s participated (59% women; 37% white).
Adherence to daily randomization was reported to be a challenge in
the present study. However, the researchers wrote “it should not explain
false positive results with regard to our prespecified primary endpoint
or assessments of autonomic tone”
Inhaled cannabis was associated with a 9% reduction in ectopic beats (rate ratio [RR] = 0.91; 95% CI, 0.85-0.98; P = .02); a 10% reduction in daily premature atrial contractions (RR = 0.9; 95% CI, 0.82-0.97; P = .012); and no change in premature ventricular contractions (P = .83) compared with nonuse, according to the study.
Researchers reported that each inhalation of cannabis was associated
with an approximately 2% reduction in ectopic beats (RR = 0.98; 95% CI,
0.97-0.99; P = .043).
“Contrary to our hypothesis, we failed to show that random assignment
to use inhaled cannabis increased common cardiac ectopy. Of note,
increasing frequencies of premature atrial contractions are an important
predictor of atrial fibrillation, and those with more premature
ventricular contraction frequencies have a higher risk for heart
failure. In fact, we found a small decrease in cardiac ectopy, driven
mainly by less premature atrial contractions, on days when participants
were randomly assigned to smoke or vape cannabis,” Marcus told Healio.
“At the same time and after excluding those ectopic beats from the
continuous ECG data, we did see evidence of increased punctuated
sympathetic activity on days randomized to cannabis, consistent with an
increase in THC exposure on those days. Other methods to assess
compliance suggested that participants generally followed their
randomization assignment most of the time.”
Mean daily steps, sleep duration per night and daily glucose changes
were not significantly different between inhaled cannabis use and
nonuse, according to the study.
“This single study should not be considered sufficient to change
clinical practice or recommendations, but should justify opening up
future investigations and lines of inquiry as to how cannabis might
actually have antiarrhythmic properties. It also challenges the notion
that all inhaled smoke is the same, particularly given quite clear
evidence that inhaled tobacco smoke has been consistently associated
with more cardiac ectopy,” Marcus told Healio.
For more information:
Gregory M. Marcus, MD, MAS, can be reached at greg.marcus@ucsf.edu or X @gregorymmarcus.
Your competent? doctor immediately prescribed marijuana for all the benefits post stroke, right? NO? So UNEDUCATED AND INCOMPETENT? Your board of directors IS THAT FUCKING INCOMPETENT?
A randomized crossover trial examined the acute cardiovascular effects of inhaled cannabis among habitual users.
There was a significant 9% reduction in premature heartbeats on days participants inhaled cannabis compared with days they abstained.
The finding of reduced cardiac ectopy was questionable given major limitations of the trial, but the data did suggest that there was no increase in these heartbeats.
Defying expectations, regular cannabis users had fewer ectopic heartbeats on the days they reached for the joint or vape, a randomized crossover trial showed.
On days using cannabis, there was a significant 9% reduction in these extra or early heartbeats (median 13 per day on cannabis vs 13.8 per day off cannabis; rate ratio [RR] 0.91, 95% CI 0.85-0.98) among habitual cannabis smokers and vapers who had no history of clinically diagnosed cardiac arrhythmias.
While each cannabis inhalation was associated with a 2% reduction in ectopic beats (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.97-0.99), Gregory Marcus, MD, MAS, of the University of California San Francisco, and colleagues noted that they were still wary of jumping too quickly to claim causality from this randomized trial.
"Given imperfect adherence, possible carryover, heterogeneous exposure, low baseline ectopy burden, and multiple exploratory analyses, the clinical implications remain uncertain," they wrote in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.
"Ultimately, the most conservative interpretation of these data may be the clear evidence that inhaled cannabis did not increase cardiac ectopy," Marcus and team conceded.
Study participants were randomly assigned each day to inhale cannabis products or abstain completely via text messages for 14 days. Inhaled cannabis included smoked cannabis (joints, blunts, pipes, and bongs) and vaped cannabis. During follow-up, participants were equipped with a continuously recording ECG patch, a wrist-worn Fitbit activity tracker and sleep monitor, and a continuous glucose monitor for the first 10 days.
No significant differences were observed for step counts, sleep duration, or glucose levels.
"This study examined the acute effects of cannabis in people who use it regularly and was not designed to evaluate the long-term health consequences," Marcus cautioned in a press release. "The overall health effects of inhaled cannabis may still be net negative, but these findings suggest there may be something about cannabis that can teach us more about the biological mechanisms that produce premature atrial contractions. That knowledge could eventually lead to new approaches for preventing or treating abnormal heart rhythms."
