Search

Background: We previously reported that the 2018 Canadian Cannabis Act, allowing youth to possess up to 5 g dried cannabis or equivalent for personal use/sharing, was associated with short-term (76 days) post-legalization reduction in police-reported cannabis-related crimes among youth. To establish whether the change might be sustained, we now estimate this association during a much longer time period by including an additional three years of post-legalization data., Methods: Using national daily police-reported criminal incident data from January 1, 2015-December 31, 2021 from the Canadian Uniform Crime Reporting Survey (UCR-2), the study employed Seasonal Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (SARIMA) time series models to assess the associations between legalization and youth (12-17 years) cannabis-related offenses (male, n = 34,508; female, n = 9529)., Results: Legalization was associated with significant reductions in both male and female police-reported cannabis-related offenses: females, 4.04 daily incidents [95% confidence interval (CI), 3.08; 5.01], a 62.1% decrease [standard error (se), 34.3%]; males, 12.42 daily offenses (95% CI, 8.99; 15.86), a reduction of 53.0% (se, 22.7%). There was no evidence of associations between cannabis legalization and patterns of property or violent crimes., Conclusions: Results suggest that the impact of the Cannabis Act on reducing cannabis-related youth crimes is sustained, supporting the Act's objectives to reduce cannabis-related criminalization among youth and associated effects on the Canadian criminal justice system., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest This research was supported in part by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Project Grant (PJT 180292) awarded to the first author (RCC). In relation to the manuscript, the authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: There is concern that recreational marijuana legalization (RML) may lead to increased cannabis use disorder (CUD) among youth due to increased marijuana use. This study investigates whether adolescent substance use disorder treatment admissions for marijuana use increased in Colorado and Washington following RML., Methods: Annual data on 2008-2017 treatment admissions for marijuana use from the SAMHSA TEDS-A dataset for adolescents age 12-17 were used to model state treatment admissions trends. Difference-in-differences models were used to investigate whether treatment admissions increased following RML in Colorado/Washington compared to non-RML states, after adjusting for socioeconomic characteristics and treatment availability., Results: Over all states in the analysis, the rate of adolescent treatment admissions for marijuana use declined significantly over the study period (β=-3.375, 95 % CI=-4.842, -1.907), with the mean rate falling nearly in half. The decline in admissions rate was greater in Colorado and Washington compared to non-RML states following RML, though this difference was not significant (β=-7.671, 95 % CI=-38.798, 23.456)., Conclusion: Adolescent treatment admissions for marijuana use did not increase in Colorado and Washington following RML. This may be because youth marijuana use did not increase, CUD did not increase (even if use did increase), or treatment seeking behaviors changed due to shifts in attitudes and perceptions of risk towards marijuana use., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None declared., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The continued toll of opioid-related overdoses has motivated efforts to expand availability of naloxone to persons at high risk of overdose, with 2016 federal guidance encouraging clinicians to co-prescribe naloxone to patients with increased overdose risk. Some states have pursued analogous or stricter legal requirements that could more heavily influence prescriber behavior., Methods: We conducted a systematic legal review of state laws that mandate or recommend that healthcare providers prescribe naloxone to patients with indicators for opioid overdose risk. We coded relevant statutes and regulations for: applicable populations, patient criteria, educational requirements, and exemptions., Results: As of September 2019, 17 states had enacted naloxone co-prescribing laws, the earliest of which was implemented by Louisiana in January 2016. If patient overdose risk criteria are met, over half of these states mandate that providers prescribe naloxone (7 states, 41.1 %) or offer a naloxone prescription (2 states, 11.8 %); the remainder encourage prescribers to consider prescribing naloxone (8 states). Most states (58.8 %) define patient overdose risk based on opioid dosages prescribed, although the threshold varies substantially; other common overdose risk criteria include concomitant opioid and benzodiazepine prescriptions and patient history of substance use disorder or mental illness., Conclusions: A growing minority of states has adopted a naloxone prescribing law, although these policies remain less prevalent than other naloxone access laws. By targeting higher-risk patients during clinical encounters, naloxone prescribing requirements could increase naloxone prescribed, destigmatize naloxone use, and reduce overdose harms. Further investigation into policy effectiveness, unintended consequences, and appropriate parameters is warranted., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Objectives: Medical marijuana use may substitute prescription opioid use, whereas nonmedical marijuana use may be a risk factor of prescription opioid misuse. This study examined the associations between recreational marijuana legalization and prescription opioids received by Medicaid enrollees., Methods: State-level quarterly prescription drug utilization records for Medicaid enrollees during 2010-2017 were obtained from Medicaid State Drug Utilization Data. The primary outcome, opioid prescriptions received, was measured in three population-adjusted variables: number of opioid prescriptions, total doses of opioid prescriptions in morphine milligram equivalents, and related Medicaid spending, per quarter per 100 