Search

Introduction: Co-use of tobacco and cannabis has long been an issue for prevention and intervention efforts targeting these substances. Blunt use-cannabis inside a cigar wrapper-has been a consistent mode of cannabis consumption since the 1990s. Since then, both tobacco control and cannabis policies have changed considerably. This paper examines the influence of tobacco taxes and smoke-free policies as well as medical and recreational cannabis policies on blunt use among young people., Methods: Combining state-level tobacco control and cannabis policy data with the restricted-access youth cohort of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study, we use multilevel logistic regression models to examine the impact of these policies on past-year blunt use., Results: While we found a main effect whereby both legal medical and recreational cannabis policies are associated with higher odds of blunt use among youth, interaction effects demonstrate that this association only emerges in states lacking a comprehensive tobacco smoke-free policy. In states with smoke-free policies, we found no significant associations between cannabis policy and odds of blunt use., Conclusions: Denormalization through smoke-free policies may mitigate the effects of recreational and medical cannabis policies on blunt use. Smoke-free policies represent a possible cost-effective mechanism to curb the co-use of tobacco and cannabis in the form of blunts. States with medical and recreational cannabis policies may benefit from greater prevention efforts for young people specifically focused on blunt use, especially in states that do not have strong tobacco control., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Prof. Fischer has held research grants and contracts in the areas of psychoactive substance use, health and policy from public funding, philanthropic and government organizations (i.e., public-only and strictly no commercial or for-profit sources).

Background: Hemp-based psychoactives comprise a burgeoning legal substance market with rising trends in use across the U.S. and Canada as well as parts of Europe. Currently, scant empirical research on the use of these Novel Psychoactive Substances (NPS) exists. By examining policy, market conditions, consumer uptake, and related risks, this research extends theory on drug trends by describing the regulatory environments that shape the emergence and popularity of psychoactive hemp-based products among young adults., Methods: Relying on ethnographic fieldwork of hemp-based markets across 3 U.S. state hemp and cannabis policy contexts as well as in-depth interviews with 40 young adult cannabis consumers recruited across 10 U.S. states, we examined how regulatory conditions shape hemp-based psychoactive markets, trends in their use, and associated risks., Results: Young adults are motivated to consume hemp-based psychoactives due to the regulatory and market environments that facilitate the production of highly potent products that are inexpensive and easily accessible. States that regulate hemp-based psychoactives as cannabis, do not provide hemp markets with a competitive advantage and as such see minimal uptake. In the absence of hemp specific policies, substantial variations in product potencies, insufficient dosing information, and unscrupulous product packaging practices may increase related risks., Conclusion: Trend theory provides insight into the complex relationships that exist between drug policy, markets, and the proliferation of legal highs. Understanding the contextual significance that both market and regulatory conditions have on legal drug production, distribution, and consumption may better inform approaches to reduce the risks commonly associated with novel psychoactive substances like hemp-based psychoactives., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Despite an increase in the varieties of cannabis products available for consumption, limited evidence is available about the patterns of cannabis consumption methods before and after legalization. Objectives: To examine the changes in modes of cannabis use and their correlates among adults in Ontario, Canada both prior to and following cannabis legalization in 2018. Methods: Data were utilized from the 2017 to 2022 Centre for Addiction and Mental Health's (CAMH) Monitor study, a repeated cross-sectional survey of adults 18 years of age and older ( n  = 2,665; 56% male). The surveys employed a regionally stratified sampling design using computer-assisted telephone interviews and web surveys. Multinomial regression was performed to examine different modes of cannabis use. Results: The exclusive use of cannabis through ingestion methods increased from 4.0% in 2017 to 16.6% in 2022 ( p  < .001). However, the exclusive use of inhalation-based cannabis decreased from 49.4% in 2017 to 25.5% in 2022 ( p  < .001). Relative to inhalation-based modes, adults were about five times more likely to use ingestion-based modes in 2020 [RRR = 4.65 (2.94-7.35)] and 2022 [RRR = 4.75 (2.99-7.55)] than in 2019, after accounting for sociodemographic factors. Conclusions: Ingestion-based cannabis use among adults increased fourfold between 2017 and 2022, a period during which recreational cannabis use was legalized in Canada. The increase was especially evident after the legalization of cannabis edibles.

Introduction: Germany is reforming its legal approach to cannabis, allowing the possession and cultivation of cannabis for recreational purposes. The objective of this study is to investigate the impact of the policy reform on (1) The prevalence of cannabis use in the general population and (2) Driving under the influence of cannabis (DUIC) among regular users., Methods and Analysis: A quasi-experimental research design will be employed, with repeated cross-sectional surveys on self-reported DUIC and cannabis use conducted at three measurement points in Germany (intervention group) and Austria (control group) over a 2-year observation period (2023-2025). Data will be collected from approximately 50 000 individuals aged between 18 years and 64 years. To minimise reporting biases in the measurement of DUIC, we will use direct and indirect assessments via crosswise model and motor vehicle accident data from official statistics. In a difference-in-difference framework, regression analyses and interrupted time series analysis will be carried out for hypothesis testing., Ethics and Dissemination: Participants will be informed about voluntary participation, data protection laws and the option to delete data on request. Ethical approval was obtained from the Local Psychological Ethics Committee of the Centre for Psychosocial Medicine in Hamburg, Germany (reference number: 0686). Findings will be disseminated through scientific networks and will be key for a comprehensive evaluation of the cannabis law reform. The findings will facilitate the design and implementation of road safety measures., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JM has worked as consultant for and received honoraria from public health agencies. All other authors do not declare any conflict of interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: The legal landscape of recreational cannabis production and consumption is rapidly expanding, driving a need to inform empirically supported cannabis regulatory policy. A behavioral economic framework integrating economic constructs (e.g., price, substitutability) with psychology and decision-making sciences, has previously been applied to tobacco regulatory sciences through the use of experimental marketplaces. However, experimental marketplaces have not yet been applied to understand cannabis choice behaviors or study ways to minimize risks from use. Herein, we describe the development and initial feasibility testing of an Experimental Cannabis Marketplace (ECM). The ECM can serve as an experimental platform relevant to evaluating the impact of regulatory policies on cannabis choices and use behavior. Methods: The ECM was designed to resemble an online cannabis dispensary. Adults aged 21 and older with past month cannabis use and past month purchase from a recreational dispensary were recruited online. To test the feasibility and acceptability of the ECM, 62 people completed the ECM shopping task and provided feedback on the ECM prototype. Participants also reported about their typical purchases from real-world dispensaries. Results: Nearly all participants rated the ECM as very (80.65%) or somewhat (16.13%) easy to navigate, and rated task instructions as at least mostly clear (100%). The majority (75.81%) said cannabis products available in the ECM were mostly the same or exactly the same as at their typical dispensary. Participant purchase choices in actual dispensary purchases closely matched ECM purchases, with 88% of product choices in typical real-world cannabis dispensaries matching the ECM products purchased. Discussion: Initial testing of the ECM indicates it is an acceptable and feasible tool for understanding cannabis purchasing and choice behavior. These preliminary findings suggest that the ECM mimics cannabis dispensary settings with people making similar choices to those made in the real world.

