Science
Older People Seeking Care for Cannabis Use at Greater Risk for Dementia, Study Finds
Middle-aged and older adults who sought hospital or emergency room care because of cannabis use were almost twice as likely to develop dementia over the next five years, compared with similar people in the general population, a large Canadian study reported on Monday.
When compared with adults who sought care for other reasons, the risk of developing dementia was still 23 percent higher among users of cannabis, the study also found.
The study included the medical records of six million people in Ontario from 2008 to 2021. The authors accounted for health and sociodemographic differences between comparison groups, some of which play a role in cognitive decline.
The data do not reveal how much cannabis the subjects had been using, and the study does not prove that regular or heavy cannabis use plays a causal role in dementia.
But the finding does raise serious concerns that require further exploration, said Dr. Daniel T. Myran, the first author of the study, which was published in JAMA Neurology.
“Figuring out whether or not cannabis use or heavy regular chronic use causes dementia is a challenging and complicated question that you don’t answer in one study,” said Dr. Myran, an assistant professor of family medicine at University of Ottawa.
“This contributes to the literature and to a sign, or signal, of concern.”
Dr. Myran’s previous research has found that patients with cannabis use disorder died at almost three times the rate of individuals without the disorder over a five-year period. He has also reported that more cases of schizophrenia and psychosis in Canada have been linked to cannabis use disorder since the drug was legalized.
The latest study, focusing on dementia, adds to a growing body of literature on regular or heavy cannabis use and cognition. Researchers have reported impacts on verbal learning, memory and attention, while imaging studies have pointed to changes in the brain related to the use of cannabis and other substances.
Veterans with traumatic brain injuries in addition to cannabis use disorder may be at heightened risk for early-onset dementia, researchers reported last year.
But many of the studies are relatively small. The new report’s strength was its large sample and the ability to track patients over time who did not have a diagnosis of dementia when they entered the study, said Madeline Meier, an associate professor of psychology at Arizona State University, who was not involved in the study.
“They were able to rule out dementia at the time of the first cannabis visit, and were able to show the temporal order — the cannabis came first, and the dementia came second,” said Dr. Meier.
Her research, which has followed and periodically tested a cohort of over 1,000 individuals over a period of many years, has linked cannabis use and neuropsychological decline.
“I think you want to combat this whole idea that cannabis is harmless and maybe even has some medical benefits,” Dr. Meier said. “This study is showing an association that I think people should take seriously and say, ‘Maybe this is putting me at risk.’”
She noted that the work by Dr. Myran and his colleagues also found that people seeking care for alcohol use were even more likely to receive a dementia diagnosis than were cannabis users.
“I’m worried about the substance abuse in that Baby Boomer age,” she said.
More and more people, including seniors, are using cannabis. Medical visits related to cannabis increased more than fivefold among adults 45 and older between 2008 and 2021, the new study found. Among adults 65 and over, visits increased almost 27-fold.
The study included more than 6 million people age 45 and over who did not have a diagnosis of dementia at the start of the research. Of them, 16,275 had an acute-care medical encounter because of cannabis.
The patients with cannabis-related visits were compared to the matched general population, and in a separate comparison, to 140,824 matched patients who needed medical care for all other reasons.
Within five years, 5 percent of those with acute care cannabis visits received a dementia diagnosis. The figure for individuals needing care for other reasons was 3.6 percent, and for similar individuals in the general population, 1.3 percent.
But people who are heavy cannabis users differ from those who are not in a variety of ways, some of which may help explain the increased risk for dementia, Dr. Myran explained.
While some of the factors can be accounted for, he said, “you can’t control for all of them.”
Another unknown is self-medication, he said. Someone who has started experiencing symptoms of cognitive decline may be more likely to turn to cannabis. If so, then “it looks as if the cannabis is causing dementia, but it’s just on the pathway — they were already developing dementia,” Dr. Myran said.
