Medical marijuana laws and workplace fatalities in the United States

Health, safety, and socioeconomic impacts of cannabis liberalization laws: An evidence and gap map

Background

Globally, cannabis laws and regulations are rapidly changing. Countries are increasingly permitting access to cannabis under various decriminalization, medicalization, and legalization laws. With strong economic, public health, and social justice incentives driving these domestic cannabis policy reforms, liberalization trends are bound to continue. However, despite a large and growing body of interdisciplinary research addressing the policy-relevant health, safety, and socioeconomic consequences of cannabis liberalization, there is a lack of robust primary and systematic research that comprehensively investigates the consequences of these reforms.

Objectives

This evidence and gap map (EGM) summarizes the empirical evidence on cannabis liberalization policies. Primary objectives were to develop a conceptual framework linking cannabis liberalization policies to relevant outcomes, descriptively summarize the empirical evidence, and identify areas of evidence concentration and gaps.

Search Methods

We comprehensively searched for eligible English-language empirical studies published across 23 academic databases and 11 gray literature sources through August 2020. Additions to the pool of potentially eligible studies from supplemental sources were made through November 2020.

Selection Criteria

The conceptual framework for this EGM draws upon a legal epidemiological perspective highlighting the causal effects of law and policy on population-level outcomes. Eligible interventions include policies that create or expand access to a legal or decriminalized supply of cannabis: comprehensive medical cannabis laws (MCLs), limited medical cannabidiol laws (CBDLs), recreational cannabis laws (RCLs), industrial hemp laws (IHLs), and decriminalization of cultivations laws (DCLs). Eligible outcomes include intermediate responses (i.e., attitudes/behaviors and markets/environments) and longer-term consequences (health, safety, and socioeconomic outcomes) of these laws.

Data Collection and Analysis

Both dual screening and dual data extraction were performed with third person deconfliction. Primary studies were appraised using the Maryland Scientific Methods Scale and systematic reviews were assessed using AMSTAR 2.

Main Results

The EGM includes 447 studies, comprising 438 primary studies and nine systematic reviews. Most research derives from the United States, with little research from other countries. By far, most cannabis liberalization research focuses on the effects of MCLs and RCLs. Studies targeting other laws-including CBDLs, IHLs, and DCLs-are relatively rare. Of the 113 distinct outcomes we documented, cannabis use was the single most frequently investigated. More than half these outcomes were addressed by three or fewer studies, highlighting substantial evidence gaps in the literature. The systematic evidence base is relatively small, comprising just seven completed reviews on cannabis use (3), opioid-related harms (3), and alcohol-related outcomes (1). Moreover, we have limited confidence in the reviews, as five were appraised as minimal quality and two as low quality.

Authors’ Conclusions

More primary and systematic research is needed to better understand the effects of cannabis liberalization laws on longer-term-and arguably more salient-health, safety, and socioeconomic outcomes. Since most research concerns MCLs and RCLs, there is a critical need for research on the societal impacts of industrial hemp production, medical CBD products, and decriminalized cannabis cultivation. Future research should also prioritize understanding the heterogeneous effects of these laws given differences in specific provisions and implementation across jurisdictions.

Workplace alcohol and other drug policy and support services in the United States, 2015-2019

BACKGROUND

Despite their growing popularity, the extent and nature of workplace alcohol and other drug (AOD) policy and support services in the United States remain unclear. The present study examined the availability of AOD policies and support services in workplaces. Also, the associations between a combination of these workplace measures and the current AOD consumption (focusing on binge drinking, use of marijuana and other illicit drugs, and nonmedical use of prescription drugs) were assessed.

METHODS

Pooled Data from the 2015-2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) were utilized to examine a nationally representative sample of 131,751 employed adults. First, the rates of those who reported having a written AOD policy at their workplaces among the total sample and subpopulations across socioeconomic status, and those who reported an employee assistance program or other counseling services for substance use problems were estimated. Then the associations between a combination of the two workplace measures and individuals' current AOD consumption were tested using multinomial logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

Although 77.2% of employed individuals reported having a written AOD policy at their workplaces, only 50% of the sample had access to support services for substance use problems. The limited access to support services was most notable among traditionally disadvantaged groups (e.g., females, Hispanics, and individuals with limited English proficiency). The models suggest that having both a workplace AOD policy and support services was associated with significantly lower rates of marijuana and other illicit drug use compared to having neither of the two measures or only support services.