Background: As cannabis policy trends toward liberalization, assessing cannabis health warning effects becomes increasingly important. This study investigated underlying mechanisms accounting for the effectiveness of cannabis health warnings on protective health intentions., Method: A sample of 1,095 adults (21+) living in legal recreational US states who reported using cannabis in the past 12 months participated in an online experiment. Participants were randomly assigned to view cannabis health warnings that described risks of impaired driving, mental health, and smoke exposure and varied pictures and text (vs. text-only) attributes in warnings. Outcomes were message reactions (cognitive elaboration, fear, and hope), attitudes and beliefs (perceived severity of cannabis harms and perceived susceptibility to cannabis harms, and perceived response and self-efficacy to prevent cannabis harms), and protective health intentions (information-seeking about cannabis health effects and having interpersonal discussions about cannabis harms with family, friends, and medical professionals)., Results: MANCOVA results showed no significant differences between text-only vs. pictorial attributes on protective health intentions; thus, warning conditions were controlled and analyzed using structural equation modeling (SEM). SEM results showed that attention to cannabis health warnings (text-only or pictorial) elicited higher cognitive elaboration, fear, and hope-an emotion associated with coping actions that motivate positive expectations of future events. These outcomes, in turn, were associated with greater perceived severity and susceptibility and greater perceived response efficacy, respectively. Hope, perceived severity, and perceived response and self-efficacy were independently associated with greater intentions to seek information about cannabis health effects and to discuss cannabis health harms., Conclusion: Attention to warnings impacted emotions, attitudes, and protective health intentions. Fear is commonly associated with health warning effects, and our results suggest that hope is also an important factor. This research contributes to understanding the effects of cannabis health warnings and can inform regulatory agencies that mandate warnings on cannabis products., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors have no conflict of interest or competing interests to report., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Social norms play an important role in cannabis use; however, there is little evidence on how social norms change in jurisdictions that legalize cannabis. This study examined trends in social norms before and after legalization of nonmedical cannabis in Canada in 2018., Methods: Data are from the International Cannabis Policy Study, a series of cross-sectional surveys conducted annually with Canadian respondents aged 16-65 years. Analyses were conducted in 2023 and included data from 58,045 respondents across 4 waves: the year immediately before legalization (2018) and 3 post-legalization waves (2019-2021). Regression models examined trends in injunctive norms (perceived approval of cannabis) and comfort in using cannabis in six different social contexts, adjusting for cannabis use frequency, medical authorization, and sociodemographic covariates., Results: Perceived social approval of cannabis use and comfort using cannabis in different social contexts was highest among males, frequent cannabis consumers, and those who reported medical authorization (p<0.05 in all cases). No changes in perceived approval were observed across years, except a temporary decrease in 2020 versus 2018 (OR=0.87, 95% CI=0.80, 0.95). Modest increases in comfort of using cannabis in 6 different social contexts were observed in 2019 (ß=0.10, p=0.001), 2020 (ß=0.10, p=0.001), and 2021 (ß=0.12, p<0.001) versus in 2018., Conclusions: Social norms have remained relatively stable after nonmedical legalization in Canada, with only modest increases in comfort of using cannabis in different social settings. The findings may reflect widespread cannabis use in Canada prior to nonmedical legalization in 2018 as well as comprehensive restrictions on promotion and advertising., (Copyright © 2023 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In Chile, Laws 19366 and 20000, implemented in 1995 and 2005 respectively, regulated and sanctioned cannabis' personal use, cultivation and trafficking., Methods: We use thirteen biannual cross-sectional national surveys data from 1994 to 2018 to examine the effect of Laws 19366 and 20000-using the rate of individuals incarcerated per 100000 population due to drug-related crimes as proxy-on the age of onset of cannabis use over time. We estimate the effect of these policies using a mixed proportional hazards framework that models the transition to first cannabis use in 47,832 individuals aged 12-21., Results: Overall, changes in these laws did not affect the transition to first cannabis use. However, increases in the rate of individuals incarcerated were associated with decreases on the age of onset of cannabis use in females and individuals living in affluent neighborhoods or in specific regions., Conclusion: We find no evidence of cannabis policy changes affecting the age of onset of cannabis use across all individuals aged 12-21. Policy effects associated with decreases in cannabis onset age in females and individuals from affluent neighborhoods or specific regions can be explained by using theoretical frames that recognize specific dynamics of cannabis supply and demand., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The number of medical cannabis licenses in Israel is increasing persistently (over 120,000 approved licenses in October 2022), reaching about 1.5% of adult population. Medical cannabis products are available in two main forms: inflorescence (administered by smoking or evaporation) and cannabis oil (administered sub-lingually). Data from the Israel ministry of health, regarding the split between these forms, show a major preference for inflorescence products over cannabis oils. This preference is increasing over time. This article reviews the main differences between the administration of these forms and their effects on the quality of treatment. It's conclusion is that for the most common cases of cannabis treatment, sublingual oils should be preferred and that the medical community has an important role in driving this change.