Of note, the change in daily ectopy was driven by a decrease in daily premature atrial contractions (PACs), with a median of 7 on cannabis days versus 9.75 on off-cannabis days (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.82-0.97), whereas premature ventricular contractions (PVCs) were unchanged on days using cannabis (median 3 vs 2.75; RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.91-1.12).
"To our knowledge, no previous randomized trial has demonstrated that any common exposure or lifestyle factor can influence PAC counts," Marcus and colleagues wrote.
The finding naturally leads to the question of whether lower PAC counts amount to tangible protection from a full-blown cardiac arrhythmia.
"Although the current study did not assess AF [atrial fibrillation] as an outcome, previous research has shown that PAC frequencies in the general population were the single most potent predictor of AF," the authors noted. "Indeed, eradication of PACs has been shown to prevent AF in select patients, and PACs, perhaps the most common arrhythmia, can themselves be bothersome and reduce quality of life."
The study included 108 adults who regularly smoked or vaped cannabis and had no history of clinically diagnosed cardiac arrhythmias.
At baseline, average age was 32 years, and 59% were women. None of the participants had diabetes, and 8% had hypertension. The most commonly reported methods of cannabis inhalation were joints (63%) and vape cartridges (57%), ranging in frequency of use from one to four times per month to three times or more per day. Fewer than one in three participants smoked tobacco or vaped nicotine concurrently.
There were a total of 713 days randomized to inhaled cannabis and 616 days randomized to abstinence.
Based on a combination of time-stamped Zio patch button presses at the time of cannabis use, daily surveys, and salivary mass spectrometry, Marcus and colleagues determined that participants followed instructions to inhale or avoid cannabis on most days, with adherence deemed as "moderate."
The authors acknowledged that there were plenty of caveats to the randomized study.
"For example, participants were not blinded to their exposure and were instructed to use their own cannabis products. This allowed for an assessment of the full inhaled cannabis experience that best recapitulated actual drug exposure and enhanced our ability to recruit and retain participants," they wrote. "However, this also resulted in substantial heterogeneity in the types and amounts of cannabis consumed and a consequent reduction in precision in analyzing associations with specific constituents."
Requiring participants to be frequent cannabis users may be a source of selection bias, they added, while the selection criteria further excluded anyone who had a history of AF or heart failure; had an implanted pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator; had been prescribed beta-blockers, nondihydropyridine calcium-channel blockers, or Vaughn-Williams class 1 or 3 antiarrhythmic medications; or had a medical reason to avoid cannabis.
Importantly, the trial did not assess other effects of acute cannabis inhalation, nor did it collect data on alcohol consumption, a common co-intervention also linked to more PACs and PVCs.
Marijuana use seems to be more popular (or at least more openly talked about) than ever. Regardless of whether you’re on the gummy bandwagon, you might wonder how it really affects your brain after the buzz wears off.
Older adults — those 60 and older — are the fastest-growing group of cannabis users in the country. According to a 2022 study, adults over 60 who started using did so for medical reasons, including to treat pain and arthritis, sleep disturbances, anxiety and depression.
While more than three-quarters of those people found the cannabis either somewhat or very helpful, the question remains: What are the side effects? You may be particularly curious about brain effects, given concerns about cognitive decline. So what exactly does the research say?
Cannabis use is linked to worse working memory
This probably isn’t too surprising, but cannabis can affect your ability to retain information in the short term. This makes some intuitive sense to anyone who has tried it: “If you smoke cannabis, afterward, if you do a working memory test where you’re trying to maintain some piece of information, like a phone number or a short list of words, you’re less good at doing that while you’re acutely intoxicated,” said Joseph Schacht, associate professor of psychiatry and co-director of the Division of Addiction Science, Prevention and Treatment at the University of Colorado School of Medicine.
Long-term cannabis use has also been associated with changes in brain volume. This is most pronounced in people who started using cannabis in adolescence, when the brain was still developing. “Cannabinoid exposure during that developmental window probably interferes with some of those normal brain development functions,” Schacht said.
Some research shows changes in the white matter of the brain in people who started using cannabis before the age of 16. White matter connects and facilitates communication among various regions of the brain. Younger users show more difficulty with cognitive tasks requiring executive function, such as inhibition control, linked to lower integrity of certain parts of white matter and higher behavioral impulsivity, said Staci Gruber, director of Marijuana Investigations for Neuroscientific Discovery at McLean Hospital in Belmont, Massachusetts, and associate professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. Gruber is the study’s lead author.