enrollees. Two difference-in-difference models were used to test the associations: eight states and DC that legalized recreational marijuana during the study period were first compared among themselves, then compared to six states with medical marijuana legalized before the study period. Schedule II and III opioids were analyzed separately., Results: In models comparing eight states and DC, legalization was not associated with Schedule II opioid outcomes; having recreational marijuana legalization effective in 2015 was associated with reductions in number of prescriptions, total doses, and spending of Schedule III opioids by 32% (95% CI: (-49%, -15%), p = 0.003), 30% ((-55%, -4.4%), p = 0.027), and 31% ((-59%, -3.6%), p = 0.031), respectively. In models comparing eight states and DC to six states with medical marijuana legalization, recreational marijuana legalization was not associated with any opioid outcome., Conclusions: No evidence suggested that recreational marijuana legalization increased prescription opioids received by Medicaid enrollees. There was some evidence in some states for reduced Schedule III opioids following the legalization., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: This study compared young adults with and without a medical marijuana (MM) recommendation from a provider ("MM card") on their developmental trajectories of frequent marijuana use and marijuana-related problems in young adulthood., Methods: The analytic sample consists of young adult past month marijuana users (N = 671) who were part of a larger, diverse, and predominantly California cohort. Analyses are based on data from seven surveys completed from ages 13-19., Results: At age 19, 28% of participants reported having an MM card to legally purchase marijuana from an MM dispensary. A multiple group latent growth model indicated that young adults who had an MM card showed steeper increases in frequent marijuana use (i.e., 20-30 days of use in the past month) from ages 13-19 compared to young adults who did not have an MM card. Logistic regression models that matched MM cardholders and non-MM cardholders on individual sociodemographic characteristics found that MM cardholders were more likely to report marijuana negative consequences, selling marijuana/hashish, and driving under the influence of marijuana in the past year. In addition, MM cardholders were more likely to have tried cutting down or quitting in the past 3-months., Conclusions: Among young adult marijuana users, those with an MM card had a higher risk profile for marijuana use and related problems compared to those without an MM card. Given expanding state legalization of MM, this issue warrants further attention., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Marijuana use during adolescence is associated with neurocognitive deficits and poorer functioning across several domains. It is likely that more states will pass both medical and recreational marijuana legalization laws in the coming elections; therefore, we must begin to look more closely at the longitudinal effects of medical marijuana (MM) advertising on marijuana use among adolescents so that we can better understand effects that this advertising may have on their subsequent marijuana use and related outcomes., Methods: We followed two cohorts of 7th and 8th graders (mean age 13) recruited from school districts in Southern California from 2010 until 2017 (mean age 19) to examine effects of MM advertising on adolescents' marijuana use, cognitions, and consequences over seven years. Latent growth models examined trajectories of self-reported exposure to medical marijuana ads in the past three months and trajectories of use, cognitions, and consequences., Results: Higher average exposure to MM advertising was associated with higher average use, intentions to use, positive expectancies, and negative consequences. Similarly, higher rates of change in MM advertising exposure were associated with higher rates of change in use, intentions, expectancies, and consequences over seven years., Conclusions: Results suggest that exposure to MM advertising may not only play a significant role in shaping attitudes about marijuana, but may also contribute to increased marijuana use and related negative consequences throughout adolescence. This highlights the importance of considering regulations for marijuana advertising, similar to regulations in place for the promotion of tobacco and alcohol in the U.S., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Alternative methods for consuming cannabis (e.g., vaping and edibles) have become more popular in the wake of U.S. cannabis legalization. Specific provisions of legal cannabis laws (LCL) (e.g., dispensary regulations) may impact the likelihood that youth will use alternative methods and the age at which they first try the method - potentially magnifying or mitigating the developmental harms of cannabis use., Methods: This study examined associations between LCL provisions and how youth consume cannabis. An online cannabis use survey was distributed using Facebook advertising, and data were collected from 2630 cannabis-using youth (ages 14-18). U.S. states were coded for LCL status and various LCL provisions. Regression analyses tested associations among lifetime use and age of onset of cannabis vaping and edibles and LCL provisions., Results: Longer LCL duration (OR vaping : 2.82, 95% CI: 2.24, 3.55; OR edibles : 3.82, 95% CI: 2.96, 4.94), and higher dispensary density (OR vaping : 2.68, 95% CI: 2.12, 3.38; OR edibles : 3.31, 95% CI: 2.56, 4.26), were related to higher likelihood of trying vaping and edibles. Permitting home cultivation was related to higher likelihood (OR: 1.93, 95% CI: 1.50, 2.48) and younger age of onset (β: -0.30, 95% CI: -0.45, -0.15) of edibles., Conclusion: Specific provisions of LCL appear to impact the likelihood, and age at which, youth use alternative methods to consume cannabis. These methods may carry differential risks for initiation and escalation of cannabis use. Understanding associations between LCL provisions and methods of administration can inform the design of effective