Legal cannabis laws, home cultivation, and use of edible cannabis products: A growing, relationship?
Legal cannabis laws, home cultivation, and use of edible cannabis products: A growing, relationship?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.09.014
复制
发表时间：
2017-12-01
影响因子：
4.4
通讯作者：
Budney, Alan J.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Borodovsky, Jacob T.;Budney, Alan J.
背景：美国一半以上的州已经颁布了法律的大麻法（LCL）。同时，食用大麻产品（即，食品）提出了新的监管挑战。LCL规定获得大麻的条款（例如，家庭种植（HC）或药房（DSP））可能会影响可食用的生产和使用。本研究探讨HC和DSP规定，大麻种植和食用use.Methods之间的关系：一个在线大麻使用调查使用Facebook的分布。数据来自1813名大麻使用者。美国各州分为无LCL（Non-LCL）或LCL州：（1）仅允许DSP（LCL DSP-only），（2）仅允许HC（LCL HC-only），或（3）允许HC和DSP（LCL HC+DSP）。分析测试了这些分类之间的关联，大麻种植，食用和采购。结果：在LCL HC-仅和LCL HC+DSP状态的个人更有可能报告目前在家中种植大麻（OR：3.3，95% CI：1.7，6.2; OR：3.9，95% CI：2.4，6.3）和上个月食用情况（OR：2.1，95% CI：1.4，3.4; OR：2.9，95% CI：2.2，3.9）。无论在哪个州，种植大麻的人比从未种植大麻的人更有可能制作食用品（OR：2.2，95% CI：1.8，2.6）。在过去一个月里，仅LCL HC状态的个体比非LCL（OR：2.75，95% CI：1.5，5.3）和仅DSP状态（OR：2.1，95% CI：1.0，4.4）的个体更有可能制作食品。在LCLHC+DSP状态的个人更有可能在过去的一个月里购买食用比个人从非LCL（OR：3.7，95% CI：2.4，5.6）和DSP的唯一状态（OR：3.2，95% CI：1.8，5.5）。结论：具体的LCL规定可能会影响个人的倾向，种植大麻，使，购买和使用食用大麻产品。允许家庭种植有助于增加种植大麻的可能性。种植大麻的人通过自制食用大麻产品来节省植物。相反，允许药房增加购买食品的可能性。具有未知和可变大麻素含量的食品的精神活性作用将是不可预测的。政策制定者应仔细考虑具体的拼箱条款如何影响大麻食用产品的获取和质量。(C)2017爱思唯尔B. V.保留所有权利。
Background: Over half of U.S. states have enacted legal cannabis laws (LCL). In parallel, edible cannabis products (i.e., edibles) have presented new regulatory challenges. LCL provisions that dictate access to cannabis (e.g., home cultivation (HC) or dispensaries (DSP)) may impact edible production and use. This study examined relationships among HC and DSP provisions, cannabis cultivation, and edible use.Methods: An online cannabis use survey was distributed using Facebook. Data were collected from 1813 cannabis-using adults. U.S. states were classified as states without LCL (Non-LCL) or LCL states that: (1) only permit DSP (LCL DSP-only), (2) only permit HC (LCL HC-only), or (3) permit HC and DSP (LCL HC+DSP). Analyses tested associations among these classifications, cannabis growing, and edible use and procurement.Results: Individuals in LCL HC-only and LCL HC+DSP states were more likely to report currently growing cannabis at home (OR: 3.3, 95% CI: 1.7, 6.2; OR: 3.9, 95% CI: 2.4, 6.3, respectively) and past-month edible use (OR: 2.1, 95% CI: 1.4, 3.4; OR: 2.9, 95% CI: 2.2, 3.9, respectively) than individuals in LCL DSP-only states. Regardless of state, those who had grown cannabis were more likely to have made edibles than those who had never grown cannabis (OR: 2.2, 95% CI: 1.8, 2.6). Individuals in LCL HC-only states were more likely to have made edibles in the past month than individuals from Non-LCL (OR: 2.75, 95% CI: 1.5, 5.3) and DSP-only states (OR: 2.1, 95% CI: 1.0, 4.4). Individuals in LCLHC+DSP states were more likely to have purchased edibles in the past month than individuals from Non-LCL (OR: 3.7, 95% CI: 2.4, 5.6) and DSP-only states (OR: 3.2, 95% CI: 1.8, 5.5).Conclusion: Specific LCL provisions may differentially affect individuals' propensity to grow cannabis and make, buy, and use edible cannabis products. Permitting home cultivation contributes to a greater likelihood of growing cannabis. Those who grow cannabis economize the plant by creating homemade edible cannabis products. Conversely, permitting dispensaries increases the likelihood of purchasing edibles. The psychoactive effects of edibles with unknown and variable cannabinoid content will be unpredictable. Policymakers should carefully consider how specific LCL provisions can affect patterns of cannabis edible product access and quality. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.