A Public Health Framework for Legalized Retail Marijuana Based on the US Experience: Avoiding a New Tobacco Industry

Assessment of Online Marketing and Sales Practices Among Recreational Cannabis Retailers in Five U.S. Cities

Background: With more states legalizing recreational cannabis, examining cannabis retail and marketing is crucial, as it may influence consumers' perceptions and behaviors. Particularly understudied is online cannabis retail. Methods: In Spring 2022, coders collected and analyzed data regarding retailer characteristics, age verification, and marketing strategies (e.g., product availability, health-related content, promotions, website imagery) among 195 cannabis retail websites in five U.S. cities (Denver, Colorado; Seattle, Washington; Portland, Oregon; Las Vegas, Nevada; Los Angeles, California). Descriptive analyses characterized the websites overall and across cities. Results: Overall, 80.5% verified age for website entry, and 92.8% offered online purchases (92.3% of retailers in Seattle, where prohibited). Of these, 82.9% required age verification for purchases, and 30.9% offered delivery. Almost all (>92%) offered flower/bud, concentrates, edibles, vaping devices, topicals, and tinctures. Health warnings were displayed on 38.3% of websites. Although all five states required health warnings regarding use during pregnancy, only 10.3% had these warnings. In addition, 59.0% posted some unsubstantiated health claims, most often indicating physical and mental health benefits (44.6%). Although Colorado, Washington, and Oregon prohibit health claims, 51.2-53.8% of these retailers posted them. Discounts, samples, or promotions were present on 90.8% of websites; 63.6% had subscription/membership programs. Subpopulations represented in website content included the following: 27.2% teens/young adults, 26.2% veterans, 7.2% sexual/gender minorities, and 5.6% racial/ethnic minorities. Imagery also targeted young people (e.g., 29.7% party/cool/popularity, 18.5% celebrity/influencer endorsement). Conclusions: Regulatory efforts are needed to better monitor promotional strategies and regulatory compliance (e.g., health claims, youth-oriented content, underage access) among online cannabis retailers.

Regulatory Framework for Cannabis: A Position Paper From the American College of Physicians

Cannabis, also known as marijuana, is the dried flowers, stems, seeds, and leaves of the Cannabis sativa plant. It contains more than 100 compounds, including tetrahydrocannabinol, which has psychoactive effects. Federal law prohibits the possession, distribution, and use of cannabis outside limited research activities, but most states have legalized cannabis for medical or recreational use. However, research into the potential therapeutic and adverse health effects of cannabis has been limited, in part because of the drug's federal legal status. In this position paper, the American College of Physicians (ACP) calls for the decriminalization of possession of small amounts of cannabis for personal use and outlines a public health approach to controlling cannabis in jurisdictions where it is legal. ACP recommends the rigorous evaluation of the health effects and potential therapeutic uses of cannabis and cannabinoids as well as research into the effects of legalization on cannabis use. It also calls for evidence-based medical education related to cannabis and increased resources for treatment of cannabis use disorder.

Associations of Local Cannabis Control Policies With Harmful Cannabis Exposures Reported to the California Poison Control System

BACKGROUND

Cannabis exposures reported to the California Poison Control System increased following the initiation of recreational cannabis sales on 1 January 2018 (i.e., "commercialization"). We evaluated whether local cannabis control policies adopted by 2021 were associated with shifts in harmful cannabis exposures.

METHODS

Using cannabis control policies collected for all 539 California cities and counties in 2020-2021, we applied a differences-in-differences design with negative binomial regression to test the association of policies with harmful cannabis exposures reported to California Poison Control System (2011-2020), before and after commercialization. We considered three policy categories: bans on storefront recreational retail cannabis businesses, overall restrictiveness, and specific recommended provisions (restricting product types or potency, packaging and labeling restrictions, and server training requirements).

RESULTS

Localities that ultimately banned storefront recreational retail cannabis businesses had fewer harmful cannabis exposures for children aged <13 years (rate ratio = 0.82; 95% confidence interval = 0.65, 1.02), but not for people aged >13 years (rate ratio = 0.97; 95% confidence interval = 0.85, 1.11). Of 167 localities ultimately permitting recreational cannabis sales, overall restrictiveness was not associated with harmful cannabis exposures among children aged <13 years, but for people aged >13 years, a 1-standard deviation increase in ultimate restrictiveness was associated with fewer harmful cannabis exposures (rate ratio = 0.93; 95% confidence interval = 0.86, 1.01). For recommended provisions, estimates were generally too imprecise to detect associations with harmful cannabis exposures.

CONCLUSION

Bans on storefront retail and other restrictive approaches to regulating recreational cannabis may be associated with fewer harmful cannabis exposures for some age groups following statewide commercialization.

Changes in online marketing and sales practices among non-medical cannabis retailers in 5 US cities, 2022 to 2023

Objectives

Given the evolving cannabis marketplace (e.g., products, marketing strategies), this study examined online cannabis marketing practices over time.

Methods

In 2022 and 2023, researchers assessed website content (e.g., age verification, sales, delivery, warnings, ad content, promotional strategies) among 175 randomly-selected cannabis retailers' websites across 5 US cities (Denver, Colorado; Seattle, Washington; Portland, Oregon; Las Vegas, Nevada; Los Angeles [LA], California, n=∼35/city). Analyses compared data from 2022 vs. 2023 and considered regulatory factors across cities.

Results

Similar to 2022, in 2023, 76.6 % required age verification for site entry, 85.1 % used social media promotion, and 90.9 % offered online sales (82.4 % of which required age verification and 34.6 % offered delivery). There were significant (p < .05) decreases from 2022 to 2023 in the proportions indicating medical card requirements (27.4 % to 15.4 %), purchase limits (59.4 % to 47.4 %), health warnings (38.9 % to 29.7 %), health benefits (60 % to 47.4 %), and discounts/price promotions (92.6 % to 86.3 %). In 2023, proportions differed across cities in ways reflecting whether state/local law allowed online sales (>90 % in Denver, Las Vegas, LA), allowed discounts/price promotions (100 % in Denver and Las Vegas), or required health warnings (48-60 % in Seattle and LA vs. < 20 % elsewhere). Despite all sites prohibiting youth-oriented content and all but Denver and Las Vegas prohibiting health claims, 30.3 % posted content targeting youth/young adults (LA = 8.1 % to Denver = 74.2 %) and 47.4 % health claims (Seattle = 27.0 % to Denver = 71.0 %).

Conclusions

Online cannabis retail presents risks for access and appeal to minors, emphasizes health benefits, and uses price promotions, regardless of restrictions, indicating need for greater regulatory efforts.

Five Years After Cannabis Legalization, Is It Time to Ease Restrictions on Promotion?