Background: Cannabis use for non-medical purposes was legalized and regulated in Canada through the Cannabis Act in October 2018. This paper examined trends in use of cannabis for non-medical purposes and related indicators from pre- to post-legalization in Canada (2018-2022)., Methods: Data from 5 years of the Canadian Cannabis Survey, an annual web-based survey administered to Canadians 16 years of age or older, were used in the analysis (n 2018 =12,952; n 2019 =11,922; n 2020 =10,821; n 2021 =10,733; n 2022 =10,048). Cannabis measures include questions about use, types of products, sources, risk perceptions and beliefs, and exposure to public education campaigns and health warnings. Adjusted logistic regression models tested differences in outcomes over time., Results: Past 12-month cannabis consumption increased among Canadians from 22 % in 2018 to 27 % in 2022 (AOR=1.41;99 % CI:1.28-1.54). Similarly, daily/almost daily (DAD) consumption increased from 5 % in 2018 to 7 % in 2022 (AOR=1.36;99 % CI:1.16-1.59). Consumption of dried flower, hash/kief, and concentrates/extracts (e.g., wax, shatter, budder) decreased since 2018, whereas consumption of edibles, beverages and vape pens/cartridges increased (p < 0.001). Legal purchasing increased from 4 % in 2018 to 69 % in 2022, while accessing cannabis through social and illegal sources decreased over time (p < 0.001)., Conclusion: More Canadians are reporting cannabis consumption since legalization and regulation of cannabis for non-medical purposes, continuing a pre-existing trend despite an increase in awareness of the risks of consuming cannabis. Trends in product use indicate a transition from dried flower and concentrates/extracts towards consumption of cannabis foods, drinks and vape pens/cartridges. The legal market is increasingly displacing the illicit cannabis market in Canada., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Despite thousands of licensed cannabis retail stores operating across Canada, there remains a significant illicit cannabis market. Some cannabis users continue to buy cannabis from dealers, illicit stores, and/or illicit online retailers., Methods: Data are from the 2021 British Columbia Cannabis Use Survey. Respondents (n = 8473) were 19 years or older, lived in British Columbia at the time of the survey, and reported using cannabis in the past 12 months., Results: Buying cannabis from all types of illicit sources was more common among younger cannabis users, those who use cannabis more frequently and started using cannabis before the age of 17 (vs. 19 or older), and among those who co-use cannabis with other drugs. Specifically, buying cannabis from a dealer was more common among men, those with lower educational attainment, and those who seek the lowest prices when buying cannabis. In contrast, those using cannabis for medical (vs. non-medical) purposes were more likely to report getting cannabis from illicit retail stores, while buying cannabis from illicit websites was more common among people who use edible cannabis products., Conclusion: Consistent with other studies, younger and more frequent cannabis users were more likely to report buying cannabis from illicit sources. However, these findings suggest there is significant heterogeneity among those who buy cannabis from different types of illicit sources, which should be carefully considered when developing policies and strategies aimed at encouraging consumers to transition to legal sources., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The author declares that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Importance: Gummies, flavored vaping devices, and other cannabis products containing psychoactive hemp-derived Δ8-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) are increasingly marketed in the US with claims of being federally legal and comparable to marijuana. National data on prevalence and correlates of Δ8-THC use and comparisons to marijuana use among adolescents in the US are lacking., Objective: To estimate the self-reported prevalence of and sociodemographic and policy factors associated with Δ8-THC and marijuana use among US adolescents in the past 12 months., Design, Setting, and Participants: This nationally representative cross-sectional analysis included a randomly selected subset of 12th-grade students in 27 US states who participated in the Monitoring the Future Study in-school survey during February to June 2023., Exposures: Self-reported sex, race, ethnicity, and parental education; census region; state-level adult-use (ie, recreational) marijuana legalization (yes vs no); and state-level Δ8-THC policies (regulated vs not regulated)., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was self-reported Δ8-THC and marijuana use in the past 12 months (any vs no use and number of occasions used)., Results: In the sample of 2186 12th-grade students (mean age, 17.7 years; 1054 [48.9% weighted] were female; 232 [11.1%] were Black, 411 [23.5%] were Hispanic, 1113 [46.1%] were White, and 328 [14.2%] were multiracial), prevalence of self-reported use in the past 12 months was 11.4% (95% CI, 8.6%-14.2%) for Δ8-THC and 30.4% (95% CI, 26.5%-34.4%) for marijuana. Of those 295 participants reporting Δ8-THC use, 35.4% used it at least 10 times in the past 12 months. Prevalence of Δ8-THC use was lower in Western vs Southern census regions (5.0% vs 14.3%; risk difference [RD], -9.4% [95% CI, -15.2% to -3.5%]; adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 0.35 [95% CI, 0.16-0.77]), states in which Δ8-THC was regulated vs not regulated (5.7% vs 14.4%; RD, -8.6% [95% CI, -12.9% to -4.4%]; aRR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.23-0.74]), and states with vs without legal adult-use marijuana (8.0% vs 14.0%; RD, -6.0% [95% CI, -10.8% to -1.2%]; aRR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.35-0.91]). Use in the past 12 months was lower among Hispanic than White participants for Δ8-THC (7.3% vs 14.4%; RD, -7.2% [95% CI, -12.2% to -2.1%]; aRR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.34-0.87]) and marijuana (24.5% vs 33.0%; RD, -8.5% [95% CI, -14.9% to -2.1%]; aRR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.59-0.94]). Δ8-THC and marijuana use prevalence did not differ by sex or parental education., Conclusions and Relevance: Δ8-THC use prevalence is appreciable among US adolescents and is higher in states without marijuana legalization or existing Δ8-THC regulations. Prioritizing surveillance, policy, and public health efforts addressing adolescent Δ8-THC use may be warranted.

Background: In 2016, California transitioned from legalized medical cannabis use to adult-use. Little is known about how this policy change affected medicinal cannabis use among young adults. Objectives: To identify longitudinal groups of medicinal cannabis users and concurrent changes in health- and cannabis use-related characteristics among young adults in Los Angeles between 2014 and 2021. Methods: Cannabis users (210 patients and 156 non-patients; 34% female; ages 18-26 at baseline) were surveyed annually across six waves. Longitudinal latent class analysis derived groups from two factors - cannabis patient status and self-reported medicinal use. Trajectories of health symptoms, cannabis use motives, and cannabis use (daily/near daily use, concentrate use, and problematic use) were estimated across groups. Results: Three longitudinal latent classes emerged: Recreational Users (39.3%) - low self-reported medicinal use and low-to-decreasing patient status; Recreational Patients (40.4%) - low self-reported medicinal use and high-to-decreasing patient status; Medicinal Patients (20.3%) - high self-reported medicinal use and high-to-decreasing patient status. At baseline, Medicinal Patients had higher levels of physical health symptoms and motives than recreational groups ( p  < .05); both patient groups reported higher level of daily/near daily and concentrate use ( p  < .01). Over time, mental health symptoms increased in recreational groups ( p  < .05) and problematic cannabis use increased among Recreational Patients ( p  < .01). Conclusions: During the transition to legalized adult-use, patterns of medicinal cannabis use varied among young adults. Clinicians should monitor increases in mental health symptoms and cannabis-related problems among young adults who report recreational - but not medicinal - cannabis use.

Introduction: The issue of decriminalization of medical marijuana has gained public attention globally due to the decisions of various governments in developed and developing countries who have decriminalized marijuana for medical purposes. The action was the result of the change in perception towards medical marijuana use, which is now believed to be safe, acceptable, and should be decriminalized. Due to the progress of modernization and the wide access to information, the change in perception towards medical marijuana seems to be inevitable and might have already permeated among the public in Malaysia. However, at the moment there is no baseline data to determine any of this claim., Objective: To determine the prevalence and factors associated with acceptance towards decriminalization of medical marijuana among adults in Selangor, Malaysia., Methodology: The study was a cross-sectional study conducted in year 2021 among 462 adults aged 18 years old and above in Selangor, Malaysia. The respondents were sampled using a multistage random sampling. The data was collected via self-administered questionnaires and has been analyzed using SPSS version 25., Result: More than half of the respondents in this study (64.7%) show acceptance towards the decriminalization of medical marijuana in Malaysia. The results of statistical tests indicate that there are significant associations between age (p < 0.001), gender (p = 0.005), ethnicity (p < 0.012), level of education (p < 0.011), employment status (p = 0.001), ever smoked (p < 0.001), given up smoking (p = 0.002), ever used substance (p < 0.001), current substance use (p < 0.001), given up substance (p < 0.001), exposure to medical marijuana-related content (p < 0.001), perceived risk associated with medical marijuana use (p < 0.001), perceived risk of harm of medical marijuana use (p < 0.001), and perceived approval of medical marijuana use (p < 0.001) with acceptance towards decriminalization of medical marijuana. The predictors for acceptance towards decriminalization of medical marijuana are perceived high approval of medical marijuana use (aOR = 7.023, p < 0.001, 95%CI = 3.534,13.955), perceived low risk of medical marijuana (aOR = 5.716, p < 0.001, 95%CI = 2.828,11.554), perceived low risk of harm from medical marijuana use (aOR = 3.480, p = 0.001, 95%CI = 1.702,7.114), current substance use (aOR = 2.264, p = 0.050, 95%CI = 1.001,5.118), and ever used substance (aOR = 2.005, p = 0.004, 95% CI = 0.054,0.576)., Conclusion: The results of the survey show that the current acceptance level towards decriminalization of medical marijuana is considerably high. However, the acceptance is mainly among those who are exposed to the substance and those who perceive low risk of medical marijuana. Thus, a further exploration of this phenomenon is needed, especially by increasing the sample size and expanding the study location to other states., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: Cannabis policy varies greatly across European countries, but evidence of how such policy impacts on recreational cannabis use among young people is conflicting. This study aimed to clarify this association by investigating how changes in cannabis legislation influenced cannabis use., Methods: Available data on self-reports of recreational cannabis use among individuals aged 15-34 years was retrieved from EMCDDA. Information on cannabis policy changes was categorized as more lenient (decriminalisation or depenalisation) or stricter (criminalisation, penalisation). Countries that had implemented changes in cannabis legislation or had information on prevalence of use for at least eight calendar years, were eligible for inclusion. We used interrupted time-series linear models to investigate changes in country-specific trajectories of prevalence over calendar time and in relation to policy changes., Results: Data from Belgium, Czech Republic, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom, for 1994-2017 was available for analyses. Cannabis use varied considerably over the study period and between countries. On average, use was stable or weakly increasing in countries where legislation was not changed or changed at the extremes of the study period (+0.08 percent per year [95% CI -0.01, 0.17 percent]). In contrast, the pooled average use decreased after changes in legislation, regardless of whether it had become more lenient (-0.22 [-1.21, 0.77]) or stricter (-0.44 [-0.91, 0.03])., Conclusions: Our findings do not support any considerable impact of cannabis legislation on the prevalence of recreational cannabis use among youth and young adults in Europe., Competing Interests: No authors have competing interests.

