Photorealistic clinical photo of an older adult speaking with a healthcare professional in a primary care exam room.

CBD use among older adults: A study

CED Clinical Relevance
#88
High practical relevance
This paper does not test efficacy, but it speaks directly to a fast-growing real-world pattern clinicians are already seeing in older patients.
๐Ÿ“‹ Clinical Insight | CED Clinic
This is a prevalence and correlates paper, not a treatment trial. Its value is that it shows who is using CBD in later life and what patterns travel with that use, while reminding clinicians not to mistake correlation for benefit, safety, or causality.
Older Adults
CBD Epidemiology
Cannabis Co-Use
Mental Health
Clinical Counseling
Audience Clinicians, informed patients, caregivers, and health journalists
Primary Topic CBD use among older adults
Source Read the full article

CBD Use Among Older Adults: What This National Survey Really Shows

CBD use among older adults is no longer a niche phenomenon. This large national survey does not tell us whether CBD is working, but it does tell us who is using it, how often that use overlaps with cannabis, and why clinicians should be asking much more specific questions when older patients say they take โ€œCBD.โ€

What This Study Teaches Us

This paper is a cross-sectional epidemiologic analysis of the 2022 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, focused specifically on adults age 50 and older. Its main contribution is not proving benefit or harm, but showing that past-year CBD use is common in later life, especially notable in adults 65 and older, where reported CBD use exceeded reported cannabis use. It also shows that CBD use strongly clusters with both medical and nonmedical cannabis use, and that different health and substance-use correlates appear in the 50 to 64 and 65-plus groups. The biggest limitation is built into the design: self-reported associations cannot tell us why people used CBD, what products they actually took, how much they took, or whether CBD caused any of the patterns seen.

Why This Matters

For clinicians, this paper matters because older adults are often assumed to be either cautious nonusers or simple โ€œmedicalโ€ users. This dataset suggests the real-world picture is more layered. A meaningful share of older adults report CBD use, many also report cannabis use, and some of that use sits alongside mental health burden, chronic illness, or other substance-use problems. That makes routine medication reconciliation and cannabinoid history-taking more important than many standard visits currently reflect.

Why This Matters

For lay readers, the study is useful because it pushes back on two familiar distortions. One is the idea that CBD is so benign and wellness-adjacent that it barely deserves medical discussion. The other is the opposite assumption, that any CBD use in older adults automatically signals misuse or danger. The paper supports neither simplification. It shows common use, meaningful overlap with cannabis, and enough complexity to justify careful, individualized conversation.

Why This Matters

At a public-health level, this study also highlights a surveillance problem. Consumers may think they are taking one thing while actually taking variable or mislabeled hemp-derived products, and large surveys still do not capture dosage, frequency, product chemistry, or motivation with enough precision. In other words, older adult CBD use is becoming more visible faster than the evidence base or product oversight is catching up.

Study Snapshot
Study Type Cross-sectional observational analysis of a nationally representative U.S. survey
Population Community-dwelling U.S. adults age 50 and older, analyzed as ages 50 to 64 and ages 65 and older
Exposure or Intervention Self-reported past-year CBD or hemp product use
Comparator Older adults without past-year CBD use, with additional comparison across no cannabis use, medical cannabis use, and nonmedical cannabis use
Primary Outcomes Prevalence of past-year CBD use and adjusted associations between CBD use and cannabis use, chronic illness count, mental illness, and other substance-use problems
Sample Size or Scope 10,560 survey respondents age 50 and older, representing nearly 119 million U.S. adults
Journal Clinical Gerontologist
Year 2025
DOI 10.1080/07317115.2024.2429595
Funding or Conflicts Supported by National Institute on Aging grant P30AG066614; authors reported no conflict of interest
Clinical Bottom Line

CBD use among older adults is common and often travels with cannabis use, but this paper does not show that CBD is treating disease, reducing medication burden, or causing the health patterns linked with it. It supports better screening and better counseling, not bigger claims.

What This Paper Looked At

The authors used 2022 NSDUH data to examine self-reported past-year CBD use in U.S. adults age 50 and older. They split the sample into ages 50 to 64 and ages 65 and older, then modeled how CBD use related to medical cannabis use, nonmedical cannabis use, chronic illness count, mental illness, nicotine dependence, alcohol use disorder, psychotherapeutic medication misuse, illicit drug use, and several sociodemographic variables. Importantly, this was not a study of prescribed CBD, verified product chemistry, clinical response, or longitudinal outcomes. It was a study of reported use patterns and reported health associations.

What the Paper Found

Past-year CBD use was reported by 18.3% of adults age 50 to 64 and 14.3% of adults age 65 and older. In the older group, CBD use was more common than cannabis use, which was reported by 8.0%. In adjusted models, both medical and nonmedical cannabis use were strongly associated with CBD use in both age groups, with incidence rate ratios above 4 in each group. In adults 50 to 64, CBD use was also associated with more chronic illnesses, mild and moderate to severe mental illness, and illicit drug use. In adults 65 and older, CBD use was significantly associated with disordered psychotherapeutic drug use, while physical health burden was not a significant correlate after adjustment. The paper also found lower reported CBD use among several minoritized groups relative to non-Hispanic white respondents.

How Strong Is This Evidence?

