Abstract 13228: Cannabis Inhalation Reduces Muscle Sympathetic Nerve Activity in Humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Despite widespread use, the neuro-cardiovascular responses associated with cannabis use remain incompletely understood. Acute increases in heart rate, which are abolished under beta-adrenoreceptor blockade, suggest cannabis increases cardiac sympathetic activity; however, its effects on peripheral sympathetic outflow have not been measured. The objective of this work was to quantify direct recordings of efferent post-ganglionic muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA) following cannabis inhalation. Hypothesis: MSNA would be increased following cannabis inhalation. Methods: Blood pressure (BP), heart rate, and MSNA measured from the fibular nerve, were recorded in seventeen young, healthy participants (22±3y: 8F) for a 10-minute epoch before and after inhalation of aerosolized dry cannabis flower (100mg, 13.6% THC). Cardiac output was estimated from finger photoplethysmography (Modelflow method). Arterial baroreflex control of MSNA was quantified using the slope of the weighted linear regression between diastolic BP and MSNA. Results: Mean BP (79±7 vs. 84±8mmHg), heart rate (61±7 vs. 81±14bpm), cardiac output (4.8±1.1 vs. 6.8±2.5L/min), and total vascular conductance (50±11 vs. 71±26mL/min/mmHg) were increased, while MSNA burst frequency (17±7 vs. 8±6bursts/min), incidence (29±11 vs. 11±9bursts/100hb), and amplitude (38.6±6.4% vs. 23.8±8.3%), and sympathetic baroreflex sensitivity (-3.9±1.8 vs. -1.5±1.5bursts/100hb/mmHg) were decreased following cannabis inhalation (all P <0.01). The rise in cardiac output was negatively associated with the reduction in MSNA burst frequency (r 2 =0.40; P <0.01). Conclusions: These data demonstrate that MSNA is reduced following acute cannabis inhalation in humans and is mediated, in part, through a baroreflex mechanism.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".