CONCLUSION

Regardless of workplace AOD policies, the limited availability of support services, especially for disadvantaged workers, raises concerns. While further investigation is needed to understand the effectiveness of the comprehensive prevention approaches at workplaces, it is also important to advocate for the potential benefits of having employee assistance or other services available along with AOD policies.

Workplace Cannabis Policies: A Moving Target

Introduction: This article proposes a workplace cannabis policy paradigm that encompasses rapidly changing laws and regulations, legally defensible drug testing policies, and the needs of particular workplaces. Numerous states have now decriminalized medical or recreational use of cannabis, although U.S. federal law still defines cannabis as a Schedule I substance with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. For employers and employees, the confusion generated by this contradiction is exacerbated by the widely varying effects of the available cannabis delivery systems, the primitive and cumbersome drug testing protocols often used in workplace settings, difficulties in measuring cannabis-related workplace impairment, and a rapidly changing cultural ethos regarding cannabis. Although other articles have addressed many of the broad theoretical constructs, there exists little practical guidance on how workplace drug programs should address cannabis use by employees, both on the job and during off-hours. Materials and Methods: Research for this review was performed in the PubMed/National Library of Medicine database. Discussion: Cannabis use is associated with cognitive deficits, motivation problems, and perceptual distortions, so employers have a legitimate interest in preventing on-the-job impairment related to cannabis use. Similarly, employees have a legitimate interest in behaving as they wish outside of the workplace, as long as that behavior does not affect their job performance. Relevant statues and case law on the subject of cannabis in the workplace reflect different legal models across jurisdictions, in addition to legislators and judges' attempts to manage this tension between employer and employees. Conclusion: An effective workplace cannabis policy must fit into a larger workplace drug and alcohol policy. It should be constructed with a collaborative effort of addiction professionals, labor attorneys, and human resource professionals. Only then can the ultimate workplace cannabis policy comply with relevant laws, protect workplace safety and productivity, and support employees while remaining flexible enough to adapt to changes in the legal environment.

Societal Costs and Outcomes of Medical and Recreational Marijuana Policies in the United States: A Systematic Review

Significant support exists in the United States for legalization of marijuana/cannabis. As of 2021, 36 states and four territories approved the legalization of medical cannabis via medical marijuana laws (MMLs), and 15 states and District of Columbia (DC) have adopted recreational marijuana laws (RMLs). We performed structured and systematic searches of articles published from 2010 through September 2021. We assess the literature pertaining to adolescent marijuana use; opioid use and opioid-related outcomes; alcohol use; tobacco use; illicit and other drug use; marijuana growing and cultivation; employment, earnings, and other workplace outcomes; academic achievement and performance; criminal activity; perceived harmfulness; traffic and road safety; and suicide and sexual activity. Overall, 113 articles satisfied our inclusion criteria. Except for opioids, studies on use of other substances (illicit drugs, tobacco, and alcohol) were inconclusive. MMLs and RMLs do not generate negative outcomes in the labor market, lead to greater criminal activity, or reduce traffic and road safety.

Marijuana legalization and household spending on food and alcohol

Utilizing the Consumer Expenditure Interview Survey from 2005 to 2019, I study spending on food and alcohol following recreational marijuana law (RML). Exploiting differences in the timing of the passage of RMLs and employing two-way fixed-effects methods, I find that households located in states adopting these laws increase their quarterly spending on food, which is driven mainly by spending on food consumed away from home. Legalization of recreational marijuana also leads to increased quarterly spending on alcohol. These findings suggest a complementarity between food, alcohol, and marijuana.

Recreational marijuana laws and junk food consumption

We use retail scanner data on purchases of high calorie food to study the causal relationship between recreational marijuana laws (RMLs) and consumption of high calorie food. To do this we exploit differences in the timing of introduction of recreational marijuana laws among states and find that they are complements. Specifically, in counties located in RML states monthly sales of high calorie food increased by 3.2 percent when measured by sales and 4.5 percent when measured by volume when using our preferred identification strategy. Results are robust to including placebo effective dates for RMLs in treated states and products as well as when using Synthetic Control Methods as an alternative methodology.

