Weed is harming teens’ brain development, largest US study warns
A large US study by UC San Diego has found that cannabis use among teens is linked to slower brain development, particularly in memory, attention, and processing speed. While the cognitive differences were modest, researchers emphasize their significance during critical developmental years. The study analyzed over 11,000 children aged 9 to 17, using self-reports and biological testing to track the effects of THC and CBD.
- ▪Teens who used cannabis showed restricted growth in cognitive skills during key brain development years.
- ▪THC exposure was associated with worsening memory over time, while CBD did not have the same effect.
- ▪Over 95% of cannabis poisoning cases in New York teens were caused by edibles, according to the National Poison Data System.
- ▪The study involved more than 11,000 children aged 9 to 17 and included both self-reporting and biological testing.
- ▪Researchers caution that while correlation was observed, the study does not prove direct causation due to potential environmental and personality factors.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
Health Weed is harming teens’ brain development, largest US study warns By Rachel Sacks Published May 3, 2026, 10:19 a.m. ET A new study has found sobering effects of weed on teenage brains. While more teens are staying away from marijuana across the country, the drug is still used by one in five kids in New York, according to a New York Impact Report from November 2025. And though some purport the substance can improve mood and energy, there are negative effects on cognitive skills — especially in younger users. While marijuana use hasn’t risen amongst teens, a large study has found the substance has a major impact on the brain. Researchers from the University of California San Diego (UC San Diego) have conducted the largest long-term study in the US on cannabis use in kids.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at New York Post.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from New York Post