Introduction: Changing patterns of cannabis consumption related to the liberalization of cannabis policies may have a countervailing effect on tobacco use. We analyzed whether cannabis policies have tempered the effects of tobacco control policies as well as the extent to which they were associated with young adult cigarette smoking., Aims and Methods: Combining data on tobacco and cannabis policies at the state, county, and city levels with the nationally-representative geocoded National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 and Census data, we use multilevel regression and fixed effect analyses to examine the impact of cannabis policies on any past 30-day cigarette smoking, frequency of smoking, and past 30-day near-daily smoking among young adults while accounting for community and individual covariates., Results: Tobacco control policies, including significant effects of comprehensive smoking bans, total vending machine restrictions, single cigarette sale restrictions, and advertising restrictions, remain robust in reducing young adult smoking, net of cannabis policy liberalization, including the legal status of possession, penalties for sale, and medical cannabis. Cannabis policies do not directly affect young adult smoking patterns in an adverse way., Conclusions: This paper provides evidence that the liberalization of cannabis laws has not adversely affected the efficacy of tobacco control efforts., Implications: While the effects of tobacco control policies on smoking are well-established, little research has considered how the liberalization of cannabis policies may affect these relationships, which is important given the co-use of these substances. This paper provides evidence that the liberalization of cannabis laws has not adversely affected tobacco control efforts., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Alcohol and cannabis use as a contraindication to organ transplantation is a controversial issue. Until recently, patients in Canada with alcohol-associated liver disease were required to demonstrate abstinence for 6 mo to receive a liver transplant. There is no equivalent rule that is applied consistently for cannabis use. There is some evidence that alcohol and cannabis use disorder pretransplant could be associated with worse outcomes posttransplantation. However, early liver transplantation for patients with alcohol-associated liver disease in France and in the United States has led to challenges of the 6-mo abstinence rule in Canada in the media. It has also resulted in several legal challenges arguing that the rule violates human rights laws regarding discrimination in the provision of medical services and that the rule is also unconstitutional (this challenge is still before the court). Recent legalization of cannabis use for adults in Canada has led to questions about the appropriateness of limiting transplant access based on cannabis use. The ethics committee of the Canadian Society of Transplantation was asked to provide an ethical analysis of cannabis and alcohol abstinence policies. Our conclusions were as follows: neither cannabis use nor the 6-mo abstinence rule for alcohol use should be an absolute contraindication to transplantation, and transplant could be offered to selected patients, further research should be conducted to ensure evidence-based policies; and the transplant community has a duty not to perpetuate stigma associated with alcohol and cannabis use disorders., Competing Interests: The authors declare no funding or conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Competing Interests: Intérêts concurrents: Aucun déclaré.

A referendum on the Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill was held in New Zealand. The Bill was meant to oversee government control over the production, supply and use of cannabis and reduce cannabis-related harm. Public health control was proposed over cannabis market by imposing licenses and cultivation, the quality and strength of marketed cannabis, and sale restrictions. Under this Bill, cannabis was only meant to be available to adults aged over 20 years through licenced stores. The potency of cannabis was to be limited. Cannabis use and was going to be permitted in private homes and specifically licensed premises. The Electoral Commission announced on 6 November 2020 that 50.7% of voters opposed the Bill and 48.4% supported it. Despite the outcome of the referendum, legalisation of cannabis may remain a live issue for many people, and doctors need to have an informed view about the impact of legalisation on mental health conditions. Experience from other countries shows that access to and potency of cannabis increased with legalisation. Despite the intent to prevent harm, cannabis legislation has been associated with adverse effects on mental health, emergency hospital presentations and crime. Public health strategies, including educating public about harm associated with cannabis, surveillance of potency and labelling, increasing minimal age for legal recreational cannabis use and bolstering treatment capacity for problematic cannabis use, including those with psychiatric disorders, should be funded by revenue generated from cannabis legislation., Competing Interests: Nil.

Objectives: Cannabis legalization has increased its use. The incidence of acute pancreatitis (AP) and severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) has also increased. In this study, data on pancreatitis were obtained from 2 states before and after cannabis legalization and compared with 2 states without legalized cannabis., Methods: Data were extracted from State Inpatient Databases from the states of Colorado and Washington before recreational cannabis legalization (2011) and after legalization (2015). Arizona and Florida were used as the nonlegalized cannabis states. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit for AP and SAP to determine a trend difference between legalized and nonlegalized cannabis states., Results: Cannabis use, AP, and SAP increased in all states. The increase in AP and SAP was not significantly different between the states that legalized cannabis use and those that did not. Legalized cannabis states had lower charges for AP and SAP and shorter length of hospitalizations., Conclusions: The trend of AP and SAP increased during the study period, but this was not correlated to cannabis use. Cannabis users had lower hospitalization costs and hospital stay. The effects of other confounders such as cannabis dose and delivery methods, alcohol, tobacco, and others need to be studied further as use increases., Competing Interests: The other authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The Canadian government legalized non-medical cannabis use by adults in October 2018 to minimize associated harms and redirect profits from criminals. In October 2019, a wider array of products, including edibles, was legalized, with entry into the legal market beginning in December., Data and Methods: Three quarters (the first quarters of 2018 and 2019 and the fourth quarter of 2020) of the National Cannabis Survey were used to examine changes in cannabis use (overall use and daily or almost daily (DAD) use), consumption methods, products and sources., Results: Cannabis use in the past three months was higher in late 2020 (20.0%) than in 2019 (17.5%) and 2018 (14.0%), and this was particularly the case among: females (for whom rates rose to equal male rates for the first time), adults aged 25 and older, and some provinces. Similarly, DAD use, at 7.9% also increased. Higher percentages of Canadians reported getting at least some of their cannabis from legal sources or growing it, and fewer were relying on friends and family or illegal sources in 2020., Discussion: This study spans three years-from before legalization to about two years after. It provides a more complete picture of the law's impact on cannabis use and related behaviours, given the more established legal cannabis industry better equipped to compete with the black market on price, convenience and selection. Findings demonstrate that change is continuing, and, as before, some cautions and assurances remain. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cannabis use continues to be difficult to measure. Monitoring remains important, given the ever-changing provincial retail landscapes; the introduction of new products; and the pressure by the industry to remove or adjust potency limits, and allow widespread delivery, farm-gate sales and cannabis lounges.

