Cannabis (Albuquerque, N.M.)最新文献

Objective: U.S. cannabis policy has been shaped by racism and produced racist outcomes. The legalization of cannabis for adult use represents an opportunity to end harmful policies and repair some of the damage caused by the War on Drugs. However, this opportunity may be slipping away. Large corporations with histories of exploitation are steering cannabis policy to maximize profits. Parabola Center for Law and Policy created a media campaign to educate the public about these issues and promote cannabis policies that benefit regular people. We conducted an experiment in the context of an online survey to determine whether six videos from the campaign would resonate with U.S. adults and influence beliefs about cannabis policy.

Method: In September 2023, we conducted an online survey of 404 U.S. adults. Participants were randomized to view six Parabola Campaign videos featuring cannabis policy experts before or after responding to survey questions.

Results: Participants who saw the Parabola Campaign videos had greater agreement that cannabis legalization should not benefit the tobacco industry, the pharmaceutical industry, and alcohol companies (all p < .05). They also had greater agreement that legalization should create space for small businesses, create a sharing community, and benefit people from communities that have been harmed by the Drug War (all p < .05).

Conclusions: Public education can be a powerful tool to promote equity-focused cannabis policy, by raising awareness of corporate influence, promoting community-centered regulatory models, and building support for an equitable approach to federal legalization.

Objective: The link between attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and cannabis-related problems is well documented, though research has primarily focused on cannabis use disorder (CUD) or cannabis consequences in aggregate. This study examined how inattentive (IN) versus hyperactive/impulsive (HI) ADHD symptoms relate to CUD symptoms as well as distinct domains of cannabis consequences (social-interpersonal consequences, impaired control, negative self-perception, self-care, risk behaviors, academic/occupational consequences, physical dependence, and blackout use) in young adults. Total amount of cannabis flower used over the past 90 days was explored as a potential mediator of these associations.

Method: Young adults (N = 160; 41% male; ages 19-25, M = 22, SD = 2.06) with a history of regular cannabis use completed self-report measures of ADHD symptoms and cannabis consequences. Participants also completed a 90-day Timeline Follow Back assessing grams of cannabis flower consumed each day, along with a structured clinical interview for CUD.

Results: IN symptoms were directly associated with cannabis-related occupational/academic consequences, self-care consequences, and blackouts/memory impairment, independent of quantity of cannabis consumption. HI symptoms showed positive indirect associations with physical dependence, impaired control, and CUD through greater amount of cannabis used. Conversely, IN symptoms had negative indirect associations with these outcomes, mediated by amount of cannabis used.

Conclusions: Findings reveal distinct pathways through which IN and HI ADHD symptoms relate to cannabis problems in young adults. Findings highlight the need to consider ADHD symptom domains separately when assessing specific cannabis-related risks, which may have implications for tailoring interventions.

Objective: Cannabis use is common among adolescents. Limited research has examined how specific cannabis use behaviors may differentially increase cannabis use disorder (CUD) risk.

Method: Data were from two waves of a prospective cohort of Southern California adolescents who used cannabis in the past six months (N = 420; Fall 2022, Spring 2023). Multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine the association of each cannabis use behavior at baseline (number of modes of cannabis administration used, product type used first and most often, cannabinoid formulation used most often, past 30-day frequency, quantity) with probable CUD at a six-month follow-up (measured using the Cannabis Abuse Screening Test), adjusting for sociodemographic factors, other substance use, and probable CUD at baseline.

Results: Most adolescents (69.8%) used >1 mode of cannabis in the past six-months; concentrates (vaped or dabbed) were the product type used most often (37.5%). Greater odds of CUD were observed for each additional cannabis product used in the past 6 months (vs. only one; adjusted odds ratio [AOR] range = 2.83-4.13; ps < .05), and for frequent past 30-day cannabis use (10+ days/month vs. 1-2 days/month; AOR = 2.87, 95%CI = [1.31, 6.27]). No other cannabis behaviors or characteristics were associated with CUD in adjusted models.

Conclusions: Frequent past-month cannabis use and using multiple modes of administration were predictors of probable CUD. In addition to monitoring the overall presence of adolescent cannabis use, these results demonstrate the importance of raising awareness about specific use behaviors associated with CUD risk among youth, particularly in regions with well-developed cannabis markets.

Objective: Cannabis demand, as measured by the Marijuana Purchase Task (MPT), holds associations with concurrent cannabis consumption and associated risks (e.g., cannabis use disorder [CUD]). As few studies have examined prospective associations between cannabis demand and future cannabis use, the current study examined this association in young adults who use cannabis. In addition, the present study explored the novel construct of projected future cannabis demand and its associations with future cannabis use.

Method: Participants first completed a current Time1 (T1) MPT, projected future Time2 (T2) MPT (i.e., "three months from now"), and measures of past-month cannabis use frequency and CUD symptoms during an initial session. They returned three months later (T2) to complete a current T2 MPT and measures of cannabis use and CUD symptoms.