In a 2026 meta-analysis of 77 studies in the journal Addiction, cannabis use was linked with reduced volume in the amygdala in particular, a region of the brain involved in processing and regulating emotions. But this study didn’t include information on when people started using the drug.
In adults ages 40 to 70 who began using cannabis after roughly 25 years of age, lifetime cannabis use is actually associated with greater brain volume, according to research published this year in the Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs. That’s particularly true in areas of the brain with receptors for cannabinoids, the active compounds in cannabis that modulate things such as pain, mood and appetite. The study authors concluded this may be a sign of the “neuroprotective” benefits of cannabis in older adults, given that brain atrophy is common with age and is linked to cognitive decline and lower quality of life.
Those neuroprotective benefits could at least partly explain why cannabis use isn’t associated with dementia risk.
We need more data on how cannabis affects mood disorders
In a review in Lancet Psychiatry, researchers found no help or harm from specific cannabinoids with relation to a number of mood-related concerns, including anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder. It also concluded there wasn’t enough data to study any potential effects on bipolar disorder or depression.
Gruber, however, noted that the study looked at either THC alone, CBD alone or a combination of THC and CBD, not the potential risks and benefits of the entire cannabis plant. (THC, or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, is the psychoactive cannabinoid associated with the high caused by marijuana, while CBD, or cannabidiol, is a nonintoxicating cannabis compound.) “The idea that we would look primarily at single extracted compounds for things like anxiety is one that isn’t necessarily going to be as successful as when we look at multi-compound products,” she said. “The synergistic action of these things all together is significantly greater than the sum of its parts,” much like how sports teams are more successful with multiple players on the field.
Schacht notes that some people use cannabis as a way to mitigate symptoms without addressing the underlying cause. “As someone who has worked in addiction and substance use for a number of years, depression and anxiety are frequently reasons that people use a number of substances, such as cannabis, alcohol and nicotine,” he said. “Those drugs can be helpful in relieving those symptoms in the short term, but over the long term, I think it's fairly clear that they are not helpful and, in some cases, actually exacerbate the problem that led people to turn to them in the first place.”
Using marijuana as a teenager or young adult is linked to a greater risk of some serious mental health problems. “People who start using cannabis when they are young and who have any kind of a family history of psychosis or severe mental illness are at risk for developing psychosis and severe mental illness themselves because of the cannabis use,” Schacht said. The greatest association with psychosis and other severe mental illnesses is also typically strongest in the heaviest cannabis users.
Ultimately, Gruber said, more studies are needed — both larger studies and those that focus on the entire cannabis plant.
And, yet, researching cannabis is challenging because it is categorized federally as a Schedule I drug, meaning that, according to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, it has “no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse.” The risk of abuse decreases as the schedule number gets higher. The government’s strict regulations on studying these substances limit research opportunities. “It would be so much easier if people could use those things in the laboratory, for example, but we can’t generally do that,” Schacht said.
That would also help researchers investigate whether the method of cannabis delivery matters. More research is needed to know whether smoking, vaping or oral administration make any difference in cognitive (or other) effects.
Age matters when it comes to problematic cannabis use
To many people, other Schedule I drugs such as heroin and LSD sound much more concerning. But research suggests that 22 percent to 30 percent of people who use cannabis have cannabis use disorder, a type of substance use problem.
The risk of developing cannabis use disorder is higher in people who start using marijuana in adolescence and use it frequently. “It doesn’t mean that every single person who uses cannabis at an early age is going to have a problem, but our work and the work of others demonstrates that earlier onset of recreational cannabis use, along with more frequent and higher magnitude of use, is usually associated with worse potential outcomes,” Gruber said.
To her, future research should focus on whether the potential therapeutic benefits of cannabis can be harnessed without increasing the risk of harm to improve upon current standards of care. It will take time for research to catch up to the increasing popularity of this plant, Gruber said, but that very popularity points to some benefit: “If people didn’t yield something from it, why would they keep using this?”
In the meantime, without more research, it can be challenging for some people to decide whether cannabis might benefit them. “The best thing we can hope for is good, sound, empirical data that helps to drive individuals’ decisions as opposed to hearing somebody say ‘That should never be used,’” Gruber said. If you’re concerned about a specific aspect of your brain health, such as dementia risk, and how cannabis may affect you, consider talking to your doctor before trying legal products.
Stephen Lankenau has
spent years studying how people use cannabis in everyday life. As
director of Drexel University's Medical Cannabis Research Center, he has
watched legalization spread, products grow stronger and daily use
become increasingly common.
