The Impact of Medical Marijuana Laws and Dispensaries on Self-Reported Health

Medical marijuana laws and mental health in the United States

The consequences of legal access to medical marijuana for individuals' well-being are controversially assessed. We contribute to the discussion by evaluating the impact of the introduction of medical marijuana laws across US states on self-reported mental health considering different motives for cannabis consumption. Our analysis is based on BRFSS survey data from close to eight million respondents between 1993 and 2018 that we combine with information from the NSDUH to estimate individual consumption propensities. We find that eased access to marijuana through medical marijuana laws reduce the reported number of days with poor mental health for individuals with a high propensity to consume marijuana for medical purposes and for those individuals who likely suffer from frequent pain.

Cannabis Policy and Consumption: Taking into account Substitution Effects

Background: Previous studies examining the cannabis-alcohol substitution effect have found that medical cannabis policies may result in substituting the use of cannabis in place of alcohol use. Objectives: This study adds to the literature on cannabis-alcohol substitution by analyzing the effect of decriminalization, medicinal cannabis, and adult-use legalization cannabis policies (2002-2019) on cannabis and alcohol use and substance substitution for all 50 states and the District of Columbia (N=867). Results: Results support the notion that liberalized cannabis policies can increase the prevalence of cannabis use. An adult-use legalization specific analysis yielded findings suggesting a complex and heterogenous effect of such laws on cannabis-alcohol complementation. Conclusion: Given the lack of clarity and heterogenous effects of cannabis laws, policy makers should carefully take into consideration the benefits of medical cannabis laws, along with the risks of decriminalization and adult-use legalization.

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.

Have recreational marijuana laws undermined public health progress on adult tobacco use?

Public health experts caution that legalization of recreational marijuana may normalize smoking and undermine the decades-long achievements of tobacco control policy. However, very little is known about the impact of recreational marijuana laws (RMLs) on adult tobacco use. Using newly available data from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) and dynamic difference-in-differences and discrete-time hazard approaches, we find that RML adoption increases prior-month marijuana use among adults ages 18-and-older by 2-percentage-points, driven by an increase in marijuana initiation among prior non-users. However, this increase in adult marijuana use does not extend to tobacco use. Rather, we find that RML adoption is associated with a lagged reduction in electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) use, consistent with the hypothesis that ENDS and marijuana are substitutes. Moreover, auxiliary analyses from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) show that RML adoption is associated with a reduction in adult cigarette smoking. We conclude that RMLs may generate tobacco-related health benefits.

Medical Cannabis for Chronic Nonmalignant Pain Management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cannabis has been used since ancient times for medical and recreational research. This review article will document the validity of how medical cannabis can be utilized for chronic nonmalignant pain management.

RECENT FINDINGS

Current cannabis research has shown that medical cannabis is indicated for symptom management for many conditions not limited to cancer, chronic pain, headaches, migraines, and psychological disorders (anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder). Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) are active ingredients in cannabis that modulate a patient's symptoms. These compounds work to decrease nociception and symptom frequency via the endocannabinoid system. Research regarding pain management is limited within the USA as the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) classifies it as a schedule one drug. Few studies have found a limited relationship between chronic pain and medical cannabis use. A total of 77 articles were selected after a thorough screening process using PubMed and Google Scholar. This paper demonstrates that medical cannabis use provides adequate pain management. Patients suffering from chronic nonmalignant pain may benefit from medical cannabis due to its convenience and efficacy.

Relationships of Cannabis Policy Liberalization With Alcohol Use and Co-Use With Cannabis: A Narrative Review

PURPOSE

The liberalization of cannabis policies has the potential to affect the use of other substances and the harms from using them, particularly alcohol. Although a previous review of this literature found conflicting results regarding the relationship between cannabis policy and alcohol-related outcomes, cannabis policies have continued to evolve rapidly in the years since that review.

SEARCH METHODS

The authors conducted a narrative review of studies published between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, that assessed the effects of cannabis policies on the use of alcohol in the United States or Canada.

SEARCH RESULTS

The initial search identified 3,446 unique monographs. Of these, 23 met all inclusion criteria and were included in the review, and five captured simultaneous or concurrent use of alcohol and cannabis.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Associations between cannabis policy liberalization and alcohol use, alcohol-related outcomes, and the co-use of alcohol and cannabis were inconclusive, with studies finding positive associations, no associations, and negative associations. Although several studies found that cannabis policy liberalization was associated with decreases in alcohol use measures, these same studies showed no impact of the cannabis policy on cannabis use itself. The lack of a consistent association was robust to subject age, outcome measure (e.g., use, medical utilization, driving), and type of cannabis policy; however, this may be due to the small number of studies for each type of outcome. This paper discusses several notable limitations of the evidence base and offers suggestions for improving consistency and comparability of research going forward, including a stronger classification of cannabis policy, inclusion of measures of the alcohol policy environment, verification of the impact of cannabis policy on cannabis use, and consideration of mediation effects.

Demand curve analysis of marijuana use among persons living with HIV

BACKGROUND

Despite medicalization and legalization of marijuana use, factors influencing demand for marijuana among persons living with HIV (PLWH) are incompletely understood. This knowledge gap undermines effective clinical management and policies. This study used demand curve simulation methods to address these issues.

METHODS

Marijuana-using PLWH (N = 119) completed experimental tasks to simulate amount of marijuana purchasing/use across different costs (money or time), and likelihood of reselling marijuana or marijuana therapeutic-use registration card in relation to profits. Additional simulations assessed purchasing of marijuana relative to other drug and non-drug goods.

RESULTS

Simulated marijuana use decreased as money and time costs increased. Consumption was greater for participants with more severe Cannabis Use Disorder (CUD) and anxiety, intermediate pain levels, and past 90-day opioid use. Whereas few participants chose to sell their registration card, marijuana resale (diversion) steeply increased with profit. Likelihood of seeking marijuana therapeutic-use certification decreased in relation to registration card money cost, having to visit more physicians to get a signature, and delay to receiving the card, and increased with duration of certification. Participants who reported recent opioid use were more likely to seek certification. Consumption of several commodities assessed was independent of marijuana.

CONCLUSIONS

Simulated marijuana use was related to participants' clinical profile (CUD, anxiety and pain symptoms, recent opioid use), and unrelated to purchasing other goods. Likelihood of seeking marijuana therapeutic-use registration was affected by several types of costs and recent opioid use. Participants were unlikely to divert registration cards. We discuss clinical and policy implications of these findings.

The legalization of cannabinoid products and standardizing cannabis-drug development in the United States: a brief report

This brief report covers recent advances in cannabis and cannabinoid regulation and drug approval. The popularity of cannabis and cannabinoid products continues to rise, and these products are available for the majority of the population in the United States to purchase as easily as alcohol. Although many states have approved programs and research licenses, these activities and products all remain federally illegal. The solution may be for the United States to offer multiple pathways for product approval that adapt to the diversity of the products and the needs of the consumer. Multiple pathways for market approval would protect public health, whether the public is using cannabis and cannabinoids as a medicine, a wellness product, or as a recreational substance.
.