After making adjustments for age, sex, income and other factors, including other health conditions, he and his colleagues determined that patients who sought care for cannabis-related reasons were 1.23 times as likely as those who had gotten any kind of acute care to be diagnosed with dementia, and 1.72 times as likely as those in the healthier general population.
Science
California confirms first measles case for 2026 in San Mateo County as vaccination debates continue
Barely more than a week into the new year, the California Department of Public Health confirmed its first measles case of 2026.
The diagnosis came from San Mateo County, where an unvaccinated adult likely contracted the virus from recent international travel, according to Preston Merchant, a San Mateo County Health spokesperson.
Measles is one of the most infectious viruses in the world, and can remain in the air for two hours after an infected person leaves, according to the CDPH. Although the U.S. announced it had eliminated measles in 2000, meaning there had been no reported infections of the disease in 12 months, measles have since returned.
Last year, the U.S. reported about 2,000 cases, the highest reported count since 1992, according to CDC data.
“Right now, our best strategy to avoid spread is contact tracing, so reaching out to everybody that came in contact with this person,” Merchant said. “So far, they have no reported symptoms. We’re assuming that this is the first [California] measles case of the year.”
San Mateo County also reported an unvaccinated child’s death from influenza this week.
Across the country, measles outbreaks are spreading. Today, the South Carolina State Department of Public Health confirmed the state’s outbreak had reached 310 cases. The number has been steadily rising since an initial infection in July spread across the state and is now reported to be connected with infections in North Carolina and Washington.
Similarly to San Mateo’s case, the first reported infection in South Carolina came from an unvaccinated person who was exposed to measles while traveling internationally.
At the border of Utah and Arizona, a separate measles outbreak has reached 390 cases, stemming from schools and pediatric centers, according to the Utah Department of Health and Human Services.
Canada, another long-standing “measles-free” nation, lost ground in its battle with measles in November. The Public Health Agency of Canada announced that the nation is battling a “large, multi-jurisdictional” measles outbreak that began in October 2024.
If American measles cases follow last year’s pattern, the United States is facing losing its measles elimination status next.
For a country to lose measles-free status, reported outbreaks must be of the same locally spread strain, as was the case in Canada. As many cases in the United States were initially connected to international travel, the U.S. has been able to hold on to the status. However, as outbreaks with American-origin cases continue, this pattern could lead the Pan American Health Organization to change the country’s status.
In the first year of the Trump administration, officials led by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. have promoted lowering vaccine mandates and reducing funding for health research.
In December, Trump’s presidential memorandum led to this week’s reduced recommended childhood vaccines; in June, Kennedy fired an entire CDC vaccine advisory committee, replacing members with multiple vaccine skeptics.
Experts are concerned that recent debates over vaccine mandates in the White House will shake the public’s confidence in the effectiveness of vaccines.
“Viruses and bacteria that were under control are being set free on our most vulnerable,” Dr. James Alwine, a virologist and member of the nonprofit advocacy group Defend Public Health, said to The Times.
According to the CDPH, the measles vaccine provides 97% protection against measles in two doses.
Common symptoms of measles include cough, runny nose, pink eye and rash. The virus is spread through breathing, coughing or talking, according to the CDPH.
Measles often leads to hospitalization and, for some, can be fatal.
Science
Trump administration declares ‘war on sugar’ in overhaul of food guidelines
The Trump administration announced a major overhaul of American nutrition guidelines Wednesday, replacing the old, carbohydrate-heavy food pyramid with one that prioritizes protein, healthy fats and whole grains.
“Our government declares war on added sugar,” Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said in a White House press conference announcing the changes. “We are ending the war on saturated fats.”
“If a foreign adversary sought to destroy the health of our children, to cripple our economy, to weaken our national security, there would be no better strategy than to addict us to ultra-processed foods,” Kennedy said.
Improving U.S. eating habits and the availability of nutritious foods is an issue with broad bipartisan support, and has been a long-standing goal of Kennedy’s Make America Healthy Again movement.