Yet one of the most basic questions remains surprisingly difficult to answer: How much cannabis is too much for the brain?
Social
rituals around alcohol help define moderation - a beer after work, a
glass of wine with dinner - and numerous studies have looked at safe
alcohol limits. One federally commissioned paper published this month in
the Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs found that anything more
than one drink a day increases mortality. But cannabis is entering
mainstream life with few shared rules or routines. Researchers are
trying to understand what problematic use looks like and whether new
habits and cultural norms could help prevent it.
The
question is becoming more urgent as cannabis use rises, particularly
among younger adults, who tend to use it most heavily and are the most
likely to experiment with increasingly potent products.
Doctors
report increasing numbers of patients arriving in emergency rooms with
confusion, paranoia, rapid heart beats, dizziness and other signs of
cannabis intoxication. One study found that cases of cannabinoid
hyperemesis syndrome, a condition involving severe, repeated vomiting,
quadrupled among adults ages 18 to 35 between 2016 and 2022.
Recreational
cannabis is now legal in 24 states and D.C. In 2002, about 25 million
Americans reported using cannabis in the past year, according to the
National Survey on Drug Use and Health. By 2023, that number had climbed
to nearly 70 million. Daily or near-daily use has climbed even faster
than occasional use, and adults over 35 are now among the
fastest-growing groups of users.
Sorting
out what constitutes "too much" is tricky. Most research has not been
designed around recreational use, and today's consumers can choose from
products ranging from high-potency vapes and concentrates to gummies,
drinks and tinctures. But the science is advancing quickly. Some of the
findings challenge long-held assumptions about the benefits of cannabis
and health. And contemporary cannabis research is increasingly
converging on three big variables: How often? How young? How strong is
the drug?
1. Shifting potency
When
marijuana entered mainstream American life in the 1960s, it quickly
became attached to a familiar set of images: hippies, anti-war protests,
youthful rebellion, experimentation. The debate over its effects was
often blunt. Cannabis was either dangerous or liberating, mind-clouding
or mind-expanding.
Interpreting
cannabis research today is challenging because marijuana is far more
potent than the products used by previous generations. In the 1970s and
'80s, most cannabis flower contained relatively modest levels of THC -
often in the low single digits. Today, many commercial products
routinely exceed 20 percent THC. Concentrated products such as vape
cartridges, waxes and "dabs" can reach 70 to 90 percent.
THC,
or tetrahydrocannabinol, is the compound primarily responsible for
cannabis's psychoactive effects, including intoxication, paranoia and,
in some users, psychotic symptoms.
Some
scientists think highly concentrated THC may produce larger dopamine
surges and more profound disruptions in perception and salience
processing - the brain's ability to determine what deserves attention.
A
growing number of studies have linked frequent use of high-potency
cannabis to altered brain connectivity, working-memory deficits and
increased risk of psychosis-like symptoms, particularly among younger
users and people with underlying vulnerabilities.
2. Overstated mental health benefits
Many
adults, especially older ones, use cannabis for medical reasons such as
to address pain, sleep or anxiety. But two recent studies - one in JAMA
Internal Medicine and another in the Lancet - cast doubts.
The
JAMA Internal Medicine report looked at previous studies related to
PTSD, anxiety, depression, ADHD, bipolar disorder and other conditions,
and found that the current evidence does not support the use of cannabis
for any of them. On the other hand, the researchers warned, use of
cannabis "demonstrates substantial risks of adverse effects."
The
Lancet paper involved a systematic review and meta-analysis of 54
randomized controlled trials with nearly 2500 participants involving a
wide range of mental health and other conditions. It found some evidence
of a reduction in insomnia, tic or Tourette's syndrome, and autism
spectrum disorder, but said "the quality of this evidence was generally
low."
"Given the
scarcity of evidence, the routine use of cannabinoids for the treatment
of mental disorders … is currently rarely justified," the authors
concluded.
3. Cognitive effects may vary by age
One
of the more surprising shifts in cannabis research is that moderate use
in adulthood may not impair cognition nearly as much as scientists once
feared.
A widely
discussed 2024 study published in JAMA Network Open, which examined
middle-aged and older adults, found no major association between
moderate cannabis use and cognitive decline across several domains after
a year of use. But the researchers noted participants generally used
lower-potency products and consumed them less than daily.
Carl
Hart, a Columbia University psychologist who has studied cannabis and
other drugs for decades, argues that the adult brain may be far more
resilient to marijuana than many people assume. In one experiment, Hart
and his colleagues offered adult participants the chance to earn money
by performing well on a math test. Participants could choose whether to
smoke cannabis beforehand.
