Low-Dose THC and Anti-Inflammatories May Delay Alzheimer’s Progression
A new study, published in the medical journal “Aging and Disease” in late December 2025, by a team of researchers from Dr. Chu Chen’s laboratory at the University of Texas Health Science Center San Antonio, has revealed a new pharmaceutical approach that may hold the key in significantly delaying the onset of Alzheimer’s disease.
The researchers, in their latest paper, have employed a combination of a small dose of THC and celecoxib, a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug that is often prescribed for arthritis.
THC, a compound in cannabis, has been extensively studied in relation to its potential in Alzheimer’s disease, but its administration has been marred by “hormetic” effects, wherein a small dose of THC has been shown to have a beneficial impact, while a larger dose may trigger inflammation and cognitive decline.
In their latest paper, the researchers have administered a precise dose of 3 mg/kg of THC and 1 mg/kg of celecoxib in a series of experiments with mice that were genetically engineered to develop Alzheimer’s disease.
The researchers found that the THC combination worked significantly better than either drug alone in suppressing the inflammation that THC triggers while leaving its ability to enhance memory and learning performance intact.
Using single-cell RNA sequencing, the researchers also found that the combination of THC and celecoxib restored the expression of genes in the brains of the mice back to a healthy status, thereby significantly reducing the amount of plaques that are characteristic of Alzheimer’s disease.
According to Dr. Chen, the combination of THC and celecoxib has “high translational potential” and may soon be tested in humans to assess its ability in slowing down the progression of the disease in early-stage Alzheimer’s patients.
Cannabis Use Linked to Better Cognitive Performance in Aging Adults
Contrary to long-standing stereotypes regarding the negative impact of cannabis on cognitive decline, a study published on January 26, 2026, in the online edition of the Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, highlighted by NORML, has now identified that older cannabis users tend to exhibit greater cognitive function than non-users.
The study, which analyzed data from a large-scale study of aging populations in the U.S. in an effort to identify correlations between cannabis use and cognitive function in later life, identified that greater lifetime cannabis use was positively correlated with greater brain volume in critical areas of the brain, including the hippocampus, which is critical for memory, as well as the caudate/putamen, which plays a role in motor function and learning.
In addition, the study identified that cannabis users tended to perform better in a series of cognitive function tests than non-users.
The study authors suggest that the results support a “hormetic” hypothesis in which low to moderate stimulation of the endocannabinoid system has a neuroprotective effect, which could potentially buffer the brain against the atrophy that occurs during the normal course of aging.
This study follows a series of recent reports out of Israel and Denmark that identified a neuroprotective effect in the geriatric population.
New Zealand Study Finds Cannabis Improves Life for Endometriosis Patients
New hope for endometriosis sufferers has been provided by observational data released by the BMJ Complementary Medicine and Therapies journal on January 29, 2026.
This debilitating disease, which affects millions of women worldwide, has proven difficult to treat using traditional pain management techniques.
A prospective cohort study by the University of Otago, New Zealand, has found significant improvements in the quality of life for endometriosis sufferers who were given standardized cannabis formulations.
Twenty-eight patients were given either CBD-dominant cannabis formulations or balanced THC/CBD formulations for a period of three months. A significant improvement in the patients’ quality of life, as well as the intensity of the endometriosis-related pain, was observed.
Specifically, the “worst pain” scores, which were severe at 7.62 before the start of the study, were reduced drastically to the more manageable level of 5.38 by the end of the 12-week period.
There was also an enormous improvement in the patients’ scores for the Endometriosis Health Profile (EHP-30), which dropped by half from 68.77 before the start of the cannabis treatment to 37.40 by the end of the period.
This is good news for endometriosis sufferers, as the cannabis treatment had “limited adverse events.” This means that the cannabis treatment is safe for endometriosis sufferers.
This finding has given cannabis a significant advantage over other treatments, such as opioids and hormonal treatments, as the former provide relief for endometriosis sufferers without any severe side effects. This research has been corroborated by the UK Medical Cannabis Registry.
“Reverse Spin Bias”: Are Researchers Downplaying Positive Cannabis Findings?
A study published in Research Integrity and Peer Review on January 29, 2026, has identified a disturbing trend in medical literature that has been termed “reverse spin bias.”
The researchd, conducted by researcher Renée O’Leary and a team of researchers who analyzed 29 systematic reviews of cannabis for pain relief, found that in a third of the cases, the conclusions of the researchers were significantly more negative than the data presented in the study warranted.
“Spin bias” is usually a problem in scientific research when the researchers present data in a more positive light than the data actually supports. However, in the case of the cannabis pain relief study, the researchers found the opposite: the researchers were “discounting, downplaying, or dismissing” the positive results of the study.
For example, even if the data showed a strong positive correlation for pain reduction, the conclusions section of the study would dismiss the results as “of low quality” without any basis in fact or emphasize the “unknown future harms” that were outside the study’s data.
The researchers believe that the reason for the negative conclusions is to increase the likelihood of the study being published in a conservative medical journal or to meet the expectations of an institution that has a negative view of cannabis.
The researchers are calling for a more critical peer review process in which the conclusions section of a study are more carefully examined to be sure it matches the actual data presented in the results section.