Counter-points to consider.

Majority of "studies" are "Observational Study" = information gathered without the subject of the research having to be explicitly involved in recording what they are doing. Basically drawing inferences (not conclusions) from a limited sample of a population where the independent variable is not under the control of the researcher because of ethical or logistical concerns.

In addition... It is important to know -- imperative to know -- if these so-called studies are aware of the latest (2022) NIH statistics proving the majority of the U.S. population is smoking marijuana compared to 4% whom even tried marijuana in 1969.

Population who CURRENTLY smoke weed:

Ages 35 - 54 = 16%

Ages 18 - 34 = 30%

Ages 55+ = 7%

These figures matter when claiming more people are suffering from these alleged symptoms but not comparing medical claims to the current greatly increased numbers of marijuana smokers.

Also, how many heart and mental issue patients would have been admitted for care regardless of smoking vs not smoking?

The 2022 research also found more people smoke marijuana today than smoke tobacco products, and by a wide margin.

Bias is suspect in most observational "studies".