Search

Introduction: The 2019 outbreak of e-cigarette or vaping product use-associated lung injury (EVALI) is believed to have been caused by vitamin E acetate, an additive used in some cannabis vaporizer products. Previous studies have primarily focused on changes in sales of electronic nicotine delivery systems following the initial advisory issued by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on August 17, 2019. The present study is intended to examine variation by age groups in sales of regulated cannabis vape products in the state of California before, during, and after the outbreak. Methods: Weekly sales revenue of cannabis vape products (from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2020) was obtained from a sample of recreational cannabis retailers licensed in California. An interrupted time series analysis, using AutoRegressive, Integrated, Moving Average methods, was employed to estimate changes in the sales and market share of cannabis vape products in the weeks following the CDC advisory. Results: The total volume of regulated cannabis vape product sales increased substantially over the 3-year study period (2018-2020). Sales and market share of cannabis vape products, however, declined in both young and older adults immediately following the advisory, rebounding to pre-EVALI levels only for the young adults. For sales, the potential EVALI effect following the CDC's advisory equates to an 8.0% and 2.2% decline below expected levels in the older and young adults, respectively. Conclusions: The differential age effect on sales may reflect concerns regarding health effects of cannabis vaping products and greater awareness of the outbreak among older adults. Findings highlight the importance of informing consumers about health risks associated with using cannabis vape products acquired from regulated versus illicit sources.

BackgroundRecent changes in California's tobacco and cannabis policies could impact the retail availability of little cigars/cigarillos (LCCs) and blunt wraps that are used for blunt smoking. This study was intended to test whether tobacco flavor bans and minimum pack sizes of LCCs have reduced tobacco availability in California jurisdictions, whereas, permissive policies on sales and marketing of cannabis increased availability.MethodsMeasures of retail availability of LCCs and blunt wraps were obtained from the 2016-2019 longitudinal sample of licensed tobacco retailers (LTRs, n = 4062) from California's Healthy Stores for Healthy Communities campaign. Additional data sources included the California Cannabis Local Laws database and geographic location of 1063 cannabis retailers used for constructing a spatial index of accessibility to the LTRs. Two-level generalized structural equation models were developed to assess effects of store- and jurisdiction-level predictors of change in tobacco availability (+, -, no change).ResultsNeither permissive cannabis policies nor accessibility to cannabis retailers were associated with an increase in retail availability of the tobacco products. Enactment of a tobacco flavor ban, however, was associated with reduced availability of LCCs and blunt wraps, which was more pronounced in jurisdictions that had permissive cannabis policies (i.e. policy interaction).ConclusionsA tobacco flavor ban may be an effective strategy to reduce retail availability of LCCs, blunt wraps and possibly other tobacco in California jurisdictions. This finding is of particular relevance as the tobacco industry has successfully petitioned for a referendum vote on California's statewide flavor ban in the 2022 election.

ImportanceAs marijuana continues to be legalized in many states, little is known about best regulatory practice, exposing the population to significant potential harm.ObjectiveTo assess the extent to which potential best practices, including those from tobacco control, were incorporated into state and local marijuana policies in California.Design and settingCalifornia legalized medical marijuana in 1996 and adult recreational use in 2016, effective in January 2018. A cross-sectional study with data collection and analysis from February 1 to November 30, 2019, measured the adoption of potential demand reduction and youth protection best practices, including restrictions on sales, products, marketing, warnings, and taxation. Laws in effect by January 31, 2019, were verified and all 539 California local jurisdictions were studied.Main outcomes and measuresAdoption of potential best practices in marijuana laws for demand reduction and youth protection.ResultsThe laws of 534 of California's 539 jurisdictions (99%) were successfully identified; 263 of these 534 jurisdictions (49%) allowed any retail sale of marijuana, covering 57% of the state's population. More than one-third of jurisdictions allow sales of marijuana for adult recreational use (203 of 534 [38%]); of those, 122 allow storefront dispensaries and 81 allow sales by delivery only. A total of 257 of 534 jurisdictions (48%) allow medical sales. Of 147 jurisdictions allowing medical or adult use dispensaries, 93 (63%) limited the number of licenses, with a mean of 1 store for every 19 058 residents (range, 154-355 143). The state imposed no limits on number of dispensaries or deliverers. Forty-two jurisdictions increased the state-specified distances required between dispensaries and schools. Only 8 jurisdictions allowing retail sales imposed restrictions on products exceeding state regulations; 1 prohibited sale of flavored products, 3 prohibited sale of marijuana-infused beverages, and 5 imposed additional restrictions on edible marijuana products. No jurisdictions limited potency of products sold, although 1 established a potency-linked tax. The state did not limit or tax potency, except for establishing a standard 10-mg dose of tetrahydrocannabinol for edible marijuana products, nor did they limit manufacturing or sale of flavored products. The state required only a health warning in 6-point font on packages. Twenty-seven jurisdictions required additional health warnings in stores or on packages, 27 allowed onsite consumption of marijuana products, and 13 allowed marijuana-related events. More than half of jurisdictions legalizing any cannabis commerce (154 of 289 [53%]) did not tax marijuana locally and little revenue was captured for prevention. Much of the state excise and cultivation taxes is slated for youth substance use prevention and treatment.Conclusions and relevanceIn implementing legalization of marijuana in California, local policies varied widely. Where marijuana was legalized, many lessons from tobacco control to reduce demand, limit harm, and prevent youth use were not adopted, potentially creating greater risk of harm.