In the spring of 2024, the federal government is expected to report on its legislative review of the Cannabis Act (2018). One of the most contentious issues is whether to relax restrictions on cannabis promotion. This commentary describes the tension between the public health aims of legalization and the secondary aim of displacing the illicit market. We maintain that among jurisdictions that have legalized cannabis, Canada stands out as having the stated primary objective of safeguarding public health, and its restrictions on promotion are evidence-based and innovative. These measures must be preserved, even in the face of growing industry pressure to loosen them.

Impairment of Endothelial Function by Aerosol From Marijuana Leaf Vaporizers

BACKGROUND

Marijuana leaf vaporizers, which heat plant material and sublimate Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol without combustion, are popular alternatives to smoking cannabis that are generally perceived to be less harmful. We have shown that smoke from tobacco and marijuana, as well as aerosol from e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products, impair vascular endothelial function in rats measured as arterial flow-mediated dilation (FMD).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We exposed 8 rats per group to aerosol generated by 2 vaporizer systems (Volcano and handheld Yocan) using marijuana with varying Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol levels, in a single pulsatile exposure session of 2 s/min over 5 minutes, and measured changes in FMD. To model secondhand exposure, we exposed rats for 1 minute to diluted aerosol approximating release of uninhaled Volcano aerosol into typical residential rooms. Exposure to aerosol from marijuana with and without cannabinoids impaired FMD by ≈50%. FMD was similarly impaired by aerosols from Yocan (237 °C), and from Volcano at both its standard temperature (185 °C) and the minimum sublimation temperature of Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (157 °C), although the low-temperature aerosol condition did not effectively deliver Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol to the circulation. Modeled secondhand exposure based on diluted Volcano aerosol also impaired FMD. FMD was not affected in rats exposed to clean air or water vapor passed through the Volcano system.

CONCLUSIONS

Acute direct exposure and modeled secondhand exposure to marijuana leaf vaporizer aerosol, regardless of cannabinoid concentration or aerosol generation temperature, impair endothelial function in rats comparably to marijuana smoke. Our findings indicate that use of leaf vaporizers is unlikely to reduce the vascular risk burden of smoking marijuana.

Parallel trajectories of vaping and smoking cannabis and their associations with mental and physical well-being among young adults

BACKGROUND

Vaping and smoking are common modes of using cannabis (THC) among young adults, but little is known about how patterns of cannabis vaping and smoking unfold over time or how using one or both types of products may differently affect mental and physical well-being. This study examines parallel processes of cannabis vaping and smoking over 5 years and mental and physical outcomes in a sample of young adults.

METHODS

Annual surveys were conducted between 2016 and 2022 with a mostly California-based cohort of 2428 young adults. Parallel process growth mixture models examined trajectories of past-month frequency of cannabis vaping and smoking from ages 20 - 25. Classes were extracted based on parallel trajectories of vaped and smoked product use. Models assessed differences in self-reported mental (anxiety, depression) and physical (ailments, subjective overall) well-being outcomes in young adulthood across classes, adjusting for demographic characteristics and mental and physical well-being at pre-baseline (average age 19).

RESULTS

Four cannabis vaping/smoking classes emerged: low use of cannabis (84.7%), decreasing smoking, low-moderate vaping (7.1%), stable moderate smoking, decreasing vaping (4.6%), and rapid increasing dual use (3.4%). Classes were similar on physical well-being indicators in young adulthood. The rapid increasing dual use class showed higher anxiety and depressive symptoms compared to other classes.

CONCLUSION

Progression to higher frequency of both vaping and smoking cannabis in young adulthood may contribute to poorer mental well-being compared to other use patterns. Targeted efforts to reduce dual vaping and smoking in young people who use cannabis may be needed.

Alignment in local approaches to alcohol and cannabis control policy: A case study of California cities and counties

BACKGROUND

Public health experts have urged governments around the world to regulate newly legalized cannabis as they do alcohol to effectively and efficiently protect health. However, research evaluating the alignment of alcohol and cannabis policies is sparse. We assessed similarities and differences in local alcohol and cannabis control policies across California, and characterized localities adopting distinct policy approaches.

METHODS

Using standard legal epidemiologic techniques, we collected and coded local alcohol and cannabis control policies relevant to public health for 12 California counties and all incorporated cities within them (N=241). We assessed whether localities were equally stringent on alcohol and cannabis policies by comparing overall restrictiveness (summed policy scores) and 9 specific provisions that applied to both substances. We captured distinct local alcohol-cannabis policy approaches using latent class analysis, and examined this classification in relation to local demographic, socioeconomic, political, and retail market characteristics.

RESULTS

All 241 localities permitted alcohol sales, while 71% banned cannabis sales. Among those that did not ban cannabis sales, more stringent alcohol policy scores were associated with more stringent cannabis policy scores (linear regression coefficient: 0.16 [95% CI: 0.07, 0.25]). Local governments rarely adopted the same provisions for alcohol and cannabis (e.g., limits on hours of sale, advertising restrictions), and only two regulated the co-location of cannabis and alcohol outlets. Localities that were restrictive on alcohol yet permissive on cannabis (12%) were more urban, politically progressive, and had more low-income and racial/ethnic minority residents. Localities that were more permissive on alcohol and restrictive on cannabis (51%) were more socioeconomically advantaged.

CONCLUSION

We found few similarities between local alcohol and cannabis control policies. California's experience suggests that, as governments around the world legalize cannabis, lessons learned from regulating alcohol are not routinely applied to cannabis, particularly in communities distinguished by high social and economic advantages.

Assessing Increases in Cannabis-Related Diagnoses in US Hospitals by Regional Policy Status

Cannabis policy is rapidly changing and more individuals are using cannabis nationally. Despite increased use and known adverse outcomes to cannabis use, there is a lack of understanding of health care utilization for cannabis-related conditions. The objectives of this study were: (1) To understand the change in the incidence of cannabis-related diagnoses from 2012 to 2015 nationally and (2) to describe the relationship between regional cannabis policies and changes in the incidence of cannabis-related diagnoses from 2012 to 2015. National Inpatient Sample (NIS) data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project for 2012 and 2015 were analyzed using SPSS software for incidence of cannabis diagnoses. Previously defined NIS regions were assigned a policy status related to medical and recreational cannabis laws. Comparisons were made at the national and regional levels to better understand change in incidence of diagnoses. From 2012 to 2015, there was a 26.7% increase in cannabis-related diagnoses in the inpatient setting nationally. All 9 regions showed increases in the incidence of cannabis-related diagnoses ranging from 15.5% to 41.9% regardless of cannabis policy. As cannabis policy increased legal access, cannabis-related diagnoses increased nationally and regionally across the United States from 2012 to 2015 regardless of cannabis policy. Continued tracking of cannabis-related diagnoses is needed to identify where interventions are necessary to reduce negative impacts of increased cannabis use.

