Commentary on Borodovsky et al.: Enhancing research on THC quantification—Consumer awareness through accurate labelling

IF 5.3 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Addiction Pub Date : 2025-01-11 DOI:10.1111/add.16758
Rachel Lees Thorne, Tom P. Freeman
{"title":"Commentary on Borodovsky et al.: Enhancing research on THC quantification—Consumer awareness through accurate labelling","authors":"Rachel Lees Thorne,&nbsp;Tom P. Freeman","doi":"10.1111/add.16758","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Borodovsky and colleagues [<span>4</span>] found that higher daily THC consumption was associated with a greater number of CUD symptoms and higher odds for meeting clinical thresholds for CUD in a large sample of United States (US) respondents. This represents an important step in our ability to estimate dose-related risk of a key public health outcome that occurs in approximately one in five people who use cannabis [<span>5</span>]. To calculate THC consumption in their comprehensive online survey, participants reported their daily quantity of cannabis use over the past week across a range of product types and estimated the potency of the cannabis that they had used.</p><p>Both quantity and potency of cannabis are needed to estimate THC consumption, and both have been linked to important health outcomes [<span>1, 6, 7</span>]. Overlooking these factors in previous research may have affected our understanding of the associations between cannabis and health outcomes such as CUD. However, estimating quantity and potency is not straightforward and requires more in depth questioning than estimating frequency alone. Several assessments, including Borodovsky and colleagues' [<span>4</span>] work, have set out to comprehensively assess THC consumption, however, several factors may influence the accuracy of estimation of these data.</p><p>Across the United States, there is a complex picture of differing legal frameworks surrounding the availability and sale of medicinal and/or recreational cannabis. Outside of the United States, most people who use cannabis do so in a setting in which cannabis is not legally sold or purchased. In legal markets, accurate information about cannabis products including quantity and potency can be included on labelling and packaging. In reality, this is not always the case, as cannabis products are not always correctly labelled [<span>8</span>]. Moreover, current labelling may not be accessible enough for consumers to interpret and retain this information. Consequently, many people who use cannabis report that they are not aware of the THC quantity in the products they consume, even in legal markets [<span>9, 10</span>]. Moreover, where cannabis is purchased illegally, consumers may lack accurate information on the cannabis they are purchasing. Researchers often need to rely on participants' recall of this information to estimate their THC consumption and, therefore, this may introduce bias to our estimates. However, recent research indicates that THC consumption can be estimated by collecting data on product type and its average THC concentration, together with amount and frequency of use, with strong validity according to urinary THC concentrations [<span>11</span>]. Nevertheless, we need to understand the influence of contextual factors on participant accuracy of estimation of their THC consumption, as well as encourage better labelling of cannabis products to improve consumers' knowledge.</p><p>Furthermore, accurate labelling of products will enable individuals who use cannabis to respond to knowledge generated by research and to any future guidelines for safer use based on THC, as Borodovsky and colleagues [<span>4</span>] recommend. One approach could be through labelling packaging with standard THC units [<span>12</span>] in the same way that alcohol products are labelled with alcohol units in many jurisdictions around the world. To maximise impact on public health, manufacturers and relevant legal bodies should incorporate such measures on accessible labelling for cannabis products, so that those who would like to monitor their use are able to do so accurately. For example, Health Canada recently sought public guidance on simplifying THC labelling on products, and the legislative review of the Cannabis Act recommended that a ‘standard dose’ or ‘unit dose’ should be prioritized and accompanied by regulatory amendments to require it as an element on cannabis product labels [<span>13</span>]. If successfully implemented, such regulation could enhance communication and consumer knowledge about THC.</p><p>Increasing the accuracy and accessibility of information available around quantity and potency of cannabis products has the potential to both improve the accuracy of our research on CUD as well as to enable consumers to make more informed choices to reduce their risk.</p><p>None.</p>","PeriodicalId":109,"journal":{"name":"Addiction","volume":"120 4","pages":"686-687"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/add.16758","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Addiction","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/add.16758","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Borodovsky and colleagues [4] found that higher daily THC consumption was associated with a greater number of CUD symptoms and higher odds for meeting clinical thresholds for CUD in a large sample of United States (US) respondents. This represents an important step in our ability to estimate dose-related risk of a key public health outcome that occurs in approximately one in five people who use cannabis [5]. To calculate THC consumption in their comprehensive online survey, participants reported their daily quantity of cannabis use over the past week across a range of product types and estimated the potency of the cannabis that they had used.

