A 1978 Medical Review Found Cannabis Had Both Therapeutic Promise and Health Risks | Research

The takeaway

A comprehensive medical review identified cannabis as having potential therapeutic uses for glaucoma and asthma while flagging cardiovascular risks during exercise and possible long-term effects on lungs and immunity.

Read this if you want a snapshot of what mainstream medicine understood about cannabis in the late 1970s.

Cannabis decreased peak exercise performance in healthy subjects

What the researchers found

This review synthesized the state of cannabis science as of 1977, covering both therapeutic potential and health concerns.

On the therapeutic side, cannabis showed promise for reducing eye pressure in glaucoma and for bronchodilation in asthma. The reviewers anticipated these findings might drive development of synthetic cannabinoid derivatives with better safety profiles.

On the risk side, the most concrete short-term concern was cardiovascular: cannabis use predisposed patients with coronary artery disease to angina during exercise. Even in healthy people, smoking marijuana decreased peak exercise performance, likely because it increased heart rate to maximum levels at lower workloads.

For long-term effects, the reviewers noted preliminary evidence suggesting impaired lung function and immune responses, but emphasized that no conclusive evidence for lasting biological consequences existed at that time.

Why it matters

This review captures a snapshot of medical understanding at a pivotal moment when cannabis was transitioning from primarily a recreational concern to a subject of serious pharmacological investigation. Many of the research directions it identified remain active today.

The numbers in context

No specific numeric data provided in the abstract beyond the publication timeframe (research through 1977).

How the study worked

Narrative review of published cannabis research through 1977, covering immunoassay detection methods, therapeutic applications, and short- and long-term health effects.

What this study cannot tell us

As a narrative review from 1978, it reflects limited evidence available at that time. The cannabis landscape has changed dramatically in terms of product potency, consumption methods, and the volume of research available.

How to read the evidence

A narrative review in a major medical journal synthesizing available evidence through 1977. Reviews provide useful context but depend on the quality and completeness of underlying studies.

When this study was published

Published in 1978, covering research through 1977. Nearly five decades of additional research have substantially expanded understanding of every topic covered.

The bigger picture

Published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, this review reflected mainstream medical thinking about cannabis in the late 1970s. It anticipated two developments that eventually materialized: synthetic cannabinoid medications (dronabinol was later approved) and ongoing debates about pulmonary and immune effects that persist decades later.

Questions still open

How have the specific concerns raised in this review held up over nearly five decades of additional research? Did synthetic cannabinoid development fulfill the therapeutic promise the reviewers anticipated?

Common questions

What therapeutic uses did the review identify?

Reduction of intraocular pressure for glaucoma and bronchodilation for asthma were the two primary therapeutic applications discussed.

What health risks were flagged?

Exercise-induced angina in heart disease patients, reduced peak exercise performance in healthy users, and preliminary evidence of effects on lung function and immune responses.

Read the original research

Cannabis, 1977.

Annals of internal medicine, 89(4), 539-49

View on PubMed ↗

Citation

. (1978). Cannabis, 1977.. Annals of internal medicine, 89(4), 539-49.