Cannabis and Exercise Science: A Commentary on Existing Studies and Suggestions for Future Directions

Gillman, Arielle S.; Hutchison, Kent E.; Bryan, Angela D.

doi:10.1007/s40279-015-0362-3

Cited by 27 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Prior research has posited that endogenous cannabinoids (i.e., cannabinoids occurring naturally in the body) provide a reward pathway for the addictive properties of PA, which may be disturbed by the consumption of exogenous cannabinoids (i.e., cannabis use), but this mechanism is not fully understood (17). Alternatively, it has been suggested that exogenous cannabinoids have indirect positive effects on health by reducing pain and in ammation, making an individual more likely to engage in PA (18,19).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

No Difference in Physical Activity Associated with Cannabis Use Status in a Nationally Representative Sample of U.S. Adults

Ong¹,

Bellettiere²,

Alvarado³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Prior research examining the relationship between cannabis use, sedentary behavior, and physical activity has generated conflicting findings, potentially due to biases in the self-reported measures used to assess physical activity. This study aimed to more precisely explore the relationship between cannabis use and sedentary behavior/physical activity using objective measures. Methods: Data were obtained from the 2005-2006 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. 2,092 participants (ages 20-59; 48.8% female) had accelerometer-measured sedentary behavior, light physical activity, and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. Participants were classified as a current cannabis user if they reported any use over the previous 30 days. Multivariable linear regression estimated minutes engaged in sedentary behavior/physical activity for current versus non-current cannabis users. Logistic regression modeled self-reported moderate-to-vigorous physical activity in relation to current cannabis use. Results: Fully-adjusted regression models indicated that current cannabis users’ objectively-measured sedentary behavior/physical activity did not significantly differ from non-current users. There were no significant associations between self-reported moderate-to-vigorous physical activity and cannabis use. Conclusions: This study is the first to evaluate the relationship between cannabis use and accelerometer-measured sedentary behavior and physical activity. Such objective measures should be used in other cohorts to replicate our finding that current cannabis use is not significantly associated with sedentary behavior/physical activity in order to fully assess the potential public health impact of recent increases in cannabis use.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

No Difference in Physical Activity Associated with Cannabis Use Status in a Nationally Representative Sample of U.S. Adults

Ong¹,

Bellettiere²,

Alvarado³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Comparable to the aforementioned growing number of psychostimulants, synthetic cannabinoids have boomed considerably, irrespective of recent indications of possible nephrotoxic properties . Noteworthy, at least concerning the use of cannabis, more in‐depth knowledge regarding its effect on exercise and recovery was considered desirable especially in the light of modified political and legal regulations that recently came into effect and potentially affect a future anti‐doping case management . The need for capabilities to analytically cope with the enormous number of new synthetic cannabinoids has resulted in a variety of test methods of colorimetric, immunological, and mass spectrometric nature that have comprehensively been reviewed by several authors .…”

Section: Cannabinoids and Narcoticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[206] Noteworthy, at least concerning the use of cannabis, more in-depth knowledge regarding its effect on exercise and recovery was considered desirable especially in the light of modified political and legal regulations that recently came into effect and potentially affect a future anti-doping case management. [207] The need for capabilities to analytically cope with the enormous number of new synthetic cannabinoids has resulted in a variety of test methods of colorimetric, immunological, and mass spectrometric nature that have comprehensively been reviewed by several authors. [208][209][210] Scheidweiler et al reported on the use of a nontargeted sequential windowed acquisition of all theoretical mass spectra (SWATH) approach, [211] allowing to successfully detect metabolites of 21 frequently identified synthetic cannabinoids [212] from human urine.…”

Section: Cannabinoids and Narcoticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Annual banned‐substance review: analytical approaches in human sports drug testing

