Effects of cannabis smoking on the respiratory system: A state-of-the-art review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The diminished perception of the health risks associated with the consumption of cannabis (marijuana) lead to a progressive increase in its inhalational use in many countries. Cannabis can be smoked through the use of joints, spliffs and blunts, and it can be vaporised with the use of hookah or e-cigarettes. Delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the main psychoactive component of cannabis smoke but contains numerous other substances. While the recreational use of cannabis smoking has been legalised in several countries, its health consequences have been underestimated and undervalued. The purpose of this review is to critically review the impact of cannabis smoke on the respiratory system. Cannabis smoke irritates the bronchial tree and is strongly associated with symptoms of chronic bronchitis, with histological signs of airway inflammation and remodelling. Altered fungicidal and antibacterial activity of alveolar macrophages, with greater susceptibility to respiratory infections, is also reported. The association with invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in immunocompromised subjects is particularly concerning. Although cannabis has been shown to produce a rapid bronchodilator effect, its chronic use is associated with poor control of asthma by numerous studies. Cannabis smoking also represents a risk factor for the development of bullous lung disease, spontaneous pneumothorax and hypersensitivity pneumonitis. On the other hand, no association with the development of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was found. Finally, a growing number of studies report an independent association of cannabis smoking with the development of lung cancer. In conclusion, unequivocal evidence established that cannabis smoking is harmful to the respiratory system. Cannabis smoking has a wide range of negative effects on respiratory symptoms in both healthy subjects and patients with chronic lung disease. Given that the most common and cheapest way of assumption of cannabis is by smoking, healthcare providers should be prepared to provide counselling on cannabis smoking cessation and inform the public and decision-makers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".