"Invariably they did not want to smoke because they wanted to make as much money as possible," Hart said.
In
this study and others, Hart found that smoking cannabis had a minimal
impact on accuracy of complex cognitive tasks. To Hart, the findings
challenge one of the oldest assumptions about marijuana - that it
inevitably drains motivation or ambition.
"Think
of all the many people who take cannabis," he said, "there are some
people not motivated to do jack, but that isn't because of cannabis. And
there are a wide range of people who have done incredible things in the
world while on cannabis. But the notion just won't die."
Other clues about what should be considered safe use come from a large 2025 study published in JAMA Network Open.
Researchers
analyzing brain scans from more than 1,000 young adults ages 22 to 36
found that the clearest cognitive effects appeared among heavy lifetime
users - people who had used cannabis more than 1,000 times. They showed
reduced brain activity during tasks of working memory - which involves
holding and using information in real time - while moderate users showed
far fewer differences. The findings suggest that frequency and
intensity of use may matter more than occasional consumption alone.
Notably,
working memory was the only cognitive domain among seven tested that
showed a statistically significant association with heavy cannabis use,
suggesting that any effects on the brain may be more targeted than
wide-reaching.
4. Teenage brains appear most vulnerable
Studies
going back decades have found that adolescents who use cannabis
regularly tend to earn lower grades and graduate from high school at
lower rates, a pattern sometimes referred to as "amotivational
syndrome."
We didn't see it in the adult brain. It was only the adolescent brain
Bertha Madras, a professor of psychobiology at Harvard Medical School
In
February, a JAMA Health Forum study that followed roughly 460,000
adolescents ages 13 to 17 into young adulthood found that using cannabis
in the previous year was associate with double the risk of later
psychotic disorders and bipolar disorders when they reach age 26. In
2025, a JAMA Psychiatry study of young adults with cannabis use disorder
found alterations in the dopamine-related brain system that were
similar to what is seen in psychosis. These observation studies cannot
prove causation, but the links have worried scientists.
Cannabis
use disorder involves an inability to quit and psychological dependence
and physiological withdrawal symptoms. The Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention says 3 out of 10 people who use cannabis have it.
"All
of these very serious neuropsychiatric symptoms are associated with
motivation," said Bertha Madras, a professor of psychobiology at Harvard
Medical School.
During
puberty and early adulthood, neural connections are rapidly being
formed, strengthened and pruned. In fact, brain-imaging research has
linked cannabis use before age 16 to changes in white matter, the neural
pathways that help different regions of the brain communicate.
One paper from 2021 found small declines in IQ in youths who used cannabis frequently.
Madras
has conducted animal experiments involving adolescent rats and primates
given daily marijuana exposure comparable to human use. She found
pronounced inflammation in a part of the brain involved in emotional
regulation and stress control.
"We
didn't see it in the adult brain. It was only the adolescent brain,"
she said. "We began to speculate this observation may help explain why
the drug has certain adverse effects on adolescents more than in
adults."
Some
studies suggest that cannabis use beginning at a younger age is
associated with more persistent changes in executive function and
IQ-related measures, but the findings remain subject to debate because
it is difficult to fully account for socioeconomic, environmental,
genetic and other confounding factors.
5. Chance of a cognitive rebound
The
idea of taking a "tolerance break" - a temporary pause in cannabis use -
has long been popular among regular users. Over time, the body can
become less responsive to THC, the psychoactive compound in cannabis,
meaning people may need larger amounts to achieve the same effects. Many
long-term users notice that cannabis feels less potent than it once
did, even as their consumption increases.
The
field remains complicated because many studies are small and it can be
difficult to separate the effects of cannabis from those of alcohol,
nicotine and other substances.
A
2021 review published in Current Behavioral Neuroscience Reports found
that some cognitive deficits associated with cannabis use - particularly
those involving attention and working memory - may improve after
sustained abstinence, especially among adults and lighter users.
Similarly, a 2018 study in the Journal of the International
Neuropsychological Society found that adolescents and young adults who
abstained from cannabis for two weeks showed measurable improvements in
attention.
Brain
imaging studies have also provided encouraging signs. Several have found
that altered patterns of brain connectivity in heavy cannabis users may
partially normalize after a period of abstinence, particularly in
networks involved in executive function, reward processing and emotional
regulation.