Results: Measures across the three MPTs (observed T1, projected future T2, and observed T2) indicate relatively stability of demand across time and accuracy in projecting future demand. Prospective associations between T1 demand measures and cannabis use were observed, with both observed T1 and projected future T2 demand measures associated with T2 cannabis use frequency.

Conclusions: Results of the current study highlight the potential of current and projected future cannabis demand measures to better understand the trajectory of cannabis use in this high-risk population.

Objective: Since legalization in 2018, older Canadians' use of cannabis has increased steadily, yet little is known about their perceptions of cannabis. We aimed to determine cannabis usage, and characterize perceptions of safety, effectiveness and stigma in community dwelling older Canadians.

Method: Canadians aged 50 years and older were invited to participate in an electronic survey of their experience with cannabis and perceptions of cannabis safety, effectiveness, and stigma. Data were categorized as participants reporting current use, non-use, prior use, and considering use. Perceptions were assessed with a 5-point Likert scale and open text box questions. Logistic regression models were used to assess how age, sex, cannabis usage, and education influenced perceptions.

Results: One thousand six hundred fifteen participants completed the survey. Current cannabis use was reported by 44% of respondents, followed by non-use (33.2%), prior use (16.5%) and considering use (6.1%). Almost half (49.2%) perceived the risks of using cannabis to be low or very low. The greatest concerns regarding cannabis use were effects on cognition/mental health (40.8%), physical health (19.1%), and available product information (18.0%). Participants somewhat or strongly agreed that there is not enough information on cannabis safety (60.4%) and effectiveness (63.8%), and 34.7% perceived there to be a negative stigma amongst family and friends. Cannabis perceptions were influenced by age, sex, cannabis usage, and education.

Conclusions: Generational and sex-based differences exist in cannabis usage and perceptions amongst older Canadians. These differences require consideration by health practitioners and public health workers to meet the educational needs of older adults.

Objective: Cannabis legalization may impact both cannabis and tobacco use, given the high prevalence of co-use (including blunt use) among young adults (YAs) in the United States. The objective of this descriptive ecological study was to examine trends in YA cannabis and tobacco use from 2002-2018 in states that passed adult and medical use (AMU) or medical use only (MUO) cannabis laws during that time (N = 16).

Method: Using data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, we conducted a segmented regression analysis to calculate absolute percent change in past 30-day cannabis, blunt, cigarette, and cigar use between time points. We descriptively compared points of slope inflection with key legalization dates.

Results: All states showed a decline in YA cigarette smoking over time, a slight decline in cigar smoking, and increases in cannabis and blunt use. Cannabis use increased following opening of MUO retail outlets and, in several states, increased following adult use law implementation and/or opening of retail outlets. For example, in Maine, cannabis use plateaued after a MUO law was adopted (2009) until about 1-2 years after retail outlets opened (2011), when YA cannabis use increased by 22.4% (95% CI: 19.0, 29.4) and continued increasing steadily after adult use was adopted (2017).

Conclusions: Cannabis and blunt use increased more in states where AMU laws were in place compared to those with MUO laws, though causality was not assessed. Varying trends may correlate with cannabis policies, tobacco policies and other political, economic, or social factors at the state level.

Objective: The diversity and potency of cannabis products have increased in recent years, underscoring the importance of understanding which products are being used and why. Patients with substance use disorders (SUDs) use have a high prevalence of risky cannabis use, making it especially important to understand use patterns in this group. We aimed to first describe cannabis product characteristics and then explore reasons for choosing products in our sample.

Method: In this mixed-methods study, 472 adults who self-reported accessing SUD treatment and lifetime cannabis use completed an online survey. A subset of 22 participants completed in-depth interviews. Quantitative results focused on describing cannabis use characteristics (e.g., product types) among participants reporting past-year cannabis use (current use group) or lifetime cannabis use but no use in past year (past use group), while qualitative descriptive analysis was used to describe reasons for choosing products among participants who were currently using cannabis.

Results: Across medical and non-medical use of cannabis, dried flower and smoked cannabis formulations were most used (e.g., 89% of the current use group reported smoking cannabis for non-medical purposes), followed by edibles (e.g., 53% of the current use group used edible formulations of cannabis for non-medical purposes), though there was considerable use of higher-potency products such as concentrates and dabs (e.g., 11% of the current use group had used dabs for non-medical purposes). Our qualitative analysis found that almost all participants were motivated by THC content when purchasing products, yet sometimes perceived medical benefits or harm reduction were reasons for using certain products (especially CBD-dominant products), while sometimes other factors (e.g., convenience, familiarity) were influential.

Conclusions: Cannabis use characteristics (including motives for choosing products) are complex and nuanced in patients accessing SUD treatment. More work is needed to understand longitudinal relationships between use of different cannabis products and both harms and potential benefits.