Equity in Coverage of Local Cannabis Control Policies in California, 2020‒2021

Objectives. To assess whether cannabis control policies that may protect public health were adopted evenly across California localities with differing sociodemographic compositions. Methods. From November 2020 to January 2021, we measured cannabis control policies for 241 localities across California and linked them to data on the characteristics of the communities affected by these policies. We evaluated whether disadvantaged communities were more likely to allow cannabis businesses and less likely to be covered by policies designed to protect public health. Results. Localities with all-out bans on cannabis businesses (65% of localities) were disproportionately high-education (55.8% vs 50.5% with any college) and low-poverty (24.3% vs 34.2%), with fewer Black (4.4% vs 6.9%) and Latinx (45.6% vs 50.3%) residents. Among localities that allowed retail cannabis businesses (28%), there were more cannabis control policies in localities with more high-income and Black residents, although the specific policies varied. Conclusions. Cannabis control policies are unequally distributed across California localities. If these policies protect health, inequities may be exacerbated. Public Health Implications. Uniform adoption of recommended cannabis control policies may help limit any inequitable health impacts of cannabis legalization. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(11):1640-1650. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.307041).

A Spatiotemporal Analysis of the Association of California City and County Cannabis Policies with Cannabis Outlet Densities

BACKGROUND

Cannabis outlets may affect health and health disparities. Local governments can regulate outlets, but little is known about the effectiveness of local policies in limiting outlet densities and discouraging disproportionate placement of outlets in vulnerable neighborhoods.

METHODS

For 241 localities in California, we measured seven policies pertaining to density or location of recreational cannabis outlets. We geocoded outlets using web-scraped data from the online finder Weedmaps between 2018 and 2020. We applied Bayesian spatiotemporal models to evaluate associations of local cannabis policies with Census block group-level outlet counts, accounting for confounders and spatial autocorrelation. We assessed whether associations differed by block group median income or racial-ethnic composition.

RESULTS

Seventy-six percent of localities banned recreational cannabis outlets. Bans were associated with fewer outlets, particularly in block groups with higher median income, fewer Hispanic residents, and more White and Asian residents. Outlets were disproportionately located in block groups with lower median income [posterior RR (95% credible interval): 0.76 (0.70, 0.82) per $10,000], more Hispanic residents [1.05 (1.02, 1.09) per 5%], and fewer Black residents [0.91 (0.83, 0.98) per 5%]. For the six policies in jurisdictions permitting outlets, two policies were associated with fewer outlets and two with more; two policy associations were uninformative. For these policies, we observed no consistent heterogeneity in associations by median income or racial-ethnic composition.

CONCLUSIONS

Some local cannabis policies in California are associated with lower cannabis outlet densities, but are unlikely to deter disproportionate placement of outlets in racial-ethnic minority and low-income neighborhoods.

County-Level Recreational Marijuana Policies and Local Policy Changes in Colorado and Washington State (2012-2019)

Policy Points In 2012, Colorado and Washington were the first states to legalize recreational marijuana through voter-initiated ballots. In these states, counties could restrict or ban local marijuana facilities through a variety of regulatory methods such as ordinances and zoning. County-level recreational marijuana policies in Washington and Colorado vary substantially, with 69.2% of Washington counties and 23.4% of Colorado counties allowing all types of recreational marijuana facilities as of April 1, 2019. After Colorado and Washington legalized recreational marijuana, many counties modified their marijuana policies over time, with shifts in county policy often preceded by advocacy and information-seeking activities.

CONTEXT

In 2012, Colorado and Washington were the first states to legalize recreational marijuana. Both allowed local governments to further regulate the availability of marijuana facilities in their jurisdictions. As early adopters, these states are important quasi-natural experiments to examine local marijuana policy and policy change processes, including key stakeholders and arguments.

METHODS

We conducted a policy scan of county-level recreational marijuana ordinances and regulations in Colorado and Washington. Data collected included policy documents from counties in both states and newspaper articles. We used a mixed-methods approach to describe the types of county-level recreational marijuana policies enacted by April 1, 2019; identify key policy stakeholders involved in local policy debates; and explore arguments used in support or opposition of county policies. We also selected four counties that represent three county policy environments (all marijuana facility types allowed, some marijuana facility types allowed, all marijuana facility types prohibited) and described the policy changes within these counties since recreational marijuana was legalized.

FINDINGS

By April 1, 2019, Colorado counties were less likely than Washington counties to allow marijuana facilities-48.4% of Colorado counties prohibited recreational marijuana facilities in their jurisdiction compared to 23.1% of Washington counties. Since state legalization, several counties in both states have made substantial marijuana facility policy modifications, often preceded by information-seeking activities. Primary stakeholders involved in policy debates included elected officials, law enforcement, individual growers/farmers, marijuana business license applicants, parents, and residents. Proponents referenced local economic gain, reduced crime, and potential health benefits of marijuana as arguments in favor of permitting local facilities, whereas opponents pointed to economic loss, negative health and public health issues, public safety concerns, and existing federal law. Both sides referenced local public opinion data to support their position.

CONCLUSIONS

By early 2019, a patchwork of local marijuana policies was in place in Colorado and Washington. We identify key areas of policy and public health research needed to inform future local marijuana policy decisions, including the impact of legalization on public health outcomes (particularly for youth) and public safety.

The importance of psychology for shaping legal cannabis regulation

Different patterns of cannabis use can be traced directly back to different interactions between 2 types of variables: pharmacological and environmental. As legal cannabis expands in the U.S. and around the world, state and national regulatory agencies are gaining control over these variables. Specifically, regulatory agencies are increasingly capable of altering (a) the pharmacological properties of cannabis products and (b) the way these products are distributed to the population. Consequently, cannabis regulatory agencies are in a unique position to use evidence from psychological science to alter cannabis consumption patterns in ways that mitigate potential harm to public health. However, most state-level legal cannabis regulatory systems in the U.S. are not yet evidence-based or public health-oriented. This applied review and commentary draws on evidence from the psychological science literature to help regulators better understand the types of behaviors they must address and guide empirically supported regulation of THC-laden cannabis, whether used putatively for medical or recreational reasons. This review is organized into 3 parts that correspond to the 3 primary agents within the cannabis regulation ecosystem: (a) the cannabis consumer, (b) the cannabis industry, and (c) the cannabis regulatory agency. Within this structure, the review addresses critical psychological variables that drive cannabis consumer and industry behaviors and discusses how regulatory agencies can use this information to protect public health. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Assessing New Zealand's Cannabis Legalization and Control Bill: prospects and challenges

BACKGROUND

Few countries have developed detailed legislative proposals for legalizing cannabis. New Zealand recently released the Cannabis Legalization and Control Bill (CLCB) that will be the subject of a referendum in September 2020.

