Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cannabis use and myocardial infarction in young adults: a cross-sectional study

cmaj.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 161 posts

Re: Cannabis use and myocardial infarction in young adults: a cross-sectional study

#51

Post by nickthegreek »

datavirtue wrote: post #31
eurasiantiger wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It very likely is due to smoke inhalation or even mixing with tobacco; IIRC inhalation of any kind of micro- and nanoparticles is linked to higher risk of myocardial infarction.

I got a few new sativa vapes recently and was hitting them both pretty hard. I got smacked with a really disturbing heart issue that felt like it was being severely over worked. It was so bad I was on my front porch in n the dark resolved to dying. I didn't in now what was going to happen. I'll admit that I'm a lightweight but I had to stop with the "turpine pens." Now I just smoke dry herb because I know how to regu…

I'd recommend looking into vaping dry herb with a Volcano to avoid the combustion of organics as well as the chemicals on the pens.

Re: Cannabis use and myocardial infarction in young adults: a cross-sectional study

#52

Post by projectazorian »

halfmatthalfcat wrote: post #26
bowsersghost wrote: post #5

I'll gladly take this risk considering cannabis preserves my sanity and keeps me away from the trough of sorrow.

Sounds like therapy would be very useful then. If you’re having to self-medicate to maintain sanity, the substances are only a crutch. Speaking from personal experience.

Most heavy cannabis users I know are either currently in therapy or have spent a lot of time in therapy. This kind of careless posting is a great way to discourage people from seeking therapy, though!

Re: Cannabis use and myocardial infarction in young adults: a cross-sectional study

#54

Post by 52-6F-62 »

hirundo wrote: post #47
52-6F-62 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not misunderstanding. The word link literally means a connection or relationship. There is neither of those two things in this data, except that their 1.3% of "abusive" smokers had heart attacks versus 0.5% of non-smokers. You cannot draw a link from that alone, but they are stating there is a link. You can state there is a link between diet and heart disease, because there's a proven causal relationship. Not so…

You are describing epidemiology, which is not an experimental science, because it does not have the luxury of independent variables. And you are correct that it is weaker at establishing links than a controlled experiment. So it's mostly a resort for when an RCT is impractical or as a way to select which RCTs to pursue.

I didn't say it was experimental science.

I said their use of the word link implies a causal relationship because that is precisely what the word link means.

If they are not describing a link, and instead are describing a correlation then they should do so.

Calling their findings a "link" is much more final and implies causation. It's not an arcane definition I'm pointing to here—it's the only definition for the word.

There is no link. There is an apparent correlation based on their filtered dataset.

Epidemiology isn't meant to create problems, it's meant to resolve them. They are borderline fabricating a problem with their misleading study.

Maybe next time they should indicate a "possible link" since that is all they actually have.

When studies make hard-nosed, misleading conclusions about health subjects that are presently on the political fence I get suspicious.

Re: Cannabis use and myocardial infarction in young adults: a cross-sectional study

#55

Post by benatkin »

halfmatthalfcat wrote: post #44
benatkin wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sweeping generalizations based on personal experience aren't much better than sweeping generalizations that aren't based on personal experience.

I don't think it's a stretch or generalization to mention mental health services to people who may be struggling with mental health issues.

The sweeping generalization I was referring to is "the substances are only a crutch". Your comment also suggests that you assume the author of the comment you replied to isn't pursuing therapy. People can do both at the same time.

A lot of things can be a crutch, but cannabis provides meaningful relief for many.

Re: Cannabis use and myocardial infarction in young adults: a cross-sectional study

#56

Post by projectazorian »

halfmatthalfcat wrote: post #44
benatkin wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sweeping generalizations based on personal experience aren't much better than sweeping generalizations that aren't based on personal experience.

I don't think it's a stretch or generalization to mention mental health services to people who may be struggling with mental health issues.

I'm quite sure that most HN posters are aware that mental health services are available. Did you provide any helpful tips for making use of such services, or just make low IQ lazy generalizations about substance users?

Re: Cannabis use and myocardial infarction in young adults: a cross-sectional study

#57

Post by goldenkey »

dsizzle wrote: post #48

The more shocking takeaway for me is that ~1% of people under 45 have had a heart attack (cannabis use is a rounding error)! That's higher than I would have guessed.

More than 1% are fat slobs. So is it really surprising?

The obesity prevalence was 40.0% among adults aged 20 to 39 years, 44.8% among adults aged 40 to 59 years, and 42.8% among adults aged 60 and older. (2021)

https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/adult.html

Re: Cannabis use and myocardial infarction in young adults: a cross-sectional study

#58

Post by EL_Loco »

zerobits wrote: post #18

It’s strange that all of the comments are looking for ways to dismiss this result (and this seems to happen generally with negative cannabis findings online). Is it not entirely possible a drug and method of consumption which stresses the cardiovascular system increases odds of an adverse cardiovascular event?

My two heaviest marijuana smoker friends are 100% sure that any study that mentions some detrimental effect from marijuana is part of a big-pharma conspiracy. Their argument is that "it's a natural herb, it's impossible for it to do harm".

Re: Cannabis use and myocardial infarction in young adults: a cross-sectional study

#59

Post by oceanplexian »

JasonFruit wrote: post #35
zerobits wrote: post #18

It’s strange that all of the comments are looking for ways to dismiss this result (and this seems to happen generally with negative cannabis findings online). Is it not entirely possible a drug and method of consumption which stresses the cardiovascular system increases odds of an adverse cardiovascular event?

People like cannabis. Naturally they minimize any suggestion that it's not all good. I do the same with Lisp, smoked meats, and predestination. I see no mystery here.

It’s certainly not all good but I’d put it in a different league from alcohol, for example. Cannabis might cause elevated heart risk over a period of years. Alcohol can stop the heart of a healthy person in a single night of binge drinking.

Re: Cannabis use and myocardial infarction in young adults: a cross-sectional study

#60

Post by hncurious »

arpinum wrote: post #3

I appreciate the study calls out that most cannabis is smoked, and it may be general smoke inhalation driving these results rather than an inherent property of cannabis

This study is really just "smoking linked to higher risk".
Post reply on HN