This is useful but mid-tier observational evidence for prevalence and pattern recognition. Because the sample is nationally representative and large, the paper is stronger than a small convenience survey for describing how common reported CBD use is in older adults. But because it is cross-sectional and self-reported, it sits far below randomized trials for questions of efficacy or safety, and below longitudinal cohorts for questions about directionality over time.

Where This Paper Deserves Skepticism

Several caution points matter here. First, the survey cannot tell us why respondents used CBD, whether they used it for pain, sleep, anxiety, wellness, or something else. Second, it does not provide dose, frequency, route, product type, or laboratory confirmation of what was actually consumed. Third, the survey category bundled โ€œCBD or hemp products,โ€ which means some respondents may have been using products containing other cannabinoids, including intoxicating hemp-derived compounds. Fourth, all exposure and health data were self-reported, so recall error, misunderstanding of product content, and social desirability bias are real concerns. Fifth, cross-sectional associations can run in multiple directions. People with more illness may seek CBD, rather than CBD being related to illness in any causal sense. Finally, because CBD use among older adults appears here as a broad consumer behavior rather than a verified pharmacologic intervention, the findings are better understood as a map of use patterns than as a map of clinical effects.

What This Paper Does Not Show

It does not show that CBD improves pain, sleep, anxiety, mood, or any chronic disease in older adults. It does not show that CBD caused the higher rates of certain mental health or substance-use problems seen in some groups. It does not show that over-the-counter CBD products were accurately labeled, contaminant-free, or chemically uniform. And it does not tell us whether CBD reduced the use of opioids, benzodiazepines, alcohol, or other drugs in this sample.

How This Fits With the Broader Clinical Conversation
This paper lands in an increasingly familiar clinical territory. Public interest in CBD has outpaced both product regulation and high-quality outcome data. That mismatch creates a strange environment where older patients may be using CBD regularly, sometimes alongside cannabis and other medications, while clinicians still have limited trial-quality evidence to guide them. The study also helps separate two issues that are often collapsed into one. One issue is whether CBD is effective for particular conditions. The other is whether CBD use among older adults is common enough, complex enough, and clinically relevant enough to deserve structured questioning during care. This paper makes the second point more convincingly than the first. Midway through that broader conversation, the phrase CBD use among older adults stops being a niche search term and starts looking like a standard geriatric intake topic.
Dr. Caplan’s Take
What I appreciate about this paper is that it stays mostly in its lane. It is not pretending to solve the efficacy question. It is showing us that a large number of older adults are already in the marketplace, already making decisions, and often doing so in ways that overlap with cannabis use and other health complexity. That alone is clinically important.
Where I would urge restraint is in how people narrate the associations. A reader could easily overread this into either reassurance or alarm. Neither is justified. The better lesson is practical: ask what product the patient is actually using, why they chose it, what else they take, what they think it is doing, and whether the label can be trusted at all.
What a Careful Reader Should Take Away

This is a good descriptive paper about a real and growing phenomenon. It tells us that reported CBD use is common in adults over 50, especially striking in those over 65, and that it frequently overlaps with cannabis use and certain markers of health complexity. It does not settle debates about benefit, substitution, or safety. Its best use is to sharpen clinical curiosity, improve patient interviewing, and keep interpretation disciplined.

๐Ÿ’ฌ Join the Conversation

Have a question about how this applies to your situation? Ask Dr. Caplan โ†’

Want to discuss this topic with other patients and caregivers? Join the forum discussion โ†’

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Was this a study of CBD treatment effectiveness?

No. It was a survey-based observational study looking at who reported using CBD and what characteristics were associated with that use.

2. How common was CBD use in this sample?

Past-year CBD use was reported by 18.3% of adults age 50 to 64 and 14.3% of adults age 65 and older.

3. Was CBD use more common than cannabis use in older seniors?

Yes, in adults 65 and older, reported CBD use was more common than reported cannabis use in this dataset.

4. Did the study prove that CBD helps older adults?

No. The design cannot tell us whether CBD was effective, ineffective, or harmful for the reasons respondents may have been using it.

5. What was the strongest association in the paper?

The most consistent finding was the strong positive association between CBD use and both medical and nonmedical cannabis use in both age groups.

6. Did the paper identify what kind of CBD products people used?

No. It did not capture detailed product formulation, dosage, route, frequency, or verified cannabinoid content.

7. Why is self-report a problem in CBD research?

Many consumers do not know exactly what is in the products they buy, so respondents may misclassify CBD, hemp, THC-containing hemp products, or mixed cannabinoid products.

8. What should clinicians do with this information?

Ask older patients specifically about CBD and hemp products, not just โ€œcannabis,โ€ and clarify product type, reason for use, co-use with THC, and possible medication interactions.

9. Does the paper suggest a substitution effect away from opioids or other medications?

Not directly. The authors discuss that possibility, but this dataset does not demonstrate medication substitution.

10. What is the main takeaway for readers?

CBD use in later life is common enough to matter clinically, but the evidence here describes patterns of use, not proof of therapeutic value.








{“@context”:”https://schema.org”,”@type”:”Article”,”headline”:”CBD Use Among Older Adults: What This National Survey Really Shows”,”about”:”CBD use among older adults”,”url”:”https://cedclinic.com/cbd-use-among-older-adults/”,”description”:”CBD use among older adults is rising, and this national survey shows who is using CBD, how it overlaps with cannabis use, and what careful readers should and should not conclude from the data.”}