AIMS

To assess the CLCB, drawing on emerging evidence from cannabis legalization overseas, public health research on alcohol and tobacco and the attempt to establish a regulated market for 'legal highs' in New Zealand.

DISCUSSION

The CLCB proposes a strictly regulated commercial cannabis market that resembles the Canadian approach, but notably without on-line sales or regional heterogeneity in retail distribution. The objective of the CLCB of lowering cannabis use over time appears at odds with the largely commercial cannabis sector that will focus on expanding sales. The CLCB includes provision for home cultivation and social benefit operators, but it is not clear what priority these operators will receive. A potency cap of 15% tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) for cannabis plants is included, and this is at the high end of black-market cannabis. The proposed progressive product tax based on THC will be challenging to implement. There is no formal minimum price, but rather discretionary powers to raise the excise if the price drops too much. The CLCB includes a comprehensive ban on advertising, but non-conventional on-line promotion will be difficult to suppress. The central government cannabis authority is tasked with developing local retail outlet policies. We caution against the temptation to employ an interim regulatory regime following a positive referendum result, because a partially regulated market will expose users to health risks and undermine public support.

CONCLUSIONS

New Zealand's Cannabis Legalization and Control Bill's objective of reducing cannabis use via a commercial market will be challenging to achieve. The bill could be strengthened with formal minimum pricing, lower potency cap and greater clarity concerning social benefit operators and the role of local government.

Development of a tobacco 21 policy assessment tool and state-level analysis in the USA, 2015-2019

OBJECTIVE

Policies raising the minimum legal sales age (MLSA) of tobacco products to 21 are commonly referred to as tobacco 21. This study sought to identify components of tobacco 21 policies and develop an instrument to examine policy language within 16 state laws adopted by July 2019.

METHODS

The multistage tool development process began with a review of established literature and existing tobacco 21 policies. In a series of meetings, tobacco control experts identified key policy components used to develop an initial tool. After testing and revisions, the instrument was used to code the existing tobacco 21 state-level policies. Inter-rater reliability (κ=0.70) was measured and discrepancies were discussed until consensus was met. Policy component frequencies were reported by state.

RESULTS

While all 16 states raised the MLSA to 21, the laws varied widely. Two laws omitted purchaser identification requirements. Fifteen laws mentioned enforcement would include inspections, but only three provided justification for conducting inspections. All 16 states provided a penalty structure for retailer/clerk violations, but penalties ranged considerably. Fourteen states required a tobacco retail licence, nine renewed annually. Six laws contained a military exemption, five were phased-in and 10 contained purchase, use or possession laws, which penalised youth. Four states introduced or expanded pre-emption of local tobacco control.

CONCLUSIONS

The instrument developed is the first to examine policy components within state-level tobacco 21 laws. Policies that include negative components or omit positive components may not effectively prevent retailers from selling to youth, which could result in less effective laws.

Facing the option for the legalisation of cannabis use and supply in New Zealand: An overview of relevant evidence, concepts and considerations

ISSUES

Non-medical cannabis policies are changing, including towards legalisation-with-regulation frameworks. New Zealand will hold a public referendum on cannabis legalisation in 2020. We reviewed data on cannabis use and health/social harms; policy reform options; experiences with and outcomes of reforms elsewhere; and other relevant considerations towards informing policy choices in the upcoming referendum.

APPROACH

Relevant epidemiological, health, social, criminal justice and policy studies and data were identified and comprehensively reviewed.

KEY FINDINGS

Cannabis use is common (including in New Zealand) and associated with risks for health and social harms, mainly concentrated in young users; key harms are attributable to criminalisation. 'Decriminalisation' reforms have produced ambivalent results. Existing cannabis legalisation frameworks vary considerably in main parameters. Legalisation offers some distinct advantages, for example regulated use, products and user education, yet outcomes depend on essential regulation parameters, including commercialisation, and policy ecologies. While major changes in use are not observed, legalisation experiences are inconclusive to date, including mixed health and social outcomes, with select harms increasing and resilient illegal markets. It is unclear whether legalisation reduces cannabis exposure or social harms (e.g. from enforcement) for youth.

IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS

No conclusive overall evidence on the outcomes of legalisation elsewhere exists, nor is evidence easily transferable to other settings. Legalisation offers direct social justice benefits for adults, yet overall public health impacts are uncertain. Legalisation may not categorically improve health or social outcomes for youth. Legalisation remains a well-intended, while experimental policy option towards more measured and sensible cannabis control and overall greater policy coherence, requiring close monitoring and possible adjustments depending on setting-specific outcomes.

Assessment of Incorporation of Lessons From Tobacco Control in City and County Laws Regulating Legal Marijuana in California

IMPORTANCE

As marijuana continues to be legalized in many states, little is known about best regulatory practice, exposing the population to significant potential harm.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the extent to which potential best practices, including those from tobacco control, were incorporated into state and local marijuana policies in California.

DESIGN AND SETTING

California legalized medical marijuana in 1996 and adult recreational use in 2016, effective in January 2018. A cross-sectional study with data collection and analysis from February 1 to November 30, 2019, measured the adoption of potential demand reduction and youth protection best practices, including restrictions on sales, products, marketing, warnings, and taxation. Laws in effect by January 31, 2019, were verified and all 539 California local jurisdictions were studied.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Adoption of potential best practices in marijuana laws for demand reduction and youth protection.

RESULTS

The laws of 534 of California's 539 jurisdictions (99%) were successfully identified; 263 of these 534 jurisdictions (49%) allowed any retail sale of marijuana, covering 57% of the state's population. More than one-third of jurisdictions allow sales of marijuana for adult recreational use (203 of 534 [38%]); of those, 122 allow storefront dispensaries and 81 allow sales by delivery only. A total of 257 of 534 jurisdictions (48%) allow medical sales. Of 147 jurisdictions allowing medical or adult use dispensaries, 93 (63%) limited the number of licenses, with a mean of 1 store for every 19 058 residents (range, 154-355 143). The state imposed no limits on number of dispensaries or deliverers. Forty-two jurisdictions increased the state-specified distances required between dispensaries and schools. Only 8 jurisdictions allowing retail sales imposed restrictions on products exceeding state regulations; 1 prohibited sale of flavored products, 3 prohibited sale of marijuana-infused beverages, and 5 imposed additional restrictions on edible marijuana products. No jurisdictions limited potency of products sold, although 1 established a potency-linked tax. The state did not limit or tax potency, except for establishing a standard 10-mg dose of tetrahydrocannabinol for edible marijuana products, nor did they limit manufacturing or sale of flavored products. The state required only a health warning in 6-point font on packages. Twenty-seven jurisdictions required additional health warnings in stores or on packages, 27 allowed onsite consumption of marijuana products, and 13 allowed marijuana-related events. More than half of jurisdictions legalizing any cannabis commerce (154 of 289 [53%]) did not tax marijuana locally and little revenue was captured for prevention. Much of the state excise and cultivation taxes is slated for youth substance use prevention and treatment.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In implementing legalization of marijuana in California, local policies varied widely. Where marijuana was legalized, many lessons from tobacco control to reduce demand, limit harm, and prevent youth use were not adopted, potentially creating greater risk of harm.