These
findings do not necessarily mean that all cannabis-related brain changes
are reversible, nor do they establish how long recovery may take. But
they suggest that for some people, reducing or stopping cannabis use may
allow some cognitive function to rebound over time.
6. Signs of protecting older brains
Scientists
are increasingly exploring whether certain cannabinoids might help
protect aging brains by reducing inflammation and cellular stress -
processes believed to play a role in diseases such as Alzheimer's and
Parkinson's. The research is still early, and most of the evidence comes
from laboratory studies rather than human trials.
A
2024 study from the Salk Institute drew attention for its focus on a
little-known cannabinoid called cannabinol, or CBN, which forms as THC
ages and breaks down over time.
The
researchers studied a form of cell death that has been increasingly
linked to neurodegenerative disease. In conditions such as Alzheimer's
and Parkinson's, neurons often begin to die after their mitochondria -
the tiny structures that produce energy inside cells - stop functioning
properly.
Using
mouse neurons, human brain-cell cultures and fruit-fly models, the Salk
team found that CBN appeared to help protect neurons by preserving
mitochondrial function and reducing oxidative stress, a damaging process
associated with aging and neurodegeneration.
The
findings generated excitement among some researchers because they
suggest that stabilizing those cellular energy systems might someday
help slow aspects of neurodegenerative decline. But scientists caution
that the work remains far from proving that cannabis-derived products
can prevent dementia or Parkinson's disease in humans.
7. Setting boundaries matters
Researchers
studying cannabis have noted that while some users develop problematic
patterns of use, most do not. This led scientists to ask what successful
users do differently. The idea stems from the long-standing "drug, set
and setting" theory, which argues that a person's experience with a
substance is shaped not only by the drug itself but also by their
mindset ("set") and the environment in which they use it ("setting").
In a paper published in December, Lankenau and colleagues looked a nine years of data on young cannabis users in Los Angeles.
They
found that most participants fell into an "uncontrolled" group that
used cannabis without consistently following self-imposed rules, while a
smaller "controlled" group practiced rules such as not using before
work or school and not driving while high. Those in the controlled group
used cannabis less frequently and were less likely to show signs of
problematic use.
A
key takeaway, he said, is that moderation may depend less on the amount
of cannabis someone uses than on whether they develop consistent
boundaries around when, where and why they use it. The authors argue
that understanding and promoting these "controlled use" practices could
become an important public health strategy in the era of legal cannabis.
Lankenau
argued that as cannabis becomes more widely available, public health
agencies - not cannabis companies - need to take the lead in educating
consumers about potency, dosing and potential risks. Because many people
can now purchase high-potency products directly from dispensaries
without consulting a physician.
"The more educated consumers are, the less negative effects we will see," Lankenau said.
I can't ever see doing carotid stenting or endarterectomy with all the risks of those procedures. Your doctor NEEDS TO GUARANTEE NO PROBLEMS IF DONE OR THE MEDICAL LICENSE IS LOST!
The obvious solution is check if the Circle of Willis is complete, then close up the offending artery!
My right carotid artery was at 80% blockage at time of stroke and
then thankfully fully closed up 3 years later. Remained closed for 10
years
and I cognitively functioned quite well with no episodes of
fainting or poor executive functioning. Eventually collaterals grew
around the blockage. Since my Circle of Willis is complete, I still had 3
fully functioning arteries supplying blood to the brain, obviously
enough to keep me highly functioning. I'm glad that my doctors were so
incompetent they never found that 80% blockage, otherwise they probably
would have insisted I undergo either stenting or endarterectomy, both of
which they couldn't guarantee no problems. And I didn't find out about
those problems until years later researching for this blog.
Study Finds Long-Term Stroke and Death Rates Favor Carotid Endarterectomy (CEA) over Carotid Artery Stenting (CAS) in Treating Patients with Asymptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis
BOSTON, MA, JUNE 13, 2026 – Today, the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) announced the findings of a new study demonstrating the safety and efficacy of emerging treatment options for patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACS).
Carotid stenosis occurs when plaque builds up in the carotid artery, narrowing the vessel and restricting blood flow to the brain and can lead to stroke. However, ACS occurs when the artery is narrowed by at least 70-80% without a recent stroke, significantly increasing the risk of future stroke, cardiovascular events, and cognitive decline. It is estimated that two million North Americans and Europeans live with treatable asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (NIH).
In November 2025, the New England Journal of Medicine published data from the Carotid Revascularization and Medical Management for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis Study (CREST-2), focused on revascularization practices to manage stroke risk in ACS patients. SVS published an opinion piece on why CREST-2 trial results should inform, not replace, clinical judgement due to how the trial reflects idealized medical therapy, not routine clinical practice.