Both quantity and potency of cannabis are needed to estimate THC consumption, and both have been linked to important health outcomes [1, 6, 7]. Overlooking these factors in previous research may have affected our understanding of the associations between cannabis and health outcomes such as CUD. However, estimating quantity and potency is not straightforward and requires more in depth questioning than estimating frequency alone. Several assessments, including Borodovsky and colleagues' [4] work, have set out to comprehensively assess THC consumption, however, several factors may influence the accuracy of estimation of these data.

Across the United States, there is a complex picture of differing legal frameworks surrounding the availability and sale of medicinal and/or recreational cannabis. Outside of the United States, most people who use cannabis do so in a setting in which cannabis is not legally sold or purchased. In legal markets, accurate information about cannabis products including quantity and potency can be included on labelling and packaging. In reality, this is not always the case, as cannabis products are not always correctly labelled [8]. Moreover, current labelling may not be accessible enough for consumers to interpret and retain this information. Consequently, many people who use cannabis report that they are not aware of the THC quantity in the products they consume, even in legal markets [9, 10]. Moreover, where cannabis is purchased illegally, consumers may lack accurate information on the cannabis they are purchasing. Researchers often need to rely on participants' recall of this information to estimate their THC consumption and, therefore, this may introduce bias to our estimates. However, recent research indicates that THC consumption can be estimated by collecting data on product type and its average THC concentration, together with amount and frequency of use, with strong validity according to urinary THC concentrations [11]. Nevertheless, we need to understand the influence of contextual factors on participant accuracy of estimation of their THC consumption, as well as encourage better labelling of cannabis products to improve consumers' knowledge.

Furthermore, accurate labelling of products will enable individuals who use cannabis to respond to knowledge generated by research and to any future guidelines for safer use based on THC, as Borodovsky and colleagues [4] recommend. One approach could be through labelling packaging with standard THC units [12] in the same way that alcohol products are labelled with alcohol units in many jurisdictions around the world. To maximise impact on public health, manufacturers and relevant legal bodies should incorporate such measures on accessible labelling for cannabis products, so that those who would like to monitor their use are able to do so accurately. For example, Health Canada recently sought public guidance on simplifying THC labelling on products, and the legislative review of the Cannabis Act recommended that a ‘standard dose’ or ‘unit dose’ should be prioritized and accompanied by regulatory amendments to require it as an element on cannabis product labels [13]. If successfully implemented, such regulation could enhance communication and consumer knowledge about THC.

Increasing the accuracy and accessibility of information available around quantity and potency of cannabis products has the potential to both improve the accuracy of our research on CUD as well as to enable consumers to make more informed choices to reduce their risk.