Understanding motivations for large US cannabis firms' participation in the cannabis space: Qualitative study exploring views of key decision-makers

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

Large for-profit firms supply the majority of US state-legal cannabis stores and some firms have attempted to shape cannabis-related policies. Understanding firms' motivations for participation in the cannabis space is critical, given firms' possible links to cannabis usage patterns. Key decision-makers (KDM) in the cannabis space may have information unavailable to lower ranking staff, and may influence firm decision-making and consequently US cannabis usage practises. We present the findings of a qualitative study investigating the views of KDMs in the cannabis market, on large cannabis firms' motivations for participation in the space.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Data were collected through 37 semi-structured interviews with a convenience sample of KDMs in the US cannabis space, representing both for-profit and non-profit organisations. Thematic analysis, with an inductive approach, was used to analyse the data.

RESULTS

KDMs reported three non-exclusive motivations for large cannabis firms' participation in the space; to seek profit, to mitigate social inequity and to provide cannabis as medicine. Within the theme relating to profit, findings suggest that for-profit and non-profit organisations in the space may be cognisant of the other's goals, representing a symbiotic relationship.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

We suggest that firms may have reasons to enter the space not necessarily centred on increasing use. Although non-profits and for-profits have different agendas, the bottom line for both groups is to expand access. Policy-makers should be aware of that fact, and set policies which consider the two groups as a unified whole.

Characterization of substance use among underrepresented sexual and gender minority participants in The Population Research in Identity and Disparities for Equality (PRIDE) Study

BACKGROUND

Profiles of substance use among less commonly described subgroups of sexual and gender minority (SGM) people (e.g., queer, genderqueer) remain largely unknown. Objective(s): To identify substance use differences among less commonly described SGM identity-based subgroups. Methods: The PRIDE Study is a national, online, longitudinal cohort study of self-identified SGM adults living in the U.S. Between 2015-2017, an iPhone application was used to administer three cross-sectional health questionnaires to participants, one of which included questions about binge alcohol, marijuana, and other drug use (substance use). This study was a secondary data analysis of participant responses to substance use survey items. Logistic regression and generalized linear modeling assessed relationships between sexual orientation or gender and use of or reported problems with substances within the past year. Results: Among the 1790 participants included in this study, 51.0% reported binge alcohol use, 39.8% reported marijuana use, and 19.7% reported other drug use (65.9% endorsed use of one or more of these) within the past year. Over 30% indicated substance use had been a problem in their life. Asexual individuals had lower odds of reporting past year binge alcohol and marijuana use (aOR: 0.27, 95% CI: 0.12-0.61; aOR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.15-0.96, respectively), and queer participants had higher odds of reporting past year marijuana use (aOR: 2.52, 95% CI: 1.58-4.03) compared to lesbian participants. Gender nonbinary participants had lower odds of reporting past year binge alcohol use (aOR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.32-0.71) and transmasculine participants had higher odds of reporting past year marijuana use (aOR: 2.18, 95% CI: 1.10-4.31) compared to cisgender women. Conclusions: Substance use heterogeneity exists between SGM groups. Comprehensive assessment of sexual orientation and gender may improve understanding of substance use and increase equity within support and treatment services for SGM populations. Highlights We examined substance use among less represented sexual and gender minority groups. Alcohol and other drug use were examined by both sexual orientation and gender identity. Analyses included identities such as queer, pansexual, genderqueer and nonbinary. Alcohol use differed across asexual, genderqueer and gender nonbinary groups. Marijuana use differed across queer, asexual and transmasculine groups.

The Grassroots of Grass: Cannabis Legalization Ballot Initiative Campaign Contributions and Outcomes, 2004-2016

CONTEXT

As of November 2018, medical cannabis was legal in 33 US states and recreational cannabis in 10, mostly enacted via ballot initiative.

METHODS

We identified 32 cannabis legalization initiatives from 2004 to 2016 and obtained campaign contribution and state political and demographic data. After exploratory analyses of 15 potential independent variables, we quantified effects of 4 factors (initiative year, voter turnout, population born before 1946, advocate funding advantage) on voter support and likelihood of passage.

FINDINGS

A small number of campaign contributors dominated both sides of the issue, with little involvement by health advocates. Time and turnout, not money, were the factors most associated with electoral outcomes, consistent with increases in public opinion favoring cannabis legalization over time. Year, turnout, and population age were associated with voter support, while year, turnout, and advocate funding advantage were associated with likelihood of passage. When adjusting for an anomalous result, initiative year was the only variable that remained significantly associated with odds of passage, with a 1-year increase in initiative date associated with 2.02 times higher odds of passage (p < .01).

CONCLUSION

These results underscore the importance of health advocate participation in developing cannabis legalization frameworks.

Sources of Information and Beliefs About the Health Effects of Marijuana

BACKGROUND

Marijuana is currently legal for recreational use in 10 states and Washington DC while a total of 34 states have implemented varying degrees of medical marijuana. The commercialization of marijuana has been accompanied by a proliferation of false claims regarding the therapeutic potential of marijuana, which are popularized by several different information sources. To date, no study has examined where US adults get their information regarding marijuana.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the sources of information associated with believing unsupported claims about marijuana.

DESIGN

Probability-based online survey PARTICIPANTS: 16,820 adults, with a response rate of about 55% (N = 9003) MAIN MEASURES: Most influential sources of information about marijuana and belief of statements consistent with misinformation, for example, smoking marijuana has preventative health benefits, secondhand marijuana smoke or use during pregnancy is completely or somewhat safe, and marijuana is not at all addictive.

KEY RESULTS

There were 9003 respondents (response rate 55%). Forty-three percent believed unsupported claims about marijuana. The most influential sources of information were health professionals, traditional media, friends/relatives, and social media/internet. Individuals reporting social media or the Internet (1.46 CI [1.30, 1.64]), the marijuana industry (e.g., advertisements, dispensaries) (2.88 CI [2.15, 3.88]), and friends or relatives (1.41 CI[1.26, 1.58]) as the most influential source of information about marijuana were more likely to believe any statement consistent with misinformation about marijuana in comparison with those who reported other sources as most influential.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals reporting the most significant source of information regarding marijuana was from social media or the Internet, the marijuana industry, or friends or relatives were more likely to believe unsupported claims about marijuana. Public health campaigns to counter the misinformation about marijuana to the public are needed.