“Data presented at the Society for Vascular Surgery’s Vascular Annual Meeting underscores the importance of knowledge of which intervention, if any, is optimal for stroke management in patients with carotid disease,” said Keith D. Calligaro, MD, Chief, Vascular Surgery at Pennsylvania Hospital, President, Society for Vascular Surgery. “We should not disregard the findings of many past studies showing the benefit of carotid endarterectomy over carotid stenting in selected patients. The findings highlight the need for randomized clinical trials, real-world outcomes data, and the expertise of vascular surgeons, the only specialty that can perform trans-femoral carotid stenting, TCAR and CEA.”
Carotid Stenosis Patients Experience Improved Stroke and Mortality Outcomes Three Years After CEA than CAS
Using the TriNetX Collaborative US Network, a multi-institutional electronic health record platform continuously updating real-world data from healthcare organizations, researchers aim to compare perioperative and long-term outcomes of CEA and CAS in asymptomatic patients. Researchers selected adult patients with ACS who underwent CEA or CAS from the TriNetX Network. Patients were matched 1:1 using a propensity score match (PSM) to balance baseline characteristics like demographics, comorbidities, and relevant medications. The study’s primary outcomes included stroke, death, and the composite outcome of stroke or death at 30 days, one year, three years, and five years.
The study identified 101,714 patients in total, 61,124 of whom underwent CEA (60.1%) and 40,590 CAS (39.9%). Through PSM, 39,471 patients were matched to each cohort with balanced baseline characteristics. The CEA group showed consistently lower rates of stroke at 30 days (2.0% vs 2.4%, p=0.001), one year (2.9% vs 3.3%, p=0.001), three years (3.6% vs 3.9%, p=0.008), and five years (4.1% vs 4.4%, p=0.038). This group also saw significantly lower mortality rates at three years (11.8% vs 12.4%, p=0.014),though other time points reflected similar rates. At every time period stroke or death outcomes favored the CEA group, with significant differences observed at 30 days (3.9% vs 4.2%, p=0.049), one year (8.7% vs 9.4%, p=0.001), three years (14.9% vs 15.8%, p< 0.001), and five years (20.1% vs 20.8%, p=0.013).
“Our results suggest that CEA has more favorable stroke and mortality outcomes when patient demographics are equal,” said lead author Anthony H. Chau, MD, Associate Professor of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University of California, Irvine. “However, our findings do not conclude that every patient should undergo CEA. Instead, they remind us how paramount patient selection is when treating carotid artery stenosis, and the detail that should go into selecting the right procedure for the right patient.”
Session Details:
“Carotid endarterectomy has improved long-term stroke and survival compared to carotid artery stenting in a real-world propensity-matched cohort analysis using the TriNetX Network”
Saturday, June 13th from 9:04 am – 9:11 am ET (Plenary 7)
###
About the Society for Vascular Surgery The Society for Vascular Surgery® (SVS) seeks to advance excellence and innovation in vascular health through education, advocacy, research, and public awareness. The organization was founded in 1946 and currently has a membership of approximately 6,500. SVS membership is recognized in the vascular community as a mark of professional achievement. For more information, visit Vascular.org.
About VAM26 The Society for Vascular Surgery’s Vascular Annual Meeting (VAM) will be held in Boston, MA, on June 10-13. Leading physicians, researchers, and health care professionals in vascular surgery gather for three full days of groundbreaking educational content showcasing the latest data, research, and innovations in vascular surgery and vascular health. For more information, visit vam.vascular.org.
If you insist on drinking, as I do, to prevent dementia via social connections then you will need your doctor to give you protocols on increasing cerebral blood flow. You can't use mine, I'm not medically trained.
I absolutely hate these pontifications on
nonuse. Solve the damn problem of dead brain rehab and this nonuse
problem goes away. SOLVE THE CORRECT PROBLEM!
Damn it all, it is NOT learned nonuse. It
is the actual inability to use it because of dead neurons. If you had
dead brain rehab protocols, this fake learned nonuse idea would cease to
exist!
A couple points I'd like to make on this:
1.
I disagree on 'Use it or lose it' existing for stroke survivors. You
can read all about my reasons for that in these 11 posts.
3. I consider this as a crutch for your stroke medical 'professionals' to blame you for not recovering just because THEY ARE COMPLETE FUCKING FAILURES AT PROVIDING 100% RECOVERY PROTOCOLS!