In the United States, policies regarding the medical and nonmedical use of cannabis are changing rapidly. In 2021, a total of 34 US states have legalized cannabis for adult medical use, and 15 of these states have legalized adult non-medical use. These changing policies have raised questions about increasing prevalences of cannabis use, changing perceptions regarding frequent use, and potentially related outcomes such as comorbid psychiatric illness or driving under the influence of cannabis. Research regarding the correlates of any and frequent cannabis use is also developing quickly. This article reviews recent empirical studies concerning (1) adult trends in cannabis use, (2) state cannabis laws and related outcomes, and (3) emerging evidence regarding how the global coronavirus 19 pandemic may impact cannabis use patterns. We summarize recent findings and conclude with suggestions to address unanticipated effects of rapidly changing cannabis laws and policies., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement Nothing declared., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Cannabis, or marijuana, comprises many compounds with varying effects. It has become a treatment option for chronic diseases and debilitating symptoms, and evidence suggests that it has immunomodulatory and antiinflammatory properties. Transplant centers are more frequently facing issues about cannabis, as indications and legalization expand. As of February 2020, 33 states and the District of Columbia have legalized medical cannabis, and 14 have legalized recreational cannabis. Moreover, 8 states have passed legislation prohibiting the denial of transplant listing solely based on cannabis use. Studies demonstrate the potential for significant pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between cannabis and immunosuppression. Additionally, safety concerns include increased risk of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, tachyarrhythmias, malignancy, neurocognitive deficits, psychosis, other neuropsychiatric disorders, cannabis use disorder, respiratory symptoms, and infection. A recent retrospective database study found a negative association between documented cannabis use disorder and graft survival, but little additional evidence exists evaluating this relationship. In the absence of robust clinical data, transplant centers need a clear, reasoned, and systematic approach to cannabis. The results of our national survey, unfortunately, found little consensus among institutions. As both recreational and medicinal cannabis become more ubiquitous nationwide, transplant centers will need to develop comprehensive policies to address its use., Competing Interests: L.J.B. has served on an advisory board for Veloxis Pharmaceuticals and currently serves on their Speaker’s Bureau. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

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., (© 2020 Society for the Study of Addiction.)

Background: Cannabis policy has shifted toward legalization in many parts of the United States (US). While attention has been focused on whether legalization will lead to changes in cannabis use, it is conceivable that legalization will also affect use of substances that individuals frequently use with cannabis. This study assessed whether cannabis legalization impacted the prevalence of poly use of cannabis and alcohol from 2004 to 2017 and estimated the prevalence of cannabis and alcohol poly use in 2017., Methods: Public and restricted-use data from the US 2004-2017 National Survey on Drug Use and Health were analyzed. Data on past-month cannabis and alcohol use were assessed each year. Cannabis legalization was determined by the presence or absence of medical marijuana laws (MML) and recreational marijuana laws (RML) in each state. Difference-in-difference approach was used to estimate the association of MML and RML on cannabis and alcohol use overall and by sociodemographic subgroups (e.g., age, income, education)., Results: Between 2004 and 2017, poly use of cannabis and alcohol increased while alcohol-only use decreased. MML were associated with increases in poly use only among adults over age 50 and among those with higher annual incomes and higher education, while RML were associated with increases in poly use broadly among adults across sociodemographic groups., Conclusions: Legalization of cannabis was associated with increases in cannabis-alcohol poly use in the US. RML were associated with increases across demographics, while the impact of MML was more limited to certain sociodemographic groups., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Little information exists about cannabis use and its correlates among workers, particularly use before or at work, which may impact occupational safety. This study explores overall and workplace cannabis use patterns before legalization among Canadian workers and estimates the associations of personal and work-related characteristics with workplace and non-workplace cannabis use., Methods: Cross-sectional data were collected from 1651 Canadian workers in June 2018. The primary outcome was past-year cannabis use pattern: use, including before/at work (past-year workplace use); use, but not before/at work (past-year non-workplace use); no past-year use (non-past-year use). The associations of personal (sociodemographic, health) and work-related factors with workplace and non-workplace cannabis use were estimated using multinomial logistic regression., Results: A quarter of respondents reporting past-year cannabis use used cannabis before and/or at work. Respondents reporting workplace use were more likely to report more frequent cannabis use, use for medical or mixed purposes, and high THC cannabis use than workers reporting non-workplace use. Several personal factors were positively associated with workplace and non-workplace use (e.g., younger age, lower education). A safety-sensitive job, drug testing, supervisor role, less job visibility, lower perceived ability of supervisors to identify use/impairment, and less restrictive workplace smoking policies were positively associated with workplace use only., Conclusions: A non-trivial proportion of workers reported workplace use, but the nature of this use is complex. Work-related factors addressing the likelihood of detection and being in a safety-sensitive job were associated with workplace use. Worker education on lower risk use appears warranted., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study evaluated demographic patterns related to prenatal cannabinoid urine drug screening (UDS) over a 5-year period during which recreational marijuana was legalized and became accessible in Washington State., Methods: Using electronic health record data, we performed a retrospective analysis for deliveries occurring over a 5-year period that encapsulated the transitions to marijuana legalization and legal access. For three cohorts of women delivering prior to legalization, between legalization and accessibility, and following accessibility, the UDS completion rate and screening demographic characteristics were assessed using Chi-squared tests and multivariate logistic regression., Results: 25,514 deliveries occurred between March 2011 and March 2016. A significantly higher percentage of women underwent UDS post-accessibility (24.5%) compared to pre-legalization (20.0%, p < 0.001). A corresponding increase was not observed in the percentage of marijuana-positive UDS in tested patients (22.7% vs. 23.3%, p = 0.86). African American women had 2.8 times higher odds than Latinas of being tested, 2.1 times higher odds than Asian women, 1.7 times higher odds than White women, and 1.4 times higher odds than women of other races (all p < 0.001). Subsidized insurance status was also strongly associated with increased likelihood of testing (aOR = 3.5, p < 0.001)., Conclusions for Practice: Prenatal UDS testing patterns changed as recreational marijuana possession and accessibility became legal. Demographic discrepancies in testing reveal biases related to race and insurance status, which may be a proxy for socioeconomic status. As such discrepancies are potential contributors to health outcome disparities, it is important for providers and health care systems to examine their practices and ensure they are being appropriately, equally, and justly applied.