Objectives. To examine whether local cannabis policies and retail availability are associated with cannabis use and problematic cannabis use (PCU) among adolescents in Northern California. Methods. The sample comprised adolescents aged 13 to 17 years screened for past-year cannabis use during well-child visits in 2021. Exposures included local bans on cannabis storefront retailers, policy protectiveness, and retail proximity and density. Outcomes included self-reported past-year cannabis use and PCU diagnoses. Modified Poisson regression models adjusted for sociodemographics. Results. The sample (n = 103 134) was 51.1% male with a median age of 15 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 14–16 years); 5.5% self-reported cannabis use, and 0.3% had diagnosed PCU. Adolescents had a lower prevalence of cannabis use in jurisdictions that banned storefront retailers (adjusted prevalence rate [APR] = 0.857; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.814, 0.903 vs allowed), banned delivery (APR = 0.751; 95% CI = 0.710, 0.795 vs allowed), or had more policy protections (APR range = 0.705–0.800). Lower PCU prevalence was also found among those in jurisdictions that banned (vs allowed) storefront retailers (APR = 0.786; 95% CI = 0.629, 0.983) or delivery (APR = 0.783; 95% CI = 0.616, 0.996). Longer drive time and lower density of storefront retailers were associated with a lower cannabis use prevalence. Conclusions. More protective cannabis policies and less retail availability were associated with a lower prevalence of adolescent cannabis use and PCU. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(S8):S654–S663. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307787) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The aim of this study is to identify cannabis products according to their appeal among young adults and measure product sales trends. Design, setting and participants: This was a retrospective comparative study using point‐of‐sale data from licensed recreational cannabis retailers that include buyer age with birth year entered by retailers, set in California, USA. Cannabis purchases by young adults (aged 21–24, GenZ) were compared with older adults (age 25+) over 4 years (2018–21). Measurements: Sales for six cannabis product categories were analyzed using a commercial data set with imputations and a raw data set. Age‐appeal metrics were dollar and unit sales to young adults, and dollar and unit share ratios (young adults/older adults), where a share ratio of 100 denotes age‐appeal comparability. A product category was considered more young‐adult appealing than others if its mean on a metric was at least one standard deviation above the grand mean across all product categories. Findings Flower (cannabis plant material) and vapor pen appealed to young adults based on absolute dollar sales, dominating young‐adult spending compared with other cannabis products (37.24 and 31.83%, respectively). Vapor pen and concentrate appealed to young adults based on dollar share ratios of 152, meaning these products comprised a 52% greater share of young‐adult cannabis spending relative to older‐adult spending (31.83/20.97% and 10.47/6.88%, respectively). Less appealing to young adults were pre‐roll, edible/beverage and absorbable products (tincture/sublingual, capsule and topical). Flower showed the largest dollar sales growth (B = +$3.50 million/month), next to vapor pen (B = +$1.55 million/month). Vapor pen tied for highest growth in the percent of product dollars from the largest package size (B = +0.85%/month) and showed the steepest price decline (B = −0.53 price per gram/month). Conclusions: In California, USA, from 2018 to 2021, relative to older adults, young adults spent a greater share of their cannabis dollars on vapor pen and concentrate (products with high potency of delta‐9‐tetrahydrocannabinol). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]