Six distinct cannabis user profiles reveal that using many product types may matter more than frequency alone | Research

The takeaway

Latent profile analysis identified six cannabis user groups in Washington State, and surprisingly, the highest-frequency concentrate users reported fewer adverse events than the next most frequent group that used a wider variety of products.

Public health professionals, harm reduction advocates, and cannabis consumers interested in how product variety relates to adverse outcomes.

What the researchers found

Six user profiles ranged from weekly flower-only users to daily concentrate users. The four groups with most frequent and varied product use were significantly more likely to self-identify as addicted. The highest-frequency concentrate group reported fewer adverse events than the polymodal group.

Why it matters

This challenges the simple assumption that more use equals more problems. Product variety may matter as much as frequency, suggesting harm reduction messaging should address polymodal use patterns.

The numbers in context

3,298 past-year cannabis users. Six latent profiles identified. Four highest-use groups significantly more likely to self-identify as addicted.

How the study worked

Latent profile analysis of 3,298 past-year cannabis users aged 16-65 in Washington State from the International Cannabis Policy Study (2019-2022).

What this study cannot tell us

Cross-sectional design cannot capture transitions between user profiles. Self-reported adverse events may differ from objectively measured harms. The counterintuitive concentrate finding could reflect survivorship bias.

How to read the evidence

Large sample from a well-established study with appropriate statistical methods, but cross-sectional analysis limits causal interpretation.

When this study was published

2025 publication using 2019-2022 survey data.

The bigger picture

As legal cannabis markets expand product options, understanding how different consumption patterns relate to harm is essential. The complexity of a person's cannabis use repertoire may be a risk factor independent of frequency.

Questions still open

Does switching between multiple product types create compounding risks?
Would adverse event patterns hold in a longitudinal design?

Common questions

Why would using more product types be associated with more problems?

Using multiple product types may reflect less controlled consumption patterns, make it harder to track intake, or expose users to varying THC concentrations across products.

Why did the heaviest concentrate users have fewer adverse events?

Several explanations are possible: tolerance from consistent high-dose use, more experienced consumption habits, or survivorship bias where those who experienced problems already reduced or stopped use.

Read the original research

Cannabis consumption patterns, adverse events, and cannabis risk beliefs: A latent profile analysis in WA State.

Drug and alcohol dependence, 273, 112728

View on PubMed ↗Publisher’s paper ↗

Citation

Garrett, Sharon B; Williams, Jason R; Carlini, Beatriz H; Hammond, David. (2025). Cannabis consumption patterns, adverse events, and cannabis risk beliefs: A latent profile analysis in WA State.. Drug and alcohol dependence, 273, 112728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2025.112728