Purpose: As marijuana's popularity continues to grow, patients with glaucoma will encounter conflicting opinions on marijuana's role in glaucoma therapy. This study seeks to define the differing perceptions among glaucoma specialists, medical marijuana dispensaries, and glaucoma patients in a state with legalized marijuana., Design: Cross-sectional study., Participants: Medical marijuana dispensaries in Colorado, members of the American Glaucoma Society (AGS), and patients with glaucoma at the University of Colorado glaucoma clinic., Methods: First, medical marijuana dispensary employees were surveyed using a mystery call approach and a brief phone script. Dispensary employees were questioned as to whether marijuana was recommended and whether marijuana was safe and effective. Second, a self-administered survey was distributed to AGS members to determine the history of recommending marijuana and influencing factors for or against this recommendation. Third, the self-administered glaucoma patient survey assessed demographics, history of glaucoma, knowledge and rate of marijuana use, and perceptions of marijuana use. All surveys were conducted from October 2018 to March 2019., Main Outcome Measures: The proportion of medical marijuana dispensaries and glaucoma specialists recommending marijuana for the treatment of glaucoma, and the proportion of patients with glaucoma using marijuana as a treatment for glaucoma., Results: A total of 203 of the 300 medical marijuana dispensaries called were successfully contacted (68%). Of these, 103 respondents (51%) recommended marijuana products for the treatment of glaucoma. The remaining 100 (49%) deferred making a recommendation or were unsure. Of the 1308 AGS members, 290 (22%) responded to the survey. Twenty-two respondents (7.6%) reported that they had recommended marijuana for the treatment of glaucoma, with the majority of these (86.4%) having done so infrequently. Among the 231 respondents with glaucoma, most (58.9%) had heard about the possible use of marijuana for glaucoma, but only 2.6% had used marijuana as a treatment for glaucoma., Conclusions: Few glaucoma specialists have recommended marijuana as a treatment for glaucoma, and an even smaller percentage of patients report its use as a treatment for their glaucoma. In contrast, many marijuana dispensary employees endorse its use. As legal access and public acceptance of marijuana escalate, physicians should be aware of these perceptions when educating patients., (Copyright © 2020 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Cannabis use and cannabis use disorder are more prevalent in U.S. states with medical marijuana laws (MMLs), as well as among individuals with elevated psychological distress. We investigated whether adults with moderate and serious psychological distress experienced greater levels of cannabis use and/or disorder in states with MMLs compared to states without MMLs., Methods: National Survey of Drug Use and Health data (2013-2017) were used to compare past-month cannabis use, daily cannabis use, and cannabis use disorder prevalence among adults with moderate and serious psychological distress in states with versus without MMLs. We executed pooled multivariable logistic regression analyses to test main effects of distress, MMLs and their interaction, after adjustment., Results: Compared to states without MMLs, states with MMLs had higher adjusted prevalence of past-month use (11.1 % vs. 6.8 %), daily use (4.0 % vs. 2.2 %), and disorder (1.7 % vs. 1.2 %). Adults with moderate and serious psychological distress had greater adjusted odds of any use (AORs of 1.72 and 2.22, respectively) and of disorder (AORs of 2.17 and 2.94, respectively), compared to those with no/mild distress. We did not find evidence of an interaction between MMLs and distress category for any outcome., Conclusions: Associations between elevated distress and cannabis use patterns are no greater in states with MML. However, cannabis use is more prevalent in MML states. Thus, higher base rates of cannabis use and disorder among adults with elevated distress are proportionally magnified in these states., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The legalisation of cannabis by the High Court of South Africa, which was confirmed by the Constitutional Court, imposes challenges to occupational medical practitioners acting as medical review officers in compliance testing and fit-for-service medical examinations. The lipophilic character of the psychoactive component of cannabis, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC), and its prolonged elimination half-life, create challenges for the ethically and scientifically correct management of the legal use of cannabis in risk-sensitive environments. Important issues to consider in testing for cannabis use are: the stance of 'zero tolerance'; screening and confirmation cut-off concentrations; and the bio-matrices used for testing. Constitutional rights relate to privacy, freedom, autonomy, freedom of religion and the equal enjoyment of rights and privileges, which must be balanced against the health and safety of others.

Background : Reducing racial and ethnic arrest disparities is one driver of cannabis legalization in the US., but outcomes of cannabis policies and equity provisions remain unknown. Early research finds legalization reduces total cannabis incidents, but disparities persist. In response, novel research approaches are emerging, but a comprehensive assessment of their strengths and limitations is needed, particularly when using data sources developed for other purposes. Objectives : This perspective assesses the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS), originally developed for crime statistics, as a means to surveil cannabis incident disparities. Methods : Massachusetts NIBRS (2000-2013) illustrates discussion points, including around sample inclusion, data integrity, and missing data. Results : We find that NIBRS is a comprehensive source for state-level monitoring if used with knowledge of its limitations. However, drawing conclusions about disparities requires careful assessment of sample inclusion and any changes to participation rates, data integrity, reporting changes, and missing variables, before analysis and reporting. Conclusion : NIBRS utility would increase with greater or required jurisdiction participation, guidance for collection of racial and ethnic data, and required ethnicity reporting. Despite limitations, cannabis disparity analyses using NIBRS can provide key insights for increasing equity in states considering and enacting cannabis legalization.

As is the case for most drugs, cannabis use has costs and benefits, and so do the policies that attempt to minimize the first and maximize the second. This article summarizes what we know about the harmful effects of recreational cannabis use and the benefits of medical cannabis use under the policy of prohibition that prevailed in developed countries until 2012. It outlines three broad ways in which cannabis prohibition may be relaxed, namely, the depenalization of personal possession and use, the legalization of medical use, and the legalization of adult recreational use. It reviews evidence to date on the impacts of each of these forms of liberalization on the costs and benefits of cannabis use. It makes some plausible conjectures about the future impacts of the commercialization of cannabis using experience from the commercialization of the alcohol, tobacco, and gambling industries. Cannabis policy entails unavoidable trade-offs between competing social values in the face of considerable uncertainty about the effects that more liberal cannabis policies will have on cannabis use and its consequences for better or worse.
., (© 2020, AICHServier GroupCopyright © 2020 AICH Servier Group. All rights reserved.)

Background: Cannabis use is more common among adults with anxiety. Cannabis legalization is occurring rapidly across the United States (US) and individuals may use cannabis to cope with anxiety. This study investigated whether cannabis use across the US has changed differentially by anxiety status and by state cannabis legalization for medical (MML) and/or recreational use (RML)., Methods: Public and restricted-use data from the 2004 to 2017 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, an annual cross-sectional, nationally representative survey of US individuals, were analyzed. The prevalence of past-30-day cannabis use by anxiety status in 2017 was estimated among respondents ages ≥18 (n = 42,554) by sociodemographics and state-level cannabis law. Weighted logistic regressions with continuous year as the predictor for the linear time trend were used to examine the time trends in cannabis use by anxiety and cannabis law status from 2004 to 2017 (total combined analytic sample n = 398,967)., Results: Cannabis use was consistently two to three times higher among those with high anxiety compared to those with some or no anxiety and was higher in states with RML compared to MML or no MML/RML. Cannabis use has increased over time among those with and without anxiety overall, in MML states, and in states without MML/RML; with a faster increase in cannabis use among those with high anxiety compared to lower anxiety in states with MML., Conclusions: Cannabis use is increasing among American adults overall, yet is disproportionately common among Americans with anxiety especially among those residing in states where cannabis has been legalized., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to report., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Cannabis is the most widely used drug in Canada. We examined the trends in past-year cannabis consumption by sociodemographic and geographic characteristics., Methods: We conducted a repeated cross-sectional analysis of the Canadian Tobacco Use Monitoring Survey, the Canadian Tobacco, Alcohol and Drugs Survey and the Canadian Alcohol and Drug Use Monitoring Survey from 2004 to 2017. Respondents were aged 15 years and older. Past-year cannabis use was analyzed using multivariable logistic regression and segmented logistic regression., Results: We analyzed 289 823 respondents (51% female) between 2004 and 2017. Between 2004 and 2017, the overall prevalence of cannabis use increased from 12.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 11.0%-13.5%) to 18.7% (95% CI 16.2%-21.5%) among men and from 6.6% (95% CI 5.9%-7.4%) to 11.1% (95% CI 9.4%-13.0%) among women. The crude rate of change was greater between 2011 and 2017 than that between 2004 and 2011 in men (odds ratio [OR] per annual change: 1.08, 95% CI 1.05-1.11) and women (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.07-1.15). After adjustment for age, education, tobacco smoking and province, the 2011-2017 trend was stronger in men (adjusted OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.05-1.46), but not in women (adjusted OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.93-1.37). Cannabis use was associated with tobacco smoking (OR 4.94, 95% CI 4.65-5.25). Heterogeneity was found in cannabis use trends by age, education and province. Cannabis use decreased among respondents aged 15-19 years and increased in other age groups., Interpretation: Cannabis consumption in Canada has increased and varies by sex, age, level of education and geography. Increases vary by sociodemographic factors and may be faster among certain groups. Further studies are warranted post-legalization., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (Copyright 2020, Joule Inc. or its licensors.)