cannabis regulatory strategies., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Support for the legalization of recreational marijuana continues to increase across the United States and globally. In 2016, recreational marijuana was legalized in the most populous US state of California, as well as three other states. The primary aim of this study was to examine trends in support for recreational marijuana legalization in Washington, a state which has had legal recreational marijuana for almost four years, using data collected over the four years post-legalization. A secondary aim was to examine trends in support for the cultivation of marijuana for personal use., Methods: Data come from geographically representative general population samples of adult (aged 18 and over) Washington residents collected over five timepoints (every six months) between January 2014 and April 2016 (N=4101). Random Digit Dial was used for recruitment. Statistical analyses involved bivariate comparisons of proportions across timepoints and subgroups (defined by age, gender, and marijuana user status), and multivariable logistic regression controlling for timepoint (time) to formally test for trend while controlling for demographic and substance use covariates. All analyses adjusted for probability of selection., Results: Support for legalization in Washington has significantly increased: support was 64.0% (95% CI: 61.2%-67.8%) at timepoint 1 and 77.9% (95% CI: 73.2%-81.9%) at timepoint 5. With each six months' passing, support increased 19% on average. We found no statistically significant change in support for home-growing., Conclusions: Support for marijuana legalization has continued to significantly increase in a state that has experienced the policy change for almost four years., (Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Medical marijuana legalization is associated with a higher prevalence of marijuana use which may affect cigarette use and nicotine dependence in co-users. In the present study, we examined relationships between statewide legalization of medical marijuana and prevalence of cigarette and marijuana co-use and nicotine dependence in co-using adolescents and adults., Methods: Data were analyzed from the 2013 National Survey on Drug Use and Health. We compared cigarette and marijuana co-use in the past 30days across age categories (12-64 years) by statewide medical marijuana legalization. Logistic regression models were used to estimate the odds of having nicotine dependence among current cigarette smokers who also reported past 30-day marijuana use and "ever but not current" marijuana use (vs. "never" use) adjusting for covariates including statewide legalization of medical marijuana., Results: Overall, 5.1% of the sample reported past 30-day cigarette and marijuana co-use and a higher proportion of co-users resided in states where medical marijuana was legal compared to illegal (5.8% vs. 4.8%; p=0.0011). Co-use was associated with greater odds of having nicotine dependence compared to cigarette-only use across age categories. Odds were highest and up to 3-times higher in adolescents aged 12-17 years (OR=3.54; 95%CI: 1.81-6.92) and adults aged 50-64 years (OR=3.08; CI: 1.45-6.55)., Conclusion: Marijuana policy could inadvertently affect cigarette and marijuana co-use and pose challenges to tobacco cessation., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Legal medical marijuana has been commercially available on a widespread basis in Colorado since mid-2009; however, there is a dearth of information about the impact of marijuana commercialization on impaired driving. This study examined if the proportions of drivers in a fatal motor vehicle crash who were marijuana-positive and alcohol-impaired, respectively, have changed in Colorado before and after mid-2009 and then compared changes in Colorado with 34 non-medical marijuana states (NMMS)., Methods: Thirty-six 6-month intervals (1994-2011) from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System were used to examine temporal changes in the proportions of drivers in a fatal motor vehicle crash who were alcohol-impaired (≥0.08 g/dl) and marijuana-positive, respectively. The pre-commercial marijuana time period in Colorado was defined as 1994-June 2009 while July 2009-2011 represented the post-commercialization period., Results: In Colorado, since mid-2009 when medical marijuana became commercially available and prevalent, the trend became positive in the proportion of drivers in a fatal motor vehicle crash who were marijuana-positive (change in trend, 2.16 (0.45), p<0.0001); in contrast, no significant changes were seen in NMMS. For both Colorado and NMMS, no significant changes were seen in the proportion of drivers in a fatal motor vehicle crash who were alcohol-impaired., Conclusions: Prevention efforts and policy changes in Colorado are needed to address this concerning trend in marijuana-positive drivers. In addition, education on the risks of marijuana-positive driving needs to be implemented., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The 1970 Controlled Substances Act was part of an omnibus reform package designed to rationalize, and in some respects to liberalize, American drug policy. While the legislation provided additional resources for law enforcement and a systematic means for regulating the use of most psychoactive drugs, it also did away with mandatory minimum sentences and provided more support for treatment and research. Over the next three decades, and in response to public alarm about drug abuse, the US Congress continuously amended the law to produce a more punitive system of drug control. The amendments, which gave the Drug Enforcement Administration greater control over scheduling and maintenance and which substantially increased penalties for illicit trafficking, transformed the law into the legal foundation of America's "drug war," as the stricter criminal approach came to be known. By the 1980s, the flexibility and innovative spirit of the original Controlled Substances Act (and that of Nixon-era drug strategy generally) had largely disappeared from American drug policy.