During the press conference, he acknowledged both the American Medical Association and the American Assn. of Pediatrics for partnering on the new guidelines — two organizations that earlier this week condemned the administration’s decision to slash the number of diseases that U.S. children are vaccinated against.
“The American Medical Association applauds the administration’s new Dietary Guidelines for spotlighting the highly processed foods, sugar-sweetened beverages, and excess sodium that fuel heart disease, diabetes, obesity, and other chronic illnesses,” AMA president Bobby Mukkamala said in a statement.
Science
Contributor: With high deductibles, even the insured are functionally uninsured
I recently saw a patient complaining of shortness of breath and a persistent cough. Worried he was developing pneumonia, I ordered a chest X-ray — a standard diagnostic tool. He refused. He hadn’t met his $3,000 deductible yet, and so his insurance would have required him to pay much or all of the cost for that scan. He assured me he would call if he got worse.
For him, the X-ray wasn’t a medical necessity, but it would have been a financial shock he couldn’t absorb. He chose to gamble on a cough, and five days later, he lost — ending up in the ICU with bilateral pneumonia. He survived, but the cost of his “savings” was a nearly fatal hospital stay and a bill that will quite likely bankrupt him. He is lucky he won’t be one of the 55,000 Americans to die from pneumonia each year.
As a physician associate in primary care, I serve as a frontline witness to this failure of the American approach to insurance. Medical professionals are taught that the barrier to health is biology: bacteria, viruses, genetics. But increasingly, the barrier is a policy framework that pressures insured Americans to gamble with their lives. High-deductible health plans seem affordable because their monthly premiums are lower than other plans’, but they create perverse incentives by discouraging patients from seeking and accepting diagnostics and treatments — sometimes turning minor, treatable issues into expensive, life-threatening emergencies. My patient’s gamble with his lungs is a microcosm of the much larger gamble we are taking with the American public.
The economic theory underpinning these high deductibles is known as “skin in the game.” The idea is that if patients are responsible for the first few thousand dollars of their care, they will become savvy consumers, shopping around for the best value and driving down healthcare costs.
But this logic collapses in the exam room. Healthcare is not a consumer good like a television or a used car. My patient was not in a position to “shop around” for a cheaper X-ray, nor was he qualified to determine if his cough was benign or deadly. The “skin in the game” theory assumes a level of medical literacy and market transparency that simply doesn’t exist in a moment of crisis. You can compare the specs of two SUVs; you cannot “shop around” for a life-saving diagnostic while gasping for air.
A 2025 poll from the Kaiser Family Foundation points to this reality, finding that up to 38% of insured American adults say they skipped or postponed necessary healthcare or medications in the past 12 months because of cost. In the same poll, 42% of those who skipped care admitted their health problem worsened as a result.
This self-inflicted public health crisis is set to deteriorate further. The Congressional Budget Office estimates roughly 15 million people will lose health coverage and become uninsured by 2034 because of Medicaid and Affordable Care Act marketplace cuts. That is without mentioning the millions more who will see their monthly premiums more than double if premium tax credits are allowed to expire. If that happens, not only will millions become uninsured but also millions more will downgrade to “bronze” plans with huge deductibles just to keep their premiums affordable. We are about to flood the system with “insured but functionally uninsured” patients.
I see the human cost of this “functional uninsurance” every week. These are patients who technically have coverage but are terrified to use it because their deductibles are so large they may exceed the individuals’ available cash or credit — or even their net worth. This creates a dangerous paradox: Americans are paying hundreds of dollars a month for a card in their wallet they cannot afford to use. They skip the annual physical, ignore the suspicious mole and ration their insulin — all while technically insured. By the time they arrive at my clinic, their disease has often progressed to a catastrophic event, from what could have been a cheap fix.
Federal spending on healthcare should not be considered charity; it is an investment in our collective future. We cannot expect our children to reach their full potential or our workforce to remain productive if basic healthcare needs are treated as a luxury. Inaction by Congress and the current administration to solve this crisis is legislative malpractice.