Medical marijuana and workers' compensation claiming

We study the effect of state medical marijuana laws (MMLs) on workers' compensation (WC) claiming among adults. Medical marijuana is plausibly related to WC claiming by allowing improved symptom management, and thus reduced need for the benefit, among injured or ill workers. We use data on claiming drawn from the Annual Social and Economic supplement to the Current Population Survey over the period 1989 to 2012, coupled with a differences-in-differences design to provide the first evidence on this relationship. Our estimates show that, post MML, WC claiming declines, both the propensity to claim and the level of income from WC. These findings suggest that medical marijuana can allow workers to better manage symptoms associated with workplace injuries and illnesses and, in turn, reduce need for WC. However, the reductions in WC claiming post MML are very modest in size.

Abuse of Licit and Illicit Psychoactive Substances in the Workplace: Medical, Toxicological, and Forensic Aspects

About one-third of adult life is spent in the workplace. The use of psychoactive substances is a major preventable cause of morbidity and mortality. The consumption of psychoactive substances during or outside working hours greatly increases the frequency and severity of labor accidents, as well as the workers’ poor general state of health and productivity, implying higher costs for enterprises. It is the responsibility of organizations to ensure the safety and health of their workers. These cannot be limited to traditional routine clinical exams, as other aspects also have an impact on health. Thus, prevention and intervention in the consumption of psychoactive substances (e.g., ethanol, opioids, central nervous system stimulants or depressants, hallucinogens, Cannabis derivatives, dissociative substances, and inhalants) in labor activity should be considered as an investment of organizations and not as a cost, in view of the professional, personal, and family advantages for workers and employers, with a potential impact on productivity, security, health, and quality of life at work. Despite the extensive literature on the subject, each article generally focuses on one or another aspect of a very specific nature, not tackling the problem in a holistic way by confronting clinical, safety, and legal issues. This article presents a reflection on the legal, laboratorial, clinical, ethical, forensic, and safety concerns related to the consumption of psychoactive substances in the workplace, and can be a cross-cutting contribution to occupational medicine, forensic medicine, and insurance medicine, as well as for entrepreneurs, lawyers, judges, workers, and technicians from the public and private sectors that develop projects in this area. This discussion is based on general principles established internationally and highlights the role of the occupational healthcare system and other decision-making actors in the prevention and supervision of workplace psychoactive consumption.

Sex, marijuana and baby booms

We study the behavioral changes caused by marijuana use on sexual activity, contraception, and birth counts by applying a differences-in-differences approach that exploits the variation in timing of the introduction of medical marijuana laws (MMLs) among states. We find that MMLs cause an increase in sexual activity, a reduction in contraceptive use conditional on having sex, and an increase in number of births. There is also suggestive evidence on temporary increases in the state-year gonorrhea rate. These changes may be attributed to behavioral responses including increased attention to the immediate hedonic effects of sexual contact, increased sexual frequency, as well as delayed discounting and ignoring the future costs associated with sex. Our findings on births suggest that behavioral factors can counteract the physiological changes from marijuana use that tend to decrease fertility. Our findings are robust to a broad set of tests.

International Perspectives on the Implications of Cannabis Legalization: A Systematic Review & Thematic Analysis

The legality, recreational and medical use of cannabis varies widely by country and region but remains largely prohibited internationally. In October 2018, Canada legalized the recreational use of cannabis—a move many viewed as controversial. Proponents of legalization have emphasized the potential to eradicate the marijuana black market, improve quality and safety control, increase tax revenues, improve the availability of medical cannabis, and lower gang-related drug violence. Conversely, opponents of legalization have stressed concerns about cannabis’ addictive potential, second-hand cannabis exposure, potential exacerbation of underlying and established mental illnesses, as well as alterations in perception that affect safety, particularly driving. This systematic review synthesizes recent international literature on the clinical and public health implications of cannabis legalization.