From prohibition to regulation: A comparative analysis of the emergence and related outcomes of new legal cannabis policy models (Colorado, Washington State and Uruguay)

An effective approach to drug regulation is a growing concern. Since 2012, 10 US States and Uruguay have taken the step to revoke prohibition and legalize the recreational cannabis market. Based on the findings from a study ('Cannalex') carried out in 2015-2017 in Colorado, Washington and Uruguay by the French Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (OFDT) and the Institute of Security and Justice (INHESJ), relying on a hundred of in-depth interviews analyzed in line with the existing official statistics and studies, this paper shows heterogeneous policy-making models and contexts for reform. It also examines the early outcomes of the cannabis policy change. A mixed picture is emerging from the regulatory regimes currently implemented. This paper discusses the reform processes and their early outcomes, with a specific focus on the less documented area: the political processes that led to legalizing cannabis, analyzed with qualitative data. It argues that the different outcomes reported across Colorado, Washington and Uruguay are framed by the regulatory options that were taken, depending on specific dynamics of reform. The discussion focuses on some hot topics raised by the effective regulations, stressing that the array of cannabis regulatory options is a public debate that has just begun.

Social and public health implications of the legalisation of recreational cannabis: A literature review

BACKGROUND

After many years of legal struggles for the legalisation of recreational use of cannabis, the Constitutional Court of South Africa ruled in favour of the applicants in September 2018. Although the ruling issued caution regarding the social challenges accompanying this legalisation, it did not address how the country would deal with the societal consequences of this ruling.

AIM

The aim of this article was to discuss the social and public health implications of the legalisation of recreational cannabis on South Africa.

METHODS

Literature review on the social, health and legal impacts of legalisation of cannabis, considering experiences of other countries that have legalised cannabis.

RESULTS

The legalisation brings a range of significant negative consequences, which include an expected increase in the number of users and the subsequent undesirable effects on the physical, mental and social health of communities.

CONCLUSION

In terms of financial, infrastructural and human resources, South Africa cannot afford the consequences of the legalisation of recreational cannabis. Poor communities, children and the youth will carry the brunt of the scourge of cannabis use.

Examining the association between exposure to various screen time sedentary behaviours and cannabis use among youth in the COMPASS study

Background

Canadian youth are among the top users of cannabis globally. The Canadian federal government identified protecting youth from cannabis-related harms as a key public health objective aligned with the legalization and strict regulation of cannabis. While there are well-established associations between screen time sedentary behaviour (STSB) and alcohol and tobacco use, the association with cannabis use is understudied. The purpose of this study is to examine the association between various types of STSBs and cannabis use in a large sample of Canadian youth.

Methods

Using cross-sectional data from 46,957 grade 9 to 12 students participating in year 5 of the COMPASS host study (2016–2017), four gender-stratified ordinal logistic regression models were used to examine how total STSB and four different types of STSBs (watching/streaming TV shows/movies, playing video games, Internet use, emailing/messaging/texting) are associated with frequency of cannabis use.

Results

One-quarter of participants (24.9%) reported using cannabis in past 12 months; the largest proportion of this group (37.9%) reported rare/sporadic use. Overall, participants spent an average 7.45 ( ±5.26) hours/day on STSBs. Total STSB was positively associated with more frequent cannabis use, and when separated by type, internet use and messaging were significant. Playing video games and watching TV/movies were also significantly associated with more frequent cannabis use, but only for females.

Conclusions

The associations between frequency of cannabis use and various measures of STSBs suggest that screen time may be a risk factor for cannabis use among youth. This association may be mediated by youths’ mental wellbeing, given emerging evidence that STSB is a risk factor for poor mental health, and the tendency for individuals to use substances as a coping mechanism. Further, the ubiquity of pro-substance use content on the internet may also contribute to increased exposure to and normalization of cannabis, further promoting its use.

•

Youth average of overall STSBs was 7.48 h per day.

•

Greater hours of overall STSB increased likelihood of higher frequency cannabis use.

•

Internet use and messaging STSBs were both positively associated with cannabis use.

•

Gender differences present for TV watching and video gaming STSBs.

•

Cyber-bullying victims show increased likelihood for higher frequency cannabis use.

An update on cannabis use disorder with comment on the impact of policy related to therapeutic and recreational cannabis use

Confusion and controversy related to the potential for cannabis use to cause harm, or alternatively to provide benefit, continues globally. This issue has grown in intensity and importance with the increased recognition of the public health implications related to the escalation of the legalization of cannabis and cannabinoid products. This selective overview and commentary attempt to succinctly convey what is known about one potential consequence of cannabis use, the development of cannabis use disorder (CUD). Such knowledge may help guide a reasonable and objective public health perspective on the potential impact of cannabis use and CUD. Current scientific data and clinical observation strongly support the contention that cannabis use, like the use of other substances such as alcohol, opioids, stimulants, and tobacco, can develop into a use disorder (addiction) with important clinical consequences. Epidemiological data indicate that the majority of those who use cannabis do not have problems related to their use, but a substantial subset (10-30%) do report experiencing symptoms and consequences consistent with a CUD. Treatment seeking for CUD comprises a substantial proportion of all substance use treatment admissions, yet treatment response rates show much room for improvement. Changing cannabis policies related to its therapeutic and recreational use are likely to impact the development of CUD and its course; however, definitive data on such effects are not yet available. Clearly, the development of more effective prevention and treatment strategies is needed for those vulnerable to developing a CUD and for those with a CUD.

Prevalence and Correlates of Simultaneous and Separate 30-Day Use of Tobacco and Cannabis: Results from the California Adult Tobacco Survey

Background: There is limited information on separate use and simultaneous use of tobacco and cannabis products, particularly for new electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). This study presents detailed information about the prevalence and correlates of individual use, separate use, and simultaneous use of tobacco and cannabis in California, the first state to allow medical marijuana in the US. It specifically distinguishes between simultaneous use (both substances used in the same occasion) and separate use (both products used, but not simultaneously). Objectives: Participants in the 2016 California Adult Tobacco Survey (N = 3,058; age range 18-64 years) completed online surveys between February and March 2016 that assessed tobacco and cannabis use in the past 30 days. Results: Participants' use of tobacco (15% cigarettes) was higher than use of ENDS (6%) or cannabis (10%); the overall rate of separate use was 6% and the overall rate of simultaneous use was 3%. Correlates of tobacco use included lower levels of education and income. Correlates of simultaneous tobacco and cannabis use included being unemployed or having a disability. Conclusions/Importance: This survey of California residents suggests how use patterns change in states that legalize medical marijuana prior to recreational cannabis, although it may underestimate prevalence due to reliance on self-reported use. Persons who were unemployed and persons with disabilities were at higher risk for simultaneous use of tobacco and cannabis. These findings suggest that prevention and cessation interventions intended to target simultaneous use should address these populations, as well as adolescents and young adults.