Background: In 2016, the Australian federal government passed legislation enabling a range of cannabis-based products to be prescribed to patients by registered healthcare professionals. An online survey conducted immediately prior to these legislative changes found that the vast majority of respondents at the time were illicitly sourcing cannabis plant matter, smoking was the preferred route of administration and mental health, chronic pain, and sleep conditions were the most frequently cited reasons for medical cannabis use. This manuscript reports the results of a follow-up survey conducted in 2018-2019, the Cannabis As Medicine Survey (CAMS-18). The goal of this second questionnaire was to examine patterns of use and consumer perspectives regarding medical cannabis use in Australia, 2 years after the introduction of legal access pathways., Methods: Anonymous online cross-sectional survey with convenience sample, recruited mainly through online media between September 2018 and March 2019. Participants were adults (18 years or over) residing in Australia who reported using a cannabis product for self-identified therapeutic reasons during the preceding 12 months. The survey measured consumer characteristics, indications and patterns of medical cannabis use, routes and frequency of administration, perceived benefits and harms, experiences and preferred models of access to medical cannabis., Results: Data were available for 1388 respondents. The main categories of condition being treated with medical cannabis were pain (36.4%), mental health (32.8%), sleep (9.2%), neurological (5.2%) and cancer (3.8%). Respondents reported using medical cannabis on 15.8 (11.2) days in the past 28, by inhaled (71.4%) or oral (26.5%) routes and spending AUD$82.27 ($101.27) per week. There were high levels of self-reported effectiveness, but also high rates of side effects. There was uncertainty regarding the composition of illicit cannabinoid products and concerns regarding their possible contamination. Few respondents (2.7%) had accessed legally prescribed medical cannabis, with the main perceived barriers being cost, disinterest from the medical profession and stigma regarding cannabis use., Conclusions: Chronic pain, mental health and sleep remain the main clinical conditions for which consumers report using medical cannabis. Despite 2 years of legal availability, most consumers in Australia reported accessing illicit cannabis products, with uncertainty regarding the quality or composition of cannabis products.

Importance: In response to increasing public support for cannabis legalization, understanding associations of state and federal policy changes related to cannabis legalization with patterns of cannabis use is important. A challenge for public health monitoring and research is significant variation in data availability related to cannabis use behaviors and perceptions across and within states and over time, including the availability of prelegalization vs postlegalization data., Objective: To review data available on cannabis use and related behaviors over time in Massachusetts and the US., Design, Setting, and Participants: This case series examined state and national surveys on public health and related behaviors and outcomes to review availability of cannabis-related data for Massachusetts for 8 key indicators over time. Additionally, the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) and Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System for all states were reviewed. The analysis was conducted between February 1, 2019, and March 18, 2020., Exposures: Surveys that enable state-level estimation of cannabis use and related behaviors., Main Outcomes and Measures: Eight key indicators related to cannabis use behaviors and perceptions: lifetime cannabis use, age of initiation, frequency of use, location of use, method of use, source of cannabis, perceptions of cannabis, and reason for use (ie, medical vs nonmedical)., Results: There were 7 surveys that monitored cannabis use and related behaviors in Massachusetts for adolescents and adults. No surveys monitored all 8 indicators of interest, and availability over time was limited. In the most recent BRFSS, 24 states asked cannabis-related questions, meaning BRFSS data on cannabis use was lacking for more than half of the US adult population. In the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System, 36 states asked standard cannabis questions; most other states had at least 1 question related to cannabis use and frequency., Conclusions and Relevance: These findings of limitations of existing surveys, and particularly the lack of national questions in the BRFSS and Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System, suggest that available data have substantial limitations for monitoring cannabis use. As cannabis policy changes continue, there is a need to remain focused on the availability of high-quality data sources that allow for critical public health research.

Aims: Personal cannabis use is common across New Zealand, and an upcoming referendum will enable the public to vote on whether this should be legalised. The present research aimed to examine the attitudes of midlife New Zealand adults on cannabis use and legalisation, and to identify potential predictors of those attitudes., Methods: At age 40, 899 participants drawn from the Christchurch Health and Development Study were interviewed about the perceived harmfulness of cannabis use, opinions on legalisation for recreational use and supply, and the use of cannabis for medicinal purposes. In addition, a range of potential predictors of legislative attitudes were examined., Results: We identified a wide range of attitudes across the cohort, however the majority tended to hold a neutral view. More than 80% of the cohort expressed support for medicinal cannabis, while 47.8% supported decriminalisation, and 26.8% expressed support for legalisation for recreational use. The strongest predictors of support for legalisation were prior use of cannabis and other drugs, while additional positive predictors included a history of depression, Māori ancestry, parental drug use, novelty seeking and higher educational attainment. Predictors of more negative attitudes were also identified, and included female gender and having dependent children., Conclusions: These findings provide insight into cannabis-related views within the New Zealand context, and may help to predict voting behaviour during the 2020 Cannabis Referendum., Competing Interests: All authors report grants from Health Research Council of New Zealand, grants from Canterbury Medical Research Foundation during the conduct of the study; Dr Boden is a member of the New Zealand Prime Minister's Chief Science Advisor's Expert Panel on Cannabis.

Aims: To explore patterns of medicinal cannabis use prior to implementation of the new Medicinal Cannabis Scheme (MCS) in New Zealand., Methods: An anonymous online convenience survey of 3,634 last-year medicinal users of cannabis promoted via Facebook™ from May to August 2019., Results: Fifty percent of the sample were female, 18% were Māori and the median age was 38 years. The medical conditions for which cannabis was most often used were pain (81%), sleep (66%) and mental health conditions (64%). Respondents perceived cannabis to be an effective therapy and reported reducing use of other pharmaceutical medicines. Fifty-two percent reported side effects from cannabis use, including increased appetite (29%), drowsiness (12%), eye irritation (11%), dependency (10%), memory impairment (10%) and lack of energy (9%). Smoking was the dominant route of administration. Nearly half (47%) had discussed their use of cannabis with a medical professional in the previous year, while 14% had requested a prescription and 5% accessed a prescribed cannabis-based product (mostly oral CBD)., Conclusion: Respondents self-medicated with cannabis to treat a wide range of health complaints. Only half discussed medicinal cannabis use with their medical professional, and a minority requested a prescription and used a prescribed cannabis-based product., Competing Interests: All authors report a grant from the Health Research Council during the conduct of the study.