Objective: Legal cannabis dispensary employees ("Budtenders") are a significant resource for cannabis users. Current research indicates that cannabis use may adversely impact mental health. Public perception, however, is often inconsistent with this evidence, leading to increased use and disproportionate harm towards individuals with mental health disorders. This underscores the need for a deeper understanding of how Budtenders may influence these perceptions. This preliminary cross-sectional survey assessed Budtender perceptions and knowledge of cannabis use and its implications for mental health.

Method: Researchers recruited Budtenders (N = 46) from legal cannabis dispensaries (Ontario Cannabis Stores) across the Greater Toronto (Canada) Area to participate in a 15-minute online survey. The survey collected non-identifying demographic data and responses about perceptions, education and customer interactions surrounding cannabis and mental health.

Results: We found that Budtender perceptions (N = 46) of cannabis' influence on mental health vary significantly based on symptomatology assessed, and often diverge from evidence-based knowledge. Notably, 54.6% of Budtenders rated cannabis as having a beneficial effect across the outcomes assessed, with sleep and depression most frequently perceived as beneficial. Customers inquired about the mental health effects of cannabis at 21% of cannabis store visits. There was considerable variability in the sources from which Budtenders derived their knowledge.

Conclusions: This study underscores significant gaps between Budtender perceptions and scientific evidence regarding cannabis use and mental health. Determining the impact of these perceptions is crucial for developing targeted, evidence-based educational interventions to mitigate the risks associated with recreational cannabis use.

Objective: This study used data from early stages of non-medical cannabis legalization in Washington State to 1) Compare cannabis dispensary density measures by urbanicity, 2) Test if dispensary density was associated with cannabis use overall and by urbanicity.

Method: Data are from the Privatization of Spirits in Washington Surveys (n = 2,162 adults) and licensing records. We graphed six cannabis dispensary density measures by urbanicity. Logistic regressions tested if dispensary density was associated with 1) cannabis use at least bimonthly and 2) daily/near-daily cannabis use after adjusting for urbanicity. Regressions stratified by urbanicity determined whether associations differed in urban vs. suburban/rural areas.

Results: Crude counts and counts per population were higher in suburban/rural areas. Counts per land area, counts in a 3- to 5-mile buffer, proximity, and clustering detected greater densities in urban areas. Monthly/bimonthly cannabis use was associated with counts per buffer in the full sample (aOR = 1.08 [1.02, 1.14]) and urban areas (aOR = 1.08 [1.02, 1.14]). Clustering was associated with monthly/bimonthly use in suburban/rural areas (aOR = 7.85 [1.31, 47.17]). Daily/near-daily use was associated with proximity and clustering in the full sample (proximity: aOR = 0.78 [0.64, 0.97]; clustering: aOR = 2.44 [1.32, 4.51]), urban areas (proximity: aOR = 0.67 [0.49, 0.92]; clustering: aOR = 2.29 [1.22, 4.32]), and suburban/rural areas (proximity: aOR = 0.66 [0.45, 0.97]; clustering: aOR = 11.10 [1.55, 79.36]).

Conclusions: In Washington's early non-medical cannabis market, dispensary availability (counts) was associated with monthly/bimonthly use. Accessibility (proximity) and clustering were associated with daily/near-daily use. Dispensary density thresholds and minimum distances between dispensaries may reduce regular and frequent cannabis use in Washington.

Background: With cannabis legal in nearly half of U.S. states, important concerns about the public health impact remain, particularly for states yet to legalize. The present study, using data collected in the initial phase of cannabis legalization in Missouri, examined predictors of the intention to initiate (in the cannabis naïve) and increase use (in those with past-year use) in a representative sample of Missouri college students.

Methods: Data (n _{cannabisnaïve} = 2,716; n _cannabisuse = 1,591) were collected from 25 Missouri college campuses. Four pre-registered multilevel models examined the associations of theory-driven predictors with the intention to initiate cannabis use and to increase use.

Results: 33.4% of all students surveyed reported past-year cannabis use, 9.9% of cannabis naïve students reported intending to initiate cannabis use, and 22% of those with previous cannabis use reported intending to increase cannabis use. Multilevel modes found that being gay or lesbian (AOR = 3.03; CI = [1.72, 5.34]), bisexual (AOR = 3.52; CI = [2.41, 5.14]), or queer (AOR = 2.51; CI = [1.71, 3.69]) was associated with intending to initiate use, while greater flourishing (AOR = 0.98; CI = [0.96, 0.99]) was associated with decreased odds of intending to initiate use. Endorsing more cannabis motives (AOR = 1.13; CI = [1.08, 1.19]), age of first use (AOR = 1.09; CI = [1.03, 1.15]), and being gay or lesbian (AOR = 2.19; CI = [1.27, 3.76]) were associated with intending to increase use. Endorsing more cannabis-related negative consequences was associated with intending to decrease use (AOR = 0.91; CI = [0.89, 0.94]).

Discussion: Multiple theory-driven factors were associated with intending to initiate or increase cannabis use following legalization. Future research should examine how intentions to change cannabis use translate to actualized behavior following legalization and factors that may create increased risk for minoritized sexual identities.