None.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对Borodovsky等人的评论:加强四氢大麻酚定量研究——通过准确的标签提高消费者的意识。
Borodovsky和他的同事发现,在美国(US)的大样本受访者中,较高的每日四氢大麻酚摄入量与更多的CUD症状和更高的达到CUD临床阈值的几率相关。这是我们在估计一种主要公共卫生后果的剂量相关风险方面迈出的重要一步,这种后果发生在大约五分之一的大麻使用者身上。为了在他们的综合在线调查中计算四氢大麻酚的消费量,参与者报告了他们过去一周内各种产品类型的每日大麻使用量,并估计了他们使用过的大麻的效力。估计四氢大麻酚的消费量需要大麻的数量和效力,两者都与重要的健康结果有关[1,6,7]。在以前的研究中忽视这些因素可能会影响我们对大麻与CUD等健康结果之间关系的理解。然而,估计数量和效力不是直截了当的,需要比单独估计频率更深入的问题。一些评估,包括Borodovsky和同事的[4]工作,已经开始全面评估四氢大麻酚的消耗,然而,几个因素可能会影响这些数据估计的准确性。在美国各地,围绕医用和/或娱乐性大麻的可用性和销售,存在着不同法律框架的复杂情况。在美国以外,大多数使用大麻的人都是在大麻不合法销售或购买的环境中使用大麻的。在合法市场上,关于大麻产品的准确信息,包括数量和效力,可以列入标签和包装上。在现实中,情况并非总是如此,因为大麻产品并不总是正确地标记为[8]。此外,目前的标签可能不足以让消费者理解和保留这些信息。因此,许多使用大麻的人报告说,即使在合法市场上,他们也不知道他们消费的产品中四氢大麻酚的含量[9,10]。此外,在非法购买大麻的地方,消费者可能缺乏关于他们正在购买的大麻的准确信息。研究人员经常需要依靠参与者对这些信息的回忆来估计他们的四氢大麻酚消费量,因此,这可能会给我们的估计带来偏差。然而,最近的研究表明,可以通过收集产品类型及其平均四氢大麻酚浓度,以及使用量和使用频率的数据来估计四氢大麻酚的消耗量,根据尿中四氢大麻酚浓度[11]有很强的有效性。然而,我们需要了解环境因素对参与者估计其四氢大麻酚消费量准确性的影响,并鼓励更好地标记大麻产品,以提高消费者的知识。此外,正如Borodovsky及其同事所建议的那样,产品的准确标签将使使用大麻的个人能够对研究产生的知识和基于四氢大麻酚的任何未来安全使用指南做出反应。一种方法可以是在包装上标上标准四氢大麻酚单位[12],就像世界上许多司法管辖区在酒精产品上标上酒精单位一样。为了最大限度地对公众健康产生影响,制造商和相关法律机构应将这些措施纳入大麻产品易于获取的标签,以便那些希望监测其使用情况的人能够准确地进行监测。例如,加拿大卫生部最近就简化产品上的四氢大麻酚标签征求公众指导意见,对《大麻法》的立法审查建议,应优先考虑“标准剂量”或“单位剂量”,并附有监管修订,要求将其作为大麻产品标签上的一个要素。如果成功实施,这样的监管可以加强沟通和消费者对四氢大麻酚的了解。提高有关大麻产品数量和效力的信息的准确性和可获得性,既有可能提高我们对CUD研究的准确性,也有可能使消费者做出更明智的选择,以减少他们的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Addiction
Addiction 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
10.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
319
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Addiction publishes peer-reviewed research reports on pharmacological and behavioural addictions, bringing together research conducted within many different disciplines. Its goal is to serve international and interdisciplinary scientific and clinical communication, to strengthen links between science and policy, and to stimulate and enhance the quality of debate. We seek submissions that are not only technically competent but are also original and contain information or ideas of fresh interest to our international readership. We seek to serve low- and middle-income (LAMI) countries as well as more economically developed countries. Addiction’s scope spans human experimental, epidemiological, social science, historical, clinical and policy research relating to addiction, primarily but not exclusively in the areas of psychoactive substance use and/or gambling. In addition to original research, the journal features editorials, commentaries, reviews, letters, and book reviews.
期刊最新文献
Understanding the interplay between alcohol use, cannabis use and mental health across the lifespan: A network analysis. Gender differences in the impact of psychological distress on methamphetamine use disorder outcomes and treatment effect. Quitting trajectories of Hong Kong Chinese smokers receiving behavioral smoking cessation interventions: A post hoc analysis of eight randomized controlled trials. Trends in fentanyl-containing drug samples seized by law enforcement agencies across Canada. Target trial emulation for addiction research-A useful method but not a panacea.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1