Background: Choice of minimum legal age (MLA) for cannabis use is a critical and contentious issue in legalization of non-medical cannabis. In Canada where non-medical cannabis was recently legalized in October 2018, the federal government recommended age 18, the medical community argued for 21 or even 25, while public consultations led most Canadian provinces to adopt age 19. However, no research has compared later life outcomes of first using cannabis at these different ages to assess their merits as MLAs., Methods: We used doubly robust regression techniques and data from nationally representative Canadian surveys to compare educational attainment, cigarette smoking, self-reported general and mental health associated with different ages of first cannabis use., Results: We found different MLAs for different outcomes: 21 for educational attainment, 19 for cigarette smoking and mental health and 18 for general health. Assuming equal weight for these individual outcomes, the 'overall' MLA for cannabis use was estimated to be 19 years. Our results were robust to various robustness checks., Conclusion: Our study indicated that there is merit in setting 19 years as MLA for non-medical cannabis.

Most U.S. states that have regulated and taxed cannabis have imposed some form of mandatory safety testing requirements. In California, the country's largest and oldest legal cannabis market, mandatory testing was first enforced by state regulators in July 2018, and additional mandatory tests were introduced at the end of 2018. All cannabis must be tested and labeled as certified by a state-licensed cannabis testing laboratory before it can be legally marketed in California. Every batch that is sold by licensed retailers must be tested for more than 100 contaminants, including 66 pesticides with tolerance levels lower than the levels allowable for any other agricultural product in California. This paper estimates the costs of compliance with mandatory cannabis testing laws and regulations, using California's testing regime as a case study. We use state government data, data collected from testing laboratories, and data collected from lab equipment suppliers to run a set of Monte Carlo simulations and estimate the cost per pound of compliance with California's new cannabis testing regulations. We find that cost per pound is highly sensitive to average batch size and testing failure rates. We present results under a variety of different assumptions about batch size and failure rates. We also find that under realistic assumptions, the loss of cannabis that must be destroyed if a batch fails testing accounts for a larger share of total testing costs than does the cost of the lab tests. Using our best estimates of average batch size (8 pounds) and failure rate (4%) in the 2019 California market, we estimate testing cost at $136 per pound of dried cannabis flower, or about 10 percent of the reported average wholesale price of legal cannabis in the state. Our findings explain effects of the testing standards on the cost of supplying legal licensed cannabis, in California, other U.S. states, and foreign jurisdictions with similar testing regimes., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

In the current study we use a synthetic control group design to estimate the causal effect of a medical marijuana initiative on suicide risk. In 1996, California legalized marijuana use for medical purposes. Implementation was abrupt and uniform, presenting a "natural experiment." Utilizing a panel dataset containing annual frequencies of Total, gun, and non-gun suicides aggregated by state for the years 1970-2004, we construct a control time series for California as a weighted combination of the 41 states that did not legalize marijuana during the analysis period. Post-intervention differences for California and its constructed control time series can be interpreted as the effects of the medical marijuana law on suicide. Significance of the effects were assessed with permutation tests. Our findings suggest that California's 1996 legalization resulted in statistically significant (p<.05) reductions in suicides and gun suicides, but only a non-significant reduction in non-gun suicides (p≥.488). Since the effect for non-gun suicides was indistinguishable from chance, we infer that the overall causal effect was realized through gun suicides. The mechanism could not be determined, however. Participation in the medical marijuana program legally disqualifies participants from purchasing guns. But since most suicides involve guns, it is possible that the effect on total suicide is driven by gun suicide alone.

Introduction: The objective of this study is to assess the changes in rates of juvenile cannabis criminal allegations and racial disparities in Oregon after legalization of cannabis (July 2015) for adults., Methods: This study included all allegations for cannabis-related offenses that occurred from January 2012 to September 2018 in Oregon. Negative binomial regression models were used to examine monthly cannabis allegation rates over time, and tested differences between youth of color and white youth, adjusting for age, gender, and month the allegation occurred. Analysis was conducted in January-March 2019., Results: Cannabis allegation rates increased 28% among all youth and 32% among cannabis-using youth after legalization. Rates of allegations were highest for American Indian/Alaska Native and black youth. Rates for black youth were double that of whites before legalization, and this disparity decreased after legalization. For American Indian/Alaska Native youth, rates were higher than whites before legalization, and this disparity remained unchanged., Conclusions: Adult cannabis legalization in Oregon was associated with increased juvenile cannabis allegations; increases are not explained by changes in underage cannabis use. Relative disparities decreased for black youth but remained unchanged for American Indian/Alaska Native youth. Changing regulations following adult cannabis legalization could have unintended negative impacts on youth., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

We examine whether marijuana decriminalization in Jamaica, a country that historically has had relatively widespread use of the drug, has led to an increase in its use, the frequency of use and the money spent on it. To this end, we use a national drug survey dataset with extensive information on people's use of, attitudes towards, access to marijuana. Our econometric analysis shows that awareness of the legislation has a positive correlation with the use of the substance. Worryingly, decriminalization positively correlates with the likelihood of first time and general use for youths. There is also some evidence that the legislation results in a substitution away from alcohol towards marijuana consumption for youths. From a policy perspective, a marijuana monitoring system can be implemented to follow the consumption patterns of youths. This should involve establishing school-level programmes that monitor students, and where potential drug users are identified, school officials should intervene to curb students' drug appetite before an escalated use of marijuana., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press in association with The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: The Canadian government legalized non-medical cannabis use by adults in October 2018 in order to minimize associated harms and re-direct profits from criminals., Data and Methods: Seven quarters of (NCS) data were combined into two groups: pre- and post-legalization periods - to examine changes in: cannabis use (overall, daily or almost daily (DAD)), source of product, driving after consumption and riding in a vehicle with a driver who had consumed., Results: By 2019, overall cannabis use had increased (16.8% vs. 14.9%), particularly among: males, adults aged 25 and older, and in Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Alberta. DAD use, at 6.0%, remained stable, as did the prevalence of driving within 2 hours of consumption (13.2%). Riding in a vehicle with a driver who had used declined, overall (from 5.3% to 4.2%) and among: females, persons aged 25 and older, and in Newfoundland and Labrador, Ontario and Alberta. Where Canadians reported obtaining their cannabis also changed, with increasing percentages reporting getting some or all of their cannabis from legal sources, and fewer using illegal sources or relying on friends/family. Some provinces experienced more change than others., Discussion: While too soon to observe the longer-term impacts associated with the Cannabis Act , early indications based on data collected in the months surrounding enactment suggests some cautions and also some assurances. Ongoing monitoring will be essential particularly given the 2.0 Act modifications and the ever-changing provincial retail and regulatory landscapes.

Eleven US states and Washington, DC, legalized recreational (adult use) cannabis. Seven states-Alaska, California, Colorado, Massachusetts, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington-allow cannabis sales. A public health concern is that exemptions in state or local smoke-free laws for public cannabis smoking or vaping will weaken smoke-free laws, expose the public to secondhand cannabis, and renormalize smoking.We describe the experience of the seven states and challenges faced in maintaining smoke-free laws. Using elements of a tobacco control framework, we identify best practices in cannabis regulation by comparing each state's smoke-free laws and allowances for public cannabis use. All states prohibit public cannabis use; two lack 100% smoke-free protections; one lacks vaping devices in its smoke-free law; three allow cannabis use in retailers; two allow cannabis use in social consumption lounges; and two allow cannabis use in tourism venues.States should close gaps in smoke-free laws and not expand where cannabis use is permitted to ensure public health.