Thevis

Kuuranne

Walpurgis

et al. 2016

Drug Testing and Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of improving anti-doping efforts is predicated on several different pillars, including, amongst others, optimized analytical methods. These commonly result from exploiting most recent developments in analytical instrumentation as well as research data on elite athletes' physiology in general, and pharmacology, metabolism, elimination, and downstream effects of prohibited substances and methods of doping, in particular. The need for frequent and adequate adaptations of sports drug testing procedures has been incessant, largely due to the uninterrupted emergence of new chemical entities but also due to the apparent use of established or even obsolete drugs for reasons other than therapeutic means, such as assumed beneficial effects on endurance, strength, and regeneration capacities. Continuing the series of annual banned-substance reviews, literature concerning human sports drug testing published between October 2014 and September 2015 is summarized and reviewed in reference to the content of the 2015 Prohibited List as issued by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), with particular emphasis on analytical approaches and their contribution to enhanced doping controls.

show abstract

“…New evidence is emerging that the euphoric effects experienced during exercise, also termed as “runner’s high,” may be the result of the actions of endogenous cannabinoid release during exercise rather than endorphins (10). The G-protein coupled cannabinoid 1 receptors (CB1) in the brain have been observed to be closely linked to opioid receptors, and the dopaminergic reward pathways suggesting endogenous cannabinoid release with PA could be a major reason why regular exercise is perceived as highly rewarding (11, 12).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns and perceptions of cannabis use with physical activity

Lisano

Stewart

Phillips

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

26Abstract 27 Background and Aims: Past research has shown that cannabis use is common among adults in the U.S. In 28 addition, physical activity (PA), such as exercise, is often a component of many American's daily 29 routines. Anecdotal information suggests that a subset of individuals use cannabis in conjunction with 30 PA, but the evidence base is lacking. The purpose of this study was to assess the frequency, methods of 31 ingestion, strain types, and timing (before, during or after) of cannabis use in combination with PA. We 32 also sought to better understand the types of PA that cannabis is being used with and reasons why 33 individuals may use cannabis with PA. 34 Methods and Results: A brief survey was developed and was administered online to community residents 35 (N = 105) who reported use of cannabis with PA. Analysis of survey responses revealed that participants 36 were using cannabis in combination with a wide range of physical activities. While cannabis use was 37 reported before, during, and after PA, the majority of participants (92%) reported use of cannabis before 38 PA. Most participants (77%) believed that the use of cannabis products with their PA had a positive effect 39 on their performance. The strain of cannabis used with PA was dependent on timing of cannabis use 40 before, during, or after PA. Although participants reported a range of reasons for using cannabis before, 41 during, or after PA, pain management was the only reason reported across all time periods. 59Phytocannabinoids, the active components in cannabis, mimic the effects of the endogenous 60 cannabinoids in the body (2). Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) are the two 61 most abundant phytocannabinoids present in cannabis products, and have received the most attention 62 from the scientific community. However, THC and CBD are just two of more than 100 known 63 phytocannabinoids (3) and the effects of these compounds have yet to be fully elucidated. Products of the 64 cannabis plant can further be described by their cultivar, or strain, and are often separated into two 65 general categories: Cannabis Indica and Cannabis Sativa (4), with varying hybrids of the two strains.66 Among medical cannabis users, common reasons for the use of Cannabis Indica include pain 67 management and as an aid in sedation and sleep, while Cannabis Sativa users often prefer this strain for 68 its perceived induction of euphoria and energy enhancement (5). Although exploration of the medicinal 69 and psychoactive effects of cannabis products is still in its infancy, interest related to cannabis use on 70 physical activity (PA) is also emerging. 71Within the U.S., just over half (51.7%) of adults over the age of 18 years met the federal PA 72 guidelines of at least 150-minutes of moderate or 75-minutes of vigorous activity per week (6). Currently, 73 although there is minimal research describing how and why the physically active general population is 74 using cannabis with PA, there have been several studies investigating c...

show abstract

Cannabis and Exercise Science: A Commentary on Existing Studies and Suggestions for Future Directions

Cited by 27 publications

References 56 publications

No Difference in Physical Activity Associated with Cannabis Use Status in a Nationally Representative Sample of U.S. Adults

No Difference in Physical Activity Associated with Cannabis Use Status in a Nationally Representative Sample of U.S. Adults

Annual banned‐substance review: analytical approaches in human sports drug testing

Patterns and perceptions of cannabis use with physical activity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About