In medicine, we are trained to treat the underlying disease, not just the symptoms. The skipped visits and ignored prescriptions are merely symptoms; the disease is a policy framework that views healthcare as a commodity rather than a fundamental necessity. If we allow these cuts to proceed, we are ensuring that the American workforce becomes sicker, our hospitals more overwhelmed and our economy less resilient. We are walking willingly into a public health crisis that is entirely preventable.
Joseph Pollino is a primary care physician associate in Nevada.
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.
Viewpoint
Perspectives
The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
-
High-deductible health plans create a barrier to necessary medical care, with patients avoiding diagnostics and treatments due to out-of-pocket cost concerns[1]. Research shows that 38% of insured American adults skipped or postponed necessary healthcare or medications in the past 12 months because of cost, with 42% reporting their health worsened as a result[1].
-
The economic theory of “skin in the game”—which assumes patients will shop around for better healthcare values if they have financial responsibility—fails in medical practice because patients lack the medical literacy to make informed decisions in moments of crisis and cannot realistically compare pricing for emergency or diagnostic services[1].
-
Rising deductibles are pushing enrollees toward bronze plans with deductibles averaging $7,476 in 2026, up from the average silver plan deductible of $5,304[1][4]. In California’s Covered California program, bronze plan enrollment has surged to more than one-third of new enrollees in 2026, compared to typically one in five[1].
-
Expiring federal premium tax credits will more than double out-of-pocket premiums for ACA marketplace enrollees in 2026, creating an expected 75% increase in average out-of-pocket premium payments[5]. This will force millions to either drop coverage or downgrade to bronze plans with massive deductibles, creating a population of “insured but functionally uninsured” people[1].
-
High-deductible plans pose particular dangers for patients with chronic conditions, with studies showing adults with diabetes involuntarily switched to high-deductible plans face 11% higher risk of hospitalization for heart attacks, 15% higher risk for strokes, and more than double the likelihood of blindness or end-stage kidney disease[4].
Different views on the topic
-
Expanding access to health savings accounts paired with bronze and catastrophic plans offers tax advantages that allow higher-income individuals to set aside tax-deductible contributions for qualified medical expenses, potentially offsetting higher out-of-pocket costs through strategic planning[3].
-
Employers and insurers emphasize that offering multiple plan options with varying deductibles and premiums enables employees to select plans matching their individual needs and healthcare usage patterns, allowing those who rarely use healthcare to save money through lower premiums[2]. Large employers increasingly offer three or more medical plan choices, with the expectation that employees choosing the right plan can unlock savings[2].
-
The expansion of catastrophic plans with streamlined enrollment processes and automatic display on HealthCare.gov is intended to make affordable coverage more accessible for certain income groups, particularly those above 400% of federal poverty level who lose subsidies[3].
-
Rising healthcare costs, including specialty drugs and new high-cost cell and gene therapies, are significant drivers requiring premium increases regardless of plan design[5]. Some insurers are managing affordability by discontinuing costly coverage—such as GLP-1 weight-loss medications—to reduce premium rate increases for broader plan members[5].
-
Detroit, MI6 days ago2 hospitalized after shooting on Lodge Freeway in Detroit
-
Technology4 days agoPower bank feature creep is out of control
-
Dallas, TX5 days agoDefensive coordinator candidates who could improve Cowboys’ brutal secondary in 2026
-
Health6 days agoViral New Year reset routine is helping people adopt healthier habits
-
Iowa3 days agoPat McAfee praises Audi Crooks, plays hype song for Iowa State star
-
Nebraska3 days agoOregon State LB transfer Dexter Foster commits to Nebraska
-
Nebraska3 days agoNebraska-based pizza chain Godfather’s Pizza is set to open a new location in Queen Creek
-
Dallas, TX1 day agoAnti-ICE protest outside Dallas City Hall follows deadly shooting in Minneapolis