rethinkTHC Search
Menu
Study breakdown

Adolescent cannabis or THC exposure in rats did not produce lasting anxiety, depression, or cognitive effects in adulthood

Animal StudyPreliminary evidence
The takeaway

Neither cannabis smoke nor THC exposure during adolescence produced robust behavioral changes in adult rats after abstinence, suggesting that adverse effects of adolescent cannabis use in humans may be driven by non-cannabinoid factors.

Neuroscientists studying adolescent cannabis effects, harm reduction advocates, and researchers interpreting human observational studies.

No lasting behavioral effects

What the researchers found

Despite testing both cannabis smoke and THC at multiple doses during the adolescent period (P29-49 or P35-45), adult rats showed no significant effects on anxiety (open field, elevated plus maze), depression (sucrose preference, forced swim), or cognition (novel object recognition) after abstinence until P70. Some subtle sex differences were slightly attenuated.

Why it matters

This null finding challenges the assumption that adolescent cannabis exposure directly causes lasting psychological harm. If the behavioral deficits seen in human studies are not reproduced in controlled animal experiments, non-cannabinoid factors (social environment, other substance use, pre-existing vulnerabilities) may drive the human associations.

The numbers in context

Cannabis smoke: PD 29-49. THC ascending doses: PD 35-45. Adult testing: PD 70. No significant effects on open field, elevated plus maze, sucrose preference, forced swim, or novel object recognition. Some sex-dependent measures slightly attenuated.

How the study worked

Two experiments in Long-Evans rats. Cannabis smoke exposure PD 29-49 or ascending THC doses PD 35-45. Adult behavioral testing at P70 for anxiety, depression, and cognition. Both sexes tested.

What this study cannot tell us

Rat behavior may not fully model human psychiatric conditions. The abstinence period (to P70) may not be long enough. Cannabis smoke exposure methods may not replicate human consumption patterns. Only behavioral outcomes were measured, not neurochemical or structural changes.

How to read the evidence

Rated preliminary because this is an animal study, though the systematic negative finding across multiple behavioral domains is notable.

When this study was published

Published in 2019.

The bigger picture

Null findings in well-designed animal studies are important because they control for the confounds that plague human observational research. If controlled cannabinoid exposure does not produce lasting behavioral changes, the human literature may be capturing correlation rather than causation.

Questions still open

  • Would longer follow-up or different behavioral tests reveal effects? Are human associations with adolescent cannabis use driven by confounds? Would higher potency exposure show different results?

Common questions

Does adolescent cannabis use cause lasting mental health problems?
Human studies suggest associations, but this controlled rat study found no lasting anxiety, depression, or cognitive effects from adolescent cannabis or THC exposure after abstinence, suggesting human associations may involve non-cannabinoid factors.
Why would animal results differ from human studies?
Animal studies can control for confounds that human studies cannot: peer influence, socioeconomic factors, other substance use, pre-existing mental health conditions, and self-selection. If these confounds drive human associations, controlled animal experiments would show null results.

Read the original research

Effects in rats of adolescent exposure to cannabis smoke or THC on emotional behavior and cognitive function in adulthood.

Psychopharmacology, 236(9), 2773-2784

Citation

Bruijnzeel, Adriaan W; Knight, Parker; Panunzio, Stefany; Xue, Song; Bruner, Matthew M; Wall, Shannon C; Pompilus, Marjory; Febo, Marcelo; Setlow, Barry. (2019). Effects in rats of adolescent exposure to cannabis smoke or THC on emotional behavior and cognitive function in adulthood.. Psychopharmacology, 236(9), 2773-2784. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-019-05255-7

Explore the wider topic