Active CAF Members and Cannabis for Mental Health: What a Clinical Study Found
Last Updated: February 2026 | Reading Time: 4 minutes
Discussion of medical cannabis in the context of Canadian veterans tends to focus on post-service populations. The St. Cyr et al. (2023) study published in BMC Psychiatry is a clinical study of people who were, in many cases, still serving — attending a specialized mental health outpatient clinic while remaining Canadian Armed Forces members or recent veterans. What it found has direct implications for clinicians working with active or recently separated personnel.
What the Study Examined
St. Cyr, Nazarov, Le et al. (2023), published in BMC Psychiatry (23: 836, DOI: 10.1186/s12888-023-05237-2), conducted a cross-sectional study of 415 CAF members and veterans attending the St. Joseph’s Operational Stress Injury Clinic in London, Ontario — an outpatient setting specializing in assessing and treating PTSD and other service-related mental health conditions — between January 2018 and December 2020.
The study examined both prevalence and correlates of cannabis use using multivariable logistic regression. Its central finding: 45.1% of the sample (n=187) reported current cannabis use for medical or recreational purposes, despite the absence of clinical practice guidelines to support or structure it. Cannabis use in this population is not marginal — it is the norm for nearly half of a treatment-seeking clinical cohort.
The Guideline Gap
The St. Cyr et al. finding reflects a broader pattern in the Canadian cannabis literature: clinical use has significantly outpaced guideline development. This is particularly pronounced in the CAF and veteran population, where cannabis use for mental health has become normalized through peer networks and increasing VAC reimbursement.
A 2023 qualitative study by Storey, Keeler-Villa, Harris, Anthonypillai, Tippin, Parihar & Rash (Canadian Journal of Pain, 7(1): 2232838) documented the experiences of 12 Canadian veterans with chronic pain who used VAC-authorized medicinal cannabis. Most had initiated cannabis to manage symptoms of preexisting conditions, with chronic pain, sleep disturbance, PTSD, and depression among the most common reasons. Most reported improvements in overall quality of life and reported replacing multiple pharmacological treatments with cannabis.
For clinicians working in CAF or veteran mental health settings, the practical implication of the St. Cyr et al. data is that the question is typically not “should I raise this topic” but “how do I engage with a patient who is already using cannabis and may or may not have disclosed it.” Clinician engagement improves the likelihood that use occurs with authorization, product consistency, and monitoring.
Correlates of Use: Who Is Using and Why
The statistically significant correlates of current cannabis use in the St. Cyr et al. sample were: younger age, lower income, potentially hazardous alcohol use, and increased bodily pain. PTSD severity, depressive severity, sleep quality, and suicide ideation were not statistically associated with cannabis use status.
The pain finding is the most clinically actionable result in the paper. It aligns with the broader veteran literature on cannabis and chronic pain and suggests that comorbid pain presentations are a meaningful prompt for cannabis use screening in this setting. The co-occurrence of cannabis use and hazardous alcohol use warrants monitoring: it does not indicate cannabis is worsening outcomes, but both patterns may require clinical attention.
The non-significance of PTSD severity as a correlate is counterintuitive given that this is a PTSD clinic population. The authors suggest it may reflect the treatment-seeking nature of the sample — individuals with more severe PTSD symptoms may be equally distributed across cannabis-using and non-using groups because both groups are presenting for treatment. It does not mean veterans are not using cannabis for PTSD symptom management. It means PTSD severity at intake did not predict cannabis use status in this clinical sample. The Sheehy et al. (2025) descriptive data from a separate veteran cohort found that the majority of cannabis users reported perceived mental health benefit, though this perceived benefit was not confirmed in adjusted analysis of measured outcomes.
What Authorization Changes
Medical cannabis authorization does several things that informal recreational use does not. It establishes product consistency: a licensed producer supplies cannabis with documented THC and CBD concentrations at a known dose. It creates a clinical record of use, relevant for monitoring and future prescribing decisions. It establishes coverage: authorized cannabis is reimbursable through VAC and Medavie Blue Cross for eligible patients, removing the financial pressure that sometimes drives substitution of cheaper unregulated sources.
For clinicians, the St. Cyr et al. prevalence data define the task: not discouraging cannabis use that is already occurring in nearly half the clinical population, but moving patients who are using recreationally toward authorized access where supply consistency, dosing, and clinical oversight can be established.
Authorization does not substitute for a mental health treatment plan. Clinicians authorizing cannabis for CAF members or veterans should situate it within a broader clinical plan that includes regular review of use and effects, monitoring for adverse patterns, and continued engagement with evidence-based care.
This article summarizes published peer-reviewed research for informational purposes. It is intended for healthcare professionals and does not constitute clinical guidelines.
References
- Sheehy, Storey, Rash, Tippin, Parihar & Harris (2025). Journal of Veterans Studies, 11(1): 30–46. DOI: 10.21061/jvs.v11i1.582
- St. Cyr, Nazarov, Le et al. (2023). BMC Psychiatry, 23: 836. DOI: 10.1186/s12888-023-05237-2
- Storey, Keeler-Villa, Harris, Anthonypillai, Tippin, Parihar & Rash (2023). Canadian Journal of Pain, 7(1): 2232838. DOI: 10.1080/24740527.2023.2232838