Scientific Quality of Health-Related Articles in Specialty Cannabis and General Newspapers in San Francisco

Recreational cannabis is being legalized in states across the USA. The public relies on popular media for health information about cannabis. We assessed the accuracy of reporting on health effects of cannabis use in GreenState, a specialty publication on cannabis published by the San Francisco Chronicle and the main newspaper using the Index of Scientific Quality for Health Related News Reports. Results were compared using t-tests. Seventeen GreenState articles and four San Francisco Chronicle articles were identified for analysis. Health articles in GreenState scored 2.9 (±1.1 [SD]) Global, with the highest scoring category Applicability (4.5 ± 0.4) and the lowest Precision (2.4 ± 1.0) on a scale of 1-5. In contrast, the San Francisco Chronicle articles received a Global rating of 4.6 (±0.2), ranging from Applicability (5.0 ± 0) to Benefits (3.8 ± 0.9). Articles in the San Francisco Chronicle scored significantly higher in all categories but Benefits which was not significantly different for the San Francisco Chronicle compared with GreenState (3.8 vs. 3.6, p = 0.77). The public, clinicians, and policymakers need to be aware of this pattern and treat information in publications like GreenState with an appropriate level of skepticism until the quality of reporting improves to general journalistic standards.

Contemporary Patterns of Marijuana Use and Attitudes Among High School Seniors: 2010-2016

PURPOSE

The goal of this study was to examine changes in contemporary patterns of marijuana use and attitudes over time. Given shifts in state-by-state marijuana legislation, there is a reason to believe that the patterns of high school seniors' marijuana use behavior and attitudes about use have changed from 2010 to 2016.

METHODS

Data are from high school seniors in the 2010-2016 waves of Monitoring the Future, a nationally representative, cross-sectional survey in the United States. Latent class analysis was used to determine underlying patterns of marijuana use and related attitudes. Differences in latent class membership were examined across years, and gender and race/ethnicity were also examined.

RESULTS

Five latent classes were identified: Intolerant Nonusers (49% of the sample), Tolerant Nonusers (12%), Disapproving Users (7%), Experimenters (6%), and Marijuana Enthusiasts (26%). Class prevalences remained relatively stable from 2010 to 2013; beginning in 2014 a significant decrease in prevalence was observed for Intolerant Nonusers and significant increases in prevalence were observed for Tolerant Nonusers and Marijuana Enthusiasts. Membership in the Marijuana Enthusiasts class was consistently more likely for males; Hispanic and black adolescents were more likely to be Disapproving Users.

CONCLUSIONS

Contemporary patterns of marijuana use and attitudes have remained consistent over time, however, significant shifts in class prevalence emerged in 2014. Findings also suggest that a substantial subgroup of adolescents would benefit from prevention and intervention efforts targeting marijuana use and attitudes.

Marijuana Regulatory Frameworks in Four US States: An Analysis Against a Public Health Standard

The movement to legalize and regulate retail marijuana is growing. We examined legislation and regulations in the first 4 states to legalize recreational marijuana (Colorado, Washington, Oregon, and Alaska) to analyze whether public health best practices from tobacco and alcohol control to reduce population-level demand were being followed. Only between 34% and 51% of policies followed best practices. Marijuana regulations generally followed US alcohol policy regarding conflict of interest, taxation, education (youth-based and problematic users), warning labels, and research that does not seek to minimize consumption and the associated health effects. Application of US alcohol policies to marijuana has been challenged by some policy actors, notably those advocating public health policies modeled on tobacco control. Reversing past decisions to regulate marijuana modeled on alcohol policies will likely become increasingly difficult once these processes are set in motion and a dominant policy framework and trajectory becomes established. Designing future marijuana legislation to prioritize public health over business would make it easier to implement legalization of recreational marijuana in a way that protects health.

Co-use of cannabis, tobacco, and alcohol during adolescence: policy and regulatory implications

Legislative reforms have legalized use of cannabis for medical and recreational purposes. Efforts to evaluate the public health impact of these changes have predominantly focused on determining whether liberalizing cannabis policies has increased cannabis use patterns. Co-use of cannabis and other licit substances, namely tobacco and alcohol, is common during the developmental period of adolescence, which is generally characterized by an increase in risk-taking and novelty-seeking. However, limited research has sought to evaluate the potential implications of reforms to medical and recreational cannabis laws on concurrent and simultaneous use of cannabis, tobacco, and alcohol during adolescence. The current report reviews the extant literature detailing the prevalence and outcomes associated with concurrent and simultaneous cannabis-tobacco and cannabis-alcohol use, including recent work that has examined how concurrent and simultaneous use may be influenced by cannabis reform. This review details how the cannabis landscape and cannabis retail marketplace have evolved and briefly summarizes the corresponding policy and regulatory challenges that have emerged. The report concludes with a focused cannabis co-use research agenda that adopts different strategies including behavioural economic, self-administration, and survey research methods.

Cannabis regulatory science: risk-benefit considerations for mental disorders

The evolving legal cannabis landscape in the US continues to present novel regulatory challenges that necessitate the development of a Cannabis Regulatory Science. Two specific issues of concern within Cannabis Regulatory Science are (1) the impact that cannabis use has on the incidence, prevalence, and severity of mental disorders, and (2) how cannabis laws and regulations modify this impact. This paper first provides several conceptual points that are useful for evaluating the relationship between cannabis use and mental disorders. Second, it selectively reviews and comments on data relevant to the relationship between cannabis use and depression, several forms of anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder. Next, regulatory and public health parallels between the nascent cannabis industry and the pharmaceutical, tobacco, and alcohol industries are discussed. The focus is on specific types of industry practices that may harm those with or at risk for mental disorders. Recommendations are then offered for legal cannabis regulations that could mitigate this harm. Last, future research goals are discussed for building the field of Cannabis Regulatory Science and addressing the potential negative impact of cannabis on those with mental disorders.

American exceptionalism and the failure to learn from mistakes of the past

Commentary to: The diverging trajectories of cannabis and tobacco policies in the United States: reasons and possible implications

The Cannabinoid Content of Legal Cannabis in Washington State Varies Systematically Across Testing Facilities and Popular Consumer Products

The majority of adults in the U.S. now have state-legal access to medical or recreational cannabis products, despite their federal prohibition. Given the wide array of pharmacologically active compounds in these products, it is essential that their biochemical profile is measured and reported to consumers, which requires accurate laboratory testing. However, no universal standards for laboratory testing protocols currently exist, and there is controversy as to whether all reported results are legitimate. To investigate these concerns, we analyzed a publicly available seed-to-sale traceability dataset from Washington state containing measurements of the cannabinoid content of legal cannabis products from state-certified laboratories. Consistent with previous work, we found that commercial Cannabis strains fall into three broad chemotypes defined by the THC:CBD ratio. Moreover, we documented systematic differences in the cannabinoid content reported by different laboratories, relative stability in cannabinoid levels of commercial flower and concentrates over time, and differences between popular commercial strains. Importantly, interlab differences in cannabinoid reporting persisted even after controlling for plausible confounds. Our results underscore the need for standardized laboratory methodologies in the legal cannabis industry and provide a framework for quantitatively assessing laboratory quality.