But I'm not medically trained so my points should not be listened to.
Last updated on December 7, 2021If you’re working on recovery after a neurological injury, you’ve
likely heard the phrase “use it or lose it.” This is one of the main
principles of neuroplasticity, which is the central nervous system’s ability to make adaptive changes based on the behaviors you repetitively perform.
To help you understand this popular neurorehabilitation phrase, this article will discuss:
To minimize losses after neurological injury, individuals must focus
on promoting neuroplasticity to reorganize the central nervous system’s
neural circuitry and restore compromised functions. One of the most
effective ways to do this is to think “use it or lose it.” It simply
means that in order to retain proficiency over a function, you must
practice it regularly.
Every function you perform activates a unique set of neural pathways
in the central nervous system (the brain and spinal cord). The most
frequently activated neural pathways are strengthened and maintained,
while those less frequently activated become neglected and forgotten.
This occurs because the central nervous system no longer senses a
demand for those functions. Therefore, to be as efficient as possible
and save energy for more in-demand functions, it will start to forget
how to perform unused functions.
Consequently, prolonged disuse can lead to learned non-use,
which refers to the conditioned suppression of affected body parts. For
example, when the left arm is weakened by a stroke, individuals tend to
compensate by using their unaffected right arm. Consistently using the
unaffected arm leads to disuse of the affected arm until eventually,
individuals forget how to use their affected arm.
The only way to prevent functions from worsening and becoming useless
after a neurological injury is to use them. Repetitively practicing
functions affected by neurological injury reinforces demand for them
and encourages the central nervous system to reorganize those functions
to unaffected regions of the brain/spinal cord. The more you practice
affected functions, the stronger the newly rewired functions become.
Now that you understand what “use it or lose it” means, let’s discuss some other principles of neuroplasticity.
Other Principles of Neuroplasticity
While “use it or lose it” is one of the most popular principles of
neuroplasticity, the other principles are equally as important to help
you understand how to optimize recovery after neurological injury.
Other principles of neuroplasticity include:
Use it and improve it. In order to get better at a specific function, you must consistently practice it.
Repetition matters. To strengthen neural circuits for a function, you must repetitively practice that function.
Intensity matters. The intensity of your training impacts how quickly adaptive changes occur.
Time matters. Depending on how long it has been
since your injury, you may experience different states of plasticity.
For example, immediately after injury, the brain experiences a
heightened state of plasticity. Therefore, individuals tend to see the
most results in the first several months after their injury.
Salience matters. Your motivation to train impacts
neuroplasticity. The more important training is to you, the easier it is
for you to participate in it.
Age matters. Neuroplasticity occurs more readily in younger brains. However, the brain never runs out of neuroplasticity and there is hope for recovery at any age.
Transference. Promoting neuroplasticity within one
set of neural pathways can promote neuroplasticity for similar
behaviors. For example, practicing leg exercises can help improve your
walking skills.
Interference. Learning compensation techniques can make it difficult to regain an affected skill.
As you can see, various factors impact how quickly neuroplasticity is
activated in the central nervous system. Fortunately, the brain adapts
throughout your entire life and even years after your injury, there is
always hope for recovery.
Is It Possible to Regain Lost Functions?
While prolonged disuse of affected functions can lead to losing them,
it is always possible to relearn them. Any function can be relearned;
however, it will take time to re-establish neural pathways for it. In
other words, you’ll likely have to start from the beginning to regain
lost functions.
This can be achieved by focusing on consistent and repetitive practice. The more you practice, the more rewiring will occur and the stronger neural pathways for that function will become.
While the point of “use it or lose it” is to encourage you to use
affected functions to avoid losing them, it is never too late to promote
neuroplasticity and relearn them. Even if it has been years since
you’ve used your affected body part, there is always hope for recovery.
Use It or Lose It: Key Points
Your brain is always adapting based on the behaviors you consistently
perform. After a neurological injury, you may experience various
impairments such as difficulties controlling your movements or poor
memory.
In order to prevent these functions from worsening, think “use it or
lose it.” The more you practice functions affected by neurological
injury, the better the central nervous system will get at recognizing
the demand for them and utilize neuroplasticity to make adaptive
changes.
Even if you’ve “lost” a function due to years of disuse, there is
always potential to relearn it by engaging in consistent and repetitive
practice. We hope this article helped you understand what “use it or
lose it” means and how to enforce it to optimize your recovery outcomes.
Related video: NIH-funded study finds midlife brain changes may help explain dementia risk (KYTX-TV Tyler-Longview)