Regulating Cannabis Manufacturing: Applying Public Health Best Practices from Tobacco Control

State legalization and regulation of cannabis, despite continued federal illegality, is a massive shift in regulatory approach. Manufactured cannabis, including concentrates, extracts, edibles, tinctures, topicals and other products, has received less attention than more commonly used dried flower, but represents emerging regulatory challenges due to additives, potency, consumption methods, and abuse and misuse potential. In November 2017, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) released initial cannabis manufacturing regulations as part of a new state regulatory structure. As the largest U.S. medical cannabis market (and largest legal adult use market in the world beginning in 2018), California's regulatory approach will potentially influence national and global policy. Comparing CDPH's initial regulations to tobacco control best practices reveals that, while the regulations recognize the need to protect public health, prioritizing public health over business interests requires stronger approaches to labeling, packaging, and product formulations. Based on tobacco best practices, we recommend that cannabis regulations incorporate large and proportionately sized informational labels, a prominent universal cannabis symbol, rotating and pictorial health warnings, mandatory plain packaging, a comprehensive ban on characterizing flavors and addictive additives, and strict limits on the potency of inhalable products and those easily confused with non-cannabis products.

Legal cannabis laws, home cultivation, and use of edible cannabis products: A growing relationship?

BACKGROUND

Over half of U.S. states have enacted legal cannabis laws (LCL). In parallel, edible cannabis products (i.e., edibles) have presented new regulatory challenges. LCL provisions that dictate access to cannabis (e.g., home cultivation (HC) or dispensaries (DSP)) may impact edible production and use. This study examined relationships among HC and DSP provisions, cannabis cultivation, and edible use.

METHODS

An online cannabis use survey was distributed using Facebook. Data were collected from 1813 cannabis-using adults. U.S. states were classified as states without LCL (Non-LCL) or LCL states that: (1) only permit DSP (LCL DSP-only), (2) only permit HC (LCL HC-only), or (3) permit HC and DSP (LCL HC+DSP). Analyses tested associations among these classifications, cannabis growing, and edible use and procurement.

RESULTS

Individuals in LCL HC-only and LCL HC+DSP states were more likely to report currently growing cannabis at home (OR: 3.3, 95% CI: 1.7, 6.2; OR: 3.9, 95% CI: 2.4, 6.3, respectively) and past-month edible use (OR: 2.1, 95% CI: 1.4, 3.4; OR: 2.9, 95% CI: 2.2, 3.9, respectively) than individuals in LCL DSP-only states. Regardless of state, those who had grown cannabis were more likely to have made edibles than those who had never grown cannabis (OR: 2.2, 95% CI: 1.8, 2.6). Individuals in LCL HC-only states were more likely to have made edibles in the past month than individuals from Non-LCL (OR: 2.75, 95% CI: 1.5, 5.3) and DSP-only states (OR: 2.1, 95% CI: 1.0, 4.4). Individuals in LCL HC+DSP states were more likely to have purchased edibles in the past month than individuals from Non-LCL (OR: 3.7, 95% CI: 2.4, 5.6) and DSP-only states (OR: 3.2, 95% CI: 1.8, 5.5).

CONCLUSION

Specific LCL provisions may differentially affect individuals' propensity to grow cannabis and make, buy, and use edible cannabis products. Permitting home cultivation contributes to a greater likelihood of growing cannabis. Those who grow cannabis economize the plant by creating homemade edible cannabis products. Conversely, permitting dispensaries increases the likelihood of purchasing edibles. The psychoactive effects of edibles with unknown and variable cannabinoid content will be unpredictable. Policymakers should carefully consider how specific LCL provisions can affect patterns of cannabis edible product access and quality.

The potential impact of cannabis legalization on the development of cannabis use disorders

Specific provisions of legal cannabis legislation and regulation could influence cannabis initiation, frequency and quantity of use, and progression to cannabis use disorder. This brief essay highlights scientifically based principles and risk factors that underlie substance use and addiction that can be leveraged to inform policies that might mitigate the development and consequences of cannabis use disorder. Specifically, pharmacologic, access/availability, and environmental factors are discussed in relation to their influence on substance use disorders to illustrate how regulatory provisions can differentially affect these factors and risk for addiction. Relevant knowledge from research and experience with alcohol and tobacco regulation are also considered. Research designed to inform regulatory policy and to evaluate the impact of cannabis legislation on cannabis use and problems is progressing. However, definitive findings will come slowly, and more concerted efforts and resources are needed to expedite this process. In the meantime, policymakers should take advantage of the large body of scientific literature on substance use to foster empirically-guided, common sense approaches to cannabis policy that focus on prevention of addiction.

Correlates of Blunt Smoking Among African American, Hispanic/Latino, and White Adults: Results From the 2014 National Survey on Drug Use and Health

BACKGROUND

Blunt use is highly prevalent in the United States and has been associated with several negative health consequences, such as an increased risk for cardiovascular and pulmonary diseases. Although recent studies have identified characteristics (e.g., gender) that are associated with blunt use, it is unclear if these factors correlate with blunt use equally across racial/ethnic groups.

METHODS

Using cross-sectional data from the 2014 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, this study aimed to determine if demographic, health and substance use correlates of current (i.e., past 30-day) and lifetime blunt use were similar across 37,628 non-Hispanic African American, Hispanic/Latino and non-Hispanic White adults.

RESULTS

Findings revealed 8.3% of African American, 3.3% of Hispanic/Latino and 2.5% of White adults reported current blunt smoking. Across all racial/ethnic groups, age and current and lifetime cigarette and illicit drug use were associated with current and lifetime blunt use. However, gender, educational level, income, current alcohol use and self-reported health status were differentially associated with current and lifetime blunt use across racial/ethnic groups. Employment status and lifetime depression were not associated with blunt use behaviors among any of the racial/ethnic groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The relationship between gender, socioeconomic status, alcohol use and self-reported health status and blunt use differs among African American, Hispanic/Latino and White adults. Researchers and providers should consider the heterogeneity in factors that are associated with blunt use when designing prevention and treatment interventions for African American, Hispanic/Latino and White adult blunt smokers.